Surge this!

[red states rule]

do you EVER have anything other than catcalls to offer this site?

Nobody is SCARED of victory. We just have a different definition of what victory - and defeat - entails. Leaving Iraqis who are killing US AND each other to solve their own problems after providing them with an enormous amount of assistance in terms of finding and helping to execute their former dictator, helping them write a constitution... holding their hands through three elections..training their army.... mission accomplished. They want to fight one another and they want to kill us. We have reason to be in the middle of that.

So now facts are "catcalls"?

Dems are scared of victory. They have invested their entire political future in the defeat of the US in Iraq

Dems are giving it everything they got to ensure defeat

 

[maineman]

So now facts are "catcalls"?

Dems are scared of victory. They have invested their entire political future in the defeat of the US in Iraq

Dems are giving it everything they got to ensure defeat

those are catcalls.

Nobody in my party is scared of victory...that is just a bullshit phrase you use but can never substantiate. We have not invested anything in the defeat of the US..and your mere accusation is regugnant and profoundly insulting. We see a future where America confronts and defeats islamic extremism...the war in Iraq does nothing for that effort and only hurts our chances of victory in it.

 

[red states rule]

those are catcalls.

Nobody in my party is scared of victory...that is just a bullshit phrase you use but can never substantiate. We have not invested anything in the defeat of the US..and your mere accusation is regugnant and profoundly insulting. We see a future where America confronts and defeats islamic extremism...the war in Iraq does nothing for that effort and only hurts our chances of victory in it.

You only have your entire parties political future invested in defeat

They have done eveything possible for the last four years to undermine the war

 

[maineman]

You only have your entire parties political future invested in defeat

They have done eveything possible for the last four years to undermine the war

I do not consider allowing Iraqis to determine their own political fate and to finally start fighting the real war against the people who DID attack us as "defeat" I am saddened that you do.

 

[red states rule]

I do not consider allowing Iraqis to determine their own political fate and to finally start fighting the real war against the people who DID attack us as "defeat" I am saddened that you do.

If you want the Iraqis to stand on their own, why do you want to pull the US support out?

They are making progress in doing just that

 

[maineman]

If you want the Iraqis to stand on their own, why do you want to pull the US support out?

They are making progress in doing just that

I think if you'll read the resolution we only want to pull out if they FAIL to make progress doing that....

and when will you ever admit you fucked up about American casualties decreasing as a result of the success of the surge, by the way?

 

[red states rule]

I think if you'll read the resolution we only want to pull out if they FAIL to make progress doing that....

and when will you ever admit you fucked up about American casualties decreasing as a result of the success of the surge, by the way?

Dems put a surrender date in the bill

 

[maineman]

Dems put a surrender date in the bill

no...you obviously do not even know what the word surrender means.

come on back when you do.

 

[red states rule]

no...you obviously do not even know what the word surrender means.

come on back when you do.

Sticking your head in the sand will not make the truth about the surrender bill go away

 

[maineman]

you see...you were supposed to go find out the definition of the word "surrender" and THEN come back.

go try again.

 

[red states rule]

you see...you were supposed to go find out the definition of the word "surrender" and THEN come back.

go try again.

The defintion is in the Dems Surrender bill

The date Dems will hand over Iraq to the terrorists and the date they force the troops out

 

[maineman]

sur·ren·der [suh-ren-der]
–verb (used with object)

1. to yield (something) to the possession or power of another; deliver up possession of on demand or under duress: to surrender the fort to the enemy; to surrender the stolen goods to the police.

2. to give (oneself) up, as to the police.

we are not advocating doing any such thing

 

[red states rule]

sur·ren·der [suh-ren-der]
–verb (used with object)

1. to yield (something) to the possession or power of another; deliver up possession of on demand or under duress: to surrender the fort to the enemy; to surrender the stolen goods to the police.

2. to give (oneself) up, as to the police.

we are not advocating doing any such thing

to surrender the fort to the enemy

Perfect explanation of the Dems war plan

 

[maineman]

to surrender the fort to the enemy

Perfect explanation of the Dems war plan

what fort are we "surrendering"? We are the occupying army here...we are allowing the Iraqi authorities to determine their own political fate. We are giving no positions to enemies, we would be turning over any military installations and assets to Iraqi government armed forces....not surrendering them to any enemy. You don't know what the word means.

 

[red states rule]

what fort are we "surrendering"? We are the occupying army here...we are allowing the Iraqi authorities to determine their own political fate. We are giving no positions to enemies, we would be turning over any military installations and assets to Iraqi government armed forces....not surrendering them to any enemy. You don't know what the word means.

Iraq is the fort

Dems are to blinded by their hate to see it

 

[maineman]

As we leave Iraq, we will turn over all our facilities and all of our assets to Iraqi government military forces. That is not surrendering to the enemy.

For our departure to be a surrender, we would have to do so under duress or upon demand, and we would turn over (surrender) our facilities and our assets to the ENEMY. That is what surrendering is.... we are not doing that.

 

[red states rule]

As we leave Iraq, we will turn over all our facilities and all of our assets to Iraqi government military forces. That is not surrendering to the enemy.

For our departure to be a surrender, we would have to do so under duress or upon demand, and we would turn over (surrender) our facilities and our assets to the ENEMY. That is what surrendering is.... we are not doing that.

Handing the country over to the terrorists (and Iran) is surrender. Something Dems have wanted to do for years

Dems have a long history of appeasement - some things never change

 

[maineman]

Handing the country over to the terrorists (and Iran) is surrender. Something Dems have wanted to do for years

Dems have a long history of appeasement - some things never change

show me any statement by any democrat that advocates handing anything over to terrorists or Iran. I suggest that we want to hand everything over to the legitimate Iraqi government.... which is surrendering nothing.

 

[Rosotar]

Handing the country over to the terrorists (and Iran) is surrender. Something Dems have wanted to do for years

It is important to remember that these terrorists didn't exist in Iraq until we invaded, deposed Saddam, and destabilized the country. Neither was Iran a threat to Iraq before we (Bush) invaded. All of these problems were created by Bush and he's had four years to resolve them. Congress is simply telling him he doesn't have a blank check to kill our soldiers anymore without showing any results. That's not unreasonable.

Dems have a long history of appeasement - some things never change

Oh yeah?

How about some examples?

 

[Paul Revere]

no...you obviously do not even know what the word surrender means.

come on back when you do.

He knows it means anything Rush limbaugh says it means.