 |
reply posted on 8-11-2006 @ 10:08 PM by xpert11
|
 Originally posted by kojac
I can bet International citizens all around the world are cheering that there has been a voter back lash against the Hawks in the Whitehouse and one
of the instigators of this whole "War on Terror" mess has been shown the door. 
Im one of those International citizens while I cant speake for anyone I wont be throwing a party. Despite being glad at Rumsfeld leaving office I dont
think that much will change in Iraq.
I doubt it after all many of the Dems supported the insanity that is the occupaton of Iraq. The Dems will blow a lot of hot air and take little
action.
[edit on 8-11-2006 by xpert11]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 8-11-2006 @ 10:21 PM by kleverone
|
I watched a newsclip 2day where Bush said he didn't want to say anything until after the election because he did not want to sway the vote! So he
basically confirms what we already knew. He is a liar and only tells Americans things according to there "sway value". What a great President!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 01:56 AM by SpankyTheCranky
|
Anyone notice THIS on MSNBC?
Check out the screenshot of MSNBC below - I have highlighted the word that caught my attention. NBC have used the term "nominate" instead of "tap"
in the body of the main article - go figure.
How long until this one makes it down the memory hole / gets "revised"?
i131.photobucket.com...
Sorry for crossposting guys!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 11:59 AM by Benevolent Heretic
|
Originally posted by kleverone
So he basically confirms what we already knew. He is a liar and only tells Americans things according to there "sway value". What a great
President!
Exactly. He either lied to us before the election or he lied to us after. It amazes me how he can stand up there and say that he told us a lie (that
Rummy was going to stay regardless of election results) so as to manipulate people's thinking. He lied, but it was for our own good, so we should
just accept it.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 12:08 PM by Boatphone
|
If he fired Rummy before the elections you people would have said he was just trying to sway people at the last minute! No matter what you folks will
just keep on crying foul...absurd!
-- Boat
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 12:11 PM by Benevolent Heretic
|
No, Boat, we're crying "Liar". At least I am. He either lied before or after the elections. He lied. That's all I'm saying. It's not a surprise,
I'm not saying I expect anything different. I'm just saying he lied and justified it by telling us that it was for our own good.
Are you disagreeing with that? Are you saying he didn't lie?
[edit on 9-11-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 12:14 PM by dgtempe
|
On another note, does it make you all feel warm and fuzzy knowing that the "new" Rumsfeld is a referral from daddy Bush? 
and YES, he lied, as always.
[edit on 9-11-2006 by dgtempe]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 12:18 PM by Peruvianmonk
|
All i can say is about time!!! Cheny Bush Rice all of them should be right behind. The democrats should try and impeach him like they did to Clinton
for a blowjob, but of course they have no bottle!! 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 02:19 PM by WestPoint23
|
Oh please, you guys are grasping for straws and making a big deal out of nothing, people change their mind all the time, and he did, in the new
political climate it was better to let Rumsfeld go.
Originally posted by dgtempe
On another note, does it make you all feel warm and fuzzy knowing that the "new" Rumsfeld is a referral from daddy Bush?
Yes it does, but not for the reasons you think.
[edit on 9-11-2006 by WestPoint23]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 02:25 PM by marg6043
|
Yes I will be watching this new appointee, He is one of the Bush Carlyle group investors, also he alone with Baker were on the called
bipartisan group overseen the Iraqi problem.
Also it has ties with Haliburton, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Occurs the controversial Energy task force that were making plans about how to make the
best of the Iraqi oil resources.
Yes this one is one very chosen one indeed. 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 02:26 PM by sardion2000
|
Originally posted by dgtempe
On another note, does it make you all feel warm and fuzzy knowing that the "new" Rumsfeld is a referral from daddy Bush?
[edit on 9-11-2006 by dgtempe]
At least daddy Bush didn't make the same mistake sonny Bush did. He at least knew when to get the hell out of Dodge. 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 02:28 PM by Benevolent Heretic
|
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Oh please, you guys are grasping for straws and making a big deal out of noting, people change their mind all the time, and he did, in the new
political climate it was better to let Rumsfeld go.
No, West, he had already decided to let Rummy go. He spoke with his replacement the weekend previous to the election. Tony Snow and Bush himself have
said that this was in the works before the election, but when Bush was asked if Rummy would resign given a Dem win, Bush emphatically said no. He said
that Rummy will be with him till the end, even though he was already picking his replacement.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 06:51 PM by xpert11
|
The man who had overall carriage of the war was Donald Rumsfeld. Powell was fired because he was blamed for failing to mobilise international support
behind the war.
After Bush sacked Powell he offered Armitage a couple of plum assignments including the post of head of the CIA. Armitage turned them down and left
the Administration: "I couldn't work in an administration that could fire Powell and keep Rumsfeld."
As Rumsfeld said: "Stuff happens."
It took a brutal electoral thrashing in the mid-term congressional elections this week to make the cocksure George Bush show his first real contrition
in six years, and for Rumsfeld finally to be held accountable for the strategic disasters of his war.
I found this article Richard Armitage makes some interesting comments even if it is just a part of the blame game.
Cheers xpert11.
[edit on 9-11-2006 by xpert11]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 14-11-2006 @ 10:37 PM by kleverone
|
What is made extremely visible in this case as in most with Bush, is that he posesses no remorse about lying and simply views it as "for the good of
America". What truly frightens me is how he is able to do this to the point of apparently rationalizing the things he lies about into truths that he
has mentally convinced himself to be the latter all along. This man still believes we should "stay the course" in Iraq. I slightly question his
sanity at this point, to be completely frank.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
