On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:10:30 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

*JimH* wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


wasted lives of US troops coming home in body bags... In the long run,
these will help get us out of Iraq.
So as we said, your side benefits from a high death count...which is why
in some morbid sort of way you delight in the fact that it has gone over
2100.
My "side" laments these wasted deaths. At the moment, there is nothing we
can do about them. But we do see that as the numbers pile up, more and
more decent Americans are reaching a state of revulsion over Bush's lies.

But go ahead and make something more out my statement than I mean. It's
about all you righties have left, eh?

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure. Once again, we have shown the
world that our mighty military cannot defeat a dedicated insurgency,
especially in an artificial country that was only held together by the
actions of a brutal dictator.

Iraq will disintegrate. Bet on it.

I have just returned

Is there some reason why you keep projectile vomiting that
"speech"?

A little truth is a good thing.
--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:39:44 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:24:17 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
. ..
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:zz0jf.616
What did the NYT do with the reporters who faked their stories?
They have fired the ones who have been caught at it, as they had no
choice.

Thanks for the information. To summarize, a few reporters did this,
and they were fired.
But folks like Jason Leopold continue to spread misinformation through
other sources. For instance, both jps and Harry jumped on a Leopold
story about the Plame investigation. I guess some folks never learn.

" Fool me once, shameon - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled
again. "


D'oh. You really don't get it. I don't care about the messenger or the
message, so long as they contribute even indirectly to crippling Bush
even a little so he is less able to destroy America.

Got it now?

You should. I have been very consistent on this. I am in favor of
anything that harms Bush politically.

It's an attribute I learned from the Bush primary campaign of 2000, when
the future presidummy's handlers went after John McCain.
What you can't seem to understand is that your attitude does more to help
Bush
than hinder him. It has become obvious that many Democrat extremists want
*only*
what's 'bad for Bush', regardless of what it does to this country.

With little exception, what is bad for Bush is good for this country.


GI's get killed------bad for the Commander in Chief. Is it good for the
country?

News about prison abuse used as propaganda-----bad for Bush. Good for the
country?

30,000 jobs lost at GM----bad for Bush. Good for the country?

I'm wondering what "exceptions" you're talking about?



GI's get killed...more evidence of Bush's bad judgment
Prison abuses...more evidence of Bush's bad leadership
Layoffs...more evidence of Bush's lack of a plan to re-industrialize
America.

And how are any of those good for the country?
--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:44:39 -0500, "P Fritz"
wrote:


"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:24:17 -0500, Harry Krause

wrote:

NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
. ..
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:zz0jf.616
What did the NYT do with the reporters who faked their stories?
They have fired the ones who have been caught at it, as they had no
choice.

Thanks for the information. To summarize, a few reporters did this,
and they were fired.
But folks like Jason Leopold continue to spread misinformation
through
other sources. For instance, both jps and Harry jumped on a Leopold
story about the Plame investigation. I guess some folks never learn.

" Fool me once, shameon - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get
fooled
again. "


D'oh. You really don't get it. I don't care about the messenger or the
message, so long as they contribute even indirectly to crippling Bush
even a little so he is less able to destroy America.

Got it now?

You should. I have been very consistent on this. I am in favor of
anything that harms Bush politically.

It's an attribute I learned from the Bush primary campaign of 2000,
when
the future presidummy's handlers went after John McCain.

What you can't seem to understand is that your attitude does more to
help
Bush
than hinder him. It has become obvious that many Democrat extremists
want
*only*
what's 'bad for Bush', regardless of what it does to this country.


With little exception, what is bad for Bush is good for this country.


GI's get killed------bad for the Commander in Chief. Is it good for the
country?

News about prison abuse used as propaganda-----bad for Bush. Good for
the
country?

30,000 jobs lost at GM----bad for Bush. Good for the country?

I'm wondering what "exceptions" you're talking about?


"Narcissists are noted for their negative, pessimistic, cynical, or gloomy
outlook on life. Sarcasm seems to be a narcissistic specialty, not to
mention spite. Lacking love and pleasure, they don't have a good reason for
anything they do and they think everyone else is just like them, except
they're honest and the rest of us are hypocrites. Nothing real is ever
perfect enough to satisfy them, so are they are constantly complaining and
criticizing -- to the point of verbal abuse and insult. "




Ah, I forgot.
--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


But go ahead and make something more out my statement than I mean. It's
about all you righties have left, eh?

No we actually have the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, the White
House, and the majority of the gubernatorial seat.



Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who actually
visited the place.


Once again, we have shown the
world that our mighty military cannot defeat a dedicated insurgency,

Pssst. We're winning.


especially in an artificial country that was only held together by the
actions of a brutal dictator.

Iraq will disintegrate. Bet on it.


Iraq will very likely disintegrate into Civil War...at which time it should
be carved up into Kurd, Sunni, and Shia territories. As long as we have
some bases along the borders, who really cares?

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who actually
visited the place.

What about reports that the Iraqi forces are abducting and murdering Sunni
citizens in a random fashion? It seems they roll into a neighborhood, round
up all the males, take them away, and kill them. Curfews in these areas are
strictly enforced, and yet these henchmen somehow manage to travel freely,
without any attempt to be discreet.

This is the Iraqi army which your president (today) said was making great
strides toward being able to manage the war. They are behaving exactly like
Saddam.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who
actually visited the place.

What about reports that the Iraqi forces are abducting and murdering Sunni
citizens in a random fashion? It seems they roll into a neighborhood,
round up all the males, take them away, and kill them. Curfews in these
areas are strictly enforced, and yet these henchmen somehow manage to
travel freely, without any attempt to be discreet.

What about those reports? The Iraqi government denies them of course. And
polls in Iraq show that the majority of folks think that they currently are
or will be better off than under Saddam:

"Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a
resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from
now than they are today."

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who
actually visited the place.

What about reports that the Iraqi forces are abducting and murdering
Sunni citizens in a random fashion? It seems they roll into a
neighborhood, round up all the males, take them away, and kill them.
Curfews in these areas are strictly enforced, and yet these henchmen
somehow manage to travel freely, without any attempt to be discreet.

What about those reports? The Iraqi government denies them of course.
And polls in Iraq show that the majority of folks think that they
currently are or will be better off than under Saddam:

"Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a
resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year
from now than they are today."


Are you capable of assuming that these reports are entirely accurate, and
what could result from the situation? I mean....just for grins....can you
imagine that?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who
actually visited the place.

What about reports that the Iraqi forces are abducting and murdering
Sunni citizens in a random fashion? It seems they roll into a
neighborhood, round up all the males, take them away, and kill them.
Curfews in these areas are strictly enforced, and yet these henchmen
somehow manage to travel freely, without any attempt to be discreet.

What about those reports? The Iraqi government denies them of course.
And polls in Iraq show that the majority of folks think that they
currently are or will be better off than under Saddam:

"Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a
resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year
from now than they are today."


Are you capable of assuming that these reports are entirely accurate, and
what could result from the situation? I mean....just for grins....can you
imagine that?

Civil War would be the result. But then I would say carve the country up
into territories made up of Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. They'll be so busy
fighting each other, they won't have time to be a threat to anybody else.

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who
actually visited the place.

What about reports that the Iraqi forces are abducting and murdering
Sunni citizens in a random fashion? It seems they roll into a
neighborhood, round up all the males, take them away, and kill them.
Curfews in these areas are strictly enforced, and yet these henchmen
somehow manage to travel freely, without any attempt to be discreet.

What about those reports? The Iraqi government denies them of course.
And polls in Iraq show that the majority of folks think that they
currently are or will be better off than under Saddam:

"Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a
resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year
from now than they are today."


Are you capable of assuming that these reports are entirely accurate, and
what could result from the situation? I mean....just for grins....can you
imagine that?

Civil War would be the result. But then I would say carve the country up
into territories made up of Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. They'll be so
busy fighting each other, they won't have time to be a threat to anybody
else.




I guarantee that if this happens (carved up), that country will be right
back where it started before your president got his erection and invaded.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Your war against Iraq is an utter failure.

Not according to our elected representatives (like Lieberman) who
actually visited the place.

What about reports that the Iraqi forces are abducting and murdering
Sunni citizens in a random fashion? It seems they roll into a
neighborhood, round up all the males, take them away, and kill them.
Curfews in these areas are strictly enforced, and yet these henchmen
somehow manage to travel freely, without any attempt to be discreet.

What about those reports? The Iraqi government denies them of course.
And polls in Iraq show that the majority of folks think that they
currently are or will be better off than under Saddam:

"Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a
resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year
from now than they are today."


Are you capable of assuming that these reports are entirely accurate,
and what could result from the situation? I mean....just for
grins....can you imagine that?

Civil War would be the result. But then I would say carve the country up
into territories made up of Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. They'll be so
busy fighting each other, they won't have time to be a threat to anybody
else.




I guarantee that if this happens (carved up), that country will be right
back where it started before your president got his erection and invaded.

With one exception: permanent US military bases along the borders of Iran
and Syria.