|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
"September Song and Dance"...the VaCunt Lullaby...
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| "September Song and Dance"...the VaCunt Lullaby...
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| Fdubya247 |
.
This one is just for you, VaCunt, you big time sucker you...your eyeballs will probably melt just reading it..."but, but, but...". What a douche-bag.
Go (fuck yourself)!:
September Song and Dance
By Eugene Robinson
Friday, June 15, 2007; A21
Here's a surprise: Remember how we were told that if we just waited until the fall, we'd see that George W. Bush's "surge" was working in Iraq? Well, now it turns out that we shouldn't expect answers in September after all.
White House spokesman Tony Snow was purposeful on Wednesday in stomping, trampling, tap-dancing upon and otherwise giving a definitive beat-down to any expectations of a serious, fact-based reassessment of Iraq policy in the fall. Never mind that the White House raised those expectations in the first place.
The September scenario has been a rhetorical mainstay for the administration and its supporters, a major argument for ignoring all the bad news from Iraq and giving Bush's troop escalation a chance to work. Let's wait for Gen. David H. Petraeus, the man who's now running the war, to submit his progress report. At that point, went the White House argument, the "way forward" would become clear.
The fog of war seems to have closed back in. "I have warned from the very beginning about expecting some sort of magical thing to happen in September," Snow told the White House press corps, whose collective recollection was somewhat different. "What I'm saying is, in September you'll have an opportunity to have metrics."
Actually, there are plenty of "metrics" already. A Pentagon report, released Wednesday, finds that since the U.S. troop escalation began, the overall level of violence in Iraq has not decreased, and civilian casualties have actually risen slightly. There has been a decline in violence in Baghdad and Anbar province -- the areas where most of the 28,700 extra "surge" troops are deployed -- but an increase in other parts of the country.
The rest of the report holds few surprises for anyone who has been paying attention. The Iraqi government is no closer to a political agreement that Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds can all live with (assuming such an agreement is even theoretically possible). Militias, not government forces, continue to rule much of Baghdad and the rest of the country. "Sectarian friction" is the euphemism du jour for civil war.
And that, mind you, is the assessment of the U.S. military, not some bunch of "cut-and-run" naysayers. U.S. casualties, meanwhile, are increasing markedly as "surge" troops deploy into hot spots. The only real non-negative news out of Iraq is the dog that didn't bark, at least not yet: The latest bomb attack on the revered Shiite mosque in Samarra has not, as of this writing, triggered the spasm of unrestrained sectarian bloodletting that everyone fears.
In this context, it's easy to understand why the White House would want everyone to forget about the whole September thing. It's obvious that Iraq certainly won't look much better by then and may look considerably worse.
Snow said he was emphasizing "metrics" because he knew that in September, "some people are going to try to make the argument, if the job is not done and if they haven't perfected it and if they haven't achieved all the -- then it's a failure. I wanted to guard against that."
Precisely. In the world of retail, this is known as bait-and-switch.
The thing is that no one should be surprised. On Iraq, Bush has been nothing if not consistent. Never has he given any indication of seriously considering a real change of policy. Every grudging concession, every ballyhooed initiative, every single announced change has been on the margins -- dump Donald Rumsfeld, appoint Petraeus, order the "surge." Politicians, analysts and even generals can talk all they want about civil war, about redeployment, about phased withdrawal. None of that is remotely on the president's agenda.
Will anything Petraeus says in his September report change Bush's determination to fight on in Iraq toward ill-defined "victory" -- to "win" what has become a multifaceted mess of sectarian warfare that everyone is destined to lose? Almost certainly not. If there is a single encouraging paragraph in the entire document, Bush will seize on it as vindication.
Facts on the ground have never been the determining factor in Bush's policy on Iraq. Facts don't even seem to be a particularly important factor. It was considerate of Tony Snow to start preparing us for the inevitable -- and, indirectly, to remind congressional leaders that if they want to change the president's course on Iraq, they won't do it through reasoned persuasion. George Bush can't bring himself to question his basic vision of Iraq, and I doubt he ever will.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...opinion/columns |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
LOL
I posted the Pentagon report for Vacunt in one of his threads and the best he could do was accuse ME of "retreating".
That hurts coming from a tough Republican car salesman like him... I mean there IS a shortage of car salesmen here in the US. We NEED car salesmen here, not soldiers over there....
He is competeing directly with NCMoron for the title of King Douche. |
|
|
| Sternposse |
Quote: Originally posted by Ass Boil
LOL
I posted the Pentagon report for Vacunt in one of his threads and the best he could do was accuse ME of "retreating".
That hurts coming from a tough Republican car salesman like him... I mean there IS a shortage of car salesmen here in the US. We NEED car salesmen here, not soldiers over there....
He is competeing directly with NCMoron for the title of King Douche. |
do you two faggots suckle each others cocks on every fucking thread?
fucks sake |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
So far every one of your posts show your obsession with gay sex and cocks.
As flattering as it is to have a repressed homo-Republican internet stalker, I am really not interested.
I don't know who's mult you are, but the fact that you are using every one of your 30 minute-spaced posts to follow me around makes you look like a real douche.
LOL |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
| Sternposse =Holey Elvis |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
That was my first thought, too HD.....
He used the same repressed homo lingo. |
|
|
| Calistan |
Quote: Originally posted by Ass Boil
That was my first thought, too HD.....
He used the same repressed homo lingo. |
He also does the same
spacing thing when he insults people. |
|
|
| harley-davidson |
Quote: That was my first thought, too HD.....
He used the same repressed homo lingo.. |
In my opinion he abandon the Holey Elvis screen name in T O before he was banned and unable to reach these boards under any name, his posts have the identical characteristics as Holey Elvis on all levels right down to the uneducated immature obsession with acts of homosexuality in his insults..........
Just sayin |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
| There is no way to hide that type of mental deficiency..... |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
.
This one is just for you, VaCunt, you big time sucker you...your eyeballs will probably melt just reading it..."but, but, but...". What a douche-bag.
Go (fuck yourself)!:
September Song and Dance
By Eugene Robinson
Friday, June 15, 2007; A21
Here's a surprise: Remember how we were told that if we just waited until the fall, we'd see that George W. Bush's "surge" was working in Iraq? Well, now it turns out that we shouldn't expect answers in September after all.
White House spokesman Tony Snow was purposeful on Wednesday in stomping, trampling, tap-dancing upon and otherwise giving a definitive beat-down to any expectations of a serious, fact-based reassessment of Iraq policy in the fall. Never mind that the White House raised those expectations in the first place.
The September scenario has been a rhetorical mainstay for the administration and its supporters, a major argument for ignoring all the bad news from Iraq and giving Bush's troop escalation a chance to work. Let's wait for Gen. David H. Petraeus, the man who's now running the war, to submit his progress report. At that point, went the White House argument, the "way forward" would become clear.
The fog of war seems to have closed back in. "I have warned from the very beginning about expecting some sort of magical thing to happen in September," Snow told the White House press corps, whose collective recollection was somewhat different. "What I'm saying is, in September you'll have an opportunity to have metrics."
Actually, there are plenty of "metrics" already. A Pentagon report, released Wednesday, finds that since the U.S. troop escalation began, the overall level of violence in Iraq has not decreased, and civilian casualties have actually risen slightly. There has been a decline in violence in Baghdad and Anbar province -- the areas where most of the 28,700 extra "surge" troops are deployed -- but an increase in other parts of the country.
The rest of the report holds few surprises for anyone who has been paying attention. The Iraqi government is no closer to a political agreement that Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds can all live with (assuming such an agreement is even theoretically possible). Militias, not government forces, continue to rule much of Baghdad and the rest of the country. "Sectarian friction" is the euphemism du jour for civil war.
And that, mind you, is the assessment of the U.S. military, not some bunch of "cut-and-run" naysayers. U.S. casualties, meanwhile, are increasing markedly as "surge" troops deploy into hot spots. The only real non-negative news out of Iraq is the dog that didn't bark, at least not yet: The latest bomb attack on the revered Shiite mosque in Samarra has not, as of this writing, triggered the spasm of unrestrained sectarian bloodletting that everyone fears.
In this context, it's easy to understand why the White House would want everyone to forget about the whole September thing. It's obvious that Iraq certainly won't look much better by then and may look considerably worse.
Snow said he was emphasizing "metrics" because he knew that in September, "some people are going to try to make the argument, if the job is not done and if they haven't perfected it and if they haven't achieved all the -- then it's a failure. I wanted to guard against that."
Precisely. In the world of retail, this is known as bait-and-switch.
The thing is that no one should be surprised. On Iraq, Bush has been nothing if not consistent. Never has he given any indication of seriously considering a real change of policy. Every grudging concession, every ballyhooed initiative, every single announced change has been on the margins -- dump Donald Rumsfeld, appoint Petraeus, order the "surge." Politicians, analysts and even generals can talk all they want about civil war, about redeployment, about phased withdrawal. None of that is remotely on the president's agenda.
Will anything Petraeus says in his September report change Bush's determination to fight on in Iraq toward ill-defined "victory" -- to "win" what has become a multifaceted mess of sectarian warfare that everyone is destined to lose? Almost certainly not. If there is a single encouraging paragraph in the entire document, Bush will seize on it as vindication.
Facts on the ground have never been the determining factor in Bush's policy on Iraq. Facts don't even seem to be a particularly important factor. It was considerate of Tony Snow to start preparing us for the inevitable -- and, indirectly, to remind congressional leaders that if they want to change the president's course on Iraq, they won't do it through reasoned persuasion. George Bush can't bring himself to question his basic vision of Iraq, and I doubt he ever will.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...opinion/columns |
First of all, nobody in the White House or the Pentagon ever said that the report from General Petraeus in September would be the defining assessment as to whether or not troops should stay in the country or anything like that. What will be conveyed in September has been contorted by the Democrats into a "defining moment" where the decision to stay or leave will be made at that moment.
What the President has said is exactly what Tony Snow said - that it wouldn't be until September until we would be able to give any sort of assessment as to the effectiveness of the new strategy - and that is only a preliminary assessment. I can guarantee you it will be a mixed bag of both good and bad "news." We have already seen good (dramatic turnaround in Anbar Province, decreased violence in Baghdad) and bad (no political progression from the Iraqi government, less than expected performance overall from the Iraqi Army/Police). Again, it's the Democrats that are making this into a monumental moment where everyone will then need to make a decision about staying or leaving. Keep in mind that this is all political manouvering on their part - they want to have as many votes as possible so any Republican who looks to face a tight race in 2008 and votes to continue to fund the war will be accused of supporting a "lost" war.
I've seen Eugene Robinson on Harball on MSNBC and the guy is obviously a Bush basher, so this comes as no surprise. He is wrong, however, with his "bait and switch" accusation. The Bush Administration never said that the September report would be the final word as to whether or not we should stay in Iraq. He is correct, however, in saying that "Bush will grasp at anything encouraging from the report" and rightly so - I would submit that the good should outweigh the bad. But this is where Robinson exposes his bias - he is essentially saying that Bush will disingenuously grasp at straws to keep the war going at all costs. The President has been clear about the ramifications of cutting and running. He has also been clear about why he thinks the goals can still be accomplished and why it's important to accomplish them.
Anyone could pen a counter argument to this that attacks the Democrats as holding up this report as the Holy Grail and cherry picking the "bad" and using it to justify their doctrine of retreat and defeat. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
:lol:
VaCunt "singing" himself to sleep again with parroted LIES and fantasy...
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
First of all, nobody in the White House or the Pentagon ever said that the report from General Petraeus in September would be the defining assessment as to whether or not troops should stay in the country or anything like that. What will be conveyed in September has been contorted by the Democrats into a "defining moment" where the decision to stay or leave will be made at that moment.
What the President has said is exactly what Tony Snow said - that it wouldn't be until September until we would be able to give any sort of assessment as to the effectiveness of the new strategy - and that is only a preliminary assessment. I can guarantee you it will be a mixed bag of both good and bad "news." We have already seen good (dramatic turnaround in Anbar Province, decreased violence in Baghdad) and bad (no political progression from the Iraqi government, less than expected performance overall from the Iraqi Army/Police). Again, it's the Democrats that are making this into a monumental moment where everyone will then need to make a decision about staying or leaving. Keep in mind that this is all political manouvering on their part - they want to have as many votes as possible so any Republican who looks to face a tight race in 2008 and votes to continue to fund the war will be accused of supporting a "lost" war.
I've seen Eugene Robinson on Harball on MSNBC and the guy is obviously a Bush basher, so this comes as no surprise. He is wrong, however, with his "bait and switch" accusation. The Bush Administration never said that the September report would be the final word as to whether or not we should stay in Iraq. He is correct, however, in saying that "Bush will grasp at anything encouraging from the report" and rightly so - I would submit that the good should outweigh the bad. But this is where Robinson exposes his bias - he is essentially saying that Bush will disingenuously grasp at straws to keep the war going at all costs. The President has been clear about the ramifications of cutting and running. He has also been clear about why he thinks the goals can still be accomplished and why it's important to accomplish them.
Anyone could pen a counter argument to this that attacks the Democrats as holding up this report as the Holy Grail and cherry picking the "bad" and using it to justify their doctrine of retreat and defeat. |
I love how your stupid ass continues to attribute the PENTAGON report to the Democrats.
You are a desperate cunt. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Ass Boil
I love how your stupid ass continues to attribute the PENTAGON report to the Democrats. |
"I mean...am I the crazy one...?" :confused:
. |
|
|
|
|
|
