Author Topic: Nice Job Bushie! (Read 3610 times)

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #45 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:13:43 PM »

WWII was/is nothing like Iraq.
-SW

texace · « **Reply #46 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:14:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Good for you!! They need you!

And if it was one of your relatives that said that? Running off to the nearest recruitment station to join up and fight a war that you obviously think is wrong...a war started for the sole reason to go to war and to take the spoils of a country all under the guise of a war on terror.

A complete stranger...an American college student...posts something out of sarcasm and you endorse him because "they need you."

Wow...

Mini D · « **Reply #47 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:15:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
no, that was you talking in your post about some looter making off with all those explosives in the back of his mercedees..

No... it is you implying that they needed "protection" when it was obvious they had enough protection to be systematically relocated.

Quote

Which is a farcry better than our troops being killed on the side of the road from these explosives, wouldnt you think?

Are you trying to tug at my heartstrings here or what? Cause other than that... this statement has little to do with anything. Or are you implying that if only we'd protected this 380 tons of explosives, suddam wouldn't have given it away to terrorists to kill Americans with? Because if that's what you're trying to do, I'm going to laugh right in your face.

Quote

Understand, I know this. Of course all weapons were in the wrong hands.

I'm referring to the supposive WMDs. What if they were really there, we had TOO FEW troops to secure them even if we found them. Before we got there we had TOO few troops. If WMDs were indeed spread all over the country there would have been nothing we could have done to stop them from being looted. As is demonstrated by America's inability to secure the non-WMDs..

LOL! welcome to the double edged sword. THERE WERE NO WMDS SO WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ATTACKED! BUT IF THERE WERE WMDS, WE SHOULD HAVE HIT THEM HARDER!!!!

Damn... you're getting dumber by the minute.

AKIron · « **Reply #48 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:20:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Winning the war on terrorism is not possible. You kill one, you make 2 more..

One has only to look so far as Spain to see the results of not fighting this war on terrorism.

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #49 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:24:34 PM »

Quote

Are you trying to tug at my heartstrings here or what? Cause other than that... this statement has little to do with anything. Or are you implying that if only we'd protected this 380 tons of explosives, suddam wouldn't have given it away to terrorists to kill Americans with? Because if that's what you're trying to do, I'm going to laugh right in your face.

Couldn't care less bout your heart.. I'm saying if your going to goto war, damn the cost(money).. Fight to win.

You in a lame attempt try to justify Bush commiting the military in a rush to war. Had he actually gone to war the right way, with a plan, people would be complaining about the cost. I said that would be better than people complaining about the dead.. So burn your heartstring for me, ok??

Quote

LOL! welcome to the double edged sword. THERE WERE NO WMDS SO WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ATTACKED! BUT IF THERE WERE WMDS, WE SHOULD HAVE HIT THEM HARDER!!!!

Nope.. Not my thinking at all. I'm simply saying that IF Iraqi actually had WMDs like Bush said they did, we were not ready for the invasion because we had too few troops to secure the WMD sites had they really been there..

Quote

Damn... you're getting dumber by the minute.

Thanks..

Mini D · « **Reply #50 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:28:54 PM »

Sorry "dude"... you're talking a bit from both sides of the fence right now. Unless you realize that you're actually saying the proper response would have been a tactical strike with no notice to either the U.S. people or Iraq.

WMDs were not the problem. Saddam having control over their manufacture was. This thread only proves it.

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #51 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:28:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by texace
And if it was one of your relatives that said that? Running off to the nearest recruitment station to join up and fight a war that you obviously think is wrong...a war started for the sole reason to go to war and to take the spoils of a country all under the guise of a war on terror.

A complete stranger...an American college student...posts something out of sarcasm and you endorse him because "they need you."

Wow...

I dont really follow this too well. Sorry if I get it wrong..

If a close relative wanted to go fight I would express my opinion and leave it at that.. After all, this is america and each has there right to attempt service with the military..

If you agree and are for the war, by all means sign up! Cause, they DO need you.. 8)

I'm all for our military, just not our present president..

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #52 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:31:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
Sorry "dude"... you're talking a bit from both sides of the fence right now. Unless you realize that you're actually saying the proper response would have been a tactical strike with no notice to either the U.S. people or Iraq.

WMDs were not the problem. Saddam having control over their manufacture was. This thread only proves it.

I dont think this thread could stand for proof of anything factual about Iraqi..

I'm not talking from both sides. I'm sayin all things being equal with the invasion the way it was, America invaded undermanned, ill-equiped, and too soon without a plan.. A clear failure from our 'war president'...

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #53 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:33:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
One has only to look so far as Spain to see the results of not fighting this war on terrorism.

Iron, I will ask you again...

When do you see America winning the war on terrorism?? What will have to be done to win it??

Eagler · « **Reply #54 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:36:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Iron, I will ask you again...

When do you see America winning the war on terrorism?? What will have to be done to win it??

within 20 years, about a generations worth of western influence in Iraq/Afgan

or all out nuke war when we get down to the brass tacks with NK and Iran, the other sides of the axis

either way, terrorism will end

AKIron · « **Reply #55 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:42:43 PM »

Difficult to see. Always in motion is the future.
-Yoda

However, we can see the past pretty clearly and we know that not fighting terrorism led us to 9/11.

Toad · « **Reply #56 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:45:33 PM »

Last year, towards the end of the year, I bought some 10 boxes high velocity Winchester Supreme pheasant loads at a great sale.

I stockpiled them with my other WSPD (Weapons of Singular Pheasant Destruction) in a "secure area" that is routinely patrolled.

It seems now that some of these boxes may have been STOLEN!!!!

Investigations continue, but it's likely that known terrorists that target the males of the pheasant species are in possession of these shells and may have already used them on pheasants as early as January of 2004 towards the close of the season.

I've called UN inspectors to check this out. I'll let you know if I find out anything.

As much as I hate to admit it, some of my own family members cannot be ruled out as potential suspects.

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #57 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:46:00 PM »

You did not answer either question..

I liked the quote though! hehe made me laugh

parker00 · « **Reply #58 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:48:40 PM »

Quote

Neither did Germany

Japan did. What is going on in Iraq is nothing compared to WWII.

john9001 · « **Reply #59 on:** October 25, 2004, 12:49:00 PM »

the troops did not find 380 tons of explosives, therefor there were no 380 tons of explosives, saddam got rid of them along with the WMD's before the invasion.

troops did not find WMD, so there were no WMD.

troops did not find 380 tons of explosives, so there were no 380 tons of explosives.

i don't know how it could be more simple.