The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-30-2014, 10:18 AM   #801
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,935

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
A good read: No, President Obama Did Not Break the Middle East

http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...e-east/373202/
I like his final analysis: It was Saddam who was ultimately responsible for the destruction of Iraq. That's true.

The question is, could Obama have left a force in Iraq to act as the go-between for Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis? It's probably true that without the U.S., there was no vehicle of communication between these factions. Like the Filkins report above states, it's unclear what Maliki wanted. The Iranians were trying to encourage Maliki to force the Americans out. Some of the Iraqi generals secretly wanted some form of American force to stay. Obama was getting a lot of political pressure at home to pull out completely. Either way, the Right Wing megaphone was going to blast him, so that was a no-win.

The Filkins interview is very instructive as to what we can expect next. The region is unraveling. Now what?
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 10:31 AM   #802
gyldenlove
Ring of Famer
 
gyldenlove's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Næstved, DK
Posts: 11,209

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
Read carefully. It says no such thing.



So the resolution says that al-Qaeda terrorists are only present in Iraq, not necessarily being "harbored"; that Iraq has been known to harbor "other" terrorists; and that terrorists and WMDs is bad, m'kay. That's all.

Once again, no statement here that Saddam was directly involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, and anybody who got that out of this resolution is an idiot.
Wow, how do those stretch-marks feel? I haven't seen anyone contort like that since Cirque du soleil. From a perspective of pure semantics you may be right, but that resolution clearly links Iraq and Al-Qaeda and 9-11. If the presence of Al-Qaeda in Iraq is used as a reason for invasion it must logically follow that just asking Saddam to hand over Al-Qaeda would not have worked, so therefore the implication is clear that Saddam was harboring Al-Qaeda.
gyldenlove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 11:17 AM   #803
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 19,776
Default

Quote:
Isaac Chotiner: I just wanted to start by asking you about a tweet of yours I saw yesterday. I will read it: “What if everything that has happened in Iraq since 2003 is just preamble to the main event?” Can you just talk a little bit more about that?

Thomas E. Ricks: The background of that thought is that there consistently has been a failure of imagination in the American approach to Iraq. It's all encompassed by the testimony given by Paul Wolfowitz down at the Pentagon during the runup to the war, in which he was asked a question about occupation or something like that and he said something like, "Hard to imagine that we’d need more troops for occupation than we did for invasion. Hard to imagine that Saddam would be doing X, Y, Z." And that failure of imagination haunts me and makes me think, as we consider the situation today, that we should step back and use our imaginations about different scenarios. I was also thinking there about a failure of my own imagination. After the surge I thought we should keep a small residual force of US Troops in Iraq, maybe 10,000 or 15,000. And I think my failure of imagination was that I didn’t see a scenario like this in which we have an Iraqi government we don’t like being attacked by a force we don’t like. If we had troops in Iraq now, I think we’d be in a horrible position of using them on behalf of Maliki in a way we don’t want to.

IC: Let me just ask you about that because, as you know, one of the critiques of the administration has been that if we had this force there, this could have all been prevented.

TR: That’s nonsense. If we had the force there, what we’d be doing now is facing this question: Do we retreat ignominiously and get the troops out of the country, or do we use them in a way—or do we find ourselves forced to use them—in a way we don’t want to, supporting Maliki without reservation? Or do they just sit there inside their camp gates and everybody mocks the Americans for doing nothing? So I think by not having troops on the ground there it greatly simplified the issues for the United States and actually gave the United States more leverage rather than less, because clearly Obama does not simply want to act on Maliki’s behalf. I think Obama sees Maliki more at fault here than he does the Sunnis.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...bad-can-it-get

The whole thing is worth a read.
TonyR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 11:39 AM   #804
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,935

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
Good read. I have Ricks' book Fiasco, which detailed just how big of a ****-up Bush and his neocons were. I love this line: I think there was a national panic after 9/11 that was encouraged by people like President Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, and I don’t see any of that now. I don’t sense a panicky atmosphere, I sense a very sober atmosphere. I’ve been really strck by in many ways how quiet the debate has been this time with the exception of these kids who are like babies who make a big mess—these guys like Cheney and Wolfowitz who make a big mess and then yell at their fathers for not cleaning it up faster.

The problem is that in the end he points out the danger of Iran's intervention in this mess. He should read the NPR Filkin's interview. Filkins has stated that one of the heads of Iran's Revolutionary Guard went into Syria and saved the situation for Assad, and is now in Baghdad, saving the situation for Maliki, and by extension, Iran. Iran is directly managing Iraq's military response to ISIS, it appears.

Basically, Bush and his neocon amateurs tumbled, stumbled and bumbled their way through Iraq and gave a great victory to Iran.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 12:01 PM   #805
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
A good read: No, President Obama Did Not Break the Middle East

http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...e-east/373202/
Kind of a strawman lead. Not many are saying Obama 'broke' the mid-east. It was already broken by most objective measures.

The liberal position problem you have on your hands is the woeful inconsistency. By no rationale can you claim that leaving Saddam in Iraq was the right call, but plinking Muammar and Assad from the sky was a good idea.

In other words you kids have (at the snap of the partisan fingers) become the "Do it cheap" Wolfowitzers to the "It'll Cost An Arm and a Leg" Shinseki perspective.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 12:09 PM   #806
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 19,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Not many are saying Obama 'broke' the mid-east.
You clearly aren't reading cutthemdown's and pricejj's posts, lol.

As to the rest of your post, I suppose I don't disagree. I just think it's funny how many bash/blame Obama no matter what he does. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. As Waldman says here:

Quote:
We can stipulate that there is literally nothing Obama could do that would satisfy most Republicans; when he says he intends to do exactly what they want, they simply change what they want, since agreeing with him on anything is psychologically intolerable for so many of them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-if-he-doesnt/
TonyR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 12:10 PM   #807
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
So, here's Lone Bolt's case (let's say he's representing a defendant on trial for killing his wife):

The defendant spoke of killing wives in general for ten years writing a foundational document supporting the idea, again, in general, and defending his perceived right to engage in such unilateral and pre-emptive behavior. The defendant supported the killing of wives in general, and his in particular, and wrote policy statements proclaiming such. The defendant wrote a paper supporting the killing of his particular wife and sent one to the president and had another published in the press. The defendant urged the president to kill his wife for him.

And then, when the defendant's wife shows up dead, Lone Bolt presents his defense: "It was just a coincidence."
And here we are at that same murder trial, with Prosecuting Attorney Rohirrim.

Ro: "Your Honor, I have here a letter written by the defendant in 1993. It states that he planned to murder his wife in the kitchen with a butcher's knife, wrap her in plastic, and bury her in the back yard!"

Judge: "Very well. Bring the evidence forward for review."

Judge reviews the letter.

Judge: "Umm... counselor? I have read the letter in its entirety. I see only a brief mention of the defendant's wife, and no mention whatsoever of any plan to kill her in the kitchen with a butcher's knife, wrap her in plastic, and bury her in the back yard as you claim. The letter mostly discusses the defendant's dislike of women in general."

Ro: "Well you see, Your Honor, that's my personal interpretation of the letter, which is just as good."


Last edited by The Lone Bolt; 06-30-2014 at 12:23 PM..
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 01:21 PM   #808
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
You clearly aren't reading cutthemdown's and pricejj's posts, lol.

As to the rest of your post, I suppose I don't disagree. I just think it's funny how many bash/blame Obama no matter what he does. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. As Waldman says here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-if-he-doesnt/
And this is called Politics. It's a shame. But it is what it is.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 01:44 PM   #809
pricejj
jungle
 
pricejj's Avatar
 
United In Orange

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 10,120
Default

Obama certainly did break Egypt and Libya, while also giving weapons to Syrian extremists, expanding the war in Afghanistan, and drone bombing civilians in Pakistan, and Yemen.

Saddam didn't have anything to do with any of those countries.
pricejj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 01:47 PM   #810
pricejj
jungle
 
pricejj's Avatar
 
United In Orange

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 10,120
Default

Socialist Regressives refuse to acknowledge any of the atrocities that the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton committed.

If they can't blame Bush, they'll blame al-Maliki, or Saddam. Completely disregarding any of the dozen or so other wars perpetrated by this administration.
pricejj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 02:03 PM   #811
Bronco Yoda
.
 
Bronco Yoda's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Ah, people have been having fun while I was hiking the top of the the Rocky Mountain National Park with my sons the last few days. Everybody should make the hike to Dream Lake, Emerald Lake and Alberta Falls. Absolutely fantastic, magnificent, majestic... breathing in the fresh, pine-scented air, watching the elk out on the tundra of the alpine meadows... I feel replenished.

Oh, and as far as Lone Bolt's crap, here's what even Wiki says:

The goal of regime change in Iraq remained the consistent position of PNAC throughout the Iraq disarmament crisis.[6][7]
Richard Perle, who later became a core member of PNAC, was involved in similar activities to those pursued by PNAC after its formal organization. For instance, in 1996 Perle composed a report that proposed regime changes in order to restructure power in the Middle East. The report was titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm and called for removing Saddam Hussein from power, as well as other ideas to bring change to the region. The report was delivered to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.[8] Two years later, in 1998, Perle and other core members of the PNAC—Paul Wolfowitz, R. James Woolsey, Elliot Abrams, and John Bolton—"were among the signatories of a letter to President Clinton calling for the removal of Hussein."[8] Clinton did seek regime change in Iraq, and this position was sanctioned by the United Nations[citation needed]. These UN sanctions were considered ineffective by the neoconservative forces driving the PNAC.[9]
The PNAC core members followed up these early efforts with a letter to Republican members of the U.S. Congress Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott,[10] urging Congress to act. The PNAC also supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (H.R.4655), which President Clinton had signed into law.[11]
On January 16, 1998, following perceived Iraqi unwillingness to co-operate with UN weapons inspections, members of the PNAC, including Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Robert Zoellick drafted an open letter to President Bill Clinton, posted on its website, urging President Clinton to remove Saddam Hussein from power using U.S. diplomatic, political, and military power. The signers argue that Saddam would pose a threat to the United States, its Middle East allies, and oil resources in the region, if he succeeded in maintaining what they asserted was a stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction. They also state: "we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections" and "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council." They argue that an Iraq war would be justified by Hussein's defiance of UN "containment" policy and his persistent threat to U.S. interests.[12]
On November 16, 1998, citing Iraq's demand for the expulsion of UN weapons inspectors and the removal of Richard Butler as head of the inspections regime, Kristol called again for regime change in an editorial in his online magazine, The Weekly Standard: "... any sustained bombing and missile campaign against Iraq should be part of any overall political-military strategy aimed at removing Saddam from power."[13] Kristol states that Paul Wolfowitz and others believed that the goal was to create "a 'liberated zone' in southern Iraq that would provide a safe haven where opponents of Saddam could rally and organize a credible alternative to the present regime ... The liberated zone would have to be protected by U.S. military might, both from the air and, if necessary, on the ground."
In January 1999, the PNAC circulated a memo that criticized the December 1998 bombing of Iraq in Operation Desert Fox as ineffective, questioned the viability of Iraqi democratic opposition which the U.S. was supporting through the Iraq Liberation Act, and referred to any "containment" policy as an illusion.[14]


Here's treasury secretary Paul O'Neill on 60 Minutes stating that Bush was looking for a way to invade Iraq "8 months before 911." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-sou...o-invade-iraq/

Here's Mother Jones with the timeline: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...q-war-timeline

So, here's Lone Bolt's case (let's say he's representing a defendant on trial for killing his wife):

The defendant spoke of killing wives in general for ten years writing a foundational document supporting the idea, again, in general, and defending his perceived right to engage in such unilateral and pre-emptive behavior. The defendant supported the killing of wives in general, and his in particular, and wrote policy statements proclaiming such. The defendant wrote a paper supporting the killing of his particular wife and sent one to the president and had another published in the press. The defendant urged the president to kill his wife for him.

And then, when the defendant's wife shows up dead, Lone Bolt presents his defense: "It was just a coincidence."





Oh, and here's one for Beavis: So, Clinton signing the Iraq Liberation Act meant he intended to invade Iraq or supported an Iraq invasion because the Act supported "regime change" in Iraq?

Obama just signed the same thing last year supporting "regime change" in Syria. Do you think we're going to invade Syria?

Read the Wiki entry above. Obviously, Clinton signed the Act in order to try and hold off the neocon dogs of war who were snapping at his heels. He continued the sanctions, the bombing and the policy of "Iraqi democratic opposition which the U.S. was supporting through the Iraq Liberation Act" but invasion? Wasn't going to happen and did not support it.

In the final analysis: Bush did it. He did it alone. He always intended to do it. He massively ****ed it up. He left the massive mess in the next president's lap and went off to paint pictures of himself in the shower. All those who voted for him are culpable. **** off!
Beautiful country. I spent a couple of spring,summer & falls up there cutting trail with the YCC in High School. You might have walked on one of my old switchbacks. One of the toughest jobs I ever loved. We'd spend weeks up there at a time putting in 12 hour days working our asses off. You wouldn't believe how in shape you get lugging a heavy rock bar, swing a double bit axe and mowing with a pulaski. I went into football season in the best shape of my life. I destroyed all the gym rats who were flipping burgers all summer.


... much like you destroyed some here with this wiki

Last edited by Bronco Yoda; 06-30-2014 at 02:07 PM..
Bronco Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 03:31 PM   #812
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,935

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
And here we are at that same murder trial, with Prosecuting Attorney Rohirrim.

Ro: "Your Honor, I have here a letter written by the defendant in 1993. It states that he planned to murder his wife in the kitchen with a butcher's knife, wrap her in plastic, and bury her in the back yard!"

Judge: "Very well. Bring the evidence forward for review."

Judge reviews the letter.

Judge: "Umm... counselor? I have read the letter in its entirety. I see only a brief mention of the defendant's wife, and no mention whatsoever of any plan to kill her in the kitchen with a butcher's knife, wrap her in plastic, and bury her in the back yard as you claim. The letter mostly discusses the defendant's dislike of women in general."

Ro: "Well you see, Your Honor, that's my personal interpretation of the letter, which is just as good."

No. I would say, "Your honor, in general this was the intent of the defendant all along as clearly stated in the letter. Besides, he's a beady eyed little ****er and we should string him up just for looking like he does."
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 04:00 PM   #813
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
No. I would say, "Your honor, in general this was the intent of the defendant all along as clearly stated in the letter. Besides, he's a beady eyed little ****er and we should string him up just for looking like he does."
I'm beginning to think you and Gaffney were separated at birth.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2014, 01:57 PM   #814
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,540
Default

US Supports BOTH sides in Mideast Slaughter...


The US is repeating the infamous history of the past -- arming/supporting both sides in a bloody war.

We did it in WW II, when NY bankers helped Hitler even as we supplied logistical support to Stalin to keep Russia in the war.

We did it in the 1980s Iran-Iraq war, when we helped both sides to destroy each other.

We are doing it again --- assisting Al Qaeda in Syria
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5534421.html

even as we help Iraqi president Al Maliki fight ISIS.
http://news.sky.com/story/1292576/ne...rs-iraq-forces

This is an immoral and treacherous policy -- that is creating hatred against the US -- more every day. MHG
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2014, 02:00 PM   #815
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,540
Default

Obama wants $500 million to arm the moderate Syrian army

Problem is, the moderates were overrun last year.
http://www.thetower.org/reports-top-...ze-warehouses/
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2014, 02:17 PM   #816
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Obama blew it. He thought he could pull out of Iraq, arm Syrian rebels, let Mubarak fall, piss off Israel and let the chips fall where they may. He knew his base foolishly thinks America should stay out of everything. It didn't work well, it never works well.

Now would Americans be traveling to Iraq had Obama left say 20 thousand troops? Of course not the whole region is violent, against women, hates Christians, not exactly a place to want to go.

Um that's why Israel is our biggest ally. You wouldn't know that from Obama though.

Oh Hamas just killed three Israeli teens. Look for Israel to do some killing soon.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2014, 02:17 PM   #817
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Obama is kidding himself if he thinks he knows who to arm in Syria. Obama looks so bad over Syria it's amazing he doesn't get made fun of every night on the news.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2014, 02:56 PM   #818
pricejj
jungle
 
pricejj's Avatar
 
United In Orange

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 10,120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Obama wants $500 million to arm the moderate Syrian army

Problem is, the moderates were overrun last year.
http://www.thetower.org/reports-top-...ze-warehouses/
This is exactly why Obama is a complete joke.

Right now he's funding the extremists with weapons, while American soldiers are over there fighting against them. I would hate to be in the military right now.
pricejj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 06:50 AM   #819
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,005

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Obama and his admin. have no clue what to do about much of anything other than tax us all into oblivion.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 08:29 AM   #820
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,935

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barryr View Post
Obama and his admin. have no clue what to do about much of anything other than tax us all into oblivion.
Oops!

In sum, taking those big three bills and the HIRE Act into account, Obama has cut taxes by $1.98 trillion and raised them by $834 billion, for a net tax cut of $1.15 trillion during his tenure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...s-in-one-post/
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 08:47 AM   #821
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,361

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Oops!

In sum, taking those big three bills and the HIRE Act into account, Obama has cut taxes by $1.98 trillion and raised them by $834 billion, for a net tax cut of $1.15 trillion during his tenure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...s-in-one-post/
Barry doesn't care about actual facts.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 09:09 AM   #822
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,935

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
Barry doesn't care about actual facts.
Must be easy to just check in with Fox and find out what you think.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 09:23 AM   #823
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Oops!

In sum, taking those big three bills and the HIRE Act into account, Obama has cut taxes by $1.98 trillion and raised them by $834 billion, for a net tax cut of $1.15 trillion during his tenure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...s-in-one-post/
Cute. The "Obamacare subsidies are tax cuts" gambit.

Well played, Roh. Well played.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 09:43 AM   #824
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,005

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
Barry doesn't care about actual facts.
the irony. if it's not on a liberal website, can't be happening.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 09:46 AM   #825
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,005

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

at the liberals b****ing about no after plan in Iraq. The same idiots who were wanting our soldiers pulled once they set foot on the ground and they and their politicians trashing our troops as nothing more than rapists and pillagers, killing innocent people, are complaining there was no good plan after the ending of Hussein's regime. Geez.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:48 AM.


Denver Broncos