|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
In article , says...
On 10/7/2010 3:47 PM, Secular Humoresque wrote: In , says... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message This was still all about Israel. If we didn't take out Saddam, Israel was going to try to and we would have been drawn is as Israel's ally when the war escalated, a far worse position than just being the cowboys with bad intel. This has little to do with Israel, even though that's a convenient forgetting of the facts. You are the one forgetting the "facts." Here's a fair rendering of Israel's influence on the Iraq war, written before it started by former CIA policy analysts: http://www.counterpunch.org/christison1213.html It will explain to you how the Jewish Zionists and the "end of days" Christian Zionists came together happily in the Bush administration. Might be too much for your attention span though. BTW, Zionism is all about Israel. You remind me of the lower to middle class Teabaggers who support Republicans, manipulated into thinking that party has their interests at heart. All part of winger knee jerk psychology. Unfortunately our Afghan war has still put is in the position of being at war with Islam. Only in the eyes of the radicals. Unfortunately, they're very good at spreading that lie. Look at the hatred people in _this_ country have toward Muslims. All part of Zionism of any stripe. Maybe with the departure of Wall Street multi-millionaire Rahm Emanuel (middle name Israel, former Israeli Defense Forces worker, son of an Irgun terrorist, Israeli citizen, etc) from the Obama administration, the Arabs will get a fair shake. Uh-oh. Looks like I'm an anti-Semite. Funny. I see that Rick Sanchez got canned from CNN for saying his Jewish bosses and Jon Stewart are hardly "oppressed minorities." He only spoke the truth, and that got him fired. Maybe he really got fired because he's an asshole who thinks because his name is Sanchez he is automatically "oppressed," but who knows? Jim - If ignorance works for you, go for it. You seem to be going for the ignorance constantly. Anyone who would come back here after what you did to John's wife is truly ignorant. I never did anything to John's wife. Nor did I make the above-referenced comment about Israel. I guess one of you assholes is ID copying me too. That's all you kiddies seem capable of doing, copying the IDs of other posters. You are using the ID of another poster. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 11:10:14 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:14:58 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:36:45 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: There are plenty of Democrats who feel the same way. Nobody really has a better idea about what to do with the detainees. Maybe they should load them all up on a surplus C5A and take them back to Afghanistan. Then they could have a problem in the air, the plane crashes and the crew were the only ones with parachutes. ;-) Even the innocent ones? How do we know who's actually a terrorist? You don't seem that concerned with the 6000 we killed in Afghanistan. Isn't that just collateral damage? and the 60,000 killed by the taliban? you're right. i dont give a rat's ass about how many of them we kill. 25% of their children die before their 1st birthday. and all they care about is their idiotic religion. No I don't care how many the Taliban kill. We should get the hell out of there and let them all kill each other if they want. They won't be holding up Hellfire missile parts and blaming us. that's the joe biden approach. i think it has merit. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 11:07:32 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:12:11 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:41:03 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:00:40 -0400, bpuharic wrote: No wonder they hate us there. who gives a **** if they hate us. if they leave us alone that's enough. They are more likely to screw with us if we are screwing with them. we arent screwing with them. afghanistan attacked us. that has some consequences. just ask the japanese. Afghanistan never attacked us. That is as valid as the WMD argument ... from the same guy, your hero GW Bush. gee. where was bin laden on 9/11 oh. you dont know. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:11:05 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:38:33 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:40:20 -0400, bpuharic wrote: Iraq all about Israel, as the upcoming Iran war will be. Afg was and is a useless war. There is nothing to win there. except the death of al qaida's influence We are making them more powerful and Pakistan is about ready to kick US out. They are refusing to let us use their roads now to supply our troops. then why are the taliban in negotiations, when our key demand is to cut ties with AQ? go ahead. find a resource saying AQ is more powerful today than it was 9 years ago. i'll wait. Beating the Taliban is like pushing mercury around in a bowl with your finger. You can move it but it is still all there and it fills in behind your finger. How many years are you planning on being there, pushing these guys around the mountains? This is Vietnam all over again. In Vietnam we never lost a battle and we still lost the war. Well actually I think that is the only war we did win in the 20th century. In every other war we had, we still have 50,000+ troops occupying the country. We are out of Vietnam and they are now trading freely with us and the rest of the world. and you're an idiot if you think pakistan is going to kick us out and lose the billions we bribe them with They have denied us the use of the only road to Afghanistan. That is certainly a sign that they want us to stop the war ... in spite of our bribes. I am sure we will patch that up but the writing is on the wall. They haven't denied us the use of the road. They closed it for a couple of days. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:57:49 -0700, jps wrote: They will be presidents with no nation changing accomplishments and each have one interesting anecdote. Bush will be remembere\d for Bush v Gore and Clinton will be remembered as being the second president to be impeached, with the blow jobs being the snicker factor that makes it memorable. Golly, I don't recall Clinton attempting to bankrupt the country apart from his support of globalism. He didn't obsessively pursue spending us into oblivion. I can't defend Bush and Obama spending a trillion each on useless wars. Unfortunately nobody remembers money you didn't spend. Obama hasn't spent nor will he spend a trillion in either place or both. Last I checked, Congress writes the checks, btw. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:09:11 -0700, jps wrote: Funny. I see that Rick Sanchez got canned from CNN for saying his Jewish bosses and Jon Stewart are hardly "oppressed minorities." He only spoke the truth, and that got him fired. Maybe he really got fired because he's an asshole who thinks because his name is Sanchez he is automatically "oppressed," but who knows? Jim - If ignorance works for you, go for it. He got fired for spitting in his boss's face. When was the last time you saw that happen and not have the spitting fool idiot loose his job? It was a short number of generations past when Jews were regularly set apart by this very society, just like blacks, asians, etc. There's a lot of people still alive who remember. And their children are still alive who know what was done to their relatives during WWII. A few have done well for themselves but guys like Sanchez are too stupid to understand that they're the exception and not part of a grand scheme of Jews taking over the world. He played right into well-hewn stereotypes and ****ed into the wind. It serves him right that he got **** in his face and lost his job. His "apology" was pathetic and the only crew who'd likely hire him now is the same group that'd love having Lou Dobbs. Maybe he can join those idiots on the couch at Fox & Friends. Hmmm A guy says Jews control the media and gets fired faster than Shirley Sherrod. That sure proves he was wrong to me.. ;-) It proves that he was a racist moron who was too full of himself to me. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:53:19 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: ?? This is your logic not mine. You're trying to equate the US with Nazi Germany. It doesn't hold. You are the one who defines "war" as "troops on the ground". I am just trying to understand that. We blockaded Iraq, denied them the use of the air space over their country with deadly force and killed a lot of innocent civilians. All of those things are acts of war. You prefer the "death from the air" method of warfare. In 1940 they called that "The Blitz" You are only upset that we actually put some of our people at risk by taking the next logical step. Sorry, but you're way off base on this. It's not reasonable to equate the two countries. I am not equating the two wars or the two countries, only pointing out bombing someone is an act of war. You don't think it is a war unless we have boots on the ground. I never said that. I said that the only time we actually had troops on the ground in Iraq was during Bush I. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:54:55 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: And your point? We went in to get bin laden. We would have settled this without a war if the Taliban had turned him over. They didn't. ... so we are going to kill men, women and children until they do. No wonder they hate us there. We do it less and less. It's against policy and every incident is looked at. See Petraeus. Now it is the CIA flying drones but the death count among the civilians is still going up. Haven't you been watching the news at all this week? Pakistan has blockaded out supplies over this exact thing. They are also not doing anything to protect the trucks stalled behind the blockade and they are being blown up as fast as the Taliban can get to them. You seem mightily concerned about AQ, but not so much with reducing the violent attacks in Afg. and around the world. Pakistan closed the road back in 2008 for a few days also. Get over it. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: There are plenty of Democrats who feel the same way. Nobody really has a better idea about what to do with the detainees. Maybe they should load them all up on a surplus C5A and take them back to Afghanistan. Then they could have a problem in the air, the plane crashes and the crew were the only ones with parachutes. ;-) Even the innocent ones? How do we know who's actually a terrorist? You don't seem that concerned with the 6000 we killed in Afghanistan. Isn't that just collateral damage? ?? I have a great concern for them. So? What's that got to do with potentially innocent people in Gitmo? |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:14:58 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:36:45 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: There are plenty of Democrats who feel the same way. Nobody really has a better idea about what to do with the detainees. Maybe they should load them all up on a surplus C5A and take them back to Afghanistan. Then they could have a problem in the air, the plane crashes and the crew were the only ones with parachutes. ;-) Even the innocent ones? How do we know who's actually a terrorist? You don't seem that concerned with the 6000 we killed in Afghanistan. Isn't that just collateral damage? and the 60,000 killed by the taliban? you're right. i dont give a rat's ass about how many of them we kill. 25% of their children die before their 1st birthday. and all they care about is their idiotic religion. No I don't care how many the Taliban kill. We should get the hell out of there and let them all kill each other if they want. They won't be holding up Hellfire missile parts and blaming us. Really? You don't care? Wow. That's quite a statement. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:12:11 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:41:03 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:00:40 -0400, bpuharic wrote: No wonder they hate us there. who gives a **** if they hate us. if they leave us alone that's enough. They are more likely to screw with us if we are screwing with them. we arent screwing with them. afghanistan attacked us. that has some consequences. just ask the japanese. Afghanistan never attacked us. That is as valid as the WMD argument ... from the same guy, your hero GW Bush. The Taliban were in control of the country. They supported and protected bin laden. We asked them to hand him over. They refused. He had killed 1000s of our people. And, your response is... do nothing. At least Bush initially went after bin laden. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:55:42 -0700, jps wrote: Yeah right, a partisan rant is fair I guess. BTW history may say the Iraq war deposed one of the worst dictators of the 20th century and Afghanistan accomplished nothing ... at about the same price. Gosh, it's a good thing Idi Amin didn't have oil under his country. You notice that since Clinton got his nose bloodied in Africa we are not really doing much war making there. Actually, we have lots of people on the ground there... special ops I think they're called. But, feel free to blame Clinton. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:15:34 -0400, bpuharic wrote: Gosh, it's a good thing Idi Amin didn't have oil under his country. You notice that since Clinton got his nose bloodied in Africa we are not really doing much war making there. we were lifesaving there. no point in stopping genocide if everyone's in favor of it Are you saying a black person's life is less valuable than an Afghani's life? You just finished a rant about how many Afghans the Taliban kill. Racist Hmm... well, perhaps if we hadn't invaded Iraq (for no reason), we'd be able to do something in say Rwanda? Gee.. you think? |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
"bpuharic" wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 07:48:08 -0500, "MMC" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 10:38:51 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: In all fairness.... Yeah right, a partisan rant is fair I guess. BTW history may say the Iraq war deposed one of the worst dictators of the 20th century and Afghanistan accomplished nothing ... at about the same price. BTW, we are not in the business of deposing dictators and Bush is the one that failed early and ugly in Afghanistan, Obama just doesn't have the balls to turn it off. no, he has the good moral sense not to abandon a commitment we made. you're confused He promised to bring everyone home during the campaign, not honor any imaginary commitment. Karzai wants to throw out all private security and is talking about throwing out all contractors. Obama may have a convenient out. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:15:34 -0400, bpuharic wrote: Gosh, it's a good thing Idi Amin didn't have oil under his country. You notice that since Clinton got his nose bloodied in Africa we are not really doing much war making there. we were lifesaving there. no point in stopping genocide if everyone's in favor of it Are you saying a black person's life is less valuable than an Afghani's life? You just finished a rant about how many Afghans the Taliban kill. Racist He tagged you Bob! haha! |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
In article ,
says... wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:11:05 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:38:33 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:40:20 -0400, bpuharic wrote: Iraq all about Israel, as the upcoming Iran war will be. Afg was and is a useless war. There is nothing to win there. except the death of al qaida's influence We are making them more powerful and Pakistan is about ready to kick US out. They are refusing to let us use their roads now to supply our troops. then why are the taliban in negotiations, when our key demand is to cut ties with AQ? go ahead. find a resource saying AQ is more powerful today than it was 9 years ago. i'll wait. Beating the Taliban is like pushing mercury around in a bowl with your finger. You can move it but it is still all there and it fills in behind your finger. How many years are you planning on being there, pushing these guys around the mountains? This is Vietnam all over again. In Vietnam we never lost a battle and we still lost the war. Well actually I think that is the only war we did win in the 20th century. In every other war we had, we still have 50,000+ troops occupying the country. We are out of Vietnam and they are now trading freely with us and the rest of the world. and you're an idiot if you think pakistan is going to kick us out and lose the billions we bribe them with They have denied us the use of the only road to Afghanistan. That is certainly a sign that they want us to stop the war ... in spite of our bribes. I am sure we will patch that up but the writing is on the wall. They haven't denied us the use of the road. They closed it for a couple of days. Did they not deny us the use of the road when it was "closed"?? |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
jps wrote:
He got fired for spitting in his boss's face. When was the last time you saw that happen and not have the spitting fool idiot loose his job? That's always a bad idea, isn't it? Same with burning bridges when you move on to different work by choice. I've returned to work for 3 different employers - because I knew not to flap my jaws for no real purpose when I left them behind. Still think his bosses fired him more because he was a loose cannon. They weren't insulted or hurt by his comments, they've heard it all before. It was just a last straw symptom of Sanchez being an asshole. It was a short number of generations past when Jews were regularly set apart by this very society, just like blacks, asians, etc. There's a lot of people still alive who remember. And their children are still alive who know what was done to their relatives during WWII. A few have done well for themselves but guys like Sanchez are too stupid to understand that they're the exception and not part of a grand scheme of Jews taking over the world. He played right into well-hewn stereotypes and ****ed into the wind. Actually, in the context of the conversation he wasn't saying anything offensive. He was responding to the comment that Jon Stewart was an "oppressed minority," which is patent nonsense. If he had just said "That's nonsense," he would still be working for CNN. But as you say, some truths are best left unsaid because they have been soiled by nefarious purpose. And he probably started it all by claiming he was himself an "oppressed minority" because he's "Latino." He's too stupid to realize that his ethnic background and fluency in Spanish is why he's been making big bucks instead of loading trucks. I don't know all the details, but Sanchez always struck me as having a chip on his shoulder. All this BS can be avoided by not engaging in ethnic/religious identification in the first place, and viewing people as individuals. Or at least by remembering mama's rule "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything." It serves him right that he got **** in his face and lost his job. His "apology" was pathetic and the only crew who'd likely hire him now is the same group that'd love having Lou Dobbs. Read the wiki on Dobbs. Except for a couple lapses in his judgment you probably are aligned with his views. Of course his entertaining the birthers irrevocably destroyed his reputation. Some mistakes don't hurt bad, others kill you. Dobbs made the latter mistake with the birther BS. Fatal. Maybe he can join those idiots on the couch at Fox & Friends. Hardly. Maybe Telemundo. Jim - Clarity of thought only comes with continued thinking. Similar to getting to Carnegie Hall. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
jps wrote:
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:36:48 -0400, Jim wrote: I never did anything to John's wife. Nor did I make the above-referenced comment about Israel. I guess one of you assholes is ID copying me too. That's all you kiddies seem capable of doing, copying the IDs of other posters. A careful look at the headers supports your case. Different versions of Thunderbird. Forget about that. He's flajim, who first started the spoofing by becoming Harry, and abandoning his flajim id. When I came across this newsgroup and decided to post here I took his old id to post anonymously. Seemed fitting since my name is Jaime and I'm currently in Florida. Never called myself flajim though. The Jim that harassed John's wife was an insurance salesman from Ohio. Anybody capable of obscene phone calls is also capable of spoofing, and vice versa, so he might be skulking around here with Loogy. Doesn't matter. It will be overcome. I have a dream. I have a dream that rec.boat posters will one day live in a newsgroup where they will not be judged by the id they use but by the content of their posts. You might say about us all "If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh?" But I'm not sure of that. Now it seems flajim wants his old id back. Maybe he's tired of spoofing. Good for him. I was probably rude to pick it up when he abandoned it. But I don't feel like changing the id just yet. Hey, nobody's perfect. Maybe I will if flajim keeps on using the id. Rolph Wolfheart might work. Even Wolf Rolphingheart. Or Urquhart Finstermiesterbothingham III. Pepe LePew? Kind of like those. Anything but Harry Krause or Loogypicker really. In the meantime you can easily enough discern the difference between us. I don't call others here names - directly anyway. Don't cuss too ****ing much either, that's for damn sure. Jim - What tangled webs we weave. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:22:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:11:05 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:38:33 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:40:20 -0400, bpuharic wrote: Iraq all about Israel, as the upcoming Iran war will be. Afg was and is a useless war. There is nothing to win there. except the death of al qaida's influence We are making them more powerful and Pakistan is about ready to kick US out. They are refusing to let us use their roads now to supply our troops. then why are the taliban in negotiations, when our key demand is to cut ties with AQ? go ahead. find a resource saying AQ is more powerful today than it was 9 years ago. i'll wait. Beating the Taliban is like pushing mercury around in a bowl with your finger. You can move it but it is still all there and it fills in behind your finger. How many years are you planning on being there, pushing these guys around the mountains? This is Vietnam all over again. In Vietnam we never lost a battle and we still lost the war. Well actually I think that is the only war we did win in the 20th century. In every other war we had, we still have 50,000+ troops occupying the country. We are out of Vietnam and they are now trading freely with us and the rest of the world. and you're an idiot if you think pakistan is going to kick us out and lose the billions we bribe them with They have denied us the use of the only road to Afghanistan. That is certainly a sign that they want us to stop the war ... in spite of our bribes. I am sure we will patch that up but the writing is on the wall. They haven't denied us the use of the road. They closed it for a couple of days. Is it open now? Last night CNN was still showing pictures of burning trucks at 0200 when I went to bed. I just turned the TV on and they are saying we have Taliban people integrated in the Afghanis who are supposed to be guarding our bases. Bob is right, we can't compare this to Vietnam. This is a lot worse. Don't know... but there's certainly looting and selling the stuff in markets. Rampant capitalism.. we must wipe it out. Even the Taliban aren't doing that! It's not comparable to VN. Come on. We're not carpet bombing villages. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:24:04 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:57:49 -0700, jps wrote: They will be presidents with no nation changing accomplishments and each have one interesting anecdote. Bush will be remembere\d for Bush v Gore and Clinton will be remembered as being the second president to be impeached, with the blow jobs being the snicker factor that makes it memorable. Golly, I don't recall Clinton attempting to bankrupt the country apart from his support of globalism. He didn't obsessively pursue spending us into oblivion. I can't defend Bush and Obama spending a trillion each on useless wars. Unfortunately nobody remembers money you didn't spend. Obama hasn't spent nor will he spend a trillion in either place or both. Last I checked, Congress writes the checks, btw. Oh you are going to use the Pentagon numbers now. When it was Bush's war you used the most circumspect projections the DNC could come up with to get to his trillion. Obama has only been there 20 months, let's project that out several more years before we say how expensive it will be. Iraq is far from over and they are still surging in Afghanistan I never used any Pentagon numbers or any specific agency. Obama won't be spending a trillion in either place. We're supposed to be drawing down in Iraq, and Afg. isn't far behind. Sorry, but that's just hysterical nonsense. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:25:54 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:53:19 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: ?? This is your logic not mine. You're trying to equate the US with Nazi Germany. It doesn't hold. You are the one who defines "war" as "troops on the ground". I am just trying to understand that. We blockaded Iraq, denied them the use of the air space over their country with deadly force and killed a lot of innocent civilians. All of those things are acts of war. You prefer the "death from the air" method of warfare. In 1940 they called that "The Blitz" You are only upset that we actually put some of our people at risk by taking the next logical step. Sorry, but you're way off base on this. It's not reasonable to equate the two countries. I am not equating the two wars or the two countries, only pointing out bombing someone is an act of war. You don't think it is a war unless we have boots on the ground. I never said that. I said that the only time we actually had troops on the ground in Iraq was during Bush I. Implying that Clinton was not at war with Iraq. It wasn't a ground war. No implication or otherwise. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:28:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:54:55 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: And your point? We went in to get bin laden. We would have settled this without a war if the Taliban had turned him over. They didn't. ... so we are going to kill men, women and children until they do. No wonder they hate us there. We do it less and less. It's against policy and every incident is looked at. See Petraeus. Now it is the CIA flying drones but the death count among the civilians is still going up. Haven't you been watching the news at all this week? Pakistan has blockaded out supplies over this exact thing. They are also not doing anything to protect the trucks stalled behind the blockade and they are being blown up as fast as the Taliban can get to them. You seem mightily concerned about AQ, but not so much with reducing the violent attacks in Afg. and around the world. I am concerned about dead Americans and a war that causes more problems than it fixes. No more no less. For Iraq, I agree. Talk to Bush. For Afg., it's too early to tell thanks to Bush. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:30:29 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: No I don't care how many the Taliban kill. We should get the hell out of there and let them all kill each other if they want. They won't be holding up Hellfire missile parts and blaming us. Really? You don't care? Wow. That's quite a statement. I really don't care. Why should I? Sometime you just have to get out and let these things shake themselves out. Every time we stick our nose in someone elses civil war we get our nose bloodied until the American public demands we leave, they finish their war and the world keeps spinning. For Whom the Bell Tolls by John Donne No man is an island, Entire of itself. Each is a piece of the continent, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less. As well as if a promontory were. As well as if a manner of thine own Or of thine friend's were. Each man's death diminishes me, -- For I am involved in mankind. Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 13:07:32 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 11:07:32 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:12:11 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:41:03 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:00:40 -0400, bpuharic wrote: No wonder they hate us there. who gives a **** if they hate us. if they leave us alone that's enough. They are more likely to screw with us if we are screwing with them. we arent screwing with them. afghanistan attacked us. that has some consequences. just ask the japanese. Afghanistan never attacked us. That is as valid as the WMD argument ... from the same guy, your hero GW Bush. gee. where was bin laden on 9/11 oh. you dont know. He wasn't in Hamburg where the plot was planned, he wasn't in Spain where the hijackers were trained and the Taliban did not have any involvement at all except letting him live there. They certainly did not know anything about airplanes crashing into buildings. Their fight is with the people who have invaded their country, no more no less. They were there before we arrived and they will be there when we leave. So, what you're saying is that if there's a known murderer living in your house, you're not really responsible for turning him in, because you weren't there when he murdered someone... |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
In article , says...
jps wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:36:48 -0400, Jim wrote: I never did anything to John's wife. Nor did I make the above-referenced comment about Israel. I guess one of you assholes is ID copying me too. That's all you kiddies seem capable of doing, copying the IDs of other posters. A careful look at the headers supports your case. Different versions of Thunderbird. Forget about that. He's flajim, who first started the spoofing by becoming Harry, and abandoning his flajim id. When I came across this newsgroup and decided to post here I took his old id to post anonymously. Seemed fitting since my name is Jaime and I'm currently in Florida. Never called myself flajim though. The Jim that harassed John's wife was an insurance salesman from Ohio. Anybody capable of obscene phone calls is also capable of spoofing, and vice versa, so he might be skulking around here with Loogy. Doesn't matter. It will be overcome. I have a dream. I have a dream that rec.boat posters will one day live in a newsgroup where they will not be judged by the id they use but by the content of their posts. You might say about us all "If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh?" But I'm not sure of that. Now it seems flajim wants his old id back. Maybe he's tired of spoofing. Good for him. I was probably rude to pick it up when he abandoned it. But I don't feel like changing the id just yet. Hey, nobody's perfect. Maybe I will if flajim keeps on using the id. Rolph Wolfheart might work. Even Wolf Rolphingheart. Or Urquhart Finstermiesterbothingham III. Pepe LePew? Kind of like those. Anything but Harry Krause or Loogypicker really. In the meantime you can easily enough discern the difference between us. I don't call others here names - directly anyway. Don't cuss too ****ing much either, that's for damn sure. Jim - What tangled webs we weave. I'm the real Harry Krause, and I never ever post anything on topic here. All of my posts are just insults and name calling. Same with my little buddy Don, and now Plume is getting with the program. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
|
George W. Bush's accomplishments
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:54:29 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: So, what you're saying is that if there's a known murderer living in your house, you're not really responsible for turning him in, because you weren't there when he murdered someone... he gets all weak kneed when he thinks of nazis attacking the US... probably why he likes bush |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:32:00 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 02:12:11 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:41:03 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:00:40 -0400, bpuharic wrote: No wonder they hate us there. who gives a **** if they hate us. if they leave us alone that's enough. They are more likely to screw with us if we are screwing with them. we arent screwing with them. afghanistan attacked us. that has some consequences. just ask the japanese. Afghanistan never attacked us. That is as valid as the WMD argument ... from the same guy, your hero GW Bush. The Taliban were in control of the country. They supported and protected bin laden. We asked them to hand him over. They refused. He had killed 1000s of our people. And, your response is... do nothing. At least Bush initially went after bin laden. ... but Bin Laden is not there now. What part of that is so hard for you to understand. Have we demanded Pakistan turn over Bin Laden? Have we occupied Islamabad to force them to? Why not if your logic is solid? So, if we leave and he comes back, which would be fairly likely, then what? Are we pressuring Pakistan to do more in the wild, border areas? |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 13:41:02 -0400, "MMC" wrote: "bpuharic" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 07:48:08 -0500, "MMC" wrote: wrote in message m... On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 10:38:51 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: In all fairness.... Yeah right, a partisan rant is fair I guess. BTW history may say the Iraq war deposed one of the worst dictators of the 20th century and Afghanistan accomplished nothing ... at about the same price. BTW, we are not in the business of deposing dictators and Bush is the one that failed early and ugly in Afghanistan, Obama just doesn't have the balls to turn it off. no, he has the good moral sense not to abandon a commitment we made. you're confused He promised to bring everyone home during the campaign, not honor any imaginary commitment. Karzai wants to throw out all private security and is talking about throwing out all contractors. Obama may have a convenient out. Where is that "Mission Accomplished" banner? Bush's biggest mistake was not believing the one behind him on the Carrier We could have brought home all the people from both wars that day and the end result would be the same. According to you, but not most other people just yet. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:33:54 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:15:34 -0400, bpuharic wrote: Gosh, it's a good thing Idi Amin didn't have oil under his country. You notice that since Clinton got his nose bloodied in Africa we are not really doing much war making there. we were lifesaving there. no point in stopping genocide if everyone's in favor of it Are you saying a black person's life is less valuable than an Afghani's life? You just finished a rant about how many Afghans the Taliban kill. Racist Hmm... well, perhaps if we hadn't invaded Iraq (for no reason), we'd be able to do something in say Rwanda? Gee.. you think? No we were not going to do anything about Rwanda. Not now. I agree. |
George W. Bush's accomplishments
wrote in message ... On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:32:57 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:55:42 -0700, jps wrote: Yeah right, a partisan rant is fair I guess. BTW history may say the Iraq war deposed one of the worst dictators of the 20th century and Afghanistan accomplished nothing ... at about the same price. Gosh, it's a good thing Idi Amin didn't have oil under his country. You notice that since Clinton got his nose bloodied in Africa we are not really doing much war making there. Actually, we have lots of people on the ground there... special ops I think they're called. But, feel free to blame Clinton. I have no problems with a few special ops people being anywhere but it should be a black op without any direct link to the US. We used to be real good at that sort of thing. That is pour best chance of getting Bin Laden. A guy with a sniper rifle or a laser designator could get him but an army never will. ?? What's wrong with ties to the US? You're in favor of the policy of targeted murder, right? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com