posted on August 30, 2004 07:29:57 PM new
Did anyone hear Bush say that the war on terror can not be won. All the talking heads were talking about it tonight - said he said it on his Today Show interview this am. Tonight, Scarborough, a conservative, said Bush messed up by saying this.
Haven't heard a word about it on FOX News ( the re-elect Bush network).
posted on August 30, 2004 08:19:11 PM new
What a flip flop...an admission that even Scarborough recognized as a mistake! So his reason for invading Iraq was clearly a lie.
The war on terrorism can never be won and it can never end. Terrorism is a policy.
posted on August 30, 2004 08:26:43 PM new
Well, at least he is being realistic - I was wondering how he was going to justify to Ammericans waging a war on every rebel group in the world. I think declaring war on chechen rebeles would have been a hard sell.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 30, 2004 09:08:56 PM new
The "war" against al Qaeda can be won, but it can't be won by Bush, and it can't be won in Iraq. But it sure can be lost in Iraq.
posted on August 30, 2004 09:12:41 PM new
Sorry for the repeat post.. but I want to make sure everyone sees how often Bush has said we can win the war on terror...only to say today.. we can not win the war on terror.
"Shame he didn't come to this realization til today. Quotes are all Bush: All mention winning the war on Terror....
LA Times, 4/27/2004. “Cheney's address Monday kicked off what the Bush campaign was calling its "Winning the War on Terror Tour."”
[The Hotline, April 28, 2004] “From a Bush-Cheney campaign e-mail: "You are invited to an online chat with" ex-NYPD commish/ex-Iraq Interim Interior Minister Bernard Kerik on 4/29. "Kerik is hosting this chat as part of the Bush-Cheney '04 Winning the War on Terror Tour…"
In one of many similar releases, the campaign said, “Bush-Cheney '04 today launched the Winning the War on Terror Tour…Today's kick-off events in Michigan, New Hampshire and Ohio will coincide with the release of a new ad, "Weapons," that will air in various markets and on national cable stations.
Jul 30 2004
We have a clear vision on how to win the war on terror and bring peace to the world.
Aug 30 2004
"I don't plan on losing my job," Bush said during his first prime time news conference of the year. "I plan on telling the American people that I've got a plan to win the war on terror. And I believe they'll stay with me. They understand the stakes."
Sep 2002
Meanwhile, with military jets flying overhead, Bush on Wednesday vowed to win the war on terrorism as he and other US leaders paid tribute to victims of the September 11 attack on the Pentagon. “Today we remember each life, we rededicate this proud symbol, and we renew our commitment to win the war that began here,” Bush said in remarks to 13,500 people gathered in front of the Pentagon section destroyed by the attack, which was officially reopened Wednesday.
Jan 2002
Our war on terror is well begun, but it is only begun. This campaign may not be finished on our watch -- yet it must be and it will be waged on our watch.
We can't stop short. If we stop now -- leaving terror camps intact and terror states unchecked -- our sense of security would be false and temporary. History has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom's fight. (Applause.)
Our first priority must always be the security of our nation, and that will be reflected in the budget I send to Congress. My budget supports three great goals for America: We will win this war; we'll protect our homeland; and we will revive our economy.
Apr 2003
"I want to thank our friends in Pakistan, I want to thank the agency ... the CIA, for working hard to continue to win the war against terror," said Mr Bush, who declared war on terrorism after the September 11, 2001 attacks.
"And make no mistake about it ... we will win the war against terror."
Jun 2003
“One of the biggest challenges before the USA is to make sure that we continue to fight and win the war on terror,” the President of the USA, Mr George W. Bush, said today.
William Niskanen article
In a speech in Cincinnati on October 7 2002, President George W. Bush asserted that "confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror". From the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1 2003, Mr Bush argued that "the liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror". Most recently, in a mid-July joint press conference with Tony Blair, Mr Bush concluded that "the removal of Saddam Hussein is an integral part of winning the war against terror".
posted on August 30, 2004 09:26:51 PM new
Here that sound ??? That silent sound in here ?? It is the sound of the silence of the neocons after Bush said the war on terror could not be won.
posted on August 31, 2004 07:45:23 AM new
He is right, though. We can secure our country and try to show other countries how living in a democracy is different than what they know; but we will NEVER change the idealogical attacks of terrorists -- They are taught this at the ages of 3 and up, and this is all they know.
What is the funniest from this board of libs and atheists is George Bush's religious beliefs are something to be ridiculed and pooh-poohed. But they never think of what drives the terrorists to want to attack our country!!
This is from http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/istiqaamah/feb1998_e.htm
What, in your opinion, is the definition of al-ghazwa al-fikree (the ideological attack)?
[A1]: Ideological warfare is a modern term which refers to a set of efforts in which a nation engages in order to conquer or influence another nation, so that [the attacked nation] takes a particular course of direction.
It is far more serious than military warfare, since it aims at secrecy, seeking to achieve subtle objectives initially; so that the attacked nation does not perceive it, nor prepare to halt it, nor stand in its way - thereby falling victim to [such an attack]. The eventual result of this onslaught is that this nation becomes sick in mind and sense; loving what the enemy wants it to love and hating what they want it to hate. It is a chronic disease which attacks and destroys nations, doing away with its personality, removing such meanings as foundations and strength. The nation which is struck by this [ideological attack] does not even feel what has hit it, or what it even is! That is why curing it becomes somewhat difficult, and making [the attacked nation] understand the ways of righteousness becomes a struggle.
This war takes place by means of school curriculums, general education, media, small and large size publications, and other such channels [that influence the thoughts of its people]. Through this the enemy hopes to deviate the nation from its beliefs; becoming attached to what the enemy throws at it. We ask Allaah for safety and protection from this.
[Q2]: Are the Arabs generally subject to this type of warfare, in particular the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia?
[A2]: Yes, the Muslims in general, including the Arabs, the Kingdom, and other than them, are all subject to a great ideological warfare from the nations of kufr (unbelief); from both the east and the west. The severest and most serious of these [ideological] onslaughts is:- [1] The war of the christian crusaders. [2] The zionist war. [3] The communist and atheistic war.
..
..
~~ Keep thy heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues(forces)of life..Proverbs 4:23~~
posted on August 31, 2004 08:39:52 AM new
What Bush is doing with Iraq:
""It is far more serious than military warfare, since it aims at secrecy, seeking to achieve subtle objectives initially; so that the attacked nation does not perceive it, nor prepare to halt it, nor stand in its way - thereby falling victim to [such an attack]. The eventual result of this onslaught is that this nation becomes sick in mind and sense; loving what the enemy wants it to love and hating what they want it to hate. It is a chronic disease which attacks and destroys nations, doing away with its personality, removing such meanings as foundations and strength. The nation which is struck by this [ideological attack] does not even feel what has hit it, or what it even is! That is why curing it becomes somewhat difficult, and making [the attacked nation] understand the ways of righteousness becomes a struggle."""
posted on August 31, 2004 08:54:35 AM new
Great post and link, neroter....and so true.
It's been happening for years already...the revision of our childrens school books. They've changed so many things, making some more PC, but even have revised the way my school books used to written. Now America is becoming the 'bad guy' rather than the one that stands for good in the world.
They've changed how our children view our first Presidents and what great things they did to set this country on a positive course. They've changed the story about the American Indians and how terrible the settlers were to be PC and what they believe is less offending.
There have been many articles written about how the school books have been changed and who has been most responsible for these changes. And it continues today, now that we don't want to offend the Middle Eastern immigrants. So even what their religious books/practices call for are being ignored by those who don't believe they 'follow' the plan they are taught from a very young age.
posted on August 31, 2004 08:59:03 AM new
Linda says,
"""Now America is becoming the 'bad guy' rather than the one that stands for good in the world."""
Ya, and THAT started 3 1/2 years ago when "bush the conqueror" took office.
In an interview on NBC-TV's Today show, Bush vowed to stay the course in the war on terror, saying perseverance in the battle would make the world safer for future generations.
But he suggested total victory against terrorism might not be possible.
Asked "Can we win?" Bush said, "I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that the those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."
Democrats, looking for ways to deflect the spotlight from Republicans as they opened their convention in New York, pounced.
SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
"After months of listening to the Republicans base their campaign on their singular ability to win the war on terror, the president now says we can't win the war on terrorism," said Democratic vice-presidential candidate John Edwards. "This is no time to declare defeat.''
Gotta love how they'll try to imply that THIS President is changing his position on fighting the terrorists. It's because they know that is THEIR weakness in this campaign. People question THEIR willingness to defend this nation...so they're trying to make President Bush look like he's joining thier side... Won't work.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan sought to clarify Bush's remarks, telling reporters, "He was talking about winning it in the conventional sense ... about how this is a different kind of war and we face an unconventional enemy.''
At a Nashua, N.H., campaign stop, Bush returned to his tough talk on terrorists and received a lengthy standing ovation from a crowd crammed into a high school gym.
"The best way to deal with them is to bring them to justice in foreign lands before they hurt us again," he said. "It means a full-scale offensive campaign...and never yielding one inch to these people.''
----
taken from TheStar.com
posted on August 31, 2004 09:06:48 AM new
No, revisor of history [crowfarm]....
I'm talking about how history books present our country in the 50's - 60s compared to how liberals have been allowed to revise the schools history books. Not what has happened since President Bush has shown what a strong leader he is in fighting our enemies, rather than pretending they're not there like the dems did for 8 years.
posted on August 31, 2004 09:12:39 AM newWhat is the funniest from this board of libs and atheists is George Bush's religious beliefs are something to be ridiculed and pooh-poohed. But they never think of what drives the terrorists to want to attack our country!!
They do consider what drives the terrorists, and it turns out to be the same thing that drives Bush and the religious right Taliban here in America.
Our god is real, yours isn't.
Our god religious book is the truth, your isn't.
God is on our side.
You do not worship our god so your are wrong/wicked/damned/unworthy.
Anybody with a lick of sense will realize that with these worthless and destructive religious beliefs the world will never be at peace and we can never "win" if our motivation is silly religious dogma.
posted on August 31, 2004 09:49:53 AM newThey've changed how our children view our first Presidents and what great things they did to set this country on a positive course. They've changed the story about the American Indians and how terrible the settlers were to be PC and what they believe is less offending.
I think you got your story backwards about the indians in textbooks. The new textbooks finally show just how evil we were to the native Americans.
The only difference new textbooks about early leaders is that they now show the whole picture. Including how "freedom" espousing men held slaves.
But if you really have a problem with school textbooks, blame Texas. The Texas school systems buys the most books and therefore determines what books will be published.
There have been many articles written about how the school books have been changed and who has been most responsible for these changes. And it continues today, now that we don't want to offend the Middle Eastern immigrants. So even what their religious books/practices call for are being ignored by those who don't believe they 'follow' the plan they are taught from a very young age.
And what, our textbooks tell all about the evils of christianity too ?
Looks like you want a religious propaganda war fought in the textbooks.
posted on August 31, 2004 09:59:18 AM newNot what has happened since President Bush has shown what a strong leader he is in fighting our enemies, rather than pretending they're not there like the dems did for 8 years.
Fighting "our enemies" in Iraq ? You mean creating enemies in Iraq.
Bush has now admitted he can not win his global war on terrorism.
That's not a strong leader, he's a nut case that got 1000 soldiers killed over his stubborn ignorance and stupid policies.
And for all of those who ridiculed France, Canada, Germany, and Russia, YOU NOW MUST ADMIT THEY WERE RIGHT ABOUT IRAQ.
THAT'S RIGHT FOLKS -- France, Canada, Germany, and Russia -- WERE RIGHT ABOUT IRAQ AND BUSH WAS WRONG.
So under his "strong leadership" we are looked at as fools and scorned and can not win the war on terrorism.
The recent Bush statement that the war on terror could NOT be won has been "corrected".
Today, in a speech to the American Legion, Bush said, "We are winning and we will win."
In a speech to the national convention of the American Legion, Bush said, “We meet today in a time of war for our country, a war we did not start yet one that we will win."........... “In this different kind of war, we may never sit down at a peace table. But make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win,” Bush said, pausing to grin slightly. “We will win by staying on the offensive, we will win by spreading liberty.”
posted on August 31, 2004 10:49:49 AM new
The best way to deal with them is to bring them to justice in foreign lands before they hurt us again," Bush told the crowd crammed into a high school gym, drawing a lengthy standing ovation. "It means a full-scale offensive campaign ... and never yielding one inch to these people."
posted on August 31, 2004 11:09:17 AM new
Yes, reamond, when the school books are being revised to make our founders, make America look evil....that's a sad day for America. And they lefties know they can indoctrine our children to their 'blame everything on America' way of seeing our history....rather than just leaving it alone...stating the facts as they were...rather than how terrible America has always been.
Anyone doing any research on the subject of how these new 'revisitionists' are changing the way history actually when down/occured, will see the damage the left is doing by re-writing our history to the way THEY want it to be seen...not the way it really happened.
School books, especially history books, were NEVER meant to be used for expressing political opinions from the left.
posted on August 31, 2004 11:24:17 AM new
Your demo gog idol clinton couldn't stop domestic terrorism (OK City) and gave world wide terrorists a sense of American weakness which lead to 9/11,
Islamic terrorism is religion based and has been present for hundreds of years. The only true way to stop terrorism would be to erase a culture, which will never happen in todays political climate.
The world has seen the elimination of many other terroristic groups as seen in the 70's only because the host countries (Germany & Japan for two) actively fought them at home. Few non religious organized terroristic groups are still active, two exceptions are in the Philippines and Peru.
The U.S. military has the means to actively destroy the current threat of terrorism. What is stopping them is "Political Correctness".
Political diplomacy has never lead to a successful elimination of terrorism. This same "Political Correctness" is what is keeping them from wrapping up hostilities in IRAQ. If orders were issued allowing our soldiers gloves to be taken off and fight as they were taught, the terrorists involved would see the determination of the U.S. not to let terrorism win.
In short it is called Peace through superior firepower and no group or culture would be willing to be TOTALLY eliminated to further their cause. (One exception to this thought is the Japanese during WWII). And look at what it finally took to stop them.
posted on August 31, 2004 12:01:08 PM new
Linda - are you saying that Indians were not slaughtered and their land taken from them as settlers moved across the country?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 31, 2004 01:07:24 PM new
No fenix - And I only used two examples...there are hundreds.
But, imo, history books should have remained telling what was actually occured....report what actually happened not form slanted opinions and state them as facts... stating opinions on who was guilty or whose fault it was.
I've saw these changes in the text books when my sons were in grammer school and we'd read their books together. One could easily see how they were becoming more and more politically correct. Like with the presidents, our founding Fathers, their actions being discussed as if written from someone in another country who didn't want our children to learn what their actions actually did, in a positive manner, for this country. Written in what I consider a very disrespectful manner.
posted on August 31, 2004 01:53:54 PM newreport what actually happened not form slanted opinions and state them as facts...
Like with the presidents, our founding Fathers, their actions being discussed as if written from someone in another country who didn't want our children to learn what their actions actually did, in a positive manner, for this country. Written in what I consider a very disrespectful manner.
What you want is just a different slant. Now you know how blacks, Native Ameicans, Chinese, and all the other minorities felt about the slant in history books PRIOR to the new slant.
But this is typical of conservatives. They can't accept different cultures and viewpoints which are just as valid as their own.
posted on August 31, 2004 04:01:20 PM new
reamond - It has absolutely nothing to do with wanting it how conservatives see/saw it. I want it to be left alone and not revised with the 'lefts' version of what they NOW think happened. It has to do with the fact that history is being revised. PERIOD.
Instead of speaking about what wrongs both sides did in our history....it projects how terrible we were to them....and forgets to mention what they did to us. Don't want the Indian child to 'feel bad' about their heritage. And this is done on hundreds of subjects.
It's PC to eliminate tons of descriptive words....tons of things these 'book revisors' think shouldn't be in them....so as not to offend anyone. Now that so much has been eliminated...it's no wonder children aren't interested in history anymore. Not that our schools spend that much time on teaching it anyway...but still...the new slant that America is always wrong....and everybody else is right is sickening to me. Leave history as it happened - don't revise it to be politically sensitive and PC.
posted on August 31, 2004 04:36:40 PM new
Anybody would know you can't win the war on terror.
Just like you can't win the war on Drugs.
Just like you can't stop Democrats from Copy & Pasting here.
We can deter it, make other country's realize they are playing with a Hornets nest if they mess with the U.S. And they are only going to get worse than they give!
[ edited by Bear1949 on Aug 31, 2004 11:30 AM ]