How did we let 3000 GIs die for the weak ego of a pampered liar and his desperate need to prove he's half the man his father was?

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Bush is a DUMB and so is the rest of the Kool-Aid drinking GOP. Are the GOPers conservatives? NO.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed116.html

It's all but official: The war in Iraq is lost. Report after leaked report says so. Everybody in Washington knows it except that draft-dodging ferret in the White House. Politicians scurry to avoid the blame. One day soon people will ask aloud: How did we let 3000 GIs die for the weak ego of a pampered liar and his desperate need to prove he's half the man his father was?

The troops from now on will die for a war that they already know is over. They are dying for politicians. They are dying for nothing. By now they must know it. It happened to us, too, long ago.

The talk among pols now is about finding an "exit strategy." This means a way of pulling out without risking too many seats in Congress. Screw the troops. We must look to the elections. Do we really want an exit strategy? A friend of mine, with two tours in heavy combat in another war, has devised a splendid exit strategy. It consists of five words: "OK. On the plane. Now." Bring your toothbrush. Everything else stays. We're outa here.

It is a workable exit strategy, one with teeth, and comprehensible to all. But we won't use it. We will continue killing our men, calculatedly, cynically, for the benefit of politicians. The important thing, you see, is the place in history of Bush Puppy. Screw the troops.

Face it. The soldiers are being used. They are being suckered. This isn't new. It happened to my generation. Long after we knew that the war in Vietnam was lost, Lyndon Johnson kept it going to fertilize his vanity, and then Nixon spoke of the need to "save face"—at two hundred dead GIs a week. But of course Johnson and Nixon weren't among the dead, or among the GIs.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Where did Bush lie ? Saying Bush lied and then not offering to say where is the sure sign of an imbecilic Left wing myrmidons who don't know what the hell they're talking about.

It happened to my generation. Long after we knew that the war in Vietnam was lost, Lyndon Johnson kept it going to fertilize his vanity, and then Nixon spoke of the need to "save face"—at two hundred dead GIs a week. But of course Johnson and Nixon weren't among the dead, or among the GIs.

Clowns like this bone head have been trying to relive their 'glory days' ever since. ( The 90's are going to make the 60's look like the 50's! ) They've wanted to make Iraq into 'nam from the start. Oh, and FDR wasn't among the GI's who stormed Normandy either. Guess that makes him vain too.

[Ranger12 46]

You put a laughing similie next to a topic talking about 3000 GIs dying. You are sick and need help.

[AURaptor 1,126]

You put a laughing similie next to a topic talking about 3000 GIs dying. You are sick and need help.

Libs and America haters love to point out how many US Soldiers have died, because they think it refects directly ( and ONLY ) on G.W. Bush. The more that die, the better they like it, because they think it makes W look bad, politically. That's the sole purpose for a-holes like BF here gleefully smile away. He doesn't give a rat's ass at the sacrafice our men and women have given. It's all a political game for him and his kind.

I say they're beyond any help, short of the grave.

[japantiger 4,051]

What else is Fred Reed an expert on? I'd like to understand his other areas of expertise so I can consult this "oracle". I actually read the link on this one; I usually don't since BF's articles usually have nothing to do with....well, anything referenced in the post...but its' a slow work day and I'm the only guy in the office....

"You are being suckered, and so are the social classes that supply the military"...this guy really put this in writing...this is about the lamest cliche' put forth by the quagmire set. Wonder what Social Class I am in? How about TIS or some of the others that post here...how about it guys...which Social Class are you in? This guy must be a genius in that he has classified us all without ever having looked into our backgrounds...phsychic maybe...no, I misspelled ... phsycho....

So what does Fred propose after we pack up and ship out overnight? Libertarians....can't live with them and can't shove an e-tool into their throats .....

[Bottomfeeder 244]

What else is Fred Reed an expert on? I'd like to understand his other areas of expertise so I can consult this "oracle". I actually read the link on this one; I usually don't since BF's articles usually have nothing to do with....well, anything referenced in the post...but its' a slow work day and I'm the only guy in the office....

"You are being suckered, and so are the social classes that supply the military"...this guy really put this in writing...this is about the lamest cliche' put forth by the quagmire set. Wonder what Social Class I am in? How about TIS or some of the others that post here...how about it guys...which Social Class are you in? This guy must be a genius in that he has classified us all without ever having looked into our backgrounds...phsychic maybe...no, I misspelled ... phsycho....

So what does Fred propose after we pack up and ship out overnight? Libertarians....can't live with them and can't shove an e-tool into their throats .....

Here, find out who you are in the food chain.

http://carbon.cudenver.edu/public/sociolog...cs/topic4c.html

1. the US class structure

a. The upper class: the corporate rich

Represents the upper class of the United States, the very wealthy, those in the very top level of corporate America. These families constitute about 0.1% of all families in the United States. Every April Fortune Magazine publishes a list of the wealthiest families in America. Some are quite old (the DuPonts, the Rockefellers, the Hunts), others are very new (Bill Gates, Bill Cosby, Michael Jackson -- mostly media stars). If you do not know who these families are, go to the library and find a copy of Fortune and read up on them. You may also want to visit the Forbes Magazine web site and see a comparative list of America's all-time wealthiest people. You may be surprised at how many have branches in Colorado, then again, maybe not.

The children are products of private secondary schools, selective ivy league or private colleges and universities (including Stanford Univeristy). In these settings the novice members of the upper class learn how to 'govern,' to run large economic enterprises and how to represent the interests of their class in the board and governing rooms of America.

Through membership in exclusive social clubs, and listings in the social register (e.g., the Denver Club in Denver, similar clubs in San Francisco, New York, Boston and Philadelphia) the families maintain links among one another. According to E. Digby Baltzell they can discuss their business and social interests in these contexts without fear of it getting into the hands of the public.

Many of these families do not become directly involved in politics (although some do, the Rockefeller family is notable in this respect -- governors of New York, Virginia and Arkansas). This does not mean that they are not involved in the politics at the local or national level. It was Avirell Harriman's widow that decided Bill Clinton would make a good president of the United States. She held a number of social gatherings to which the Clinton's were invited so they could meet the people with the money needed to support a run for the presidency. She also convinced these fellow members of the elite that Bill Clinton would be the kind of president that would do the things they felt necessary to save the country. Ronald Reagan was the product of similar activites as was Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy.

In summary, the upper class is an exclusive group that tends to marry and socialize entirely within its own groups. They occupy positions of power in the board rooms of American corporations and busines and to be actively involved directly or indirectly in politics.

b. The upper middle class: professional / managerial

This upper middle class consists of lawyers, physicians, other top management of large and medium corporations, top level engineers, some college university professors and others with this type of education and position in the economic structure of the society.

The class is characterized by 'doing.' The have attended public schools, relatively exclusive colleges and Universities, prestigious public Universities.

In general this class carries out the mandates of the upper class or supports them in a variety of ways -- educating their children for example.

c. The middle class: clerical / sales

These are the 'white collar' lower middle management type people, the solid middle class. Occupations tend to be those of teacher, lower level management and so forth. Education is often limited to state colleges and universities, possibly community colleges.

The members of this class do most of the work of the society, manage much of the low level sectors of the organizations. They are often quite conservative and very active in their religious communities. Today this group is a mixed bag, often including the small business owner and family farmer. Individuals in these last two groupings often feel threatened by the changes in the society and by large corporations, government and business.

d. The working class: skilled and unskilled

The working class, what is often seen as the backbone of America. This class consists of people who build the goods that we all consume (if they are indeed made in America!). These are the truck drivers who deliver the goods to us, the policeman who maintain order, firefighters who keep it cool. This class also includes those who have very minimal skills.

It used to be that one could make a good living as a member of this class, often with very little formal education (in the 1940s and 1950s some high school was all that was needed). The cities of the upper Ohio Valley in Ohio, the manufacturing communities of Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana are filled with these families. The towns of Virginia and Pennsylvania also have their share of these families (steel workers and coal miners). As more and more manufacturing is leaving the United States this class is under severe pressure. It is increasingly difficult for their children to follow in their parents footsteps. It is increasingly difficult for individuals with less than a high school education to find well-paying jobs and to be able to support the life styles that their parents found very familiar and comfortable.

e. The lower class: the poor / an underclass?

This is often seen as an underclass, a group that is perpetually underprivileged, often not even managing to get by. There is a very fine line between this group of people and the ones in the two 'classes' above. Any kind of financial downturn, unemployment or major medical crisis will put many people in the above two groups into this one.

The members of this class are characterized as having little formal education and few if any marketable skills. Their existence is from hand to mouth, day-to-day. For many there are also health problems (mental and physical). Marriage comes early and with it parenthood. Poverty or near poverty is a standard condition of life for the members of this class (however, do keep in mind that poverty is relative to the wealth of the society).

The difficulties faced by this class is such that attempts to deal with any single feature of their lives is doomed to failure. For example, it is often argued that all that is needed for this class to join the main stream is a steady job. However, that is predicated on a better education. Achievement of either is often hindered by severe health problems that keep them from focusing on study or from working steadily as is expected by the middle and upper classes.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

You put a laughing similie next to a topic talking about 3000 GIs dying. You are sick and need help.

That's not what I meant and you know it. Bush is a dumb@$$, that's what funny. The three-thousand dead GIs is a resultant of the facts. It's not my fault that you voted for an idiot...the man is delusional, he doesn't even realize what he saying anymore. He must be removed from office for failure to maintain mental stability and integrity. Bush has too much brain damage. That dude is long gone.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/12/21/12969/

It's too late to send more troops, the window has closed. We wanted more troops when Al Zarqawi was killed. The momentum was in our favor, but now it won't make a difference. This is more evidence of the fact that they don't want to win this war. Instead, win or lose, they want a long drawn out conflict to to which they can profit. Not fooled. Cheney did 911.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...st&p=242062

In December 2003, months after the Bush administration's reckless assertions about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction proved to be false, ABC's Diane Sawyer pressed Bush about justifying a war to the American public by stating "as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he [saddam] could move to acquire those weapons." Put on the spot, Bush resorted to his punk college ways by responding: "So what's the difference?"

Two months later, Bush weaseled again. When put on the spot by Tim Russert, of Meet the Press, Bush justified his illegal, immoral invasion of Iraq by asserting: "Saddam Hussein was dangerous, and so I'm not going [sic] leave him in power and trust a madman…He had the ability to make weapons, at the very minimum." Such a snotty and infantile excuse for sending thousands to their deaths should have persuaded even the most brain-dead of Bush supporters that he had wasted his vote on a reckless punk.

http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/punk.html

[AURaptor 1,126]

....the man is delusional, he doesn't even realize what he saying anymore. He must be removed .......for failure to maintain mental stability and integrity. *He has too much brain damage. That dude is long gone.

Sounds a lot like reasons to remove BF from AUNation. Hmmmm

Bush is a dumb@$$, that's what funny. - BF

Oh yea, name calling just reinforces the fact that you have no argument. Go back to school little man. - BF replies to himself

BF, you could have this argument all by yourself , and the rest of us should just sit back and watch the insanity insue.

[DKW 86 7,440]

Stop the name calling or I willm start by giving several of you a vacation.

[Ranger12 46]

That's not what I meant and you know it. Bush is a dumb@$$, that's what funny. The three-thousand dead GIs is a resultant of the facts.

So, you are saying that because Bush is stupid and it resulted in the death of GIs, the fact that Bush is stupid is funny? Just to play devil's advocate here, if President's stupidity resulted in thousands of deaths, wouldn't that President's stupidity be considered a tragedy instead of funny? By saying it is funny, is that not making light of the deaths?

I just can't for the life of me seeing any sane reason to put a laughing similie next to a post about soldiers dying, regardless of politics.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

That's not what I meant and you know it. Bush is a dumb@$$, that's what funny. The three-thousand dead GIs is a resultant of the facts.

So, you are saying that because Bush is stupid and it resulted in the death of GIs, the fact that Bush is stupid is funny? Just to play devil's advocate here, if President's stupidity resulted in thousands of deaths, wouldn't that President's stupidity be considered a tragedy instead of funny? By saying it is funny, is that not making light of the deaths?

I just can't for the life of me seeing any sane reason to put a laughing similie next to a post about soldiers dying, regardless of politics.

I'm sorry it offended you, so I removed it. I apologize for offending another veteran.

This war is getting out of hand and it doesn't look good because the wrong people are making the calls. The inexperienced are not doing what the experienced tells they should do, so we all lose. It's not funny when an American soldier dies, but what is funny is the insanity that is supported by those diehard people who back the policy that kills the American soldier. It doesn't make any $#@%ing sense. It's stupid and outdated. What have we gained by this war? Come on give to me, and none of that bull$#!! about being attack since 911 or removal ruthless dictator (heck, we have two ruthless dictators in the White House). Really give me something I can chew on (meat). I guess if you own Haliburton stock, somewhere in your portfolio, you made out good on blood-money. I, thank God, don't have to live with that.

"But, I think, when I get back, it's time for me to retire. If I get back."

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061219/19iraq.htm

Oh yea, Balboa is a fictional character. I don't read fiction.

[bojack34 2]

You put a laughing similie next to a topic talking about 3000 GIs dying. You are sick and need help.

That's not what I meant and you know it. Bush is a dumb@$$, that's what funny. The three-thousand dead GIs is a resultant of the facts. It's not my fault that you voted for an idiot...the man is delusional, he doesn't even realize what he saying anymore. He must be removed from office for failure to maintain mental stability and integrity. Bush has too much brain damage. That dude is long gone.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/12/21/12969/

It's too late to send more troops, the window has closed. We wanted more troops when Al Zarqawi was killed. The momentum was in our favor, but now it won't make a difference. This is more evidence of the fact that they don't want to win this war. Instead, win or lose, they want a long drawn out conflict to to which they can profit. Not fooled. Cheney did 911.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...st&p=242062

I wander what you think of JFK. All the liberals talk about how great of a president he was but did you know he was the first prez to put ground troops in Vietnam. I doubt u did.

In December 2003, months after the Bush administration's reckless assertions about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction proved to be false, ABC's Diane Sawyer pressed Bush about justifying a war to the American public by stating "as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he [saddam] could move to acquire those weapons." Put on the spot, Bush resorted to his punk college ways by responding: "So what's the difference?"

Two months later, Bush weaseled again. When put on the spot by Tim Russert, of Meet the Press, Bush justified his illegal, immoral invasion of Iraq by asserting: "Saddam Hussein was dangerous, and so I'm not going [sic] leave him in power and trust a madman…He had the ability to make weapons, at the very minimum." Such a snotty and infantile excuse for sending thousands to their deaths should have persuaded even the most brain-dead of Bush supporters that he had wasted his vote on a reckless punk.

http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/punk.html

[bojack34 2]

I wander what you think of JFK. All the liberals talk about how great of a president he was but did you know he was the first prez to put ground troops in Vietnam. I doubt u did.

[AURaptor 1,126]

More Americans died on the roads of Georgia over the past 3 days ( 17 ) while driving than soldiers died in Iraq.

I guess we should outlaw driving now too, huh?

[Bottomfeeder 244]

I wander what you think of JFK. All the liberals talk about how great of a president he was but did you know he was the first prez to put ground troops in Vietnam. I doubt u did.

I don't care. That was then, this is now. The only thing I see useful there is we should learn from our mistakes.