The Iraq / war on terror thread

[shades]

Look Pilferk.
Fancy boy, using big words doesnt make you sound anymore intelligent where I come from.
Its common sense that rules the day
every word in the letter,
thats not a media article, thats a written letter.
that touches on every point you need to address if you want to kill the argument against Iraq being a part of the war on terror.

You choose to stay focused on being a one track mind, I dont.
Speculation is part of a plan of action against future disasters. Even you can grasp that.
And on the insult note, so you do it elegantly by saying you are not going to 'educate' me and that the fact that I belive his words adds "even more color" to my posts is where you and I part ways in the gonad department.
 
If I could get my hands on you during one of your 'elegant' insults this converstaion would be over, or at least the verbal part on your end.
but i cant, so stick to addressing my arguments and quit acting like a little girl.

[gilld1]

Vernon Chong?  Is that Tommy's real name?  Because whoever wrote it was high as kite!

[pilferk]

Look Pilferk.
Fancy boy, using big words doesnt make you sound anymore intelligent where I come from.

What, you having a hard time following?? Sorry if the "big words" are causing some issues for you.? Quite frankly, I don't care.? It's the way I write.? It's always been the way I write.? It will always be the way I write.? Find it wordy? Again, I don't care.?

Don't like it, don't read it.

Its common sense that rules the day

And you've demonstrated an appalling lack of it.

every word in the letter,
thats not a media article, thats a written letter.
that touches on every point you need to adress if you want to kill the argument against Iraq being a part of the war on terror.

It's speculation, spin, and slippery slope assertions. All of it.? Arguments killed.? Not to mention, it's a freaking "urban legend".? We don't know who wrote it or why.? ?The whole thing could be a joke (wouldn't that be a hoot) by the author.

Next?

You choose to stay focused on being a one track mind, I dont.

A blatant lie. On both sides of the ball.

Speculation is part of a plan of action against future disasters. Even you can grasp that.

Sure, well-reasoned speculation based on reality, not rampant speculation used simply to bolster an opinion or make a point.? Muslims are GOING to take over France?? Spain IS finished?? And you espouse common sense?? Please.......

And on the insult note, so you do it elegantly by saying you are not going to 'educate' me and that the fact that I belive his words adds "even more color" to my posts is where you and I part ways in the gonad department.

See, here's the thing.? I don't insult you.? I don't call you names. That's the difference.

I've spent volumes of posts proving you're incorrect.? It's gotten boring.? You seem unwilling to do your own research or legwork. Hell, I just did it again by pointing out the snopes article on the "letter" you posted.  I'm kicking myself for that, already! ? I'm simply telling you I ain't doing it for you anymore.?It's the truth. If you find that insulting...tough noogies.

I add that your posts add more "color" to future posts to point out that ONE simple thing.? I'm not insulting you.? I'm telling you when you demonstrate you are naive and possess little comprehension of the political climate and process, we take you less serioulsy each time. It's the truth.  If you find that insulting....tough noogies.

On the gonad comment...it sure takes a lot of balls to sit behind a screen and toss out childish insults.? Maturity too.

If I could get my hands on you during one of your 'elegant' insults this converstaion would be over, or at least the verbal part on your end.

My friend, if you got your hands on me at ANY time, you'd be quite unhappy at the outcome.? ?Of course, that's irrelevant to the conversation at hand, and further proof that you're simply unable to hold up your end of the discussion...instead, you resort to threats of physical violence (again, FYI, against the rules....you wanna talk speculation..I speculate there's a banning in your future).

but i cant, so stick to addressing my arguments and quit acting like a little girl.

LOL..says the guy who hasn't addressed that the whole letter is speculation and spin...or a single point in my post...but instead threatened me.? Are you a comic by trade?? If not, you should find an open mic night nearby.? You'd kill with this stuff.

[jarmo]

and quit acting like a little girl.

Your attempts at insulting other board members is only gonna get you banned.

So, if that's what you want, keep it up a bit more and I'll take care of it.



/jarmo

[pilferk]

and quit acting like a little girl.

Your attempts at insulting other board members is only gonna get you banned.

So, if that's what you want, keep it up a bit more and I'll take care of it.



/jarmo

I liked the threat of physical violence, personally.? Pretty funny, all things considered, but certainly not very appropriate.

[shades]

ok, Im dealing with some of the most powerful pens on the net.
I stand defeated,
you want to ban me, if it serves the dictator mentality that the 'moderator' title somehow ultimately carries, then I certainly wouldnt want to impose.

I just get a little annoyed  and I usually sense the testosterone level of the other side of the screen by the volume of smart alleck remarks.
And that, 'you want to be banned, Ill ban you' comment. whatever dude.

I posted a letter, and who cares if snow white wrote it, doesnt change the content.
Its a reason, explanation, and justification for the War in Iraq all in one.
Explains why we have to trample on a few civil rights, explains why you have to stand up to terror instead of trying to reason with it.
Which is the only alternative Ive heard from the other side.
you people have been bashing the other sides stance using hindsight so long you dont even realize you're doing it anymore.

What would you have done.
I asked that 20 times months ago.
i came back and you are still bashing the other side while offering NOTHING.
Big fat nothing. Stand back and have a little respect for those kids over there doing there damndest to show the world the USA is not full of people like you guys who do nothing but whine when the heat is on high.
 

[pilferk]

I posted a letter, and who cares if snow white wrote it, doesnt change the content

On the contrary...it DRASTICALLY changes the content, and certainly drastically changes it's credibility.? I think that's pretty obvious.? And it certainly explains WHY it's such crappy speculative, slippery slope drivel.....it was probably written to be just that.

What would you have done.
I asked that 20 times months ago.
i came back and you are still bashing the other side while offering NOTHING.
Big fat nothing.

A lie.? Asked and answered over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Remember that research and legwork I mentioned??

Stand back and have a little respect for those kids over there doing there damndest to show the world the USA is not full of people like you guys who do nothing but whine when the heat is on high.

LOL.? Don't "whine".....says the guy who, when confronted with differing world views and opinions resorts to whining, name calling, and threats of physical violence. Priceless.

Respect them how?? By letting the government trample on the rights they fight to preserve?? I don't call that respect, by any stretch.? Respect them by "becoming" what we hate most about the extremists?? How is THAT respect?

Or maybe we should respect them by letting them continue to die in a war that not only we shouldn't have fought, but that we've fought "wrongly" since the start?? Respect them by cutting pay and benefits AND not equipping them properly for the mission? Or maybe we respect them by not providing clear obtainable objectives (something that, at least by the sounds of things, Bush has now been pressured into) in order to complete the mission? Don't you dare insinuate this administration has "respected" the boys risking their lives out there.? There are too many examples to the contrary.

No matter how much you want it to be...this isn't about "disrespecting" the troops.? We've covered that ground too...and you were shown to be incorrect.?

[jarmo]

you want to ban me, if it serves the dictator mentality that the 'moderator' title somehow ultimately carries, then I certainly wouldnt want to impose.

When will your kind get it?

We have rules, you don't like them, leave.

If you don't follow them after you've been told to, I will make you leave.


It's really fucking simple. Everybody gets it except your kind who are always posting about dictatorship, fascism, power and whatever else you come up with.

I just get a little annoyed? and I usually sense the testosterone level of the other side of the screen by the volume of smart alleck remarks.
And that, 'you want to be banned, Ill ban you' comment. whatever dude.

You act like you don't like the rules we have here. That usually leaves me very few options.

I'm not gonna let a few people who don't believe in our rules ruin what we have here. The sooner you get that, the better.


/jarmo

[Charity Case]

I thought the letter made some good points, and I think even you Pilferk can see that good points can be made by anyone.  The author is not as relevant as the material (whoever the author might be).

As for the banning....and this is not to pick on you Pilferk....but isn't saying "Let me educate you" more insulting than just name calling?? I think it is.? The rules here state that you can't insult other members...right?? At least that is the intent of the rules.? When you get uppity and start stating that you are going to "educate" people...that is just an uptown way of calling them stupid.? However, because the insult is in a different wrapper (and probably more because you are a liberal as is the majority of the moderators here) you go unadmonished.?

[shades]

"MY KIND"huh?

And there is a glaring Topic titled "FUCK CHRISTMAS" on the board.

And you're claiming to be offended by me?

what is this comedy central?

[shades]

And thank you Charity.
for stating the obvious.
The threads are exactly what they were three months ago on the Iraq war and Bush.

And although we are winning the war, and Bush stated the objective and time table years ago,
now the liberals are claiming they 'forced' him to give a timeline.
Its fuckin hilarious is what it is.

PEACE

[the dirt]

If I could get my hands on you during one of your 'elegant' insults this converstaion would be over, or at least the verbal part on your end.

My friend, if you got your hands on me at ANY time, you'd be quite unhappy at the outcome. ?

So when and where's the fight? ?

[jarmo]

"MY KIND"huh?

Yes, your kind. The kind of people who are always pointing out how I'm a dictator and/or a fascist as soon as I point out that they're breaking the rules. That's what your kind does.




/jarmo

[Prometheus]

And thank you Charity.
for stating the obvious.
The threads are exactly what they were three months ago on the Iraq war and Bush.

And although we are winning the war, and Bush stated the objective and time table years ago,
now the liberals are claiming they 'forced' him to give a timeline.
Its fuckin hilarious is what it is.

PEACE

new timeline?


hmmm the only one i have seen is the when the jobs done....... frankly im conservative on military issues.... and the orgional timeline was well suited answer..... though to satisfiy the masses a statment of time like... say after the war was called a victory and over and stabilation began a min 5 yr time frame..... then a reevaluation of the situation if things are looking good a staggarded withdrawl over 2 - 3 years..... if things are looking dicey stilll then a  2 year after review..... and same as b4...... most likely there will still be a sizable force in country for at least 10 years...... with the last going... if bases are not granted for stragetic purposes by ythe iraqi goverment withing another 2 -3yrs


if there has been a solid timeline given.... ill find it after this post

[pilferk]

And although we are winning the war, and Bush stated the objective and time table years ago,
now the liberals are claiming they 'forced' him to give a timeline.
Its fuckin hilarious is what it is.

Prove it.? Where's his stated timeline? And "eventually" and "someday" aren't timelines.  They're cop outs.

Oh, right....."when we're done"...done with what, exactly, he's never specifically said.  Or what "done" exactly means to him.

[pilferk]

I thought the letter made some good points, and I think even you Pilferk can see that good points can be made by anyone.? The author is not as relevant as the material (whoever the author might be).

Please point them out.? I will admit good points can be made? by anyone.? I don't see a single one in that letter.? All I see is rampant speculation and drivel.

As for the banning....and this is not to pick on you Pilferk....but isn't saying "Let me educate you" more insulting than just name calling?? I think it is.? The rules here state that you can't insult other members...right?? At least that is the intent of the rules.? When you get uppity and start stating that you are going to "educate" people...that is just an uptown way of calling them stupid.? However, because the insult is in a different wrapper (and probably more because you are a liberal as is the majority of the moderators here) you go unadmonished.?

Charity, first off...your opinion is hardly the most unbiased on the subject, eh? Nor is it particularly relevant.

In addition, I can't reasonably find any reason why you could possilby consider my comments "insulting a poster".? I'm making a point.? In the above posts, actually, I've said "I'm NOT going to educate you anymore", largely because I've spent far more time and energy doing spades research for him in the past.? He makes outrageous claims, and, rather than just ask him for proof (which, FYI, he never seems to be able to provide), I've just gone out and flat out proved him wrong.? My comments are to the point that I'm not going to do it anymore.? I'm going to simply tell him the long and short of it, and he can connect the dots himself.? If he (or you) finds that insulting...well, I find it laughable that you would, all thiings considered.? I'm hardly cussing him out or calling him names.? If you can't see the reasonable difference, I'm not sure why.

Of course, you'll claim your being persecuted and treated unfairly, which, quite frankly, is bullshit.? ? If you think you're treated unfairly or don't like the rules...you all know where the door is.  Don't let it hit you where the good lord split you.

[sandman]

source: LA Times

From the war front comes optimism

Before reading such an apocalyptic conclusion, stop to consider why so many with firsthand experience have more hope than those without any.

By Max Boot


When it comes to the future of Iraq, there is a deep disconnect between those with firsthand knowledge - Iraqis and U.S. soldiers in Iraq - and those whose impressions are shaped by doomsday media coverage and domestic politics.

A large majority of the American public is convinced that the liberation of Iraq was a mistake, while a smaller but growing number thinks that we are losing and that we need to pull out soon. Those ideas are echoed by finger-in-the-wind politicians, including many - such as Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.) and Harry Reid (D., Nev.), Rep. John Murtha (D., Pa.), former Sen. John Edwards (D., N.C.), and Bill Clinton - who supported the invasion.

Yet in a survey last month from the U.S.-based International Republican Institute, 47 percent of Iraqis polled said their country was headed in the right direction, as opposed to 37 percent who said they thought that it was going in the wrong direction. And 56 percent thought things would be better in six months. Only 16 percent thought they would be worse.

American soldiers are also much more optimistic than American civilians. The Pew Research Center and the Council on Foreign Relations just released a survey that found that 64 percent of military officers are confident that we ultimately will establish a stable democracy in Iraq. Comparable figures for journalists and academics are 33 percent and 27 percent, respectively. Even more impressive is how our service members are voting with their feet. Although both the Army and the Marine Corps are having trouble attracting fresh recruits - no surprise, given the state of public opinion regarding Iraq - reenlistment rates continue to exceed expectations. Veterans are expressing their confidence by signing up to continue fighting.

Perhaps the Iraqi public and the U.S. armed forces are delusional. Maybe things really are on an irreversible downward slope. But before reaching such an apocalyptic conclusion, stop to consider why so many with firsthand experience have more hope than those without any.

For starters, one can point to two successful elections this year, on Jan. 30 and Oct. 15, in which most Iraqis who showed up braved insurgent threats to vote. The constitutional referendum in October was particularly significant because it marked the first wholesale engagement of Sunnis in the political process. Since then, Sunni political parties have made clear that they will participate in the Dec. 15 parliamentary election. This is big news. The most disaffected group in Iraq is starting to realize that it must achieve its objectives through ballots, not bullets.

There are also heartening economic indicators that receive little or no coverage in the Western media. For all the insurgents' attempts to sabotage the Iraqi economy, the Brookings Institution reports that per-capita income has doubled since 2003 and is now 30 percent higher than before the war. Thanks primarily to the increase in oil prices, the Iraqi economy is projected to grow at a whopping 16.8 percent next year. According to Brookings' Iraq index, five times more cars are on the streets than in Saddam Hussein's day, with five times more telephone subscribers and 32 times more Internet users.

The growth of independent media - a prerequisite of liberal democracy - is even more inspiring. Before 2003, there was not a single independent media outlet in Iraq. Today, Brookings reports, there are 44 commercial TV stations, 72 radio stations, and 100-plus newspapers.

But aren't bombs still going off at an alarming rate? Of course. It's almost impossible to stop a few thousand fanatics who are willing to commit suicide to slaughter others. Yet there is hope on the security front. Since the Jan. 30 election, not a single Iraqi unit has crumbled in battle, according to Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, who until September was in charge of their training. Iraqi soldiers are showing impressive determination in fighting the terrorists, notwithstanding the terrible casualties they have taken.

Not to suggest that everything is wonderful. The situation remains grim in many respects. But the most disheartening indicator of all is simply the American public's loss of confidence in the war effort. Abu Musab Zarqawi may be losing on the Arab street (his own family has disowned him), but he's winning on Main Street. And, as the Vietnam War showed, defeatism on the home front can become self-fulfilling.

[Charity Case]

Charity, first off...your opinion is hardly the most unbiased on the subject, eh? Nor is it particularly relevant.

Why is my opinion not relevant?  Everyone's opinion, by nature, is biased.  It's a fundamental part of someone's opinion.  So why is your biased opinion more relevant than mine?  See that's a perfect example of your 'uppity' approach to posting.

In addition, I can't reasonably find any reason why you could possilby consider my comments "insulting a poster".? I'm making a point.? In the above posts, actually, I've said "I'm NOT going to educate you anymore", largely because I've spent far more time and energy doing spades research for him in the past.? He makes outrageous claims, and, rather than just ask him for proof (which, FYI, he never seems to be able to provide), I've just gone out and flat out proved him wrong.? My comments are to the point that I'm not going to do it anymore.? I'm going to simply tell him the long and short of it, and he can connect the dots himself.? If he (or you) finds that insulting...well, I find it laughable that you would, all thiings considered.? I'm hardly cussing him out or calling him names.? If you can't see the reasonable difference, I'm not sure why.

I have not read your whole discussion with shades so I really can't comment on this.  But from my knowledge of how you write, you are very condensending and uppity toward people.  As a matter of fact you hide behind that to some extent.  Do I find it insulting, well only by definition, because it doesn't make much difference in this world, all thing considered.  I find it funny that you think being condesending is ok is not insulting.

Of course, you'll claim your being persecuted and treated unfairly, which, quite frankly, is bullshit.? ? If you think you're treated unfairly or don't like the rules...you all know where the door is.? Don't let it hit you where the good lord split you.

I think based on some of slc's posts and the insults he has repeatedly hurled here and his never being punished for them, and the fact that the only people punished in this section are conservatives, I'd say that people are not treated fairly here.  You'd actually dsagree with this?  You seem to smart to actually diagree with something so obvious.  As for knowing where the door is, well that's obvious.  If I thought it was untolerable I'd be gone by now.  But please don't be so naive as to think there is equity in the length of rope given to liberal and conservatives on this forum.

[Charity Case]

source: LA Times

From the war front comes optimism

Before reading such an apocalyptic conclusion, stop to consider why so many with firsthand experience have more hope than those without any.

By Max Boot


When it comes to the future of Iraq, there is a deep disconnect between those with firsthand knowledge - Iraqis and U.S. soldiers in Iraq - and those whose impressions are shaped by doomsday media coverage and domestic politics.

A large majority of the American public is convinced that the liberation of Iraq was a mistake, while a smaller but growing number thinks that we are losing and that we need to pull out soon. Those ideas are echoed by finger-in-the-wind politicians, including many - such as Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.) and Harry Reid (D., Nev.), Rep. John Murtha (D., Pa.), former Sen. John Edwards (D., N.C.), and Bill Clinton - who supported the invasion.

Yet in a survey last month from the U.S.-based International Republican Institute, 47 percent of Iraqis polled said their country was headed in the right direction, as opposed to 37 percent who said they thought that it was going in the wrong direction. And 56 percent thought things would be better in six months. Only 16 percent thought they would be worse.

American soldiers are also much more optimistic than American civilians. The Pew Research Center and the Council on Foreign Relations just released a survey that found that 64 percent of military officers are confident that we ultimately will establish a stable democracy in Iraq. Comparable figures for journalists and academics are 33 percent and 27 percent, respectively. Even more impressive is how our service members are voting with their feet. Although both the Army and the Marine Corps are having trouble attracting fresh recruits - no surprise, given the state of public opinion regarding Iraq - reenlistment rates continue to exceed expectations. Veterans are expressing their confidence by signing up to continue fighting.

Perhaps the Iraqi public and the U.S. armed forces are delusional. Maybe things really are on an irreversible downward slope. But before reaching such an apocalyptic conclusion, stop to consider why so many with firsthand experience have more hope than those without any.

For starters, one can point to two successful elections this year, on Jan. 30 and Oct. 15, in which most Iraqis who showed up braved insurgent threats to vote. The constitutional referendum in October was particularly significant because it marked the first wholesale engagement of Sunnis in the political process. Since then, Sunni political parties have made clear that they will participate in the Dec. 15 parliamentary election. This is big news. The most disaffected group in Iraq is starting to realize that it must achieve its objectives through ballots, not bullets.

There are also heartening economic indicators that receive little or no coverage in the Western media. For all the insurgents' attempts to sabotage the Iraqi economy, the Brookings Institution reports that per-capita income has doubled since 2003 and is now 30 percent higher than before the war. Thanks primarily to the increase in oil prices, the Iraqi economy is projected to grow at a whopping 16.8 percent next year. According to Brookings' Iraq index, five times more cars are on the streets than in Saddam Hussein's day, with five times more telephone subscribers and 32 times more Internet users.

The growth of independent media - a prerequisite of liberal democracy - is even more inspiring. Before 2003, there was not a single independent media outlet in Iraq. Today, Brookings reports, there are 44 commercial TV stations, 72 radio stations, and 100-plus newspapers.

But aren't bombs still going off at an alarming rate? Of course. It's almost impossible to stop a few thousand fanatics who are willing to commit suicide to slaughter others. Yet there is hope on the security front. Since the Jan. 30 election, not a single Iraqi unit has crumbled in battle, according to Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, who until September was in charge of their training. Iraqi soldiers are showing impressive determination in fighting the terrorists, notwithstanding the terrible casualties they have taken.

Not to suggest that everything is wonderful. The situation remains grim in many respects. But the most disheartening indicator of all is simply the American public's loss of confidence in the war effort. Abu Musab Zarqawi may be losing on the Arab street (his own family has disowned him), but he's winning on Main Street. And, as the Vietnam War showed, defeatism on the home front can become self-fulfilling.

Exactly.  Great article.  There is alot of good stuff in that article, as I have bolded above.  Things are no where near as bad as the liberal media would have us believe.  If they were, no one would re-enlist.  I think in 2 years we will be looking back on this and saying that it was the right thing to do.

[Guns N RockMusic]

SLC, if you're gonna bait me with that lame excuse of a signature, at least be qualifed in your accusations.  You know dick shit about me, the military (daddy's service doesn't count - it's not genetic) and you sure as hell don't know anything about Iraq.  You've probably never done a hard thing in your life and your general lack of concern for others and general well-being is upsetting to say the least.  You sir don't give two shits about American servicemen or Iraqis.  You'd sacrifice the lives of millions all to proove a point.  I'd survive in Iraq because I understand the concept of teamwork and comradery; my buds wouldn't shoot me and leave me for dead.  You're a coward because you bark like a big dog but your actions remain silent.  If what you've said is true and your family is ex-military and Republican, then you're the classic case of adolescent rebellion gone to far.  All I know is that if your father is military, he must silently cry himself to sleep at night knowing he has a loud mouth like you for offspring.