's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

Bush quote to Iraqis "Bring them on"(26 posts)

Bush quote to Iraqis "Bring them on"rwbadley
Jul 3, 2003 7:39 AM
Full quote: "There are some who feel like that the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is bring them on. We've got the force necessary to deal with the security situation."

So, our fearless leader remains safe and snug while declaring to the citizens of Iraq to go ahead and attack our young men and women working to keep the peace.

On many levels I find this disturbing. Any thoughts?

re: Bush quote to Iraqis "Bring them on"TJeanloz
Jul 3, 2003 7:44 AM
I don't really see what's disturbing about being confident in the capabilities of your troops. I read it as cheerleading more than anything else. A declaration that despite some setbacks, the US Military will continue to secure the country is important to establish and maintain credibility.
You don't see?...rwbadley
Jul 3, 2003 8:24 AM
Let's set aside for a moment how it would appear to world opinion. The fact we occupy mideast nations by force of military, and after occupation do an end zone dance and yell out 'is that all you got? come on, bring it on!

Let's set aside it would be just another ridiculous statement by the leader of the free world.

If the statement builds troop moral, that might be fleeting if Iraqis take him at his word.

If George W were in the ring mana a mano with his direct opponent, he might have some reason to make such a statement. Even then I would say bad sportsmanship. But to display bravadocio when his neck isn't the one that will be slit. The sons and daughters of our friends and family are the ones at risk.

I have to admit it makes my blood boil. If citizen George wants to put his own self on the line, he can do so and then talk about it.

If he had the nads to display that 'tude to this middle aged fart (me), I would certainly do my best to demonstrate my point of view.

My opinion is President 'cheese whiz for brains' is a liability, not an asset to American long term interests. If I were somewhat charitable to the man in the past, that has ceased to exist.

Going for a ride now, back in four hours...;-)

Just look at today's newsRidearound
Jul 3, 2003 7:48 AM
for an instant result of that latest no-brain totally embarassing to be American micro-witted nonsense.

Please wake me up with a nice coffee when this nightmare is over.

Fast forwards...

"gee thanks, No, I'm fine, I just had this horrible dream that GW had won the election, started a war he couldn't finish in a place he couldn't spell, and we were there for years and years gettin' killed before we eventually bailed out, having shredded out international credibility and lef the place in bits".

"No, not Vietnam, Iraq".

"Or was it Iran. Or Syria. Or Lybia".

"Anyway, thank God for the wake-up call"...
it's playing well here - the US should be proud of their fine diplomat - nmMJ
Jul 3, 2003 7:49 AM
We are proud (excepting the Dixie Chicks, who remain ashamed)TJeanloz
Jul 3, 2003 7:52 AM
What amuses me the most about this, is that foreigners seem to have mistaken us for people who actually care what they think. Newsflash - we don't care how it's "playing" in the UK, France, or anywhere else.
Jul 3, 2003 7:55 AM
maybe you should care how it's playing in Iraq - two more US soldiers killed today - maybe not such a bright move by GW

BTW - did you see the Berlusconi gaffe?
Jul 3, 2003 7:57 AM
It will be interesting to see how it plays in Iraq. I think a statement like that can be reassuring to some of the people there.

I did see Mr. Berlusconi's faux pas, it seems not only American leaders deserve a boot in the mouth from time to time.
Jul 3, 2003 8:01 AM
people who find that sort of folksy-aggro-linguaTexana comforting should save it for Friday night high school football games
Sorry we don't all speak the Queen's English (nm)TJeanloz
Jul 7, 2003 11:57 AM
Ther is no point to argueing ...Live Steam
Jul 3, 2003 8:04 AM
with the unreasonable. They do not comprehend that a united front stands a much better chance for success that a divided one. Their self-serving agenda of dividing the country is apparent. The Dumocrats are desperate and will stop at nothing in order to regain control. I hope they can all live with their conscience. Have a nice "Fourth of July / Independence Day" all of you America bashers. Even you deserve to enjoy the protection and freedom afforded to those living under the Stars and Stripes.
How would you know?Ridearound
Jul 3, 2003 8:08 AM
Nothing you have written even comes close to being an argument in any intelligent sense of the term.

Let's have a competition for how many air-head meaningless labels you can fire around in one post shall we? You can be judge, as there'd be no competition else...
Jul 3, 2003 12:18 PM
"Ther is no point to argueing with the unreasonable. They do not comprehend that a united front stands a much better chance for success that a divided one."

No point in questioning GW with someone who is too blind/ignorant/stupid to find any faults in him.

I also LOVE the reference (once again) that anyone questioning GW is a 'Dumocrat'(BTW, I have to ask - did you think that up all by yourself?), American basher, or not supporting the committed troops. I think the original poster was saying just the opposite!

Of course, by your own logic, you were anti-American for the previous two administrations ... and will be again in the future.
Exactly!Live Steam
Jul 3, 2003 1:43 PM
Yup! All by myself :O) Dumocrat with a capital "D" is referring to the larger entity and the talking heads leading that party. "democrats" are those that vote that way. Regular people. I used the capital version here because it has become the party line to say "Where are the WMD?" Or "Iraq is in turmoil!" Well duh! It has been a pretty $hitty place to live for a long time even if you were in the right party. One wrong or misinterpreted move and it's lights out. Now that is changed. For better or worse. Saddam put a hit out on GW1 yet he still wasn't considered an enemy of the state by the left. I wonder how they would feel if the boy Bubba was the target of such a hit.

Was I anti-American because I didn't support Clinton? On most issues of foreign policy, I stood with him. On his domestic agenda and his personal failings, I would have like to see him drawn and quartered. I only began to become suspicious of his true international agenda after he bombed that aspirin factory. It then appeared he was using the lives of American service men and women to distract attention from his ass. Quite despicable, don't you think?

My point in that since prior to the beginning of this war, if all parties involved presented a united front against Saddam - this includes the French, Germans and Russians who everyone is so eager to side with - the war may never have happened. Saddam would have had no where to turn. He would have caved to the strict inspections the UN resolutions required. The same now goes for the after war period. If the Arab World where there terrorist factions emerge from, see that the rest of the free world don't like what they see regarding harboring and abetting terrorists, then they may help put a stop to their proliferation.

Bickering among ourselves and continuing to use the war for politicking, is counterproductive and damaging. Reference WW2 for that. The Middle East needs to get it's house in order. It is a small region and they are causing the most turmoil. You may say it's a matter of perspective and you would be right. If I am a terrorist I wouldn't want peace, but I live in a free society, so peace is a virtue. The rulers in the Middle East like the unrest and pinning it on the US. It distracts the attention from the oppressed people in their respective countries from the truth about their plight. They are poor and unaccounted for because of the stratified class system they live under. Blaming the US is pointless. If they were more democratic, having a free economy, we would have more people to do business with without the current threats. More of them would be able to prosper and live rewarding lives, instead of living with hate and fear.
interesting ...sacheson
Jul 3, 2003 2:07 PM
... two posts in one day that I agree with. Are you showing a more moderate side of yourself?

Jeez, much more of this talk and I'll have a little foot-in-mouth for my comments a while ago ...
Whoa! The whole point to democracy is argueing.Spoke Wrench
Jul 6, 2003 8:40 AM
That's what has made us the nation that we are. One of the things that has impressed me most favorably about this Iraq conflict is that our military people, uniformly, seem to understand that is the concept that is worth risking their lives over. American's bicker amongst ourselves and, over a long enough period of time, we always eventually get it right.

Sadam, on the other hand, insisted that everyone in Iraq follow him and did not tolerate any argueing. I like the American way better.
Which is a shame reallyRidearound
Jul 3, 2003 7:56 AM
because it's foreigners who are going to be putting the bombs in our shopping malls and outside out embassays.

But so long as it doesn't affect you directly, hey, why would you care right?

And some news for you - foreigners have NOT confused us with people who have the grace to have regard to anyone else's opinions lately.
also funnyMJ
Jul 3, 2003 7:58 AM
BTW - I was in to the chicks before they were "liberal"
Keep me posted on that one,TJeanloz
Jul 3, 2003 7:59 AM
Let me know next time the IRA blows up a shopping mall in Cleveland.

Actually, I'll amend my statement, I think we do care about the opinions of people in the developing world. We don't care about holier-than-thou Europeans.
Jul 3, 2003 8:01 AM
IRA. Ok - whatever.

Try to read a bit more of the "out of state" pages if you can - it may help.

You don't say...
What are the "out of state" pages? (nm)TJeanloz
Jul 3, 2003 8:59 AM
A phone directory for commie subversives :O) (nm)Live Steam
Jul 8, 2003 9:06 AM
Yeah, bring em on!Spoiler
Jul 3, 2003 1:34 PM
Sure, they might blow up a bunch of our young men and women, but we've got lots more where they came from! And with the fourth of July approaching, we could lose half of them and the public would still support our troops right to give up their lives.
Teenage Arabs wearing dynamite suits? Lets see them. Potshot snipers? Just try to hit us. You think a single private or sergeant means that much to us? Dead soldiers are no longer a bad sign for the public. Now, they're a symbol of our steadfast determination to drive on. The more dead, the easier it's to forget the original reasoning for warring. After a while, you're just fighting to avenge last weekend's killing.
If only we had two countries to look at as an example of what not to do.
That's hilarious :)TypeOne
Jul 3, 2003 3:38 PM
On a related note, any Letterman watchers out there?4bykn
Jul 3, 2003 2:25 PM
I love the "Joke That Isn't Really a Joke" segment. The way Dubya stands there with that incomprehensible expression after trying to make a witty remark, priceless.
And yes, I do realize those are all taken out of context, but still gets a chuckle none-the-less.
The tough guy shtickjtolleson
Jul 6, 2003 12:21 PM
gets old, at least to me. Yes, I admit that my reaction is colored by my own politics.

"Bring it on" isn't just about "confidence in the troops." It is about foregoing an opportunity to give a message of moral condemnation.

"Let's get ready to r-u-u-u-m-m-b-l-e" ??? What is this, the World Wrestling Federation?