Friday, May 11, 2007

Friday free for all

Lets go

Posted by The Game at 12:24 PM

Labels:

13 comments:

Jim said...

What is today's definition of "victory" in Iraq?

May 11, 2007 10:08 PM
jhbowden said...

March 17th, 2003:

"As we enforce the just demands of the world, we will also honor the deepest commitments of our country. Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people are deserving and capable of human liberty. And when the dictator has departed, they can set an example to all the Middle East of a vital and peaceful and self-governing nation.

The United States, with other countries, will work to advance liberty and peace in that region. Our goal will not be achieved overnight, but it can come over time. The power and appeal of human liberty is felt in every life and every land. And the greatest power of freedom is to overcome hatred and violence, and turn the creative gifts of men and women to the pursuits of peace."
--G.W. Bush

May 11, 2007 10:39 PM
The Game said...

I guess it has been the same since 2003...
What Dem's consider victory keeps changing...

May 11, 2007 10:44 PM
Jim said...

What will happen if the US withdraws it's military forces from Iraq?

May 11, 2007 11:18 PM
The Game said...

comfort for the terrorists of the west...
make the US look weak...
civil war in iraq
iran or syria try to take over iraq
all out war in middle east
iran with nukes...

May 11, 2007 11:52 PM
Jim said...

"comfort for the terrorists of the west..." - What does that mean?

"make the US look weak...". Or smart?

"civil war in Iraq" What is it now?

"iran or syria try to take over iraq". Says who?

"All out war in the middle east" Says who?

"iran with nukes..." What does that have to do with it?

May 12, 2007 12:03 AM
The Game said...

terrorists will feel that the west is weak and gain more courage to attack...

and your great answer of "says who"...the answer to that is just about every military expert and everyone who does not have a liberalism mental disorder

May 12, 2007 8:46 AM
Jim said...

Oh, Jason! I really love to read your stuff. I either end up rolling on the floor laughing or falling asleep. This one has me laughing. Best way to start the morning.

May 12, 2007 9:19 AM
jhbowden said...

I don't find hating the West and cheering on tyranny as funny as you do.

May 12, 2007 11:56 AM
Marshal Art said...

The mentally deficient or retarded often laugh at that which isn't funny. Jim obviously suffers from some sort of malfunction since he simply denies what is so obvious to any rational thinking person. This libs Jason has listed have all shown by their words and/or actions to be anti-American. They claim they want to reclaim America, as if it has been taken over by some malevolent force, but don't realize that it is they who are the negative influence on our nation. This, too, is supported by the countries listed by Jason that have recently elected more conservative leaders. The liberal example of Europe, so touted and coveted by our own moonbats, is being rejected by their own people in favor of that which is more American in tone. Of course, this will also be denied and ignored until each European country raises the stars and stripes over their own colors, so don't hold your breath that the libs will see the light.

To counter Jim's goofy responses to Game's answers,

""comfort for the terrorists of the west..." - What does that mean?" It means that the enemy will be justified in their further violence since we've proven true their belief that our people can't handle any casualties and will turn tail if the scum persist.

""make the US look weak...". Or smart?" it will make us look weak to the only ones for whom such would matter, that being the enemy. But our allies will also feel certain that our help is only token at best and that we are not to be relied upon.

""civil war in Iraq" What is it now?" More like a gang war with two factions fighting each other, not a group of insurgents fighting the government, like in our Civil War. Trouble is being stirred up by outside forces in order to create a civil war, but that is hardly the same as a true civil war.

""iran or syria try to take over iraq". Says who?" Says anyone who's really paying attention. Iranian influence and even some invlovement of their personnel have been discovered recently. What does that say to you? Both Syria and Iran would love to have Iraq as an ally rather than a democratic thorn in their sides.

""All out war in the middle east" Says who?" This possibility exists due to fewer around to inhibit anti-Israel sentiment.

""iran with nukes..." What does that have to do with it?" One less country to oppose their having them. A next door neighbor fearful of Iranian power might seek to subvert their nuclear ambitions.

May 12, 2007 12:44 PM
Jim said...

Bin Laden and our enemies absolutely LOVE the fact that the US military remains in Iraq. THEY LOVE IT. They can see that the cost of keeping our troops there is sucking the US dry, sucking the military dry, leaving the homeland without adequate resources to handle natural disasters, breaking our budget, and taking young lives.

Our true enemies will mourn the day the US leaves Iraq. They will know that the US will have a chance to regather its resources, its strength, and its prestige around the world. They will hate that.

The true "slow bleed" is the slow bleed of the military by those who support keeping them in a situation that cannot not be sustained unless they start accepting 15 year-olds and people with 60 IQs and deploying troops for 2-3 years in theater with 3 months home. There is your "slow bleed".

May 12, 2007 1:25 PM
Jim said...

Jason, and all. I really respect your opinions when you call me names and impugn my sanity. It gives your argument so much gravitas.

Sure, we're exterminating their "senior leadership" just like cutting off heads of the hydra.

Apparently you do not read a lot of differing opinions from experts on the subject. The US military itself says that only about 7% of the insurgency is al Qaeda. Many experts believe that Iraq's own forces will take care of al Qaeda themselves once the US leaves. Al qaeda doesn't want that so they goad Bush into staying so that Iraq won't turn its attention to al Qaeda and they want it so that they can keep killing US soldiers and marines.

How will you dispute that?

May 13, 2007 3:37 PM
Marshal Art said...

Jim,

I'd like to know where you're getting your statistics. Only 7% of the insurgents are AQ? According to the Multi-Nat'l Forces website, there are only four major insurgent groups operating in Iraq, and you say AQ constitutes only 7%? It would seem we'd have heard more of the other groups if that's the case.

And who are these "many experts" to whom you refer? The "experts" I've been listening to claim that the Iraqi army, though progressing well, does not have the leadership in place as yet to take over all operations. Training the grunts is the easy part. Training the officers takes a bit more time. To leave now would not make the officers ready to lead. They'll require more training time.

And based on the link from Jason's last post, AQ can't wait for us to leave. You must be getting your info from Rosie O'Donnell's website.

May 14, 2007 10:44 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)