Has Vermont Sacrificed Enough for the War on Terror? Not According to Bush.

Thursday, October 06 2005 @ 12:48 PM EDT

Contributed by: Anonymous

Have the Iraqi people sacrified enough blood?

Have U.S taxpayers paid enough for stealing Iraq's oil supply?

Has Bush wised up (or is is he still repeating the same old crap)?

Nope.

Here's the Reuters headline:

"Bush says more sacrifice needed in war on terror"

In Orwellian tones Bush reiterated his policy of perpetual war:

"We will never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory," Bush said in a speech on Washington's war on terrorism.


A CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll last month said only 32 percent of Americans approved of Bush's handling of the war, which he launched in 2003 citing the threat of weapons of mass destruction possessed by Saddam Hussein's government.

A note to those not paying close attention: The weapons didn't exist.

Bush's remarks were aimed at an increasingly restive American public, which is [allegedly] weary of daily television images of bombings from Iraq and holding funerals for the more than 1,900 Americans killed in Iraq.

Bush continued with his rhetoric:

"Wars are not won without sacrifice, and this war will require more sacrifice, more time, and more resolve. The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we have ever faced," he said.


Read Orwell's 1984

It's all in there

0 comments



http://www.ibrattleboro.com/article.php/20051006124818436