When did the West get inhabited by a bunch of Pussies?

[whottt]

who gives the about geographical position.

DarkReign...do I have your permission to claim ownership here? And this was the smartest statement he made...

[smeagol]

Actually it kinda looks like both sides are doing some last-minute posturing before coming back to the negotiating table. Iran really doesn't have a choice now that Russia and China are turning on it.

I hope you are right.

Did you lose a bet or did you put the Hawks as your team simply for kicks?

[whottt]

If by Middle East you mean Iran...it probably won't be that big of a deal.


They'll go down faster than a Spurstalk Lib on Usama.

I'm pretty proud of this comment...should I sig it?

[whottt]

Did you lose a bet or did you put the Hawks as your team simply for kicks?

That was Chump's response to TimVP's call for avataring something Spurs related that you have been critical of in the past...early in htis season as a sign of team support.

See Finley in mine? Elson in TimVPs?

Chump isn't a team player...he's above changing his avatar as a Spurs rallying cry like hte rest of us. He's too good for us.


Either that or he couldn't find a Manu avatar he liked.

[boutons_]

Whott goes down faster on dubya than 101, clanny, aggie, and yoni gang-bang Whott in the rear.

When do you enlist for the Iran war, Macho Men?

[smeagol]

Either that or he couldn't find a Manu avatar he liked.

Would a Hedo avatar make any sense?

Probably not . . .

[101A]

Whott goes down faster on dubya than 101, clanny, aggie, and yoni gang-bang Whott in the rear.

When do you enlist for the Iran war, Macho Men?

My son's accepted into the AF academy.

I am prepared to make a much more dear sacrifice than my own life.

[ChumpDumper]

I have avatars turned off, so I don't even remember I have one most of the time. I just changed my team to the Hawks for the of it. I like when people talk smack about them because of it.

[mikejones99]

About 1972, when feminism started getting crazy

[ChumpDumper]

Also "Austin Toros" isn't a choice for teams so I chose the closet thing available.

[DarkReign]

Link to where I said I owned you in this thread? Or are you just hijacking on general principles?

Mr. Proof, Intelligence and Decency?

By the way...now, I do own you. The proof is your tripping over your own reading INcomprehension.

And yes I know what you meant...you just can't read.

I agree....it gets tedious. But the simple fact is most liberals have weak historical knowledge and tend to rely on newsblurbs and propaganda as their backing.

It's not hard to win...nor is it particularly rewarding....you can't cure stupidity.

Who died and left you god?

And you are clueless at best.

Youd make a good rabble-rousing political lobbyist at best or a good roadside attraction at worst.

Kepp going...please.

[xrayzebra]

Well the dimm-o-craps have proven one thing, they are as
Rush says the party of defeat. They say March of next year is
our day of surrender in no uncertain terms. Why, well to save
the lives of our young soldiers, who they support. If that be the
case, how come they don't just defund the war NOW. Could it
be they really don't care about supporting the troops and saving
lives. Or just that they as Pelosi says: "have a new Congress in
Washington". Where is all the support for this cut off date, other
than boutons, on the board.

Obviously, dimm-o-craps cant afford for us to win in Iraq. So
they use any method they can to bring us down, hence Bush
fails.

[clambake]

Monetary support for the troops is in the bill. Why would bush want to veto a bill that supports our troops. The inclusion for withdrawal is because bush lacks the competence to wage and win a war, Afghanistan included. He claims the money for war runs dry in April. Are you ting me? He's a terrible manager, already gambling with next months rent money. Any other fool would find himself in the street.

[101A]

Monetary support for the troops is in the bill. Why would bush want to veto a bill that supports our troops. The inclusion for withdrawal is because bush lacks the competence to wage and win a war, Afghanistan included. He claims the money for war runs dry in April. Are you ting me? He's a terrible manager, already gambling with next months rent money. Any other fool would find himself in the street.

The date of defeat in the bill is a compromise, and bought with pork. Is that your view of a "competent" method of waging a war?

[xrayzebra]

Monetary support for the troops is in the bill. Why would bush want to veto a bill that supports our troops. The inclusion for withdrawal is because bush lacks the competence to wage and win a war, Afghanistan included. He claims the money for war runs dry in April. Are you ting me? He's a terrible manager, already gambling with next months rent money. Any other fool would find himself in the street.

Horse hockey. You are wrong as two left feet and you
know it.

[clambake]

The date of defeat is in the bill? Where did you get that from? Rush the dope head?

[xrayzebra]

No, the dimm-o-craps. You know the Pelosi and Reid,
the real estate agent.

[101A]

The date of defeat is in the bill? Where did you get that from? Rush the dope head?

One loses a war by surrendering first.

Leaving Iraq = Surrender

Therefore, a premature pullout (one before the government of Iraq is capable of defending itself from insurgents) = defeat.

(and you didn't answer the question)

[clambake]

Is there an answer to waging a corruptive war? I guess you might find an answer from all the people bush dumped because they didn't agree with his MO. Bush's past experience with war was how to avoid it, not conduct it. Do you think this is something that can be learned on the fly? It's not just him. McCain has made some outragous claims of his own. He should base his experience on war from inside a cell.

[boutons_]

It's pretty clear that the US military's attempt to:

1) provide security to Iraq, even just to Bagdad, has been thoroughly DEFEATED.

2) hand over responsibility for (non) security to the Iraqis has been thoroughly DEFEATED.

3) to achieve ANY of the objectives of the war has been thoroughly DEFEATED.

WHAT THE IS THE POINT of staying in Iraq and bleeding to death, with regress, not progress, accelerating after 4 years? WTF is the point?

Like in VN, it's not the military's fault they have failed. It's 100% the fault of the civilians who sent them to do an impossible task.

[Oh, Gee!!]

One loses a war by surrendering first.

Leaving Iraq = Surrender

Therefore, a premature pullout (one before the government of Iraq is capable of defending itself from insurgents) = defeat.

(and you didn't answer the question)

actually, we've already won the war.

[smeagol]

You know the Pelosi

You are being a little harsh

[xrayzebra]

^^Am I, she sold her soul to put our nation down in everyway
possible. No I am not being harsh. She would do anything to
have her way.

[101A]

It's pretty clear that the US military's attempt to:

1) provide security to Iraq, even just to Bagdad, has been thoroughly DEFEATED.

2) hand over responsibility for (non) security to the Iraqis has been thoroughly DEFEATED.

3) to achieve ANY of the objectives of the war has been thoroughly DEFEATED.

WHAT THE IS THE POINT of staying in Iraq and bleeding to death, with regress, not progress, accelerating after 4 years? WTF is the point?

Like in VN, it's not the military's fault they have failed. It's 100% the fault of the civilians who sent them to do an impossible task.

Are the insurgents currently celebrating in the streets of Baghdad? Are they claiming victory, or they still forced to kill us in small numbers ONLY through suicide attacks, and otherwise hide in fear that we will find them, and kill them? The latter is what will happen if the Dems (and you) get there way - looks alot like defeat. The former is what is happening now - looks alot like we're the more powerful force, slowly hacking away at an insurgency that I imagine gets most of its encouragement and motivation from THIS country.

[101A]

Is there an answer to waging a corruptive war? I guess you might find an answer from all the people bush dumped because they didn't agree with his MO. Bush's past experience with war was how to avoid it, not conduct it. Do you think this is something that can be learned on the fly? It's not just him. McCain has made some outragous claims of his own. He should base his experience on war from inside a cell.

I still don't see an answer in your statement. Do you think Congress the method Pelosi is using to "manage" this war is the correct way to go about it; through accomodation and bribery?