rance42

We all know what kind of scripted crap will come from the opposing party, good examples are those most recent. The President said he would veto any bill with multitudes of earmarks. So what does the Congress do? They created specific large earmarks to a bill that also had benefits for Veterans attached to it. Everyone and their brother knows that the President will veto the bill on earmarks but the opposing party claims that he is against the Veterans. Should Senator Obama become President don’t you think the same crap will happen by the opposing party? Just how dumb do they think we really are? Or are we really that dumb?

If our economy were as bad as the Democrats in Congress say it is, then what responsibility do they hold? Is the Executive Branch so strong that it holds all the resposibility, or is the Legislative Branch so weak and timid that they are intimidated by the President?

Should Congress take responsiblity for the war during the "Lame Duck" period of the current President? Then in January the new President ask for the War Powers Act be provided to him or her with their vision of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Bosnia?

• Military will have to relocate in country to staging areas for the redeployment. This will provide easy targets for all enemies of the US in Iraq to attack.

• The attacks will increase greatly and become very persistent. The purpose is to show as much aggression against the US for recruiting and funding purposes as we try to depart Iraq. They will attempt to indicate that they drove the US out of Iraq just as they drove the Russians out of Afghanistan. They will also attempt to correlate our departure from Iraq as the same departure from Vietnam. To many of the Muslim world this will elevate Osama bin Laden in exactly the same stature he held immediately following the 9-11 attacks.

• With the increase in followers and funding to the Al Qaeda network, they can and will follow us here to the shores of the Continental US.

• It will be now up to unarmed Americans to defend themselves from the enemy instead of the American Military who at least had the opportunity to face and defend themselves from the enemy.

• President Obama, Senator Reid, and Congresswoman Pelosi will attempt to blame President Bush for the cause and effect. The will always use “we should never have been there in the first place” as their primary deflection of blame.

• Truth is just as we attacked Iraq in the first place, we cut off all communication within Saddam’s military network; we are doing this to ourselves here in defense of Al Qaeda. By removing the abilities to monitor possible surveillance of our enemies and other restrictions to the American intelligence community we continually place ourselves in the dark just as we did Saddam. When we are attacked the next time President Obama, Senator Reid, and Congresswoman Pelosi will of course blame President Bush for a failed Homeland Security Program and of course announce how they will improve it.

• Senator Obama states that we are no safer now than when we moved into Iraq, truth will be told when our first attack since 9-11 occurs on our shores. Can he, as our current President, accept the responsibility for the next attack or blame others.

OK, this keeps running through my mind every time Senator Obama talks about pulling troops out of Iraq.

I can just see our troops told they have to relocate to Afghanistan because that is where the real enemy is located. They line up, just as players do at the end of a football game, and shake hands with the Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda tells them “Good game, I really thought you had it won … too bad” and “Hey, next time we meet you will get home field advantage”. This as the Al Qaeda begins their “pilgrimage” from all over the Middle East to Iraq. Before boarding the planes to leave country we shake hands with the Iranian insurgents who just look at us and say “We really love that new coach of yours, best player on our team” and “Looks like you shouldn’t have been here in the first place”. They begin to laugh hysterically.

Now, we begin to greatly increase our numbers into Afghanistan. To picture this, the way I do, draw a line in the ground. On the left is Afghanistan and on the right is Pakistan. Take a bucket full of plastic toy soldiers and dump them on the ground in a pile. Be careful NOT to let them cross the line on the Pakistan side. This is the U.S. Military, now put a table and two plastic figures playing cards, most likely “fish” on the Pakistan side. There is no reason to add any more troops to those figures because they are on a constant “pilgrimage” to Iraq (just as they were during the initial battles in Afghanistan). There are also more moving into sectors not controlled by the U.S military in Afghanistan. We of course can only go there when the allied country with that area of responsibility leaves. Then is the only time we can engage the Taliban or Al Qaeda in those sectors. As for the massive new number of American troops in the North the rules of engagement are clear “We will wait here until we have captured Osama bin Laden, this is what we should have been doing in the first place”. As we gather strength in unnecessary numbers we sit and wait while Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden continue to play cards amused at the incredible U.S. Military with so many troops the only casualties are that of fratricide.

Quite frankly we have not seen this kind of Military strategy since President Johnson or Saddam Hussein.

OK, this keeps running through my mind every time Senator Obama talks about pulling troops out of Iraq.

I can just see our troops told they have to relocate to Afghanistan because that is where the real enemy is located. They line up, just as players do at the end of a football game, and shake hands with the Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda tells them “Good game, I really thought you had it won … too bad” and “Hey, next time we meet you will get home field advantage”. This as the Al Qaeda begins their “pilgrimage” from all over the Middle East to Iraq. Before boarding the planes to leave country we shake hands with the Iranian insurgents who just look at us and say “We really love that new coach of yours, best player on our team” and “Looks like you shouldn’t have been here in the first place”. They begin to laugh hysterically.

Now, we begin to greatly increase our numbers into Afghanistan. To picture this, the way I do, draw a line in the ground. On the left is Afghanistan and on the right is Pakistan. Take a bucket full of plastic toy soldiers and dump them on the ground in a pile. Be careful NOT to let them cross the line on the Pakistan side. This is the U.S. Military, now put a table and two plastic figures playing cards, most likely “fish” on the Pakistan side. There is no reason to add any more troops to those figures because they are on a constant “pilgrimage” to Iraq (just as they were during the initial battles in Afghanistan). There are also more moving into sectors not controlled by the U.S military in Afghanistan. We of course can only go there when the allied country with that area of responsibility leaves. Then is the only time we can engage the Taliban or Al Qaeda in those sectors. As for the massive new number of American troops in the North the rules of engagement are clear “We will wait here until we have captured Osama bin Laden, this is what we should have been doing in the first place”. As we gather strength in unnecessary numbers we sit and wait while Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden continue to play cards amused at the incredible U.S. Military with so many troops the only casualties are that of fratricide.

Quite frankly we have not seen this kind of Military strategy since President Johnson or Saddam Hussein.

Sad that a country as diverse as this one feels that if it cannot win the opinion of the other side, that one way to win is to demean the other side. Is it necessary to feel that "if you lose, I win" mentality? Or would it be better to tell the rest of the world "yes we disagree, but there is no better country on this planet than those who will always try?"

That site has me completely overwhelmed by livid examples of unwarrented conspiracies.

After watching last nights debate I found the numbers used very confusing. According to Senator Obama the top 6 % of Americans make $97,000 a year or more. According to the SCHIPs bill, the highest rate for the poor who need health care is $83,000 a year. Does that mean that middle America is only $14,000 difference between the two. I find this very confusing and would like to find out if this is accurate.

Would one party either left or right satisfy the needs of this country or would everyone else have to conform to the needs of the few. I think what I am really asking is before you rant that your party is better...Who is it better for?

This is not front line news because it is contrary to the mainstream media agenda.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071114/wl_mideast_af...

TBILISI, Georgia (AP) Georgia's president has announced a state of emergency in the capital of the former Soviet nation.

Another country has joined against the Al Qaida, this time Jordan. Country governments that either turned on Al Qaida or Al Qaida turn on the government should be Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071105/ap_on_re_mi_ea...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/...

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, and now Lybia. Seems like we are the good guys after all.

For YA folks who do not live in the USA, do you feel that this is a terrible country? How much is based on its own citizens telling the world.

I just recieved a notice by AP that Pakistan is under a state of emergency and I can not find out why.

BALTIMORE (AP) The father of a fallen Marine has been awarded $2.9 million by a jury that found leaders of a fundamentalist church had invaded the family's privacy when they picketed the Marine's funeral.

If, Al Jazeera, Muslim Clerics, and the Iraqi citizens turned on the Al Qaida and Taliban? Wouldn’t this be a win for the US and its allies, and our War on Terrorism?

Big news this is an American War bought and paid for both the Legislative and Executive Branches of our Government. Congress could take back the War Powers Act any time they want to. They won't because of this war and dumping their responsibilities onto one man and by blaming him they are gaining seats in Congress. Trust me they have no intention of ending this war until they absolutely have to.

Currently in America we have in place a health care system it is called SCHIPs, been in place for sometime and still one third of parents who are eligible for it or Medicare have not enrolled. Before we add a higher level of income to an existing program we need to insure that the current (poorest of the poor) children are covered. Are you interested in children or interested in bashing bush? I am for the children of this country and strongly believe that the House should play the most important part (both parities). They have districts, if they could go door to door to get votes and drive the poorest to the voting booths then by god they can do the same for the children in health care. They and their staff have plenty of time away from Washington to do just that, four weeks off for labor day would have been a perfect time.