Unnacceptable?

Superlative

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
109
Points
48
April 10th.

"Congress’s failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines, and others could see their loved ones headed back to the war sooner than they need to,” That scenario is “unacceptable,” Bush said, noting he believes the American people would agree with him.


April 11th.

Tours of duty for members of the U.S. Army will be extended from 12 months to 15 months effective immediately, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced Wednesday.

"What we're trying to do here is provide some long-term predictability to our soldiers and their families," Gates told reporters at the Pentagon.
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
I am sure the troops are thankful for the "support" Dems are giving them

Iraq war is 'lost': US Democrat leader

The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.
"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid told journalists.

Reid said he had delivered the same message to US President George W. Bush on Wednesday, when the US president met with senior lawmakers to discuss how to end a standoff over an emergency war funding bill.

"I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear ... I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically."

Congress is seeking to tie funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to a timetable to withdraw US troops from Iraq next year, but Bush has vowed to veto any such bill and no breakthrough was reported from the White House talks.

Bush on Thursday was addressing an Ohio town hall meeting and defending the war on terror launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.


"It is the most solemn duty of our country, is to protect our country from harm," Bush told the invited audience in Tipp, Ohio.

"A lesson learned was that -- at least in my opinion -- that in order to protect us, we must aggressively pursue the enemy and defeat them elsewhere so that we do not have to face them here."

But Reid drew a parallel with former US president Lyndon Johnson who decided to deploy more troops in Vietnam some 40 years ago when 24,000 US troops had already been killed.

"Johnson did not want a war loss on his watch, so he surged in Vietnam. After the surge was over, we added 34,000 to the 24,000 who died in Vietnam," Reid said.

The comments came a day after bombers killed more than 200 people in a slew of car bombings in Baghdad, dealing a savage blow to the US security plan which aims to deploy an extra 30,000 troops in the country to quell sectarian unrest.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates fly into Iraq Thursday on an unannounced visit for talks with top US military commanders there.

He met with General David Petraeus, chief of coalition forces in Iraq, his deputy Lieutenant Colonel Ray Odierno and Admiral William Fallon, chief of US forces in the Middle East.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=
 
OP
Superlative

Superlative

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
109
Points
48
"I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear ... I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically."

Bush on Thursday was addressing an Ohio town hall meeting and defending the war on terror launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"It is the most solemn duty of our country, is to protect our country from harm," Bush told the invited audience in Tipp, Ohio.

"A lesson learned was that -- at least in my opinion -- that in order to protect us, we must aggressively pursue the enemy and defeat them elsewhere so that we do not have to face them here."
So lets look at this, A democrat says lets use diplomacy, and Bush employs the same polarising talking points he has since the beginning of the invasion.

Bush hasn't changed his stance, and his stance is proving to be less and less fruitful. (which means nothing is changing)

Now what id like from you (RSR) is your opinion, in your own words regarding what you think should/could be done.

Should the US carry on and wait patiently for the surge to show progress?

Or should they continue trying to address the issues of sectarian violence and attempt to reach some kind middle ground with the Iraqi people?
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
The surge is showing signs of progress. I have posted them on several threads

So far, the libs opn this board have failed to answer a common sense question

How do you use diplomacy with people whose only goal is to kill you?
 
OP
Superlative

Superlative

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
109
Points
48
How do you use diplomacy with people whose only goal is to kill you?
Please allow me the room to demonstrate.

Your attention would be appreciated.


Lets say you were a little bit, for lack of better words, aggressive, and territorial and proud.

And you didnt really like me much, (no big stretch)

One day.

I kick in the door to your house and burst in with a very big gun and pointed it in your face,

and said very loudly:

"Dont Fuckin MOVE, Im here to free you from your landlord!!"

The next day I blow up your neighbours house,(accidentally of course)

The next day I stood in your living room

And said:

"please, carry on living, this wont take long I promise."

the next day I stood in your kitchen.

I told my friends to go accross the street and search the guys house.

They dragged him into the street and put a black hood over his head and took him away.

The next day I stood in your bedroom.

And said:

"please, continue carrying on living, this wont take long I promise."

Take away the electricity, and water once in a while and repeat this for a few years.

What would you do?

How would you feel?


Would you maybe wish harm on the man with the very big gun occupying your house?

The man who helps sometimes, while his friends kill others?

What would you do?

Would you want him to leave? ?


Would you go out and meet with your friends and say

"This is bullshit, Im a prisoner in my own home."

What would you do?

What if one of your friends said,

"They will never leave. lets kill them."

Some of your friends might say:

"No, we cannot."

Some might say:

"They killed my son."

"They killed my father."

"I want to kill them."


What would you do?


This is what the general population of Iraq feels not the people who already distrusted and hated America.

I realize America isnt in anyones living room, but they are on EVERY streetcorner in Baghdad.

What would you do?

I might fight back. But thats just me.

What would you do?
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
Too many words placed in a chronological order to make a valid point leave RSR confused.
I posted the appropriate response to his child like post

Why are you here Paul? No pro terrorists rally to attend?

Oh well, go burn a solider in effigy like your fellow Bush haters did - help let out that built up hate you have inside

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0anRyWT9nQg[/ame]
 
OP
Superlative

Superlative

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
109
Points
48
I posted the appropriate response to his child like post

Why are you here Paul? No pro terrorists rally to attend?

Oh well, go burn a solider in effigy like your fellow Bush haters did - help let out that built up hate you have inside

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0anRyWT9nQg
Yer so ridiculous.


How about an actual response, in your own words to what it would be like to have someone invade your town?

Not even Iraq related, just what would you do if a foreign country took over your town?

NOT A CUT AND POST.

your honest response in what you personally would do if there were armed forces in the streets of your neighborhood.

can you do that?
 

Paul Revere

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
374
Reaction score
25
Points
16
Location
Fayetteville, PA.
I posted the appropriate response to his child like post

Why are you here Paul? No pro terrorists rally to attend?

Oh well, go burn a solider in effigy
What's a "solider"?

Why should I waste my time burning anything?

Who are you to give me orders?

I know you weren't expecting there to be any math today, but here is a math equation about you.

What to you get when you add a complete asshole and a fucking asshole?




Use the formula x + y = z







?????????????????????????????????????? Still Waiting!










?????????????????????????????????????? Still Waiting!




















Answer:
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
Paul the troll and more of his wits of wisdom

Maybe one day he will actually contribute something
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
Well, isn't this just grand? You have to know this: in remote caves, training camps, and safe houses all over the world, champagne corks are popp -- well, not champage -- jugs of goat's milk are popping as terrorists toast a job well done.

Al-Qaeda and likeminded murderous, infidel-hating zealots worldwide are now, officially, just one step away from total victory. America's armed forces -- once the mightiest, the most courageous, and victorious fighting machine in the world -- have been defeated.

The admission of US defeat in the war on terror was issued by Senate Majority Leader "Benedict Arnold" Harry Reid, speaking on behalf of the formerly great people of the United States. The Nevada Democrat announced to his countrymen -- and to the terrorists: "This war is lost, and the surge is not accomplishing anything." He left the door open for de-funding the remaining troops in Iraq who are still, stubbornly, fighting a losing effort.

No reaction yet from terror camps, but Al-Qaeda leaders could soon appear with Dingy Harry in a joint video statement, to denounce the American effort to defend itself and formally declare victory. The terms of surrender are still unclear, but many experts predict new terrorist activity inside the US -- now that the Iraqi theater has been declared lost by Harry Reid and the Democrats.

Now, the one remaining obstacle to complete victory is the capitulation of President Bush. But Democrats -- who have fought his Administration since hostilities began in earnest on 9/11 -- have pledged to exact the president's submission shortly.

From the war front, this is your correspondent, Rush Limbaugh, reporting. As-salam aleikum, hala hala... whatever.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...01.member.html
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
HA, and I left alot out just to make it easier to understand.
Give 'Em Surrender Harry Finds His Tet Offensive
By Scott Sultzer

We now have two "Harry" bookends to the current historical period. At one end is Harry Truman, who led us through to victory in World War II and stood up to communist aggression into the Korean Conflict. That Harry had a nickname. It was "Give 'Em Hell" Harry.


And now, at the opposite end of the spectrum in time and substance, we have "Give 'Em Surrender" Harry, the Senate Majority leader.

Give 'Em Surrender Harry just declared our counterinsurgency failed and the war lost. In making this lover's embrace of defeat, Give ‘Em Surrender Harry cited as his evidence of the surge's failure a series of 4 car bombs, 3 of them suicide bombs, that occurred in Baghdad Wednesday and for which Al Qaeda in Iraq claimed responsibility. It's Give ‘Em Surrender Harry's version of the Tet Offensive.

For those who might not know, Tet was the defining event of the Vietnam War. It was a mass offensive by 84,000 North Vietnamese Army (NVA) soldiers and Viet Cong. And it was a total military failure. Within thirty days of its start, the U.S. had killed 50,000, completely decimating the Viet Cong and had taken a sizable chunk out of the NVA. U.S. losses were 1,100 soldiers. For the first time, television brought home the carnage suffered by our troops. The American casualties shocked the press who, led by Walter Cronkite, portrayed Tet as a North Vietnamese victory and the Vietnam War as unwinnable. Our withdrawal from Vietnam became inevitable.

Give ‘Em Surrender Harry's defining event is not quite as large as Tet, of course. Give ‘Em Surrender Harry just declared that the United States' new strategy in Iraq, the surge, and indeed our entire nation, has been defeated in Iraq by four members of al Qaeda.

Let that sink in for a moment.

The foe we face in radical Islam is, though not a nation state, every bit as much an existential threat to us and Western Civilization as Nazi Germany. We are one dirty bomb on Wall Street away from a recession or possibly even a depression. We are one nuclear explosion in a port city away from much, much worse. As Give 'Em Hell Harry's predecessor, FDR told the nation on December 9, 1941 -

"the United States can accept no result save victory, final and complete," against such an existential foe, else we would be living in a world without "security for any nation-or any individual . . ."
Give 'Em Surrender Harry apparently missed that speech on American values and resolve.

Though the threat we face may be dire, Give 'Em Surrender Harry is declaring our defeat in a Tet Offensive that saw no U.S. casualties. To date, our soldiers lost in Iraq number 3,315. Each is a tragedy, and as a former soldier and the father of soldiers, I deeply appreciate and grieve for each one. I am in no way belittling their loss when I point out, for the benefit of Give 'Em Surrender Harry, that 3,315 killed in Iraq is 3% of the losses we sustained in WWI to defeat German aggression; it is 1% of what we sustained defeating the Nazis in WWII; it is 6% of what we sustained in destroying the North Korean Army and driving back the Chinese hordes in the Korean Conflict; and, it is 6% of what we sustained in Vietnam before we pulled out.

And, just so you know, the U.S. has never lost an engagement in Iraq or Afghanistan involving a platoon size element or larger of U.S. soldiers. A platoon is about thirty men. Do you understand how significant that is? And those platoons have sent countless jihadis to meet Allah.

With that track record, how can we possibly lose to Islamic extremists in Iraq or Afghanistan - or anywhere else in the world for that matter? Well, that is unless we are forced to embrace defeat predicated upon Give 'Em Surrender Harry's Tet Offensive of 4 al Qaeda suicide bombers.

Do you think Give 'Em Surrender Harry really means it when he says the surge has failed and our nation has lost in Iraq? Or is it just Give Em Surrender Harry who has decided that he wants us to lose, putting his quest for raw power above the horrid ramifications for our national security and our foreign policy (who will ever again ally with us against a determined opponent?) if we leave Iraq before a democracy of Shia, Kurd and Sunni is functioning and secure there? It is cowardice, cynicism and hypocrisy writ on a grand scale.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/give_em_surrender_harry_finds.html
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
The surge is showing signs of progress. I have posted them on several threads
So far, the libs opn this board have failed to answer a common sense question

How do you use diplomacy with people whose only goal is to kill you?
would that be the mythical "60% decrease in American casualties" spam?

or the "month old press release" spam?
 

Rosotar

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2007
Messages
422
Reaction score
45
Points
16
Location
New Mexico
The surge is showing signs of progress. I have posted them on several threads?
No,

It's not working any more than anything else that's been tried in the past four years has worked.

How do you use diplomacy with people whose only goal is to kill you?
Who told you that their only goal was to kill you.

It's not that simple RSR.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top