Surge to Nowhere

you don't even begin to know the meaning of patriotism.

For having been an Officer in the US Navy your patriotism is sorely lacking as well. Your constant repeated attacks on a sitting president with absolutely no evidence to back "your Opinion" up is despicable to say the least. Then your pathetic attempt to claim people that point out your hypocrisy are Traitors is hilarious.

Clinton , according to you never lied to the US but Bush has. You keep demanding proof that Clinton did what he ADMITTED he did on National TV while insisting the current President, whom has never even been charged with an offense is guilty of exactly what your buddy Clinton did.

You insist that scores of Democrats in powerful positions with independent means to receive independent briefings were somehow hood winked by the President and the CIA and that the rest of the world agreed to lie for the President for some unknown reason all the while claiming Clinton never Perjured himself before a sitting Judge.

A democrat must be CONVICTED in order for you to accept they did anything wrong, but a Republican, why they can just be accused with no evidence at all to back the claim.

A Democrat can say anything, do anything and until or unless they are charged and then convicted in your book they are simply being picked on, BUT you can make the most spurious of claims against any Republican and then fall back on " it's my opinion" to justify what you have claimed. Now when one of us NEO CONS says it is our "opinion" you sneer and claim we have no right to make that claim.
 
For having been an Officer in the US Navy your patriotism is sorely lacking as well. Your constant repeated attacks on a sitting president with absolutely no evidence to back "your Opinion" up is despicable to say the least. Then your pathetic attempt to claim people that point out your hypocrisy are Traitors is hilarious.

Clinton , according to you never lied to the US but Bush has. You keep demanding proof that Clinton did what he ADMITTED he did on National TV while insisting the current President, whom has never even been charged with an offense is guilty of exactly what your buddy Clinton did.

You insist that scores of Democrats in powerful positions with independent means to receive independent briefings were somehow hood winked by the President and the CIA and that the rest of the world agreed to lie for the President for some unknown reason all the while claiming Clinton never Perjured himself before a sitting Judge.

A democrat must be CONVICTED in order for you to accept they did anything wrong, but a Republican, why they can just be accused with no evidence at all to back the claim.

A Democrat can say anything, do anything and until or unless they are charged and then convicted in your book they are simply being picked on, BUT you can make the most spurious of claims against any Republican and then fall back on " it's my opinion" to justify what you have claimed. Now when one of us NEO CONS says it is our "opinion" you sneer and claim we have no right to make that claim.


1. I have NEVER said that Clinton did not lie to the American people. I have only said he was never convicted of the crime of perjury. that is a fact. Ergo: in this country, until you have been found guilty of a crime, you are presumed innocent of the crime. Same with Teddy Kennedy....
2. I am retired. I have every right to criticize the president for what I feel is a terrible counterproductive foreign policy. My doing so IS patriotic, and if you don't think so, that is your problem, not mine. Go read what Teddy Roosevelt had to say again and see if you can actually understand it this time.
3. You can make any comment or tell any lies about me that you like....you certrainly have proven your ability to do so in the past. I cannot stop you... I can only comment on them in passing.
 
The argument could be made that Israel is safer with Saddam Hussein out of power. But that argument does not hold water. Current Iraqi leaders such as Muqtada al-Sadr and Adnan Dulaimi are not less anti-Israel than Saddam, and it turns out he did not have WMD with which to attack Israel anyway. The Shiites of Iraq will certainly side with Hizbullah against Israel, which may actually mean that Israel is less secure now than before. Moreover, to have substantial turmoil on their doorstep just cannot be good for the Israeli.

That is the Twist! America and Israel were both better off with Sadam in power. Its a case of beware of what you wish for. Sadam's Iraq was a bitter enemy of Iran. Sadam's Iraq created a balancing power against Iran in the Middle East. Yes Sadam didn't hide the fact that he hated the US and Israel, but really he his regime had problems of its own to worry about. (1) The Kurds, (2) The Shiite Majority and (3) The Iranians still hadn't forgotten the bodily war they fought.

To top it off Sadam brought relative stability to a country and region that usually has none. If (when?) the Malik government fails when we leave, Iraq becomes 10 fold more dangerous to Israel and the US.
 
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

Its a shame to ignore the truth....so watch it....


WELL.... WHERE ARE YOU MM... RAYBOY.... DCD?:eusa_doh:
Or are you just practicing the cut and run tactics you preach...:rofl:

Great job Alpha... the thread has been abandoned by the Al Queda supporters...:clap2:

Its amazing the way the cowards scatter when face to face with proof of their refusal to admit the truth about their party... :eusa_liar: LIARS

Great clip...

the cowardess traitors have gone to another thread where they can spread their Bin Ladin supporting BS...

Rayboy you and MM are a disgrace to the uniform...
 

Forum List

Back
Top