Day the Music Died

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,899
6,003
Downrange
The Liberal core of the Democrats have taken their agenda to the front lines of Iraq.I wonder how the dirt pounders feel while they sit on duty.How can you truly be against the war and still support the troops mission?Isn't that a friggin' oxymoron?
A Democrat controlled house shat on our troops in Vietnam and now history repeats itself once again.God save our boys.

What a joke

But yesterday's vote signaled peril for the Democratic congressional leadership as well. Despite deep Republican discontent with the course of the war, Democrats were unable to persuade more than 17 members of the president's party to register that dissatisfaction with their votes. If Democratic leaders could not build a broader bipartisan coalition for a symbolic vote, it may prove much harder to attract Republican support for proposals to limit Bush's options in Iraq.

Thought Executive branch ran the war?



SO when the dynamic duo of Pelosi and Murtha get their way,how long before the Boogey Muslim comes knocking at our door?

Yall wanted change...you're gonna get it for sure!


I'm afraid the Dem's just rolled over and exposed their belly
 
It is called checks and balances. Why the President may control the armed forces, the Congress can declare war and holds the purse strings. These checks are there incase the idiots of this country elect some dumb ass to power who thinks he/she can do as he/she please with no accountability.

In terms of the boogey man coming to our door step. Had W actually gone after the people who supported the attack and left well enough alone, perhaps there would be less of a chance of that happening. Instead, W went ahead, lied to the people, invaded and occupied a country that had nothing to do with any threat against the US, cost 3,100 US service men and women their lives, pissed off the american people, squandered billions upon billions of dollars all to prove he has a penis. Yea, that worked really well.
 
That’s the difference between Bill and George.

George had a great opportunity to change the country but blew it. :blink:

Bill changed the country and got blowed. :p

B) UT
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #4
Liberal yellow belly seen in Middle East.....

The United States will not achieve its goals in the Middle East, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned on state television.

"Realities in the region show that the arrogant front, headed by US and its allies, will be the principal loser in the region," the broadcast quoted Khamenei as saying in a meeting with Syrian president Bashar Assad.

Iran and Syria have long been close allies. During the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, Syria was the only Arab country to support Iran.

During the past 10 years, Iranian companies have invested more than �350 million in Syria, in sectors such as power generation, motoring, cement and agriculture.

After the pullout in Iraq...coming to a shopping mall near you!
 
Dell...

Like so many, you have allowed W and his neo-con cronies to take your eye off the ball. While we've had hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq - we've lost ground against al Qaeda (the REAL enemy) in the place that we should have pounded the hell out of in the first place! It's time to follow the Biden plan - split Iraq up into three loosely-federated states, get out of there, and get about the business of destroying al Qaeda. Perhaps you think playing referee in a Sunni vs. Shi'a civil war is more important than actually eliminating the people who attacked us in the first place.


Al Qaeda Chiefs Are Seen to Regain Power
By MARK MAZZETTI and DAVID ROHDE
WASHINGTON, Feb. 18 — Senior leaders of Al Qaeda operating from Pakistan have re-established significant control over their once-battered worldwide terror network and over the past year have set up a band of training camps in the tribal regions near the Afghan border, according to American intelligence and counterterrorism officials.

American officials said there was mounting evidence that Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, had been steadily building an operations hub in the mountainous Pakistani tribal area of North Waziristan. Until recently, the Bush administration had described Mr. bin Laden and Mr. Zawahri as detached from their followers and cut off from operational control of Al Qaeda.

The United States has also identified several new Qaeda compounds in North Waziristan, including one that officials said might be training operatives for strikes against targets beyond Afghanistan.

American analysts said recent intelligence showed that the compounds functioned under a loose command structure and were operated by groups of Arab, Pakistani and Afghan militants allied with Al Qaeda. They receive guidance from their commanders and Mr. Zawahri, the analysts said. Mr. bin Laden, who has long played less of an operational role, appears to have little direct involvement.

Officials said the training camps had yet to reach the size and level of sophistication of the Qaeda camps established in Afghanistan under Taliban rule. But groups of 10 to 20 men are being trained at the camps, the officials said, and the Qaeda infrastructure in the region is gradually becoming more mature.

Full Article
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #8
Its not Dubya who got the eye off the ball...its Big Nance and her clown posse.....
Don't worry Murtha and Pelosi will fix us quite well....take it to the bank.
In the not too distant future you'll get to enjoy free of charge,exploding muslims while shopping at your local mall.Dems already have sounded retreat and emboldened the enemy.

Of course they're regrouping in Pakistan...we don't have permission to go in there..interesting isn't it?And it W's fault? How 'bout a little payola from Osama to Paki's?

When we walk outa Iraq they're going to follow us home...get your head outa the sand dude.... ;)
 
Its not Dubya who got the eye off the ball...its Big Nance and her clown posse.....
Don't worry Murtha and Pelosi will fix us quite well....take it to the bank.
In the not too distant future you'll get to enjoy free of charge,exploding muslims while shopping at your local mall.Dems already have sounded retreat and emboldened the enemy.

Somehow I think that holding two countries (that had nothing to do with 9/11) hostage while threatening several more with unwelcome invasions is what "emboldens" the crazies...not backing off. Does this mean that we need to keep killing a thousand + American GIs a year for all of eternity b/c the minute that we stop, the infidels will bomb the crap out of us? Guess we should have thought of that before entering a war of ego that had nothing to do with the "exploding muslims".

Let me ask you something, "dude". If you have a hornets nest 6 blocks from your house, do you think that driving over to it and throwing rock after rock at it is going to solve the problem? Now I've used an over-simplified analogy b/c you could, in effect, destroy the entire nest and suffer only a few stings but I don't think that it's going to necessarily work to destroy the entire middle east. Hitler tried to rid the world of cultures that he didn't understand and that wasn't a good idea...I don't think it's a good plan for Bush to try to rid the world of cultures that he doesn't understand.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #10
What you're overlooking is a continual penchant for killing Americans by muslim fanatics for quite some time.I don't like to see our guys being in harms way anymore than the next person,but the Troops seem to think they are making a difference(don't let Murtha hear that)....If its so friggin bad over there why do so many re-up?

When Big Nance gets her way and we leave Iraq...Syria and Iran will walk across the street and open up shop.Even McCain knows those facts of life.....and he even said they will be here next.Don't worry Dude...its our children who will have to deal with a Liberal Legacy created here and now.

W's surge and new game plan looks like it is working,but you know we can't have that...the Dem's can't let a successful mission go down in Iraq because it will screw up the '08 election.No,no no.....we can not win in Iraq at all costs!Pelosi does not want that.

Look at what Murtha and Pelosi are trying to do with the purse strings in Iraq.....thought I told you it would go that way but you insisted the executive branch runs the war :lol: .Yeah....Virginia :lol: .

As for that Hornets nest....go in at night on a new moon with thermal technology and kill them all in a flash! :shock:
 
They keep re-upping b/c the military has greatly increased the incentives to do so in response to substantial declines in new recruit numbers.

You blame the liberals for creating this mess yet it was and still is Bushie that launched this "war" and it is all his fault that the hatred towards the US has grown a hundred-fold over the past five years. He has single-handedly bred a new generation of American-haters that despise US citizens and policy more than any other group has in the past. You think that "terrorism" has been bad in the past...it will get far, far worse in the future b/c Bush has ensured that the hornets have been agitated. Though I do like your no-response on what we're actually doing there and what, other than wiping the middle east (hornet's nest) off the face of the earth will actually resolve this matter that Bush started.

Bush's "surge" hasn't even taken root yet other than on paper. You seem to think that Congress not wanting to divert even more funding from science, education, and healthcare is a bad thing. Bushie is spending more than any of his predecessors could ever dream of and passing meaningful tax cuts only to the wealthy. Oh...and his excessive spending is not on furthering or even fostering our country (i.e. not education, science, or healthcare) but rather on the debacle he has created.

Mission was already accomplished from what I can recollect so why the proposed "surge"? And as I have asked numerous times without a trace of response...when does this Iraq-thing end? Sure we can send more GIs to suffer for Bush's decisions but at what point can we actually begin to withdraw. In fact..."withdrawl of troops" has been coined as an evil term by your cronies so that tells me we can NEVER withdraw. Guess we should dig in even more and plan to go much further in debt (economically and scientifically) as we now wag the dog and threaten to invade Iran.

When is enough idiocy actually too much? The answer is when it has doomed our children and our children's children to threats we couldn't have even imagined. We can thank Bushie for that. Hooray for creating chaos where it did not exist. You keep tieing Iraq to muslim extremists in the US but again...the Iraqi's had nothing to do with 9/11. You have got to be pretty dumb b/c I've had to tell you that in every post and you still can't comprehend. But maybe you can see the future b/c I predict that there are a helluva lot of Iraqis that are more than willing to kill Americans now. Only way to prevent that from happening and "accomplish our mission" in Iraq would be to genocide the entire region. If you're not willing to go that far (and I sure as heck hope you aren't) then I'd say that the mission is unaccompishable.
 
Its not Dubya who got the eye off the ball...its Big Nance and her clown posse.....
Don't worry Murtha and Pelosi will fix us quite well....take it to the bank.
In the not too distant future you'll get to enjoy free of charge,exploding muslims while shopping at your local mall.Dems already have sounded retreat and emboldened the enemy.

Of course they're regrouping in Pakistan...we don't have permission to go in there..interesting isn't it?And it W's fault? How 'bout a little payola from Osama to Paki's?

When we walk outa Iraq they're going to follow us home...get your head outa the sand dude.... ;)

Yes, it is W who took his eye of the ball and went after the wrong target. Iraq DID NOT attack us. The VAST MAJORITY of the fighting there has NOTHING to do with al Qaeda even to this day. It's a stupid Sunni vs. Shi'a civil war with a little bit of help from Iran and Syria just to keep our troops stuck there even longer. While we've got hundreds of thousands of troops stuck rotating through Iraq and playing referee in the wrong place - UBL and his crowd are probably laughing their arses off while the US is letting them re-group.

You bring up the corrupt Pakistani gov't...and you're exactly right. Problem is that W decided early on that we could count on Pakistan's president to be a reliable ally in the war on terror. Even if he's not corrupt (and he probably is) Musharraf is clearly too weak to control parts of his own country. Any way you slice it, our troops should have blanketed Afghanistan to wipe out al Qaeda -- and should have gone into the un-governed parts of Pakistan too, if that's what was needed. Of course, that's NOT what happened.

Instead, W has actually pulled troops OUT OF AFGHANISTAN to bolster the war in Iraq. Again - it's W who decided to WEAKEN the fight against those who actually attacked us to devote more men and resources to fight a stupid civil war in Iraq.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #13
Show me a war plan that went exactly as planned..... :lol:

On a two-day campaign swing in South Carolina, McCain fielded questions from the crowd for more than an hour and said the United States can succeed in Iraq with additional troops and a new strategy. McCain has been a strong proponent of using more troops and favors Bush's increase of some 21,500 U.S. forces in the nearly four-year-old war.

BTW....screw the troops.....This should get your attention
 
Make no mistake, when/if we abandon Iraq and allow it to fall into the wrong hands you will not only see a Darfur to the tenth power but the Sands of Iraq hold the world's 2nd largest oil reserve. (imagine if you will $200 or $300 barrel oil) the saudis are extremely nervous about the possibility of the entire region becoming a lit powder keg and are now expressing a desire to go nuclear. Our allies will lose any confidence in our ability to finish a war with a victory and our enemies will only be emboldend to further their agenda.

Iraq may have had nothing to do with 9/11 directly but our government felt it was a terrorist threat just the same, yes the timing was off but saddam had to be dealt with sooner or later and the civil war that has followed was not anticipated. it has no doubt become a major cluster fuk especially now that Iran and Syria are supplying the insurgents with arms. with our backs against the wall running is not an option, we stand and fight until victory or admit defeat and crawl home at which time the whole middle east could possibly implode and World War III will be set into motion.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #15
Unfortuneatly for you and I Local 12.....their liberal fairy tale come true in DC will have repercussions the likes these posters can not fathom.Its those rose colored glasses,dude....
They can't see beyond the end of their nose for what its worth....
I just can't wait to hear all the excuses when the Merde hits the Ventilatuer after we pull out.Its quite plain for me to see that a withdrawal from the big 'I' will be seen as defeat and they will have us on the run and it will embolden them on.What fools these liberals are...then The She Bittch will want to open a dialog.Phooken idiots...... :down:

Hello.....Nancy...Hello

Two triggers

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the trigger for such an attack reportedly includes any confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon - which it denies.


The Natanz plant is buried under concrete, metal and earth
Alternatively, our correspondent adds, a high-casualty attack on US forces in neighbouring Iraq could also trigger a bombing campaign if it were traced directly back to Tehran.

Long range B2 stealth bombers would drop so-called "bunker-busting" bombs in an effort to penetrate the Natanz site, which is buried some 25m (27 yards) underground.
 
Back
Top