GG Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 You mean you're not confused by the "groundswell of anti-war sentiment" even though I got tired of cutting & pasting.
PastaJoe Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 I'm soooo confused. Which one is it?QUOTE(PastaJoe @ Mar 29 2007, 03:24 PM) A majority of Americans and Democrats don't want to just leave right now, they are mature enough to realize that it has to be a phased redeployment and want to put more resources towards training Iraqis, border control, and chasing al Queda in Al Anbar. So the Congress is already doing what the majority of Americans and Democrats want. QUOTE(PastaJoe @ Mar 29 2007, 02:24 PM) And your inability to be unable to recognize a groundswell of anti-war sentiment among most in the country shouldn't come as a shocker to anyone here as well. Now you attributing quotes to me I didn't make? Where did that 2nd one come from, I never wrote that. I structure my sentences better than that. Most people refer to it as the Iraq War, but in fact the war ended years ago, and the proper designation should be the Iraq Occupation. "Mission Accomplished" gave the mistaken message that the need for the large number of troops was over, and that we could bring the majority of troops home. That is what most people interpreted it to mean, and what the administration mistakenly thought was true.
DC Tom Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 Now you attributing quotes to me I didn't make? Where did that 2nd one come from, I never wrote that. I structure my sentences better than that. Most people refer to it as the Iraq War, but in fact the war ended years ago, and the proper designation should be the Iraq Occupation. "Mission Accomplished" gave the mistaken message that the need for the large number of troops was over, and that we could bring the majority of troops home. That is what most people interpreted it to mean, and what the administration mistakenly thought was true. He's right, GG. That one was Joey Ballless's. My bad too, sorry.
GG Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 He's right, GG. That one was Joey Ballless's. My bad too, sorry. I guess it's hard to keep track of all the Joe Pasta Balls
Joey Balls Posted March 30, 2007 Author Posted March 30, 2007 Jeezuz H Christ and belzeebub! I'm not Joe pasta, or molson export. But I'm pretty convinced Gekko, Toolbox Tommy and Potsie Derwood are all the same character, throw mezza meatball in there too. Dismiss the vote as some might (what with the pork and the riders and all that-as if the previous republican dominated congress never attempted such a thing goodness gracious no), scoff at the anti-war movement, or keep fighting for your neo-con world order. Won't make a bit of difference...you've already proven your irrelevence
DC Tom Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Jeezuz H Christ and belzeebub! I'm not Joe pasta, or molson export. You may as well be molson. But Joey Spaghetti is smarter, I'll give him that.
Joey Balls Posted March 30, 2007 Author Posted March 30, 2007 But Joey Spaghetti is smarter, I'll give him that. Oh probably TT, nothing would surprise me anymore. And this probably isn't saying much but he seems to have a leg up on you as well with his grasp of the US attorney scandal, something that seems to have flown over your noggin.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 What's in Room 101? "Your greatest fear..." Well, then...what's in Room 3.5? A fully regressed rat in a cage?
molson_golden2002 Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 2) So being in the Military means staying home with your family's. NICE JOB!! You are so brave with other people's lives. God, what a disgusting person you are
molson_golden2002 Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Yes, exactly, and us staying there 10 more years won't change a damn thing. Time to cut and run now. The BS argument that the whole region will blow up if we leave is garbage. Even Saudi Arabia is calling on us to leave now. They sound really afraid!
VABills Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 You are so brave with other people's lives. God, what a disgusting person you are And how's about me? The military isn't a welfare program so this kids can get three warms and a rack at night. They are getting trained, fed and paid to defend the people and interests of this country that the Commander in Chief deam important. You going to call me disgusting? Go ahead. I served, I got my pretty little medals. I've been in areas of unrest. It was my job, and what I got paid to do. What's disgusting is those folks who abandoned their posts, refused orders and endangered the lives of their fellow service members because they were cowards.
molson_golden2002 Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 1) Here's another thing I'm not getting. 2) Now "Mission Accomplished" is suddenly right??? Didn't we spend the past four years listening to everyone explain how much of a crock of sh-- that was? 3) Now it's suddenly become the left's mantra... 1) No one is surprised you don't "get" something. You are an incredible little piss-ant moron 2) No one is claiming mission accomplished, we are claiming that Iraqis are responsible for Iraq. Please site where liberals, leftist or whoever are claiming "mission accomplished." 3) The left's mantra??? How about a solid majority of Americans who want us out of there? How about American troops who defend America, not nation build in some place where it can't be done? How stupid are you?
erynthered Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 You are so brave with other people's lives. God, what a disgusting person you are God, you're an idiot. Look what you wrote retard.
molson_golden2002 Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 And how's about me? The military isn't a welfare program so this kids can get three warms and a rack at night. They are getting trained, fed and paid to defend the people and interests of this country that the Commander in Chief deam important. You going to call me disgusting? Go ahead. I served, I got my pretty little medals. I've been in areas of unrest. It was my job, and what I got paid to do. What's disgusting is those folks who abandoned their posts, refused orders and endangered the lives of their fellow service members because they were cowards. And the military isn't something that can capriciously used. I signed up because I had trust in the civilian leadership to use our lives responsibly. They are not being used that way now, IMO. To simply say, "Well, they signed up, that's it," isn't much of an argument to me
DC Tom Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 1) No one is surprised you don't "get" something. You are an incredible little piss-ant moron MUCH better than "look in the mirror". This is the type of idiot we need more of here. 2) No one is claiming mission accomplished, we are claiming that Iraqis are responsible for Iraq. Please site where liberals, leftist or whoever are claiming "mission accomplished." "Cite". And NOW you're saying the mission isn't accomplished...but we should leave anyway?
Johnny Coli Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 MUCH better than "look in the mirror". This is the type of idiot we need more of here."Cite". And NOW you're saying the mission isn't accomplished...but we should leave anyway? Semantics, really, as "the goal posts" as GG put it, are being moved by both sides. The loser in the whole "mission accomplished" photo op is really Bush and the Neocons. He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. The mission as he originally defined it (which was pretty vague to begin with) was unseating Saddam from power and finding WMDs, followed by democratizing Iraq. Saddam was removed from power and there weren't any WMDs, so yeah, that mission was kind of accomplished--if you really lower the bar. As for democratizing Iraq, that's a colossal failure. In fact, you could make the case that the NeoCons botching the occupation phase pretty much destroyed any chance for a secular, democratized Iraq. Iraq is now in a civil war and the US occupying force is bogged down in the middle of it. Personally, in my opinion (which I'm repeatedly told doesn't amount to much around here) there is no way the US military can affect any positive change in Iraq from this point forward, really. All the reasonable Iraqis are being executed or have left. All that are left are the ones who hate each other and us, or the ones that can't leave. The US military will be a convenient scapegoat for all of Iraq's ills until if and/or when we leave. Why prolong the inevitable? The next POTUS, Dem or Rep will undoubtedly redeploy the military out of Iraq. Why, you ask? Because no pro-war candidate will ever win the national election. So, why not start getting them out now? It's not like either the House or Senate plans call for a total abandonment of Iraq (despite what some in the GOP or here say). The US military won't get the orders to bug out on a friday and be gone by sunday afternoon. That's just an ignorant and false accusation to make. People don't like links on this board, but how many here have actually read the legislation? No where in that legislation does it call for abandoning the military. No where in that legislation does it call for stopping the flow of funds to the troops. The legislation calls for goals and benchmarks to be met, or the redeployment begins. What the hell is wrong with setting benchmarks? Why would Bush be against setting reasonable goals for the sovereign Iraqis to control their own country? Because Bush will never admit any mistakes, will never take the blame for anything, will never abandon Iraq because that's pretty much all he's got at this point. Iraq is his legacy. To leave Iraq and admit he fugged it up would be to admit his presidency is a failure. He's shown zero humility to this point, I don't see him showing any now. It's a shame that the US military is paying for that level of hubris.
Merovingian Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Has the United States Congress ever set a date certain for surrender before? Or is this a first? When you break this down it really is simple. The democrats know that they have to do nothing more then continue to demonize the war on terror and keep all of the attention there. It is like the classic shell game. They know that the war is unpopular, hell all wars are unpopular, this is nothing new. What is somewhat new is the brazen willingness to ignore our overall security in their blind effort to win more power. They all know that pulling out will be a disaster, they just figure that will always be able to be blamed on the ones who got us in there and they can just deal with whatever buildings are blown up, or cities for that matter when it happens. At least they will have their power. What I find most disturbing is that somewhere in a cave buried deep in the mountains of Pakistan, OBL is laughing his ass off at what is transpiring. Could this possibly have turned out any better for them? Soon we will announce the date of surrender in Iraq and then the democrats will find a way to force us into withdrawing from Afghanistan. Well one thing is for sure, Okinawa is going to be very crowded with all the troops redeploying there in order to better keep an eye on things.
PastaJoe Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 The democrats know that they have to do nothing more then continue to demonize the war on terror and keep all of the attention there. They're all for fighting the war on terrorism, what they're trying to bring to an end is the Iraq Occupation; two different issues. What I find most disturbing is that somewhere in a cave buried deep in the mountains of Pakistan, OBL is laughing his ass off at what is transpiring. Could this possibly have turned out any better for them? Yeah, 5 years later since Bush said he'd get OBL dead or alive, go figure. If only the Democrats hadn't prevented him from invading Afganistan and capturing him. Oh wait, they did allow it. How did that turn out?
Johnny Coli Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Has the United States Congress ever set a date certain for surrender before? Or is this a first? Whom, exactly, would they be surrendering to? What I find most disturbing is that somewhere in a cave buried deep in the mountains of Pakistan, OBL is laughing his ass off at what is transpiring. Could this possibly have turned out any better for them? Soon we will announce the date of surrender in Iraq and then the democrats will find a way to force us into withdrawing from Afghanistan. I find it very disturbing. No doubt OBL is laughing, because we've essentially ignored that he's in Pakistan and the bulk of our military is bogged down in a country he hasn't set foot in. Just an FYI, there are very few people who think the war in Afganistan is unjustified. Most would rather we redeploy the bulk of the military there, you know, to find the guy that was responsible for 9-11. Well one thing is for sure, Okinawa is going to be very crowded with all the troops redeploying there in order to better keep an eye on things. Okinawa? You do know that we have military bases throughout the Mid-East, right? You do know that redeployment doesn't remove any-and-all US presense in Iraq, right?
Joey Balls Posted March 30, 2007 Author Posted March 30, 2007 And how's about me? The military isn't a welfare program so this kids can get three warms and a rack at night. They are getting trained, fed and paid to defend the people and interests of this country that the Commander in Chief deam important. You going to call me disgusting? Go ahead. I served, I got my pretty little medals. I've been in areas of unrest. It was my job, and what I got paid to do. What's disgusting is those folks who abandoned their posts, refused orders and endangered the lives of their fellow service members because they were cowards. This is an interesting post. In the last sentence it spells out what might end this conflict before the next president or congress ever acts. Having been involved in many protests over the last four years against US involvement in Iraq, I have noticed the growing number of veterans groups at these affairs, including many from the recent conflict. Will we eventually lose the will to fight this war? Have we already? http://mediastudy.com/articles/av2-1-07.html
Recommended Posts