proehling wrote:
"Bill" wrote

Nuking Tehran is something I have been thinking about. Baghdad too. This
Viet Nam in the sand **** is getting old.

Good thinking. So far your list looks like this:

First: invade the wrong small mid-eastern country for fabricated reasons.

That was Herr Bush, not me.

Second: declare "Mission Accomplished" several decades early.

Herr Bush again, our idiot president.

Third: act puzzled and hurt when the people you've just ground into the dirt
refuse to lick your boots and form the stable puppet government you had in
mind.

Fourth: refuse to admit that you ever made any mistakes, but keep changing
the reasons you claim we're there.

Fifth: attack anyone on your own side who dares to disagree with you in any
way, claiming that they want to surrender to the terrorists.

Bush, Bush, and Bush.

Sixth: after everything else has failed; contemplate making the whole thing
100% worse by nuking Baghdad and Teheran without provocation.

WITHOUT???? provocation???

Bill, you're wonderful! I can't imagine how President Bush missed getting
you onto that crack White-House team of strategists that have made the world
into such a wonderful place in a mere six years!


I voted for Gore in 2000, and Kerry in 2004.
If the rest of the voters want Bush, then we have a messy war on our
hands. I remember the whole Viet Nam thing too and heard rumors that
Johnson was getting so frustrated he was contemplating that kind of
force. Viet Nam was such a mess that he chose to get out of the white
house in 1968 and we got Nixon. Nixon, Bush, same kind of animal.
Bill Baka