The President’s Speech at Ft. Bragg, N.C.

[Back]

Full text of speech (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-28-bush-text_x.htm) provided by the White House.

Saddam himself was not mentioned once.

if that was the worst you could come up with backlash Im happy... sad that i missed it. thanks for providing the text

[Back]

Figured I’d take it easy. Besides, there are so many glaring contradictions to what he has said in the past I couldn’t even list them all. And thats not even taking into account how it stands in the global community.

But here’s one really nasty critique for you. He doesn't want to set a timeline because that tells the enemy your plans. Well, what about saying that we have met an objective by getting them all in Iraq so we can face them there and not here? Just like the run up to the invasion. If Saddam had WMDs, he sure as hell had enough time to get rid of them before our attack.

um, thats nothing new, its been said 1000 times by 1000 people. Saying we will get out on this date is stupid at least.

[Artha]

If Saddam had WMDs, he sure as hell had enough time to get rid of them before our attack.

Wait, you're a conservative now!?!?

[Back]

Maybe on your channels, but this year is the first time this civilian has heard it offered as yet another legitimate excuse to invade Iraq.

If Saddam had WMDs, he sure as hell had enough time to get rid of them before our attack.


You do understand that the only reason that happened is because people like you demanded we go to the UN first.

[Back]

Originally posted by Artha

If Saddam had WMDs, he sure as hell had enough time to get rid of them before our attack.

Wait, you're a conservative now!?!?

Just someone with some common sense. ::cough:: Well, how about I’ve read Sun-Tzu?

[Artha]

Maybe on your channels, but this year is the first time this civilian has heard it offered as yet another legitimate excuse to invade Iraq.
Heh, for what it's worth, I've used the exact same argument on these boards. You know, that whole "Bush lied!!!" thing.

[Back]

Originally posted by Dave

If Saddam had WMDs, he sure as hell had enough time to get rid of them before our attack.


You do understand that the only reason that happened is because people like you demanded we go to the UN first.

Oh, but wait, the reality of it is, Dave, he dosen’t, and didn’t, according to the FBI, the CIA, the UN weapons inspectors and everybody else in the world.

Notice I used IF.

[DeV]

Originally posted by Backlash
He doesn't want to set a timeline because that tells the enemy your plans. :rolleyes:

At this point we'd be happy knowing if we've actually won the war, if we're not quite there yet, but close, damn, something along the lines of actual goals for completion, not necessarily pulling out completely. That wouldn't even be right at this stage and would be a great disservice to the people of Iraq.

I think your bias is getting in the way.
Completion, when WE feel the Iraqi defence forces can fend for themselves against the terrorists and foreign threats.

That is the only goal that is needed.

Which has been said 1000's of times by 1000's of people including myself on the boards before.

[Edited on 6-29-2005 by Dave]

[DeV]

Originally posted by Dave
I think your bias is getting in the way.
Completion, when WE feel the Iraqi defence forces can fend for themselves against the terrorists and foreign threats.
Nah, I think your bias is getting in the way. When the Secretary of state can't even present a somewhat accurate figure of how many trainees their are that doesn't conflict with that of Rumsfield and Iraqi officials, then I'll assume their speaking in circles and if you consider that bias, so be it.

Go back and read the thread where we were discussing that very topic. I gave you the most accurate numbers in accordance with the State Departments ongoing count. If you wish to you can even research it back to when numbers were first being collected.

You cant expect somebody to be able to pull numbers out of their head whenever any question is asked.

[Edited on 6-29-2005 by Dave]

[Makkah]

<<Go back and read the thread where we were discussing that very topic. I gave you the most accurate numbers in accordance with the State Departments ongoing count.>>

I don't think her point was to get someone to quote a number. It's that everyone gave strikingly different numbers as answers. Great communication there.

[Edited on 6-29-2005 by Makkah]

[Back]

Originally posted by Dave
You cant expect somebody to be able to pull numbers out of their head whenever any question is asked.

In your case, sure, but when it comes to something as important as war, you would hope people in charge of it could.

But “We don’t do body counts” - Gen. Tommy Franks