|
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: perspicuity85 on February 02, 2007, 06:59:22 pm What are the pluses/minuses of the Iraq War? Yes, Saddam is gone, but was that worth our possibly irreversible negative global image? And what about the loss of our troops? Would they support the war if they had a voice today? Bottom line, I want to know what decision people on this forum would have made if they could take what we know today, and go back to the decision of whether or not to go to war in Iraq. What would you do if you were Bush, and you knew what the conditions were going to be in 2007?
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 02, 2007, 07:26:58 pm there is no +s to any war,and Mdunn is sick of the war subjects,I want my brothers home,and want no more war!No winners come out of any war!
I am a veteran of both Desert Storm and Somalia,I served 14 years with Army Rangers and I know the outcomes of each,I want a peaceful world for my newborn son...PERIOD Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 02, 2007, 07:40:16 pm If anyone knows any history to the Singer/Songwriter Bobby Darin...He wrote a song called"The simple song of freedom"..In the song he states if leaders want war...lets put them in a room and let them settle it between them,not involve all the people!...If ya never heard the song...get it...lots of truth to it.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 02, 2007, 11:51:03 pm quote: Awesome! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: waterboy on February 03, 2007, 10:22:09 am quote: Agreed. Well said MDunn. Did you feel that way during the two conflicts you served in? Did they change your view? Many of us understand the difference between serving our country and supporting our troops while still disagreeing with war as the solution. Your insights would be interesting. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 03, 2007, 10:26:26 am quote: +'s Saddam, Uday, Qusay, Zarqawi dead. Gaddafi sees the s**t hammer lowered on Saddam and turns over his weapons programs. Kurds are safe in their own homeland now. Iraqis have the opportunity to create their own destiny and no longer live in fear of a despot. No more money is being funded to Hamas through Iraq to pay off families of suicide bombers. These are just to name a few. Here are dozens more: http://www.iraqblc.com/iraq-accomplishments.htm -'s 3,000+ dead troops. Sectarian violence increasing, which is our biggest obstacle. quote: I would venture to say that many of them would...but I'm open to you giving me some information that proves otherwise... quote: Irrelevant discussion that promotes Monday morning QB arguments. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 03, 2007, 11:43:43 am quote: Not so much in Desert Storm,but in Somalia I witnessed some very horrific deaths of our boys,The movie Blackhawk Down is based on what happened,Those guys were in my unit,and I knew them very well.At almost 41,I would still go back to Iraq if needed,but I dont agree with the reasons we are there,never did!If I went back it would only be for the reason that my experiencees might help save someones life there.Too many poorly trained young men are sent over there and they have no clue how militant and lethal the enemy can be. My injurys I recieved in Somalia prevent me from ever going back in,but if I could help in some way I surely would. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 03, 2007, 03:50:11 pm quote: What makes you think this? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 03, 2007, 04:20:12 pm quote: Boys just out of Basic training who average in ages from 18 to 23..dont have the proper training needed to carry them thru difficult situations.Yes they can shoot a weapon,are in good shape,but they lack experience. Im not saying our military doesnt train well,they are awesome at packing in training courses in limited time.All I meant was they need more skills before they are sent over.I went to Ranger school and it was the most difficult thing I ever did in my life,but the training I recieved is why I am still alive today.I have 2 bullet holes in my back from somalia,that could have been fatal if it werent for my training.I stronly feel basic training during war should be extended for at least 4 to 6 weeks longer. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: sgrizzle on February 03, 2007, 05:38:49 pm I think the soldiers are well trained but while the U.S is trying to concentrate it's money on safe point-and-click methods of remotely blowing people up, the opposition is more of a "reach out and touch someone" type of people. Urban warfare is incredibly difficult to combat. It's like dressing your child for the snow, you can pile on sweaters, gloves, boots and mittens until they are a toasty 80degrees but then they can't even get up if they fall over. We could drive IED-proof vehicles but then they are so big, we'd also be driving over the civilians and couldn't see an insurgent if they were cleaning the windshield.
Pluses - lot of bad people gone, lots of other "bad people" rethinking their strategies. Minuses - large number of lives lost, stuck in a lose-lose situation. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: rwarn17588 on February 04, 2007, 12:18:18 pm The soldiers on the ground in Iraq don't sound very optimistic in this story:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16616389.htm I also bring this up because it also quotes Sgt. Chance Oswalt of Tulsa, who said: "They can keep sending more and more troops over here, but until the people here start working with us, it's not going to change." Anybody know him? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 04, 2007, 12:41:03 pm These soldiers do:
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/feb/04/national_guard_leaders_support_troop_surge/?state_regional Posting crap like this is a virtual stalemate... Whatever you're looking to prove, there's a story out there to "prove" your point. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: rwarn17588 on February 04, 2007, 05:21:37 pm The main reason I posted the story was because of the Tulsa connection.
Again, I ask: Does anyone know him? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 05, 2007, 11:09:24 am quote: What do you think of the "phased redeployment" idea? I too have never been in favor of this war, the only logical explanations for it are also the most distasteful. But I would probably be ok with withdrawing all but about 80K troops, placing those troops in bases far from action, and using them for support of the Iraqi military. Of course there would still be plenty of opportunities for incidents like those that occurred in Somalia, but those things are already happening. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 05, 2007, 11:20:46 am quote: Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 05, 2007, 11:28:38 am I disagree with that on a few points there, but I believe you may very well be 100% right about the need for full withdrawal. Its an easy case to make.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 11:33:16 am quote: You mean precipitous withdrawal? quote: Why bother discussing logic after invoking the ol' cut and run strategy? quote: How do you suppose they support the Iraqi military if they're "far from action?" quote: Yeah, why repeat the same ignorant mistake from Somalia and run away again when doing so emboldens the enemy? But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where, after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post-cold war leadership of the new world order, you moved tens of thousands of international forces, including twenty-eight thousand American solders, into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu, you left the area in disappointment, humiliation, and defeat, carrying your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge, but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You had been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the heart of every Muslim and a remedy to the chests of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut, Aden, and Mogadishu. -- OBL Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 05, 2007, 11:37:51 am [/quote] Yeah, why repeat the same ignorant mistake from Somalia and run away again? But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where, after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post-cold war leadership of the new world order, you moved tens of thousands of international forces, including twenty-eight thousand American solders, into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu, you left the area in disappointment, humiliation, and defeat, carrying your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge, but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You had been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the heart of every Muslim and a remedy to the chests of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut, Aden, and Mogadishu. -- OBL [/quote] American forces have no control over what the higher ups do.If it would have been up to me,I would have stayed longer to finish the job,same in Desert Storm.We were more less puppets on The governments strings. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 11:47:54 am I agree, Bush 1.0 abdicated his responsibility the first time around, as well as Clinton, and it would have been much easier pre 9/11 to deal with the resulting nonsense going on there now. Every time we walk away from a battle with these nut jobs with out tail between our legs we lose because it emboldens them further.
We need to unleash hell and break the back of this in Iraq immediately with whatever resources are necessary to get the job done. Leaving now creates a vacuum that Iran is waiting to fill, and they are hell bent on destroying Israel and the US. Growing instability in the region only helps our enemies. We gain absolutely NOTHING by leaving, because we will be right back in the thick of things once Iran starts making moves. Either we deal with it now, or we deal with it later, take your pick. And with this announcement today (http://"http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8511140484"), do we really think we can wait this one out? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 05, 2007, 11:51:19 am Then another answer would be to set up permenant bases as we have in Germany and Korea.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 05, 2007, 12:04:36 pm quote: You'd have to willing to accept another Beirut scenario, minus car bombs perhaps, plus morters and RPGs. If US forces are there, they will be targeted in some fashion. Given that the world largest Navy can begin an invasion of just about any country within a month, actual stationary forces may not be necessary. Don't know if that's acceptible or not. Reagan's only options in Beirut after the barracks bombing were to pull out, keep the status quo, or invade. The withdrawal wasn't pleasant, but given the other options, it was probably the right thing to do IMO. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 05, 2007, 12:15:44 pm Maybe us americans need to start moving over there and buying up all the hotels and convenient stores,I would be willing to attend the Slurpee college they go to before they come over here to live.Oops,I forgot to mention liquer stores..They dont believe in alcohol,but that dont stop them for buying up all U.S. liquer stores!
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 12:29:26 pm Keeping forces there is a moot point if we don't tamp down the insurgency and sectarian violence. Long term deterrant against Iran...possibly, but it won't be needed if Iraq stabilizes and can keep Iran out itself.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 05, 2007, 12:47:16 pm Many here have drank the kool aid!
http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html Iran is not as big of threat as the Busheviks make them out to be. Fear over diplomacy? Civilized versus nomadic.... How many here really prefer to extend this debacle into Persia? "Iran strike 'would be disastrous' " "A coalition of charities, faith groups and unions has warned Tony Blair that any military action against Iran would have "unthinkable" consequences. " http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6330353.stm Look, both countries have fanatics running the show, or so it appears. "New Gulf of Tonkin in the Persian Gulf" http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/020407a.html "There is absolutely nothing credible about anything that comes out of Iraq either through the administration or the mainstream press. War-weary Americans, who spoke loudly and clearly about the question of more war, are known suckers for official lies." Some BIG SUCKERS here on this thread. We'd gain more by leaving than staying... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 05, 2007, 01:35:12 pm Speaking of Soviets, something I found interesting about the Soviet/Afghan events in the 80s (and 90s), was that 1) the Afghan Communist gov't came to power before the Soviet invasion, 2) the Afghan Communist gov't was actually stronger and more capable after the Soviets left because the Afghans took the lead role, and 3) The Afghan Communist gov't only collapsed after post-Soviet Russian withdrew its military and economic support.
Even if everyone agrees that the Afghan Communist gov't was illegitimate and should have died a natural death leading to the Taliban, there's something to be said for the idea that it is better to have locals take the lead, with an outside power providing military and economic support. And there's also something to be said for the idea that locals will not take the lead as long as some other entity is willing to do the job for them. Is the Iraqi gov't currently in danger? If you're listening to the Iraqi politicians, apparently the gov't is doing fine. They aren't worried, and they probably should be. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 02:06:59 pm If Iran weren't in the picture I might be inclined to agree with you...Iran is funding the insurgency and providing the weapons that are killing our troops. We can only expect that they are waiting to move in when we leave.
As I have said before, we need massive troops on the Iranian border and massive troops on the Syrian border to cut off the flow of people and weapons in and out. Let the Iraqis have a shot at it, but if the insurgency got out of hand we'd have to step right back in. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 05, 2007, 03:14:36 pm ^"Iran is funding the insurgency and providing the weapons that are killing our troops."
too much kool aid....cool it...makes you look sick! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 03:41:04 pm Would someone tell Dingus McGee that I can't see his posts anymore and he's wasting his time...
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 05, 2007, 03:54:32 pm quote: Since he can't see this..... HE'S AN IGNORAMOUS! NEED MORE PROOF? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 05, 2007, 04:35:41 pm quote: IMO a full-blown Civil War is likely once we leave. Whether it's now, or in 10 years. The Iraq War has become increasingly a war of Nationalism and National Identity. That just doesn't go away overnight. At some point, these folks have to answer the questions "Who are we?" and "What is Iraq?" Ultimately, we can't provide those answers. I assume that there is some Iranian military and economic influence. If they are supporting the Sunnis directly, I would expect that support to dry up completely once we have left. It's more plausible that there is an indirect link through the black market, or other countries. Most US casualties have come at the hands of Sunni insurgents. The biggest influence Iran has right now, is in presumably arming Shias. But the Shias also dominate the US backed gov't, and the Iraqi gov't has no intention of cracking down on Shias. And, perhaps most importantly, Ayatollah Al-Sistani has repeatedly called for no attacks against US or gov't forces. It doesn't always work, there are always going to be criminal/terrorist types, but the Shia majority is more interested in what the Sunnis are doing, than us. In a way, it would be easier to make the case against Iran if the Iraqi Shia leadership weren't trying so hard to avoid us. I don't think we in the US, have come to terms with the fact that if this gov't is to be legitimate, it also has to be predominately Shia. It scares us a little bit, and that fear can cause us a lot of problems. I do believe that the gov't we've established will stand as long as we keep political and economic ties open. That would be a victory. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 04:58:13 pm quote: Only time will tell. quote: There is more than "some" help...the Iranians were the masterminds of the attack two weeks ago where they dressed up as US servicemen and kidnapped and killed 5. They are providing IEDs and have been killed and found by our guys in the field, namely Iranian Guard. Also, what incentive would Iran have to w/draw support of Sunni terrorists and back away if we left? They don't support Sunnis anyway. Supposing you ment Shia, I have the same question? Why would they just go away? quote: Which, as I have said before is a huge problem. We should have had a netural party running the country until the insurgency calmed down. Maliki is a HUGE problem. quote: Not if they are being driven by outside forces to increase the violence. quote: Could you explain this more? quote: Why? I suppose it doesn't matter as long as the Shia aren't offing the Sunnis and Kurds, but there is growing suspicion that Maliki is complicit and/or turning a blind eye towards the violence. quote: Hope so. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 05, 2007, 05:11:06 pm ^"There is more than "some" help...the Iranians were the masterminds of the attack two weeks ago where they dressed up as US servicemen and kidnapped and killed 5. They are providing IEDs and have been killed and found by our guys in the field, namely Iranian Guard."
No proof. Even if there was it's not enough proof to do to Iran what we have done to Iraq..... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 05, 2007, 05:46:34 pm quote: ya mean free them from a murderous Tyrant!Poor Iraqis..Took us 2 weeks to free them of them,hmmm how many residents Iraq have???Lilly livered cowards couldnt do it themselves! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 05, 2007, 06:16:49 pm quote: No, I meant Sunni. There has been lately an attempt to connect Sunnis to Iran. I don't know why, wouldn't expect that to be true. But if there is any link, Iran would abandon that track immediately after we left. As for the Shias, I believe Iranian influence will continue for some time after we've left. Not indefinitely. As long as we keep ties to the Iraqi gov't, the Shias will win any civil war. Foreign influence with the Shias or Sunnis does not trump national interests. Even Shia Iraqis have very little love for Iran, they'll be dumped when they're no longer useful. quote: We have to accept that more or less. No matter what we do, majority will rule in that gov't for now. In the end, as we should have known all along, the Shias will run Iraq if it's to be a democracy. Probably doesn't matter if it's Maliki or not. We could topple the gov't, and install someone friendlier. Perhaps a Kurd, or a Sunni. But as soon as they go after the Shias, we'll have a whole new problem. quote: The easiest way to look at it is to take the Sunnis for example. When we invaded and eliminated the Baath Party, we more or less elimated the Sunni leadership. The Sunni insurgency is a swirling mass of groups with various degrees of organization, and few "all encompassing" leadership figures. The Shia leadership is intact. Whether you're talking about the gov't, warlords, or clerics. The Shia leadership has primarily taken on the position of non-interference with the US and Iraqi gov't. While you certainly have splinter groups, smaller factions capable and willing to carry out attacks, the overwhelming majority of Shias are going to line up under the typical leadership structures. The Shia population has far more potential to do damage, than they are doing right now. quote: That's part of that question of National Identity. There is going to be a gov't in Iraq, some will like it, some won't. If the Shia majority and the Iraq gov't align, the carnage will be determined by the amount of Sunni resistance and whether or not Sunnis choose to participate in the gov't. That is where US ties to the Iraqi gov't become critical; to maintain democratic processes during a civil conflict, to help maintain a standing Iraqi military, and to guarantee the ability of Kurds and Sunni Arabs to participate. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 05, 2007, 06:25:02 pm When is someone going to explain that in Iran, aka Persia, The Sunni and Shia relationship differs from the other Arab countries because the Persians are civilized?????
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 05, 2007, 06:28:23 pm quote: Yea and America used to belong to the indians,so does that mean we are the same country we were 300 years ago NO....And neither is your beloved"PERSIA"aka hellran! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Rico on February 05, 2007, 06:45:06 pm Originally posted by iplaw
quote: These two "democracies" that you refer to.. would they be....? The "Opium Kingdom of Afghanistan" and the Theocracy that Bush refers to as a budding Democracy "Iraq"... If so it is nice to know reality does not bind the dreams of Tulsa Attorneys... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Rico on February 05, 2007, 06:49:02 pm quote: Yes.. Iran was a far more civilized country during the US backed reign of the "Shah"....... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 07:45:25 pm quote: Did you not read his post close enough or are you just really bad with understanding analogies? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 05, 2007, 07:47:58 pm quote: Geez... I know you were aiming for "witty" but it ended up pathetic...I think you and Dingus McGee are the only ones impressed with your posts...I've never seen someone so obsessed with what I do for a living. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Rico on February 05, 2007, 10:04:40 pm Originally posted by iplaw.
quote: You flatter yourself Sir.. quote: Was not the intent.. Fact... not Fiction. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Breadburner on February 05, 2007, 11:00:31 pm IP is spot on as usual.....Anyone talked to any Persians lately...?...I have... The ones I spoke with are disgusted with the current idiot in charge over there and would love some help getting rid of him.....It's unfortunate they are ashamed to say where the are from....
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 05, 2007, 11:05:49 pm quote: Definitely. No doubt this has been the end game. When I speak of Persia, it's a referral to a civilized people. There is a strong movement within Iran to change leadership. This post would not be complete without this link....read it wise guys.... http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/Israel.html Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 08:07:29 am Breadburner: Thanks. I love Persians, but their rugs are expensive. (http://www.hjo3.net/orly/gal2/orly_rico.jpg) Ya know I love ya... RICO[;)] Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 06, 2007, 08:23:07 am Iranian diplomat snatched in Iraq
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070206/ts_nm/iraq_iran_diplomat_dc_4 Diplomats are the enemy????? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Conan71 on February 06, 2007, 08:58:59 am Our vision for a representative democracy in an area which has been dominated by monarchies, theocracies, and a centuries old feud between the two major factions of Islam is flawed.
Middle Easterners do not understand the concept of separation of religion from government and they don't want it. About the only thing which would have kept the government in Iraq from turning into a cluster #$%& would to have replaced a ruthless and brutal dictator with a less ruthless and less brutal dictator. I just don't see how there can ever be hope for secular governments in the ME, nor do I really believe we should influence that on a sovereign nation. The people aren't used to it and they don't want it. To them, their area is sacred and they want a religious preservation of it. Unfortunately, I can't conjure up a better solution for the time being and I'm not privvy to the intel that our military and diplomatic leaders have. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Rico on February 06, 2007, 09:12:41 am quote: You Sir have made the statement to end all statements......... I am truly impressed and thankful. You have expressed many of the thoughts of the American People... That is for everyone other than those that believe "Ya can whup those sandn*^%#@s inta behavin if ya have a mind to.." Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 09:40:28 am Unfortunately we have obligations and entanglements which extend beyond "planting democracy." Since the late 70's we've had countries threatening and attacking sworn allies and recently developing nuclear programs, all while giving the UN the finger. As much as we would all like to walk away from the ME and pretend like it doesn't exist we can't.
Eventually countries like Iran WOULD get nuclear technology, the UN be damned. If we are willing to let Israel take one for the team, then we have to be willing to live with those consequences, but I assure you that once they finished them off Europe would be next... Bottom line...who always get's stuck picking up the pieces when the rest of the world turns a blind eye to evil...Germany, Japan, Darfur, Somalia, Cambodia, Nicaragua... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 06, 2007, 09:59:40 am PERSIANS HAVE NICE KITTY CATS TOO!
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: MichaelC on February 06, 2007, 11:25:35 am It's not "turning a blind-eye". If Iran continues the path towards nuclear weapons, and they likely will, the US will bomb their war making capacity to near zero. And I'll probably be supportive of that. Ground forces is another story.
I believe we can avoid a collision with Iran, and the inevitable fallout, but there needs to be good-faith diplomatic talks with Iran. That hasn't happened in nearly 30 years. It's not Bush's fault, it's US foreign policy, and it needs to change. Iran's leadership may very well believe that the US is out to get them, or they may believe that the US doesn't have the capacity (politically or militarily) to level Iran. If Iranian leadership believes either one of those items, we need to change their minds. Can't do that without talking to them. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 11:30:29 am I don't have a problem talking with Iran...I just don't give it much of a chance of accomplishing anything. I also have concerns that this would work against us and afford them more time to develop nukes if we do the standard UN 50 strikes or you're out policy.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 06, 2007, 12:05:29 pm A U.S. Marine squad was marching north of Faluijiah when they came upon an Iraqi terrorist, badly injured and unconscious.
On the opposite side of the road was an American Marine in a similar but less serious state. The Marine was conscious and alert and as first aid was given to both men, the squad leader asked the injured Marine what had happened. The Marine reported, "I was heavily armed and moving north along the highway here, and coming south was a heavily armed insurgent. We saw each other and both took cover in the ditches along the road. "I yelled to him that Saddam Hussein is a miserable, lowlife scum bag, and he yelled back that Ted Kennedy is a good-for-noth ing, fat, left wing liberal drunk." "So I said that Osama Bin Ladin dresses and acts like a frigid, mean-spirited lesbian! He retaliated by yelling, Oh yeah? Well, so does Hillary Clinton!" "And, there we were, in the middle of the road, shaking hands, when a truck hit us! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 06, 2007, 12:25:13 pm ^common ground!
http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/Israel.html READ IT! And IPsqueak, please quit playing the fear card. "but I assure you that once they finished them off Europe would be next..." Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 01:08:46 pm quote: I wonder if Kennedy was the one driving the truck, or is he only commits vehicular homicide when a large body of water is close at hand? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: rwarn17588 on February 06, 2007, 01:15:42 pm Doubt it was Teddy. They don't serve booze in Iraq, you know. [;)]
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Conan71 on February 06, 2007, 01:16:31 pm quote: I have to agree with you. That is perhaps one of the bigger sources of resentment from some of these despots in s$%& hole countries is we won't even give them the "diplomatic time of day". Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 01:20:55 pm quote: Can you imagine going that long without a single drink...on a side note, we sent a "care package" to a friend and it got rejected because it had a little "mens only" reading material in it... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 06, 2007, 01:38:15 pm Amazing how republijerks continue to go after politicians personal lives but fail in delivering criticism of the one's who cause the most problems, one's who widen the gaps between us, and one's who are outed by their personal habits.
BTW, Ted Kennedy has not had a drink in years. Unlike the posties who continue to do self abuse by over indulging in kool aid served up by our stupid leaders. And how does the GOP defend Rudy's past? Political parties don't have morals so they don't have to defend them .... Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 06, 2007, 01:47:37 pm quote: It was a joke for christ sakes!!!Get a sence of humor why dont ya!This thread is old and going nowhere,most never do,so why not post jokes instead! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 06, 2007, 01:59:46 pm quote: so than this time the jokes on you! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 06, 2007, 02:03:13 pm At last, A bumper sticker for both parties.
FINALLY, someone has come out with a 100% bipartisan political bumper sticker. The hottest selling bumper sticker comes from New York state . . ! "RUN HILLARY RUN" Democrats put it on the rear bumper. Republicans put it on the front bumper. You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. -Art Buchwald Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 02:03:23 pm Ladies and gentlement...Dingus McGee is "the" joke of all jokes, there is no greater cosmic punchline.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Conan71 on February 06, 2007, 02:07:23 pm IP, it's a shame that the ignore function doesn't block out quoted material in other's posts. I was begining to enjoy conversations with the rational members of this forum again.
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 02:14:10 pm quote: I know...what a low rent forum...[;)] What's fabulous is that he's still talking and NO ONE is responding to his posts, it's like he's f***ing 5 years old and can't take a hint. Even fellow democrats ignore him... but he's TROOF teller. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 06, 2007, 02:19:12 pm "Have we hit bottom yet?" Definitely the question on a lot of people's minds.
If we have hit bottom, you can count on the Republicans to start digging. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: mdunn on February 06, 2007, 02:20:48 pm quote: thats the troof!!! Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Conan71 on February 06, 2007, 02:22:51 pm This is cool. Aox, you can rant all you want and I can't read a word of it, you have become in my world a total mute unless you have someone to re-quote your clap-trap meanderings. It's almost like holding his head under water... [8D]
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: rwarn17588 on February 06, 2007, 02:24:53 pm I ignore axeman, too. But if you hadn't knocked off the name-calling in another thread, iplaw, you would have gone on the "ignore" list, too.
We're all adults here. Time to start acting like it. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: iplaw on February 06, 2007, 02:27:39 pm Rwarn:
What namecalling? I think the only one I throw names at is altruism, but I've heard he likes it that way... I hope I didn't call you a name, but I apologize if I did. Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: Conan71 on February 06, 2007, 02:30:55 pm quote: But immaturity keeps me young! [:P] Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 08, 2007, 01:20:16 pm Let's make Iraq our 51st state and continue to throw out the Iraqi government officials!
"U.S. and Iraqi forces detain deputy minister " http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070208/ts_nm/iraq_raid_dc;_ylt=AiBoayImP9QUd9Vtd01dyLWs0NUE "At around 9 a.m. today, American forces accompanied by Iraqi forces broke into the ministry, forced the guards to lie on the floor and took Zamili," said Qassem Allawi, the ministry spokesman." Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: tim huntzinger on February 08, 2007, 01:47:27 pm Would that be a + or -?
Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: guido911 on February 08, 2007, 05:18:12 pm Chew on this one:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/08/video-cavalry-scout-dips-his-bullets-in-pork/ Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: aoxamaxoa on February 15, 2007, 12:14:10 pm "Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash. "
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2007/02/bushs_friends_t.html "In the last few days we've been subject to a p.r. campaign by the administration and their allies in the media focused on supposed Iranian funding of the Shiite faction in the Iraqi civil war. But at the same time, Saudi Arabia is funding the Sunni side. Once again, Saudi Arabia gets a pass." Uh, When Do We Bomb Riyadh, Mr. Bush? Title: +'s and -'s of the Iraq War Post by: tim huntzinger on February 15, 2007, 12:20:26 pm Right after Tehran (http://"http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070214-2.html")
|