Ferret, this kind of response makes you look foolish, if you really don't undestand his statement, then you are, but to pretend like it compares to Clinton lying, you are way off. I don't know anyone who thought the war was over when Bush said that it was finished, cause no one I know took it as saying "the fight is finished", just that part of going in and taking saddam out and then you have to go and clean up, along with help start the new system. Did you really think that the goal was to get saddam out and then leave?? That would have been foolish along with not caring for the people that would have been abondoned for a slaughter while terrorists groups fought for power. There probably would have been 4 major factions dividing that country, making it a huge civil war.
I feel so sorry for the ignorant and delusional this time of year. I will be sure to say a prayer for them this Christmas. There's nothing like re-writting history
Mia That is old now, Bush has made couple of new speeches, look at those speeches and find a new one liner.
Ok so if the terrorst don't have tanks it not major combat? Give me break we are still operation with thousands of soldiers, tanks , etc. Who knows how many gunships and planes Its the locals fighting for power, at what point do our allies in Iraq become terrorists too? I mean it fine when the militias kill the insurgents , but supposedly they are starting to kipnap and execute politcal enemies.
ferret77: Your failure to understand my statement does not make it crap, any more than your failure to understand nuclear science makes nuclear science crap. It simply makes you ignorant. And, after having explained many things to you repetitively, the only logical conclusion which I can arrive at is that you are willfully ignorant.
I see similarity between DMOZ and Bush administration, both are corrupt organizations that serve their administrators by ignoring the truth, procedures and regulations.
Please you know that statement is just trying to play word games. If the enemies don't have tanks its not major combat? Why not just say there is no war because the enemy does have uniforms? Maybe we could call it a police action and negate any statement ever said about it that contain word "war". Just call the the gloabal struggle against islomic fanacistism or whatever. It does't change anything, the mission wasn't accomplished, combat operations continue, and we have not preavailed.
ferrett77: Let me make this perfectly clear. Major combat is army vs. army. The phase we are in now would traditionally be called a "mop up operation". However, nowadays it will more likely be termed OOTW (Operations Other Than War). The role was are now in is that of national policemen, protecting the Iraqi populace from Al Qaeda infiltrators and sympathizers and from violent individuals and groups within their own population. You can call it a lot of things. You can paint it pink and call it Eunice if you like. But you cannot call it major combat.
Will-fully! Move on and don't waste time with unrepentant libs that are going to say what they say anyway! It's hard to see Iraqis gaining freedom and democracy after 3000 years or so, but if they do, nor Americans or Bush are going to be credited for it. I don't know what they would say, maybe that the same result could have been achieved with no loss of lives via UN resolutions and inspections (OK you can start laughing, although it's a pretty sad issue anyway). So what's the point? Let them drink french wine, get drunk and have all those dreams of theirs of a better world without Bush, without Americans, with free drugs, free sex etc
Little willy; Are you talking about willfully ignorant? I posted six points in my post but you or the other usual Bush supporters here didn't say anything about it and instead gave me a red rep with your usual name calling. The funny thing is that with all your macho BS posting here, the usual supporters don't have the ball to sign it. But I understand your problem, after all what can you post when even government admits to those mistakes.
It's actually quite important that the enemy doesn't wear uniforms. It's terrorism, not war in the common meaning of the word, otherwise there would be wars going on in many countries that are not deemed as being involved in war, even civil. Spain (ETA and Islamic terrorists, although the latter ones are quite satisfied for the time being), France (Corsica), Italy (Red Brigades and Mafia), UK (IRA), Russia (Islamic fighters all over the Caucasus). That's not war, or you are rewriting history and the dictionary too.
Talk about trying to twist and rewrite history No it is not major conflict, trying to compare to the references you listed though and not calling it 'war' but terror is nothing but rewriting history. Guess our minute men were terrorists, thanks for clearing it up.
sweet a new bush aplogist spitting talking points your right there is no war, its police action I guess that changes everything
were is this definition of "major combat operations" listed Will? I have been looking around trying to find out where this id defined as Army vs Army combat? And what exactly contitutes an army now, what are the numbers of insurgency at now?
Thank you ferret77, I suppose that means that you do know that the war, the actual war, is over. That doesn't mean that everything is ok, but I am happy to see that we agree on something. Now let's see some "police action" being done by the Iraqis, and let's get the hell out of there ASAP! That means as soon as the Iraqis can handle it, in the mean time we're stuck there! We can't just abandon them to themselves! Let's get on with it in the best possible way! Once we're all back home, we'll discuss and have elections, just as the Iraqis will. But for now, full support to the troops that aren't exactly chatting their way through internet forums hoping to verbally beat the terrorists, in writing!
It doesn't matter what their numbers are -- unless they organize and fight as an army it is not classified as major combat.
After all, it makes perfect sense. A war is not expected as the fighting that is conducted by the terrorists. It's not even something new, it's never been considered a war. Only terrorists themselves and their supporters could consider it a war to make things work their way, a holy war sounds even better, huh?