War: Dems are going for the gold.

[Antiderivative]

So far, I count 9. Am I missing any? Nine wars with an unemployment rate of 9.2%, the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, and now SS and Medicare are on the table for cuts (which I don't care, but I care about priorities). This is preposterous. It is an abomination.

1. Iraq
2. Afghanistan
3. Pakistan
4. Libya
5. Yemen
6. Somalia
7. Drugs
8. Obesity
9. Poverty

However, many Dems will shirk responsibility for these wars. They will either blame Bush or not call them a war. However, if another nation bombed us, I bet these same Dems would call it a war, even if the other nation did not.

It is no wonder they threw Cindy Sheehan under the bus when they got elected into power.

 

[Brian175]

Yeah the Dems need to chill out on those predator strikes on obesity. It's getting out of control.

 

[uscitizen]

That unmanned drone strike on the Krispy Creme factory was totally out of line.

 

[Antiderivative]

Dems love to minimalize their war mongering.

Just like LBJ did. You people are freaks.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIekamBDiAw]YouTube - ‪Born In The USA - Bruce Springsteen Paris 85‬‏[/ame]

 

[Kuros]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

 

[uscitizen]

If we could but win the war on stupidity ther rest would go away.

 

[uscitizen]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

Good thing it only lasted 6 monjths and cost around 40 billion.
And the USA was not going to have any casualties.

 

[Moonglow]

they should have WWE matches to the death with foreign nations to follow a political policy.

 

[Brian175]

If we could but win the war on stupidity ther rest would go away.

Far too many targets.

 

[Antiderivative]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

It about nation building, not killing people.

How do we fare at building nations who are not hostile to us, but have a history of being warming us to us?

Its is so fucked, that you do not even realize.

 

[uscitizen]

If we could but win the war on stupidity ther rest would go away.

Far too many targets.

A target rich environment. How can you miss?

 

[xsited1]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

Another gem of a quote.

 

[Avorysuds]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

Good thing it only lasted 6 monjths and cost around 40 billion.
And the USA was not going to have any casualties.

It's sad... what's worse is how Dems took over the House and Senate running on not funding Bush's wars and won big... That was 6 years ago? Even more sad is when the Dems got a president in office that said much of the same stuff only to expand and start new wars with his Dem Senate/House....

It's amazing how the 2 parties are so alike... What is the difference between a Neocon and a Progressive liberal?

 

[CitizenPained]

That unmanned drone strike on the Krispy Creme factory was totally out of line.

Fat kids are a casualty of wars. Get over it.

 

[Moonglow]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

Good thing it only lasted 6 monjths and cost around 40 billion.
And the USA was not going to have any casualties.

is sad... what's worse is how Dems took over the House and Senate running on not funding Bush's wars and won big... That was 6 years ago? Even more sad is when the Dems got a president in office that said much of the same stuff only to expand and start new wars with his Dem Senate/House....

It's amazing how the 2 parties are so alike... What is the difference between a Neocon and a Progressive liberal?

NEocons tend to be closet homosexuals, and progressives like women they are not married to.

 

[Kuros]

I'm sorry, but a genuine anti-war post does not post a specific attack the Democrats for being warmongers, not when the biggest two US wars of the last decade, Iraq and Afghanistan, were declared by Republican majorities under a Republican President.

There is a very small anti-war movement in the US. Much of the anti-war sentiment shifts depending on which party is in power.

 

[Avorysuds]

I'm sorry, but a genuine anti-war post does not post a specific attack the Democrats for being warmongers, not when the biggest two US wars of the last decade, Iraq and Afghanistan, were declared by Republican majorities under a Republican President.

There is a very small anti-war movement in the US. Much of the anti-war sentiment shifts depending on which party is in power.

It Question, when did the Afghanistan War start? When did the anti war Dems take office... When did Obama become president and when did Obama say he was going to end the Afghan war?

end of 2001 so more like 2002...

2002 to 2007 when Dems took over... 2007 to 2009 when Obama stepped in... 2009 to 2011. So 4 1/2 years The Dems controlled the wars and Obama has us in there until 2014, so about 7ish years for Dems.

Bush with Rep Congress 2002 -2007 = 5 years

Bush with Dem congress 2007-2009 = 2 years

Obama with Dem congress 2009 - 2011 = 2 years

Republicans = 5 years
Democrats = 4 1/2 years currently...

A possible Democrat 7 years...

Who's war is it????

This is not looking at Iraq or any of the new wars started under Obama...

 

[Brian175]

*sigh*

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iraq Body Count (lowest estimate) 98,170 civilian casualties

Its not the number of wars, its the number of casualties.

Good thing it only lasted 6 monjths and cost around 40 billion.
And the USA was not going to have any casualties.

It's sad... what's worse is how Dems took over the House and Senate running on not funding Bush's wars and won big... That was 6 years ago? Even more sad is when the Dems got a president in office that said much of the same stuff only to expand and start new wars with his Dem Senate/House....

It's amazing how the 2 parties are so alike... What is the difference between a Neocon and a Progressive liberal?

I don't disagree that the parties are far to similar, but some of these more recent 'wars' are how we should have been going about the GWOT in the first place. Instead of placing a large amount of conventional troops on the ground fighting a bunch of tribals that don't really care what America does, we should have been utilizing SOF and unmanned aircraft to do surgical attacks and raids on al-qaeda and other terrorist networks. SF could also continue FID work in some of these countries that are host to terrorist such as the Philippines and utilize indigenous to do some of the work for us.

 

[shintao]

Dems love to minimalize their war mongering.

Just like LBJ did. You people are freaks.

Oh, we found ourselves a butcher from Baghdad, you fucking idiot...........