War in Iraq... When should the troops come home???

Deadshot · #11 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Dead, is it Democrats in charge, or just members of the political elite club that crosses party lines? If this is the case then it will not matter.

Nah, they want to make it a clean sweep in '08. Right now teh Dems' are in charge. In 2010, when we have the majority everywhere

, we'll pull what happened to the R's in the early 2000's. That is "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely."

The sorryful, regretable, nasty and disgusting ying and yang of politics.

rob · #12 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadshot

Nah, they want to make it a clean sweep in '08. Right now teh Dems' are in charge. In 2010, when we have the majority everywhere

, we'll pull what happened to the R's in the early 2000's. That is "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely."

The sorryful, regretable, nasty and disgusting ying and yang of politics.

While this happens, the American people lose everything.

Kix · #13 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyhigher

I would like to know what is acceptable to the American people regarding our troops in Iraq coming home?

Why? You already gave up on America and moved to Asia and you said you're glad you're not here anymore. That means it's not your war and they're not "your" troops.

Quote:

What number of deaths to our American troops is acceptable?

Only the exact number it takes to WIN this war; not one more, despite the best efforts of some here and abroad to make it last a lot longer than it should by supporting the enemy by word and deed.

Quote:

What would you tell the family of a fallen soldier?
He died defending America?

I have spent a LOT of time with a LOT of families of fallen troops and NOT one of them has had any problem understanding what their son died for. There is a lot of evil in this world. If we don't fight it, who will? Surly not those who choose to support the enemy with their words and deeds.

Quote:

And last, aftter is was discovered there were no "WMD'S" in Iraq, and that the intelligence regarding Iraq's weapons program was, " well, not so intelligent" should we have brought the troops home?

WMD were found in Iraq and a LOT of them. But that was NOT the only reason we went there. A dozen years of more than a dozen UN violations were the reason. WMD were only one of those.

Still Dizzy · #14 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyhigher

I would like to know what is acceptable to the American
people regarding our troops in Iraq coming home?

What number of deaths to our American troops is acceptable?

What would you tell the family of a fallen soldier?
He died defending America?

You know Roosevelt could have said the same thing in 1942. At that time we had lost EVERY sea, and land battle. Thank God that unlike MOST Liberal/Socialists he had balls.

Deadshot · #15 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Still Dizzy

You know Roosevelt could have said the same thing in 1942. At that time we had lost EVERY sea, and land battle. Thank God that unlike MOST Liberal/Socialists he had balls.

When in '42?

In April and November of '42 the Soviets were on the offensive and the Germans were requesting permission to break out (Hitler refused) - so our ally was doing well
April '42 was the Doolittle raid, which hurt Japanese morale and helped American morale
May '42 we stopped Operation MO, and won the Battle of the Coral Sea
June of '42 we won Midway, there by changing the balance of power to a break even stand point. Break even with the US well on it's way to dominance.
We began the Battle for Guadalcanal in the fall of '42 and we're winning it by the end of the year.
May '42 the British capture an intact Enigma Machine, the allies begin to crack sub codes thereafter.
Later that month the British sink the Bismark, a blow to German morale - helping allied morale.

The British raid at Dieppe was the ONLY disaster.

Just out of curiousity, have you ever read a History Book about WWII?

Please stop making stupid arguements when History proves you wrong. By the end of '42 we were begining to win in the Pacific and in the Atlantic we were preparing for our first real push. FDR made his decisions based on victory, not stale mate and/or loss. READ A HISTORY BOOK!!!

rob · #16 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Still Dizzy

You know Roosevelt could have said the same thing in 1942. At that time we had lost EVERY sea, and land battle. Thank God that unlike MOST Liberal/Socialists he had balls.

Dizzy, you are correct on this. A leader must have balls to get the job done and that leaves out the Democrats trying to get to the whitehoust.

Deadshot · #17 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Dizzy, you are correct on this. A leader must have balls to get the job done and that leaves out the Democrats trying to get to the whitehoust.

There's the example Rob. The example of a crazy, one from your side, talking out of his ass and you piggybacking on top of it. That's what screws up these forums. The Crazies leading the way, and the intelectuals jumping on board for the ride.

See above, I proved Diz wrong.

But your point was to try and make a crack at the Dem's, a crack that fell flat when you agreed with the wrong information that Diz provided.

rob · #18 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadshot

There's the example Rob. The example of a crazy, one from your side, talking out of his ass and you piggybacking on top of it. That's what screws up these forums. The Crazies leading the way, and the intelectuals jumping on board for the ride.

See above, I proved Diz wrong.

But your point was to try and make a crack at the Dem's, a crack that fell flat when you agreed with the wrong information that Diz provided.

Dead, have you forgot about the D day rehearsal where IKE lost almost 70% of the landing craft, becase the weather changed so drasticlay and also there was a u boat in the water also. I have read about the World War II.

Deadshot · #19 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

Dead, have you forgot about the D day rehearsal where IKE lost almost 70% of the landing craft, becase the weather changed so drasticlay and also there was a u boat in the water also. I have read about the World War II.

When, in 1942 did this happen?

Here's Still Dizzy's quote, which you responded to "You know Roosevelt could have said the same thing in 1942. At that time we had lost EVERY sea, and land battle. Thank God that unlike MOST Liberal/Socialists he had balls. "

1942, is the key. When in 1942 did Ike lose anything? Ike didn't get to London until June '42. It wasn't until November '42 that he was put in charge of Supreme Commander Allied Force of the North African Theater of Operations. There were NO D-Day type of invasion landings practiced for or led in 1942.

Ergo, Diz and You are both wrong. FDR made decisions from the point of victory, both USA and Allied. We had no horrific or even bad, USA military setbacks in 1942.

CrankyYankee · #20 (**permalink**) 02-11-2007, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Still Dizzy

You know Roosevelt could have said the same thing in 1942. At that time we had lost EVERY sea, and land battle. Thank God that unlike MOST Liberal/Socialists he had balls.

Iraq didn't attack us, we attacked them.

WWII, Pearl Harbor? We were attacked, and that REQUIRES a response.

That is why the war in Afganistan was a just response, and the war in
Iraq? Not so much....