So, will this "no timetable" crock of horseshit affect anything?

Ahh, gotta love *co's logic:

"We're having poor peoplee killed over there so we won't have to kill them over here!"

:mad:

... post Katrina.

As for his constant argument against 'setting timetables' and not setting 'arbitrary deadlines', where was that rhetoric when it came to the inspectors in Iraq, pre-invasion?

For years we've been hearing that if we set a time for wihdrawal, the insurgients will quiet down and just wait us out. At the same time, we've been hearing that Iraqi troops can't be properly trained due to the violence caused by insurgients.

It's that same old Bush circular reasoning; that's why he's always saying we're turning the corner -- and that's why we keep winding up in exactly the same place we started.

than letting something as unimportant as a war just drag on forever.

:sarcasm:

"Oh, we'll finish it up sometime, I dunno."

Bush sounds like a 14-year-old being asked to fix up his room.

:dunce:

of that.

"When it is assumed that because one thing follows another that the one thing was caused by the other."

Example: I took EZ-No-Cold and 2 days later my cold was gone.

To counter the argument show that the correlation is coincidental by showing that:

1) The effect would have occurred even if the cause did not occur (such as the idea that OBL is a careful planner and has not yet decided to attack us)

or

2) that the effect was caused by something other than the suggested cause (such as greater airline security)

In fact Katrina shows that we are less capable of dealing with major tragedy because we decided to "attack them there."

Economy is hobbled by $6 billion/month spent in Iraq.

It's mostly Iraqis who are insurgents while 4-10% are non-Iraqis. So we aren't really fighting "them."