Zarqawi goes kawploey?

sheepofblue · 11-20-2005, 3:09 PM

Zarqawi goes kawploey? Likely false but if not could be good news for the Iraqi's (and bad for the Dems)

CBRVFR · 11-20-2005, 3:36 PM

I hope the mother****er's in eternal agony, but why in the world would you infer that this would be bad for democrats?

sheepofblue · 11-20-2005, 4:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

I hope the mother****er's in eternal agony, but why in the world would you infer that this would be bad for democrats?

Most are planning for a failed war effort and this could be very beneficial. A stabilization of the area prior to elections would be devastating to most (not all) democrats. Of course the news media will continue to focus on anything negative so that might over shadow the sucesses

seamus · 11-20-2005, 4:24 PM

Saddam was captured and/or killed several times before he was actually captured. While I'd like it to be true, and I'd be more than happy to do it myself, I'll believe it when I see it.

If it's true, the DP as a whole will denounce those in their party who resisted as "wackos". They'll put the dems who supported the war from the start in front of the camera as PR for the party.

sheepofblue · 11-20-2005, 7:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamus

Saddam was captured and/or killed several times before he was actually captured. While I'd like it to be true, and I'd be more than happy to do it myself, I'll believe it when I see it.

If it's true, the DP as a whole will denounce those in their party who resisted as "wackos". They'll put the dems who supported the war from the start in front of the camera as PR for the party.

Agree, also it will be hard to prove if he blew himself up. So it might be he just dissappears similar to the thug from Saudi Arabia.

CBRVFR · 11-20-2005, 7:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sheepofblue

Most are planning for a failed war effort and this could be very beneficial. A stabilization of the area prior to elections would be devastating to most (not all) democrats. Of course the news media will continue to focus on anything negative so that might over shadow the sucesses

Are you talking about the 11/06 congressional mid-term elections? They'll have little to do with foreign policy. Democrats can run against Bush very effectively without mentioning Iraq. And coincidentally, not many republicans will be asking for white house help a year from now.

It's convenient to believe that all dems or republicans believe what their nationally-prominent "leaders" spout in order to rile people up and motivate campaign contributions. But it's far from the truth.

The reality is that most people just despise one party less than the other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamus

If it's true, the DP as a whole will denounce those in their party who resisted as "wackos". They'll put the dems who supported the war from the start in front of the camera as PR for the party.

NFW. The heads of the party are Dean, Kerry, and Gore. Their job is to foam at the mouth and raise cash. And hope like hell that Hillary doesn't get the nomination, or we may get a third Bush in the Oval.

No democrat will denounce an anti-war dem. Period.

And, just because W hasn't shown leadership by telling us when our soldiers will stop dying for a bunch of ingrates doesn't make those who point out his shortcomings less American.

Columnist James Pinkerton suggested today that if we STOP protecting the Sunni triangle and let the Shiites and Kurds have a swing at these guys, we may see a different picture in Iraq. I had to read it twice to see if he was being sarcastic. He's not. And he may be right.

luvtolean · 11-20-2005, 7:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

No democrat will denounce an anti-war dem. Period.

Nope. And they won't denounce a pro-war one either. They have it easy there.

Quote:

Columnist James Pinkerton suggested today that if we STOP protecting the Sunni triangle and let the Shiites and Kurds have a swing at these guys, we may see a different picture in Iraq. I had to read it twice to see if he was being sarcastic. He's not. And he may be right.

Yes, a good observation. It'd be interesting.

seamus · 11-20-2005, 8:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

No democrat will denounce an anti-war dem. Period.

They already have. The vote was XXX-3. Left hook in the left's eye. The vote was a way of putting everything "on the record". Now, if anyone other than the 3 calls for withdrawal or claims they were for withdrawl can be called out on the carpet.

CBRVFR · 11-20-2005, 8:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamus

They already have. The vote was XXX-3. Left hook in the left's eye. The vote was a way of putting everything "on the record". Now, if anyone other than the 3 calls for withdrawal or claims they were for withdrawl can be called out on the carpet.

Wrong, man.

Even Kerry doesn't support leaving on the next bus.

The bill was a political trap and 3 felt they could make political hay in their districts by voting for it. It has nothing to do with the real problem we actually have there.