Comments on: 3 GIs Killed In Baghdad Bridge Blast

Six Soldiers Wounded As Bomb Hits Bridge Checkpoint; Former Sunni Foes Asked For Help

[j-whitman]

notblue,,,, Carefull, Bush wouldn't like you blaming 9/11 on the Saudi's.. You're right of course. --- But won't talk about the Saudi's will he ??? -- Too busy trying to lie again & blame it all on Iran including the Taliban & al Quida who is funded by the Sudai's & Iran's enemys.

[rafterman1]

===The war in Afghanistan is the real war but the war in Iraq is what????? Not real, non-existent, a figment of our imagination?

No, the Iraq war is a war that no longer serves America's needs and it is ridiculous to keep fighting it when cost far exceeds the payoff.

===See, this is where the faulty logic is. Your Congress authorized this war in Iraq. There ain't no way of getting around it.===

And it was a mistake. Dems are realizing it by trying to end the war, but Repubs refuse to. How many Repubs voted for the Iraq bill to set a timeline? Not enough apparently. The Dems don't have the votes to do squat unless enough Repubs come over to our side. Ending the Iraq war is in th hands of Bush anmd the Repubs in Congress, plain and simple.

===They the Dumnos come out and say that Bush lied to get them in this war. They do not assume responsibility for their actions. This is the reason I loath them.===

He did lie - ask Colin Powell how proud he is of his UN speech. But Dems are taking responsibility - by trying to end the war they helped start. It is the Repubs who still refuse to take responsibility for what is going on right now.

[notblue]

Rafterman, the fact that even you are holding on to this misguided idea that these radicals are in and owe allegiance to specific countries will not allow you to move on to the larger picture or threat. The mantra, Afghanistan is ok but Iraq is not makes no sense since these radicals have no allegiance to any specific country. Saudi's comprised most of the 911 terrorists.

[mudrose-2009]

iF we were a bunch of peaceniks against war, then why the support for one war but not the other? Maybe because we are trying to use some logic in determining which is the best way to defend the country? Which makes the idea that liberals or Democrats are "surrenderers" illogical based on the evidence.


Posted by Rafterman1

You seriously can't believe you are defending the left with this kind of illogic. It's like Spewlosi said. The war in Afghanistan is the real war but the war in Iraq is what????? Not real, non-existent, a figment of our imagination? See, this is where the faulty logic is. Your Congress authorized this war in Iraq. There ain't no way of getting around it. They the Dumnos come out and say that Bush lied to get them in this war. They do not assume responsibility for their actions. This is the reason I loath them.

[j-whitman]

Rafterman1,,, Some are against all wars, it's called FREEDOM -- Some are for any war they can profit from & gain political influence they are called republicans --------

SOME ARE AGAINST FAILED WAR RAN BY A DECIDER WHO'S HAD A LIFETIME OF FAILURES & 4 YEARS OF FAILED WAR PROGRESS

BUT WE ALL WILL FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOMS & IT STARTS HERE & NOW

[rafterman1]

===But they would from you because you are a big, hunk of intellectual depth. Right? Hahahahahahaha.===

Intellectual enough to not make "funny" nicknames out of people's names and think that it's hilarious. Except for Bush, who is Bushie or "the decider" and Bill Clinton, who is "Bubba".

[rafterman1]

===On another note, if one was to institute the beliefes of the leftwing in this country where pascifism is the only option===

But that's not the position of the left, which is why your argument falls apart. The majority of the left believe in sensible defense. We do not subscribe to the idea that any war is a good war. Such an idea is a falicy. We are not a bunch of peaceniks. You will find few lefties against the Afghanistan war. That's because the war in Afghanistan made sense while the war in Iraq did not.

If we were a bunch of peaceniks against war, then why the support for one war but not the other? Maybe because we are trying to use some logic in determining which is the best way to defend the country? Which makes the idea that liberals or Democrats are "surrenderers" illogical based on the evidence.

[j-whitman]

Mudrose,,, Clinton didn't fix the problem for sure -- But he didn't start a war on unfounded evidence did he & kill 3,500 Americans or 10's of thousands of innocent civilians did he ???

Notblue,, Good point girl,, what you are missing is -- An Ideaology can only be defeated by a better ideaology --- NOT BY WAGING WAR ON COUNTRIES THAT ARE NOT THREATS

[jerr11]

CONGRATULATIONS to the Bush/Cheney Killing Machine for three more DEAD bodies!

In terms of their sheer capacity to kill American troops needlessly (Maybe Halliburton will dispute the use of the word needlessly here), these two genuises of death (aka Alabama Bush and Deferment Cheney) are in a league of their own!

[mudrose-2009]

RamaLamaObama? Billary the Clintoid? Are you five? You are showing your intellectual age. Like anyone would take any opinion serious coming from you about foreign policy.

Posted by Rafterman1

But they would from you because you are a big, hunk of intellectual depth. Right? Hahahahahahaha.

[rafterman1]

RamaLamaObama? Billary the Clintoid? Are you five? You are showing your intellectual age. Like anyone would take any opinion serious coming from you about foreign policy.

[notblue]

Certainly not ALL Muslims are the same or should be catigorized as such, however, the defening silence from the vast majority of Muslims regarding the radical Muslim element is damning to the whole. On another note, if one was to institute the beliefes of the leftwing in this country where pascifism is the only option, then a path to true peace would be to withdraw from Iraq and the middle east in general, denounce christianity and all other "non-Islam" religions, and incorporate the Isalmic ideology and way of life. That would be the only path of appeasement when reffering to radical Islam. The alternative would be to stand up and fight the ideology. It's important to understand it's an ideology we are fighting as an ideology knows no allegiance to ANY specific country.

[mudrose-2009]

Mudrose,,, Go back before Clinton to the former Bush --- He's the one who started cutbacks in the CIA for private contractors.... Do a little research before you start echoing ingorant dishonorable GOP logic.
Posted by j-whitman

And Clintoid took care to correct it? Isn't that your argument with ignorant dishonorable GOP logic? I think I want to throw up on you, too.

[j-whitman]

Mudrose,,, Go back before Clinton to the former Bush --- He's the one who started cutbacks in the CIA for private contractors.... Do a little research before you start echoing ingorant dishonorable GOP logic.

[mudrose-2009]

Mudrose,,,

You want to know why our intelligence is bad ????? Most of our agents are private contractors, working for politically conected companies (Bush Loyalist & campaign contributors).
Posted by j-whitman

Oh, I see, that probably explains why our intelligence was bad when Clintoid was in office too and why the whole ftrucking Congress along with most of Europe thought that Sadaam had weapons of mass destruction and Congress gave Bush the authorization to go into Iraq. Must have been bad then too. But then if Congress knew then what it knows now, they probably wouldn't have believe the intelligence that came out of the Clintoid administration too. Our intelligence is not the greatest not because we have private contractors although that isn't such a bad thing, it's that with the language barrier we cannot get agents to infiltrate the rank and file of the enemy. In other words, we are not a Muslim country.

[j-whitman]

Radio,,

I'm sure they are using every tool available to them,,, There just isn't enough trooops to do the job, as well as lack of equipment --- It's been a major problem since the beginning of this "War of Roses".
I've got things to do, see ya later.

[j-whitman]

Mudrose,,,

You want to know why our intelligence is bad ????? Most of our agents are private contractors, working for politically conected companies (Bush Loyalist & campaign contributors).

[micma-2009]

ATTENTION!

MUDROSE IS A PAID HACK.

HE'S NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.

WHY ENGAGE SOMEONE WHO IS PAID TO LIE AND SPIN?

[radiob-2009]

J
I wonder why they are not using stop sticks(used by police to stop cars, trucks etc.) and why the barriers that are set up are not working? Are they creating bottlenecks?

[mudrose-2009]

Mudrose,,, They aren't running for the office of President, are they ???
Posted by j-whitman

Oh, so whatever they do then doesn't affect the citizenry? Is that your argument? Look at the winners you have running. RamaLamaObama. Haven't heard one bright idea come out of his mouth. Billary the Clintoid who was defined and rightly so as a European Caricature and the Soros/MoveOn.Org. owned Bumperstick sticker himself Edwards. Great cast of hopefuls. I call them the graet appeasers. Bumpersticker candidates, bumpersticker hopefuls who will spiral down America into socialism and open borders.