Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Bodhi on May 24, 2004, 07:37:31 PM
-
I just watched President Bush's speech, and I beleive in what he says. The world has been a dangerous place, and we are working towards an end to some of that danger. I liked his mentioning the vision of terror and destruction meeting the vision of liberty and freedom. The Iraqi people will be free, and they, will have the ability to find their own path, and will always find a friend in the United States of America.
Well said GW, I have, and will continue to support you.
:aok
-
Well done, W.
-
He said nothing related to a clear and concise exit strategy. Just the typical:
-terrorist bad
-iraqi freedom
-terrorist bad
-some election stuff might happen
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
He said nothing related to a clear and concise exit strategy. Just the typical:
-terrorist bad
-iraqi freedom
-terrorist bad
-some election stuff might happen
I heard more than you did apparently... and that was a goal of the US to provide assistance to a free Iraq.
welcome to my ignore list...
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
I heard more than you did apparently... and that was a goal of the US to provide assistance to a free Iraq.
welcome to my ignore list...
Ignore whom you cannot debate with. WTG!!!!
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
Ignore whom you cannot debate with. WTG!!!!
look who's talking
DING DING DING DING
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
look who's talking
DING DING DING DING
Go back to worrying if your neighbor is going to marry his dog or not.
-
A debate with you would serve no purpose, other than to listen to you spout DNC rhetoric. I on the other hand follow no political party, and am therefore not going to spout any rhetoric for anyone.
The president stated we were seeking the UN's help to ensure free elections in Iraq, that and (according to the UN resolution introduced) the Iraqi's can ask us to go when their government is in place... guess thats not a clear strategy???
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I thought the goal was to defend the US from Iraqi WMD? ... or was it terrorism? ... or liberating Iraq? ... ... ...
Circular reasoning to justify a war that has no reason.
But do not worry, his main point was to "not fail". What do you need details for with a 5 point plan like that!
-
Stabby what is your MA handle?
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
A debate with you would serve no purpose, other than to listen to you spout DNC rhetoric. I on the other hand follow no political party, and am therefore not going to spout any rhetoric for anyone.
The president stated we were seeking the UN's help to ensure free elections in Iraq, that and (according to the UN resolution introduced) the Iraqi's can ask us to go when their government is in place... guess thats not a clear strategy???
Not really, and you do follow a political party. Just because you think it is cool to check the independent box when you register to vote does not change your fundamental beliefs.
-
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040525/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_text&cid=544&ncid=1480
America will fund the construction of a modern maximum security prison.
This is great news! Nothing says AMERICA quite like a state of the art maximum security prison.
:aok
-
Originally posted by Sandman
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040525/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_text&cid=544&ncid=1480
This is great news! Nothing says AMERICA quite like a state of the art maximum security prison.
:aok
Maybe we can get Dell to use the prisoners as slave labor like they did in Texas!
-
New name and same old frogie. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Maverick
New name and same old frogie. :rolleyes:
(http://death.innomi.com/uploads/10263891.gif)
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
He said nothing related to a clear and concise exit strategy. Just the typical:
-terrorist bad
-iraqi freedom
-terrorist bad
-some election stuff might happen
Um... he went through each aspect of the plan step by step.
Did you watch it, or did you form your opinion of the speach yesterday?
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Um... he went through each aspect of the plan step by step.
Did you watch it, or did you form your opinion of the speach yesterday?
5 broad outlined points does not equal a clear and concise plan.
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
5 broad outlined points does not equal a clear and concise plan.
Actually, concise was exactly what it was. If you want a more detailed explanation of US foriegn policy in Iraq without having to sit infront of your TV for 14 hours, write the White House - maybe Bush will whip something up on paper and autograph your copy?
-
:D
StabbyTheIcePic = Age 24 / Kerry VOTE
GScholz = Not from here / NO VOTE / NO SAY / No relevance
strk = Prolly to young / NO VOTE / NO SAY / and definatly irrelevant!!!!! (and even if he can it will be trumped by Bhodie's vote)
Will edit as the thread turns
:lol
-
Originally posted by RedTop
:D
StabbyTheIcePic = Prolly to young / NO VOTE
GScholz = Not from here / NO VOTE / NO SAY / No relevance
Will edit as thread thread turns
:lol
age 24
-
Originally posted by GScholz
*LOL!* Perhaps you should have listened to the UN in the first place.
perhaps the UN should have acted....
The US and coalition did act, and aside from some rediculous prisoner abuse allegations, the tragedy of dead servicemen and Iraqui civilians, and the final conclusive proof of the presence of WMD's, we for the first time see the possibility of a free Iraq. An Iraq that is free from tyranny, free from terror, and free from oppression. You can mock the US led efforts all you like, but it still does not change the precept that the actions in Iraq are leading to a safer world. Why else would the terrorists fight so hard to stop us?? Because they are beginning to see the end, and like any cornered animal, they are fighting with all they have left... unfortunately what thye have left is suicide bombers, random roadside bombs, and oppressive militias. There will come an end to these terrorists in Iraq, and then, Iraq can move on, and join the ranks of the free world.
It's a pity that so many look past the noble acts of most of the servicemen and women in action over there. They are the ones who are making a difference, and they are the ones whom the Iraqi's can thanks when they have a free country.
Bush has provided 5 steps to a free Iraq:
Handing over authority to a sovereign Iraqi government.
Establishing security.
Continuing to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure.
Encouraging more international support.
Moving toward a national election in Iraq that "will bring forward new leaders empowered by the Iraqi people."
How is that not a clear strategy? I see it, but the naysayers do not, so unfortunately we are at the same impasse. The only problem is, a free Iraq is happening no matter how badly you naysayers do not want that.... (which is sad, because the anti-american's overzealousness to see us fail is hurting the ones they should be worried about)
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
age 24
My generation is obviously ****ed.
Think of it this way, Stabster, Ill be cancling out your vote.
Sweet dreams. :D
-
Hmmm
The first of these steps will occur next month, when our coalition will transfer full sovereignty to a government of Iraqi citizens who will prepare the way for national elections.
The second step in the plan for Iraqi democracy is to help establish the stability and security that democracy requires.
The third step in the plan for Iraqi democracy is to continue rebuilding that nation's infrastructure so that a free Iraq can quickly gain economic independence and a better quality of life.
The fourth step in our plan is to enlist additional international support for Iraq's transition.
The fifth, and most important step is free national elections, to be held no later than next January.
It's kinda thin... Call it "exit criteria" and we have a winner. :)
-
Bohdi.....Librals will allways complain critisize whine bich whatever untill they get what they want.
WHen you meet them half way or all the way its never good enough for them.
-
I will be voting in a swing state. So actually your vote does not cancel out mine.
Oh there is this
United States (AFP) - Facing criticism that Iraq (news - web sites) is adrift in violence and scandal, President George W. Bush (news - web sites) will lay out what aides call a "clear strategy" for that country's future in a prime-time speech.
The White House did not ask major US television networks to broadcast the speech, and Bush was not expected to detail the specifics of who will take power in Iraq on June 30.
How can you lay out a clear strategy without explaining who will take over?
-
(http://www.georgebush.com/images/downloads/GWB_logo_200.gif)
-
err...Stabby.your 24?
Wow....Ill go with Saur's vote as well....Thats 2 to 1:p
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Bohdi.....Librals will allways complain critisize whine bich whatever untill they get what they want.
WHen you meet them half way or all the way its never good enough for them.
the so called liberals are always going to complain, the problem is, they have not seen the writing on the wall. The world is becoming a better place because of our actions. They only see the short term, but it's the long term that is what should concern them. Unfortunately, their lack of vision, will cost countless American and foreign servicemen and women their lives in the future if the "libs" visions are followed. Thats the true tragedy here.
-
...and the so called conservatives think they're prophets.
-
you two kill me with your liberal talk. I suggest you go meet a few.
hey could you see Bush*s face all messed up from his bike wreck?
-
Originally posted by strk
you two kill me with your liberal talk. I suggest you go meet a few.
hey could you see Bush*s face all messed up from his bike wreck?
No he had a good makeup artist. Have you seen the before pics?
(http://death.innomi.com/uploads/boo.jpg)
And then there is zombie bush that feeds on the brains of Iraqi POWs errrrrr terrorists. For freedom.
(http://death.innomi.com/uploads/bushzombie.jpg)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Nope the UN shouldn't have acted with war, and they didn't. You shouldn't have acted with war, but you did. Like an elephant in a glasshouse. Ridiculous prisoner abuse allegations? US servicemen have already confessed to the crimes, including murder. WMD? Never going to find any (and that alone makes the war illegal). A free Iraq? Not going to happen. Not when you're there, and not after you leave. The US administration has acted moronically, wasted all the support they got after 9/11, made the UN pretty much irrelevant by defying it, made a lot of new enemies, created a lot of terrorists, wasted huge amounts of resources ... on a futile and pointless war.
right on!
except it wasnt pointless - Halliburton made billions, somebody made off with a year of Iraqi oil
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
No he had a good makeup artist. Have you seen the before pics?
(http://death.innomi.com/uploads/boo.jpg)
And then there is zombie bush that feeds on the brains of Iraqi POWs errrrrr terrorists. For freedom.
(http://death.innomi.com/uploads/bushzombie.jpg)
\
he did that falling off his bike?? Why does the dirt in Crawford hate america??
-
The funniest thing in this thread is you all think you know something.
we all know nothing
the world is not being made a better place
The anchient civilisations had a better grasp of what 'our' planet needs than we will ever do.
IMO Bush is a puppet on the strings of the real leaders and Blair is a sniveling little muppet hanging from bush's ball sack.
the war was not good. it was a disaster.
9/11 was not good. it was a tragedy. but it happened because the world is not meant to be one big happy family.
The human race is a false term. and a true term in another sense.
it is false because there are more than just one species of human.
it is true because it is a 'race' to see which of the many humans races will win.
the arab races are the most devious/devoted
the oriental races are the most inteligent/dangerous
the white race is the most ignorant (i am white)
the african (black) race is the most natural/agresive/evolutionary
there are other races and other cultures.
why can america/britain not see that the whole world will never, ever enjoy being 'just like America/britian'
America was founded when we killed thousands apon thousands of indigenous races.
Britain was founded (alot longer ago than america) by the bastad, unwanted children of europe.
we mean nothing.
we are not the best.
The world as we know it is coming to an end in the next 200 years.
and that is an absolute maximum.
Who the hell are you mechanic? you might ask
i am someone who has had a lot more time to think about and study this world than 99% of you.
i mean to cause no offence to any people/races by this post.
but if i gave a false reflection of my tru opinion i would not be the man i think i am (still not worth anything compared to nature, but im not a liar, or a coward to my own truth)
-
It was a good speech but I doubt it will help him in the polls. What he is saying is so basic and fundamental that it just goes over most peoples heads.
Sadly, I don't think he's going to win in November. That's too bad, he's a good man who deeply cares about the security of the United States and actually had a plan to preserve it.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
The funniest thing in this thread is you all think you know something.
we all know nothing
the world is not being made a better place
The anchient civilisations had a better grasp of what 'our' planet needs than we will ever do.
IMO Bush is a puppet on the strings of the real leaders and Blair is a sniveling little muppet hanging from bush's ball sack.
the war was not good. it was a disaster.
9/11 was not good. it was a tragedy. but it happened because the world is not meant to be one big happy family.
The human race is a false term. and a true term in another sense.
it is false because there are more than just one species of human.
it is true because it is a 'race' to see which of the many humans races will win.
the arab races are the most devious/devoted
the oriental races are the most inteligent/dangerous
the white race is the most ignorant (i am white)
the african (black) race is the most natural/agresive/evolutionary
there are other races and other cultures.
why can america/britain not see that the whole world will never, ever enjoy being 'just like America/britian'
America was founded when we killed thousands apon thousands of indigenous races.
Britain was founded (alot longer ago than america) by the bastad, unwanted children of europe.
we mean nothing.
we are not the best.
The world as we know it is coming to an end in the next 200 years.
and that is an absolute maximum.
Who the hell are you mechanic? you might ask
i am someone who has had a lot more time to think and study these factors than 99% of you.
i mean to cause no offence to any people/races by this post.
but if i gave a false reflection of my tru opinion i would not be the man i think i am (still not worth anything compared to nature, but im not a liar, or a coward to my own truth)
Either way we're doing the right thing. If the world WAS meant to be a happy place, we're helping establish that. If it wasn't, we're at least killing other suckers off.
-
Someon is going to have soooo much fun with that post, Mr. Mechanic/Philosopher/Political Scientist/Low level demi-God.
Flame suit... READY! :aok
-
Originally posted by RedTop
err...Stabby.your 24?
Wow....Ill go with Saur's vote as well....Thats 2 to 1:p
Thats it - close the booths. We just took an official poll and Im calling CNN.
Bush is ahead of Kerry. Must have been the speach. ;)
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Either way we're doing the right thing. If the world WAS meant to be a happy place, we're helping establish that. If it wasn't, we're at least killing other suckers off.
rofl
martlet i do declare, you are a genius
that is truly the best response anyone, anywhere could have given me.
i will think this over for along time now
<>
(cant stop smiling at how simply brilliant your logic is)
i had never thought about it from that view point
thank you for the enlightenment sir:aok :aok :aok
-
Marlet, youre obviously out of your class... give up.
All those thousands of dollars in higher education wasted...
I should have just gone to Lincoln Technical Institute for automotive technology. I had no idea they taught all this stuff there.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
There are only three races of Homo Sapiens. Negroid, Caucasian and Mongoloid. All other "races" are derived from these three and basically are just the result of ethnicity, i.e. breeding.
but that does not mean that no other races can be or have been created
with the multicultured societies of todays mordern world we are creating many hundreds of new races
i am think on a scale of 1000s of years not 100s
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Thats it - close the booths. We just took an official poll and Im calling CNN.
Bush is ahead of Kerry. Must have been the speach. ;)
We need to have a Bush won Party Saur....I'll bring the Dr. Pepper....and some Tater Chips:lol
-
He said nothing new... just kept speaking over and over same things
-
Bush* is wearing MAKE-UP!! what a complete phony. is he wearing panty hose too? sheesh.
(http://www.foxnews.com/images/126407/6_2_052404_bush_speech.jpg)
-
StabbyTheIcePic = Age 24 / Kerry VOTE
GScholz = Not from here / NO VOTE / NO SAY / No relevance
strk = Prolly to young / NO VOTE / NO SAY / and definatly irrelevant!!!!! (and even if he can it will be trumped by Bhodie's vote)
Fishu = Ain't from round here neither...NO VOTE / NO SAY / NO WORRIES
Will edit as the thread turns
:lol
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Bohdi.....Librals will allways complain critisize whine bich whatever untill they get what they want.
http://www.m-w.com/home.htm Dear Lord, at least make an effort to spell like an educated American. Boy, would you feel the wrath of my 7th grade english teacher, she went postal long before it was in vogue.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Marlet, youre obviously out of your class... give up.
All those thousands of dollars in higher education wasted...
I should have just gone to Lincoln Technical Institute for automotive technology. I had no idea they taught all this stuff there.
Ahhh, a fact filled intelligent response. And here I was thinking you were wasting that GED.
-
Originally posted by RedTop
StabbyTheIcePic = Age 24 / Kerry VOTE
GScholz = Not from here / NO VOTE / NO SAY / No relevance
strk = Prolly to young / NO VOTE / NO SAY / and definatly irrelevant!!!!! (and even if he can it will be trumped by Bhodie's vote)
Fishu = Ain't from round here neither...NO VOTE / NO SAY / NO WORRIES
Will edit as the thread turns
:lol
sheet I wish I was too young to vote. Im twice old enough lol.
irrelevant huh? you wrote more about me than any of the others you seek to dismiss! ha!
-
Well Dangit.........
All this editing... I feel like the editor trying to edit a George Carlin skit for TV. :p
ok.....:lol
StabbyTheIcePic = Age 24 / Kerry VOTE
GScholz = Not from here / NO VOTE / NO SAY / No relevance
strk = Old enuff / KERRY VOTE !!!!! (His will be trumped by Bhodie's vote)
Fishu = Ain't from round here neither...NO VOTE / NO SAY / NO WORRIES
Will edit as the thread turns
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Ahhh, a fact filled intelligent response. And here I was thinking you were wasting that GED.
LOL! Marlet - Im supporting you... read my post in context, you stoopid idjit.
:aok
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
Ignore whom you cannot debate with. WTG!!!!
Let use know when your old enough to vote will you:lol
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
LOL! Marlet - Im supporting you... read my post in context, you stoopid idjit.
:aok
No one supports me! Back off, or I'll pull out my next canned insult!
FEAR MY KNEE JERK REACTION!!!!1111
:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:
-
Originally posted by RedTop
err...Stabby.your 24?
Wow....Ill go with Saur's vote as well....Thats 2 to 1:p
Ahh make that 3 to 1:aok
-
Originally posted by GScholz
You would have to think on a scale of millions of years. There are only three races of Homo Sapiens, all others "races" are just genetic mixes of the three races, and result of localized breeding (minor differences like hair collor, facial caracteristics etc.).
in that case, what do you classify arabs as?
negroid or mongaloid?
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
LOL! Marlet - Im supporting you... read my post in context, you stoopid idjit.
:aok
haha I was wondering about that. you guys dont break ranks very often
-
Ahhh! There's nothing like civil discourse...
...and this is nothing like civil discourse.
If these political discussions were being held face-to-face we would all have to wear raincoats.
Shuckins/Leggern
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Negroid-Caucasian with a dash of Mongoloid. It's pretty obvious if you look at the map, the Caucasus to the north, Africa to the west and Asia to the East.
so therefore they are a 4th race?
contradicting your statement about there only being 3 races of homo-sapiens
arabs have been around for 1000s of years. surely long enough to class as a seperate race
-
(http://www.foxnews.com/images/126407/6_2_052404_bush_speech.jpg)
lets look at Bush*s make-up again. Do you think he wants a gay wedding? Was he whistleing show tunes when he came off his bike?
I mean seriously folks, the man wears make-up! how femme can you get?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No they are not a 4th race, they are mulattos. They are no more a separate race of Homo Sapiens than what a offspring of a Bulldog and a Retriever would be to the Canine species.
what you mean race is just a genotype. It means nothing as genetically we are all the same.
-
It is more accurate to say that there is a SINGLE SPECIES, with regional variations in certain physical characteristics.
Genetic scientists have proven, by studying mitochondrial DNA, that ALL "races" originated in Africa. Asians, Europeans, and Native Americans are all descended from a small group of "Africans" who migrated across the Red Sea more than 100,000 years ago.
Endlessly debating "racial differences" makes my gorge rise.
Shuckins/Leggern
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No they are not a 4th race, they are mulattos. They are no more a separate race of Homo Sapiens than what a offspring of a Bulldog and a Retriever would be to the Canine species.
in that case we are all mongrel races originating from the 'master' race
negroids.
so therefore there are not 3 human species, but only one
(i am being serious here)
which leads me to believe nazism was correct apart from the choice of 'master' race (im not being too serious here before anyone letter bombs my house):p
-
and Bush* wears make-up!!!!!!
-
RedTop,
You forget Bush wasn't just talking of national issues, but international issues.
Not like Bush has really anything to do with Spain for example, but yet he included them in his speech.
So it doesn't matter whether one is eligible to vote him or not.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
RedTop,
You forget Bush wasn't just talking of national issues, but international issues.
Not like Bush has really anything to do with Spain for example, but yet he included them in his speech.
So it doesn't matter whether one is eligible to vote him or not.
he has you there redtop lol
AH USA-0
AH Others-1
(will edit as thread developes)
-
Originally posted by Fishu
RedTop,
You forget Bush wasn't just talking of national issues, but international issues.
Not like Bush has really anything to do with Spain for example, but yet he included them in his speech.
So it doesn't matter whether one is eligible to vote him or not.
I think what he was trying to say is:
"Who gives a crap what you or your little pissant country thinks? The color underwear I have on impacts the world more than your existance does".
I'm not positive, but that's a guess.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
RedTop,
You forget Bush wasn't just talking of national issues, but international issues.
Not like Bush has really anything to do with Spain for example, but yet he included them in his speech.
So it doesn't matter whether one is eligible to vote him or not.
Fishu,
Point well taken Sir:)
Mechanic
he has you there redtop lol
We will have to go to the judges on the score issue.....please submit in triplicate your reason that you think the score should be as you posted. The judges will write there thesis on their ruling and submit there findings in 1- 20 years. Thanks for playing.:rofl
-
Originally posted by Martlet
I think what he was trying to say is:
"Who gives a crap what you or your little pissant country thinks? The color underwear I have on impacts the world more than your existance does".
I'm not positive, but that's a guess.
He was a bit more eliquent than that Martlet...But....You may have a point.:lol
pssssssttttt: Know what tho...In the grand scheme of things....NONE of our opinions or reasons for anything as to the war...Our feelings on it..or our vote in the next election as a THING to do with Jack Crap in another 50 years...At least to this Older more refined Redneck.:lol
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
http://www.m-w.com/home.htm Dear Lord, at least make an effort to spell like an educated American. Boy, would you feel the wrath of my 7th grade english teacher, she went postal long before it was in vogue.
sorry about the spelling, glad you could find fault in the spelling, not the argument.
BTW... 14 hour days do that to you... spelling that is.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
I think what he was trying to say is:
"Who gives a crap what you or your little pissant country thinks? The color underwear I have on impacts the world more than your existance does".
I'm not positive, but that's a guess.
after you grasiously posted
'point well taken sir :) '
i would have leveld the score had it not been for this obsenely ignorant quote from martlet which takes the USA score way down to -50 while the european score remains at a solid 1
the key phrase in the loss of 50 points was 'your little pissant country'
this shows the attitude that makes people commit terror attacks on your country
i like all countries/races/people equally untill they prove to me they are dumb as a pig. and even stupidity is only a downer when it is coupled with moronic pride
-
Originally posted by strk
(http://www.foxnews.com/images/126407/6_2_052404_bush_speech.jpg)
lets look at Bush*s make-up again. Do you think he wants a gay wedding? Was he whistleing show tunes when he came off his bike?
I mean seriously folks, the man wears make-up! how femme can you get?
For someone claiming to be in their 40's, you sure act like one of my employee's kids.... a 5 year old.
Congrats you're on the list...
the list of people with nothing to say, but plenty of breath to waste.
:aok
-
Originally posted by mechanic
The funniest thing in this thread is you all think you know something.
we all know nothing....
blah blah blah blah adfinitum....
Read the first two lines of your post. Then realise that you were right... you do indeed know nothing....
:aok
-
Originally posted by RedTop
He was a bit more eliquent than that Martlet...But....You may have a point.:lol
pssssssttttt: Know what tho...In the grand scheme of things....NONE of our opinions or reasons for anything as to the war...Our feelings on it..or our vote in the next election as a THING to do with Jack Crap in another 50 years...At least to this Older more refined Redneck.:lol
damn right sir
lets go get in our spitVs and kill us some 'bad guys'
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHA!
Scores:
USA - 1
OTHERS - 1
Martlet - -50
-
Bodhi I wonder If these people really even want to be Americans?
I mean some of the Americans posting on this board LOL
-
Originally posted by mechanic
after you grasiously posted
'point well taken sir :) '
i would have leveld the score had it not been for this obsenely ignorant quote from martlet which takes the USA score way down to -50 while the european score remains at a solid 1
the key phrase in the loss of 50 points was 'your little pissant country'
this shows the attitude that makes people commit terror attacks on your country
i like all countries/races/people equally untill they prove to me they are dumb as a pig. and even stupidity is only a downer when it is coupled with moronic pride
Martlet is from MassAChoosits....They have RedSox there....They have a place in Boston called the "Combat Zone" or at least they used to...They have a place called SeeKonk...Swansee....and since I am from the south I understand that Northerners think and talk different than I do.
They actually sound like they are ALWAYS in a bad mood. Even when offering you a Donut or somthing. example.....
In Texas..We say..."Would you like a Donut Sir / Maam...
In Mass they Say..Yo..you want this F'in thing or what already!!!
See? So I really think he was being polite in a Mass sort of way. :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
How bout a new counter?
So far this speech has changed 0 minds on this BBS about the Iraq war issue.
This count will not likely need to be updated.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
damn right sir
lets go get in our spitVs and kill us some 'bad guys'
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHA!
Scores:
USA - 1
OTHERS - 1
Martlet - -50
Be glad to...as soon as I ohh...Runover severall old people...Kill at least 8 minorities and try my BEST to cheat someone outta something....
You know...like a good Republican that I am. :rofl
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
How bout a new counter?
So far this speech has changed 0 minds on this BBS about the Iraq war issue.
This count will not likely need to be updated.
You are absolutely wrong... I was having some doubts about some policy issues, and was debating not voting... (I will burn in hell before I vote Kerry), I feel reaffirmed in Bush. He is a man of conviction, and a man of heart. One that has a good vision, and will give his all for the American people... definitely not something ole flip flop Kerry strikes in me....
-
Scores:
USA 1
Others 1
Martlet -50
Bhodi -100 (special prize for being the moodiest shrecker around and quite obviously not having a light hearted thought 9in his head about something as stupid as this BBS fight)
edit: Grunherz 500000000 points for the best point so far in this silly long list of pointless points
-
Originally posted by mechanic
Scores:
USA 1
Others 1
Martlet -50
Bhodi -100 (special prize for being the moodiest shrecker around and quite obviously not having a light hearted thought 9in his head about something as stupid as this BBS fight)
Glad you feel that way... but you have not seen moody... not by a long shot...
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
You are absolutely wrong... I was having some doubts about some policy issues, and was debating not voting... (I will burn in hell before I vote Kerry), I feel reaffirmed in Bush. He is a man of conviction, and a man of heart. One that has a good vision, and will give his all for the American people... definitely not something ole flip flop Kerry strikes in me....
:aok I'd kiss ya Bodhi if'in ya's a girl and it wasn't with all the gay talk on this BBS...may have a rumor started ya know.:rofl
-
What do you all want to happen?
The attempt to give Iraqis their own sovereignity is going to be made. It's not going to be easy, it's not going to be fast and undoubtedly more blood will be shed.
But how do each of you want this to turn out?
Do you want it to fail simply so you can smugly say "I told you so!" ?
Or do you want it to succeed so that there's at least a hope for the future of the Iraqi people and maybe the Middle East?
Debate the cause of the war, question the WMD, etc., etc. That's what historians do.
It's Realpolitik now.
This thing is going to happen. Do you want it to succeed or fail?
-
in all honesty, if we forget all the bbs bullchit:
i truly hope things settle down in iraq and i hope there is soon to be a cease to the loss of American, British, etc forces and that peace will come to the iraqi people who have suffered for so long
if they could see how much we all whine and fight from our armchairs and luxuary living, i think they would start another war
-
Originally posted by Toad
What do you all want to happen?
The attempt to give Iraqis their own sovereignity is going to be made. It's not going to be easy, it's not going to be fast and undoubtedly more blood will be shed.
But how do each of you want this to turn out?
Do you want it to fail simply so you can smugly say "I told you so!" ?
Or do you want it to succeed so that there's at least a hope for the future of the Iraqi people and maybe the Middle East?
Debate the cause of the war, question the WMD, etc., etc. That's what historians do.
It's Realpolitik now.
This thing is going to happen. Do you want it to succeed or fail?
I'll be the first to say succeed...More than most here I want it to work. I'm a conservative. I agree with the reasons this war happened. Is there so blame to be laid at the administartions feet? Sure. But not the type that is trying to be levied here.
I want it for the 100's of americans that have died doing there duty.
I want it for the Iraqi people that have died at the hands of Hussein and his Sons and there government.
I want it for this country. For the World to see that we are not as they think we are. That we did not set to conquer , but help people.
ALL stuff aside I want it because it's right. IMO. We were mislead to a degree. I don't think by Bush but by others thru Bush. I think Bush told us what he truly believed to be the truth as to WHY we were going to war. I think we are still sitting ducks to the Quacks out there that will do us harm.
Has everything went well there? NO...But war is that way. Did we get a black eye due to numbskulls abusing the prisoners. YES. And that is just fuel for a fire that burns in some that don't want to see anything outside of there thinking Bush is just short of the Devil.
Personally , I think he is a man of convictions as well. I think he has high morals. He has Strong Values and is doing IMO what he feels deep in his heart is right.
Now some here feel what I just said is total crap. Thats there opinion and they are entitled to it. They ahve a right to vote for who they think will be the best in November.
I'll vote for Bush. I think he will do the best job for ME as an American. His values and morals coinside with mine. His beliefs are along the lines as mine. His idea of our National security is along mine. He'll get my Vote.
I want this Country to be a beacon for the world. Idealistic? Probably. But , as an Ex_Navy who served this country with pride and dignity , its what I served for. It's the greatest country in the world.
No matter what the reasons you feel the way you do....No matter who you are...As Americans...Try to stand side by side until the job is done. THEN...Argue and disagree in a civil way.
-
Bravo, Bodhi, RedTop, and Toad! There are so many shallow uninformed grandstanding critics in the world you have to wonder why some brave souls ever go into politics, i.e., freely elected offices in real democracies.
It's 100 times harder to DO things than stand around in safety on the sidelines and yap endlessly about personal agendas and vendettas.
If Iraq can get its act together after the abuses by Saddam, and if it can avoid theocracy, the world has a chance to be a better place, and the horrendous cost of Iraq might even be worth it.
Democracy, security, and freedom (relative, nothing is absolute) are total mysteries to way too many nations and peoples of the world. People reared in ignorance, whether in neighborhoods or nations, are at the mercy of thugs and exploiters.
Ultimately it's the ancient ends justify the means question. Innocents and good people die in every conflict -- the point is whether they died for something worthwhile or in vain.
Successful leaders somehow have to seize the opportunities at hand and improve the future rather than be crippled by not just differences of opinion but genuine enemies, foreign and domestic, who would attack them no matter what they do.
I didn't vote for Bush but I have to applaud him as a decent human being apparently trying to do the right thing for the nation and for the world. He doesn't pretend to know everything and he does try to surround himself with the best and brightest advisors.
We live in a great nation when even during the Iraq and Palestine miseries we can poke fun at the President's painful fall from a bike many people of his age couldn't even ride down the driveway. Maybe instead of poking fun at our elected leader we ought to inquire more about his welfare and try to help him help us all.
But too many would rather ridicule the President (try that in any nation other than a genuine democracy) and try to portray him as clumsy or weak to cripple him for reelection. Free elections are at once our greatest strength and our greatest weakness, for we can count on opponents around the world working very hard to have us elect the least capable government.
Hopefully all who attain party candidancy are qualified to lead, but usually there is a best choice for the time and circumstances.
I suppose the whole thrust of this rant is that for American citizens, and for true friends of America around the world, the pride and purpose of 9/11 payback and future prevention should focus on what can we do to make the next day better rather than endless divisive wasted excessive expensive second-guessing about what went wrong yesterday, especially when the enemy is given more support than our casualties.
So in Iraq keep cleaning out the disenfranchised militants determined to keep their nation from the democratic freedom so tantalizingly close at hand. It would be an epic tragedy if Iraq, the Middle East, and the world do not capitalize, literally, on the greatest opportunity Iraq has ever had in the modern world.
-
What Toad, Redtop, and Halo said...
your last post as well Mechanic...
You know my biggest fear of all of this? Is that if we fail here, the consequences are going to be so far reaching I have barely the ability to contend. I had lunch with a former deputy commander of the Big Red One today... and he brought up a valid point... He said, that this war has two outcomes:
1 - we bring freedom to Iraq and the idea of that for the whole mideast, and we deal the terrorists such a setback that they are not a cohesive force in the future.
2 - we bow out, allow the insurgents and terrorists to turn Iraq into another Afganistan, and the middle east will be forever emcamped with the terrorists. Saudi, UAE, and Jordan will all fall, and tyranny and islamic militism will reign. The terrorism that this will spawn will last a hundred years, and mostly likely spawn the largest ever civilian death toll the world has ever seen.
He went on to say that we owed it to the people of Iraq, but most importantly we owed it to the world to end this. To take the 1st option, because there was no recourse. This is a war we must win.
I agree, this is it, we can not tire, we can not falter, we must not fail. Truly, the reasons of the how and why will wait, the end result is what is important. Hopefully, those that seem to really want the US to fail will eventually realise that this is not just about the US failing, it is about the world. The world can not afford the long term costs that will come from a failure in Iraq. I say that from the bottom of my being, because I would like my children to grow up in a world were they do not fear a terrorist's bomb, or a nuke, or some other WMD being employed against civilians. That alone is why I will continue to stay the course and support Bush.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
I agree, this is it, we can not tire, we can not falter, we must not fail. Truly, the reasons of the how and why will wait, the end result is what is important. Hopefully, those that seem to really want the US to fail will eventually realise that this is not just about the US failing, it is about the world. The world can not afford the long term costs that will come from a failure in Iraq. I say that from the bottom of my being, because I would like my children to grow up in a world were they do not fear a terrorist's bomb, or a nuke, or some other WMD being employed against civilians. That alone is why I will continue to stay the course and support Bush.
Nice sentiments. However, there wouldn't be "failure in Iraq" had we decided not to invade to "free the Iraqis" but instead kick the butt in Afghanistan that needed kicking, get our vengeance and call it a day.
Instead, you have a war where we may have troops there FOREVER to artificially install a democracy onto a people that really don't want it. What happens when we turn over "power" to the Iraqi's and they ask us to leave? What then? Do we say no? Do we remain a occupying imperialistic force? Do you think that the occupying force will engender more hate against us or less?
I understand your wanting to protect your children yet what we have done so far in Iraq is nothing more than breed a whole new group of terrorists--people who do not fight a linear war, people whose entire war history is based on familial relationships, religion and assasination. People who may not have hated us before but do now. How would you deal a "setback" to such a force that needs no "cohesion" to be successful? Those terms were used by your military man because he was not trained to understand any other.
Stay the course? Be a lemming. You are only planning the deaths of more innocents by supporting a truly ignorant, unrealistic cause expounded by a leader who doesn't understand the consequences of his actions and refuses to admit error.
h
-
(http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/reagan350.gif)
-
Originally posted by Horn
Nice sentiments. However, there wouldn't be "failure in Iraq" had we decided not to invade to "free the Iraqis" but instead kick the butt in Afghanistan that needed kicking, get our vengeance and call it a day.
Instead, you have a war where we may have troops there FOREVER to artificially install a democracy onto a people that really don't want it. What happens when we turn over "power" to the Iraqi's and they ask us to leave? What then? Do we say no? Do we remain a occupying imperialistic force? Do you think that the occupying force will engender more hate against us or less?
I understand your wanting to protect your children yet what we have done so far in Iraq is nothing more than breed a whole new group of terrorists--people who do not fight a linear war, people whose entire war history is based on familial relationships, religion and assasination. People who may not have hated us before but do now. How would you deal a "setback" to such a force that needs no "cohesion" to be successful? Those terms were used by your military man because he was not trained to understand any other.
Stay the course? Be a lemming. You are only planning the deaths of more innocents by supporting a truly ignorant, unrealistic cause expounded by a leader who doesn't understand the consequences of his actions and refuses to admit error.
h
War on terrosists isn't about revenge and then going home, it's about attacking terrorists and it does not end with Afghanistan or Iraq. How ignorant to believe we should get "revenge" in Afghanistan then go home as if that completes the job.
And who are you to say Iraqis do not want democracy? How do you know Iraqis hate us? If you believe this stuff without facts, then you are the lemming.
What new group of terrorists did we "breed" Any data on that?
And by the way, where have we failed in Iraq? What part of the Iraq war was a failure?
-
Originally posted by Horn
Nice sentiments. However, there wouldn't be "failure in Iraq" had we decided not to invade to "free the Iraqis" but instead kick the butt in Afghanistan that needed kicking, get our vengeance and call it a day.
Instead, you have a war where we may have troops there FOREVER to artificially install a democracy onto a people that really don't want it. What happens when we turn over "power" to the Iraqi's and they ask us to leave? What then? Do we say no? Do we remain a occupying imperialistic force? Do you think that the occupying force will engender more hate against us or less?
I understand your wanting to protect your children yet what we have done so far in Iraq is nothing more than breed a whole new group of terrorists--people who do not fight a linear war, people whose entire war history is based on familial relationships, religion and assasination. People who may not have hated us before but do now. How would you deal a "setback" to such a force that needs no "cohesion" to be successful? Those terms were used by your military man because he was not trained to understand any other.
Stay the course? Be a lemming. You are only planning the deaths of more innocents by supporting a truly ignorant, unrealistic cause expounded by a leader who doesn't understand the consequences of his actions and refuses to admit error.
h
Horn what would you do?
Beacause objectivly there isnt much difference between your "all is lost" and Bush's "stay the course."
-
Originally posted by Horn
Stay the course? Be a lemming. You are only planning the deaths of more innocents by supporting a truly ignorant, unrealistic cause expounded by a leader who doesn't understand the consequences of his actions and refuses to admit error.
h
Seeings that this is america.... you are entitled to that opinion, sadly, it seems you have missed it, missed it completely. You have not the slightest belief that we can accomplish what we set out to do. Just for one second think, and I mean think hard... do you honestly believe that teh military would have taken on this mission had it not thought it remotely possible? DO you not think that the military might just be saying pull out now? I have yet to hear that, but what I have heard and am constantly hearing are the "arm chair" strategists screaming "We can't win, the war is wrong... the Iraqi's have nocohesion" thats a bunch of bull chit, and you damn well know it. The insurgents are not just made up of idiots deciding to shoot em up... they are well organised, and guess what, they have support, from an unlikely ally... people like yourself. They (the insurgents) know that all they have to do is rally public opinion in our countyr against our mission, and voila, we pull out, they get to continue to be tyrants...
You say I am a lemming... well, guess what, I see you as the lemming. You have joined on with all the others that can not stay a course of anything, lest it benefit you in the immediate. That in the end is that biggest problem in this country, is the need for instantaneous rewards. Well, guess what, this thing is far from over, and unless Bush's ideas are followed through, the death toll is not going to stay overseas, we will be tending to masses dead in our very own country... haven't thought of that had you?
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Just for one second think, and I mean think hard... do you honestly believe that teh military would have taken on this mission had it not thought it remotely possible? DO you not think that the military might just be saying pull out now?
What makes you think the military had a choice?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
What makes you think the military had a choice?
Because had Bush mindlessly sent them off to do this supposed "personal vendetta" the Kerry campaign would be flaunting it's "latest general to say, I advised against this...!"
Keep on hating Bush sandy... it's that blindeyed hatred that is going to continue to fill body bags. You and your ilk have become so focused on hatig BUsh, that you have missed the reality that your lack of support does... erode teh available actions our troops can take... owing to the fact they are now caught up with worrying about public opinion at home. Hope you "told you sos" and "Bush Haters" feel good, because you're just as damn responsible for filling the body bags with GI's as are the terrorists in Iraq. How you people sleep is beyond me... :mad:
-
Oh, I get it. It wasn't Bush's decision. The military pushed him into it.
:rolleyes:
...and I sleep just fine. I didn't send anyone's son off to die on some misbegotten crusade.
-
KERRY FOR PRESIDENT!
Busch has killed enough fathers sons brothers.
Besides whats the objective for them to be overe there for now any way? We got sadam and now there saying there gonna send him back to Iraq.
What a waste.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
The funniest thing in this thread is you all think you know something.
we all know nothing
the world is not being made a better place
The anchient civilisations had a better grasp of what 'our' planet needs than we will ever do.
IMO Bush is a puppet on the strings of the real leaders and Blair is a sniveling little muppet hanging from bush's ball sack.
the war was not good. it was a disaster.
9/11 was not good. it was a tragedy. but it happened because the world is not meant to be one big happy family.
The human race is a false term. and a true term in another sense.
it is false because there are more than just one species of human.
it is true because it is a 'race' to see which of the many humans races will win.
the arab races are the most devious/devoted
the oriental races are the most inteligent/dangerous
the white race is the most ignorant (i am white)
the african (black) race is the most natural/agresive/evolutionary
there are other races and other cultures.
why can america/britain not see that the whole world will never, ever enjoy being 'just like America/britian'
America was founded when we killed thousands apon thousands of indigenous races.
Britain was founded (alot longer ago than america) by the bastad, unwanted children of europe.
we mean nothing.
we are not the best.
The world as we know it is coming to an end in the next 200 years.
and that is an absolute maximum.
Who the hell are you mechanic? you might ask
i am someone who has had a lot more time to think about and study this world than 99% of you.
i mean to cause no offence to any people/races by this post.
but if i gave a false reflection of my tru opinion i would not be the man i think i am (still not worth anything compared to nature, but im not a liar, or a coward to my own truth)
Maybe you should try again, cause this list is the biggest bunch of BS I've had to read in quite a while.
-
Originally posted by digaling
KERRY FOR PRESIDENT!
Busch has killed enough fathers sons brothers.
Besides whats the objective for them to be overe there for now any way? We got sadam and now there saying there gonna send him back to Iraq.
What a waste.
Actually Kerry has personally killed Fathers, Sons, Brothers and, if I am not mistaken, women and children. Kerry even admitted to participating in war crimes. So if that is your argument against Bush, what is your excuse for supporting Kerry?
Who do Bush kill?
-
Stabby was just hanging on his keyboard, waiting for the speech to end, so he could post. Granted, that was a given.
What’s so funny, is once he got so excited, he made a post, but then strk started a post at the same time, and they are fighting each other for threads. Who is the best Bush basher now? I say Strk. He is like mrblack, but a bad read.
Strk is mad that Bush wears makeup, Frogmanthepic just wants Strk too wear make up and dress up like Kerry.
Yup, it’s confusing.
-
The anchient civilisations had a better grasp of what 'our' planet needs than we will ever do.
I find this to be a strange statement, what makes you think this?
-
LOL you know atleast Bodhi has the personal courage to post and stand by his opnions.
While most of you would not know courage if it came up and bite you on the arse.
Bodhi.
And I agree the President made some good sense tonight.
God belss America And God Bless George Bush.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
the so called liberals are always going to complain
Bush himself has cast the war as one promoting liberal values, making the world safe for democracy and all that.
This adventure in nation-building, in the absence of any kind of threat, is not consistent with traditional American conservative beliefs.
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
Bush himself has cast the war as one promoting liberal values, making the world safe for democracy and all that.
This adventure in nation-building, in the absence of any kind of threat, is not consistent with traditional American conservative beliefs.
what part of the war do you think is bad? Saddam was no threat?
-
I'm just looking forward to the day when Bush opens his mouth without saying the word "Freedom" "Terroists" his script writers need to give that one a break.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
For someone claiming to be in their 40's, you sure act like one of my employee's kids.... a 5 year old.
Congrats you're on the list...
the list of people with nothing to say, but plenty of breath to waste.
:aok
the feeling is mutual Bodhi. you add nothing to these boards imo
-
I got dizzy watching his eye's thought I was at a tennis match
-
Originally posted by Creamo
Stabby was just hanging on his keyboard, waiting for the speech to end, so he could post. Granted, that was a given.
What’s so funny, is once he got so excited, he made a post, but then strk started a post at the same time, and they are fighting each other for threads. Who is the best Bush basher now? I say Strk. He is like mrblack, but a bad read.
Strk is mad that Bush wears makeup, Frogmanthepic just wants Strk too wear make up and dress up like Kerry.
Yup, it’s confusing.
you back from your baning creamtard? you may like to wear make-up - I think it is silly. Worship your boy king and his cosmetics - maybe you can share the same lipstick.
if you dont like what I write, dont read it.
-
you have four more years ... some of you may even be out of puberty by then LOL
(http://www.georgebush.com/images/downloads/GWB_logo_200.gif)
Landslide Bush!
-
Originally posted by Eagler
you have four more years ... some of you may even be out of puberty by then LOL
(http://www.dailykos.net/images/zogby_5-24.gif)
Landslide Bush!
we shall see. I bet you have until January 20, at which time we will get a real president again.
there is a village in crawford who is missing its idiot . . .
-
nice unbias site there .... LOL
http://www.dailykos.net/
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Nope the UN shouldn't have acted with war, and they didn't. You shouldn't have acted with war, but you did. Like an elephant in a glasshouse. Ridiculous prisoner abuse allegations? US servicemen have already confessed to the crimes, including murder. WMD? Never going to find any (and that alone makes the war illegal). A free Iraq? Not going to happen. Not when you're there, and not after you leave. The US administration has acted moronically, wasted all the support they got after 9/11, made the UN pretty much irrelevant by defying it, made a lot of new enemies, created a lot of terrorists, wasted huge amounts of resources ... on a futile and pointless war.
Ok I'm with GS on this one.....
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
This adventure in nation-building, in the absence of any kind of threat, is not consistent with traditional American conservative beliefs.
THere is lies the conflict. They have found WMD's. Regardless of whether you ar anyone else chooses to believe this, they have found some. They will find more. At the time, they seem to be fighting the insurgents a bit more than looking. The insurgents feel that if they can disrupt the search long enough until the elections, if Kerry the putz wins, Kerry will just pull out. They really are mistaken, because:
a Kerry will not win
b we will find the final disposition of the WMD stock pile.
The really interesting part is that you call this "adventure" (poor choice of words IMHO, especially considering the death toll) a nation building... when Bush and the rest of the people with vision call it freeing a people from tyranny and removing a dangerous and rutheless dictator. Thats the bottom line isn't it. Those that choose to turn the blind eye to that, just to find fault with Bush... well, then... by all means carry on, continue to fill American body bags with your ignorant public opinion. It has been your right since Vietnam... :mad:
As I said before, I am amazed that you can sleep at night, that and I am so glad you are going before God for judgement someday, because if it was up to me, I'd burn the lot of you in hell.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
I am so glad you are going before God for judgement someday, because if it was up to me, I'd burn the lot of you in hell.
You sound exactly like Bin Laden here.
When Americans speak like that,I feel terrorists have won : your country was built as a beacon for freedom and justice, and they turned you into hateful bigots.
-
I do believe Saddam's actions or lack of was the UN's undoing, not the US but I am sure in many eyes, the evil US is worse than Saddam, and to some, even the terrorists and to those I kindly say - blow it out ur arse pls
-
Originally posted by Spooky
You sound exactly like Bin Laden here.
When Americans speak like that,I feel terrorists have won : your country was built as a beacon for freedom and justice, and they turned you into hateful bigots.
I am worse than Bin Laden?
Sure..............
I realise that my total distaste and lack of any desire to try to rationalise to the idiots that want the US to fail is wrong, and I stated that, which again, were it up to me.... but it's not, thankfully. So, even though I realise that it is better it is not up to me, and I have no other recourse than to continue to support my president, I am like Bin Laden.... wow, did not know that unilateral support of one's president, the lack of any violent action on my behalf, and the admission of the inability to forgive the liberals is now one in the same as terrorists. Well, if that's your argument, then in your eyes, I guess the hell I am.
Thankfully, you're argument is rediculous.
-
TV makeup?
Yeah NO real men use that stuff. Certainly not a manly man like Mr. Kerry. Right? Tell us the truth Strk.. you think Mr. Kerry has a little appointment with the makeup artist before major TV appearances?
You know who I'm talking about, right?
This guy?
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/116_1085493800_botox.jpg)
BTW, Strk... I had no idea you were from Texas, let alone Crawford!
-
How is not goosestepping for bush= filling bodybags??
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
- Theodore Roosevelt, “Editorial” Kansas City Star May 7, 1918.
-
criticism is one thing, but when public opinion at home changes the way the troops fight, and deploy is a completely different thing. All the liberal outcry has, and is continuing to hamper efforts to end the insurgency. That kind of having to look over their shoulders (to liberal opinion at home) is exactly what is killing American soldiers. Before you say I am advocating unrestrained violence, rethink it. I am advocating that the commanders on the scene no more about what they need, then any of us back here. So when they ask for 500 more tanks, and instead get 200 humvees (because the liberal public will cry and scream over the tanks), it is that kind of whining and thoughtlessness that kills our troops.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
criticism is one thing, but when public opinion at home changes the way the troops fight, and deploy is a completely different thing.
Maybe the military has changed.
When I was in, we didn't give a rat's bellybutton what the public thought while we were deployed. We were too focused on doing the job given to us by our command.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Thankfully, you're argument is rediculous.
Is it ? you talk about GOD and judgment for those who do not think like you and Boooosh !
Same rethoric, if you can fathom the meaning of the word : I was not comparing YOUR (Bohdi) actions and Bin Laden's, just that when push comes to shove, Neo cons sound exactly like mullahs and islamic extremists.
Therefore, I was expressing how sad it is when people from a country who was built on great humanist principles are brought to the level of 14th century islamic retards... ie, Bin laddy and his clique of savages lured the US to their playing field, and made the US play by their rule...
So far, with that kind of attitude and talk from the US, tangos are recruiting more and more every day, bleeding hearts worldwide are making Michael Moore richer...
-
Bodhi: As I said before, I am amazed that you can sleep at night, that and I am so glad you are going before God for judgement someday, because if it was up to me, I'd burn the lot of you in hell.
Lmao I love these 'christians'... I really feel love from brother bodhi! Can you dig it? I mean he follows the footsteps of jesus so well with his war drum! Jesus said himself in the bible, 'Blessith are thou that wish to burn their fellow man in hell, blesseth are thou that follows the drumbeat of war!, blessith are thou that would praise and worship those that condone war and the killing of his fellow man, for in heaven lay riches and glory abundant for each terrorist killed. For I say unto you, each unbelieveing soul that my children send to burn in hell a star will be placed upon their headdress for all in heaven to adore.'
Bodhi, may god bless and keep you! A place in heaven awaits you..
TheDudeDVant
-
Maybe the military has changed.
If you follow Hackworth over at SFFT it is alarming. It seems there is now a combination of the usual careerism (ticket punchers) with a new sense of political correctness (perhaps a vaild point to blame Clinton for getting it started, not that it has lessened since) that is particularly disturbing.
http://www.hackworth.com/
Charon
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
criticism is one thing, but when public opinion at home changes the way the troops fight, and deploy is a completely different thing. All the liberal outcry has, and is continuing to hamper efforts to end the insurgency. That kind of having to look over their shoulders (to liberal opinion at home) is exactly what is killing American soldiers. Before you say I am advocating unrestrained violence, rethink it. I am advocating that the commanders on the scene no more about what they need, then any of us back here. So when they ask for 500 more tanks, and instead get 200 humvees (because the liberal public will cry and scream over the tanks), it is that kind of whining and thoughtlessness that kills our troops.
500 tanks turn to 200 humvess because of a liberal? Tell me bodhi, who was in charge of sending troops to iraqi? Who came up w/ the plan of what , who and how much we were sending? Who in our government said we had plenty of troops on the ground?
dude
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
500 tanks turn to 200 humvess because of a liberal? Tell me bodhi, who was in charge of sending troops to iraqi? Who came up w/ the plan of what , who and how much we were sending? How in our government said we had plenty of troops on the ground?
dude
Blame Clinton. ;)
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Bush and the rest of the people with vision call it freeing a people from tyranny and removing a dangerous and rutheless dictator
That's what liberal presidents try to do with our military, maybe you weren't paying attention during the last century.
Saddam wasn't a threat to us. He was a regional menace, and as long he was there we needed to keep troops in Saudi Arabia, which was destabilizing their Monarchy. That was the real reason we went to war over there.
If Kerry wins, we will stay in Iraq, we have to. There is really no difference between Bush and Kerry on this issue.
As far as burning in hell, maybe I'll make that my sig file.
-
sclotz... I believe that it was not so much that we were sure that the sadman had WMD's as it was that he was not allowing us or the un to search for them which was a violation of the agreement that caused him to be invaded... The more we learned about him tho... the more good reason to have him out of power..
small points I know but... worth not losing sight of.
lazs
-
Didnt America tell the inspectors to get the funk out cause we were bout to bomb iraqi? The inspectors were inspecting pre-war..
dude
-
I am advocating that the commanders on the scene no more about what they need, then any of us back here. So when they ask for 500 more tanks, and instead get 200 humvees (because the liberal public will cry and scream over the tanks), it is that kind of whining and thoughtlessness that kills our troops.
That was absolutely, 100 percent Rumsfeld. He even sacked a general who disagreed with his "Iraq light" approach. [To me, this is far more significant as a reflection on his right to continue as SecDef than any links to the current prison scandal. One Macnamara was enough, now we have a whole cabinet full to contend with]
The indictment reads something like this: President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld were determined to prove that wars could be fought differently -- with fewer troops -- than in the past. They sent too few to Afghanistan, allowing Osama bin Laden to get away. When the new U.S.-supported leader in Afghanistan said his country needed more peacekeepers, the United States and its allies were slow and stingy in response. The administration then sent too few troops to Iraq, which allowed all kinds of bad things to happen: the postwar looting from which the U.S. occupation in some ways never recovered; the fading away of the Iraqi army; the borders and ammunition dumps and even nuclear sites left unguarded; and the steady strengthening of armed resistance. And rather than take responsibility for these decisions, Mr. Bush and his top leaders always claimed to be fulfilling their generals' requests -- but the generals had seen that officers who challenged the Bush ideology (see: former Army chief of staff Eric K. Shinseki) didn't last long.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19016-2004Apr16.html
By David H. Hackworth
Deploying without sufficient armor and then having to fly 70-ton Abrams tanks to Iraq is as flaky as almost everything else about a war where politicians were proclaiming just a year ago that once we drained the swamps, the rest would be rice and flowers.
If “Blood and Guts” Gen. George Patton had been running things, he’d have roared when told to deploy to a battlefield without all of his killing gear. Rest assured that the 1st Cavalry, 1st Infantry and 1st Marine Divisions would have shipped out with their full kit of heavy weapons instead of liberation light.
But there are few Pattons at the top of today’s military who know the fighting game and have the guts to tell Perfumed Prince superiors that their poor decisions could get soldiers killed. So now – according to the Pentagon’s Lt. Col. Diane Battaglia – our brilliant Brass are “repositioning assets” while our soldiers and Marines are absorbing rocket propelled grenades and road-side mines in thin-skinned vehicles far more fit for a vacation at Yosemite than for combat.
“Most of our tanks were left behind, and tankers, gun bunnies and ADA (Air Defense) guys became infantry,” says a 1st Cav leader in Iraq. “What we need are more tanks and tracked APCs (armored personnel carriers). We also need more Strykers (armored carrier vehicles), because tracks are no good for line-haul escort duty. However, the Strykers aren’t the end-all – they’re having problems maneuvering inside cities with RPG-proof cages. Bradleys can turn faster.”
Now we’re flying armor to these besieged outfits at about $200,000 a tank, and our seaports are on overtime loading ships with the track vehicles that were also left behind.
It’s no wonder that the Pentagon will soon ask we-the-people for additional billions of dollars to continue pursuing the greatest military miscalculation in our country’s history. Meanwhile, the meter’s already closing on $300 billion, 800 dead and more than 22,000 battle and non-battle casualties.
Central Command’s Maj. Gen. John Sattler says that based on the changing situation in Iraq, he requested more tanks and armored Bradley Fighting Vehicles.
Hello? What changing situation? During the months they were preparing to deploy, pals of mine in all three divisions have been groaning to me that they were parking their heavy stuff in the motor pool to go in light. These sergeants, lieutenants and captains already saw that the insurgency struggle in Iraq was getting worse daily, that improvised explosive devices and ambushes were the enemy’s weapons of choice, and that only armor would protect them while they tried to defeat a basically inept but fanatical foe.
But the high brass, from SecDef Donald Rumsfeld down, diligently ignored the fact that guerrilla resistance in Iraq was growing stronger and bolder with the passage of each bloody week.
It’s the type of foggy thinking that reminds me of early 1965, when my parachute brigade was alerted to deploy to Vietnam and we were told we had to take our Army dress uniforms. I yelled at the Pentagon staff officer who gave me the word, and he replied, “We're envisioning a short war.” Or the Pentagon's failure in 1993 to send requested tanks to Mogadishu. The result: “Black Hawk Down,” where a lot of good men died or got shot up.
Until Desert Storm, our military did a pretty good job profiting from the lessons of Vietnam. But then the brass became drunk on their splendid 100-hour victory and concluded that “Shock and Awe” with fewer ground troops and lighter equipment would do the whole trick in future conflicts.
So this time around we went into Iraq criminally short on boots and heavy gear. And one year later, our military’s senior commanders still don’t get what's going down in the killing fields of Iraq, nor are they listening to what their warriors are telling them.
Since the vast majority of the American people are not yet affected by the carnage, waste and stupidity, the death mill of Iraq will grind on until more and more of our sons’ and daughters’ bodies are flown into Dover Air Force Base at the dead of night to keep the photos off Page One.
Unless the people wake up quick smart and demand decent leadership from the top to the bottom of our armed forces, that sad day will come.
© 2004 David H. Hackworth.
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=69&rnd=96.93470836053886
Charon
-
Originally posted by Charon
The indictment reads something like this: President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld were determined to prove that wars could be fought differently -- with fewer troops -- than in the past. They sent too few to Afghanistan, allowing Osama bin Laden to get away. When the new U.S.-supported leader in Afghanistan said his country needed more peacekeepers, the United States and its allies were slow and stingy in response. The administration then sent too few troops to Iraq, which allowed all kinds of bad things to happen: the postwar looting from which the U.S. occupation in some ways never recovered; the fading away of the Iraqi army; the borders and ammunition dumps and even nuclear sites left unguarded; and the steady strengthening of armed resistance. And rather than take responsibility for these decisions, Mr. Bush and his top leaders always claimed to be fulfilling their generals' requests -- but the generals had seen that officers who challenged the Bush ideology (see: former Army chief of staff Eric K. Shinseki) didn't last long.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2004Apr16.html
Charon
LOL... that is an accusation, and an unfounded one at that. Where is the proof, where are the quotes... None, nadda... top it off with the source, and voila, there is your credibility... :lol
As for the Hackworth article... he hits on one key note, a miscalculation. That is true, but the miscalculation is more than a miltary necessity, it is a misacalculation of liberal public outcry, and at how effective the terrorist propaganda would be on our dimwitted liberals. We cry for weeks over a few Iraqi terrorist prisoners being slapped around, and having photos taken of them... we cry for a day about Berg's beheading... how soon we forget the mistreatment dealed out by these extremists on a daily basis... thats the miscalculation, that our liberal public is really this stupid.
-
Saddam was barely mayor of baghdad at the time of our invasion. The terrorists have won, we have fallen into the traps they laid out for us after 9/11.
-
Hey eagler here is a pro bush website:
http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html
They predict kerry in a landslide. Sorry but the majority of Americans do not like Bush.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
LOL... that is an accusation, and an unfounded one at that. Where is the proof, where are the quotes... None, nadda... top it off with the source, and voila, there is your credibility... :lol
As for the Hackworth article... he hits on one key note, a miscalculation. That is true, but the miscalculation is more than a miltary necessity, it is a misacalculation of liberal public outcry, and at how effective the terrorist propaganda would be on our dimwitted liberals. We cry for weeks over a few Iraqi terrorist prisoners being slapped around, and having photos taken of them... we cry for a day about Berg's beheading... how soon we forget the mistreatment dealed out by these extremists on a daily basis... thats the miscalculation, that our liberal public is really this stupid.
DAng!Aint Logic A biotch:eek:
-
Originally posted by StabbyTheIcePic
Saddam was barely mayor of baghdad at the time of our invasion. The terrorists have won, we have fallen into the traps they laid out for us after 9/11.
Please put down the copy of spies monthly would you LOL.
Old saddumb was still large and in charge before we rolled in Go take a reality pill please.:rolleyes:
-
It’s common knowledge, but be ignorant if you want Bodhi. It's that type of attitude that fills bodybags.
…White's departure and the coming retirements of Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric K. Shinseki and Vice Chief of Staff Gen. John Keane will clear the way for Rumsfeld to install his own handpicked Army leaders and put his stamp on the Army's force structure, doctrine and training…
From the day he arrived in the Pentagon, Rumsfeld has been at war with the Army's top generals - veterans of combat in Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Mogadishu, Haiti, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq, and with some of the top leadership of the other services, as well. Navy Secretary Gordon England has left to become deputy secretary of homeland security, and Air Force secretary James Roche has also had a number of bruising encounters with Rumsfeld, who Pentagon officials said has a habit of publicly ridiculing those who disagree with him…
Relations between Rumsfeld and the Army became even frostier in late February, when senators pressed Shinseki at a hearing to estimate how many soldiers he thought it would take to secure the peace in postwar Iraq. Shinseki reluctantly testified that he thought it might require "several hundred thousand," based on his experience as commander of peacekeeping forces in Bosnia. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz publicly called that estimate grossly exaggerated.
When White was asked about Shinseki's estimates, he cited the general's experience in such matters. Published reports at the time said Rumsfeld wanted to fire White on the spot for supporting the Army chief of staff…
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Galloway_042603,00.html
In his remarks yesterday, Rumsfeld acknowledged that the original battle plan to topple Hussein had been changed dramatically as the Bush administration developed its war strategy over the past year.
But, he said, that 1991 plan -- which envisioned a far larger, more heavily armored and conventional invasion force -- was "old and stale" and "didn't reflect any of the lessons from Afghanistan; it didn't reflect the current state of affairs in Iraq; and it didn't take into account the capabilities of the United States in terms of the shift away from dumb bombs to precision bombs."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6636-2003Apr1?language=printer
Gen. Shinseki's sins, according to Rumsfeld, involved continuing to present his and his staff's assessments, whether they agreed with Rumsfeld's or not. Gen. Shinseki has been the Army's prime advocate of transformation, changing the Army's fighting posture to meet the needs of a 2003 world. The most visible crunch came when, in a congressional hearing, Gen. Shinseki was asked how many troops he believed would be required to defeat and occupy Iraq. He replied that, based on his own experience as commander of U.S. forces in the postwar period in Bosnia-Herzegovina, he thought the Iraq project might require as many as several hundred thousand U.S. troops.
This response was at variance with Rumsfeld's own line at the time that it would take many fewer than that. Gen. Shinseki turned out to be right. There are now some 165,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, the place is clearly not yet under U.S. control, and there is also no indication that the requirement for many U.S. troops is likely to change in the foreseeable future.
Another relevant piece for the rest of us in the Rumsfeld vs. Shinseki dispute -- the cynosure of the larger Rumsfeld vs. America's uniformed forces issue -- is the career of Gen. Shinseki himself, and what he stands for in the U.S. Army. Gen. Ric Shinseki is a Japanese-American from the Hawaiian island of Kauai. He was wounded once in Vietnam, stitched back together, and then sent there again for another combat tour. During the second tour he was wounded severely, losing most of a foot. He still didn't quit. He eventually reached the Army's highest post when he was named chief of staff in 1999.
When Gen. Shinseki reviewed the troops gathered for his retirement ceremony, on his last day in the Army, he walked across the field at Fort Myer with a limp from his old wound. He introduced himself with his signature line: "My name is Shinseki. I am a soldier." Gen. Shinseki and his wife, Patty, whom he said was the only person he loved more than the Army, personify the Army as it sees itself, as one family.
http://www.post-gazette.com/forum/comm/20030615eddan156p2.asp
Pushed to the wall, Shinseki said his best estimate was "something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers." He added: "We're talking about a post-hostilities control over a piece of geography that's fairly significant, with the kinds of ethnic tensions that could lead to other problems."
Two days later, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, appearing before the House Budget Committee, bluntly rejected Shinseki's estimates as "wildly off the mark" and added that it was "not a good time to publish highly suspect numbers."
He went on to suggest that other models weren't valid because Iraq did not feature the same kind of ethnic tensions as, say, Afghanistan.
Say what?
This ancient land almost invented the concept of revenge and payback, and virtually every family and clan in Iraq has been brutally whipped and beaten into submission by Saddam Hussein's Baathist Party thugs. Then there is the fact that the minority Sunni Muslims have ruled and terrorized the Shiite majority and for generations repressed the Kurds, Turkomen and others. Iraq is not a big Switzerland, it is a big Lebanon.
It's a relief to know that there won't be any ethnic or tribal or religious tensions when the sun rises over liberated Iraq. A force the size of, say, the Texas Highway Patrol should be sufficient to keep the peace in a country the size of California, feed and house its refugees and rebuild what's been destroyed in the coming war, the last war, and the war before that one.
Secretary Rumsfeld said that in his opinion, General Shinseki "misspoke."
Shinseki tried to do the Army commanders responsible for what comes next - and Rumsfeld and his political lieutenants - a favor by leaving them room to deal with a much tougher reality, should that materialize. But in the Pentagon today, no good deed goes unpunished.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/5361364.htm?1c
Charon
-
Busch: We have to get the weapons of mass destruction!
There were none.
Just an excuse for the dweeb like always.
-
Originally posted by Charon
It’s common knowledge, but be ignorant if you want Bodhi. It that type of attitude that fills bodybags.
Charon
LOL and you attitude raises the demande for white flags.
-
yes because we were in danger of being invaded by iraq. Yep they were massing at the borders.
-
No, that was Kuwait. They pry won't be massing there again anytime soon.
-
I though you would be earning some big bucks in Iraq, peddling your elite, South American honed sniper skills to the highest bidder. To think I ignored my own ignore list for this :(
Charon
-
WTG Bush!
-
Originally posted by Creamo
No, that was Kuwait. They pry won't be massing there again anytime soon.
Yes, that was a war that was justified.
-
HANS Blix LOL the master of Puppets.
-
I lowered my cholesterol.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
nice unbias site there .... LOL
http://www.dailykos.net/
that is where the screen shot came from. the article came from the wall street journal. the link is posted above.
-
Originally posted by Toad
TV makeup?
Yeah NO real men use that stuff. Certainly not a manly man like Mr. Kerry. Right? Tell us the truth Strk.. you think Mr. Kerry has a little appointment with the makeup artist before major TV appearances?
You know who I'm talking about, right?
This guy?
(http://)
BTW, Strk... I had no idea you were from Texas, let alone Crawford!
very funny. better go check your mascara!
its easy to point to Botox Kerry, but that is besides the point. Bush trys to portray himself as a regular guy, some one you would like to go have a beer with, despite his privileged upbringing and opportunity. This just peels off a bit of his facade. he is nothing but a big phony
-
Originally posted by Charon
That was absolutely, 100 percent Rumsfeld. He even sacked a general who disagreed with his "Iraq light" approach. [To me, this is far more significant as a reflection on his right to continue as SecDef than any links to the current prison scandal. One Macnamara was enough, now we have a whole cabinet full to contend with]
Charon
that was General Shinsecki, who warned that Iraq would take several hundred thousand men and commit us there for a few years.
-
Originally posted by txmx
LOL and you attitude raises the demande for white flags.
lol!
Maybe Shinsecki was right after all, huh? OR is that not possible because that would make your beloved make-up wearing, lying cheating W* wrong?
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
I just watched President Bush's speech, and I beleive in what he says. The world has been a dangerous place, and we are working towards an end to some of that danger. I liked his mentioning the vision of terror and destruction meeting the vision of liberty and freedom. The Iraqi people will be free, and they, will have the ability to find their own path, and will always find a friend in the United States of America.
Well said GW, I have, and will continue to support you.
:aok
Amen.
-
I'd wager that better than 90% of the politicans....heck any celebrity..... has a little date with the makeup artist before appearing on news shows or even Oprah or Leno.
So makeup before a TV appearance is "phony" but "botox treatments" are manly? ROFL! Both are part of political life in America today. It's just the way it is.
If this peels off any facade at all, it's the one the reveals your desperation to find something, anything, negative to say about Bush.
Oh, and I'm not voting for Bush this time, BTW. So forget that one before you even start.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
The funniest thing in this thread is you all think you know something.
we all know nothing
the world is not being made a better place
The anchient civilisations had a better grasp of what 'our' planet needs than we will ever do.
IMO Bush is a puppet on the strings of the real leaders and Blair is a sniveling little muppet hanging from bush's ball sack.
the war was not good. it was a disaster.
9/11 was not good. it was a tragedy. but it happened because the world is not meant to be one big happy family.
The human race is a false term. and a true term in another sense.
it is false because there are more than just one species of human.
it is true because it is a 'race' to see which of the many humans races will win.
the arab races are the most devious/devoted
the oriental races are the most inteligent/dangerous
the white race is the most ignorant (i am white)
the african (black) race is the most natural/agresive/evolutionary
there are other races and other cultures.
why can america/britain not see that the whole world will never, ever enjoy being 'just like America/britian'
America was founded when we killed thousands apon thousands of indigenous races.
Britain was founded (alot longer ago than america) by the bastad, unwanted children of europe.
we mean nothing.
we are not the best.
The world as we know it is coming to an end in the next 200 years.
and that is an absolute maximum.
Who the hell are you mechanic? you might ask
i am someone who has had a lot more time to think about and study this world than 99% of you.
i mean to cause no offence to any people/races by this post.
but if i gave a false reflection of my tru opinion i would not be the man i think i am (still not worth anything compared to nature, but im not a liar, or a coward to my own truth)
like, wow, doood. That must be some good watermelon yer smokin....kin I have some??
-
Originally posted by slimm50
like, wow, doood. That must be some good watermelon yer smokin....kin I have some??
Dont do it mechanic!!! He'll turn you in!!
:lol :lol :lol
Dude
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Dont do it mechanic!!! He'll turn you in!!
:lol :lol :lol
Dude
Fink:D
-
Originally posted by Toad
I'd wager that better than 90% of the politicans....heck any celebrity..... has a little date with the makeup artist before appearing on news shows or even Oprah or Leno.
So makeup before a TV appearance is "phony" but "botox treatments" are manly? ROFL! Both are part of political life in America today. It's just the way it is.
If this peels off any facade at all, it's the one the reveals your desperation to find something, anything, negative to say about Bush.
Oh, and I'm not voting for Bush this time, BTW. So forget that one before you even start.
well I think its funny/stupid. I thought Kerry's Botox was funny/stupid too. I would have preferred Howard Dean who could kick both their tulips at once!! Yeeaaarrrrrgggghhhhhhhh!!
hey I can make fun of Bush* if I want to
-
Of course you can.
But maybe it affects the way folks look at all your "anti" posts? Maybe it devalues any valid points you might make because you get pigeon-holed as just another silly cheap-shot artist?
Maybe?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Of course you can.
But maybe it affects the way folks look at all your "anti" posts? Maybe it devalues any valid points you might make because you get pigeon-holed as just another silly cheap-shot artist?
Maybe?
Toad, I think the maybe part is a thing of the past...
-
Watching Bush his speech writers must cringe as mumbles his way through their well written spin on events and future plans. How can someone who has rehearsed the speech twice still pronounce Abu Ghraib incorrectly and differently every time?
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Watching Bush his speech writers must cringe as mumbles his way through their well written spin on events and future plans. How can someone who has rehearsed the speech twice still pronounce Abu Ghraib incorrectly and differently every time?
...-Gixer
Yeah hes a real dumb arse alright LOL
Just the leader of the only remaining super power.
And you are who again?:rofl
-
Originally posted by txmx
Yeah hes a real dumb arse alright LOL
Just the leader of the only remaining super power.
And you are who again?:rofl
Is that the best response you can come up with?
Please try again and with hopefully the slightest amount of sense. As it makes far more interesting rearding for not only myself but everyone else reading this thread.
...-Gixer
-
We need ole "Slick Willy" back. He certainly provided the country with plenty of entertainment. We miss his intelligence...his snappy repertoire...the high-dollar pre-smoked cigars...and his unflagging devotion to family, honor, and country. Here was an American caesar who would have made a fine French president!
Amend the amendment! Clinton in 2004!
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
We need ole "Slick Willy" back. He certainly provided the country with plenty of entertainment. We miss his intelligence...his snappy repertoire...the high-dollar pre-smoked cigars...and his unflagging devotion to family, honor, and country. Here was an American caesar who would have made a fine French president!
Amend the amendment! Clinton in 2004!
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
thats good... one of the best pieces of bait I have ever seen!