Col...don't ya just love the nitpicking and having to prove EVERYTHING to these neoconservatives including your very existence sometimes?

Yeah, who needs proof.  Make outrageous accusations without backing them up, but thats the usual for the liberals and liberal-tarians now.

They can NOT address the real issues and like Bush will never admit when they are wrong!

We address all your issues col, and prove most of them wrong.  The fact that you cannot accept anything but "blame Bush" is not our problem.

Col...don't ya just love the nitpicking and having to prove EVERYTHING to these neoconservatives including your very existence sometimes?

Paladin's question was NOT nitpicking! The col talks about this and that as if he's an authority on the subject no matter what it is. Paladin was merely trying to establish a baseline on the col's education. Since you're still kind of new to this posting thing, why don't you "listen" instead of running your mouth?

IslandDog

You have done NOTHING of the sort. The data I present comes from either governmental agencies or research groups that have national standing. Your problem is that when they clearly show how lame Bush and his policies are, you attempt to divert attention from the consequences of the Bush policies by attacking me or the sources of the data. The thing that makes you and some others on this Blog site look truly stupid is that you are contradicting agencies like the U.S. Treasury, Census Bureau, Brookings Institute , The Comptroller General of the U.S., CBO, CIA, GAO etc. It is you that do not know what you are talking about not the unimpeachable sources I sight in my Blogs.

This is a list of the major sources I used in my book:

George W. Bush – Robin Hood for the Rich by Colonel Gene P. Abel


Sources:

Against All Enemies by Richard A. Clarke

Alan Greenspan, Chairmen Federal Reserve

Bill Gates

Boston Globe-Bush National Guard Service

Brookings Institute

Center For Economic And Policy Research

Charles Lewis

Congressional Budget Office - CBO

Dan Rather

David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States

Dept. of Labor, Division of Labor Force Statistics

Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Public Debt

Face The Nation Interview with VP Cheney 2001

Federal Reserve

General Accounting Office –GAO

General Barry McCaffrey

General Eric Shinseki, Former Army CoS

General Wesley Clark

Hoover Institute

Imperial Hubris by Anonymous (Michael Scheuer)

Journal of Foreign Affairs

Lt. General John Riggs

Lt. George W. Bush’s National Guard records

Office of Management and Budget – OMB

Paul Craig Roberts

Paul O’Neil, Former Secretary of the Treasury 2001-2003

Paul R. Pillar retired CIA Top Counterterrorism Coordinator

Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward

Popular Science -- Airborne Laser

Presidential Commission on Social Security

Professor Jeffrey Record -- United States Army War College visiting professor

Professor Paul Krugman, Princeton University

Professor Rogan Kersh

Senator Ted Kennedy comments on Medicare January 2005

Sierra Club

Social Security and Medicare Trustees

The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind

Toshi Tsurumi, Harvard Professor of GWB

United States Army War College

U S Conference of Mayors

Warren Buffet

Washington Post

60 minutes

60 Minutes II

Since you're still kind of new to this posting thing, why don't you "listen" instead of running your mouth?

dude,,,i've been on here for 3 years...i've been writing online since the early 90's...reach in your pocket, pull out a quarter and buy a clue...

Paladin's question was NOT nitpicking!

i've seen this man's credentials repeadedly questioned over time. if ya'll were paying attention, you'd know he is who he says he is.

hell, dufus, you even accused me and him of being the same person with absolutely NOTHING substantial to back it up with...just a typical knee-jerk reaction when you thought ya "smelled blood" and could "get em" ...so you went shooting off your mouth, again like dick cheney on a quail hunt...

and the only reason i even know of his existence is from your (and your cronies) blabbering about him all over this site. but like other things you seem clueless on, you probably never realized that only "no publicity is bad publicity."

keep diggin miler...china's just a few more feet down...

LMFAO!!!!

You have done NOTHING of the sort.

Yes we have.

I've seen this man's credentials repeatedly questioned over time. if ya'll were paying attention, you'd know he is who he says he is. hell, dufus, you even accused me and him of being the same person with absolutely NOTHING substantial to back it up with...just a typical knee-jerk reaction when you thought ya "smelled blood" and could "get em" ...so you went shooting off your mouth, again like dick Cheney on a quail hunt... and the only reason i even know of his existence is from your (and your cronies) blabbering about him all over this site. but like other things you seem clueless on, you probably never realized that only "no publicity is bad publicity." keep diggin miler...china's just a few more feet down...

You're about the "biggest" joke going! If you had bothered to read, you would know that I retracted that statement about you and the col.

And this man's credentials are being called into question for 2 reasons:

1. His use of left wing sites exclusively for his info.
2. His inability to even view informational proof that usually refutes his "opinion".

The one that needs the clue is you, not me.

The one that needs the clue is you, not me.

how are things in oz?

You're about the "biggest" joke going! If you had bothered to read, you would know that I retracted that statement about you and the col.

too little, too late...after i TOLD you we aren't the same person,,,you kept on going until one of YOUR cronies clued you in days later. you retracted it? SO WHAT? YOU SHOOT 1ST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER, IF YOU BOTHER TO ASK QUESTIONS AT ALL (besides the amateur lawyering attempts). you don't get it son,,,it's time to keep your mouth shut. stop tryin to "get me" on somethin...even if ya do, at this point, 99 to 1 isn't much different than 100-0.

it's abundantly clear that your big lofty "goal" is to try and "get" me and all those who question this administration's policies. the days of "gotcha" political rhetoric are gone. didn't you get the memo last year? you still think it's just some pack of loony liberals that oppose this policy, it's not...hardly. right now, i think chuck hagel might be the most corageous man in the senate. is that a new thing for me? did i jump on the "hagel" bandwagon when he skewered sec. rice last week? no...if you "bothered to read" ...you would know that i praise people on the right as well as on the left, including him. WWW Link i don't approach politics like you do, with all the conservative and liberal barriers (et al) people place on themselves AS IF that ensures some "principled stand" on their part. to me, locking in these narrowminded philosophies is just blind obedience, takes no actual thought and ensures division rather than unity. but you don't bother to read my stuff honestly, and think that just because i am critical of this admin. that i hate all republicans and am some "left wing loon," which is false. despite the repeated refforts of you and the crony gang trying to somehow "prove" that i am and do.

while i have many very constructive conversations with those on the GOP right, you still linger out there like a bad odor playing the same stupid games. go do something else for a bit, maybe you will come back with a better perspective.

or you can scour this reply, and continue to look for something to "get me" on. if 99-1 is your goal, go for it, lol.

Drmiler


"1. His use of left wing sites exclusively for his info"

I would like you to explain how the following sources I have used to document the results of Bush policies in my book and blogs are "Left Wing":



Against All Enemies by Richard A. Clarke

Alan Greenspan, Chairmen Federal Reserve

Bill Gates

Brookings Institute

Center For Economic And Policy Research

Congressional Budget Office - CBO

David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States

Dept. of Labor, Division of Labor Force Statistics

Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Public Debt

Face The Nation Interview with VP Cheney 2001

Federal Reserve

General Accounting Office –GAO

General Barry McCaffrey

General Eric Shinseki, Former Army CoS

Hoover Institute

Imperial Hubris by Anonymous (Michael Scheuer)

Journal of Foreign Affairs

Lt. General John Riggs

Lt. George W. Bush’s National Guard records

Office of Management and Budget – OMB

Paul O’Neil, Former Secretary of the Treasury 2001-2003

Paul R. Pillar retired CIA Top Counterterrorism Coordinator

Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward

Popular Science -- Airborne Laser

Presidential Commission on Social Security

Professor Jeffrey Record -- United States Army War College visiting professor

Social Security and Medicare Trustees

The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind

United States Army War College

U S Conference of Mayors

Warren Buffet

1193 (Field Artillery), Nuclear weapons (M1 Prefix) and later Finance Officer. I completed the Artillery Officers Basic, Combat Intelligence, Nuclear Weapons, Command and General Staff College and Army War College. I also completed Finance Officers Basic and Advanced.

Thanks

I was curious since your writing did not seem to have much military knowledge, or even basic understanding of the way the military works. I don't know you only your words here on JU. Taking account that you were in the Army and I was not explained some of the disparity but not all of it. As you are an officer and I am not I can understand some of your comments but not the ignorance in them. You use terms that someone in the 2 shop don’t use in favor of terms the military does not use.
I looked at your list of sources and find some credible some not. Based on your list I would say that your points are not so much truth and facts but religion. Religion in the purist form the belief in things unseen. Meaning you that don’t need proof or facts or even logic, what you believe is your religion and it sees you through silly things like facts. I believe in God, I have never seen him, I talk to him daily and we communicate all the time. Can I prove God does this? Nope. Is this belief irrational? Only to nonbelievers. You believe that Mr. Bush is the evil one that is the cause of all our problems. When shown proof that most of your sources are either mistaken or out right lying, you refused to believe or even give what you are told the benefit of the doubt. When you make a statement you see a bunch of people dispute the statement with facts. I need to stop here and be fair and honest. Some of your disputers are also religious zealots that see Mr. Bush in a different light of never doing anything wrong.
Just so you know, I was a Marine liaison to DIA for 7 years, I was also a charter member of FAST company and I am still PRP certified. Are you? If you are who and what you say you are then you might have an idea of what that means. No I am not super man or super spy I am an old guy trying to get into heaven. I don’t have a problem with your religion I have a problem with you spouting lies, half truths, and myths and trying to pass them off as truth. Semper Fi Colonel.

Paladin77

I thank you for you service. I have the highest respect for the Corps.

I am sorry you think the facts I have presented are not true. I have researched the issues covered in my book carefully and I can assure you they are correct. I see what Bush is doing to our military and I am truly disappointed. He is an arrogant man with little success at anything during his life. I have looked at his service and know he tried to escape Vietnam by getting his father to hide him in the National Guard. You and I know that the Guard during Vietnam was the best way to make it appear as if you served while insuring you were not sent to fight. When the requirements of the Guard interfered with what Lt Bush wanted to de he failed to fulfill his obligations and then got his Daddy to get him an Honorable discharge he DID NOT EARN! I had three Commands during my 30 years and I can assure you if one of my troops had failed to obey regulations the way Bush did, he would have been disciplined not given an Honorable Discharge. Bush would not have been elected DOG Catcher had Daddy not got him that Honorable Discharge which he does not deserve. He is a failure in many respects but what he has done to our military is one of his worst failures. Most of the dead and injured in Iraq are because Bush did not allow the military handle the war. He refused to send the troop levels needed to establish and maintain order in Iraq and that is responsible for 95% of the dead and injured. He also hyped the danger Saddam presented this country in 2003 and took us into a war that was not justified and which has not made us safer!

it's abundantly clear that your big lofty "goal" is to try and "get" me and all those who question this administration's policies. the days of "gotcha" political rhetoric are gone. didn't you get the memo last year? you still think it's just some pack of loony liberals that oppose this policy, it's not...hardly. right now, i think chuck hagel might be the most corageous man in the senate. is that a new thing for me? did i jump on the "hagel" bandwagon when he skewered sec. rice last week? no...if you "bothered to read" ...you would know that i praise people on the right as well as on the left, including him. WWW Link i don't approach politics like you do, with all the conservative and liberal barriers (et al) people place on themselves AS IF that ensures some "principled stand" on their part. to me, locking in these narrowminded philosophies is just blind obedience, takes no actual thought and ensures division rather than unity. but you don't bother to read my stuff honestly, and think that just because i am critical of this admin. that i hate all republicans and am some "left wing loon," which is false. despite the repeated refforts of you and the crony gang trying to somehow "prove" that i am and do.

No I only go after the ignorant. Which is a catagory "both" of you fit into. If what you're saying was even "remotely" true...there are far more to go after than you sorry pair.

The one that needs the clue is you, not me. how are things in oz? You're about the "biggest" joke going! If you had bothered to read, you would know that I retracted that statement about you and the col.

See the difference between us is that I can and have admitted when I was wrong. You two never will.

drmiler

Which of the sources I posted above are as you said, " use of left wing sites exclusively for his info?"

WRONG AGAIN!!!!!

You two never will.

i have been corrected on here and conceded many things pal...meanwhile all you throw around is right wing garbage and try to hold people to impossible standards and false standards.

for an exmaple, just look above...his sources were hardly "all left wing." i see no aplogy from you. just more bullsh*t.

or one can go over to the article he did about the protests of SMU against Bush's library, where you jumped right out, googled something and grabbed the 1st 2 (very old) articles from the list that supported your view. you couldn't even be bothered to page down to the times article and other recent articles from the AP wire reporting the current story. you just saw red and lashed out.

you are obvious, simple and easy to play...go get some fresh air please, it might do ya some good.

or an exmaple, just look above...his sources were hardly "all left wing." i see no aplogy from you. just more bullsh*t.

You know something? You can kiss me where the good Lord split me! And please try reading "before" running off at the mouth. Go "back and read my reply where I tore his arguement to shreds using his VERY OWN link. In his SMU article he made the claim that it was President Bush's policies that were causing the trouble at SMU over the library. After the bs with you, I asked him to show me "where" in his linked article it said "anything" about GW's policies. You know what? He couldn't do it because it does NOT mention that anywhere.

You're about the "biggest" joke going! If you had bothered to read, you would know that I retracted that statement about you and the col. too little, too late...after i TOLD you we aren't the same person,,,you kept on going until one of YOUR cronies clued you in days later. you retracted it? SO WHAT? YOU SHOOT 1ST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER, IF YOU BOTHER TO ASK QUESTIONS AT ALL (besides the amateur lawyering attempts). you don't get it son,,,it's time to keep your mouth shut. stop tryin to "get me" on somethin...even if ya do, at this point, 99 to 1 isn't much different than 100-0.

And "for the record"....NONE of my so-called cronies clued me to anything! See you attack me everywhere, "except" on my own blog. Why is that I wonder?

As for the col...I apoligize for the previous comment about all left wing sites being used.

Against All Enemies by Richard A. Clarke

The man is a political hack, you might say he is biased.

Lt. George W. Bush’s National Guard records

Taken out of context. This issue came up when he ran for Governor and was shot down. It came up when he ran for president the first time and it had no traction either. The problem was that it has been disputed by all the members who are living that served with him. It is disputed by the official records.

60 minutes

60 Minutes was so embarrassed by the shoddy story that it got rid of all the people involved. It got so bad for CBS that my local radio station dropped CBS for the remander of the contract because they were losing listeners and credability. They are now a FOX radio station. There may be a CBS radio affiliate in my town but I have yet to find it. My point is that listing them as your sourse is not going to gain you credability. I did not mind them doing a hatchet job on the President but the fact that they ran with an old discredited story as if it were news then stood by the story and to a small extent still have supporters.

Sierra Club

An extreme left wing organization that does noting more than work on bringing fear to the world.

I can see why some would question your sources. I pointed out several times your government sources that were not accurate. So just because you quote the government does not mean that the facts and figures you use are correct. In doing this people might suspect your due dilligence in your reoprting of them. For me it has little to do with your like or dislike of our current President I just hated it when I see obvious facts contorted and misrepresented.

I thank you Sir for not resorting to name calling. Just because we disagree on some minor points does not mean we have to act like children. I do like doing so from time to time but not on a regular basis.

I don't give a rat's ass about what excuse was used for this war. I don't care if Dubya got up one morning and said "I just HATE that Hussein guy". The problem with this war isn't why it was fought, it was how it was fought, and even more so how the reconstruction was handled. Period.

The Col has far, far more ammunition in the green zone instead of the White House. The decisions made after "mission accomplished" border on the criminal. If I had to give any advice to the anti-Bush crowd, it would be to stop trying to justify leaving an evil man to harass the world, and start looking at what was done after he was in his spider hole.

Paladin 77

Richard Clark is a very knowledgeable individual and to ignore the information he has presented would be stupid. Many of the things he has stated have been confirmed by at least three other Former CIA Section Chiefs and Generals Zinni and Trainer.

“Lt. George W. Bush’s National Guard records


Taken out of context. This issue came up when he ran for Governor and was shot down. It came up when he ran for president the first time and it had no traction either. The problem was that it has been disputed by all the members who are living that served with him. It is disputed by the official records.”


This is what has been established about the service of GWB in the Air Guard:

He got into the Guard to avoid service in Vietnam. His application to the Guard said he DID NOT want to be sent overseas and we all know that during the Vietnam War National Guard Service was the best way not to be sent into war. The old saying, "Women and Children first, then the National Guard"

He got into the Guard with the help of his father's contacts (Ben Barns and BG George Rose). Bush had one of the LOWEST Flight Test Scores but despite this and given the fact he had NO prior military training, was given a direct commission ahead of 150 others for a Guard Slot.

He failed to take a REQUIRED Flight Physical and as a result was grounded ( I have a copy of his Grounding Order ).He did not attend drills at any location for a period of 5 months in 1972. As you know, following orders and regulations are the ESSENTIAL component of military discipline. Bush failed to follow Air Force Regulations to take the required physical and attend drills. Flight officers that are grounded are subject to a mandatory Board of review. There is NO record of this board of Review. When members of the Guard and reserve failed to attend drills, they were to be reported to their component (The Air Force in this case) for activation. That did not happen when Bush did not attend drills.

Despite his refusal to obey these two requirements, GWB was granted an EARLY HONORABLE Discharge. I have communicated with the economics Professor for GWB at Harvard and he confirmed to me that GWB told him that his father's contacts got him into the guard and arranged for his early honorable discharge. Bush by his refusal to take that physical and maintain his flight status, for which he was trained, and his failure to attend drills for 5 months did NOT EARN him an Honorable Discharge! Bush should have been disciplined.

Yes the Sierra Club is a left wing organization but their contention that Global Warming is taking place has been documented by NOAA. When you look at the majority of my sources any claim they are mostly left wing, as some on this Blog site have said is simply untrue.

Bakerstreet

You refuse to accept that Bush is the reason for the situation we see in Iraq Today

First, he made a strategic error when he hyped the danger from Saddam and invaded Iraq. He did not listen to the warning that for us to invade a Moslem country would not be accepted by Iraq or the Moslem world even though Saddam deserved to be removed from power. His removal should have been at the hands of the Iraqi's or at the very least other Moslems not the U.S. Bush also failed to understand the long stranding sectarian hate that would be released when Saddam was deposed. That has both destabilized Iraq and allowed foreign terrorists to set up operations in Iraq.

Then Bush compounded the strategic error he made by invading Iraq by not sending the troop levels needed to establish and maintain control over the various factions. He was unable to hold the areas of sectarian unrest because we did not have the number of troops required. He allowed the Iraqi army to be dispended which meant we did not have them to help control the violence and provided the man power to establish the groups that are conducting the daily violence. We could not control the borders or stop the warring factions from helping themselves from the use of Ammo and explosives locate in over 200 sites thought Iraq.

Those choices were not made in the Green Zone but in the White House by a President that did not have a CLUE as to how and fight the war in Iraq!

"Those choices were not made in the Green Zone but in the White House by a President that did not have a CLUE as to how and fight the war in Iraq!"

Heh, I assumed you knew about the situation. I see I was wrong. I would suggest before you start debating things you learn of which you speak.

Bremer and others in the green zone were making sweeping policy decisions without consulting the white house, and which the white house had categorically opposed. Bush's fault was a) not caring about who got hired for what, not requiring a stamp off approval before major decisions were made, and c) not removing people and vetoing decisions once they found the people to be inept assholes.

Col, you're all about the rhetoric. You could have very valid arguments, but you're focusing on shoddy moralisms and exclamation points.

Richard Clark is a very knowledgeable individual and to ignore the information he has presented would be stupid. Many of the things he has stated have been confirmed by at least three other Former CIA Section Chiefs and Generals Zinni and Trainer.

President Reagan was a very knowledgable individual, He had a degree in economics yet he was portrayed as a dolt by political hacks, who after he left office and before his death had to admit that his policies did work. The problem with most liberals is that they can only see the here and now and can't see long term solutions. When a serious long term solution is put on the table they cry that it does noting or next to nothing right now. Democeats had all the power for 40 years yet did nothing to solve the problems. Sure they threw money at the problem to look like they were doing something but after 40 years all they can say is they tried. One of those hacks was President Bill Clinton. Look at the facts. In 40 years the Democrats spent 1 trillion dollars to fix the problem with education. They tried and failed. President Bush came up with no child left behind and the first thing the liberals did was undercut the program by teaching the test instead of teaching the material that would be on the test. The reason for this is that if the teachers failed to teach the students they would be held accountable. So the kids still don't get an education because the educators don't wish to take a chance on the students that they might learn something. The liberals spent half a trillion dollars on the war on poverty over 40 years the idea was to get people off wellfare and back to work. President Bush and the conservatives cut wellfare. the liberals cried that Mr. Bush was a racist and hated poor people. The stupid poor people needed the federal teet in order to survive because they could not make it in the hard cruel world without the liberals. Now in order to save government jobs they are on the street looking for people to put on welfare like they did in the 60's to create more government jobs. This means that less people are on welfare and is seen by liberals is a bad thing.

President Bush has and MBA and ran the state of Texas but political hacks cry that he is an idiot that does not know what he is doing. It seems that your insiteful Mr. Clark did nothing to stop 9/11 but as soon as he left the administration began to do his political hack job. You don't have to be ignorant to be a hack.

He got into the Guard to avoid service in Vietnam. His application to the Guard said he DID NOT want to be sent overseas and we all know that during the Vietnam War National Guard Service was the best way not to be sent into war. The old saying, "Women and Children first, then the National Guard"

I don't have a problem with this. This is why I support an all volunteer force. The people in the military today want to be there. They understand the job and the risks, when you have a draft you have people that don't want to be there and serious problems with discipline. It is the only reason the current military has not revoted as the 70's era military did. We don't have a serious problem with drug abuse as we did back then.

He got into the Guard with the help of his father's contacts (Ben Barns and BG George Rose). Bush had one of the LOWEST Flight Test Scores but despite this and given the fact he had NO prior military training, was given a direct commission ahead of 150 others for a Guard Slot.

This story has been disputed for years and no one within the system has said on record that the story was even close to being true. The best evidence of this was that CBS had only forged documents to support the story.

He failed to take a REQUIRED Flight Physical and as a result was grounded ( I have a copy of his Grounding Order ).He did not attend drills at any location for a period of 5 months in 1972. As you know, following orders and regulations are the ESSENTIAL component of military discipline. Bush failed to follow Air Force Regulations to take the required physical and attend drills. Flight officers that are grounded are subject to a mandatory Board of review. There is NO record of this board of Review. When members of the Guard and reserve failed to attend drills, they were to be reported to their component (The Air Force in this case) for activation. That did not happen when Bush did not attend drills.

What you leave out is the fact that his unit was changing over to a new aircraft and the expense of training someone who was leaving service would be a waste of money. He requested a transfer so he could go to school something that would have given him an automatic deferral from any service if you remember. So if he did not wish to serve all he had to do was go back to college. So he did not need to get into the Guard to avoid service. Everyone that is alive who was there said his father had nothing to do with him getting into the guard. Yet the stories persist. Why believe the people who were there when you can believe the ones that were not? It makes sense to support the people that were not there if it proves your case or agrees with your religion of hate the man.

Despite his refusal to obey these two requirements, GWB was granted an EARLY HONORABLE Discharge. I have communicated with the economics Professor for GWB at Harvard and he confirmed to me that GWB told him that his father's contacts got him into the guard and arranged for his early honorable discharge. Bush by his refusal to take that physical and maintain his flight status, for which he was trained, and his failure to attend drills for 5 months did NOT EARN him an Honorable Discharge! Bush should have been disciplined.

As stated above the people that are in the know say different. He was given the early out to go to Harvard. How do you explain why Mr. Bush was not brought up on charges for his refusal? He was under a different commander at that time so it can't be political strings that were pulled or is it your contention that the entire military bowed down to Congressman Bush and kept it out of the papers to protect him?

Yes the Sierra Club is a left wing organization but their contention that Global Warming is taking place has been documented by NOAA. When you look at the majority of my sources any claim they are mostly left wing, as some on this Blog site have said is simply untrue.

Better check the site again NOAA is backing away from that lie as fast as they can. Read my article Global Warming is Real. It is a truncated version of my book I wrote for fun a few years ago. It points out little things the "experts" missed in their desire to gain government funding. Also check out the UN site as they have retracted their statemtnts that man is the largest cause of greenhouse gasses. It seems that cow farts are. Under this new light do you propose to ban cows instead of SUV's?

The left wing takes information from anyone that will support their claims, and when that information is proven wrong they continue to site that incorrect information as you just did on global warming. Yes, the earth is getting hotter. No, man is not the cause as the liberals scream. Same facts different interpretations of those facts. Man is not the evil of the world and our being here does little to the earth. Our being here my kill man through ignorance and a few animals but the earth will still be here. If you really want to make the earth the way it was before man came on the scene then we would have to have carbon dioxide atmosphere which would kill off all the plants and animals on the planet. Then the rightful owners will take over again. Of course they are almost all but wiped out by their own farts. They consume carbon and fart oxygen. Oops their mistake.

Bakerstreet

The choice to not follow the invasion plan, not to follow established doctrine or the advice of the Army CoS and send the 500,000 troops was Bush. When Bremer got to Iraq and saw that the troop levels were not enough to control the growing violence and he asked Bush for more troops. Bush DID NOT send them.

The decision to dismantle the Iraqi Army, Police and Civilian Workers was not made by Brenner. On pages 193 and 194 of State of Denial, Woodward quotes Bremer when Garner questioned the order to begin the De-Baathification and dismantle military, police and Civilian Government, " Those are my instructions ( Bremer replied) and I intend to execute them" Garner said, "Hell you won't be able to run anything if you go this deep." “I told you Bremer said, I have my instructions"

Those instructions did not originate with Bremer. They were developed at the White House. Thus Bush sent only 1/3 the U.S. forces THE GENERALS SAID WERE NEEDED AND THEN dismantled the Iraqi military, police and Civil Government. The result is what we see today-- Violence and a country in Civil War in the Sunni/Shiite areas. We are sending more troops into what is a civil war. Only the 4,000 Marines going into the western area to fight the Foreign Terrorists is justified!

We should be sending the 17,500 troops going to the Civil War in Baghdad into Afghanistan.

Bakerstreet The choice to not follow the invasion plan, not to follow established doctrine or the advice of the Army CoS and send the 500,000 troops was Bush. When Bremer got to Iraq and saw that the troop levels were not enough to control the growing violence and he asked Bush for more troops. Bush DID NOT send them. The decision to dismantle the Iraqi Army, Police and Civilian Workers was not made by Brenner. On pages 193 and 194 of State of Denial, Woodward quotes Bremer when Garner questioned the order to begin the De-Baathification and dismantle military, police and Civilian Government, " Those are my instructions ( Bremer replied) and I intend to execute them" Garner said, "Hell you won't be able to run anything if you go this deep." “I told you Bremer said, I have my instructions" Those instructions did not originate with Bremer. They were developed at the White House. Thus Bush sent only 1/3 the U.S. forces THE GENERALS SAID WERE NEEDED AND THEN dismantled the Iraqi military, police and Civil Government. The result is what we see today-- Violence and a country in Civil War in the Sunni/Shiite areas. We are sending more troops into what is a civil war. Only the 4,000 Marines going into the western area to fight the Foreign Terrorists is justified! We should be sending the 17,500 troops going to the Civil War in Baghdad into Afghanistan.

Skipping over Paladin again I see. And why is that? Is it because he's dead on and you have no evidence to refute him?

"The choice to not follow the invasion plan, not to follow established doctrine or the advice of the Army CoS and send the 500,000 troops was Bush. When Bremer got to Iraq and saw that the troop levels were not enough to control the growing violence and he asked Bush for more troops. Bush DID NOT send them."

I can't discuss this with someone that poses urban legend as fact. I suggest you look into what really happened and then try again.