What are you trying to say here, exactly? I can't sort through the LOLs. What do you mean by catch phrase? I don't get any of this.<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
State department is a catch phrase thrown in LOL. Yah, lets release this to the press and the world. If thats the mentality at the state department, then god forbid dude we are all in trouble. LOL. Holy crap.
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Iraqi citizens polled - Vast majority want US forces out immediately
well i wouldnt go that far, but i have a hard time with this poll.Ikarti wrote:
Yeah, because I bet all those Iraqis are over there baking American flag cakes.smtt686 wrote:
this is the dumbest poll ive ever seen...u want me to believe that people went door to door in iraq asking for opinions..... yeah, lets all get on that bandwagon. The U.N. isnt even welcome there. What did they do? Get a bunch of pollsters to hire armed insurgent escorts to make sure they have safe passage through baghdad!
but in reality, i do like the idea of american flag cakes... sounds yummy
I think he's trying to say that they're pretending the state department came up with it. Or that the state department is a figment of our collective imaginations.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
What are you trying to say here, exactly? I can't sort through the LOLs. What do you mean by catch phrase? I don't get any of this.<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
State department is a catch phrase thrown in LOL. Yah, lets release this to the press and the world. If thats the mentality at the state department, then god forbid dude we are all in trouble. LOL. Holy crap.
Come now people. Surely the Iraqis want the US to remain there. They have brought with them nothing but good tidings to the Iraqi people since they graced their ancient lands. God forbid Saddam was still in power - there would be scores of people dying there everyday.
Like you really need a poll for this? what a HUGE waste of money that could have been spent on something worthwhile like food, medicine etc that was wasted during oil for food?The_Shipbuilder wrote:
You do realize that there are people in Iraq doing things other than shooting each other in the streets, right?smtt686 wrote:
this is the dumbest poll ive ever seen...u want me to believe that people went door to door in iraq asking for opinions..... yeah, lets all get on that bandwagon. The U.N. isnt even welcome there. What did they do? Get a bunch of pollsters to hire armed insurgent escorts to make sure they have safe passage through baghdad!
Did you read my original post, or did you just look at the pretty pictures?
I'll quote it for you.Also,In my original post, quoting the WP article, I wrote:
The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.The Methodology section of the actual report, which anyone can find in 10 seconds with google, wrote:
The survey was designed and analyzed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes for WorldPublicOpinion.org. Field work was conducted through D3 Systems and its partner KA Research in Iraq.
Maybe that's where the lost billions went!smtt686 wrote:
Like you really need a poll for this? what a HUGE waste of money that could have been spent on something worthwhile like food, medicine etc that was wasted during oil for food?The_Shipbuilder wrote:
You do realize that there are people in Iraq doing things other than shooting each other in the streets, right?smtt686 wrote:
this is the dumbest poll ive ever seen...u want me to believe that people went door to door in iraq asking for opinions..... yeah, lets all get on that bandwagon. The U.N. isnt even welcome there. What did they do? Get a bunch of pollsters to hire armed insurgent escorts to make sure they have safe passage through baghdad!
Did you read my original post, or did you just look at the pretty pictures?
I'll quote it for you.Also,In my original post, quoting the WP article, I wrote:
The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.The Methodology section of the actual report, which anyone can find in 10 seconds with google, wrote:
The survey was designed and analyzed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes for WorldPublicOpinion.org. Field work was conducted through D3 Systems and its partner KA Research in Iraq.
So now that I've shown your assumptions to be wrong, you take a new approach. Now it's "the poll was a huge waste of money".smtt686 wrote:
Like you really need a poll for this? what a HUGE waste of money that could have been spent on something worthwhile like food, medicine etc that was wasted during oil for food?
Please - don't get me started on huge wastes of money.
The National Priorities Project wrote:
The War In Iraq Costs
$318,148,732,828
Instead, we could have provided
15,423,149
students four-year scholarships at public universities.
The title of this post is wrong and misleading. Using the same poll data (for what it's worth), only 35 % want the U.S. to withdraw within 6 months. The "vast majority" want the U.S. to stay longer than 6 months. I would not consider that "immediately".
Pffft, you want a waste of money, we could recover ALL of the money if we got rid of USELESS departments that don't do anything like say the Dept. of Education, Dept. of Agriculture, Internation Assitance Department, and the Dept. of Health and Human Services. If we combined all those into one agency, and just got rid of the first two all together. We would save over 500 billion a year.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
So now that I've shown your assumptions to be wrong, you take a new approach. Now it's "the poll was a huge waste of money".smtt686 wrote:
Like you really need a poll for this? what a HUGE waste of money that could have been spent on something worthwhile like food, medicine etc that was wasted during oil for food?
Please - don't get me started on huge wastes of money.The National Priorities Project wrote:
The War In Iraq Costs
$318,148,732,828
Instead, we could have provided
15,423,149
students four-year scholarships at public universities.
So far this year we have spent $385 BILLION dollars on INTEREST PAYMENTS alone. And you think the Iraq war is costly, you gotta be kidding me.http://www.federalbudget.com/
The treasury dept and Health and human services use up more than TWICE the dept. of defense.....(and that includes a WHOLE lot other stuff than just the Iraq war).
You wanna talk waste of money, how about tax reform, how about getting RID of the U.N. how about REFORMING social security (maybe not privatizing it) but REFORM.
Social security alone spends 500 BILLION dollars annually. Iraq war.....God you guys just can't focus on ANYTING else can you?
Edit: Here is my question, When Bush is gone, who the hell are you going to pick on and funnel your hate towards? (assuming a Repub win), you guys will be screwed. I can say this much, if it was a Dem in the hot seat, and was in the Balkans, or the middle east (hmmm Clint........nm) Repubs wouldn't be calling for his IMPEACMENT (on those terms) or be FUNNELING so much hate towards him/her. Amazing how the left is so different than right in terms of hatred and disrespect.
Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-28 21:38:42)
No one is innocent in war, realize that now. Even our reporters are targets for them, and if we have to kill someone, I'm willing to do whatever it takes so they can't get us again.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
Right, because the Administration's top priority is preventing the deaths of innocent Iraqis.Deader wrote:
"If the Americans leave right now, there is going to be a massacre in Iraq."
It's that part that America would like to avoid.
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/IBC/ibc144_1.gif
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/IBC/ibc144r_3.gif
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/counters/ibc_a.gif?1288295
did we really need official charts graphs and stats to know that they want ius out? it doesnt take a rocket scientist
Okay, boys. Let's pack up. Bus leaves in 10 minutes. Even if we left tomorrow, there would still be people who would say, "OMFG, why'd you abandon them nubs?" A paradox...
I checked out the historical debt data on the Treasury Dept's web site to see how much the past few presidents have cared about the national debt, and what they've done to balance the national budget.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
Pffft, you want a waste of money, we could recover ALL of the money if we got rid of USELESS departments that don't do anything like say the Dept. of Education, Dept. of Agriculture, Internation Assitance Department, and the Dept. of Health and Human Services. If we combined all those into one agency, and just got rid of the first two all together. We would save over 500 billion a year.
So far this year we have spent $385 BILLION dollars on INTEREST PAYMENTS alone. And you think the Iraq war is costly, you gotta be kidding me.http://www.federalbudget.com/
The results are very interesting.
Give me a break.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
The treasury dept and Health and human services use up more than TWICE the dept. of defense.....(and that includes a WHOLE lot other stuff than just the Iraq war).
You wanna talk waste of money, how about tax reform, how about getting RID of the U.N. how about REFORMING social security (maybe not privatizing it) but REFORM.
Social security alone spends 500 BILLION dollars annually. Iraq war.....God you guys just can't focus on ANYTING else can you?
"Tax reform" is too vague. What do you mean? Paying less taxes, so the government has less money to pay off the national debt? Or what?
As for social security, I agree with you that it is a major issue that should be a key target for reform. But reform is going to take YEARS. Not to mention very strong leadership. Clearly Bush isn't afraid to go against the polls, but he's already swimming against the tide of public opinion right now and he's not going to open another massive can of worms. Whoever reforms social security will be a hero to future Americans but unpopular to current ones.
Even if the American people and all the branches of the government were 100% committed to reform right now (which they are not), it would still take years of LOTS of hard work and dedication. And you're kidding yourself if you think we're going to cut funding by more than 50% even 10 years after reform. You can change the investment portfolio and chase higher and riskier returns, but only to a point. You can cut social security benefits, but imagine the public outcry when granny's monthly check goes down even 10%.
Bottom line is, it's a great way to save some money in the long term, but it's not going to pay off any time soon.
Meanwhile, you cut where you can, try to avoid waste, and start developing a real exit strategy for the money pit that is Iraq.
I can't speak for any other Bush critic, but for me it's not a matter of channelling hate. It's a matter of recognizing blatant incompetent, misguided policy, fearmongering, the abuse of public sentiment, actions that burn through America's goodwill and political capital with the rest of the world, and lying so that the American people will continue funding misguided wars and the military-industrial complex. Any leaders who do the same in the future, liberal or conservative, will be targets of my outspoken ire and contempt.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
Here is my question, When Bush is gone, who the hell are you going to pick on and funnel your hate towards? (assuming a Repub win), you guys will be screwed.
We have a winner, you got the first part right. This is an election year now.Ikarti wrote:
I think he's trying to say that they're pretending the state department came up with it. Or that the state department is a figment of our collective imaginations.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
What are you trying to say here, exactly? I can't sort through the LOLs. What do you mean by catch phrase? I don't get any of this.<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
State department is a catch phrase thrown in LOL. Yah, lets release this to the press and the world. If thats the mentality at the state department, then god forbid dude we are all in trouble. LOL. Holy crap.
Here's a novel idea. Since the Iraqi's have this voting thing down, or so we are told, why don't we let them vote on whether we should remain in Iraq and continue to *cough* keep them safe from harm *cough* or leave them to establish themselves the way they want to govern themselves?
Less taxes? No thats a horrible idea, fearmongering god I hate that word it is so overused and used incorrectly SO MUCH, omfg. That last paragraph is certainly your opinion and your entitled to it.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
"Tax reform" is too vague. What do you mean? Paying less taxes, so the government has less money to pay off the national debt? Or what?AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
The treasury dept and Health and human services use up more than TWICE the dept. of defense.....(and that includes a WHOLE lot other stuff than just the Iraq war).
You wanna talk waste of money, how about tax reform, how about getting RID of the U.N. how about REFORMING social security (maybe not privatizing it) but REFORM.
Social security alone spends 500 BILLION dollars annually. Iraq war.....God you guys just can't focus on ANYTING else can you?
As for social security, I agree with you that it is a major issue that should be a key target for reform. But reform is going to take YEARS. Not to mention very strong leadership. Clearly Bush isn't afraid to go against the polls, but he's already swimming against the tide of public opinion right now and he's not going to open another massive can of worms. Whoever reforms social security will be a hero to future Americans but unpopular to current ones.
Even if the American people and all the branches of the government were 100% committed to reform right now (which they are not), it would still take years of LOTS of hard work and dedication. And you're kidding yourself if you think we're going to cut funding by more than 50% even 10 years after reform. You can change the investment portfolio and chase higher and riskier returns, but only to a point. You can cut social security benefits, but imagine the public outcry when granny's monthly check goes down even 10%.
Bottom line is, it's a great way to save some money in the long term, but it's not going to pay off any time soon.
Meanwhile, you cut where you can, try to avoid waste, and start developing a real exit strategy for the money pit that is Iraq.
Exit strategy, yeah a good idea, but we cannot cut and run, it will make things a lot more dangerous or do you think otherwise.
Why do you think its misguided? What was so wrong about Iraq (don't even dare say Bush Lied, because I will go off on your ass about the definition of a lie), I just want to know what you think is wrong with trying to help people gain Democracy where they obviously needed it.
Let's just kill all of the Sunni's and Shia's. Then give Iraq to the Kurds.
I hate to break it to you people, but even ol dubya wants the troops out, no one wants to be there, but leaving before the iraqui's can defend themselves is inhuman and irresponsible,
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Iraqi citizens polled - Vast majority want US forces out immediately