Reply With Quote
Chump's definitely got an argument style made for CNN newsblurbs...
And bumperstickers.
Chump and Whottt should be on TV!
Chump's definitely got an argument style made for CNN newsblurbs...
And bumperstickers.
With flip-flopping like that, whottt is much better suited to running for President as a Democrat.
And with reading comprehension like that....it's ironic that you hate Bush.
so, they still won't let you push a broom.
I love how you guys think being anti-war you gives you a free pass not to join...to attack and undermine those that have...
And to call those that support them cowards...
Really bolsters the validity of your anti-war arguments....
Sounds like a case of guilt projection if you ask me....
PS: there are still guys joining....
I hope they aren't killed needlessly either.
Well said.
Never feel guilty for protesting an unecessary war.. your just another dead ender/ war ... you and your ilk will be demonized in the run up to the election.. and rightfully so.. your defense of the indenfensable sounds like a big case of guilt projection... if your wrong you supported the needless deaths of 4,000 dead GIs.. of course if had any type of conscience that might bother but hey as long as the gOP keeps winning elections dead GIs are collateral damage..very patriotic of you.. ok you now lecture those of us who never served while in the backround the leading GOP hopefuls haven't either..
Except
for
that....
Things are, by all accounts, looking better in Iraq. NPR, of all places, has had THREE positive stories THIS week.
It is indeed looking better. I think it is a combination of the fact that they know we are running out of patience, and the fact that they are doing what they should have been doing 4 ing years ago.
The fact that it took 4 years for the administration to realize that, yes they should have been following the military's own counter-insurgency doctrine, is the entire basis for imposing criminal negligence charges on the administration.
As a vet, the fact that we went into the post-war with NO PLAN either says the administration was negligent or deliberately trying to up, and the deaths of thousands of our troops are directly on those in charge.
as has been reported for the last 4 yrs. Now I do hope things are getting better and it seems as though this time it is. However I have learned with this administration that I must wait before deciding if I believe them or not when it comes to news out of Iraq..
Please don't tell me that you believe everything this administartion says at face value? or do you?
This is the point that I am amazed that no one seems to be peeved about. The administration was wrong for starting the war. They had no post war plan and all along they criticized anyone who dared to question them. Now the 14th strategery is working but no one is upset about the ineptness that has caused thousands of GI lives..
Exactly. It is as if the current good (ok, less bad) news is somehow vindication of the last 4 years.
Don't get me wrong. I am happy things are improving.
I will be even happier when this number falls to zero.
But all the post war success doesn't for an instant wash the blood from the hands of this administration
Again, don't get me wrong. I am NOT a "peacenik" or a dove by any stretch of the imagination.
I *am* really pissed off about the level of dip ted-ness this administration has displayed for the last 4 years and how that has DIRECTLY gotten not only our troops but tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Iraqis killed.
RG, don't you think the dimms could take a little blame for
egging the enemy on with their BS? They have done nothing
but trash our troops, their mission and the administration with
the help of the MSM. You have to admit that it is exceeding
strange to hear the enemy use the dimms own words in their
little propaganda pieces. And urge our citizens to vote for
the dimm-o-craps.
ray now says terrorists are reputable sources...and blaming the dems for the unecessary war and no post war planning?
ray would you consider cheney a reputable course? if you do what do you think about these statements
Sounds like the dems today..“The notion that we ought to now go to Baghdad and somehow take control of the country strikes me as an extremely serious one in terms of what we’d have to do once we got there. You’d probably have to put some new government in place. It’s not clear what kind of government that would be, how long you’d have to stay. For the U.S. to get involved militarily in determining the outcome of the struggle over who’s going to govern in Iraq strikes me as a classic definition of a quagmire.”
[Wow why does cheney hate America? Sounds alot like today's dems..QUOTE]“Once you got to Iraq and took it over, and took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world and if you take down the central government in Iraq, you can easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off. How many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? And our judgment was - not very many and I think we got it right.”[/QUOTE]
Wow sounds alot like today's dems..."Cheney knew sectarian violence was inevitable; he knew it’d be a quagmire; he knew we’d lose international support; and he knew a U.S. occupation would further destabilize the Middle East. Cheney not only did it anyway, he didn’t say anything about his expectations. Just the opposite — he and his close allies said the war would be short, cheap, and easy."
I said no such thing. I said the enemy uses the Dimms ownray now says terrorists are reputable sources...
words in their propaganda. You need to go back to
school or take some lessons in reading comprehension.
In short, the dimms and the AQ words are interchangeable.
In short, the dimms and the AQ words are interchangeable.
Notice you don't quote in dimm-o-craps. Guess I could
reference some of their BS. But I cant be bothered. You
know I am right, as usual.
well where i come from when you use someone's words to justify your position you imply they are credible..so then if they aren't credible then your point is mute and not credible?
Oh, you know I am credible and right on the mark. You just
cant admit the truth.
Any effect that anti-war statements have on the ground are negligible. If anything the fact that the current debate has gotten so anti-war while the situation on the ground is improving tends to point away from any real effect, i.e. if anti-war speeches are more intense than they have ever been, and that really had an effect on the ground, then one would expect the situation on the ground to worsen as such anti-war speeches got more common.
The Dimms had no responsibility for running post-war Iraq, and no responsibility for deciding on overall strategy or commanders.
Any minor PR gains from democrat misgivings to this war is FAR outweighed by administration incompetence in terms of assigning blame.
(shrugs)
I am all about quantifying things, and proof. You can prove that the Dimms words are used in propaganda, but you can't prove their effectiveness as a propaganda tool.
I CAN make an extremely good case for how inept and incompetant the post war occupation has been.
Sorry, x. The invasion of Iraq followed Al Qaeda's script for the expansion of terrorism to a T. Bush has been the best recruiter for terra this world has ever known.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
