The War on Terror is about Oil. Always has been.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl >>> NOT GUILTY.
- Thread starter Contumacious
- Start date
The War on Terror is about Oil. Always has been.
After the left believing and parroting every unsubstantiated anti-military accusation all through the Iraq war, I thought it was pretty clear. How did you get through all that and suddenly this makes you question them?
Except most of those allegations were substantiated. Abu Grahib, for instance.
again, guy, the way this case is won is in the Media. This is a kangaroo court by an organization trying to cover up an embarrassment. The only way you keep them from doing it is by blowing the lid on this whole rancid business.
Wrong again. The only thing the judge can admit is actual testimony by someone with first hand knowledge. An op-ed piece is hearsay.
Are you really that dumb?
Last edited:
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,368
- 1,130
jon_berzerk
In all fairness to Joe, I did pin him down on this the other night, and got him to say that he thought the war against the Taliban was wrong. Since the Taliban sheltered Bin Laden, is still running around killing innocent people, and is fighting our troops, maybe he should change that defense to "Bergdahl was being forced to fight in an unjust war against terrorists".
that would be an acceptable and more accurate reflection
jon_berzerk
In all fairness to Joe, I did pin him down on this the other night, and got him to say that he thought the war against the Taliban was wrong. Since the Taliban sheltered Bin Laden, is still running around killing innocent people, and is fighting our troops, maybe he should change that defense to "Bergdahl was being forced to fight in an unjust war against terrorists".
Uh, I said no such thing. I said continuing to fight in Afghanistan AFTER Al Qaeda had fled the country was stupid. We are what, 14 years into this war now and no closer to defeating "The Taliban" than we were in 2001.
Bergdahl was a mentally ill man who the army recruited because most Americans know the Afghan War is bullshit and they ain't signing their sons and daughters up for it.
After the left believing and parroting every unsubstantiated anti-military accusation all through the Iraq war, I thought it was pretty clear. How did you get through all that and suddenly this makes you question them?
Except most of those allegations were substantiated. Abu Grahib, for instance.
No, most were not, what happened was substantially different from the original accusations. Abu Ghraib for instance.
Regardless, even if "most" were eventually substantiated, so that makes an immediate declaration of guilt by the left reasonable and they are still pro-military while they do it?
LOL, what a dumb ass
Fine by me...as long as the end result is him locked in a straitjacket, in a padded cell for the rest of his life, never to see the light of day again except in a body bag.
NOt really. We only lock up the mentally ill if they are an immediate threat to themselves or others.
Bergdahl isn't a threat to anyone but the Army's reputation.
Oh, and Joe........
About all of your claims that Bergdahl was in an unjust war over oil. I would like to remind you (again) that he was in Afghanistan. They don't even have any oil.
At least get your facts straight before you mount your defense of Bergdahl. Otherwise, people tend to think you're living proof that the military DOES enlist mental cases and idiots.
The War on Terror is about Oil. Always has been.
You just can't question leftist programming, can you?
The amount of oil we have gotten out of Iraq and ... hello ... Afghanistan ... shows that wasn't our priority. The war on terror is a war on terrorists.
Now without oil we would not be in the middle east being targets for terrorists, but it's like saying the United States exists for a war on Indians.
And which party while screaming about war for oil fights domestic exploration and energy independence?
The truth is a far more powerful argument than your idiotic talking points
No, most were not, what happened was substantially different from the original accusations. Abu Ghraib for instance.
Regardless, even if "most" were eventually substantiated, so that makes an immediate declaration of guilt by the left reasonable and they are still pro-military while they do it?
LOL, what a dumb ass
Oh, double Wide, the problem was, most of the really bad stuff we did, we really did. Iraq was a fuckup of massive proportions.
- Mar 31, 2009
- 94,772
- 71,237
- 3,605
Fine by me...as long as the end result is him locked in a straitjacket, in a padded cell for the rest of his life, never to see the light of day again except in a body bag.
NOt really. We only lock up the mentally ill if they are an immediate threat to themselves or others.
Bergdahl isn't a threat to anyone but the Army's reputation.
He deserted and has to pay the price. He knew the rules
You just can't question leftist programming, can you?
Guy, I was in the first Gulf War when Bush exlicitely said it was about Oil. Now we try to pretend it's about freedom and terrorism. But it's about oil.
He deserted and has to pay the price. He knew the rules
1) there's no real evidence he deserted.
2) Even if he did, there's a real question about his mental capacity to appreciate the consequences of his actions.
3) Given the lies the Army has already been caught in about "Sergeant" Bergdahl, I'm kind of not inclined to believe anything they say.
You just can't question leftist programming, can you?
Guy, I was in the first Gulf War when Bush exlicitely said it was about Oil. Now we try to pretend it's about freedom and terrorism. But it's about oil.
Bush never said it was about oil
got a link?
- Mar 31, 2009
- 94,772
- 71,237
- 3,605
He deserted and has to pay the price. He knew the rules
1) there's no real evidence he deserted.
2) Even if he did, there's a real question about his mental capacity to appreciate the consequences of his actions.
3) Given the lies the Army has already been caught in about "Sergeant" Bergdahl, I'm kind of not inclined to believe anything they say.
Yes there is evidence he deserted. Stop lying
Judge needs to slap a gag order on all parties. Any of them breathe one single word about it, lock them up and/or dishonorably discharge them.
If the Army has to hide what it is doing, then you can pretty much guess the are doing something wrong.
I'm always amazed that when you guys claim the government can't settle a dispute about a wedding cake INSIST they should be able to prosecute a man for a mistake made during a war no one wants to fight anymore.
No, most were not, what happened was substantially different from the original accusations. Abu Ghraib for instance.
Regardless, even if "most" were eventually substantiated, so that makes an immediate declaration of guilt by the left reasonable and they are still pro-military while they do it?
LOL, what a dumb ass
Oh, double Wide, the problem was, most of the really bad stuff we did, we really did. Iraq was a fuckup of massive proportions.
Well, Cartman, actually Iraq to you is just a source for Partisan gotcha talking points. You hold one of the two twins who did that mess together blameless. It's not a real issue for you. Free government cheese is the issue for you.
I do have a question for you though, double wide. Does it rook you having to buy two seats on airplanes?
Want to complete that statement? According to your earlier statement it should conclude with "but never went outside the United States"You just can't question leftist programming, can you?
Guy, I was in the first Gulf War when Bush exlicitely said it was about Oil. Now we try to pretend it's about freedom and terrorism. But it's about oil.
You just can't question leftist programming, can you?
Guy, I was in the first Gulf War when Bush exlicitely said it was about Oil. Now we try to pretend it's about freedom and terrorism. But it's about oil.
Bush never said it was about oil
got a link?
Yes, he did. I'm guessing you are too young to remember.
You just can't question leftist programming, can you?
Guy, I was in the first Gulf War
I was in the War of the Roses
when Bush exlicitely said it was about Oil. Now we try to pretend it's about freedom and terrorism. But it's about oil.
W didn't say that and your repeating it doesn't make a lie into truth. Why is it every time you speak Nancy Pelosi's lips move?
Well, Cartman, actually Iraq to you is just a source for Partisan gotcha talking points. You hold one of the two twins who did that mess together blameless. It's not a real issue for you. Free government cheese is the issue for you.
Double Wide, you know that you are babbling now, right.
Come on, tell us why the Iraq War was a good idea.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 21
- Views
- 485
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 569
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 227
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8087
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-