I don't agree with going into Iraq, but if you're in there, DO IT RIGHT!
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
politicians with more than one opinion?
your shocked by this?
all of em do it.
Wow.... who saw that coming... well I did. The reason for Iraq is a very good one, the reason to stay there is an even better one.
Simply put, the democrats were looking for a way to stay on the map. They took somthing that the general population did not understand (Iraq) and publicized it as a shortcoming of our current admistration. Yet, the demmies themselves, understand how important this war is. Honestly I was waiting for some of the truth to come out. But you wont even see all of the truth, the demmies are still hidding the fact that Bush was right on more that one part of the war. Search on google for "saddam and the third reich" and you will see the truth. Basically, Saddam deserves nothing less than death by hanging.
Rollinredcavi wrote:Wow.... who saw that coming... well I did. The reason for Iraq is a very good one, the reason to stay there is an even better one.
Simply put, the democrats were looking for a way to stay on the map. They took somthing that the general population did not understand (Iraq) and publicized it as a shortcoming of our current admistration. Yet, the demmies themselves, understand how important this war is. Honestly I was waiting for some of the truth to come out. But you wont even see all of the truth, the demmies are still hidding the fact that Bush was right on more that one part of the war. Search on google for "saddam and the third reich" and you will see the truth. Basically, Saddam deserves nothing less than death by hanging.
The only thing that Bush has correct about Iraq was this - Calling Saddam a worthless scumbag @!#$ is an undue compliment compared to what he really is.
He's hardly the only one who is that bad though - including currently in power governments. Where is our intervention in genocide where oil isn't involved?
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
i dont feel that it is that dems want to pull and run like many reps would like everyoen to believe. and i dont thin the american public wants that to happen either. thats more the peace and freedom parties soapbox.
the american public does not feel that reps have a plan or a plan that they like to wrap up our jobs in iraq in a timely manner.
i know that i dont trust ANY plan that bush talks about that gives a rough timeline for finishing up the job of freeing the iraqi people.
----------
all i want is a honest attempt to finish as fast as possible. i dont want another soldier dieing for me.
as an american i honestly do not believe the reps have a plan or even want to finish up quickly. i want urgency in war and i think the american people feel the dems have more urgency, and i agree.
Creative Draft Art Media Forums
Saddam and the third reich? THE MAN WAS BORN IN 1937! The third reich fell in 1945 when Saddam was 8. As for him being evil, we didn't have a problem with that back in the 80's when we kept supplying him with weapons and plans for the Osirak nuclear reactor.
And what did Saddam do that was so bad? Kill a bunch of people? Well pull me up a chair! I've never heard such a thing. Japan (Nanking Massacre - 150,000) Idi Amin (500,000), Pol Pot (1.7 million), Rwanda (1994 Genocide - 1 million) to Darfur RIGHT NOW (400,000)
How many did Saddam off? A million maybe? So? Does that make him special? Where are we for Darfur? Where were we when a million people got hacked into pieces by machete in Rwanda? What did we do when Pol Pot exterminted one fifth of Cambodia? God man... we were LAUGHING at Idi Amin's jokes while he slaughtered his people!!!!!!!
Don't you get it? Iraq is the enemy now, but so was Vietnam at one time. Now we're kissing up to the same people who killed 50,000 of your people because they're ready to sell their first born to be trade partners. It doesn't matter who's the enemy. We'll always have an enemy. Today's friend can be tomorrow's foe, today's foe can be tomorrow's friend. Iraq used to be our friend and ally, now it's not. In fifty year it'll all have changed.
It doesn't matter. There's no reason behind it. Not really. There doesn't need to be and there never will. War isn't about ideals, it's not about patriotism, it's not about liberating so-and-so, it's about killing and frightening our potential enemies. To have peace, you must have war; and war can never EVER end.
Get it?
well they cant just pull the @!#$ out right away
its gotta be a gradual process
^^^ only after the military, Police, and Parliament are stable enough to stand on their own. Which they aren't yet. This is also assuming that there will not be sectarian violence that will see Sunni's massacred by the Shi'ia.
GET THE JOB DONE.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Rollinredcavi wrote:Wow.... who saw that coming... well I did. The reason for Iraq is a very good one, the reason to stay there is an even better one.
Simply put, the democrats were looking for a way to stay on the map. They took somthing that the general population did not understand (Iraq) and publicized it as a shortcoming of our current admistration. Yet, the demmies themselves, understand how important this war is. Honestly I was waiting for some of the truth to come out. But you wont even see all of the truth, the demmies are still hidding the fact that Bush was right on more that one part of the war. Search on google for "saddam and the third reich" and you will see the truth. Basically, Saddam deserves nothing less than death by hanging.
Double you tee ef? How important this war is? Saddam and the third reich? You make my head hurt.
Republicans, over the last year or so, have labeled democrats as "cut and runners." That's not the case. Yes, they want us out of Iraq, but they never suggested removing all of our troops immediately. Of course it has to be gradual. You can't cripple and nation and then just say have fun. Something needs to change though. We need an exit plan and to actually get Iraq in condition to take control of itself. That hasn't been done so far.
We should never have been there in the first place. Bah.
The difference is that the Dems actually have an exit plan.
Anyone else remember the "Mission Accomplished" speech given on the aircraft carrier, WTF was that.
Also it should be noted that when an atricle says Democrats said this or Republicans said that. If you don't have any names the entire thing is worthless. Fox news does this crap all the time.
-Chris
Jeremy Knox wrote:Saddam and the third reich? THE MAN WAS BORN IN 1937! The third reich fell in 1945 when Saddam was 8.
Have you searched yet? If so than you would know what the name Talfah means. And you would know who the Hanzars are, you would also know about the Grand Mufti that was best friends with Hitler, whos torn down generals gave Saddam money to fund his political rise. Yeah its true. Research.
Instead of thumping a coincidental link that really means nothing in the greater scheme of things (ie: Hitler was a National Socialist Fascist Despot, Stalin was a Bolshevik Communist Despot, Pol Pot was a Maoist Communist despot, Idi Amin was military dictator despot... what's the common denominator? Think about it), address the larger problem of what is being stated.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Kill em all and let Allah sort it out...
