2,000 and counting.
 

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.

2,000 and counting.
 

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.

2,000 and counting.
 

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

2,000 and counting.
 

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.

2,000 and counting.
 

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

2,000 and counting.
 

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.

2,000 and counting.
 

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

2,000 and counting.
 

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

2,000 and counting.
 

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.

2,000 and counting.
 

"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

2,000 and counting.
 

"Bob Crantz" wrote
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?

I would if Iraq were about to become an Anglo-American democracy, or even a
western European one but it is not.

Iraq was a secular dictatorship under Saddam. As such it was a bastion
opposing Islamic extremism in the middle east. There were no WMDs after the
UN ordered them disposed of. There were no terrorist training camps. Al
Qaeda was forbidden! The only terrorism Saddam sponsored was paying
pensions to palistinian suicide bombers who targeted Israel. Then came Bush
.....

Under the new constitution Iraq will have the same kind of government as
Iran, with the same kinds of people in charge. Iran elects a parlimentary
government similar to Britian's, but there is a "supreme court" comprised of
radical Islamic Mullahs which decides if each law conforms with Islamic law
before it goes into effect. Iraq will be the same. Iran sponsors terrorism
throughout the world, providing safe haven and training for terrorists. Iraq
will be the same.

Call that "complete victory"? Hell, Bush has done more for bin Ladin in
Iraq than al Zarqawi has - and killed 2000 Americans to do it!

2,000 and counting.
 

"Bob Crantz" wrote
So how does one really know when they win?

When there is a secular western democracy in Iraq - like was supposed to
replace Saddam's dictatorship.

Anybody see us heading in that direction???

2,000 and counting.
 

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


Bob Crantz wrote:
Doug, why must you ruin everything!


Oops, sorry. But carry on, carry on, I don't think anybody noticed my
little comment...

DSK

2,000 and counting.
 

OzOne wrote
Or at least those children without developmental problems.

The story goes that a big limo pulled up in front of the most expensive
hotel in Dallas. A whole entourage lept from a following SUV. Men in black
helped a handsome couple from the limo. Then more men in black helped a
young man out and into a wheel chair. A bystander remarked "Isn't that sad.
That couple has so much wealth but I bet they'd give it all to have that
young man whole and healthy." "Listen you SOB" said the father "I'm one of
the richest most powerful men in Texas! That boy is only 27 years old! He
hasn't even been potty trained yet, let alone had to learn to walk! I'm
grooming him to be President of the USA someday!"

2,000 and counting.
 

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote
So how does one really know when they win?

When there is a secular western democracy in Iraq - like was supposed to
replace Saddam's dictatorship.

Anybody see us heading in that direction???

No..... and it will never work in Iraq. Not without a Western Military
presence to ensure it's survival for a complete generation.

CM

2,000 and counting.
 

Winning: when the opponent loses the will or means to fight.

Who will win?


"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote
So how does one really know when they win?

When there is a secular western democracy in Iraq - like was supposed to
replace Saddam's dictatorship.

Anybody see us heading in that direction???

2,000 and counting.
 

If one reads the new Iraqi Constitution one finds:

a. The establishment of a state religion/ religious state.

b. Redistribution of wealth/socialism

What Bush has accomplished in the US:

a. The establishment of a state religion/ religious state.

b. Redistribution of wealth/socialism

At least he is consistent!

Amen!


"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote
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?

I would if Iraq were about to become an Anglo-American democracy, or even
a
western European one but it is not.

Iraq was a secular dictatorship under Saddam. As such it was a bastion
opposing Islamic extremism in the middle east. There were no WMDs after
the
UN ordered them disposed of. There were no terrorist training camps. Al
Qaeda was forbidden! The only terrorism Saddam sponsored was paying
pensions to palistinian suicide bombers who targeted Israel. Then came
Bush
....

Under the new constitution Iraq will have the same kind of government as
Iran, with the same kinds of people in charge. Iran elects a parlimentary
government similar to Britian's, but there is a "supreme court" comprised
of
radical Islamic Mullahs which decides if each law conforms with Islamic
law
before it goes into effect. Iraq will be the same. Iran sponsors
terrorism
throughout the world, providing safe haven and training for terrorists.
Iraq
will be the same.

Call that "complete victory"? Hell, Bush has done more for bin Ladin in
Iraq than al Zarqawi has - and killed 2000 Americans to do it!

2,000 and counting.
 

In article 6r58f.56899$S4.41079@edtnps84,
Capt.Mooron wrote:

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote
So how does one really know when they win?

When there is a secular western democracy in Iraq - like was supposed to
replace Saddam's dictatorship.

Anybody see us heading in that direction???

No..... and it will never work in Iraq. Not without a Western Military
presence to ensure it's survival for a complete generation.

A single generation isn't enough time. It needs to be at least
two. That's about 50 years.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

2,000 and counting.
 

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
A single generation isn't enough time. It needs to be at least
two. That's about 50 years.

Heh Ganz... don't you have to be in LA for a Sausage Swallowing Contest?

CM

2,000 and counting.
 

In article gFa8f.57802$S4.34010@edtnps84,
Capt.Mooron wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
A single generation isn't enough time. It needs to be at least
two. That's about 50 years.

Heh Ganz... don't you have to be in LA for a Sausage Swallowing Contest?

CM

They called me and said they've decided to let you do it, since you
keep volunteering.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

2,000 and counting.
 

"Bob Crantz" wrote
Winning: when the opponent loses the will or means to fight.

Who will win?

Al Qaeda, of course! ... just as the communists won in 'nam.

Iraq has already chosen an Iranian style Islamic Republic. Next month they
will elect a flock of Muslim extremists like the Iranian nutcase hollering
for the destruction on Israel. These will appoint a "supreme court" composed
of radical mullahs who'll really be running things - just like they do in
Iran.

This will allow Bush and company to declare victory and cut and run - after
killing another 2000 Americans.

The new Iraqi government will reach an "accomodation" with al Qaeda to end
the civil war. Zarqawi will in fact take over.

Iraq will provide training and R&R camps for terrorists who, in turn, will
subvert or overthrow less radical Muslim governments. Bin Laden will return
to Saudi Arabia triumphant like Kohmini did to Iran.

Terror will become as common in the US and Europe as it is now in Israel.
Radical Christians who elected Bush will blame his Democrat successor.

Aren't you glad we got rid of Saddam? He ws preventing all this.

2,000 and counting.
 

"Bob Crantz" wrote

If one reads the new Iraqi Constitution one finds:

a. The establishment of a state religion/ religious state.

b. Redistribution of wealth/socialism

What Bush has accomplished in the US:

a. The establishment of a state religion/ religious state.

b. Redistribution of wealth/socialism

At least he is consistent!

Amen

Amen!

2,000 and counting.
 

Well, he will be down one disciple... Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been
indicted.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote

If one reads the new Iraqi Constitution one finds:

a. The establishment of a state religion/ religious state.

b. Redistribution of wealth/socialism

What Bush has accomplished in the US:

a. The establishment of a state religion/ religious state.

b. Redistribution of wealth/socialism

At least he is consistent!

Amen

Amen!