Originally Posted by fightingirishgirl4life
You are speaking about globalists and republican corporatists not liberals, dems or progressives.
The race to the bottom is sponsored by Walmart.
Senior Member
You are speaking about globalists and republican corporatists not liberals, dems or progressives.
The race to the bottom is sponsored by Walmart.
Senior Member
hmmm maybe I should start posting really stupid shit and see what it does for my rep.......
Bush is one of the lizard people!!!
(give me some rep!!!)
Senior Member
Right-there are no democrat corporatists involved. Still can't let go of that partianship can ya ?
A nutcase will do nutty things.
Senior Member
The only two demo corporatists i know of are named Clinton. Whereas the ideology has been promoted by the GOP for 30 years.Right-there are no democrat corporatists involved. Still can't let go of that partianship can ya ?
I was responding to a rabidly partisan post.
Senior Member
Let me help you here a bit
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/09/1071/
http://www.counterpunch.org/mokhiber06162006.html
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/...ocrats-in.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/25/142943/110
A nutcase will do nutty things.
Senior Member
Thanks DD, that was a big help in understanding how the dems have become so imbedded with Pres supplemental budget without limits, passed his original use of force authorization and generally whoosed out almost universally for the last 6 years.
The dems don't stand for anything but republican light these days. I knew Hillary and Lieberman weren't real dems. Maybe most of them are some new hybrid.
Wherefore art thou, Lily?
And they certainly aren't Liberals. Liberals support the troops in the best way possible: they want to bring them home.
Gunny's nightmare
Yet most would rather stay where they are and finish their job.
Wherefore art thou, Lily?
And the numbers say you are completely wrong:
linkThe American military — once a staunch supporter of President Bush and the Iraq war — has grown increasingly pessimistic about chances for victory, according to the 2006 Military Times Poll.
For the first time, more troops disapprove of the president’s handling of the war than approve of it. Barely one-third of service members approve of the way the president is handling the war.
When the military was feeling most optimistic about the war — in 2004 — 83 percent of poll respondents thought success in Iraq was likely. This year, that number has shrunk to 50 percent.
Only 35 percent of the military members polled this year said they approve of the way President Bush is handling the war, while 42 percent said they disapproved. The president’s approval rating among the military is only slightly higher than for the population as a whole. In 2004, when his popularity peaked, 63 percent of the military approved of Bush’s handling of the war. While approval of the president’s war leadership has slumped, his overall approval remains high among the military.
Just as telling, in this year’s poll only 41 percent of the military said the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place, down from 65 percent in 2003. That closely reflects the beliefs of the general population today — 45 percent agreed in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll.
When you lose the support of the military who is fighting your war, you lose period.
Just Me
Liberals like you support partisan political victory at the expense of this nation. Doesn't matter to you what's in our best interest so long as you can claim some usually sorry-ass and despicable "W" in the "D" column.
No troop I ever knew of besides the usual 10% of whom I am sure YOU belonged EVER considered being pulled off a mission before it was complete as being supported in ANY way.
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
Gunny's nightmare
There is a difference between having a difference of opinion and not wanting to do their job. Unlike you and your lib buddies, our troops have honor and sense of duty, and they want to stay and finish their jobs.
Ain't I a sweety? HEH HEH
That is correct---in a way. Their job is to follow orders, for Good, bad, or indifferent. That doesn't necessarily mean that they think their orders are right.
Who else is as much a Bush-basher as I???
An Italian Confusious Say: "He who throwist mud, losith ground"
Wherefore art thou, Lily?
Their job is to stay alive and get home. If you think it is anything else in this conflict you are seriously deluded.
Me and my Liberal friends SERVED our country unlike you and your chickenhawk buddies who never saw a war they didn't like but never found the time to actually do any of the fighting. The sense of honor and duty comes from fighting for an honorable cause, not referreeing a civil war.
Senior Member
What kind of ignorant statement is that ? Their job consists of way more than staying alive. Show them some respect by giving them credit for the incredible amount of work they do.Their job is to stay alive and get home.
A nutcase will do nutty things.
Wherefore art thou, Lily?
Your partisan attitude has blinded you to the truth of this war, Gunny, and it's really sad to see. Your Boy George sees that he is losing this conflict all the way around now and is bringing back the big Boogieman to scare us all: Osama bin Laden. After stating that he doesn't know where he is and doesn't care because he is irrelevant and ignoring him for years, he now brings him up 11 times in one speech and tries to salvage a failed policy of a failed war in a failed presidency. The only sorry ass and despicable position is that of failed leader and the morons who still march in lockstep to the Stay The Course drumbeat.
You are too stupid to see there is no victory in this war. Getting our troops home alive is our only victory. The Endless War on terrorism has begun and you are totally clueless to our real position. You keep sitting there cheering for victory when in reality the only choices are War Continues or War Ends.
You could never have been more wrong but then that's par for the course for your blindly partisan dumbass self. Who are you going to believe more: me or a troop in the field? You are going to believe a troop in the field, of course. So do I.
linkBAGHDAD — Staff Sgt. David Safstrom does not regret his previous tours in Iraq, not even a difficult second stint when two comrades were killed while trying to capture insurgents.
“In Mosul, in 2003, it felt like we were making the city a better place,” he said. “There was no sectarian violence, Saddam was gone, we were tracking down the bad guys. It felt awesome.”
But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When they searched the bomber’s body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.
“I thought: ‘What are we doing here? Why are we still here?’ ” said Sergeant Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the First Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. “We’re helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us.”
His views are echoed by most of his fellow soldiers in Delta Company, renowned for its aggressiveness.
How many deployments will be enough Gunny? How many times do we recycle troops thru the war before they come back ruined and worthless to the defense of our country? How long do you cut corners on their medical benefit to further fund the war? How long do you refuse to bring replacement weaponry into the conflict because your budget doesn't call for it and further risk the lives of more troops? How long do you continue to fight a war on the cheap that doesn't kill vast numbers of our troops but makes them mentally worthless after a half dozen tours in the war further reducing the capability to defend our own borders? How long, Gunny?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote