How Much You Wanna Bet We Put The Amount Of Troops Back In Iraq We Should've Left There?

[JakeStarkey]

Calm yourself, child-in-an-old-man's-body...

I counterpointed your idiotic remarks about Pubs and warfare quite effectively...

Always happy to *****-slap an America-basher like you...

Stop-by for another smack-down, whenever you like...

Always happy to help...

Next contestant, please...

I'm leaning toward very stupid..

Kondor3 can make good comments on occassion, but right now he is a very stupid troll.

 

[Kondor3]

No, Kondor3, you don't get to deflect.

You were hoisted on your petard.

GOP presidents have indeed started wars. The greatest one, the Civil War, killed more Americans than all the other wars and was guided by Lincoln.

All our recent wars were started by the GOP. And note the Republicans and Democrats were happily joined in together.

Conclusion: the OP is off balance. Second Conclusion: Kondor3 is off balance as well.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

The challenge in the original post in that sequence was the pretense that Democrats were amateurs compared to Republicans, when it came to warfare.

I countered with WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and the Democratic Presidents who initiated or escalated and expanded them.

I never held that Republicans did not start their share of wars.

I never held that Republicans did not start all of our most recent wars.

Such things are conceded and understood in advance - nolo contendere.

I merely countered that Democrats have been responsible for or presided over most of the vast and most costly warfare of the 20th century.

Given that these are facts...consequently, no deflection was necessary, nor was any attempted.

As if oftentimes the case, you came in late on a conversation, misunderstood, and decided to make a pain in the ass out of yourself, over nothing at all.

Which is about as 'off-balance' as one can get, in these environs.

Next contestant, please.

 

[Kondor3]

Calm yourself, child-in-an-old-man's-body...

I counterpointed your idiotic remarks about Pubs and warfare quite effectively...

Always happy to *****-slap an America-basher like you...

Stop-by for another smack-down, whenever you like...

Always happy to help...

Next contestant, please...

I'm leaning toward very stupid..

And you, Achmed, can go back to offering your backside to your Militant Muslim handlers.

 

[Kondor3]

Calm yourself, child-in-an-old-man's-body...

I counterpointed your idiotic remarks about Pubs and warfare quite effectively...

Always happy to *****-slap an America-basher like you...

Stop-by for another smack-down, whenever you like...

Always happy to help...

Next contestant, please...

I'm leaning toward very stupid..

Kondor3 can make good comments on occassion, but right now he is a very stupid troll.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

 

[georgephillip]

And you, Achmed, can go back to offering your backside to your Militant Muslim handlers.

Swallowed your quota of corporate kosher cum today, Sissy?

 

[Kondor3]

And you, Achmed, can go back to offering your backside to your Militant Muslim handlers.

Swallowed your quota of corporate kosher cum today, Sissy?

Take it to the Flame Zone, Achmed... take it to the Flame Zone.

 

[georgephillip]

Take it to the Flame Zone, Achmed... take it to the Flame Zone.

Whatever, Troll.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, Kondor3, you don't get to deflect.

You were hoisted on your petard.

GOP presidents have indeed started wars. The greatest one, the Civil War, killed more Americans than all the other wars and was guided by Lincoln.

All our recent wars were started by the GOP. And note the Republicans and Democrats were happily joined in together.

Conclusion: the OP is off balance. Second Conclusion: Kondor3 is off balance as well.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

The challenge in the original post in that sequence was the pretense that Democrats were amateurs compared to Republicans, when it came to warfare.

I countered with WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and the Democratic Presidents who initiated or escalated and expanded them.

I never held that Republicans did not start their share of wars.

I never held that Republicans did not start all of our most recent wars.

Such things are conceded and understood in advance - nolo contendere.

I merely countered that Democrats have been responsible for or presided over most of the vast and most costly warfare of the 20th century.

Given that these are facts...consequently, no deflection was necessary, nor was any attempted.

As if oftentimes the case, you came in late on a conversation, misunderstood, and decided to make a pain in the ass out of yourself, over nothing at all.

Which is about as 'off-balance' as one can get, in these environs.

Next contestant, please.

You were defeated, Kondor 3. You deflection is noted and cast aside. Trot along.

 

[Kondor3]

No, Kondor3, you don't get to deflect.

You were hoisted on your petard.

GOP presidents have indeed started wars. The greatest one, the Civil War, killed more Americans than all the other wars and was guided by Lincoln.

All our recent wars were started by the GOP. And note the Republicans and Democrats were happily joined in together.

Conclusion: the OP is off balance. Second Conclusion: Kondor3 is off balance as well.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

The challenge in the original post in that sequence was the pretense that Democrats were amateurs compared to Republicans, when it came to warfare.

I countered with WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and the Democratic Presidents who initiated or escalated and expanded them.

I never held that Republicans did not start their share of wars.

I never held that Republicans did not start all of our most recent wars.

Such things are conceded and understood in advance - nolo contendere.

I merely countered that Democrats have been responsible for or presided over most of the vast and most costly warfare of the 20th century.

Given that these are facts...consequently, no deflection was necessary, nor was any attempted.

As if oftentimes the case, you came in late on a conversation, misunderstood, and decided to make a pain in the ass out of yourself, over nothing at all.

Which is about as 'off-balance' as one can get, in these environs.

Next contestant, please.

You were defeated, Kondor 3. You deflection is noted and cast aside. Trot along.

You declaring it thus does not render it thus, lightweight.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, Kondor3, you don't get to deflect.

You were hoisted on your petard.

GOP presidents have indeed started wars. The greatest one, the Civil War, killed more Americans than all the other wars and was guided by Lincoln.

All our recent wars were started by the GOP. And note the Republicans and Democrats were happily joined in together.

Conclusion: the OP is off balance. Second Conclusion: Kondor3 is off balance as well.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

The challenge in the original post in that sequence was the pretense that Democrats were amateurs compared to Republicans, when it came to warfare.

I countered with WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and the Democratic Presidents who initiated or escalated and expanded them.

I never held that Republicans did not start their share of wars.

I never held that Republicans did not start all of our most recent wars.

Such things are conceded and understood in advance - nolo contendere.

I merely countered that Democrats have been responsible for or presided over most of the vast and most costly warfare of the 20th century.

Given that these are facts...consequently, no deflection was necessary, nor was any attempted.

As if oftentimes the case, you came in late on a conversation, misunderstood, and decided to make a pain in the ass out of yourself, over nothing at all.

Which is about as 'off-balance' as one can get, in these environs.

Next contestant, please.

You were defeated, Kondor 3. You deflection is noted and cast aside. Trot along.

You declaring it thus does not render it thus, lightweight.

Just as I thought. Says the lightweight, Kondor3, who was easily defeated. Your immoral stubbornness is no concern of mine.

 

[Kondor3]

No, Kondor3, you don't get to deflect.

You were hoisted on your petard.

GOP presidents have indeed started wars. The greatest one, the Civil War, killed more Americans than all the other wars and was guided by Lincoln.

All our recent wars were started by the GOP. And note the Republicans and Democrats were happily joined in together.

Conclusion: the OP is off balance. Second Conclusion: Kondor3 is off balance as well.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

The challenge in the original post in that sequence was the pretense that Democrats were amateurs compared to Republicans, when it came to warfare.

I countered with WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and the Democratic Presidents who initiated or escalated and expanded them.

I never held that Republicans did not start their share of wars.

I never held that Republicans did not start all of our most recent wars.

Such things are conceded and understood in advance - nolo contendere.

I merely countered that Democrats have been responsible for or presided over most of the vast and most costly warfare of the 20th century.

Given that these are facts...consequently, no deflection was necessary, nor was any attempted.

As if oftentimes the case, you came in late on a conversation, misunderstood, and decided to make a pain in the ass out of yourself, over nothing at all.

Which is about as 'off-balance' as one can get, in these environs.

Next contestant, please.

You were defeated, Kondor 3. You deflection is noted and cast aside. Trot along.

You declaring it thus does not render it thus, lightweight.

Just as I thought. Says the lightweight, Kondor3, who was easily defeated. Your immoral stubbornness is no concern of mine.

Back under your rock, Jakey.. I don't feel like dealing with child-minds in decrepit old bodies right now... go dry-hump somebody else's leg tonight.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, Kondor3, you don't get to deflect.

You were hoisted on your petard.

GOP presidents have indeed started wars. The greatest one, the Civil War, killed more Americans than all the other wars and was guided by Lincoln.

All our recent wars were started by the GOP. And note the Republicans and Democrats were happily joined in together.

Conclusion: the OP is off balance. Second Conclusion: Kondor3 is off balance as well.

Go back to sleep, Jake.

The challenge in the original post in that sequence was the pretense that Democrats were amateurs compared to Republicans, when it came to warfare.

I countered with WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and the Democratic Presidents who initiated or escalated and expanded them.

I never held that Republicans did not start their share of wars.

I never held that Republicans did not start all of our most recent wars.

Such things are conceded and understood in advance - nolo contendere.

I merely countered that Democrats have been responsible for or presided over most of the vast and most costly warfare of the 20th century.

Given that these are facts...consequently, no deflection was necessary, nor was any attempted.

As if oftentimes the case, you came in late on a conversation, misunderstood, and decided to make a pain in the ass out of yourself, over nothing at all.

Which is about as 'off-balance' as one can get, in these environs.

Next contestant, please.

You were defeated, Kondor 3. You deflection is noted and cast aside. Trot along.

You declaring it thus does not render it thus, lightweight.

Just as I thought. Says the lightweight, Kondor3, who was easily defeated. Your immoral stubbornness is no concern of mine.

Back under your rock, Jakey.. I don't feel like dealing with child-minds in decrepit old bodies right now... go dry-hump somebody else's leg tonight.

Now the language comes, as it always does for the losers. Your are just adorable.

You remind me of a four year old in the corner, red eyed and stamping his little feet. You are acting like Yurt.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Obama was correct to refuse to bailout Maliki with air strikes when he treated Sunnis so poorly.

Obama will not send US ground troops into Iraq because it will never be necessary.

Peshmerga will participate in the upcoming liberation of Mosul.

.
Barzani: Peshmerga to participate in Mosul operation

Erbil: President of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Masoud Barzani confirmed that Peshmerga forces will participate in the liberation of Mosul in an interview with Voice of America’s (VOA) Kurdish service. Barzani told VOA as long as the Islamic State (IS) is in Mosul, it remains a threat to the Kurdistan Region. “The liberation of Mosul is in the interest of Kurdistan’s people,” Barzani said. IS militants took over Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, in June 2014 as part of a blitz offensive in the country’s northwest. “We have no conditions for participating in the liberation of Mosul, and we are ready to confront IS fighters wherever they are, according to our capabilities,” Barzani said. Regional and coalition partners have participated to varying degrees in the fight against IS inside both Iraq and Syria…nrttv.com

Iraqi Kurdistan News in brief April 22 2015

The liberation of Mosul within the next twelve months with no dead American troops required will create a major dilemma for Right Wingers who have been hell bent driven to believe and perhaps hoping that Daesh terrorist scum would take over all of Iraq so they could falsely blame 'losing Iraq' on Obama two national elections in a row.

An ISIS defeat in Iraq and a continual moderating of Iran and their compliance with the IAEA the first year of the deal will certainly mess up right winger's foreign policy political agenda won't it?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/07/18/dempsey-baghdad-tour-ramadi-offensive-gains-momentum/30342359/Joint Chiefs chairman More U.S. troops not needed in Iraq

Thare still no U.S. Combat troops fighting on the ground and top military leaders say no need for them more proof EconChick knows nothing about Iraq:

. Joint Chiefs chairman: More U.S. troops not needed in Iraq. Jim Michaels, USA TODAY16 hours ago. Copyright Gannett 2015.

 

[TheOldSchool]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/07/18/dempsey-baghdad-tour-ramadi-offensive-gains-momentum/30342359/Joint Chiefs chairman More U.S. troops not needed in Iraq

Thare still no U.S. Combat troops fighting on the ground and top military leaders say no need for them more proof EconChick knows nothing about Iraq:

. Joint Chiefs chairman: More U.S. troops not needed in Iraq. Jim Michaels, USA TODAY16 hours ago. Copyright Gannett 2015.

SassyIrishLass

 

[francoHFW]

OP- Only if a moron GOP clown gets elected...

 

[whutTHEYsay]

When the Daesh terrorist scum start.
killing themselves as the following report advise, there definitely is no need for US troops to get involved in the fighting on the ground.


"33 ISIS militants killed in internal fight west and east of Mosul, says Kurdish official
By Abdelhak Mamoun - Jul 21, 2015"

33 ISIS militants killed in internal fight west and east of Mosul says Kurdish official - Iraqi News