|
Grex > Agora47 > #195: Is that Air Force one? No. It's a Gulfstream. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
bru
|
|
Is that Air Force one? No. It's a Gulfstream.
| 
Nov 28 12:23 UTC 2003 |
Is that Air Force one? No. It's a Gulfstream.
President Bush and his staff pulled of the secret of secrets on thankgiving
when he snuck out of his ranch, boarded Air Force One, and flew 15 hours to
Baghdad, Iraq to have dinner with 600 troops.
In total he spent 2.5 hours in Baghdad.
Only 5 people in Iraq new the president was coming. The Presidents mother
and father were not even told he would not be at the ranch until after they
arrived for dinner. They did not even tell all his secret service staf that
he was leaving.
after teh Aircraft arrived in Baghdad, a British Airways pilot nearby asked
"Is that Air Force One?" Upon which the presidents pilot replied, "No. It's
a Gulfstream." The British pilot apparently caught on immediately and simply
replied "Oh."
|
| 101 responses total. |
gull
|
|
response 1 of 101:
|
Nov 28 15:51 UTC 2003 |
Heh.
This is being spun as an attempt to prove that things in Iraq aren't
that bad, but the extraordinary secrecy that was needed for the trip
seems to me to prove otherwise. When the President can *openly* visit
Iraq, we'll know we've really accomplished something.
I'm sure, regardless, that we'll see lots of video from this trip in
campaign ads next year. In fact, that was probably the main reason for
going. He needed some new footage now that he can't use the aircraft
carrier landing anymore.
|
jep
|
|
response 2 of 101:
|
Nov 28 16:47 UTC 2003 |
I dunno. Even if you hate him, I think you can give the president
some credit for visiting a war zone on Thanksgiving.
|
jep
|
|
response 3 of 101:
|
Nov 28 16:55 UTC 2003 |
An article in USA Today says that Democratic senators Hillary Clinton
and Jack Reed visited Iraq just after President Bush. Give them
credit, too. I'm happy to see representatives of our government
trying to boost the morale of the troops on holidays.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 4 of 101:
|
Nov 28 17:36 UTC 2003 |
He just wasted some of the taxes we pay. I give him no credit whatsoever
for this publicity stunt. However I give the *pilot* some credit. If
I were in the military in Iraq I would have thought - "what a dumb
thing to do".
|
aruba
|
|
response 5 of 101:
|
Nov 28 18:00 UTC 2003 |
I agree with jep -even though I don't like our president, it was a nice
thing to do. I'm not sure how the troops on the ground felt about it,
though.
|
gull
|
|
response 6 of 101:
|
Nov 28 18:50 UTC 2003 |
Re #4: Considering that a DHL cargo jet had to make an emergency landing
last week after getting hit by a missile while approaching that airport,
I give any pilot who's willing to fly a big fat target in or out of
there a lot of credit.
Re #5: The ones who actually got to see him seemed to like it a lot. I
haven't seen any quotes from the ones who didn't.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 7 of 101:
|
Nov 28 19:55 UTC 2003 |
> I haven't seen any quotes from the ones who didn't.
Nor are you likely to.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 8 of 101:
|
Nov 28 21:06 UTC 2003 |
It was a distraction for the soldiers there, and I'm sure they appreciate
any distraction they can get from the job at hand.
|
jep
|
|
response 9 of 101:
|
Nov 28 22:32 UTC 2003 |
If you think the president was wasting taxpayer's money by going, do
you also think the senators are doing so? I don't see how you can
separate the two occasions. Either they're all doing something good,
or they're all doing something bad.
I think it's good leadership for all three of them, and a welcome show
of support. The troops are away from their families for a year,
including right through the whole holiday season, and people are dying
every day; our government can dang well have someone important over
there to have dinner with them.
I understand that it's politics for all of the elected officials, and
that it's aimed at next year's elections. It's a very good thing that
American politicians have to do things to build public support.
|
twenex
|
|
response 10 of 101:
|
Nov 29 00:13 UTC 2003 |
I'm sure the servicemen and their families will appreciate the fact
that he went over there to increase morale among the troops. Howewver,
the rest of us can relax, safe in the knowledge he did it as a
publicity stunt and for his own selfish reasons. For a change.
|
gull
|
|
response 11 of 101:
|
Nov 29 01:08 UTC 2003 |
I predict that he will complain, based on intelligence gathered during
his two-hour stay, that the press is being too negative about Iraq.
|
bru
|
|
response 12 of 101:
|
Nov 29 02:29 UTC 2003 |
You know, he did also talk to 5 Iraqi leaders for an hour.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 13 of 101:
|
Nov 29 03:26 UTC 2003 |
...who sat there stunned wondering if they dared to saying anything the
least bit controversial...
|
bru
|
|
response 14 of 101:
|
Nov 29 04:24 UTC 2003 |
you really think they fear him taht much? I doubt it.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 15 of 101:
|
Nov 29 04:54 UTC 2003 |
rcurl what a sour whiner you have become. Stick to science...
|
other
|
|
response 16 of 101:
|
Nov 29 06:21 UTC 2003 |
And what, in this case, defines "leaders"? I can only assume that
it means, "People of Iraqi ancestry whom the American ruling
authority in Iraq has vested with the authority to speak for the
Iraqi people, whether or not the Iraqi people want to be spoken for
by these individuals."
|
other
|
|
response 17 of 101:
|
Nov 29 06:32 UTC 2003 |
And, in case the above doesn't make it screamingly apparent, this
means it is fairly safe to conclude that these so-called "Iraqi
Leaders" are entirely unlikely to represent either a threat or any
opposition whatsoever to Mr. Bush.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 18 of 101:
|
Nov 29 06:36 UTC 2003 |
I haven't whined yet, albaugh. I just think that we have a shallow and
incompetent president, and I've said so. We know that Bush avoids like
the plague the least semblence of direct opposition - see the item
on how he forces those that oppose him to stay out of his sight. Since all
he can deliver to US are empty platitudes, how should we expect any more
substance with "foreigners"? Haven't you seen him making a fool of himself
at the UN?
|
bru
|
|
response 19 of 101:
|
Nov 29 11:00 UTC 2003 |
not nearly so much a fool of himself as the previous president did. You just
gotta bitch because you didn't want him for president, because he doesn't do
what you want. Tough. He is doing the things I believe need to be done.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 20 of 101:
|
Nov 29 18:31 UTC 2003 |
We'll see. So far, his results are pretty bad. He has set most of the
world, both allies and enemies, against us to a higher pitch than ever
before. I somehow don't think this needed to be done.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 21 of 101:
|
Nov 29 18:47 UTC 2003 |
cue the violins
|
rcurl
|
|
response 22 of 101:
|
Nov 29 18:55 UTC 2003 |
ominious drums might be needed
|
mcnally
|
|
response 23 of 101:
|
Nov 29 19:34 UTC 2003 |
re #19:
> You just gotta bitch because you didn't want him for president,
> because he doesn't do what you want.
Four years ago, bru, if someone had claimed that thouse were your
only reasons for resenting the current president, how full of shit
would you have thought them to be?
|
scg
|
|
response 24 of 101:
|
Nov 30 20:08 UTC 2003 |
A few years ago, we had a new President who had rarely if ever left North
America, and whose idea of foreign policy involved dealing with Mexico. On
balance, I'm glad to see him making impulsive-looking Thanksgiving trips to
other continents. I just wish he'd make such visits without invading first.
In other words, it sounds to me like a fun trip. I find it hard to get upset
about, but this isn't a President who gives me any shortage of other things
to be upset about.
Senators Clinton and Reed went to Afghanistan, not Iraq, for Thanksgiving.
Bush's apparrent abandonment of Afghanistan is one of the things that upsets
me greatly about him.
|