Reply With QuoteThis was one of the most asinine comments I've seen him make. Makes him sound like an REMF. Come to think of it, he is an REMF.Originally Posted by XPav
Dear Iraqi Irregulars,
Please attack our soldiers.
Sincerely,
George Bush.
PS: I want to cut benefits for soldiers so that it won't cost me that much. That way I can give more money back to my rich friends.
This was one of the most asinine comments I've seen him make. Makes him sound like an REMF. Come to think of it, he is an REMF.
But, realize, that most Republicans are stuck up, down-to-Earth assholes who like a man who can shittalk with the best of them.
This attitude which peeks its way out on occasion and Frist's campaigning for an amendment banning gay marriages are two reasons why I can never vote Republican. The reasons for not voting for a Democrat, however, are running neck and neck.
Damn Tyjenks, maybe you should move to Australia. :lol:
Well, I was pretty disgusted with Bush's "Bring them on" comment, but realistically, this is probably not a bad move politically. It's not like his comments are actually going to increase the number of militants shooting at us in Iraq. Anyone who wants to take a crack at us already is, and his belligerent comments will have next to zero effect on how many people hate us.
Domestically I do not think it's a bad move. It does increase the amount those of us who don't like him think he's an idiot (but we are pretty much lost to him anyway) and I think it increases the rally around the flag effect. He's treating the whole thing like a football game, and trying to get Americans' patriotic fevor up -- as in "yeah we can whip them, bring it on."
I think the only real potential cost to him is the effect this might have on potential foreign allies. I'm sure this doesn't play well in Europe for example. However, as with Americans who don't like him, I think he's already done such a poor job with Europe that they're not going to like him no matter what he says.
Maybe I need to give the American people more credit on this matter than I do. But honestly, I don't see this kind of asinine comment as hurting Bush at all.
With Tudor and Kleve?!?! Fuck that.
My problem is that it was an asinine comment.
Can someone please explain to me how this is supposed to make us safer as a country?
I completely agree with you Tyjenks, I thought it was an incredibly stupid comment to make. I just don't think it's going to hurt him at all politically and might actually help him. Of course if things in Iraq suddenly take a substantial turn for the worse he will look pretty stupid. But I don't think that's all that likely to happen. It is possible, but I think things will probably continue at the current level for the forseeable future or maybe quiet down just a little bit. If we keep on losing 1-2 soldiers a week, at some point, it won't even make the headlines. And I doubt anyone will have the guts to call Bush on it during the debates, because frankly I don't think it will play very well -- after all, realistically now that we're in, we're in, we really cannot leave until the job is done.My problem is that it was an asinine comment.
I will say thought that if I were a soldier on the ground in Iraq I'd be pretty pissed to hear him talk like that.
I can't imagine FDR or Lincoln saying it, that's for sure. Or Eisenhower. Or Kennedy. Even Reagan seems unlikely.
If we were not losing the soldiers as you pointed out, his comment could be set aside as playing to his base. Since we are losing men/women, its like he is saying, "Well, you are only getting a couple a day now. Can't you do better than that? I double dog dare ya'!" Maybe people will blow it off anyway and it will not hurt him a bit. If I were a Democratic Congressman ***shivers***, I would be loading that up in my media weapon of choice and firing away at him.
Again, as a voter and, yes, proud American, who believes Bush, Jr. is really a decent, caring guy at heart, that wass a moronic thing to say.
Actually my first thought when I saw "Bring them on" was remembering Reagan's comment about bombing the Soviet Union when he thought the microphone was off. Of course in Reagan's defense he did think the mic was off, Bush was making a public comment.
Finally, a politician that doesn't mince words and everybody wants some kind of Clinton to spin the hell out of everything.
You guys are ding-dongs.
The comment is incredibly stupid. Especially when the attacks seem to be getting more organized by the day. How long before someone rams a truck bomb into a barracks and kills a few dozen US soldiers? Bush's comments will come back to haunt him if the situation in Iraq isn't calmed in short order.
There's not mincing words, ala Teddy Roosevelt, and then there's sounding like a mullet-sporting redneck thug, ala, well, Junior.
Well, it was a joke.Actually my first thought when I saw "Bring them on" was remembering Reagan's comment about bombing the Soviet Union when he thought the microphone was off. Of course in Reagan's defense he did think the mic was off, Bush was making a public comment.
I think a better comparision would be if Reagan had said "Come on, I dare you to send those T-72s across the Fulda gap! We'll own ya!"
You have to love Teddy "Don't vote my way and I'll make sure the only thing you represent is Charlie's Fried Chicken back home in Kentucky. Don't like it? Then guh, guh, guh, go the fuck back home, redneck" Roosevelt. I know I would've felt threatened as a congressmen under his presidency, fuck, I don't wanna know how the enemies felt.
I could agree with you whole-heartedly if only that was his common practice. The problem is his spin cycle, as printed by his writers, is on 98% of the time. He turns it off once in a blue moon and something like this comes out. I bet after he stepped away from the mic, his lap dogs politely said, "I have a little suggestion, Mr. President. Howzabout we just stick to the script from now on? OK?"
I agree they weren't the same, but they were both shows of false or foolish bravado.Well, it was a joke.Actually my first thought when I saw "Bring them on" was remembering Reagan's comment about bombing the Soviet Union when he thought the microphone was off. Of course in Reagan's defense he did think the mic was off, Bush was making a public comment.
I think a better comparision would be if Reagan had said "Come on, I dare you to send those T-72s across the Fulda gap! We'll own ya!"
"Finally, a politician that doesn't mince words and everybody wants some kind of Clinton to spin the hell out of everything."
The spin is coming; Rove is probably working on it right now.
Great Virtuous Spirit?
Yeah, Bush was just speaking off the cuff. And just happened to be standing in front of a painting of Teddy Roosevelt when he turned into a Tough Guy. :roll:
Why the hell are we even fighting over there still? There are no WPMs and Saddam is ousted, if not dead. We set up a government quickly in Afghanistan. Let's do the same and get the hell out of Iraq. Bring them on should be bring them home.
Well, the government in Afghanistan really only controls Kabul, and it's hardly the model of what we want in the Middle East. With Afghanistan, there was also early agreement on how to choose a new regime with the Loya Girga or whatever it was. But there is still no real civil society in much of the country and the defense minister has a private army much larger than the US trained Official Afghan Army. And US troops are still in Afghanistan. Not 150k strong, but there.
Iraq doesn't have any traditional system of choosing leaders (the first Iraqi king was established at Baghdad by the British), no figurehead exile who can bring legitimacy to a process (like the Afghan king) and a lot of people who were deeply involved in the last government running around. Unlike Afghanistan, there is no Iraqi Liberation Army to back up US troops or to pass off patrol duties to. The Kurdish army isn't going anywhere south of Mosul.
Troy
You realize how many people tool over those speeches, how much more he spends on polling. The aircraft carrier stunt? Setting up those massive lights to illuminate the Statue of Liberty for his speech?
Mark
Iraq is not Afghanistan.
Yeah, Afghanistan doesn't have alot of oil.
Mark:
Halliburton hasn't milked all it can out of their contracts yet.
While both are true, neither is really pertinent as to the military and governmental difficulties which are completely different in the two country's. Your two posts did beat separate dead horses rather nicely, but did not address Troy's valid arguements as to why we are still in Iraq when Afghanistan was handled more easily. In fact, even though it was brief, Russ' point was pretty much the Cliff Notes version of TSG's and well put, also.Mark:
Halliburton hasn't milked all it can out of their contracts yet.
Which is interesting, now that the head of the EU isn't all that diplomatic, either.
Posting Permissions