Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Where the hell is the Neo-Con OUTRAGE?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Atticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:12 PM
Original message
Where the hell is the Neo-Con OUTRAGE?
Some of our fellow citizens should literally be beside themselves about the Senate report due out tomorrow. Requested by John Kerry, the report, among other things, confirms that Osama Bin Laden was absolutely within reach of US military forces at Tora Bora when the Bush administration withdrew to prepare for a push into Iraq. Only 100 Special Forces personnel were left in place and Bin Laden and his supporters simply walked away into a trackless area of neighboring Pakistan.

This must rank as one of the most bone-headed, half-assed, totally unsupportable decisions ever made by a US Commander in Chief.

So where is the spittle-flecked, eye-bulging, table pounding OUTRAGE from all the war hawks? You know, the ones who were all for anything and everything that Dim Son wanted to do in the Middle East, so long as it involved lots of death and carnage and gee-whiz weapons systems with snappy names like "shock and awe". Where are these red, white and blue "raghead killin' sons o'bitches" now that their hero is shown to be what we knew him to be all along: a hopelessly incompetent man-child too stupid to realize how he was being manipulated?

Last question: Do you think they'd be a little more upset if a Democrat had let Bin Laden escape due to sheer incompetence?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TheCowsCameHome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. They'll spin their attacks to focus on Kerry.
G U A R A N T E E D.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Or blame Clinton
I've already seen that on another board. It went around a lot after 9/11. Clinton had bin Laden in the cross hairs serveral times blah, blah, blah.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Saw a very small report burried in the San Diego Union Tribune...
About 1 inch long.

Hell, I doubt the Neocons look that deep in the paper. If they do read it the word "witchunt" will appear in their defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. The Dick and his daughter Liz Cheney have been out in force
Since Obama was inaugurated. So not all the cowards are silent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
5. Are you kidding? You probably won't hear a peep from them. Don't
forget, they were cheerleaders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmileyRose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. It had nothing to do with incompetence
capturing bin Laden would have meant a quick end to the war. America would have it's bad guy and that would be the end of it.

No Iraq war, no gazillions in taxpayer money to the Bush family and friends, no American access to Iraqi oil fields.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Here's their response...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
certainot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
8. 1000 radio stations determine what outrage makes it into the mainstream
and what the acceptable outrages are
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Yep. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
10. "a hopelessly incompetent man-child too stupid to realize he's being manipulated"
Strange how all his incompetence nets his family and friends billions.

Let's keep the deniability plausible shall we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. His family and friends were among his most effective manipulators. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old mark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
12. I have seen this blamed on the Democrats in congress, although
what they even had to do with it I have no idea.

It's a Bush fuckup, pure and simple, and the RWers just totally ignore that or blame the wrong people.

You are giving them too much credit it you expect logical thinking from them, or much thinking at all.

mark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
14. Bush said himself that Bin Laden wasn't that important.
Which I'm sure had nothing to do with the fact that his family and the Bin Ladens had been buddies for years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
15. Oh heck yeah. Remember how they blamed Clinton because
his administration had not caught bin laden. They blamed him because, when they bombed bin laden's camp, he wasn't there. Of course the CIA gave the military the position of bin laden and Clinton had to get permission to bomb. So by the time congress approved the bombing raid bin laden had gone bye bye. Then when the CIA gave another position, congress denied Clinton approval to bomb. So who was the scape goat when bush's incompetence let those planes take down the Twin Towers, why Clinton, of course, it was his fault because Clinton did get him in the first bombing raid. They messed them selves purporting that theory after the attack. It was all Clinton's fault, Clinton let it happen blah blah blah. I bet you don't hear one damn republican admit it was bush's fault about anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC