What happened to the “Master Debaters?”

[Harry Dresden]

Bush/DeLay/Frist figured out that if you call yourself a "Conservative" and spend money like a "Liberal", you win elections. Once the lying started, the thinking stopped.

I was a pretty loyal Republican prior to the Bush/DeLay/Frist era. Once that insanity started I left. The only Republican Partisans left are the folks that hate the Democrats so much they can't possibly vote 3rd party for fear of those "damned dirty libs."

If you're a free thinking person, you're not a partisan now. At best you're an independent. If you call yourself a Conservative and you're a Republican loyalist, then I just feel sorry for you. What happened to Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter ought to tell you you're out of luck in the GOP.

DOC....you can be the most Independent free thinking person alive.....there are about 10 leftist on this board,who if you disagree with them.....you are called a neo-con or a right-winger.....so all that shit you mentioned is moot here.....

 

[rdean]

oh really.....so Sadam allowed free and fair elections?.....you know like the one they had where he was the unanimous choice?......no votes for the other 5 guys....dam!... he was good....

They don't have free and fair elections now. First, women can't go anywhere unescorted by a male relative. That means that if an unescorted woman shows up at the poll, she can't vote.

The Christian population has been pretty much wiped out. So nothing is "free and fair" for them.

If they didn't like their government, then it was up to them to change it - not us.

Since the "constitution" says all "legislation is based on Islam" and "Islam is the national religion" (Articles 2 and 3), anyone who doesn't agree with "Islam" is pretty much screwed. How is that fair? That is not really a question because the answer is obviously, "It's not".

How come so few Republicans actually know what is going on in Iraq these days? The Constitution, the death of the Christians, the lack of women's rights, religion run amok?

um Deano....you said BEFORE the invasion they had the govt of their choice....look up at the bolded.....now you are talking about AFTER the invasion....which is it?.....

Both. If they didn't like Saddam, they could do something about it and didn't. Remember, American Patriots, though out numbered and out armed by the British Military, the biggest in the world at the time, put their lives on the line and became the "United States of America".
Once America declared independence, you had some who wanted an "American King" and some that wanted a Religious theocracy. Thank God, both of those sides failed.

We invaded Iraq and put religious zealots in power. I'm sure Bush didn't see any problem with that. He wanted to do that here. I'm sure that majority of Iraqi's believe that is a good thing.

Remember, the majority of Iranians thought the Ayatollah was a "good thing". But, you know what they say, "Be careful what you ask for, you might get it".

Now, the majority of Iranians want religion OUT of government. That's the entire basis of the current problems in Iran.

It's much easier for an educated population to throw off a religious government. Iraq is now poor and ignorant and theocratic. It may never recover.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Both. If they didn't like Saddam, they could do something about it and didn't. Remember, American Patriots, though out numbered and out armed by the British Military, the biggest in the world at the time, put their lives on the line and became the "United States of America".

what could they have done?.....this ass and his two pieces of shit spawn would have had no problems gunning down a whole bunch of people protesting against him....under the guise of ....they posed a threat to the security of the nation....or at the least they are thrown in prison never to be seen again....remember...the American Patriots had Arms and militias on their side....the Iraqis had very little of this AND did not know whom they could trust.....AND...you never answered my quasi question.....you said that they had the govt of their choice before all this nonsense happened.....i say no they did not....they had the govt Sadam allowed them to have.........

 

[garyd]

Um no we weren't out numbered by the Brits and the Brits were basically operating at the end of a logistical shoestring. The largest number of troops the Brits deployed during the Revolution was some where around 30k and they were strungout from one end of the country to the other.

 

[rdean]

Um no we weren't out numbered by the Brits and the Brits were basically operating at the end of a logistical shoestring. The largest number of troops the Brits deployed during the Revolution was some where around 30k and they were strungout from one end of the country to the other.

Historians have estimated that approximately 40–45% of the colonists actively supported the rebellion while 15–20% of the population of the thirteen colonies remained loyal to the British Crown. The remaining 35–45% attempted to remain neutral.[6]

At least 25,000 Loyalists fought on the side of the British. Thousands served in the Royal Navy. On land, Loyalist forces fought alongside the British in most battles in North America

By 1779, the number of British and German troops stationed in North America was over 60,000, and more than 20,000 black soldiers fought on the British side.

Though a few tribes were on friendly terms with the Americans, most Native Americans opposed the United States, since native lands were threatened by expanding American settlement. Approximately 13,000 warriors fought on the British side; the largest group, the Iroquois Confederacy, fielded about 1,500 men.

American Revolutionary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't know. There are tons of references attached at the end of this Article and many more links to a lot more info.

I'm pretty sure it was a lot harder than you conservatives think it was. Actually, I'm not even sure if most conservatives understand the difficulty of war. Perhaps that was why the south was slaughtered during the Civil War?