President Bush, in his address to the nation Thursday evening, unveiled a new strategy in Iraq — he called it "return on success" — that would bring home American troops from Iraq as they succeed in restoring order.
It was just another way of asking the nation for more time. He endorsed Gen. David Petraeus’ recommendation to end the surge of 30,000 troops by next summer, which the military had said couldn’t be sustained past that time anyway.
There was very little new here, except an acknowledgment by Bush that the war will continue into his successor’s term, an open-ended commitment couched as an "enduring relationship" with a trusted ally. Bush’s stand makes it probable that upwards of 100,000 troops will be left in Iraq at the end of his presidency. And that he’ll leave the tough decisions for ending the Iraq war to his successor.
This isn’t what the country signed onto when Bush took the country to war with Iraq in 2003.
"The way forward I have described tonight makes it possible, for the first time in years, for people who have been on opposite sides of this difficult debate to come together."
Well, not quite.
If anything, Bush’s "way forward" is only his latest version of "stay the course," a path that will lead to even deeper frustration in the country and angry debate in the 2008 presidential campaign.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- BlueJay on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
64 Comments
Yeah, zero political progress — maybe even a sliding back of progress with the murder of a Sunni sheik and the apparent hardening of the soft ethnic partitions in Baghdad — but Augustus Stupidus retains the old-timey faith in Iraqis.
That’s the same idealism, btw, that led Bush to trumpet a forthcoming surge of democracy in the ME at the point of US weapons. One that is patently not forthcoming.
So no political progress, but the prez ain’t losin’ faith.
The American public, otoh, we’ll see about. Bush’s 5,700 troop drawback by Christmas and the eventual rollback of the surge by summer has probably bought him the votes of fence-sitting GOP Senators.
Which should be enough to1) Cover the president’s political backside, which as always is Job #1 for every GOP lawmaker.2) Ensure continued Dem control of Congress and may assure a Dem president outright, come 2008.
It’s never a good thing when a president’s idealism lags the voting public’s realism. That’s better known as a “failure of leadership.”
Pedant, the fence-sitting GOP senators were the intended audience of the remarks of last night, IMHO.
Add to “progress”: the report yesterday on many media outlets of the Kurds making their own deal with Hunt Oil to develop the reserves located in “their” area of Iraq, effectively scuttling any “oil revenue sharing” legislation in the Iraqi Parliament.
Where have all the troops gone?NATO lacks troops to guarantee Afghan peace: report By Mark John
2 hours, 13 minutes ago
BRUSSELS (Reuters) – The NATO force in Afghanistan does not have enough troops or equipment to secure advances made against Taliban insurgents and to guarantee a successful end to its mission, a lawmakers’ report concluded on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENTThe findings of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, which draws legislators from 42 countries, echoes recent complaints by NATO commanders that troop shortages are hampering operations and come as some allies face domestic pressure to pull troops out.
“The NATO mission still suffers from a lack of personnel and assets,” the assembly’s Defence and Security Committee concluded after a six-day tour of allied operations last week which included talks with local and national Afghan officials.
“Fundamentally, the delegation came away with a sense that current efforts are making significant incremental progress, but not at a rate that will ensure without doubt an acceptable end state to our mission there,” it concluded.
The report did not recommend how many reinforcements were needed on top of the 50,000 troops currently under NATO and U.S. command. The most pressing needs included more helicopters, intelligence and reconnaissance assets and trainers to build up the Afghan security forces, it said.
NATO commanders say they have had success in wresting towns from the Taliban and handing them back to government control, only to watch them be re-taken by insurgents because of the weakness of local Afghan army or police forces.
NATO wants to accelerate efforts to train up the Afghan army but is facing resistance from many allies who refuse to send either troops or trainers into the southern heartlands of the Taliban where most fighting takes place.
“Consolidation means being able to ensure that the insurgents do not return,” NATO Parliamentary Assembly Secretary-General Simon Lunn told Reuters.
“‘More’ in this case would imply more boots on the ground, more trainers and more enablers,” he said, using the military term for helicopters and other vital operational equipment.
Top soldiers including U.S. General Dan McNeill, commander of the NATO-led force in Afghanistan, and General Ray Henault, the Canadian who heads up NATO’s Military Committee in Brussels, have in recent days complained of troop shortfalls.
But they have stopped short of making specific calls for more troops at a time when key allies such as Canada and the Netherlands — both in the south — face tough decisions about extending their missions in the face of domestic opposition.
The NATO Parliamentary Assembly draws its members from the 26 NATO allies and 16 other countries. Its aims range from making the alliance more accountable to fostering dialogue on security issues.
VT and Pedant,
Indeed. We’ve heard it all before, differently packaged, and more convincingly argued.
The one angle to add here is that kicking this to the next President has an added bonus: if a Democrat gets the office, as is likely to happen, the fact that withdrawal and the inevitable collapse happens on the Democrat’s watch will pay big GOP dividends for the foreseeable future.
Bush can claim his legacy of not having “lost Iraq,” Republicans can hand off their personal and collective failure to Democrats, and Democrats stay in the electoral doghouse.
Given all of this, it’s time for Democrats to defund the whole project. If the question is whether they should pay the political price now or later, it’s always better to do it sooner and as quickly as possible.
Also doesn’t hurt that the majority of the electorate wants us the hell out of Iraq.
Too bad our Repub. leaders don’t know how to quit bush!Gingrich: Republicans need “clean break” from Bush By Steve Holland
44 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Republican presidential candidates need to make a “clean break” from President George W. Bush and the U.S. government or they will lose in November 2008, a veteran Republican leader said on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT”If you don’t represent real change, you just gave away the 2008 election,” said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who led the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 1994 and now is flirting with a White House run.
Gingrich cited the Iraq war, the failed federal response to Hurricane Katrina two years ago and the inability to control U.S. borders and illegal immigration as evidence of a need for a complete overhaul of the U.S. system of governing.
“Now that may or may not make the White House happy. But I think that’s the whole point about making a clean break,” Gingrich told a group of reporters over breakfast.
He added: “I believe for any Republican to win in 2008 they have to … offer a dramatic, bold change. If we nominate somebody who has not done that, they get to be the nominee but there is very, very little likelihood that they can win.”
Gingrich echoed the view of many political analysts who believe voters are looking for a big change in 2008 and that Democrats hold a natural advantage after eight years with Bush in the White House.
While Gingrich, who has been considering a late entry into the Republican presidential race, said “the odds are very high that I won’t run,” he did not completely rule it out.
He said he would not make a final decision before September 29, depending on whether he feels a candidate from the current Republican group can defeat the Democratic nominee and whether he would be able to raise at least $30 million for a race.
But Gingrich, who represented Georgia for 20 years, indicated that a push he is making for a grass-roots change in how the country is governed, with less partisanship, would take at least five years to develop into a coherent alternative to the current system.
DOES NOT TARGET BUSH
Gingrich said he did not intend to specifically target Bush, just that he is the current leader of a government that has taken decades to become overly bureaucratic and ineffective.
“This isn’t about Bush,” he said, calling the president “a very decent man” who “believes very deeply in what he is doing.”
Still, he took issue with a number of Bush’s policies, and questioned why Bush felt the need to make an address to the country on Iraq on Thursday night, after the top U.S. officials in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, had already laid out the situation earlier in the week.
“The right two people to talk about Iraq were Gen. Petraeus and Amb. Crocker,” said Gingrich.
On Iraq, Gingrich said that “to stay the course I think in the long run is not a very sound strategy,” and that the United States should work quickly to stop Iran’s “proxy war” against U.S. troops in Iraq.
He said this should be done in a non-violent way, such as through diplomatic sanctions, economic pressure and covert action and “if necessary with indirect military application.”
Washington accuses Iran of exporting improvised bombs to Iraqi militants that are killing Americans, a charge Tehran denies.
Chavez, etc., it would seem to me that limiting the vouchers as you suggest might have some constitutional issues.
On tracking private vs. public school dropout problems; this sounds like a good idea, but the availability of private school data on this point might well be limited or nonexistent unless said private school is state accredited, and files the mandated reports with the state DOE under a system called KIDS. I do know that under KIDS, if a school which must report the required information doesn’t know where a student transfers or goes if s/he doesn’t return to the reporting school for the next academic year, there is one option (not that familiar with the system) that seems to fairly describe the situation that is treated as a drop-out by the state, but if another option is selected, the student is not treated as a drop-out; thus, even these data are suspect.
And Steven, how’s this for a cynicism check; the tuition in the private schools increases to the normal tuition + the voucher amount, thereby eliminating from the pool those who couldn’t afford the base tuition from the outset.
Oops, my turn to post at the wrong thread!
Bush succumbs to the inevitable demands made by troop shortage, and headlines around the country hail it as ‘bush agrees to troop reduction’ like it’s some kind of iniative of his making. Bush wouldn’t know his way forward if he had a gps strapped to his wrist!
msnbc who i think is kinda right leaning, never mind keith olbermann or that idiot tucker carlson pretty much was left wondering wtf bush was talking about last night.
bush clearly lied on several points.
“we are fighting in iraq with 37 allies”
even rightie chris matthews was amazed at bush’s outright lies.
bush lies.
Washington supplied cluster bombs to Israel in a rush shipment to kill Lebanese civilians.
But Iran is condemned for trying to help their Arab neighbors fight off an Invading Army who has clearly stated that Iran is next.
All this is being done so Israel is safe to keep murdering their neighbors and stealing their land with impunity.
How two-faced and foolish can America get { under Bushco }.
Israeli Zionist are laughing up their sleeves watch their fool Bush do all their dirty work.
Should be: Israeli Zionists are laughing up their sleeves watching their fool Bush do all their dirty work.
He’s a fool to do their dirtywork, oh boy. Steelie Dan.
So, Bush is tying the withdrawal of troops from Iraq with our success in pacifying it. Given our previous success rate there, we’ll have a draft in place by October and 50,000 new young surgers in Baghdad by Christmas, and 100,000 on top of the ones we have there now (whose tours have been indefinitely extended) by March! Vietnam all over again, including that ephemeral, fast-retreating light at the end of the tunnel. When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn!
Give it just a little more time, and their love will surely grow!
Stay the failed course … and on and on ad infinitum.
Gee, I thought there were severl hundred thousand trained ARI troops. Why can’t they handle the few hard-core “dead-enders in their last throes”?
Cut-off Bush’s “war” { slaughter } money and this whole nasty thing goes away including the 3 dollar gasoline which is breaking the back of our economy.
The middle class and the poor are suffering the job loss and home foreclosures now running rampant due to the Israeli drain on our economy.
Their “greedy makes us needy.”
Their choices:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerPage.jhtml
Do you agree?
Just when bush thought he’d turned another corner with Anbar, there was an IED in the road.
His speech should have been called “F You, America! I’m doing what ever I want and you can’t stop me.”
Worst.President.Possible.
Your time is up, Mr. Bush. Your misinformation, lack of forthought, and miserable leadership skills, got us into this mess, so your time is up. Sit down, go to the back of the class, and leave quietly on January 20, 2009.
I like the fact that the response was given by an Army Ranger. Quite a contrast to chicken-hawk GWB.
We’ll be there forever, it’s the plan to maintain a base so we can keep a close eye on and intiminate Iran and Syria. We never pulled out of Germany or Korea…it’s just one more part of the world we’ll be responsible for policing, which won’t be easy considering the fundamental religious culture and the tribalism that’s been there for a thousand years.
I don’t think it’s right to pull out now anyway..we made a huge mistake and destroyed their country, so it’s our responsibility to make an effort and put it back together..even if it takes the next hundred years. or so.Bush has caused more damage during his reign than any president I know.
For someone who accused me of running away, you never did address my data on guns the other day….
You know Nathan, I used to tell my kids that “when you keep running over a dead cat, it just gets flatter”. I feel the same way about this issue..I know what the numbers are, and I know how gun violence has affected our country. You have your opinions and I’m not going to change them with anything I have to say. I’m not wasting my time anymore with those that cherish their weapons like some sort of sacred religion.There is nothing left to say..it’s all been said.
Ed
The money that the US “spends” on Israel is piss in the ocean.
It is NOTHING!
You are a kook to keep claiming that Israel is any kind of a “drain” on the US economy
Hitler expected a sixweek walkover when he invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, only for the war to end four years later with his suicide in the ruins of his own capital, Berlin.
Thats fine and dandy Mary, just don’t accuse me of running away from a conversation anymore.
I love how all of a sudden everyone doesn’t want to talk about guns when they are faced with the facts…
My post…
Apparantly “facts” are in the eye of the beholder when it comes to the gun nuts. You guys buy into the spin put out by the NRA and all the pro-gun web sites…I’m not “running” from anything, Hank..I just thinks it’s stupid to keep trying to make the same points over and over. If you don’t get it after all the debate on this blog the last few days, then you’re not going to. You can keep kneeling before your guns like you do your God and it makes no difference to me.
I mean Nathan.
Here are some REAL facts: If you live in the USA, your chances of getting killed with a firearm is 8 times that of living in another high income country with gun control. If you live in a “high gun ownership” state like Mississippi or Lousianna, your child has 16 times the chance of accidently getting killed with a firearm than if you lived in a “low gun ownersip” state like Hawaii or Rode Island.The number and availability of guns is directly related to the number of deaths by firearms.
In 2004, (the latest number from the CDC)there were 29,569 deaths by firearms..that includes homocides, suicides, and accidents. Compare those numbers with Europe or Japan..and the numbers speak for themselves.Those are the facts…I’m not posting anymore on this subject, because it’s futile to try and convince the gun nuts that guns aren’t some holy grail to be protected at all costs..and that even includes human cost.
Bush made it clear in his address last night that we will still be adrift in Iraq when he leaves office in 2009. It’s not unreasonable to assume, therefore, that by the time the conflict is resolved, the Boomer Generation will be moving into their much anticipated retirement phase, and Generation X will be coming of political age. Most of us are somewhere in our thirties now, watching this mess play out. It’s important to remember this fiasco, to never forget what happened and why, and also to conceive of a better way to conduct business when our time arrives. Therefore, I encourage those who are inclined to get access to JFK’s “American University Commencement Address,” which he delivered on June 10, 1963. No question that it’s a Cold War speech, but it’s also a beautiful speech and the message is applicable to the here and now. I’m quoting below from one of the early paragraphs:
“I have, therefore, chosen this time and place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth too rarely perceived. And that is the most important topic on earth: peace. what kind of peace do I mean and what kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, and the kind that enables men and nations to grow, and to hope, and build a better life for their children — not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women, not merely peace in our time but peace in all time.”
Mary,
And where did you get your numbers from?
The VPC, Gun Control Inc, Million Mom March, Brady Campaign, or Americans for Gun Safety?
“The number and availability of guns is directly related to the number of deaths by firearms.”
I just proved you wrong on this the other day.
I clearly showed you that the number of deaths has NOT BEEN GOING UP while millions and millions of more guns are being bought every year.
In 10 years almost 20 million more people became gun owners and about 100 million more guns are in the market.
Over the past 20 years nearly every state in the country has now allowed concealed carry.
The number of deaths is not going up.
Yet you still keep saying:
“The number and availability of guns is directly related to the number of deaths by firearms.”
I got all my information from surveys, the CDC, and the ATF which had nothing to do with the NRA.
More guns being purchased does not necessarily mean more gun availability, does it?
I sent your dad some research about a year ago which suggested that better discharge deterents (like trigger locks) were associated with fewer adolescent suicide deaths. Not cause and effect, but a correlation in a logistic regression sense.
Bush makes another appeal for more time
Any of you remember the subject!?
Ok Steven,
Mary has clearly indicated today and in the past that simply more guns = more gun death.
Even now she didn’t just say availability, she said “number” as well.
I could just as easily say that America prescribes 80% of all the Ridalin in the world and we also have the highest number of gun deaths so it must be Ridalin!
The statement is meaningless.
I have asked Mary countless times to back up her statements or to tell me where she gets her data.
She doesn’t.
Our country has more serial killings, rapes, and violent crime than many other industrialized countries.
That is not because of guns.
So if every other type of crime is comparably high like our gun deaths are then why do we blame the availability of guns?
We have a problem with violence in this country not guns.
Ok Steven,
Mary has clearly indicated today and in the past that simply more guns = more gun death.
Even now she didn’t just say availability, she said “number” as well.
I could just as easily say that America prescribes 80% of all the Ridalin in the world and we also have the highest number of gun deaths so it must be Ridalin!
The statement is meaningless.
I have asked Mary countless times to back up her statements or to tell me where she gets her data.
She doesn’t.
Our country has more serial killings, rapes, and violent crime than many other industrialized countries.
That is not because of guns.
So if every other type of crime is comparably high like our gun deaths are then why do we blame the availability of guns?
We have a problem with violence in this country not guns.
Posted by: Nathan | September 14, 2007 at 08:59 PM
Ok Steven,
Mary has clearly indicated today and in the past that simply more guns = more gun death.
Even now she didn’t just say availability, she said “number” as well.
I could just as easily say that America prescribes 80% of all the Ridalin in the world and we also have the highest number of gun deaths so it must be Ridalin!
The statement is meaningless.
I have asked Mary countless times to back up her statements or to tell me where she gets her data.
She doesn’t.
Our country has more serial killings, rapes, and violent crime than many other industrialized countries.
That is not because of guns.
So if every other type of crime is comparably high like our gun deaths are then why do we blame the availability of guns?
We have a problem with violence in this country not guns.
Posted by: Nathan | September 14, 2007 at 08:59 PM
When I was a kid, I lived in a neighborhood where there were about 50 or so kids. We’re talking about back in the 50s when any house in the neighborhood was open to any kid in the neighborhood. If you needed a drink of water or had to go to the bathroom, all you had to do was knock on the door and ask.
The neighbor across the street was the gun lover’s gun nut. He literally had hundreds of guns. The walls of his study were covered with handguns. He had a gun range and bullet trap in his garage. All of us kids were in and out of that house all the time. But we never touched Mr P’s guns. We didn’t have any special classes and our parents didn’t have to lecture us. Those guns belonged to Mr P, so we didn’t touch them. What specifically has changed between now and then? I can remember looking at all of those guns and admiring them, but I never even considered taking one down and playing with it. What is it about kids now that makes them want to play with a real gun?
A thought:When I was a kid, we all had “pop guns” and replica guns and we played army all of the time. Could it be that because we were allowed to have toy guns, we weren’t so mystified by real guns? Could the PC idea that kids shouldn’t be allowed to play with toy guns be contributing to the problem?
Just a thought. Any comments?
Hell, when I was a brat kid, I wore my cap-shootin’ dual six-shooters to school, and promptly got sent home. That was in the ’50’s, but it was also a Catholic school. Even got my ears pulled; how much more fun can it get than that!
LOL Walker!I didn’t go to Catholic school and it was no big deal to wear your cap pistols. You were in deep doo if you got caught with a cap pistol AND caps.
God. ENOUGH about friggin’ gun control. Nathan is a like a little kid who wants to be told the same story EVERY DAMN NIGHT.
(Ahem). Ok. Here’s the Rude Pundit, comparing Iraq to…Terri Schaivo. Seems appropriate in the light to Caligula’s “Damn! We’re kickin’ ASSSSSSSS in Iraq” speech of last night.**********************************rudepundit.blogspot.com
9/13/2007
“The Terri Schiavo War in Iraq:What is it with right wingers and their inability to just let dead causes die? For the way Iraq war supporters cling to this shameful debacle resembles nothing so much as their refusal to let Terri Schiavo finally expire back in 2005. The Petraeus/Crocker hearings were merely justification to keep the feeding tube in the oughta-be corpse. Bush’s speech tonight is just more bullsh*t rhetoric to prop up the body.
It all just reaks of the putrescent smell of that disgraceful “debate” over the body of Terri Schiavo. The constant promise that miracles are possible, that they were just around the corner, even though Schiavo had been in the same state for years. The self-righteousness of those who wanted her hooked up to machines, consequences be damned, because doing so was in and of itself a good. The strange, sad idiocy of the few citizens who were chanting for Schiavo’s right to “life,” no matter if that life was merely an inexorable decline into complete breakdown. Those who wanted to let Schiavo die? Tarred as people who hate life. Christ, Bill O’Reilly may as well be telling us that Iraq is smiling at the balloon. Joe Lieberman barely even needs to write a new script.
Like so many of us were saying back in that stupid March of 2005, let it go. The fight is over. No matter how many drugs or operations or prayers you use, it’s done. Walk away. If Schiavo’s body was gonna heal, it’d have to be on its own, for there was nothing left to do. Who knows. Maybe Iraq will do better once it’s taken off life support. But, even if you believed the initial invasion was right and good, you gotta understand: the dead need to decompose. Maybe flowers will bloom in the rot. Maybe it’ll just be dirt.
Shortly after Schiavo died, on Meet the Press, John McCain, who was one of the 97 senators too cowardly to show up to actually vote on the Schiavo bill, spoke with a great deal of regret over the whole Schiavo matter, demonstrating how lessons can be learned: “Maybe we didn’t use our brains as well as we should have…I think we ought to get this issue behind us and move forward. It’s an American tragedy and I hope that the next time we’re presented with one of these situations we’ll perhaps approach it in a more measured and reasoned fashion.” He could have been talking about…well, other things, too.
Of course, in the same interview, McCain said, “I do believe that there are some signs, which can be viewed as hopeful…There is a better training and equipping program of the Iraqi military. We’ve got one of our best generals, General Petraeus, doing that.” Like with Terri Schiavo, in Iraq, “hope” is just another word for “blindness.”"
OK – Nathan you’ve said your piece let it go quit badgering people — try acting like a mature Marine
CF,An interesting juxtaposition by his rudeness. Thanks for sharing.
Steven Davis.
Indeed. When the Rude One is right, he’s right.
Ken,
The other night Mary started accusing me of running away from a conversation.
I was merely returning the favor.
How long are these insurgents supposed to be in their last throws as Dick Cheney said?
You know Nathan, I used to tell my kids that “when you keep running over a dead cat, it just gets flatter”.
Posted by: Mary Caruso
lolLOLLOLthis is a wonderful saying.i’m gonna have to save it in my file where i keep all those things you want to keep and are sure they will come in handy… some year
here’s several i liked at one time enough to save…
Mark Twain, who said: “Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest.”
Be loyal to your country all the timeBe loyal to your government when it deserves itMark Twain
As George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
I just proved you wrong on this the other day.
OK, THEN IT’S OVER, RIGHT
I clearly showed you that the number of deaths has NOT BEEN GOING UP while millions and millions of more guns are being bought every year.
BLAHBLAHBLAHETC
In 10 years almost 20 million more people became gun owners and about 100 million more guns are in the market.
GODSTOPOK, YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT.
OH, BY THE WAY, IS LARRY CRAIG, WHO MAY PROVE THE IDEA THAT THE SMALLER THE GUY’S DICK THE BIGGER HIS GUN COLLECTION, STILL ON THE NRA’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS ??
One more reason we are totally screwed in the Middle East.
The U.S. military’s top general acknowledged Friday that he made mistakes in his early Iraq war strategy but said he still has no doubt that invading the country was the right decision.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070915/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/pace_iraq_mistakes_4
I got all my information from surveys, the CDC, and the ATF which had nothing to do with the NRA.
Posted by: Nathan | September 14, 2007 at 08:22 PM
==========================
Some of the bloggers can actually think based on their own concepts and ideas… and dont need some “quotation” to back up their individual thoughts…
Nathan, I have told you all along where I get my numbers and stats…the CDC and the John Hopkins Center for Gun Research. I don’t know why you always accuse me of making this up. If gun availabilty has nothing to do with the rate of gun deaths in this country..then how do you explain that the rate of gun deaths in industrialized countries that have gun control is so much lower than ours? Just look at cities the size of New York, like London for instance, and see what the gun violence is there compared to us. Like I said, the numbers speak for themsleves. I agree that we have a problem with violence in this country, but when people have easy access to guns, it makes it easier to kill others when they get violent.
I don’t think totally banning guns is the answer, and I’ve never said that..but I think they need to be strictly controlled, because it would decrease the gun violence..history has proven that in other countries, why not ours?
And why are you so determined to turn every thread into a debate on guns? It’s getting boring.
It’s been fun. Gotta go.Football game is over and golf is winding down. Time to get something constructive done.
Mary,
I’m not. It bothered me the other day when you accused me of running away from a converstaion when every gun conversation you have ever been in you never came back to…
Until now.
“but I think they need to be strictly controlled, because it would decrease the gun violence..history has proven that in other countries, why not ours?”
Then why is it that in citied like Washington DC that is not true?
You can keep saying having strciter controls would reduce gun violence, but every state that does it, it doesn’t happen.
There are many explanations for gun violence being less in other countries that have little to do with the avialabilty of guns.
If you look at the numbers you would see that ALL violent crime is significantly less in other countries.
So what does that have to do with the availability of guns?
Can you even tell me what the percentage of crimes with guns was with legally obtained guns?
You keep talking about stricter controls, but time has proven that the only people those controls effect are the ones who obey the law.
The criminals are getting their guns illegally now. So how is passing stricter controls going to stop that?
Nathn, there are lots of ways..like getting harder on those who pocess guns illegally with mandatory and lengthy prison terms, make people go through strict screening and waiting periods before they can buy a gun. Give severe consequences to those who’s guns are involved in accidents, like the grandfather of the kid who killed my nephew.There are lots of things we can do to curtail the gun violence in this country.
BTW, I don’t run from any discussion, I just get tired and bored with repeating myself..it’s kind of likke talking to a two year old, I can only say the same thing so many times before I have to stop. You never say anything I haven’t heard before, you never come up with a new way of looking at the issue..so why should I stick around?I’m going to fry some chicken for dinner now, I’m not “running away”. I’ve jusy got better things to do.
“make people go through strict screening and waiting periods before they can buy a gun.”
Again Mary, how many of those guns used in crimes were obtained legally?
What will this do to reduce gun violence?
“BTW, I don’t run from any discussion, I just get tired and bored with repeating myself..it’s kind of likke talking to a two year old”
Mary, and all you do is post the same old arguments form the anti-gun websites.
I ask you serious questions which you seem to be unable to answer.
It is not old, other than the fact that you can’t seem to be able to defend your opinions.
“the CDC and the John Hopkins Center for Gun Research.”
NATHAN — you got anything in your bag of quotes, to show that CDC and Johns Hopkins are “anti-gun” web sites???
Dan Froomkin said this very clearly:
“Let’s be clear one more time about this claim: The surge of five extra combat brigades (bringing the total from 15 to 20) started in January. Their 15-month tours of duty will begin to expire next April. The Army and Marines have no combat units ready to replace them. The service chiefs refuse to extend the tours any further. The president refuses to mobilize the reserves any further. And so, the surge will be over by next July. This has been understood from the outset. It is the result of simple arithmetic, not of anyone’s decision, much less some putative success.”
President Bush’s TV address was the worst speech he’s ever given on the war in Iraq, and that’s saying a lot. Every premise, every proposal, nearly every substantive point was sheer fiction. The only question is whether he was being deceptive or delusional.
We still don’t know WHY we are there or what the mission is.
“Mary, and all you do is post the same old arguments form the anti-gun websites.”My arguments come from my heart..my facts come from reliable sources. Like I said in my previous posts, I have nothing left to say on the subject…”you keep running over a dead cat, it just gets flatter”, Nathan.