Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Iraq issue not ours
Obama didn't have any issue getting involved in Egypt did he now? Or Libya. Or Syria. Or the Ukraine.
Intelligence must have known that their former prisoner Bagdhadi that they released in 2009 was gaining strength, power, and a massive following trying to topple Assad in Syria.
You really should check out who the administration let go in 2009. And my oh my now 5 top Taliban leaders have been let go too.
How ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi became the worlds most powerful jihadist leader
How ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi became the world?s most powerful jihadist leader - The Washington Post
How many troops died or were wounded in our Egyptian intervention? Libya? Syria? Ukraine?
Wait just one minute, Bush had this guy in custody for 4 years and didn't do anything to stop him either. Did they warn the incoming Obama Administration who they had captured? What was that warning?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY]Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube[/ame]Are you or any of us PRIVELEGED to know what was WARNED from one President's administration to anothers?....If so link us up Sightless Puppy!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY"]Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube[/ame]Are you or any of us PRIVELEGED to know what was WARNED from one President's administration to anothers?....If so link us up Sightless Puppy!
We would've been in Iraq since 1991, jagoff. Then Iraq would implode after we left in 2154.
Some folks are just too stupid to see the truth and some are just too afraid to belive the truth. Which is it in your case?Quote: Originally Posted by francoHFW View Post
Nobody had heard of him in 2009. You piss off lol...
Are you arguing in favor of Bush Sr. invading Iraq in 1991, toppling Saddam Hussein, and then occupying Iraq with American forces until 2014? This appears to be your argument since you think that withdrawing US soldiers from Iraq (where they weren't supposed to be in the first place) was a bad thing. Are you arguing for the US to lie to the entire world in order to invade countries and then occupy them indefinitely? Whenever the US leaves, and we would have to leave because we're not supposed to invade countries over lies and then set up permanent military bases to keep the locals in line (*hint*: that's an "empire"), that country would descend into chaos, with several ancient tribal groups vying for authority, just as Dick Cheney said would happen in 1994.We would've been in Iraq since 1991, jagoff. Then Iraq would implode after we left in 2154.
2154? We are in S, Korea since 1953, and our presence their has insured that the North WORRIES about what they do...except NOW with the pussy in power, that has all changed! Idiot, where did you get 2154 from, out of you asshole like ALL of the shit you post?....Want to call our military men RACIST *****, like you called the members of the Boston Tea Party?
You're simply pond scum, that can type!
Reagan and the CIA trained, armed and funded the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan to fight a prolonged war based on guerrilla tactics adopted from the Viet Cong.
This is what you get when you let a liberal run a war...you get Vietnam all over again. It will take a Republican to straighten this shit out once Obama takes his mother in law and his family back to Chicago.
This is what you get when you let a liberal run a war...you get Vietnam all over again. It will take a Republican to straighten this shit out once Obama takes his mother in law and his family back to Chicago.
Are you arguing in favor of Bush Sr. invading Iraq in 1991, toppling Saddam Hussein, and then occupying Iraq with American forces until 2014? This appears to be your argument since you think that withdrawing US soldiers from Iraq (where they weren't supposed to be in the first place) was a bad thing. Are you arguing for the US to lie to the entire world in order to invade countries and then occupy them indefinitely? Whenever the US leaves, and we would have to leave because we're not supposed to invade countries over lies and then set up permanent military bases to keep the locals in line (*hint*: that's an "empire"), that country would descend into chaos, with several ancient tribal groups vying for authority, just as Dick Cheney said would happen in 1994.We would've been in Iraq since 1991, jagoff. Then Iraq would implode after we left in 2154.
2154? We are in S, Korea since 1953, and our presence their has insured that the North WORRIES about what they do...except NOW with the pussy in power, that has all changed! Idiot, where did you get 2154 from, out of you asshole like ALL of the shit you post?....Want to call our military men RACIST *****, like you called the members of the Boston Tea Party?
You're simply pond scum, that can type!
I wish you could understand. It would make explaining all of this much easier.
"We are in S, Korea since 1953, and our presence their has insured....." Our military spending has insured that Americans can't speak English. I guarantee that if we spend more on our schools than we do on our war machine, you would know the difference between "their" and "there". If Bush Sr. had invaded Iraq in 1991, we would still be there today, and we would have to be "their" well beyond 2154, just as the great white American Empire intends to stay in Korea, Japan, and Germany well beyond 2154.
I know you like to use the term "subversive" like it's an insult, so I'll do the same. The members of the original Boston Tea Party were subversive against the British crown, just like the character in your profile picture. I know you can't understand the irony in any of that but it should be pointed out nonetheless.
Are you arguing in favor of Bush Sr. invading Iraq in 1991, toppling Saddam Hussein, and then occupying Iraq with American forces until 2014? This appears to be your argument since you think that withdrawing US soldiers from Iraq (where they weren't supposed to be in the first place) was a bad thing. Are you arguing for the US to lie to the entire world in order to invade countries and then occupy them indefinitely? Whenever the US leaves, and we would have to leave because we're not supposed to invade countries over lies and then set up permanent military bases to keep the locals in line (*hint*: that's an "empire"), that country would descend into chaos, with several ancient tribal groups vying for authority, just as Dick Cheney said would happen in 1994.2154? We are in S, Korea since 1953, and our presence their has insured that the North WORRIES about what they do...except NOW with the pussy in power, that has all changed! Idiot, where did you get 2154 from, out of you asshole like ALL of the shit you post?....Want to call our military men RACIST *****, like you called the members of the Boston Tea Party?
You're simply pond scum, that can type!
I wish you could understand. It would make explaining all of this much easier.
"We are in S, Korea since 1953, and our presence their has insured....." Our military spending has insured that Americans can't speak English. I guarantee that if we spend more on our schools than we do on our war machine, you would know the difference between "their" and "there". If Bush Sr. had invaded Iraq in 1991, we would still be there today, and we would have to be "their" well beyond 2154, just as the great white American Empire intends to stay in Korea, Japan, and Germany well beyond 2154.
I know you like to use the term "subversive" like it's an insult, so I'll do the same. The members of the original Boston Tea Party were subversive against the British crown, just like the character in your profile picture. I know you can't understand the irony in any of that but it should be pointed out nonetheless.
Trying to talk, much less reason with this POND SCUM, is an endeavor, I will overlook the next time! It's like calling my cat for supper...I may get a look, but after that it's a crap shoot!
Although I do believe my cat has the intelligence of a 2 year old, KNoB isn't quite that advanced!
I wonder if THEIR is a reason for this troll to post this?...Ah, yes....#1 below! ...Also #4!
Are you arguing in favor of Bush Sr. invading Iraq in 1991, toppling Saddam Hussein, and then occupying Iraq with American forces until 2014? This appears to be your argument since you think that withdrawing US soldiers from Iraq (where they weren't supposed to be in the first place) was a bad thing. Are you arguing for the US to lie to the entire world in order to invade countries and then occupy them indefinitely? Whenever the US leaves, and we would have to leave because we're not supposed to invade countries over lies and then set up permanent military bases to keep the locals in line (*hint*: that's an "empire"), that country would descend into chaos, with several ancient tribal groups vying for authority, just as Dick Cheney said would happen in 1994.
I wish you could understand. It would make explaining all of this much easier.
"We are in S, Korea since 1953, and our presence their has insured....." Our military spending has insured that Americans can't speak English. I guarantee that if we spend more on our schools than we do on our war machine, you would know the difference between "their" and "there". If Bush Sr. had invaded Iraq in 1991, we would still be there today, and we would have to be "their" well beyond 2154, just as the great white American Empire intends to stay in Korea, Japan, and Germany well beyond 2154.
I know you like to use the term "subversive" like it's an insult, so I'll do the same. The members of the original Boston Tea Party were subversive against the British crown, just like the character in your profile picture. I know you can't understand the irony in any of that but it should be pointed out nonetheless.
Trying to talk, much less reason with this POND SCUM, is an endeavor, I will overlook the next time! It's like calling my cat for supper...I may get a look, but after that it's a crap shoot!
Although I do believe my cat has the intelligence of a 2 year old, KNoB isn't quite that advanced!
I wonder if THEIR is a reason for this troll to post this?...Ah, yes....#1 below! ...Also #4!
the cat doesn't take you serious either ...
He's taken over Mosul. He's now scored Tikrit. He was released in 2009. Why?
All hells breaking loose in Iraq and this former American prisoner is taking over.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, 43, known as Adu Dua, has emerged as one of the world's most lethal terrorist leaders
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY"]Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube[/ame]Are you or any of us PRIVELEGED to know what was WARNED from one President's administration to anothers?....If so link us up Sightless Puppy!
Just goes to show you even the GREAT DICK CHENEY was wrong, as we could have wiped out Saddam with far fewer deaths, and could have STAYED, made Iraq like our position in S.Korea and have a foothold on the fucking muslim terrorists that developed because they SAW our unwillingness to follow through as WEAKNESS and exploited it to the fullest...and as we see today, are again TAKING OVER IRAQ!
Damn, you liberal dogs aren't as smart as muslim terrorists!
30% of the 500 prisoners released by Bush have rejoined the fight.
The neo-cons brought this on inevitably because of the invasion in 2003.
This is a zero sum game we cannot influence, much less win.
