idrankwhat 0 #26 January 29, 2007 QuoteAgreed.... but you speak like it's in the past but it is far from over even there yet. Ooops. You're right! I was using the past tense. It will be back on the front page of our propaganda papers in a couple of months. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #27 January 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteWe don't need a set timeline, we need a set of goals and milestones to accomplish, yeah, and what are these goals exactly?? Quotewell the only things that would be a waste would be to pull out now before we win What do you mean by "win"???? It's an occupation during an insurgency! How TF do you "win" an occupation?? You don't win an occupation, you endure it, until you finally decide to leave. Nice talking points"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #28 January 29, 2007 that's why I posted them. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #29 January 29, 2007 (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #30 January 29, 2007 QuoteI also hear everyone talking about "wasting" lives, or "sacrificing" more soldiers, well the only things that would be a waste would be to pull out now before we win leaving those deaths unanswered, if we come out victorious those deaths were anything but in vane, no soldier ever dies for nothing but it is very disrespectful to the dead to give up on the fght they gave their lives for. Look back at Somolia, we lose 18 men and Clinton tucks his dick between his legs and runs, all the Rangers over there were begging to stay and finish the fight, but the politician wanted to play to the favor of the public. And that's exactly what's happening now, the Dems. want to make the voters happy so they can win in the next election and the Republican's want to still find a way out, but ensure victory along the way. OK then... how about this.. lets have a vote in the military about who wants to stay in Iraq.. and who wants to go home..... Those who want to stay indefinitely to achieve victory get to stay and fight the evil doers... and those of you who wish to exist in a perpetual war can do so. Those who want to go... we can use them in Afghanistan to finish the fucking job that we started out to do...where the majority of people actually want us to be.. to help them get over 30 years of war they have had to live in. We finish that war.. we have a stable democracy in the middle east and our people can come home victors without having to stand in between a few million fucknuts who want to kill each other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #31 January 29, 2007 Personally, I wouldn't want to be an USA soldier in Iraq when they begin to downsize the USA military force. steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #32 January 29, 2007 I do hope they give our lads the 'heads up' before starting to pull yours out, too...... it might just slip their minds. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #33 January 29, 2007 QuoteOne fact seems to debunk your theory here. If still being in Iraq in 08 is a problem for the Dems and and win for the R's then the Dems should vote to pull funding and get out now. If they have done the correct thing they will look like heros buy elections time. What do you think? That would be better than the opposite, however, there wouldn´t be any guarantee that troops would be completely out by 2008. If not they would still be in the same position. But even if they got the troops out they would be seen by many as anti-patriotic for giving up a possible victory in a war (Rep´s public relationship department would see too that). But the biggest threat would be if there is another terrorist attack on U.S soil. and there will be, the matter is when. The reps will blame the terrorist attack on those who didn´t support the war on terror (again the reps public relations department will see to that). So IMO the best is not move, it is like the chess term "zugzwang" when any move you make will favour the opponent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #34 January 29, 2007 QuoteI don't believe the situation is loose-loose for the democrats. If they win the election and if there is still a war in Iraq, then the democrats finally have an opportunity to stop talking and start acting. However, with the amount of talk they have done, if they don't manage to make the situation better then it will be a large loss because people will believe that the democrats are all talk and no action (or at least no better action than the republicans) which the republicans are already trying to present them as. As i said before there is not a good solution to this mess, only a lesser of two evils. But whoever doesn´t have to make the choice will bash the opponent under the pretence that they could have done better. Notice that i am only talking about the political aspect of this war, not the ethical one. If it was up to me i would pull the trops right now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #35 January 29, 2007 QuoteIMO, of course she wants the war to be over before the 08 elections just in case she wins! Why, because she is smart enough to know that she, as president, could not pull troops if the job is not done either because ot the danger it would expose this country to.! Thoughts? I'm sure she's just saying this because it's easier than proposing a better solution, but that doesn't get around the validity of her comment, even if it's not why she said it. Bush got us into this mess, and morally, it should be his responsibility to get us out of it. Realistically, he doesn't have any great options in front of him. Realistically, I can't see him showing any more concern for his successors on this subject than he does our future populace with regard to the deficit and environment. Fuck the future, it's all about now. That's what I see his attitude as being, across a variety of subjects. And I would characterize myself as more of an independent than democrat, but I don't think we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. (Yes, I know you said "most") Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #36 January 29, 2007 Inheriting shite from the previous administration is a constant in politics... You can live with it for a while, blaming the last lot, but eventually you have to actually do something about it. So it's in the very best interest of the currently benched team to ensure that the fielded team sort as much of their shit out as possible before hand over day..... and that's what she is doing - nothing new here.... except the size of the toilet!! (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #37 January 29, 2007 I don't blame her! Nobody wants to clean up anyone else's mess. However, she sure as hell doesn't want it ended by, oh, October, 2008. It would make the Republicans look too good. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #38 January 29, 2007 QuoteI don't blame her! Nobody wants to clean up anyone else's mess. So why should the rest of the world have to clean up our mess in the middle east?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #39 January 29, 2007 OK then... how about this.. lets have a vote in the military about who wants to stay in Iraq.. and who wants to go home..... Those who want to stay indefinitely to achieve victory get to stay and fight the evil doers... and those of you who wish to exist in a perpetual war can do so. Quote It cracks me up that I took the time to write a well thought out post that doesn't just complain about a situation it offers up a fairly logical solution and the only thing people on the other side of the fence can do is make emotionally driven sarcastic comments rather than offering up an alternative solution. come on Amazon, a vote in the military, your post was nothing more than a shot at me. Don't you have anything better to do with your time. and honestly if they did take a vote I think you'd be surprised at how many are willing to stay.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #40 January 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteI don't blame her! Nobody wants to clean up anyone else's mess. So why should the rest of the world have to clean up our mess in the middle east? It's a different question, along the lines of "Why should we have to clean up anyone else's mess" that the hated isolationists ask all the time? I'd prefer to limit this inquiry to the presidential aspects, instead of a discussion of UN level ramifications. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #41 January 29, 2007 Quotecome on Amazon, a vote in the military, your post was nothing more than a shot at me. Don't you have anything better to do with your time. and honestly if they did take a vote I think you'd be surprised at how many are willing to stay. No its a shot at ALL of thosew who support an ill concieved and poorly thought out war... who will only feel victory is achieved not by negotiation but by a total collapse of the evil doers... dont get me wrong.. I truely beleive that all those who stand to gain financially from the war should be right there in Iraq.. fighting for that percieved return....I think most of us in this country see this war for what it is....and MOST Americans are ready for it to be over. I knew plenty of guys who wanted to stay in Vietnam... to save face... if face saving is so important.. then by all means.. stay.. just dont make a bunch of people stay who do not want to and do not have very much to gain... and losing them means a HELL of a LOT to their families. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites akarunway 1 #42 January 29, 2007 "but the politician wanted to play to the favor of the public."___________________________________________________________________________________________________In the USA I was indoctrinated in MANY MANY moons ago I thought (or was brought up to think) public will dominated govt. will. Guess we have a 180' nowadays. Just shut up and do as your're told by govt. NOTI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #43 January 29, 2007 QuoteI knew plenty of guys who wanted to stay in Vietnam... to save face... if face saving is so important.. then by all means.. stay.. just dont make a bunch of people stay who do not want to and do not have very much to gain... and losing them means a HELL of a LOT to their families. VOLUNTEER ARMY ... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO FIGHT, DON'T VOLUNTEER"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #44 January 29, 2007 QuoteVOLUNTEER ARMY ... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO FIGHT, DON'T VOLUNTEER And if you want to support WAR.. THEN FUCKING VOLUNTEER... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #45 January 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteVOLUNTEER ARMY ... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO FIGHT, DON'T VOLUNTEER And if you want to support WAR.. THEN FUCKING VOLUNTEER... So you believe that the only way to support a war is to volunteer? PS: Swearing does not improve your argument."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #46 January 29, 2007 WELL SINCE YOU WANTED A SHOUTING MATCH>> I THOUGHT YOU WERE READY FOR IT..... BASICALLY IF YOU THINK WAR IS KEWL>>> GO DO IT YOURSELF INSTEAD OF CALLOUSLY SENDING OFF THOSE WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED TO DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION>> NOT ENRICH YOUR NEO CON BUDDIES. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #47 January 29, 2007 QuoteWELL SINCE YOU WANTED A SHOUTING MATCH>> I THOUGHT YOU WERE READY FOR IT..... Shouting and swearing are not the same thing. QuoteBASICALLY IF YOU THINK WAR IS KEWL>>> GO DO IT YOURSELF INSTEAD OF CALLOUSLY SENDING OFF THOSE WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED TO DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION>> NOT ENRICH YOUR NEO CON BUDDIES. Do you understand the values of a Neoconservatist? I am not a Neoconservatist, do you not read my posts or do you have trouble comprehending my posts? Reading comprehension is mandatory for any discourse in a written forum ...work on it."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #48 January 29, 2007 QuoteDo you understand the values of a Neoconservatist? I am not a Neoconservatist, do you not read my posts or do you have trouble comprehending my posts? Reading comprehension is mandatory for any discourse in a written forum ...work on it. I guess that you did not comprehend that I was talking about Kind George and Prince Dick....Prince Dick and his vassals in the PNAC are the architects of this fiasco... they are called NEO CONS.... This is based on YOU not starting the war.. THEY did. All of them were too cowardly to actually go to war when they were young.... yet now.. they seem to think an optional war.. to grab for the oil revenues of one of the largest oil producers on the planet.....would pay for THEIR WAR... I just think they should go LEAD the troops if they want to start optional wars. I also think that if somone thinks war is a great option.. then sign up and GO and quit sabre rattling from afar. There are thousands dead from this incompetent exercise in fantasy that has turned into nightmares for SO MANY other human beings . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #49 January 29, 2007 QuoteI guess that you did not comprehend that I was talking about Kind George and Prince Dick....Prince Dick and his vassals in the PNAC are the architects of this fiasco... they are called NEO CONS.... Once again, you resort to personal attacks instead of proof. Poor form for a debate. QuoteThis is based on YOU not starting the war.. THEY did. All of them were too cowardly to actually go to war when they were young.... yet now.. they seem to think an optional war.. to grab for the oil revenues of one of the largest oil producers on the planet.....would pay for THEIR WAR... I just think they should go LEAD the troops if they want to start optional wars. I also think that if somone thinks war is a great option.. then sign up and GO and quit sabre rattling from afar. I don't think war is ever a great option. I don't think this war was started for the right reasons (should have been started to give the people freedom). I don't think this war will end for the right reasons. QuoteThere are thousands dead from this incompetent exercise in fantasy that has turned into nightmares for SO MANY other human beings . How many people died during the American Revolution or the American Civil War? Freedom should not be a fantasy, it should be a reality."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #50 January 29, 2007 QuoteHow many people died during the American Revolution or the American Civil War? Freedom should not be a fantasy, it should be a reality. I really hope you are not trying to equate this war based on the reasons behind it ( nationbuilding in a very oli rich country) and those..... they are horses of FAR different colors. Oh.. and this is not a debating forum.... get over it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 2 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
lawrocket 3 #40 January 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteI don't blame her! Nobody wants to clean up anyone else's mess. So why should the rest of the world have to clean up our mess in the middle east? It's a different question, along the lines of "Why should we have to clean up anyone else's mess" that the hated isolationists ask all the time? I'd prefer to limit this inquiry to the presidential aspects, instead of a discussion of UN level ramifications. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #41 January 29, 2007 Quotecome on Amazon, a vote in the military, your post was nothing more than a shot at me. Don't you have anything better to do with your time. and honestly if they did take a vote I think you'd be surprised at how many are willing to stay. No its a shot at ALL of thosew who support an ill concieved and poorly thought out war... who will only feel victory is achieved not by negotiation but by a total collapse of the evil doers... dont get me wrong.. I truely beleive that all those who stand to gain financially from the war should be right there in Iraq.. fighting for that percieved return....I think most of us in this country see this war for what it is....and MOST Americans are ready for it to be over. I knew plenty of guys who wanted to stay in Vietnam... to save face... if face saving is so important.. then by all means.. stay.. just dont make a bunch of people stay who do not want to and do not have very much to gain... and losing them means a HELL of a LOT to their families. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #42 January 29, 2007 "but the politician wanted to play to the favor of the public."___________________________________________________________________________________________________In the USA I was indoctrinated in MANY MANY moons ago I thought (or was brought up to think) public will dominated govt. will. Guess we have a 180' nowadays. Just shut up and do as your're told by govt. NOTI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #43 January 29, 2007 QuoteI knew plenty of guys who wanted to stay in Vietnam... to save face... if face saving is so important.. then by all means.. stay.. just dont make a bunch of people stay who do not want to and do not have very much to gain... and losing them means a HELL of a LOT to their families. VOLUNTEER ARMY ... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO FIGHT, DON'T VOLUNTEER"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #44 January 29, 2007 QuoteVOLUNTEER ARMY ... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO FIGHT, DON'T VOLUNTEER And if you want to support WAR.. THEN FUCKING VOLUNTEER... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #45 January 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteVOLUNTEER ARMY ... IF YOU DON'T WANT TO FIGHT, DON'T VOLUNTEER And if you want to support WAR.. THEN FUCKING VOLUNTEER... So you believe that the only way to support a war is to volunteer? PS: Swearing does not improve your argument."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #46 January 29, 2007 WELL SINCE YOU WANTED A SHOUTING MATCH>> I THOUGHT YOU WERE READY FOR IT..... BASICALLY IF YOU THINK WAR IS KEWL>>> GO DO IT YOURSELF INSTEAD OF CALLOUSLY SENDING OFF THOSE WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED TO DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION>> NOT ENRICH YOUR NEO CON BUDDIES. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #47 January 29, 2007 QuoteWELL SINCE YOU WANTED A SHOUTING MATCH>> I THOUGHT YOU WERE READY FOR IT..... Shouting and swearing are not the same thing. QuoteBASICALLY IF YOU THINK WAR IS KEWL>>> GO DO IT YOURSELF INSTEAD OF CALLOUSLY SENDING OFF THOSE WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED TO DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION>> NOT ENRICH YOUR NEO CON BUDDIES. Do you understand the values of a Neoconservatist? I am not a Neoconservatist, do you not read my posts or do you have trouble comprehending my posts? Reading comprehension is mandatory for any discourse in a written forum ...work on it."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #48 January 29, 2007 QuoteDo you understand the values of a Neoconservatist? I am not a Neoconservatist, do you not read my posts or do you have trouble comprehending my posts? Reading comprehension is mandatory for any discourse in a written forum ...work on it. I guess that you did not comprehend that I was talking about Kind George and Prince Dick....Prince Dick and his vassals in the PNAC are the architects of this fiasco... they are called NEO CONS.... This is based on YOU not starting the war.. THEY did. All of them were too cowardly to actually go to war when they were young.... yet now.. they seem to think an optional war.. to grab for the oil revenues of one of the largest oil producers on the planet.....would pay for THEIR WAR... I just think they should go LEAD the troops if they want to start optional wars. I also think that if somone thinks war is a great option.. then sign up and GO and quit sabre rattling from afar. There are thousands dead from this incompetent exercise in fantasy that has turned into nightmares for SO MANY other human beings . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #49 January 29, 2007 QuoteI guess that you did not comprehend that I was talking about Kind George and Prince Dick....Prince Dick and his vassals in the PNAC are the architects of this fiasco... they are called NEO CONS.... Once again, you resort to personal attacks instead of proof. Poor form for a debate. QuoteThis is based on YOU not starting the war.. THEY did. All of them were too cowardly to actually go to war when they were young.... yet now.. they seem to think an optional war.. to grab for the oil revenues of one of the largest oil producers on the planet.....would pay for THEIR WAR... I just think they should go LEAD the troops if they want to start optional wars. I also think that if somone thinks war is a great option.. then sign up and GO and quit sabre rattling from afar. I don't think war is ever a great option. I don't think this war was started for the right reasons (should have been started to give the people freedom). I don't think this war will end for the right reasons. QuoteThere are thousands dead from this incompetent exercise in fantasy that has turned into nightmares for SO MANY other human beings . How many people died during the American Revolution or the American Civil War? Freedom should not be a fantasy, it should be a reality."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #50 January 29, 2007 QuoteHow many people died during the American Revolution or the American Civil War? Freedom should not be a fantasy, it should be a reality. I really hope you are not trying to equate this war based on the reasons behind it ( nationbuilding in a very oli rich country) and those..... they are horses of FAR different colors. Oh.. and this is not a debating forum.... get over it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
