posted on October 30, 2006 09:15:54 PM new
Yep....vote for the democrats and they'll be sure and force America to admit defeat.
They have NO suggestions on what they believe will happen IF we retreat. You don't hear them calling for anything except running and trying to hide from the terrorists. Great Americans that they are.
Guess they just think the terrorists will decide to let us be. You think they will? Then be SURE and vote for the democrats.
Voting for the liberals/dems will guarantee that after they get rid of Homeland Security...after they get rid of most of the the Patriot Act....after they get rid of most of the necessary tools currently being used to hunt down the suspected terrorists in our country.....the terrorists should have a pretty easy time fulfilling their goal....our destruction.
Yep....our enemies couldn't ask for better 'friends' - 'supporters' than our very own liberals. saddam thought so too....and he said so. He very much loved that they took HIS side....and protested against this war. lovely....not!!
Then all the deaths of our brave soldiers will be for nothing. We will have shown their families that what their sons and daughters VOLUNTEERED and fought and died for wasn't worth it. Their deaths were a total waste. Thanks to the dems who have NEVER held our military as a valuable organization to begin with.
Then....we'll soon be fighting the same terrorists on our OWN LAND...that we're fighting in Iraq right now. That'll be great fun. After all....the terrorists will see OUR withdrawal as a WIN for them. They will feel more impowered to continue forward, against our weaked Nation. Yep....and all with the help of our OWN democratic leaders.
The dem party will be SO PROUD that they again brought America to her knees. That pleased them then...and it will again.
The liberals are just such GREAT American patriots NOT!!! - always supporting/enabling our enemies.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 30, 2006 09:25 PM ]
posted on October 31, 2006 05:40:12 AM new
LIAR-K said,"Yep....vote for the democrats and they'll be sure and force America to admit defeat."
Sorry Liar_K if we had a better commander and chief things might be better in Iraq.
This DUMBO in the White House is getting ready to blame all his mistakes on Iraq and pull out troops. He is unwilling to take the blame for his blunders. Since you have been wrong about 90% of the things you said about Iraq in the past I understand why you don't see that.
DON'T WORRY LIAR_K WE ARE COMING AFTER PEOPLE LIKE YOU IN JUST A FEW DAYS. WE ARE GOING TO START TAKING OUT COUNTRY BACK FROM LIARS AND CROOKS YES!!!
P.S. Maybe you can tell me how many republican lawmakers are either in jail or on their way to jail for cheating the American people? There has been so many I have lost track. So LIAR_K how many?
posted on October 31, 2006 07:06:59 PM newYou don't hear them calling for anything except running and trying to hide from the terrorists. Great Americans that they are.
How many and which elected Democrats are calling for "running"? You can't name three, I betcha. Go on, do it. This nonsense is just the standard, tired Republican line. A last ditch effort to save a miserably failed administration. The old say it often enough and the rubes will believe it trick. It worked once, I doubt it'll work again. You're either a rube or one of the ones who believes in saying it often enough. I'll keep my opinion about which one you are to m'self.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on October 31, 2006 08:00:47 PM new
SINCE BUSH INVADED IRAQ.
Year US Deaths US Wounded
2003 486 2408
2004 848 7998
2005 846 5943
2006 636 4338
Total 2816 20687
BELOW IS JUST A FEW MORE REASONS WHY NO ONE CAN BELIEVE WHAT BUSHY AND HIS SUPPORTERS SAY ABOUT HIS IRAQ INVASION.
10/31/06 NPR: Iraqi Security Collapses in Shiite Town; Troops Return
Hoping to stem the tide of sectarian cleansing, U.S. troops return to Saab al-Bur, a small Shiite town in a largely Sunni region west of Baghdad. Last month, American troops handed control of the area to Iraqi government security forces....
Oct 31, 2006 — Washington (Reuters) - What do you call a situation where 3,000 citizens of a country kill each other every month through bombing, shooting and beheading? If the country is Iraq, it depends on who answers the question.
U.S. and Iraqi government leaders are avoiding the term "civil war," although President George W. Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and several generals have said Iraq was "close to," "nearing" or "in danger of" civil war.
BUSHY AND RUMMY ARE VERY "CLOSE TO","NEARING" AND "IN DANGER" OF TELLING US ALL ANOTHER BIG FAT AZZ LIE ABOUT THE CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ.
posted on October 31, 2006 09:20:26 PM new
Surely ye jest, profe.
They're in the news ALL THE TIME calling for this administration to withdraw.
Again...I point out to one and all....the liberals vote the way they do because they aren't aware of the TRUTH. They LIVE in a constant state of denial.
======
Let's see....nancy pelosi....john murtha....Serrano ....McKenney....Wexler...ALL democrats.....and here is a list of 12.
And when the vote was taken....SIX liberal COWARD democrats voted 'present'. No guts to take a stand. As can be expected...just like kerry. If they vote 'present' then no one can call them at a later date on their votes...because they didn't vote. Dem tactic.
I believe that should cover your request for ONLY three....when there are so many liberal COWARDS who want America to leave Iraq....and that would be admitting defeat to our enemies.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh and on it being 50% MY FAULT.
Nope....our society once was a trusting one. People like logansdad and his ilk have changed that from being trusting....to having to be SCARED of what the JERKS out in this world are willing to do to them. That is TAKING ADVANTAGE of the ones who still have expectations that MOST people are DECENT people.....not low-life scammers, spammers, crooks, people who defraud others out of money....etc.
I perfer to have higher expectations than you. I EXPECT people to be decent....until they prove they aren't. Like logansdad has AGAIN.
That they aren't decent huan beings....doesn't make ME 50% responsible for their personal LACK of good character.
Nor for their FAILURES as people.
NO WAY, profe.
It's 100% on THEIR own behavior. They are the ones doing WRONG.
You sound like people who want to leave their windows open at night to sleep more comfortably are 50% responsible if someone breaks in and murders them.
NOPE...I don't agree. They didn't have the 'right' to do that.
THEY were the ones VIOLATING other people....NOT vis vis.
You're a liberal...so you're just confused on who's NOT doing anything wrong....and trusting people to act like adults is NOT a 'wrong' thing to do.
Liberals NEVER put the blame where it belongs....on the ABUSER or violator or murder or our enemies. They're ALWAYS defend their SICK actions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 31, 2006 09:46 PM ]
posted on October 31, 2006 09:54:02 PM new
classic said: "posted on October 31, 2006 06:07:04 AM
[quoting the repetative screamer] "DON'T WORRY LIAR_K WE ARE COMING AFTER PEOPLE LIKE YOU IN JUST A FEW DAYS."
classic said: "Hey Linda....ya better lock your doors! LOL"
Appears that's the truth - if you listen to THEM on who's at fault and who's NOT.
Just look at the liberal women here [not ONE bit of blame towards logansdad]...and kiara, of course sticks with her own ilk...supporting logansdad and his actions.... and then the profe's statements here.
It appears if one has their name, address and phone number in ANY PHONE book....they're INVITING the whole world to come to their home and do whatever the SICKO wants to do.
Guess that would apply to all business' too. Put the phone number and address of their business in the phone book...to the liberal mind...that's an INVITATION to come burn it down.
Gee...maybe we better inform the phone company....so that the many MILLIONS of people who are listed in all those phone books across the US, aren't making themselves 50% guilty [at fault].
LOL LOL LOL - THAT'S the liberal brain appears to work.
TWISTED....oh so twisted.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 1, 2006 12:17:20 AM new
Have you been drinking again, Lindak? You're ranting about us on the wrong topic as this one is about Iraq.
And why are you obsessing for days/weeks about anyone here e-mailing you porn or spam when no one has done that? Are you angry because they haven't or are you just seeking any kind of attention you can get since you got booted from Otwa? You really sound like you need to take a break.
posted on November 1, 2006 04:10:04 AM new
Here is the text of a September letter sent to the President by the same Democrats Linda claims are "COWARDS" who want to "run". Nowhere in this letter do I read anything about running. What I do see is a plea to the administration to change course.
September 4, 2006
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
Over one month ago, we wrote to you about the war in Iraq. In the face of escalating violence, increasing instability in the region, and an overall strain on our troops that has reduced their readiness to levels not seen since Vietnam, we called upon you to change course and adopt a new strategy to give our troops and the Iraqi people the best chance for success.
Although you have not responded to our letter, we surmise from your recent press conferences and speeches that you remain committed to maintaining an open-ended presence of U.S. forces in Iraq for years to come. That was the message the American people received on August 21, 2006, when you said, “we're not leaving [Iraq], so long as I'm the President.”
Unfortunately, your stay the course strategy is not working. In the five-week period since writing to you, over 60 U.S. soldiers and Marines have been killed, hundreds of U.S. troops have been wounded, many of them grievously, nearly 1,000 Iraqi civilians have died, and the cost to the American taxpayer has grown by another $8 billion dollars. Even the administration's most recent report to Congress on Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq indicates that security trends in Iraq are deteriorating, and likely to continue to worsen for the foreseeable future. With daily attacks against American and Iraqi troops at close to their highest levels since the start of the war, and sectarian violence intensifying, we can only conclude that our troops are caught in the middle of a low-grade civil war that is getting worse.
Meanwhile, the costs of a failed Iraq policy to our military and our security have been staggering. As you know, not a single Army non-deployed combat brigade is currently prepared to meet its wartime mission, and the Marine Corps faces equally urgent equipment and personnel shortages. Lieutenant General Blum, the National Guard Bureau Chief, has stated that the National Guard is “even further behind or in an even more dire situation than the active Army.” Your recent decision to involuntarily recall thousands of Marines to active duty to serve in Iraq is but the latest confirmation of the strain this war has placed on our troops. At the same time, the focus on Iraq and the toll it has taken on our troops and on our diplomatic capabilities has diverted our attention from other national security challenges and greatly constrained our ability to deal with them.
In short, Mr. President, this current path – for our military, for the Iraqi people, and for our security – is neither working, nor making us more secure.
Therefore, we urge you once again to consider changes to your Iraq policy. We propose a new direction, which would include: (1) transitioning the U.S. mission in Iraq to counter-terrorism, training, logistics and force protection; (2) beginning the phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq before the end of this year; (3) working with Iraqi leaders to disarm the militias and to develop a broad-based and sustainable political settlement, including amending the Constitution to achieve a fair sharing of power and resources; and (4) convening an international conference and contact group to support a political settlement in Iraq, to preserve Iraq’s sovereignty, and to revitalize the stalled economic reconstruction and rebuilding effort. These proposals were outlined in our July 30th letter and are consistent with the “U.S. Policy in Iraq Act” you signed into law last year.
We also think there is one additional measure you can take immediately to demonstrate that you recognize the problems your policies have created in Iraq and elsewhere –consider changing the civilian leadership at the Defense Department. From the failure to deploy sufficient numbers of troops at the start of the war or to adequately equip them, to the prison abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib, to disbanding the Iraqi military, to the failure to plan for the post-war occupation, the Administration’s mistakes have taken a toll on our troops and our security. It is unacceptable to dismiss the concerns of military personnel and their families when they are affected by the consequences of these failures, as the Secretary of Defense recently did in Alaska by suggesting that volunteers should not complain about having their deployments extended. While a change in your Iraq policy will best advance our chances for success, we do not believe the current civilian leadership at the Department of Defense is suited to implement and oversee such a change in policy.
Mr. President, staying the course in Iraq has not worked and continues to divert resources and attention from the war on terrorism that should be the nation’s top security priority. We hope you will consider the recommendations for change that we have put forward. We want to work with you in finding a way forward that honors the enormous sacrifice of our troops and promotes U.S. national security interests in the region. We believe our plan will achieve those goals.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
Harry Reid, Senate Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, Senate Assistant Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer, House Minority Whip Carl Levin, Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee Ike Skelton, Ranking Member, House Armed Services Committee Joe Biden, Ranking Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Tom Lantos, Ranking Member, House International Relations Committee Jay Rockefeller, Vice Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee Jane Harman, Ranking Member, House Intelligence Committee Daniel Inouye, Ranking Member, Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee John Murtha, Ranking Member, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee
Calling for a change in policy isn't "running" and doesn't make anyone a "coward".
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on November 1, 2006 04:12:29 AM new
For the sake of clarity and so it doesn't look like you're spinning completely out of control, you ought to confine your comments about the email/porn issue to the appropriate thread.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on November 1, 2006 04:27:36 AM new
From my link.....
"In June, the Senate voted 86 to 13 to reject a proposal by John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) that would have ordered Bush to bring most of the troops home within 13 months."
"Another Democratic measure -- a nonbinding call on Bush to begin a troop drawdown by December -- failed 60 to 39 but had the backing of most Democrats."
Plus....look at how the dem party treated one of their own, Lieberman, why? For NO OTHER reason than that he felt we should NOT withdraw from Iraq...as most in his party were calling for. So they #*!@ on him, a man who had served his party well for YEARS and YEARS....all over his stand on remaining UNTIL we completed our mission in Iraq.
Bet he doesn't see this issue about his own party the same way you do profe.
LOL
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 1, 2006 10:26:42 AM newprofe, that you don't want to believe those in MY link wanted us to leave IMMEDIATELY is funny. You asked, I gave you proof and you just ignore it.
I'm glad your amused. If I've brought some mirth into your life then it's a good day. However, nothing in YOUR link OR MINE says anything about immediate withdrawal. Both letters call for the President to BEGIN redeployment by the end of the year. You are choosing to read words that really aren't there Linda. Neither link has quotes from anyone calling for us to "leave IMMEDIATELY". I find it less than funny that you think those words are in there somewhere, I find it pathetic.
Typical democrat/liberal .....
I'm curious, you're so quick to typify everyone into neat little definitions. Do you do this to everyone you come into contact with in real life too? Do you find it as easy to stereotype actual flesh and blood people? Or maybe that's why you spend so much time on discussion boards, because board posters aren't as hard to figure out as real people.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on November 1, 2006 12:26:13 PM new
LIAR_K,
Have you no shame woman? You are constantly getting stuffed or caught in lies but you keep on. HAVE YOU NO SHAME WOMAN???
The good news is in just a few days Americans can start taking the power away from liar NEO-CONS like Liar_K,Bushy/Cheney and other crooked NEO-CON lawmakers. YES!!!
posted on November 1, 2006 12:28:14 PM new
profe. There is something VERY wrong with a school teach who can't comprehend the written word.
YOU asked for three names who were calling for the IMMEDIATE withdraw of our troops. I gave them to you. Those three VOTED to withdraw our troops IMMEDIATELY....NOT any old slow withdrawal.
Read it again...maybe you'll GET it this time.
from google page:
Lawmakers reject calls for troop pullout - Conflict in Iraq ...
House spurns calls for immediate Iraq pullout ... Jose Serrano of New York, Robert Wexler of Florida and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, voted for withdrawal. ...
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10097801/
========
And you certainly can't imply that the liberals/dems haven't been working for at least a couple of years now to FORCE this President to withdraw our troops ...and when that didn't work...then they tried to FORCE him to give a specific DATE when we would. lOL
That didn't go over well either. Too many that do serve in our Congress that KNOW admitting defeat to the terrorists is NOT in our Nations best interests.
Here....an anti-war site....where at least THEY can admit the truth...even though so many here can't.
"House Kills First Vote on Iraq Withdrawal"
by Mitch Jeserich
The House of Representatives voted down a measure, by a 128 to 300 vote, that called on President Bush to devise a plan for a withdrawal from Iraq.
It came in the form of an amendment to the $491 billion budget for the Pentagon that was passed on Wednesday night.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NO ONE can honestly say the dems/liberals haven't been TRYING to FORCE a withdrawal from Iraq...for a long time now. NO one who's honest anyway.
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 1, 2006 01:11:13 PM new
In your first link Linda, you'll recall that it was Hastert and and a bunch of other Republicans who put that measure before the house, NOT democrats. It was a stunt plain and simple and virtually all democrats voted against it.
Your second link makes no mention of "immediate withdrawal" and so proves nothing.
How funny it is that the only measure to come to a vote before the congress regarding "immediate withdrawal" was put there by Republicans.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on November 1, 2006 01:22:11 PM new
I remember that QUITE well, profe.
They did that because that's ALL the dems were talking about....over and over and over and over...bring our troops home.
SO....the republicans did this to tell them to put their VOTES before the American public....show if they were just whining, as they usually do, looking to gain more support for our pulling out of Iraq.
But, of course being dems....they PROVED they didn't actually support what they'd been bitching about all that time. They sure didn't want the voters to hold THEM responsible for our LOSING this war.
Nope....showed themselves to be the hypocrites they are....the cowards to actually vote for what they'd been calling for us to do....withdraw. LOL
The republicans FORCING them to actually put their VOTE where their complaints/whining ANTI-war statements were.....showed them to be just what they are....talkers ...with NO courage of their OWN convictions.
And you're saying those three I posted TWICE didn't vote for an immediate withdraw from Iraq????
Typical dem. Refuse to admit the FACTS even when their in front of their faces.
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 1, 2006 01:26:31 PM new
I remember that QUITE well, profe.
They did that because that's ALL the dems were talking about....over and over and over and over...bring our troops home.
SO....the republicans did this to tell them to put their VOTES before the American public....show if they were just whining [for votes and support], as they usually do, looking to gain more support for our pulling out of Iraq.
But, of course being dems....they PROVED they didn't actually support what they'd been bitching about all that time. They sure didn't want the voters to hold THEM responsible for our LOSING this war.
Nope....showed themselves to be the hypocrites they are....the cowards who WON'T/wouldn't actually vote for what they'd been calling for us to do....withdraw. LOL
From the Las Vegas Sun nov. '05 - AP report:
November 18, 2005
House GOP Seeks Quick Vote on Iraq Pullout
By LIZ SIDOTI
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -
House Republicans sought a showdown Friday with Democrats on a proposal by one of their most senior members to force an end to the U.S. deployment of troops in Iraq.
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., offered the resolution demanding a pullout. The GOP-run House was expected to reject it - and make a prominent statement about where Congress stands on Iraq - as the chamber scurried toward a Thanksgiving break.
"We'll let the members debate it and then let them vote on it," said Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the acting majority leader.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's office had no immediate comment.
Murtha, a well-respected Vietnam veteran who voted for the Iraq war, [b]called for the immediate withdrawal of troops Thursday, intensifying the already red-hot debate on Capitol Hill over President Bush's war policies.
============
The republicans FORCING them to actually put their VOTE where their complaints/whining ANTI-war statements were.....showed them to be just what they are....talkers ...with NO courage of their OWN convictions.
And you're saying those three I posted TWICE didn't vote for an immediate withdraw from Iraq????
Typical dem. Refuses to admit the FACTS even when their in front of their faces.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 1, 2006 01:33 PM ]
posted on November 1, 2006 01:40:22 PM new
Here you go....another quote DIRECT from the donkey's mouth.
Murtha:
I believe with a U.S. troop redeployment, the Iraqi security forces will be incentivized to take control. A poll recently conducted shows that over 80% of Iraqis are strongly opposed to the presence of coalition troops, and about 45% of the Iraqi population believe attacks against American troops are justified. I believe we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis.
I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice that the United States will immediately redeploy. All of Iraq must know that Iraq is free. Free from United States occupation. I believe this will send a signal to the Sunnis to join the political process for the good of a "free" Iraq.
My plan calls:
To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
posted on November 1, 2006 01:48:00 PM new
For anyone who doesn't believe there were a lot of liberals/dems calling for our immediate troop withdrawal...admitting defeat to our enemies.....here's plenty of proof otherwise.
It's all over the internet....just waiting to be read.
helen might even agree with the call for immediate withdrawal by the liberals....after all one of the sites that reported on them doing JUST THAT...is Russia.com She believes most of what they say/print.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 1, 2006 02:00 PM ]
posted on November 1, 2006 02:47:47 PM new
LIAR_K,
Its simple and almost every one can see it. BUSHY/CHENEY are getting ready after this election and way before the next election to declare VICTORY IN IRAQ.
Those 2 liars will blame all their failures on the new Iraqi Government. If they don't you can kiss any chance of electing a republican president.
These 2 men (if you want to call BUSHY/CHENEY men) have no choice but to blame their failures on somebody. Before this election they are trying to blame the Democrats after this election it will be the Democrats and Iraqi government they blame their failures on.
posted on November 2, 2006 04:10:10 AM new
That Murtha link is a good one. Here's another quote from it that speaks volumes. I'll resist bolding.
The threat posed by terrorism is real, but we have other threats that cannot be ignored. We must be prepared to face all threats. The future of our military is at risk. Our military and their families are stretched thin. Many say that the Army is broken. Some of our troops are on their third deployment. Recruitment is down, even as our military has lowered its standards. Defense budgets are being cut. Personnel costs are skyrocketing, particularly in health care. Choices will have to be made. We can not allow promises we have made to our military families in terms of service benefits, in terms of their health care, to be negotiated away. Procurement programs that ensure our military dominance cannot be negotiated away. We must be prepared. The war in Iraq has caused huge shortfalls at our bases in the U.S.
Much of our ground equipment is worn out and in need of either serious overhaul or replacement. George Washington said, “To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.” We must rebuild our Army. Our deficit is growing out of control. The Director of the Congressional Budget Office recently admitted to being “terrified” about the budget deficit in the coming decades. This is the first prolonged war we have fought with three years of tax cuts, without full mobilization of American industry and without a draft. The burden of this war has not been shared equally; the military and their families are shouldering this burden.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on November 2, 2006 05:41:13 AM new
11/02/06 LINDA_K YOU CAN BLAH,BLAH,BLAH ALL YOU WANT THE BOTTOM LINE IS BELOW.
SINCE BUSH INVADED IRAQ AMERICA HAS 2,930 DEAD AMERICAN TROOPS.
SINCE BUSH INVADED IRAQ AMERICA HAS 20,895 WOUNDED TROOPS.
SINCE BUSHY INVADED IRAQ BUSHY HAS SPENT 339,000,000,000 OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN IRAQ
BELOW IS JUST A FEW MORE REASONS WHY NO ONE CAN BELIEVE THE BLAH,BLAH,BLAH FROM NEO-CON LIARS LIKE LIAR_K.
11/02/06 AP: Shiite militia briefly seizes Iraqi city
The Shiite militia run by the anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr briefly seized control of the southern Iraqi city of Amarah on Friday in one of the boldest acts of defiance yet by the country’s powerful, unofficial armies.
11/01/06 abc.net.au: Leaked US report shows Iraq close to 'chaos'
A leaked military report shows the US Central Command believes Iraq is one step closer to what it describes as "chaos". The classified material includes a colour-coded bar chart with the word "peace" in green at one end and "chaos" in red at the other.
11/01/06 AP: 40 Shiites reported abducted in Iraq
More than 40 Shiites were abducted along a notoriously dangerous highway just north of Baghdad, police said Wednesday, and the death toll from a suicide bombing at a wedding party rose to 23, including nine children.
posted on November 2, 2006 08:43:55 AM new
In five days America will decide if they want to give more political power to the party who doesn't want to keep the war in Iraq. The party who WANTS to see America brought to her knees....by admitting DEFEAT to our enemies.
Maybe there are some liberals/dems/Independents that want America to bring our troops home....because of the cost...because of the death and injuries.
I agree it's a very HIGH price to pay....losing our treasure to fight evil. Not easy for anyone to see.
But there will be benefits that come from all this....IF America has the patience to see it through. They commanders on the ground in Iraq tell us the Iraqi army is about 75% ready to take over protecting their own nation. If we quit now.....all we've done has been for nothing. IF we can be patient a while longer...I think the results will be well worth the wait.
To those who want to see withdrawal... I ask....THEN WHAT? We just sit and wait until they attack us here, on our own land?
President Bush has said as long as he's President...we'll be there until our commanders tell us differently - or the Iraqi leaders - or the mission is accomplished.
I just hope everyone realizes that America could soon become Baghdad....we could be living under the SAME situation they are right now...where one can't go out their door, walk in the streets without worrying about being killed. YOU want to live that way? I sure don't. I like the security I have all around me now.
These terrorists aren't going away....no matter how the delusional rationalize that our only solution is to withdraw. They'll be here soon - and all this money that the liberals continue complaining about, the funds being spend to KEEP that from happening here, in America, will be spent REPAIRING our own towns, cities, states against the damage war has caused here.
For those righties who have become disolusioned with this administration.....how is handing the power over to the lefties going to make things better for America? They certainly don't have any plans to keep us safe. They have however promised to change Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, our taxes stop building any fence on our southern border - their typical liberal agendas.
I don't see that as being a smart solution at all. I see that as giving more power to a party that WON'T defend/protect this Nation. Who will continue on with their anti-America agenda....until America is no longer a super power.
Yep...I guess if you'd like to live your lives, have your children and grandchildren living like the Iraqi people are right now....then hey....vote the dems in. In no time we'll have this 'war' going on here in our towns, cities and states. And we'll STILL be paying for it. That's not going to change....just where it occurs will.
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 2, 2006 09:28:21 AM new
Bush and his mindless followers believe that it's okay to go into someone else's country and rip it apart and kill lots of people who had nothing to do with the global war on terrorism so they spout the nonsense that it's stopping the terrorists from coming here and doing it to them. They are ignorant to the fact that their borders and ports are not secure so terrorists can arrive daily and kill them if they choose to. Don't they question anything?
posted on November 2, 2006 10:44:26 AM new
Yes, Bush and his mindless followers. Lindak, I am amused that you have to change the quote so I take it the word 'mindless' kind of hit a raw nerve deep within you.
hmmmm....that included ALL those DEMOCRATS who VOTED FOR the war.
Two words...... faulty intelligence.
As for insulting the Dem party, sometimes they deserve to be insulted just as any other party. Please remember that all of us don't take sides and look blindly at issues like you seem to.
posted on November 2, 2006 10:55:37 AM new
Want to know how many American Troops have died in your state go to http://icasualties.org/oif/ByState.aspx
SEE JUST MY STATE PENNSYLVANIA BELOW
WHEN YOU VOTE IN A FEW DAYS THINK HOW BUSHY LIED TO AMERICA ABOUT HIS IRAQ INVASION.
Pennsylvania 136
Aliquippa/Hopewell Davies, Shawn M. Specialist 08-Jul-2004
Allegheny Barr, Aric J. Lance Corporal 04-Apr-2004
Allegheny Goodrich, Joseph P. Staff Sergeant 10-Jul-2005
Amity Culbertson III, Russell G. Corporal 17-Oct-2006
Apollo Booker, Stevon Alexander Staff Sergeant 05-Apr-2003
Avonmore Henry, Joshua J. Specialist 20-Sep-2004
Beaver Falls Bevington, Allan R. Sergeant 21-Sep-2006
Bedford Matthews, Clint Richard "Bones" Specialist 19-Mar-2004
Bethlehem Coffin, Christopher D. 1st Sergeant 01-Jul-2003
Bethlehem Carlson, Frederick A. Specialist 25-Mar-2006
Bridgeport Karpowich, Paul D. Sergeant 1st Class 21-Dec-2004
Bridgeport Todd III, John H. Corporal 29-Jun-2004
Brockport Loudon, Christopher E. 2nd Lieutenant 17-Oct-2006
Bryn Athyn Smith, Tristan Specialist 27-Aug-2006
Butler Morgain, Carl J. Sergeant 22-May-2005
Carbondale Pugliese, George A. Staff Sergeant 28-Sep-2005
Carbondale Brown, Oliver J. Private 1st Class 28-Sep-2005
Carlisle Voelz, Kimberly A. Staff Sergeant 14-Dec-2003
Carlisle Morrison, Nicholas B. Lance Corporal 13-Aug-2004
Carmichaels Cox, Gregory A. Specialist 27-Sep-2004
Carneys Point Horton, Jeremy R. Staff Sergeant 21-May-2004
Cochranville Hardy, Brandon M. Corporal 28-Apr-2006
Confluence Thompson, Nils George Private 1st Class 04-Aug-2005
Connellsville Feniello, Shelby J. Private 1st Class 09-Oct-2006
Conway Brown Jr., Timmy R. Private 1st Class 12-Aug-2003
Coudersport Franklin, Michael W. Private 1st Class 07-Mar-2005
Dallas Cleary, Michael J. 1st Lieutenant 20-Dec-2005
Darby Kane, Joseph M. Staff Sergeant 14-Oct-2006
Dillsburg Zeigler II, Kenneth E. Private 1st Class 12-May-2005
East Berlin Small, Corey L. Private 1st Class 03-Jul-2003
Easton Seifert, Christopher Scott Captain 23-Mar-2003
Easton Klinger, Joshua P. Private 1st Class 14-Jun-2005
Enon Valley Bucklew, Ernest G. Sergeant 02-Nov-2003
Erie Oaks Jr., Donald Samuel Specialist 03-Apr-2003
Erie Cortes III, Victor M. Staff Sergeant 29-May-2005
Ford City Coleman, Bradli N. Private 30-May-2004
Fredericktown Huey, Sean P. Staff Sergeant 11-Nov-2004
Freedom Paytas, Dylan R. Private 16-Nov-2005
Green Lane Phelan, Mark P. Lieutenant Colonel 13-Oct-2004
Greenfield Township Slebodnik, Eric W. Sergeant 28-Sep-2005
Greenville Marzano, Michael A. Sergeant 07-May-2005
Greenville Brozovich, Daniel A. Sergeant 1st Class 18-Oct-2006
Hallstead Evans, William L. Specialist 19-Sep-2005
Hallstead Wiegand, Lee A. Specialist 28-Sep-2005
Harleysville Kulick, John Specialist 09-Aug-2005
Hellertown Humlhanz, Barton R. Corporal 26-Aug-2004
Hollidaysburg Baum, Ronald E. Gunnery Sergeant 03-May-2004
Hollidaysburg Adams, Brandon E. Sergeant 19-Sep-2004
Hollidaysburg Lightner Jr., Daniel R. Staff Sergeant 27-Oct-2005
Holtwood Bennett, Keith A. Staff Sergeant 11-Dec-2005
Indiana Giles, Landon S. Private 26-Feb-2005
Indiana McCaulley, Randy D. Sergeant 1st Class 23-Mar-2006
Irvona Kritzer, Bradley G. Private 1st Class 05-May-2004
Jacobus Cohen, Michael R. Corporal 22-Nov-2004
Jamestown Veverka, David Michael Staff Sergeant 06-May-2006
Jim Thorpe Baddick, Andrew Joseph Sergeant 29-Sep-2003
Johnstown Golby, Christopher A. Specialist 08-Jan-2004
Johnstown Rusin, Aaron J. Private 1st Class 11-Oct-2004
Karthaus Jodon, Andrew R. Sergeant 12-May-2005
Lackawaxen Beisel, Jacob Walter Lance Corporal 31-Mar-2006
Landisburg Frye, Jason L. Private 1st Class 06-Oct-2005
Lansdale Maglione III, Joseph Basil Lance Corporal 01-Apr-2003
Levittown Johnson, Maurice J. Specialist 01-Nov-2003
Liberty Ostrom, Ryan S. Staff Sergeant 09-Aug-2005
Lopez Snowberger III, Stephen P. Private 1st Class 11-May-2006
McConnellsburg Cutchall, Christopher E. Staff Sergeant 29-Sep-2003
McKees Rocks Kasecky, Mark Joseph Specialist 17-May-2004
McKeesport Carman, Edward W. Staff Sergeant 17-Apr-2004
Media Smith, Michael J. Specialist 11-Jan-2005
Mercer McLaughlin, Michael E. Lieutenant Colonel 05-Jan-2006
Middlebury Campbell, Jeremy M. Specialist 11-Sep-2005
Milford Allen, Louis E. 1st Lieutenant 08-Jun-2005
Milton Long, Zachariah W. Specialist 30-May-2003
Montrose Arnold, Daniel L. Staff Sergeant 28-Sep-2005
Morrisville Detample, Nathaniel E. "Nate" Private 1st Class 09-Aug-2005
Murrysville Ingraham, Thor H. Staff Sergeant 08-May-2005
New Berlinville Zimmerman, Travis C. Private 22-Apr-2006
New Castle Moxley Jr., Clifford L. Specialist 25-Sep-2004
New Castle Gettings, Albert Pasquale Corporal 05-Jan-2006
New Ringgold Hartman, Jennifer M. Sergeant 14-Sep-2006
Newville Hayslett, Timothy L. Sergeant 15-Nov-2003
Northampton Grimes, Kyle J. Corporal 26-Jan-2005
Northumberland Co. Swank, Brett D. Sergeant 24-Jan-2005
Northumberland Co. Dreese, Justin W. Private 1st Class 03-Sep-2006
Oil City Kephart, Jonathan Roy Specialist 09-Apr-2004
Oxford Renehan, Kyle J. Corporal 09-Dec-2004
Philadelphia Faunce, Brian R. Captain 18-Sep-2003
Philadelphia Brabazon, Edward W. Specialist 09-Mar-2004
Philadelphia Nolan, Joseph M. Sergeant 18-Nov-2004
Philadelphia Jones, Rodney A. Specialist 30-Sep-2004
Philadelphia Zangara, Nicholas J. Specialist 24-Jul-2004
Philadelphia Jeffcoat, Brahim J. Sergeant 06-Aug-2005
Philadelphia Pellegrini Jr., Gennaro Specialist 09-Aug-2005
Philadelphia Straub Jr., Francis J. Sergeant 09-Aug-2005
Philadelphia Conboy, Adam C. Lance Corporal 12-May-2006
Philadelphia Johnson II, Carl W. Corporal 07-Oct-2006
Phoenixville Bernstein, David R. 1st Lieutenant 18-Oct-2003
Pittsburgh Weismantle, Douglas J. Specialist 13-Oct-2003
Pittsburgh Navea, Rafael L. Specialist 27-Aug-2003
Pittsburgh Tomko, Nicholas A. Sergeant 09-Nov-2003
Pittsburgh Hall Jr., Robert E. Specialist 28-Jun-2005
Pittsburgh Kenny, Patrick Brian Lance Corporal 06-Oct-2005
Pittsburgh Melcher, Mark W. Specialist 15-Apr-2006
Pittsburgh West, Jason M. Captain 24-Jul-2006
Pleasant Hills Freund, Steven Private 1st Class 23-May-2006
Pleasant Mount Brown, Andrew W. Sergeant 08-Oct-2004
Plymouth Baker, Sherwood R. Sergeant 26-Apr-2004
Pocono Summit Puello-Coronado, Jaror C. Sergeant 13-Jul-2003
Port Matilda Ivory, Craig S. Specialist 17-Aug-2003
Pottstown Sherman, Anthony L. Lieutenant Colonel 27-Aug-2003
Punxsutawney Smith, Scott R. Sergeant 1st Class 17-Jul-2006
Quakertown Ramos, Tamarra J. Specialist 01-Oct-2003
Reading Fernandez, William V. Specialist 19-Sep-2005
Richeyville Minucci II, Joseph Sergeant 13-Nov-2003
Sabinsville Knier, Tony L. Sergeant 1st Class 21-Oct-2006
Saegertown Lauer, Timothy J. Specialist 14-Oct-2006
Sellersville Mininger, Robert T. Lance Corporal 06-Jun-2005
Shamokin Sandri, Matthew J. Specialist 20-Mar-2004
Sharon Kashmer, Douglas E. Private 1st Class 08-Jun-2005
Spinnerstown Krout, Kurt E. Specialist 06-Aug-2005
Spring Church Sturges Jr., William R. Specialist 24-Jan-2004
State College Aitken, Tristan Neil Captain 04-Apr-2003
Trafford McIntosh, Eric A. Staff Sergeant 02-Apr-2006
Union City Curran, Carl F. Specialist 17-May-2004
Uniontown Hull, Eric R. Specialist 18-Aug-2003
Upper Moreland Toczylowski, Jeffrey P. Major 03-Nov-2005
Vandergrift Wells, Lonny D. Sergeant 09-Nov-2004
Verona Santoriello, Neil Anthony 1st Lieutenant 13-Aug-2004
Warfordsburg Szwydek, Steven W. Lance Corporal 20-Oct-2005
Warren Gleason, Michael T. Specialist 30-May-2003
Washington Kovacicek, Ryan J. Lance Corporal 10-Jul-2005
Watsontown Lloyd, Dale Thomas Sergeant 19-Jul-2004
West View Adams, Brent A. Sergeant 1st Class 01-Dec-2005
Yardley Maher III, William J. Specialist 28-Jul-2003
York Kondor, Martin W. Specialist 29-Apr-2004
Youngsville Mitchell, Sean R. Specialist 31-Mar-2004
posted on November 2, 2006 11:12:07 AM new
Which side will American voters choose next Tuesday?
The 'blame America' liberals - the ones who are always complaining about how 'bad/evil' America's actions towards others are?
Or will they believe our commanders on the ground in Iraq - that we're NOT losing this war....
Or will they REALLY decide they want a party in power which has never supported a strong military?
I personally believe what our commanders tell us. THEY want their troops to complete their mission and come home in VICTORY....not shame nor defeat FORCED upon them by the radical left.
===============
Why do we ONLY hear the negative about what we're accomplishing in Iraq? The left leaning MSM supports the dem/liberal party. They don't want to report much good happening in Iraq....they never do/have....because then the voters would have the WHOLE truth...and could make better, more informed decisions. They don't WANT that.....they want it to ONLY appear terrible.
And here's another reason also.
========
Good News in Iraq Attracts the Bad Guys, General says....
By Mark Finkelstein
CNSNews.com Correspondent
November 02, 2006
(CNSNews.com) - Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, chief spokesman for the U.S. military in Iraq, on Thursday suggested there's a reason why Americans don't hear as much good news as bad news from Iraq.
Caldwell told Cybercast News Service, ""Every time we get ready to talk about a good-news story [about a specific area where U.S. troops are operating], we go through a deliberative process, asking ourselves, 'Are we putting the Iraqi citizens at risk?'
He said the U.S. doesn't want to give the enemy more targets. "We know that as soon as we announce [good news], the insurgents will immediately...target that, in order to discount it." He said the enemy is doing what it can to prove that Iraq is in turmoil and that security isn't good.
Caldwell made his remarks in a conference call from Baghdad. He was taking questions from reporters located in the United States.
News reports from Iraq during the month of October were indeed discouraging, with daily reports of sectarian violence.
This week, the Associated Press reported that more than 1,000 Iraqis died in various October attacks, the highest monthly death toll since the AP began tracking civilian deaths in April 2005. The report said the number was probably underestimated.
And a number of U.S. media outlets noted that more than 100 U.S. troops were killed in Iraq in October - the fourth-deadliest month of the war, reports said.
During Thursday's press conference, Caldwell was asked to comment on press coverage of the war - specifically, a segment that aired on the 'Today' show on October 28, in which NBC reporter Richard Engel asked a US soldier if he worried about dying.
Engel also asked soldiers if they worried about their women back home being faithful to them while they were away.
Caldwell told Cybercast News Service, "I don't think that's something that needs to be asked about. It really should not be in the public domain. I don't think these people should pry into people's personal lives."
In a recent profile of Engel in the Washington Post, Howard Kurtz quoted the NBC reporter as saying, "I think war should be illegal...I'm basically a pacifist."
In other comments on Thursday, Caldwell:
-- Noted that the Iraqi military is adding over 18,000 troops to its forces, resulting, in a 10 percent increase in combat troops.
-- Described Iran as being "unhelpful," particularly in terms of supplying weapons to Shiite elements in Iraq.
He also estimated that every month, 50-70 foreign fighters infiltrate Iraq from Syria.
-- Mentioned that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is making efforts to bring a variety of domestic leaders and organizations into the political fold, including Shi'ite leader Muqtada al Sadr and his militia.
(Mark Finkelstein is heading to Iraq later this month and will report for Cybercast News Service from Baghdad and Fallujah.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 4, 2006 12:04:33 PM new
11/04/06 UPDATE ON THE BUSH INVASION OF IRAQ
SINCE BUSH INVADED IRAQ AMERICA HAS 2,829 DEAD AMERICAN TROOPS.
SINCE BUSH INVADED IRAQ AMERICA HAS 20,895 WOUNDED TROOPS.
SINCE BUSHY INVADED IRAQ BUSHY HAS SPENT 339,000,000,000 OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN IRAQ
BELOW IS JUST ANOTHER REASON WHY NO ONE CAN BELIEVE THE BLAH,BLAH,BLAH FROM NEO-CON LIARS.
11/03/06 AP: U.N. - 100,000 Iraq Refugees Flee Monthly
Nearly 100,000 Iraqis are fleeing each month to Syria and Jordan, forcing the United Nations to set aside its goal of helping refugees return home after the U.S.-led invasion, officials said Friday
You're ranting about us on the wrong topic as this one is about Iraq. 