Defeatocrats Outraged

[Guest Guest]

I'm so tired of this dialogue.  You know what?  I hope a democrat wins the next election and then, because they won't do ANYTHING (see: Bill Clinton) to protect this country, we get attacked and more civilians are killed I get to say "see I told you so."

Hold that thought.  Although I would find that satisfying, the lives of Americans comes first to me.  I hope the Dems lose huge; unless Lieberman was to run, I believe he would actually protect the country.

Now, you will say that the US was safer before "Bush's War", but guess the news, they hated us before, they hate us now, and I don't see the point in trying to measure their degree of hatred.

72068[/snapback]

Everything goes back to Clinton. Do you accept any responsiblilty for this miserable failure of a president?

[Strife767]

I'm so tired of this dialogue.  You know what?  I hope a democrat wins the next election and then, because they won't do ANYTHING (see: Bill Clinton) to protect this country, we get attacked

You mean like how a Democrat was in office the last time we got attacked? Oh, wait...

Now, you will say that the US was safer before "Bush's War",

And we will be 100% correct.

but guess the news, they hated us before, they hate us now, and I don't see the point in trying to measure their degree of hatred.

72068[/snapback]

The "war" made things worse, period. There are more Al-Qaeda in Iraq now than there were before we "liberated" (such words these jackasses choose to use) it.

[Guest Radagast]

I'm so tired of this dialogue.  You know what?  I hope a democrat wins the next election and then, because they won't do ANYTHING (see: Bill Clinton) to protect this country, we get attacked and more civilians are killed I get to say "see I told you so."

Hold that thought.  Although I would find that satisfying, the lives of Americans comes first to me.  I hope the Dems lose huge; unless Lieberman was to run, I believe he would actually protect the country.

Now, you will say that the US was safer before "Bush's War", but guess the news, they hated us before, they hate us now, and I don't see the point in trying to measure their degree of hatred.

72068[/snapback]

The big difference is that there are a whole lot more people who hate us or have lost all respect for us now since Bush's War started. He has hurt our military. There are far fewer joining than before the war. He has hurt us as an economic power, Dollar -v- Euro. Lucky for the Republicans Bush never has to face the voters again.

Also, the use of the word 'they' when refering to those that have the means to harm the USA, is the root of the misconception. There is not one shred of evidence that there were any 'they' in Iraq before we invaded. In fact, there was a mountain of evidence that a lot of 'they' were, and still are, in the hills of Western Pakistan. Under the nose of Bush's hero 'Mr. Democracy' Musharraf, bin Laden and his band of merry men grow stronger.

The reasons for the invasion of Iraq were weak. In my view, the reasons to stay there now are weaker. What? It will turn into a holy mess if we leave? What is it now, a vacation destination? All the chest pounding over the 'surge' is meaningless. Iraqi deaths have gone up. US casualties have gone down. The reason for both is that we are back to depending more on air power rather than ground forces. There have been surgelike efforts before. When we draw down, everything goes back to the usual level of carnage. So, we should surge forever?

I still contend that the Iraqis are the only ones who can solve Iraq's problems. al Queda in Iraq does not have the numbers to 'take over' the government, to contend they do is ridiculous. They and their cheerleaders comprise less that one percent to the Iraqi population. All we are doing is getting in the way and exacerbating the problem. When you get to a point in your policy where you are paying warlords to shoot at the other guys instead of our troops, you have to wonder just what the hell we're doing there. When we stop paying them, will they start shooting at us again? I don't think we should stay there to find out.

[Guest Guest]

War is hell. Soldiers have been killed in war since the beginning of time.

  Semper Fi.

71834[/snapback]

This is exactly the problem with people like this. They think war is justified on its own merits, as if there was some inherent merit to war.

[Guest Guest]

I looked for the report about Rice and I could not find it.

Is the burden of proof on me to show that the report is false?

71796[/snapback]

Yes. Now get back in your ****.

KOTW Note: The above post was edited for content.

[Guest Patriot]

Except that sometimes, there is an actual reason to attack.

How many of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi, again?

72102[/snapback]

World Trade Center (2), Pentagon and Cole are pretty good reasons.

They all came from the same swamp.

[Guest Patriot]

War is inded hell. Especially when none of your kids are involved.

72092[/snapback]

Huh ??

[Guest Patriot]

And a war of choice that was easily avoidable and unlikely to have any long-term benefit to the US has been wage by a thoughtless, incompetent president since 2003.

72087[/snapback]

You're right. After the World Trade Center was destroyed and the Pentagon almost destroyed, Bush could have acted like a defeatocrat and done nothing.

Instead he vowed to defend the country and drain the swamp. We have not been attacked since and the swamp is being drained. Thank God for President Bush.

Semper Fi.

[Guest Guest]

You're right. After the World Trade Center was destroyed and the Pentagon almost destroyed, Bush could have acted like a defeatocrat and done nothing.

  Instead he vowed to defend the country and drain the swamp. We have not been attacked since and the swamp is being drained.  Thank God for President Bush.

  Semper Fi.

72182[/snapback]

Knock off the Semper Fi. No way you're a marine. You're probably some 5'2" fat 14 year old.

[Guest Guest]

You're right. After the World Trade Center was destroyed and the Pentagon almost destroyed, Bush could have acted like a defeatocrat and done nothing.

  Instead he vowed to defend the country and drain the swamp. We have not been attacked since and the swamp is being drained.  Thank God for President Bush.

  Semper Fi.

72182[/snapback]

Or he coud have acted like an intelligent man, assessed the situation, and gone after those actually responsible for the attacks instead of pursuing his personal agenda.

You are disgusting bringing God into any defense of this man's misleadership.

Whu don't you espouse your hero's philosophy? Semper Lie

[Guest Guest]

Except that sometimes, there is an actual reason to attack.

How many of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi, again?

72102[/snapback]

How many non-Iraqis are fighting in Iraq?

[Bryan]

Except that sometimes, there is an actual reason to attack.

How many of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi, again?

72102[/snapback]

You might want to look at Hussein's 10+ years of thumbing his nose at UN resolutions while cheating on the sanctions regime.

Oh, wait. You're Strife. Never mind.

[Strife767]

World Trade Center (2), Pentagon and Cole are pretty good reasons.

Do you have working eyes in that thick head of yours?

How many of the hijackers were Iraqi, and/or was their leader Iraqi? Answer the question, coward.

[Guest Radagast]

You're right. After the World Trade Center was destroyed and the Pentagon almost destroyed, Bush could have acted like a defeatocrat and done nothing.

  Instead he vowed to defend the country and drain the swamp. We have not been attacked since and the swamp is being drained.  Thank God for President Bush.

  Semper Fi.

72182[/snapback]

Since this 'swamp draining', as you call it, has been going on, Spain and the UK have both been attacked. That would indicate that our military operations in Iraq have not had any effect on the crazy pepole blowing up things in Western countries.

When there is another attack on US soil, what will your spin be then? Point is, the war has nothing to do with terrorist attacks on the West because Iraqis never attcked the United States.

[Guest Guest]

You're right. After the World Trade Center was destroyed and the Pentagon almost destroyed, Bush could have acted like a defeatocrat and done nothing.

  Instead he vowed to defend the country and drain the swamp. We have not been attacked since and the swamp is being drained.  Thank God for President Bush.

  Semper Fi.

72182[/snapback]

Two of our allies have been attacked but I guess YOU are the type of low level turd who doesn't give a rat's A** about anyone b\out yourself you REMF WANKER!

Or is it just another one of your convenient omissions of FACT?

[Guest Guest]

Knock off the Semper Fi. No way you're a marine. You're probably some 5'2" fat 14 year old.

72199[/snapback]

With PatRat it's more like: Semper Lie

[Guest Guest]

You might want to look at Hussein's 10+ years of thumbing his nose at UN resolutions while cheating on the sanctions regime.

Oh, wait.  You're Strife.  Never mind.

72235[/snapback]

Who gives a Rat's A** about resolutions issued by a spineless organization too piss-ant to enforce them? Using UN sanctions as an excuse for anyone other than the UN to invade is a cheap load of BS.

[Guest Guest]

You might want to look at Hussein's 10+ years of thumbing his nose at UN resolutions while cheating on the sanctions regime.

Oh, wait.  You're Strife.  Never mind.

72235[/snapback]

Better a thumbed nose than a world in turmoil over something outsiders can't fix.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Since this 'swamp draining', as you call it, has been going on, Spain and the UK have both been attacked. That would indicate that our military operations in Iraq have not had any effect on the crazy pepole blowing up things in Western countries.

When there is another attack on US soil, what will your spin be then? Point is, the war has nothing to do with terrorist attacks on the West because Iraqis never attcked the United States.

72250[/snapback]

Fulagas, your post makes no sense. Could be the Kool-aid.

[Guest Guest]

Fulagas, your post makes no sense. Could be the Kool-aid.

72342[/snapback]

It actually makes a lot of sense, I guess in reality YOU are 2dumb2understand.

[Guest Radagast]

You might want to look at Hussein's 10+ years of thumbing his nose at UN resolutions while cheating on the sanctions regime.

Oh, wait.  You're Strife.  Never mind.

72235[/snapback]

I find your concern for UN resolutions quite touching. Isreal has been ignoring UN resolutions for years and the US has been defending Isreal. If the UN resolution happens to be in the interest of the sitting US administration, we defend it, if not it's the UN be damned and sometimes even the overall interest of the United States people be damned.

[Guest Guest]

You might want to look at Hussein's 10+ years of thumbing his nose at UN resolutions while cheating on the sanctions regime.

Oh, wait.  You're Strife.  Never mind.

72235[/snapback]

[Bryan]

I find your concern for UN resolutions quite touching.

Do tell.

Isreal has been ignoring UN resolutions for years and the US has been defending Isreal.

How many of those resolutions stem from a ceasefire between the U.S. and Israel?

If the UN resolution happens to be in the interest of the sitting US administration, we defend it, if not it's the UN be damned and sometimes even the overall interest of the United States people be damned.

72430[/snapback]

In what way has the U.S. gone against any sanctions against Israel suggested under the force of the UN?

Please also note that the Iraq War was and is in the best interests of the people of the United States (though it's fair to note that a majority fail to realize it at the moment).

[Guest Guest]

Please also note that the Iraq War was and is in the best interests of the people of the United States (though it's fair to note that a majority fail to realize it at the moment).

POPPYCOCK!

That's an opinion at best and I don't beieve a very well founded one.

How is pissing away thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to depose some tinpot despot who may well be replaced by someone even worse while our attackers' organization ci=ontinues to operate in over 40 countries in the best interest of the people of the US?

Think what you like but your opinion is unsupported by fact.

[Guest Guest]

I find your concern for UN resolutions quite touching. Isreal has been ignoring UN resolutions for years and the US has been defending Isreal. If the UN resolution happens to be in the interest of the sitting US administration, we defend it, if not it's the UN be damned and sometimes even the overall interest of the United States people be damned.

72430[/snapback]

Where is Isreal?