Now that a Deadly Terrorist has achieved room temperature liberals don't look to happy, Why is this?

Question

John Murtha you were saying?
Nancy Pelosi you were saying?
Teddy you are not talking.

Answer 1

The fact that we caught one means we ARE on the right track (with a few detours) and that just proves that the Liberals were....OMG...WRONG!! Just wait though...next move Bush makes , they'll be back bashing everyone and everything they can get their hands on. Personally, they don't know what they're talking about! Bush is acually doing Something while liberals want to sit back here and hide. GO MILITARY!! GO BUSH!!! GO AMERICA!!!

Answer 2

Hey brave guy, what's your credentials for being so tough? Where do you and your lying sack of crap conservatives get the idea that liberals are not happy with the death of Zarqawi? Every thing I have heard today from liberals has been that all are glad this terrorist is gone. Right away you conservitives try to politicize it with lies just like everything you do. Republicans have to relie on hatred, scare tactics and division of the American people because they have nothing else. You all sound so tough on terrrorism but I don't see many conservatives that are veterans. In fact why are over 70 veterans of our armed forces running as Democrates for office this year and only 2 Republicans. That says more than anything you and your fellow liars say about the war on terror. Republicans are big mouth, yellow bellied chicken-sh*ts cowards and this comes from a combat veteran. In fact I don't ever remember seeing a Republican in a foxhole. They're only happy fighting with their lying mouths rather than see the real thing like Murtha.

Answer 3

I'm a liberal and I'm thrilled that he's dead.

That doesn't make the war any more justified. He didn't start killing us until we went over there to start with. His sorry *** was not worth the death of a single one of our brave men and women. His death-picture does not erase a single flag-draped coffin, nor make one mother's, wife's, daughter's, or girlfriend's tears worth it. His death does not make us here at home any more safe from terrorism, nor does it redeem us in the eyes of the global community for the innocent people that have been killed because they were in the way. His death won't bring back the money we've wasted in this debacle. $250,000,000 PER DAY would buy an awful lot of school books. His death won't return our country to a land of laws, where privacy is protected and the president can't just wipe away the rules in the name of "National Security".

And if you think there aren't 10 more guys lining up to take his spot, you aren't paying attention.

Wake up -- we are there because of oil. Period. End of story. We aren't there to stop any terrorists, we aren't there to bring democracy, we aren't there to keep the world safe. We are there because the current administration is in bed with big oil, and big oil wanted the price to go up. The day we leave, the "democracy" we leave behind will start to crumble, even if we are there 1000 years, because these people don't want democracy -- they want revenge. Revenge against the bathists for 30 years of carnage, revenge against the west for propping up Saddam and then destroying the country when we decided he wasn't useful anymore, revenge against the Shiites for taking revenge against the Sunis, revenge against the Kurds because they want thier own country.

Oh yeah, before you go criticising Murtha, you should explain to us all the time you spent under fire in a foreign land. He earned his right to give his opinion. If we make him shut up, then noone has a right to speak.

Answer 4

I'm not sure what you mean. That Murtha, Pelosi and Kennedy are unhappy that we got rid of a terrorist? Why would they be? That's what we're supposed to be doing.

Or are you saying that they are now shown to be wrong in some way about wanting to get out of this war?

Illogical.

Answer 5

we're shocked that something positive happened for once. Maybe we should spend $50 billion and 3 more years trying to get another one. like maybe bin laden. Oh yeah, did you know who this guy was before the war? Or did this terrorist arise as a result of the invasion? Prepare for the backlash, guys

Answer 6

My understanding from the senator from CT is that Al Quaeda in Iraq accounts for just 15% of the insurgency. You also have the Bathists and Al Sadr's brigades, hit squads in police uniforms, sunni-shiite violence, a fragile government, etc. So while bumping off Al Z. will help, it's not like there will suddenly be peace in the valley....I'm just sayin'.....

Answer 7

good question- it keeps them liberals tryin hard to make up more excuses to the smart ppl's questions.
sometimes it's funny 2 watch 'em make their excuses, filled with jargon and nothing solid.
i guess the liberals just like negative things, and now there's one less negative thing in the world, so they're unhappy
thanks 2 the best army in the world, there'e less terrorists every day, and they gotta go around whining about how horrible what we're doin is. u almost feel sorry 4 their confused brains.

Answer 8

If we had stuck with only going after bin Laden and not gone into Iraq, we would never have heard of Zarqawi in the first place. It's great he's dead, but the whole things been bungled from the start.

Answer 9

The liberals are so ticked over Al- Zarqawis' death and the country agreeing with Ann Coulters' book they don't know weather to jump up or down-- but give em' a few days and they'll do both!!

Answer 10

Because they have been trying to claim since Sept 11, that there is no connection between Iraq and Al quida. Let me see, now where was the #2 man in al qida killed? Hum, Iraq, maybe, huh?