T1B

Return fire from the right
The idea of talks with Iran and Syria riles many conservatives. Some say the focus was on an exit, not a victory.
By Greg Miller
Times Staff Writer

December 8, 2006

WASHINGTON — Right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh called it "The Iraq Surrender Group."

The conservative New York Post tabloid doctored a front-page photo to depict the co-chairmen of the Iraq Study Group in primate fur, under the headline "Surrender Monkeys," inspired by a frequently quoted line from "The Simpsons."

And conservative commentator William J. Bennett vented in volcanic fashion. "In all my time in Washington I've never seen such smugness, arrogance, or such insufferable moral superiority," Bennett wrote on the National Review website. "Self-congratulatory. Full of itself. Horrible."

...

Seen any mirrors lately, Bill?

That's the problem with Washington right now. You have the war hawks and the chicken hawks, and very little in between. The adminsitration wants to keep force feeding democracy to a people and culture that doesn't want it, and the old men who formed the study group want to give away the henhouse to the foxes in order to afford a shot at getting out of iraq.

What we don't need is to bring the iranians and syrians in and concede to every single demand they make in order to get them to stop funding and supporting the civil war in iraq. Unfortunately we don't have a very smart president in charge right now, so whatever decision he ends up with is sure to be the mother of all cluster fucks, as usual.

Mister Bushice wrote: What we don't need is to bring the iranians and syrians in and concede to every single demand they make in order to get them to stop funding and supporting the civil war in iraq. Unfortunately we don't have a very smart president in charge right now, so whatever decision he ends up with is sure to be the mother of all cluster fucks, as usual.

Shirley .... you jest.

I wish.

and don't call me surely. ;)

Mister Bushice wrote:
What we don't need is to bring the iranians and syrians in and concede to every single demand they make in order to get them to stop funding and supporting the civil war in iraq. Unfortunately we don't have a very smart president in charge right now, so whatever decision he ends up with is sure to be the mother of all cluster fucks, as usual.

Now do you understand why mvscal & I are now in favor of an immediate pull-out from Iraq?

The people voted for cut & run; give them what they voted for, dammit!

If that results in a region-wide sunni vs shiite civil war that results in a whole shit-load of innocent people getting slaughtered, tough shit. Better them than us.

The DemocRats never understood that we're at war, and neither did Chimpy or Rummy.

Cuda wrote:
Now do you understand why I so love the taste of mvscal's nutsack.

Because you've yet to formulate your first original thought?

Mikey wrote:

Fuck off, douchebag.

You'll need to up your game a whole bunch just to advance to dumbfuck status

Mikey wrote:Because you've yet to formulate your first original thought?

Case in point:

mvscal's nutsack rider wrote:

Mikey wrote:

Cuda wrote:

Mister Bushice wrote:
What we don't need is to bring the iranians and syrians in and concede to every single demand they make in order to get them to stop funding and supporting the civil war in iraq. Unfortunately we don't have a very smart president in charge right now, so whatever decision he ends up with is sure to be the mother of all cluster fucks, as usual.

Now do you understand why mvscal & I are now in favor of an immediate pull-out from Iraq?

I didn't realize you'd formed a committee. does mvscal know of this?

The people voted for cut & run; give them what they voted for, dammit!

the people voted for a change in leadership and a better approach to iraq. Cut and run ain't it.

If that results in a region-wide sunni vs shiite civil war that results in a whole shit-load of innocent people getting slaughtered, tough shit. Better them than us.

The DemocRats never understood that we're at war, and neither did Chimpy or Rummy.

I'm more in favor of setting specific dates with the iraqi government, forcing them to meet goals no matter what. Get those lazy shitheads off their sand filled asses

But unless the sunnis AND shiites begin to work to accomplish peace, no matter what we do, it will fail.

Bush has been against setting any deadlines for over 3 years now. I'm betting he steps up and announces deadlines in the near future. It's the only way to get out while still trying to achieve some level of success.

Mister Bushice wrote:

Cuda wrote:

Mister Bushice wrote:
What we don't need is to bring the iranians and syrians in and concede to every single demand they make in order to get them to stop funding and supporting the civil war in iraq. Unfortunately we don't have a very smart president in charge right now, so whatever decision he ends up with is sure to be the mother of all cluster fucks, as usual.

Now do you understand why mvscal & I are now in favor of an immediate pull-out from Iraq?

I rarely bother to actually read anybody's posts here.

FTFY

If that results in a region-wide sunni vs shiite civil war that results in a whole shit-load of innocent people getting slaughtered, tough shit. Better them than us.

The DemocRats never understood that we're at war, and neither did Chimpy or Rummy.

I'm more in favor of setting specific dates with the iraqi government, forcing them to meet goals no matter what. Get those lazy shitheads off their sand filled asses

But unless the sunnis AND shiites begin to work to accomplish peace, no matter what we do, it will fail.

Bush has been against setting any deadlines for over 3 years now. I'm betting he steps up and announces deadlines in the near future. It's the only way to get out while still trying to achieve some level of success.

Despite what the hand-wringers keep trying to make people believe, the War on Terror really boils down to a War on Islam. The islamists understand this, but our leaders want to pretend otherwise for some reason. The only thing that will get our leaders to take the war seriously and to what it takes to win is going to be a nuke strike in this country- even then, I'm not so sure that'll wake them up- but I have no doubt the islamists are going to pull one off at some point. I don't know about you, but I'd just as soon that could be put off as long as possible, and the most likely way to do that is to get the muzzies preoccupied slaughtering each other. An added benefit would be that there'll be fewer of them to have to kill when the time does come.

Terrorists Killing pro US iraqis, women and children in iraq isn't going to be a deterrent to home grown terror cells in europe or the US. This same story has been yapped here for 4 years "keep killing them, and eventually they'll run out of bodies" Bullshit. That won't ever happen. At best it's a wash with the conversion of new haters streaming in to take the place of the dead. Besides, when we do leave, the killing of the insurgents will drop significantly, yet their numbers will still increase.

Mister Bushice wrote:Terrorists Killing pro US iraqis, women and children in iraq isn't going to be a deterrent to home grown terror cells in europe or the US.

Perhaps not so much of a deterrent as an event to motivate them to go to where the killing is. Muzzie vs muzzie jihad will attract them like welfare attracts níggers. Eough of them will flock to the region that we'll have significantly fewer of them to worry about over here.

This same story has been yapped here for 4 years "keep killing them, and eventually they'll run out of bodies" Bullshit. That won't ever happen. At best it's a wash with the conversion of new haters streaming in to take the place of the dead.

Gibberish. Is there an infinite number of muzzies? Of course not. Keep reducing a finite number and eventyally you get down to zero. "Killing us only makes us stronger" only worked for Obi Wan Kenobi, who was a fictional character, btw. True, the number of muzzies that will need to be killed is a big one. All the more reason to let them do most of the work themselves.

Besides, when we do leave, the killing of the insurgents will drop significantly, yet their numbers will still increase.

More drivel. You can't have a civil war- let alone a region-wide civil war- without an enourmous amount of slaughter.

You do realize that most of the people responsible for the major terror attacks in the US and Europe aren't from the Middle East, right?

Oh...the Halliburton folks didn't want you to know that...sorry.

How far west do the a-rabs have to be before they're considered not middle eastern?

North African a-rabs (Europe's wetbacks) have pulled just about all the shit in Europe & Jolly Olde England. They consider themselves a-rabs & muzzies ahead of anything else, so they can go into the same bucket.

As far as major terror attacks in the US goes, there's only 9/11 and while the hijackers were all a-rabs, all but one or maybe two were Saudis. Last I knew, Saudis qualified as Middle Eastern.

What was your point again?