Yes, the numbers do confirm that America is winning!

Go USA!!!

Hoo-Yaa!

Amen!

The only good commie is one that's dead...



OzOne wrote in message ...

2,000 soldiers DEAD
15,000 wounded,
Untold numbers (yeah literally untold) of innocent Iraqis killed and
maimed.

And for what?
No WMD!

http://tinyurl.com/8ne4g


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:18:51 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
scribbled thusly:

Yes, the numbers do confirm that America is winning!

Winning what?

Go USA!!!

Hoo-Yaa!

Only a lunatic would cheer 2000 dead!

I'm cheering the dead on the other side. There's more of them than us -
we're winning!

Bet those 15,000 wounded are really whoopin it up eh.

I bet they are. They are Patriotic Americans who volunteered to fight evil.
The are rooting for the side of good. Every terrorist killed in one less
that kills many others.




Amen!

The only good commie is one that's dead...

Where are the commies?

Sitting at your keyboard?


Sure you're living in the right century....meds wear off?


Doesn't take much to go over your head does it? Wound a little tight aren't
you?



OzOne wrote in message
...

2,000 soldiers DEAD
15,000 wounded,
Untold numbers (yeah literally untold) of innocent Iraqis killed and
maimed.

And for what?
No WMD!

http://tinyurl.com/8ne4g


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.




Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

In article , OzOne wrote:

You do realise that you're nuts, Don't you?

Realize it? He wallows in it. Actually, he's just reliving Vietnam days.
--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

OzOne wrote in message ...

You do realise that you're nuts, Don't you?

Part of being nuts is that you don't realize it. Do you realize that France
is the only country to have surrendered twice in WWII?

The marginal cost to win in Iraq is so small, it's a slam dunk! Complete
victory in less than 3 years! Don't you agree?





On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 01:40:44 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:18:51 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
scribbled thusly:

Yes, the numbers do confirm that America is winning!

Winning what?

Go USA!!!

Hoo-Yaa!

Only a lunatic would cheer 2000 dead!

I'm cheering the dead on the other side. There's more of them than us -
we're winning!

Bet those 15,000 wounded are really whoopin it up eh.

I bet they are. They are Patriotic Americans who volunteered to fight
evil.
The are rooting for the side of good. Every terrorist killed in one less
that kills many others.




Amen!

The only good commie is one that's dead...

Where are the commies?

Sitting at your keyboard?


Sure you're living in the right century....meds wear off?


Doesn't take much to go over your head does it? Wound a little tight
aren't
you?



OzOne wrote in message
.. .

2,000 soldiers DEAD
15,000 wounded,
Untold numbers (yeah literally untold) of innocent Iraqis killed
and
maimed.

And for what?
No WMD!

http://tinyurl.com/8ne4g


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.




Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.




Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

I'm cheering the dead on the other side. There's more of them than us -

we're winning!



How SAD. I bet Loco agrees!

RB

I meant incremental cost.

We're winning!

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:05:21 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message
...

You do realise that you're nuts, Don't you?

Part of being nuts is that you don't realize it. Do you realize that
France
is the only country to have surrendered twice in WWII?

Tell me what that has to do with your unbalance?

You do recall that this war was started because your 'intelligence'
people weren't smart enough to believe what the French believed (that
there were no WMD) and that Shrub gave up the chase for Bin Laden to
pursue this other unfound objective?



The marginal cost to win in Iraq is so small, it's a slam dunk! Complete
victory in less than 3 years! Don't you agree?

Marginal cost?
You mean 30,000 people?

Victory? in 3 years.....You mean another 3 more years?....
seems to me Shrub was claiming victory quite a while back.

And still the body count climbs.
How many more "marginal" lives do you think it will cost?


You obviously are nuts!


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

OzOne wrote:
You do recall that this war was started because your 'intelligence'
people weren't smart enough to believe what the French believed (that
there were no WMD)

Not just the French. There were a lot of intel sources trying to tell
President Bush & Vice President Cheney that the odds were against Iraq
having a serious WMD program since the 1st Gulf War. They just were
ignored... or fired.



... and that Shrub gave up the chase for Bin Laden to
pursue this other unfound objective?


Yep



The marginal cost to win in Iraq is so small, it's a slam dunk! Complete
victory in less than 3 years! Don't you agree?


Marginal cost?
You mean 30,000 people?


No, he means "marginal" ie the additional cost of gaining the desired
result, as a proportion of costs already expended.

He's meaking fun of both sides, I think.


Victory? in 3 years.....You mean another 3 more years?....
seems to me Shrub was claiming victory quite a while back.


Yep. And then he said "Bring it on."

When are the adults going to show up and take charge, I wonder?

DSK

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 23:17:13 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
scribbled thusly:

I meant incremental cost.

We're winning!

Ahhh, so increments of 10 at a time is OK.
Lets see now, 30,000 dead in Iraq over 2 years.
That's increments of say 300/week.....'only' 43/day.

I guess to a lunatic, that's acceptable.

Who's winning again?
And what is it that you're winning?


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

Well, for Bushco it is acceptable. No doubt, they've done all the focus
groups, they know exactly how many American boys the public will tolerate
being killed, as long as the #'s don't cross that threshold, everything's
okey dokey. Rice announced recently that the US "might" be in Iraq for
another 10 years, barely made the news. The incremental cost that might get
the public's attention is how much we're spending there, that isn't
changing. If you can't win their hearts, appeal to their wallets.

John Cairns

Why do you include those killed by terrorists in your numbers?

It's like including the gas chamber victims in the numbers for the invasion
of Normandy.

Since the terrorists are doing most of the killing, they must be winning!
What did Stalin win with the 15 million he killed?

So how does one really know when they win?

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 23:17:13 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
scribbled thusly:

I meant incremental cost.

We're winning!

Ahhh, so increments of 10 at a time is OK.
Lets see now, 30,000 dead in Iraq over 2 years.
That's increments of say 300/week.....'only' 43/day.

I guess to a lunatic, that's acceptable.

Who's winning again?
And what is it that you're winning?


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
OzOne wrote:
You do recall that this war was started because your 'intelligence'
people weren't smart enough to believe what the French believed (that
there were no WMD)

Not just the French. There were a lot of intel sources trying to tell
President Bush & Vice President Cheney that the odds were against Iraq
having a serious WMD program since the 1st Gulf War. They just were
ignored... or fired.



... and that Shrub gave up the chase for Bin Laden to
pursue this other unfound objective?


Yep



The marginal cost to win in Iraq is so small, it's a slam dunk! Complete
victory in less than 3 years! Don't you agree?


Marginal cost?
You mean 30,000 people?


No, he means "marginal" ie the additional cost of gaining the desired
result, as a proportion of costs already expended.

He's meaking fun of both sides, I think.

Doug, why must you ruin everything!




Victory? in 3 years.....You mean another 3 more years?....
seems to me Shrub was claiming victory quite a while back.


Yep. And then he said "Bring it on."

When are the adults going to show up and take charge, I wonder?

DSK