The McCain Thread

[Tron5000]

It wasn't an unanimous support for the invasion, that what I'm saying.

And it wasn't just support from our "closest allies," that's what I'm saying.

 

[Excel]

The contrast between these two is going to be something to behold. Not in policy, but in style, structure and appearance. Obama just has to do a jumping jack and he'll win the debates. And now McCain wants to do town hall meetings? Is this even wise? I know he does better when he does not have a teleprompter, but what does happen in that instance is he forgets what he says on a week to week basis and then contradicts himself! Good lord. We're in for a ****ing show my friends. GAH! NOW I'M SAYING IT!

Word, cant wait

Bush is such an idiot that he was able to hoodwink the entire US Congress, UN, Great Britain, Australia, France...he's so remarkably stupid that he was able to fool the entire world into agreeing that we should invade Iraq. Yes indeed, what a fool.

Didn't fool Barack

Where was McCains expirience on that brilliant call, eh?

 

[Raiden]

And it wasn't just support from our "closest allies," that's what I'm saying.

Compare the support US got from their Afghan invasion with their Iraq's, and you see the drop in support. Afghan war was the right decision, but it was hard to justify for Iraq war and now more people than ever believe it was the wrong decision.

 

[Tron5000]

Word, cant wait



Didn't fool Barack

Where was McCains expirience on that brilliant call, eh?

Yeah, Obama's so smart that he saw through President Bush's lies and has always opposed the war. But once he was elected to the US Senate, he voted FOR every war funding bill until he decided to run for President. That's when he stopped voting for these bills.

But he's ALWAYS been opposed, he says? Interesting...

 

[Excel]

Yeah, Obama's so smart that he saw through President Bush's lies and has always opposed the war. But once he was elected to the US Senate, he voted FOR every war funding bill until he decided to run for President. That's when he stopped voting for these bills.

But he's ALWAYS been opposed, he says? Interesting...

Well, uh, our idiot President already had troops there...what was Obama supposed to do??? Not vote for funding to give them the **** they need to survive, seeing as they are ALREADY THERE?

You guys are gonna have to try harder

 

[Tron5000]

Compare the support US got from their Afghan invasion with their Iraq's, and you see the drop in support. Afghan war was the right decision, but it was hard to justify for Iraq war and now more people than ever believe it was the wrong decision.

If "it was hard to justify Iraq war," then why did all of the above nations find it justifiable to be involved?

 

[Tron5000]

Well, uh, our idiot President already had troops there...what was Obama supposed to do??? Not vote for funding to give them the **** they need to survive, seeing as they are ALREADY THERE?

You guys are gonna have to try harder

Then I'll just try using Obama's own words:

http://townhall.com/Columnists/Jona...t_on_iraq_falls_short?page=full&comments=true

After the invasion, Obama did not favor an immediate pullout from Iraq. Right around the time he delivered his brilliant keynote address to the Democratic National Convention in July 2004, he told the Chicago Tribune that when it came to the war, "there's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage."

In other words, while he opposed the war, he was committed to Bush's initially flawed military strategy.

Now, it is from Townhall.com, so I guess the dastardly Jonah Goldberg could just be making this up. But that's not the case.

 

[Raiden]

If "it was hard to justify Iraq war," then why did all of the above nations find it justifiable to be involved?

If the Iraq war was indeed justifiable, then US should have no problem finding the same support they received from the Afghan war, esp. after 9/11. The fact that there were many more nations opposed to this war suggested that US did not convince the rest of the world that they were justified to invade Iraq. The dissenting nations found US's claim that Iraq had WMD to be not as bulletproof as they had claimed, even after Colin Powell went to the UN to drum up support for the war.

 

[Excel]

The troops were already there...explain what he should have done...

 

[Tron5000]

If the Iraq war was indeed justifiable, then US should have no problem finding the same support they received from the Afghan war, esp. after 9/11. The fact that there were many more nations opposed to this war suggested that US did not convince the rest of the world that they were justified to invade Iraq. The dissenting nations found US's claim that Iraq had WMD to be not as bulletproof as they had claimed, even after Colin Powell went to the UN to drum up support for the war.

My question is: if the war was not justifiable, then why did the nations I listed feel it necessary to participate? Were they all tricked by the sinister idiot George Bush? Are they all just so much dumber than the idiot President that he pulled the wool over their eyes?

 

[Matt]

The troops were already there...explain what he should have done...

Things Obama could've done:

- Called for a redeployment.
- Called for an immeidiate withdrawl of all troops.
- Called for new strategies on the ground.
- Not voted to fund the war after entering Senate.
- Called for new generals to be put in command of the ground troops.

Do I really need to go on?

 

[Excel]

Things Obama could've done:

- Called for a redeployment.
- Called for an immeidiate withdrawl of all troops.
- Called for new strategies on the ground.
- Not voted to fund the war after entering Senate.
- Called for new generals to be put in command of the ground troops.

Do I really need to go on?

Please, Obama was powerless. Any cries for those woulda been ignored. The only thing he could do that had any real say was his vote's, and he voted to help the soliders there on the ground. Cant argue with that.

 

[Matt]

My question is: if the war was not justifiable, then why did the nations I listed feel it necessary to participate? Were they all tricked by the sinister idiot George Bush? Are they all just so much dumber than the idiot President that he pulled the wool over their eyes?

My feelings on the Iraq War:

The cause of the war (Freedom for Iraqis) was justifiable. The intent of the war, by George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, and Condi Rice was not. They had no interest in catching terrorists or overthrowing an evil regime. Furthermore, the planning was naive and the strategies were shortsighted.

 

[Tron5000]

Things Obama could've done:

- Called for a redeployment.
- Called for an immeidiate withdrawl of all troops.
- Called for new strategies on the ground.
- Not voted to fund the war after entering Senate.
- Called for new generals to be put in command of the ground troops.

Do I really need to go on?

And apparently he should not have said, in July of 2004, that "there's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage."

I smell something. Is it BO? Or BS?

 

[Matt]

Please, Obama was powerless. Any cries for those woulda been ignored. The only thing he could do that had any real say was his vote's, and he voted to help the soliders there on the ground. Cant argue with that.

So let me get this straight, a man in the United States Senate feels powerless to effect United States policy so he just curls into a little ball, keeps his mouth shut, and votes how Bush wants...does that sum it up? Wow, such an inspirational leader you're voting for.

 

[Tron5000]

My feelings on the Iraq War:

The cause of the war (Freedom for Iraqis) was justifiable. The intent of the war, by George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, and Condi Rice was not. They had no interest in catching terrorists or overthrowing an evil regime. Furthermore, the planning was naive and the strategies were shortsighted.

As far as your last sentence goes, here's a reason I'm a McCain supporter (from the same article previously linked to):

Meantime, there was the supposedly dogmatic McCain challenging Bush's approach to Iraq nearly from the get-go. In the summer of 2003, in response to the upswing in violence, he called for "a lot more military" in order to win in Iraq. He said he had "no confidence" in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. In May 2004, McCain told ABC's George Stephanopoulos that "we've got to adjust to the realities of the situation as it exists and that means doing whatever is necessary and acting decisively."

 

[Excel]

I wouldnt say hes been doing that the past year, and I am pretty certain he won't be doing that in office

 

[Raiden]

My question is: if the war was not justifiable, then why did the nations I listed feel it necessary to participate? Were they all tricked by the sinister idiot George Bush? Are they all just so much dumber than the idiot President that he pulled the wool over their eyes?

I chalk it up as the influence US has to those nations, and as the only superpower in the world after Cold War US does have tremendous influence, through foreign aid, military base, economic alliance, etc. The fact is, many countries did not buy US's assertion that Iraq had WMD (which later found to be false after all), and US did not get the support from the UN Security Council, but they invaded anyway. If Iraq's case was as solid as Al Qaeda/Taliban connection in Afghan, US wouldn't have had the opposition in the first place.

 

[Tron5000]

I wouldnt say hes been doing that the past year, and I am pretty certain he won't be doing that in office

No, in office he'll just change his mind from one day to the next on whether Iran is a "threat" ("serious," "grave" or otherwise). He'll be friends with a man one day and excommunicate him from the Obama camp the next. He'll hold unconditional talks with leaders of terrorist-sponsoring nations, which just so happen to be killing our soldiers as we speak.

That's some "change" I can't wait for.

 

[Excel]

No, in office he'll just change his mind from one day to the next on whether Iran is a "threat" ("serious," "grave" or otherwise). He'll be friends with a man one day and excommunicate him from the Obama camp the next. He'll hold unconditional talks with leaders of terrorist-sponsoring nations, which just so happen to be killing our soldiers as we speak.

That's some "change" I can't wait for.

Still better than W 3.0

 

[Tron5000]

I chalk it up as the influence US has to those nations, and as the only superpower in the world after Cold War US does have tremendous influence, through foreign aid, military base, economic alliance, etc. The fact is, many countries did not buy US's assertion that Iraq had WMD (which later found to be false after all), and US did not get the support from the UN Security Council, but they invaded anyway. If Iraq's case was as solid as Al Qaeda/Taliban connection in Afghan, US wouldn't have had the opposition in the first place.

Why would the UN give support for the war, when Saddam and Little Annan were making billions on the Oil-For-Food deal? When Germany and France initially opposed the war in the UN because they had sweetheart oil deals with Saddam? When half the Security Council is made up of nations that support terrorism and abhor the US?

F the UN.

 

[Tron5000]

Still better than W 3.0

Considering how often Bush and McCain have butted heads on differing issues (Iraq War, for example), I find it odd how you refer to McCain as "W 3.0." Care to enlighten me?

 

[Excel]

What'd they butt heads over? How many soliders should be in a war we shouldnt be in? Please enlighten me how somebody who wont end the war, somebody who has addmitted he deosnt **** bout the economy....will be better.

 

[Tron5000]

What'd they butt heads over? How many soliders should be in a war we shouldnt be in? Please enlighten me how somebody who wont end the war, somebody who has addmitted he deosnt **** bout the economy....will be better.

So you don't want to explain why you consider McCain to be "W 3.0." Right on.

They butted heads on the tactics, force and military personnel that should be used in Iraq. They butted heads on campaign finance reform. They butted heads on several spending bills that McCain felt should be stripped of earmarks.

And if you want to talk about the economy, Obama will break us all. His trillion dollars in "social programs," his undying love of the Labor Unions over Capitalist economics, his belief that Government, rather than the free-market economy, knows best how to run (and regulate) business, his insistence on taxpayer-funded national health care for all (including those with the ability to work and pay taxes yet choose not to)...these ideals will decimate our economy. Forget about the income gap. Everyone will be poor.

 

[Excel]

Voted for 95% of Bush's policies...W 3.0 here we come