while Mr Bush did not hurt himself, I don't think he improved his position with the speech.  I certainly agree with a thrust that internationalizes the transition to an Iraqui Government.  However, I expec that the international community will make us eat some cold poop before they cooperate in this.  They eventually will cooperate (it is within their own self interest), but it will be like getting sex from your wife when she is uninterested -- there will be times when you will wonder why you bothered.  

The people of Iraq will also settle down and cooperate, but they will take a while.  They also will see it as within their own interest to get along with each other.

Other opinions??? Fire away...  Harry

But from what I've seen and heard, his speech will satisfy his supporters, but not influence anyone else to support him.  

I agree with you about the international community.  Frankly, I think that they would like to help us, once Bush is out of office, but they, especially France, Germany, Spain, and our non-oil rich Arab allies such as Egypt & Jordan, would like to see Bush lose before making tangible moves to support us.

All he really did was spew the same drivel his been saying for the last year.

Plus after months of being in the spotlight you'd think he'd know how to pronounce Abu Ghraib by now, he stumbled over it at least twice that I saw.  Oh, NEW part he’d said we’d tear it down, but talk about too little to late, and more really to get rid of our own mess, this administration just doesn’t get it do they; for it to be a meaningful peace sign/offering it should have been demolished after they caught Saddam, not now. Besides I heard on TV that the Iraqi’s no longer want it torn down, they want to turn it into temporary housing because so many have been displaced due to the war.

The subject line of your post tells me that you need to cut back on the Samuel Adams pal, or get more sleep.

I don't think the speech will have any impact because hardly anybody was able to see it.  It wasn't widely carried by the media.

As far as getting help from other nations, I suppose you mean France and Germany here, (virtually everyone else is helping or their broke) it is in smelly fuckers best interest to finally get involved.  Now that we know they were in cahoots with coffieman and his son in ripping off profits from the "Oil for food" program with Saddam, which had a lot to do with their attitude, and the Iraqi people know it too, and are a bit pissed, they must help for fear of no trade (oil) from Iraq.

As far as coffieman and his blue hats, interesting news out of the Congo today, seems his bluey's are getting some pretty cheap sex from the AID's infested Congolese teens (trading a little poontang for "something to eat!".  And who will be the asshole, The United States Of  America, of course!

As far as Iraqi's getting along, not til the majority turn on the Islamo-Fascists and kill them.  These pukes want a theocracy and will settle for nothing less.  They need kill'in in order for peace in Iraq.  It would be preferable if the majority in Iraq did the kill'in, but either way, it's what needs to happen, post haste, with prejudice!

My typing is starting to really suck ) ...

... and I see you have enough juice in your post to get everyone's blood running.  

The speech was covered pretty well here in the effete East.  I agree that Europe will play with us eventually, although we will have to eat a dry dog turd first.  

Yea, there is going to be some blood shed in Iraq, regardless of what we do.

I was listening to a French Philosopher last night who wrote a book on Terrorism.  I want to get hold of a copy and read it to see if it is worth a post and a recommendation.  He made some interesting points.

He must be a socialist enconomist, or a coward, or a whiner.  After all, whining is a participation sport for those smelly fucks!

Interesting bit of vitriol, accompanied by staggering hypocrisy.

Nowhere in the referenced articles did I find any mention of AIDS or HIV - guess you threw that in to sweeten the pot.

As for your shock - shock! that such transactions are going on, please enlighten me as to which of your 11 reviewed women did not exchange sex for a commodity. You gave them money for sex, my friend - money that they may well have used to buy, among other things, a 'banana or a cake' to feed their children. I'd love to see your high moral stance when confronted with a nubile youth willing to rent her body for your pleasure. Oh, wait - we've already seen that, 11 times that we know of.

Ain't no hookers without johns, pal - and vice versa.

Starving 12 year olds trading sex with UN (I hate to call them soldiers) to feed their children, conceived by rape?  Same as seeing a provider in Southern California?

My reference to AID's is based on the epidemic of AID's/HIV in Africa and rampant in the Congo.  It would be poetic justice if these assholes picked it up.

-- Modified on 5/26/2004 5:51:43 PM

I suggest that you stick your head in a vat of Bleu Cheese to get yourself acclimatized to the place.

Saint Bribite, how could I have forgotten - whatever you do is moral, simply because you do it.

Your reference to AIDS was simply histrionics - now relax, calm down, and go back to adding to that list of people who need killing. All the French, any arab who's looks you don't like, any citizen of a country that hasn't supported the Bush administration blindly, and me, of course.

Onward Xtian soldiers! Sieg Heil!

"go back to adding to that list of people who need killing. All the French, any arab who's looks you don't like, any citizen of a country that hasn't supported the Bush administration blindly, and me, of course."

You could teach over reactiing.  It is well known that most democrats if told a lie over and over enough times will believe that it is true, obviously, you are a student of that technique.

Finally, it seems that you do not see any difference between hobbying with well fed providers who have chosen their profession (I don't see crack whores) and seem very content in their lifestyles and 12 year old rape victims in the Congo selling their bodies to get a bite to eat for their babies from UN Blue Hats who are supposed to be protecting them.  Pity.

This of course will most likely be consider a personal attack by the KING OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, The Meal Ticket, and be gutted like most of my FREE FUCKING SPEECH!

You said:
...........'It is well known that most democrats if told a lie over and over enough times will believe that it is true,'...............


So this is why the Republicans keep telling lies? They think the Dems and the rest of the world are so gullible and devoid of actual facts, that they will actually start believing them?

Unfortunate that some democrats hatred of the President Bush is so overwhelming.  The media is only reporting the bad that goes on in Iraq, and it should be reported.  However, for every bad story that gets out of Iraq, there are 100 good success stories that are out there. I talked with a soldier that just got back after a year there and he can't even watch the news anymore here.  Add to that the rantings of some extreme liberals like "Al Gore Zeera" and the doom and gloom that is presented is by the American left is the biggest ally the terrorists, extremist Shiites, and former Baath party faithful have got going.  Makes you wonder if the majority of the people that support the Democratic party are buying into all of this crap that is being spewed by the extreme left.  The reality is that the country is at war.  Fewer casualties in Iraq in a year than were suffered in a single day at Iwo Jima, the Bulge, or Tarawa, and some in this country don't have the stomach to see it through.  Maybe we need to relook at what happened on 9-11 and reconfirm why we fight.  This link is  a pretty good reminder.  http://www.kaosweaver.com/flash911.html

Well, Bribite - why don't you hazard a guess at which side is best at opining about who needs killing? How many Repugs wax philosophical about the need for erasing whole groups and how many liberals talk about saving and improving lives?
The only life I see the conservative side concerned with is that of an unborn fetus, and they forget they exist just as soon as they are born. If every right-to-lifer adopted a kid there would be no need for abortion. They're not so much 'pro life' as 'pro birth'. And which side screams in favor of capitol punishment? Yeah, it's a regular 'kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out' kind of crowd you belong to, isn't it?
Overreacting? I think not.

As far as lies go, gee - here you are, buying every bald faced lie that Bush tells and repeating it as gospel. You can't even see it, can you?

Hate eats you up, Bribite - you're incapable of responding to a post without using profanity and personal attacks. You talk about killing other human beings with no trepidation. I have an image of you crouching over your computer in your Unabomber shack out behind the garage late at night, typing furiously while spittle flies from your mouth. Get some help, dude - life's too short.

As for your claim of censorship - here's a clue for you. This isn't a free speech forum - this is owned and operated by someone who can allow or disallow any kind of speech he likes. You're here on his sufferance, as am I. Go back and read that disclaimer you ignored in your haste to get in here where the pussy is - I think you'll find it's all covered there.

There were no WMDs threatening us.

There were no Al Qaida cells in Iraq, developing threats to us.  UNTIL we created a power vaccuum, that is.

The citizenry have not asked to have a democracy and have not shown that they are ready for democracy.

Saddam was perfectly capable of torturing prisoners without US.

We have yet to come up with any reason that we got nearly 800 Brave Americans killed, over 2000 Brave Americans maimed, killed 10s of thousands of Iraqis, and wasted close to $200 Billion so far.

# 2 Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11

# 3 There have been more casualties in Iraq since Bush claimed it was over than there were while the war was really a war.

# 4 I find it absolutely amazing that the Right are buying the current admins. bullshit.

The Right are today's "True Believers" (see Eric Hoffer's excellent book), dialing in Rush Limbaugh and waiting to hear the dogma de jour.

As an example, likening the torture performed under U.S. auspices at Abu Ghraib (and elsewhere) to fraternity 'hazing' is an embarrassment to civilized people everywhere.

I would just like to remark on your # 3 point.  I believe the 800 (current) death toll is far less than the death toll of the WTC attacks.  If you are refering to the many thousands of Iraqis - Well, don't you know the value of an Iraqi (even innocent) is not even close to that of an American.  

So, let's say its 1000 Iraqis (innocent) / 1 American, if that, then the death toll is only maybe 810-900.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and not take your statements as treason.

Good day sir.

Other than being used as a bogus justification for invading Iraq, there was no linkage between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida.  In fact, Al Qaida despised Hussein, because he repressed the fundamentalist religious extremists within his country.  NOW, once we have created a power vaccuum in Iraq, Al Qaida is finally able to operate inside that nation.  So George Bush can take credit for making Iraq safe for Al Qaida to operate there.

And one of the great things about being an American is that we have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to disagree with our leaders, and call them out when they are wrong, as Bush so clearly is on Iraq.  And it is pure chickenshit to claim that this type of informed dissent is treason.

I repeat with a correction, you are the Queen of Histrionics!

The waiting list for adoptions in this country is 6 years for newborns.  The leftist courts have barred the adoption of "children of color" by white adoptive parents, but not vice versa.  Your Planned Parenthood Packaged Spiel" is without truth or merit, per usual.  Personally I have two adopted children.

Answering your "unibomber" tripe would result in censorship, something which you seem to be immune from.

My claim of censorship is towards an overly PC moderator, who has obviously allowed his personal political leanings to control his moderating and allowed those he agrees with to post with immunity.  Many of my responses have been much less personally directed than your "unibomber" scat and have been moderated out by our moderator who is obviously in lock step with your socialist leanings.

And it still seems that you cannot decipher the difference between a starving 12 year old rape victim selling herself for food to your heroes in blue hats from a well groomed escort of choice!  But then again, the left has never been accused of possessing even a modicum of morality.

No, I knew the sarcasm was there. I am pretty thick skinned anyway.