BF2S Forums Dems Defeat The Troops

Reciprocity wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Iraqis do want democracy and they do die for it.  How many Iraqi policemen and soldiers have fallen due to "insurgents"?

they're dying for a crappy pay check after we destroyed what little economy existed.

ER. No that is where your ideals and mine differ.  I believe that the Iraqi people want freedom and democracy.  They want it to work.  You are a fool if you think that those police officers are working soley because it is the only job in town.

reciprocity wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Actually Bush and Cheney do more than "jack shit" for the cause.

yeah, we've seen how well they've treated our wounded veterans.  Keep up the good work.

Granted, The VA hospitals conditions should have been brought to Bush's attention sooner, but that shit doesn't happen over night.  Try decades.  It has been a long running joke about VA treatment.  At least Bush is fixing it.  Better than the last president who cut military spending and literally left the country to avoid being called to war. (and you guys went after Bush for being a draft dodger)

Reciprocity wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

The Dems are there at every turn trying to undermine them.

have we gained anything in Iraq since 2003?  Have the Iraqis gained anything since 2003?  4 years of IEDs.  4 years of sectarian violence that we were absolutely unprepared for.  4  years of waiting for the Iraqis to get their shit together.  4 years of waiting for any sight of real, long term improvement.

Things are getting better, you just watch too much left wing news.  I'm not saying it is a bed of rose over there, but great things are happening.  Did you know that there was a carnival in Baghdad?  Ferris wheels and shit...  I can all ready imagine your retort > "wow a fucking carnival after how many US deaths"..  I just don't think you get the picture. 

Reciprocity wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Do you really expect Bush and Cheney on the front lines in tanks?

no, but perhaps they wouldn't be so willing to toss our soldiers into the meat grinder if they hadn't both pussed out of Vietnam.

Oh yea, what was Bush doing?  Learning to fly a fighter jet.  That takes a bit more brains than skippering a boat.  See the swiftwater vets.

Reciprocity wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Actually, wars are won.  That's the way it works.  There are winners and losers.  IE  WWII..  Axis =loss / Allies= Win.  It would be great if every country out there were a democracy.  It is proved that countries with similar or the same governments  go to war much less with each other than with those governments that are nothing alike.

yeah, and back here on fucking earth we've got reality to deal with.  Your notion that the war on terror will someday be over and there will be a winner and a loser is both inane and frightening.  It's the response you would expect from a small child, and even worse, it's the simplistic answer you would give a child.  if this is what the conservative goal is we are screwed.  Suggesting that someday the terrorists will all be dead or have surrendered and that terrorism will cease to exist is like saying someday we will objectively win the war on drugs.  drugs will cease to exist, no one will make them, sell them or use them. 

and yes, democracy would we great in every county,  just look at how well it's turned out in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Next stop, Iran.

The only inane, frightening thinking here is yours.  There will always be some fanatical ideological asshole who wants to kill me (and you too) out there.  So what do you propose?  Give up?  Appease?  You mean embolden him?  You fight until you win.  It may not be in my day or yours, but you keep fighting.  The US by and large is a forgiving peaceful culture -alas the enemy is not.  Your sitcom 30 min problem solved brain doesn't see that a fight with an enemy of this nature takes time.  Ever hear of the 100 year war?

Iran? Yea that fucking nut job Amadinnajacket is a much better alternative to democracy.

Kmarion wrote:

Drakef wrote:

Spark wrote:

I may as well say that conservatives secretly are all nazi's.

This is a stupid debate. Anyone who says that their political opponents are helping the enemy is, in fact, helping the enemy, by helping dent the democracy they are so 'proud' of.

Well said.

As a Canadian, neither American political party has any favour with me, and both are guilty of partisan politics instead of actually doing anything positive. There really is a political divide in the States. Americans vote in Democrats as their representatives, yet opposition to their actions remain strong. As for Iraq, you Americans must do the right thing. I suggest solving it.

Solving it would be forcing them to be successful. It is a ridiculous idea. We can not "solve" Iraq. Iraqi's must do this. What America and it's allies are trying to do is support the elected government by maintaining the rule of law. If the ruling body of Iraq would listen to the people who were isolated and removed from power they may take a step in the right direction. No matter how nasty a war gets you should always be listening.

And my questions for my conservative brethren are, how long do we give them?
Are they like the 51st state?

Are we responsible for their inability to achieve social calm because we came uninvited*?



* I live near the largest Mosque in the United States and many former Iraqis before the war, before 9-11 were calling for the US to take decisive action against Sadamm.
I've had the pleasure of meeting and interacting with many Muslims in my trade, heh, I work for wealthy ones in Beverly Hills and Bel Air.

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

No, democrats are worse, at least you know where you stand with Al Queda

Yep, those Democrats must be rather annoying.  Unlike the insurgents, they've been successful at defeating the Republicans lately.  First, they take your House, and then they take your Senate.

Well, Al Queda and the democrats against the republicans, isn't exactly a fair fight.

I wasn't aware that political opposition and terrorism are the same thing.

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Yep, those Democrats must be rather annoying.  Unlike the insurgents, they've been successful at defeating the Republicans lately.  First, they take your House, and then they take your Senate.

Well, Al Queda and the democrats against the republicans, isn't exactly a fair fight.

I wasn't aware that political opposition and terrorism are the same thing.

It isn't but political opposition at the expense of our fighting troops aiding the enemy. Stand united. You do not vote to go to war then spend your time speaking out against it, at the peril of our troops. You do not print war stratagies in the NY Times.
There is a reason Al Queda hopes the democrats win.

lowing wrote:

It isn't but political opposition at the expense of our fighting troops aiding the enemy. Stand united. You do not vote to go to war then spend your time speaking out against it, at the peril of our troops. You do not print war stratagies in the NY Times.
There is a reason Al Queda hopes the democrats win.

Yeah, because if I were Al Qaeda and I wanted a particular political party to win, I'd definitley make it known so my support for them would win over the American voters

Sorry, what you're proposing here is, if one party initiates military action, the other party has to shut up and go along with it. Funny how that didn't happen when Clinton got us bogged down in any of his military misadventures. What, "Support the Troops", but only if it's a Republican CIC? People aren't in favor of this war so much anymore. The windsocks in the Democratic party are listening to them so they can try and stay in power. Some of the windsocks in the GOP are too.

lowing wrote:

There is a reason Al Queda hopes the democrats win.

I heard Cheney say that soundbyte first right?

Small fragmented group which spreads via the franchised Al-qaeda name sure as hell can have all the opinions in the world, but to use them for political means ....tsk tsk someone isn't paying attention to their constituents --unless of course a politicians manages to gerrymander their districts all the way out to the middle east then we are talking about a whole different beast here.

Last edited by Fen321 (2007-03-26 07:49:48)

Oh my god, what if leaving the region actually stabilizes and unities the country?

Allot of these groups who have been fighting each other for so many years now have a common enemy. Now why would it be wrong for this country to win? They have been invaded and occupied for the past 4 years. Imagine that China gets attacked by a U.S. Citizen who was pissed and just decided to invade and occupied the United States to rebuild it? What would you do, I would try to fight because I think the U.S. Citizen would be able to come together and set up there own form of rule.

We've taken out the problem of the region, lets have faith of there people to do what's right for them. Democracy or other..

Haha Silly-face... Well take all that jazz out of the picture, I'm talking Red Dawn style, what would you do?

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Haha Silly-face... Well take all that jazz out of the picture, I'm talking Red Dawn style, what would you do?

Iraqis can have Iraq. iranians and Saudis can't.


your point is made, of course we would fight.

Yet another post where non-Americans think they know everything about our country and try and tell us how to live. These will never stop.

surgeon_bond wrote:

arent all
repuclicrats and democrans the same though ?

YEs. It's just certain people eat shit from one and not the other. Doesn't matter though. We're all still eating shit.