Iraq Pullout Would Lead To Bloodbath, Bush Warns

Source: Washington Post

President Bush warned Thursday that pulling out of Iraq too soon would trigger a bloodbath akin to that of the Cambodian killing fields of the 1970s, while Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid declared that it is too late to stay because the war has already been lost.

On a day that reverberated with echoes of the Vietnam War era, Bush and Reid (D-Nev.) engaged in a long-distance debate over the lessons of history and the fate of the latest overseas war as part of a struggle over $100 billion in funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Reid cast Iraq as another Vietnam and Bush as another Lyndon B. Johnson, while the president described dire consequences if the past repeats itself.

"I want to remind you that after Vietnam, after we left, millions of people lost their life," Bush said here when an audience member asked about comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq. "The Khmer Rouge, for example, in Cambodia. And my concern is there would be a parallel. . . . The same thing would happen. There would be the slaughter of a lot of innocent life. The difference, of course, is that this time around, the enemy wouldn't just be content to stay in the Middle East; they'd follow us here."...


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/19/AR2007041902719.html?hpid=topnews

---

No Iraq Pullout Would Lead To Bloodbath, Zandor Warns

It certainly costs a lot more this way, we should be getting some professional blood massage too.

and nice desperate garb there to mention the Khmer Rouge.

yesterday

See thinkprogress.com

that as well.

He's got his little song & dance choreographed pretty well...

:puke:

a fricking DICTIONARY...

CUZ...

If he did open a damn dictionary....
under "bloodbath"
would be
a picture of...
BAGHDAD, APRIL 2007


Argh... I sputter. I shake.
With
Rage.

Buffoon, thy name is BUSH.

And the latest in this latest WHY to "Stay The Course", is just more BS to keep things going so the idiots hijacking our nation can keep the drum beat going on their march to Iran. :mad: :nuke: :grr:

Hey, Pretzelnuts McFuckwad! Have you seen any of the actual bloodbath photos that have been in circulation since you started this global tragedy? :grr:

I hate it, and it makes no logical sense, but it's historic usage, sadly.

:eyes:

Elizabethans tortured, conquered whatever the hell they could plant a flag on, occupied Ireland, enforced a state religion of which the Queen was the head,and arrested and beheaded anyone who was considered the slightest threat to the monarch.

The bath comes later. Then maybe a nice blood jacuzzi.

What a fucking dildo this man is.

No offense, sex toys.

.

I don't see how pulling guns out of a war will make the casualties worse. Fewer guns and bombs, fewer casualties on both sides.
Of course there would be fewer targets as well, our troops would no longer be in the way.

of people trying to avoid reality.

It seems that there was a time that Bush was avoiding comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam. So I guess that means that he does intend to install a government as weak and corrupt as the one we installed in Vietnam when were there.

What would have happened if Saddam had suddenly died? What started that whole ethnic cleaning business in the Balkans was the death of Tito.

I thought we were now going to stay there unless the surge failed and no progress was being made. It now appears that his latest argument about a supposed bloodbath will hold true whether the surge works or not. It looks like a fall-back position if September rolls around and we're still seeing massive chaos in Baghdad. I really wonder how Bush can expect us to believe his projection of a forthcoming bloodbath if we leave, as he hasn't been right about any projections in Iraq so far.

and it has not been reported correctly one time.

"Harry M. Reid declared that it is too late to stay because the war has already been lost."

What he said was (I have to paraphrase, was not taping), "if we continue on the course bush has set, then the war is lost; we need a change in direction"

that use of "is" was in a hypothetical: "if... then... (it) is"

that is a far cry from a blanket unqualified statement that it now is lost

I would have preferred he use "will be" for clarity, but this construct means the same thing

...verbatim quote. All I can find is the word "lost," in quotes or the beginning of a quote, then ellipses, then "the war is lost."

You're absolutely right: this is BS. The media had better show the entire quote, uncut, or they owe Reid a huge apology.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/20/politics/main2709229.shtml

"I believe myself that the secretary of state, secretary of defense and — you have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows — (know) this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday,"

Anyone who disagrees and uses the old Vietnam comparison should remember that the Khmer Rouge took power because of our illegal carpet bombing of the country. So, that can be argued as being our fault, too. Don't you love how many Americans refuse to acknowledge any of the darker parts of our history?

because by anyone's definition Iraq IS a bloodbath now. What a fuckhead.

"We cower as you point your fingers telling us to support our troops. You and the smarmy pundits in your pocket - those who bathe in the moisture of your soiled and blood-soaked underwear - can take that noise and shove it."

Sean Penn

what went on in Vietnam? What an asswipe.

Same tired old lines. Get a new speech writer.

:evilfrown:

Us leaving Vietnam had nothing to do with Pol Pot.

Control of that oil allows Bush's cronies to control prices.

Our military is stuck in the middle of a bloody, hopeless quagmire thanks to the gangsters in the White House.

Maybe that would motivate them to get their shit together. The present state of affairs clearly isn't doing that.

And we would stop sacrificing American lives.

Not to mention the fact that the U.S. military killed hundreds of thousands of Viet Namese.

Bush learns all the wrong lessons from Viet Nam. No surprise, considering his own background.

used to say.

Someone should have asked him why things were more stable before the U.S. invaded Iraq, 4 years ago.

"I want to remind you that after Vietnam, after we left, millions of people lost their life," Bush said here when an audience member asked about comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq. "The Khmer Rouge, for example, in Cambodia."


It was Nixon's bombing of Cambodia that caused the Cambodian people to support the Khmer Rouge. We are just as responsible for the killing fields as Pol Pot was.

Trying to scare everyone into doing what he wants.

Let's see, even though we didn't support this war, we must now support it because if we don't there will be bloodshed? I'm thinking this is a no-win sitchiation. And even though the Iraqis were not in a civil war when dimson invaded, it is now their fault that the war has devolved the nation into chaos. So, everything that's gone wrong is the fault of the Iraqis, the Iranians and the Democrats. Isn't that all the little weasel is about, now, deflecting blame?

This was your war, Mr. President. You lied for it. You worked hard for it. Hell, you were "elected" for it. It's yours. We have only begun to pay its price, but don't try to tell us that the consequences of your policy belong to others.

And it's already a bloodbath.

Then the Bush invasion again! What a brilliant move! That's the second bloodbath for Iraqis;

After US leaving the country, there will be another bloodbath;

It's inevitable. Iraqis have to set up another dictator.

Anyone who has little common sense of history would understand that before the Iraq invasion.

It's just unfortunate for the Iraqis. Bloodbath after bloodbath after bloodbath!

(and the track record of those around him) has proven he likely to be correct about predictions of how things will go in Iraq. :sarcasm:

I mean, it probably would get somewhat worse. What do we do about such a situation if it gets that much worse? Do we sit back and ignore it even though we are directly responsible for causing it? What if it gets even WORSE than it is now, do we ignore it if there are death squads roaming the streets killing at will (they probably already are, but you know, more of them). How the heck do we fix the place, since we did break it.

It needs to be american ammo filling these people full of holes. Because "Money trumps peace".

A blood-shower is OK, though. What a total dick.

Wrong!

He and his crowd have been WRONG about virtually everything regarding Iraq and the Iraq War up to now, it's AMAZING to me that anyone listens to him or his crowd at all anymore.

In fact, if we want to make sure SOMETHING goes right over there, maybe we should start doing the opposite of whatever he says is the right thing to do.

And destabilized the entire region.

I hate him.

"' But I believe, sir, in my soul that I have made the right decisions for this country when it comes to prosperity and peace."

Until one sect beats the other into submission it will continue. It's all about power and money to these "clerics". They could stop it if they wanted to, but they don't want it to stop until they are the winner. We opened the floodgates that held back a religious war. We can't turn back time.

My best guess is that we will eventually leave, Iraq will let the civil war run it's course and in the end we will see an Iraq ruled by religious zealots. The ones who truly lose are Women of Iraq. They are the ones that ultimately have lost the rights they had gained over the last 50 years.

So who is being proven right?

Besides bush wants a slow bloodbath anyway...another DUer postulated that bush wants to keep Iraqi oil from flooding the market. This made sense to me. Big oil does NOT want prices to come down. By keeping things at a slow boil over in Iraq, the Iraqi people are unable to recover their own oil in quantities large enough to impact this precious market.

I must have missed something at some point. What is it now? A blood shower? A blood splash?
Guess I am really off the mark, I sort of had the impression that Iraq ALREADY WAS A BLOODBATH!
Silly me!

Like they couldn't come and get us now, if they wanted to. Ahhhhh.....booga, booga, booga!

:puke:

its the oil not the blood.

And since when has an right-wing prediction been accurate?