 | |
{OT}: Dingy Harry strikes again
Toyota Discussions related to Toyota cars and trucks (alt.autos.toyota)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#51
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: {OT}: Dingy Harry strikes again -
04-22-2007
, 09:06 AM
|
Scott in Florida wrote: I love the sight of mushroom clouds in the Middle East... You love your little blue "helper" pills even more. |
polish your Mary Janes.
Charles of Schaumburg
#52
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Apr 21, 8:08 pm, "Sherlock" <svgula... (AT) juno (DOT) com> wrote: Yup, permanent force in Iraq is probably what is needed. We needed it in Germany after WWII and in Korea after that conflict. Both those places have been peaceful and prospersous since. Harry's words are absolutely costing US lives but unfortunately some people just can't connect these dots... Actually Iraq has very little in comman with WWII, we won in Germany. Iraq is more like Vietnam, totally un-winnable. BTW it's peaceful over there now too after we finally got our asses out of there. How are Reids comments costing lives? Bush's incompentence is what has cost lives. Not admitting tha the war is a lost cause, and that we need to get out is what is costing lives. We also cannot afford the hundreds of billion of dollars a year that this war is costing, with no end in sight. The USSR went broke and collasped spending money they didn't have on the millitary, don't think it can't happen to the US. |
finally had to take drastic measures to get the local government to put a
leash on the Wolves.
We should be doing the same thing in Iraq. We won the actual war, now we've
got local insurgents attacking not only us, but the local government.
For you Dims on the Left to compare Iraq to Vietnam just demonstrates how
myopic you guys are. You want us to lose. So go and (expletive deleted)
yourself, but quit trying to (expletive deleted) my country. If you want to
go live in a Loonie Left paradise, you can pack your bags, I'll even help
arange transport to Cuba.
Charles of Schaumburg
#53
| |||
| |||
|
|
Mike Hunter wrote: The more the lefty kooks post the goofier they get! You're as predictable as the lies told by a car salesman. |
Charles of Schaumburg
#54
| |||
| |||
|
|
n5hsr wrote: "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nospam (AT) whitehouse (DOT) gov> wrote in message news:Xns99195E5A9B4C2FredGarvin (AT) 66 (DOT) 250.146.128... The "replay of Vietnam" began the minute the first US troop landed. Sorry, the replay began when the Dims chickensh!ted out, just like they did in 1968. Vietnam: 500,000+ soldiers, 130,000 sq. miles Gulf War: 250,000+ soldiers, 9,000 sq. miles Iraq War: 160,000 soldiers, 169,000 sq. miles Only the Iraq War was initiated with Republicans in control of both Congress and the White House, and considering what a small force they sent for such a large country, it seems that they chickenshitted the war from the beginning. Charles, next time provide proof to back your claims, and don't just blab at the bar between sips. |
Vietnam 59,000 lost
Iraq 3000 lost
Now put that in your bong and smoke it, you long haired, maggot infested,
dope smoking FM type.
Charles of Scahumburg
#55
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hoping people have forgotten that the White House admitted (eventually and reluctantly) that it provided the banner? Your version doesn't wash there, Mikey! -- Ignorance is patriotism. Truth is treason. "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:l5GdnfsQ2pIkDbfbnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... Nobody said it, it was on the banner placed by the grew of the carrier. It referred to the completion of the units six month mission in mid east waters. That fact was explained in the media, but of course that makes no difference to the Dims or the kooks mike "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:AfqWh.573$nR1.514 (AT) trnddc06 (DOT) .. "dizzy" <dizzy (AT) nospam (DOT) invalid> wrote in message news:9hbk23d981ueicao6bl0fnetmp6j64lhm2 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... Sheesh! It's the "dims fault" that Iraq is a disaster. Sheesh again! "Mission accomplished", even! Who said, "Mission accomplished?" Whoever that was was not very analytical, was he? Jeff |
#56
| |||
| |||
|
|
In message news:S5GdnT9cI5HBhbfbnZ2dnUVZ_ternZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com, n5hsr sprach forth the following: "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nospam (AT) whitehouse (DOT) gov> wrote in message news:Xns99195E5A9B4C2FredGarvin (AT) 66 (DOT) 250.146.128... In message news:MpidnYYGHckn1bTbnZ2dnUVZ_q2pnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com, n5hsr sprach forth the following: Man the Dims really do want to replay Vietnam, don't they? The "replay of Vietnam" began the minute the first US troop landed. Sorry, the replay began when the Dims chickensh!ted out, just like they did in 1968. The Dims are the party of Chickensh!t and have been since then. What's YOUR name, rank and serial number, pal? And what part of Baghdad are you stationed in? |
to serve. And diabetic, that's an automatic disqualifier.
Charles of Schaumburg
#57
| |||
| |||
|
|
Scott in Florida wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 23:40:07 GMT, "Truckdude" <shrub (AT) thedeecider (DOT) com wrote: Hoping people have forgotten that the White House admitted (eventually and reluctantly) that it provided the banner? So what? The mission of the ship was accomplished. It's extremely disingenuous of you to claim that. You know very well that GW Bush and Karl Rove wanted to make all Americans think that the war in Iraq had been won. GW Bush's words even said so: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." He didn't say that major combat operations of the ship, the USS Lincoln had ended. |
--
Scott in Florida
#58
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:l5GdnfsQ2pIkDbfbnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... Nobody said it, it was on the banner placed by the grew of the carrier. It referred to the completion of the units six month mission in mid east waters. That fact was explained in the media, but of course that makes no difference to the Dims or the kooks mike Thanks, Mike, for this outrageous tale that could be told with a straight face only by a staunch repuglicant ...or Baron Munchausen! Total nonsense. Funny how dated that banner is now.....as is Bush's flight suit heroics. |
#59
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:l5GdnfsQ2pIkDbfbnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... Nobody said it, it was on the banner placed by the grew of the carrier. It referred to the completion of the units six month mission in mid east waters. That fact was explained in the media, but of course that makes no difference to the Dims or the kooks I don't know why the banner was there, but Bush was on the carrier to celebrate the completion of the mission in Iraq. He began: "Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." A big Oopsie. He clearly indicated that more work has to be done in Iraq. But, he was also claiming that the war was over. He didn't talk about his strategy to win the peace. As far as I can tell, he didn't have one. http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/ Jeff mike "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:AfqWh.573$nR1.514 (AT) trnddc06 (DOT) .. "dizzy" <dizzy (AT) nospam (DOT) invalid> wrote in message news:9hbk23d981ueicao6bl0fnetmp6j64lhm2 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... Sheesh! It's the "dims fault" that Iraq is a disaster. Sheesh again! "Mission accomplished", even! Who said, "Mission accomplished?" Whoever that was was not very analytical, was he? Jeff |
#60
| |||
| |||
|
mike
"Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote
Quote:
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:U7GdneV1Tsx0D7fbnZ2dnUVZ_oKnnZ2d (AT) ptd (DOT) net... Are your really that naive? Come on Mike, you can make a better comeback than that. Do you really want a President who is not analytical? Jeff mike "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:xrrWh.155$1M1.137 (AT) trnddc01 (DOT) .. "mack" <mackerel (AT) dslextreme (DOT) com> wrote in message news:132kevu9llg8a41 (AT) corp (DOT) supernews.com... ... He acted on the best information he had at the time, given what happened on 9/11. You seem to think the world is at peace until GWB came along, that is not true. Terrorism has been building for many years, culminating on 9/11 with the killing of about 3000 innocent citizens. I know you are very partisan and that is why you take the position that GWB is an idiot. He beat the best the democrats had and I know it must hurt you profoundly. Tough shit. "dh" is exactly right, about Bush being an idiot. But he omitted the important qualifier.... Bush is an evil idiot. The typical village idiot is a benign sort of fool who skips around the town square singing nonsense lyrics to songs in his head. Bush plans to hang around for the next year and a half doing nothing to save our troops from death, and the civilians in Iraq from death, knowing that once the Democratic president arrives in Jan. 2009, the burden will be on his shoulders, and Bush can then say "The US didn't cut and run from Iraq on MY watch!" An evil idiot with no idea that he'll be vilified in the history books twenty years from now. And mark my words, he Will Be Vilified. I don't think Bush is an evil idiot. Unfortunately, Bush doesn't have the type of curiosity that a President needs. For example, he should have asked questions before going into Iraq like, 1) Are the intelligence reports really accurate? 2) Are we prepared to win the peace after I land on an aircraft carrier and declare, "Mission accomplished?" 3) About 95% of the countries in the world are against us going into Iraq, including the French, whom we fought with in WWII. Why? A lot of US citizens are protesting going into Iraq. Could the vast majority be right and could I be wrong? Bush said, "I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things." This was in 2003. One has to ask why so many people voted for Bush in 2004. Then one has to ask: Who are the real idiots? http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030604-3.html Jeff |
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.