CSNbbs

About what I figured but did any of you guys notice all the brown on the Repugs faces after the meeting? Wow. Some had brown noses. Some had brown lips and McBush, well lets just say his hair is no longer grey.

The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

WMD Owl Wrote:The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

He didn't say crap except what Bush allowed him to say. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Which middle east country is next in line after Iran? Syria?

RobertN Wrote:

WMD Owl Wrote:The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

He didn't say crap except what Bush allowed him to say. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Which middle east country is next in line after Iran? Syria?

Yeah, what does he know. He's only there. Levin is MUCH more knowledgeable. /sarcasm

RobertN Wrote:

WMD Owl Wrote:The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

He didn't say crap except what Bush allowed him to say. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Which middle east country is next in line after Iran? Syria?

He's an honest and honorable man who's served his country with distinction.

All things that have never, and will never, be said of someone like you.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:[quote=RobertN]
[quote=WMD Owl]
The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

He didn't say crap except what Bush allowed him to say. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Which middle east country is next in line after Iran? Syria?

Quote:He's an honest and honorable man who's served his country with distinction.

I agree with your assesment of the General...But I oppose the theft of my wages to finance further "military" occupation of Iraq...I am willing to support the theft of my wages in reconstruction of the infrastructure of Iraq...providing the people wish us to help and that they cease all violence against each other and those that would help them rebuild....otherwise....I oppose further involvement in Iraq based on the principle of non initiation of force.

RebelKev Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:

WMD Owl Wrote:The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

He didn't say crap except what Bush allowed him to say. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Which middle east country is next in line after Iran? Syria?

Yeah, what does he know. He's only there. Levin is MUCH more knowledgeable. /sarcasm

Of course he knows what is going on over there. He just isn't allowed to say the truth.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:

WMD Owl Wrote:The General told it like it is. They have to keep US troops in there to deal with Sadr and eventually the Iranians.

He didn't say crap except what Bush allowed him to say. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Which middle east country is next in line after Iran? Syria?

He's an honest and honorable man who's served his country with distinction.

All things that have never, and will never, be said of someone like you.

I am sure he is. Unfortunately when you have "The Decider" telling you what you can and can't say because your job is on the line, things tend to get spun or nothing comes out at all. Which is exactly what happened.

RobertN Wrote:Of course he knows what is going on over there. He just isn't allowed to say the truth.

Have you been there? I have. So tell us, armchair QB, what's actually going on in Iraq. We that have been there need to know.

RebelKev Wrote:

RobertN Wrote:Of course he knows what is going on over there. He just isn't allowed to say the truth.

Have you been there? I have. So tell us, armchair QB, what's actually going on in Iraq. We that have been there need to know.

Lots of IED's blowing up our troops and civilians. They have a budget surplus from selling oil. There are more AQ in Iraq now then when we attacked. THere are no WMD's. Most of the violence is still Suni vs Shiites. The government still can't get crap done. Of course, that doesn't matter much since they have no power to do anything anyway. THe militia's have the power to dictate what happens in the country. The Iraqi soldiers are taking forever to train and still can't fight by themselves. The average Iraqi still doesn't have electricity for more than a few hours a day. Did I miss anything?

RobertN Wrote:Lots of IED's blowing up our troops and civilians. They have a budget surplus from selling oil.

How many have been killed by IEDs in the past year? Don't **** with me, dumb***. This is what I do. I KNOW what the government is doing to protect our GIs. I won't tell you a GDamn thing about what I work on, but I will tell you I work with IACORA. Don't **** with me, you non-serving piece of **** and don't you DARE try to use my brethren for your GDamn political point.

....and whatever mod has been doing it, you delete THIS post, you'll be demodded. Edit all you want. You delete the entire post, it's over. I have logs.

RobertN Wrote:The Iraqi soldiers are taking forever to train and still can't fight by themselves. The average Iraqi still doesn't have electricity for more than a few hours a day. Did I miss anything?

BTW, this above shows you have f'n STUPID this idiot is. I guess I'm probably talking to myself, because there's no way in hell a moonbat news organization is going to report progress in Iraq.

I asked you, dip$hit, when have you been there? When have you met the Iraqi troops? They STEPPED up to the plate against Sadr's men to the point where he ceased his operation. They, not the US, THEY. **** you, traitor.

RebelKev Wrote:How many have been killed by IEDs in the past year?

I don't really want to intrude on your dialog (and we all know that RobertN will never provide data to back up his diatribes), but I've been curious about this point. This site seems to indicate that there are 3267 hostile deaths to 738 non-hostile (about 18.4% of total deaths were non-hostile - higher than what I'd expect). Of the hostile deaths, 2076 were by "explosive device" (excluding mortars, rpg, and grenades), roughly 63.5% of the total hostile casualties. I presume that these are IED deaths? Regardless, this doesn't break down deaths in this category over time.

Some images relevant to a previous discussion:

variation on an old joke:

what do you call it when rebelkev is surrounded by 5,000 flaming liberals(oops. progressives)?

not nearly enough flaming liberals.

gruehls Wrote:variation on an old joke:

Just curious - is this in response to me?

I45owl Wrote:

gruehls Wrote:variation on an old joke:

Just curious - is this in response to me?

nosir.

nothing to do with you.

Quote:variation on an old joke:

what do you call it when rebelkev is surrounded by 5,000 flaming liberals(oops. progressives)?

not nearly enough flaming liberals.

Whew..... that's a good one. Knee slapper there.

Machiavelli Wrote:

Quote:variation on an old joke:

what do you call it when rebelkev is surrounded by 5,000 flaming liberals(oops. progressives)?

not nearly enough flaming liberals.

Whew..... that's a good one. Knee slapper there.

hmmm.

the reports were that you were gutless, spineless, brainless and used your knees only to fall upon them and pray that better men might save you.

if you're really slapping a knee, i guess the intelligence (a word foreign to you) got it all right but the knee part.

RobertN Wrote:Of course he knows what is going on over there. He just isn't allowed to say the truth.

No disrepect intended but how is it that you know he's not allowed to say the truth? Do you believe even for a moment that, if there was even the smallest iota of proof that he was lying, the NY Times, LA Times, CBS, NBC, CNN and others (hell, Dan Rather would come out of retirement) would be all over it? If you know the truth how did you come to learn of it?

And if the truth is obvious to you then why isn't obvious to everyone else?