bush speech

1…5681011

Comments

  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    Open wrote:
    What makes it neutral, if it was pro US and pro Israel? Tell me what the neutral position is on this subject?

    The difference between me and you is, I look at situations and see that sometimes, one side is right and one side is wrong; one side is good, and the other is evil. So your "neutrality" is misplaced.
  • Open
    Open Posts: 792
    jsand wrote:
    The difference between me and you is, I look at situations and see that sometimes, one side is right and one side is wrong; one side is good, and the other is evil. So your "neutrality" is misplaced.

    LOL..yeah i dont see that reflected on one post on here.
  • pushmepullme
    pushmepullme Posts: 255
    jsand wrote:
    Oh yeah. The middle east was a bastion of freedom. It was never fucked up until the US came.

    I didn't say it was, but bombing the fuck out of Iraq and Afghanistan hasn't helped has it? I'm sure a little 5 year old kid who's just watched his mum and dad get bombed to little bits is going to grow up loving America isn't he?
    "I am a doughnut." (live - Berlin, Germany - 11/03/96)

    "Behave like rock stars - not like the President." (live - Noblesville, IN - 8/17/98)

    --Ed

    "Yeah, I was gonna learn to play it (Breath) but somebody slipped me a bottle of viagra and was busy doing something else six times last night" (live - New York, NY - 9/10/98)

    --Ed

  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    pushmepullme wrote:
    I didn't say it was, but bombing the fuck out of Iraq and Afghanistan hasn't helped has it? I'm sure a little 5 year old kid who's just watched his mum and dad get bombed to little bits is going to grow up loving America isn't he?

    Well, if that little kid had common sense, peraps he'd blame it on the psychopath who didn't like the fact that his mom and dad didn't follow the same sect of Islam.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    jsand wrote:
    Well, if that little kid had common sense, peraps he'd blame it on the psychopath who didn't like the fact that his mom and dad didn't follow the same sect of Islam.

    Don't recall the sects waging urban warfare under Saddam......therefore US provication brought civial war....albeit....unknowingly (most likely over-looked)to the area.....not to say Saddam was much better...but the US is not helping the situation....the evidence is everywhere...like I say the war on terror is equivalent to the war on drugs....ultimate failure.....both can be won using alterntive methods however those roads are always deemed unattainable or illogical....but that is matter that is left to the eye of the beholder....
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    jsand wrote:
    Well, if that little kid had common sense, peraps he'd blame it on the psychopath who didn't like the fact that his mom and dad didn't follow the same sect of Islam.
    The sect of Islam?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    jsand wrote:
    Well, if that little kid had common sense, peraps he'd blame it on the psychopath who didn't like the fact that his mom and dad didn't follow the same sect of Islam.

    sounds perfuckly reasonable...as we know, 5 year old children can easily comprehend the death of a parent...

    5 year old: Why isn't mommy and daddy coming back...

    answer: well, they died so America can have it's freedom...

    5 year old: oh, ok, that sounds good to me, mommy and daddy must of hated freedom and the American way of life...I understand...I should be angry at radical islam and not the people who killed my parents...
  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    inmytree wrote:
    sounds perfuckly reasonable...as we know, 5 year old children can easily comprehend the death of a parent...

    5 year old: Why isn't mommy and daddy coming back...

    answer: well, they died so America can have it's freedom...

    5 year old: oh, ok, that sounds good to me, mommy and daddy must of hated freedom and the American way of life...I understand...I should be angry at radical islam and not the people who killed my parents...

    5 year old if and when he has the capacity to reason: Why did mommy and daddy have to die because some ignorant piece of shit is obsessed with Allah?
  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    Collin wrote:
    The sect of Islam?

    Sunni and Shiite. Understand?
  • stupidcorporatewhore
    stupidcorporatewhore Posts: 761
    jsand wrote:
    Well, if that little kid had common sense, peraps he'd blame it on the psychopath who didn't like the fact that his mom and dad didn't follow the same sect of Islam.

    wrong.

    Iraq was secular before the war. Iraq was not islamic until we invaded it and turned it over to the extremists.

    look, just admit your president fucked up on iraq and we can all move on.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    jsand wrote:
    5 year old if and when he has the capacity to reason: Why did mommy and daddy have to die because some ignorant piece of shit is obsessed with Allah?

    nice....:rolleyes:
  • Open
    Open Posts: 792
    jsand wrote:
    Well, if that little kid had common sense, peraps he'd blame it on the psychopath who didn't like the fact that his mom and dad didn't follow the same sect of Islam.

    WOW....this says it all.
  • Open
    Open Posts: 792
    jsand wrote:
    5 year old if and when he has the capacity to reason: Why did mommy and daddy have to die because some ignorant piece of shit is obsessed with Allah?

    Replace 5 year old with Bush and Allah with Jesus...and you will see what people in iraq are saying.
  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    Open wrote:
    WOW....this says it all.

    The truth...yup.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    pushmepullme wrote:
    I didn't say it was, but bombing the fuck out of Iraq and Afghanistan hasn't helped has it? I'm sure a little 5 year old kid who's just watched his mum and dad get bombed to little bits is going to grow up loving America isn't he?


    are you serious? you dont think getting rid of the taliban in afghanistan was helpful? do you know anything about the taliban?
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    jlew24asu wrote:
    are you serious? you dont think getting rid of the taliban in afghanistan was helpful? do you know anything about the taliban?

    Getting rid of the Taliban was a good idea, yes and has been somewhat helpful on the war on terror. However. The Taliban and al quada are the war on terror. We had them beat and then decided to go into Iraq. That is where we fucked up both Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Because of our re-shifting of focus from one front to another we allowed both fronts to become very weak. Because both fronts are weak we now have terrorist attacks in both countries, it's debatable how much control the Taliban has in southern Afghanistan.

    Basically what I am getting at is that we really fucked up the reigon, our attack on Iraq might as well had been a recruitment poster for extremists, and there is no end in sight to this snafu.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • puremagic
    puremagic Posts: 1,907
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    A) TWO DIFFERENT WARS - YET FIGHTING THE SAME CRAP

    People don't die over CRAP. Care to be a little more specific in your response.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    B) AFGHANISTAN WAS WON - No matter how much you wish this country would've failed - The Karzai goverment was much quicker to form than the Iraq govt' - The re-surgence of the Taliban is due to their in-ability to control their people - we're still fighting there , yes, and I'm pretty sure we're gonna have to send more troops there at some point to exterminate once again

    Scream all you want I'm not intimidated by the "you" tactics, ok. The Afghanistan campaign was designed to remove the Taliban who were the country's ruling government sect, destroy the al-Qaeda terrorists, and capture bin Laden. The Taliban was not defeated, they moved their operation into and along the Pakistan border, with the aid of the Pakistan military who supported them and refused to allow the U.S. or coalition troops to cross their borders. As you have stated, the Taliban government has returned, the al-Qaeda terrorists are still operational and growing, and bin Laden is still free. You do the math.
    DCGARDEN wrote:

    C) The problem? The problem was this : Every piece of intell we had at our disposal was that stockpiles of WMD existed - you would've wanted to just leave him be because he wasn't bothering anyone - I would've chosen to remove the chance of those stockpiles ending up in the hands of Al Qaeda -

    That's all you got! ok.
    DCGARDEN wrote:

    D) Iran & Syria - Are you that bent? These two are the biggest supporters of terrorism in the region - This is a war on terror - period

    Bent, no. Just tried of the same old same old. If this is a war on terror - period and the objective is to go after countries who knowingly support and habor such terrorists. Then the U.S. should have invaded Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and UAE. Side note these are only three nations that "formally" recognized the Taliban as the ruling government of Afghanistan. If you do a little unbias research and follow the money, the history and the real path to 9/11 you will see these countries repeatly funded bin Laden and the very terrorists who died on 9/11.

    Use these links as starting point
    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-2051
    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-2164
    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-3821
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Getting rid of the Taliban was a good idea, yes and has been somewhat helpful on the war on terror. However. The Taliban and al quada are the war on terror. We had them beat and then decided to go into Iraq. That is where we fucked up both Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Because of our re-shifting of focus from one front to another we allowed both fronts to become very weak. Because both fronts are weak we now have terrorist attacks in both countries, it's debatable how much control the Taliban has in southern Afghanistan.

    Basically what I am getting at is that we really fucked up the reigon, our attack on Iraq might as well had been a recruitment poster for extremists, and there is no end in sight to this snafu.


    someone cancel my account, I think I might agree with you. kind of.


    at this point, I would be happy to see us leave iraq given iraqis can protect themselves from extremists taking over. I think they are close. taliban and el queda are in fact our enemies and that is who were are stuck fighting in iraq now.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    puremagic wrote:

    "Scream all you want I'm not intimidated by the "you" tactics, ok. The Afghanistan campaign was designed to remove the Taliban who were the country's ruling government sect, destroy the al-Qaeda terrorists, and capture bin Laden. The Taliban was not defeated, they moved their operation into and along the Pakistan border, with the aid of the Pakistan military who supported them and refused to allow the U.S. or coalition troops to cross their borders. As you have stated, the Taliban government has returned, the al-Qaeda terrorists are still operational and growing, and bin Laden is still free. You do the math."



    the taliban and el queda are hiding in caves and are constantly on the run. I wouldnt exactly say they have made a triumphant return to power. US actually had a few hundred more in their crosshairs but choose not to pull the trigger because of rules of engagement. would our enemies have done the same?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213641,00.html
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    jlew24asu wrote:
    puremagic wrote:

    "Scream all you want I'm not intimidated by the "you" tactics, ok. The Afghanistan campaign was designed to remove the Taliban who were the country's ruling government sect, destroy the al-Qaeda terrorists, and capture bin Laden. The Taliban was not defeated, they moved their operation into and along the Pakistan border, with the aid of the Pakistan military who supported them and refused to allow the U.S. or coalition troops to cross their borders. As you have stated, the Taliban government has returned, the al-Qaeda terrorists are still operational and growing, and bin Laden is still free. You do the math."



    the taliban and el queda are hiding in caves and are constantly on the run. I wouldnt exactly say they have made a triumphant return to power. US actually had a few hundred more in their crosshairs but choose not to pull the trigger because of rules of engagement. would our enemies have done the same?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213641,00.html

    You bash me earlier for my source and you post a source on something else and it is Fox News? Fair and balanced.

    Here is how concerned we are about the rules of engagement.


    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4999734/ - War Crimes Memo

    http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read/29503
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm

Categories