President Moron is now trying to pick and choose the paletable parts of Bakers Iraq report and shove it down our throats. I expect him to go down as one of the worse presidents in our history and I voted for him the first time Kerry the second. He is the reason I revoked my lifelong membership in the Republician party. Anyways a poll for your views.

wrong fukking forum for this $hit.

none of the above.....but dont have an answer either

wrong fukking forum for this $hit.

very nice..do you talk to your mother with that potty mouth son

at least I have a mother, instead of two fathers and a hole in the wall like you do.

You really have to wonder about people who would choose to prosecute a sitting President for ambiguos war crimes in a time of war. Talk about handing the enemy a victory.

You really have to wonder about people who would choose to prosecute a sitting President for ambiguos war crimes in a time of war. Talk about handing the enemy a victory.
In light of the fact that a majority of the World, including a majority of Americans believe the President led us to war for false reasons, therefore validating exactly what Bin Laden said we would do...

The near term victory has already been granted. Time will tell if we can take it away...

-spence

for once I am with Spence !

for once I am with Spence !
Stay for a while...you may like it here :hee:

-spence

In light of the fact that a majority of the World, including a majority of Americans believe the President led us to war for false reasons, therefore validating exactly what Bin Laden said we would do...

The near term victory has already been granted. Time will tell if we can take it away...

-spence

Bin Laden punches America in the face and then predicts America will punch back. That is validation?

Bin Laden punches America in the face and then predicts America will punch back. That is validation?
It's a bit more nuanced than that...but you did just articulate his point!

-spence

It's a bit more nuanced than that...but you did just articulate his point!

-spence

Wow. Using that rationale Victory is easily achieved. So using that logic had we not responded to Terrorist attacks we would have been victorious in the War on Terrorism.
:laugha:

The only victory Bin Laden has achieved is the false victory awarded to him by certain individuals in an effort to validate and further political agenda (quest for power).

Wow. Using that rationale Victory is easily achieved. So using that logic had we not responded to Terrorist attacks we would have been victorious in the War on Terrorism.
Unfortunately, that's about the level of dialogue that's directed our foreign policy the past five years :hs:

-spence

Unfortunately, that's about the level of dialogue that's directed our foreign policy the past five years :hs:

-spence

We spent the 90's in dialogue.

We spent the 90's in dialogue.

And it was during this period of "dialogue" that the omnipresent hatred for everything American grew and festered to the point that led to 9/11.

And it was during this period of "dialogue" that the omnipresent hatred for everything American grew and festered to the point that led to 9/11.
Wow, that's a silly statement.

I'm assessing a 15 yard penalty for oversimplification abuse.

-spence

Wow, that's a silly statement.

I'm assessing a 15 yard penalty for oversimplification abuse.

-spence

I'm assessing a matching 15 yard penalty for Analysis Paralysis.

wrong fukking forum for this $hit.

Duhhhh - Correct forum.... If you seriously have a problem with something use the "report post". Otherwise STFU as I seem to recall you said glad for the Poli forum as it would keep the rest cleaner...

(unless this was moved from parent forum in which case I take back the STFU part :tooth: )

I'm assessing a matching 15 yard penalty for Analysis Paralysis.
Overruled by the Chair Umpire!

You don't undertake a global effort costing a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of lives without some basic understanding of what's understandable.

Well, Bush does...but you and I shouldn't :)

-spence

Overruled by the Chair Umpire!

You don't undertake a global effort costing a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of lives without some basic understanding of what's understandable.

Well, Bush does...but you and I shouldn't :)

-spence

Come on, this isn't Tennis its Football. The time to partake in engaging dialouge and nuance study ended with the pre-season (September 11, 2001). The dialogue that remains should be on the level of our military leadership and field commanders. Let the quarterbacks call the plays and this game will be won. Bin Laden's true victory will come when America locks itself into an unwinnable debate over whether we should fight back or not.

Come on, this isn't Tennis its Football. The time to partake in engaging dialouge and nuance study ended with the pre-season (September 11, 2001). The dialogue that remains should be on the level of our military leadership and field commanders. Let the quarterbacks call the plays and this game will be won. Bin Laden's true victory will come when America locks itself into an unwinnable debate over whether we should fight back or not.

:claps:

Well said.

Let the quarterbacks call the plays and this game will be won. Bin Laden's true victory will come when America locks itself into an unwinnable debate over whether we should fight back or not.
Absurdity.

Even the neoconservatives who architected the strategy have blasted the quarterbacks for demonstrating near zero competence in calling plays.

This isn't about fighting versus not fighting back, it never was and it never will be.

The question is "how" we go about fighting back.

Do we follow a militarized pre-emptive doctrine rooted in idiological fantasy and executive arrogance?

...or do we use all our weapons including military, economic, polical to competently demonstrate by example why the US should be the leader in the world.

You're just rehashing divisive election year rhetoric :bsod:

-spence

Absurdity.

Even the neoconservatives who architected the strategy have blasted the quarterbacks for demonstrating near zero competence in calling plays.

This isn't about fighting versus not fighting back, it never was and it never will be.

The question is "how" we go about fighting back.

Do we follow a militarized pre-emptive doctrine rooted in idiological fantasy and executive arrogance?

...or do we use all our weapons including military, economic, polical to competently demonstrate by example why the US should be the leader in the world.

You're just rehashing divisive election year rhetoric :bsod:

-spence
I'm hoping your definition of quarterback is different than mine but it may not be. I define the Quarterback as the guy on the field making the plays as in Generals on down and last I heard it wasn't the Neocons criticizing them. I dont trust politicians, be it Kerry, Pelosi, Rumsfeld or Bush to win wars. I'll trust the most efficient, effective military machine in the world to win wars. Let them do what they know needs to be done and we will have a real victory. The party that most allows our soldiers to win gets my vote. And if you think differing opinions are divisive you'd best learn to deal with the division because it aint changing.

at least I have a mother, instead of two fathers and a hole in the wall like you do.


You sir are a pig

Wow, that's a silly statement.

I'm assessing a 15 yard penalty for oversimplification abuse.

-spence

For you to throw a flag would mean you are a referee. You are at most a commentator, and a biased one at that. :lasso:

Dems fairy-tail

I define the Quarterback as the guy on the field making the plays as in Generals on down and last I heard it wasn't the Neocons criticizing them.
It's a better fit certainly, but I avoided the parallel because it simply doesn't work.

The US Military has been hamstrung by poor policy since the fall of Saddam, and perhaps much before.

Try as hard as our Military can (and I do believe they are giving it their all) they have been put into a situation where their skills and effort are not enough to win on their own. There is no military end game in Iraq, nor the War on Terror.

If your vote truly goes towards those that give the troops what they need to win, they you should be outraged those you probably voted for sent them on an unplanned, mismatched mission with weak justification in Iraq...and were not allowed to finish the mission in Afghanistan.

-spence

We wouldn't be in this position, if the job was completed in 1991 when we had 580,000 troops there. But the Dems were crying about the 10 or 15 troops we lost then, and its the same Dems that want us out now.

If your vote truly goes towards those that give the troops what they need to win, they you should be outraged those you probably voted for sent them on an unplanned, mismatched mission with weak justification in Iraq...and were not allowed to finish the mission in Afghanistan.

-spence

I probably would be outraged if I didn't know that we have the best equipped, supplied, and trained military in history. But that can be debated/discussed/studied ad nauseum when we set up a few dozen committees, commissions, inquiries and investigations into the root causes. I'm sure Terrorism will give us a timeout until we conclude the proceedings.

We wouldn't be in this position, if the job was completed in 1991 when we had 580,000 troops there. But the Dems were crying about the 10 or 15 troops we lost then, and its the same Dems that want us out now.
And the same Democrats who voted for it before they voted against it.

I probably would be outraged if I didn't know that we have the best equipped, supplied, and trained military in history. But that can be debated/discussed/studied ad nauseum when we set up a few dozen committees, commissions, inquiries and investigations into the root causes. I'm sure Terrorism will give us a timeout until we conclude the proceedings.
While important in a broader sense, in the context of this thread it's a moot issue. There's no military only end game...You must have not been paying attention the past three thousand posts.

Or perhaps you really don't care.

-spence

We wouldn't be in this position, if the job was completed in 1991 when we had 580,000 troops there. But the Dems were crying about the 10 or 15 troops we lost then, and its the same Dems that want us out now.


Back then practically everyone from #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney to Scrowcroft to George Sr, Powell, Schwarzkopf, The Saudis, The French, The entire coallition agreed that going to Baghdad would have been a mistake, and far more costly then where they had gone to at that point (and it was 200 something troops lost by the end of the ground war). Up until the end of the ground war the Coallition forces were able to practice deception and mobile warfare across mostly unpolulated desert, maximizing their firepower and minimizing - usualy - that of the Iraqi forces. Much like in GW2, the road to Bagdhad was easier than feared but GW1 had the luxury of not needing to go door to door.

Had the US Forces decided to chase and get Sadamm other member countries of the coallition may have stopped fighting or god knows what....



This current situation is absolutely horrendous. If the options are to stay and fight the bad guys over there (many that we created) or to "Redploy" as some call it, we're in deep sheit. Due to the gawd awfull planning (or lack of planning) and execution by this administration our prospects for changing things over there in a possitve matter at the expense of our young men & women is rapidly diminishing.

The prospects of leaving there are almost as bad or could be worse. The region could go up in smoke. But hey, maybe of they are all fighting each other over there, instead of us over there, things might be better?

Who knows - if we leave a vaccuum then maybe the Saudis and Syrians will prop up the Sunnis, Iran backing the Shiites - Arab on Persian Crime writ large. Shoot - might take the pressure a little off Isreal if GW3 happens between all of them.

I know hindsight is 20 / 20 but this was a colossally STUPID thing to do. Errors were then compounded by mistakes and then compounded by lack of reality.

Nobody knows, and certainly the Limbaughs and Hannity's of the world know jack on this too (I woun't pick on O'Riley becuase he isn't bright enough zip his fly the same way twice).

I was too young to remember what life was like for those of us in the land of the Big PX during Vietnam. But I honestly felt that our country and government had learned for those harsh lessons and wouldn't eff things up badly again. I assumed that how the military took a real hard look at itself and learned from it's lessons that the same could be said true for the politicians - boy was I naive.

The American soldier, grunt, airman, and squid are now paying, yet again, the highest price for poor leadership. This time around - much like the last time around, our military, our good people bust their asses in all sorts of conditions that would make most of us here (that didn't do it) really grow up. They and their families are paying for bad decisions and bad policy.

I want leadership. I want a long term plan. I want incopentent Government people out on their ass - especially Bush and Rummy (still can't happen soon enough).

Do you think this would have been effed up by the numbers so badly had McCain (or any other more competent leader) been in there 6 years ago? We probably would not have gone into Iraq in the first place. IF 9/11 had still happend (and almost assuredly it would have regardless of who was at the helm) Afghanistan would likely be over now and perhaps a more effective War on Terror would have happened with more buy in from around the globe....


Sorry - Rant Off

PLEASE, ENOUGH WITH THE RATIONAL, HONEST AND OBJECTIVE THOUGHT.

-spence

PLEASE,PLEASE,PLEASE ALL you new DEM's

PLEASE,PLEASE,PLEASE ALL you new DEM's


Nothing "new" dem about me. I voted more R on this last ticket than not. I just wish people would throw out the "Party" model and think this crap through.

The worst thing for this country is being able to vote a party ticket - as well as the extreme left and the extreme right.

Best effing country in the world is being run by malcontents who are most effective at dividing the country, and pushing agendas that do not support the American People. There is no balance. Balance Danielson, balance. You know, Wax on Wax off and all that sheet :rotf2:

I'm sorry, but I'm pissed. I am not drinking the Kool aid :spidey:

-spence

I do believe spence is talking AGAIN!

My cousin leaves for that %$%$%$%$hole tommorow. 4 kids left at home with mom. Short deployment. Thank God. So I am feeling a little frisky.

My cousin leaves for that %$%$%$%$hole tommorow. 4 kids left at home with mom. Short deployment. Thank God. So I am feeling a little frisky.
I've got a friend planning on his fourth tour! Heck he may already be in Kuwait...was damn nearly killed before the real shooting even began. Had to watch his first child's birth via video conference from a hospital bed in Germany. All in all I'd say he's pretty lucky.

Best wishes for a safe and fast return :angel:

-spence

Beyond all the slam dunking and pointed wit here on this issue..... its a hell hole over there.....and its not Dems and Retropubs..... its us....America..... over policing and sickenly trying to insert DEMONOCRACY into countries and peoples who do not desire so.



You should all watch Catch 22 again and again.

You really have to wonder about people who would choose to prosecute a sitting President for ambiguos war crimes in a time of war. Talk about handing the enemy a victory.


GWBUSH:

And I reject those ideas," he said. "Ideas such as leaving before the job is done. Ideas such as not helping this (Iraqi) government take the necessary and hard steps to be able to do its job."

Our Iraqi Government...not the the Iraqi peoples choice but our version....

Puhleeeesssseee.... you must have stock in munitions?

Our Iraqi Government...not the the Iraqi peoples choice but our version....

Puhleeeesssseee.... you must have stock in munitions?
This really is the problem.

It seems clear the single biggest mistake Bush made was to insert Paul Bremer to dictate just exactly how the Iraqi's were going to run their country.

The arrogance of this is beyond words. It literally is hegemony and it's exactly what Bin Laden told the Islamic world we would do.

Combined with the fact that Bush seems to have cared little of the regional social and religious structure...oh, and they didn't bother to secure the tons and tons of munitions and arms left in the open after Saddams fall...

The stupidity of this is beyond words. I don't know about you, but I expect more expertise from my government and accountability for those who led us here in this manner.

Instead Bush gives them civilian medals and high ranking jobs.

The obscenity of this is beyond words.

Skitterpop, I think some are just afraid to look.

-spence

This really is the problem.

It seems clear the single biggest mistake Bush made was to insert Paul Bremer to dictate just exactly how the Iraqi's were going to run their country.

The arrogance of this is beyond words. It literally is hegemony and it's exactly what Bin Laden told the Islamic world we would do.

Combined with the fact that Bush seems to have cared little of the regional social and religious structure...oh, and they didn't bother to secure the tons and tons of munitions and arms left in the open after Saddams fall...

The stupidity of this is beyond words. I don't know about you, but I expect more expertise from my government and accountability for those who led us here in this manner.

Instead Bush gives them civilian medals and high ranking jobs.

The obscenity of this is beyond words.

Skitterpop, I think some are just afraid to look.

-spence


I think some people just understand that they can't dial in the Way-Back Machine and un-insert Paul Bremer into Iraq. Some people probably also think that conceding defeat in Iraq as a form of punishment to Bush is not the right to do for the country. But on the other hand some people probably think that conceding defeat as a form of punishment to Bush is critical to their cause at any cost.

trying to insert DEMONOCRACY into countries and peoples who do not desire so.



You should all watch Catch 22 again and again.

Demonocracy..........Interesting.

Some people probably also think that conceding defeat in Iraq as a form of punishment to Bush is not the right to do for the country. But on the other hand some people probably think that conceding defeat as a form of punishment to Bush is critical to their cause at any cost.
Is that all you've got?

Yes, Americans by and large want us to loose. What a crock...

-spence

Is that all you've got?

Yes, Americans by and large want us to loose. What a crock...

-spence

By and large? Nope, I dont think so. Only those who think charging a sitting President with war Crimes in the midst of a war.

I've got a friend planning on his fourth tour! Heck he may already be in Kuwait...was damn nearly killed before the real shooting even began. Had to watch his first child's birth via video conference from a hospital bed in Germany. All in all I'd say he's pretty lucky.

Best wishes for a safe and fast return :angel:

-spence

Wonder what made him opt for his fourth deployment.

By and large? Nope, I dont think so. Only those who think charging a sitting President with war Crimes in the midst of a war.
So in a time of war all accountability should be suspended?

For a war that we know won't have an end?

This makes no sense.

Bush's duty is to defend the US Constitution...He's not King.

-spence

By and large? Nope, I dont think so. Only those who think charging a sitting President with war Crimes in the midst of a war.


War crimes .... they do it and its a crime .... we do it in the name of God and Democracy and its not? .... this lack of self observance with objective honesty has always puzzled me about America.

For a war that we know won't have an end?

-spence

Fortunately the guys I know in Iraq past and present don't consider themselves part of your "we".

I beg to differ. The military could win on thier own if they didn't have to stay out of the mosques. If they could enter and destroy what is inside the war would end.

And what is so confusing about the simple fact that they, the fanatical muslims, who are nothing but thugs subverting a religon, declared war on us. And the declaration took place many years before 09/11/2001.

Enter the mosques and shoot SADR and the others who are formenting and perpetuating the war for thier own benefit.

Dialogue, dialogue, dialogue...............dialogue got us 09/11/2001. Dialogue got us 444 days of captivity for the embassy hostages. Dialogue allows the enemy to resupply most of the time.

I watched those planes hit the towers, one after the fact, one live. I said in the barber shop where I was we are at war as I paid my bill and started to leave. We just need to figure out who to shoot at. I firmly believe because of his rheotoric and his undying support of anti-american diatribe Hussein, deserved to be the first to go. Doing what Bush did was to pro-active for many Amercians, and in that regard unpalatable, but sometimes when all else seems to be gone, or is gone, one has to save face. And saving face before the world is extremely important. Bin Laden and all the rest wanted war and they got it. But like most terrorists (cowards) after the fact they are hiding well-away from the shooting.

I have asked this question before and I'll ask it again of the anti-Bush group. What would you have done different after 9/11 than what Bush and most of Congress did?

War crimes .... they do it and its a crime .... we do it in the name of God and Democracy and its not? .... this lack of self observance with objective honesty has always puzzled me about America.

Pick up a book on the Holocaust if you wanna see war crimes and crimes against humanity. Read up on the Bataan death march and what the Japs did to Americans. You'll see real war crimes there, not you're silly make believe war crimes.

I don't think GWB is out looking to round up and slaughter random civilians. Please show me the proof of where GWB ORDERED the murder and exececution of innocent people? And innocents killed during battle is not a war crime you know. I want you to show me proof of when GWB ordered the murder and slaughter of random innocents just becasue he could.

The 7 people who voted to charge Bush with war crimes in this stupid poll are freakin idiots. You guys are clueless! Read some history and you'll see what war crimes truly are.

Rest assured there was an element in WWII and every other war in History that was determined that we were unable to win. Vietnam is a good example of what happens when you listen to them.

I beg to differ. The military could win on thier own if they didn't have to stay out of the mosques. If they could enter and destroy what is inside the war would end.

And what is so confusing about the simple fact that they, the fanatical muslims, who are nothing but thugs subverting a religon, declared war on us. And the declaration took place many years before 09/11/2001.

Enter the mosques and shoot SADR and the others who are formenting and perpetuating the war for thier own benefit.

Dialogue, dialogue, dialogue...............dialogue got us 09/11/2001. Dialogue got us 444 days of captivity for the embassy hostages. Dialogue allows the enemy to resupply most of the time.

I watched those planes hit the towers, one after the fact, one live. I said in the barber shop where I was we are at war as I paid my bill and started to leave. We just need to figure out who to shoot at. I firmly believe because of his rheotoric and his undying support of anti-american diatribe Hussein, deserved to be the first to go. Doing what Bush did was to pro-active for many Amercians, and in that regard unpalatable, but sometimes when all else seems to be gone, or is gone, one has to save face. And saving face before the world is extremely important. Bin Laden and all the rest wanted war and they got it. But like most terrorists (cowards) after the fact they are hiding well-away from the shooting.

I have asked this question before and I'll ask it again of the anti-Bush group. What would you have done different after 9/11 than what Bush and most of Congress did?

If the prior administration had taken terrorism seriously we may not even be in the current situation. But instead, Slick Willy had the NSA eavesdropping on the hottest female dignitary in the world. :rotf2: You can't make this stuff up. Forget Bin Laden, let focus on Princess Di.

I beg to differ. The military could win on thier own if they didn't have to stay out of the mosques. If they could enter and destroy what is inside the war would end.
In all honesty I've never heard a single military or terrorisim expert assert such a thing. I don't believe it for a moment.
I have asked this question before and I'll ask it again of the anti-Bush group. What would you have done different after 9/11 than what Bush and most of Congress did?
Who's anti-Bush? I'm anti bad policy :)

Quite simply, we should have recognized 9/11 for what it was...not an offensive strike against our freedom by crazy terrorists, but rather the result of a global Islamic insurgency that feeds from many sources.

This is the problem with the entire notion of the "terrorist". If you either are a terrorist or you are not then logic would dictate we could sinply target and kill terrorists to be successfull. This is the rational I hear repeatedly in these pages by many of you...

But the reality is we're fighting insurgents...it's a groundswell of rage against the entire world. We're target number one not because we're free, but because the USA is known as the world leader and our economy is the underpinning of the global economy.

This rage is present in every nation on earth. Some of it is perhaps justified and much of it is not.

But the US Military can't kill everyone we say is a terrorist when there's a stream of rage that's rooted in over a billion people, most of whom don't have the freedom or means to express any difference of opinion.

I could go on...but this is the fundamental problem with our post 9/11 policy.

-spence

Bizzaro Logic:
Given the fact that combatting violence against American citizens with military force isn't an option, perhaps rather than attacking the Training infrastructure for Al Queda post 9/11 we could have provided some group therapy for those poor individuals who cannot control their rage and maybe a mass apology from the American people would have helped soothe their animosity towards us. 9/12/01 should've been the time for some serious introspection to determine the things that the victims of the WTC, the Pentagon and the American people in general were guilty of to provoke such an attack. After the root cause analysis was completed we could've then sent a delegation of Jesse Jackson and Jimmy Carter to Afghanistan to engage the Taliban in some engaging dialog. What the Hell do those Terrorism experts know anyways.

Dont forget: When we kill a Terrorist who is a sworn enemy of America we are handing Bin Laden a Victory. Yep he gets great satisfaction when the top leaders in his organization are exterminated.

What's Bizaro is you're interpretation. I've never stated that violence isn't an option or that killing terrorists is a win for al Qaeda.

Violence with weak justification that seems to needlessly kill civilians though is a completely different matter.

Perception does count, this is a rebellion.

Your perception of what I believe seems to be quite different from what I really believe. It's as if you don't read my words, but just respond with the same tired black and white mantra.

-spence

Bizzaro Logic:
Given the fact that combatting violence against American citizens with military force isn't an option, perhaps rather than attacking the Training infrastructure for Al Queda post 9/11 we could have provided some group therapy for those poor individuals who cannot control their rage and maybe a mass apology from the American people would have helped soothe their animosity towards us. 9/12/01 should've been the time for some serious introspection to determine the things that the victims of the WTC, the Pentagon and the American people in general were guilty of to provoke such an attack. After the root cause analysis was completed we could've then sent a delegation of Jesse Jackson and Jimmy Carter to Afghanistan to engage the Taliban in some engaging dialog. What the Hell do those Terrorism experts know anyways.

Dont forget: When we kill a Terrorist who is a sworn enemy of America we are handing Bin Laden a Victory. Yep he gets great satisfaction when the top leaders in his organization are exterminated.

You are the wings beneath my wings....anti anything....you make me sing.
You should be in Iraq :spin: fighting for what you believe....go get em Sniper :btu:

I am pro killing the bastards con lying about Iraq and there involvment with Bin Laden. I am also sick of Bush acting like a King and Rumsfield the top courtier. Real kids got killed and maimed over there. We have inflamed not only the Middle East but a lot of the 3rd world against us. And I am certian that we come off looking like 3rd grade bullies over the whole thing. Did I metioned American kids getting killed!!! Thats a shame, a shame. 3000 empty spots at the Christmass dinner table this season FOR WHAT!!!

I am pro killing the bastards con lying about Iraq and there involvment with Bin Laden. I am also sick of Bush acting like a King and Rumsfield the top courtier. Real kids got killed and maimed over there. We have inflamed not only the Middle East but a lot of the 3rd world against us. And I am certian that we come off looking like 3rd grade bullies over the whole thing. Did I metioned American kids getting killed!!! Thats a shame, a shame. 3000 empty spots at the Christmass dinner table this season FOR WHAT!!!

Killing Terrorists is bad but killing conservatives is good?
Yeah okay.
:whackin:

Pick up a book on the Holocaust if you wanna see war crimes and crimes against humanity. Read up on the Bataan death march and what the Japs did to Americans. You'll see real war crimes there, not you're silly make believe war crimes.

I don't think GWB is out looking to round up and slaughter random civilians. Please show me the proof of where GWB ORDERED the murder and exececution of innocent people? And innocents killed during battle is not a war crime you know. I want you to show me proof of when GWB ordered the murder and slaughter of random innocents just becasue he could.

The 7 people who voted to charge Bush with war crimes in this stupid poll are freakin idiots. You guys are clueless! Read some history and you'll see what war crimes truly are.


How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

Your perception of what I believe seems to be quite different from what I really believe. It's as if you don't read my words, but just respond with the same tired black and white mantra.

-spence
Maybe these statements were misinterpreted.

On the topic of Bin Ladens victory you claim we have handed him:

Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Bin Laden punches America in the face and then predicts America will punch back. That is validation?

It's a bit more nuanced than that...but you did just articulate his point!

As far as the use of Miltary Force against Terrorism
your statement was:

There's no military only end game...
Sorry I missed the only.

But having said that; We can assume you support (in conjunction with Military action) the Governments non-military efforts such as the wiretapping of Terrorists and the programs to investigate, trace and freeze Terrorists financial resources?

Any objection to the NY Times exposure of those efforts just prior to an FBI raid on a Terrorist funding Islamic charity?

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

All this from a guy who refers to Democracy as Demonocracy.

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

Wow you must be privy to some real secret stuff because this is the first time I've heard of civilians being targeted by America in Iraq including the shock and awe campaign which targeted strictly Government and Military Targets. That probably bums you out huh?

But having said that; We can assume you support (in conjunction with Military action) the Governments non-military efforts such as the wiretapping of Terrorists and the programs to investigate, trace and freeze Terrorists financial resources?
Certainly if done within the law, and I think there a high probability that Bush has abused his authority in this regard in some cases. Simply because he has good intentions isn't good enough for me. History has proven that proper oversight is prudent to protect the liberties of US citizens.

Any objection to the NY Times exposure of those efforts just prior to an FBI raid on a Terrorist funding Islamic charity?
I felt that specific instance was a bad editorial decision.

But that's not to say that the media should abuse censorship of its own content. There's a line between breaking a scoop to sell papers and providing information the public ought to know.

For all the allegations I hear about a "liberal media" subverting the US government there's little discussion about the political idiology of the leakers themselves!

-spence

All I can say to you spence, Get a rifle and walk the post!

I don't think GWB is out looking to round up and slaughter random civilians. Please show me the proof of where GWB ORDERED the murder and exececution of innocent people? And innocents killed during battle is not a war crime you know. I want you to show me proof of when GWB ordered the murder and slaughter of random innocents just becasue he could.
Skipper, you don't have to murder or execute innovent people to have commited a war crime. There is a lot of International Law regarding war that the US is party to...and we've clearly violated a lot of it, which I'd guess most wars do. While I wouldn't burden Bush with all of this, he certainly bears a lot of responsibility seeing as he is the Commander in Chief.

Additionally I'd be willing to wager some good money that Bush has indeed approved exemptions to the Geneva Conventions which are probably illegal.

At the very least he's clearly misled the American people or outright lied about our behavior in this regard.

-spence

All I can say to you spence, Get a rifle and walk the post!
What color is a rifle?

I need to select some coordinating shoes, and perhaps a contrasting linen pocket square :)

-spence

What color is a rifle?

I need to select some coordinating shoes, and perhaps a contrasting linen pocket square :)

-spence

YELLOW to match your body color!!!!!

YELLOW to match your body color!!!!!:jester: :jester: :jester:

-spence

All this from a guy who refers to Democracy as Demonocracy.


Only when we try to force feed it into a country that has no interest in it.

Wow you must be privy to some real secret stuff because this is the first time I've heard of civilians being targeted by America in Iraq including the shock and awe campaign which targeted strictly Government and Military Targets. That probably bums you out huh?


If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.
Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.

Any way you cut it it's a lot of death.

If I remember correctly, International law does provide for a "reasonable" number of civilian deaths as acceptable in times of war.

But considering the context...

The the ratio of civilians to hostiles isn't very productive.

That most of the world (including America) doesn't buy the justification.

That it's clear the war was planned and executed at the top in a most incompetent manner.

So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.

Please think :think:

Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.

Get it?

-spence

I would not consider war crimes just or practical. Certainly to the military - just doesn't fly for me. I wouldn't mind seeing some investigations at the very top...


Interesting read from Iraq - I'm about 1/2 way through but my eyes are burnt out...

http://www.brookings.edu/comm/events/20061026.pdf

Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.

So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.

Please think :think:

Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.

Get it?

-spence


You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.

You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.
Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...

-spence

Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...

-spence


You say Toma toe they say Tahmahto :scatter:

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.

No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!

Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue

In Skitterpops mind, every member of a US Bomber crew that flew flights over Germany during WWII should be charged with war crimes. I mean, how many tens of thousands of civilians were killed during those bombings!? FDR and IKE should've been charged with war crimes and murder also. After all, they ordered the attacks that killed those civilians! In Skitterpops mind, they must be war criminals too.

Just needed to put into perspective how insane his logic is.

I don't think Bush is going out of his way to get civillians killed - kinda rediculous. Sure, he has ranged from stupid to less than brilliant on many things but trying to kill civilians is as foolish as him being behind 9/11.

The rules of engagement by the US military are probably more inline with minimizing civilian casualties than any military in the past 100 years.

Shock and Awe was just that. Precision munitions and missiles that destroy what they are aiming at 85% of the time.

From a military standpoint to be able to take out a single target now means that one aircraft can often destroy today, in 2006, what probably would have taken a squadron of B17s in WW2. Two smart weapons from one aircraft hitting the intended target instead of a fleet of aircraft indiscriminently unloading hundreds of bombs for the same target. Even in Vietnam there was often several attempts at a target with "dumb" bombs that were within a few years hit with the early versions of laser guided weapons.

Using the unguided weapons caused far more civilian deaths and the deaths of our military (takes a lot more planes to hit a target means a lot more planes can get shot down).

Add to the top of it that these people on the other side put THEIR civilians in harm's way. Mosques, schools, hospitals.

No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!

Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue


Skip....are you really this dumb?

Man do I know how to stir up some %$%$%$%$ or what!!

I don't think Bush is going out of his way to get civillians killed - kinda rediculous. Sure, he has ranged from stupid to less than brilliant on many things but trying to kill civilians is as foolish as him being behind 9/11.

The rules of engagement by the US military are probably more inline with minimizing civilian casualties than any military in the past 100 years.

Shock and Awe was just that. Precision munitions and missiles that destroy what they are aiming at 85% of the time.

From a military standpoint to be able to take out a single target now means that one aircraft can often destroy today, in 2006, what probably would have taken a squadron of B17s in WW2. Two smart weapons from one aircraft hitting the intended target instead of a fleet of aircraft indiscriminently unloading hundreds of bombs for the same target. Even in Vietnam there was often several attempts at a target with "dumb" bombs that were within a few years hit with the early versions of laser guided weapons.

Using the unguided weapons caused far more civilian deaths and the deaths of our military (takes a lot more planes to hit a target means a lot more planes can get shot down).

Add to the top of it that these people on the other side put THEIR civilians in harm's way. Mosques, schools, hospitals.

Good post, right on the money!

But Skitterpop thinks we are bunch of dummies for thinking this way! :rollem:

STOP

You guys are missing the point.

Nobody has said Bush targets civilians, and the fact that terrorists might do it is moot unless you care to stoop to their level.

The simply fact is that many tens of thousands of civilians are being killed for a variety of reasons and this is adding kerosene to the already blazing fire. Regardless if it's a US bomb, insurgent or terrorist attack...the Iraqi finger points back at the USA as we're supposed to be providing protection.

More Iraqis pushed into the insurgency for nationalistic reasons means even more pushed into sectarian violence and more into Jihad.

We're in a very bad place right now. I hope everyone has a lot of tuna stocked under the bed.

-spence

Good post, right on the money!

But Skitterpop thinks we are bunch of dummies for thinking this way! :rollem:


No I don`t Skip....but nice try at the cover....I make one very brief statement which you add names and much content to which I never mention....you make up all this crap I never said to fit your war on you being right about everything you comment on.....its funny :whackin:

STOP

You guys are missing the point.

Nobody has said Bush targets civilians, and the fact that terrorists might do it is moot unless you care to stoop to their level.

-spence
I'm not sure Skitter will agree with you on that.

No I don`t Skip....but nice try at the cover....I make one very brief statement which you add names and much content to which I never mention....you make up all this crap I never said to fit your war on you being right about everything you comment on.....its funny :whackin:

So you are now saying that Bush hasn't targeted civilians? Should Clinton have been charged with War Crimes for his bombing in the Balkins?

So you are now saying that Bush hasn't targeted civilians?
No, he's never said that. He may be saying that he believes our use of force has at times been illegal...

-spence

Wow, draft wins.

Good luck with that, I'll be somewhere warm and fishing if that happens. :wave:

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.


Here it is..... nice gymnastics TRYING to make it something else :doh:

Here it is..... nice gymnastics TRYING to make it something else :doh:

Then we can assume that the Bombing of the Balkins was a war crime for the same reasons and those responsible should stand trial?

The problem with this war is it is being fought in a time of political correctness that is going to destroy our youth and our country. Most of the left that are now intent on weakening our war effort voted for it. This country does not produce men anymore! This war is nothing compared to what our fathers and grandfathers fought. I work in the Lexington,Concord area of Ma. and let me tell you. If the Revolutionary War happened today we would cave in like the bunch of pansies we are rapidly becoming. I call for the real men to stand up to this bunch of weak, left leaning people who run their lifes based on emotion instead of reality. the way I see it,this country is in a whole lot of trouble.

Then we can assume that the Bombing of the Balkins was a war crime for the same reasons and those responsible should stand trial?


Skip? Is that you? You can continue to assume as much as you want as that is your forte.

Skip? Is that you? You can continue to assume as much as you want as that is your forte.

Cute. Now answer the question please.

Cute. Now answer the question please.
How is this relevent to the conversation on Iraq? Unless you want to dive into the nuances of each action it doesn't add much value.

-spence

How is this relevent to the conversation on Iraq? Unless you want to dive into the nuances of each action it doesn't add much value.

-spence

It's totally relevant to the point of Bush being charged with War Crimes for actions in Iraq which as you'll remember is the fourth choice in the poll question.
Or maybe we should start a new poll which could be:

Should Bush be held to higher standards than past Presidents?

Should Bush be held to higher standards than past Presidents?
Potential illegallity of the Balkins action under Clinton does in no way mean Bush is being held to a higher standard. Two wrongs wouldn't make a right...

I think there's good reason to take issue with both, but for very different reasons. To use one as a precident though doen't make much sense.

-spence

Potential illegallity of the Balkins action under Clinton does in no way mean Bush is being held to a higher standard. Two wrongs wouldn't make a right...

I think there's good reason to take issue with both, but for very different reasons. To use one as a precident though doen't make much sense.

-spence

Your absolutely right.........and I never expected an answer from you or Skitter on the Balkins question. It just wouldn't fit.

Thanks then, this has been very productive :yawn:

Any babies yet?

-spence

Thanks then, this has been very productive :yawn:

Any babies yet?

-spence

More revealing than productive.

More revealing than productive.

No babies yet she's twenty seven weeks and the Doctors said they wont let her go anymore than 30 weeks. She's been condemned to bed rest for the remainder. The good news is babies Alpha, Beta, and Cappa are doing excellent. Thanks for asking.

More revealing than productive.
Yes, it has revealed an inability for you and Skippy to make substantial comments :hihi:

-spence

No babies yet she's twenty seven weeks and the Doctors said they wont let her go anymore than 30 weeks. She's been condemned to bed rest for the remainder. The good news is babies Alpha, Beta, and Cappa are doing excellent. Thanks for asking.
Excellent, should make your new year a bit more exciting.

Also, it should be Alpha, Beta and Gamma...oh and Kappa is spelled with a K ;)

-spence

Excellent, should make your new year a bit more exciting.

Also, it should be Alpha, Beta and Gamma...oh and Kappa is spelled with a K ;)

-spence

Ther babies were designated A,B, and C. So my daughter assigned those temporary names. Gamma and Kappa just didn't work. She's a product of a Liberal University, what can I say.

Ther babies were designated A,B, and C. So my daughter assigned those temporary names. Gamma and Kappa just didn't work. She's a product of a Liberal University, what can I say.
Is there anything but? Oh yea, Bob Jones :hee:

-spence

Spence, entering the mosques and killing Sadr is my stated opinon, not that of anyone else, yet anyways. We've been told we cannot enter mosques for any reasons. Only Iwaqi soldiers and stupid dumb rabbits can. My only point here is that is an assinine policy. Most of the murderers in Iraq hide there.

Spence, entering the mosques and killing Sadr is my stated opinon, not that of anyone else, yet anyways. We've been told we cannot enter mosques for any reasons. Only Iwaqi soldiers and stupid dumb rabbits can. My only point here is that is an assinine policy. Most of the murderers in Iraq hide there.
It's simply not feasable most of the time. This isn't political correctness as much as pragmatic strategy. There are so many negatives they outweight the benefit. I'm speaking both locally (revolt) and Globally as it would be a PR boon for Jihadists.

We may have had an opportunity to nail Sadr a few years ago, but his position is so strong now that to directly go after him would be very difficult. It would appear to be US hegemony rather than democratic process.

We do need to find a way to minimize his influence in the Iraqi government. This certainly looks to be a long tent pole.

-spence

Cute. Now answer the question please.


I would if your question had anything to do with what I`ve posted.....assuming you have read my post?

I would if your question had anything to do with what I`ve posted.....assuming you have read my post?

Asking if you felt War Crimes were commited in the Balkins bombing isn't relative to your feeling that War Crimes were commited in the bombing of Iraq? Okay. Like I said I didn't expect you to answer.

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

Just for the record Skitter, this was your response to my post when i described what i believed real war crimes were, holocaust, bataan death march etc.

So you respond to that post with your above comments, basiclly implying that shock and awe should be considered with the real war crimes i mentioned.

So how am i twisting your statements again?? Its pretty clear what you were implying, that sock and awe should be considered a war crime.

How am i misquoting you again!?

Just for the record Skitter, this was your response to my post when i described what i believed real war crimes were, holocaust, bataan death march etc.

Skipper-lou,

A war crime is any violation of the laws of war. It's not just the really big stuff...

-spence

Skipper-lou,

A war crime is any violation of the laws of war. It's not just the really big stuff...

-spence

Perhaps, but that's not the point here. Skitter clearly implied that shock and awe should be in the war crimes category. How was shock and awe a war crime? I'm waiting for his reply....

Just for the record Skitter, this was your response to my post when i described what i believed real war crimes were, holocaust, bataan death march etc.

So you respond to that post with your above comments, basiclly implying that shock and awe should be considered with the real war crimes i mentioned.

So how am i twisting your statements again?? Its pretty clear what you were implying, that sock and awe should be considered a war crime.

How am i misquoting you again!?


Implying that civilians were killed is not saying Bush should be charged with war crimes....my war crimes comment was in general about all wars,no matter what country is doing the killing.... all wars bring death and destruction..... and its not sock and awe :usd:

Implying that civilians were killed is not saying Bush should be charged with war crimes....my war crimes comment was in general about all wars,no matter what country is doing the killing.... all wars bring death and destruction..... and its not sock and awe :usd:

Then end this drivle and say "I dont think Bush is guilty of war crimes"..........and if that doesn't work for you say: "I dont think Bush is any more guilty than his predecessor is of commiting war crimes".

Then end this drivle and say "I dont think Bush is guilty of war crimes"..........and if that doesn't work for you say: "I dont think Bush is any more guilty than his predecessor is of commiting war crimes".
Ok, that's no trying to lead the witness :hs:

-spence

Then end this drivle and say "I dont think Bush is guilty of war crimes"..........and if that doesn't work for you say: "I dont think Bush is any more guilty than his predecessor is of commiting war crimes".


Are you wearing a leather mask? :btu:


Control freaks are generally people who realize that they have no control but carry on none the less.

We are who we are and i refuse to be DEVOURED by any little big bad wolf of intellect imagined.

Are you wearing a leather mask? :btu:


Control freaks are generally people who realize that they have no control but carry on none the less.

We are who we are and i refuse to be DEVOURED by any little big bad wolf of intellect imagined.

He asked a simple question. Do you believe president Bush is a war criminal? Yes or No

And if yes please explain why. With facts to back up your answer of course.

We're just trying to figure out what the hell your position is!

doggie style

doggie style

just keep dodging the question....

Its not my job to answer your questions


Happy Holidays

I think this is something they've learned by watching the various conservative pundits engage in one sided debates on their programs.

Take one little item of little value and make it the rise above everything else. Keep the sheep focused on what's not important...

I see it all the time.

-spence

I think this is something they've learned by watching the various conservative pundits engage in one sided debates on their programs.

Take one little item of little value and make it the rise above everything else. Keep the sheep focused on what's not important...

I see it all the time.

-spence

Or we could compare it to the routine regularly practiced by the other side of the spectrum. When faced with pointed questions whose answer would reveal the true partisan hypocrisy: Evade, attack, duck and cover.

When faced with pointed questions whose answer would reveal the true partisan hypocrisy: Evade, attack, duck and cover.
Well, when I see any of those questions from ya we'll see :hihi:

-spence

War crimes .... they do it and its a crime .... we do it in the name of God and Democracy and its not? .... this lack of self observance with objective honesty has always puzzled me about America.

This was my post.... Many people in this country and in the global community long believe America is an imperialistic war mongering country....no matter what president/power group is sitting at the time.

We carry on in the guise of democracy, patriotism, and God though many people believe otherwise.

All wars and uprisings have war crimes within them.... its part of the nature of wars.

We are all guilty by relation to some degree.... all humans globally.

This was my post.... Many people in this country and in the global community long believe America is an imperialistic war mongering country....no matter what president/power group is sitting at the time.




Intersting perception considering it isn't the US who is currently involved in almost every armed conflict on the face of the earth. Guess who is.

Covertly?

This was my post.... Many people in this country and in the global community long believe America is an imperialistic war mongering country....no matter what president/power group is sitting at the time.

We carry on in the guise of democracy, patriotism, and God though many people believe otherwise.

All wars and uprisings have war crimes within them.... its part of the nature of wars.

We are all guilty by relation to some degree.... all humans globally.

In your opinion, is Bush going out of his way to commit war crimes? This what we are asking you. But you wont answer this simple question.

Is Bush going out of his way to commit war crimes? Yes or No

Why wont you answer this? :huh:

Its not my job to answer your questions


Happy Holidays

Yeah it's tough answering a simple yes or no question isnt it?

Intersting perception considering it isn't the US who is currently involved in almost every armed conflict on the face of the earth. Guess who is.
Once again...what's the point?

-spence

In your opinion, is Bush going out of his way to commit war crimes? This what we are asking you. But you wont answer this simple question.

Is Bush going out of his way to commit war crimes? Yes or No

Why wont you answer this? :huh:

Yes

Now on with the show:hee:

Yes

Now on with the show:hee:


Like I said. Revealing. :rotf3:

Like I said. Revealing. :rotf3:


Does this mean I have been DEVOURED :conf:

Please....you flatter only yourself SS :rotf3:

Yes

Now on with the show:hee:

Ok, now tell us why he is a war criminal? What has he done to be classified as a war criminal? Please tell us, give the facts to back up your war criminal claim.

Ok, now tell us why he is a war criminal? What has he done to be classified as a war criminal? Please tell us, give the facts to back up your war criminal claim.


What took you so long? I`m too old for homework....you give me the proof that he is`nt since you insisted on my answer.

Even though he is only a figurehead for the power group he is still the President and ultimately responsible.


Let`s hear it kind sir.

What took you so long? I`m too old for homework....you give me the proof that he is`nt since you insisted on my answer.

Even though he is only a figurehead for the power group he is still the President and ultimately responsible.


Let`s hear it kind sir.

Again, you wont answer a simple question.

Because you have no proof of any war crimes Bush has comitted.

You are so avoiding this question, its quite funny.

Instead of answering my simple question of showing any proof of Bush and war crimes, like an 8 year old you try and turn the question around so you dont have to answer it.

Pathetic!

Again, you wont answer a simple question.

Because you have no proof of any war crimes Bush has comitted.

You are so avoiding this question, its quite funny.

Instead of answering my simple question of showing any proof of Bush and war crimes, like an 8 year old you try and turn the question around so you dont have to answer it.

Pathetic!


You insisted....you answer..... lets hear it Skippy!

Whats that term?........oh yeah, "Blind partisan hatred".

Whats that term?........oh yeah, "Blind partisan hatred".

Since when is outrage over incompetency and our harm to our troops partisan?

Talk about calling the kettle black.

-spence

Whats that term?........oh yeah, "Blind partisan hatred".


Possibly self hatred.... and since therapy is questionable....you`re stuck.

Merry Christmas :jester:

Possibly self hatred.... and since therapy is questionable....you`re stuck.

Merry Christmas :jester:

I hereby prescribe you to:

Fish More!

Merry Christmas back at ya, now go :gu: a couple of egg nogs.

Since when is outrage over incompetency and our harm to our troops partisan?

Talk about calling the kettle black.

-spence It was in reference to the whole charge Bush with War Crimes thing................but now that you mention it; If only we could focus all that outrage at the people who actually are harming our troops. I know, I know, Bush is the true enemy yada yada yada, We hear the same crap all the time from Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong, Al Queda and Al Jazeera. It's real old. Done with this. :doh:

I know, I know, Bush is the true enemy yada yada yada, We hear the same crap all the time from Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong, Al Queda and Al Jazeera. It's real old. Done with this. :doh:
So you think Skitterpop is on the same side as Iran and Bin Laden?

That's pretty perverted.

And it's really missing the point. Bush isn't the enemy but to defeat terrorisim we need to win by example. The real secret weapon we can employ is to reinforce globally what's made America great. On this front Bush doesn't have a clue.

-spence

2941 confirmed dead US Soldiers.All these fine folks for a culture(religion) that HATES us.

God is good,god is great effing islam should be sh!t on my plate!

We need to leave there and LET THEM KILL THEMSELVES!!!Its what they are best at...killing themselves.

So you think Skitterpop is on the same side as Iran and Bin Laden?

That's pretty perverted.


-spence

I suppose it could be considered perverted thinking if it ever actually occured.

But they probably do get a comfortable little smile on their face when they hear and read some of the crap the Left puts out in this country.

But they probably do get a comfortable little smile on their face when they hear and read some of the crap the Left puts out in this country.
Not sure why you waste your valuable brain time on stuff like this.

You don't think Bin Laden was praising Allah when Bush invaded Iraq?

You don't think Bin Laden wasn't dancing around his cave when is was clear there was no WMD?

You don't think Bin Laden doesn't &$^#%CENSORED&$^$ his AK-47 every day when Iraqi violence seems to keep increasing up, and up and up...

The new (and non liberal) Iraq Group Report has had the displeasure of reporting to the American people that the "drive by media" has actually be dramatically under reporting violence in Iraq because of how the US Government has been skewing statistics.

It would seem as though reality is our own worst enemy.

-spence

Not sure why you waste your valuable brain time on stuff like this.

You don't think Bin Laden was praising Allah when Bush invaded Iraq?

You don't think Bin Laden wasn't dancing around his cave when is was clear there was no WMD?

You don't think Bin Laden doesn't &$^#%CENSORED&$^$ his AK-47 every day when Iraqi violence seems to keep increasing up, and up and up...

The new (and non liberal) Iraq Group Report has had the displeasure of reporting to the American people that the "drive by media" has actually be dramatically under reporting violence in Iraq because of how the US Government has been skewing statistics.

It would seem as though reality is our own worst enemy.

-spence

Spin and counter-spin. The really crappy thing about wars is they never go the way you would like. Maybe Bin Laden has won some battles as you love to point out but so have we. No doubt his greatest victory would be the American People charging their own President with War Crimes. Couple that with running away from a fight with Al Queda (yes Al Queda is in Iraq) and.......use your imagination from there.

The really crappy thing about wars is they never go the way you would like.
Of course, that's why you're supposed to have contingency plans!

Not the "let's assume the worst case" to get us in and then "assume the best case" once we're there.

Maybe Bin Laden has won some battles as you love to point out but so have we. No doubt his greatest victory would be the American People charging their own President with War Crimes. Couple that with running away from a fight with Al Queda (yes Al Queda is in Iraq) and.......use your imagination from there.
We've has some tactical wins but little in the way of strategic wins against global terrorisim. If Bush was charged with war crimes or impeached Bin Laden wouldn't see it as a victory against the West, it would simply be confirmation of his beliefs that our leadership is corrupt.

And that's the rub. To hide what most around the world believe as unethical at best, or illegal at worst in the name of patriotisim is a serious compromise to the same moral superiority we claim to be standing up for in the middle east.

Try as you may to cast this aside as partisanship, but in doing so you're separating yourself from the values of classical liberalisim that in the hands of nearly free men gave birth to the Declaration of Independence and the US Constiturion.

-spence :smokin:

Like Father like son....... just an excerpt...


International War Crimes Tribunal
United States War Crimes Against Iraq Initial Complaint
Charging

George Bush, J. Danforth Quayle, James Baker,
Richard Cheney, William Webster, Colin Powell,
Norman Schwarzkopf and Others to be named
With
Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against
Humanity and Other Criminal Acts and High Crimes in
Violation of the Charter of the United Nations,
International Law, the Constitution of the United States
and Laws made in Pursuance Thereof.

Preliminary Statement

These charges have been prepared prior to the first hearing of the Commission of Inquiry by its staff. They are based on direct and circumstantial evidence from public and private documents; official statements and admissions by the persons charged and others; eyewitness accounts; Commission investigations and witness interviews in Iraq, the Middle East and elsewhere during and after the bombing; photographs and video tape; expert analyses; commentary and interviews; media coverage, published reports and accounts gathered between December 1990 and May l991. Commission of Inquiry hearings will be held in key cities where evidence is available supporting, expanding, adding, contradicting, disproving or explaining these, or similar charges against the accused and others of whatever nationality. When evidence sufficient to sustain convictions of the accused or others is obtained and after demanding the production of documents from the U.S. government, and others, and requesting testimony from the accused, offering them a full opportunity to present any defense personally, or by counsel, the evidence will be presented to an International War Crimes Tribunal. The Tribunal will consider the evidence gathered, seek and examine whatever additional evidence it chooses and render its judgment on the charges, the evidence, and the law

I thinks you guys are beating a dead horse now!!!

Skitter - I think they are taking that a bit far...

I agree :hihi:

a bit whimsical

There is only one way to handle "TERRORISTS"!!!!Its called "HEAD SHOT"!!


While I'll agree a good terrorist is a dead terrorist no need for pics like that here... JohnR

Gross, kids are on this site, you gotta remove this

A little much Uffah. :huh:

Wow.

I have to admit I'm more than a bit astonished you posted those pictures...I'm assuming they're real as I didn't launch them.

Of all the stupid things said at times on this board, this demonstrates a more serious lack of judgement than I can ever recall.

Simply pathetic Uffah.

-spence

The picture are a drastic approach at making ones point, but if you look closely you'll notice they pouches in the jacket/vest hes wearing are filled with C-4, which is why he was shot in the head.

I don't have a problem with terrorists being shot in the head, but posting them here is completely innapropriate.

-spence