wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:07:12 GMT, "A.Boater"
wrote:

How many days since "Mission Acomplished?"

http://bonstemps.com/Zombiebirdhouse...complished.jpg

That was another missed opportunity to get the **** out of there.

Olbermann is probably still keeping the exact count since that event
but we are over 19 years and on the 4th president since we should have
come home from Iraq. When we finally do the result will be the same.

The only time we had troops on the ground in Iraq was during Bush I, unless
you count Rumsfeld, et. al., giving him a gold phone. He was a threat to the
region and Bush I wisely stopped before he got to Baghdad. Bush II wasn't as
smart as his father, clearly.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 06:30:40 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 01:48:44 -0400, wrote:

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

so what?

and Afghanistan accomplished nothing ... at about the
same price.

really? where are the taliban? they still rule kabul and have al qaida
training camps in afghanistan?

The Taliban still holds big areas in southern Afghanistan and they
will be back in Kabul the day we leave. Right now they are across the
road in Pakistan and our ability to do much there is really limited.
We are killing about 50 innocents per terrorist we kill and that is
worse that the ratio of Nazi reprisals in WWII. The rest of the world
is waking up to that reality. We also risk losing Pakistan.
If we destabilize a nuclear power we have really set world safety
back 40 years. It won't be a Soviet missile that blows up a US city,
it will be a leaked Pakistani warhead delivered in a Ryder truck or a
small boat.

Right, but they don't harbor bin laden and there are negotiations underway
to bring them into the political framework (basically we get out, they don't
harbor terrorists is the gist of it).

So, now with your false equivalency argument you're comparing the US to the
Nazis????

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.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 09:47:32 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 00:50:50 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
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.

The Iraq war was started not because of some ugly dictator. It was
started
because of the neocon wetdream vision of transforming the middle east
into
a
laissez-faire capitalism.

Iraq all about Israel, as the upcoming Iran war will be.

Nope. The Jews didn't do it this time. It was the right-wing Christians.

Saddam never threatened the US and Iran is not threatening the US. You
do the math. Who are they threatening?

Our oil interests in the region. Do the math.

Afg was and is a useless war. There is nothing to win there.

Nope. The Taliban supported and protected bin laden. There was and
possibly
still is something to stablize.

All we have done is strengthen the Taliban. They are now the patriots
and we are the invader. It has come out that Bin Laden was only the
finance anyway. The real mastermind behind 9-11 was Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed and we have been torturing him in Gitmo for years.
The real deterrent to serious attacks these days is cutting off the
money, not chasing ghosts around the mountains of SE Afghanistan.
We have become very successful at that, using drug war tools.

Among some, I'm sure that's true. Most Afghanistan people just want to live
in peace and they don't particularly like the Taliban.

It's nice to know you have inside information about who is doing what to
whom wrt to terrorism. I'm sure the intelligence community would like to
hear from you!

Actually, we stopped torturing him during the Bush administration, and it
was over a couple of months, not years. So much for your facts.

And, how do you propose we "cut off the money"? We've not been successful
doing that using "drug war" tools. Actually, the Taliban were pretty good at
it.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 09:49:34 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 06:04:07 -0400, Secular Humoresque
wrote:


I agree we had no business being in Iraq but Clinton and Bush 1 were
there keeping the fire stoked. We should have come home in 1991.

Nope. They were containing Saddam. It worked.

What the hell does that mean? The sanctions were largely ineffective
and he was in the process of pushing us out anyway. Most of western
Europe had abandoned the effort. It was basically just Clinton and
Blair against the world.

They were working. They weren't perfect, but they were working, and he
wasn't a threat to the region.

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.

OK let's just jump ahead 10 years and look at Iran. What is going to
happen there if we don't act?

I don't know. It's not clear that Israel can do much, but ultimately, we
don't need to attack Iran unless they do something truly aggressive.

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.


You see the same thing in every war. You have to dehumanize the enemy.
That is the nature of war. It is the only way you can convince young
people to kill their fellow man and convince their parents to pay for
it..
In this case it is a double whammy since we are not paying for the
war. We are borrowing the money from the same generation we are making
die for the war.



Well, maybe we should stop hating Muslims. That would be a good start.

"Jim" wrote in message
...
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.




Drop dead. You're a simpleton and yes, you're an anti-Semitic asshole.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:39:06 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:07:12 GMT, "A.Boater"
wrote:

How many days since "Mission Acomplished?"

http://bonstemps.com/Zombiebirdhouse...complished.jpg

That was another missed opportunity to get the **** out of there.

Olbermann is probably still keeping the exact count since that event
but we are over 19 years and on the 4th president since we should have
come home from Iraq. When we finally do the result will be the same.

The only time we had troops on the ground in Iraq was during Bush I,
unless
you count Rumsfeld, et. al., giving him a gold phone. He was a threat to
the
region and Bush I wisely stopped before he got to Baghdad. Bush II wasn't
as
smart as his father, clearly.


Using your logic, Germany was never at war with the UK. They never had
troops on the ground there either, they were just flying over and
bombing.

?? This is your logic not mine. You're trying to equate the US with Nazi
Germany. It doesn't hold.

In article , 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.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:41:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The Taliban still holds big areas in southern Afghanistan and they
will be back in Kabul the day we leave. Right now they are across the
road in Pakistan and our ability to do much there is really limited.
We are killing about 50 innocents per terrorist we kill and that is
worse that the ratio of Nazi reprisals in WWII. The rest of the world
is waking up to that reality. We also risk losing Pakistan.
If we destabilize a nuclear power we have really set world safety
back 40 years. It won't be a Soviet missile that blows up a US city,
it will be a leaked Pakistani warhead delivered in a Ryder truck or a
small boat.

Right, but they don't harbor bin laden and there are negotiations underway
to bring them into the political framework (basically we get out, they
don't
harbor terrorists is the gist of it).

What? Bin Laden has been in Pakistan for bout 9 years. Somebody there
is harboring him. Islamabad has about as much control in that area as
Kabul. You really need a GPS to tell the difference between Pakistan
and Afghanistan down there anyway.

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.

Pakistan could deal with it if they really wanted to, but they have their
own political problems. And, as you said, we don't want to destabilize that
gov't any more than necessary.

So, now with your false equivalency argument you're comparing the US to
the
Nazis????


Only the tactic. If we think killing thousands of innocent people to
get a few hundred Taliban we are not much better than the Nazis.
The same people who question the ethics of Gitmo are willing to ignore
the legal concept that we would rather "let a guilty person go free
than convict (or kill without trial) an innocent one".

There's no comparison. Sorry.

Gitmo should be closed. The Republicans and their fear-based diatribes are
holding that up too.

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.