They have been emboldened, they have been convinced they are winning, and they are now ramping up the offensive against our sons and daughters all because Baker and his pals want to preach to the world that we cannot win this war, while we are still in it. Happy now libs? Cause I'm damn well pissed...
I guess you and your ACLU buddies have a few more funerals to protest...
2006-12-06 13:22:02 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Alex, you are brilliant.
They won't be happy until they get their own way anyway. Just like any other five year old.
They kill more soldiers and unborn babies than all of the guys on death row put together.
EDIT: All of this, and they are jumping for joy right with the muslims about the death of our soldiers just so they can say that they were right. Let's put them on the ACLU boat that ships in the immigrants and ship 'em all out. (Maybe France is a good idea... they can take all of the Target stores with them while they're at it!)
Then, when more commies and terrorists invade our borders, we can defend ourselves with no one whining.
2006-12-06 13:45:23 · answer #1 · answered by Put on your boxing gloves boys! 4 · 2⤊ 6⤋
it quite is quite unusual the main efficient militia isn't vulnerable to ever win yet another conflict. Their situation starts off off by calling each thing a police action. Even in the U. S. except the community place of living could be relatively on the polices' edge, or regulation will loose. Being so efficient the U. S. consistently feels like the bully. they are hamstrung by their regulations of engagement. the press & the Left in effect act like the enemys 5th column. besides the fact that if it quite is real that Al Qaeda's Jahad is fueled by the 1st worldwide's decadence, the Left & the press are presenting the two the weapons & the gasoline which will ultimately attack them. The Left & the press could be leaders for something of the worldwide taking area in the privilages the do, yet they choose to make certain the loose worldwide as a results of fact the enemy of the third worldwide. they do no longer use their "stronger mind" to grant concept out strategies that makes use of the hated Capitalist very own using stress to get what they choose.
2016-10-17 22:22:23 · answer #2 · answered by ranford 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not see how in hell you could assume such a thing. You and other conservatives make the most extreme leaps in logic, that I almost feel embarrassed for you. Almost. Even Bill O'Rielly wouldn't go as far as you have with this kind of thinking.
You claim to want rational discussions with liberals, and hate name-calling, but this sort of garbage will only bring it on.
Oh, and liberals seem to be rather good people, which you'd notice if you actually talked with one.
2006-12-06 14:34:27 · answer #3 · answered by tiko 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
GWB is the one to blame. He sent those guys there in the first place. I knew you sickos would try to blame the libs. for this mess in Iraq. I'm mad too. I'm also mad that the death toll for the war is over 2900 too. Tens of thousands are injured. Will they recieve proper care or will their benefits be cut off by Bush and his cronies?Bush has been in denial all these years and now the first day the recommendations hit the public, you try to blame the libs. Shame on you, blind one.
2006-12-06 13:49:48 · answer #4 · answered by Schona 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Our soldiers have getting killed every day since the war started.
One would have to be under a delusion to think that the committee's announcement of its' findings today has "emboldened" anyone killing american troops in Iraq. The Committee didn't get anyone killed today, the insurgents killed them just as they have been doing for the last two years. By what twisted logic do you come up with this stuff?
2006-12-06 13:30:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 4⤋
Oh, Alex B with the PHoney Degree. From the USA today, Nov 30, 2006 - "The fighting in Iraq involves dozens of militias and gangs. Among the major combatants: Al-Qaeda in Iraq..., Badr Brigade..., Mahdi Army..., Mujahedin Shura Council..., Peshmerga..."
Now, go to the corner book store and buy the Dec 3 issue of Newsweek and read about the most dangerous man in Iraq.
It pays to know what is going on in Iraq before you "shoot from the keyboard."
P.S. the people protesting at funerals are a religious group from Kansas, and it's gays in the military they are protesting.
2006-12-06 13:38:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
James Addison Baker III (born April 28, 1930), American politician and diplomat, was Chief of Staff in President Ronald Reagan's first administration, United States Secretary of the Treasury from 1985 to 1988 in the second Reagan administration, and Secretary of State in the administration of President George H. W. Bush.
Hardly a military genius.
The ISG is led by co-chairs James Baker, a former Secretary of State (Republican) and Lee Hamilton (Democrat), a former U.S. Representative and the vice chair of the 9/11 Commission. It is composed of four additional Republicans and four additional Democrats.
[edit] Republicans
In addition to Baker, the panel's Republicans are:
* Sandra Day O'Connor, former Supreme Court Justice
* Lawrence Eagleburger, former Secretary of State
* Edwin Meese III, former US Attorney General
* Alan K. Simpson, former Wyoming Senator
[edit] Democrats
In addition to Hamilton, the panel's Democrats are:
* Vernon Jordan, Jr., business executive
* Leon E. Panetta, former White House Chief of Staff
* William J. Perry, former US Secretary of Defense
* Charles S. Robb, former Governor of Virginia and former U.S. Senator
Only one with any previous experience in deployment and use of the military. And he was secretary of defense under CLINTON!
Not a very qualified comission in my estimation, especially one that is giving direction on military activities.
2006-12-06 13:38:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Oh, the 10 who got killed today are because the Iraqis are emboldened, but the 2,800 before today are not?
2006-12-06 13:52:30 · answer #8 · answered by Dastardly 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
yes... you know that commie lib Baker... he worked with that commie lib George H. Bush didn't he?
HAHHAA...
when exactly are you going to get that the current strategy is a complete failure? how many members of your own party have to stand up and go "this isn't right" before you come to your senses?
if you truely do belive this... then you have a duty to kill Baker if he endangered soldiers. He is endangering soldiers lives so maybe you should take him out? if you don't, then you're just sitting by doing nothing... right? you're supporting his actions through your inactions... if you ACTUALLY believe he is a threat.
2006-12-06 13:30:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 4⤋
that Saudi sympathizer has caused a minor Tet offensive. they will never learn will they?
didn't cause anything? I guess the call for the return of Palestine was no big deal either? Gee who supports the Palestinians? Saudi Arabia... and what Law firm represents them? BAKER.....yea, he doesn't have interests..
Happy who backs those groups? Hamas, Iran, and the Saudis. you need to do just alittle more research but thanks for proving my point.
2006-12-06 13:25:36 · answer #10 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋