I'm not supporting Obama's actions in afghanastan

[ihopehefails]

How about the troops, are you supporting the troops?

Because you know you can't support the troops without supporting the mission.

And anything short of supporting the mission is treason.

That depends on what you mean by 'support the troops'. Do you mean spit on them and call them baby killers and turn my hatred of the war against them? Do you mean not supporting the purpose that they are being used? I don't plan on spitting on them and threatening to burn down recruitment centers like code PMS pink wants to but my support for the troops action is conditional on what they are being used for. Maybe I think firebombing a stronghold where they whackoff to porn is pointless and a waste of lives or perhaps Osama is planning his next attack from their so its worth it. What is the purpose of this? That is what I am asking?

 

[ihopehefails]

obama is brilliant taking on the terrorists in the mountains of afganistan.....he will succeed where the english the russians and every other country that tried to take afganistan failed....

Despite the fact that it has been repeated many times that the goal in Iraq or Afghanastan was never about conquest the left keep defining failure as the inability to conquer. How many times have we heard that Bush's failure was that he could not pacify the muslims in Iraq or retain complete control of afghanastan from the left? Its as if in their own minds the military is used as an instrument of conquest and foreign intervention (Kosovo).

Sucks we can't conquer them...

he will succeed where the english the russians and every other country that tried to take afganistan failed....

 

[ihopehefails]

Call it political but I don't see any reason to support his attack on a non important entity in that country. All we have been told so far is that it is a taliban stronghold which could mean a lot of things. Is it crucial for an overall plan of success? I think if we don't get a better reason for this action than just "its a taliban stronghold" then I wonder what motives were behind it.

How about the military commanders on the ground, are you supporting their actions in Afghanistan?

I haven't been given a reason to support them other than its a taliban stronghold.

 

[groupthink]

“If my sons did not want wars…there would be none”.
Gutle Schnaper…Wife of Mayer Amschel Rothschild

 

[JakeStarkey]

ihef writes, "Despite the fact that it has been repeated many times that the goal in Iraq or Afghanastan was never about conquest . . . ". You better tell the whacko reactionary wing just what it was about then. I remember the neo-cons wanting to create a stable ally in the Middle East to secure our oil supply, although they hid that behind the WMD argument.

It was obvious Bush had not won the war before the election, and now eighteen months later, our troops are coming home victorious later this summer. That is not happening on the neo-con watch.

 

[Rudy]

i remember the ANTI-war movement... during the bush years...

glad to see now the anti-war movment has changed its position.. i heard even code pink is calling on more bombing..and to begin the bombing of pakistan... for freedom.

yes we can... steal your money and expand the wars.

The -anti-war movement was for Iraq.

Code Pink is irrelevant in politics. The fact that you even bring them up means you are grasping at straws.

 

[ihopehefails]

ihef writes, "Despite the fact that it has been repeated many times that the goal in Iraq or Afghanastan was never about conquest . . . ". You better tell the whacko reactionary wing just what it was about then. I remember the neo-cons wanting to create a stable ally in the Middle East to secure our oil supply, although they hid that behind the WMD argument.

It was obvious Bush had not won the war before the election, and now eighteen months later, our troops are coming home victorious later this summer. That is not happening on the neo-con watch.

How many deaths were there before and after the surge?

 

[groupthink]

i remember the ANTI-war movement... during the bush years...

glad to see now the anti-war movment has changed its position.. i heard even code pink is calling on more bombing..and to begin the bombing of pakistan... for freedom.

yes we can... steal your money and expand the wars.

The -anti-war movement was for Iraq.

Code Pink is irrelevant in politics. The fact that you even bring them up means you are grasping at straws.

ohhhh ok... so the dems that were against the iraq war...were pro afghan war? wow..i didnt know that.


gooooo war!! so there never was an anti-war movment? see..here in california.... its pretty common to see obama stickers on cars... with "war is not the answer" or..."no more wars"

thats pretty anti-warish isnt it?

im confused.

 

[Colin]

Call it political but I don't see any reason to support his attack on a non important entity in that country. All we have been told so far is that it is a taliban stronghold which could mean a lot of things. Is it crucial for an overall plan of success? I think if we don't get a better reason for this action than just "its a taliban stronghold" then I wonder what motives were behind it.

How about the military commanders on the ground, are you supporting their actions in Afghanistan?

I haven't been given a reason to support them other than its a taliban stronghold.

The troops I know who are serving out there wouldn't want YOUR support, or others like you. They would recognise you for what you are.

 

[groupthink]

i do not support the troops... i feel sorry for them.

one of obamas advisors said it best..


"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy."
henry kissinger.....

 

[Rudy]

ihef writes, "Despite the fact that it has been repeated many times that the goal in Iraq or Afghanastan was never about conquest . . . ". You better tell the whacko reactionary wing just what it was about then. I remember the neo-cons wanting to create a stable ally in the Middle East to secure our oil supply, although they hid that behind the WMD argument.

It was obvious Bush had not won the war before the election, and now eighteen months later, our troops are coming home victorious later this summer. That is not happening on the neo-con watch.

How many deaths were there before and after the surge?

I'm pretty sure the fact that we started paying the terrorists to fight with us rather than against us has a lot to do with your equation.

 

[ihopehefails]

How about the military commanders on the ground, are you supporting their actions in Afghanistan?

I haven't been given a reason to support them other than its a taliban stronghold.

The troops I know who are serving out there wouldn't want YOUR support, or others like you. They would recognise you for what you are.

Someone who wants to ask what is the point of being here if you are not going to kill Osama Bin Laden? What is the point of risking my life for a stronghold that may or may not have any strategic interest? These are pretty good questions to ask.

 

[Rudy]

i remember the ANTI-war movement... during the bush years...

glad to see now the anti-war movment has changed its position.. i heard even code pink is calling on more bombing..and to begin the bombing of pakistan... for freedom.

yes we can... steal your money and expand the wars.

The -anti-war movement was for Iraq.

Code Pink is irrelevant in politics. The fact that you even bring them up means you are grasping at straws.

ohhhh ok... so the dems that were against the iraq war...were pro afghan war? wow..i didnt know that.


gooooo war!! so there never was an anti-war movment? see..here in california.... its pretty common to see obama stickers on cars... with "war is not the answer" or..."no more wars"

thats pretty anti-warish isnt it?

im confused.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble.. but hippies out in California do not represent the views of the politicians representing me in Washington DC.

Just like I know there are very few politicians on Capitol Hill who are like the every day teabagger. Quit making something out of nothing.

 

[ihopehefails]

ihef writes, "Despite the fact that it has been repeated many times that the goal in Iraq or Afghanastan was never about conquest . . . ". You better tell the whacko reactionary wing just what it was about then. I remember the neo-cons wanting to create a stable ally in the Middle East to secure our oil supply, although they hid that behind the WMD argument.

It was obvious Bush had not won the war before the election, and now eighteen months later, our troops are coming home victorious later this summer. That is not happening on the neo-con watch.

How many deaths were there before and after the surge?

I'm pretty sure the fact that we started paying the terrorists to fight with us rather than against us has a lot to do with your equation.

Lets assume that is true. What has Obama done that is so different from Bush's policy that you can say has caused a sudden turnaround? As far as I know nothing has changed. He is doing the same policy as before so how can you declare victory if Bush was fucking it up?

 

[ihopehefails]

The -anti-war movement was for Iraq.

Code Pink is irrelevant in politics. The fact that you even bring them up means you are grasping at straws.

ohhhh ok... so the dems that were against the iraq war...were pro afghan war? wow..i didnt know that.


gooooo war!! so there never was an anti-war movment? see..here in california.... its pretty common to see obama stickers on cars... with "war is not the answer" or..."no more wars"

thats pretty anti-warish isnt it?

im confused.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble.. but hippies out in California do not represent the views of the politicians representing me in Washington DC.

Just like I know there are very few politicians on Capitol Hill who are like the every day teabagger. Quit making something out of nothing.

You sure didn't mind all the rhetoric that helped get Obama in office and you sure didn't mind Bill Ayers being an associate of Obama at one time.

 

[Colin]

I haven't been given a reason to support them other than its a taliban stronghold.

The troops I know who are serving out there wouldn't want YOUR support, or others like you. They would recognise you for what you are.

Someone who wants to ask what is the point of being here if you are not going to kill Osama Bin Laden? What is the point of risking my life for a stronghold that may or may not have any strategic interest? These are pretty good questions to ask.

What the fuck would you know about risking your life! About as much as you seem to know about the situation in Afghanistan. Diddly squat!

 

[groupthink]

The -anti-war movement was for Iraq.

Code Pink is irrelevant in politics. The fact that you even bring them up means you are grasping at straws.

ohhhh ok... so the dems that were against the iraq war...were pro afghan war? wow..i didnt know that.


gooooo war!! so there never was an anti-war movment? see..here in california.... its pretty common to see obama stickers on cars... with "war is not the answer" or..."no more wars"

thats pretty anti-warish isnt it?

im confused.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble.. but hippies out in California do not represent the views of the politicians representing me in Washington DC.

Just like I know there are very few politicians on Capitol Hill who are like the every day teabagger. Quit making something out of nothing.

so there was no anti-war movment?

 

[RadiomanATL]

ohhhh ok... so the dems that were against the iraq war...were pro afghan war? wow..i didnt know that.


gooooo war!! so there never was an anti-war movment? see..here in california.... its pretty common to see obama stickers on cars... with "war is not the answer" or..."no more wars"

thats pretty anti-warish isnt it?

im confused.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble.. but hippies out in California do not represent the views of the politicians representing me in Washington DC.

Just like I know there are very few politicians on Capitol Hill who are like the every day teabagger. Quit making something out of nothing.

so there was no anti-war movment?

No. It was a conspiracy.

 

[groupthink]

The troops I know who are serving out there wouldn't want YOUR support, or others like you. They would recognise you for what you are.

Someone who wants to ask what is the point of being here if you are not going to kill Osama Bin Laden? What is the point of risking my life for a stronghold that may or may not have any strategic interest? These are pretty good questions to ask.

What the fuck would you know about risking your life! About as much as you seem to know about the situation in Afghanistan. Diddly squat!

1) leave family and wife and child behined
2) get on a plane and leave peacefull homeland
3) land 7 thousand miles away live,eat,breath and shit in DU infested afghanistan..
4) kill dirty brown people
5) step on landmine
6) leave family....wife...and child alone.

for freedom!!!!!! yeehaw!!!! superbowl!!! beer!!!

 

[Rudy]

I haven't been given a reason to support them other than its a taliban stronghold.

The troops I know who are serving out there wouldn't want YOUR support, or others like you. They would recognise you for what you are.

Someone who wants to ask what is the point of being here if you are not going to kill Osama Bin Laden? What is the point of risking my life for a stronghold that may or may not have any strategic interest? These are pretty good questions to ask.

Wow.... you're dumber than a bunch of retards playing chess in the dark.