Who're we kidding, Reps?

rob · #21 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Realist1

Perhaps if we offer them (D) Mayor Nagin of New Orleans as a sign of good Faith? Think of all he has to offer the Iraqis in expertise...

Realist, we are wanting stop hostilites not increase them and besides Bagdad may not want to be a chocolate city.

I_Hate_the_Nazi_Right · #22 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 08:56 PM

Did you read the post above where I explained that the objectives that were proposed to congress when this war was ok'ed have been met?

What do you have to say to that?

babetoo · #23 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45

Why is the left so dedicated to failure in Iraq? Just a simple question. They seem more concerned with surrender than victory

i don't think so nathan we are more concerned with common sense.

our common sense should tell us , that we can't change the outcome. it has been four years. i believe it is worse in iraq, not better for our having been there.

babe

steve k · #24 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I_Hate_the_Nazi_Right

Oh... Steve, You know you are my biggest fan, and the reason you CAN"T STAND me is because I'm right and everything that you believe in is crumbling down in front of your very eyes.

The democrats haven't invested in defeat, which isn't the case, but what we are interested in is pulling our loved ones out of lose-lose situation where they are being dragged through a meat grinder daily

So, say what you will about the democrats using this political, it's is DISCUSTING how your side i.e. Neocon (you don't even get the title republican) are keeping the men and sending more to DIE for a usless cause, so here it is in easy term because I know you're not very bright Steve... k...

Democrats = Bringing home troops before they crippled or killed in a civil war and if you read the upper portion of this post you'll see that the ORIGINAL objectives have been met so let's go home

Neocon = Keep the war going so we get their oil, control the region and have a launching area for attack on other countries in the region. Funny this is that you dumb fucks still can't figure out how to get their oil... even thought that is the first area secured after the invasion, the Ministry of Oil...

Hey steve... you debate the iraq question I would love to head to head.

Oh, lord. It really is too early for you, dickless. Nothing is crumbling before my eye. Why would you say that? Because then you would be saying my moral compass and belief system is crumbling and that foundation is not something that will crack. So strike one.

Whereas I actually know people in the region serving, you know whatever your hairy right hand tells you. Whereas I understand what is happening in the world you take the course of least resistance because you are quite frankly too stupid to know any better. You will not get a head to head debate from me on Iraq whether you send me a private message or try to twist my words around. Ain't going to happen because you are just too stupid in your thinking and to partisan to discuss with. You are the worst of what this system has to offer not the best. I don't know what a "neocon" is. I don't give a shit about tag-lines or labels. I leave that to people like yourself. If you prefer to call me a "neocon" (or worse) have at it. You mean less to me than practically anyone else I can think of.

nathanbforrest45 · #25 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 09:23 AM

The American military is under utilizing the military master minds in this country. I mean, look at IHNR and George Owell. Isn't it obvious they are the absolute best when it comes to military stategy? IHNR has an inside source telling him all is lost and we should just go away and lick our wounds. George is like George Patton, able to come up with a pithy quote at the drop of a threat. The Joint Chiefs of Staff should immediately call on these well informed, well trained AC Generals. After all, they have received their military training from weeks and weeks of playing Risk and Battleship.

I also note that the latest news is that Iran is closer to the atomic bomb than originally thought. We need IHNR and George to clarify this and tell us why this is just another lie made up by the Bush Administration. I honestly believe that if Iran were to nuke Isreal IHNR and George would both claim either we did it or the Isrealies did it to themselves to make the peace loving Iranians look bad.

Yes IHNR, the mission should be the complete annihilation of the Middle East. As Conan said "We should slaughter their men and listen to the lamatations of their women" because then and only then can we even begin to find peace.

rob · #26 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 09:53 AM

Nazi, yes we took out Saddam and turned the country over to people that have never goverened themselves. There is a learning curve here, but you Liberals want them to step up immediately. Yes as Bush announced the war is over, but winning the peace is taking much longer. If you look at WWII we destroyed everything in Germany, so that after the war the citizens were more concerned with rebuilding the country to complain about the occupation forces there.

Bush didn't tell congress that he was going to into nation building, but surely as much compassion that you liberals have for underpriviledged people, wouldn't want us to leave the Iraqi citizens in a lurch?

steve k · #27 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Nazi, yes we took out Saddam and turned the country over to people that have never goverened themselves. There is a learning curve here, but you Liberals want them to step up immediately. Yes as Bush announced the war is over, but winning the peace is taking much longer. If you look at WWII we destroyed everything in Germany, so that after the war the citizens were more concerned with rebuilding the country to complain about the occupation forces there.

Bush didn't tell congress that he was going to into nation building, but surely as much compassion that you liberals have for underpriviledged people, wouldn't want us to leave the Iraqi citizens in a lurch?

Isn't it at least a little interesting that those same people (like 'Nazi', 'Harsh Truth' et al) who continually accuse our government of human rights abuses in Gitmo and elsewhere have been absolutely silent on the hostage taking of the British marines. It is an illegal kidnapping, many terms of the Geneva Convention have been violated and I have not heard word one from our liberal friends about how nasty this is. It is illegal to to them on television screens and coherse (sp.) their testimony which is surely being done. Let alone what is probably happening to them off camera. Wher's the outrage you fucking hypocrties?

nathanbforrest45 · #28 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve k

Isn't it at least a little interesting that those same people (like 'Nazi', 'Harsh Truth' et al) who continually accuse our government of human rights abuses in Gitmo and elsewhere have been absolutely silent on the hostage taking of the British marines. It is an illegal kidnapping, many terms of the Geneva Convention have been violated and I have not heard word one from our liberal friends about how nasty this is. It is illegal to to them on television screens and coherse (sp.) their testimony which is surely being done. Let alone what is probably happening to them off camera. Wher's the outrage you fucking hypocrties?

Steve
You have to understand (1) The British sailors were pawns of the Bush Administration and were in all liklihood in Iranian Territorial Waters, hell man, they were probably actually in downtown Tehran and (2) The Iranians would NEVER torture or force anyone to lie. Its only the EVIL West that would do such a thing. The liberals would all rather blame the United States for any and all wrong doings then to actually try to understand the dynamics here.

TheHarshTruth · #29 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve k

Isn't it at least a little interesting that those same people (like 'Nazi', 'Harsh Truth' et al) who continually accuse our government of human rights abuses in Gitmo and elsewhere have been absolutely silent on the hostage taking of the British marines. It is an illegal kidnapping, many terms of the Geneva Convention have been violated and I have not heard word one from our liberal friends about how nasty this is. It is illegal to to them on television screens and coherse (sp.) their testimony which is surely being done. Let alone what is probably happening to them off camera. Wher's the outrage you fucking hypocrties?

Steve
You have to understand (1) The British sailors were pawns of the Bush Administration and were in all liklihood in Iranian Territorial Waters, hell man, they were probably actually in downtown Tehran and (2) The Iranians would NEVER torture or force anyone to lie. Its only the EVIL West that would do such a thing. The liberals would all rather blame the United States for any and all wrong doings then to actually try to understand the dynamics here.

Cute. Very good example of the average posts from these two.

steve k · #30 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheHarshTruth

Cute. Very good example of the average posts from these two.

And what of it?