Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 74
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Uh, Barye. I think you're saying that Zarqawi is a terrorist, and that he was in Iraq prior to the liberation. Then how is it that W is lying that Saddam was harboring terrorists? Help me out here.

    he was lying when he said that zarquawi was in an area where saddamm was harboring him

    that is a clear lie -- and you should at the minimum acknowledge that
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  2. #22  
    You keep speaking of the cost, but never mention what has been gained.

    You're not alone in this. The members of your party, and their allies in the media, have been particularly reticent to discuss elections in Afghanistan and Iraq, the liberation of Lebanon, the surrender of Libya's WMD program and the unease with which Bashir Asad and the Iranian mullahs sleep at night.

    The words of your party are driving anew a wedge between the military and the people. That is a real and unrecognized peril in the politically motivated course of action they've embarked upon.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    how much chaos, civil strife, civl war, and attacks on american peacemaking soldiers occurred in Bosnia after our arrival there ???

    I would love for Bosnia to be the "meausuring stick" with which to compare the brilliance of Bill Clinton to the idiocy of generalissomo junior.
    Different circumstances for sure. However, your initial question suggested that the ends justify the means. Presuming Iraq doesn't exerience a hype-induced premature end, it is peaceful self-rule is still a very viable outcome in Iraq.

    <TANGENT>It's funny how we ascribe the military explits to the commander in chief as though he is (was) actually developing the strategy. At best, he is (was) authorizing the recommendations of others.</TANGENT>
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    he was lying when he said that zarquawi was in an area where saddamm was harboring him

    that is a clear lie -- and you should at the minimum acknowledge that
    I'm sure that W had Zarqawi's address.

    Do you remember Leon Klinghoffer? Who was it that killed him and where was he located?
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    I'm sure that W had Zarqawi's address.

    Do you remember Leon Klinghoffer? Who was it that killed him and where was he located?
    we went to war for abbas ??

    the truth is revealed to me
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    ...the unease with which Bashir Asad and the Iranian mullahs sleep at night.
    I imagine they sleep safe and sound, knowing the US military as a whole is already spread thin due to Iraq and Afghanistan, and does not have the option of another undertaking of that sort.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Cite source on the Taliban's "striking comeback".

    When AQ has to target Muslims they are indeed crippled. What a shocking display of weakness that was. Just like the mosque bombings in Iraq today. (Of course you probably think our storm troopers did that.)
    You do realize a civil war is being fought in Iraq?
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Uh, Barye. I think you're saying that Zarqawi is a terrorist, and that he was in Iraq prior to the liberation. Then how is it that W is lying that Saddam was harboring terrorists? Help me out here.
    Please stop using this very poor arguement. He was in the Kurdish controlled North.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I imagine they sleep safe and sound, knowing the US military as a whole is already spread thin due to Iraq and Afghanistan, and does not have the option of another undertaking of that sort.
    Your assumption is that change can only be achieved by American military force. There are burgeoning democracy movements in Syria and Iran. They are watching very closely what we do in Iraq.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    You do realize a civil war is being fought in Iraq?
    So a Jordanian masterminding terror attacks in Iraq fits your definition of a civil war?

    That explains a lot.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    You keep speaking of the cost, but never mention what has been gained.
    Yes, what has been gained? A Kurdish North which will embroil Turkey?

    A Shiite Muslim based gov'r in the South, we'll call Iran 2?

    A displaced minority population which just happened to be the majority of the military that was sent home with their guns after the occupation?

    Well all that just sounds peachy doesn't it.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Please stop using this very poor arguement. He was in the Kurdish controlled North.
    And what do you call Kudish controlled northern Iraq other than...Iraq?

    Where was Abu Nidal? Abu Abbas? Why won't you ever respond to my questions about what was happening at Salman Pak? Do you think Saddam had that airliner there in order to train his anti-terrorist folks?
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    So a Jordanian masterminding terror attacks in Iraq fits your definition of a civil war?

    That explains a lot.
    The external fighters are being tolerated by the Sunnis at this time due to enemy of my enemy. Come on. You're really not this simple are you? Or do you just make statements like that because it fits your party's goals?
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Your assumption is that change can only be achieved by American military force. There are burgeoning democracy movements in Syria and Iran. They are watching very closely what we do in Iraq.

    perhaps the salient delusional idea of the neo-conmen was the sanitizing idea of arab democracy -- that they would all turn into little gop eating ditto heads...

    there is a thriving democracy in Iran -- one that voted in the most fundamentalist hard core islamic candidate.

    The same is in store for Iraq, and perhaps Syria (or perhaps worse there)
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Why won't you ever respond to my questions about what was happening at Salman Pak? Do you think Saddam had that airliner there in order to train his anti-terrorist folks?
    You're kidding right? The lead post in this thread is about an Iraqi defector lying and telling intelligence people what they want to hear, and then you turn around and quote the same for your proof? Sigh.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    The external fighters are being tolerated by the Sunnis at this time due to enemy of my enemy. Come on. You're really not this simple are you? Or do you just make statements like that because it fits your party's goals?
    Classic liberal assault. Anyone who disagrees is "simple". As far as statements that fit a party's agenda, look no further than the mirror. (By the by, I am a conservative, not a Republican. Still, I've never been able to bring myself to vote for a Dem, even one that supports my positions, because I know that if the Dems ever regain control of government everything I support will come under assault.)

    As far as a simplistic view of this...we're fighting a war against a violent ideological enemy, and you insist on viewing it within borders and terroritories.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    You're kidding right? The lead post in this thread is about an Iraqi defector lying and telling intelligence people what they want to hear, and then you turn around and quote the same for your proof? Sigh.
    Uh, so he was lying about the airliner that is plain to see in overhead imagery of the time?

    He was lying about the vicious fights my brother Marines go into when they closed on that facility?

    http://home.earthlink.net/~reed-x/im...20facility.jpg
    Last edited by 1911sforever; 11/18/2005 at 12:28 PM.
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    perhaps the salient delusional idea of the neo-conmen was the sanitizing idea of arab democracy -- that they would all turn into little gop eating ditto heads...

    there is a thriving democracy in Iran -- one that voted in the most fundamentalist hard core islamic candidate.

    The same is in store for Iraq, and perhaps Syria (or perhaps worse there)
    That's right. That's why they keep having to put college students in prison in Iran.

    Ten years. Maybe less. That's all the time the theocracy has left in Iran. Hopefully it'll fall before the Mullahs get a bomb and the Israelis act. You all did see what the Iranian top dog had to say about Israel a few weeks ago, right?
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Things that make you think a little......
    1. There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That's just one American City , about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq
    2. When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following FDR...led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year. Truman...finished that war and started one in Korea , North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year. John F. Kennedy....started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us. Johnson...turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year. Clinton...went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
    3. In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation. We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records. It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick killing a woman.
    AMEN!!
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Classic liberal assault. Anyone who disagrees is "simple". As far as statements that fit a party's agenda, look no further than the mirror. (By the by, I am a conservative, not a Republican. Still, I've never been able to bring myself to vote for a Dem, even one that supports my positions, because I know that if the Dems ever regain control of government everything I support will come under assault.)

    As far as a simplistic view of this...we're fighting a war against a violent ideological enemy, and you insist on viewing it within borders and terroritories.
    I at least know the difference when it comes to Iraq. your violent ideological enemy without borders is a very convienent way for those in power to keep using force. When deadly force is used, and my country's military is put in harms way, I need something a bit more concrete than a catch phrase such as "war on terrorism".
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions