and of course...
And no, these quotes are NOT from the Onion.
New York Times 10/6
Uh oh ! The apocalypse !
Is there even an attempt to provide any kind of justification in support of such a claim ?
So let's see now...Islamic militants have made Iraq their main front -- Now how did that happen? Could it be the result of an...invasion? He did use the term Islamic militants, and not terrorists, but also not insurgents--interesting. But they are like communists? Maybe he is confusing the anti-semitism with being like Nazis? What's troubling is he is either catapulting the propaganda or he really doesn't know the difference, and I guarantee you many Americans will believe this Bush*t because they don't know the difference either. I think it's propaganda to further the "spread of democracy" theme (I'm losing track--that's the most recent reasoning for the war, right?).
George casey is backtracking on timing for the U.S. to pullout of Iraq. Hmm... You don't suppose there's a problem with Iraqi capability? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9521347/ The Army is planning for four more years (worst case scenario). http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9022420/ Well sure, because we will be there until at least 2009 because it will take a new president at least a year to plan and implement a draw down.
Other polls show Americans want to cut back on Iraq to pay for Katrina. I predict the anti-war protests will continue, and support for the war is likely to be an issue in 2006. Keep up the good work Georgie.
His speech was seen as a positive by retired Gen Barry McCaffery (analysis). McCaffery is considered to be optimistic about the future in Iraq:
"I think personally, we're going to pull this off by next summer. I'd be surprised if we don't end up by next autumn with an Iraqi government that largely works, a low-grade civil war, a security force that works."
Not exactly what was hoped for, maybe, but at this point "a low-grade civil war" would be an improvement over the current situation.
I'm not sure if the Senate was impressed or not, since their 90-9 vote on an amendment to the defense spending bill prohibiting cruel, inhumane, degrading treatment or punishment of detainees came the day before the speech. If that goes through the House with a similar level of support, threatening a veto would be risky - people might laugh.
Even big business is starting to gang up on Bush, pushing for more limits on information the government can obtain via the Patriot Act.
I think he's going to need more than one speech.
Maybe he can mount a campaign similar to last winter's Social Security privatization tour. :uhh:
The problem is, people believe this. The reality is Bush has done more to "rally the Muslim masses" than an other factor. And the so-called moderate states are what exactly? The words propped up come to mind.
Wow, just when I thought he couldn't sink any lower, he went and called the insurgents communists.
The bigger problem is that he is technically correct. Some insurgency and Al Qaeda leaders have said that they wish to establish a unified Islamic empire across the Islamic world. The thing is, even if two or three leaders badly want to do this, it doesn't mean they have a snowball's chance in hell of actually doing it, with or without US resistance.
Terror as a beehive
Oh yes, about the speech: When times get tough, start another war. This is a response to his drop in the polls.
Separate names with a comma.