We are losing the war on terror

[Bruzilla]

Which is why we can't say we are winning. We will never kill their motivating spirit unless there is a way to prove that God does not approve of what they are doing.

Buddy Lee... I think you're going to see their "motivating spitir" come to an end as soon as Bush gets re-elected. Why? Because a lot of their motivating spirit comes from the fact that they are constantly hearing how if George Bush loses, the US will withdrawl from Iraq and that the chance of further military action anywere will be remote. The Democrats have been saying for over a year now how they'll go back to the good-old-days of pre-9/11 if they win, and that's a great motivator for these scumbags to do everything they can to make Bush look bad.

Once Bush wins, and there's no longer any hope of America quitting the fight, their motivating spirit is going to dwindle quickly.

 

[SamSpade]

But Bush lied about those. Too bad. He shouldn't have lied to the American Public and sent our young men and women to be killed and beheaded in Iraq.

You may have noticed that most of the beheadings have been civilians, and not even necessarily Americans. No one SENT them there.

But I love the whole "Bush Lied" crap. So *BUSH* lied. But in the following:

Oct 9, 2002: "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Oct 9, 2002: "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation."

Oct 9, 2002: The Iraqi regime's record over the decade leaves little doubt that Saddam Hussein wants to retain his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and to expand it to include nuclear weapons. We cannot allow him to prevail in that quest.

Oct 9, 2002: "Regime change has been an American policy under the Clinton administration, and it is the current policy. I support the policy. But regime change in and of itself is not sufficient justification for going to war--particularly unilaterally--unless regime change is the only way to disarm Iraq of the weapons of mass destruction pursuant to the United Nations resolution."
Jan 23, 2003: "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."

.............somehow, Kerry did NOT lie.

Here's the plain, honest truth. The very intel the President had was the SAME intel that Kerry saw. They both drew the SAME conclusion, and Kerry voted FOR it. So how is it that BUSH misled, but Kerry did not? They told the same story.

Now if somehow, Bush DUPED Kerry - then, Kerry's simply stupid.
If Kerry saw it and believed and commented on it - then Kerry's just a liar.
If Kerry didn't see it but said he did, and relied on staff to read it FOR him - then he's a liar AND stupid.

Sorry - the "Bush lied" argument is the flimsiest story out there.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Buddy Lee... I think you're going to see their "motivating spitir" come to an end as soon as Bush gets re-elected. Why? Because a lot of their motivating spirit comes from the fact that they are constantly hearing how if George Bush loses, the US will withdrawl from Iraq and that the chance of further military action anywere will be remote. The Democrats have been saying for over a year now how they'll go back to the good-old-days of pre-9/11 if they win, and that's a great motivator for these scumbags to do everything they can to make Bush look bad.

Once Bush wins, and there's no longer any hope of America quitting the fight, their motivating spirit is going to dwindle quickly.

Are u dumb? That is not the case. Instead of fighting a war in Iraq Kerry will go after the real Terrorist. The ones that Bush can't seem to focus on.

 

[UrbanPancake]

You may have noticed that most of the beheadings have been civilians, and not even necessarily Americans. No one SENT them there.

But I love the whole "Bush Lied" crap. So *BUSH* lied. But in the following:

Oct 9, 2002: "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Oct 9, 2002: "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation."

Oct 9, 2002: The Iraqi regime's record over the decade leaves little doubt that Saddam Hussein wants to retain his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and to expand it to include nuclear weapons. We cannot allow him to prevail in that quest.

Oct 9, 2002: "Regime change has been an American policy under the Clinton administration, and it is the current policy. I support the policy. But regime change in and of itself is not sufficient justification for going to war--particularly unilaterally--unless regime change is the only way to disarm Iraq of the weapons of mass destruction pursuant to the United Nations resolution."
Jan 23, 2003: "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."

.............somehow, Kerry did NOT lie.

Here's the plain, honest truth. The very intel the President had was the SAME intel that Kerry saw. They both drew the SAME conclusion, and Kerry voted FOR it. So how is it that BUSH misled, but Kerry did not? They told the same story.

Now if somehow, Bush DUPED Kerry - then, Kerry's simply stupid.
If Kerry saw it and believed and commented on it - then Kerry's just a liar.
If Kerry didn't see it but said he did, and relied on staff to read it FOR him - then he's a liar AND stupid.

Sorry - the "Bush lied" argument is the flimsiest story out there.

Get over it. We all know Bush is stupid, I mean he cares more about Iraq then he does the American people. He doesn't care if we have jobs, and good healthcare. He cares more about Saddam then he does about you. He cares so much about Saddam that he diverted troops from the real focus on terror, and sent them to Iraq where they did nothing to stop and prevent terror.

 

[Pete]

Are u dumb? That is not the case. Instead of fighting a war in Iraq Kerry will go after the real Terrorist. The ones that Bush can't seem to focus on.

Yea right, I forgot "He has a plan"

 

[SmallTown]

All I can say is this. For the sake of somd.com, please let Bush win. I like coming here, and don't want to see the ramifications of a Kerry win. We're talking the sky is falling, the seas are boiling. So please. Save somd.com and all that we hold dear.

 

[SmallTown]

He cares more about Saddam then he does about you. .

Do you think Bush goes and visits Saddam's jail to sodomize him?

 

[Pete]

Get over it. We all know Bush is stupid, I mean he cares more about Iraq then he does the American people. He doesn't care if we have jobs, and good healthcare. He cares more about Saddam then he does about you. He cares so much about Saddam that he diverted troops from the real focus on terror, and sent them to Iraq where they did nothing to stop and prevent terror.

Liar, Kerry only cares about special interest, Big Labor, he will sell everone out for a a Buck sixty and a photo op. He doesn't give a rats ass about healthcare, the economy, stem cells, or Iraq. All he cares about is the cool jacket with the Presidential Seal on it he might get to wear.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Are you sure that isn't Bush?

 

[UrbanPancake]

Do you think Bush goes and visits Saddam's jail to sodomize him?

I think he might. I think he wanted to capture him just so he could get close to Saddam. Maybe the evil dictator thing turns him or something.

 

[Pete]

I think he might. I think he wanted to capture him just so he could get close to Saddam. Maybe the evil dictator thing turns him or something.

Kerry wants to return Saddam to power and give the French ambasador to the UN veto power over all legislation in the next congress.

 

[UrbanPancake]

All I can say is this. For the sake of somd.com, please let Bush win. I like coming here, and don't want to see the ramifications of a Kerry win. We're talking the sky is falling, the seas are boiling. So please. Save somd.com and all that we hold dear.

Oh yesssss, without Bush shielding us from make believe terrorists and pretend WMD we will all be doomed.....we need a conservative agenda. With Bush I think we need to restrict marriage only to those who can actually reproduce, we also need to out law all abortions (I don't care if you were raped or not), we also need to triple the military budget and invade Canada for being toO liberal (AND TRYING TO SELL US CHEAP AMERICAN MADE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS) ......... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[SamSpade]

He cares so much about Saddam that he diverted troops from the real focus on terror, and sent them to Iraq where they did nothing to stop and prevent terror.

ANOTHER load 'o sh!t. Pray tell, how many troops were "diverted"? Do you mean the approximately 18,000 troops we already have in Afghanistan? Or the 9,000 other NATO troops there? PLEASE elaborate on why we need MORE troops in other theaters of the War on Terror. Explain to the Pentagon why they are wrong, and you're right, about the most effective way to deal with terrorists there. Why more ground troops would be better than special ops.

You know, if this were WW2, you'd be asking "why is Roosevelt in North Africa and Sicily? I thought we were fighting the GERMANS? Why don't we just land in Germany and end the war? He's wasting our troops! And why are we even IN the Balkans, anyway?"

There are many theaters in the War on Terror. One is in Iraq, and it requires ground troops. Others are in the Phillipines and it requires special forces and advisers.

Basically, all you do is spew out liberal tripe. You haven't a single original thought in your head. Want me to trot out what you'll say next? You can't think for yourself. It's sad.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Kerry wants to return Saddam to power and give the French ambasador to the UN veto power over all legislation in the next congress.

Do you believe everything you hear?

 

[Pete]

Do you believe everything you hear?

No, I just made it up like the stupid crap you post here fool. P.S. Did you find the post where I talked about how your dad is ashamed of you yet?

 

[SamSpade]

No, I just made it up like the stupid crap you post here fool. P.S. Did you find the post where I talked about how your dad is ashamed of you yet?

That's MEAN. You know he doesn't know who his daddy is.

 

[dustin]

Do you believe everything you hear?

I think this is the first post you've made that doesnt contain "Bush"

You sound like a terrorist with all the "Bush"'s you throw in...

 

[UrbanPancake]

No, I just made it up like the stupid crap you post here fool. P.S. Did you find the post where I talked about how your dad is ashamed of you yet?

No. But you don't insult me. Last time I checked my father isn't embarrassed of me. But now that I think about it yours probably is after seeing you run around with those crazy signs on 301.

 

[UrbanPancake]

ANOTHER load 'o sh!t. Pray tell, how many troops were "diverted"? Do you mean the approximately 18,000 troops we already have in Afghanistan? Or the 9,000 other NATO troops there? PLEASE elaborate on why we need MORE troops in other theaters of the War on Terror. Explain to the Pentagon why they are wrong, and you're right, about the most effective way to deal with terrorists there. Why more ground troops would be better than special ops.

You know, if this were WW2, you'd be asking "why is Roosevelt in North Africa and Sicily? I thought we were fighting the GERMANS? Why don't we just land in Germany and end the war? He's wasting our troops! And why are we even IN the Balkans, anyway?"

There are many theaters in the War on Terror. One is in Iraq, and it requires ground troops. Others are in the Phillipines and it requires special forces and advisers.

Basically, all you do is spew out liberal tripe. You haven't a single original thought in your head. Want me to trot out what you'll say next? You can't think for yourself. It's sad.

OSAMA GOT AWAY!!!! Bush dropped the ball on this one. If there is another attack it will be because Osama is still free, and he's recruiting more men then our troops are killing, and it will be W's fault for looking the other way when he should have been looking for Osama. Just like a Chimp to get distracted.

 

[SamSpade]

OSAMA GOT AWAY!!!! Bush dropped the ball on this one..

Oh really? Where WAS he? Next to Waldo?

If there is another attack it will be because Osama is still free, and he's recruiting more men then our troops are killing.

If there's another attack, it will be on Kerry's watch - and he'll blame Bush for it, because that all he's good for.