Flip Flopping...
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)Posted by: Rat Faced
No nation can negotiate with terrorists. For there is no way to make peace with those whose only goal is death.
George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020404-1.html)
April 4, 2002
The Bush campaign's central message on Kerry: Anyone who would negotiate with terrorists can't be trusted with U.S. national security in a post-9/11 world.
Now, where is Manny and Hank to tell me the difference between this and Flip Flopping... Im sure they said they hated Flip Floppers.. :ph34r:
After weeks of delicate negotiation . . . a small group of insurgent commanders apparently came face to face with four American officials seeking to establish a dialogue with the men they regard as their enemies. The talks on June 3 were followed by a second encounter 10 days later, according to an Iraqi who said that he had attended both meetings . . . further talks are planned in the hope of negotiating an eventual breakthrough that might reduce the violence in Iraq...(more)
The Sunday Times of London
US 'in talks with Iraq rebels' (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1669601_1,00.html)
June 26, 2005
The USA are, in effect, admitting they cant win there now :rolleyes:
Posted by: GepperRankins
flip-flopping shouldn't be a negative term :dry:
Posted by: Rat Faced
As i've said before, i dont consider that it is either... You should change your mind if new information or facts indicate you should, its called intelligence.
Our Republicans though have declared that they do think its a deplorable thing...
I wish to hear their spin on this ;)
Posted by: GepperRankins
they don't need to put spin on things. they can just be all out hypocrites, anyone who questions them is unpatriotic. how many times has the whitehouse said stuff like you can't force a regime upon a country or they can't be expected to police the globe; before and during the iraq farce war
Posted by: Tikibonbon
nm...
Posted by: lynx
Hmm, negotiation.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't this what some of us were suggesting before tens or hundreds of thousands were killed?
Posted by: vidcc
Anything that will help bring the casualty figures down has my support.
Posted by: Tikibonbon
Seeing as Blair is Bush's lap bitch, I quess the English are finally, in effect, admitting they can't win there now.
Posted by: vidcc
Seeing as Blair is Bush's lap bitch, I quess the English are finally, in effect, admitting they can't win there now.
I think opinion in the uk was heavily against it from the start, most want out
Posted by: Tikibonbon
Seeing as Blair is Bush's lap bitch, I quess the English are finally, in effect, admitting they can't win there now.
I think opinion in the uk was heavily against it from the start, most want out
You don't get what I said do you?
The USA are, in effect, admitting they cant win there now
the English are finally, in effect, admitting they can't win there now.
Posted by: GepperRankins
wtf tiki?
no-one ever thought this would work out apart from brainwashed americans. i doubt the UK and US governments at their most deluded ever expected it to work. by their working out though, 100s of 1000s of lives is worth the oil.
Posted by: Tikibonbon
wtf tiki?
no-one ever thought this would work out apart from brainwashed americans. i doubt the UK and US governments at their most deluded ever expected it to work. by their working out though, 100s of 1000s of lives is worth the oil.
Is it really that hard see I was refering to Rat Faced's broad statement of AMERICANS admitting we can not win there. Yea, yea, he'll say "everyone knows I was refering to the government", bullshit.
And I hope you are not saying all americans are "brainwashed".
What does it say about a government than, if knowing it wouldn't work out, still follows another country to war?
Following another country into war, sending your child to work as an intern in that other country's capital buildings.....hmm, wonder if Blair gives good head....
Posted by: GepperRankins
it was pretty obvious "USA" meant the whitehouse.
i reckon a good deal of them are
i don't really know what it says about them, i didn't vote for them and i'm sure not going to stick up for them now.
Posted by: ruthie
Is it really that hard see I was refering to Rat Faced's broad statement of AMERICANS admitting we can not win there. Yea, yea, he'll say "everyone knows I was refering to the government", bullshit.
And I hope you are not saying all americans are "brainwashed".
.
Whether RF was referring only to the Bush administration, or to americans too, he is correct. As many of us that were against this debacle from the beginning, knowing it was pure bullshit and a farce, there were many americans who supported this illegal war, and still do.
Not all americans are blind and brainwashed.... but many are. I'm sure it was "comforting" for family members of troops to hear Rumsfeld talk about a 12 year "insurgency"...better known as freedom fighters.
IMPEACH
Posted by: bigboab
This has nothing to do with America, British or anybody else. It is the lying cheating politician who are leading them. A lot of people stand by their decision to elect someone, right or wrong.:(
It is like football and other sports supporters. Their team can do no wrong. I know my team cant.:lol:
The latest craze is Anti Royalists(UK). I have nothing against the Royals. They are every bit as good as me.:blink:
Posted by: Rat Faced
No nation can negotiate with terrorists. For there is no way to make peace with those whose only goal is death.
George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020404-1.html)
April 4, 2002
The Bush campaign's central message on Kerry: Anyone who would negotiate with terrorists can't be trusted with U.S. national security in a post-9/11 world.
Now, where is Manny and Hank to tell me the difference between this and Flip Flopping... Im sure they said they hated Flip Floppers.. :ph34r:
After weeks of delicate negotiation . . . a small group of insurgent commanders apparently came face to face with four American officials seeking to establish a dialogue with the men they regard as their enemies. The talks on June 3 were followed by a second encounter 10 days later, according to an Iraqi who said that he had attended both meetings . . . further talks are planned in the hope of negotiating an eventual breakthrough that might reduce the violence in Iraq...(more)
The Sunday Times of London
US 'in talks with Iraq rebels' (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1669601_1,00.html)
June 26, 2005
The USA are, in effect, admitting they cant win there now :rolleyes:
Just quoted myself to check... & yep, i definatly said Bush.. ie: THE GOVERNMENT.. I even ASKED for the Republican Spin in the following post...D'oh..
As to the UK... our Lapdog went in there without the support of the population of this country, and no... cant see any UK "Negotiators" in the report.
The USA insists on Operational Command in everything so, good or bad, the USA makes the decisions and gets the flack. If you dont like that, then let another country take the Operational Command, so THEY get the flack for it.
The USA is the only allied country that always insists on this, the rest of us trust each other.
Cannot give the responsibility wihout the corresponding authority.. however, we've already noticed that Bush Inc doesnt accept responsibility for anything (Both Domestic & International), despite having the authority and making the stuff happen... (Unless its good news, of course)
Reminds me of Blaire, really :blink:
BTW:
wonder if Blair gives good head....
I already asked about this in another thread :P
Posted by: JPaul
What is it that people don't understand.
You / we elected the Government you / we have.
Feck, you / we re-elected them after the action in Iraq.
This means that the majority (allowing for the vagaries of the electoral system) of people who could be arsed voting, elected the same people. How much effort did the chaps who didn't want them re-elected put in to achieving this. Not enough, obviously. How many were active on the hustings, few and far between methinks.
Changing one's position due to altering circumstances, or indeed to try another approach is not only acceptable, it is laudable. The situation in the North of Ireland is much improved (tho' still far from perfect). The reason is quite simple, people talked and compromised. The "we won't talk to terrorists" mentality was put on hold.
The only lasting solution to any such situation is perforce a peaceful one. A compromise one. Solutions which involve use of force do not work, not in any sustainable way.
Posted by: JPaul
The latest craze is Anti Royalists(UK). I have nothing against the Royals. They are every bit as good as me.:blink:
No they're not.
You policed the land and educated it's youth.
You were and are a useful member of society.
Posted by: GepperRankins
What is it that people don't understand.
You / we elected the Government you / we have.
Feck, you / we re-elected them after the action in Iraq.
This means that the majority (allowing for the vagaries of the electoral system) of people who could be arsed voting, elected the same people. How much effort did the chaps who didn't want them re-elected put in to achieving this. Not enough, obviously. How many were active on the hustings, few and far between methinks.
Changing one's position due to altering circumstances, or indeed to try another approach is not only acceptable, it is laudable. The situation in the North of Ireland is much improved (tho' still far from perfect). The reason is quite simple, people talked and compromised. The "we won't talk to terrorists" mentality was put on hold.
The only lasting solution to any such situation is perforce a peaceful one. A compromise one. Solutions which involve use of force do not work, not in any sustainable way.
maybe if I had control over the media things would be different :dry:
Posted by: Rat Faced
No one can say the UK media has been pro-Iraq or even pro-Government much of the time.. (well, maybe 50:50 ;) )
Its not really their fault that there is no effective opposition, they do there best, but the politicians of the opposing parties have to try too :rolleyes:
Posted by: JPaul
No one can say the UK media has been pro-Iraq or even pro-Government much of the time.. (well, maybe 50:50 ;) )
Its not really their fault that there is no effective opposition, they do there best, but the politicians of the opposing parties have to try too :rolleyes:
As do their "supporters", however if it's lip service only, then what's the point.
Posted by: Rat Faced
None of our Republicans wish to comment as to whether this is Flip Flopping then? :rolleyes: