You sign up over a month ago, and this is the first comment you post?
You look an awful lot like a sleeper troll to me.
Posted on 08/31/2004 10:55:04 AM PDT by arkady_renko
Mark Oliver
Tuesday August 31, 2004
The US president, George Bush, does believe America will win the war on terror after all despite his damaging remarks yesterday to the contrary.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said today that Mr Bush "will make it crystal clear ... that we will win the war on terrorism by continuing to take the fight to the enemy".
This standpoint was in marked contrast to Mr Bush's comments on NBC television yesterday. He was asked whether America could win its "war on terror", and replied: "I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."
Bush opponents had pounced on the remarks, which were a volte-face from the president's usually more bullish rhetoric about terrorism.
Mr Bush, who has described himself as a "war time president", will further try to repair the damage with a speech tonight in Nashville, Tennessee, to the American Legion, the country's largest veterans organisation.
Asked today by reporters whether the war on terror could be won, the Democratic presidential candidate senator John Kerry replied, "Absolutely".
Senator John Edwards, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate, said yesterday: "After months of listening to the Republicans base their campaign on their singular ability to win the war on terror, the president now says we can't win the war on terrorism."
Some commentators have predicted that homeland security and the threat of terrorism will be the biggest issue at the ballot box in November's presidential elections.
As the four-day Republican national convention headed into its second day at Madison Square Garden in New York under extremely heavy security, Bush supporters scrambled to explain the president's comments.
First lady Laura Bush, who is scheduled to speak at the convention tonight, defended her husband, saying on ABC's Good Morning America that "this isn't a war with a country where you're going to have a surrender at some point, but the fact is, as we look around the world, we are already winning the war on terror".
The governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is also speaking at the convention tonight and was expected to salute Mr Bush's record as commander in chief.
In yesterday's opening session, Republicans invoked the memory of the September 11 2001 attacks as a test of Mr Bush's mettle as a strong and decisive leader.
Rudolph Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, likened the president to Winston Churchill and Ronald Reagan. He said: "Since September 11th President Bush has remained rock solid ... we need George Bush more than ever."
Senator John Edwards, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate, said yesterday: "After months of listening to the Republicans base their campaign on their singular ability to win the war on terror, the president now says we can't win the war on terrorism."
Democrats are too stupid to realize that terrorism is going to be with us until the end of time; the only way to "win" is to keep fighting.
That being said, I'd love to hear their "plan" to win the war on terrorism.
So Kerry isn't the only one who flip-flops?
Did Bush vote for it before he voted against it?
Did he say reporting for duty 30 years after saying that he was a war criminal?
Did he say that he was for the Vietnamese and then block the Senate vote to try to pressure Vietnam to cease human rights violation?
Is there going to be a little flag waved by the terrorists when they give up?
This is analogous to having some sort of roach infestation in your house. You can be sure you’ve killed them all, but they’ll always be a threat you need to keep on top off. Bush will get the house tented and take the hurt to them; Kerry will put out some humane traps and hope they leave us alone.
Methinks Mr. Edwards is another victim of Bush "strategery." They try to capitalize on a gaffe, and in the end they just end up digging an even deeper hole for themselves. Makes me almost wonder if President Bush does this on purpose, knowing he's setting a trap.
You sign up over a month ago, and this is the first comment you post?
You look an awful lot like a sleeper troll to me.
Shame to waste a sleeper account on such a lamea** comment.
Can you hear the lambs?
smells trollish around here
A_R
So Kerry isn't the only one who flip-flops?Ah! Your first post. Welcome to FreeRepublic.com .....
ping
Can we prevent all "lone nut" acts of terrorism in Bali, Israel, et al or do those not meet your consideration for "terrorism" or things to tackle in "the war on terror"?
Or do you just like getting a Walter Cranky-like soundbite of President Bush saying that the war is "now unwinnable"? You do realize that Michael Moore is CHEERING for the other side to win in Iraq and denying that there is even any terrorism over there:
(April 14, 2004):The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win. Get it, Mr. Bush?....I oppose the U.N. or anyone else risking the lives of their citizens to extract us from our debacle...the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end.
Absolutely correct, 100%!
No. So does your mama. I found that out last night.
By the way, you might not recognize her next time you see her, I shaved her back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
