Best news of the day

[kosar]

Matt: I always like this angle, too. Apparently, we would have really made things better 15 years ago had we kept going....I'm sure the 9/11 attackers would still be alive today, promoting world peace and Bin Laden would be the democratically elected leader of the Middle East Coalition for Understanding an Iraq would be the model for a perfect democracy.

Ridiculous.

Makes absoulutely no sense at all. Sun Tzu thinks he's intelligent, but he's really just a gnat to swat away.

Those guys in the early 90's (which ironically includes Cheney) had it right. Both Cheney and Bush 41 eventually explained why they didn't go to Baghdad.

They both described it to a tee, what would happen. It did happen.

NOW, let's see who gets blamed when all hell breaks out when we totally withdraw our troops.

 

[UGA12]

Rumsfield briefing kosar

No point just thought it was funny, carry on

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Very true. Besides after this F job by Bush we need to pay some taxes to fix this whole mess.

Wait, you mean to tell me that we are going to have to pay for this war? That's absurd. Just because we spend billions (we don't have) every week on this war doesn't mean we have to increase taxes.

Sincerely,

Righty

 

[kosar]

Wait, you mean to tell me that we are going to have to pay for this war? That's absurd. Just because we spend billions (we don't have) every week on this war doesn't mean we have to increase taxes.

Sincerely,

Righty

Money we don't have? Wtf are you talking about.

We have that and then some. Tax breaks for everyone!

It ain't exactly Rosie riveter territory.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Money we don't have? Wtf are you talking about.

We have that and then some. Tax breaks for everyone!

It ain't exactly Rosie riveter territory.

Good point, Matt. As long as China will lend us the money, we might as well spend it. We're kind of like a 16yr old chick with Daddy's credit card....we don't understand the repercussions of our own spending because someone else seems to be footing the bill and nobody is holding us accountable. At some point, the bill will have to be paid.....bringing that up makes you a enemy #1 of the irrational (aka, Republicans).

 

[Sun Tzu]

No, not partisan. If anything, i'm a one-trick pony these days (the last 5.5 years). The Iraq 'war.'

This is really the only thing I care about in regard to this election and the only issue I cared about in the 2004 election.

All you guys talking about taxes this, taxes that? Environment this and environment that? Global warming?

I give a f*ck.

This occupation has been the biggest f*ck job for our country since Vietnam. I said it before it started and I have not been wrong.

And as even *you* pointed out, it will end in chaos, just like Vietnam did. So YOU tell me who is to blame when that happens. Bush 41? :mj07: Are you retarded?

Name calling really adds so much to the debate doesnt it?

If the War is your issue thats certainly a reasonable view. But dont Obama and MccCain have essentially the same Iraq plan? So that issue doesnt seem to be much reason to pick one of these clowns over the other.

 

[THE KOD]

Name calling really adds so much to the debate doesnt it?

.

..............................................................

your lucky thats all he said.

 

[kosar]

But dont Obama and MccCain have essentially the same Iraq plan?

Can you even be serious? Uhhh, no. They don't.

 

[Sun Tzu]

Can you even be serious? Uhhh, no. They don't.

Oh really...please detail the differences for me. All that either has said is they intend to be out in 16-20 months (depending on the day they are talking).

 

[THE KOD]

If the War is your issue thats certainly a reasonable view. But dont Obama and MccCain have essentially the same Iraq plan? So that issue doesnt seem to be much reason to pick one of these clowns over the other.

.................................................................

No its two differant views.

Obama wants to get out of Iraq using common sense and diplomacy. He wants to talk to all nations instead of Bush and Cheney like war mongering and saber rattling.

McCain on the other hand. 100 more years would be good for him to stay in Iraq. Bomb Bomb bomb Iran, refuses to talk to other nations we are at odds with, loves the nuke buttons, cannot read a teleprompter, has a hot ass temper, makes very questionable decisions even when picking his VP the most important person in his admin other than him. :shrug:

Come on Palin was the best the Repubs could come up with ?

its ludicrous.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Oh really...please detail the differences for me. All that either has said is they intend to be out in 16-20 months (depending on the day they are talking).

I thought McCain had an Iraq withdrawal plan closer to 100 years
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/14/mccain.king/

 

[kosar]

Oh really...please detail the differences for me. All that either has said is they intend to be out in 16-20 months (depending on the day they are talking).

I suppose that you're emboldened by the recent 'timeline' supposedly(according to Iraqis and of course denied by us) agreed to by our administration. This doesn't include McCain, btw. He's not a part of this administration.

The evil timeline that has been ridiculed for a year.

Obama has proposed moving 1 to 2 brigades out a month until we are out of there.

I might have missed it, but I haven't seen anything from McCain other than some vague hope that we are totally out of there before 2012.

 

[dr. freeze]

If you want to be intellectually dishonest, you can tell us McCain wants to be there 100 years.

If you want to be a grown up, you will realize that McCain was referring to military bases, one of which I am sure either Barry or Johnnie will keep men there as long as they are President. (See German base for an example). it is an ideal place for a base strategically, and one that hopefully will be used to maintain good relations with the moderate regimes in the area.

There is basically no difference in either Johnnies, Barry's, or George's exit strategy at this point.

 

[Sun Tzu]

I suppose that you're emboldened by the recent 'timeline' supposedly(according to Iraqis and of course denied by us) agreed to by our administration. This doesn't include McCain, btw. He's not a part of this administration.

The evil timeline that has been ridiculed for a year.

Obama has proposed moving 1 to 2 bridages out a month until we are out of there.

I might have missed it, but I haven't seen anything from McCain other than some vague hope that we are totally out of there before 2012.

Come on Kosar...they are both incredibly vague about everything. And some things they are both incredibly dishonest.

 

[kosar]

Come on Kosar...they are both incredibly vague about everything. And some things they are both incredibly dishonest.

Well, I didn't miss the recent news that NOW we are in favor of a timeline.

Let's go, then.

Things are wonderful. Let's get out of there.

After 2 years, at least, of 'certain elements' saying that a timeline would just give the 'enemy' (lol) time to wait it out?

NOW, a timeline is ok.

So let's get this done.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

If you want to be intellectually dishonest, you can tell us McCain wants to be there 100 years.

If you want to be a grown up, you will realize that McCain was referring to military bases, one of which I am sure either Barry or Johnnie will keep men there as long as they are President. (See German base for an example). it is an ideal place for a base strategically, and one that hopefully will be used to maintain good relations with the moderate regimes in the area.

You're either out or you're not. Nothing intellectually dishonest about it. Even if Barack kept troops there for the length of his presidency, that's 92 years less than McCain is offering up. You can spin the hell out of the strategy angle, but it's just another line of crap coming from the right.

By the way, I think we are doing a hell of a job in the relations dept.....spending another 100 years there should really smoothe things over. :mj07:

 

[dr. freeze]

You're either out or you're not. Nothing intellectually dishonest about it. Even if Barack kept troops there for the length of his presidency, that's 92 years less than McCain is offering up. You can spin the hell out of the strategy angle, but it's just another line of crap coming from the right.

By the way, I think we are doing a hell of a job in the relations dept.....spending another 100 years there should really smoothe things over. :mj07:

Well, when Johnnie is 172 years old and in his 20th term, we will truly know if that 100 years was worth it. Until then, let history decide.

Got it?:0corn :0corn

 

[dr. freeze]

Well, I didn't miss the recent news that NOW we are in favor of a timeline.

Let's go, then.

Things are wonderful. Let's get out of there.

After 2 years, at least, of 'certain elements' saying that a timeline would just give the 'enemy' (lol) time to wait it out?

NOW, a timeline is ok.

So let's get this done.

I think people got on board the timeline once we could see stability being achieved and the Iraqi government finally stepping up. Before that, there wasn't really any other viable option as the whole region coudl have blown up and the world economy could have been strangled with the oil problem.

 

[kosar]

I think people got on board the timeline once we could see stability being achieved

I think that's splendid. So I assume that you'll be at the front of the line calling to 'bring 'em home?'

Oh.

 

[dr. freeze]

I think that's splendid. So I assume that you'll be at the front of the line calling to 'bring 'em home?'

Oh.

Yes sir.