wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:54:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:00:28 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

and afganistan? guess you havent heard of 9/11.


Yeah I heard of it. I also heard the people who planned it have not
been in Afghanistan for 6 years.

hmmm...again you need to read the news.

the taliban just abducted 2 US servicemen the other day

The Taliban had nothing to do with 9-11. They are simply reacting to
our invasion of their country.

Not directly, but they were certainly allowing bin laden to do whatever
he
wanted inside the Afg. border.


That was then, this is now and OBL is not in Afghanistan. We have
managed to push that problem into a country that is a lot more
dangerous than Afghanistan and almost as unstable, getting worse every
day.


Then or now, it doesn't matter. If we can stabilize Afg., then we have a
better chance of finishing him.

We could absolutely dominate Afghanistan and that still does not give
us the right to invade Pakistan to get OBL ... unless you think that
is our next step.

Why does Cambodia seem to be coming up in my mind?

OBL might not even be the biggest danger to the US these days. It
could be another group in Africa or Indonesia and we are totally
ignoring them in our obsession with OBL.
I had a dog like that once. He saw a rabbit under the macadamia nut
tree once and after that he had to go look there every time he went
outside. There were rabbits everywhere but he kept trying to find that
one.
We always fight the last war and try to prevent the last attack
instead of looking for the next one.


Our biggest enemies aren't in the middle east.

--
Harold

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:55:05 -0400, wrote:



Why does Cambodia seem to be coming up in my mind?

let's see...when did cambodia attack us?

uh...never

when did afghanistan attack us?

since i was in NY with the USCG after the attacks i personally can
answer THAT question


We always fight the last war and try to prevent the last attack
instead of looking for the next one.

this guy says

1. afghanistan is like vietnam

2. complains we are fighting the last war

i think he's a victim of his own hype

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:08:19 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:08:02 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

what particular aspect of these documents comes as news to you?

because NO ONE is surprised by ANYTHING in those documents.

Most of these documents have not even be read and analysed yet but it
certainly seems to be making the government nervous.
I am sure the government knows we are bankrolling the Taliban with our
payments to the corrupt governments over there but the public didn't
really see it in government documents until now.

ROFLMAO!!

this is OLD news. hell, it's common knowledge the ISI is corrupt and a
branch office of the taliban.

were you REALLY that ignorant?

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:08:19 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:08:02 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

what particular aspect of these documents comes as news to you?

because NO ONE is surprised by ANYTHING in those documents.

Most of these documents have not even be read and analysed yet but it
certainly seems to be making the government nervous.

incidentally you might want to read this:


http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/2...ex.html?hpt=T1

CNN: What do you make of the disclosures in the WikiLeaks documents?

Fareed Zakaria: I think the reaction has been vastly overdone. Frankly
I think it was overdone by the three newspapers that published them
and then by the rest of the media. This has been compared by almost
everybody involved to the Pentagon Papers. They are in fact nothing
like that.

CNN: How were the Pentagon Papers different?

Zakaria: The Pentagon Papers was a secret report commissioned by the
highest levels of government to assess how the war was going in
Vietnam. What it revealed was that the government, at the very highest
level, had been deceiving itself and the American people about the
progress of the war, and that the war was in fact going much, much
worse than the public had been led to believe.

What the war logs show is nothing like that at all. They provide a lot
of granular detail about the complexities of fighting a
counterinsurgency war.
----------------

which is pretty much what i said....

as opposed to your hysteria in comparing these to the pentagon papers

"bpuharic" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:50:12 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
. ..


what's funny is, i'm a relative newcomer to this newsgroup. i was
surprised when the right wing guppies, who think they're sharks,
started after obama.

it's fun treating them like kittens. you dangle the truth in front of
them, and they get all hyper....

And who is the poster child for hyper?

at this point it's 'gfretwell' with his nazi sympathies for al qaida

he honestly hates america. the rest of you guys love america...you're
seriously ****ed up, but i wouldnt question your patriotism



You don't have a clue.

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:40:40 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:50:12 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
...


what's funny is, i'm a relative newcomer to this newsgroup. i was
surprised when the right wing guppies, who think they're sharks,
started after obama.

it's fun treating them like kittens. you dangle the truth in front of
them, and they get all hyper....

And who is the poster child for hyper?

at this point it's 'gfretwell' with his nazi sympathies for al qaida

he honestly hates america. the rest of you guys love america...you're
seriously ****ed up, but i wouldnt question your patriotism



You don't have a clue.

chuckle clue?

hell you guys don't even know what a detective is...

"Larry" wrote in message
...
TopBassDog wrote:
On Jul 26, 8:24 pm, wrote:

wrote in message

...


On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:03:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


and george bush killed 4400 US troops in iraq while spending a
trillion there


how'd that work out?


About the same as Afghanistan, what's your point.?
Obama is still in both places.


And, the troop numbers in Iraq are dropping as per his stated
objective..


I suppose you heard about the Afghan surge? They still have more
people GOING IN.

And, they have an exit strategy. A flexible one, but a stated one. Next
question.

Yes, yes, D'Plume. And exit strategy which is second only to the exit
strategy for Gitmo.

You are debating with a hot headed bitch. Stop and she will STFU!

You and Dogman are morons.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:54:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:00:28 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

and afganistan? guess you havent heard of 9/11.


Yeah I heard of it. I also heard the people who planned it have not
been in Afghanistan for 6 years.

hmmm...again you need to read the news.

the taliban just abducted 2 US servicemen the other day

The Taliban had nothing to do with 9-11. They are simply reacting to
our invasion of their country.

Not directly, but they were certainly allowing bin laden to do whatever
he
wanted inside the Afg. border.


That was then, this is now and OBL is not in Afghanistan. We have
managed to push that problem into a country that is a lot more
dangerous than Afghanistan and almost as unstable, getting worse every
day.


Then or now, it doesn't matter. If we can stabilize Afg., then we have a
better chance of finishing him.

We could absolutely dominate Afghanistan and that still does not give
us the right to invade Pakistan to get OBL ... unless you think that
is our next step.

We've got the drones going last I checked.

Why does Cambodia seem to be coming up in my mind?

OBL might not even be the biggest danger to the US these days. It
could be another group in Africa or Indonesia and we are totally
ignoring them in our obsession with OBL.
I had a dog like that once. He saw a rabbit under the macadamia nut
tree once and after that he had to go look there every time he went
outside. There were rabbits everywhere but he kept trying to find that
one.
We always fight the last war and try to prevent the last attack
instead of looking for the next one.

"Larry" wrote in message
...
Harry  wrote:
On 7/26/10 8:50 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:40:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Bummer about the facts isn't it...

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...reation-in-1q/


Yeah buddy they expect a whopping 0.4% drop in unemployment this year.

Well, is that better than an increase? Seems to me lower is better.


OK well at that rate we will get back to the 2007 unemployment rate in
2023




And your solution is?
A new President, Congress, and House. Coming soon to a country near you!

Well, we shall see .. until then feel free to keep hating Obama, Reid, and
Pelosi... for the good of the country of course.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:00:43 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:55:05 -0400, wrote:



Why does Cambodia seem to be coming up in my mind?

let's see...when did cambodia attack us?

uh...never


You really are ignorant of history aren't you. We attacked Cambodia
covertly because we said they were harboring the VC, just like
Pakistan harbors OBL.
The whole thing unraveled after the Pentagon Papers exposed this all
and it became clear that instead of trying to wind down an unpopular
war, as promised by the new president, we were expanding it.
I expect this and subsequent "leaks" to bring the same anti-war
sentiment out this time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHjWDCX1Bdw



--
Me