# So Fallujah has fallen to al Qaida



## novasteve (Jan 4, 2014)

And nobody is discussing it?


----------



## Truthmatters (Jan 4, 2014)

why you want to go "free" Iraq again?


----------



## Katzndogz (Jan 4, 2014)

obama intended this all along.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement.  It's why he intentionally weakened our military and is continuing to weaken our military.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 4, 2014)

It's Iraq's problem, let them deal with it.


----------



## blackhawk (Jan 4, 2014)

Were as a nation back to the pre 9-11 mindset we will ignore what goes on in the middle east till it bites us in the ass again.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jan 4, 2014)

This is what happens when society supports religious extremist. The religious extremist take over and destroy any freedom of thought.


----------



## aaronleland (Jan 4, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> obama intended this all along.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement.  It's why he intentionally weakened our military and is continuing to weaken our military.



Nothing you said is backed up by any evidence, and it may be one the dumbest thing ever typed on this forum. Good job.


----------



## Rozman (Jan 4, 2014)

Left wing talking heads will be on the Sunday shows either.
Blaming it on a video or
Blaming it on Bush!


----------



## LeadRoundNose (Jan 4, 2014)

I've said all along we should have gone into Iraq and Afghanistan and squatted all over them.  Turn it into another Japan.

Besides, strategically we had Iran surrounded.  SURROUNDED.

Hey, when I fight the ultimate enemy I always kick ass all around them and right when I get the main enemy right where I want them i give up and go home.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jan 4, 2014)

I am blaming it on religion. A very fucked up idea of one.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 4, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> obama intended this all along.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement.  It's why he intentionally weakened our military and is continuing to weaken our military.



What a lie.   You need to be charged under the 1917 Espionage Act.  Not really but you lie.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

I guess Democrats no longer care about the innocent civilian deaths, torture and injuries. Sure makes Democrat outrage over Abu Ghraib look like political fodder and hypocrisy..as suspected

Will Democrats continue to blame and defame Bush...of course.. 

Will Obama get a free pass on his handling of Iraq..of course..it's a Democrat habit 

---------------------------


The United Nations said 7,818 civilians were killed in 2013, a return to 2008 levels. The startling figure follows warnings from lawmakers and analysts that the violence threatens to undo hard-fought gains by the United States. 

Civilian death toll in Iraq highest in years, fueling concern of Al Qaeda 'resurgence' | Fox News


----------



## kiwiman127 (Jan 4, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> obama intended this all along.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement.  It's why he intentionally weakened our military and is continuing to weaken our military.



Actually,,this is a continuation of the war between the Sunni and the Shiite that got going not too long after the fall of Saddam and the election of a Shiite dominated government.  
I think most folks know that al Qaeda is basically dominated by Sunni.  And as al Qaeda sees an opening in Syria, they see an opening in Iraq as the government has basically left out the Sunni with their policies.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Jan 4, 2014)

So, this isn't a Bush thing or an Obama thing, it's an Al-Maliki thing.   No partisan show here.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

According to Obama ... "Al Qaeda is on the road to defeat"

Democrats and the Demo-News media should use that statement to undermine Obama...oops, their not allowed to and wouldn't anyway...


----------



## Mojo2 (Jan 4, 2014)

This is dedicated to the Americans and others who suffered and sacrificed for freedom in the original atrocity which saw several private contractors murdered and their bodies defaced and defiled as well as the initial combat ops in the town leading up to and including the first AND second so-called assaults on Fallujah.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_0h8jI005Y]Fallujah - Tankers Dream - YouTube[/ame]

If this music doesn't rock you, something may be wrong with your mojo!

Watch it to the end.

Really.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 4, 2014)

And the next incursion into Iraq will rack up a few more million dollars for Dick Cheney and his Republican and Democratic friends.


----------



## Mojo2 (Jan 4, 2014)

aaronleland said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > obama intended this all along.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement.  It's why he intentionally weakened our military and is continuing to weaken our military.
> ...



When you post as you have here, your credibility is definitely not enhanced with quotes such as these:



> Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about -Mark Twain
> 
> War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today. -John F. Kennedy



...as part of your signature.

You invalidate your statement in the post by identifying yourself with the sig quotes as being opposed to American patriotism and against war.

We're all against war. But its mostly those who see ZERO circumstances when war is necessary that make anti-war posters, stickers and sig quotes part of their raison d'être.

And your post, coming from a person who never recognizes when force may be the better evil, is laughable.

And anyone who decries American patriotism is no friend of mine.


----------



## Mojo2 (Jan 4, 2014)

Indeependent said:


> And the next incursion into Iraq will rack up a few more million dollars for Dick Cheney and his Republican and Democratic friends.



That was posted as sarcasm, yes?

Because it was Dick Cheney who helped win Gulf War I, but because that was a war Liberals could understand they thought Cheney had gravitas.

Now he's teh debil.


----------



## Jroc (Jan 4, 2014)

Lumpy 1 said:


> According to Obama ... "Al Qaeda is on the road to defeat"
> 
> Democrats and the Demo-News media should use that statement to undermine Obama...



Obama pulled out of Iraq without a status of forces agreement. it's Obama's fault this happened. Even if you didn't agree with Bush, what was the point of letting the terrorist retake Fallujah after all we didn't there to liberate it from the terrorists. now look at the place. We should at least be there with air support for the Iraqi military if needed


----------



## skye (Jan 4, 2014)

The stunning and absolute tragedy is that this victory of Al Qaida  highlights the complete stupidity of trying to save Iraq from itself and try to install good old american style democracy, not only there but in the whole  region.

Obama is largely to blame because his principle of withdrawing from the world hot-spots has meant the vacuum has been filled by enemies of the West including Islamists  and Al Qaeda ...who Obama once claimed it has been defeated.

The whole thing makes you puke!


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 4, 2014)

novasteve said:


> And nobody is discussing it?



How can they, that would require saying that Obama is wrong, and that is illegal, and racist.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 4, 2014)

We had no business going to war in Iraq.

We are now witnessing an inevitable fight between two factions of Islam, which means all of our lives, blood, treasure have been wasted there.


----------



## Dot Com (Jan 4, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> We have no business going to war in Iraq.
> 
> We are now witnessing an inevitable fight between two factions of Islam, which means all of our lives, blood, treasure have been wasted there.



^ that

No Arab country wants to be occupied by foreign invaders. If we stayed there ANOTHER 10 yrs, they simply would have waited us out.

Repubs can't constantly fly the deficit hawk banner on the one hand then blow huge wads of taxpayer cash into these foreign excursions on the other hand. Only people profiting are defense contractors.....HEY!!! that where Repubs get campaign contributions & cushy jobs after they are defeated/retire. Hmmm


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

Indeependent said:


> And the next incursion into Iraq will rack up a few more million dollars for Dick Cheney and his Republican and Democratic friends.



As well as Pelosi and her husband and Obama's political contributors yet again..


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

skye said:


> The stunning and absolute tragedy is that this victory of Al Qaida  highlights the complete stupidity of trying to save Iraq from itself and try to install good old american style democracy, not only there but in the whole  region.
> 
> Obama is largely to blame because his principle of withdrawing from the world hot-spots has meant the vacuum has been filled by enemies of the West including Islamists  and Al Qaeda ...who Obama once claimed it has been defeated.
> 
> The whole thing makes you puke!



Obama was more concerned with the coming election that the integrity of the United States, I suppose he figured He/his voters/the Demo-media would blame Bush for Obama's defeat and resulting death toll.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 4, 2014)

Lumpy 1 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > And the next incursion into Iraq will rack up a few more million dollars for Dick Cheney and his Republican and Democratic friends.
> ...



Right, so let's all be aware of what neo-conservatism is all about.  Not American exceptionalism, only corporate pockets.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > We have no business going to war in Iraq.
> ...



Liberals talking about wasting taxpayer money is always amusing.

When Democrats waste far far far far far more they call it investment so Democrats have a ready excuse..Oh, the comedy and accepted hypocrisy by the left.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 4, 2014)

Val Jarrett took over for Osama, she's running AQ and she has Obama doing her bidding


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 4, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> We had no business going to war in Iraq.
> 
> We are now witnessing an inevitable fight between two factions of Islam, which means all of our lives, blood, treasure have been wasted there.



Wasted because Obama handed Iraq to AQ


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> Lumpy 1 said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



What, are you talking General Electric and other Obama/Democrat contributors.

 I hope there is a re-emergence of American Exceptional-ism, it's been sorely abused by liberal policies and legislation but it still exists. I recall being personally reintroduced to it when I visited my son at his army base and met his fellow soldiers.


----------



## Mojo2 (Jan 4, 2014)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Val Jarrett took over for Osama, she's running AQ and she has Obama doing her bidding



And I hope everyone recognizes HER radical orientation by education and through childhood and subsequent indoctrination.

Hey Conservatives, you ever wonder why the Left REALLY gets riled up when you discuss McCarthy?

It's because so many of them feel some kind of guilt and they know people who would be correctly identified as having anti-American views. People like Jarrett. 



> Like so many Obama appointees, Valerie Jarrett bears the unmistakable imprint of the president&#8217;s ideology. She is a leftist to her core, with notable personal ties to the communist movement. Jarrett&#8217;s maternal grandfather, for instance, was a Chicagoan named Robert Taylor, who in the 1940s was involved with such communist fronts as the American Peace Mobilization and the Chicago Civil Liberties Committee. Also a member of these groups was Frank Marshall Davis, the communist journalist who in the 1970s would mentor a young Barack Obama.
> 
> Jarrett&#8217;s mother (and Robert Taylor&#8217;s daughter) is early-childhood-education author Barbara Taylor Bowman, who co-founded a Chicago-based graduate school in child development known as the Erikson Institute, named after the psychoanalyst Erik Erikson; in 1950 Erikson became a hero to the left by choosing to resign from his professorship at the University of California rather than sign an anti-communist loyalty oath as the school required. Indicative of the Erikson Institute&#8217;s radical political orientation is the fact that its board of trustees has included, in addition to Bowman, such figures as Tom Ayers (father of the former Weather Underground terrorist and lifelong Marxist Bill Ayers) and Bernardine Dohrn (longtime wife of Bill Ayers).
> 
> In 1983 Valerie Jarrett married the son of Vernon Jarrett, a black journalist who formerly wrote for the communist-influenced Chicago Defender. In the 1940s, Mr. Jarrett was a leader of the Chicago chapter of American Youth for Democracy&#8212;youth wing of the Communist Party USA. He also served on a publicity committee for the Packinghouse Workers Union, a Chicago-based entity dominated by the CPUSA. In each of these endeavors, Mr. Jarrett had close contact with the aforementioned communist, Frank Marshall Davis.



http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/john-perazzo/valerie-jarretts-radical-roots/


And here's another source which goes into great detail to explore her Communist background.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2418


Add to this the numbers of Muslims who came to America to live partly to satisfy the command for jihad. Muslims who might have felt certain their jihad would be without doubt and without incident. If America began seeing the big picture things might change for these non-violent Muslims who by simply living here are supporting future tactics of people like the Brotherhood.

So when the subject of McCarthy comes up we have Muslims, Hispanics as well as un-discriminating Libs to deal with.


----------



## aaronleland (Jan 4, 2014)

Mojo2 said:


> ...as part of your signature.
> 
> You invalidate your statement in the post by identifying yourself with the sig quotes as being opposed to American patriotism and against war.
> 
> ...



Really? It's my sig that offended you? I'm obviously not trying hard enough. 

And what about JFK's quote says that force is never necessary? 

As for your patriotism, I don't decry American patriotism. I decry blind patriotism.

_*Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism - how passionately I hate them!* -Albert Einstein_


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 4, 2014)

CrusaderFrank said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > We had no business going to war in Iraq.
> ...



Only in your dream, neo-con.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 4, 2014)

Lumpy 1 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Lumpy 1 said:
> ...



I agree wholeheartedly.  Let's not confuse the two ism's as integrated.

They are not.

I want American exceptionalism with the neo-cons out of it.

And I agree with the quality of our Armed Forces personnel.  

They are so awesome.


----------



## Dot Com (Jan 4, 2014)

Repubs, & people who vote for them, never tire of sending others people's kids to endless deployments so they can say victory is right around the corner  Result? endless quagmires w/ TRILLIONS of borrowed taxdollars.


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jan 4, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Repubs, & people who vote for them, never tire of sending others people's kids to endless deployments so they can say victory is right around the corner  Result? endless quagmires w/ TRILLIONS of borrowed taxdollars.



Democrats got us into Vietnam, would you like to start there and then go before and after?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 4, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Repubs, & people who vote for them, never tire of sending others people's kids to endless deployments so they can say victory is right around the corner  Result? endless quagmires w/ TRILLIONS of borrowed taxdollars.



Dems, i.e., Wilson, FDR, Truman, Clinton, and Obama did the same.


----------



## Edgetho (Jan 5, 2014)

aaronleland said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > obama intended this all along.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement.  It's why he intentionally weakened our military and is continuing to weaken our military.
> ...



the lying cocksucker-in-chief and his toady, Hitlery, intentionally fucked up the Status of Forces agreement with Iraq and everybody with an above room temperature IQ knows it.

Since you're not really interested in facts anyway, I'm not going to bother explaining it to you


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 5, 2014)

Matthew said:


> This is what happens when society supports religious extremist. The religious extremist take over and destroy any freedom of thought.



Yeah like all that freedom of thought they got going at the following Universities that are controlled by secularists.

Queers United: University of Alaska Students Protest "Ex-Gay" Speaker



> Students at the University of Alaska Fairbanks are protesting a series of speaking engagements by Edward Delgado a so called "ex-gay" evangelist. Brought in as a guest speaker by the Campus Bible Ministries Mr. Delgado will give 14 lectures titled From Sins Bondage to Christs Freedom" on his claim that through reading the Bible he magically journeyed from being gay to becoming a heterosexual.
> 
> The visit is offensive to gay students, and allies because of advertisements around campus with the headline Gay? Lonely? Confused? attempting to draw students to the event in hopes of their salvation.



Wow, so much freedom of thought and expression there, so much the students can effectively get a speaker uninvited by their protests, lol.

And there are plenty more with a simple Google search. Some of these protests are done by religious groups operating under the tacit approval of secular administrators, so even having said secularists in charge doesn't keep the religious fanatics from censoring those they disagree with...as long as they are not Christian.

Groups protest former Israeli PM's speech | abc7chicago.com

Anti-India protests back at Kashmir University - The Hindu

Hell, these secular kooks don't even want their universities accepting money from the unwashed and unapproved.

50 educators sign letter to Catholic University protesting Koch Foundation?s $1 million gift - The Washington Post

Student protesters accuse Florida Atlantic University of violating their First Amendment rights | Inside Higher Ed



> A predictable pattern of events played out at Florida Atlantic University this spring: an Israeli speaker gave a presentation on campus, and pro-Palestinian students protested. But the way they protested -- by interrupting his talk -- has renewed a debate over free speech.



Lol, yeah, the right to free speech seems to be a point of debate among all you enlightened folks, there Matthew. Why is that up for debate in the ivory towers these days?


Here is a video of secular run university free speech
Muslim Brotherhood Supporters Storm SOAS London University Lecture On Egypt (VIDEO)

And another speaker silenced by secularists.

Ray Kelly lecture canceled amidst student, community protest ? Brown Daily Herald

And of course the last century is filled with secularist luminaries like Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Ill Sung, Stalin, etc.

Very impressive record that secularists have for allowing freedom of thought and speech, all the way back to the French Revolution...oh , wait, there was that Reign of Terror thingy....

roflmao


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 5, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Repubs, & people who vote for them, never tire of sending others people's kids to endless deployments so they can say victory is right around the corner  Result? endless quagmires w/ TRILLIONS of borrowed taxdollars.



That has to be one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read.

Most of our wars in the past 100 years have had Democrats at the helm, not Republicans.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 5, 2014)

aaronleland said:


> Mojo2 said:
> 
> 
> > ...as part of your signature.
> ...



You are the typical libtard ass hat who has nothing but contempt for the patriot who patrols the streets overseas as well as at home....until you need him.

Eat shit, little whiney bitch.


----------



## Edgetho (Jan 5, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Repubs, & people who vote for them, never tire of sending others people's kids to endless deployments so they can say victory is right around the corner  Result? endless quagmires w/ TRILLIONS of borrowed taxdollars.
> ...



Kudos for your intellectual honesty.  Unusual from a dim  

To libturdom in general.........

At least ten times the number of Americans died under democrats as Republicans in Foreign Wars.

Wilson, WWI

FDR, WWII

Truman, Korea

And this will come as a surprise to dimocraps (because you're stupid) but....

Two Thirds of the deaths during the Viet Nam War came under JFK and LBJ.

What Republicans do is stop cataclysmic Wars before they happen.  dimocraps are too stupid to consider that.  They're attitude is, "Peace now.  Let our children worry about the next Global War."

Because they're cowards.  

And if you people on the left don't think the ME can cause the next Global War, you're too stupid to live


----------



## Edgetho (Jan 5, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> > Mojo2 said:
> ...



Orwell wrote, "People sleep peaceably in their beds because Rough Men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

He was doing an essay on Kipling and his works when he decided that Kipling's high regard for the Warrior was based on the historical need for ALL Great Civilizations to have great Armies.

Think about it.  The Greeks might be known for their Philosophy and their Mathematics but the people of that era knew them mostly for their Army.

Same with Romans.

The British didn't become the most powerful Empire to ever exist by having a weak Army.  They were seriously badass.

None of these civilizations ceased because they stopped writing poetry or gazing at the sky, they ceased because bigger, badder Armies came around and kicked their fucking asses.

In the case of the Brits, it was FDR who dismantled them, but it was still the direct result of Hitler and his Army.

dimocraps are scum because they are arrogant and stupid.  A deadly combination.

They don't like being around "Rough Men".  They think we're barbaric, coarse, and violent.

And they would be right.

Consider this, when Persia decide to wipe Greece from the face of the Earth, how many Persian Armies were turned away by Philosophical words or by the logic of Math?

How many Philosophers and Mathematicians stood and railed against the invading Persian Army?

If any did, they died.  Probably horribly.

Rough Men protect candy-assed Philosophers and Academics from invaders and marauders and the civilizations who forget that are not long for this world.

But, dimocraps are the scum of the Earth for a reason.  They're stupid and they're arrogant and should NEVER have power.

Ever.


----------



## Bleipriester (Jan 5, 2014)

We should consider to supply the moderate fighters among ISIL with weapons to help the Iraqi people to overthrow the regime.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 5, 2014)

Edgetho said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



"What Republicans do is stop cataclysmic Wars before they happen" is dishonest, of course.

Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush

More Americans died in the Civil War than in all other wars combined


----------



## Katzndogz (Jan 5, 2014)

obama intended to lose in both Iraq and Afghanistan.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement, to make sure more Americans died.

Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement - Washington Times

The rules murdering our troops | New York Post

Then to make SURE we lost, he came up with weakening our fighting ability by filling the military with gays and women.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 5, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> obama intended to lose in both Iraq and Afghanistan.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement, to make sure more Americans died.
> 
> Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement - Washington Times
> 
> ...



Exactly right


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 5, 2014)

Jroc said:


> Lumpy 1 said:
> 
> 
> > According to Obama ... "Al Qaeda is on the road to defeat"
> ...



Obama has also weakened 3 other nations in the Mideast. Egypt, Libya and Syria.  his decisions are going to lead to multiple afghanistans down the road


----------



## Truthmatters (Jan 5, 2014)

awwwhhhhhhh


the right is getting all misty in the eyes over going back into Iraq

Look you idiots how many years did we tell you it would turn into a civil war once we left?

Sadam was a lump of shit


he was the lump of shit that acted as a cork in the middle east bottle of bees.


You wanted that cork gone.


ACCEPT what you did


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 5, 2014)

Truthmatters said:


> the right is getting all misty in the eyes over going back into Iraq
> 
> Look you idiots how many years did we tell you it would turn into a civil war once we left?
> 
> ...


For once I have to totally agree with TM   ....     

I hope it never happens again........


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 5, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > obama intended to lose in both Iraq and Afghanistan.  That's why he changed the rules of engagement, to make sure more Americans died.
> ...



Exactly and deliberately false: your comments are treasonable.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 5, 2014)

Sunni Man said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > the right is getting all misty in the eyes over going back into Iraq
> ...



Neo-cons want to be bee keepers.

Idiots.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 5, 2014)

novasteve said:


> And nobody is discussing it?



well you rest assured 

it isnt the same old alqeada 

it is a new one according to msm


----------



## Truthmatters (Jan 5, 2014)

so when you righties all go back into the middle east to fight again will you pay for it this time or will you just DUMP the cost on the next democractic president who gets elected because your idiot ideas yet again fail?


----------



## longknife (Jan 5, 2014)

Part of me says, "Let 'em go ahead and slaughter each other. Fewer for us to fight in the future."\

But the other part of me says, "Is this the result of all those lives lost by our men and women fighting there to free people from religious tyranny?"

And then Kerry blabs his big mouth off to say that we'll support Iraq - but not with military forces. What the hell is he talking about?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 5, 2014)

Sunni Man said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > the right is getting all misty in the eyes over going back into Iraq
> ...




I hope we never have to again, but circumstances may call for it.

Our mistake was REMAINING in Iraq and trying to rebuild it. We should have made peace with the Baathist party-led government and had them re-establish a political entity that was stable and able to remain fairly democratic. But if they cant do that, it is none of our damned business.

It was the decision to play nation builder that ruined Bushes presidency, and for that he can thank his neocon advisors like Connie Rice.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 5, 2014)

Truthmatters said:


> so when you righties all go back into the middle east to fight again will you pay for it this time or will you just DUMP the cost on the next democractic president who gets elected because your idiot ideas yet again fail?



Most of the current deficit is not due to the military budget, honey.


----------



## Truthmatters (Jan 5, 2014)

wars should be paid for .

NO sane country cuts taxes and wages expensive wars at the same time.

its why your party is so full of shit.


----------



## Truthmatters (Jan 5, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



so lying the American people into Iraq was fine with you?


I guess you like their election cheating too huh?


----------



## U2Edge (Jan 5, 2014)

Truthmatters said:


> awwwhhhhhhh
> 
> 
> the right is getting all misty in the eyes over going back into Iraq
> ...



Well, you're so called cork invaded and annexed Kuwait, the first country to be invaded and annexed since Hitler last did it in the early 1940s. Saddam also invaded Iran, invaded and attacked Saudi Arabia and attacked Israel, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait with Ballistic Missiles. Saddam also used WMD more times than any leader since World War I. He is responsible for the deaths of 1.7 million people inside and outside Iraq. He is responsible for one of the worst environmental disasters the planet has ever seen when he dumped oil into the Persian Gulf and lit all of Kuwaits oil wells on fire. 

     It was necessity that Saddam was removed and the world and Iraq are far better off without him. 

        Iraq now has a problem with extremist just like the British once had a problem with the IRA. That's a far better situation for Iraq than all the wars, sanctions and life under Saddam.


----------



## U2Edge (Jan 5, 2014)

Truthmatters said:


> so when you righties all go back into the middle east to fight again will you pay for it this time or will you just DUMP the cost on the next democractic president who gets elected because your idiot ideas yet again fail?



The war did not fail. Saddam was removed and the oil in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia has never been safer!


----------



## blackhawk (Jan 5, 2014)

It was predictable this would happen when we pulled out of Iraq it's sad and depressing but by no means surprising.


----------



## Edgetho (Jan 6, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> Edgetho said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Read it again......


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 6, 2014)

blackhawk said:


> It was predictable this would happen when we pulled out of Iraq it's sad and depressing but by no means surprising.



*It was predictable this would happen*

it was openly *predicted* that this would happen


----------



## Desperado (Jan 6, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> blackhawk said:
> 
> 
> > It was predictable this would happen when we pulled out of Iraq it's sad and depressing but by no means surprising.
> ...



And it is the same thing that will happen in Afghanistan too.


----------



## Edgetho (Jan 6, 2014)

Truthmatters said:


> awwwhhhhhhh
> 
> 
> the right is getting all misty in the eyes over going back into Iraq
> ...



Was there Civil War in Post War Germany?

How about in Post War Japan?

Italy?

No.  You know why?

Because we didn't have back-stabbing, gutless, American-Hating dimocrap scum running our Country back then.

Truman may have been a democrat, but he loved America and believed in America.

He was also a veteran and an honest man.

But there no democrats anymore.  Only America-Hating, back-stabbing, gutless, cowardly, vote-buying, scum of the Earth dimocraps.

dimocrap scum stabbed SE Asia in the back......  Result, at least 2 Million dead in Cambodia, probably just as many in Viet Nam, though no one but the murdering communist scum know for sure.

dimocrap scum stabbed the Iraqis in the back and they'll stab the Afghans in the back as well.

These people don't know the difference between dimocrap scumbags, like you, and decent, honest, Patriotic Americans like us.

We gave our word as a Country to these people to see this thing through.  We promised the people of Iraq that we wouldn't desert them if they sided with us.  We did the same in Iraq.

"Viet Nam?", we said.  "That was decades ago, we don't do that anymore.  If you side with us, we won't run away this time like we did after Viet Nam."

Yeah, right.

Do you think there will be retribution after the extremist ragheads take back the Country?

Think about it.....  If you're capable of thinking.

How many will be murdered?  How many will die?  How many?

Didn't the lying cocksucker-in-chief just tell us only 14 months ago that al Qaeda was on the run?

Was he lying or just another incompetent dimocrap scumbag?

Let's face it, people.  dimocrap scum don't care about the deaths and murders that will happen when they break their word to people.  Not to Foreigners, not even to their own citizens.

dimocraps are the scum of the Earth.

And next time we tell the population of a Country, "We won't run away from you like we did the Vietnamese, the Iraqis and the Afghans.  Honest."

Do you think they'll believe us?


----------



## Desperado (Jan 6, 2014)

U2Edge said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > so when you righties all go back into the middle east to fight again will you pay for it this time or will you just DUMP the cost on the next democractic president who gets elected because your idiot ideas yet again fail?
> ...



So you going against the grain and ARE admitting the Iraq war was about oil, as opposed to WMD.
It was not our duty to protect Kuwait and Saudi Arabia .


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 6, 2014)

Desperado said:


> U2Edge said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



We have signed on to do that as long as the Kuwaitis and Saudis only accept USD for their oil, which props up demand for USD.

Our currency is effectively back by oil instead of gold.


----------



## Edgetho (Jan 6, 2014)

Desperado said:


> U2Edge said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



There is a three hour special that airs on History Channel every now and then about the debriefing of Saddam Hussein before he was executed.

The story revolves around the one, single FBI agent who not only debriefed Saddam, but befriended him.

Long story short, Saddam post Desert Storm wasn't all that worried about the US re-invading.  Especially not with a dimocrap as president.

What he was worried about were the Iranians.  REAL worried.  

So he fabricated a story about how he had WMDs.  Which was believable because he did have a Nuclear Station at one time until the Israelis took it out.

And as long as the Iranians believed he had WMDs, they wouldn't fuck with him because the Iranians knew, FOR A FACT, that Saddam would nuke them into oblivion if he had the weapons to do so.

Just like today, the most brutal Wars in all of Islam are between Shi'a Sunni.

They hate each other even more than they hate us.

Saddam wanted the world to believe he had WMDs.

The CIA believed it, MI-6 believed it, Mossad believed it, the Iranians believed it, the Russians, the Chinese and the UN.....  They all thought he either had WMDs or was very near having them.

Sixteen (16) of them.  Sixteen UN Resolutions were ignored by Saddam Hussein.

United Nations Security Council and the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For YEARS, Iraq thumbed its nose at Weapons Inspectors.  Every major political figure of the time, INCLUDING the rapist Clinton said Hussein had to go.


> "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
> --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
> 
> "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
> ...



And dimocraps are some dishonest scum for continually bringing this up.

Now, just sit down and shut the fuck up.

Fucking moron.

I hate dimocraps.  THE most dishonest scum that has ever walked the Earth


----------



## Desperado (Jan 6, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Desperado said:
> 
> 
> > U2Edge said:
> ...



But by all official government explanations, The Iraqi War was not about the oil.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 6, 2014)

Desperado said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...



I have no idea why the neocons decided to hang the whole war on WMDs when there were a ton of reasons to go in there besides that.

But we did not extract oil from their for our use. Our allies get most of that oil. I think we get most of our foreign oil from Mexico and Canada.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 6, 2014)

Edgetho said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Edgetho said:
> ...



No need to.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Jan 6, 2014)

novasteve said:


> And nobody is discussing it?



  Pffffttt...this is an obvious lie. 
Obammy wiped out,decimated,destroyed and put Al Qaida on the run.
 Just ask him...


----------



## ScreamingEagle (Jan 6, 2014)

herewegoagain said:


> novasteve said:
> 
> 
> > and nobody is discussing it?
> ...



Forward...!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 6, 2014)

The neo-cons created the conditions for the loss of American lives, treasure, and prestige in Iraq.


----------



## U2Edge (Jan 6, 2014)

Desperado said:


> U2Edge said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



Its been US national security policy to protect the oil in Saudi Arabia since Roosevelt started that policy in 1943. Its energy and its vital to the economy. Without it, the cost of putting gas in your car and food in your mouth jumps astronomically. 

         Saddam's WMD's are weapons that Saddam can use to improve his ability to threaten US interest in the Persian Gulf which is oil and natural gas. So its not one or the other, its both, both are linked.


----------

