posted on October 18, 2006 06:43:41 PM new
You all are talking back and forth about IRAQ and how it's good that we are fighting the terrorist over there instead of here in the USA. How dumb are you? IRAQ did not have terrorists before we stepped in, They crossed their borders into Iraq because we were there. Iraq is being use as a battleground, and nothing more. Fighting them over there doesn't stop terrorists over here in USA. Why? I'll tell you why. Listen up dummys. Since 9\11 we went and change things around in the name of "National Security" They came up with the "patriot Act" which take away a lot of our civil rights. Airports change the way they handle passengers, and make it miserable to fly. Do you agree with me so far?. OK, Here's the good part. Of all that national security stuff and some people believe its a good thing that we can give up some of our Liberty in the name of National Security. WELL Then' why did the President and his lackeys fail to close our borders in the name of National Security, why is customs allowing people in on Student visa and they don't show up to register for school, but go on thier merry way and get lost in this country to do what they want. Did you ever think that some of these people might be terrorists. They got the money to get GOOD fake passports. Why is Bush trying to unite mexico and canada with the USA? Yes dummies its true, (listen to the news stations that tell the truth). Illegally too, He's bypassing Congress, and dealing in backroom agreements with big corporate business. Now with everything that I said here. How is being over in Iraq going to stop them here? Bin laden could afford a makeover and get thru customs on a student visa. Our security rest on our borders, and customs agents. You big DUMMIES.(
posted on October 18, 2006 09:01:01 PM newIRAQ did not have terrorists before we stepped in
First of all, this statement is 100% wrong. Now if you said that Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before the war, that would be true. (It was brilliant how Bush sucked them into Iraq to be dealt with there instead of here.)
However, there are many terrorist groups native to Iraq that indeed need to be disarmed.
Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), Moreover, Iraq has hosted several Palestinian splinter groups that oppose peace with Israel , including the mercenary Abu Nidal Organization, whose leader, Abu Nidal, was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002. Iraq has also supported the Islamist Hamas movement and reportedly channeled money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Remember, this war is to fight ALL terrorism.
I do agree with one thing though, but the demomorons will not allow it to happen. We do need to close the boarders and build that complete wall between us and Mexico.
[ edited by ST0NEC0LD613 on Oct 18, 2006 09:04 PM ]
posted on October 19, 2006 04:51:22 AM new
Stone,
What about Bushy having 6 years to close our southern borders and doing nothing?
In Iraq Bushy made a large training ground for terrorists. The terrorists get trained in Iraq then move on to Afghanistan,Africa and yes through our open southern border.
Again you prove there is no fix for neo-CON stupid by NOT SEEING THAT BUSHY IS THE WORST PRESIDENT AMERICA EVER HAD.
THE GOOD NEWS IS IN JUST A FEW DAYS THE MAJORITY OF AMERICAS CAN START TAKING THEIR COUNTRY BACK.
posted on October 19, 2006 09:05:40 AM newIt was brilliant how Bush sucked them into Iraq to be dealt with there instead of here.
Saddam kept a lid on terrorism in Iraq. No one there was attacking the US. Bigpeepa and Charlesw are correct, Bush's war opened it up to more terrorism increasing worldwide and the borders are not secure. The Taliban is now on the increase also.
It was not a brilliant move on Bush's part, it was a huge dumb mistake and thousands of innocent lives have been lost because of it and the Iraqi people did not deserve this mess being made of their country.
The worst part is that there has been no gain from any of it. Now countries like Iran and North Korea openly sneer at the US and have no respect or fear at all because they recognize that the power is crumbling and that the US has an inept and clueless leader who is a joke worldwide.
posted on October 19, 2006 11:53:38 AM new
"However, there are many terrorist groups native to Iraq that indeed need to be disarmed."
Notice how Stone used the word, "native" in this sentance. Also notice that this argument only comes from one direction. It is important to note that some of these groups are NOT considered terrorists within Iraq. Just as the Michigan Militia isn't a terrorist group in the US, yet as we know... the MM would love to invade Canada. LOL.
Seriously though... you truly have to consider these simple facts when it comes to Iraq. If the rolls were reversed and it was Iraq that came in and controlled the United States in the same manner as we have to them, don't you think Americans would form militias, terrorist groups to fight off the invaders, etc? We wouldn't sit back and let this happen to us. We didn't during the Revolutionary War, why would we do it now?
The fact remains that this Administration is forcing their will upon a Sovereign Nation, something that Bush said he wouldn't do against Pakistan in an effort to get Bin Laden (the terrorist that actually attacked us who wasn't in Iraq). Obviously, this was NOT because Pakistan is a Sovereign Nation, but rather a NUCLEAR nation. This of course sends a clear message to Iran and NK. If they join the Nuke Group, they won't be attacked either.
It is obvious that the Bush Administration has absolutely no idea about International Politics, Global Affairs, nor do they seek collaboration from others. They pretend they do, but the reality is that they want everything their way with little room for negotiation.
posted on October 19, 2006 01:42:14 PM new
charlesw
I am sure by now you realize that stupid people like Stone,Classic and Colin can't defend their failed government movement any longer. Now they just insult people that rub their noises in their own sh*t.
Keep up your good work so we can all get lots of laughs from these narrow minded out of touch with reality neo-CON fools.
THE GOOD NEWS IS IF THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS TURN OUT TO VOTE ON 11/07/06, WE CAN SHUT-UP THESE FOOLS AND START TAKING OUR COUNTRY BACK. YES!!!
posted on October 19, 2006 05:42:43 PM newFirst of all, this statement is 100% wrong.
Where is your proof to back up this statement? I guess we have to take your word for it since you were so accurate in your other posts about the federal deficit.
We do need to close the boarders and build that complete wall between us and Mexico
Spend trillons of dollar to build a wall to keep the illegals out. If they are determined they will find a way to get into this country. Furthermore, will this administration provide the necessary funds so this so called wall can be watched 24/7/365 in order to make sure no illegals are getting in.
Do you honestly think this wall would keep the illegals out. Are we going to build a wall between the United States and Canada so the illegals do not decide to come into America that way?
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on October 19, 2006 06:05:16 PM new
STONE,CLASSIC AND COLIN, try to defend below.
Need to know the U.S. now knows for a fact terrorist have entered the U.S. through our southern border. Bushy sat on his hands for almost 6 years and did nothing about closing our southern border. YOUR DOING A GREAT JOB BUSHY NOT,NOT,NOT.
Just one more reason to kick his lock stepping Republican lawmakers out of power in just a couple weeks.
posted on October 19, 2006 08:13:02 PM new
See what I mean? The liberals just don't have a CLUE as to what they're talking about.
rusty says: "The fact remains that this Administration is forcing their will upon a Sovereign Nation.
This administration is doing NO SUCH thing. LOL LOL LOL Their purple fingers were THEM voting for their OWN government...and their OWN leaders. Those are the people who have been making the decisions for Iraq. Not this administration. Ignorance.....GLOWING again from the left.
To say anything else just once again proves the radical liberals aren't reality based AT ALL. LOL LOL
And I'm happy to KNOW that MOST dems didn't support a 'cut and run' program like rusty and his ilk here would like to see happen. But RATHER....voted to REMAIN THERE and fight the terrorists. NOT admit defeat as our radicals here want to see us do.
They're RADICALS, and a TINY minority, even IN their OWN party. LOL LOL 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
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 19, 2006 08:16 PM ]
posted on October 19, 2006 08:29:53 PM new
"How Dumb are you people"
....well...let me put it this way. LOL NOT dumb enough to believe the anti-American left.
====
Best of the Web Today - October 19, 2006
By JAMES TARANTO
Wall Street Journal
Tet's Real Lesson
We have long argued that America's mainstream media--because of what they see as the "lessons of Vietnam"--are actively working to promote American defeat in Iraq. (We gave this theme a lengthy treatment in a talk last November at the Hudson Institute, which later became an essay in the February issue of The American Spectator.)
From CNN comes one of the most striking bits of evidence yet that this is the case. This promo for a "CNN exclusive" appears today on the homepage of CNN.com (we've captured it here for posterity as well):
Almost 2,800 Americans have been killed so far in Iraq and one of the most dangerous insurgent opponents is the sniper. CNN has obtained graphic video from the Islamic Army of Iraq, one of the most active insurgent organizations in Iraq, showing its sniper teams targeting U.S. troops. The Islamist Army says it wants talks with the United States and some Islamist Internet postings call for a P.R. campaign aimed at influencing the American public.
==
The video is disturbing to watch but CNN believes the story, shocking as it is, needs to be told.
By airing this video, CNN is participating in what it acknowledges is "a P.R. campaign aimed at influencing the American public" in ways favorable to America's enemies. And the network does not even seem to realize what a shocking admission this is.
With the midterm elections less than three weeks away, the media are filled with Tet talk. Here's Simon Hooper, in a commentary that also appears today on CNN.com:
For veteran statesmen such as [James] Baker, the parallels with another era-defining American war must also be striking. In the late 1960s the U.S. military found itself fighting an unwinnable conflict, enduring mounting casualties against a growing chorus of dissent at home--in Vietnam.
On Wednesday [President] Bush himself acknowledged parallels between the current situation in Iraq and the 1968 Tet Offensive--widely considered to be the point when American public opinion turned against the war.
As we noted yesterday, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times also drew the analogy in a column whose description of Tet is worth repeating:
Although the Vietcong and Hanoi were badly mauled during Tet, they delivered, through the media, such a psychological blow to U.S. hopes of "winning" in Vietnam that Tet is widely credited with eroding support for President Johnson and driving him to withdraw as a candidate for re-election.
Tet, that is, was a military victory for the U.S. that turned into a propaganda victory for the communists because American journalists presented a false picture of what had happened.
The media today are eager to repeat their "success" in Vietnam--and it was a success inasmuch as the media were hugely influential over the course of events. But from a journalistic standpoint it was a gross failure. The real lesson of Vietnam is that journalists got the story wrong.
We are not at all convinced that the American people are about to get fooled again.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 19, 2006 08:32 PM ]
