|
|
| Author |
Message |
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
 Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:22 Post subject: Re: 44 Iraqi soldiers smoked execution style
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | Yay! everything is going so smooth in Iraq!
Woot free the Iraq citizens !!!!
| Quote: | | BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi authorities have discovered the bodies of 44 Iraqi soldiers and four drivers after they were ambushed and killed overnight near the Iraq-Iran border, an Iraqi military commander said Sunday |
Iraq is f****d.
Situation grim f*****s this is a classic reason why you dont attack someone unless they attacked you first.
| Quote: | | Discovery of the bodies was followed by news that insurgents had killed a U.S. State Department security official at a U.S. Army base near Baghdad airport. |
|
Does this sound like a celebration to anyone else?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:25 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Trebel wrote: | | You guys are f*****g morons. We invaded a country and overthrew an oppressive dictator w/ just over 1000 casualties. Whoever said we are barely handling Iraq is f*****g stupid. Look at the numbers, we anally raped the Iraqi army and Saddam. Yes people are still dying, but in the end Iraq will be a better place. If you want something to get your panties in a knot over pick something like cigarettes or alcohol. They kill far more people then this war on Iraq ever will. |
Yes indeed look at the numbers...closing in on 15K dead Iraq citizens
Meanwhile terrorism is thriving
Soldiers refusing to report...shameful yes but its an indicator on how f****d up things are.
Soldiers refusing their orders...shameful and sad but its an indicator on how bad the situation is.
And people are so dead set against the US occupation its like pulling teeth to get any support from our allies...
Because we stated Saddams WMD as our reason for invading and finding none we keep on occupying because we HAVE to.
had Bush just gotten Bin Laden in Tora Bora when he was cornered alot of this shit would be put to rest within reason, and the victims of 911 would have some kind of closure and some sense of justice.
Instead they got Bush changing the enemy with no end in sight
Were involved in a war we cant even pull out of...because if we do EVERYONE we set up in power is going to die and Iraq will revert to the same old shit, except now there are fourteen thousand surviving fathers, mothers sons daughters husbands wives friends and family, who now hold america responsible for their deaths.
So here we sit, resources diverted and hands tied, no justice in sight
Wee.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:28 Post subject:
|
|
|
How would capturing Bin Laden have stopped us from invading Iraq, Jack?
It was going to happen.. regardless. How many times do I have to say this. The signs for a US (or UN invasion) of Iraq have been around since 1991.. and much more telling since 1996 with the iraq sponsored bombings in S.A. and the assassination plot against Bush Sr. This all comes down to a failure of the 1991 coalition from having the balls to just knock Saddam out back then.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:37 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Frax wrote: | How would capturing Bin Laden have stopped us from invading Iraq, Jack?
It was going to happen.. regardless. How many times do I have to say this. The signs for a US (or UN invasion) of Iraq have been around since 1991.. and much more telling since 1996 with the iraq sponsored bombings in S.A. and the assassination plot against Bush Sr. This all comes down to a failure of the 1991 coalition from having the balls to just knock Saddam out back then. |
Frax, my dear slope forhead mongoloid I see you forgot that weve been through the topic of "priority enemies"
Allow me to jog your f*****g slackjawed gaptoothed syphilis addled memory on the topic of who is your f*****g PRIORITY ENEMY and why you dont tie up 100percent of your resources in a quagmire till you take down the suckerpunching losing terrorist piece of dogshit FIRST.
What you DONT do is tie up your army in some mudhole and become unable to avenge those peoplewho died on 911, which is exactly what happened.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:38 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Capturing Bin Laden is good for one reason and one reason only: Justice. Liberals don't believe in this ideal so it's not their place to complain. When it comes to national security, Bin Laden is irrellevent.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:41 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Confused wrote: | | Capturing Bin Laden is good for one reason and one reason only: Justice. Liberals don't believe in this ideal so it's not their place to complain. When it comes to national security, Bin Laden is irrellevent. |
Living up to your name still 
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:45 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | | Confused wrote: | | Capturing Bin Laden is good for one reason and one reason only: Justice. Liberals don't believe in this ideal so it's not their place to complain. When it comes to national security, Bin Laden is irrellevent. |
Living up to your name still |
I notice that every time I destroy yout argument you insert the emoticon. I'll just assume that to be an admission of your loss.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:50 Post subject:
|
|
|
Not so much the destruction of my argument as much as it is my own realization that bush could tatoo a c**k to his forhead and replace his hands with mechanical crab claws and he could still do no wrong in your eyes.
At that point it becomes funny to me and thus the laughing man.
Sometimes I do cool shades too
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 10/24/04 - 23:54 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | Not so much the destruction of my argument as much as it is my own realization that bush could tatoo a c**k to his forhead and replace his hands with mechanical crab claws and he could still do no wrong in your eyes.
At that point it becomes funny to me and thus the laughing man.
Sometimes I do cool shades too
|
I'm afraid so. I so completely destroy your argument that your only response is speechlessness...an attempt to look as though you're ridiculing me with laughter. The only problem is you really give no explanation for your laughter, so you just look like a leftist who's just been shit on by a Republican.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Scrabler
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2660
Location: Mobile, AL
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 00:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | | Frax wrote: | How would capturing Bin Laden have stopped us from invading Iraq, Jack?
It was going to happen.. regardless. How many times do I have to say this. The signs for a US (or UN invasion) of Iraq have been around since 1991.. and much more telling since 1996 with the iraq sponsored bombings in S.A. and the assassination plot against Bush Sr. This all comes down to a failure of the 1991 coalition from having the balls to just knock Saddam out back then. |
Frax, my dear slope forhead mongoloid I see you forgot that weve been through the topic of "priority enemies"
Allow me to jog your f*****g slackjawed gaptoothed syphilis addled memory on the topic of who is your f*****g PRIORITY ENEMY and why you dont tie up 100percent of your resources in a quagmire till you take down the suckerpunching losing terrorist piece of dogshit FIRST.
What you DONT do is tie up your army in some mudhole and become unable to avenge those peoplewho died on 911, which is exactly what happened. |
What's with you dumb liberal f***s? Iraq is hardly using up our resources. We are fighting in Afghanistan now just as we would be if we weren't in Iraq.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 00:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
confused mumbled
| Quote: |
I'm afraid so. I so completely destroy your argument that your only response is speechlessness...an attempt to look as though you're ridiculing me with laughter. The only problem is you really give no explanation for your laughter, so you just look like a leftist who's just been shit on by a Republican
|
I hardly think your statement of Bin Laden being "irrelevant to national security" destroys any argument, except maybe if two guys were arguing on who can say the dumber reply: a severly retarded idiot or Confused, and he used that sentence as an example.
then in that respect, the guy who champions the retard for being dumber would have his argument destroyed but I seriously doubt that was the context you were referring to.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 00:10 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | confused mumbled
| Quote: |
I'm afraid so. I so completely destroy your argument that your only response is speechlessness...an attempt to look as though you're ridiculing me with laughter. The only problem is you really give no explanation for your laughter, so you just look like a leftist who's just been shit on by a Republican
|
I hardly think your statement of Bin Laden being "irrelevant to national security" destroys any argument, except maybe if two guys were arguing on who can say the dumber reply: a severly retarded idiot or Confused, and he used that sentence as an example.
then in that respect, the guy who champions the retard for being dumber would have his argument destroyed but I seriously doubt that was the context you were referring to. |
There you go again. You can't say why Bin Laden is relevent to national security. Given that he no longer releases messages, there's a pretty good chance that he's dead and an almost certainty that he's at least inno condition to do harm. You fail, and horribly at that. But I predict you will continue to bring up more DNC talking points without actually thinking them through.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 06:55 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | | Frax wrote: | How would capturing Bin Laden have stopped us from invading Iraq, Jack?
It was going to happen.. regardless. How many times do I have to say this. The signs for a US (or UN invasion) of Iraq have been around since 1991.. and much more telling since 1996 with the iraq sponsored bombings in S.A. and the assassination plot against Bush Sr. This all comes down to a failure of the 1991 coalition from having the balls to just knock Saddam out back then. |
Frax, my dear slope forhead mongoloid I see you forgot that weve been through the topic of "priority enemies"
Allow me to jog your f*****g slackjawed gaptoothed syphilis addled memory on the topic of who is your f*****g PRIORITY ENEMY and why you dont tie up 100percent of your resources in a quagmire till you take down the suckerpunching losing terrorist piece of dogshit FIRST.
What you DONT do is tie up your army in some mudhole and become unable to avenge those peoplewho died on 911, which is exactly what happened. |
So you agree we should have invaded Iraq. Good to see you are coming around to the smart side.
BTW are you and dicksnot in some sort of competition to show realpoor who is the largest retard? This post goes a long ways towards keeping you at least in a tie with him.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Docter
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3420
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 09:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
Even if Iraq had no ties whatsoever to the attack against us on 9/11...there are still reasons for removing Saddam from power.
When he invaded Kuwait and we gathered a coalition to kick his ass out...he signed a peace treaty. He never upheld his part of the peace treaty...in fact, he openly flaunted his hostility and disdain towards the US.
If you are at war, then sign a peace treaty, then do not uphold all portions of that treaty, then you are in fact back at war.
We spent...what...ten years going through the UN to make Saddam abide by the peace terms? If you can't force someone to abide to terms for ten years, you won't be able to do it for the next 100.
Bush and the US had every right to go into Iraq and remove Saddam's sorry ass...and get someone into power that will abide by the peace treaty.
Understand now?
(IMHO, the UN was not helping to keep Saddam in check, as they were benefitting from the Oil for Food program through kickbacks...why upset their gravy train. That's why the Security Council kept blocking all US resolutions.)
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Vengar_OO
Sir Postalot
Joined: 30 Nov 2002
Posts: 1029
Location: Mayport, FL
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 11:02 Post subject: -==-
|
|
|
If Bin Laden was such a priority, why wasn't he taken care of before 9/11 ? You know, like right after the USS Cole.
Plus what Docter said.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Brael
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2122
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 11:27 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Clinton was already on his way out of office when the USS Cole got hit, he probally didn't want to mess up his "legacy" by having people remember military action at the end of his presidency, and rather have them remember the economic boom he was lucky enough to be president for. The real question is why didn't we do more than throw a couple missles at people after the 1991 WTC bombing? The USS Cole was just another chance for an excuse to do something, something should have been done after the first attack. A higher priority should have been placed on Bin Laden by Clinton but he wasn't and we really paid for it 10 years later.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 11:32 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
The USS Cole was attacked on 12 October 2000.. clinton had 14 months left in office...
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Brael
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2122
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 11:48 Post subject:
|
|
|
| frax wrote: | The USS Cole was attacked on 12 October 2000.. clinton had 14 months left in office...
|
So Bush didn't take office until 2002? Umm... no.
Last edited by Brael on 10/25/04 - 11:51; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 11:50 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
so my math was off. Die in a fire. He still should have done something about it.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 12:59 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Frax wrote: | | so my math was off. Die in a fire. He still should have done something about it. |
Buzzz!
Im sorry Frax, wrong answer!
But we do have some lovely parting gifts for you!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Brael
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2122
|
|
Posted: 10/25/04 - 13:31 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Ya he should have, if he did his job in 91 we probally wouldn't have had the USS Cole get attacked but it was and he should have done something.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Teutates
Luke Warm
Joined: 12 Sep 2004
Posts: 232
Location: At her computer
|
|
Posted: 10/26/04 - 06:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | | had Bush just gotten Bin Laden in Tora Bora when he was cornered alot of this shit would be put to rest within reason, and the victims of 911 would have some kind of closure and some sense of justice.. |
You are so full of shit it's not even funny.. You try to make people believe that if Bin Laden had been captured you would be all happy and support the war ??? You waffle worse than JK does and are perhaps one of the biggest sheep (take it how you want to) on the planet
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/26/04 - 11:51 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Teutates wrote: | | Jack Crow wrote: | | had Bush just gotten Bin Laden in Tora Bora when he was cornered alot of this shit would be put to rest within reason, and the victims of 911 would have some kind of closure and some sense of justice.. |
You are so full of shit it's not even funny.. You try to make people believe that if Bin Laden had been captured you would be all happy and support the war ??? You waffle worse than JK does and are perhaps one of the biggest sheep (take it how you want to) on the planet |
Had Bin Laden been captured, I wouldnt be nearly as critical of Bush as I am now, this is correct.
I do not respect a president who makes such obvious tactical blunders, and combine that with a president who is a mush mouth moron...well you get the picture...
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
sinrakin
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 7044
|
|
Posted: 10/26/04 - 12:03 Post subject:
|
|
|
Nice: Allawi blames the massacre on "major neglect" by US forces. I guess the Bush administration didn't write this speech for him, like they did with the one he gave in the US where he thanked us:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1228534.htm
| Quote: | Iraqi interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi has blamed "major neglect" by US-led forces for the execution of 49 Iraqi army recruits by insurgents this weekend.
"I think it was because of gross negligence by some elements within the multinational forces," Mr Allawi told the country's interim Parliament, without giving details.
"The killings represent the epitome of what could be done to hurt Iraq and the Iraqi people," adding that a special investigation had been launched.
Mr Allawi also warned that violence would rise ahead of January polls, as his Government said more than 560 people had been killed in suicide attacks between June and September.
"I can tell you we expect more attacks against Iraq," he told the country's interim Parliament.
He said the Iraqi Government had intelligence that more militants from hardline Islamic groups had infiltrated the insurgents' stronghold of Fallujah, west of the capital.
More than 560 people have been killed and 1,200 injured in 92 suicide attacks in Iraq in the four months to September, said Interior Minister Falah Naqib, also in an address to Parliament.
Assessing the fledgling police force, the Interior Minister admitted their ranks had been infiltrated by rebels.
"With the problem of unemployment, a number of the police are on the terrorists' payroll and are ready to attack a tank or a police post in exchange for money," he said. |
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Dyers
Sir Postalot
Joined: 26 Oct 2002
Posts: 1269
|
|
Posted: 10/26/04 - 13:28 Post subject:
|
|
|
If Kerry misses his tour as President, Jack.
http://www.theelectras.com/home.htm
You can still buy his CD and catch his tour in the 2005 reunion. 
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Rennol
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 3741
Location: Charleston, IL
|
|
Posted: 10/26/04 - 15:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Frax wrote: | How would capturing Bin Laden have stopped us from invading Iraq, Jack?
It was going to happen.. regardless. How many times do I have to say this. The signs for a US (or UN invasion) of Iraq have been around since 1991.. and much more telling since 1996 with the iraq sponsored bombings in S.A. and the assassination plot against Bush Sr. This all comes down to a failure of the 1991 coalition from having the balls to just knock Saddam out back then. |
You should f*****g read Bush's own book, he outlines why they didn't stay, exactly because of the b******t like this. Iraq was a caged animal that didn't take a lot to keep reigned in, now we have the whole Army in there trying to control it. That's real smart.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
