In case you haven't noticed, Obama is about to lose Iraq

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

LL is showing he has no comprehension of the Middle East geo politics ...

.... according to the official Barnes and Noble chair warmer...

"geo politics"?? LMAO.

Does it make you feel intellectually superior to use academia-lingo?

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

am I the only one who finds the repeated use of the title of the video game Mortal Kombat somewhat juvenile and ignorant?

and it seems that one of our newer, more sharp edged posters is doctoring quotes AND the handles of fellow members.

May you burn in hell (for about two weeks) for that, herasswipe.

The shit eating "Dick Turd" posting pics of shit and vomit. I would say disgusting and sick, in need of serious help.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Congratulations you have just been awarded parrot of the year award..Wear it proudly.

Only a total idiot declares a victory for themselves.

You have just been bitch slapped by i'va biggen

and EVA just declares victory for himself.......but he's wrong again.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

and EVA just declares victory for himself.......but he's wrong again.

YouRong is usually wrong......

I think that's why he sticks to vomit as a topic. His expertise, when he's not eating shit.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

and EVA just declares victory for himself.......but he's wrong again.

Poor Judy, find a link to your last lie. You are one who is always declaring you win a discussion dioshit.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

YouRong is usually wrong......

I think that's why he sticks to vomit as a topic. His expertise, when he's not eating shit.

As a shit eater you have no peers. Time to take your brain out for cleaning.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Poor Judy, find a link to your last lie. You are one who is always declaring you win a discussion dioshit.

But only you posted that "Only a total idiot declares a victory for themselves". I didn't because I don't believe it. So you are either a liar or an idiot. What is your choice?

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

But only you posted that "Only a total idiot declares a victory for themselves". I didn't because I don't believe it. So you are either a liar or an idiot. What is your choice?

Duuuh I did not declare victory, only pointed out my opinion on those who do. You are a educator??? WOW

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

.... according to the official Barnes and Noble chair warmer...

"geo politics"?? LMAO.

Does it make you feel intellectually superior to use academia-lingo?

Did you have to look its meaning up Mr. Armchair.

[herfacechair]

"Seeing you cannot move on after each point has been addressed and bring anything new to the discussion I'm not going through all this again" -- I'va biggen

This is you telling me that you're not going through, "all of this," again. What's meant by, "all of this?" Why, my repeat counter rebuttals to your repeat rebuttals. So, what do you end up doing?

Well, you read through the comments despite your "cannot move on" statement, quotation marks used strongly, and then you generate a reply. Not only are you a failure when it comes to coming up with the facts about the things that we are arguing, you're also a failure when it comes to talk about what you will do in the future.

If you cannot get your own actions correct, what makes you think that any critical thinker can see any "validity" with anything you say afterwards? Your arguments, and your thought processes, are nothing but an ate-up soup sandwich.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Congratulations you have just been awarded parrot of the year award..Wear it proudly. (Not original, used description I used.)

Only a total idiot declares a victory for themselves.

Not only do you keep repeating yourself like a broken record, but you can't even be original. You're showing that you've ran out of argument, thus you're showing us that you lost the debate. You did the equivalent of a playground tactic: saying, "I'm not the doo doo head, you are the doo doo head."

I'm sorry, but telling it like it is doesn't make me an idiot. It simply makes me someone that states the obvious.

I'll give you an example, someone that I played chess against.

It was blatantly obvious that I was winning by the fact that I had not only captured most of his men but was closing in for checkmate. Finally, when it became checkmate time, the opponent picked his king up and put it in another side of the board.

Both of us obviously knew that I won, but my opponent refused to acknowledge that I won. He actually disagreed with me in my statement that I had won the game. He insisted that the game was still going on, that there was no checkmate move in progress, and that that neither side was winning.

You're employing the same antics that he employed by denying the fact that I presented, the fact that my side of the argument has won on this thread. You claimed that you're presenting the facts. Unfortunately, your facts were either strawmen, red herring, inductive fallacy, or simply opinion.

My side of the argument presented facts that reflected the realities on the ground in Iraq as well as the general geostrategic environment.

Not only did you failed to defend your argument, you consistently repeated your points that had already been rebutted. When called out on the fact that you were doing this, and when called out on your non-argument, you resorted to the ploys typically used by the losing side of the argument.

It was like that chess game. Your intellect is telling you that you lost his argument, but your ego insists that you presented "facts." This is an example of cognitive dissonance. Your side of the argument is now doing the debate version of "airlifting" the king to another side of the chessboard to avoid laying it down on the board.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

You have just been bitch slapped by i'va biggen Not original, used description that I used.

Time to reply with you using your own words, which actually do apply this time:

"Only a total idiot declares a victory for themselves" -I'va biggen:

Making the above statement is essentially you claiming victory. That statement tells a critical thinking reader that you're a hypocrite. When I stated in my side of the argument won, I was making a statement based on what was actually written within each post. When you made that quoted statement, you did it in the same sense that Baghdad Bob did it during the Iraq invasion.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

As a shit eater you have no peers. Time to take your brain out for cleaning.
(Not original, used description LexusLover used.)

Not only do you consistently repeat your own arguments, you consistently repeat other people's descriptions of you in your response to them. Again, this is equivalent to a kid in kindergarten, on the recess playground, saying "No, I'm not a rotten egg, you're the rotten egg," to the kid that just called him a rotten egg.

Judging by the amount of shit that you spewed on this thread, and on other threads, I wouldn't be surprised if you were the mobile toilet for your area. That's probably your main hobby activity. I guess in your case, it has to go somewhere, so you discharge on this thread and on other threads.

You need to put your brain, and yourself, through Kool-Aid detoxification, before you tell someone else to clean their brains.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Duuuh I did not declare victory, only pointed out my opinion on those who do. You are a educator??? WOW

Wrong, you're being hypocritical when you declared "victory". The mere fact that you turned around to say the same thing to people that you're debating is proof that you've lost. Calling someone a "shit eater" simply because they called you one, and mirroring them as you say their words back to them, is a sign that you lost. The same concept applies to your claiming that you "bitch slapped" me, quotation marks used strongly. You mirrored what I said rather than come up with something new while using our insults to you.

You could've woven a new statement about "bitch slapping" and "shit eating," but you didn't. That's a sign that someone has lost the argument. In this case, you. If you weren't looking at this thread via a glass belly button because you have your head up your ass, you'd see that you lost simply by failing to present the facts, by the ploys that you're using.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WTF

(REPEAT POINT)

LL is showing he has no comprehension of the Middle East geo politics and all the acumen of a Tea Bagger. Parroting their ignorant talking points. They were for the war before they were against it! He is the John Kerry in 2014

Wrong, those on your side of the argument, including you, have absolutely no understanding of any of the major topics on this thread. You have no clue about what's going on in the Middle East, you have no clue about what's going on around world, you simply don't have a clue about most of the hard news being reported.

You dismiss the points being advanced against you as "parroting ignorant talking points," quotation marks used strongly. Yet, neither your side of the argument nor you have done anything on this thread to prove those talking points wrong. Not only have you failed to prove those talking points wrong, but you failed to understand that our side the argument has come to our conclusions on our own based on the facts.

This brings me back to a question that I asked you earlier, which you refused to answer:

If I were to go on an internet forum, and say that one plus one equals two, would it be safe for someone reading that to assume that you were the one that made that post because you also agree that one plus one equals two? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Copy and paste the question and the options to your reply, then put an "X" in the box that represents your reply. Spare me the nonsense that you want to add.

The only parroting that I see is coming from your argument, as well as those that I'm arguing against. Not only do you parrot the talking points of your liberal opinion leaders, like those of the Wall Street shitters (OWS), you also parrot your own talking points. Your group, and your liberal opinion taskmasters, are an example of the saying, "the blind leading the blind."

Originally Posted by WTF

(REPEAT POINT)

Are you Dick Cheney's bastard child?

If I were to go on an internet forum, and say that one plus one equals two, would it be safe for someone reading that to assume that you were the one that made that post because you also agree that one plus one equals two? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Copy and paste the question and the options to your reply, then put an "X" in the box that represents your reply. Spare me the nonsense that you want to add.

I know that you won't answer that question per the parameters that I set, because the simple common sense reply destroys your argument.

Again, if two different people view the facts and come up to the same conclusion, that's not one person telling the other person what to think. It's simply two or more people looking at the facts and independently coming up to the same conclusion.

Originally Posted by WTF

Mortal Kombat my ass. If we invaded Mexico and tried to control their oil by installing a pro American government we would be in Mortal Kombat with Mexico. Why?

This is why I said this to JD barleycorn earlier in this thread:

"Notice how we're on the same side, and those opposing us haven't answered my question on who has stepped foot in Iraq. There's a good chance that we have arm chair generals arguing against boots on the ground experience. That even makes them look more stupid. " -herfacechair

You have absolutely no clue about what it is you're talking about. You're stringing a bunch of words together to make it sound like you "know" what you're talking about... you're actually making yourself come across as a buffoon, as someone simply pulling shit out of his ass as he shows us how smart he isn't.

The use of "mortal combat" when talking about asymmetrical warfare describes a struggle or conflict were only one side wins and the other parishes. The enemy that we are engaged with in the Middle East have actually sworn to eliminate our culture and way of life. They've sworn this same fate for those around the world that are not their definition of Islam.

Mexico isn't like that.

The fact that you'd even bring up the topic about invading Mexico "for their oil," quotation marks used strongly, speaks strongly for the fact that you don't have a clue about economics. The United States and Mexico are part of a free trade agreement. This free trade agreement allows us to import oil from Mexico more economically.

The economies of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, are very integrated. This arrangement allows the Mexicans to sell us as much oil as they can sell us as if North America were a single country. The Mexican government is on friendly terms with the US government, the Mexican government is very pro-US.

The Mexicans don't believe in a do or die manifest destiny the way our enemies do.

You need to do a lot of research on the actual facts before coming on here and showing us how clueless you are.

Originally Posted by WTF

Because Nation building is no longer possible what with social media and asymmetrical warfare. You can not win the hearts and minds of people unless their is a bigger threat they fear. Once that threat is dispersed they will turn on you....just as happened in Iraq. You are stuck in a 1950's mindset.

Since you insist on repeating the nation building aspect of this argument, not the full spectrum warfare aspect of this argument that I'm arguing, time to ask you the same question you keep avoiding:

Where, in any of the posts that I've made here, did I specifically state that we should be out there building every country for the sake of "nation building" itself?

Part of our campaign in Iraq was rebuilding infrastructure to support free economic trade within Iraq and with other countries. You need to facilitate businesses thriving in order to benefit the general population. When businesses thrive, people have a better chance of getting jobs. When people have a better chance of getting jobs, they will have less incentive to fight against the coalition.

Unlike you, I have combat deployed to Iraq. I know for fact that we won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. The vast majority of Iraqis that I ran into during our combat patrols showed that through their emotions and their friendly attitudes toward us. Throughout the Iraq involvement, the vast majority Iraqi people were on our side, and wanted us to succeed. They knew that our success there meant a better life for them... they were already experiencing the positive impact we were having.

Had you gone to Iraq, it'd be blatantly obvious to you that the people over there that want to report the terrorists, that want to turn against terrorist, don't do so for fear of reprisal. This usually happens if they don't have confidence in the friendly forces. But, once they have confidence in the friendly forces to defeat the terrorists, they turned against the terrorist left and right. They also turned against the terrorists in large droves.

If you paid attention to the news, you'd notice that the Iraqis had initiated an offensive. It's a rough offensive for them, but they've been making gains.

The terrorist group that swept through Iraq consists of mostly different people than the ones that we fought over there. A very similar organization, but with mostly different people. The vast majority of Iraqis don't support those terrorists. The vast majority of the Iraqis aren't the ones turning against the West.

But watch, as the Iraqi military makes further progress, expect the Iraqis in the terrorist controlled areas to turn against the terrorists.

You win hearts and minds by persuading the people that there is more benefit with taking a specific course of action than there is with continuing with the present course of action. That was done successfully in Iraq. I deployed to Iraq is an infantryman, but I'm in psychological warfare now. Psychological warfare is responsible for taking the lead in winning hearts and minds.

The fact that you think that it's mainly fear speaks volumes to the fact that you have absolutely no clue about what you're talking about. Neither our training nor our field manuals support your insinuation that this is about fear.

It doesn't matter if we're in the 1950s or in the 21st century, human nature hasn't changed between the time humans first showed up on the planet and now.

Originally Posted by WTF

(REPEAT POINT)

With the oil we have in this country there is no reason to be over in that part of the world except for a small minority of Americans' that are redistributing the wealth on many in this country to them.

(REPEAT POINT)

Do you not see the fallacy of this very argument?

Why commit forces to invade a small oil-producing country that doesn't even produce the majority of our oil, when we could've done that to a country that produces more of our oil? If this were about oil, the US would've invaded Venezuela.

If you had a clue about world events, if you had a clue about world history, you'd know that this has nothing to do with oil and everything to do with asymmetrical threat that were dealing with.

Again:

The real reason for entering Iraq was asymmetrical in nature. Under asymmetrical warfare, you don't need to have a military capable of attacking United States to be a threat. With Al Qaeda proving that it was willing to strike within the United States, and with a dictator not coming clean with this the WMD programs, we were in an asymmetrical situation that's comparable to being in the room full of easily flammable liquids with a man playing with matches. We had to go into Iraq, which was a perfect next stop in the war terror.

People who have absolutely no clue, about the threat that the United States faces, don't see that the enemy that we are facing has visible and invisible parts. This enemy uses traditional and nontraditional means of warfare. Iraq under Saddam, the Taliban, Abu Sayef (sp) in the Philippines, Hamas, the Taliban, and any other terror group that believes in killing the infidel, are part of a single entity.

Our enemy does not recognize the borders separating the Arab countries. In their eyes, every predominantly Muslim country is part of the Islamic nation. Their ultimate goal is to establish a global Islamic caliphate. The first step would be to create several Taliban style governments across the Middle East. Once the Middle East is turned into a revived Moorish caliphate, the next step would be to work on the rest of the world.

This war was never just about 9/11, Al Qaeda, Afghanistan, and the Taliban. These were just symptoms of the real issue. This issue is a radical Islamic war to eradicate the West, and to establish global Islamic caliphate's around the world.

With Saddam Hussein hosting radical terrorist conventions, and making death to America speeches, it doesn't take a genius to figure out who he would choose to side with between the United States or Al Qaeda.

If you look at the map the Middle East, and see Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Lebanon, and Jordan, you'll see that we have turned the Middle East into a checkerboard of countries in different stages of democracy.

Up to 2005, I predicted a ripple effect that would happen as a result of our interventions into Afghanistan and Iraq. I argued that once these two countries progressed on the path that we set them on, the rest of the Arab world would want the same thing.

What I predicted ended up becoming the Arab Spring which started a few years later. The Obama administration failed to capitalize on this Arab spring.

Also, the fact that we're giving monetary incentives to get people to take courses of actions that we want them to take spares us from having to deploy the troops to more places in the world. I've seen how this concept worked on the ground.

The mere fact that you had money to disburse forced people to work together who otherwise wouldn't work together... once they benefited politically and economically from that cooperation, what we gave them money wise becomes chump change... and not much of an incentive. But, by then, they've found a better benefit... one that they get from seeing and experiencing the benefits of what we wanted them to do early on.

Don't blame the current failures on the previous administration or on the US military.

Originally Posted by WTF

Did you have to look its meaning up Mr. Armchair.

Notice how he quotes you saying, "geo politics," then proceeds to make his comment? Once again, you're showing a knack for misunderstanding what you're replying to, and a knack for doing it by advancing a counter argument to an argument that isn't being made.

When it comes to this argument, the above photo accurately represents your side of the argument. JD barleycorn and I are war veterans from conflicts that took place in the part of the world. None of you guys have indicated that you have similar experiences.

We represent the boots on the ground experience to your armchair general ploys.

You should be ashamed of yourself for not understanding English written so that even a 5th grader could understand what's being said.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

am I the only one who finds the repeated use of the title of the video game Mortal Kombat somewhat juvenile and ignorant?

God save us, and our education system, if more than one person feels the way you feel in that quote.

Congratulations, you're the first person on this thread to fall for one of my booby-traps. Whenever I generate these posts, I deliberately leave misspelled words, misused words, or other kinds of errors.

People that are desperate in these arguments, who know that they're losing, will resort to nitpicking the words that the opposition uses as part of their main reply... or as part of their main reply... rather than a part of a minor reply accompanying a main argument. The sooner they resort to nitpicking words, the more desperate they are. The normal reaction is resorting to being grammar police. But that's not the limit.

People that have lost the argument will do what you just did above. Notice that the very first time I use that term, I said this:

Again, we're locked in mortal combat with an enemy that wants to eliminate our way of living and to force us to live under the banner of Islam. Only one option is going to happen... either we prevail in the long run, or they prevail in the long run.

I was expecting the others to fall for my booby-trap words. Instead, you fell for it, showing your desperation in this argument. The others are showing desperation through their replies as well, but not as great a desperation as that of someone that'll nitpick words instead of engage in debate.

So not only have you been the first person to fall for one of my booby-traps, you did it real fast.

What I find juvenile is that you'll ignore the entire context of my statement because of one of the booby-trapped words that I used. I also find that your failure to understand my use of mortal combat/Mortal Kombat stems from your ignorance.

A person that's not desperate in this argument would've read that booby trap word within context of my argument.

Since you're not that bright, I'll try to explain this in more simple terms then writing that a fifth grader could understand. In the game, two characters fight until one is completely "killed." That's based on a concept that has been around for thousands of years. This concept is one where a fight between two or more people results in the opposition's elimination.

Our enemies want to eliminate non-radical Islamic cultures and way of doing things. In this fight, there is no third option. You either win or get eliminated.

Now, if you had more than one brain cell, you would've taken my original term for that concept and associated it with the videogame title. But apparently, all you have is one brain cell and it's trying to take you over, causing you to type as if a retarded ghost possesses you... or maybe a retarded ghost actually possesses you despite your one brain celled activity's intentions.

If you paid attention in literature class, you'd know that my use of the videogame title served as symbolism. It also served as a booby-trap to measure one of the opposition's desperation in this argument. If you think that my use of that videogame title is both juvenile and ignorant, then you have your head shoved so far up your ass that you need a glass belly button to see.

My using the videogame title the way I used it on this thread utilizes both, university level experience as well as "been around the block" experience. You got punked via the use of symbolism.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

and it seems that one of our newer, more sharp edged posters is doctoring quotes AND the handles of fellow members.

First, anybody that could understand English, written at the level that a fifth grader could understand, would see that my comments within a quote represent my emphasis. It's blatantly obvious, just by looking at the quote in my post, that I am labeling the comments within those quotes.

You're an example of why defending the American education system is one of the most challenging tasks to accomplish when debating against a foreign message board member. I know for fact that most fifth graders would get what I dictate to this post, because I've used that tactic on a thread that one of my family members, a fifth grader, was able to read and understand.

He understood what I was getting at, it speaks volumes that you don't. You need to go back and sue your education system for dereliction of duty.

Doctoring handles is doctoring handles regardless of where the doctoring takes place in, inside or outside a quote. The mere fact that other usernames got doctored didn't seem to faze you... until the guy that ploys into your ass got his username doctored.

AssUp GayRidden: May you burn in hell (for about two weeks) for that, herasswipe.

See you there when that happens, hypocrite. I burned in "hell" for almost an entire deployment... it got so hot that even the mosquitos and bugs didn't come out. Two weeks isn't shit, dumbass.

It looks like your one brain celled activity got lost. I'd tell you to go out looking for it, but your consistently moaning, "Brrraaaaaiiiiin" while looking for your it might cause someone to shoot you. The opposition needs all the help it could get.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

The shit eating "Dick Turd" posting pics of shit and vomit. I would say disgusting and sick, in need of serious help.

Certainly you've had enough recommendations over the years Slobbrin.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

God save us, and our education system, if more than one person feels the way you feel in that quote.

Congratulations, you're the first person on this thread to fall for one of my booby-traps. Whenever I generate these posts, I deliberately leave misspelled words, misused words, or other kinds of errors.

People that are desperate in these arguments, who know that they're losing, will resort to nitpicking the words that the opposition uses as part of their main reply... or as part of their main reply... rather than a part of a minor reply accompanying a main argument. The sooner they resort to nitpicking words, the more desperate they are. The normal reaction is resorting to being grammar police. But that's not the limit.

People that have lost the argument will do what you just did above. Notice that the very first time I use that term, I said this:

Again, we're locked in mortal combat with an enemy that wants to eliminate our way of living and to force us to live under the banner of Islam. Only one option is going to happen... either we prevail in the long run, or they prevail in the long run.

I was expecting the others to fall for my booby-trap words. Instead, you fell for it, showing your desperation in this argument. The others are showing desperation through their replies as well, but not as great a desperation as that of someone that'll nitpick words instead of engage in debate.

So not only have you been the first person to fall for one of my booby-traps, you did it real fast.

What I find juvenile is that you'll ignore the entire context of my statement because of one of the booby-trapped words that I used. I also find that your failure to understand my use of mortal combat/Mortal Kombat stems from your ignorance.

A person that's not desperate in this argument would've read that booby trap word within context of my argument.

Since you're not that bright, I'll try to explain this in more simple terms then writing that a fifth grader could understand. In the game, two characters fight until one is completely "killed." That's based on a concept that has been around for thousands of years. This concept is one where a fight between two or more people results in the opposition's elimination.

Our enemies want to eliminate non-radical Islamic cultures and way of doing things. In this fight, there is no third option. You either win or get eliminated.

Now, if you had more than one brain cell, you would've taken my original term for that concept and associated it with the videogame title. But apparently, all you have is one brain cell and it's trying to take you over, causing you to type as if a retarded ghost possesses you... or maybe a retarded ghost actually possesses you despite your one brain celled activity's intentions.

If you paid attention in literature class, you'd know that my use of the videogame title served as symbolism. It also served as a booby-trap to measure one of the opposition's desperation in this argument. If you think that my use of that videogame title is both juvenile and ignorant, then you have your head shoved so far up your ass that you need a glass belly button to see.

My using the videogame title the way I used it on this thread utilizes both, university level experience as well as "been around the block" experience. You got punked via the use of symbolism.



First, anybody that could understand English, written at the level that a fifth grader could understand, would see that my comments within a quote represent my emphasis. It's blatantly obvious, just by looking at the quote in my post, that I am labeling the comments within those quotes.

You're an example of why defending the American education system is one of the most challenging tasks to accomplish when debating against a foreign message board member. I know for fact that most fifth graders would get what I dictate to this post, because I've used that tactic on a thread that one of my family members, a fifth grader, was able to read and understand.

He understood what I was getting at, it speaks volumes that you don't. You need to go back and sue your education system for dereliction of duty.

Doctoring handles is doctoring handles regardless of where the doctoring takes place in, inside or outside a quote. The mere fact that other usernames got doctored didn't seem to faze you... until the guy that ploys into your ass got his username doctored.

AssUp GayRidden: May you burn in hell (for about two weeks) for that, herasswipe.

See you there when that happens, hypocrite. I burned in "hell" for almost an entire deployment... it got so hot that even the mosquitos and bugs didn't come out. Two weeks isn't shit, dumbass.

It looks like your one brain celled activity got lost. I'd tell you to go out looking for it, but your consistently moaning, "Brrraaaaaiiiiin" while looking for your it might cause someone to shoot you. The opposition needs all the help it could get.

How elaborate! What a well planned trap. You caught me, you back pedaling video zombie. The only rub is that I wasn't arguing with your post or endeavoring to trying to refute any of its highly intelligent points, like we are in mortal combat (lmao) with an enemy that wants to remove our way of living. I was simply pointing out that your use of video game titles to drive your discussion was and is incredibly juvenile. In fact, I didn't even mention you by name, did I?

You chose to launch into a rant attacking me personally. Not for any position of yours I'd contested. Obviously your little "booby trap" was no such thing, but in fact an error about which you are now embarrassed ... And rightfully so.

I'd strongly suggest you spend a little more time reading the high literature on this forum before you start complaining about anything. Ask your pal IBIdiot about doctoring handles... He'll give you a primer. Judging by your weak attempts to doctor my handle, you could use some help. In fact, believe it or not, IBIdiot's verbal ejaculations are possibly more to the point than yours.

Next time, realize that nobody cares two shits about your booby traps, how you devised them, why you hide them In your prose and what you're trying to prove. If you want to make excuses for your mistakes you have two palatable choices: 1) Admit your error or 2) lie about it.

Just spare us the fucking War and Peace-length threads, OK. They're all so tedious!

Oh, and you're not the only Veteran on this board. Just one of the most intellectually frustrated and self conscious.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

"]

OMG parrot boy is jabbering about the same old same old. A rant full of I's and won over and over. You must be one insecure child, were you unloved? Words can't describe the pity I have for you. However I am finished with this discussion, so you can declare victory like other idiots on this board.