Fuck you war supporters

[red states rule]

I agree with you about the override, the real problem was how it got this far. It shouldn't have. That is the fault of the administration and the party that helped put them there.

I would say the appeasers in the Dem party play a huge role as well

Some have put their party ahead of the country

Have mistakes been made - you bet

No war has been fought without mistakes, but we did not quit and go home because of them

 

[Annie]

I would say the appeasers in the Dem party play a huge role as well

Some have put their party ahead of the country

Have mistakes been made - you bet

No war has been fought without mistakes, but we did not quit and go home because of them

Actually, it was the administration's problems dealing with the setbacks, which they should not only have anticipated, but warned against. That the dems make hay, well that's politics.

When they do so in a way as Reid, they are rightly called on the carpet. Same with Pelosi in Syria.

At this juncture, I'll say the only thing standing between a landslide for the Dems are the majority leaders in both houses.

 

[red states rule]

Actually, it was the administration's problems dealing with the setbacks, which they should not only have anticipated, but warned against. That the dems make hay, well that's politics.

When they do so in a way as Reid, they are rightly called on the carpet. Same with Pelosi in Syria.

At this juncture, I'll say the only thing standing between a landslide for the Dems are the majority leaders in both houses.

The other major thing preventing a Dem landslide is their policies

 

[Annie]

The other major thing preventing a Dem landslide is their policies

I believe that is what I was saying.

 

[zadie be]

This timeline is just showing a weakness in America again.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not like war and I know that many think this war was not justified. However, I felt it was justified because all of us know weather we like it or not that Saddam was sneakie and horrible. He and his sons killed more people than any WMD. So yes it is good that he and his sons are not around to torture his people.

If we run from the terrorist or insurgents over there they will just bring it to us here. They know America is weak and runs every time there is a war as in the past. They also know that if they come here they will be given a free ride and get what they want because the USA government does not stop people from committing crimes in America that is so evident by them letting the illegal persons get away with everything and not making them leave this country. Instead they say let me change the language to Spanish and give you medical. They should have told them I am sorry but we have laws and rules that must be respected. The terrorist know we are weak and the only people who commit crimes in America that go to jail are Americans. An example of that is our troops who get tortured over there but isfan American does it they go to jail. When are we going to stop running and letting people take us over.

Please see that if they come home they apear the weak man in the prison who gets passed around for a smoke.

I do not want to have the horror of them comming over here and torturing our citizens as they do thier own.

 

[maineman]

I am seeing the people are not to happy with the surrender bill or the cutting of funds

when will you stop using that idiotic and inaccurate term? No one is suggesting that we surrender to anyone. No one. The funding bill has passed. It provides funding for military operations. It suggests a time to turn the operation over to Iraqis. We surrender to no one. We turn the security of Iraq over to the Iraqis who we have been training for four years.... we are saying that, with Iraqis killing Americans every day at an INCREASING rate (no decrease of any percentage of American casualties due to any "success" ofr any "surge" as you have repeatedly LIED about) it is time for Iraqis to protect themselves. It is clear by the American body count, that the Iraqis are not thrilled to have us there.

 

[red states rule]

when will you stop using that idiotic and inaccurate term? No one is suggesting that we surrender to anyone. No one. The funding bill has passed. It provides funding for military operations. It suggests a time to turn the operation over to Iraqis. We surrender to no one. We turn the security of Iraq over to the Iraqis who we have been training for four years.... we are saying that, with Iraqis killing Americans every day at an INCREASING rate (no decrease of any percentage of American casualties due to any "success" ofr any "surge" as you have repeatedly LIED about) it is time for Iraqis to protect themselves. It is clear by the American body count, that the Iraqis are not thrilled to have us there.

I call the Dems bill a surrender bill because it is a surrender bill.

 

[maineman]

I call the Dems bill a surrender bill because it is a surrender bill.

no...it is not a surrender bill.... you call it that because that is your talking point....and you cannot think for yourself or explain things for yourself. The definition of surrender requires us to leave and turn over our encampments and our assets to the enemy. When WE do leave, we will turn those things over to the army of the legitimately elected government of Iraq.

I ask you again: Did Britais surrender palestine and Israel in the spring of '48?

 

[red states rule]

no...it is not a surrender bill.... you call it that because that is your talking point....and you cannot think for yourself or explain things for yourself. The definition of surrender requires us to leave and turn over our encampments and our assets to the enemy. When WE do leave, we will turn those things over to the army of the legitimately elected government of Iraq.

I ask you again: Did Britais surrender palestine and Israel in the spring of '48?

at least the Dems have the terrorists on their side

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55424

 

[maineman]

no...it is not a surrender bill.... you call it that because that is your talking point....and you cannot think for yourself or explain things for yourself. The definition of surrender requires us to leave and turn over our encampments and our assets to the enemy. When WE do leave, we will turn those things over to the army of the legitimately elected government of Iraq.

I ask you again: Did Britais surrender palestine and Israel in the spring of '48?

RSR....can you ever answer questions?

 

[red states rule]

The term surrender fits perfectly for what Dems want to do in Iraq

 

[maineman]

no...it does not.... I explained to you the difference and you run away from the discussion and hide behind little cut and paste cartoons. you are a joke.

 

[red states rule]

no...it does not.... I explained to you the difference and you run away from the discussion and hide behind little cut and paste cartoons. you are a joke.

Just posting the facts - something you really hate to see

 

[maineman]

cartoons are now facts?

what a moron!

 

[actsnoblemartin]

When the new mods comes, I want new rules FOR EVERYONE.

no name calling, no cut and pastes, no insulting, no fighting.

 

[red states rule]

cartoons are now facts?

what a moron!

The coutless articles which you ignore

As usual I am being proven right - now Dems are starting to cave on their DOA surrender bill