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

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

(REPEAT POINT)

OMG parrot boy is jabbering about the same old same old.

Do you not see a pattern here? Again:

If you feel like I'm "repeating the same thing over and over again," it's because you're repeating your talking points over and over again. So, if you're seeing a response for a third or fourth time, it's because you said the same thing three or four times. If you don't want to see me repeat a point, quit repeating a point that I've already rebutted.

Here's how to works:

Let "X" be your statement.

Let "Y" be my statement.

If "X," then "Y."

If "X" is the same thing, then "Y" will be the same response. If you want to see a different point addressed, then make a different point. What you really complaining about is my refusal to let your BS stand unchallenged.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

(REPEAT POINT)

A rant full of I's and won over and over.

Like a liberal, you ignore your own involvement that resulted in my correcting you. You accuse me of being a "total idiot," quotation mark's used strongly, for accurately pointing out that your side lost. I replied by showing you an analogy describing how much you were looking like an idiot for refusing to admit that your side lost.

I save my replies to this thread in Microsoft Word. I have 98 pages of arguments saved, prior to this current batch. I did a "Control F" and typed "won" in the search box. I received 32 results where that word showed up, either by itself or part of another word.

I went back and looked over my previous reply to you, and sure enough, it wasn't what you described.

That quoted statement is just you setting up stress shields to protect your one brain celled activity from all attacks of reason. You know you've lost, your ego gets irritated when you're constantly reminded of that.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

You must be one insecure child, were you unloved? Words can't describe the pity I have for you.

Over the past decade, liberals/progressives like you tried to assign a specific psychological issue to me for showing persistence and replying to your side of the argument. None of you guys were correct.

If you feel that I'm constantly reminding you that your side of the argument lost, it's because you keep complaining about me doing that. Your complaint requires a response, which has everything to do with the complaint. This has nothing to do with "insecurity," quotation marks used strongly.

I'm not doing this to reassure myself of something I know for fact is a case. The latter doesn't require reassurance. Your repeat complaint of it though, and your refusal to admit it as stated in your replies, dictate my reminding you again of your status in this argument.

What you mistake for "pity" is actually you showing contempt and frustration at my refusal to let your BS stand unchallenged.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

However I am finished with this discussion, so you can declare victory like other idiots on this board.

I predict that after this reply, you're going to come here and comment. Your going to prove, through your own actions, that you're wrong about your own actions just as you were wrong like you were majority of times on this thread.

When you do jump on this thread to directly or indirectly address something that I said, or something that someone in my side argument has said, you're going to prove... with your own actions... that I'm right even when I'm talking about your actions in the face of you being wrong.

You're not the first person that repeatedly hinted that he/she was "done" with an argument. Like the others, you're not saying this because you're tired of the argument, but because you're hoping that you're saying this will discourage others or me from challenging your BS.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WTF

(Section that WTF refused to include, bold red, is added back in to put my statement back into the context that I presented.)

That is because they were split up according to the British and French interests back in the 1920's not the Arab world's boundaries but power of the day.

Adding the rest of my comment in makes it blatantly obvious that you lack integrity. :mrgreen:

You're wrong, as usual. The fact that you'll edit out the actual argument that I'm presenting speaks volumes to the fact that you know that you can't argue against my actual argument. So, instead of having the integrity to realize that you don't have an argument, you selectively quote me in order to take me out of context.

You're creating a strawman.

Had you quoted me within the context that I actually presented that post, you would not have needed to put your reply down. But, since you proved your ignorance with that statement, I'm going to pounce.

The manifest destiny they talk about, or their ultimate goal, is to convert the whole world into a series of Islamic caliphates. This has been the goal centuries before the European countries carved up the Middle East. Back then, the Muslims had the advantage and were pushing the Europeans back. The Europeans were in the Middle Ages, And the Byzantine Empire was being seriously challenged.

During the Medieval Period, the Western Europeans didn't have empires that controlled the Muslim world. The Muslim world was under its own series of caliphate's and Emirates.

When they initially set out to complete the manifest destiny to convert the whole world into Islam, the Europeans were not in any way shape, or form, able to carve out boundaries in the Middle East. If anything, they were struggling to prevent the Muslims from pushing their boundaries outward.

This struggle against us, the West, has taken place since the founding of Islam. The last time I checked, the 1920's took place in the 20th Century, not the 7th Century.

Originally Posted by WTF

(REPEAT POINT)

We should extradite our self from the region and let them fight their Civil war and if need be, then fight the winner.

You need to quit looking at these guys from a Western mindset. You need to quit thinking that the radical elements there think the way we think here in the West.

What's taking place in Iraq isn't a civil war. If we do what you argue we should do, we'd be making a strategic mistake in the form of retreat. What we're seeing is a fight between radical elements that don't like the West. The stronger one will take control and expand.

This isn't a symmetrical warfare event where there are just two sides battling for control. This is an asymmetrical event where there's gonna be perpetual conflict until a dominant side rises and takes control of everybody else.

As non-Muslims, we're bigger enemies in the eyes of all these radicals regardless of whether they're fighting against each other or are allied with each other. In order for them to set up enough momentum to spread radical Islam throughout the Middle East, the West and the rest of the world has to disengage from that region.

You, arguing for a course of action that will facilitate the radicals, makes you a useful idiot for these terrorists.

What we're currently doing in Iraq is necessary. Like I said earlier this thread, only one side can win, either radical Islam or the West. There's no third or other option in what's in reality mortal combat between radical Islam and the rest of the world. The last time we remained disengaged from something like that, someone was able to have a safe haven to plot major terrorist attacks against the US... which took place in September 11.

Your argument here represents a retreat, an admission of defeat, and is based on your ignorance of the groups of people that you're trying to talk about.

Originally Posted by WTF

all your other bs is just chest pounding..."Me and JD have been there..."' bla bla bla.

Once again, you're pulling shit out of your ass. What you dismiss as, "BS," quotation marks used strongly, is an argument that you know you can't argue against.

My bringing up the fact that JD and I have boots on the ground experience in wars that took place in the part of the world that we are arguing about, is me telling you something that your horse blinders are blinding you from... The fact that we know what we're talking about in this argument as opposed to you, and those on your side of the argument, not having a clue about what you're talking about.

Your arguments, as well as that of those on your side of the argument, are nothing but ignorant armchair general ranting. By insisting that someone with boots on the ground experience in Iraq needs to understand something related to Iraq, you make yourself look like an ass.

You're acting like a kindergartner trying to argue about the sun with a solar physicist.

My putting my credentials on the table isn't me pounding my chest. It's me reminding you that I have firsthand experiences the backs my argument against you, and your lack of first hand experience on the argument.

Originally Posted by WTF

These fuckers do not give a shit about our way of life other than they do not want us coming to their country and shoving it down their throat...just the same as we wouldn't like them invading here and trying to shove their way of life down ours.

you're wrong and three counts.

First, you're showing that you are susceptible to propaganda by insisting that this is about them not wanting us over there. If you had a clue about current events, you would've known that the US was out of the country when the terrorists flooded right into Iraq.

You people argued that our departure from Iraq would result in them not fighting each other. You people argued that our being there was causing people to fight each other. Well, two years after we left the government pleaded with us to come back.

The event that we've argued about on this thread proves you peoples assumption wrong.

Second, you erroneously claim that they don't want our way of life. When I was there, the evidence that they wanted to be like us was all over the place. The Iraqis were rushing toward westernizing. In fact, they were more westernized at the end of our deployment and they were when we first got there.

The Iraqis, and the people in the Middle East, want to be more westernized. I know that for a fact, I've seen it in their actions. Had you been in Iraq like I was, you wouldn't be pulling shit out of your ass about these guys complaining about us "shoving things down their throat."

Third, our enemies in that region have repeatedly stated that they were to take the war to us. This isn't because we took the initiative to go into Iraq and Afghanistan. This is because of the manifest destiny that I was talking about earlier in this thread.

The terrorist attacks of 9/11 was supposed to be a major turning point toward them accomplishing that goal. From Osama bin Laden's own words:

Originally stated by Osama Bin Laden:

(Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

(a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Islam is the religion of all the prophets, and makes no distinction between them - peace be upon them all.

It is to this religion that we call you; the seal of all the previous religions. It is the religion of Unification of God, sincerity, the best of manners, righteousness, mercy, honour, purity, and piety. It is the religion of showing kindness to others, establishing justice between them, granting them their rights, and defending the oppressed and the persecuted. It is the religion of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil with the hand, tongue and heart. It is the religion of Jihad in the way of Allah so that Allah's Word and religion reign Supreme. And it is the religion of unity and agreement on the obedience to Allah, and total equality between all people, without regarding their colour, sex, or language.

(b) It is the religion whose book - the Quran - will remained preserved and unchanged, after the other Divine books and messages have been changed. The Quran is the miracle until the Day of Judgment. Allah has challenged anyone to bring a book like the Quran or even ten verses like it.

(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.

We call you to all of this that you may be freed from that which you have become caught up in; that you may be freed from the deceptive lies that you are a great nation, that your leaders spread amongst you to conceal from you the despicable state to which you have reached.

(b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?

Read that quote 10 times, then write it down five times, then read it out loud three times. BURN that Osama bin Laden statement into your "brain." If they didn't give a "shit" about our way of life, Osama bin Laden wouldn't have made it a point to show us that our way of living, and our way of doing things, is an offense against Islamic law.

If you listen to the statements of the radicals in that area, they're singing to the same tune. It's a tune that has been played since the 7th Century. As usual, you don't know what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by WTF

(REPEAT POINT)

If they didn't have any oil , we wouldn't give two shits about shoving our way of life down their throats.

Again:

That's not true. United States gets the vast majority of its oil from locations in North America and adjacent to it. The majority of our oil comes in via pipelines. This means our oil rigs in the Caribbean, and pipelines from Mexico, from Canada, and from locations in United States, provide us with the vast majority of our oil.

This was true before the Iraq war.

Venezuela is also a major supplier of our oil. Outside of North America, Saudi Arabia provides the most oil. But compared to North America, Saudi Arabia is minor. If this were about oil, we would've invaded Venezuela.

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.

Second, like I said earlier, the Iraqis WANT to be westernized. I know that for fact, because that's what I observed when I combat deployed to Iraq. You, having never combat deployed to Iraq, make yourself look like an ass by insisting otherwise about the Iraqis and their wants.

Originally Posted by WTF

(Inductive Fallacy)

You are nothing more than a tool for special interest (Oil and Defense industries) and to stupid to even realize it.

Your arguments here makes you a useful idiot for radical terrorists, and you're too stupid to even realize it.

First, as I mentioned earlier, this wasn't about oil. If we wanted to go to war over oil, we would've invaded Venezuela.

The mere fact that you would mention that this is about oil, and accuse me of being there "tool," quotation marks used strongly, speak strongly for the fact that you don't know what you're talking about. It also shows that you have absolutely no clue about global economics, about world history, about current events, or about anything else that you've tried to argue on this thread.

You are driven mainly by arrogance and not by reason. Not only are you a useful idiot for the radical terrorists, including those that swept through Iraq, but you're a tool for the liberal propagandists that shove their propaganda down your throat.

In psychological warfare, you'd be considered as susceptible to propaganda.

Originally Posted by WTF

So in summary you need to not only understand geo politics present but also past. Something you and LexusLover need a refresher course in.

Your arguments on this thread, and on other threads, makes it painfully obvious that you don't understand current geopolitics, past geopolitics, world history, Middle East history, US history, current events, global economics, logistics, or anything else that you've tried to talk about here.

Don't mistake the progressive Kool-Aid as an understanding of geopolitics. It isn't. Perhaps if you pulled your head out of your ass, and removed the horse blinders blinding you, you'd see that my side of the argument is telling it like it is, based on the facts.

[herfacechair]

Someone mentioned the Mission Accomplished sign...

AGAIN:

A lot of people equate that mission accomplished sign as Bush declaring the war over. The vast majority those people have never been in the Navy. That, "Mission Accomplished," sign was something the ship was saying to the world... for itself. In order not to use the ships funds, they requested that the White House generate a sign for them.

If you actually listen to the speech that George Bush made on the flight deck, he only declared major combat operations over. Nowhere in there did he say that minor combat operations were over. In that same speech, he laid out the fact that we would be facing continued dangers in that country. He also mentioned a timeline for withdrawal, and that was when the country was a strong democracy able to secure itself.

We did precisely that before the timeline of withdrawal called for us to leave... at the time the US military left, they were able to secure themselves. What was needed was continued engagement from Washington DC.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Yssup Rider: How elaborate! What a well planned trap. You caught me,

Although this was sarcastic, you were actually accurate with that statement, I did in fact got you with an elaborate plan. ...

THE REMAINDER OF THIS IMBECILIC POST CAN BE READ IN THE PREVIOUS RANT SUBMITTED BY THIS RAVING LUNATIC. I WILL NOT WASTE FURTHER BANDWITH REPEATING THIS IN ITS PAINFULLY TEDIOUS ENTIRETY.... SO LET'S SKIP DOWN TO WHAT HERASSLICKER IS REALLY CONTRIBUTING TO THIS THREAD WITH HIS PARANOID, PASSIVE/AGGRESSIVE TEXTBOOK DIATRIBES.

BLAH BLAH BLAH!

DING. DING. DING. DING. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. WE HAVE A WINNER!

Good thing I didn't mention the word plagiarism...

[i'va biggen]

You nailed that empty suit yussup...

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

If you actually listen to the speech that George Bush made on the flight deck, he only declared major combat operations over. Nowhere in there did he say that minor combat operations were over. In that same speech, he laid out the fact that we would be facing continued dangers in that country. He also mentioned a timeline for withdrawal, and that was when the country was a strong democracy able to secure itself.

We did precisely that before the timeline of withdrawal called for us to leave... at the time the US military left, they were able to secure themselves. What was needed was continued engagement from Washington DC.

1. According to General Dempsey, Malichi needs to agree to a more inclusive government.

2. The Iraq forces can defend itself.

3. Use Airstrikes to help the Iraq forces if needed.

4. He does not call for 20,000 boots on the ground.

http://news.yahoo.com/dempsey-iraqi-...-politics.html

[WTF]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

My bringing up the fact that JD and I have boots on the ground experience in wars that took place in the part of the world that we are arguing about, is me telling you something that your horse blinders are blinding you from... The fact that we know what we're talking about in this argument as opposed to you, and those on your side of the argument, not having a clue about what you're talking about.

.

JD has not been there since 1992 for one and for two you two merely being there is no different than a fan who attended the Super telling me he can win the next 100 Super Bowls.

The fact that you think any Arab nation could invade this country successfully shows your total ignorance of warfare and the fact that you think we can afford to build the world in our image tells me you still believe in the Easter Bunny.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Someone mentioned the Mission Accomplished sign...

AGAIN:

A lot of people equate that mission accomplished sign as Bush declaring the war over. The vast majority those people have never been in the Navy. That, "Mission Accomplished," sign was something the ship was saying to the world... for itself. In order not to use the ships funds, they requested that the White House generate a sign for them.

If you actually listen to the speech that George Bush made on the flight deck, he only declared major combat operations over. Nowhere in there did he say that minor combat operations were over. In that same speech, he laid out the fact that we would be facing continued dangers in that country. He also mentioned a timeline for withdrawal, and that was when the country was a strong democracy able to secure itself.

We did precisely that before the timeline of withdrawal called for us to leave... at the time the US military left, they were able to secure themselves. What was needed was continued engagement from Washington DC.

Thanks for clearing up that whole MISSION ACCOMPLISHED thing for us. I know we've ALL been wondering what that really meant!

Not only verbose and delusional (not to mentioned somewhere on the high side of über-aggressive, you're presenting yourself as a Bush apologist as well.

Yep. You're a winner!

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

T

Yep. You're a winner!

There is little doubt that he was a "Looney Tunes" enthusiast as a young lad and probably searches for the re-runs even today!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Thanks for clearing up that whole MISSION ACCOMPLISHED thing for us. I know we've ALL been wondering what that really meant!

Is "us" all of your personalities, or just two of them?

President Bush:

Thank you. Thank you all very much.

Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.
In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment, yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible.

Because of you our nation is more secure. Because of you the tyrant has fallen and Iraq is free.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of precision and speed and boldness the enemy did not expect and the world had not seen before.

From distant bases or ships at sea, we sent planes and missiles that could destroy an enemy division or strike a single bunker. Marines and soldiers charged to Baghdad across 350 miles of hostile ground in one of the swiftest advances of heavy arms in history.

You have shown the world the skill and the might of the American armed forces.

This nation thanks all of the members of our coalition who joined in a noble cause. We thank the armed forces of the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland who shared in the hardships of war. We thank all of the citizens of Iraq who welcomed our troops and joined in the liberation of their own country.

And tonight, I have a special word for Secretary Rumsfeld, for General Franks and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done.

The character of our military through history, the daring of Normandy, the fierce courage of Iwo Jima, the decency and idealism that turned enemies into allies is fully present in this generation.

When Iraqi civilians looked into the faces of our service men and women, they saw strength and kindness and good will. When I look at the members of the United States military, I see the best of our country and I am honored to be your commander in chief.

In the images of fallen statues we have witnessed the arrival of a new era. For a hundred of years of war, culminating in the nuclear age, military technology was designed and deployed to inflict casualties on an ever-growing scale.

In defeating Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, Allied forces destroyed entire cities, while enemy leaders who started the conflict were safe until the final days. Military power was used to end a regime by breaking a nation.
Today we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime.

With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians.

No device of man can remove the tragedy from war, yet it is a great advance when the guilty have far more to fear from war than the innocent.

In the images of celebrating Iraqis we have also seen the ageless appeal of human freedom. Decades of lies and intimidation could not make the Iraqi people love their oppressors or desire their own enslavement.

Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food and water and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives, humanity rejoices and everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear.

We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We're pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime who will be held to account for their crimes. We've begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated.

We are helping to rebuild Iraq where the dictator built palaces for himself instead of hospitals and schools.

And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by and for the Iraqi people.

The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq.

The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on.

That terrible morning, 19 evil men, the shock troops of a hateful ideology, gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the beginning of the end of America.

By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve and force our retreat from the world.

They have failed.

In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals and educate all of their children.

Yet we also have dangerous work to complete. As I speak, a special operations task force lead by the 82nd Airborne is on the trail of the terrorists and those who seek to undermine the free government of Afghanistan.

America and our coalition will finish what we have begun.

From Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa, we are hunting down Al Qaida killers.

Nineteen months ago I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight nearly one half of Al Qaida's senior operatives have been captured or killed.

The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.
And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.

In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.
Our war against terror is proceeding according to the principles that I have made clear to all.

Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country and a target of American justice.

Any person, organization or government that supports, protects or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and equally guilty of terrorist crimes. Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilized world and will be confronted.

And anyone in the world, including the Arab world, who works and sacrifices for freedom has a loyal friend in the United States of America.
Our commitment to liberty is America's tradition, declared at our founding, affirmed in Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, asserted in the Truman Doctrine and in Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire.

We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, Iraq and in a peaceful Palestine.

The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world. Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope.
When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life.

American values and American interests lead in the same direction. We stand for human liberty.

The United States upholds these principles of security and freedom in many ways: with all of the tools of diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence and finance.

We are working with a broad coalition of nations that understand the threat and our shared responsibility to meet it.

The use of force has been and remains our last resort. Yet all can know, friend and foe alike, that our nation has a mission: We will answer threats to our security, and we will defend the peace.

Our mission continues. Al Qaida is wounded, not destroyed. The scattered cells of the terrorist network still operate in many nations and we know from daily intelligence that they continue to plot against free people. The proliferation of deadly weapons remains a serious danger.
The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland and we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike.

The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide.

No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost; free nations will press on to victory.
Other nations in history have fought in foreign lands and remained to occupy and exploit. Americans, following a battle, want nothing more than to return home. And that is your direction tonight.

After service in the Afghan and Iraqi theaters of war, after 100,000 miles on the longest carrier deployment in recent history, you are homeward bound.
Some of you will see new family members for the first time; 150 babies were born while their fathers were on the Lincoln. Your families are proud of you, and your nation will welcome you.

We are mindful as well that some good men and women are not making the journey home. One of those who fell, Corporal Jason Mileo, spoke to his parents five days before his death. Jason's father said, "He called us from the center of Baghdad, not to brag but to tell us he loved us. Our son was a soldier."

Every name, every life is a loss to our military, to our nation and to the loved ones who grieve. There is no homecoming for these families. Yet we pray in God's time their reunion will come.

Those we lost were last seen on duty.

Their final act on this Earth was to fight a great evil and bring liberty to others.

All of you, all in this generation of our military, have taken up the highest calling of history: You were defending your country and protecting the innocent from harm.

And wherever you go, you carry a message of hope, a message that is ancient and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, "To the captives, come out; and to those in darkness, be free."

Thank you for serving our country and our cause.

May God bless you all. And may God continue to bless America."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript

"We have difficult work to do in Iraq....."

"The war on terror is not over,..."

[WTF]

LL not only thinks like Dick Cheney that the war in Iraq was necessary but that George Custer made the correct move at Little Big Horn.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by WTF

LL not only thinks like Dick Cheney that the war in Iraq was necessary but that George Custer made the correct move at Little Big Horn.

Assigning beliefs or actions to others that they've never demonstrated or voiced: another tool in WTF's tiny toolbox.

[Yssup Rider]

What is the purpose of cutting and pasting Bush's speech, LLIdiot?

You ain't got shit to contribute? Don't post shit!

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

What is the purpose of cutting and pasting Bush's speech, LLIdiot?

Rumor has it that the words from Shrub's speech makes LLIdiot sexually aroused.

[herfacechair]

Yssup Rider: How is this any different than what you accuse others, you lying hypocrite?

You need to quit being a liar, and a hypocrite, before you accuse other people of being a "lying hypocrite," quotations used strongly. There's no similarity to what LexusLover described of you guys, and the description to our side of the argument.

You guys have failed to defend your positions, and have utilized a variety of tactics that includes strawman arguments, red herrings, repeat points, childish games, etc., in the face of not having anything substantive to add to your arguments, or to the topic on this thread.

You people have engaged in a bunch of childish, arrogant, ploys in an attempt to wear down the opposition in the face of your side of the argument losing this debate. There's a BIG difference between what LexusLover describes of your side of the argument, and what our side of the argument is doing.

Yssup Rider: It isn't. You can't defend your positions... Fuck, you can't even express your position.

Wrong. Not only have we effectively defended our positions, we've effectively destroyed your arguments. You accuse another poster of not being able to express their positions, yet here you are unable to express yours.

Like your fellow butt pirates WTF, I'va biggen, bigtext, etc., you consistently repeat yourself as if you were a parrot. You people are constantly in retreat, and refuse to even deal with simple, straightforward questions that destroy your own arguments.

Yssup Rider: No wonder you're the patriarch of the Idjot klan, errr, clan!

He's nobody's patriarch, and he's certainly not a member of your side of the argument. You people have thoroughly been discredited in a debate where the opposition has booth, boots on the ground experience as well as extensive research experience.

Yet, instead of taking the honorable course of action when faced with people who have credentials in this argument where you don't, you people plow on like idiots... like the black knight that lost all of his limbs, but insisted that he was "winning" the duel.

You people consistently breathe in your own disproven exhaust on this thread.

Yssup Rider: Maybe you should have a family reunion ... In Clarksville.

Since your allies on this thread and you like to breath in used air, perhaps you guys should have a gay circle get together where you guys fart on each other's faces. Judging by your performances on this thread, that exercise should be natural and easy for you guys.

Yssup Rider: That is, if you can find it anymore.

You can't even find your one brain celled activity which was too small to wonder on its own, but since it did, it got lost.

Yssup Rider: Thanks for clearing up that whole MISSION ACCOMPLISHED thing for us. I know we've ALL been wondering what that really meant!

You're not thankful that I did that. You're so invested in the brainwashing that you received... brainwashing that you readily accepted, because it caters to your arrogance and emotions... that when I smack you with the facts, you devolve into acting like a juvenile. More on that later.

Yssup Rider: Not only verbose and delusional (not to mentioned somewhere on the high side of über-aggressive, you're presenting yourself as a Bush apologist as well.

You see, this is what I mean when I describe you, and your allies, as idiots breathing their own used air in. I was in the Navy prior to being in the Army. What you dismissed as verbose, delusional, uber-aggressive, Bush apologist, is an argument based on my Navy experiences.

I know for a fact that the "Mission Accomplished" sign was meant for the ship that displayed that sign, and not for President Bush's message. Since it's painfully obvious that you don't have military experiences, let me spell this out for you. Missions exists on different levels. Within a mission, you're going to have multiple missions.

That specific ship had a mission to launch air strikes into Iraq, followed up by acting as a platform that supported the initial missions on the ground. It did that during a deployment that was extended beyond what that ship normally would've done for a deployment.

Once major combat operations ended, that ship's specific mission was completed. It was that mission that the ship was talking about when it displayed that sign... which was meant more for the community surrounding that ship's home port, specifically for the family of the embarked Sailors.

That banner wasn't intended to communicate for the entire military, or for the entire Iraq Campaign.

It looks like you saw the post containing the speech that President Bush made on the flight deck. EDUCATE yourself. He said nothing about the Iraq Campaign being over, and he said nothing about minor combat operations being over. In fact, he described a process that ended up actually happening.

That's not delusion, but me using both, my first hand experiences as well as actual news to refute your assumption... which resulted from liberal propaganda... that said banner intended to declare all operations in Iraq over.

You'd have to be smoking some seriously good shit if you think that I'm "delusional" or I'm being an "apologist."

Yssup Rider: Yep. You're a winner!

The fact that you have to be sarcastic to come close to the truth speaks volumes for your lack of integrity and for your extensive academic dishonesty.

Yssup Rider: THE REMAINDER OF THIS IMBECILIC POST CAN BE READ IN THE PREVIOUS RANT SUBMITTED BY THIS RAVING LUNATIC.

Remember when I said that there's a purpose behind every word, sentence, paragraph, concept, etc., that I use? Going into "all capitalization mode" is a sign of someone that's not only desperate, but is frustrated that he's losing. You just showed me that you're a control freak, and are frustrated that you lost control. Your arrogance isn't taking the ass whoppen very well, isn't it?

You're like the folks that I've played chess, or another game, against. You're doing the equivalent of shoving chess pieces around and throwing the chessboard into the air, in response to losing bad. Like a child that's used to getting his/her way, you're pulling a tantrum.

Like the others that I've debated before debating you, you've resorted to implying that I "have" one form of psychological issue or another... all because I keep hammering you no matter what ploy you use to try to get me away from your trail.

Your frustration, and hurt ego, is making me laugh. I take sadistic pleasure in destroying your arguments... then watching your reactions to them. If I could laugh at some of the things that I've said to you, long after I've posted them, then I could only imagine how deep under your skin I'm getting.

In fact, out of all of the butt pirates that I'm arguing with on this thread, you seem to have the thinnest skin. This is part of the reason to why I've done this for a decade, and will continue to do this... this is fun. :mrgreen:

Yssup Rider: I WILL NOT WASTE FURTHER BANDWITH REPEATING THIS IN ITS PAINFULLY TEDIOUS ENTIRETY....

Again, remember when I said that there was a purpose behind the things that I do here? Well, get this. I knew that since it was the 4th of July prior to posting the last reply, someone among the opposition... perhaps most or all of them, would've been drunk.

So, when I came here, guess who I found was pasting here, under Jack Daniels' control? You guessed it, you. I was like, "Fuck yeah, I'm slapping this idiot hard, the resulting reply will be real funny!" Sure enough, I laughed my ass off when I saw your reply... or, should I say, EDITED reply.

Being as drunk as you were, your initial reaction was to quote my entire post, then provide a reply.

But, I knew that once you inched closer to your senses, that you were going to backpedal and adjust your reply. That's EXACTLY what you did. :mrgreen: Manipulating your emotions via strategically placing words in my reply is like making a dog chase its own tail.

But, let's face it. I get email feeds when people reply after I post. The first reply I got was the reply that I'm addressing right now... which originally contained my entire post. You going back and saying that you won't repost what I say is essentially you back peddling.

You know what this tells me? This tells me that after you replied to my post, you were agitated by what I said. I was sound asleep by the time you replied, but I occupied that empty noggin of yours... well, I occupied the areas in that empty noggin of yours that wasn't already occupied by the only thing that you seem to have permanently residing in that void of a noggin of yours... a toy monkey banging its cymbals. :mrgreen:

AssUp GayRidden: SO LET'S SKIP DOWN TO WHAT HERASSLICKER IS REALLY CONTRIBUTING TO THIS THREAD

The stealth technology that you're using to protect your one brain celled activity's vacant spot from all attacks of reason is impressive. Here's a simple break down of what's going on in this thread.

You, and your gay band of butt pirates, aka your side of the argument, are advancing propaganda on this thread. You people are so intoxicated with the liberal/progressive Kool-Aid that you're resistant to the facts... heck, the facts are completely useless to you people since "facts" to you are what "feels" good for you people's egos... not those pesky real facts that destroy your dissolutions of what's going on.

Those on my side of the argument are presenting the cold hard facts that destroys you butt pirates' Kool-Aid driven propaganda.

AssUp GayRidden: WITH HIS PARANOID,

You've devolved into using insults as the primary segment of your replies, and you've also devolved into using "all caps". None of those insults/opinions are on target. Again, if what you say about me were anything like your weapon marksmanship, I'd hate to be the person standing behind you as you try to shoot the target in front of you.

If anything, your actions, and your inaccurate statements, makes you come across as the "paranoid" person.

AssUp GayRidden: PASSIVE/AGGRESSIVE

From Dictionary dot com:

"Denoting or pertaining to a personality type or behavior marked by the expression of negative emotions in passive, indirect ways, as through manipulation or noncooperation: a passive-aggressive employee who often misses deadlines."

http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...ggressive+?s=t

Nowhere in there do you see a definition, or description, of anything that I'm doing. Missing deadlines? ROTFLMFAO! I'm sorry, but I'm not going to "miss a deadline" when it comes to replying to you retards... not to insult the mentally challenged of course.

Expressing of negative emotions in passive, indirect ways?

Yup, your sarcasm, and your resorting to pictures, without your advancing a real argument, are examples of you being passive aggressive. Manipulation? You mean, like you completely changed the text in what you quoted from me?

That kind of manipulation? Yup, put one more checkmark in the category of you being "passive aggressive."

Noncooperation? Sorry, my not cooperating with your demands to adjust my debating methods isn't me being passive aggressive in the sense that I'm merely "getting back" at you. My "noncooperation" stems from my refusing to give up one of my advantages in order for your ego to not get bruised as much.

I simply don't accommodate the demands/requests of the people that I debate with.

AssUp GayRidden: TEXTBOOK DIATRIBES.

Once again, from dictionary dot com:

"A bitter, sharply abusive denunciation, attack, or criticism: repeated diatribes against the senator."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diatribe?s=t

That's a perfect description of your own post, the one that I'm replying to, and most of your other posts. In fact, your "all caps" remark fits that definition perfectly. Don't mistake a reasoned, logical, fact based argument, that destroys your drivel, rubbish, and garbage posts, as "diatribes," quotation marks used strongly.

So, what's a common denominator behind the above? What I told you before... you're projecting your own traits onto me... just like the other liberals like to do.

AssUp GayRidden: BLAH BLAH BLAH!

Your dismissing a fact/logic based argument by saying that is incredibly juvenile. In fact, that's what most juveniles do when their parents are trying to talk sense to them... but they think that their parents are "wrong" and that they "don't" know what they're talking about.

I'm destroying you so bad in this argument, and hammering you real strong, that I've got you reverting back to your teenage days.

Yssup Rider: Good thing I didn't mention the word plagiarism...

Until you quit mimicking others in lieu of coming up with and sticking to your original arguments, you don't have a leg to stand on talking about plagiarism.

Yssup Rider: What is the purpose of cutting and pasting Bush's speech, LLIdiot?

To prove wrong the ignorant assumption that the "Mission Accomplished" banner was George Bush saying that the war was "over." He said no such thing, and any assumptions that claim that "mission accomplished" meant "that it was" is outright wrong.

Posting that speech on this thread is relevant, and had to be done, to show you people how wrong your arguments are.

Yssup Rider: You ain't got shit to contribute? Don't post shit!

Bye, see you, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out... meaning, do as you preach. He contributed something that had relevance to this thread. You're just a liberal windbag that likes to blow fart out of his mouth to give himself a phony sense of legitimacy.

You're pissed that someone posted something that destroys one of you people's darling arguments... it blatantly shows how wrong you guys are. Before I stop whipping your ass for the moment, I noticed that you ran like a coward from questions I asked you in my reply.

As long as you reply to me without answering these questions, per the parameters that I set, I'm going to keep asking you these questions:

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Yssup Rider: Oh, and you're not the only Veteran on this board.

Sigh, Yssup Rider, please give him another reminder, thanks. :mrgreen:

"I'd strongly suggest you spend a little more time reading the high literature on this forum before you start complaining about anything." -Yssup Rider

Because if you did what you preached, you would've seen this:

"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

And this:

"JD barleycorn and I are war veterans from conflict that took place in the part of the world. None of you guys have indicated that you have similar experiences." -herfacechair

Which leads to the question:

Where, in my posts here, did I claim to be the ONLY veteran?

I know for fact that you can look at that question, and the preceding quotes, and realize that you're wrong. You're understandably, and rightfully, feeling embarrassed because of that mistake. If you choose to ignore that question then consider this question:

Where you wrong when you accused me of claiming to be the only veteran on the board? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Copy and paste that question, along with those "yes" and "no" options to your reply. Put an "X" in the bracket that represents your reply. Spare me any additional nonsense that you're going to want to add to this question.

if you reply to me while failing to answer this question per the parameters that I set, I'm going to consistently ask you these same questions.