little news item on prisoner abuse in Iraq

There may be hope for you yet, Tirk old boy! You may finally be getting it!

 

I've always gotten it. Its you who contradicts yourself by asking where did you say about having to appease anyone so I showed you where you infer exactly that. I'm hoping you eventually get it.

 

Mike, dont retract what you meant. Was clear that was your belief.

 

And just when I was beginning to have a ray of hope for you!




I have never used or even implied the term "appease(ment) in any of my posts. Any half wit knows you don't get a damn thing out of appeasement but further exploitation of your weakness by the enemy. This is my whole point but you morons don't seem to be able to grasp that. If anybody is doing any appeasing , it's old Georgie boy himself.

Let's take for example the recent decision to pull back from Fallujah after threatening to use whatever force is necessary and then reneging and turning over control to some former Saddam general and continuing in "negotiations". You think W didn't have control of this? So how does this play to the bad guys? "If we fight hard enough and kill enough Americans and take some hostage, then they'll back off.". I guess we really mean what we say, right?

In no way can my assertion that our soldiers behavior need be above reproach be considered "appeasement". Behaving themselves and not indulging in the behavior alleged is not giving in to the enemies demands.

You folks can't have your cake and eat it too. You want democracy and justice and freedom brought to the people of Iraq but you don't mind sanctioning things that IN THEIR MINDS are just as bad as what they had before.
W wants the same things plus he wants the insurgency to stop and the horrible incidents of killing American civilians but he's not willing to commit the forces or act necessarily to do it.

I read this crap from you guys about "worrying what the rest of the world thinks" and so forth. Hell, your boy showed he didn't give a damn about what the rest of the world or even his own people thought when he started this crap so what's holding him back now? It can't be what the Iraqi's or the rest of the Arab world think, could it? If so, why? They can't hate us any more than what they do now. It can't be because of fear of Al Qaida and what they might do. We're already earmarked for reprisal from them. Golly gee, did it ever occur to any of you that the rest of the world might have been right? Nah, probably not. We all know that the good old USofA is NEVER wrong. (And don't come here with that self-hate crap either.)


You idiots talk about how Bill Clinton didn't do anything or John Kerry won't and imply they (didn't) don't have the courage to act. Well courage without wisdom has gotten a lot of people killed needlessly my friends. Perhaps these men had the wisdom and understanding of what would happen if we got ourselves into this type of mess and had the courage to stay out of it. For the record I believe W acted properly in invading Afghanistan. Our enemies who attacked us and those who backed them were there. Not so in Iraq


Like I said in my previous posts, if you are going to war, go to war completely or don't go at all. Civilians get killed in war, that's fact. The one's who die that oppose us are just like the enemy. The families of the ones who support us and our motives will understand. So either do it or get the hell out. Every life that's lost, every tear shed in grief on any side is useless and the situation will only get worse the longer things stay as they are.


And btw, why are using a quote from G-man to illustrate something I (supposedly) said?

 

Why do you keep saying that we aren't fully committed? Maybe if every other damn day our President and his cabinet didn't have to dance in front of some BS panel we could build some more steam. Consider a few facts:

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
January..... in the fair city of Detroit (Michigan) there were 35
murders in the month of January. That's one American city, about
as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq!

Worst president in history? The following appeared in the Durham, NC
local paper as a letter to the editor. Please forward to all on your
list as this will put things in perspective:

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war. They
complain about his prosecution of it. One liberal recently claimed Bush
was the worst president in U.S. history. Let's clear up one point: We didn't
start the war on terror. Try to remember, it was started by
terrorists BEFORE 9/11.

Let's look at the "worst" president and mismanagement claims.

FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From
1941-1945, 450,000 lives we! re lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never
attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of
18,333 per year.

John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never
attacked us. I think history might show Eisenhower committed the troops
and Kennedy was honoring that commitment.

Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives
were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never
attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three
times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost
600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year. Bush did all this abroad while not
allowing another terrorist attack at home.

Worst president in history? Come on! The Democrats are complaining about
how long the war is taking, but...It took less time to take Iraq than it
took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day
operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing
records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Teddy Kennedy to call
the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!

 

Perhaps it's not so much that we're morons, as it is the fact that you're too dumb to express yourself clearly. After all, YOU'RE the one claiming to be misunderstood here. I (and several others, as well) thought I was reading you loud and clear.

 

Obviously you aren't, are you?

 

Mike, if you don't see where you clearly implied/inferred just that then you need to reread your posts. I agree with some of what you say yet you clearly contradict yourself. Not gonna get in a pissing contest til you can see why everyone is a moron to what you thought you said.