Bush concerned over civil war talk in Iraq

[sabra]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/WBT005822.htm

Bush concerned over civil war talk in Iraq

WASHINGTON, Aug 21 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Monday he was concerned about talk of civil war in Iraq but withdrawal from that country would be "absolutely wrong."

[jeff30997]

1. No,George...

What would be "absolutely wrong" is the withdrawal of a baseball bat from your ass.

[saigon68]

3. I thought the Chimp had a Zucchini up his ASS

[jeff30997]

5. LOL!

Or maybe it's a sequoia!!!:rofl:

[lonestarnot]

12. a redwood.

[Webster Green]

2. He's concerned about the "talk", but not about the war.

Pretty much all you need to know about the commander-in-chimp.

[ixion]

7. exactly... they're always concerned about the CONTEXT of the problem

rather than the substance.

[warrens]

4. The Sunday gabfests were civil war-centric

And a lot of the gabbers were repukes finally admitting that Iraq is a total mess with no solution, and that Bush has no plan to solve the problem, just "stay the course."

This is going to go from bad to worse as the election approaches. The Chicago Trib tried to spin the fact that 22 people were killed by snipers this weekend on their religious migration. "Relatively low casualties judged a security success" was the headline, more or less. My, aren't we setting low hurdles for the term success, eh?

[maseman]

6. What he is saying is the equivilant to

shooting up a post office and then worrying about the well-being of the employees afterward. HE CAUSED THE FUCKING Civil War there.

[Phredicles]

15. Hey, that was the LA Times' headline, too.

But then I remembered: The Trib owns the Times.

Still, it would be funny if it weren't so horrible: "Isn't this great news? Only 22 people were killed; everyone else was just really, really scared. Freedom is on the march!!!" Just pathetic.

[Sapere aude]

8. Does anyone really give a shit what he says or thinks?

Bush is irrelevant. He is not in charge of anything.

[MiniMe]

9. Is he concerned that we are talking about it, or about the possibility?

Hmmmm, lets see, this is King George. He says there is no civil war so there isn't. He must be concerned that we are talking about it. :sarcasm:

[damntexdem]

10. Hey, listen up, Dubya:

It ain't the talk that you have to worry about -- it's the civil war!

[crim son]

11. That's not civil war, that's

FREEDOM ON THE MARCH! Remember? You told us there wasn't gonna be any civil war, that the insurgency was weakening and that soon all the Iraqis would be dancing in the streets with joy at their "liberation." Fucking dipshit.

[coalition_unwilling]

13. Who would have ever predicted that the decline and fall

of the American Empire would be presided over by a Repuke? What you are witnessing in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere is the withering on the vine of the NeoCon fantasy of empire-building through "creative destruction." I recommend sitting back and enjoying the spectacle. Or one could take out paleoconservative Edmund Gibbons' "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire." Or for a more contemporary spin, try William Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."

[crim son]

14. I've read the latter.

I wish I believed we are seeing the withering on the vine you speak of. And once I understood what underlies the repuke/neocon philosophy/ideal it became very easy to imagine the U.S. imploding under their leadership. What amazes me is how your average american is still struggling to understand what's happened. This lack of understanding I blame on both parties.

[AlCzervik]

16. concerned about the "Talk" not the actual events unfolding on the ground