PDA

View Full Version : ooops, US Intel paints bleak picture of Iraq mission disputing rosey DUHbya


memyselfI
09-16-2004, 08:03 AM
Yeah, I know the truth in Iraq War is going to get buried by the CONVENIENT diversion that is the Vietnam War... :shake: :cuss:

Intel Officials Have Bleak View for Iraq

Thu Sep 16, 4:04 AM ET
By KATHERINE PFLEGER SHRADER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The National Intelligence Council presented President Bush (news - web sites) this summer with several pessimistic scenarios regarding the security situation in Iraq (news - web sites), including the possibility of a civil war there before the end of 2005.

In a highly classified National Intelligence Estimate, the council looked at the political, economic and security situation in the war-torn country and determined that — at best — stability in Iraq would be tenuous, a U.S. official said late Wednesday, speaking on the condition of anonymity.


At worst, the official said, were "trend lines that would point to a civil war." The official said it "would be fair" to call the document "pessimistic."


The intelligence estimate, which was prepared for Bush, considered the window of time between July and the end of 2005. But the official noted that the document draws on intelligence community assessments from January 2003, before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and the subsequent deteriorating security situation there.


This latest assessment was performed by the National Intelligence Council, a group of senior intelligence officials that provides long-term strategic thinking for the entire U.S. intelligence community.


Acting CIA (news - web sites) Director John McLaughlin and the leaders of the other intelligence agencies approved the intelligence document, which runs about 50 pages.


The estimate appears to differ from the public comments of Bush and his senior aides who speak more optimistically about the prospects for a peaceful and free Iraq. "We're making progress on the ground," Bush said at his Texas ranch late last month. A CIA spokesman declined to comment Wednesday night.


The document was first reported by The New York Times on its Web site Wednesday night.


It is the first formal assessment of Iraq since the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on the threat posed by fallen Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites).


A scathing review of that estimate released this summer by the Senate Intelligence Committee found widespread intelligence failures that led to faulty assumptions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.


Disclosure of the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq came the same day that Senate Republicans and Democrats denounced the Bush administration's slow progress in rebuilding Iraq, saying the risks of failure are great if it doesn't act with greater urgency.


"It's beyond pitiful, it's beyond embarrassing, it's now in the zone of dangerous," said Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record), R-Neb., referring to figures showing only about 6 percent of the reconstruction money approved by Congress last year has been spent.


Senate Foreign Relations Committee members vented their frustrations at a hearing during which State Department officials explained the administration's request to divert $3.46 billion in reconstruction funds to security and economic development. The money was part of the $18.4 billion approved by Congress last year, mostly for public works projects.


The request comes as heavy fighting continues between U.S.-led forces and Iraqi insurgents, endangering prospects for elections scheduled for January.


"We know that the provision of adequate security up front is requisite to rapid progress on all other fronts," Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Ron Schlicher said.


White House spokesman Scott McClellan said circumstances in Iraq have changed since last year. "It's important that you have some flexibility."

Hagel, Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and other committee members have long argued — even before the war — that administration plans for rebuilding Iraq were inadequate and based on overly optimistic assumptions that Americans would be greeted as liberators.

But the criticism from the panel's top Republicans had an extra sting coming less than seven weeks before the U.S. presidential election in which Bush's handling of the war is a top issue.

"Our committee heard blindly optimistic people from the administration prior to the war and people outside the administration — what I call the 'dancing in the street crowd' — that we just simply will be greeted with open arms," Lugar said. "The nonsense of all of that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent."

He said the need to shift the reconstruction funds was clear in July, but the administration was slow to make the request.

State Department officials stressed areas of progress in Iraq since the United States turned over political control of Iraq to an interim government on June 28. They cited advances in generating electricity, producing oil and creating jobs.

___

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 08:07 AM
This isn't news. We all know things haven't gone well. But it sure would be nice see one liberal rag or one liberal in general, write about the good that has come out of it.

I just wish I could see you tell my friends who are there how much you think they are f^cking up.

Chief Henry
09-16-2004, 08:12 AM
This story is from the same people that told us Bush
supporters were booing Bill Clintons surgery :rolleyes:

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 08:19 AM
This isn't news. We all know things haven't gone well. But it sure would be nice see one liberal rag or one liberal in general, write about the good that has come out of it.

I just wish I could see you tell my friends who are there how much you think they are f^cking up.

Sure, get back to me when you can find more 'good' than bad. As of now, and really as of April, there has been decreasing 'good' and more bad.

And I would be more than happy to tell your 'friends' how much the BUSH Administration f*cked up and made their jobs unnecessarily dangerous, longer, and of less certainty. How they've been consistently lied to and manipulated and how it is not they who are at fault.

stevieray
09-16-2004, 08:27 AM
Denise, if you were serving in Iraq and said the things you say here, I think the reaction would make the flak you receive here look like childs play.

HC_Chief
09-16-2004, 08:28 AM
A free Iraq is a
noble cause but it's just so <i>haarrd</i>.

Chief Henry
09-16-2004, 08:31 AM
Denise, if you were serving in Iraq and said the things you say here, I think the reaction would make the flak you receive here look like childs play.

Very True, but she never pays attention to White Euro's, she only digs the Camel jockeys :harumph:

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 08:53 AM
Yeah, I know the truth in Iraq War is going to get buried by the CONVENIENT diversion that is the Vietnam War... :shake: :cuss:
___

Think you need to talk to your candidate ‘bout that.

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 08:57 AM
Think you need to talk to your candidate ‘bout that.

Yes, he was stupid enough to fall into the Cons trap of having to prove his braveness, prowess, manhood, and kill or be killed M.O....

and the media have been playing their dutiful part in keeping the American people shielded from the truth but that DIVERSION does not CHANGE the truth.

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 09:01 AM
Yes, he was stupid enough to fall into the Cons trap in having to prove his braveness, manhood, and kill or be killed M.O....

and the media have been playing their dutiful part in keeping the American people shielded from the truth but that DIVERSION does not CHANGE the truth.

ROFL So now he can’t make any decisions for himself? Everything has been preordained by conservatives? And this is supposed to make your candidate sound stronger?

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 09:05 AM
Yes, he was stupid enough to fall into the Cons trap of having to prove his braveness, prowess, manhood, and kill or be killed M.O....

and the media have been playing their dutiful part in keeping the American people shielded from the truth but that DIVERSION does not CHANGE the truth.

ROFL And of course the “conservative” media that didn’t even know who the SBVT were before claiming they lied, while holding up known forged documents in an attempt to blast Bushy, are in it with them.
“You’re schemin’ on a thing, that’s sabotage.” :thumb:

RINGLEADER
09-16-2004, 09:05 AM
Well, my criticism of Bush and Iraq doesn't change with this report. A great portion of the country is relatively quiet and stable, but areas such as Fallujah and other Sunni strongholds continue to be war zones. If they hadn't stopped the war early they could have waged this part of the war last year.

Anyway, the alternative to Bush on Iraq is Kerry's plan to give the UN control over $18 billion in US reconstruction aid (bad idea), remove half the troops in a year despite the conditions on the ground (bad idea), and remove all US troops in his first term regardless of whether or not democracy has succeeded (very bad idea).

RINGLEADER
09-16-2004, 09:07 AM
Yes, he was stupid enough to fall into the Cons trap of having to prove his braveness, prowess, manhood, and kill or be killed M.O....

and the media have been playing their dutiful part in keeping the American people shielded from the truth but that DIVERSION does not CHANGE the truth.


Seems to me that all these diversions that have you so upset are of the Democrats own creation...the focus on Vietnam at the convention, the focus on Vietnam currently being peddled by the DNC...the focus on Vietnam by the memos that the Bush-haters forged for CBS...you might want to ask yourself how you can support a candidate to run the nation when the dude can't run a coherent campaign. Don't forget that the people who are making these decisions for your guy today would be the ones running the country if he wins.

[shudder]

Anyway D-Nise...don't worry...new poll has Kerry ahead by one-point nationally.

Of course, he's losing by four in New Jersey, by three in Pennsylvania, by two in Minnesota and leads in Illinois by only four and New York by only six.

;)

But it's far from over...

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 09:11 AM
:rolleyes:

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 09:12 AM
ROFL So now he can’t make any decisions for himself? Everything has been preordained by conservatives? And this is supposed to make your candidate sound stronger?

Hey, I'm not a big Kerry fan. I have said that since before he was deemed to be the candidate many months ago...

but it was quite apparent from the beginning that they were going to challenge Kerry's manhood and his toughness and Kerry would have to make a choice as to how to respond. I think he made the wrong choice in accepting their challenge and thus is dealing with the consequences.

That being said, if he had NOT chosen to take up their challenge they would have found something else to make him the issue vs. defending their record and as a seasoned politician he should have KNOWN this.

I heard an interesting remark about DUHbya yesterday from Christopher Dickey who is the ME/Paris bureau chief for Newsweek. He said that Iran likely thinks that the US is weaker now that they have used force in Iraq. That the US getting bogged down in a quagmire and unable to stablize a small country like Afghanistan or a disorganized country like Iraq really makes them appear weak and thus has emboldened Iran...

that the US was actually stronger with the THREAT of force vs. actually USING their force. They have thus proven themselves to be weakened by losing the threat and replacing it with the reality of the actualization of it.

I think the same could have and should have applied to Kerry and his service. The idea of him being a war hero and having served was greater and more effective than the truth of his actual service and thus if he had not chosen the path he did (focusing on it vs. on other aspects of himself) then he would have retained the strength and not been on the defensive.

Like the example of the US above, his trying to show strength actually showed more weakness in end...

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 09:13 AM
Seems to me that all these diversions that have you so upset are of the Democrats own creation...the focus on Vietnam at the convention, the focus on Vietnam currently being peddled by the DNC...the focus on Vietnam by the memos that the Bush-haters forged for CBS...you might want to ask yourself how you can support a candidate to run the nation when the dude can't run a coherent campaign. Don't forget that the people who are making these decisions for your guy today would be the ones running the country if he wins.

[shudder]

Anyway D-Nise...don't worry...new poll has Kerry ahead by one-point nationally.

Of course, he's losing by four in New Jersey, by three in Pennsylvania, by two in Minnesota and leads in Illinois by only four and New York by only six.

;)



But it's far from over...

See my response in post #15. It's applicable to your post too. :thumb:

That being said, I'm not worried about the day to day polls. I think the day to day events of the US and the world are a greater indicator of who will be elected than the polls are.

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 09:13 AM
:hmmm:

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 09:15 AM
Actually, they list three possibilities with both best and worst case scenarios.


As is typical with the left these days, the title is just another rampant lie.

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 09:17 AM
:shake:

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 09:17 AM
Actually, they list three possibilities with both best and worst case scenarios.


As is typical with the left these days, the title is just another rampant lie.


Feel free to post, with congressional solidarity too boot, the pollyana scenario. I'd like to see what the best case is in this situation...

seeing that the whole 'flowers' theory really didn't manifest itself.

Jenson17
09-16-2004, 09:21 AM
.

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 09:23 AM
Hey, I'm not a big Kerry fan. I have said that since before he was deemed to be the candidate many months ago...

but it was quite apparent from the beginning that they were going to challenge Kerry's manhood and his toughness and Kerry would have to make a choice as to how to respond. I think he made the wrong choice in accepting their challenge and thus is dealing with the consequences.

That being said, if he had NOT chosen to take up their challenge they would have found something else to make him the issue vs. defending their record and as a seasoned politician he should have KNOWN this.

I heard an interesting remark about DUHbya yesterday from Christopher Dickey who is the ME/Paris bureau chief for Newsweek. He said that Iran likely thinks that the US is weaker now that they have used force in Iraq. That the US getting bogged down in a quagmire and unable to stablize a small country like Afghanistan or a disorganized country like Iraq really makes them appear weak and thus has emboldened Iran...

that the US was actually stronger with the THREAT of force vs. actually USING their force. They have thus proven themselves to be weakened by losing the threat and replacing it with the reality of the actualization of it.

I think the same could have and should have applied to Kerry and his service. The idea of him being a war hero and having served was greater and more effective than the truth of his actual service and thus if he had not chosen the path he did (focusing on it vs. on other aspects of himself) then he would have retained the strength and not been on the defensive.

Like the example of the US above, his trying to show strength actually showed more weakness in end...

Interesting analogy, at least on Iran, but I’d guess that what has emboldened Iran, aside from our own media attempting to oust our president, is that there funneling of money and terrorist into Iraq is having an affect. That and the fact that they’re getting away with it, they’re using a proxy (Terrorists/Bathists in Iraq) to beat us up and it’s working.

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 09:27 AM
Feel free to post, with congressional solidarity too boot, the pollyana scenario. I'd like to see what the best case is in this situation...

seeing that the whole 'flowers' theory really didn't manifest itself.

Maybe you could post a link to this whole “flowers scenario”? Complete with congressional solidarity.

Cochise
09-16-2004, 09:32 AM
Hey, I'm not a big Kerry fan. I have said that since before he was deemed to be the candidate many months ago...


Can't say I didn't predict this.

As defeat seems more and more iminent, the libs will jump ship one by one saying that sKerry was just the wrong candidate, or just plain stay away from the board.

The fact that even Duhnise is distancing herself from sKerry shows that libs are more resigned than they let on, IMO

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 10:06 AM
Can't say I didn't predict this.

As defeat seems more and more iminent, the libs will jump ship one by one saying that sKerry was just the wrong candidate, or just plain stay away from the board.

The fact that even Duhnise is distancing herself from sKerry shows that libs are more resigned than they let on, IMO

Uh, I was an Edwards supporter who said I could not get really worked up for Kerry...months before it looked like he would win the nomination.

And I don't believe he's lost it yet. I just don't believe he was our best option and nothing he's done has changed that belief but has made it stronger.

memyselfI
09-16-2004, 10:09 AM
Maybe you could post a link to this whole “flowers scenario”? Complete with congressional solidarity.

ROTF. You cannot honestly say you did not hear the WH or their lap dogs say that the US would be welcomed with open arms and even flowers prior to the start of the war....

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 10:12 AM
ROTF. You cannot honestly say you did not hear the WH or their lap dogs say that the US would be welcomed with open arms and even flowers prior to the start of the war....

ROFL Uh, actually yes I can. I don’t remember Bushy, or his “lap dogs”, saying anything other than it’s going to be a long tough “slog”.
Got’a link showing otherwise? Complete with congressional solidarity, of course. :hmmm:

HC_Chief
09-16-2004, 10:16 AM
At the outset of the WOT Bush, and everyone associated with his cabinet, stated it was going to be a long, tough fight.

It's obvious you leftists weren't paying any attention (too busy whining about 'stolen elections' and other such nonsense)

Radar Chief
09-16-2004, 10:19 AM
At the outset of the WOT Bush, and everyone associated with his cabinet, stated it was going to be a long, tough fight.

It's obvious you leftists weren't paying any attention (too busy whining about 'stolen elections' and other such nonsense)

Actually I believe at the time the whine list included, “but, the sanctions are working”. ROFL

HC_Chief
09-16-2004, 10:27 AM
Actually I believe at the time the whine list included, “but, the sanctions are working”. ROFL

Yeah that, and "Afghanistan has never lost, they're going to kill a bajillion American soldiers!!"

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 11:06 AM
Feel free to post, with congressional solidarity too boot, the pollyana scenario. I'd like to see what the best case is in this situation...

seeing that the whole 'flowers' theory really didn't manifest itself.
Actually, best case also has political, economic, and social issues listed as well.

My point was that you lied again in your title. Sure it was a lie of omission as you deliberately avoided mentioning the other two scenarios noted and just posted the worst case in your title, but that is pretty much par for the Dan RatherFar Lefts like yourself over the last few weeks, isn't it?

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 11:09 AM
Yeah, I know the truth in Iraq War is going to get buried by the CONVENIENT diversion that is the Vietnam War...

Who was the dumbass that initially brought up the Vietnam War?

Face it, your campaign is led by morons.

Donger
09-16-2004, 11:14 AM
Face it, your campaign is led by morons.

If any more evidence was actually needed, they were going to have Ted Kennedy campaign for Kerry in Nanticoke, PA. One small problem: that was Mary Jo's hometown...

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 11:17 AM
If any more evidence was actually needed, they were going to have Ted Kennedy campaign for Kerry in Nanticoke, PA. One small problem: that was Mary Jo's hometown...
Is he driving? Perhaps a Nanticoke native can chauffeur him home. Is their a route to DC from Nanticoke via Chappaquidick?

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 02:28 PM
And I would be more than happy to tell your 'friends' how much the BUSH Administration f*cked up and made their jobs unnecessarily dangerous, longer, and of less certainty. How they've been consistently lied to and manipulated and how it is not they who are at fault.

That will get you bitch slapped.

Take my advice. If you ever run into one, say thank you and keep moving.

alpha_omega
09-16-2004, 02:34 PM
Must all these threads start with "oops"?

KCTitus
09-16-2004, 02:36 PM
That will get you bitch slapped.

Take my advice. If you ever run into one, say thank you and keep moving.


No it wont, Duck lies...find a marine and tell him that today.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 03:56 PM
No it wont, Duck lies...find a marine and tell him that today.

I'm still trying to figure out what that says or what that is suppose to mean.

6 Iron
09-16-2004, 04:21 PM
I'm still trying to figure out what that says or what that is suppose to mean.

I believe he wants to see Denise slapped.

the Talking Can
09-16-2004, 04:27 PM
Hagel, Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and other committee members have long argued — even before the war — that administration plans for rebuilding Iraq were inadequate and based on overly optimistic assumptions that Americans would be greeted as liberators.

But the criticism from the panel's top Republicans had an extra sting coming less than seven weeks before the U.S. presidential election in which Bush's handling of the war is a top issue.

"Our committee heard blindly optimistic people from the administration prior to the war and people outside the administration — what I call the 'dancing in the street crowd' — that we just simply will be greeted with open arms," Lugar said. "The nonsense of all of that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent."

Boy, sure sounds like an endoresment for four more years.....of fantastically inept leadership.

But hey, did you hear about CBS......

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 04:40 PM
I believe he wants to see Denise slapped.


Doh, OK, I read it a little slowwwwwwer that time. :)

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 04:44 PM
[B]

But hey, did you hear about CBS......

Hey, did you hear the one about the liberal who uses the deaths of brave American men and women as political fodder?

It's a real f^cking riot, I tell ya.

the Talking Can
09-16-2004, 04:57 PM
Hey, did you hear the one about the liberal who uses the deaths of brave American men and women as political fodder?

It's a real f^cking riot, I tell ya.

isn't there some limit to # of times some dumbass can accuse another person of celebrating American's dying?

this is just the most ignorant response...if you don't want to deal with an issue than kindly insert your head up your ass....but discussing the status and outcomes of a President's actions while in office is pretty much central to any kind of meaningful and functioning democracy (newsflash: an election is coming)...so sub-human assholes like yourself can spare me the canned and uber-stupid reply [retard voice]"you just like watching amer'cans die"[/retard voice]

or, you could actually pay some ****ing attention and direct your response to the Republican leadership who actually made the comments in question...but that would require reading and thinking (cognition)...as opposed to belching and farting...you are exhibit A of the type of knuckle-dragging inbred that now inhabits this forum blasting anybody and everybody with your Dumb Gun....for Christ's ****ing sake- CUT IT OUT...and turn off the radio, its melting whats left of your brane....

NewChief
09-16-2004, 05:16 PM
isn't there some limit to # of times some dumbass can accuse another person of celebrating American's dying?

this is just the most ignorant response...if you don't want to deal with an issue than kindly insert your head up your ass....but discussing the status and outcomes of a President's actions while in office is pretty much central to any kind of meaningful and functioning democracy (newsflash: an election is coming)...so sub-human assholes like yourself can spare me the canned and uber-stupid reply [retard voice]"you just like watching amer'cans die"[/retard voice]

or, you could actually pay some ****ing attention and direct your response to the Republican leadership who actually made the comments in question...but that would require reading and thinking (cognition)...as opposed to belching and farting...you are exhibit A of the type of knuckle-dragging inbred that now inhabits this forum blasting anybody and everybody with your Dumb Gun....for Christ's ****ing sake- CUT IT OUT...and turn off the radio, its melting whats left of your brane....


ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL :thumb:

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 05:35 PM
Are there any limits on how many times the death of a troop can used by brainwashed, leftist, retards, which’s only goal is to oust Bush?

I said it before; it is very American to question authority. How convenient for you to ignore that.

Say what you want about Bush, but the day I see one liberal, post something positive about THE TROOPS, I'll back off.

You need to get a grip on reality, shit can. The reality of the war isn’t affecting you; it’s affecting those who are fighting it. Try and get your over sized head with oversized ego out of your ass and thank one of them for doing what you don’t have the balls or spine to do.

I'll back off when you stop using these deaths in vein.

NewChief
09-16-2004, 05:39 PM
Say what you want about Bush, but the day I see one liberal, post something positive about THE TROOPS, I'll back off.


May god bring our troops home safely and protect them.

I was going to do it earlier today, but it seems so trite to respond just so you'll shut the **** up. However, my wife and I constantly talk about the troops being over there and talk about how horrible it must be for them to be over there. One of our good friends that we met in Colorado and used to spend a lot of time snowboarding and snowshoeing with is over there, and we constantly worry about him.

We wish nothing but the best on him and the rest of our troops. I'm sure that, as invividuals, they're doing the best they can over there. I'm sure that some of them are positively impacting the lives of some Iraqis.

Now will you shut the **** up about liberals celebrating when the troops die? It's just fuggin ignorant.

Pants
09-16-2004, 05:44 PM
Exactly, we don't celebrate when they die, we get sad and pissed. Pissed at the ****ing president for sending them there. Of course we are going to bring the deaths up because it shows how bad the leader of our country ****ed up. That's why we want him out of here. Shit man. Don't you see that we do NOT want any more troops to die, thats WHY we bring up shit like that. You'd rather see them die and call them heroes we'd rather see them alive then heroes, think about that u fuggtard.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 05:45 PM
May god bring our troops home safely and protect them.

I was going to do it earlier today, but it seems so trite to respond just so you'll shut the **** up. However, my wife and I constantly talk about the troops being over there and talk about how horrible it must be for them to be over there. One of our good friends that we met in Colorado and used to spend a lot of time snowboarding and snowshoeing with is over there, and we constantly worry about him.

We wish nothing but the best on him and the rest of our troops. I'm sure that, as invividuals, they're doing the best they can over there. I'm sure that some of them are positively impacting the lives of some Iraqis.

Now will you shut the **** up about liberals celebrating when the troops die? It's just fuggin ignorant.


Good for you. Now show me where I said liberals celebrate the deaths of Americans.

I'll save you the time, asshole, I never said it.

Here is what I said, since you and can are having a hard time keeping up.

No body is dancing for joy about it. But how about just one liberal or one democrat on here saying something like;

"Bless these brave servicemen and women. Bless their families and god speed them home."

You can't do it. And none of you have. You just use their sacrifice to justify your hatred of Bush. And for that, shame on you.

I never said anything that shit can or you are saying I did.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 05:50 PM
This is also what I said regarding this.

This isn't news. We all know things haven't gone well. But it sure would be nice see one liberal rag or one liberal in general, write about the good that has come out of it.

Now where did I say you were celebrating the deaths?

I never said. I said shit can was using their deaths as political fodder.

How about a f^cking thank you, I think they deserve it.

Pants
09-16-2004, 05:50 PM
You ****ing implied it.

"You just use their sacrifice to justify your hatred of Bush. And for that, shame on you."

So you are saying 1000 soldiers dead is not enough to justify my dislike for Bush. Way to go "patriot".

Pants
09-16-2004, 05:51 PM
This is also what I said regarding this.



Now where did I say you were celebrating the deaths?

I never said. I said shit can was using their deaths as political fodder.

How about a f^cking thank you, I think they deserve it.

What the ****? We thank them for rsiking their lives in the line of duty. It's the duty we are pissed about. How hard is that for you to comprehend?

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 05:52 PM
Exactly, we don't celebrate when they die, we get sad and pissed. Pissed at the ****ing president for sending them there. Of course we are going to bring the deaths up because it shows how bad the leader of our country ****ed up. That's why we want him out of here. Shit man. Don't you see that we do NOT want any more troops to die, thats WHY we bring up shit like that. You'd rather see them die and call them heroes we'd rather see them alive then heroes, think about that u fuggtard.


Blow me newbie.

Once again, go find where I said that. Go on...go find it.

NewChief
09-16-2004, 05:52 PM
This is also what I said regardin this.



Now where did I say you were celebrating the deaths?

I never said. I said shit can was using their deaths as political fodder.

How about a f^cking thank you, I think they deserve it.

By your logic, you're using their deaths as political fodder, too. You're using their deaths to guilt people into silence about their dislike for this administration.

**** it dude. You're really not worth arguing with. You just piss me off with your hostility and inability to see any side other than your own.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 05:52 PM
What the ****? We thank them for rsiking their lives in the line of duty. It's the duty we are pissed about. How hard is that for you to comprehend?


Then say so, asshole.

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 05:54 PM
.... You just piss me off with your hostility and inability to see any side other than your own.

Liberals are never guilty of THAT, are they....

Pants
09-16-2004, 05:55 PM
Blow me newbie.

Once again, go find where I said that. Go on...go find it.

Do you support Bush? -- Yes.
Did Bush send them to Iraq? -- Yes.
Do you agree with Bush on war in Iraq? -- Yes.
When we say we don't like Bush because he sent them to Iraq, do you get angry? -- Yes.

"Where did I say that?" In every ****ing post you write.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 05:56 PM
By your logic, you're using their deaths as political fodder, too. You're using their deaths to guilt people into silence about their dislike for this administration.

**** it dude. You're really not worth arguing with. You just piss me off with your hostility and inability to see any side other than your own.


You are not reading my entire posts.

You are putting words in my mouth and implying I said that.

I said, the questioning of authority was very American. But how about some props for the troops and how about some acknowledgement that they have done a lot of good things over there.

Has there been some royal f^ck ups? Hell, yes. Has Bush made some royal f^ck ups? Hell yes. I can acknowledge that, why can't liberals acknowledge what good that has come from it?

NewChief
09-16-2004, 05:58 PM
Liberals are never guilty of THAT, are they....

I don't pretend to speak for all liberals, and I was referring to once specific conservative.

I think my own ability to see the other side's viewpoint, as well as make fun of my own viewpoint, is pretty evident from my posts on here.

Way to rush in for the totally irrelevant cheapshot, though! :thumb:

Pants
09-16-2004, 06:00 PM
You are not reading my entire posts.

You are putting words in my mouth and implying I said that.

I said, the questioning of authority was very American. But how about some props for the troops and how about some acknowledgement that they have done a lot of good things over there.

Has there been some royal f^ck ups? Hell, yes. Has Bush made some royal f^ck ups? Hell yes. I can acknowledge that, why can't liberals acknowledge what good that has come from it?

What good? Iraqis were living their lives in peace, under an insane dictator, but in peace nonetheless. Now look at their country. And the whole damn Middle East is even more pissed at the U.S. Other U.N. nations are also none too happy.

Just to clarify TROOPS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST, Bush does.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 06:17 PM
What good? Iraqis were living their lives in peace, under an insane dictator, but in peace nonetheless. Now look at their country. And the whole damn Middle East is even more pissed at the U.S. Other U.N. nations are also none too happy.

Just to clarify TROOPS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST, Bush does.


Nice disclaimer, BTW.

We owe the UN nothing. The UN is a corrupt organization. They were taking billions of dollars from SH, during the oil for food program. They can not be trusted, no matter who is president.

We can start with fact that SH is no longer a threat to ANYONE. Not his neighbors, not us, not the Kurds...NO ONE. And to me, that is enough. But there's more. People lived in peace around SH only if he let them. They didn't have the right to say what you say about Bush.

There are hundreds of free press news papers. That should make the libs happy. More schools, hospitals, more freedoms than they have ever known. So much more freedom, they don't what to do with it. General elections...on and on.

Look, no one is saying that it hasn't been a tough, bumpy road, because it has. No one is saying that mistakes weren't made, because they have.

But if you want to argue about the reasons we went to war, it's too late. It's already happened. And what we do now is more important.

Pants
09-16-2004, 06:24 PM
Nice disclaimer, BTW.

We owe the UN nothing. The UN is a corrupt organization. They were taking billions of dollars from SH, during the oil for food program. They can not be trusted, no matter who is president.

We can start with fact that SH is no longer a threat to ANYONE. Not his neighbors, not us, not the Kurds...NO ONE. And to me, that is enough. But there's more. People lived in peace around SH only if he let them. They didn't have the right to say what you say about Bush.

There are hundreds of free press news papers. That should make the libs happy. More schools, hospitals, more freedoms than they have ever known. So much more freedom, they don't what to do with it. General elections...on and on.

Look, no one is saying that it hasn't been a tough, bumpy road, because it has. No one is saying that mistakes weren't made, because they have.

But if you want to argue about the reasons we went to war, it's too late. It's already happened. And what we do now is more important.

Hmm, gotta admit, that is a good thought. :hmmm: BUT, I still oppose Bush.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 06:26 PM
I don't pretend to speak for all liberals, and I was referring to once specific conservative.

I think my own ability to see the other side's viewpoint, as well as make fun of my own viewpoint, is pretty evident from my posts on here.

Way to rush in for the totally irrelevant cheapshot, though! :thumb:


Instead of crying and stomping off like a little girl who didn't get her way, you should try reading what is written, and stop trying to insinuate intent.

I give no quarter and I expect no quarter. Just stop putting words in my mouth at the behest of the talking shit can.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 06:28 PM
Hmm, gotta admit, that is a good thought. :hmmm: BUT, I still oppose Bush.


Fair enough. This place would be pretty boring if we all thought alike.

I got to get. Good night.

the Talking Can
09-16-2004, 06:51 PM
Duck's Dog gave me some neg. rep. for putting him in his place....that's so sweet:

"Go f^ck yourself, nutless asshole"

and also comfirms everything I said...how tidy

patteeu
09-16-2004, 07:25 PM
May god bring our troops home safely and protect them.

I was going to do it earlier today, but it seems so trite to respond just so you'll shut the **** up. However, my wife and I constantly talk about the troops being over there and talk about how horrible it must be for them to be over there. One of our good friends that we met in Colorado and used to spend a lot of time snowboarding and snowshoeing with is over there, and we constantly worry about him.

We wish nothing but the best on him and the rest of our troops. I'm sure that, as invividuals, they're doing the best they can over there. I'm sure that some of them are positively impacting the lives of some Iraqis.

Now will you shut the **** up about liberals celebrating when the troops die? It's just fuggin ignorant.

Don't believe this baloney, Duck Dog. NewChief is obviously not a liberal or he would have imploded at his keyboard while typing this. I think he must be a closet conservative. Welcome aboard, NC! :thumb:

hehe :p

patteeu
09-16-2004, 07:34 PM
What good? Iraqis were living their lives in peace, under an insane dictator, but in peace nonetheless. Now look at their country. And the whole damn Middle East is even more pissed at the U.S. Other U.N. nations are also none too happy.

Just to clarify TROOPS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST, Bush does.

Here's are two good things that have come out of our Iraq initiative off the top of my head:

1) Saddam Hussein will never be in a position to cooperate with terrorists in the future.

2) Libya's Khadafi voluntarily gave up his WMD program after seeing us take down Saddam.

I would also guess, although I have no way of knowing, that we are developing much better human intelligence resources as a result of working so closely with Iraqis to rebuild their country.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 07:56 PM
Duck's Dog gave me some neg. rep. for putting him in his place....that's so sweet:

"Go f^ck yourself, nutless asshole"

and also comfirms everything I said...how tidy

ROFL

You must be colored blind too. I gave you a pos rep.

stevieray
09-16-2004, 08:04 PM
What good? Iraqis were living their lives in peace, under an insane dictator, but in peace nonetheless. Now look at their country. And the whole damn Middle East is even more pissed at the U.S. Other U.N. nations are also none too happy.

Just to clarify TROOPS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST, Bush does.

living in peace..?

ROFL

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 08:05 PM
living in peace..?

ROFL

Yeah, slaves were living in "peace" in the South....before that idiot and war monger Abe Lincoln started the Civil War too. :shake:

:banghead: