So - why are we in Iraq?

[Bala]

The President's own words: In mp3 audio
President Bush's Introductory Remarks on Iraq and Middle East (18 mins.)
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/25audio.htm

"So, much of the thinking and decision-making that I do now is based upon my belief that we're in this grand ideological struggle. It is a struggle between moderate people, and a struggle between ideologues who are totalitarian and kill to achieve an objective without conscience."

"Iraq is the central part of this global war right now. The extremists, radicals have made it clear that they want us to leave. You know, it's an interesting world in which people are not willing to listen to the words of an enemy, but in this case, we're able to listen to the enemy and find out what the enemy thinks and publish their thoughts. The Commander-in-Chief must listen carefully and take their words extremely seriously."

"Other parts of the world, and some here – and I'm not casting dispersion, I'm just giving you a sense – I'm telling you what's on my mind. I am in disbelief that people don't take these people seriously, as if they're some kind of incompetent, and/or isolated people. They're plenty competent, they're plenty tough, and they're plenty ambitious."

"The good news is, is that we've severely hurt them. My strategy, from day one, was to go on the offense, stay on the offense, and keep the pressure on them until we are able to bring as many to justice as possible. They morph. You know, they kind of – there is al Qaeda central, there is al Qaeda look-alikes, there is al Qaeda want-to-bes. They're dangerous. Some are more dangerous than others. And we have got special teams and special operating teams, as well as intelligence teams, pressuring them a lot."

"And we're pretty successful. We have upheld doctrine. And we take threats – the doctrine is "if you harbor" – and we upheld that doctrine, of course, in Afghanistan. And then we're taking these – we're dealing with threats. I made the right decision on Saddam Hussein. Now the question is, can we help this government succeed? And the answer is not only can we help them, we must help them, and they will succeed."

Question 1: On the Baker Commission Report and Future of Iraq (5 mins.)
http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question01.mp3

Question 2: "Shouldn't Syria Be Getting Subverted in Return in Some Way?" (4 mins. http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question02.mp3

Question 3: "Would you see that as a failure of this administration if … the Iranian program is going ahead?" (3 mins.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question03.mp3

Question 4: On North Korea, and whether the United States could be reverting to a policy of strategic deterence (4 mins.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question04.mp3

Question 5: Other than diplomacy, what are we doing to protect ourselves? (1 min.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question05.mp3

Question 6: "How can we measure victories?" (5 mins.)
http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question06.mp3

Question 7: Why don't we talk about how many enemies are being killed by Americans? (2 mins.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question07.mp3

Question 8: Question on the domestic politics of immigration and national security (4 mins.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question08.mp3

Question 9: Question about possibility of direct oil payments to Iraqis (2 mins.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question09.mp3

Question 10: Question about whether Iraqis take advantage of American commitment (5 mins.) http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question10.mp3

Question 11: Would the president veto certain tax proposals? (3 mins.)
http://images.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061025/question11.mp3

[46zilzal]

October 26th, 2006
4 U.S. Marines, 1 sailor killed in Iraq

Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. military on Thursday announced the deaths of five U.S. troops in fighting in Iraq, raising to 96 the number of American forces killed this month.

The four Marines and one Navy sailor all died in fighting in Anbar province, a hotbed of the Sunni insurgency against U.S. troops and their Iraqi government allies.

The latest deaths raised to 96 the number of U.S. forces killed in October, the highest toll for any month this year and on course to surpass the October 2005 total of 96.

[46zilzal]

vasion of Iraq a 'pure failure': Hans Blix

Associated Press

COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- Former U-N chief weapons inspector Hans Blix describes the U-S-led invasion of Iraq as a "pure failure'' that has left the country worse off than under the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein.

In unusually harsh comments to a Danish newspaper today, the diplomatic Swede said Washington has ended up in a situation in which neither staying nor leaving Iraq are good options.

Blix says, "Iraq is a pure failure.''

[luv_america]

Bala,

Thanks for posting this.

There's is not one liberal on this board that will listen to this. Pure and simple it will explain why we are there. The libs don't want to hear this as it doesn't fit their template that Bush is the terrorist.

[luv_america]

46,

no one could care less about Hans Blix. He's another "stick your head in the sand" European idealist liberal.

If Blix and his UN buddies did their job instead of lining their own pockets in the "Oil for Food" scandal (the scandal in my mind, still doesn't get enough press), we might not be in the mess.

Just remember all those resolutions that Sadaam laughed out. He set the stage for North Korea and Iran to chuckle at them too.

Its people like Blix that will lead us all into oblivion, just like they did in the 20th century.

[PlanB]

LUV, did Lefty meet you in some Casino on the strip in the free luncheon
line? I KNOW you & Lefty are the same guys on different puters. Come
on, come clean, you'll feel better for it.

[Secretariat]

luv,

Whether you like it or not, Blix was right on the WMD's.

But Bala this is a real good question.

1) If you listen to Bush's ghost writer for his autobiography, the reason is this:

http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761

Two years before 9/11, candidate Bush was already talking privately about attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer

Houston: Two years before the September 11 attacks, presidential candidate George W. Bush was already talking privately about the political benefits of attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer, who held many conversations with then-Texas Governor Bush in preparation for a planned autobiography.

“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.”

...

Or if you listen to the BBC, we're in iraq because of God.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml

President George W Bush told Palestinian ministers that God had told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq - and create a Palestinian State, a new BBC series reveals.

In Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, a major three-part series on BBC TWO (at 9.00pm on Monday 10, Monday 17 and Monday 24 October), Abu Mazen, Palestinian Prime Minister, and Nabil Shaath, his Foreign Minister, describe their first meeting with President Bush in June 2003.

Nabil Shaath says: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me,
"George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …" And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I'm gonna do it.'"

..

If you listen to former Senator Fritz Hollings, it is Israel's security.

http://www.arabialink.com/Archive/GWPersp/GWP2004/GWP_2004_05_08.htm

“Of course there were no weapons of mass destruction. Israel’s intelligence, Mossad, knows what’s going on in Iraq. It is the best. It has to know; Israel’s survival depends on knowing. Israel long since would have taken us to the weapons of mass destruction if there were any, or if they had been removed. With Iraq no threat, why invade a sovereign country? The answer: President Bush’s policy to secure Israel.

Led by Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Charles Krauthammer, for years there has been a domino school of thought that the way to guarantee Israel’s security is to spread democracy in the area. Wolfowitz wrote: “The United States may not be able to lead countries through the door of democracy, but where that door is locked shut by a totalitarian deadbolt, American power may be the only way to open it up.” And on another occasion: Iraq as “the first Arab democracy.. would cast a very large shadow, starting with Syria and Iran but across the whole Arab world.”

...

If you listen to GW in 2005 it is to keep th oil fields from falling into the hands of terrorists:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/08/31/bush_gives_new_reason_for_iraq_war/

Bush gives new reason for Iraq war
Says US must prevent oil fields from falling into hands of terrorists
By Jennifer Loven, Associated Press | August 31, 2005

CORONADO, Calif. -- President Bush answered growing antiwar protests yesterday with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists.

...

If you listen to John Kerry's speech on the debate on the Iraq War REsolution it was for one reason only:

Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies.

In voting to grant the President the authority, I am not giving him carte blanche to run roughshod over every country that poses or may pose some kind of potential threat to the United States. Every nation has the right to act preemptively, if it faces an imminent and grave threat, for its self-defense under the standards of law. The threat we face today with Iraq does not meet that test yet

But it is not imminent, and no one in the CIA, no intelligence briefing we have had suggests it is imminent. None of our intelligence reports suggest that he is about to launch an attack.

...

Why are we in Iraq?

There are lots of theories. Take your pick. The Senators who voted to give GW authority thought it was about WMD's.

Regardless, he and Rummy got us in this mess, and now hopefully, we get the heck out gracefully.

[Lefty]

LUV, did Lefty meet you in some Casino on the strip in the free luncheon
line? I KNOW you & Lefty are the same guys on different puters. Come
on, come clean, you'll feel better for it.
I'm having deja vu all over again. This reminds me of about 4 yrs ago when some nut me of being Dave Shwartz, Slider and myself. This is about as stupid and aswrong. Btw, i'm unaware of where the free kuncheon is. Could you give me the name of the casino?

[JustRalph]

Sec, who cares? If I was made president in a couple of years, I know right now who I would attack too.........

[kenwoodallpromos]

We are still occupying land from the following wars:
Korea, WW2, Civil War, American Revolution.
No wonder Iraqis are worried!

[luv_america]

The problem you guys on the left fail is that when we start to speak out, you think that we're all programmed. You just don't like to hear dissent cause it starts to define your theories as cooky. The stuff you guys believe is just insane.

Secetariat can't get through a rant without some kind of liberal "Air America", "Daily Koz" kind of conspiracy theory.

The rest of us live in the real world. You should join us sometime. You might start to understand us better.

[Indulto]

The problem you guys on the left fail is that when we start to speak out, you think that we're all programmed. You just don't like to hear dissent cause it starts to define your theories as cooky. The stuff you guys believe is just insane.

Secetariat can't get through a rant without some kind of liberal "Air America", "Daily Koz" kind of conspiracy theory.

The rest of us live in the real world. You should join us sometime. You might start to understand us better.LA,
I’ve been reading your posts hoping that some NEW ideas from conservatives would be forthcoming, but after thirty-some of your posts, all we seem to have in our midst is another “liberal-basher,” albeit an articulate one.

Since I can’t seem to get any specifics from board stalwarts JR or lsbets, I’ll rise to your bait and give you a shot at a progressive’s capitalist alternative to “staying the course.” Let’s call it the “Peace Purchase Initiative.”

Suppose we say to the Sunni and Shia, “We’re committed to rebuilding your infrastructure when you are ready, but we recognize that now is not the time. Since you won’t allow us to help currently, we’re going to re-deploy our troops into Northern Iraq until you’re willing -- in practice -- to accept our assistance. We will maintain a military presence there to protect the democratic Kurdish minority from external threats from Turkey, and internal threats from Sunni and/or Shia.

We’ve already trained your soldiers/police to the point where they CAN defend whatever groups they WISH to. It’s going to be up to you whether they are used to keep the peace or destroy it, but we’re no longer going to provide you with any excuse to call us OCCUPIERS. We will attempt to help the Iraqi forces we have already trained to voluntarily re-deploy.

If, once all Iraqi factions are co-existing peacefully (even as independent states, if necessary), the Kurds also do not want us in their geograhic area, we are prepared to initiate a phased withdrawal from there as well.

We will not place any restriction on how you govern yourselves, but in order to receive our financial assistance, you must concurrently rebuild any existing oil production capacity, with all external sales INITIALLY going to U.S. companies in which you will be able to purchase stock. We encourage you to eventually obtain complete control over these resources in a peaceful manner, while honoring contractual commitments.

Once security has been established by the southern factions, our assistance for rebuilding there will go to Iraqi-owned companies whenever possible, but any external contracts must go to U.S. companies who will employ local citizens to the greatest extent possible. If you wish to develop new oil production resources, you will have to provide a secure environment and incentives for U.S. companies to locate and develop those resources.

If, at any time, the Sunni and the Shia wish to petition the UN to provide assistance in protecting their borders with Iran and/or Syria, we will not interfere."

[Suff]

Bush Invaded Iraq not even knowing what a Sunni or Shiite was. They've had to explain it to him post-invasion. Virtually all of our problems in Iraq surround sectarian violence between the two.


Knowing that, no one would ask me to take Bush serious if he were to explain the nuances of our Iraq dificulties. Would they?

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Ambassador_claims_shortly_before_invasion_Bush_080 4.html

[ljb]

Fellows,
It appears that after all this rhetoric from the right, this Iraq thing is starting to boil down to the original thoughts of some here.
It's all about the OIL ! The only reason the neocons refuse to leave Iraq now is the OIL would be in Shiite hands, follow the money !
ps. LA is not Lefty or Tom, still think a contest is needed here. I know who he is but won't divulge it until pa starts a contest. :lol:

[46zilzal]

Sec, who cares? If I was made president in a couple of years, I know right now who I would attack too.........
if that had happened the world would be now mostly radioactive

[Lefty]

Fellows,
It appears that after all this rhetoric from the right, this Iraq thing is starting to boil down to the original thoughts of some here.
It's all about the OIL ! The only reason the neocons refuse to leave Iraq now is the OIL would be in Shiite hands, follow the money !
ps. LA is not Lefty or Tom, still think a contest is needed here. I know who he is but won't divulge it until pa starts a contest. :lol:
Hmm, if we pull out of Iraq and the oil fell into bad hands, and outr gasoline spiked up to $8- 10 bucks a gallon you and others would be blaming Bush for doing that. Oil is but one component in the war on terrorism.

[luv_america]

Interesting post. It certainly has a lot of merit.

One has to take the perspective that our situation in Iraq is not permanent. There needs to be an ongoing support of the local military and police forces to establish the capability of self-defense. The Shia and Sunni "silent majority" at some point need to put a stop to the invasion of their country by Arab and Islamic terrorists. I believe our government supports these initiatives, although they are not easy. Democracy and accountable government take time to develop and need to come from the people, not occupiers or politicians.

Our presence in Iraq was designed to take out the regime that played shell game with the possibility that they possessed WMD. This has been a well fought over point, and doesn't really need rehashing. What Iraq turned into was a battle between the continental extremists who would desire the US to leave a headless Iraq to them. They would turn Iraq in another terrorist state puppet of either Iran or the Jihadists. This is NOT in our global long term interests. The Bush Administration has decided to put a line in the sand, and show the Jihadists that we are serious about defending our interests (Democracy and accountable government) and our allies in the region (Israel) from the threat that the Islamic movement one that would have the ability to grow and hold a country hostage, especially one with rich natural resources like Iraq that could fund the purchase of military arms, goods, and yes, possibly WMD.

I know the liberal point of view is that this is all for oil. Oil is the rich natural resource that the terrorists crave to use as cash cow to fund jihadism. They want it worse than we do, which one of the main reasons why they fight in Iraq. We should want to keep it out of their hands.

About ljb's comment that he knew all along that this is about oil. I assume that he expects that the US will exploit the oil. Its been over 3 years and there is yet to be some evidence that US has even remotely come close to doing that. How many years must we keep "hands off" before that accusation goes away?

Lastly, we should all think about this. If we "cut and run", what do you think happens? If the terrorists get the state and hold 25 million Iraqi's hostage and use their oil to fund jihadism, what is in store for the rest of the world? You'd have to ask yourself in 5 years, would you feel safer?

[luv_america]

Indulto,

As far as me being a "liberal basher", I'm not here to bash liberals personally. I believe that you are caring people. You have ideas and intentions that show that you care.

Its you're ideas and intentions that I intend to bash. Some of them are downright dangerous.

Also, if you read my posts, I'm trying to get liberals to be honest with us, and tell us what they really think. I've been asking for specifics on plans and ideas and getting very little in the way of substance and plenty of attack (your honest, but mildly disagreeable post excluded).

Its my opinion that liberals don't like their ideas or intentions challenged. Judging from the stuff Bush & Co. takes, liberals should be willing to receive some questioning back. I'm starting to do that around here because I find this turf fertile (Firm) and the opposition easy to defeat.

Bashing, no, your ideas, absolutely.

[chickenhead]

The rest of us live in the real world. You should join us sometime. You might start to understand us better.

I think one of the main sticking points in making any progress person to person is this:

Conservatives, supporters of Bush, supporters of the war, fail to realize that the way the war was framed, the reason the war was allowed to happen, was because of WMD, and when they more or less completely failed to materialize, how absolutely cold that left a large percentage of people.

Pleased don't argue the WMD point, there is really no reason to argue that point. Let's leave any and all conspiracy theories out of this, I'm not going to prescribe ulterior motives or anything underhanded to Bush co.

But that is what the war was sold on, that is why the war happened. All of the other reasons lumped together, would not have got anywhere near enough votes to do anything with.

That is not something that can be so easily swept away, or I should say maybe for you it is -- but you should be able to understand why for many people it is not. It is extremely difficult for many people to get over the fact that they feel they were lied to. There are a whole lot of virulently anti-Bush people, who would not be had we found the stockpiles we expected.

That created an enormous rift politically. In the wake of 9-11 most Americans were not in the mood for any kind of partisan bickering...there was not an enormous virulently anti-Bush population. All the moderates and many liberals were rooting for him, quite properly. He got a lot of legislation passed.

Iraq and the failure to find the WMD's left a lot of those people out cold...feeling betrayed, and that should be understandable to anyone. The problem is, that rift has never been closed. And it has never really seriously been addressed by the two sides. It's just been a partisan political shell-game of each side blaming the other, misstating each others positions, questioning each others patriotism, etc. It allowed the far left to gain back a serious foot hold in substitute of any real leadership by anyone. That is not where the party was in 2002.

At this point I think most liberals have just decided to be anti-Bush till it's over. Put on the blinkers, hunker down, and whatever else, DO NOT TRUST HIM, ABOUT ANYTHING. Conservatives, in response, have decided not only do they have political differences with liberals, they actually hate them, for not understanding things, for not "getting over it".

I think it's a shame -- some decent leadership in the pre and immediate post war period on both sides would have landed us in a totally different place politically. But here we are, and I for one think it sucks.

[betovernetcapper]

I could be wrong on this, but as a result of the Gulf war, wasn't Iraq supposed to allow UN weapons inspectors free and unfeatered access to any and all possible weapons sites?
Didn't Iraq deny the inspectors access on a regular basis?
Wasn't Iraq told that the US would invade if they didn't comply?
Or was this some other bunch of --------------------? :confused:

[chickenhead]

I could be wrong on this, but as a result of the Gulf war, wasn't Iraq supposed to allow UN weapons inspectors free and unfeatered access to any and all possible weapons sites?
Didn't Iraq deny the inspectors access on a regular basis?
Wasn't Iraq told that the US would invade if they didn't comply?
Or was this some other bunch of --------------------? :confused:

I think you are right about some things, not right about others. The threat of US invasion for non-compliance came right before the current war, not right after the Gulf War.

And the reason that there was support for that policy, a possible invasion, rather than just bombings as we had previously done, was because the administration made the case that not only do we know he has weapons, but we know where they are.

So the whole argument was predicated not on whether or not he is complying with inspections, but that we know he has weapons, and he is not disarming. That is a much different circumstance.

[ljb]

Hmm, if we pull out of Iraq and the oil fell into bad hands, and outr gasoline spiked up to $8- 10 bucks a gallon you and others would be blaming Bush for doing that. Oil is but one component in the war on terrorism.
Personally i would like gas prices to be similiar to before we pulled into Iraq. Follow the money Lefty.

[Bala]

".........Follow the money......."

Why do “they” {most of the Arab world} hate us
but love American currency.

I recall Saddam and his sons had an enormous personal
stash of American cash. Must be nice to be king and have
the UN on your side.






______________________________________________
If evolution is true than any monkey can select the BC pick six.

[Indulto]

Originally posted by luv_america
Indulto,

As far as me being a "liberal basher", I'm not here to bash liberals personally. I believe that you are caring people. You have ideas and intentions that show that you care.

Its you're ideas and intentions that I intend to bash. Some of them are downright dangerous.

Also, if you read my posts, I'm trying to get liberals to be honest with us, and tell us what they really think. I've been asking for specifics on plans and ideas and getting very little in the way of substance and plenty of attack (your honest, but mildly disagreeable post excluded).

Its my opinion that liberals don't like their ideas or intentions challenged. Judging from the stuff Bush & Co. takes, liberals should be willing to receive some questioning back. I'm starting to do that around here because I find this turf fertile (Firm) and the opposition easy to defeat.

Bashing, no, your ideas, absolutely.LA,
Respectfully, when will YOU be honest and specific? So far your attempts to distort liberal positions rather than specifically explain why you consider them invalid or impractical, shows that you are not really interested in discussing issues, but rather in dismissing and discrediting your opposition.

Take this “single issue” distraction of yours. If valid, your theory would be just as applicable to conservatives as to liberals. As just one counter-example, many of those who do not reject legalized abortions (as opposed to “favoring” abortion) also do not reject the death penalty.

I don't reject all conservative ideas, but I do reject individuals of any political persuasion who try to stifle dissent using a "You're either with us or against us" approach, especially self-professed patriots.

The real problem I hope you will alleviate in your next thirty-some posts is the use of inflammatory hype. You know very well that only a fraction of people who opposed the invasion of Iraq are “antiwar,” i.e., against all military action. Do you really consider it cowardly to voice concern that soldiers’ lives are being consumed with no end in sight for inaccurately, improperly, and apparently incompetently defined objectives?

What really distinguishes you from other liberal-bashers here, though, is your contention that liberals are “anti-Christian.” Conservatives usually exaggerate the liberal “Church-State Separation” ideal as “anti-religion.” By elevating that conflict, you demonstrate a capacity for duplicity which liberals usually associate with Karl Rove. Any connection?

[Secretariat]

The problem you guys on the left fail is that when we start to speak out, you think that we're all programmed. You just don't like to hear dissent cause it starts to define your theories as cooky. The stuff you guys believe is just insane.

Secetariat can't get through a rant without some kind of liberal "Air America", "Daily Koz" kind of conspiracy theory.

The rest of us live in the real world. You should join us sometime. You might start to understand us better.

The real world? To me your posts indicate you live in a very isolated world. I'm OK with that, but don't pretend that this is the only world people live in. This country is composed of all kinds of people with all kinds of views. I'm all for dissent. Dissent is simply your POV. I just don't agree with it. If you look at the latest polls, there appear to be a lot of people who you would beleive don't live in the real world.

As to my posts, they're not from the Daily koz, or DU.

Why would Bush's ghost writer say these things?

What is wrong with quoting Senator Hollings or Senator Kerry other than quoting Rush Limbaugh as many do here?

I think Senator Kerry knows what he said as does Hollings? I think Senator Hagel knows what he says.

I've been here a long time and have had "dissenting" opinins with some, and agreement from others. I may disagree with JR, or Lefty or Isbets, but I respect their right to voice their opinion, and I don't think they are a wacko for doing so. Maybe misguided or wrong in my opinion, but I don't feel the need to resort to name calling.

[luv_america]

I missed that. What name did I call you?

[Lefty]

Personally i would like gas prices to be similiar to before we pulled into Iraq. Follow the money Lefty.
So would I but pulling out of Iraq would not accomplish that. Follow some logic, lbj.

[ljb]

So would I but pulling out of Iraq would not accomplish that. Follow some logic, lbj.
I have been following the logic all along , it is you that fail to see the connection here. Follow the money Lefty.

[Tom]

Follow the money.
Follow the money.

You know who follows the money?
Hookers and pickpockets.

Like Lefty says, follow some logic, some facts. Inuendos are not evidence. Put up something of substance.

[ljb]

Follow the money.
Follow the money.

You know who follows the money?
Hookers and pickpockets.

Like Lefty says, follow some logic, some facts. Inuendos are not evidence. Put up something of substance.
Buddy Tom,
You mean like you do ? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[luv_america]

Indulto,

Respectfully, lets stick with the ideas and argue them. I'm thrilled to do that.

There are so many posts on this board that are skewed media reports that obscure the truth, and too many conspiracy theories.

When conservatives argue liberals over the facts, it is MY OPINION that liberals cannot get honest with us and tell us what they think because we won't vote for them.

You and the folks attacking me here are making the rest of the board very curious as to the content of my posts. You are a great advertisement for my ideas.

[46zilzal]

yes everytime there is something out there that might SKEW the neocon idea of the world, IT MUST BE A LIE!

[luv_america]

"neocon", so are you a Jew-hater like some others on this board too?

[46zilzal]

"neocon", so are you a Jew-hater like some others on this board too?
I don't hate anyone. part of my Buddist philosophy

[luv_america]

Then why do you use the word neocon when I clearly establish myself as a conservative? Many liberals (a few here) use the word as a code word for "Jewish" conservative with an anti-semitic tone. You could do yourself well and drop that word.

[Tom]

He can't help it. It's hereditary. Going to take a whole lot more evolting to get that out.:lol:

[hcap]

Please do not attempt to link my contempt for the neocon foreign policy with anti-semitism. The misbegotten Iraq adventure is reason enough to hold bush and cheney in contempt.

And funny they don't look Jewish to me....

Darth cheney of the Sith religion...
http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/cheney-smiling.jpeg


And junior of the duckish, lame duckish sect...

http://images.dailykos.com/blogads3/83630186/img.gif

You don't have to be Jewish. Just wrong and stupid

[46zilzal]

Then why do you use the word neocon when I clearly establish myself as a conservative? Many liberals (a few here) use the word as a code word for "Jewish" conservative with an anti-semitic tone. You could do yourself well and drop that word.

other people can define words however they want. Never thought of a necon as being anything other than one wanting to promote change by agression.

[luv_america]

Interesting, how else do you promote change in despotic regimes other than by force? Can you name one tyrant that stepped down after a discussion over tea?

[Secretariat]

"neocon", so are you a Jew-hater like some others on this board too?

And as Ronald Reagan said, "There he goes again."

[46zilzal]

all these wars since 1950 are simply surrogates: Let's FIGHT OUT our ideological differences, but let's just NOT DO IT on our homeland. It's okay to blow up THEIR homes/infrastructure/water/transportation systems...just not OURS.

[luv_america]

46,

exactly. We don't want our homes blown up, and we'll try to blow up the homes that are keeping our allies or other people ensalved or simply not free.

If we leave the country to YOU, our homes will get blown up. That's precisely the point why we won't let you have that power. We don't TRUST you to protect us.

Thanks for being honest with us.

[46zilzal]

46,

exactly. We don't want our homes blown up, and we'll try to blow up the homes that are keeping our allies or other people ensalved or simply not free.

If we leave the country to YOU, our homes will get blown up. That's precisely the point why we won't let you have that power. We don't TRUST you to protect us.

Nope I don't want anything to do with running ANY country.....Let's just keep those third world battlegrounds for the goons who must think it must matter they do it so often. I have many a patient from those battlegrounds who tell me tales of horror all the time. What a load of bull shit all this swaggering jingoism is!

[Bala]

"Nope I don't want anything to do with running ANY country.....Let's just keep those third world battlegrounds for the goons...."
This is precisely the attitude in France and other parts of Europe. Curiously, this kind of thinking is why fanatics fight their wars in Spain and London subway systems. Incidentally, the religion of peace is still overturning and setting fires to buses in France. CNN decided it was not worthy to report. Might be a good time for Europe to study Arabic. Once that continent of cowards lose this jihad North America is next.

This is a command from the prophet Muhammad himself.
Quran:
Sura: 8:12
8:60
9:14

_____________________


Critics of Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_islam)often point to the Quran to prove that it is not of divine origin and therefore conclude that Islam is false. The divine origin of the Quran and the morality of the Quran are hot topics of criticism in Islam.

[JustRalph]

Nope I don't want anything to do with running ANY country.....

Then you won't bitch when the U.S. Annexes Canada

[46zilzal]

Then you won't bitch when the U.S. Annexes Canada
just when will that happen?

[Lefty]

I don't hate anyone. part of my Buddist philosophy
You better go back to classes because most of your posts clearly show your hate of the President.

[46zilzal]

You better go back to classes because most of your posts clearly show your hate of the President.
No I think he is a blithering idiot. I don't hate idiots

[Lefty]

Nope I don't want anything to do with running ANY country.....Let's just keep those third world battlegrounds for the goons who must think it must matter they do it so often. I have many a patient from those battlegrounds who tell me tales of horror all the time. What a load of bull shit all this swaggering jingoism is!
This is precisely the attitude that brght Hitler so close to world domination.

[46zilzal]

more horse shit from the King of it

[46zilzal]

The problem you guys on the left fail is that when we start to speak out, you think that we're all programmed. You just don't like to hear dissent cause it starts to define your theories as cooky. The stuff you guys believe is just insane.

Secetariat can't get through a rant without some kind of liberal "Air America", "Daily Koz" kind of conspiracy theory.

The rest of us live in the real world. You should join us sometime. You might start to understand us better.
Wave that flag stick out that chest and try to get THEM to knock that chip off your shoulder....any excuse to BLOW up folks

[Lefty]

more horse shit from the King of it
Can you tell me why i'm wrong?

[Lefty]

No I think he is a blithering idiot. I don't hate idiots
He doesn't hate you either and(can you buhlve it)for the same reason.

[luv_america]

46,

maybe you're right. I'm going to start learning Arabic. I think women in Burka's (with a chopped off clitoris) are hot!!

[46zilzal]

Good shot of all the wasted lives, but as a scoiopath there is no conscience to bother.

[46zilzal]

He doesn't hate you either and(can you buhlve it)for the same reason.
BUHLVE you me I don't care

[46zilzal]

46,

maybe you're right. I'm going to start learning Arabic. I think women in Burka's (with a chopped off clitoris) are hot!!
do what you want but this bull shit war has nothing to do with that.

[Tom]

46,

maybe you're right. I'm going to start learning Arabic. I think women in Burka's (with a chopped off clitoris) are hot!!

The line between you and Hcap are really starting to blurr. Politics is no excuse for poor taste.

[Lefty]

Good shot of all the wasted lives, but as a scoiopath there is no conscience to bother.
Calling the Pres of thew United States a sociopath is beyond the pale, buddy boy. You haven't the brains or credentials to make that call. You constantly just make crappy comments without a thing to bk them up.

[Indulto]

Originally posted by luv_america(1)
Indulto,

Respectfully, lets stick with the ideas and argue them. I'm thrilled to do that.

There are so many posts on this board that are skewed media reports that obscure the truth, and too many conspiracy theories.

When conservatives argue liberals over the facts, it is MY OPINION that liberals cannot get honest with us and tell us what they think because we won't vote for them.

You and the folks attacking me here are making the rest of the board very curious as to the content of my posts. You are a great advertisement for my ideas.LA,
As you continue to simply pay lip service to “arguing ideas” without actually doing so, it becomes clearer that whatever your true objective is, it apparently isn't to raise the level of discourse here.Originally posted by luv_america(2)
"neocon", so are you a Jew-hater like some others on this board too?Originally posted by luv_america(3)
Then why do you use the word neocon when I clearly establish myself as a conservative? Many liberals (a few here) use the word as a code word for "Jewish" conservative with an anti-semitic tone. You could do yourself well and drop that word.So "luv" loves to label liberals as “anti-semitic” as well as "anti-Christian?"Originally posted by luv_america(4)
46,

exactly. We don't want our homes blown up, and we'll try to blow up the homes that are keeping our allies or other people ensalved or simply not free.

If we leave the country to YOU, our homes will get blown up. That's precisely the point why we won't let you have that power. We don't TRUST you to protect us.

Thanks for being honest with us.“Hill Street Blues” logic seems to be popular here, i.e., “Do it to them before they do it to us!” Not quite as effective as a mushroom cloud, but I’m sure you’ll use that one before election day.Originally posted by luv_america(5)
46,

maybe you're right. I'm going to start learning Arabic. I think women in Burka's (with a chopped off clitoris) are hot!!Wow! Fifty-some posts within a week without any substance, but quite liberal in their abuse of freedom to rant. Now that you’ve decided to reveal your “anti-Muslim” side, perhaps a more appropriate pseudonym for you would be ”Hate, America.” ;)

What amuses me about your advertised assistance, HA, is your presumption that the "right-reclining" here actually need it. But maybe YOU’RE right. Just because I don’t expect the enlightened among them to enthusiastically embrace your expertise in repulsive expression doesn’t mean enough won’t eventually endorse your efforts to "enhance" their effectiveness, and you won’t be ………… alone ………… :D

I genuinely enjoy being a "great advertisement" for your ideas. :lol:

[luv_america]

Indulto,

nice try. I don't need to defend the substance of my posts. You obviously didn't read them and are trying to surpress my will to post more.

In a short time I built up quite a fan club here. Can you say the same?

[luv_america]

Sorry Tom for the poor taste comment, it certainly was left there for effect. No one on the left ever denounces the Islamic Jihadist movement. If we let guys like 46 run the roost, that's what our women, maybe 20 years from now, will face.

[Secretariat]

In a short time I built up quite a fan club here. Can you say the same?

Good God, hopefully that is not your goal here. If so, there may be a few therapists online you can PM.

[Tom]

LA,
As you continue to simply pay lip service to “arguing ideas” without actually doing so, it becomes clearer that whatever your true objective is, it apparently isn't to raise the level of discourse here.So "luv" loves to label liberals as “anti-semitic” as well as "anti-Christian?"“Hill Street Blues” logic seems to be popular here, i.e., “Do it to them before they do it to us!” Not quite as effective as a mushroom cloud, but I’m sure you’ll use that one before election day.Wow! Fifty-some posts within a week without any substance, but quite liberal in their abuse of freedom to rant. Now that you’ve decided to reveal your “anti-Muslim” side, perhaps a more appropriate pseudonym for you would be ”Hate, America.” ;)

What amuses me about your advertised assistance, HA, is your presumption that the "right-reclining" here actually need it. But maybe YOU’RE right. Just because I don’t expect the enlightened among them to enthusiastically embrace your expertise in repulsive expression doesn’t mean enough won’t eventually endorse your efforts to "enhance" their effectiveness, and you won’t be ………… alone ………… :D

I genuinely enjoy being a "great advertisement" for your ideas. :lol:

Whatever it is, it certainly has nothing to do with horse racing, which you obviously understand is the primary purpose here. BTW, I'll join YOUR fan club! :D

[46zilzal]

Sorry Tom for the poor taste comment, it certainly was left there for effect. No one on the left ever denounces the Islamic Jihadist movement. If we let guys like 46 run the roost, that's what our women, maybe 20 years from now, will face.
46 doesn't want to EVER. I'll let clowns like you TRY to dictate to everyone.

[Tom]

Good God, hopefully that is not your goal here. If so, there may be a few therapists online you can PM.

So Sec, tell how this guy is different in his approach than Hcap or Ljb or 45 is?
Different sides, but the same thing, right?

[46zilzal]

different? HE is a brainwashed jingoist with the same indoctrinated "lets go out and kill them" approach yearning for a following of Like minded disciples. Has the innovation of a copying machine.

[PlanB]

This thread is beyond saving w/reason & argument.

[luv_america]

46,

yes, I think we should KILL all the people who are trying to KILL us before they do. That's the BIG problem in Iraq. We're playing too nice and NOT KILLING all the bad guys we need to kill.

For example, when they hide in a mosque, we should blow the mosque to smithereens. They won't hide in mosques anymore.

[ljb]

This is for luv's part of America.
From Wikipedia Neoconservatism is a political current and movement, mainly in the United States, which is generally held to have emerged in the 1960s, coalesced in the 1970s, and has had a significant presence in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
Most have shortened this to just neocons.

[JustRalph]

This thread is beyond saving w/reason & argument.

that may be the post of the day..........dead on..........

[Indulto]

This thread is beyond saving w/reason & argument.that may be the post of the day..........dead on..........Yet another meaningful contribution from the strength through silence faction. ;)

[46zilzal]

46,

yes, I think we should KILL all the people who are trying to KILL us before they do. That's the BIG problem in Iraq. We're playing too nice and NOT KILLING all the bad guys we need to kill.

For example, when they hide in a mosque, we should blow the mosque to smithereens. They won't hide in mosques anymore.
real classy since not a single Iraqi ever attacked the U.S.

[46zilzal]

All alone poor guy

[RXB]

Indulto,
In a short time I built up quite a fan club here. Can you say the same?

This thread might be beyond saving w/ reason and argument but it still has entertainment value. First the "neocon is code for Jew" bit, and now boasting about a "fan club" in the off-topic section of a horse racing message board.

Can a run for office be far behind?

[Secretariat]

This thread might be beyond saving w/ reason and argument but it still has entertainment value. First the "neocon is code for Jew" bit, and now boasting about a "fan club" in the off-topic section of a horse racing message board.

Can a run for office be far behind?

:lol: :lol: :lol: