OT Head wounds
From : roy
Q: was watching gma this morning they had bob woodward on. he is the abc anchor that was hit by a i e d. or in my time a command detonated mine or booby trap. anyway a year has gone by since he suffered a serious brain injury from which he has partially recovered. he was saying this morning that it seems that the a lot of the head injuries are not being included in the causality figures. he alluded to the number being in the thousands. there is a special on tonight about him and others that suffered a like injury at 10pm that should be real interesting. do ya think that they lied about the number of wias our government nah. .
Replies:
From : miles
tbone wrote yes it is. dont try and put all the problems on congress or the dems who have only had control for a rew months. why do liberals seem to think having 1 or 2 more votes in congress means control that implies that all votes on all issues are party line. they most certainly are not. most votes are not party line. .
From : miles
tbone wrote who sent them there miles yes tbone. im well aware you believe everything that goes wrong anywhere in this country is bushs and the reps fault and nothing that went wrong during the prior admin. is the dems fault. oh ya to liberals nothing went wrong under their watch. .
From : miles
tbone wrote and yet you re-elect him. must be that bias clouding your vision. clinton ran a campaign promising a tax cut. very shortly after being elected we saw one of the largest tax hikes in history. yet dems re-elected him. i think your memory is clouded. .
From : roy
tbone wrote lol i said fox style reporting miles not that it was from fox and not so much what cnn said but what you twist it to mean. i quoted what clinton said. unaccounted for means they did exist and he doesnt know where they are. have to agree with you there. .
From : Annonymous
stormin mormon wrote one of the things i find different. conservatives deal in facts liberals deal in feelings. thats very true. liberals make decisions from emotions. often its long term decisions based on quick emotional reactions rather than rationality. .
From : tbone
as global warming and most of them are conservatives. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : roy
was watching gma this morning they had bob woodward on. woodruff not woodward. bob woodwards the watergate guy. ooops. i did that didnt i. sorry my bad! .
From : miles
roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not you know thats rather absurd. people are people. liberals ignore what doesnt effect them just the same as anyone else. .
From : tom lawrence
was watching gma this morning they had bob woodward on. woodruff not woodward. bob woodwards the watergate guy. .
From : electrician
says... do ya think that they lied about the number of wias our government nah. i recently read something similar. the wia to kia ratio in vietnam was something on the order of 6 or 7 to 1 whereas the ratio in iraq is more like 17 or 18 to 1 with a significant portion of those being brain related trauma due to being exposed to explosive shock. the point of the story was that the next couple of generations are going to be paying a steep cost for veterans health care particularly for the mentally impaired and disabled vets. .
From : roy
says... do ya think that they lied about the number of wias our government nah. i recently read something similar. the wia to kia ratio in vietnam was something on the order of 6 or 7 to 1 whereas the ratio in iraq is more like 17 or 18 to 1 with a significant portion of those being brain related trauma due to being exposed to explosive shock. the point of the story was that the next couple of generations are going to be paying a steep cost for veterans health care particularly for the mentally impaired and disabled vets. the thing about this is in viet nam we did not have the body armor so those hit although traumatically in the head would die of other wounds throughout their body. i spent a year in a hospital in pa there was this building set off by itself that all the head wound were housed in.. there were a couple of hundred beds in it i think. it was so damn sad they never came out of there and we couldnt go in. of course now bush has cut the funding for the va. so now what meager support they could receive is now even less. that just sucks!!! .
From : electrician
says... the thing about this is in viet nam we did not have the body armor so those hit although traumatically in the head would die of other wounds throughout their body. i spent a year in a hospital in pa there was this building set off by itself that all the head wound were housed in.. there were a couple of hundred beds in it i think. it was so damn sad they never came out of there and we couldnt go in. of course now bush has cut the funding for the va. so now what meager support they could receive is now even less. that just sucks!!! i am also a vietnam era vet but never served in country. it makes me sick to see the body bags coming home and the disabled vets struggling to adapt to their disabilities. i had hoped we had learned something from the experience in vietnam but apparently not. sadly it looks like more of the same until there is a change in administration. .
From : bob
electrician wrote i had hoped we had learned something from the experience in vietnam but apparently not. sadly it looks like more of the same until there is a change in administration. we havent learned anything from any other conflict weve been for 200+ years why would this be any different you think this all the administrations fault. aka- all bushs fault. in reality its an american fault. as a general rule we dont have a solid history of taking good care of our wounded. sad but true. its more dramatic now because we are saving more wounded lives than ever before. its not going to change in the next administration either. -- ..bob 2006 fxdi hot rod 2001 dodge dakota qc 5.9/4x4/3.92 1966 mustang coupe - daily driver 1965 ffr cobra - 427w efi damn fast. .
From : roy
says... the thing about this is in viet nam we did not have the body armor so those hit although traumatically in the head would die of other wounds throughout their body. i spent a year in a hospital in pa there was this building set off by itself that all the head wound were housed in.. there were a couple of hundred beds in it i think. it was so damn sad they never came out of there and we couldnt go in. of course now bush has cut the funding for the va. so now what meager support they could receive is now even less. that just sucks!!! i am also a vietnam era vet but never served in country. it makes me sick to see the body bags coming home notice that bush stopped the media from showing the coffins as they arrived at andrews. and the disabled vets struggling to adapt to their disabilities. i had hoped we had learned something from the experience in vietnam but apparently not. sadly it looks like more of the same until there is a change in administration. we are still dealing with the same friggin bs that claimed that there was nothing with agent orange no harm comes from exposure to it. no such thing as ptsd i could go on forever. i went to the va once they had a group called combat veterans anonymous kinda like aa. it was decent and was run by combat vets not really the va. hell we had to put up our own monument the wall. but that was pretty much our choice nam vets had enough of government. i watched the show last night about had me in tears. but he has and is going after the va. at least now vets have a advocate that has balls clout and no other agenda imo. .
From : electrician
noneofyourbusiness@goaway.net says... we havent learned anything from any other conflict weve been for 200+ years why would this be any different you think this all the administrations fault. aka- all bushs fault. in reality its an american fault. as a general rule we dont have a solid history of taking good care of our wounded. sad but true. i meant to refer to the fact that we will never get our troops out of iraq and afghanistan until there is a new administration. and i do consider both quagmires the direct fault of bush who deserted while in the guard and his draft evading sidekick cheney 4 deferments while in school. i just hope he doesnt have time left to start another one with iran. .
From : electrician
says... notice that bush stopped the media from showing the coffins as they arrived at andrews. i did notice that but the networks would probably have quit showing them anyway. they find topics like the death of anna nichole smith and other such horseshit to be more important and interesting. we are still dealing with the same friggin bs that claimed that there was nothing with agent orange no harm comes from exposure to it. no such thing as ptsd i could go on forever. i went to the va once they had a group called combat veterans anonymous kinda like aa. it was decent and was run by combat vets not really the va. hell we had to put up our own monument the wall. but that was pretty much our choice nam vets had enough of government. iraq and afghanistan will be no different than vietnam or the first iraq war. once its over the veterans will be forgotten by everyone else except other veterans. if there is to be a monument to the sacrifice of our troops in iraq or afghanistan it will be up to the veterans to make it happen. did you know the base realignment and closure commission is still operating i think that says it all. lets close some more bases while our troops are stretched so thin they are having to spend 3 or 4 tours in the butthole of the world. i watched the show last night about had me in tears. but he has and is going after the va. at least now vets have a advocate that has balls clout and no other agenda imo. .
From : roy
electrician wrote i had hoped we had learned something from the experience in vietnam but apparently not. sadly it looks like more of the same until there is a change in administration. we havent learned anything from any other conflict weve been for 200+ years why would this be any different i think this is the first time a administration felt the need to hide its war dead as they were brought home. you think this all the administrations fault. aka- all bushs fault. in reality its an american fault. as a general rule we dont have a solid history of taking good care of our wounded. the va and the military is charged with takeing care of our wounded. the admistration controls the va. hell he appointed the chair of the republican commitee to run the va. sorta like the guy he appointed to run fema. of course now at we are involved in this mess the administration cuts the funding for the va. do you hear of any new military hospitals opening to care for the wounded nope they are still closing facilities. imus was spearheading a fund raiseing effort for a hospital in texas. i guess the current administration was too busy to help out. sad but true. its more dramatic now because we are saving more wounded lives than ever before. its not going to change in the next administration either. this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration -- .bob 2006 fxdi hot rod 2001 dodge dakota qc 5.9/4x4/3.92 1966 mustang coupe - daily driver 1965 ffr cobra - 427w efi damn fast. .
From : roy
says... notice that bush stopped the media from showing the coffins as they arrived at andrews. i did notice that but the networks would probably have quit showing them anyway. they find topics like the death of anna nichole smith and other such horseshit to be more important and interesting. we are still dealing with the same friggin bs that claimed that there was nothing with agent orange no harm comes from exposure to it. no such thing as ptsd i could go on forever. i went to the va once they had a group called combat veterans anonymous kinda like aa. it was decent and was run by combat vets not really the va. hell we had to put up our own monument the wall. but that was pretty much our choice nam vets had enough of government. iraq and afghanistan will be no different than vietnam or the first iraq war. once its over the veterans will be forgotten by everyone else except other veterans. if there is to be a monument to the sacrifice of our troops in iraq or afghanistan it will be up to the veterans to make it happen. did you know the base realignment and closure commission is still operating i think that says it all. lets close some more bases while our troops are stretched so thin they are having to spend 3 or 4 tours in the butthole of the world. exactly! i watched the show last night about had me in tears. but he has and is going after the va. at least now vets have a advocate that has balls clout and no other agenda imo. .
From : bob
roy wrote this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we and im sure the next admin will make dramatic improvements in manpower benifits pay and equipment. especially if aunt hillary manages to get elected. -- ..bob 2006 fxdi hot rod 2001 dodge dakota qc 5.9/4x4/3.92 1966 mustang coupe - daily driver 1965 ffr cobra - 427w efi damn fast. .
From : bill allemann
yes and ask the vets who survived mogadishu about uncle bills decisions. oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we and im sure the next admin will make dramatic improvements in manpower benifits pay and equipment. especially if aunt hillary manages to get elected. -- .bob 2006 fxdi hot rod 2001 dodge dakota qc 5.9/4x4/3.92 1966 mustang coupe - daily driver 1965 ffr cobra - 427w efi damn fast. .
From : roy
roy wrote this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. and im sure the next admin will make dramatic improvements in manpower benifits pay and equipment. especially if aunt hillary manages to get elected. lets see your wonderful pal georgie stuck troops in some shit hole lacking armour for the trucks. one can only guess how many of our troops were wounded cause of that and other short comings. but shit in georges war while your getting your ass shot up olgeorge is closing support facilities here. sorry bob it just dont pass the smell test. there is absolutley no way this shit should be happening. you can deflect it all ya want like he said its on his watch. do you have any idea how many lives this cluster fuck has screwed up im not talking about only the troops the wives the sons the daughters. families whos husband and father comes home with ptsd then comes all the divorces all the broken homes. wait until the suicide rate starts to climb. any idea how long we evrybody will be paying the price for this mess you come up with this lame uncle bill annd aunt hillary bullshit. it is a tad bigger than that. get a friggin clue. .bob 2006 fxdi hot rod 2001 dodge dakota qc 5.9/4x4/3.92 1966 mustang coupe - daily driver 1965 ffr cobra - 427w efi damn fast. .
From : leythos
on wed 28 feb 2007 223817 -0500 roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. bill clinton is the reason were in a war - if he had taken care of the problem after the number of times he ignored it we would have stood a good chance of 9/11 never happening. if america had not been seen as weak because of clinton and the lack of doing anything to protect america we would be in a lot better postion than we are now. i served in the navy and my oldest son is in the military currently and ive yet to talk to a active duty person that this this is bushs fault or that doesnt think the war on terror is a honorable thing to be doing. -- leythos spam999free@rrohio.com remove 999 for proper email address .
From : miles
roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. clinton attacked iraq and in his speech gave for the most part the exact same reasons as bush for doing so. while he didnt send in troops clinton did conduct an action of war. one isnt any more excusable than another. war is war whether its from the ground or air. .
From : miles
leythos wrote i served in the navy and my oldest son is in the military currently and ive yet to talk to a active duty person that this this is bushs fault or that doesnt think the war on terror is a honorable thing to be doing. ive heard a few returning soldiers paraded on liberal bashing bush. the soldiers ive actually met are ticked at the dems for doing everything they can from the start to limit the ability of the military to do their job. now the dems are split on legislation to further put restraints on the troops. most dems want to stop funding but dont want to appear to not support the troops. good grief!! theyve never supported the troops and now its a problem for them .
From : miles
roy wrote do you really believe we are fighting a war on terror in iraq i believe the likes of al quedas resources are tied up in iraq fighting the usa so in that regard the answer is yes. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles from my experience id rather fight a war from the air. the up close style really does suck. only so much can be done from the air. the current war in iraq is for the most part limited to baghdad and vicinity. the same issue exists in afganistan. air power can only do so much. ground troops are needed to get in where air just cant. .
From : roy
on wed 28 feb 2007 223817 -0500 roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. bill clinton is the reason were in a war - if he had taken care of the problem after the number of times he ignored it we would have stood a good chance of 9/11 never happening. if america had not been seen as weak because of clinton and the lack of doing anything to protect america we would be in a lot better postion than we are now. if we were in such a horrible position or uinprepared wtf are we doing engaged in a war i served in the navy and my oldest son is in the military currently and ive yet to talk to a active duty person that this this is bushs fault or that doesnt think the war on terror is a honorable thing to be doing. do you really believe we are fighting a war on terror in iraq -- leythos spam999free@rrohio.com remove 999 for proper email address .
From : roy
roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. clinton attacked iraq and in his speech gave for the most part the exact same reasons as bush for doing so. while he didnt send in troops clinton did conduct an action of war. one isnt any more excusable than another. war is war whether its from the ground or air. miles from my experience id rather fight a war from the air. the up close style really does suck. .
From : tbone
leythos wrote i served in the navy and my oldest son is in the military currently and ive yet to talk to a active duty person that this this is bushs fault or that doesnt think the war on terror is a honorable thing to be doing. ive heard a few returning soldiers paraded on liberal bashing bush. it is far more than a few miles and the numbers are increasing. the soldiers ive actually met are ticked at the dems for doing everything they can from the start to limit the ability of the military to do their job. which is of course complete bullshit as the dems and congress for that matter really doesnt have the power to do shit and at the start of this retarded war the dems were the minority. of course it is easier to tell them that it is the dems fault things are so fucked up instead of the truth which happens to be their commander and chief bush rushed them in there in a panic without a game plan exit strategy or required equipment before it became obvious that we had no valid reason for going in the first place. now the dems are split on legislation to further put restraints on the troops. really please name them or are you referring to the idiots plan to send in more as moving targets. most dems want to stop funding but dont want to appear to not support the troops. good grief!! man your bias in high gear now. there is a big difference between actually supporting the troops and just sending in more with still no valid game plan and further weakening this countries national defenses. hell even more and more republican congressman are realizing that this is an exercise in futility. theyve never supported the troops and now its a problem for them now you are just sounding like a typical hard right wing fool. they have always supported our troops but have never supported this bogus war and were not the ones to rush them to that hell hole without the needed equipment. that would be the retard that you voted for which really doesnt say too much for your intelligence either but then again all you ever cared about are the tax cuts anyway and who cares how many will die just as long as you get to keep more money.. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
on wed 28 feb 2007 223817 -0500 roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. bill clinton is the reason were in a war - if he had taken care of the problem after the number of times he ignored it we would have stood a good chance of 9/11 never happening. lol more complete shit. bush had that same information when he took office and didnt do a damn thing. what exactly did you expect clinton to do if america had not been seen as weak because of clinton and the lack of doing anything to protect america we would be in a lot better postion than we are now. more complete crap. terrorists dont give a damn about such things and being strong makes their acts much more effective. i served in the navy and my oldest son is in the military currently and ive yet to talk to a active duty person that this this is bushs fault or that doesnt think the war on terror is a honorable thing to be doing. of course not as that would make them look like a scumbag but just because most dont say it doesnt mean many dont feel it. now if we actually did the job in afghanistan then it would truly be a war of honor against terrorism but this war is nothing but a stupid move for no reason at all. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. clinton attacked iraq and in his speech gave for the most part the exact same reasons as bush for doing so. which cost how many american lives and destabilized the entire region how much the thing is that when clinton did it his actions were effective as they did in fact stop production of wmds and at the time we had proof that they were making them and did have them. while he didnt send in troops clinton did conduct an action of war. more right wing spin and complete crap. i can see why you watch fox . call it what you want he did not declare war on iraq the production of wmds stopped and the region remained stable. he did what he did and it was done unlike now where we will be dealing with this shit for the next 20 years and never come out ahead. one isnt any more excusable than another. war is war whether its from the ground or air. it was not war pinhead it was a military strike and there is a big difference between the two even if you are not bright enough to understand that. as for excusable when clinton did it we had proof he had and was making weapons which we simply did not have when bush sent us in their so one is more excusable than the other. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
roy wrote do you really believe we are fighting a war on terror in iraq i believe the likes of al quedas resources are tied up in iraq fighting the usa so in that regard the answer is yes. then once again you would be wrong. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
tbone wrote now the dems are split on legislation to further put restraints on the troops. really are you serious have you not been following the this week you are aware they were supposed to be voting on a bill to limit funding. you do know why they have now delayed that vote geez tbone now you are truly showing how little you know and keep up on the issues. thats very typical liberal of you!! now you are just sounding like a typical hard right wing fool. they have always supported our troops define support. in the dems view losing the war and having them come home is supporting them. true .
From : miles
tbone wrote lol more complete shit. bush had that same information when he took office and didnt do a damn thing. what exactly did you expect clinton to do clinton waged war on iraq and gave the exact same reasons as bush for doing so. quit your whining. more complete crap. terrorists dont give a damn about such things and being strong makes their acts much more effective. terrorists have been heavily waging a public media war and they are very successful at it. terrorists very much do care what others think. the old divide and conquer still holds true and they know it well. they very much do want to show how weak the usa is. .
From : miles
tbone wrote he did not wage war miles so how about you quit whining. yes tbone bombing the heck out of another country is an act of war...except to liberals who redefine it to suit their political needs. .
From : miles
tbone wrote which cost how many american lives and destabilized the entire region how much the thing is that when clinton did it his actions were effective as they did in fact stop production of wmds and at the time we had proof that they were making them and did have them. his waging war on iraq did nothing. had proof of what exactly clinton said the same thing as bush but now youre saying clinton was right and bush was wrong after the war began clinton publicly stated that on the day he left office iraq had wmds. so even clinton himself disagrees with your above notion that he stopped them. while he didnt send in troops clinton did conduct an action of war. more right wing spin and complete crap. i can see why you watch fox . call it what you want he did not declare war on iraq geez. liberals have the most wacked out definition of war. bombing the heck out of another country is an act of war despite your warped definition to suit your biased needs. it was not war pinhead dropping bombs on another country is not an act of war huh good grief. any attack on another country is war. you cant define it as being ground troops only. geez why do you liberals make up warped definitions to make your own actions more palatable .
From : tbone
tbone wrote now the dems are split on legislation to further put restraints on the troops. really are you serious have you not been following the this week you are aware they were supposed to be voting on a bill to limit funding. you do know why they have now delayed that vote geez tbone now you are truly showing how little you know and keep up on the issues. thats very typical liberal of you!! hahahahahahahahahaha you really do make me laugh with your bogus fox style reporting. they have made it more than clear that they in no way want to cut fundong for the troops already their but do want to prevent additional funding that will be used to sent 30000 more troops in harms way. of course the fox method just talks about the funding cuts as if they are an indication of non support too funny. now you are just sounding like a typical hard right wing fool. they have always supported our troops define support. in the dems view losing the war and having them come home is supporting them. true we will never win this war and never should have gone to begin with so yes they show support by bringing them home and out of harms way with no hope of victory. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote lol more complete shit. bush had that same information when he took office and didnt do a damn thing. what exactly did you expect clinton to do clinton waged war on iraq and gave the exact same reasons as bush for doing so. quit your whining. he did not wage war miles so how about you quit whining. more complete crap. terrorists dont give a damn about such things and being strong makes their acts much more effective. terrorists have been heavily waging a public media war and they are very successful at it. terrorists very much do care what others think. the old divide and conquer still holds true and they know it well. they very much do want to show how weak the usa is. actually it is far more effective to show that they can take out a strong opponent and like i said being strong will not stop a terrorist attack because no matter how strong you are it is impossible to strike back at something that for the most part doesnt exist. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote which cost how many american lives and destabilized the entire region how much the thing is that when clinton did it his actions were effective as they did in fact stop production of wmds and at the time we had proof that they were making them and did have them. his waging war on iraq did nothing. really then why didnt we find anything when bush went in had proof of what exactly he had proof of wmds exisitng and being used. how do you think the current idiot knew what to look for even though they didnt exist anymore. clinton said the same thing as bush but now youre saying clinton was right and bush was wrong that is because clinton was right and bush was wrong. after the war began clinton publicly stated that on the day he left office iraq had wmds. show proof of exactly what he said. so even clinton himself disagrees with your above notion that he stopped them. then clinton was wrong as they no longer exist as proven by our current president at the cost of how many lives!! while he didnt send in troops clinton did conduct an action of war. more right wing spin and complete crap. i can see why you watch fox . call it what you want he did not declare war on iraq geez. liberals have the most wacked out definition of war. ya think so. go look it up. bombing the heck out of another country is an act of war despite your warped definition to suit your biased needs. lol wrong. it is a military action and nothing more unless either side actually declares war moron. it was not war pinhead dropping bombs on another country is not an act of war huh lol it could be but only the country being attacked can declare it as an act of war otherwise it is nothing more than a military action. good grief. any attack on another country is war. hahahahaha you do make me laugh. you cant define it as being ground troops only. never said it could but until it is declared as war it isnt so stop whining. geez why do you liberals make up warped definitions to make your own actions more palatable its not my definition miles and you still didnt answer the question of how many americans died. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : roy
roy wrote miles from my experience id rather fight a war from the air. the up close style really does suck. only so much can be done from the air. the current war in iraq is for the most part limited to baghdad and vicinity. the same issue exists in afganistan. air power can only do so much. ground troops are needed to get in where air just cant. that is my point!! if you are going to put troops on the ground they are going to get hurt! this administration is not providing the care that these troops need. they have their head buried in the sand. we can go around and around and have meaningless arguments about fox and other outlets but it does not change the fact that the wounded and their families are not getting the care help or support they need and damn well deserve. pointing figures and saying its this ones fault or that ones fault doesnt change the fact the wounded and their families are being screwed by the country that sent the troops into harms way. the blame game dont cut it. .
From : miles
tbone wrote hahahahahahahahahaha you really do make me laugh with your bogus fox style reporting. they have made it more than clear that they in no way want to cut fundong for the troops already their but do want to prevent additional funding that will be used to sent 30000 more troops in harms way. i see. then you didnt read the dems original proposal that was supposed to have been voted on tuesday and was canceled because of splits among the party. in your lack of knowledge mind you seem to think there is no split and nothing has been delayed as a result of it. we will never win this war and never should have gone to begin with so yes they show support by bringing them home and out of harms way with no hope of victory. support isnt denying the troops what they need. its giving the troops what they need and they define that not you. .
From : miles
tbone wrote after the war began clinton publicly stated that on the day he left office iraq had wmds. show proof of exactly what he said. once again you show your complete lack of knowledge on the subject. you stated that clinton took care of all the weapons in iraq so bush was wrong when he repeated clintons own words. i know youll twist and squirm your way around this rather than admit youre wrong but here is the proof of what clinton said after the war started. clinton people can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in afghanistan or internationalize iraq or whatever but it is incontestable that on the day i left office there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. http//www.cnn.com/2003/allpolitics/07/23/clinton.iraq.sotu/ so even clinton himself disagrees with your above notion that he stopped them. then clinton was wrong as they no longer exist as proven by our current president at the cost of how many lives!! you credited clinton for bombing iraq because of wmds and getting rid of them. clinton gave the same exact reason as bush and clinton said after he left office they are still wmds in iraq. you said clinton was right bush was wrong. now youre back peddeling saying clinton was wrong too. good grief tbone!!! lol wrong. it is a military action and nothing more unless either side actually declares war moron. oh so war its only war if its on some official paper or statement saying its war otherwise we just call if military action this is just too dang funny!! lol it could be but only the country being attacked can declare it as an act of war otherwise it is nothing more than a military action. then why are you complaining about the iraq war its just a military action. .
From : miles
roy wrote that is my point!! if you are going to put troops on the ground they are going to get hurt! this administration is not providing the care that these troops need. i agree in part. the wh got the funding for just such a purpose. it hasnt been spent but the hold up isnt in the wh. pointing figures and saying its this ones fault or that ones fault doesnt change the fact the wounded and their families are being screwed by the country that sent the troops into harms way. the blame game dont cut it. i agree but above you seemed to blame this administration. the problem extends far beyond the wh. .
From : beekeep
on tue 27 feb 2007 092322 -0500 roy roy@home.net wrote was watching gma this morning they had bob woodward on. he is the abc anchor that was hit by a i e d. or in my time a command detonated mine or booby trap. anyway a year has gone by since he suffered a serious brain injury from which he has partially recovered. he was saying this morning that it seems that the a lot of the head injuries are not being included in the causality figures. he alluded to the number being in the thousands. there is a special on tonight about him and others that suffered a like injury at 10pm that should be real interesting. do ya think that they lied about the number of wias our government nah. i got hit in the head with an iud once. does that count beekeep .
From : roy
roy wrote roy wrote this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. youve forgotten how many small wars bill sent the military on. youve forgotten how bill gutted the military in personnel and equipment. youve forgotten how many attacks on us personnel and property occurred on bills watch. youve forgotten that more us servicemen died in acts of war during bills 8 year tenure than the 16 years prior. youve conveniently forgotten a lot. im well aware of the bs clinton had us involved in. who has been continually closeing facilities in the middle of a war you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. and you are so filled with love for him i guess you must think that everything is just wonderful turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. please a history book isnt needed. history is happening right now. like i said geta clue. arguing with a liberal is like teaching a pig to dance - etc etc etc. im done with you. you can be done with what evever you want.that doesnt change a friggin thing. bottom line is troops went to a war became injured and are not getting the care they need. it really pisses me off and if i want somebody held accountable for this screw up call me whatever the hell ya want. .
From : tbone
tbone wrote after the war began clinton publicly stated that on the day he left office iraq had wmds. show proof of exactly what he said. once again you show your complete lack of knowledge on the subject. oh really lets see what you know. you stated that clinton took care of all the weapons in iraq so bush was wrong when he repeated clintons own words. that is correct as when clinton bombed iraq we knew he had them and the inspectors found them. so far in the bush bullshit we have yet to find anything so i say again clinton was right and bush was wrong! i know youll twist and squirm your way around this rather than admit youre wrong but here is the proof of what clinton said after the war started. ok this is what i was waiting for. clinton people can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in afghanistan or internationalize iraq or whatever but it is incontestable that on the day i left office there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. hahahahahaha as i thought fox style reporting at its best. did you not see the key words here. let me point them out for you unaccounted for. that does not mean that he still had them despite what fox might want you to believe only that we didnt know what happened to them and as current evidence shows they were in fact destroyed and his capability to make more also was not operational. so even clinton himself disagrees with your above notion that he stopped them. then clinton was wrong as they no longer exist as proven by our current president at the cost of how many lives!! you credited clinton for bombing iraq because of wmds and getting rid of them. he did it to scare saddam and yes it worked. if not where are they now clinton gave the same exact reason as bush and clinton said after he left office they are still wmds in iraq no he didnt. all he said was that at the time he left office he did not know what happened to some of them. you said clinton was right bush was wrong. because the facts say it as well. when clinton attacked he did have them and we knew it. when bush sent us there he didnt and even the reports comming in months and even days before the invasion were saying that they didnt exist which is exactly the reason that he rushed us in there unprepared. now youre back peddeling saying clinton was wrong too. good grief tbone!!! your spin is getting lame miles. i said that if he claimed there were still wmds in iraq as he left office as you claimed he did that he was wrong but he in fact said no such thing. he actually said that he didnt know what happened to them and he had no proof of their destruction and sorry to burst you right wing bubble miles but that is not the same thing. lol wrong. it is a military action and nothing more unless either side actually declares war moron. oh so war its only war if its on some official paper or statement saying its war otherwise we just call if military action this is just too dang funny!! call it what you want but without a declaration of war it isnt one but even if it was when clinton did it it was effective with minimum loss of life and we have proof for its validity and effectivness after the fact. so far in this one we sent in troops unprepared for battle are doing nothing for them and their families after the fact lost how many soldiers to date killed how many innocent iraqis destroyed how much of the infrastructure of iraq found not a single wmd spent how many billions of dollars doing it and have no possible way to win. sorry miles but even if you call what clinton did a war it was very effective with minimum cost unlike this complete disaster that bush wants to further escalate. lol it could be but only the country being attacked can declare it as an act of war otherwise it is nothing more than a military action. then why are you complaining about the iraq war its just a military action. sorry pinhead but bush declared it a war so now that is exactly what it is. i would say nice try at spinning it but sadly it was no better than your heros attempt at this war. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : roy
roy wrote that is my point!! if you are going to put troops on the ground they are going to get hurt! this administration is not providing the care that these troops need. i agree in part. the wh got the funding for just such a purpose. it hasnt been spent but the hold up isnt in the wh. pointing figures and saying its this ones fault or that ones fault doesnt change the fact the wounded and their families are being screwed by the country that sent the troops into harms way. the blame game dont cut it. i agree but above you seemed to blame this administration. the problem extends far beyond the wh. that may or may not be factual. this administration cut the funding for the va closed support facilities. this administration has a obligation to provide care not just initial care but support for those put in harms way. it has failed to do so. with this surge the problem will become worse. like i said before hopefully enough light gets put on the subject so the folks get the help and support they require. .
From : roy
roy wrote that may or may not be factual. this administration cut the funding for the va closed support facilities. isnt some of this because of attachments to the funding bills that were objected too bush was also accused of cutting funding for education. that was in reference to a bill the reps killed because while it funded education it provided no accounting of its effectiveness. it also had other unrelated attachments that had objections. this administration has a obligation to provide care not just initial care but support for those put in harms way. it has failed to do so. with this surge the problem will become worse. while thats true it takes more than just the wh. the democrats have fought from the beginning to make such support very difficult. the dems have been in power now. have they worked hard to get the troops what they need the opposite seems to be more true. its not just the wh. miles im not going to play the blame game with ya. somebody sent the troops. somebody is supposed to care for the wounded troops. that hasnt happened. if ya cant take care of your people then ya dont put them in harms way. blame whoever you want. .
From : bob
roy wrote roy wrote this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. youve forgotten how many small wars bill sent the military on. youve forgotten how bill gutted the military in personnel and equipment. youve forgotten how many attacks on us personnel and property occurred on bills watch. youve forgotten that more us servicemen died in acts of war during bills 8 year tenure than the 16 years prior. youve conveniently forgotten a lot. you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. arguing with a liberal is like teaching a pig to dance - etc etc etc. im done with you. -- ..bob 2006 fxdi hot rod 2001 dodge dakota qc 5.9/4x4/3.92 1966 mustang coupe - daily driver 1965 ffr cobra - 427w efi damn fast. .
From : miles
..bob wrote you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. thats the trouble with liberals. they dont pick issues. instead they take sides. for instance no doubt rush is totally right wing conservative biased. however he routinely bashes bush and the republicans over specific issues he disagrees with. liberals bashing another liberal very rare. .
From : azwiley1
gb is an assclown! .bob wrote you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. thats the trouble with liberals. they dont pick issues. instead they take sides. for instance no doubt rush is totally right wing conservative biased. however he routinely bashes bush and the republicans over specific issues he disagrees with. liberals bashing another liberal very rare. .
From : azwiley1
ok is this better gb specifically is a flaming assclown! to the rest i dont think there will ever be a politician that you will ever like everything they do. that is the primary reason why you listen to the debates and such come election time so you vote for the one that best fits your guidelines then as is almost always the case they slap their constituents in the face lie cheat blow dont inhale and screw us every way they can. azwiley1 wrote gb is an assclown! in general id have to agree with you but i prefer to discuss specific issues. i agree with bush on some and disagree on others. in general i though clinton was an assclown as well. however its the same thing. i agreed on some issues disagreed on others. .
From : miles
azwiley1 wrote ok is this better gb specifically is a flaming assclown! so was his predecessor and his wife who wants to be chief assclown. to the rest i dont think there will ever be a politician that you will ever like everything they do. that is the primary reason why you listen to the debates and such come election time so you vote for the one that best fits your guidelines then as is almost always the case they slap their constituents in the face lie cheat blow dont inhale and screw us every way they can. that is very true. they campaign on one platform and once in office do as they please. .
From : miles
tbone wrote hahahahahaha as i thought fox style reporting at its best. fox while the quote was probably on fox at one time or another the story was from cnn. did you not see the key words here. let me point them out for you unaccounted for. unaccounted for means that weapons existed and are now missing. they do not mean they dont exist as you seem to imply. that does not mean that he still had them despite what fox might want you to believe the story was from cnn not fox despite you best wishes. only that we didnt know what happened to them and as current evidence shows they were in fact destroyed and his capability to make more also was not operational. what such evidence they are still unaccounted for. oh wait you mean evidence such as saddam said they were destroyed. good grief. he did it to scare saddam and yes it worked. if not where are they now they are unaccounted for. that is not the same as not existing. we knew they existed so the question isnt if they exist its where are they now. we dont know but they exist somewhere. saddam had plenty of time to move them bury them etc. iraq is the size of california. no way can every inch of dirt be searched for what takes up little space. no he didnt. all he said was that at the time he left office he did not know what happened to some of them. you stated clinton destroyed them all. clinton himself doesnt believe that but you liberals make up what fits your story. because the facts say it as well. when clinton attacked he did have them and we knew it. how did we know it same evidence bush had. did clinton blow up wmds or just milk factories sorry pinhead but bush declared it a war oh really please show us all the official declaration of war against iraq by the usa. .
From : miles
roy wrote that may or may not be factual. this administration cut the funding for the va closed support facilities. isnt some of this because of attachments to the funding bills that were objected too bush was also accused of cutting funding for education. that was in reference to a bill the reps killed because while it funded education it provided no accounting of its effectiveness. it also had other unrelated attachments that had objections. this administration has a obligation to provide care not just initial care but support for those put in harms way. it has failed to do so. with this surge the problem will become worse. while thats true it takes more than just the wh. the democrats have fought from the beginning to make such support very difficult. the dems have been in power now. have they worked hard to get the troops what they need the opposite seems to be more true. its not just the wh. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles im not going to play the blame game with ya. somebody sent the troops. somebody is supposed to care for the wounded troops. that hasnt happened. if ya cant take care of your people then ya dont put them in harms way. blame whoever you want. roy it just seems you are pointing the blame rather directly at just the wh administration. .
From : miles
azwiley1 wrote gb is an assclown! in general id have to agree with you but i prefer to discuss specific issues. i agree with bush on some and disagree on others. in general i though clinton was an assclown as well. however its the same thing. i agreed on some issues disagreed on others. .
From : roy
.bob wrote you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. thats the trouble with liberals. they dont pick issues. instead they take sides. and the problem with the cons is they ignore evrything as long as it does not affect them personally for instance no doubt rush is totally right wing conservative biased. however he routinely bashes bush and the republicans over specific issues he disagrees with. cmon miles rush is under the influence pick a better example.vbg liberals bashing another liberal very rare. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles im not going to play the blame game with ya. somebody sent the troops. somebody is supposed to care for the wounded troops. that hasnt happened. if ya cant take care of your people then ya dont put them in harms way. blame whoever you want. roy it just seems you are pointing the blame rather directly at just the wh administration. miles heres my deal. somebody sent our troops to war. those troops were not properly equipped those troops were injured. those injured have not and are not receiving proper care. this is worse than the crap we went through coming back from viet nam. at least then we had more facilities like i said to bob call me whatever ya liberal con gay or whatever it pisses me the fuck off this sucks soo friggin bad everybody should be ashamed. now who sent them to the war with shoddy equipment who is in charge of assuring they get proper care oh who ordered the media to stop filming the caskets of our war dead as the caskets arrived home why do you believe that was done .
From : miles
roy wrote and the problem with the cons is they ignore evrything as long as it does not affect them personally its not just conservitives. the dems ignored major issues all through the 90s. your statement is one of hatred and bias when in fact almost all politicians are self serving and ignore what isnt of interest to them. cmon miles rush is under the influence pick a better example.vbg pain killers lol. this week rush has been bashing the republicans big time. mostly talking about a few of the louder mouthed ones who claim theyre conservatives. todays republican party is anything but conservative. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles heres my deal. somebody sent our troops to war. so theres the real issue. youre against the war and thus dont care where the problem lies. the issue with vet healthcare extends far deeper than this war. vets had horrible care with the prior administration as well. political bias and hatred that causes finger pointing is not going to help solve the problem. now who sent them to the war with shoddy equipment i know its of no concern to you but who created the mess of lack of decent equipment in the first place oh who ordered the media to stop filming the caskets of our war dead as the caskets arrived home why do you believe that was done i dont feel they should be broadcast on national tv unless the families approve. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles heres my deal. somebody sent our troops to war. so theres the real issue. youre against the war and thus dont care where the problem lies. no miles that is not the issue. im not happy about it. but i wasnt happy about vn either. miles the problem is cause and effect. the issue with vet healthcare extends far deeper than this war. when you send troops to war they get wounded. dont you think that before you put troops in a position to be hurt you should be prepared to treat those who are hurt ..vets had horrible care with the prior administration as well. true. dont you think that going to war would increase the burden on the va. given that wounded have to be put somewhere and that somewhere is the va political bias and hatred that causes finger pointing is not going to help solve the problem. now who sent them to the war with shoddy equipment i know its of no concern to you but who created the mess of lack of decent equipment in the first place miles if you are not prepared to go to war then ya dont go! oh who ordered the media to stop filming the caskets of our war dead as the caskets arrived home why do you believe that was done i dont feel they should be broadcast on national tv unless the families approve. we have a difference of opinion. i think the true cost of war should be stuck in everybodys face as they have their supper. maybe then they will think about options. miles i asked you a four questions in my prior post you answered none of them. i find that odd. .
From : roy
roy wrote and the problem with the cons is they ignore evrything as long as it does not affect them personally its not just conservitives. the dems ignored major issues all through the 90s. your statement is one of hatred and bias when in fact almost all politicians are self serving and ignore what isnt of interest to them. im talking about the citizens not the politicians. when i say it it is bias and hatred cmon miles your better than that. cmon miles rush is under the influence pick a better example.vbg pain killers lol. this week rush has been bashing the republicans big time. mostly talking about a few of the louder mouthed ones who claim theyre conservatives. todays republican party is anything but conservative. .
From : Annonymous
on fri 2 mar 2007 081617 -0500 roy roy@home.net wrote roy wrote roy wrote this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. youve forgotten how many small wars bill sent the military on. youve forgotten how bill gutted the military in personnel and equipment. youve forgotten how many attacks on us personnel and property occurred on bills watch. youve forgotten that more us servicemen died in acts of war during bills 8 year tenure than the 16 years prior. youve conveniently forgotten a lot. im well aware of the bs clinton had us involved in. who has been continually closeing facilities in the middle of a war you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. and you are so filled with love for him i guess you must think that everyt
From : tbone
tbone wrote he did not wage war miles so how about you quit whining. yes tbone bombing the heck out of another country is an act of war...except to liberals who redefine it to suit their political needs. lol and this coming from the masters or redefinition the conservatives. sorry miles but an act of war does not in itself make it a war and he hardly bombed the heck out of them. that would be your buddy bush who did that. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
roy wrote that is my point!! if you are going to put troops on the ground they are going to get hurt! this administration is not providing the care that these troops need. i agree in part. the wh got the funding for just such a purpose. it hasnt been spent but the hold up isnt in the wh. yes it is. dont try and put all the problems on congress or the dems who have only had control for a rew months. this crap has been going on since the beginning and is the sole responsibility of the wh as he is their commander and chief. pointing figures and saying its this ones fault or that ones fault doesnt change the fact the wounded and their families are being screwed by the country that sent the troops into harms way. the blame game dont cut it. i agree but above you seemed to blame this administration. the problem extends far beyond the wh. no. it doesnt -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
roy wrote miles im not going to play the blame game with ya. somebody sent the troops. somebody is supposed to care for the wounded troops. that hasnt happened. if ya cant take care of your people then ya dont put them in harms way. blame whoever you want. roy it just seems you are pointing the blame rather directly at just the wh administration. who sent them there miles -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote hahahahahaha as i thought fox style reporting at its best. fox while the quote was probably on fox at one time or another the story was from cnn. lol i said fox style reporting miles not that it was from fox and not so much what cnn said but what you twist it to mean. did you not see the key words here. let me point them out for you unaccounted for. unaccounted for means that weapons existed and are now missing. they do not mean they dont exist as you seem to imply. and it doesnt mean that they do either. even you say existed and not exist and since we still cannit find them after years of looking.... that does not mean that he still had them despite what fox might want you to believe the story was from cnn not fox despite you best wishes. and the twist came from you. only that we didnt know what happened to them and as current evidence shows they were in fact destroyed and his capability to make more also was not operational. what such evidence they are still unaccounted for. oh wait you mean evidence such as saddam said they were destroyed. good grief. no the evidence that we still cannot find them after years of looking and complete access to saddams intelligence. he did it to scare saddam and yes it worked. if not where are they now they are unaccounted for. that is not the same as not existing. and after this much time searching all indications say that they are gone. we knew they existed so the question isnt if they exist its where are they now. we dont know but they exist somewhere. really then show me every car that was ever built. going by your idiotic theory since they all did exist they still must exist somewhere and therefore should be able to be located. dont worry ill wait. saddam had plenty of time to move them bury them etc. iraq is the size of california. no way can every inch of dirt be searched for what takes up little space. do you really think that he is going to hide them where he cant find them or be able to get to them are you really this stupid doing that would basically be putting them into the hands of his enemies. even if he did do that to some or even most of them he would keep a few accessable in case he needed them and we have found nothing. no he didnt. all he said was that at the time he left office he did not know what happened to some of them. you stated clinton destroyed them all. clinton himself doesnt believe that but you liberals make up what fits your story. i never said any such thing. what i said was that he scared saddam and made it clear that we could swat him like a fly and that if he continued on his current course we would. because the facts say it as well. when clinton attacked he did have them and we knew it. how did we know it same evidence bush had. did clinton blow up wmds or just milk factories we knew it because we saw him using them and when the inspectors went in they found them. what evidence did bush have sorry pinhead but bush declared it a war oh really please show us all the official declaration of war against iraq by the usa. please miles he says it himself or have you forgotten the war on terror or the additional funds required for the war he is requesting. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote hahahahahahahahahaha you really do make me laugh with your bogus fox style reporting. they have made it more than clear that they in no way want to cut fundong for the troops already their but do want to prevent additional funding that will be used to sent 30000 more troops in harms way. i see. then you didnt read the dems original proposal that was supposed to have been voted on tuesday and was canceled because of splits among the party. in your lack of knowledge mind you seem to think there is no split and nothing has been delayed as a result of it. what in the hell are you talking about oh i forgot you dont actually answer questions and just make clouded accusations. we will never win this war and never should have gone to begin with so yes they show support by bringing them home and out of harms way with no hope of victory. support isnt denying the troops what they need. its giving the troops what they need and they define that not you. then i guess that bush also doesnt support the troops since he sent them in without the required equipment to begin with and is doing nothing for them when they leave. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
azwiley1 wrote ok is this better gb specifically is a flaming assclown! so was his predecessor and his wife who wants to be chief assclown. to the rest i dont think there will ever be a politician that you will ever like everything they do. that is the primary reason why you listen to the debates and such come election time so you vote for the one that best fits your guidelines then as is almost always the case they slap their constituents in the face lie cheat blow dont inhale and screw us every way they can. that is very true. they campaign on one platform and once in office do as they please. and yet you re-elect him. must be that bias clouding your vision. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
roy wrote roy wrote this administration has taken things to a new low. im sure it will change with a new administration oh yes. uncle bill was so much better for our military. we have a short memory dont we no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. youve forgotten how many small wars bill sent the military on. how many declerations of war were issued and how many of these mini wars were created by clinton and not responces to requests for help. youve forgotten how bill gutted the military in personnel and equipment. because despite your fantasy wars we were not in a war and it was more than just clinton it was also the right wing congress trying to cut costs to allow for lower taxes. funny how during clintons term all of the problems of the world were his responsibility but now on bushs watch all of the problems are being created by outside forces and he isnt responsible for any of them. grow up. youve forgotten how many attacks on us personnel and property occurred on bills watch. and how many innocent americans died on our own soil during bushs watch sorry to burst your bubble but this is far more a sign of the times and the growing greed of the people in power. youve forgotten that more us servicemen died in acts of war during bills 8 year tenure than the 16 years prior. youve conveniently forgotten a lot. and how much higher is that figure now. it looks like bush has that record beat by 8 more years and how many more will die before he is done you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. oh please dude. the right should be the last to talk about hatred with what you did to bill and that was all that it was pure hatred and fear. arguing with a liberal is like teaching a pig to dance - etc etc etc. im done with you. at least you can argue with most liberals even talking to a conservative is about as effective as talking to a wall. just to damn stupid to see anything but their own narrow viewpoint. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
.bob wrote you are so filled with hate for gb that you cant see anything else. turn off the liberal media and pick up a history book. thats the trouble with liberals. they dont pick issues. instead they take sides. and the problem with the cons is they ignore evrything as long as it does not affect them personally and when they wake up and see what they are doing does tha make them ex-cons for instance no doubt rush is totally right wing conservative biased. however he routinely bashes bush and the republicans over specific issues he disagrees with. cmon miles rush is under the influence pick a better example.vbg liberals bashing another liberal very rare. lol you are kidding right. they do it all of the time. how do you think bush got two terms in office -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
roy wrote when you send troops to war they get wounded. dont you think that before you put troops in a position to be hurt you should be prepared to treat those who are hurt that would be nice but the military was cut to shreds already. you have to work with what you have and work towards getting whats needed. trouble is politics gets in the way. true. dont you think that going to war would increase the burden on the va. given that wounded have to be put somewhere and that somewhere is the va that cant be the deciding factor of whether to go to war or not. the real issue roy is that you are against this war period. if you were for the war you would not still have this same argument. are you also totally against sending troops to afghanistan for the same reason miles if you are not prepared to go to war then ya dont go! roy that cant be the deciding factor. youre telling that if the usa is attacked then we cant do a dang thing about it because were not prepared. your real issue is the war itself and reasons for going. thats a fair argument. military readiness or lack of is not a valid reason to defend or not defend this country the best it can. if your reply to that is to question the aspect of this war as defending itself then again your issue is the war and not the militarizes abilities. we have a difference of opinion. i think the true cost of war should be stuck in everybodys face as they have their supper. what would have happened if we had daily reports of the 100s or 1000s killed in a day of fighting during wwii what if we had daily photos of the coffins showing up at supper time during wwii it depends on whether you are for or against such war but a policy has to work both ways. the better policy is respect the soldiers dignity and have respect for the families involved. if they say not to show such photos then dont do it. the soldiers needs supersedes your own. .
From : miles
tbone wrote sorry miles but an act of war does not in itself make it a war to you there was no korean war. there was no vietnam war. there was no gulf war. in fact to you the last time the usa was in a war was wwii. good grief. so whats your real issue then the only difference between military action and war is a piece of paper that calls it a war. the net effect is the same. .
From : miles
tbone wrote then i guess that bush also doesnt support the troops since he sent them in without the required equipment to begin with i agree in part. he certainly does need to find ways to get more of what they need to them. the dems however have not been trying to do so at all. you defined your definition of support as cut and run. thats not support at all as its not what the troops define it as. .
From : miles
tbone wrote lol i said fox style reporting miles not that it was from fox and not so much what cnn said but what you twist it to mean. i quoted what clinton said. unaccounted for means they did exist and he doesnt know where they are. liberals redefine that to mean they no longer exist. and it doesnt mean that they do either. id rather assume they do until found rather than the liberals approach to just say they dont exist and be happy with that. no the evidence that we still cannot find them after years of looking and complete access to saddams intelligence. thats all you need iraq is a large area. no way possible every inch could be searched. not even close. really then show me every car that was ever built. going by your idiotic theory since they all did exist they still must exist somewhere and therefore should be able to be located. dont worry ill wait. never said they should be able to locate. youre also trying to compare millions of cars to 100s of weapons. do you really think that he is going to hide them where he cant find them or be able to get to them huh he knows where he put them. we dont. say he buried some out in the middle of the desert somewhere. how the heck would we find them why do liberals think its so easy to search every inch of a country the size of california we knew it because we saw him using them and when the inspectors went in they found them. what evidence did bush have yep inspectors found them and tagged and inventoried them as well as put seals on the buildings. when they returned the seals were broken and weapons gone. for you the fact we cant find them means they dont exist. thats absurd logic. i do not believe anything saddam says about destroying them. he said he was working with the un. if thats the case he would have invited them to witness their destruction. none the less saddams word is not worth a dang but you bought it and accept it for no other reason than we dont know what he did with them. even a destroyed weapon has identifiable remnants. please miles he says it himself or have you forgotten the war on terror that is not an official declaration of war as you said was needed in order to define it as war. the usa has set policies for the declaration of war. it has not been declared as such by anyone except you. .
From : roy
roy wrote when you send troops to war they get wounded. dont you think that before you put troops in a position to be hurt you should be prepared to treat those who are hurt that would be nice but the military was cut to shreds already. you have to work with what you have and work towards getting whats needed. trouble is politics gets in the way. true. dont you think that going to war would increase the burden on the va. given that wounded have to be put somewhere and that somewhere is the va that cant be the deciding factor of whether to go to war or not. the real issue roy is that you are against this war period. miles whether or not i am against this war isnt the issue although you seem to want to make it the issue. if you were for the war you would not still have this same argument. are you also totally against sending troops to afghanistan for the same reason miles if you are not prepared to go to war then ya dont go! roy that cant be the deciding factor. youre telling that if the usa is attacked then we cant do a dang thing about it because were not prepared. i was reading a report that 90% of the national guard can not perform its peacetime or wartime mission. due to lack of equipment. youd best pray that this country is not attacked. your real issue is the war itself and reasons for going. thats a fair argument. military readiness or lack of is not a valid reason to defend or not defend this country the best it can. miles we are not defending our country. military readiness or lack of it is a damn big factor as to whether we should be running around in the desert if your reply to that is to question the aspect of this war as defending itself then again your issue is the war and not the militarizes abilities. we have a difference of opinion. i think the true cost of war should be stuck in everybodys face as they have their supper. what would have happened if we had daily reports of the 100s or 1000s killed in a day of fighting during wwii what if we had daily photos of the coffins showing up at supper time during wwii it depends on whether you are for or against such war but a policy has to work both ways. being for or against again has nothing to do with it. why shouldnt the citizens be made aware of the true cost of war the better policy is respect the soldiers dignity and have respect for the families involved. i guess you are more worried about the dignity of the dead than that of the wounded. if they say not to show such photos then dont do it. the soldiers needs supersedes your own. showing a flag draped coffin does not take from the dignity of the dead. miles im still waiting for you to answer those for question. .
From : miles
group for when i need to buy the next batch jmc nevermind. have to get em in the states flyin out tomorrow and ship em myself. partsamerica wanted $20 to ship three bloody filters and a small wrench. augh! the whole parts order was only $25.00! anybody know a good online parts vendor that charges fair shipping prices to apo addresses jmc i do! ;^ mike . 222 331515 pn4gh.274$pg.216@fe19.lga roy wrote i was reading a report that 90% of the national guard can not perform its peacetime or wartime mission. due to lack of equipment. youd best pray that this country is not attacked. i agree completely. but lets say we are attacked. what youve told me is that because were not prepared we shouldnt fight bac miles we are not defending our country. see roy thats what i meant. the issue to you is not the readiness. its the war itself. if we were fighting a war that you considered defending our country you wouldnt sit here saying we shouldnt send troops. that means the issue for your argument is the war itself. being for or against again has nothing to do with it. why shouldnt the citizens be made aware of the true cost of war they should. anyone can find out easily how many soldiers have been killed. its not a secret. thats different that parading coffins on the nightly . soldiers and their families should be respected. i guess you are more worried about the dignity of the dead than that of the wounded. huh parading coffins on the nightly doesnt help the wounded. thats the issue i was replying to not funding of the va hospitals which i fully agree needs serious attention. showing a flag draped coffin does not take from the dignity of the dead. now that depends on the methods and reasons the media shows them. but whether its dignified or not is not up to you to decide. it is the families that should. miles im still waiting for you to answer those for question. what question is that ive answered several. some cant be answered without further input which i have asked for to clarify your logic. .
From : snoman
on fri 02 mar 2007 181746 -0700 miles nope@nopers.com wrote clinton ran a campaign promising a tax cut. very shortly after being elected we saw one of the largest tax hikes in history. yet dems re-elected him. i think your memory is clouded. is it also clouded that under him there was first budget surplus since kenedy days and that bush is running up red ink at record rates. but then their are those that listen to the bs and ignore reality. btw i worked on the bomb dump trucks during the last few years of vietnam b52s the cong really hated those things and called then silent death because they flew so high on bomb drops usually. there is no wining iraq through military force just like nam was but rather than cut our losses they will spend hundreds of billion of dollars more on it and countless lives so save face not to mention the gravely wounded that survive from medical science but handicapped for life that they never seem to provide counts on. mark my word but one day history will mark iraq as one of the uss biggest mistakes and may even lead to the erosion of it position as a super power in the future because it really wrecked credibilty. this last 4 years has also provided some great ojt for future terrorists too. over 1/2 a trillion dollars has been spent over there on a wasted cause that the public knows about anyway. just think what even half that amount could have done at home. the true cost will not be known for many years and will likely go well into the trillions. ----------------- thesnoman.com .
From : miles
snoman wrote is it also clouded that under him there was first budget surplus since kenedy days and that bush is running up red ink at record rates. thats a liberal myth. there was not a single year during clintons presidency that the federal reserve took in more money than was spent. ive asked here months ago to show me in what year revenues exceeded expenditures and nada zip zilch. fact is it never happened. the surplus was a budget projection that never happened. many people believe it because its been blasted over and over to the point people just accept it as fact. again i ask to show me in what years during clintons presidency where actual $s taken in by the feds exceeded expenditures. .
From : roy
relocate the stock carter to the frame rail. install psi guage. do away with banjo bolts and restrictive stock steel lines. my 98.5 is done like that after the last vp44 failure just after i got the truck. now ive got 14psi at idle and cannot draw it under 10psi at wot. i used metric/ -8 jic fittings to replace the banjo bolts and 1/2 goodyear gatorgrip diesel fuel line. from the tank to the pump. so its agreed that the lift pump is the first step what is the word on the in the tank pump any better i have in and out gauges on the filter and i kept min of 5 lbs but is goes up and down with cold starts up and drops with petal to the metal on sat 24 feb 2007 075805 -0800 david loyd hotrod@r.sunset.net wrote help im on my 3rd pump on my 98 1/2 24 valve an
From : roy
tbone wrote who sent them there miles yes tbone. im well aware you believe everything that goes wrong anywhere in this country is bushs and the reps fault and nothing that went wrong during the prior admin. is the dems fault. oh ya to liberals nothing went wrong under their watch. miles again you didnt answer the question. you did what is becoming your usual. .
From : roy
codes again that cause the last 2 change outs is dodge or cummins being held resoponsable for this design failaur any help please and what is the best way to fix it dlhotrod@yahoo.com get a commercial version from cummins they are built better than the chrysler oems and cheaper too. huh it is a bosch pump. what are you talking about hes probably talking about the fedex pump. as i understand it everyone now incorporates the more reliable electronics of the original / replacement fedex units. theres also a bushing that went from bronze to steel iirc. i havent followed the vp44 saga too closely because mine seems to be working fine so far. yup and it has been my experience that a a failed or failing lift pump are the death of them. . 222 331523 esbkb0082a@4.guy.com roy wrote i was reading a report that 90% of the national guard can not perform its peacetime or wartime mission. due to lack of equipment. youd best pray that this country is not attacked. i agree completely. but lets say we are attacked. what youve told me is that because were not prepared we shouldnt fight bac miles we are not defending our country. see roy thats what i meant. the issue to you is not the readiness. wrong. its the war itself. if we were fighting a war that you considered defending our country you wouldnt sit here saying we shouldnt send troops. miles we are not defending our country. we are thousands of miles away trying to prop up another government. whether or not i agree with it or not matters not. that means the issue for your argument is the war itself. wrong again. my issue is that we have troops that were sent to fight a war with shit equipment and when wounded cant get the care and help they need. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles we are not defending our country. we are thousands of miles away trying to prop up another government. whether or not i agree with it or not matters not. oh but that is the entire issue to you. if we had proper readiness youd still be against this action. it makes no difference to you and is not the issue. youve made it very clear youre against this action and readiness would not change how you feel about sending troops there. wrong again. my issue is that we have troops that were sent to fight a war with shit equipment and when wounded cant get the care and help they need. you would still be just as much against sending troops there even if they had all the proper equipment. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles again you didnt answer the question. you did what is becoming your usual. roy both you and tbone are just into playing a game and arguing. when ive asked questions regarding actions by the democrats theyre ignored or said to be irrelevant. if you wish to discuss then do so. if you want to play games and argue then im not interested. .
From : miles
roy wrote tbone wrote lol i said fox style reporting miles not that it was from fox and not so much what cnn said but what you twist it to mean. i quoted what clinton said. unaccounted for means they did exist and he doesnt know where they are. have to agree with you there. roy that what gets me about the liberals and democrats arguments about no wmds exist. we know they existed. without any evidence of their destruction id rather have the assumption that they still do exist but we dont know where. iraq is a large land area to search for something that takes up very little space. .
From : miles
roy wrote yup the avoid road works real well. i guess next time there is a update we will know how to get it.g revision af is supposed to be out in the next few weeks. it probably is just updated maps. i wish alpine didnt charge $200 for each upgrade which is released twice per year. i dont have any warranty on mine so i cant get a replacement for my damaged disk! .
From : miles
roy wrote i thought you had a new durango. nope. i have a 2004 durango but the nav unit is in my 2007 caliber. however i bought the nav unit used and installed myself so no warranty. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles again you didnt answer the question. you did what is becoming your usual. roy both you and tbone are just into playing a game and arguing. when ive asked questions regarding actions by the democrats theyre ignored or said to be irrelevant. if you wish to discuss then do so. if you want to play games and argue then im not interested. miles in discussing about anything with you some how you spin it into a liberal /repub debate. with the exception of the nav disc. thanks again for the help. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles in discussing about anything with you some how you spin it into a liberal /repub debate. thats because you tbone etc. keep pointing fingers at one party even though you say you dont want to point fingers. if finger pointing isnt what you want then dont do it yourself!! division isnt whats needed to solve the problem. if bush is an idiot then so is kennedy pelosi and company. theyre all politicians and they all stink!! im not the one making it a dem/rep issue. with the exception of the nav disc. thanks again for the help. no problem. ive used the avoid road feature and it does indeed work great. the patch to remove the in-motion limitations works great and allows my wife to find routes without me having to pull off the road. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles we are not defending our country. we are thousands of miles away trying to prop up another government. whether or not i agree with it or not matters not. oh but that is the entire issue to you. miles im not happy about it. at first sure everybody myself included believed what we were told. once the hard facts came out and the lies and crap continued a lot of people withdrew their support. im aware we aint geting out of there soon it is what it is. that has nothing to do with the issue of bs care for the wounded and the lack of preparedness. talk about a rush to battle.. if we had proper readiness youd still be against this action. at the start no. now that all the info has come out i really think wed be better served to ring the friggin country and give them a demo of a arc light. then explain that if they dont surrender their weapons we move the box and start taking them out wholesale. it makes no difference to you and is not the issue. youve made it very clear youre against this action and readiness would not change how you feel about sending troops there. when have you ever heard of allowing every member of the population to have a ak and a rocket launcher. some friggin plan how about disarm the friggin population. nah thats against policy. we have yet to figure out how or what to fight imo. in that regard yup im against how it is being fought. .
From : miles
roy wrote i believe that t-guy has been here longer than both of you in one form or another. that could be. ive been around here off and on since about 1999 or 2000. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles im not happy about it. at first sure everybody myself included believed what we were told. once the hard facts came out and the lies and crap continued a lot of people withdrew their support. i still firmly believe we need to be there. we are fighting the likes of al queda and thats a needed fight. however i think the war has been horribly executed. i dont take sides on that issue. politics from both sides have made it a mess. still the war currently is mostly isolated to baghdad and not the entirety of iraq which has become fairly settled. when have you ever heard of allowing every member of the population to have a ak and a rocket launcher. some friggin plan how about disarm the friggin population. nah thats against policy. we have yet to figure out how or what to fight imo. in that regard yup im against how it is being fought. i agree with you there. how its being fought is horrible. the commanders on the ground should have the ability to fight on their terms. politicians on both sides have prevented them. trying to fight a war thats on tv daily with the public insisting it be politically correct is pure bs and makes it difficult for the commanders to get their job done. they need to forget about the pc crap and do what they need to do. the fastest way to bring our guys home is to give them everything they need and stop the pc crap. putting any limits on them will only make things worse and extend their stay. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles in discussing about anything with you some how you spin it into a liberal /repub debate. thats because you tbone etc. keep pointing fingers at one party even though you say you dont want to point fingers. if finger pointing isnt what you want then dont do it yourself!! division isnt whats needed to solve the problem. if bush is an idiot then so is kennedy pelosi and company. theyre all politicians and they all stink!! im not the one making it a dem/rep issue. with the exception of the nav disc. thanks again for the help. no problem. ive used the avoid road feature and it does indeed work great. the patch to remove the in-motion limitations works great and allows my wife to find routes without me having to pull off the road. yup the avoid road works real well. i guess next time there is a update we will know how to get it.g .
From : tbone
roy wrote when you send troops to war they get wounded. dont you think that before you put troops in a position to be hurt you should be prepared to treat those who are hurt that would be nice but the military was cut to shreds already. you have to work with what you have and work towards getting whats needed. trouble is politics gets in the way. true. dont you think that going to war would increase the burden on the va. given that wounded have to be put somewhere and that somewhere is the va that cant be the deciding factor of whether to go to war or not. the real issue roy is that you are against this war period. miles whether or not i am against this war isnt the issue although you seem to want to make it the issue. if you were for the war you would not still have this same argument. are you also totally against sending troops to afghanistan for the same reason miles if you are not prepared to go to war then ya dont go! roy that cant be the deciding factor. youre telling that if the usa is attacked then we cant do a dang thing about it because were not prepared. i was reading a report that 90% of the national guard can not perform its peacetime or wartime mission. due to lack of equipment. youd best pray that this country is not attacked. your real issue is the war itself and reasons for going. thats a fair argument. military readiness or lack of is not a valid reason to defend or not defend this country the best it can. miles we are not defending our country. military readiness or lack of it is a damn big factor as to whether we should be running around in the desert if your reply to that is to question the aspect of this war as defending itself then again your issue is the war and not the militarizes abilities. we have a difference of opinion. i think the true cost of war should be stuck in everybodys face as they have their supper. what would have happened if we had daily reports of the 100s or 1000s killed in a day of fighting during wwii what if we had daily photos of the coffins showing up at supper time during wwii it depends on whether you are for or against such war but a policy has to work both ways. being for or against again has nothing to do with it. why shouldnt the citizens be made aware of the true cost of war the better policy is respect the soldiers dignity and have respect for the families involved. i guess you are more worried about the dignity of the dead than that of the wounded. if they say not to show such photos then dont do it. the soldiers needs supersedes your own. showing a flag draped coffin does not take from the dignity of the dead. miles im still waiting for you to answer those for question. then you will be waiting a real long time. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
roy wrote i was reading a report that 90% of the national guard can not perform its peacetime or wartime mission. due to lack of equipment. youd best pray that this country is not attacked. i agree completely. but lets say we are attacked. what youve told me is that because were not prepared we shouldnt fight bac lol are you really this desperate he said no such thing. we are the ones that started this war and in that case we needed to be prepared and have the proper equipment to do it and we didnt. if we are attacked then we have to defend ourselves with whatever we have but that was not the case here no matter how hard you try and spin it. miles we are not defending our country. see roy thats what i meant. the issue to you is not the readiness. its the war itself. if we were fighting a war that you considered defending our country you wouldnt sit here saying we shouldnt send troops. that means the issue for your argument is the war itself. that has got to be the most retarded statement from you so far. how exactly could a war be considered defending our country either it is or it isnt. in the case of afghanistan we were defending our country but iran is an attack by us period! being for or against again has nothing to do with it. why shouldnt the citizens be made aware of the true cost of war they should. anyone can find out easily how many soldiers have been killed. its not a secret. thats different that parading coffins on the nightly . soldiers and their families should be respected. more right wing spin and complete bullshit. showing them coming home after giving their lives for this country is showing them respect and giving them honor. all this president is doing is shoving their sacrifice under the rug so he doesnt look bad which equates to no respect at all. i guess you are more worried about the dignity of the dead than that of the wounded. huh parading coffins on the nightly doesnt help the wounded. thats the issue i was replying to not funding of the va hospitals which i fully agree needs serious attention. and yet you still pass the buck on the democrates lol!!! showing a flag draped coffin does not take from the dignity of the dead. now that depends on the methods and reasons the media shows them. but whether its dignified or not is not up to you to decide. it is the families that should. more complete crap. once the body is in possession of the family then it is their decision as to what happens not before. miles im still waiting for you to answer those for question. what question is that ive answered several. some cant be answered without further input which i have asked for to clarify your logic. more smoke and mirrors how typical. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote sorry miles but an act of war does not in itself make it a war to you there was no korean war. there was no vietnam war. there was no gulf war. in fact to you the last time the usa was in a war was wwii. good grief. so whats your real issue then the only difference between military action and war is a piece of paper that calls it a war. the net effect is the same. miles im not going to continue these silly arguments. fine we will call clintons bombing a war but now with it being a war i guess clinton was a far superior commander and chief as his war accomplished what he wanted it to with minimum cost all around. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
tbone wrote lol are you really this desperate he said no such thing. we are the ones that started this war and in that case we needed to be prepared and have the proper equipment to do it and we didnt. tbone now youre spinning again. what you are saying is exactly the point i made. the issue is not the lack of equipment for you and roy. it is the war itself your against. if we were better prepared youd still be against sending troops just the same. it would make zero difference for you. that has got to be the most retarded statement from you so far. how exactly could a war be considered defending our country either it is or it isnt. defined by individuals such as yourself. you say one thing others disagree. in the case of afghanistan we were defending our country but iran is an attack by us period! iran too funny. more right wing spin and complete bullshit. showing them coming home after giving their lives for this country is showing them respect that depends entirely on the context of the media for their reason and commentary that goes along with it. but it really doesnt matter. the wishes of the soldiers family should be respected first before yours. and yet you still pass the buck on the democrates lol!!! the dems tried several times to add pork barrel spending onto va funding bills and refused to allow line item vetoes to get rid of it. yes the reps shot some of those bills down for good reason. quit with the attachments. nonetheless i never said the buck is entirely on the democrats. i said the problem is politicians from both sides. they all a mess. it is you that keep point only at bush and the reps for every single problem that exists. thats pure bs and serves zero purpose in getting anything done. more complete crap. once the body is in possession of the family then it is their decision as to what happens not before. bull! what you are saying is to tell the families to foff if they dont like it. good grief. really nice of you. .
From : miles
tbone wrote miles im not going to continue these silly arguments. fine we will call clintons bombing a war but now with it being a war i guess clinton was a far superior commander and chief as his war accomplished what he wanted it to with minimum cost all around. no he didnt. he even stated there are still unaccounted for wmds. he didnt get saddam to fully cooperate and not play continued games. saddam never complied with the uns request to fully declare all his weapons destruction of them etc. hell saddam said he still had wmds so your claims of clinton accomplishing anything is absurd. clinton doesnt even believe in your bs. .
From : roy
roy wrote yup the avoid road works real well. i guess next time there is a update we will know how to get it.g revision af is supposed to be out in the next few weeks. it probably is just updated maps. i wish alpine didnt charge $200 for each upgrade which is released twice per year. i dont have any warranty on mine so i cant get a replacement for my damaged disk! i thought you had a new durango. .
From : tbone
roy wrote tbone wrote lol i said fox style reporting miles not that it was from fox and not so much what cnn said but what you twist it to mean. i quoted what clinton said. unaccounted for means they did exist and he doesnt know where they are. have to agree with you there. roy that what gets me about the liberals and democrats arguments about no wmds exist. we know they existed. and that is the key word miles existed. it has been years and so far not a sign of them or any functioning means to create more of them. without any evidence of their destruction id rather have the assumption that they still do exist but we dont know where. of course you would because the minute you dont you would have to admit that you were wrong. iraq is a large land area to search for something that takes up very little space. that indicates that he hid them so well that even he could not find them or use them if he needed them. that is about the dumbest thing that i have heard from you so far but dont worry i know that you will top it. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote then i guess that bush also doesnt support the troops since he sent them in without the required equipment to begin with i agree in part. he certainly does need to find ways to get more of what they need to them. no miles he needed to get them what they needed before they went in and didnt dfo it. the dems however have not been trying to do so at all. more complete crap. when the dems realized what a half-assed plan our great leader had with nowhere near the required equipment and not exit strategy they tried to stop it and were then accused by the idiots of the right including you of being flip-flops. you defined your definition of support as cut and run. another right wing moronic rant. there is a thats not support at all as its not what the troops define it as. lol now that depends on which ones you ask. and of course you have to add the fact that many of our troops would consider it a traitorous act to go against the commander and idiot many need to believe it to be a just cause of face the fact of what a waste of money and lives this whole act is. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
tbone wrote and that is the key word miles existed. it has been years and so far not a sign of them or any functioning means to create more of them. all that means is that we havent found them. there are 168000 square miles of land in iraq. yes they could be anywhere in iraq and they take up very little space. your assumption is that we know everything saddam did and thats an absurd assumption. that indicates that he hid them so well that even he could not find them now why would you assume that he knew where he put them. we dont. why do you seem to think that if saddam knew where they were then we should .
From : tbone
tbone wrote lol i said fox style reporting miles not that it was from fox and not so much what cnn said but what you twist it to mean. i quoted what clinton said. unaccounted for means they did exist and he doesnt know where they are. liberals redefine that to mean they no longer exist. no time has defined them as non-existing. unaccounted for means that he didnt know what happened to them not that he didnt know where they are. and it doesnt mean that they do either. id rather assume they do until found rather than the liberals approach to just say they dont exist and be happy with that. of course you would because otherwise you would have to admit that you helped elect an idiot and were wrong on your support for this moronic war. no the evidence that we still cannot find them after years of looking and complete access to saddams intelligence. thats all you need iraq is a large area. no way possible every inch could be searched. not even close. you really do sound like an idiot. why should they have to search the entire country. do you really think that saddam would hide them so that he could not find them either or even have access to a few if needed are you really this stupid really then show me every car that was ever built. going by your idiotic theory since they all did exist they still must exist somewhere and therefore should be able to be located. dont worry ill wait. never said they should be able to locate. youre also trying to compare millions of cars to 100s of weapons. i am comparing nothing just using your flawed logic. iraq is not the usa and saddam is not going to document the destruction of weapons like the us does. actually he is going to everything possible to hide the fact because once others know he was disarmed it becomes revenge time against him and he knew it. do you really think that he is going to hide them where he cant find them or be able to get to them huh he knows where he put them. we dont. how exactly does he know unless he wrote the cordinates down or placed some type of locater with them and unless he burried them himself and alone others would also know where they are. say he buried some out in the middle of the desert somewhere. how the heck would we find them lol how would he find them and how would he know that someone didnt betray him and give the location to someone else who would take them without his knowledge sorry miles but he would need to record the location somewhere and would not hide them where he would have no idea what could be happening to them. why do liberals think its so easy to search every inch of a country the size of california liberals are not dumb enough to think that the whole country would need to be searched to find them if they still existed. we knew it because we saw him using them and when the inspectors went in they found them. what evidence did bush have yep inspectors found them and tagged and inventoried them as well as put seals on the buildings. when they returned the seals were broken and weapons gone. for you the fact we cant find them means they dont exist. thats absurd logic. you could say that if we just found the empty buildings but after this much time your claim that they still exist is what is absurd or in reality just desperate. i do not believe anything saddam says about destroying them. he said he was working with the un. if thats the case he would have invited them to witness their destruction. no he wouldnt and if you wernt so damn ignorant you would know that. he was a bully and the last thing any bully would do is show the world that they are now defensless. none the less saddams word is not worth a dang but you bought it and accept it for no other reason than we dont know what he did with them. even a destroyed weapon has identifiable remnants. sure unless they were also destroyed or used for something else. if what you say is true then some remains from every car ever build should also be able to be found. when are you going to begin looking for them please miles he says it himself or have you forgotten the war on terror that is not an official declaration of war as you said was needed in order to define it as war. the usa has set policies for the declaration of war. it has not been declared as such by anyone except you. miles you can spin this all you want even you call it a war. i dont recall any agencies including fox calling clintons bombing a war. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
tbone wrote no time has defined them as non-existing. only to a biased liberal. there is no way possible that the entirety of iraq can be searched. it is a very large land area. wmds do not take up much space. of course you would because otherwise you would have to admit that you helped elect an idiot and were wrong on your support for this moronic war. now there ya go tbone showing your true colors and reason for your views. pure political hatred and bias. you really do sound like an idiot. why should they have to search the entire country. do you really think that saddam would hide them so that he could not find them either or even have access to a few if needed huh saddam could have hidden them anywhere in the entire country. what are you smoking i am comparing nothing just using your flawed logic. iraq is not the usa and saddam is not going to document the destruction of weapons like the us does. youve said before that saddam complied with the un when in reality he did know such thing and youve just admitted to that effect. saddam never did comply with the uns demands to declare the whereabouts of all wmds. saddam never declared the wmds that went missing. never even mentioned them in his report to the un. how exactly does he know unless he wrote the cordinates down or placed some type of locater with them and unless he burried them himself and alone others would also know where they are. what the hell are you talking about tbone youre saying it is impossible for someone to hide something because if they did they wouldnt know where they put it good grief!! lol how would he find them he would know where to go. iraq is a very large area. what part of that do you not comprehend we have only searched a fraction of 1% of the total land area. we never dug it all up and searched inside every single building in the country. not even close. liberals are not dumb enough to think that the whole country would need to be searched to find them if they still existed. so if i hide something somewhere here in arizona you can come here and quickly find it what are you smoking .
From : tbone
roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. you know thats rather absurd. people are people. sorry miles but people are also different form each other and some try and see the big picture while others see only what concerns them. liberals ignore what doesnt effect them just the same as anyone else. the difference is that liberals look long term and to the future while conservatives look toward the past. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : Annonymous
on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom you know thats rather absurd. people are people. sorry miles but people are also different form each other and some try and see the big picture while others see only what concerns them. liberals ignore what doesnt effect them just the same as anyone else. the difference is that liberals look long term and to the future while conservatives look toward the past. .
From : miles
tbone wrote so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. youre way too predictable with your absurdity! the difference is that liberals look long term and to the future while conservatives look toward the past. liberals look long term oh now thats funny. pelosis thoughts didnt even last a couple months. dang liberal hypocrites. .
From : miles
theguy@whatever.net wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom you havent been here long enough otherwise you wouldnt ask that. from his years of such stupid remarks he actually believes his crap. .
From : roy
theguy@whatever.net wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom you havent been here long enough otherwise you wouldnt ask that. from his years of such stupid remarks he actually believes his crap. i believe that t-guy has been here longer than both of you in one form or another. .
From : miles
tbone wrote i already said that they get their facts straight and were credible for what they say but there bias does not have them showing the entire picture. more so than cbs or cnn. heck foxs #1 host is not a conservative. cbs is heavily left wing biased whether you see it or not. .
From : tbone
theguy@whatever.net wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom you havent been here long enough otherwise you wouldnt ask that. from his years of such stupid remarks he actually believes his crap. lol you should be the last person in here to say something like this with all of the crap you keep spewing out that you actually believe. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. youre way too predictable with your absurdity! sadly it is not as absurd as it looks. while we can both agree that the definition of liberal is not kind and loving person they do look more at the big picture and long term than conservatives and become active when they see what appears to be a problem in the long term unlike conservatives who are qiute short sighted that way. the difference is that liberals look long term and to the future while conservatives look toward the past. liberals look long term oh now thats funny. pelosis thoughts didnt even last a couple months. dang liberal hypocrites. and that is another thing different about liberals. when they realize that they might be wrong or if the situation changes they make changes to their plans unlike our current conservative leader who just plods along on the same course no matter how wrong it gets. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
looking at a ram 1500 standard cab lb. 2001 series with the v-6. 2wd. its really a good looking truck and drives well. a few cosmetic issues but nothing major. here are the problems my mechanic formerly at a local dodge dealreship found on a pre-sale inspection today. windshield replacement cracked all the way across leaking rear differential new serpetine belt factory original is on there at 84000 miles new plugs and wires all original drivers side tail light left side valve cover leaking oil - plus it has two open recalls on it. ideas suggestions things i should know and/or worry about thanks a million! .
From : miles
tbone wrote hell there are still some intelligent people in hear that still are under the illusion that there is no such thing as global warming and most of them are conservatives. prove it then. russian scientists disagree with you http//www.mos.com//2006/08/25/globalcooling.shtml the united nations intergovernmental panel on climate change released these findings which disagree with you scientists established that the climate since the termination of the last glacial stage some 12000 years ago has hardly been stable or constant states the report. between four and seven thousand years ago the earths mean surface temperature was some 1-2 degrees celsius higher than it is today for largely unknown reasons. the earth goes through periods of global warming just as it does global cooling. satellite records satellite data show a net global temperature trend of +0.06 degrees/decade significantly less than forecast by climate models which are unproven. while i agree we need to curb pollution globally the politically motivated issues surrounding global warming is pure bs. liberals who preach how we need to conserve should live by their own words. figures such as al gore or john edwards live extravegant greedy wasteful lifestyles. their bs about global warming is just political bunk. .
From : tbone
on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom gee thanks for pointing out the obvious but your negative reaction indicates that you know that even it this there is an ounce of truth to it. the fact is that most liberals do look at the bigger picture and realize that many things effect people long term even if not directly while most conservatives tend to have tunnel vision and only see what effects them directly and in the short term. hell there are still some intelligent people in hear that still are under the illusion that th
From : miles
tbone wrote they do look more at the big picture and long term than conservatives and become active when they see what appears to be a problem that is only your biased opinion and nothing more. liberals pray on the weak for their own gains. while many social programs do help considerably the democrats favorites work to only oppress people and make them dependent on these programs. thats the difference between liberals and conservatives. liberals think theyre helping with handouts that result in dependency. conservatives prefer programs which help people to help themselves. and that is another thing different about liberals. when they realize that they might be wrong or if the situation changes they make changes to their plans oh now theres a liberal cop out. liberals can campaign on one agenda then in a blink of an eye flip flop in a 180 turn. yes situations change that require policies to be adjusted. thats a far cry from reversing ones major thoughts only weeks after as pelosi has done over and over. .
From : miles
tbone wrote then i guess that santa and the easter bunny are real and hiding in santas workshop at the north pole because just because we havent found them doesnt mean that they dont exist. oh please!! your analogy is worthless. if difference is that your bunny and santa have never been found or known to exist. wmds in iraq were found inventoried photographed tagged and sealed. they are now missing. to you that means they dont exist anywhere. so what do you think that saddam was the only man on earth that knows where they are if they still exist. do you really think that he si going to hide them in an area where he could not get to them if he needed them or protect them from someone else getting them and using them on him. are you really this stupid what the hell are you ranting about youre saying its impossible to hide small items anywhere in 168000 square miles because the person hiding them wouldnt be able to find them if he hid them well. good grief tbone youre getting absurd with this logic. no miles what is absurd it that he would hide them in a place where he could not get to them or that noboby has come forward offering to reveal their location pure bull! nobody has come forward with evidence of what happened to them but that doesnt concern you. most of saddams cohorts are dead anywa
From : Annonymous
on wed 7 mar 2007 195842 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote on wed 7 mar 2007 163327 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom gee thanks for pointing out the obvious then why did you write such a thing tom why did you reply to it
From : Annonymous
on wed 7 mar 2007 163327 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom gee thanks for pointing out the obvious then why did you write such a thing tom but your negative reaction indicates that you know that even it this there is an ounce of truth to it. tom that makes absolutely no sense at all. you sound like a jr. high school kid. so if i say something is stupid that means i think it is true fuck you are a moron. the fact is that most liberals do look at the bigger picture and realize that many things effect people long term even if not directly while most conservatives tend to have tunnel vision and only see what effects them directly and in the short term. that type of over generalization is worthless tom. it devalues the whole debate. it is the type of sophomoric statement that you resort to all too often. you cant rely on your arguments so you have to develop some wierd sort of intellectual heirarchy to make up for it. hell there are still some intelligent people in hear that still are under the illusion that there is no such thing as global warming and most of them are conservatives. that is also a worthless over generalization. the subject of global warming is much debated. there are many scientists lined up on both sides and there is much to consider on both sides. argue the ideas tom not the labels. you really dissapoint me some of the time. .
From : tbone
on wed 7 mar 2007 163327 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom gee thanks for pointing out the obvious then why did you write such a thing tom why did you reply to it but your negative reaction indicates that you know that even it this there is an ounce of truth to it. tom that makes absolutely no sense at all. you sound like a jr. high school kid. oh yea and your ranting here sound so much more adult. so if i say something is stupid that means i think it is true fuck you are a moron. yet another ulta-intelligent response from you. hide all you wan to pinhead the fact that you are still in here whining about it says it all. the fact is that most liberals do look at the bigger picture and realize that many things effect people long term even if not directly while most conservatives tend to have tunnel vision and only see what effects them directly and in the short term. that type of over generalization is worthless tom. it devalues the whole debate. it is the type of sophomoric statement that you resort to all too often. you cant rely on your arguments so you have to develop some wierd sort of intellectual heirarchy to make up for it. yawn. all you seem to come up with are more of these lame insults. prove any of it wrong and dont worry ill wait. as for evidence look at the american auto industry again!!! hell there are still some intelligent people in hear that still are under the illusion that there is no such thing as global warming and most of them are conservatives. that is also a worthless over generalization. the subject of global warming is much debated. there are many scientists lined up on both sides and there is much to consider on both sides. no there really isnt. anyone that thinks that we can continue dumping more and more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere while at the same time destroying the very things that eliminate them also at an ever increasing rate and then think that there will be no effect from it is either in denile find that for some reason it is better fir them to cloud the truth or is simply a retartd. which one are you argue the ideas tom not the labels. you really dissapoint me some of the time. here is a clue for ya i really dont give a phuck what you think and as for arguing ideas try practicing what you preach. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
that indicates that he hid them so well that even he could not find them now why would you assume that he knew where he put them. we dont. saddam knew where they. your implying that because he knew everyone else would know is pure lunacy! because unlike you i am not an idiot. he would write down the location somewhere incase he needed someone to get to them so its impossible for anyone to hide anything anywhere with your logic. geez. . 222 331735 bvkhh.2370$oj1.14@fe18.lga tbone wrote because only an idiot would ever believe that the entire country needed to be searched. he did not have complete control over the entire country and would not hide them in the areas that he did not. tbone use a bit of logic here. iraq is 168000 square miles. fine take away the northern kurdish regions. take away a few other remote areas and whats left ill even exagerate your bs a bit and say he hid them somewhere in a 100000 square mile region. youre trying to tell me its impossible to hide something because if saddam could find it then we could. pure bs. gee with your logic nothing could ever be hidden by anyone. what does political hatred have to do with anything sorry to burst your bubble miles but it truly was the conservative party that launched the political hatred machine. conservatives arent in the hate mode. they dislike certain policies of certain liberals but generally dont hate. you and your fellow liberals on the other hand are full of pure hatred. liberals spew generic hate towards bush reps and conservatives. if bush is for something liberals are against it if he is against something theyre for it. party line hatred and nothing more. i dont have to either like or hate the man to see that this war was a mistake from the beginning and serves no valid purpose. there is more going on in this country the world etc. than the war. yes i realize its a big issue but its not the only issue. yet its the only issue with you. why hatred perhaps actually i said no such thing. i said that he got rid of the wmds but never said that he complied with any un demands when he did it. just because we havent found them does not verify he destroyed them. most of the known weapons would leave residue that could be identified. none the less id rather assume they exist than take saddams word for it. i never said that he did. he probably destroyed them probably you have no idea. none at all. he probably moved them somewhere even though you feel nothing could be hidden without us being able to find. if they are going to hide them so well that after years of searching we cannot find them that is exactly what im saying. so everything in the world thats been hidden and searched for has been found huh too funny. and i would bet that if you just hid it without documenting where you put it that it would not be all that long before you would not be able to find it either unless you are now claiming that you have never lost anything. so we have every scrap of documentation and records that saddam and his cohorts ever wrote pretty absurd logic you have! .
From : tbone
on wed 7 mar 2007 195842 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote on wed 7 mar 2007 163327 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote on mon 5 mar 2007 153707 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote roy wrote im talking about the citizens not the politicians. so just conservatives ignore and liberals are all caring and active with issues regardless of whether it effects them or not yea pretty much as that is the defining difference between the two sides. well..........im not really involved in this debate but i stopped by and read this post. i gotta say the above post is the most stupid thing that i have seen written here and that includes a whole lot of stupid shit man. im assuming that tome wrote that tongue in cheek so to speak right tom gee thanks for pointing out the obvious then why did you write such a thing tom why did you reply to it but your negative reaction indicates that you know that even it this there is an ounce of truth to it. tom that makes absolutely no sense at all. you sound like a jr. high school kid. oh yea and your ranting here sound so much more adult. so if i say something is stupid that means i think it is true fuck you are a moron. yet another ulta-intelligent response from you. hide all you wan to pinhead the fact that you are still in here whining about it says it all. the fact is that most liberals do look at the bigger picture and realize that many things effect people long term even if not directly while most conservatives tend to have tunnel vision and only see what effects them directly and in the short term. that type of over generalization is worthless tom. it devalues the whole debate. it is the type of sophomoric statement that you resort to all too often. you cant rely on your arguments so you have to develop some wierd sort of intellectual heirarchy to make up for it. yawn. all you seem to come up with are more of these lame insults. prove any of it wrong and dont worry ill wait. as for evidence look at the american auto industry again!!! hell there are still some intelligent people in hear that still are under the illusion that there is no such thing as global warming and most of them are conservatives. that is also a worthless over generalization. the subject of global warming is much debated. there are many scientists lined up on both sides and there is much to consider on both sides. no there really isnt. anyone that thinks that we can continue dumping more and more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere while at the same time destroying the very things that eliminate them also at an ever increasing rate and then think that there will be no effect from it is either in denile find that for some reason it is better fir them to cloud the truth or is simply a retartd. which one are you argue the ideas tom not the labels. you really dissapoint me some of the time. here is a clue for ya i really dont give a phuck what you think and as for arguing ideas try practicing what you preach. yeah you really dont care do you thats why you respond to every post in this ng that disagrees with you. tom you do care thats the whole thing. you care but your too lightweight to discuss anything in a resonable or intelligent way. and that has nothing to do with being a liberal or a conservative.........a demo or a repub...........a devoted fox guy or a cnn guy...........or any of the other droll inane bullshit that you go on about. you are just a fucking moron in spite of what label you put on yourself. so come back with whatever sophomoric jr. high school retorts that you have it wont make any difference.........it still sucks to be you. gee you really hurt my feelings now -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : roy
tbone wrote because only an idiot would ever believe that the entire country needed to be searched. he did not have complete control over the entire country and would not hide them in the areas that he did not. tbone use a bit of logic here. iraq is 168000 square miles. fine take away the northern kurdish regions. take away a few other remote areas and whats left ill even exagerate your bs a bit and say he hid them somewhere in a 100000 square mile region. youre trying to tell me its impossible to hide something because if saddam could find it then we could. pure bs. gee with your logic nothing could ever be hidden by anyone. what does political hatred have to do with anything sorry to burst your bubble miles but it truly was the conservative party that launched the political hatred machine. .. if bush is for something liberals are against it if he is against something theyre for it. party line hatred and nothing more. it would seem to be common sense at this stage. i dont have to either like or hate the man to see that this war was a mistake from the beginning and serves no valid purpose. there is more going on in this country the world etc. than the war. yes i realize its a big issue but its not the only issue. dont you think the war is influencing a bunch of other things .
From : miles
roy wrote dont you think the war is influencing a bunch of other things yes hatred. and that accomplishes nothing except perhaps negatively effect other issues. being against the war is one thing. doing what the democrats have done only makes it even worse more prolonged and extends to far more than just the war. im pissed at the reps for a poorly conducted war and the dems for making sure its a poorly conducted war and hoping it gets worse before election time. the worst thing the dems can have happen is for success in iraq prior to elections. they discount any success and wont discuss any good things happening in iraq. they dont want it and thats disgusting. i dont like what the reps have done either. but the dems response is diplorable. theyre not the answer. .
From : roy
roy wrote dont you think the war is influencing a bunch of other things yes hatred. and that accomplishes nothing except perhaps negatively effect other issues. being against the war is one thing. doing what the democrats have done only makes it even worse more prolonged and extends to far more than just the war. im pissed at the reps for a poorly conducted war and the dems for making sure its a poorly conducted war and hoping it gets worse before election time. the worst thing the dems can have happen is for success in iraq prior to elections. they discount any success and wont discuss any good things happening in iraq. they dont want it and thats disgusting. i dont like what the reps have done either. but the dems response is diplorable. theyre not the answer. miles geeeeze what do you feel is the answer the rebubs screwed up the dems are deplorable. talk about hatred. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles geeeeze what do you feel is the answer the rebubs screwed up the dems are deplorable. talk about hatred. hatred i dont hate one side for anything and everything they do or not do. thats what hatred causes. i think politicians on both sides are a mess. yes the reps screwed up but the dems do not have any answers at all and have done everything they can to make things even worse. the answer is to give the troops every dang thing they need and let them fight the war on their terms instead of having to be politically correct and caught in between political sides. the fastest way to bring our troops home is to let them fight their way. waging a political battle on the home front puts them at risk and extends their stay. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles geeeeze what do you feel is the answer the rebubs screwed up the dems are deplorable. talk about hatred. hatred i dont hate one side for anything and everything they do or not do. thats what hatred causes. i think politicians on both sides are a mess. so your now looking for another party yes the reps screwed up but the dems do not have any answers at all and have done everything they can to make things even worse. the answer is to give the troops every dang thing they need and let them fight the war on their terms instead of having to be politically correct and caught in between political sides. it would seem that this country is unable to equip our troops to do that. the fastest way to bring our troops home is to let them fight their way. waging a political battle on the home front puts them at risk and extends their stay. i guess waging a political battle in another country lessens that risk how do we know when we have won this battle .
From : tbone
roy wrote miles geeeeze what do you feel is the answer the rebubs screwed up the dems are deplorable. talk about hatred. hatred i dont hate one side for anything and everything they do or not do. thats what hatred causes. i think politicians on both sides are a mess. oh please miles wake up and pull your head out of your ass. every time you complain about something its always those damn liberals. i have yet to ever see you blame the cons for anything and somehow anything major always happens to be clintons fault and never either bush or reagan lol!!! yes the reps screwed up but the dems do not have any answers at all and have done everything they can to make things even worse. more lies and complete crap. now you are saying that the dems are traitors because if they want more soldiers to die then that is exactly what they are and we both know that is not the truth. talk about political hatred. the answer is to give the troops every dang thing they need and let them fight the war on their terms instead of having to be politically correct and caught in between political sides. that is not the dems fault that would be the idiot that sent them there without the needed equipment and no battle plan or exit strategy. the fastest way to bring our troops home is to let them fight their way. hahahaha you really make me laugh. what exactly is their way waging a political battle on the home front puts them at risk and extends their stay. the sad thing is that you would be saying it very different if it was a democrat that sent them there. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
any good things happening in iraq. they dont want it and thats disgusting. and the sad thing is that the reps are no different. i dont like what the reps have done either. but the dems response is diplorable. theyre not the answer. and the reps have proven that they are not either. time to give the other side a chance. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving . 222 331768 45f03c22$0$28109$4c368faf@roadrunner.com tbone wrote then i guess that santa and the easter bunny are real and hiding in santas workshop at the north pole because just because we havent found them doesnt mean that they dont exist. oh please!! your analogy is worthless. if difference is that your bunny and santa have never been found or known to exist. but by your logic that doesnt mean that they dont. wmds in iraq were found inventoried photographed tagged and sealed. they are now missing. to you that means they dont exist anywhere. no that means that they are missing but since they have still yet to be found and according to you the only one that knew where they were is dead they will probably never be found which is the same as not existing and that is even if they so exist at all and they probably dont. so what do you think that saddam was the only man on earth that knows where they are if they still exist. do you really think that he si going to hide them in an area where he could not get to them if he needed them or protect them from someone else getting them and using them on him. are you really this stupid what the hell are you ranting about youre saying its impossible to hide small items anywhere in 168000 square miles because the person hiding them wouldnt be able to find them if he hid them well. good grief tbone youre getting absurd with this logic. that is correct. as you say they are not huge and can easily be lost in 168000 square miles of open desert if the location is not properly recorded and there would be no valid reason for not recording the location for when they may be needed or the location checked to make sure that they were not discovered and stolen. no miles what is absurd it that he would hide them in a place where he could not get to them or that noboby has come forward offering to reveal their location pure bull! nobody has come forward with evidence of what happened to them but that doesnt concern you. most of saddams cohorts are dead anyways. lol oh please do you really think that he and his officers are the ones that hid them if they were hidden at all lol. they would have been hidden by regular military and with the reward available for their recovery someone would have squeeled especially after saddams capture. that indicates that he hid them so well that even he could not find them now why would you assume that he knew where he put them. we dont. saddam knew where they. your implying that because he knew everyone else would know is pure lunacy! how would he know unless they were in a military building or he dad the exact location recorded somewhere because only a retard would depend on memory for that. because unlike you i am not an idiot. he would write down the location somewhere incase he needed someone to get to them so its impossible for anyone to hide anything anywhere with your logic. geez. we are talking about a weapon miles not a gold watch and a weapon hidden where it cannot be monitored and accessible is a danger to its owner. saddam mat have been a coward but he was not an idiot. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote because only an idiot would ever believe that the entire country needed to be searched. he did not have complete control over the entire country and would not hide them in the areas that he did not. tbone use a bit of logic here. iraq is 168000 square miles. fine take away the northern kurdish regions. take away a few other remote areas and whats left ill even exagerate your bs a bit and say he hid them somewhere in a 100000 square mile region. once again you talk out of your ass. we are not talking about money here or some item of value we are talking about a weapon and a weapon is worthless if you cannot access it somehow. hiding it in the middle of the desert is pointless as it makes it impossible to access easy to lose and at risk of theft from one of his enemies. youre trying to tell me its impossible to hide something because if saddam could find it then we could. pure bs. gee with your logic nothing could ever be hidden by anyone. there is nothing that can be hidden that cannot be found especially when you have access. you are under the delusion that he is going to hide a weapon where he cannot directly access it and that is just pure ignorance. doing that to a weapon makes it less than worthless it actually makes it a threat against the one hiding it as someone else could locate it and use it against him. it would be far better to destroy it and make a new one when it is needed. the problem there is that we could also not find any means to create new ones something else that we were told existed. then you can add that there is huge money available to someone willing to reveal their location and at this point do you really think that everyone that would know where they are is dedicated to a dead man what does political hatred have to do with anything sorry to burst your bubble miles but it truly was the conservative party that launched the political hatred machine. . if bush is for something liberals are against it if he is against something theyre for it. party line hatred and nothing more. sorry miles but that was the definition of your party with clinton and there was no depth your party wouldnt sink to. the republican party made a laughing stock out of this great country so dont talk to me or anyone else about political haterd as you and yours defined it and now the gloves are off so get used to it. it would seem to be common sense at this stage. i dont have to either like or hate the man to see that this war was a mistake from the beginning and serves no valid purpose. there is more going on in this country the world etc. than the war. yes i realize its a big issue but its not the only issue. oh you mean like the destruction of the middle class. dont you think the war is influencing a bunch of other things .
From : tbone
roy wrote dont you think the war is influencing a bunch of other things yes hatred. and that accomplishes nothing except perhaps negatively effect other issues. being against the war is one thing. doing what the democrats have done only makes it even worse more prolonged and extends to far more than just the war. and you can thank the republican party for this. as they say what comes around goes around. the difference however is that the republicans did it for no other reasons but fear and hatred while the dems are doing it because of the loss of life for no reason as well as hatred of this idiot. im pissed at the reps for a poorly conducted war and the dems for making sure its a poorly conducted war and hoping it gets worse before election time. sorry miles but the dems had nothing to do with it for the last 4 years as it was the wh and the republican controlled congress. i doubt that anyone hopes that it gets worse and will make sure that the right wing smoke and mirrors trick doesnt happen this time just before the elections. the worst thing the dems can have happen is for success in iraq prior to elections. i really doubt that the war will have much effect on the elections this time. they discount any success and wont d
From : tbone
dealer. none of this should cost you anything other than your time. ... -d .
From : tbone
tbone wrote hell there are still some intelligent people in hear that still are under the illusion that there is no such thing as global warming and most of them are conservatives. prove it then. there is no need to prove the obvious but our 70 degree winter the melting ice caps and the possible polar bear extinction that even bush is concerned about are some clues. russian scientists disagree with you http//www.mos.com//2006/08/25/globalcooling.shtml hahahahahaha now that was funny and not a single fact to back up any of it. try giving a credible source. the united nations intergovernmental panel on climate change released these findings which disagree with you scientists established that the climate since the termination of the last glacial stage some 12000 years ago has hardly been stable or constant states the report. what a complete load of shit. if the climate were not stable there would be no life on this planet. the eco-system of this planet keeps it stable although situations do occur to shift it every now and then. the difference between then and now is that those conditions were probably one time or short time things that allowed the eco-system to adjust to it and correct it. this is not the case now as we continue to contaminate the environment as we continue to destroy the very things the earth used to clean it back up and only a retard would think this would have no effect. between four and seven thousand years ago the earths mean surface temperature was some 1-2 degrees celsius higher than it is today for largely unknown reasons. and until the reasons are known this is just a theory and a poor one at that. the climate does not just change. it is always cause and effect. the earth goes through periods of global warming just as it does global cooling. bullshit. the earth has gone through periods of climatic change due to conditions none of us were around to record. satellite records satellite data show a net global temperature trend of +0.06 degrees/decade significantly less than forecast by climate models which are unproven. yea like your measurments about the lake effect snows and that everything was normal and yet record snows. net trends are much like averages and for the most part are useless meaningless data. while i agree we need to curb pollution globally the politically motivated issues surrounding global warming is pure bs. only in your dreams miles. liberals who preach how we need to conserve should live by their own words. many do but why should they be the only ones to do without while people like you continue on with your head up your ass. my wife says i should conserve more and while i think she is correct im not going to do without for no reason and as long as people like you exist that is all that it would be. figures such as al gore or john edwards live extravegant greedy wasteful lifestyles. their bs about global warming is just political bunk. that is a lame excuse. funny how money seems to be about the only thing you care about but rich dems are extravagant greedy and wasteful. the difference between them and you miles is that they are willing to conserve but not until the majority does as well but as long as people like you exist.... -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote pretty much like the man before him but the economy was recovering and most americans were doing pretty well and that scared the hell out of the rich. bush sr. did 2 years after. it took clinton a couple months. .
From : tbone
oh that makes sense. -- christopher a. young you cant shout down a troll. you have to starve them. .. nathan in montana wrote i consider fox to be the most credible of all. they are just as biased as the ny times although on the opposite end of the spectrum but their reporting is factual. see if tbone thinks that way! i already said that they get their facts straight and were credible for what they say but there bias does not have them showing the entire picture. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote lol are you really this desperate he said no such thing. we are the ones that started this war and in that case we needed to be prepared and have the proper equipment to do it and we didnt. tbone now youre spinning again. what you are saying is exactly the point i made. the issue is not the lack of equipment for you and roy. it is the war itself your against. if we were better prepared youd still be against sending troops just the same. it would make zero difference for you. you are correct as far as my feelings to this senseless war but that doesnt change the fact that he sent us there unprepared and for no valid reason. that has got to be the most retarded statement from you so far. how exactly could a war be considered defending our country either it is or it isnt. defined by individuals such as yourself. you say one thing others disagree. please explain to me exactly how attacking iraq is in any way defending this country and i want facts. in the case of afghanistan we were defending our country but iran is an attack by us period! iran too funny. a spelling error get over it. more right wing spin and complete bullshit. showing them coming home after giving their lives for this country is showing them respect that depends entirely on the context of the media for their reason and commentary that goes along with it. but it really doesnt matter. the wishes of the soldiers family should be respected first before yours. of course you would come up with crap like this as there is no way for the agencies to do this and bush could give a rats ass about the families wishes. he just doesnt want to look even worse than he already does. and yet you still pass the buck on the democrates lol!!! the dems tried several times to add pork barrel spending onto va funding bills and refused to allow line item vetoes to get rid of it. pretty much like the reps do all of the time such as the bridge to knowhere. sorry miles but that is far from a one sided thing and with the reps in control of congress fo so long there really wasnt much else the dems could do to get some things passed. if the reps killed the bills just because of some pork that really doesnt show much support for the troops either. yes the reps shot some of those bills down for good reason. really how good of a reason could it be to get our soldiers killed quit with the attachments. that goes both ways miles and it was the reps who killed the line item veto many times as well. nonetheless i never said the buck is entirely on the democrats. i said the problem is politicians from both sides. they all a mess. it is you that keep point only at bush and the reps for every single problem that exists. actually miles that would be you and blaming all of the problems of the world on clinton. the only reason you are trying to blame both sides is because the true fault rests completely on the wh and you know it. thats pure bs and serves zero purpose in getting anything done. lets see you say this the next time something goes wrong that could be blamed more in the dems. more complete crap. once the body is in possession of the family then it is their decision as to what happens not before. bull! what you are saying is to tell the families to foff if they dont like it. good grief. really nice of you. oh miles cut the bullshit. the families didnt want their loved ones sent over there for no reason to begin with and yet off they went to die. if they went to die for this country then they should be honored when their bodies return not swept under the rug like is happening now. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote yes it is. dont try and put all the problems on congress or the dems who have only had control for a rew months. why do liberals seem to think having 1 or 2 more votes in congress means control because miles it does. control of congress means control of the commities and thats where the real power comes from and also for the most part determins what bills ever reach the floor. that implies that all votes on all issues are party line. it means no such thing although with this president that seems to be the way it was happening. they most certainly are not. most votes are not party line. this means nothing. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote who sent them there miles yes tbone. im well aware you believe everything that goes wrong anywhere in this country is bushs and the reps fault and nothing that went wrong during the prior admin. is the dems fault. oh ya to liberals nothing went wrong under their watch. you cant even answer this simple question!!! and as usual somehow the dems are to blame too funny. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving . 222 331798 45f09014$0$8936$4c368faf@roadrunner.com roy wrote miles in discussing about anything with you some how you spin it into a liberal /repub debate. thats because you tbone etc. keep pointing fingers at one party even though you say you dont want to point fingers. pretty much as you do only this time its valid. if finger pointing isnt what you want then dont do it yourself!! division isnt whats needed to solve the problem. if bush is an idiot then so is kennedy pelosi and company. theyre all politicians and they all stink!! im not the one making it a dem/rep issue. of course not this time as it is the reps fault but just about every other time you blame those damn liberals for everything. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote and yet you re-elect him. must be that bias clouding your vision. clinton ran a campaign promising a tax cut. very shortly after being elected we saw one of the largest tax hikes in history. pretty much like the man before him but the economy was recovering and most americans were doing pretty well and that scared the hell out of the rich. yet dems re-elected him. i think your memory is clouded. he was re-elected because the economy was doing very well for the majority of the people and mostly for the rich like today. my memory is just fine miles. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
on thu 8 mar 2007 111632 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote hmmm. according to tom roy talks out of his ass miles has his head up his ass im just a plain old ass. where exactly did i say roy talks out of his ass as far as the other two accusations yea you got them right. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote miles im not going to continue these silly arguments. fine we will call clintons bombing a war but now with it being a war i guess clinton was a far superior commander and chief as his war accomplished what he wanted it to with minimum cost all around. no he didnt. he even stated there are still unaccounted for wmds. lol thats all he could say as he didnt know what happened to them but bush made it clear that not only did saddam have them at the ready but was going to use them against us both lies. he didnt get saddam to fully cooperate and not play continued games. never said that he did but he did get saddam to eliminate the wmds even if saddam never admitted to doing it. saddam never complied with the uns request to fully declare all his weapons destruction of them etc. and he never would and anyone with half a brain would know that. hell saddam said he still had wmds so your claims of clinton accomplishing anything is absurd. of course he did. he needed the fear of them to keep other countries near him from attacking him. clinton doesnt even believe in your bs. really when was the last time you discussed it with him -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : Annonymous
on thu 8 mar 2007 111632 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote hmmm. according to tom roy talks out of his ass miles has his head up his ass im just a plain old ass. tom.........you got some wierd stuff going on in that mind of yours. roy wrote miles geeeeze what do you feel is the answer the rebubs screwed up the dems are deplorable. talk about hatred. hatred i dont hate one side for anything and everything they do or not do. thats what hatred causes. i think politicians on both sides are a mess. oh please miles wake up and pull your head out of your ass. every time you complain about something its always those damn liberals. i have yet to ever see you blame the cons for anything and somehow anything major always happens to be clintons fault and never either bush or reagan lol!!! yes the reps screwed up but the dems do not have any answers at all and have done everything they can to make things even worse. more lies and complete crap. now you are saying that the dems are traitors because if they want more soldiers to die then that is exactly what they are and we both know that is not the truth. talk about political hatred. the answer is to give the troops every dang thing they need and let them fight the war on their terms instead of having to be politically correct and caught in between political sides. that is not the dems fault that would be the idiot that sent them there without the needed equipment and no battle plan or exit strategy. the fastest way to bring our troops home is to let them fight their way. hahahaha you really make me laugh. what exactly is their way waging a political battle on the home front puts them at risk and extends their stay. the sad thing is that you would be saying it very different if it was a democrat that sent them there. .
From : tbone
tbone wrote they do look more at the big picture and long term than conservatives and become active when they see what appears to be a problem that is only your biased opinion and nothing more. and this based on your own biased opinion. liberals pray on the weak for their own gains. ok lets see some examples. while many social programs do help considerably the democrats favorites work to only oppress people and make them dependent on these programs. more complete biased crap. what advantage is it to anyone to make people dependant on them thats the difference between liberals and conservatives. liberals think theyre helping with handouts that result in dependency. conservatives prefer programs which help people to help themselves. oh do you mean like the job retraining programs that are getting massive cuts with the new budget the conservatives want to keep them struggling so that they will be grateful for any low paying jobs they care to offer so it seems like the conservatives want to keep them dependant as well but dont want to pay for the damage caused by it. and that is another thing different about liberals. when they realize that they might be wrong or if the situation changes they make changes to their plans oh now theres a liberal cop out. liberals can campaign on one agenda then in a blink of an eye flip flop in a 180 turn. and the conservatives are different how the real difference is that in the real world when things change the dems try and change their plans unlike our current idiot. yes situations change that require policies to be adjusted. but it never seems to happen. instead we get the smoke and mirrirs crap to try and make everything look good no matter how bad it is getting. thats a far cry from reversing ones major thoughts only weeks after as pelosi has done over and over. really again lets see some examples. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
roy wrote so your now looking for another party im not sure what point youre driving at. i have to like one party or the other good vs. evil id like it if republicans went back to being conservatives. that would be a start. how do we know when we have won this battle it will never be won. does that mean we should quit fighting and surrender terrorism is a war that has to be fought until such time the word no longer exists. no way do i think returning to the methods used by both parties the past few decades is an option. terrorism is not something a police style method can be used as was tried for decades. you have told me what you are against. what are you for with regards to combating global terrorism and the likes of al queda .
From : miles
tbone wrote once again you talk out of your ass. we are not talking about money here or some item of value we are talking about a weapon and a weapon is worthless if you cannot access it somehow. hiding it in the middle of the desert is pointless as it makes it impossible to access easy to lose and at risk of theft from one of his enemies. answer the question then. is there no way possible for anyone to hide anything no way for anything to ever remain hidden you make it all sound so easy. ya saddam knew where they were so no problem for us to find them. hmm...saddam never said where he supposedly destroyed them yet we havent found any place with remnants either. grind them up burn them and bury them and there would still be evidence of their existance yet we havent found any. there is nothing that can be hidden that cannot be found especially when you have access. you are under the delusion that he is going to hide a weapon where he cannot directly access it and that is just pure ignorance. you are under the delusion that anything hidden by anyone is very easy to go and find. thats just pure lunacy! sorry miles but that was the definition of your party with clinton and there was no depth your party wouldnt sink to. that is completely untrue. i disagreed with many policies of clintons and agreed with several as well. i never blanket disagreed with clinton just on the account of because hes clinton. yet you most certainly do just that with bush. big difference. you hate!! the republican party made a laughing stock out of this great country so dont talk to me or anyone else about political haterd as you and yours defined it and now the gloves are off so get used to it. youve just proven my point with your above pure blanket hatred of reps and bush. that accomplishes nothing. youre against anything bush says or does simply because of your hatred rather than particular issues on an individual basis. that is pure hatred tbone and you got it bad. .
From : miles
tbone wrote oh please miles wake up and pull your head out of your ass. every time you complain about something its always those damn liberals. i have yet to ever see you blame the cons for anything and somehow anything major always happens to be clintons fault and never either bush or reagan lol!!! i look at individual issues and have not made blanket statements. that would be you! i also dont play the blame game as you so insist. i state what i agree with or what i dont agree with. i prefer to discuss issues rather than your method of blanket hatred. more lies and complete crap. now you are saying that the dems are traitors because if they want more soldiers to die then that is exactly what they are and we both know that is not the truth. now if that isnt a spin!! dems do not have answers at all and they most certainly have done everything they can to hamper our militaries ability. that has cost lives not saved them. it has extended the war not shortened it. yes reps handled this war poorly but dems have zero solutions and have done everything they can to mess it up further. dems are not the solution. that is not the dems fault that would be the idiot that sent them there without the needed equipment and no battle plan or exit strategy. voting down bills to build weapons aircraft etc. is most certainly the dems fault. the sad thing is that you would be saying it very different if it was a democrat that sent them there. thats pure political bias that makes you say such things. i never blasted clinton for bombing iraq. i wished he did more. try again. .
From : miles
tbone wrote and you can thank the republican party for this. as they say what comes around goes around. the difference however is that the republicans did it for no other reasons but fear and hatred while the dems are doing it because of the loss of life for no reason as well as hatred of this idiot. oh i see. hampering our military is just a tit for tat bs by the dems good grief. sorry miles but the dems had nothing to do with it for the last 4 years as it was the wh and the republican controlled congress. here we go again with that political crap. you seem to think all bills are voted straight down party lines. go take a look at the voting records tbone and then rethink your argument. if 10% of the reps voted against a bill and 99% of the dems did as well then it failed. why do you make excuses for the dems voting against bills to fund more equipment aircraft and weaponry and the sad thing is that the reps are no different. the reps do talk about the good things that have gone on in iraq. the dems do everything they can to trash it and bury it. they want negativity. its politics for them. .
From : miles
it is funny to watch you act this desperately. you act as if he was the only one who would know where they were. hmm...saddam never said where he supposedly destroyed them yet we havent found any place with remnants either. grind them up burn them and bury them and there would still be evidence of their existance yet we havent found any. lol who cares about reminants and if what you way is true you should be able to find evidence of every model t ever build. dont worry ill wait while you look. there is nothing that can be hidden that cannot be found especially when you have access. you are under the delusion that he is going to hide a weapon where he cannot directly access it and that is just pure ignorance. you are under the delusion that anything hidden by anyone is very easy to go and find. thats just pure lunacy! no you are under the delusion that he would hide a weapon like some secret treasure rendering it useless. sorry miles but that was the definition of your party with clinton and there was no depth your party wouldnt sink to. that is completely untrue. no it isnt. i disagreed with many policies of clintons and agreed with several as well. i never blanket disagreed with clinton just on the account of because hes clinton. yet you most certainly do just that with bush. big difference. you hate!! i dont hate the man. i dont even know him but he has not made all that many good decisions during his presidency. the republican party made a laughing stock out of this great country so dont talk to me or anyone else about political haterd as you and yours defined it and now the gloves are off so get used to it. youve just proven my point with your above pure blanket hatred of reps and bush. what exactly does the above sentence have to do with bush it is not a blanket hatred as i have voted for many republicans including reagan and bush sr the first term. but the shit the republicans did to clinton out of nothing but fear and hatred is fact that you cannot spin out of. that accomplishes nothing. youre against anything bush says or does simply because of your hatred rather than particular issues on an individual basis. more complete crap. i just dont see anything that he does benefiting the common citizen of this country. he is solidly in the pocket of big business and the oil companies and has done nothing for this country. he spends billion on a useless war while cutting programs for retraining our workers and we still have large areas of this country destroyed by storms left untoutched. that is pure hatred tbone and you got it bad. you must be looking in the mirror. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
on thu 08 mar 2007 201039 -0700 miles nope@nopers.com wrote stormin mormon wrote one of the things i find different. conservatives deal in facts liberals deal in feelings. thats very true. liberals make decisions from emotions. often its long term decisions based on quick emotional reactions rather than rationality. geez. now you sound like tom. for crying out loud cant any of you stop the insanity you guys are so into fucking labels that you cant see what is in front of your fucking faces. .
From : miles
tbone wrote of course you would come up with crap like this as there is no way for the agencies to do this and bush could give a rats ass about the families wishes. he just doesnt want to look even worse than he already does. its very clear that you dont give a rats ass about the feelings and wishes of soliers families. its all about politics and hatred for you. oh miles cut the bullshit. the families didnt want their loved ones sent over there for no reason to begin with and yet off they went to die. if they went to die for this country then they should be honored when their bodies return not swept under the rug like is happening now. that decision is up to the families not you. most of the families have stated they dont want their loved ones coffins shown on tv especially as part of a political statement. complete lack of respect by you because of your political feelings is just sick. .
From : miles
tbone wrote oh please miles every time you put the blame on the liberals you are making a blanket statement. that made no sense at all. i discuss particular issues. you on the other hand are simply against anything and everything bush or the reps do without regard to any particular issue at hand. now who is spinning. the republicans have proven for the past 6 years that they dont have the answers either. i already said that so not sure why youre repeating. i said the reps are a mess and the dems do not have any answers. the dems are not the solution. both sides are one huge mess. kennedy pelosi gore edwards clinton...none of them have any solutions. they just rant as you do. more complete crap and blanket accusations. the republicans also have no answers and are the cause of the problem not the solution. crap huh fine. tell us all about the great iraq war plan of the dems. the solid plan theyve come up with. take a few pages if you need since im sure its well thought out and lengthy. sorry miles but many of these cuts have come from the republicans and are not the dems fault. gotta pay for those tax cuts. bull. the apache and comanche programs were killed by the dems for instance and thats just for starters. .
From : tbone
tbone wrote pretty much like the man before him but the economy was recovering and most americans were doing pretty well and that scared the hell out of the rich. bush sr. did 2 years after. it took clinton a couple months. and yet the economy was humming along and many people were doing very well even after these tax hikes. the dept caused by reagan needed to be paid for and he increased the taxes in a way that the poor and middle classes were not overly effected and put the burden on the rich where it belongs. the republican party leaders did not like that much and i wonder why -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote once again you talk out of your ass. we are not talking about money here or some item of value we are talking about a weapon and a weapon is worthless if you cannot access it somehow. hiding it in the middle of the desert is pointless as it makes it impossible to access easy to lose and at risk of theft from one of his enemies. answer the question then. why you never do. is there no way possible for anyone to hide anything lol just about anyone can hide something. no way for anything to ever remain hidden now that depends on what it is and how it was hidden. there is a big difference between hiding something so that it cannot be easily found and destroyed and hiding something so that nobody can find it. what possible reason would he have for hiding it the second way and even then with our current technology unless he hid it in some completely inaccessible location we should have found some of them by now. you make it all sound so easy. no im just using simple logic. if he hid them as well as you would like to believe then they would be useless to him as well and if so why keep them and risk them being found and used against him ya saddam knew where they were so no problem for us to
From : Annonymous
tbone wrote oh please miles wake up and pull your head out of your ass. every time you complain about something its always those damn liberals. i have yet to ever see you blame the cons for anything and somehow anything major always happens to be clintons fault and never either bush or reagan lol!!! i look at individual issues and have not made blanket statements. oh please miles every time you put the blame on the liberals you are making a blanket statement. that would be you! i also dont play the blame game as you so insist. bullshit miles. every time there is a problem it somehow is the democrats fault and if you know for a fact that it was really the republicans then you blame both sides. i have yet to see you blame the republicans for anything. i state what i agree with or what i dont agree with. i prefer to discuss issues rather than your method of blanket hatred. i would suggest that you review your past posts. more lies and complete crap. now you are saying that the dems are traitors because if they want more soldiers to die then that is exactly what they are and we both know that is not the truth. now if that isnt a spin!! it isnt spin miles. dems do not have answers at all and they most certainly have done everything they can to hamper our militaries ability. now who is spinning. the republicans have proven for the past 6 years that they dont have the answers either. as for hampering the militaries ability here you go with the blanket accusations again. that has cost lives not saved them. and here you do accusing them of being unpatriotic again. it has extended the war not shortened it. do you care to prove this of course not as it is your thing to make accusations and never back a single one of them up. this war is running long because we have no plan and that is the total fault of the wh. yes reps handled this war poorly but dems have zero solutions and have done everything they can to mess it up further. dems are not the solution. more complete crap and blanket accusations. the republicans also have no answers and are the cause of the problem not the solution. that is not the dems fault that would be the idiot that sent them there without the needed equipment and no battle plan or exit strategy. voting down bills to build weapons aircraft etc. is most certainly the dems fault. sorry miles but many of these cuts have come from the republicans and are not the dems fault. gotta pay for those tax cuts. the sad thing is that you would be saying it very different if it was a democrat that sent them there. thats pure political bias that makes you say such things. i never blasted clinton for bombing iraq. i wished he did more. try again. exactly what more could he have done. at least what he did was planned out. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
on thu 8 mar 2007 221510 -0500 tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote tbone wrote oh please miles wake up and pull your head out of your ass. every time you complain about something its always those damn liberals. i have yet to ever see you blame the cons for anything and somehow anything major always happens to be clintons fault and never either bush or reagan lol!!! i look at individual issues and have not made blanket statements. oh please miles every time you put the blame on the liberals you are making a blanket statement. like you have never done that..........other than every post you make that would be you! i also dont play the blame game as you so insist. bullshit miles. every time there is a problem it somehow is the democrats fault and if you know for a fact that it was really the republicans then you blame both sides. i have yet to see you blame the republicans for anything. i state what i agree with or what i dont agree with. i prefer to discuss issues rather than your method of blanket hatred. i would suggest that you review your past posts. more lies and complete crap. now you are saying that the dems are traitors because if they want more soldiers to die then that is exactly what they are and we both know that is not the truth. now if that isnt a spin!! it isnt spin miles. dems do not have answers at all and they most certainly have done everything they can to hamper our militaries ability. now who is spinning. the republicans have proven for the past 6 years that they dont have the answers either. as for hampering the militaries ability here you go with the blanket accusations again. that has cost lives not saved them. and here you do accusing them of being unpatriotic again. it has extended the war not shortened it. do you care to prove this of course not as it is your thing to make accusations and never back a single one of them up. this war is running long because we have no plan and that is the total fault of the wh. yes reps handled this war poorly but dems have zero solutions and have done everything they can to mess it up further. dems are not the solution. more complete crap and blanket accusations. the republicans also have no answers and are the cause of the problem not the solution. that is not the dems fault that would be the idiot that sent them there without the needed equipment and no battle plan or exit strategy. voting down bills to build weapons aircraft etc. is most certainly the dems fault. sorry miles but many of these cuts have come from the republicans and are not the dems fault. gotta pay for those tax cuts. the sad thing is that you would be saying it very different if it was a democrat that sent them there. thats pure political bias that makes you say such things. i never blasted clinton for bombing iraq. i wished he did more. try again. exactly what more could he have done. at least what he did was planned out. .
From : tbone
tbone wrote and you can thank the republican party for this. as they say what comes around goes around. the difference however is that the republicans did it for no other reasons but fear and hatred while the dems are doing it because of the loss of life for no reason as well as hatred of this idiot. oh i see. hampering our military is just a tit for tat bs by the dems good grief. lol talk about spin and once again blaming the dems for all of the problems with the war. talk about political hatred. sorry miles but the dems had nothing to do with it for the last 4 years as it was the wh and the republican controlled congress. here we go again with that political crap. i guess you misses your own above lol! you seem to think all bills are voted straight down party lines. go take a look at the voting records tbone and then rethink your argument. i never said that they were but in the beginning the dems had no choice but to vote for the reps crap or be labeled as traitors or have you forgotten the term flip-flop. it kinda ranks up there with cut and run. if 10% of the reps voted against a bill and 99% of the dems did as well then it failed. why do you make excuses for the dems voting against bills to fund more equipment aircraft and weaponry and the sad thing is that the reps are no different. the reps do talk about the good things that have gone on in iraq. sure they do becuase it was their party that sent those men there and if you think that is is not politically motivated then you are indeed a fool. i dont here much of the negative side comming from the right. gee i wonder why that is. the dems do everything they can to trash it and bury it. they want negativity. its politics for them. this is exactly what im talking about. you accuse the dems for using a situation in a political manner but refuse to accept that the reps are doing the same damn thing. while the dems are showing the negative side the reps are only showing the positive so how is one any better or worse than the other. you really need to pull that head out of your ass. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : miles
tbone wrote and yet the economy was humming along and many people were doing very well even after these tax hikes. it was growing before clinton ever took office. besides massive amounts of money being blindly invested in worthless stocks could never last and had nothing to do with what clinton did or didnt do. the dept caused by reagan reagan inherited a complete mess from carter. double digit inflation double digit interest rates double digit unemployment. reagan did what was needed to get this country going again. his policies completely reversed what took place under carter. needed to be paid for and he increased the taxes in a way that the poor and middle classes were not overly effected and put the burden on the rich where it belongs. weve already discussed this. there never was any surplus. i asked you to show me in what year during clintons term revenues exceeded expenditures and you finally came back saying you couldnt. you did give some smoke and mirror excuses but the fact remained there never was any such year because the surplus was only a projected budget that never happened. sorry to inform you tbone but with the current tax rates the rich pay a higher % share of total taxes collected than before the cuts. look it up although i doubt the truth is of interest to you. .
From : miles
tbone wrote lol talk about spin and once again blaming the dems for all of the problems with the war. talk about political hatred. huh i never blamed all the problems on the dems. i said they have made a problem even worse. that too complex of a concept for you i never said that they were but in the beginning the dems had no choice but to vote for the reps crap or be labeled as traitors or have you forgotten the term flip-flop. it kinda ranks up there with cut and run. oh i see. the dems have no backbone and thus its the reps fault they vote bad. good grief! besides it was the dems who voted to stop building of equipment weapons aircraft etc. ya the things the military is saying they lack. sure they do becuase it was their party that sent those men there and if you think that is is not politically motivated then you are indeed a fool. i dont here much of the negative side comming from the right. gee i wonder why that is. you dont huh check fox. plenty of negativity regarding the war. hmm..how can that be since they are so heavily right biased .
From : roy
roy wrote so your now looking for another party im not sure what point youre driving at. i have to like one party or the other good vs. evil id like it if republicans went back to being conservatives. that would be a start. how do we know when we have won this battle it will never be won. does that mean we should quit fighting and surrender miles what are we fighting in iraq terrorism is a war that has to be fought until such time the word no longer exists. now that it has reached us we go to and stay iraq i think that the money expended there could be put to better use protecting this country from terrorism. dont you no way do i think returning to the methods used by both parties the past few decades is an option. terrorism is not something a police style method can be used as was tried for decades. you have told me what you are against. what are you for with regards to combating global terrorism and the likes of al queda i take a much harsher view than most. screw the human rights rules of engagement and world opinion. if a country condones or harbors terrorist cells isolate them. if need be use smart weapons or failing that not so smart weapons. troops on the ground nope. if the wh needs to play with its troops use them for port security rail security and border security. first believe me from one who works in a large city in mass transportation. this country is a sieve. there is nada nothing none pick the word being done other than in the airports with regard to security. sure there are a few feel good things going on. im really amazed that nothing has happened. gotta tell ya im thrilled to be retiring ive felt for quite some time that working on the passenger railroad is working with a bullseye on you. .
From : miles
roy wrote miles what are we fighting in iraq terrorism roy. who is it that is funding the fighting against us in iraq terrosism and the likes of al queda are worldwide. where would you prefer that we fight them or is it your contention we should not fight them anywhere should we go back to dealing with terrorism as a police action now that it has reached us we go to and stay iraq i think that the money expended there could be put to better use protecting this country from terrorism. dont you then youre saying we shouldnt fight terrorists. there is no way youre going to keep them out of this country. what form of protection are you talking about walls troops etc. all along the borders good luck with that. i take a much harsher view than most. screw the human rights rules of engagement and world opinion. if a country condones or harbors terrorist cells isolate them. isolate them how boycotts embargos that method is what has been tried for decades and has no effect. if need be use smart weapons or failing that not so smart weapons. troops on the ground nope. no way can a war be won from the air alone. not a chance. not unless you just nuke the entire country. first believe me from one who works in a large city in mass transportation. this country is a sieve. there is nada nothing none pick the word being done other than in the airports with regard to security. give some ideas that would make subways trains buses etc. immune to terrorist attacks especially from suicide bombers or roadside bombs gotta tell ya im thrilled to be retiring ive felt for quite some time that working on the passenger railroad is working with a bullseye on you. that could be. one problem is that people wont stand for tightened security. look at the airlines. people are fighting like crazy against strict security measures. it would be even worse if the same methods were used in subways and railroads. .
From : roy
roy wrote miles what are we fighting in iraq terrorism roy. who is it that is funding the fighting against us in iraq you really believe that we are fighting terrorism in iraq or are we trying to prop up a new government terrosism and the likes of al queda are worldwide. so i guess you believe that we should put troops in conflict worldwide. where would you prefer that we fight them or is it your contention we should not fight them anywhere should we go back to dealing with terrorism as a police action what have we accomplished thus far other than giving some terriorists a close by target now that it has reached us we go to and stay iraq i think that the money expended there could be put to better use protecting this country from terrorism. dont you then youre saying we shouldnt fight terrorists. dont put words in my mouth miles. i told you in my previous post my view on dealing with them. we seem to disagree. there is no way youre going to keep them out of this country. what form of protection are you talking about walls troops etc. all along the borders good luck with that. honestly i dont have a answer but if it means closeing the borders im not opposed to it. i take a much harsher view than most. screw the human rights rules of engagement and world opinion. if a country condones or harbors terrorist cells isolate them. isolate them how boycotts embargos that method is what has been tried for decades and has no effect. perhaps if we could muster some support from other nations it might work. if need be use smart weapons or failing that not so smart weapons. troops on the ground nope. no way can a war be won from the air alone. not a chance. not unless you just nuke the entire country. miles nothing personal but it seems to me that the loudest advocates for putting troops on the ground are those that have never been shot at. when this country is capable of equiping its troops properly and careing for the wounded that will surly follow then talk to me about troops on the ground in some shit hole. oh give me a good reason why they are going to the aformentioned shit hole. this country has has the capability to drop a bomb with pinpoint accuracy. can kill a person from over two miles away with one bullet. there is no need to put people on the ground in such large numbers. as far as nuking a entire country as i said before box bomb them. first believe me from one who works in a large city in mass transportation. this country is a sieve. there is nada nothing none pick the word being done other than in the airports with regard to security. give some ideas that would make subways trains buses etc. immune to terrorist attacks especially from suicide bombers or roadside bombs i can walk into any rail yard and walk onto any train when they are not in service and not be questioned by anybody. nuff said. gotta tell ya im thrilled to be retiring ive felt for quite some time that working on the passenger railroad is working with a bullseye on you. that could be. one problem is that people wont stand for tightened security. look at the airlines. people are fighting like crazy against strict security measures. it would be even worse if the same methods were used in subways and railroads. people will adapt. the screaming and yelling about the airlines has pretty much subsided. this thread is going nowhere im out of it. .
From : miles
roy wrote you really believe that we are fighting terrorism in iraq or are we trying to prop up a new government yes. again i ask who is it that is funding those we are fighting in iraq so i guess you believe that we should put troops in conflict worldwide. nope. let them use there resources to come where we want. again who are we fighting and who is funding them what have we accomplished thus far other than giving some terriorists a close by target weve killed or captured much of the top brass in al queda one more major leader today. weve isolated the war mostly in and around baghdad. the other 17 provinces are fairly quiet now. i also believe lack of major attacks in the usa and usa interests around the world is a result that al queda etc. have their resources tied up. dont put words in my mouth miles. i told you in my previous post my view on dealing with them. we seem to disagree. if i heard you right you more or less said take the gloves off and not fight a pc war. i fully agree. now how and where exactly honestly i dont have a answer but if it means closeing the borders im not opposed to it. not possible to close the borders. we have two very long borders. perhaps if we could muster some support from other nations it might work. that has been done over the decades and has had zero effect. embargos and boycotts do nothing towards decreasing terrorism. miles nothing personal but it seems to me that the loudest advocates for putting troops on the ground are those that have never been shot at. when this country is capable of equiping its troops properly and careing for the wounded that will surly follow then talk to me about troops on the ground in some shit hole. oh give me a good reason why they are going to the aformentioned shit hole. roy this doesnt do anything towards presenting a solution to combating global terrorism. this is exactly why i say the democrats do not have any solutions at all because thats the position they take. so the only choice is to not fight at all at least for the time being until our military is restrengthened after being torn apart during the 90s. this country has has the capability to drop a bomb with pinpoint accuracy. can kill a person from over two miles away with one bullet. there is no need to put people on the ground in such large numbers. you give more credit to smart weaponry than theyre capable of. without people on the ground you wont know what to strike. its also impossible to win from the air against enemies in extremely rugged terrain. a war can not be won from the air alone. i can walk into any rail yard and walk onto any train when they are not in service and not be questioned by anybody. nuff said. someone can easily rip up a remote section of track as well this happened in arizona not that long ago. putting troops all along every track and at every switching station etc. is not possible. .
From : napalmheart
roy wrote no i have a real good memory. i dont recall uncle bill burying us in a fucked up war. clinton attacked iraq and in his speech gave for the most part the exact same reasons as bush for doing so. while he didnt send in troops clinton did conduct an action of war. one isnt any more excusable than another. war is war whether its from the ground or air. dont forget the balkans action. jets remarked as nato planes killing innocent serbs. the missile into the chinese embassy was a nice touch. seriously i liked that one! .
From : tbone
tbone wrote oh please miles every time you put the blame on the liberals you are making a blanket statement. that made no sense at all. i discuss particular issues. you on the other hand are simply against anything and everything bush or the reps do without regard to any particular issue at hand. more spin and complete crap. now who is spinning. the republicans have proven for the past 6 years that they dont have the answers either. i already said that so not sure why youre repeating. i said the reps are a mess and the dems do not have any answers. exactly. you dont say that the reps dont have the answers only that they are a mess. the truth is not only dont they have the answers either in this case they are the cause of the problem. as for the dems not having the answers getting out may in fact be the only answer as it will force the hands of the leaders in iraq as well as the other countries that are content to sit on thir hands. these other countries were quick to jump in with the n. korea issues when bush decided to do nothing besides cut them off. funny how you think it was the correct decision there. the dems are not the solution. both sides are one huge mess. as i have said many times before miles this is your bias talking. kennedy pelosi gore edwards clinton...none of them have any solutions. they just rant as you do. and what exactly hass bush or the reps done. oh yea just more of the same old thing that not only doesnt work but is killing our men and women. too funny if it were not so sad. more complete crap and blanket accusations. the republicans also have no answers and are the cause of the problem not the solution. crap huh fine. tell us all about the great iraq war plan of the dems. they didnt have one as they knew that we didnt belong there. what exactly is the war plan of the reps besides the same old head up the ass method of keeping everything the same even though it clearly doesnt work and come up with catch phrases to insult anyone that disagrees with them. the solid plan theyve come up with. take a few pages if you need since im sure its well thought out and lengthy. we need to develop an exit strategy and stick to it. ther is no way to win this war the way it is currently being fought so we either force some of the responsibility to maintain things on others or we stay there forever. if it works in n. korea there as you say it does there is no reason that it will not work in iraq. sorry miles but many of these cuts have come from the republicans and are not the dems fault. gotta pay for those tax cuts. bull. the apache and comanche programs were killed by the dems for instance and thats just for starters. were we at war then and iirc the reps controlled congress then too. either way you dont start a war unless you are prepared for it and that is exactly what this wh did. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : roy
tbone wrote damn tom that was 10 friggin days ago!! ya gotta get a hobby.bfg roy oh please miles every time you put the blame on the liberals you are making a blanket statement. that made no sense at all. i discuss particular issues. you on the other hand are simply against anything and everything bush or the reps do without regard to any particular issue at hand. more spin and complete crap. now who is spinning. the republicans have proven for the past 6 years that they dont have the answers either. i already said that so not sure why youre repeating. i said the reps are a mess and the dems do not have any answers. exactly. you dont say that the reps dont have the answers only that they are a mess. the truth is not only dont they have the answers either in this case they are the cause of the problem. as for the dems not having the answers getting out may in fact be the only answer as it will force the hands of the leaders in iraq as well as the other countries that are content to sit on thir hands. these other countries were quick to jump in with the n. korea issues when bush decided to do nothing besides cut them off. funny how you think it was the correct decision there. the dems are not the solution. both sides are one huge mess. as i have said many times before miles this is your bias talking. kennedy pelosi gore edwards clinton...none of them have any solutions. they just rant as you do. and what exactly hass bush or the reps done. oh yea just more of the same old thing that not only doesnt work but is killing our men and women. too funny if it were not so sad. more complete crap and blanket accusations. the republicans also have no answers and are the cause of the problem not the solution. crap huh fine. tell us all about the great iraq war plan of the dems. they didnt have one as they knew that we didnt belong there. what exactly is the war plan of the reps besides the same old head up the ass method of keeping everything the same even though it clearly doesnt work and come up with catch phrases to insult anyone that disagrees with them. the solid plan theyve come up with. take a few pages if you need since im sure its well thought out and lengthy. we need to develop an exit strategy and stick to it. ther is no way to win this war the way it is currently being fought so we either force some of the responsibility to maintain things on others or we stay there forever. if it works in n. korea there as you say it does there is no reason that it will not work in iraq. sorry miles but many of these cuts have come from the republicans and are not the dems fault. gotta pay for those tax cuts. bull. the apache and comanche programs were killed by the dems for instance and thats just for starters. were we at war then and iirc the reps controlled congress then too. either way you dont start a war unless you are prepared for it and that is exactly what this wh did. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : tbone
tbone wrote damn tom that was 10 friggin days ago!! ya gotta get a hobby.bfg its friggen cold out there today and i had some time to kill - -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : roy
tbone wrote damn tom that was 10 friggin days ago!! ya gotta get a hobby.bfg its friggen cold out there today and i had some time to kill - it is at that wont hit freezeing today. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .