The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Bush hits Dem war tactics

chance1

chance1

JUB 10k Club
Banned
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Posts
21,347
Reaction score
16
Points
0
Location
NYC
GWB is not happy - nope

No I'm not talking about the abuse he is taking on JUB by the 80%

He's upset at the Dems on Capitol Hill

Why you ask?

"Cause they're using our troops as leverage to win domestic political battles"

It's not very often - not at all
But he's right here - right on the money

I'm sure you'll agree

Uh oh - NY Post again - hope this gets read

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03182007/news/nationalnews/bush_hits_dem_war_tactics_nationalnews_.htm


BUSH HITS DEM WAR TACTICS
Post Wire Services

March 18, 2007 -- WASHINGTON - Democrats who are moving ahead with antiwar legislation are using troops as leverage to win domestic political battles, President Bush said yesterday.
Bush said some lawmakers see a chance "to micromanage our military commanders, force a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq and spend billions on domestic projects that have nothing to do with the war on terror."
In his weekly radio address, the president said, "Many in Congress say they support the troops, and I believe them. Now they have a chance to show that support in deed, as well as in word."
Bush repeated his insistence that his spending request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan be approved "without strings and without delay" or he will veto it.
Democrats have pledged to keep pushing until there is a change of course in Iraq.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), in her party's weekly radio address, promoted a Democratic plan to narrow the mission of U.S. forces in Iraq and begin redeployment of U.S. troops within four months. "Regrettably, our effort was blocked by Senate Republicans and a president who stubbornly refused to listen," Murray said.
 
Darn -- I stopped in here to see if by some miracle the Dems had actually come up with some tactics for the war, only to find it's tactics using the the war, not tactics for the war.
Figures.
Pelosi's tactic so far has been to see how clearly she can prove that the Democrats learned nothing from Vietnam. Murray is clearly in the same boat.

The Republicans made an incredible mess, the Democrats just want to walk off and let it get worse -- does anyone have trouble understanding why I'd rather vote for almost anyone else?
 
"Regrettably, our effort was blocked by Senate Republicans and a president who stubbornly refused to listen," Murray said.

Way to go!..|

He wants advice on how to bail out of his mess but won't listen to it.

And in other breaking news, Bush sucks!
 
Only the American people were misled into beleiving our invasion of Iraq was essential to the war on terror.
Saddam Hussein was a cruel and ruthless dictator, but he wasn't an adversary in our war on terror.
If anything our invasion has fanned the flames of terrorism.
But Bush is still singing the same old song.
 
chance1 said:
GWB is not happy - nope

No I'm not talking about the abuse he is taking on JUB by the 80%

He's upset at the Dems on Capitol Hill

Why you ask?

"Cause they're using our troops as leverage to win domestic political battles"

It's not very often - not at all
But he's right here - right on the money

I'm sure you'll agree
Click to expand...

______________________________________________________________

G.W. Bush is not happy?--what a shame.

Where is the proof that the abuse on JUB is 80% --- maybe it's 95%.

G.W.B. is a slime ball liar.
I don't belive anything that comes out of his mouth via his brain--Karl Rove!
 
chance believes bush is right?

gee that never happened before :rolleyes:

the democrats were put in office by the people of the united states to dig it out of the sorry hole that bush has created

and they are doiing PRECISELY what they are supposed to be doing

im so sorry if bush has had to live with a rubber stamp congress until now

that wont ever be happening again, and no whining and whinging on his part will make it go away

this congress will be a real congress and it will think on its own.
 
Kulindahr said:
Darn -- I stopped in here to see if by some miracle the Dems had actually come up with some tactics for the war, only to find it's tactics using the the war, not tactics for the war.
Click to expand...

there are countless democratic plans for he war out there... you know this all too well

i can only assume that you are intentionally misleading the readers here and playing footsy with your republican party apologist counterpart
 
Using "troops as leverage to win domestic political battles"? Gosh, we've never seen that before, have we? In fact, Bush and his allies (yes, there are a handful) are doing the same thing they accuse Democrats of--accusing Dems of not "supporting the troops" and "emboldening the enemy."

As for Democratic action on Iraq, anyone who has had a high school civics class can understand that there is little you can do with 49 (Democratic caucus minus Johnson and Lieberman) votes in the Senate, especially when you have a minority leader hell bent on standing up for Bush.
 
Did anyone else notice the small amount of media coverage of the anti-war/anti-Bush demonstrations all over our country on Saturday.
Whether the Dems have or don't have war tactics, the demonstartions clearly indicated people aren't happy with the Repubs war tactics.
 
Although I'm not a tactician, if I were I'd probably divide the operations into:
Offensive tactics
Defensive tactics
Withdrawal tactics.
Bush did a fine job on offensive (not only militarily in Iraq, but offending citizens of his country and the world at large)
Defensive, not so good. Soldiers and Humvees without adequate armor and supplies.
Withdrawal, no plan back then and no plan now.
Seems rather ironic that a leader whose tactics were medioacre or inferior is qualified to judge the tactics of others.
 
lancelva said:
Using "troops as leverage to win domestic political battles"? Gosh, we've never seen that before, have we? In fact, Bush and his allies (yes, there are a handful) are doing the same thing they accuse Democrats of--accusing Dems of not "supporting the troops" and "emboldening the enemy."

As for Democratic action on Iraq, anyone who has had a high school civics class can understand that there is little you can do with 49 (Democratic caucus minus Johnson and Lieberman) votes in the Senate, especially when you have a minority leader hell bent on standing up for Bush.
Click to expand...

so are u saying the Dems are no worse than the Repubs?

I thought they were supposed to be better

the idea is to be better no?
 
^No, I said that Republicans are accusing Democrats of doing something that the Republicans are doing. AKA hypocrisy. Democrats are not the one's "using the troops for political leverage" unless that's why you call trying to ensure that they receive the proper training and equipment before they are deployed.
 
Lanceva dont lie through through your teeth.

The very first thing the Dems will do as has been proven ad nauseum in the past, the first thing will be to cut defense and pay for socio-economic projects.
They can cry foul and the party in charge gets the blame, however I received more pay raises, new equipment and Op Tar funding from both Republican admins. It is all smarmy bullshit coming out of the Dems mouths. How do you think the services got so run down? It takes time to do that, It also takes time to rebuild and restock. If they would simply continue to fund all they ask for in all admins then in ten or fifteen years the military will be back on track.
 
Just like Republicans to screw something up so completely that there's no viable solution and then blame somebody else for it.

I hope Bush uses his veto pen generously. He will only be putting a "nail in the coffin" of the entire Republican party, even moreso than he has already.
 
Right so Bush dismantled ou military during the Clinton years. Good call. I noticed dems are equally talented at commenting on institutions they know nothing about.
 
At the beginning of the Iraq war, 80% of all Army units and almost 100% of active combat units were rated at the highest levels of readiness. Just the opposite exists today. Virtually all of our active-duty combat units at home and all of our guard units are at the lowest level of readiness.

The emergency supplemental appropriations bill currently being debated in Congress provides more than was requested by the President for our troops and veterans.

The bill also includes money that Bush did not request for veterans healthcare:$450 million for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder/Counseling; $450 million for Traumatic Brain Injury care and research; $730 million to offset the Administration’s insurance premium increase to our troops and their families; $62 million for amputee care for our returning war fighters; $14.8 million for burn care; and provides funding for the creation of a new program that will provide support for those who are taking care of our severely wounded in military hospitals around the world.

We have also proposed legislation to prohibit the deployment of troops who are not “fully mission capable” as defined by the Department of Defense – in other words, "troops who are fully trained, equipped and protected."

That's what you call really "supporting our troops."
 
^Actually we won a war during the Clinton years, and with no casualties. The military that invaded Iraq was the military that Clinton left for Rummy to squander.
 
General_Alfie said:
As to those so-called "people" who trash Clinton's rebuilding of the military,
Click to expand...


Bill Clinton didn't rebuild the military, he downscaled it to 10 Divisions, which is one of the main reasons there was insufficient troop density to handle Iraq.
 
so the Dems are not using the war as political leverage?

anyone?

I don't think so
 
Lance is right its hypocritical for the republicans to accuse anyone of playing politics with the troops.

And Mazda and 69 I can't say for sure how rundown a military Clinton left Bush. What I can say for sure is that Bush thought enough of that military and its capabilities to take it into war in two countires.

Given Bush's actions I'd say he doesn't agree with your assesment.

Also 69 however much Clinton reduced the military Bush didn't send all the troops he had avaiable to him when he went into Iraq so what makes you think had he more he would have sent more?

And how do you explain the fact that it wasn't till almost 4 yrs into this war before Bush asked congress to increase the size of the military.

Perhaps you thought it needed to larger but until recently your president didn't agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top