how liberals celebrate 4th of july

[Gunny]

Do they make brown electrical tape?

Yes.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Did you have to take today off to rest up from all those goings-on?

Nope, back at work today. No rest for the wicked, you know!

 

[Gunny]

Nope, back at work today. No rest for the wicked, you know!

Being evil must come with supernatural recuperative powers.

 

[Rosotar]

During the Clinton years, libs said patriotism was standing by the President and supporting what he wanted to accomplish

Bullshit RSR!

I don't remember anyone actually saying that. Neither do you.

Today during the Bush years, libs say patriotism is doing everything you can to oppose and impeach him. As well as to surrender to terrorists in Iraq

That's because Bush is an enemy of our nation. It is our duty to stand up for our nation even if that means denouncing it's failed leaders.

 

[Rosotar]

liberals think it is "patriotism" to take every chance they can to undermine america. a liberal wants the terrorists to win, this isnt an exaggeration. they want to leave iraq and stop the war on terror, which they didnt believe existed to begin with. trusting a liberal with running this country is basically handing over the keys to al qaeda.

This is just pure, ti-foil hat wearing propaganda!

There is no TRUTH in it whatsoever. It's just a talking point.

BTW.....70% of America now wants us out of Iraq. I suppose they're all "liberals" huh?

 

[Gunny]

This is just pure, ti-foil hat wearing propaganda!

There is no TRUTH in it whatsoever. It's just a talking point.

BTW.....70% of America now wants us out of Iraq. I suppose they're all "liberals" huh?

That would be 70% of Americans do not approve of the way the war is being conducted in Iraq.

 

[Rosotar]

why else would Dems support surrender in Iraq? Dems have invested their politcal future in the US's defeat in Iraq

That's a Rush Limbaugh talking point.

That is why we need the fairness doctrine back. This is what happens when clowns like Rush get to dominate the airwaves for three hours every day with no counter point. Weak minded individuals like you RSR pick up the tripe they spew and ditto it around as if it's some kind of truth. It's only fair that people like you should be required to hear BOTH sides of the story since you are all too willing to let others make up your mind for you.

 

[Rosotar]

LMAO. I'm not too concerned about being anybody's bitch, and I probably know the bikers.

Of more pressing concern, IMO, is the need for said other convicts to worry about me deciding whether or not *I* want a bitch.

You so tough Gunny!

My hero!

 

[Rosotar]

That would be 70% of Americans do not approve of the way the war is being conducted in Iraq.

What's the difference?

 

[Gunny]

You so tough Gunny!

My hero!

So much for trying to inject a little levity. Get over yourself.

 

[Gunny]

What's the difference?

You're going to tell me that you cannot see the difference between disapproving of a war itself, and disapproving of how that war is being conducted?

I guarantee you that if the US was "smashing its way to a clear-cut victory", those numbers would be reversed because the closet warhawks would be back out front cheerleading.

 

[Rosotar]

You're going to tell me that you cannot see the difference between disapproving of a war itself, and disapproving of how that war is being conducted?

The more you argue semantics the farther you get from the essence of the truth.

I guarantee you that if the US was "smashing its way to a clear-cut victory", those numbers would be reversed because the closet warhawks would be back out front cheerleading.

Unfortunately "IF" is the operative word here and it's a mighty big "if". Like my old grandmother, God rest her soul, used to say...if wishes were haystacks there would be a hell of a lot of fat horses.

Why do you insist on dwelling in the world of "if's" when our soldiers are still dying over there? Couldn't you be of more help to them if you'd simply get with the program and start paying attention to the FACTS of the situation? Your wishful thinking is not going to "win" this war or any other one. Hope is not a strategy. Faulty, wishful thinking is what got us into this clusterfuck in the first place.

 

[Larkinn]

The more you argue semantics the farther you get from the essence of the truth.

Semantics? That difference is huge.

 

[Rosotar]

Semantics? That difference is huge.

Which difference are you speaking of?

The difference between the truth and partial pieces of the truth thrown out into an argument as the whole thing?

 

[Gunny]

The more you argue semantics the farther you get from the essence of the truth.




Unfortunately "IF" is the operative word here and it's a mighty big "if". Like my old grandmother, God rest her soul, used to say...if wishes were haystacks there would be a hell of a lot of fat horses.

Why do you insist on dwelling in the world of "if's" when our soldiers are still dying over there? Couldn't you be of more help to them if you'd simply get with the program and start paying attention to the FACTS of the situation? Your wishful thinking is not going to "win" this war or any other one. Hope is not a strategy. Faulty, wishful thinking is what got us into this clusterfuck in the first place.

I'm not arguing semantics. I'm arguing two completely separate subjects that you are insisting are the same.

It isn't hard at all to support the war yet disapprove of the way it's being conducted.

Obviously, even attempting to spell that simple fact out via example zoomed right over since you instead chose to ignore what I said and rant over it instead.

I do not base any strategy on "hope" or "if." That is taking what I attempted to use to illustrate a point WAY out of context. There isn't anything YOU could teach me about strategy and/or tactics, and you have proven that yourself with this very post. You're so filled with hatred for a man and his political beliefs you can't even address this topic with any semblance of addressing reality.

FYI, I did not agree with invading Iraq. I thought Saddam was the lesser of two evils between he and islamofascists overrunning Iraq, and had you cared to look, I've discussed the issue at length more than once. You choose instead to run your mouth.

Y'see, what you do is offer absolutely NOTHING to the issue. You're still btiching about something that's already happened. We're there. It happened. DO try to move on.

 

[Gunny]

Which difference are you speaking of?

The difference between the truth and partial pieces of the truth thrown out into an argument as the whole thing?

He's talking about the fact that you cannot apparently cannot differntiate between two, completely separate topics -- the war, and how that war is being conducted.

 

[mattskramer]

He's talking about the fact that you cannot apparently cannot differntiate between two, completely separate topics -- the war, and how that war is being conducted.

I agree with you here. There is an obvious difference between thinking that a war was not justified and thinking that a war (justified or not) is being run poorly.

Anyway, I thought that the was not justified and I think that it is being run poorly.

 

[Gunny]

I agree with you here. There is an obvious difference between thinking that a war was not justified and thinking that a war (justified or not) is being run poorly.

Anyway, I thought that the was not justified and I think that it is being run poorly.

It's more complicated than that, IMO.

I think there was plenty of justification to take Saddam out. He was a pain in the ass, and cost me 3 Christmas's with my daughters. I was deployed for so long during the First Gulf War I came home to find my baby could both walk and talk. That added, to the usual list of crimes against the rest of humanity.

I also think that taking Saddam out was strategically the wrong thing to do. I know as early as post-First Gulf War, in military circles, the most likely scenario predicted exactly what has happened -- a power vaccum has been opened in which differing factions are fighting for control. Saddam sat right between the Iranian shia and the rest of the Middle East that is mostly Sunni.

I also consider it unwise tactically to open a second front unnecessarily before obtaining a complete victory on the first. Hitler proved how disasterous THAT can be by unnecessaily invading Russia.

Was the decision mine, I'd have saved Saddam for another day, and I consider my opinion strategically, superior to the one that has been used.

Since you like analogies ... here's one for you ...

If you're in a boat and it capsizes, do you swim? Or refuse to swim because the boat wasn't supposed to capsize? I'm swimming.

The decision was made to invade Iraq, and it was carried out. Whatever my opinion of invading Iraq is, it is irrelevant to the fact that we are there, and need to clean up the mess we made.

 

[mattskramer]

It's more complicated than that, IMO.

I think there was plenty of justification to take Saddam out. He was a pain in the ass, and cost me 3 Christmas's with my daughters. I was deployed for so long during the First Gulf War I came home to find my baby could both walk and talk. That added, to the usual list of crimes against the rest of humanity.

I also think that taking Saddam out was strategically the wrong thing to do. I know as early as post-First Gulf War, in military circles, the most likely scenario predicted exactly what has happened -- a power vaccum has been opened in which differing factions are fighting for control. Saddam sat right between the Iranian shia and the rest of the Middle East that is mostly Sunni.

I also consider it unwise tactically to open a second front unnecessarily before obtaining a complete victory on the first. Hitler proved how disasterous THAT can be by unnecessaily invading Russia.

Was the decision mine, I'd have saved Saddam for another day, and I consider my opinion strategically, superior to the one that has been used.

Since you like analogies ... here's one for you ...

If you're in a boat and it capsizes, do you swim? Or refuse to swim because the boat wasn't supposed to capsize? I'm swimming.

The decision was made to invade Iraq, and it was carried out. Whatever my opinion of invading Iraq is, it is irrelevant to the fact that we are there, and need to clean up the mess we made.

In my humble opinion, we can pull back and return to containment. Let the factions fight amongst themselves (or work things out among themselves). We should spend more money and resources on intelligence and on our own border security. Saddam is gone. There is a new government onto Iraq. That is enough. We can’t prance all over the world and depose ruthless dictators. I think that North Korea has more of a despotic dictator and is more of a threat than Iraq ever was.

 

[Gunny]

In my humble opinion, we can pull back and return to containment. Let the factions fight amongst themselves (or work things out among themselves). We should spend more money and resources on intelligence and on our own border security. Saddam is gone. There is a new government onto Iraq. That is enough. We can’t prance all over the world and depose ruthless dictators. I think that North Korea has more of a despotic dictator and is more of a threat than Iraq ever was.

I think we need to quit pussyfooting around with the democratically-elected government of Iraq and tell them to get on the stick and start taking over their own damned civil war.

In this, the resemblance to Vietnam is real. We are supporting a government that is dragging its feet, more than willing to let us do its job.