Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: mosgood on December 09, 2006, 11:52:54 PM
-
So are things now going bad in Iraq because Bush has said it... or HAVE they been bad as a lot of democrats have stated (pubs too) for awhile and Bush just now has to admite it after the Dems won?
Should we call Bush an Amerihater for not showing support for our troops? Cause we all know that if you say anything adverse about the fight our troops are in... it's not showing support.
So, if Bush says things are going bad in Iraq.. and he has been president for the WHOLE war... is it Clintons fault?
If things are going bad in Iraq... Did Rumsfeld do a good job? Did Bush?
Why are the Dems being so cool to Bush now? The People that wanted his head are now saying they wont try to take it now that they have a shot at it (except for that lame duck congresswoman). I wonder what kind of deal those guys made.
I'm tired........
-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nominated for dumbest thread starting post this year.
-
year end awards are coming up, we should keep these things in mind
-
<-------- Former Republican, current Independant. Shutters are the thought of all the years I wasted participating in the party....
-
Geez. Well he sure ain't left. ;)
-
Let's put a call into Cynthia McKinney's office and find out!!
-
People who start political or religious threads should be hung, burned at the stake, drawn and quartered, and beheaded for good measure. I don't know who gets on my nerves worse, politicians or clowns who can't shut up or stop typing about politicians.
-
Oh ya I forgot where I was posting this thread....
It's all the Democrats fault!!!
How's that??? better?
-
Originally posted by cav58d
<-------- Former Republican, current Independant. Shutters are the thought of all the years I wasted participating in the party....
<-----Shudders at the thought that the language is dissolving into jibberish...
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Oh ya I forgot where I was posting this thread....
It's all the Democrats fault!!!
How's that??? better?
senator polosi, "i will do everything in my power to get america out of Iraq", what message does that send to the insurgents? It tells them what they already knew, that they can't defeat the american military but they can defeat the american government, just set off a few bombs and the US govt will redeploy for a "honorable peace"
-
Bush was right, but I believe he's chickening out. What is happening is all talk.
Up until now, Bush has been claiming that we were winning the war. I believed it then, and I believe it now. But people have been claiming for so long that we have been losing the war that it would make bush look like a fool for not agreeing with them.
Unfortunately, to me, Bush now looks like a bigger fool for being a pansy.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Up until now, Bush has been claiming that we were winning the war. I believed it then, and I believe it now.
Multiple needles are inbound your bubble as we speak...
zOOOOOOM... *pop* :D
-
I CAN understand how people across the world think that if we never went into Iraq, the world would be a better place.
I DON'T understand how people across the world think that if we withdraw from Iraq the world will be a better place...
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Oh ya I forgot where I was posting this thread....
It's all the Democrats fault!!!
How's that??? better?
Now yur learning mosgood, for a minute there I thought you had become a traitor or something :)
shamus
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
People who start political or religious threads should be hung, burned at the stake, drawn and quartered, and beheaded for good measure. I don't know who gets on my nerves worse, politicians or clowns who can't shut up or stop typing about politicians.
Ok, let's hear how these threads started by YOU are NOT political or don't count.. :lol
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=192240
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=191211
-
whats happenin in Iraq, and what has become painfully clear to most thoughtful americans (and the bush admin, finally) is that Iraq is so full of religious hatred and so many people are willing and ready to commit acts of criminal savagry against their fellow Iraqis that its simply a waste of time trying to give those people the opportunity to have a valuable and meaningful life. They would rather put it all in Gods hands and butcher each other into eternity. They have not evolved, due to the ignorant and backward nature of their religion.
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Oh ya I forgot where I was posting this thread....
It's all the Democrats fault!!!
How's that??? better?
Ya, the democrats have taken control of the govt, and already gotten us into an unwinable quagmire in Iraq. ;)
-
Originally posted by WhiteHawk
Ya, the democrats have taken control of the govt, and already gotten us into an unwinable quagmire in Iraq. ;)
democrats don't know how to win wars but they know how to end them ........run away run away.
-
Originally posted by john9001
democrats don't know how to win wars but they know how to end them ........run away run away.
Uhh.. so the repubs were not winning the war on purpose I guess then?
-
[whisper]World War 2 was ended while democrats were in power...same with WW1[/whisper]
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
[whisper]World War 2 was ended while democrats were in power...same with WW1[/whisper]
Whispers back "they were in power when it started too".
-
But my response was about ending them....
Or perhaps the invasion of Poland and the sinking of the Lusitainia somehow were a plot of the DNC?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
But my response was about ending them....
Or perhaps the invasion of Poland and the sinking of the Lusitainia somehow were a plot of the DNC?
There are suspicions.
Maybe we can talk of the Gulf of Tonkin?
Ignoring the warning signs of the imminent attack on Pearl Harbor?
Turning a blind eye to Hitlers advance accross Europe?
"Oops oh darn, we gotta go to war." :D
-
Originally posted by Dago
There are suspicions
Here's a good website for you (if you haven't yet bookmarked it) (http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=89)
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Here's a good website for you (if you haven't yet bookmarked it) (http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=89)
LOL, the only ones who have been wearing that tin foil hat are democrats. (and you I guess)
-
Originally posted by john9001
democrats don't know how to win wars but they know how to end them ........run away run away.
Let me explain to you the facts:
Pres controls the war..
Dems control nothing as of yet.
Reps are cut and runners.. Wait and see:)
:)
-
Originally posted by cav58d
<-------- Former Republican, current Independant. Shutters are the thought of all the years I wasted participating in the party....
Shutters? Like window shutters or did you mean shudders?
Mark
-
Bush war right for going into Iraq reguardless of reason
But his persecution of the war once reaching bahgdad has been suspect.
Too much inflexability and unwillingess to change course once it was obious the original plan wasnt working.
-
has been suspect.
====
Bush should ahve accepted Rumsfelds resignation immediately following the disgusting military behaviors at Abu Ghraib. The Bush failure to act was the beginning of the end of the administrations credibility as far as Im concerned.
-
Only Congress can declare war, the president wages it after that. Any way you slice it, regardless of any legislation trying to absolve Congress of its responsibility, invading a country without a declaration of war is a war against the constitution and fabric of the nation. It's tyranny.
Congress and the president are both wrong.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Bush war right for going into Iraq reguardless of reason
Regardless of reason it was RIGHT to invade a sovereign nation.
Why?
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Regardless of reason it was RIGHT to invade a sovereign nation.
Why?
saddam did not comply with the UN resolutions he signed at the cease fire of gulf war one. He was hitler without hilters industrial might.
And if you say "why don't you go after all the other hitlers in the world?", i say one hitler at a time.
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Regardless of reason it was RIGHT to invade a sovereign nation.
Why?
guess you dont read many of my posts as I have posted my reasons many times already.
Your ideals are great. and if thats the way the world worked. It would surely be a fine and honorable place to live.
Unfortunately. Those ideals do not accurately reflect the way the world is in a realistic sense
The problem with the Nay sayers is two fold.
Largely they only follow party rhetoric
And their scope of vision is small and fail to think in the broader sense or long term
in a nutshell and without going into every single detail
Repeated violations of the cease fire agreements.
Repeated firing on our aircraft enforcing the no fly zone as per the Cease fire agreement
Assasination attempt on a former President of the US
Bombing of Barracks in Saudi Arabia.
The previous 3 IMO all acts of war against the US and all directly tracable to Saddam himself
Oil for food scandal and secret deal attempts with Russia,Germany and France.
If we didnt act in our interests. They were sure to act in theirs.
You dont really delude yourself into thinking these countries were against it because of some great love for Saddam or Iraqs sovereignty do you?
Securing our national interests (read OIL)
Like it or not this country MUST always act to protect our national interests.
And if that means invading a sovereign nation. Well then thats what we have to do.
Just as every nation does
this is how the world is how the world always has been and how the world always will be.
Like it or not Oil and the the supply thereof isnt just in our national interests it IS our national interest and will be for the forseeable future.
It was a deteriorating situation we were going to have to deal with sooner or later. All you have to do is look at Iran and North Korea to see how well santions and containment policies dont work in the long term.
Santions were without question falling apart.
It was only a matter of time before they fell apart completely and we would be back to square one leaving Saddam to follow in the footsteps of North Korea and Iran.
Anyone up for invading either of those two headaches these days?
No. Much better to bite the bullet (no pun intended) and fix the small leak in the roof now rather then wait for the entire thing to collapse
And better to attack an enemy when he is at his weakest then wait for him to regain strength and have to deal with him in less favorable conditions.
BTW
Germany was a sovereign nation too
-
Originally posted by mosgood
Regardless of reason it was RIGHT to invade a sovereign nation.
Why?
NATO attacked Yugoslavia and sent in troops during the Kosovo war... nobody had a problem with that, so apparently there are circumstances where invading a sovereign nation is right.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Bush war right for going into Iraq reguardless of reason
I asked why because I read this as it saying... no matter the reason it's ok to invading Iraq. In other words.. the reason didn't matter. It was just worded funny
Regarding your impression of my ideals.. I haven't expressed my opinion about this. I've asked a bunch of questions though.
For me, if we used all the excuses saddam gave us to invade Iraq because we need to secure the oil.. I think that THAT is a ligitimate reason. Your right... the oil is a national interest. The admin has dont a crappy job securing the country though and them thinking.. "They will welcome us as liberators" was banking a whole bunch on wishful thinking.
I think that since we DID spend a whole of tax dollars so far... we better have at least secured the oil for a long time.
I also wonder how nervous IRAN has to feel with the U.S. army at their doorsteps.
-
Originally posted by mosgood
I asked why because I read this as it saying... no matter the reason it's ok to invading Iraq. In other words.. the reason didn't matter. It was just worded funny
.
My bad then I misinterpreted what you were saying
Problem is. if he had said "We are going in there to secure oil for our national interests" everyone would still b screaming "no blood for oil"
Which is a line that always cracked me up.
Cause everyone would feel that way right up to the point where there is a gas shortage and lines stretch for miles at every gas station and people are shooting each other over it
Like it or not. Oil and Plastic is what makes the world go round
-
Originally posted by Dago
Ignoring the warning signs of the imminent attack on Pearl Harbor?
Turning a blind eye to Hitlers advance accross Europe?
You ever read a few of the campaign speeches of Republicans running against Roosevelt?
"Turning a blind eye..." Yeah, ok. Atlantic Charter, Lend Lease, fireside chats about garden hoses and the whole nine. It was hardly Roosevelt's fault the American people rarely ever have the stomach to do something good until they absolutely have to.
Good thing he ignored the warning signs about Pearl Harbor... The world would be a scary place if he didn't.
-
Originally posted by mosgood
"They will welcome us as liberators" was banking a whole bunch on wishful thinking.
they did welcome the US troops as liberators, CNN didn't show that part.
-
maybe they mean welcomed the way B-24s were at ploesti:O :O :O :O :O
-
Originally posted by Vudak
You ever read a few of the campaign speeches of Republicans running against Roosevelt?
"Turning a blind eye..." Yeah, ok. Atlantic Charter, Lend Lease, fireside chats about garden hoses and the whole nine. It was hardly Roosevelt's fault the American people rarely ever have the stomach to do something good until they absolutely have to.
Good thing he ignored the warning signs about Pearl Harbor... The world would be a scary place if he didn't.
and dont forget.
WWI was called "Wilsons war'
And WWII was called Roosevelts war" by the opposition.
Funny how history keeps repeating itself.
course if Clinton had invaded this would have been called "Clintons war" by the opposing party
-
(http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q161/Z06racingls1/bigPiss-on-Liberals.jpg) :noid
-
yep... expecting humans to want to have freedom is a natural thing for most Americans.
You throw off a dictator and you expect the peoples to act like WWII era conquered and then liberated your-0-peeans. grateful (for a time at least)
How could they not? Ooooops.. they have a stone age religion that loves to go 10th century at every opportunity. They are still a band of desert tribes that all hate each other with centuries old blood fueds...
Too bad they get ahold of money and 21st century weapons once in a while.
lazs
-
With a couple more weeks to go before innaugeration time the new dem majority already has a plan for handling the Iraq issue called Operation Somalia.
We dropped the ball getting our troops that extra body armor, those gentlemen will need all the extra armor to protect thier backs over the next couple of years with the new majority in control...
I noticed today that the leaders of Hamas have admited to meeting with Democratic leaders in europe over the past few months which came as no surprise.. Liberals meeting with a known terrorist sponsor kinda like JFK meeting in secret with the Soviet premier back in the late 50's.....
The years go by but the treasonous behavior continues....
-
Originally posted by lazs2
yep... expecting humans to want to have freedom is a natural thing for most Americans.
You throw off a dictator and you expect the peoples to act like WWII era conquered and then liberated your-0-peeans. grateful (for a time at least)
How could they not? Ooooops.. they have a stone age religion that loves to go 10th century at every opportunity. They are still a band of desert tribes that all hate each other with centuries old blood fueds...
Too bad they get ahold of money and 21st century weapons once in a while.
lazs
another difference is during WWI the war wasnt just taken to the armies but to the people themselves. Either intentionally or unintentionally
In both German and Japan we made war so terrible for so long that by wars end. the last thing they wanted to do was fight
Now instead of taking the war to the enemy we worry entirely too much about collateral damage.
I say, your having problems with an area. You do like Patton did in WWII. With planes and bombers circling overhead. Issue an ultimatum to the town occupants. Surrender now or we flatten the town with you in it.
If they dont surrender. Flatten the town.
We try to be too nice. To be too civilized.
War is neithernice nor civil
War is brutal. The ultimate form of butality
And that is exactly the way it should be persecuted
-
Originally posted by john9001
they did welcome the US troops as liberators, CNN didn't show that part.
BBC, CNN or any other major or even minor network showed this, because it never happened, unless u got the footage to prove me wrong...
-
The shuttering makes me shudder.
-
because it never happened, unless u got the footage to prove me wrong...
...something about a Statue toppling.....happy people....just can't seem put my finger on it...
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
The shuttering makes me shudder.
:rofl
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
The shuttering makes me shudder.
Piss shiver? ;)
-
Originally posted by ROC
...something about a Statue toppling.....happy people....just can't seem put my finger on it...
one isolated event... how about the 4000+ death toll, that sounds like a very warm welcome, so does suicide bombers...
Iraqi's are still killing Americans and Canadians
-
Originally posted by Nemeth
one isolated event... how about the 4000+ death toll, that sounds like a very warm welcome, so does suicide bombers...
Iraqi's are still killing Americans and Canadians
Actually its more Iranians and Syrians then Iraqis
while every death is tragic.
4K over the span of what? 5 years now is nothing short of a miraculously small number
The problem is. Unlike the "greatest Generation"
Your typical civilian doesnt have the intestonal fortitude for what it takes.
Our enemies have no such weakness.
And they do recognise it as our weakness
And THAT is where they are better then us
THAT is where they have us beat
Rest assured.
As enreged as this country was after 9/11
Even if this were Afghanistan and the same things were happening there instead of Iraq.
You would be hearing the same screams from the same people.
While I agree in large part with the admittedly small portions I have read of the report
I was an am disturbed that at least 1 former high ranking member of the military wasnt represented or included.
I dont consider former secretary of Defence William J. Perry to be a former high ranking member of the military but rather a political liason between the Military and the white house.
IMO there should have been at least one former Cheif of staff included in the study
I do not see how a completely valid assessment can be made without proper military representation and analysis
-
Actually its more Iranians and Syrians then Iraqis
If this is true, why hasnt the US attacked Iran or Syria??
Why dont they eliminate their "terrorist threat"?
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Actually its more Iranians and Syrians then Iraqis
I do not see how a completely valid assessment can be made without proper military representation and analysis
Because the problem is entirely political. The War isn't winable through force of arms any more. Smart folks are realizing that and planning accordingly.
-
The war is winable by force. It's just that the US is not willing to use full force.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Because the problem is entirely political. The War isn't winable through force of arms any more. Smart folks are realizing that and planning accordingly.
Its not going to be winnable by being entirely political either.
but by both.
Still in any event the question is in large part what to do with our military and how.
Seems to me it would make perfect sense that someone sould have been involved if for no other reason then to give a military perspective.
Having only civilian representation is the moral equivelent of amature kids playing stratego pushing little flags across a map
-
Originally posted by Nemeth
If this is true, why hasnt the US attacked Iran or Syria??
Why dont they eliminate their "terrorist threat"?
Probbly the same reason we didnt go into China during the Korean War.
and the same reason we werent supposed to go into Cambodia during Nam.
Politics
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Probbly the same reason we didnt go into China during the Korean War.
and the same reason we werent supposed to go into Cambodia during Nam.
Politics
As well as the reason why we haven't liberated Cuba from Castro...
-
one isolated event.
Wait, you said "It never happened"
I showed you one, and you say ok, it's one isolated event. When I show you more, and I can show you more, will you have another comment of how that doesn't count either?
Which is it, Never, Almost Never, or you might have missed something?
Some people are difficult to try and have a discussion with, especially when they can't stick with what they actually say.
-
Originally posted by ByeBye
The war is winable by force. It's just that the US is not willing to use full force.
Full force = genocide?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Full force = genocide = knee jerk reply?
-
Originally posted by ROC
Some people are difficult to try and have a discussion with, especially when they can't stick with what they actually say.
all im doin is being an @55 and pissin a whole bunch of u's off, and apparently its working
The war is winable by force. It's just that the US is not willing to use full force.
how may troops, tanks, artillery, jets, etc. is considered full force??
Can you force a preist to stop being religous?? no
Can youforce me to stop being an athiest?? HELL no
So can a war be won by force, especially when facing such strong religous groups that are willing to sacrifice themselves for their country? im guessing you can... (note the carcasim...)
-
Originally posted by Nemeth
Iraqi's are still killing Americans and Canadians
Canada didn't deploy it's military to Iraq. We are however, in Afghanistan.
-
yeh... i realized after i posted and was 2 lazy 2 edit, but still, canada is just the claen up crew for the americans... if it wasnt for bush wanting to deploy in2 iraq/afganistan, canada wouldnt b i this mess... thats prolly the main reason i hate bush so much... harper isnt much better for keeping r troops in afg. we're just wasting r canoes and bb's on them...
-
Originally posted by Nemeth
yeh... i realized after i posted and was 2 lazy 2 edit, but still, canada is just the claen up crew for the americans... if it wasnt for bush wanting to deploy in2 iraq/afganistan, canada wouldnt b i this mess... thats prolly the main reason i hate bush so much... harper isnt much better for keeping r troops in afg. we're just wasting r canoes and bb's on them...
Canadians died in the 911 attacks. What mess did Bush get you into?