|
Obama endorses slavery
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:40:23 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... yeah the right wing is pretty stupid uh...what happens to a bill the pres doesnt like, genius? any idea?? VETO the ****er!!! Then Congress has to show how bad they are to override the veto. Bush signed almost all the spending bills he received and those he should have vetoed he signed with some statement of memorandum. He was almost as F'ed up as Obama. I am giving the most F'ed award to Obama, as he came in saying he was going to fix the problems. Got us in to another couple wars, did not get us out of wars he said he would, and has been a cheerleader for overspending. he HAS ended our role in iraq. less than 50K soldiers there...about as many as in germany. it took 11 years to end the depression of 29. even obama cant end the damage the right did to the US in 2 years. and he's involved us in no wars. sorry |
Obama endorses slavery
In article ,
says... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:52:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 23:44:35 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:32:46 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: Reply: The deficits are being driven up by overspending the fact is the deficits are being driven up by bush's tax cuts. THEY are the largest components of the deficit your cliche is mindless babbling REPLY: Your racist cliché and Bush blame cliché is nothing but a cliché. really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? We as a country are spending $1.60 for every tax dollar collected. How much did Bush cut the tax collection? Double the amount of Personal Income Tax collected and we could still not balance the budget. Explain why it is all Bush's fault. No ****ing cliché. A reasoned response. If another cliché, forget about ever being considered as have a brain and not just a waste of oxygen. it's bush's fault because 1. he cut taxes especially on the rich 2. he increased spending by an unfunded drug program added to medicare 3. he increased spending by spending a trillion in iraq 4. he deregulated the markets so that wall street blew up the economy and yet the right still blames the black guy Reply: You are still stupid. Obama has been President long enough to have started his reelection quest. Why did he not cut spending? Not increase it. Why did he make Wall Street to big to fail house bigger? Why has he accepted all the debt from those financial houses now paying Billions of bucks in bonus money so they could pay those bonus bucks? Why has he not implemented a tax of 110% on all bonus money over say 1 million bucks? You are so shallow. It is always some racist or Right Winger that is the problem. You are a racist in you are like Jessie Jackson. Blame all on race. You must be one crappy engineer, or at least have no creative ability, as you have no real though processes. For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. So when Bush was in office HE spent the money but now when Obama is in office it is congress spending the money. It is stupid statements like this that show how mindlessly partisan you are. Screw you. Bush pushed us into a war we didn't need nor could afford. He was the one who pushed tax cuts when none were needed. Sounds to me you're the partisan, stupid one. Sounds like you are getting somewhat frustrated with the facts hitting you in the face. You are indeed as partisan as harry and the rest here. Mindlessly blaming Bush for things that happened in the last 40 years while democrats pretty much ran congress as a majority. -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Obama endorses slavery
In article ,
says... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. yeah the right wing is pretty stupid uh...what happens to a bill the pres doesnt like, genius? any idea?? The idea that you would suggest that it is as simple as that, shows how stupid you really are... Tell us what happens if a president doesn't like the law? Are you going to say he vetos's it? Is that your big argument??? If so, again, you are stupid. A veto is a lot more complicated than that, especially if the other side of the political spectrum holds both the house and senate... You guys are so partisan, you can't even ask a simple question.... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Obama endorses slavery
In article ,
says... "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message . .. really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. yeah the right wing is pretty stupid uh...what happens to a bill the pres doesnt like, genius? any idea?? VETO the ****er!!! Then Congress has to show how bad they are to override the veto. Bush signed almost all the spending bills he received and those he should have vetoed he signed with some statement of memorandum. He was almost as F'ed up as Obama. I am giving the most F'ed award to Obama, as he came in saying he was going to fix the problems. Got us in to another couple wars, did not get us out of wars he said he would, and has been a cheerleader for overspending. The racists here only support him because he is black... Anyone with a brain can see that... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Obama endorses slavery
I_am_Tosk wrote:
In articleR7KdnRQPSsSweSHQnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@earthlink .com, says... "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. yeah the right wing is pretty stupid uh...what happens to a bill the pres doesnt like, genius? any idea?? VETO the ****er!!! Then Congress has to show how bad they are to override the veto. Bush signed almost all the spending bills he received and those he should have vetoed he signed with some statement of memorandum. He was almost as F'ed up as Obama. I am giving the most F'ed award to Obama, as he came in saying he was going to fix the problems. Got us in to another couple wars, did not get us out of wars he said he would, and has been a cheerleader for overspending. The racists here only support him because he is black... Anyone with a brain can see that... You sure play fast and loose with your misinterpretation of terms, little pile of dog ****. |
Obama endorses slavery
On Sun, 1 May 2011 08:43:45 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... gee. i notice the RIGHT was doing this before the LEFT did. AND the GOP has had congress now for4 months and hasnt done ****. hasnt cut a dollar. not one. so your statement is a meanigless cliche The fact you fail to note it that the Democrats have basically "had congress" for almost 50 years.. and most of the damage was done by the GOP with the feckless democrats paralyzed by the class war the GOP is waging. so the GOP is MUCH more effective at THEIR program of destroying america than the dems are at saving it. .. But you only want to blame it on the republicans because they have had one of three parts of the leadership triangle for four months.. The fact is, the democrats have been in charge during the whole destruction of our economy. the GOP had the congress for almost ALL of clinton's term and almost ALL of bush' term and now has it in obama's gee. you kind of ignored that didnt you? and the GDP increases FASTER under the dems than under th GOP: http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm so enough with the right wing bull****, OK? it's all wrong |
Obama endorses slavery
On Sun, 1 May 2011 08:54:18 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. yeah the right wing is pretty stupid uh...what happens to a bill the pres doesnt like, genius? any idea?? The idea that you would suggest that it is as simple as that, shows how stupid you really are... Tell us what happens if a president doesn't like the law? Are you going to say he vetos's it? Is that your big argument??? If so, again, you are stupid. A veto is a lot more complicated than that, especially if the other side of the political spectrum holds both the house and senate... You guys are so partisan, you can't even ask a simple question.... uh, no it 's not 'more complicated' and you haven't presented any info to say why it IS try again. |
Obama endorses slavery
|
Obama endorses slavery
wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011 12:11:26 -0400, wrote: wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 01:17:19 -0400, wrote: he HAS ended our role in iraq. less than 50K soldiers there...about as many as in germany. How many road side bombs do they have in Germany? Granted we are down to one or two dead GIs in Iraq every month but that is one or two too many. What about Afghanistan? The ironic thing is Iraq will probably be seen as the successful war. We may actually come out of that one with a functional government. In 50 years Afghanistan will still be a corrupt collection of war lords and tribal areas. Iraq may be annexed by Iran. If a Republican is back in the White House, he might take the proceeds and give them to the contras. That might be an issue if they were both Sunni or Shi'a but it would be a civil war if the Shi'a tried to take over Iraq. BTW I was wrong about the current death toll in Iraq. It was 9 in April as of the 28th. "Combat troops" is a meaningless term when the main cause of death is the road side bomb. What? Another civil war? |
Obama endorses slavery
On Sun, 01 May 2011 12:02:30 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011 01:14:24 -0400, wf3h wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:55:57 -0400, wrote: The Bush tax cuts are about a quarter of the deficit (all of the cuts, not just the $250k people). gee. and that's exactly what i said. they are the LARGEST component. Then you are wrong Bob. The tax cut on the $250k+ people is $700 billion over 10 years. The people less than $250k would pick up an additional $3 trillion over 10 years. The whole nut was $3.7T over 10 years. WHOA sports fans. the tax cuts included the middle class. the TOTAL tax cuts amount to over 3.7 TRILLION and THAT is the largest component of the deficit AND 700 billion is nothing to sneeze at. the RICH CAUSED this problem and got a bailout. it's time they paid for the damage they've caused. why are THEY getting a free ride? why is the right so SOCIALIST?? That is over 10 years. The $1.5T deficit is per year. If you repeal the whole tax cut (very unlikely) it is still only a quarter of the deficit, leaving us with a 1.13 trillion problem. i absolutely agree. Personally I think we should have let the rich eat the turd they gave us but everyone said that was going to cause a depression amazingly enough you're one of the few folks who seems to realize this. that realization is completely absent in the tea party folks .. The only thing that makes that comment suspect is it was former Goldman Sachs people saying it (the same ones who still advise the White House). If it was Lehman people dominating the government policy I bet Goldman would have gone down and Lehman would have been bailed out. paul krugman also says it. unfortunately i think the 'too big to fail' mentality has us permanently on the hook to those guys |
Obama endorses slavery
|
Obama endorses slavery
On Sun, 01 May 2011 00:10:46 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 18:44:40 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:50:11 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:40:03 -0700, wrote: And, we don't have to solve the "whole" nut in one action. Keep at it. You seem to think in the very short term when it suits you. You are not even willing to start fixing this. If we don't attack the deficit in some meaningful way we will never get a handle on the debt. If you repealed the whole Bush tax cut it is barely a decent start on the deficit, Now you're going to just lie? I clearly outlined a way to start. Repeal tax breaks for those over $250K, ding corps that ship jobs overseas, make them pay their fair share in taxes, end subsidies, and spend not one additional cent on the military. There, you just said it again. You don't think there is a cent we could cut from the current military budget, you just want to keep it the same? I'm saying that it would be a good place to start. Are you unable to understand that simple statement? You are not giving us any specifics about exactly how you "ding" these companies. It is an interesting concept but I have not heard plan that really works. That's a very complicated question, and nobody on this newsgroup is qualified to answer it. Of course, that doesn't matter, since big concepts seem to be beyond your ability to grasp. We have already determined that tax cut on the $250k+ people is an insignificant amount of money (1/2% increase in the interest debt will eat that.) You have already determined that. As I said, and as I will continue to say, IT'S A GOOD START. Let me say this again slowly. a half of a percent hike in the interest we pay on the debt would eat all of repealing that Bush tax cut on the 250K+ people. What does that have to do with anything... so what. Interest rates change. How much would a 1/2% decrease in interest on the debt change our financials? So what. So your tax cut repeal is insignificant. A half percent is not only possible it is very likely. That was what S&P report really said. This is not an issue of whether the US will pay back the bonds, it is what the dollar will be worth when they do. As would be the opposite. It's a short term issue which has nothing to do with the long term problem. |
Obama endorses slavery
On Sun, 01 May 2011 00:16:02 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 18:47:07 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:52:58 -0400, wrote: For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. So when Bush was in office HE spent the money but now when Obama is in office it is congress spending the money. It is stupid statements like this that show how mindlessly partisan you are. Screw you. Bush pushed us into a war we didn't need nor could afford. He was the one who pushed tax cuts when none were needed. Sounds to me you're the partisan, stupid one. I have condemned Bush's wars every time it comes up. The difference is you seem to applaud Obama's wars Two and counting now. Insults do not strengthen your case. You're the one who started with the insults. You seem unable to have a civil discussion, and when you realize your position is weak, you claim things like I make "stupid statements" and that I'm a "mindless partisan." I have NEVER applauded any war, and you know DAMN WELL I haven't. You're just angry and scared, apparently. You think Bush is a GODDAMN hero deep down and you think EVERYTHING is OBAMA's fault or he has to solve all the problems Bush made much, much worse. Illogic and right wing nonsense is what has undermined this country. You're contributing. |
Obama endorses slavery
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:34:44 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 23:44:35 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message m... On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:32:46 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: Reply: The deficits are being driven up by overspending the fact is the deficits are being driven up by bush's tax cuts. THEY are the largest components of the deficit your cliche is mindless babbling REPLY: Your racist cliché and Bush blame cliché is nothing but a cliché. really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? We as a country are spending $1.60 for every tax dollar collected. How much did Bush cut the tax collection? Double the amount of Personal Income Tax collected and we could still not balance the budget. Explain why it is all Bush's fault. No ****ing cliché. A reasoned response. If another cliché, forget about ever being considered as have a brain and not just a waste of oxygen. it's bush's fault because 1. he cut taxes especially on the rich 2. he increased spending by an unfunded drug program added to medicare 3. he increased spending by spending a trillion in iraq 4. he deregulated the markets so that wall street blew up the economy and yet the right still blames the black guy Reply: You are still stupid. Obama has been President long enough to have started his reelection quest. Why did he not cut spending? Not increase it. Why did he make Wall Street to big to fail house bigger? Why has he accepted all the debt from those financial houses now paying Billions of bucks in bonus money so they could pay those bonus bucks? Why has he not implemented a tax of 110% on all bonus money over say 1 million bucks? You are so shallow. It is always some racist or Right Winger that is the problem. You are a racist in you are like Jessie Jackson. Blame all on race. You must be one crappy engineer, or at least have no creative ability, as you have no real though processes. For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. So when Bush was in office HE spent the money but now when Obama is in office it is congress spending the money. It is stupid statements like this that show how mindlessly partisan you are. Reply: Can we hear an AMEN. Obama could start vetoing spending bills. He can not instigate spending, Bush seems to have been able to, but Obama could veto spending. Also he could get his party affiliations in Congress to institute more controls on the TOOBIGTOFAIL. And implore Congress to reinstitute Glass-Steagall or the equivalent. Can we hear an AMEN for two morons arguing over stupidity. Bush could have no promoted a war of choice, but that was ok with you. Bush could have acted in the best interest of the people vs. the corps, but that's not ok with you. You're one of at least a pair or scumbag assholes, who blame all your troubles on a black man. Look in the mirror. YOU and yours got us into this mess, not the you are in any way financially like the CEOs and Wall Street creeps. You're just ignorant and scared. |
Obama endorses slavery
|
Obama endorses slavery
On Sun, 01 May 2011 09:01:14 -0400, Harryk
wrote: I_am_Tosk wrote: In articleR7KdnRQPSsSweSHQnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@earthlink .com, says... "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:41:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:55:51 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... really? oh. i forgot. you right wingers have your myths and you dont let evidence interfere with your delusions that the rich are the best thing that's ever happened to the US. well, there's always this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa...36&emailView=1 aw, damn, it shows the bush tax cuts are driving the deficit that's a shame, right wnger, isn't it? you say 'overspending' 'cuz you heard that on rush. it doesnt mean anything but he said it so it MUST be true, right? For someone who claims someone else is stupid, you're the one who thinks Obama is the one who cuts spending. Last I checked its Congress' job. You are not part of the problem... you are the problem. yeah the right wing is pretty stupid uh...what happens to a bill the pres doesnt like, genius? any idea?? VETO the ****er!!! Then Congress has to show how bad they are to override the veto. Bush signed almost all the spending bills he received and those he should have vetoed he signed with some statement of memorandum. He was almost as F'ed up as Obama. I am giving the most F'ed award to Obama, as he came in saying he was going to fix the problems. Got us in to another couple wars, did not get us out of wars he said he would, and has been a cheerleader for overspending. The racists here only support him because he is black... Anyone with a brain can see that... You sure play fast and loose with your misinterpretation of terms, little pile of dog ****. Please don't denigrate piles of **** like that! |
Obama endorses slavery
On Mon, 02 May 2011 01:31:19 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011 15:01:36 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 12:09:00 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 01:17:19 -0400, wf3h wrote: he HAS ended our role in iraq. less than 50K soldiers there...about as many as in germany. How many road side bombs do they have in Germany? Granted we are down to one or two dead GIs in Iraq every month but that is one or two too many. What about Afghanistan? The ironic thing is Iraq will probably be seen as the successful war. We may actually come out of that one with a functional government. In 50 years Afghanistan will still be a corrupt collection of war lords and tribal areas. According to your nonsense, we should just pack our bags and leave Germany and all other places tomorrow. A bunch of hooey. Yes I do think we should pull the troops out of Germany. What is our national interest there? We are not saving the world from the Soviets and I doubt the Nazis are coming back. I can say the same thing about Japan. You just can't accept the fact that Obama is doing what he can to extricate us from Iraq. You can't accept the fact that Obama had to do something in Afg. We did what we were supposed to do in Afghanistan and like I have been saying all along, it was one small special Ops team running a small operation in Pakistan, not an army of 150,000 men in Afghanistan. Amen. |
Obama endorses slavery
On Mon, 02 May 2011 01:24:28 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011 14:51:19 -0700, wrote: So your tax cut repeal is insignificant. A half percent is not only possible it is very likely. That was what S&P report really said. This is not an issue of whether the US will pay back the bonds, it is what the dollar will be worth when they do. As would be the opposite. It's a short term issue which has nothing to do with the long term problem. The fed money rolls over as often as every 30 days. That could easily be an immediate problem. If the foreign money people start believing the dollar is dropping in value they will want an interest hike that keeps them whole. This is an auction. It never has been. Perhaps China wants to eliminate it's customer base? I doubt it. |
Obama endorses slavery
|
Obama endorses slavery
On Mon, 02 May 2011 01:31:19 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011 15:01:36 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 12:09:00 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 01:17:19 -0400, wf3h wrote: he HAS ended our role in iraq. less than 50K soldiers there...about as many as in germany. How many road side bombs do they have in Germany? Granted we are down to one or two dead GIs in Iraq every month but that is one or two too many. What about Afghanistan? The ironic thing is Iraq will probably be seen as the successful war. We may actually come out of that one with a functional government. In 50 years Afghanistan will still be a corrupt collection of war lords and tribal areas. According to your nonsense, we should just pack our bags and leave Germany and all other places tomorrow. A bunch of hooey. Yes I do think we should pull the troops out of Germany. What is our national interest there? We are not saving the world from the Soviets and I doubt the Nazis are coming back. I can say the same thing about Japan. And, I agree with both. However, we cannot and should not remove our troops in some kind of frenzied rush. There are bigger issues at stake. You just can't accept the fact that Obama is doing what he can to extricate us from Iraq. You can't accept the fact that Obama had to do something in Afg. We did what we were supposed to do in Afghanistan and like I have been saying all along, it was one small special Ops team running a small operation in Pakistan, not an army of 150,000 men in Afghanistan. Which has little to do with what's going on in Afg. |
Obama endorses slavery
On Mon, 02 May 2011 11:32:11 -0400, John H
wrote: On Mon, 02 May 2011 01:31:19 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 15:01:36 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 12:09:00 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 01:17:19 -0400, wf3h wrote: he HAS ended our role in iraq. less than 50K soldiers there...about as many as in germany. How many road side bombs do they have in Germany? Granted we are down to one or two dead GIs in Iraq every month but that is one or two too many. What about Afghanistan? The ironic thing is Iraq will probably be seen as the successful war. We may actually come out of that one with a functional government. In 50 years Afghanistan will still be a corrupt collection of war lords and tribal areas. According to your nonsense, we should just pack our bags and leave Germany and all other places tomorrow. A bunch of hooey. Yes I do think we should pull the troops out of Germany. What is our national interest there? We are not saving the world from the Soviets and I doubt the Nazis are coming back. I can say the same thing about Japan. You just can't accept the fact that Obama is doing what he can to extricate us from Iraq. You can't accept the fact that Obama had to do something in Afg. We did what we were supposed to do in Afghanistan and like I have been saying all along, it was one small special Ops team running a small operation in Pakistan, not an army of 150,000 men in Afghanistan. Amen. Ah..men... they are mostly short-sighted and think with their penises. |
Obama endorses slavery
On Mon, 02 May 2011 11:48:39 -0700, sent the
following message On Mon, 02 May 2011 11:32:11 -0400, John H wrote: On Mon, 02 May 2011 01:31:19 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 15:01:36 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 12:09:00 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 01 May 2011 01:17:19 -0400, wf3h wrote: he HAS ended our role in iraq. less than 50K soldiers there...about as many as in germany. How many road side bombs do they have in Germany? Granted we are down to one or two dead GIs in Iraq every month but that is one or two too many. What about Afghanistan? The ironic thing is Iraq will probably be seen as the successful war. We may actually come out of that one with a functional government. In 50 years Afghanistan will still be a corrupt collection of war lords and tribal areas. According to your nonsense, we should just pack our bags and leave Germany and all other places tomorrow. A bunch of hooey. Yes I do think we should pull the troops out of Germany. What is our national interest there? We are not saving the world from the Soviets and I doubt the Nazis are coming back. I can say the same thing about Japan. You just can't accept the fact that Obama is doing what he can to extricate us from Iraq. You can't accept the fact that Obama had to do something in Afg. We did what we were supposed to do in Afghanistan and like I have been saying all along, it was one small special Ops team running a small operation in Pakistan, not an army of 150,000 men in Afghanistan. Amen. Ah..men... they are mostly short-sighted and think with their penises. Short sighted? Is that why girls think they have to wave their tits in order to be noticed? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:00 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com