Bush says we cannot win War on Terror.

[gatorboy]

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?oldflok=FF-APO-1131&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20040830%2F0754975285.htm&sc=1131&flok=NW_5-L3

<snip>
When asked ``Can we win?'' the war on terror, Bush said, ``I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that the - those who use terror as a tool are - less acceptable in parts of the world.''
<snip>

Say it loud and tell everyone you know. Bush says he can't win. He's been running on the Terror issue and knows he can't win it. This should be the biggest talking point for every news group out there!

[kwolf68]

1. But

He can kick anyone's ass in a beer-bong contest.

[DemNoir]

2. OK

I'm waiting patiently for the media driven public outrage over this remark.

[dennis4868]

3. ANOTHER FLIP FLOP.....

before - we will win the war on terror

now - we will not win


Can you imagine if Kerry said this....it would be all over the cable tv news! EVERYWHERE AS ANOTHER FLIP FLOP FLOP FOR KERRY.

[moondust]

5. "I can win the war on terror."

He said it just a few days ago. Will try to find it.

Can't find it. I heard him say it to somebody within the past 4-5 days. I couldn't believe he said it.

[Eurobabe]

4. Bu$h is right....

If you fight the 'ar on terra' the way we fight the 'war on drugs' -- no it won't be 'winnable.' You're treating the symptoms and NOT the disease.

It's called ALLOPATHIC government....

[no_hypocrisy]

6. The Emperor Has No Clothes: There is no "war on terror".

Sounds good, but it doesn't exist except for a state of mind.

I know the Right needed something punchy to replace the war on godless communism and a war on terror does the trick for their purposes.

I don't disclaim the problems associated with individuals and groups acting in a freelance manner who wish to "shock and awe" western civilization in general, and the United States specifically. But a war on terror is just another name for a perpetual Crusades where the Christians will triumphantly march into Jerusalem, throw out the godless (by their standards) heretics and never give it up again. A war is by most standards an organized dispute between sovereign nations, and we're missing a country in this case. And I don't mean an esoteric imaginary country assigned to a religious-political movement. I mean the typical one with borders, diplomats, patriotic identification by the citizens, etc.

So when * says a "war on terror" can't be won, I agree. You can't win a situation that doesn't exist.

[no name no slogan]

7. Giving credit where credit is due

It only took this Republican liar in chief three years to admit his "War on Terror" was "unwinnable".

The Republican liar in chief to declare a war on terror (Reagan, 1984, after the Bierut marine barracks bombing) NEVER admitted the war on terror was unwinnable.

However, the mere fact that our presidents feel that the only way to deal with terror is by waging yet another pointless, unwinnable war says it all, IMHO.

Maybe someday we'll get a president whose first reaction to an attack (real or otherwise) isn't unconditional war, but something else that will diffuse the situation and not lead to the senseless murder of tens of thousands of people.

[MO_Dem]

8. The way he's gone about it

makes that too true, sadly. When his policies and actions CREATE more hatred toward us, it seems to me that his methods lead to escalation.

[livetohike]

9. Good talking point for everyone this week

The RNC is making the war on terror their big issue! The talking heads better pick up on this. Perhaps we should start an e-mail campaign to remind them of this latest Bush quote.

[Atman]

10. But this whole thing is supposed to be about...

who could win the war on Terror! So now what, he's throwing in the towel? Is he gonna quit the race? Jeezuz, what a dick.

[gatorboy]

11. Here's a nice quote when he had announced just the opposite:

http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/wwwhnsct3.html

<snip>
We're not only doing everything here at home, but we're doing everything we can abroad. Let me first tell you this: we're winning the war on terror. We've hauled in thousands of terrorists. They're captured. They're off the street. They're not a problem. (A)Like (similar) number were not as lucky. And they're not a problem, either. We're dismantling al-Qaeda one person at time. There used to be a kind of a brain trust of these people. And slowly, but surely, we're bringing them to justice. We're at war in a different kind of war. It's a war that requires us to be on an international manhunt. We're on the hunt. It's a war that causes us to need to get the enemy on the run. We got them on the run. And it's just a matter of time before we bring them to justice.
<snip>

Hmmmm so how can you be 'winning' something that's unwinnable?

[jmowreader]

13. How I translate this phrase

"We've hauled in thousands of terrorists" means he considers everyone the US has captured since the start of operations in Afghanistan (to include operations in the Philippines and Iraq) to be a terrorist.

"Like number were not as lucky" means he considers everyone the US has killed since the start of operations in Afghanistan to be a terrorist.

This has the feel of the doorgunner in Full Metal Jacket--the jarhead who sat at his machinegun just shooting everyone he saw: "Everyone who moves is a VC. Everyone who stands still is a well-disciplined VC."

[derby378]

12. Holy Ginsburg's Theorems, Batman!

1. You can't win.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't even quit the game.