another liberal surrender monkey???

[retiredman]

another leftist surrender monkey?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/gen-sanchez-ass.html


I can hardly wait for the koolaid soaked Bush butt lickers to start assailing the patriotism of THIS fine general.

Honest to God....how many retired flag officers need to step up and slap you assholes across the face to get you to admit that this stupid stupid war is a idiotic endeavor?

"America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.”

but internet chickenhawks with pocket protectors on here will claim that they know more about what is going on in Iraq than the former commander of our forces there.

You pom pom waving Bush lovers all make me so fucking sick I could puke.

[Sir Evil]

Why don't you try to get the link right bottom feeder.

[mrg666]

The webpage cannot be found


?

[retiredman]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/gen-sanchez-ass.html

try again

[mrg666]

“There was been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders,” said Sanchez, who commanded U.S. forces from June 2003 to July 2004.

is that a typo or is he a retard

[retiredman]

another flag officer who followed the orders of the civilian national leadership and now, when free from the constraints that bind officers from publicly criticizing their civilian (or military) superiors, he tells it like it is. It is a nightmare. I have been saying that for years and every pompom waving chickenhawk on every board I visit has called me a cheese eating surrender monkey and a traitor and a coward.

I have no doubt that they will call General Sanchez that very same thing.

because they would rather a hundred thousand more americans die in this war than admit they were wrong and their president was wrong.

[stephanie]

Here's another article...
Retired US Iraq Commander Calls Bush Strategy 'Desperate'
Snip...
By Al Pessin
Washington
12 October 2007

Pessin report (mp3) - Download 726k
Listen to Pessin report (mp3)


A former commander of U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq has sharply criticized the Bush administration's handling of the war, saying there has never been a comprehensive strategy with all the elements needed to win. VOA's Al Pessin reports from Washington.


Ricardo Sanchez (file photo)
Retired Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez says there has been a "crisis of leadership" in the administration and the congress that has led to unnecessary deaths, and that the problem has not been solved by the new strategy President Bush announced in January.

"After more than four years of fighting, America continues its desperate struggle in Iraq without any concerted effort to devise a strategy that will achieve victory in that war torn country, or in the greater conflict against extremism. From a catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan to the administration's latest surge strategy, this administration has failed to employ and synchronize its political, economic and military power. The latest revised strategy is a desperate attempt by the administration that has not accepted the political and economic realities of this war, and they have definitely not been able to communicate effectively that reality to the American people," he said.

Asked to say what strategy he would recommend, General Sanchez enumerated many of the points of the president's approach - train the Iraqi military, promote political reconciliation, build national institutions and work with Iraq's neighbors to get their support. But he said the administration has not synchronized the efforts of all U.S. government agencies or provided enough resources to pursue the strategy. And he says military commanders should have been given more authority to work on traditionally civilian issues, particularly early in the conflict.

read the rest...
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-12-voa62.cfm

[Nukeman]

heres what he said. He doesnt like what has been going on but he also says we CANT PULL OUT

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071012/ap_on_re_mi_ea/sanchez_iraq_2



ARLINGTON, Va. - The U.S. mission in Iraq is a "nightmare with no end in sight" because of political misjudgments after the fall of Saddam Hussein that continue today, a former chief of U.S.-led forces said Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT


Retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who commanded coalition troops for a year beginning June 2003, cast a wide net of blame for both political and military shortcomings in Iraq that helped open the way for the insurgency — such as disbanding the Saddam-era military and failing to cement ties with tribal leaders and quickly establish civilian government after Saddam was toppled.

He called current strategies — including the deployment of 30,000 additional forces earlier this year — a "desperate attempt" to make up for years of misguided policies in Iraq.

"There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight," Sanchez told a group of journalists covering military affairs.

Sanchez avoided pointing his criticism at any single official or agency, but it appeared a broad indictment of White House policies and a lack of leadership in the Pentagon to oppose them. Such assessments — even by former Pentagon brass — are not new, but they have added resonance as debates over war strategy dominate the presidential campaign.

Sanchez went on to offer a pessimistic view on the current U.S. strategy against extremists will make lasting gains, but said a full-scale withdrawal also was not an option.

"The American military finds itself in an intractable situation ... America has no choice but to continue our efforts in Iraq," said Sanchez, who works as a consultant training U.S. generals

[actsnoblemartin]

just because your a patriot, dont mean youre NOT an asshole.

If you WANT people to listen to you, stop trying to bully everyone one who doesnt agree with you and TONE DOWN THE RHETORIC.


another leftist surrender monkey?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/gen-sanchez-ass.html


I can hardly wait for the koolaid soaked Bush butt lickers to start assailing the patriotism of THIS fine general.

Honest to God....how many retired flag officers need to step up and slap you assholes across the face to get you to admit that this stupid stupid war is a idiotic endeavor?

"America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.”

but internet chickenhawks with pocket protectors on here will claim that they know more about what is going on in Iraq than the former commander of our forces there.

You pom pom waving Bush lovers all make me so fucking sick I could puke.

[diuretic]

He's described a horrible place to be - can't get out but can't win. Anyway the clock is running down, it'll be time for the Bush Administration to leave and then someone else will have to work on this mess.

[Sitarro]

Hey Maine shit,

I wonder what YOU would be saying if Sanchez would have said how perfect the conflict has gone. The only reason you and the media have brought this guy out is that he, like others like him who want to get his fifteen minutes of fame criticizing his Commander in Chief, say what you want to hear. Yea, President Bush should have been more like the Democrats and taken polls to see what Joe couch potato thought would be the best move because those guys and former Navy cooks know a lot more than the military advisors that the President depends on to guide his moves in this arena.

We also have no idea why this "General" has decided to come out now and blather on to the media, what is he getting out of it? Even more important, who gives a shit besides you cooky?

[actsnoblemartin]

Hey Maine shit,

I wonder what YOU would be saying if Sanchez would have said how perfect the conflict has gone. The only reason you and the media have brought this guy out is that he, like others like him who want to get his fifteen minutes of fame criticizing his Commander in Chief, say what you want to hear. Yea, President Bush should have been more like the Democrats and taken polls to see what Joe couch potato thought would be the best move because those guys and former Navy cooks know a lot more than the military advisors that the President depends on to guide his moves in this arena.

We also have no idea why this "General" has decided to come out now and blather on to the media, what is he getting out of it? Even more important, who gives a shit besides you cooky?

:lol: Absolutely hysterical.

No, the general is right, iran doesnt have enough oil :laugh2:, lets just give them iraqs too, which is like the 2nd leading oil producer

[stephanie]

Hey Maine shit,

I wonder what YOU would be saying if Sanchez would have said how perfect the conflict has gone. The only reason you and the media have brought this guy out is that he, like others like him who want to get his fifteen minutes of fame criticizing his Commander in Chief, say what you want to hear. Yea, President Bush should have been more like the Democrats and taken polls to see what Joe couch potato thought would be the best move because those guys and former Navy cooks know a lot more than the military advisors that the President depends on to guide his moves in this arena.

We also have no idea why this "General" has decided to come out now and blather on to the media, what is he getting out of it? Even more important, who gives a shit besides you cooky?

He wouldn't of posted this post.....that's for sure..:poke:

[diuretic]

Bang on as much as you like, Bush is running down the clock. He's watching that calendar and trying to keep the absolute nutball Cheney under control so he can zip out of the White House and leave it to the next president to clean up his mess. It's how he does things in his life. Cheney may be a problem for him though, if Cheney keeps banging on about bombing the crap out of Iran it might give Bush some more grief he doesn't need. If I gave a shit about him I might feel sorry for him.

[Kathianne]

There was a bit more to Sanchez's statement than has widely been reported:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/10/018743.php


October 12, 2007
A Tree Falls In the Forest

If the Bush administration gets attacked, the press will report it. But what if someone attacks the press? If the attack goes unreported, did it ever really happen?

Today General Ricardo Sanchez gave a speech to the Military Reporters and Editors' annual conference, in which he criticized just about everyone associated with our effort in Iraq. The Washington Post's headline was typical: "Former Iraq Commander Faults Bush."

Actually, I don't believe Sanchez ever mentioned Bush by name, although, as I say, he was critical of just about everybody. But it would be hard to tell from press accounts of Sanchez's speech that he was mostly critical of...the press. Here is the first half of Sanchez's speech, verbatim:

GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN

SOME OF YOU MAY NOT BELIEVE THIS BUT I AM GLAD TO BE HERE. WHEN SIG ASKED ME IF I WOULD CONSIDER ADDRESSING YOU THERE WAS NO DOUBT THAT I SHOULD COME INTO THE LION'S DEN. THIS WAS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I HAVE FIRMLY BELIEVED SINCE DESERT SHIELD THAT IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE STRENGTH OF OUR DEMOCRACY THAT THE MILITARY AND THE PRESS CORPS MAINTAIN A STRONG, MUTUALLY RESPECTFUL AND ENABLING RELATIONSHIP. THIS CONTINUES TO BE PROBLEMATIC FOR OUR COUNTRY, ESPECIALLY DURING TIMES OF WAR. ONE OF THE GREATEST MILITARY CORRESPONDENTS OF OUR TIME, JOE GALLOWAY, MADE ME A BELIEVER WHEN HE JOINED THE 24TH INFANTRY DIVISION DURING DESERT STORM.

TODAY, I WILL ATTEMPT TO DO TWO THINGS - FIRST I WILL GIVE YOU MY ASSESSMENT OF THE MILITARY AND PRESS RELATIONSHIP AND THEN I WILL PROVIDE YOU SOME THOUGHTS ON THE CURRENT STATE OF OUR WAR EFFORT. AS ALL OF YOU KNOW I HAVE A WIDE RANGE OF RELATIONSHIPS AND EXPERIENCES WITH OUR NATIONS MILITARY WRITERS AND EDITORS. THERE ARE SOME IN YOUR RANKS WHO I CONSIDER TO BE THE EPITOME OF JOURNALISTIC PROFESSIONALISM - JOE GALLOWAY, THOM SHANKER, SIG CHRISTENSEN, AND JOHN BURNS IMMEDIATELY COME TO MIND. THEY EXEMPLIFY WHAT AMERICA SHOULD DEMAND OF OUR JOURNALISTS - TOUGH REPORTING THAT RELIES UPON INTEGRITY, OBJECTIVITY AND FAIRNESS TO GIVE ACCURATE AND THOROUGH ACCOUNTS THAT STRENGTHEN OUR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND IN TURN OUR DEMOCRACY. ON THE OTHER HAND, UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE ISSUED ULTIMATUMS TO SOME OF YOU FOR UNSCRUPULOUS REPORTING THAT WAS SOLELY FOCUSED ON SUPPORTING YOUR AGENDA AND PRECONCIEVED NOTIONS OF WHAT OUR MILITARY HAD DONE. I ALSO REFUSED TO TALK TO THE EUROPEAN STARS AND STRIPES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS OF MY COMMAND IN GERMANY FOR THEIR EXTREME BIAS AND SINGLE MINDED FOCUS ON ABU GHARAIB.

LET ME REVIEW SOME OF THE DESCRIPTIVE PHRASES THAT HAVE BEEN USED BY SOME OF YOU THAT HAVE MADE MY PERSONAL INTERFACES WITH THE PRESS CORPS DIFFICULT:

"DICTATORIAL AND SOMEWHAT DENSE",

"NOT A STRATEGIC THOUGHT",

LIAR,

"DOES NOT GET IT" AND

THE MOST INEXPERIENCED LTG.

IN SOME CASES I HAVE NEVER EVEN MET YOU, YET YOU FEEL QUALIFIED TO MAKE CHARACTER JUDGMENTS THAT ARE COMMUNICATED TO THE WORLD. MY EXPERIENCE IS NOT UNIQUE AND WE CAN FIND OTHER EXAMPLES SUCH AS THE TREATMENT OF SECRETARY BROWN DURING KATRINA. THIS IS THE WORST DISPLAY OF JOURNALISM IMAGINABLE BY THOSE OF US THAT ARE BOUND BY A STRICT VALUE SYSTEM OF SELFLESS SERVICE, HONOR AND INTEGRITY. ALMOST INVARIABLY, MY PERCEPTION IS THAT THE SENSATIONALISTIC VALUE OF THESE ASSESSMENTS IS WHAT PROVIDED THE EDGE THAT YOU SEEK FOR SELF AGRANDIZEMENT OR TO ADVANCE YOUR INDIVIDUAL QUEST FOR GETTING ON THE FRONT PAGE WITH YOUR STORIES! AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR MEASURE OF WORTH IS HOW MANY FRONT PAGE STORIES YOU HAVE WRITTEN AND UNFORTUNATELY SOME OF YOU WILL COMPROMISE YOUR INTEGRITY AND DISPLAY QUESTIONABLE ETHICS AS YOU SEEK TO KEEP AMERICA INFORMED. THIS IS MUCH LIKE THE INTELLIGENCE ANALYSTS WHOSE EFFECTIVENESS WAS MEASURED BY THE NUMBER OF INTELLIGENCE REPORTS HE PRODUCED. FOR SOME, IT SEEMS THAT AS LONG AS YOU GET A FRONT PAGE STORY THERE IS LITTLE OR NO REGARD FOR THE "COLLATERAL DAMAGE" YOU WILL CAUSE. PERSONAL REPUTATIONS HAVE NO VALUE AND YOU REPORT WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY AND ARE RARELY HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR UNETHICAL CONDUCT.

GIVEN THE NEAR INSTANTANEOUS ABILITY TO REPORT ACTIONS ON THE GROUND, THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ACCURATELY AND TRUTHFULLY REPORT TAKES ON AN UNPRECEDENTED IMPORTANCE. THE SPECULATIVE AND OFTEN UNINFORMED INITIAL REPORTING THAT CHARACTERIZES OUR MEDIA APPEARS TO BE RAPIDLY BECOMING THE STANDARD OF THE INDUSTRY. AN ARAB PROVERB STATES - "Four things come not back: the spoken word, the spent arrow, the past, the neglected opportunity." ONCE REPORTED, YOUR ASSESSMENTS BECOME CONVENTIONAL WISDOM AND NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CHANGE. OTHER MAJOR CHALLENGES ARE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO BE MANIPULATED BY "HIGH LEVEL OFFICIALS" WHO LEAK STORIES AND BY LAWYERS WHO USE HYPERBOLE TO STRENGHTEN THEIR ARGUMENTS. YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCURATELY AND PROMINENTLY CORRECT YOUR MISTAKES AND YOUR AGENDA DRIVEN BIASES CONTRIBUTE TO THIS CORROSIVE ENVIRONMENT. ALL OF THESE CHALLENGES COMBINED CREATE A MEDIA ENVIRONMENT THAT DOES A TREMENDOUS DISSERVICE TO AMERICA. OVER THE COURSE OF THIS WAR TACTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT EVENTS HAVE BECOME STRATEGIC DEFEATS FOR AMERICA BECAUSE OF THE TREMENDOUS POWER AND IMPACT OF THE MEDIA AND BY EXTENSION YOU THE JOURNALIST. IN MANY CASES THE MEDIA HAS UNJUSTLY DESTROYED THE INDIVIDUAL REPUTATIONS AND CAREERS OF THOSE INVOLVED. WE REALIZE THAT BECAUSE OF THE NEAR REAL TIME REPORTING ENVIRONMENT THAT YOU FACE IT IS DIFFICULT TO REPORT ACCURATELY. IN MY BUSINESS ONE OF OUR FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS IS THAT "THE FIRST REPORT IS ALWAYS WRONG." UNFORTUNATELY, IN YOUR BUSINESS "THE FIRST REPORT" GIVES AMERICANS WHO RELY ON THE SNIPPETS OF CNN, IF YOU WILL, THEIR "TRUTHS" AND PERSPECTIVES ON AN ISSUE. AS A COROLLARY TO THIS DEADLINE DRIVEN NEED TO PUBLISH "INITIAL IMPRESSIONS OR OBSERVATIONS" VERSUS OBJECTIVE FACTS THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL CHALLENGE FOR US WHO ARE THE SUBJECT OF YOUR REPORTING. WHEN YOU ASSUME THAT YOU ARE CORRECT AND ON THE MORAL HIGH GROUND ON A STORY BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT RESPOND TO QUESTIONS YOU PROVIDED IS THE ULTIMATE ARROGANCE AND DISTORTION OF ETHICS. ONE OF YOUR HIGHLY REPECTED FELLOW JOURNALISTS ONCE TOLD ME THAT THERE ARE SOME AMONGST YOU WHO "FEED FROM A PIG'S TROUGH." IF THAT IS WHO I AM DEALING WITH THEN I WILL NEVER RESPOND OTHERWISE WE WILL BOTH GET DIRTY AND THE PIG WILL LOVE IT. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOUR STORY IS ACCURATE.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS WHAT OUR FOREFATHERS INTENDED. THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS STATES:
...PUBLIC ENLIGHTENMENT IS THE FORERUNNER OF JUSTICE AND THE FOUNDATION OF DEMOCRACY. THE DUTY OF THE JOURNALIST IS TO FURTHER THOSE ENDS BY SEEKING TRUTH AND PROVIDING A FAIR AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AND ISSUES. CONSCIENTIOUS JOURNALISTS FROM ALL MEDIA AND SPECIALTIES STRIVE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC WITH THOROUGHNESS AND HONESTY. PROFESSIONAL INTEGRITY IS THE CORNERSTONE OF A JOURNALIST'S CREDIBILITY

THE BASIC ETHICS OF A JOURNALIST THAT CALLS FOR:

1. SEEKING TRUTH,

2. PROVIDING FAIR AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AND ISSUES

3. THOROUGHNESS AND HONESTY

ALL ARE VICTIMS OF THE MASSIVE AGENDA DRIVEN COMPETITION FOR ECONOMIC OR POLITICAL SUPREMACY. THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS. WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME IS THAT YOU ARE PERPETUATING THE CORROSIVE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT IS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND KILLING OUR SERVICEMEMBERS WHO ARE AT WAR.

MY ASSESSMENT IS THAT YOUR PROFESSION, TO SOME EXTENT, HAS STRAYED FROM THESE ETHICAL STANDARDS AND ALLOWED EXTERNAL AGENDAS TO MANIPULATE WHAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SEES ON TV, WHAT THEY READ IN OUR NEWSPAPERS AND WHAT THEY SEE ON THE WEB. FOR SOME OF YOU, JUST LIKE SOME OF OUR POLITICIANS, THE TRUTH IS OF LITTLE TO NO VALUE IF IT DOES NOT FIT YOUR OWN PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS, BIASES AND AGENDAS.

IT IS ASTOUNDING TO ME WHEN I HEAR THE VEHEMENT DISAGREEMENT WITH THE MILITARY'S FORAYS INTO INFORMATION OPERATIONS THAT SEEK TO DISSEMINATE THE TRUTH AND INFORM THE IRAQI PEOPLE IN ORDER TO COUNTER OUR ENEMY'S BLATANT PROPAGANDA. AS I ASSESS VARIOUS MEDIA ENTITIES, SOME ARE UNQUESTIONABLY ENGAGED IN POLITICAL PROPAGANDA THAT IS UNCONTROLLED. THERE IS NO QUESTION IN MY MIND THAT THE STRENGTH OUR DEMOCRACY AND OUR FREEDOMS REMAIN LINKED TO YOUR ABILITY TO EXERCISE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS - I ADAMANTLY SUPPORT THIS BASIC FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY AND COMPLETELY SUPPORTED THE EMBEDDING OF MEDIA INTO OUR FORMATIONS UP UNTIL MY LAST DAY IN UNIFORM. THE ISSUE IS ONE OF MAINTAINING PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND STANDARDS FROM WITHIN YOUR INSTITUTION. MILITARY LEADERS MUST ACCEPT THAT THESE INJUSTICES WILL HAPPEN AND WHETHER THEY LIKE WHAT YOU PRINT OR NOT THEY MUST DEAL WITH YOU AND ENABLE YOU, IF YOU ARE AN ETHICAL JOURNALIST.

FINALLY, I WILL LEAVE THIS SUBJECT WITH A QUESTION THAT WE MUST ASK OURSELVES--WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE ETHICAL STANDARDS OF THE PROFESSION IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT OUR DEMOCRACY DOES NOT CONTINUE TO BE THREATENED BY THIS DANGEROUS SHIFT AWAY FROM YOUR SACRED DUTY OF PUBLIC ENLIGHTENMENT?

So, one might ask: Why did the Washington Post (and every other news outlet I have seen) not headline their story: "Former Iraq Commander Bitterly Denounces Mainstream Media's Coverage of Iraq War"? Or, perhaps, "Former Iraq Commander Accuses Biased, Unethical, Agenda-driven Press of 'Killing Our Servicemembers Who Are At War'"?

I guess the question answers itself. The Post has an agenda, and those headlines wouldn't have advanced it. The same is true for essentially all newspapers and other news outlets. It's quite a luxury to be able to decide whether criticisms of your own conduct ever see the light of day--a luxury the mainstream media not only enjoy, but abuse.

[jimnyc]

Honest to God....how many retired flag officers need to step up and slap you assholes across the face to get you to admit that this stupid stupid war is a idiotic endeavor?

Is there really any wonder left as to why you get attacked on this board? No provocation whatsoever here except from you.

[retiredman]

you are absolutely right, Jim. I am letting my frustrations build as some sort of continuum. I have watched over the years, as general after general has retired and spoken out about this president's handling of this war only to see, time and again, folks on here and elsewhere around the net, with nothing approaching the generals' military acumen, attack those generals, assail both their patriotism and their wisdom, and suggest that they had some ulterior motive for speaking out. I should have waited for that sort of condemnation to happen here and not merely presumed it and gotten angry at the presumptive response.

[82Marine89]

you are absolutely right, Jim. I am letting my frustrations build as some sort of continuum. I have watched over the years, as general after general has retired and spoken out about this president's handling of this war only to see, time and again, folks on here and elsewhere around the net, with nothing approaching the generals' military acumen, attack those generals, assail both their patriotism and their wisdom, and suggest that they had some ulterior motive for speaking out. I should have waited for that sort of condemnation to happen here and not merely presumed it and gotten angry at the presumptive response.

Isn't this the same general who was relieved of his command during the Abu Ghraib non-scandal scandal? Didn't that effectively cost him his fourth star? Do you think he might harbor some anger toward this administration?

[Gaffer]

There was a bit more to Sanchez's statement than has widely been reported:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/10/018743.php

Good find. I agree with him. The press is an important part of the war effort and they are failing miserably. I have said that for years. They are agenda and economically driven, in that order.

Sanchez wasn't Bush bashing. He was media bashing. There needs to be more of that.

[LuvRPgrl]

another leftist surrender monkey?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/gen-sanchez-ass.html


I can hardly wait for the koolaid soaked Bush butt lickers to start assailing the patriotism of THIS fine general.

Honest to God....how many retired flag officers need to step up and slap you assholes across the face to get you to admit that this stupid stupid war is a idiotic endeavor?

"America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.”

but internet chickenhawks with pocket protectors on here will claim that they know more about what is going on in Iraq than the former commander of our forces there.

You pom pom waving Bush lovers all make me so fucking sick I could puke.

SO, RETIRED generals are better leaders than CURRENT generals.

CHicken Hawks??? PAAAA LEASE
So, if one didnt serve in the armed forces, they should not have a say so in this issue?
Ok, then men shouldnt get to vote on abortion
Adults without school age kids shouldnt get to vote on education issues.
People who live in big cities shouldnt get to vote on enviormental issues in places like Alaska.

[LuvRPgrl]

you are absolutely right, Jim. I am letting my frustrations build as some sort of continuum. I have watched over the years, as general after general has retired and spoken out about this president's handling of this war only to see, time and again, folks on here and elsewhere around the net, with nothing approaching the generals' military acumen, attack those generals, assail both their patriotism and their wisdom, and suggest that they had some ulterior motive for speaking out. I should have waited for that sort of condemnation to happen here and not merely presumed it and gotten angry at the presumptive response.

So, why arent you harping on the Generals MAIN point, the problem with the press corps reporting on and in Iraq????

Things that make you go HMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[gabosaurus]

Why don't you try to get the link right bottom feeder.

Gotta love it :lmao:

[Kathianne]

another leftist surrender monkey?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/gen-sanchez-ass.html


I can hardly wait for the koolaid soaked Bush butt lickers to start assailing the patriotism of THIS fine general.

Honest to God....how many retired flag officers need to step up and slap you assholes across the face to get you to admit that this stupid stupid war is a idiotic endeavor?

"America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.”

but internet chickenhawks with pocket protectors on here will claim that they know more about what is going on in Iraq than the former commander of our forces there.

You pom pom waving Bush lovers all make me so fucking sick I could puke.

Not often that I post the same thing on different boards, but seems it's becoming de rigueur around these parts:



I can hardly wait for the koolaid soaked Bush butt lickers to start assailing the patriotism of THIS fine general.

and right on schedule:

Unfortunately the left got their first:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/082804Y.shtml


Army's Report Faults General in Prison Abuse
By Douglas Jehl and Eric Schmitt
The New York Times

Friday 27 August 2004

Washington - Classified parts of the report by three Army generals on the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison say Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the former top commander in Iraq, approved the use in Iraq of some severe interrogation practices intended to be limited to captives held in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and Afghanistan.

Moreover, the report contends, by issuing and revising the rules for interrogations in Iraq three times in 30 days, General Sanchez and his legal staff sowed such confusion that interrogators acted in ways that violated the Geneva Conventions, which they understood poorly anyway.

Military officials and others in the Bush administration have repeatedly said the Geneva Conventions applied to all prisoners in Iraq, even though members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban held in Afghanistan and Guantánamo did not, in their estimation, fall under the conventions.

But classified passages of the Army report say the procedures approved by General Sanchez on Sept. 14, 2003, and the revisions made when the Central Command found fault with the initial policy, exceeded the Geneva guidelines as well as standard Army doctrines...

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:1enDwgaXrh8J:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse+sanchez+abu+ghraib&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us&client=firefox-a


...[edit] Ricardo Sanchez

Documents obtained by The Washington Post and the ACLU show that the senior U.S. military officer in Iraq Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez authorized the use of military dogs, temperature extremes, reversed sleep patterns and sensory deprivation as interrogation methods in Abu Ghraib.[70] Also a November 2004 report by Brig Gen Richard Formica found that many troops, from the Abu Ghraib prison, were only following orders based on a memo from Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez and "[She] didn't find cruel and malicious criminals that are out there looking for detainees to abuse,".[71] "Gen Sanchez authorised interrogation techniques that were in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions and the army's own standards", ACLU lawyer Amrit Singh said in the union's statement.[72] In an interview for her hometown newspaper The Signal, General Karpinski claimed to have seen unreleased documents from Rumsfeld that authorized these tactic for Iraqi prisoners.[73] Both Sanchez and Rumsfeld have denied authorization....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/12/185224/75


Lying General creates smokescreen for himself
by profmarcus
Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 04:05:44 PM PDT

[cross-posted at And, yes, I DO take it personally]

robert parry reports on general ricardo sanchez' october 12 speech...



http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:NGxAAE8JZZkJ:iddybud.blogspot.com/2004_06_13_archive.html+kos+ricardo+sanchez&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=20&gl=us&client=firefox-a

[Gaffer]

Not often that I post the same thing on different boards, but seems it's becoming de rigueur around these parts:

First he's a villain, then he's a hero. Seems its all in how you take him out of context.

[JohnDoe]

But wasn't it determined that Sanchez was following the new orders from Rumsfeld that authorized these new, stonger, techniques used at Abu Graib? I believe soooo....?

Though this does not negate the fact that Sanchez could have denied the administration these requests and stuck by the Geneva convention....

[typomaniac]

Is there really any wonder left as to why you get attacked on this board? No provocation whatsoever here except from you.

Every other right-wingnut on this board who uses "liberals" in a sentence invariably uses a word like "assholes" somewhere in the same post as a synonym.

And they scream like 8-year-old girls when they get attacked.

[jimnyc]

Every other right-wingnut on this board who uses "liberals" in a sentence invariably uses a word like "assholes" somewhere in the same post as a synonym.

And they scream like 8-year-old girls when they get attacked.

Please point out to me the many threads started by conservatives where they start off a discussion by calling liberal members of this board assholes.

[actsnoblemartin]

exactly. :).


Please point out to me the many threads started by conservatives where they start off a discussion by calling liberal members of this board assholes.

[Black Lance]

To put the thread back on track: could someone please explain to me why we need to continue fighting in Iraq? Certainly it is possible to simply withdraw from the region if it suits or needs. There are plenty of other places that Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations can use as bases *cough * Iran *cough*, so why not judge pull out our ground troops and let the Iraqis have their idiotic civil war without us?

[retiredman]

First he's a villain, then he's a hero. Seems its all in how you take him out of context.

seems it might also have something to do with the fact that at first he was on active duty following orders of neocon suits in DC, and now he is retired and free to speak his mind.

[Kathianne]

seems it might also have something to do with the fact that at first he was on active duty following orders of neocon suits in DC, and now he is retired and free to speak his mind.

That's not what folks on the left said at the time, see the whole post.

[Gaffer]

To put the thread back on track: could someone please explain to me why we need to continue fighting in Iraq? Certainly it is possible to simply withdraw from the region if it suits or needs. There are plenty of other places that Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations can use as bases *cough * Iran *cough*, so why not judge pull out our ground troops and let the Iraqis have their idiotic civil war without us?

We need to leave iraq a stabilized self sufficient country when we leave there. There is NOT a civil war going on there. There is a proxy war with iran and syria. And a war with al qaeda. al qaeda already has iran and syria as supply bases. That's where their money comes from, along with material support. If you believe shea and sunni are not cooperating in this you better look again. syria and iran are allies and have sworn to support one another. syria is sunni and iran is shea.

[retiredman]

We need to leave iraq a stabilized self sufficient country when we leave there. There is NOT a civil war going on there. There is a proxy war with iran and syria. And a war with al qaeda. al qaeda already has iran and syria as supply bases. That's where their money comes from, along with material support. If you believe shea and sunni are not cooperating in this you better look again. syria and iran are allies and have sworn to support one another. syria is sunni and iran is shea.

I have a hard time believing that shiite persian Iran is providing money to arab sunni AQ. Do you have any proof of that?

Sryia's leaders are alawites, which makes the calculus a bit more complex, by the way. and I have no doubt that, regardless of their differences, arab syria and persian Iran both have a vested interest in making sure that Iraq does not turn into a blood bath.

[Yurt]

I have a hard time believing that shiite persian Iran is providing money to arab sunni AQ. Do you have any proof of that?

Sryia's leaders are alawites, which makes the calculus a bit more complex, by the way. and I have no doubt that, regardless of their differences, arab syria and persian Iran both have a vested interest in making sure that Iraq does not turn into a blood bath.

You are a fool. They have very similar ideology and goals, and yet you have a HARD time understanding and believing they have one common goal?

Dhimmi.

Learn it well, for BOTH ideologies will teach it to you.

[BoogyMan]

Here's another article..
Asked to say what strategy he would recommend, General Sanchez enumerated many of the points of the president's approach - train the Iraqi military, promote political reconciliation, build national institutions and work with Iraq's neighbors to get their support. But he said the administration has not synchronized the efforts of all U.S. government agencies or provided enough resources to pursue the strategy. And he says military commanders should have been given more authority to work on traditionally civilian issues, particularly early in the conflict.

read the rest...
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-12-voa62.cfm

Well done Stephanie, the good general has his own ideas, and what MFM will refuse to notice is that Sanchez voiced his views without the invective and dishonor that the left finds a standard tool of discourse.

Gen. Sanchez also had some choice words for the media, that have not yet seen the light of day in the left-wing press. Check out his commentary.

http://www.militaryreporters.org/sanchez_101207.html

Ouch, he spanked the media pretty hard, and what of that commentary in the left-wing cesspool that is the major media? ...crickets chirping...

[Gaffer]

I have a hard time believing that shiite persian Iran is providing money to arab sunni AQ. Do you have any proof of that?

Sryia's leaders are alawites, which makes the calculus a bit more complex, by the way. and I have no doubt that, regardless of their differences, arab syria and persian Iran both have a vested interest in making sure that Iraq does not turn into a blood bath.

It's been posted on here and multiple sites all over the place. The iranians are supporting al qaeda both in iraq and afghanistan. They are supporting the taliban, hizzbollah and hamas. There is not a terror organization that isn't tied to iran. Do a little research mr I lived in the middle east.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend applies very well here. It's no different then the US siding with the soviets during WW2. We didn't like them but we aided them against our common enemy. The same applies today with the shites and sunnis. This stuff is strategy 101. Both think that once the US is out they can over power the other.

There are a lot of complexities, but the one thing that is plain and simple is that iran is supplying everyone. iran could care less if there is a blood bath in iraq. It just makes things easier for them. It's what they do.

[retiredman]

It's been posted on here and multiple sites all over the place. The iranians are supporting al qaeda both in iraq and afghanistan. They are supporting the taliban, hizzbollah and hamas. There is not a terror organization that isn't tied to iran. Do a little research mr I lived in the middle east.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend applies very well here. It's no different then the US siding with the soviets during WW2. We didn't like them but we aided them against our common enemy. The same applies today with the shites and sunnis. This stuff is strategy 101. Both think that once the US is out they can over power the other.

There are a lot of complexities, but the one thing that is plain and simple is that iran is supplying everyone. iran could care less if there is a blood bath in iraq. It just makes things easier for them. It's what they do.

so...nothing to suggest thtat Iran is helping AQ other than your bloviating?

Let me know when there is something other than that to read. Beyond that, don't wast my time.

[red states rule]

EXCLUSIVE: Iraq Weapons -- Made in Iran?
Intelligence Officials Say Weapons Responsible for Increasing U.S. Deaths in Iraq

U.S. military and intelligence officials tell ABC News that they have caught shipments of deadly new bombs at the Iran-Iraq border.

They are a very nasty piece of business, capable of penetrating U.S. troops' strongest armor.

What the United States says links them to Iran are tell-tale manufacturing signatures -- certain types of machine-shop welds and material indicating they are built by the same bomb factory.

"The signature is the same because they are exactly the same in production," says explosives expert Kevin Barry. "So it's the same make and model."

U.S. officials say roadside bomb attacks against American forces in Iraq have become much more deadly as more and more of the Iran-designed and Iran-produced bombs have been smuggled in from the country since last October.


"I think the evidence is strong that the Iranian government is making these IEDs, and the Iranian government is sending them across the border and they are killing U.S. troops once they get there," says Richard Clarke, former White House counterterrorism chief and an ABC News consultant. "I think it's very hard to escape the conclusion that, in all probability, the Iranian government is knowingly killing U.S. troops."


'Very Lethal'
U.S. intelligence officials say Iran is using the bombs as a way to drive up U.S. casualties in Iraq but without provoking a direct confrontation.

John Negroponte, director of national intelligence, testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Feb. 2, saying, "Tehran's intention to inflict pain on the United States and Iraq has been constrained by its caution to avoid giving Washington an excuse to attack it."

The U.S. Army has embarked on a crash effort to find ways to stop the bombs, according to an unclassified report issued last month. The devices are easily hidden and detonated by motion detectors -- like those used in garden security lights -- that cannot be jammed.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1692347&page=1

[Yurt]

so...nothing to suggest thtat Iran is helping AQ other than your bloviating?

Let me know when there is something other than that to read. Beyond that, don't wast my time.

do you honestly believe that Iran would not work with AQ in their common goal:

the destruction of israel and the west

[manu1959]

so...nothing to suggest thtat Iran is helping AQ other than your bloviating?

Let me know when there is something other than that to read. Beyond that, don't wast my time.

where is AQ getting their weapons and equipment....

[Yurt]

where is AQ getting their weapons and equipment....

Hillary's hope chest?

[retiredman]

where is AQ getting their weapons and equipment....

are you suggesting that Iran is the only source? :laugh2:

[Kathianne]

are you suggesting that Iran is the only source? :laugh2:

and that would matter, why?

[retiredman]

do you honestly believe that Iran would not work with AQ in their common goal:

the destruction of israel and the west


I don't think that persian shiites and arab sunnis play well together regardless of the motivation.... and we have that added little wrinkle that you neglect to mention: AQ's REAL goal is the eliminatation of middle eastern Islamic nation states - like Iran.

[Gaffer]

are you suggesting that Iran is the only source? :laugh2:

You want to name another source?

[LuvRPgrl]

Every other right-wingnut on this board who uses "liberals" in a sentence invariably uses a word like "assholes" somewhere in the same post as a synonym.

And they scream like 8-year-old girls when they get attacked.

I do call liberals on PERSONAL attacks. There is nothing wrong with mean spirited attacks on a persons posistion or opinion.
Your assertation couldnt be farther from the truth. I do it all the time. I call a lib a lib and dont resort to calling them assholes.
Is that good enough for you, asshole??




(joke, joke, joke)

[Yurt]

I don't think that persian shiites and arab sunnis play well together regardless of the motivation.... and we have that added little wrinkle that you neglect to mention: AQ's REAL goal is the eliminatation of middle eastern Islamic nation states - like Iran.

At least you admit they could work together, even temporarily.

[retiredman]

At least you admit they could work together, even temporarily.

no. I don't

[Gaffer]

no. I don't

Because it would prove all your posts on here are wrong and you would never admit to being wrong if you said it yourself.

Your flat out, totally and completely WRONG. The saudis supply al qaeda with money while iran supplies the arms.They will fight to the bloody end with each other, but only after they have driven the western countries out of the ME. That is their mutual goal. After that they will fight to establish their caliphates. Winner takes all.

[Yurt]

no. I don't

yes you did.

[retiredman]

the saudis - arab sunnis who distrust the hell out of the Iranian persians, are joining with them to supply AQ with money and arms, even though AQ and OBL HATE the saudis and completely distrust the persian shiites?

what color is the sky in your world?

[Yurt]

the saudis - arab sunnis who distrust the hell out of the Iranian persians, are joining with them to supply AQ with money and arms, even though AQ and OBL HATE the saudis and completely distrust the persian shiites?

what color is the sky in your world?

what color is yours richard noggin?

[retiredman]

what color is yours richard noggin?

who asked you, dick head?

[Yurt]

who asked you, dick head?

from one who isn't smart enough to realize that "not play together well" necessarily means they are playing/working together. spineless waste of matter.

[Sir Evil]

from one who isn't smart enough to realize that "not play together well" necessarily means they are playing/working together. spineless waste of matter.

:laugh2::laugh2:

we knew that already but still funny.

[retiredman]

from one who isn't smart enough to realize that "not play together well" necessarily means they are playing/working together. spineless waste of matter.

from one who does not understand that "don't play well together" is an idiomatic expression, you may or may not have a spine, but you certainly don't have a very agile brain.

I was unaware I had to dumb the language down to My Weekly Reader style for you.

maineman can learn. maineman can learn that yurt is a moron. see maineman learn. learn maineman learn.

[Yurt]

from one who does not understand that "don't play well together" is an idiomatic expression, you may or may not have a spine, but you certainly don't have a very agile brain.

I was unaware I had to dumb the language down to My Weekly Reader style for you.

maineman can learn. maineman can learn that yurt is a moron. see maineman learn. learn maineman learn.

I understand you made an idiotic expression, no lesson necessary...

[Sir Evil]

I understand you made an idiotic expression, no lesson necessary...

Hey Yurt, you must first understand that the biggest liberal surrender monkey is the author of this thread, once that is understood you will see how easy things become idiotic when dealing with this turd.

[retiredman]

I understand you made an idiotic expression, no lesson necessary...


given your troglodytic brain, I realize no further lessons would be of any value.

do you LIVE in a yurt?

[Yurt]

Hey Yurt, you must first understand that the biggest liberal surrender monkey is the author of this thread, once that is understood you will see how easy things become idiotic when dealing with this turd.

tis true. He ain't got the sense that God gave a goose.

Then again, he doesn't play well with others....

[Sir Evil]

tis true. He ain't got the sense that God gave a goose.

Then again, he doesn't play well with others....

:laugh2:

yeah, kind of a board fact at this point.

[glockmail]

do you honestly believe that Iran would not work with AQ in their common goal:

the destruction of israel and the west


The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

All these mid-east assholes hate each other. But they hate us more, and hate jews more than anything.

[LuvRPgrl]

the saudis - arab sunnis who distrust the hell out of the Iranian persians, are joining with them to supply AQ with money and arms, even though AQ and OBL HATE the saudis and completely distrust the persian shiites?

what color is the sky in your world?
man oh man, are you mixed up.
1st, "Iranian persians" is totally redundent
Second, you are completely mixing groups up. You talk about religous groups, then countries, then a terrorist group, then a single person.

S Arabia is not a monolithic block regarding religion, nor is Iran.
AQ is not monolithic in ethnicities. Im sure there are Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, etc etc etc.
Your mixing of groups and then claiiming such and such group hates such and such group just doesnt work.

[retiredman]

1st, "Iranian persians" is totally redundent

oh really? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ethnic_groups_in_Iran

Second, you are completely mixing groups up. You talk about religous groups, then countries, then a terrorist group, then a single person.
that is because all of those issues are in play.

S Arabia is not a monolithic block regarding religion, nor is Iran.
The royal family of Saudi Arabia is sunni and they all practice a relatively moderate form of wahabbism. The population of Saudi Arabia is overwhelmingly sunni. Iran, while not ALL persian or shia - as shown above, is overwhelmingly so, and the leadership of Iran is entirely so.
AQ is not monolithic in ethnicities. Im sure there are Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, etc etc etc.I would like to know how you can be so sure as to the presence of persian shiites in an extremist group founded by sunni arabs.
Your mixing of groups and then claiiming such and such group hates such and such group just doesnt work.
what DOES work is the fact that arabs have degrees of loyalty that expand outward and to become degrees of animosity. first family, then clan, then sect. animosity becomes more severe as one moves further outward. sunnis hate shiites, but they hate them less than they do Jews.

As I said, it is nonsensical to imagine that Saudi Arabia - who expelled OBL and is vehemently opposed to his brand of extremist wahabbism - would provide HIM or his organization with any substantive support. It is also nonsensical to imagine that the shiite persian leadership of Iran would provide substantive assistance to sunni arabs in Iraq who are battling shiite arabs in Iraq. Sadr and other shiite warlords are getting the assistance from Iran - NOT AQ.

[Gaffer]

1st, "Iranian persians" is totally redundent

oh really? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ethnic_groups_in_Iran

Second, you are completely mixing groups up. You talk about religous groups, then countries, then a terrorist group, then a single person.
that is because all of those issues are in play.

S Arabia is not a monolithic block regarding religion, nor is Iran.
The royal family of Saudi Arabia is sunni and they all practice a relatively moderate form of wahabbism. The population of Saudi Arabia is overwhelmingly sunni. Iran, while not ALL persian or shia - as shown above, is overwhelmingly so, and the leadership of Iran is entirely so.
AQ is not monolithic in ethnicities. Im sure there are Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, etc etc etc.I would like to know how you can be so sure as to the presence of persian shiites in an extremist group founded by sunni arabs.
Your mixing of groups and then claiiming such and such group hates such and such group just doesnt work.
what DOES work is the fact that arabs have degrees of loyalty that expand outward and to become degrees of animosity. first family, then clan, then sect. animosity becomes more severe as one moves further outward. sunnis hate shiites, but they hate them less than they do Jews.

As I said, it is nonsensical to imagine that Saudi Arabia - who expelled OBL and is vehemently opposed to his brand of extremist wahabbism - would provide HIM or his organization with any substantive support. It is also nonsensical to imagine that the shiite persian leadership of Iran would provide substantive assistance to sunni arabs in Iraq who are battling shiite arabs in Iraq. Sadr and other shiite warlords are getting the assistance from Iran - NOT AQ.

It's nonsensical to assume that just because to groups hate each other that they won't work together against a common enemy.

Just because bin laden is exiled from saudi arabia does not mean there are not supporters of him there sending him the funds he needs. If iran can get money from sunni al qaeda do you actually believe they won't sell them arms to use against us just because they don't like them.

bin ladens son has been hiding out in iran. They claimed he was on "house arrest". If they hate his kind so much why is he alive?

As usual you want to look at things from a simple point of view when its much more complicated and interwoven.

[glockmail]

....
what DOES work is the fact that arabs have degrees of loyalty that expand outward and to become degrees of animosity. first family, then clan, then sect. animosity becomes more severe as one moves further outward. sunnis hate shiites, but they hate them less than they do Jews.

As I said, it is nonsensical to imagine that Saudi Arabia - who expelled OBL and is vehemently opposed to his brand of extremist wahabbism - would provide HIM or his organization with any substantive support. It is also nonsensical to imagine that the shiite persian leadership of Iran would provide substantive assistance to sunni arabs in Iraq who are battling shiite arabs in Iraq. Sadr and other shiite warlords are getting the assistance from Iran - NOT AQ. As usual talking out both sides of your fat sorry ass. True all ragheads hate each other and hate jews most of all. But they also hate America (just like you liberals) and will form alliances with each other to fight jews and back-stab americans.

[retiredman]

As usual talking out both sides of your fat sorry ass. True all ragheads hate each other and hate jews most of all. But they also hate America (just like you liberals) and will form alliances with each other to fight jews and back-stab americans.

so let me get this straight: the saudi's who rely on American petrodollars for their very existence, are going to join up with their mortal enemies, the persians, to fight their meal ticket?

[glockmail]

so let me get this straight: the saudi's who rely on American petrodollars for their very existence, are going to join up with their mortal enemies, the persians, to fight their meal ticket? They can find another outlet for their oil.

[retiredman]

OK. I just wanted to clarify that I had correctly summarized your position.:laugh2:

[glockmail]

OK. I just wanted to clarify that I had correctly summarized your position.:laugh2: So you admit that you're full of shit then.

[retiredman]

of course not. I just wanted to make sure that I had summarized and memorialized your total lack of knowledge about Islam, arabs, persians, and the middle east. ANd I was able to do just that.

:lol:

[retiredman]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/28/washington/28weapons.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

it would appear that the Bush administration does not really agree with your "Through the Looking Glass " view of foreign affairs!

[Gaffer]

of course not. I just wanted to make sure that I had summarized and memorialized your total lack of knowledge about Islam, arabs, persians, and the middle east. ANd I was able to do just that.

:lol:

All I've seen from you is your total lack of understanding of the middle east and arabs and your dhimmitude.

want to learn about islam and the ME, try these sites.

http://jihadwatch.org/

http://www.antimullah.com/

http://www.thememriblog.org/

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/be-not-afraid.htm

[glockmail]

of course not. I just wanted to make sure that I had summarized and memorialized your total lack of knowledge about Islam, arabs, persians, and the middle east. ANd I was able to do just that.

:lol:
As usual, the exact opposite is true.:coffee:


By the way, douchebag, when you neg-rep me, having your below zero rep, nothing happens. I suspect the same thing happens when you have sex with a woman. You put out all your effort and she feels nothing.

But then that would explain why you're more interested in butt-sex with guys. :lol:

[retiredman]

actually, I gave you positive reps.... not negative ones...but I realize full well they don't count for anything. It was still positive in the spirit in which it was intended.

And like I said earlier...for you to suggest that Iran and Saudi Arabia are going to band together to attack the United States is.... well...from my perspective....not accurate.

One would wonder why american administrations for decades have been providing Saudi Arabia with giant military aid packages. I think you need to go warn them! tell them to stop!!!!:laugh2:

[glockmail]

actually, I gave you positive reps.... not negative ones...but I realize full well they don't count for anything. It was still positive in the spirit in which it was intended..... Negative, postive, push, pull, ill intentions- whatever. Just like the men you choose to have butt-sex with, I feel nothing.

[retiredman]

your vile personal and completely erroneous attacks on me are good for a laugh. Thanks. Wait til my wife hears that you are back and posting again! She loves to read your weird rants at me. We sometimes share a glass of port after dinner sitting in front of the laptop in the downstairs den just chuckling at your apparently frantic obsession with me. Please do keep it up. I am not sure that you want to be a source of humorous entertainment for us, but then, I really don't think you care one way or the other. So it really is sort of symbiotic, isn't it? You obviously get to release all that pent up sexually repressed aggression you have on me, instead of on those around you, and my wife and I get to enjoy a post prandial giggle.:clap:

[glockmail]

By the way my dogs ripped apart a deer that wandered onto the property the other night and I had to shoot the poor thing. So when are you coming to visit me like you threatened to during our last PM?

[glockmail]

your vile personal and completely erroneous attacks on me are good for a laugh. Thanks. Wait til my wife hears that you are back and posting again! She loves to read your weird rants at me. We sometimes share a glass of port after dinner sitting in front of the laptop in the downstairs den just chuckling at your apparently frantic obsession with me. Please do keep it up. I am not sure that you want to be a source of humorous entertainment for us, but then, I really don't think you care one way or the other. So it really is sort of symbiotic, isn't it? You obviously get to release all that pent up sexually repressed aggression you have on me, instead of on those around you, and my wife and I get to enjoy a post prandial giggle.:clap:

I’m getting an image of two overweight, acne-scarred, hairy Neanderthals holed up in a dank house full of beat up furniture and urine stained carpets, staring into a computer screen with toothless grins, sweating.

[retiredman]

maybe someday when you least expect it! But do keep on posting!

[retiredman]

I’m getting an image of two overweight, acne-scarred, hairy Neanderthals holed up in a dank house full of beat up furniture and urine stained carpets, staring into a computer screen with toothless grins, sweating.

that's good. go with it.... really feel it.... expand that into something really hate filled.... make it long and involved. We'll hurry through dinner just to read it!:lol:

[glockmail]

maybe someday when you least expect it! But do keep on posting! The dogs are always hungry, but not for the poison "treats" that you planned on tossing over to them. :lame2:

[retiredman]

I am quite friendly with dogs. I like dogs a lot. I am sure I would love to meet yours someday.....

keep your fingers crossed!

[glockmail]

The deer was quite friendly, and they were glad to meet her as well. Of course I may have less compassion with two-legged intruders, and simply turn up the volume to drown out the wimpering.

[retiredman]

you keep a light on for me....you'll never know when I might be driving by!

but DO keep up the sick and twisted, homoerotic, thinly veiled autobiographical rants. Great stuff! really!

[glockmail]

you keep a light on for me....you'll never know when I might be driving by!
....

Sorry, no lights outside the house, as I like to keep the place dark. So bring a flashlight. It will make a nice target.

[Yurt]

your vile personal and completely erroneous attacks on me are good for a laugh. Thanks. Wait til my wife hears that you are back and posting again! She loves to read your weird rants at me. We sometimes share a glass of port after dinner sitting in front of the laptop in the downstairs den just chuckling at your apparently frantic obsession with me. Please do keep it up. I am not sure that you want to be a source of humorous entertainment for us, but then, I really don't think you care one way or the other. So it really is sort of symbiotic, isn't it? You obviously get to release all that pent up sexually repressed aggression you have on me, instead of on those around you, and my wife and I get to enjoy a post prandial giggle.:clap:

Now that is facking weird!

[actsnoblemartin]

Over the line. :slap:


Negative, postive, push, pull, ill intentions- whatever. Just like the men you choose to have butt-sex with, I feel nothing.

[glockmail]

Over the line. :slap: Not in context.

[actsnoblemartin]

Fair enough.

Im not mad at you or anything. And ive been talking to other on the board about calming down. So please dont take what i said as a personal insult or anything ok. I think youre a great person. :clap:


Not in context.

[Yurt]

Fair enough.

Im not mad at you or anything. And ive been talking to other on the board about calming down. So please dont take what i said as a personal insult or anything ok. I think youre a great person. :clap:

Ok mother goose :laugh2:

[typomaniac]

Fair enough.

Im not mad at you or anything. And ive been talking to other on the board about calming down. So please dont take what i said as a personal insult or anything ok. I think youre a great person. :clap:

Well, I think he's a human piece of garbage. :2up:

[glockmail]

Well, I think he's a human piece of garbage. :2up: Coming from a slice of pig fat as yourself, I'll take that as a compliment.

[typomaniac]

Coming from a slice of pig fat as yourself, I'll take that as a compliment.

Don't you know anything? Pig fat RULES!!
http://onewholeclove.typepad.com/one_whole_clove/images/bacon

[glockmail]

Don't you know anything? Pig fat RULES!!
http://onewholeclove.typepad.com/one_whole_clove/images/bacon The fat is what got drained from the bacon into the waste bucket.
:laugh2:

[typomaniac]

The fat is what got drained from the bacon into the waste bucket.
:laugh2:

God, how creative. :lame2: even for you.

[LuvRPgrl]

1st, "Iranian persians" is totally redundent

oh really? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ethnic_groups_in_Iran]
Thanks for the link that proves YOU WRONG. I dont see the term PERSIAN in there anywhere.


Second, you are completely mixing groups up. You talk about religous groups, then countries, then a terrorist group, then a single person.
that is because all of those issues are in play. ]

So what, you still cant compare them to each other.


S Arabia is not a monolithic block regarding religion, nor is Iran.
The royal family of Saudi Arabia is sunni and they all practice a relatively moderate form of wahabbism. The population of Saudi Arabia is overwhelmingly sunni. ]
Overwhelmingly? Still irrelevant. You cant compare the relationships of two types of groups, a terrorist group and a country, or a relgion, etc.

Iran, while not ALL persian or shia - as shown above, is overwhelmingly so, and the leadership of Iran is entirely so.
AQ is not monolithic in ethnicities. Im sure there are Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, etc etc etc.I would like to know how you can be so sure as to the presence of persian shiites in an extremist group founded by sunni arabs.]
Herein lies your problem, Reading comprehension. Show where I stated there are Persian Shites in AQ

Your mixing of groups and then claiiming such and such group hates such and such group just doesnt work.
what DOES work is the fact that arabs have degrees of loyalty that expand outward and to become degrees of animosity. first family, then clan, then sect. animosity becomes more severe as one moves further outward. sunnis hate shiites, but they hate them less than they do Jews.]
Yea? and who doesnt?


As I said, it is nonsensical to imagine that Saudi Arabia - who expelled OBL and is vehemently opposed to his brand of extremist wahabbism - would provide HIM or his organization with any substantive support. It is also nonsensical to imagine that the shiite persian leadership of Iran would provide substantive assistance to sunni arabs in Iraq who are battling shiite arabs in Iraq. Sadr and other shiite warlords are getting the assistance from Iran - NOT AQ.][/QUOTE]
and its non sensical to believe that he couldnt have gotten some support from some individuals, or organizations in Saudi Arabie

give it up, U R getting your ass kicked...or are you mashocistic?

[LuvRPgrl]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/28/washington/28weapons.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

it would appear that the Bush administration does not really agree with your "Through the Looking Glass " view of foreign affairs!

You are such a fucking idiot. You go and post links that give us support on our posistion.
"The Bush administration is preparing to ask Congress to approve an arms sale package for Saudi Arabia and its neighbors that is expected to eventually total $20 billion at a time when some United States officials contend that the Saudis are playing a counterproductive role in Iraq."
which is exactly what Gaffer and I stated.

[LuvRPgrl]

so let me get this straight: the saudi's who rely on American petrodollars for their very existence, are going to join up with their mortal enemies, the persians, to fight their meal ticket?

Do your really believe your own shit?
Your contentions are so simplistic in a complex issue.

You know America and England supplied the Finns with arms to fight the Russians at the beginning of WWII, and then later supplied the Russians with arms in the very same war.

Point is, Saudi Arabia is doing a very fine balancing act, and are supporting AQ as much as they can without totally destroying their relationship with us. I have read that over and over and over in so many places, and often from liberals. And its also not to say, that much of SA support of AQ doesnt have to come directly from the govt. Its easy in that region to funnel money and never be able to figure out where it came from. Go drink some more port, I think you need it,

[Gaffer]

Do your really believe your own shit?
Your contentions are so simplistic in a complex issue.

You know America and England supplied the Finns with arms to fight the Russians at the beginning of WWII, and then later supplied the Russians with arms in the very same war.

Point is, Saudi Arabia is doing a very fine balancing act, and are supporting AQ as much as they can without totally destroying their relationship with us. I have read that over and over and over in so many places, and often from liberals. And its also not to say that much of SA support of AQ doesnt have to come directly from the govt. Its easy in that region to funnel money and never be able to figure out where it came from. Go drink some more port, I think you need it,

I have to spread the rep around before giving it to you again. :salute:

[retiredman]

Do your really believe your own shit?
Your contentions are so simplistic in a complex issue.

You know America and England supplied the Finns with arms to fight the Russians at the beginning of WWII, and then later supplied the Russians with arms in the very same war.

Point is, Saudi Arabia is doing a very fine balancing act, and are supporting AQ as much as they can without totally destroying their relationship with us. I have read that over and over and over in so many places, and often from liberals. And its also not to say that much of SA support of AQ doesnt have to come directly from the govt. Its easy in that region to funnel money and never be able to figure out where it came from. Go drink some more port, I think you need it,

Of COURSE there is a difference between the Saudi people and the Saudi government. Given the fact that Saudi Arabia is the home of wahabbism, as well as the bin Laden family, I am sure that AQ gets support in many ways from certain factions of the people of SA. Not, however, from the government of SA. And not from the government of Iran....

[LuvRPgrl]

Of COURSE there is a difference between the Saudi people and the Saudi government. Given the fact that Saudi Arabia is the home of wahabbism, as well as the bin Laden family, I am sure that AQ gets support in many ways from certain factions of the people of SA. Not, however, from the government of SA. And not from the government of Iran....

BALONEY. I guess you did go have some more Port.

Didnt you read what I said about US supplying two opposing countries? That was the US GOVT. those things happen all the time

The part about funneling money is in reference to the govt, who else would want to hide their status as supporting AQ? Do you honestly think that the entire Saudi govt is a monolithic block of integrity?

Of course not. Im sure there are many AQ supporters in there who manage to funnel funds/arms and other support.

You dont think any of the Saudi govt officials are not funneling military information to AQ?
IF you do, then please tell me who manufactured the bubble you live in, they did a magnificent job for it to last this long.

[typomaniac]

I have to spread the rep around before giving it to you again. :salute:

I think it's too late to earn more votes just by desperately stroking the penis of partisanship. :(

[LuvRPgrl]

I think it's too late to earn more votes just by desperately stroking the penis of partisanship. :(


name calling. The sign of a defeated man with a weak arguement.

[glockmail]

name calling. The sign of a defeated man with a weak arguement.
Not to mention the self-flaggelation aspect of it. Perhaps that's how he consoles himself with his loss.

[actsnoblemartin]

wow, this thread has hit a new low.

All we need is jerry springer, and were set :lol:

[typomaniac]

wow, this thread has hit a new low.

All we need is jerry springer, and were set :lol:

Glockmail can do that to any thread. It's his special gift. :laugh: