Right wingers , explain this for me ?

[Spider]

Just when I was thinking the surge working , damn Bush goes and lies again ........... will this man ever stop trying to bullshít people ?

[N.O.Bronco]

HA HA thats great where did you get it?

[Blueflame]

Just when I was thinking the surge working , damn Bush goes and lies again ........... will this man ever stop trying to bullshít people ?

It's pathological... the man can't seem to help it. If his lips are moving, it's pretty safe to assume he's lying.

[cbs1177]

it is so sad what photo shop can do. wait I photo shop all my match.com and eharmony photos. So glad to see the technology being used for a good cause.

[Spider]

HA HA thats great where did you get it?

Crooks and Liars and it is a true photo

[Spider]

It's pathological... the man can't seem to help it. If his lips are moving, it's pretty safe to assume he's lying.

I think you are right

[TailgateNut]

it is so sad what photo shop can do. wait I photo shop all my match.com and eharmony photos. So glad to see the technology being used for a good cause.

Photo shop?
WTF?

Are all right wingers blind in their left eye? ....and is this why they do not see the "whole picture"?

[Dudeskey]

Just when I was thinking the surge working , damn Bush goes and lies again ........... will this man ever stop trying to bullshít people ?

He's sufffering from Baghdad Bob disorder... matter of fact all Bu$hco folowers are beginning to sound like this guy:
http://cache.boston.com/images/bostondirtdogs//2004/Baghdad_bob.jpg

[W*GS]

It's pathological... the man can't seem to help it. If his lips are moving, it's pretty safe to assume he's lying.

That makes Bush the typical politician. This is news?

[Garcia Bronco]

The General was on the tube this morning saying that things are getting better...so take that for what it's worth

[Spider]

The General was on the tube this morning saying that things are getting better...so take that for what it's worth
that would be nice ........ I dont think it will work , doesnt mean I want us to fail , I just want us out of Iraq and back in the war on terror asap ...........

[Blueflame]

That makes Bush the typical politician. This is news?

It most assuredly is news to a lot of the American people (what... roughly 30% now) who still believe George W. Bush "talks to God" and is, in essence, the same thing as Jesus Christ incarnate... a "good Christian man who wouldn't deliberately lie to us". Fact is, he does lie... purposely and consistently.

[bendog]

It's working in terms of keeping the shiaa death squads and milita off the streets. But the cost is that our troops are more exposed, and the sunni are taking advantage, and the sunni and al queda are killing the shiaa pilgrims, in an effort to press Sadr to bring back the militias to protect them, with the hope that the US army will then destroy the militas, and thereby further sunni interests in their civil war.

[W*GS]

It most assuredly is news to a lot of the American people (what... roughly 30% now) who still believe George W. Bush "talks to God" and is, in essence, the same thing as Jesus Christ incarnate... a "good Christian man who wouldn't deliberately lie to us".

Anyone who takes what a politician says at face value (and that includes folks not in your these-people-are-fundy-idiots-and-personify-all-that's-wrong-with-the-US-today group above) is hopelessly naïve.

The Bush-worshippers haven't gotten what they wanted from him. If you believe they still think that he can do no wrong, you're mistaken.

Fact is, he does lie... purposely and consistently.

Name me a politician or President who doesn't.

Bush's lying doesn't distinguish him from any of his contemporaries or predecessors.

[Blueflame]

Anyone who takes what a politician says at face value (and that includes folks not in your these-people-are-fundy-idiots-and-personify-all-that's-wrong-with-the-US-today group above) is hopelessly naïve.

The Bush-worshippers haven't gotten what they wanted from him. If you believe they still think that he can do no wrong, you're mistaken.
Yes, about 30% of Americans are hopelessly naive. And there is still a percentage of them who believe he can do no wrong. Even though Republicans controlled all 3 branches of government, yet did absolutely nothing about the wedge issues that drive the religious right, those voters will still look for the "R" after the name in every single future election because they've been told from the pulpit every Sunday that they'll burn in Hell for eternity if they vote for a Democrat. :P They'll be convinced that "Bush is a good Christian man who wanted to ban abortion and gay marriage, but his hands were tied by the godless liberals". His image as "godly" has been carefully crafted... complete with photos against backgrounds that intentionally create the illusion that he has a "halo". It's a total joke...

Name me a politician or President who doesn't.

Bush's lying doesn't distinguish him from any of his contemporaries or predecessors.
So it's OK for Bush to be a serial liar because other politicians have also been liars, eh?

[W*GS]

Yes, about 30% of Americans are hopelessly naive.

You're forgetting the lefties and progressives in your percentage - that adds at least 1/2 of 1%...

hey'll be convinced that "Bush is a good Christian man who wanted to ban abortion and gay marriage, but his hands were tied by the godless liberals".

That's no worse than Clinton being stymied by the "vast right-wing conspiracy" that was used many times as an excuse...

So it's OK for Bush to be a serial liar because other politicians have also been liars, eh?

Expecting Bush to be honest when no other politician in history (US and worldwide) ever has been, and using his endless deceptions to criticize him, merely illustrates a double standard.

[Spider]

Expecting Bush to be honest when no other politician in history (US and worldwide) ever has been, and using his endless deceptions to criticize him, merely illustrates a double standard.

so we should stop trying KKK members for hanging blacks cause KKK members did it before ......... or we shouldnt have tried Ted Bundy cause others have killed hookers ..........
or it will be ok for the next president to lie to get us into a war , cause Bush and LBJ already set the stage ?

[Blueflame]

You're forgetting the lefties and progressives in your percentage - that adds at least 1/2 of 1%...
Actually, I didn't specify the political leanings of the roughly 30% of Americans who still think Bush is honest.
That's no worse than Clinton being stymied by the "vast right-wing conspiracy" that was used many times as an excuse...
Yeah, 'cause for six years of Clinton's term, the Democrats had control of all 3 branches of government yet still did nothing about the wedge issues, right? Ha!
Expecting Bush to be honest when no other politician in history (US and worldwide) ever has been, and using his endless deceptions to criticize him, merely illustrates a double standard.
"I" don't expect Bush to be honest. Nor do I believe for one instant that his actions are unduly influenced by faith in any "god" but the ones he really worships, namely power, oil, and the almighty dollar. I do think deliberately selling him to the gullible as something he isn't... is hypocritical to the nth degree, though.

[Bronco Bob]

That's no worse than Clinton being stymied by the "vast right-wing conspiracy" that was used many times as an excuse...


The difference being when Clinton was president the right wing Republicans
actually did control both houses of Congress for most of Clinton's 8 years.
And they did actively block many of Clinton's proposals, and went so far
as to have the House impeach him. Not to mention Fox News and
right wing talk radio came into their own during Clinton's presidency.
If that isn't a right wing conspiracy, how would YOU define a right
wing conspiracy against Clinton?

Where-as with the Bush presidency, the right wing Republicans actually
did control both houses of Congress for Bush's first 6 years. Bush would
have more of a leg to stand on as to why he didn't get the religious
right's agenda passed if it were the godless liberals in control of Congress,
but as they weren't he has no legitimate excuse.

[W*GS]

so we should stop trying KKK members for hanging blacks cause KKK members did it before ......... or we shouldnt have tried Ted Bundy cause others have killed hookers ..........

You don't hold current KKK members or new Ted Bundys accountable when you've overlooked their crimes in the past.

Be consistent.

[W*GS]

Actually, I didn't specify the political leanings of the roughly 30% of Americans who still think Bush is honest.

Coyness isn't your strong point.

How many of that 30% are lefties or "progressives"?

Yeah, 'cause for six years of Clinton's term, the Democrats had control of all 3 branches of government yet still did nothing about the wedge issues, right? Ha!

That's one thing Clinton has always been able to count on - those who make excuses for his mistakes, errors, and colossal eff-ups. Nothing is ever Clinton's fault. He's completely, utterly, and totally blameless. Period.

He's got you so snookered you don't even see it.

"I" don't expect Bush to be honest.

So why do you criticize him for being a liar?

What politicians do you expect to be honest - or do you expect them to be honest, generally?

Nor do I believe for one instant that his actions are unduly influenced by faith in any "god" but the ones he really worships, namely power, oil, and the almighty dollar.

All politicians are megalomaniacs. Even Clinton.

I do think deliberately selling him to the gullible as something he isn't... is hypocritical to the nth degree, though.

Politicians are always sold as something they're not. Clinton, for example, was sold as a good friend to blacks, yet somehow Bush has put blacks into higher positions of power than Clinton ever did. Clinton was sold as an ally of women, yet in his life, it's quite clear that women are to him little more than sperm receptacles.

I'm just curious as to why you have such a strident double standard.

[W*GS]

The difference being when Clinton was president the right wing Republicans actually did control both houses of Congress for most of Clinton's 8 years.

The GOP took the House in 1994 partly because Clinton went so far leftward between 1992 and 1994 that the voters snapped him back to where they wanted him to go - sorta like Bush in 2006.

And they did actively block many of Clinton's proposals,

Depending on the proposal, that's a Good Thing.

Not to mention Fox News and right wing talk radio came into their own during Clinton's presidency.

Rather refreshing to have points of view other than center-left to far-left, isn't it?

If that isn't a right wing conspiracy, how would YOU define a right wing conspiracy against Clinton?

Yep, poor Clinton. Like I told Blueflame, you've been snookered by that scumbag too.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob
If that isn't a right wing conspiracy, how would YOU define a right wing conspiracy against Clinton?



Yep, poor Clinton. Like I told Blueflame, you've been snookered by that scumbag too.

I've noticed you have a tendency to not answer the question.

[cutthemdown]

I read they captured Al Baghdadi the Al quedia in Iraq leader!!! I know I know another will take his place but that hit the Sunni Insurgency and is a good thing if true. I think the reason they say it's better is just because with troops in the city more people are going about their lives and not moving out etc etc. I don't think they really mean the death has went down all that much.

[Crushaholic]

There could certainly be 'encouraging signs'. That doesn't mean people won't be killed. It's still a war zone...

[Blueflame]

Coyness isn't your strong point.
How many of that 30% are lefties or "progressives"?
That's one thing Clinton has always been able to count on - those who make excuses for his mistakes, errors, and colossal eff-ups. Nothing is ever Clinton's fault. He's completely, utterly, and totally blameless. Period.
He's got you so snookered you don't even see itSo why do you criticize him for being a liar?
What politicians do you expect to be honest - or do you expect them to be honest, generally?
All politicians are megalomaniacs. Even Clinton.
Politicians are always sold as something they're not. Clinton, for example, was sold as a good friend to blacks, yet somehow Bush has put blacks into higher positions of power than Clinton ever did. Clinton was sold as an ally of women, yet in his life, it's quite clear that women are to him little more than sperm receptacles.
I'm just curious as to why you have such a strident double standard.

Looks to me like you have me mistaken for someone who likes/admires Clinton. Sorry, but I really don't care to discuss a guy who hasn't been relevant to anything for a long time.

I have a problem with phonies who deliberately create a sham and pretense of being the polar opposite of what they really are. Clinton did not do that; Bush does.

[colosilverado]

WTF? This has been happening for eons. It just didn't make the news until the last few years because it was controlled by Saddam. I hope they plunge further and further into war, we eventually pull out and shake hands with whoever is left standing.
They now have a real chance to fight it out for a change, unlike they did when Saddam was in power, because the Sunnis controlled everything and kept the murdering to a Sunni only event most of the time.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

WTF? This has been happening for eons. It just didn't make the news until the last few years because it was controlled by Saddam. I hope they plunge further and further into war, we eventually pull out and shake hands with whoever is left standing.
They now have a real chance to fight it out for a change, unlike they did when Saddam was in power, because the Sunnis controlled everything and kept the murdering to a Sunni only event most of the time.

Are people really still this ignorant? We now created a theocracy and have put the Shiites in control (see Iran). Biggest ****ing blunder of the 21st century!

[colosilverado]

Are people really still this ignorant? We now created a theocracy and have put the Shiites in control (see Iran). Biggest ****ing blunder of the 21st century!

Really? You're ignorant for a statement like that. Saying it is the biggest blunder of the century, any century is a bold claim.
The Sunnis are so much better. I do actually think we should pull out and let wholesale civil war devour those fools in that region and then we attempt to make peace with the survivors, if there are any left.

[Spider]

WTF? This has been happening for eons. It just didn't make the news until the last few years because it was controlled by Saddam. I hope they plunge further and further into war, we eventually pull out and shake hands with whoever is left standing.
They now have a real chance to fight it out for a change, unlike they did when Saddam was in power, because the Sunnis controlled everything and kept the murdering to a Sunni only event most of the time.

:kiddingme

[Spider]

Really? You're ignorant for a statement like that. Saying it is the biggest blunder of the century, any century is a bold claim.
The Sunnis are so much better. I do actually think we should pull out and let wholesale civil war devour those fools in that region and then we attempt to make peace with the survivors, if there are any left.
what other big Blunders have happened in the 21s Century so far ?
Libby got nailed for lying to protect Cheney , doesnt that tell you anything ?
you made the Claim that this little war between the Sunnis and Shiite have been going on under Saddam , would ask for Proof , but we both know that wont Happen .......... i agree with your lets pull out and deal with the winners
but the rest of your 2 post are far retched

[colosilverado]

what other big Blunders have happened in the 21s Century so far ?
Libby got nailed for lying to protect Cheney , doesnt that tell you anything ?
you made the Claim that this little war between the Sunnis and Shiite have been going on under Saddam , would ask for Proof , but we both know that wont Happen .......... i agree with your lets pull out and deal with the winners
but the rest of your 2 post are far retched
Who can provide proof of what was happening under Saddam since everything was state-controlled. Let's see, the purges in the Soviet Union didn't happen either because you never read anything about it. That's what happens when that kind of control exists.
These people have been fighting for eons. They will be fighting for eons. I am not naive enough to think that Bush or any other foreign entity will unite them. I do think that is a fool's folly. I think you guys think that I am a staunch Bush backer. I'm really not. I just don't think that every damn event that happens in the world is Bush's fault like you guys do. They will still be fighting for eons to gain some sort of power because they have nothing. If they get something, they want to hold on to it. That is the hope here, I guess. It probably won't work. Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, they're all the same in my book. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

I do support our military fully. Anyone who steps into harm's way for an ideal, be it wrong or not, has my respect. You can call them sheep if you want to, but until you have walked a mile in their boots, you shouldn't. A lot of these guys and gals just want to kill those who would kill our people. I'm all for that. I wish I had the balls to do it. I don't. I hate seeing our soldiers wounded and killed and seeing the survivors with their horrible injuries. It hurts to view some of the websites where they show what has happened. But, in most of the interviews, those same soldiers say that they would do it all over again. I'd love for some of you guys to spew your rhetoric at some of these people. I'd love to see it. You're much more comfortable behind your keyboard. So am I, so don't pretend what we're saying here means anything.....really.
The funny thing is, if most of us met (and didn't discuss politics), we'd get along fine. We'd probably have a beer together, watch a game or whatever and have a good time. We might even decide, we *gasp* like each other despite some contrary views.

[Spider]

Who can provide proof of what was happening under Saddam since everything was state-controlled. Let's see, the purges in the Soviet Union didn't happen either because you never read anything about it. That's what happens when that kind of control exists.
These people have been fighting for eons. They will be fighting for eons. I am not naive enough to think that Bush or any other foreign entity will unite them. I do think that is a fool's folly. I think you guys think that I am a staunch Bush backer. I'm really not. I just don't think that every damn event that happens in the world is Bush's fault like you guys do. They will still be fighting for eons to gain some sort of power because they have nothing. If they get something, they want to hold on to it. That is the hope here, I guess. It probably won't work. Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, they're all the same in my book. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

I do support our military fully. Anyone who steps into harm's way for an ideal, be it wrong or not, has my respect. You can call them sheep if you want to, but until you have walked a mile in their boots, you shouldn't. A lot of these guys and gals just want to kill those who would kill our people. I'm all for that. I wish I had the balls to do it. I don't. I hate seeing our soldiers wounded and killed and seeing the survivors with their horrible injuries. It hurts to view some of the websites where they show what has happened. But, in most of the interviews, those same soldiers say that they would do it all over again. I'd love for some of you guys to spew your rhetoric at some of these people. I'd love to see it. You're much more comfortable behind your keyboard. So am I, so don't pretend what we're saying here means anything.....really.
The funny thing is, if most of us met (and didn't discuss politics), we'd get along fine. We'd probably have a beer together, watch a game or whatever and have a good time. We might even decide, we *gasp* like each other despite some contrary views.

yap yap , yap ...........I know you are a great American support the troops , God gays , Guns , heard it all before ............

[N.O.Bronco]

Who can provide proof of what was happening under Saddam since everything was state-controlled. Let's see, the purges in the Soviet Union didn't happen either because you never read anything about it. That's what happens when that kind of control exists.
These people have been fighting for eons. They will be fighting for eons. I am not naive enough to think that Bush or any other foreign entity will unite them. I do think that is a fool's folly. I think you guys think that I am a staunch Bush backer. I'm really not. I just don't think that every damn event that happens in the world is Bush's fault like you guys do. They will still be fighting for eons to gain some sort of power because they have nothing. If they get something, they want to hold on to it. That is the hope here, I guess. It probably won't work. Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, they're all the same in my book. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

I do support our military fully. Anyone who steps into harm's way for an ideal, be it wrong or not, has my respect. You can call them sheep if you want to, but until you have walked a mile in their boots, you shouldn't. A lot of these guys and gals just want to kill those who would kill our people. I'm all for that. I wish I had the balls to do it. I don't. I hate seeing our soldiers wounded and killed and seeing the survivors with their horrible injuries. It hurts to view some of the websites where they show what has happened. But, in most of the interviews, those same soldiers say that they would do it all over again. I'd love for some of you guys to spew your rhetoric at some of these people. I'd love to see it. You're much more comfortable behind your keyboard. So am I, so don't pretend what we're saying here means anything.....really.
The funny thing is, if most of us met (and didn't discuss politics), we'd get along fine. We'd probably have a beer together, watch a game or whatever and have a good time. We might even decide, we *gasp* like each other despite some contrary views.

Lets do this in order from bolded points cause i have a few comments and questions to your reasoning.

1.) We can, we have hes been directlly responsible for around 200,000 deaths since he came into power in 1979 Courts led by shia judges declared that before his death sentence. Now many will argue it is in the millions, but you have to realize they factor in every non-natural death as attributed to his fault. Which if you look at the evidence, alot of that ends up needing to be discarded. We backed them and supplied iraq during the Iraq-Iran war were most of those deaths are from. The next one that is tried to be soley attributed to him is the sanctions. And no matter how you look at it, we as the rest of the world were much more responsible for the deaths, even considering Saddams stealing of 10% of the little aid given. The effect was supposed to be to get them to rise up, it never worked.

2.)Agreed, but note the difference between the overall sunni and Shia fighting and Iraqs version. If you recall the old iraq army minus the republican guard had both sunni and shia members, also that theyre really hasnt been a sunni shia all out war in iraq for a very long time. And now the sunni shia fight is, yes in part religious but much more fueled by the political aspects of the sunnis losing power and the shias wanting to keep it. That latter part is directlly our fault.(de-baathification, disbandment of iraqi army, constituional errors)

3.)Theyre not the same by any means and to make any rational evaluation of the situation in Iraq requires understanding of all of them. This is whre i question you coming in here acting all elitist and proclaiming us to be a bunch of ignorant irrational character attackers.

4.) This i think makes me kinda chuckle. Because in the human shield thread you showed dissent for the palestinians who strap bombs to they're chest. Is that not an ideal, when you truelly look at it? How about Communism, if we decided to go and spread communism would you still support it? afterall its an ideal.

5,) To me this is a logical fallacy. you are saying they want to kill those who would kill us. and you support them for it. Well when you consider they wouldnt had been killing us if we didn't chase the ideal of Bush and didnt piss them off when we got they're, they wouldnt have wanted to kill us as bad now would they?

6.)As a person with two friends in iraq, one for a third tour, and several others i have met and talked to. I will tell you i have brought up many of these points and my feelings on Iraq to them and they dont universally believe what you said. In fact many have varying degrees of feelings. However i have realized the ones who have looked at it in-depth and critically ive talked too, are the ones who arent to supportive.

Supporting the troops doesnt mean we have to support the policy. That ability to do so was enshrined to us in the very papers and ideals of our founding fathers. As Jefferson wrote "A little rebellion of Government is a good thing" and necissary to maintain a democratic republic such as ours.

[colosilverado]

Lets do this in order from bolded points cause i have a few comments and questions to your reasoning.

1.) We can, we have hes been directlly responsible for around 200,000 deaths since he came into power in 1979 Courts led by shia judges declared that before his death sentence. Now many will argue it is in the millions, but you have to realize they factor in every non-natural death as attributed to his fault. Which if you look at the evidence, alot of that ends up needing to be discarded. We backed them and supplied iraq during the Iraq-Iran war were most of those deaths are from. The next one that is tried to be soley attributed to him is the sanctions. And no matter how you look at it, we as the rest of the world were much more responsible for the deaths, even considering Saddams stealing of 10% of the little aid given. The effect was supposed to be to get them to rise up, it never worked.

2.)Agreed, but note the difference between the overall sunni and Shia fighting and Iraqs version. If you recall the old iraq army minus the republican guard had both sunni and shia members, also that theyre really hasnt been a sunni shia all out war in iraq for a very long time. And now the sunni shia fight is, yes in part religious but much more fueled by the political aspects of the sunnis losing power and the shias wanting to keep it. That latter part is directlly our fault.(de-baathification, disbandment of iraqi army, constituional errors)

3.)Theyre not the same by any means and to make any rational evaluation of the situation in Iraq requires understanding of all of them. This is whre i question you coming in here acting all elitist and proclaiming us to be a bunch of ignorant irrational character attackers.

4.) This i think makes me kinda chuckle. Because in the human shield thread you showed dissent for the palestinians who strap bombs to they're chest. Is that not an ideal, when you truelly look at it? How about Communism, if we decided to go and spread communism would you still support it? afterall its an ideal.

5,) To me this is a logical fallacy. you are saying they want to kill those who would kill us. and you support them for it. Well when you consider they wouldnt had been killing us if we didn't chase the ideal of Bush and didnt piss them off when we got they're, they wouldnt have wanted to kill us as bad now would they?

6.)As a person with two friends in iraq, one for a third tour, and several others i have met and talked to. I will tell you i have brought up many of these points and my feelings on Iraq to them and they dont universally believe what you said. In fact many have varying degrees of feelings. However i have realized the ones who have looked at it in-depth and critically ive talked too, are the ones who arent to supportive.

Supporting the troops doesnt mean we have to support the policy. That ability to do so was enshrined to us in the very papers and ideals of our founding fathers. As Jefferson wrote "A little rebellion of Government is a good thing" and necissary to maintain a democratic republic such as ours.

You're over simplfiying the Sunni/Shia situation yourself and I am not only speaking about Iraq. There are thousands of different sects. I am referring to that region as a whole. They've been killing each other for eons. I suppose Bush was responsible for the crusades as well? I don't understand your paragraph about ideals in the slightest. Probably due to your mastery of grammar and such, but regardless, I am against anyone whose "ideals" are of killing Americans. Communist, socialist, Sunni, Kurd, Palestinian...whatever.
So, since we're over there, they want to kill us more?
If we weren't over there, you say that they wouldn't want to kill us as bad. What a relief that is!

They want to kill us because they want to kill anyone that has more than them, and that is pretty much everyone. Are the Israelis on the ground over there? Nope. Do they want to kill them deader than dead? Yep.
Were there people on the ground over there when 9/11 happened? Nope. Did they kill innocent people here in the US? Yep.... (conspiracy theorists, take the challenge and go over to JREF), they sure as hell did. Do I hope we go into Pakistan, Syria and Iran to hunt these bastards down? Yep. I'd support it fully. How's that for supporting a policy. We don't need the news over there sticking their noses in it either.
Are there guys who are against the war over there in the military? Duh. You've talked to 3 and they are against it, so that means they all are?

[colosilverado]

yap yap , yap ...........I know you are a great American support the troops , God gays , Guns , heard it all before ............

I don't think that me supporting the troops makes me great. Could you at least try to form a complete sentence or two so you don't look like a total truck driving hillbilly? It would make your statement mean a little more...

[Spider]

I don't think that me supporting the troops makes me great. Could you at least try to form a complete sentence or two so you don't look like a total truck driving hillbilly? It would make your statement mean a little more...

LOL you twit if it wasnt for us Hillbilly Truck Drivers your life wouldnt be what it is

[colosilverado]

LOL you twit if it wasnt for us Hillbilly Truck Drivers your life wouldnt be what it is

It doesn't change the fact that you're expecting me to take you seriously, then you can't form a coherent sentence to form the basis of your so-called argument. You are a representative of your anti-Bush group. Think about the picture you paint. Without the industry I'm in, you wouldn't be doing your job...you twit.

[Spider]

It doesn't change the fact that you're expecting me to take you seriously, then you can't form a coherent sentence to form the basis of your so-called argument. You are a representative of your anti-Bush group. Think about the picture you paint. Without the industry I'm in, you wouldn't be doing your job...you twit.

LOL rule #1 , Realy dont give a damn what you think or take seriously ..........you might believe the bullshít you sling , but I dont ........

[Spider]

I. Without the industry I'm in, you wouldn't be doing your job...you twit.

LOL dumb ass tell me all about how you deal with the oil field

[N.O.Bronco]

You're over simplfiying the Sunni/Shia situation yourself and I am not only speaking about Iraq. There are thousands of different sects. I am referring to that region as a whole. They've been killing each other for eons. I suppose Bush was responsible for the crusades as well? I don't understand your paragraph about ideals in the slightest. Probably due to your mastery of grammar and such, but regardless, .............................
So, since we're over there, they want to kill us more?
If we weren't over there, you say that they wouldn't want to kill us as bad. What a relief that is!

They want to kill us because they want to kill anyone that has more than them, and that is pretty much everyone. Are the Israelis on the ground over there? Nope. Do they want to kill them deader than dead? Yep.
Were there people on the ground over there when 9/11 happened? Nope. Did they kill innocent people here in the US? Yep.... (conspiracy theorists, take the challenge and go over to JREF), they sure as hell did. Do I hope we go into Pakistan, Syria and Iran to hunt these bastards down? Yep. I'd support it fully. How's that for supporting a policy. We don't need the news over there sticking their noses in it either.
Are there guys who are against the war over there in the military? Duh. You've talked to 3 and they are against it, so that means they all are?

1.) and by your own admittance, they are culturally releveant to they're location, so then you should be understanding that in Iraq they have not fought or quarrelled in a very longtime and the reasons for they're fighting are much different then you say. Again though, where did i simplify there quarrels? Im not finding it? Im finding me explain to you what you felt was irrellevent, but im not finding me say anything to which your claiming.

2.)now what kind of statement is this? really this is like a really poor deflection attempt to change the conversation and im not biting.

3.) this shows your real lack of understanding for the facts that make up the base of which you are arguing from. Yes, they want to kill us for being there, for the things we did to them(Debaathification, disbandment of the army, pisspoor affect on the ministries, the fact we are occupying them.) See if you actually understood the facts surrounding a lot of the whys and hows of our situation in Iraq, my previous statement would have made perfect sense.

4.)Sounds like right-wing talking points to me? If you really believe that you are pretty naive in your understanding of the human psyche(sorry, coming from a psychologist, its true) and again, the facts surrounding this situation.

5.) did i say that? nope dont think so, it was merelly a counter-argument to yours. An argument against your bold challenge, to dare speak out to a person in active-duty. I responded and told you what they had to say, since I had already passed your test, I responded, end of story.

As for the part in between the two bolded parts in your second paragraph, I have no idea what the hell your talking about. So please try and rephrase or explain what you are arguing about, in a different and more in depth manner. Now as for my grammar on the last thread and possiblly this one, my bad. I was in a rush responding to you and didnt proof-read what i had wrote. So next time instead of bashing me, why dont you just ask politelly to have it re-worded.

I am against anyone whose "ideals" are of killing Americans. Communist, socialist, Sunni, Kurd, Palestinian...whatever.

First off on this, are you infrencing that all socialists, communists, sunnis, kurds and palestinians want to kill us? Because the context in which im reading this sure makes it sound that way. Before I might wrongfully assume something, please clear this up for me.

[colosilverado]

LOL dumb ass tell me all about how you deal with the oil field

I'm downstream of the oil field, dumbass.

[colosilverado]

LOL rule #1 , Realy dont give a damn what you think or take seriously ..........you might believe the bullshít you sling , but I dont ........

Then why the **** are you yapping at me in this forum and this thread...if you don't care what I think? LOL. Just to make sure your little anti-Bush club has some sort of response to anyone who comes in here and invades the War, Religion and anti-Bush forum?

[colosilverado]

1.) and by your own admittance, they are culturally releveant to they're location, so then you should be understanding that in Iraq they have not fought or quarrelled in a very longtime and the reasons for they're fighting are much different then you say. Again though, where did i simplify there quarrels? Im not finding it? Im finding me explain to you what you felt was irrellevent, but im not finding me say anything to which your claiming.

2.)now what kind of statement is this? really this is like a really poor deflection attempt to change the conversation and im not biting.

3.) this shows your real lack of understanding for the facts that make up the base of which you are arguing from. Yes, they want to kill us for being there, for the things we did to them(Debaathification, disbandment of the army, pisspoor affect on the ministries, the fact we are occupying them.) See if you actually understood the facts surrounding a lot of the whys and hows of our situation in Iraq, my previous statement would have made perfect sense.

4.)Sounds like right-wing talking points to me? If you really believe that you are pretty naive in your understanding of the human psyche(sorry, coming from a psychologist, its true) and again, the facts surrounding this situation.

5.) did i say that? nope dont think so, it was merelly a counter-argument to yours. An argument against your bold challenge, to dare speak out to a person in active-duty. I responded and told you what they had to say, since I had already passed your test, I responded, end of story.

As for the part in between the two bolded parts in your second paragraph, I have no idea what the hell your talking about. So please try and rephrase or explain what you are arguing about, in a different and more in depth manner. Now as for my grammar on the last thread and possiblly this one, my bad. I was in a rush responding to you and didnt proof-read what i had wrote. So next time instead of bashing me, why dont you just ask politelly to have it re-worded.



First off on this, are you infrencing that all socialists, communists, sunnis, kurds and palestinians want to kill us? Because the context in which im reading this sure makes it sound that way. Before I might wrongfully assume something, please clear this up for me.


Are you trying to pass yourself off as a Psychologist? There is no way you have any education given your ability to post in the English language.
I don't have to clear anything up for you and I am not 'inferencing' anything other than I am against anyone who has a policy of wanting to kill Americans.
I have other things going on right now, so I'll get back to ya or not.

[Spider]

Then why the **** are you yapping at me in this forum and this thread...if you don't care what I think? LOL. Just to make sure your little anti-Bush club has some sort of response to anyone who comes in here and invades the War, Religion and anti-Bush forum?
I never pass up the opportunity to insult a dumb ass ..........
I'm downstream of the oil field, dumbass.
Damn near everyone is , depends on how you look at it ..........