Dems In Disarray Over Iraq

[maineman]

you said post 44 sums up how the terrorists feel about the Dems surrender plan. It says nothing about that in any way. you remain a buffoon.

 

[Diuretic]

Only after one side has won

Remember the terms are settled by both sides. And smart victors don't crush their opponents. The Romans knew that. But no matter because here it doesn't apply. The invasion was a success, the occupation is a failure. Time to leave.

 

[Diuretic]

Quote:Originally posted by maineman"

this post would make sense except for the fact that democrats do not advocate surrender in any way and except for the fact that post #44 has absolutely nothing to do with American democrats whatsoever....so basically, it doesn't make ANY sense.

congratulations RSR, you are a buffoon.

To which RSR retorted:

Only in your view

To which I add:

I wouldn't be too sure of that chief, here's a second opinion at no cost. You're a buffoon.

 

[red states rule]

Remember the terms are settled by both sides. And smart victors don't crush their opponents. The Romans knew that. But no matter because here it doesn't apply. The invasion was a success, the occupation is a failure. Time to leave.

and what happened to the Romans?

No war has ended until one side gave up

The Dems are trying win the war for the terrorists

 

[Diuretic]

and what happened to the Romans?

No war has ended until one side gave up

The Dems are trying win the war for the terrorists

How long has the US Empire been in existence? Fifty, sixty years? How long did the Roman Empire last?

"No war has ended until one side gave up". And this conflicts with my statement that all wars end in armistice in what way?

The Democratic Party can see the occupation of Iraq is an abject failure and they want to stop feeding people to the meat-grinder. You of course, with your slavish devotion to Bush can't deal with the fact that Iraq is the greatest foreign policy failure in US history and your fetish object, Bush, is responsible. Instead your mental blindness and slavish devotion to your fetish object drive you to insist that more and more people are presented to the maw of the meat-grinder. If you're so fucking keen on war then show some guts and enlist, instead of screaming like the chickenhawk you are. Grab your hat, make it a big one, you're going to have to put the white feathers somewhere.

 

[red states rule]

How long has the US Empire been in existence? Fifty, sixty years? How long did the Roman Empire last?

"No war has ended until one side gave up". And this conflicts with my statement that all wars end in armistice in what way?

The Democratic Party can see the occupation of Iraq is an abject failure and they want to stop feeding people to the meat-grinder. You of course, with your slavish devotion to Bush can't deal with the fact that Iraq is the greatest foreign policy failure in US history and your fetish object, Bush, is responsible. Instead your mental blindness and slavish devotion to your fetish object drive you to insist that more and more people are presented to the maw of the meat-grinder. If you're so fucking keen on war then show some guts and enlist, instead of screaming like the chickenhawk you are. Grab your hat, make it a big one, you're going to have to put the white feathers somewhere.

Last I checked the US has been around since 1776

Libs want the US to lose this war - so that is when the terrorists will win.

It was Redi who said the Dems should gain seat in Congress - another slip of the truth from White Flag Harry all he cares about is gaining more power - not on winning the war

 

[maineman]

Last I checked the US has been around since 1776

Libs want the US to lose this war - so that is when the terrorists will win.

It was Redi who said the Dems should gain seat in Congress - another slip of the truth from White Flag Harry all he cares about is gaining more power - not on winning the war

show me where any democrat has ever said that we want to LOSE this war.

I'll wait.

 

[red states rule]

show me where any democrat has ever said that we want to LOSE this war.

I'll wait.

The surrender date is all the proof you need

if you have the balls to accept the truth

which you don't

 

[maineman]

you need to look up the definition of the word "surrender" and start using it correctly..... which, unfortunately for you, would require that you refrain from using it in its current context.

 

[red states rule]

Telling the enemy when the US will leave is surrender

Dems care more about power and their party then their country and the troops

 

[maineman]

Telling the enemy when the US will leave is surrender

Dems care more about power and their party then their country and the troops

no..it is not.... go look up the definition of the word.

try again.....

and start trying to say something of substance and intelligence and please stop repeating those same old campaign slogans. really...you are so boringly predictable

 

[red states rule]

no..it is not.... go look up the definition of the word.

try again.....

and start trying to say something of substance and intelligence and please stop repeating those same old campaign slogans. really...you are so boringly predictable

I am repeating the truth

You keep repeating the Dem talking points

 

[maineman]

if you do not even know the correct definition of the word surrender, how can you use it incorrectly in a sentence and have that sentence be truthful?

 

[red states rule]

if you do not even know the correct definition of the word surrender, how can you use it incorrectly in a sentence and have that sentence be truthful?

Ah, the Dems did not raise taxes defense again

 

[maineman]

you are not making any sense.... but that is not really news, is it?

 

[red states rule]

you are not making any sense.... but that is not really news, is it?

When nailed with what Dems say and do, you deny. Then you demand proof. When proof is presented you go back to den=y and say that is not reeally what they did

You tried to the same when you spen one hour lying how Dems did not vote to raise taxes on every wage earners (even retired couples)

 

[maineman]

When nailed with what Dems say and do, you deny. Then you demand proof. When proof is presented you go back to den=y and say that is not reeally what they did

You tried to the same when you spen one hour lying how Dems did not vote to raise taxes on every wage earners (even retired couples)

what proof are we talking about in this discussion?

 

[red states rule]

what proof are we talking about in this discussion?

Try the Dems surrender date in the bill

 

[maineman]

Try the Dems surrender date in the bill

again.... no one is surrendering anything to anyone. When we leave, we will turn over our facilities and encampments and assets to the legitimate Iraq government. THat is not surrender at all.

 

[Superlative]

again.... no one is surrendering anything to anyone. When we leave, we will turn over our facilities and encampments and assets to the legitimate Iraq government. THat is not surrender at all.

And dont worry RSSR, any legitimate Iraqi government will be completely controlled with US interest in mind. We will be running the region when we leave.