Surge this!

The terrorists thank you for your loyal and continued support MM

I don't support terrorists at all...I think that lying about the extent of our casualties to protect your party and your president to the detriment of your own country is pretty despicable.


When ARE you ever gonna admit you fucked up about that 60% decrease claim?

Or will yoiu just keep ignoring it like a total pussy? Everyone sees you running from it. I get PM's every day from people from all sides on here telling me how bady I have owned your sorry ass on that point....you don't seem to realize that your BEST move at this point would be to admit it so that I can no longer rub your nose in it all the time....
 
Must be a bit of free association going on in your mind then. What are the connections, if any?

There is little, if any, support of the troops at the anti war rallies

Elected Dems have called the troops terrorists, uneducated, compared them to Nazi's and Pol Pot

At these rallies, the anti war peace niks have burned a US soldier in Effigy

There are a few Dems who get it - Joe Liberman, Zell Miller, and Ed Koch
 
There is little, if any, support of the troops at the anti war rallies

What do you mean by the phrase "support for the troops"? I keep reading it in your various posts, like a mantra, but I need to know your definition.

Elected Dems have called the troops terrorists, uneducated, compared them to Nazi's and Pol Pot

In another thread I've asked you for some info on this (and acknowledged the Kerry "joke" which fell flat)

At these rallies, the anti war peace niks have burned a US soldier in Effigy

Yes they did. Fucking stupid action it was too.

There are a few Dems who get it - Joe Liberman, Zell Miller, and Ed Koch

Joe's an Independent now, didn't Zell say he was going GOP? Ed Koch - what a great bloke he is, great Mayor he was indeed. I think he's wrong in supporting Clinton for the nomination though.
 
Read the other thread

BTW it was not a "botched joke" it was an insult

The troops can do without the support of the Dems. The troops are trying to win the war - Dems are trying to lose it
 
Read the other thread

BTW it was not a "botched joke" it was an insult

The troops can do without the support of the Dems. The troops are trying to win the war - Dems are trying to lose it

Leaving aside your interpretation of Kerry's stupid joke let's look at your assertion in the last sentence.

In Iraq there is no "war". There were two distinct phases to this operation. One was the invasion. Successful. The second was the occupation. Now to be reasonable and fair an occupation can only be judged on what it seeks to achieve. The occupation of Germany was a success, very difficult at times, but a success for the West. The occupation of Germany by the Soviets and the establishment of the GDR was a failure in the end for the Soviet bloc. Agreed? The occupation of Japan was a success? Agreed.

The occupation of Iraq continues. So far it hasn't succeeded. The administration is, to be blunt, fucking the occupation up. It is tossing more and more troops into the meat grinder, 'stay the course'. The Democrats can see that the administration hasn't got a clue about how to make the occupation work. That the administration hasn't a clue isn't surprising. There is no exit plan because there was no intent to exit.

Let me ask you a straight question and I'd appreciate a straight answer. Leaving aside for a moment the numbers of deaths of Iraqis, how many US military personnel should be killed and shockingly maimed before you would pull the pin? The Democratic Party has said that it's enough, what's wrong with that? What's wrong with them saying no more of your troops should be killed in this failed enterprise? But since you want it to continue, tell me, at what point would you say, that's it, it's just not worth it? What numbers would need to fall for you to make that decision?
 
Leaving aside your interpretation of Kerry's stupid joke let's look at your assertion in the last sentence.

In Iraq there is no "war". There were two distinct phases to this operation. One was the invasion. Successful. The second was the occupation. Now to be reasonable and fair an occupation can only be judged on what it seeks to achieve. The occupation of Germany was a success, very difficult at times, but a success for the West. The occupation of Germany by the Soviets and the establishment of the GDR was a failure in the end for the Soviet bloc. Agreed? The occupation of Japan was a success? Agreed.

The occupation of Iraq continues. So far it hasn't succeeded. The administration is, to be blunt, fucking the occupation up. It is tossing more and more troops into the meat grinder, 'stay the course'. The Democrats can see that the administration hasn't got a clue about how to make the occupation work. That the administration hasn't a clue isn't surprising. There is no exit plan because there was no intent to exit.

Let me ask you a straight question and I'd appreciate a straight answer. Leaving aside for a moment the numbers of deaths of Iraqis, how many US military personnel should be killed and shockingly maimed before you would pull the pin? The Democratic Party has said that it's enough, what's wrong with that? What's wrong with them saying no more of your troops should be killed in this failed enterprise? But since you want it to continue, tell me, at what point would you say, that's it, it's just not worth it? What numbers would need to fall for you to make that decision?


Dems believe by leaving Iraq now the terrorists will lay down their guns and bombs and become law abiding citizens

Dems believe the terrorists will not kill those who are helping the US set up the govenment

Dems believe Iran will not step in and help the terrorists take over the country

Dems believe the terrorists and Iran qill not use the oil revenues from Iraq to finance terrorist operations

Dems believe if the US leaves Iraq the terrorists will stop their attacks on US interests

As I said, we can do without the Dems support
 
Dems believe by leaving Iraq now the terrorists will lay down their guns and bombs and become law abiding citizens
not true. I believe that our true enemies are NOT the sunnis and shiites fighting one another in Iraq... I think that whenever we leave, they will continue to kill one another until they lose their stomach for it... but regardless, they are not the ones who attacked us and they are not the ones we ought to be killing
Dems believe the terrorists will not kill those who are helping the US set up the govenment
I believe that the non-Iraqi AQ elements are a small piece of the puzzle...I am sure that sunnis will kill shiites in the government and shiites will kill sunnis in the government

Dems believe Iran will not step in and help the terrorists take over the country
I believe that Iran is already helping the shiites in Iraq just like Syria and Saudi Arabia are helping the sunnis in Iraq. I am able to understand the difference between indiginous Iraqis who are fighting one another for control of their own country and islamic extremists who have a totally different agenda
Dems believe the terrorists and Iran qill not use the oil revenues from Iraq to finance terrorist operations
I do not believe that the shiites who will ultimately control Iraq will give oil revenues to any sunni wahabbists whatsoever

Dems believe if the US leaves Iraq the terrorists will stop their attacks on US interests
Absolutely false. I believe that the sooner we leave Iraq and start actually fighting the war against the people who attacked us and who intend to attack us again, the safer we will be.

As I said, we can do without the Dems support
we can do without morons like you who don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
 
Dems believe by leaving Iraq now the terrorists will lay down their guns and bombs and become law abiding citizens

Point me to such a statement.

Dems believe the terrorists will not kill those who are helping the US set up the govenment

Oh? They believe that? Show me.

Dems believe Iran will not step in and help the terrorists take over the country

LOL - there's a fucking Shi'ite government in Iraq. The Democrats can see that, they know as soon as the US pulls out that al-Maliki and his mates are going to go Persian on them. So what? Who fucking cares? Of course Iran is going to buddy up with Iraq, they're doing it already. Now you're starting to get it. If Iraq (second biggest oil reserves in the world, possibly the biggest in the world according a recent discover) and Iran (both Shi'ite) get together then their oil reserves will be bigger than the Saudis (Sunni - Wahabbist). Now you know why Bush won't pull out. He can't. He fucked it up. The US is going to have to stay there until the oil runs out if an accommodation can't be reached with Iran and seeing as how Bush won't deal with Iran - hello...is it getting through to you yet?....there's a fucking stalemate.


Dems believe the terrorists and Iran qill not use the oil revenues from Iraq to finance terrorist operations

Why the fuck would they? Iran is in a hell of state, economically speaking. It has been mismanaged long before Ahmadinajad got into power but the little bloke has really managed to fuck it up even more. Why the hell would they finance terrorist ops? No advantage if they've got a nice friendly Shi'ite govt in Iraq that will be their new special best friend.


Dems believe if the US leaves Iraq the terrorists will stop their attacks on US interests

Fuck! What if they're right???? What if the terrorists suddenly realise there's no point in attacking US/Western interests?

As I said, we can do without the Dems support

You need their brains.
 
you see...you made a series of statements, and I responded to each one of them. why not answer each of my responses and we can go from there?
 
no...really....you made a series of accusations. I took the time to address each and every one of them....and you have dodged responding to that. but hten, that is what you do about everything. Remember...it was you who said that America had seen a 60% decrease in casualties because of the success of the surge and have NEVER EVER been able to back that lie up. Why IS that?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top