Alaska Darin Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I suppose if you actually conveyed your OWN opinions backed up by facts and at least a decent knowledge of history and an eye on the overall big picture instead of your MTV/Air America/Fahrenheit 911 pablum you've continually puked up here you wouldnt be constantly derided. 371355[/snapback] There is that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 You guys crack me up. Disagree with your opinion and you get attacked and insulted. Typical radicals. Some of you think so highly of yourselves , either you have an incredible inferiority complex that needs constant messaging or you truly believe that a small group of you ppp board posters are so "tuned in" and always correct that our entire government should consult with you before making any decisions. And you all seem to do the same thing you accuse everyone else of... you critisize without offering any solutions or outline in detail what you would do different other than general concepts. Thanks for the laughs. 371348[/snapback] Gee, just because we've been over this same ground for three years running, you'd think we'd want to discuss it even further with a new pinhead who unthinkingly regurgitates sound bytes he doesn't understand and can't support... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Gee, just because we've been over this same ground for three years running, you'd think we'd want to discuss it even further with a new pinhead who unthinkingly regurgitates sound bytes he doesn't understand and can't support... 371379[/snapback] And that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Gee, just because we've been over this same ground for three years running, you'd think we'd want to discuss it even further with a new pinhead who unthinkingly regurgitates sound bytes he doesn't understand and can't support... 371379[/snapback] I guess he didnt believe it a few pages ago, or years ago. Friggin Masochist!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 this obsession you have with Kirk/Picard was funny at first but now its just getting disturbing. you and EC got a little too much manlove for James T 371295[/snapback] But....such a nice toupe....and he saved the whales too...both of them... What are you trying to say? You haven't figured out how to undermine the guy who always has all the hot chicks around? Maybe not. The hottest thing Piccard ever saw was Data's head after three mezcal shooters. While he was quoting French poetry, Kirk would be banging Consellar Troi. Advantage Kirk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 But....such a nice toupe....and he saved the whales too...both of them... What are you trying to say? You haven't figured out how to undermine the guy who always has all the hot chicks around? Maybe not. The hottest thing Piccard ever saw was Data's head after three mezcal shooters. While he was quoting French poetry, Kirk would be banging Consellar Troi. Advantage Kirk. 371408[/snapback] Very astute observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reuben Gant Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 One thing that bothered me about the speech last night, is when Bush resorts to the suggestion that the blood of those killed will all be in vain if the mission is not completed. (I forget the exact wording) But the logic seems to progress something like this, the blood of those that have died justify that we keep fighting. That is not a justification for what needs to be done it is an appeal to sentiment. I was opposed to the war, but at the same time think a hasty pull-out could be a tragedy. I didn't hear what I wanted to, which was what are the conditions which define success to him the Com. in Chief. If it is not a timeline, which I am not demanding, at least what are the conditions in terms of resistance, a constitutional threshold, or something a little more substancial than "when they stand up, we'll stand down." I am cynical, yes, and at the same time I hear the ghost of LBJ's vietnamization program, which may not be a fair comparision, but it is what I hear. I want to know the end-game. Wasn't that the part of the Powell doctrine - to have clearly defined parameters for success. To me, as a person listening to that speech, and deeply concerned about what is happening there, and who gets sent there, I was hoping he was going to cut through the mission creep and hone it down to at least conditions that I could say, okay, "if that happens, there is the potential that some good will come of it all." It is perhaps the logical positivist in me that also does not buy the transformation of the middle-east argument. Mostly because it is not easily verifiable: I would like to believe that a free Iraq will transform the mid-east, but I don't think even if we are very successful that corruption won't quickly settle into Free Iraq. His speech I thought was unsatisfying. I wasn't angry. I just felt sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 You guys crack me up. Disagree with your opinion and you get attacked and insulted. Typical radicals. Some of you think so highly of yourselves , either you have an incredible inferiority complex that needs constant messaging or you truly believe that a small group of you ppp board posters are so "tuned in" and always correct that our entire government should consult with you before making any decisions. And you all seem to do the same thing you accuse everyone else of... you critisize without offering any solutions or outline in detail what you would do different other than general concepts. Thanks for the laughs. 371348[/snapback] Honestly, it would have gone better for you if you'd made sense.........like even once or twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 ...I want to know the end-game. Wasn't that the part of the Powell doctrine - to have clearly defined parameters for success. ..." 371418[/snapback] The Powell doctrine wasn't followed. Rumsfeld and the neo cons had other ideas on how things should be done. At least that's the take I got from the PBS Frontline special of Rumsfeld's War. Linky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 One thing that bothered me about the speech last night, is when Bush resorts to the suggestion that the blood of those killed will all be in vain if the mission is not completed. (I forget the exact wording) But the logic seems to progress something like this, the blood of those that have died justify that we keep fighting. That is not a justification for what needs to be done it is an appeal to sentiment. I was opposed to the war, but at the same time think a hasty pull-out could be a tragedy. I didn't hear what I wanted to, which was what are the conditions which define success to him the Com. in Chief. If it is not a timeline, which I am not demanding, at least what are the conditions in terms of resistance, a constitutional threshold, or something a little more substancial than "when they stand up, we'll stand down." I am cynical, yes, and at the same time I hear the ghost of LBJ's vietnamization program, which may not be a fair comparision, but it is what I hear. I want to know the end-game. Wasn't that the part of the Powell doctrine - to have clearly defined parameters for success. To me, as a person listening to that speech, and deeply concerned about what is happening there, and who gets sent there, I was hoping he was going to cut through the mission creep and hone it down to at least conditions that I could say, okay, "if that happens, there is the potential that some good will come of it all." It is perhaps the logical positivist in me that also does not buy the transformation of the middle-east argument. Mostly because it is not easily verifiable: I would like to believe that a free Iraq will transform the mid-east, but I don't think even if we are very successful that corruption won't quickly settle into Free Iraq. His speech I thought was unsatisfying. I wasn't angry. I just felt sad. 371418[/snapback] I read what you wrote. I sometimes feel sad too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 At least the libs here haven't used the latest dem parrot word: quagmire. The only quagmire is the one in the brains full of mush that the dems in congress have. Nancy "Runaway Bride" Pelosi actually used the word Iraqization today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 You guys crack me up. Disagree with your opinion and you get attacked and insulted. Typical radicals. Some of you think so highly of yourselves , either you have an incredible inferiority complex that needs constant messaging or you truly believe that a small group of you ppp board posters are so "tuned in" and always correct that our entire government should consult with you before making any decisions. And you all seem to do the same thing you accuse everyone else of... you critisize without offering any solutions or outline in detail what you would do different other than general concepts. Thanks for the laughs. 371348[/snapback] No, just a part of the government consults with me before they make decisions about things like this. Not the whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 But....such a nice toupe....and he saved the whales too...both of them... What are you trying to say? You haven't figured out how to undermine the guy who always has all the hot chicks around? Maybe not. The hottest thing Piccard ever saw was Data's head after three mezcal shooters. While he was quoting French poetry, Kirk would be banging Consellar Troi. Advantage Kirk. 371408[/snapback] talking to you and EC is like trying to discuss evolution to pat robertson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shameless Homer Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 At least the libs here haven't used the latest dem parrot word: quagmire. The only quagmire is the one in the brains full of mush that the dems in congress have. Nancy "Runaway Bride" Pelosi actually used the word Iraqization today! 371612[/snapback] I caught the "Iraqization" line too. Listen to Kennedy, Pelosi, Harkin and so on and you get the Democrats plan for the next 3 years. Iraq as Vietnam. No matter how far fetched (the numbers are off to the tune of 50 -1, no Communism fear, etc) the parallel is the new Democrat mantra. It is absolutely remarkable what one political party is willing to lie about, exaggerate about or spin to eviscerate the other party in power. And both parties do it. There is simply too much money controlled by politicians in our country. It is at the root of all the dissention between the parties. It's not at all about the dead soldiers and the freedom they fought and died for. It's who will retain or capture the political power and therefore the money, the very, very big money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 No, just a part of the government consults with me before they make decisions about things like this. Not the whole thing. 371664[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Great, then why are all our resources in IRAQ! 370921[/snapback] Are you really this stupid or did you just forget your coffee this morning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Then let Israel take care of their part of the globe... and THEIR enemies, we'll take care of ours. Oh wait, it's political... ok forget it. 371019[/snapback] Oh, but see, we can't do that, because then we'd be repressing the poor Muslims. You really ARE a nit-wit, aren't ya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 nucular? 371076[/snapback] Oh the delicious irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 For anyone wanting to know the "end game" or exact exit strategy, have you ever played the game RISK? Try playing while spelling out your exact strategy to your opponents and see if you win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 For anyone wanting to know the "end game" or exact exit strategy, have you ever played the game RISK? Try playing while spelling out your exact strategy to your opponents and see if you win. 371757[/snapback] but...but...but....Americans have a right to know!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts