>That he is given to juvenile stunts like the flight suit, cowboy boots and John
>Waynesque manure like “Bring it on.”
That’s Kerry’s line.
And didn’t Clinton pull off a similar (flight-suit) stunt in Kosovo?
So?
Did he? And so what if he did? Are you saying that Clinton sets your standard of what is or is not laughable?
Nothing novel about it, I’m afraid. It’s just:
or
Identify (or manufacture) an enemy, and everyone rallies around the flag. Government popularity soars, opposition is silenced. Used to be standard practice. Apparently becoming standard practice again.
And neither should you – in the appropriate thread. Not all threads though, need absolutely be about Bush’s intelligence, emotional development, preferred sexual positions or fashion taste. We’ve already got way plenty of them (reeder has a veritable stickie in the pit) and it was my opinion that addressing Bush as Our Flight Suit In Chief (let alone comments on his emotional development or ability to function as a city councilman in a small town) was fairly silly – not that I made a big thing out it, except some more silliness – which Spiny Norman thought was out of line. But giving it a little more thought I’m back on evaluating every post on its own, if for no other reason then because not being able to remember the name of my own children half of the time, there’s just no way I’m going to remember who’s is who on an online message board, let alone keep track of such things as age, profession and credentials. And you are absolutely correct in not taking online discussions too personal.
There are, what, roughly and from memory some 140,000 coalition (that’d be the coalition without the apostrophes) troops in Iraq at the moment – of those the Spanish contribution amounts to about 1000 or 0.7%. Just how earth shattering is that loss going to be, military speaking? Of course it’s a barb in the policy of trying to make the coalition seem international founded. But the withdrawal was going to happen anyway, and Sailor has already addressed the June 30 date. So there, subject discussed, case closed. (…now we can go back to the regular scheduled Bush-bashing)
My original post was that I thought it odd, and I still do, that an administration that makes a big thing of a “coalition” and those who support that position would turn around and say “Who needs them?” when an important member of that so-called coalition pulls out. And that attitude on the part of the administration sort of leads to a question of the maturity of the head of it.
On last night’s (19 April) News Hour with Jim Lehrer a reporter from the New York Times spoke about this. It is on the News Hour site in audio which I can’t hear because I don’t have QuickTime. You and others might be able to get it.
Anyway, he said that the 1000 Spanish troops are in the area of the city where the Marines are currently operating. The Spanish were involved in a firefight not too long ago, took casualties and were highly spoken of by the Marine commanders in the area. Those Marines also said that their troops were stretched pretty thin and the 1000 Spanish would be sorely missed.
Remember, 140,000 is the total. Of these many are supply, maintenance, transportation, signal, ordnance and other support activities. The total number of front-line combat forces is far smaller and the loss of 1000 people, all combat because they depend on the US for logistical support, is a lot more serious than might appear at first the glance at just the raw numbers.
You are, of course, aware the Kerry was parodying Bush when he said that? Also, there’s a world of difference between so challanging your political opponents, and macho posturing to your armed enemies. In fact, as I looked up the above link, I see that the Iraqis have, indeed, brought it once again, killing twenty-one.
If Clinton did the flight suit thing, at least he didn’t turn it into a administration-defining spectacle like Bush did. Also, tu quoque never proved anything. Let’s start demanding more from our leaders, starting with teh ones still in office.
Sure, but on the positive side, if AQ doesn’t manage to fuck with US elections, it’ll prove what some have thought for some time: We haven’t seen more terrorist attacks in the USA because The Bad Guys blew their load on 9/11.
Maybe I should have put “wad”. Less porn-a-rific.
Ah well.
-Joe
Yeah, that’s brilliant.
Kerry’s statement lead to how many bodybags being used?
None, huh? Ah well, try again.
-Joe
I doubt that the Prez’s comment had any effect no the number of body bags either. Those who’re inclined to fight against American troops are prob’ly not inspired by the Prez’s single comment.
Actually, Kerry was just aping (for laughs and effectiveness) GWB’s ‘Bring it on’ from 2003.
I’m afraid I’m going to have to ask for a cite on this one.
As far as I’m aware, Clinton actually seemed to realize some people, particularly in the miltary, might object to his Vietam era draft dodging. So avoided stunts like that which would only draw attention to it, GWB seems to enjoy rubbing peoples nose in it…
Though while were on subject Kosovo (hell, we’re already far off the original post subject, why stop now ? 
… Interesting how the right wing pundits who accuse all and sundry of treason for even thinking about critising the Iraq war seemed to have forgotten some of the comments they made about that war, while Americans were off risking their lives for their country, etc…
Rep. Scarborough (The Crier Report, 6/8/99): “This has been an unmitigated disaster … Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we’ve killed. Ask the refugees that we’ve killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals.”
Michael Savage (NewsMax, 11/30/99): “These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark … who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton."
Hannity (Hannity & Colmes, 4/6/99): "Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?”
Originally posted by Squink
[QUOTE]
Gum also seems incapable of distinguishing Sadr from bin Laden.[/QOUTE] Gum is perfectly capable distinguising Bubba Laden from Al Sad sod, but had a duh moment. You got the right link though, thankee:
“Radical Muslim cleric welcomes Spain’s troop withdrawal from Iraq.
The Radical Shiite Cleric Moqtada Al Sadr has urged other countries with troops in Iraq to follow the example of Spain and save the lives of their soldiers”.
*like having a duh moment distinguishing quote from qoute. *
In other words, the cleric is totally unrelated to Bin Laden, Al Qaeda or any terrorism or terrorists and just wants the strangers out of his country and the Spanish people have agreed with him since the US launched the invasion. The Spanish people are on the side of the Iraqi people in this fight, not on the side of terrorists attacking the USA. Different things even if GW cannot tell them apart.
I couldn’t let this little jewel pass unchalenged. You do realize that the Vietnam war was a bit more complicated than simply a war to deterr north vietnamese agression. After all, they were invading their own country wich had been artificially divided by U.S.A. It was a nasty colonial war that get out of controll (I suggest you read Barbara Tuchman’s The March of Fooly for more details).-
Back to the op, anyone that says that Spain is quitting the War because of the terrorist attacks, is either an idiot or didn’t make a proper research. I followed, via Televisión Española, the war debate in Spain’s parliament. Mr Zapatero, as the leader of the opposition, was crystal clear. The war was about to be launched without authorazation from the UN, it was therefore an illegal war.-
His actions, since he has become the prime minister, are a consequence of his posture.-
I couldn’t let this little jewel pass unchallenged. You do realize that the Vietnam war was a bit more complicated than simply a nasty colonial war that get out of control.
Way to go Estilicon. Brand any opinion that differs from your own as idiotic. That’s the way to keep an open discussion. clap clap
btw. You’re not the only one who has followed Spanish television, and the discussion has mostly been about why Spain elected the socialists in the first place (which let to their withdrawal), as well as the socialist’s lousy timing. My advice: do at little reading and come back when you have something relevant to contribute with, eh?
Coming from you that’s quite rich.
Spain elected the socialists because they represented the will of the people and they turned away from the conservatives because they went against the will of the immense majority of the Spanish people. As simple as that.
Socialist’s lousy timing? For who was it lousy? For Spain it could not come soon enough. The Dominican Republic and Honduras are also pulling out. If it was lousy for the USA then they might want to take it into account next time they start wars against the will of the entire world.
I am quite amused to see some of the American media throwing infantile temper tantrums against Spain. Screw them.
The US government has accepted the fact that Spain will withdraw its troops but it is asking the Spanish government to keep in Iraq intelligence and other personnel. We shall see what comes of this but I hope the Spanish government gives the US government what they deserve: the middle finger.
The USA got itself into this against the rest of the world and have made a mess which affects the entire world. Let the USA fix the problem they created.
Is that so? Of course I might, in the heat of the moment, outside the pit have called someone else an idiot (and if so I apologise). Can’t remember exactly doing so though. But you’ll undoubtedly show me where exactly, since you’re so sure.
Yes, I’m aware that’s your view Sailor. However that’s not what Estilicon said, and he completely misunderstood the discussion so far, and then started out far down a thread by calling people idiots based on his own misunderstandings.