Quite simply, the fever-swamp areas of the Dhimmicratic Party appear to be suffering from a mass psychosis---although unlike what Freud did with Woodrow Wilson, I cannot state that as absolute fact without talking to the delusional lefties on a one-on-one basis.

It appears that a large segment of self-proclaimed Democrats suffer from double-digit IQs [though they'll be quick to deny native intelligence exists], dependence on drugs or alcohol, a need for a safety-net nanny-state to compensate for their career incompetence, plus a defective moral and public education. My guess is that a large portion are avowed atheists or agnostics.

I know I'm being hurtful, judgmental and non-compassionate, but these people deserve a long detox from their usual intake of bad food, drink, drugs and reading materials/porn films.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.06.07 - 9:44 pm | #

It's ok to judge, as long as you have judged yourself first. I think people misunderstand the verse in the bible that states "Judge not, that ye be not judged?"

These type of people are buffoons and they should be ridiculed relentlessly with no mercy for their idiocy. If you ask me, we don't judge enough.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.06.07 - 10:52 pm | #

I've got nothing specific on this post. You're just such a frickin genius. I'd go vegetarian (not vegan, nothing's worth that) to have a tenth the analytical and rhetorical skill you have.

Best regards,
Truman
A. Truman North | Email | Homepage | 09.06.07 - 11:33 pm | #

These people don't direct their concern toward our real enemies because it doesn't satisfy their need to feel somehow special and ultra-informed compared to the societal norm.

Nobody notices them with their pain and general dissappointment with life if they blend too easily with the simply obvious.
SteveH | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:09 am | #

It appears that a large segment of self-proclaimed Democrats suffer from double-digit IQs [though they'll be quick to deny native intelligence exists], dependence on drugs or alcohol, a need for a safety-net nanny-state to compensate for their career incompetence, plus a defective moral and public education. My guess is that a large portion are avowed atheists or agnostics.

yet another thread where the good doctor diagnosises others with the very form of neurotic psychological phenomenon she herself suffers from. what a unique opportunity it is to see this psychosis at work in real-time on the internet.
jay k. | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 10:41 am | #

The Bush Crime Family is indeed the greatest threat to our nation at this time. You are self-deluded.

We all knew he was a lying piece of filth long before he stole the White House.

Not only a compulsive liar, Bush is ignorant and uncaring as to consequences and cultures, who recklessly stirred the pot of chaos in that area of the world and wound up commiting numerous war crimes, endangering the national security of the United States and creating more anti-American terrorists all around the globe. He also will be remembered as the president who, in the name of bringing democracy to the world, trampled it at home.

Go drink some more of his kool-aid, you fools.
Tom Shefchik | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 10:46 am | #

And had Bush only redirected his anger towards real enemies, we wouldn't be in the quagmire we see in Iraq now.

Our president is the king of neurotic denial, no wonder it's sweeping the nation.
Reluctant Republican | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 10:52 am | #

Is the anger misplaced? None of the enemies -- and I certainly would not call any of those listed as friends -- have done as much harm to the US as the administration of George W Bush.

*Iran didn't take away habeas corpus
*Syria has never destabilized an entire region, despite efforts to do so
*North Korea never spied on US citizens without warrant or cause, never detained US citizens for daring to speak out against this president nor stolen any US elections
*Al Qaida never killed as many American Citizens as President Bush has in his disastrous, illegal, and immoral war against a country that never threatened us, a country he knew beforehand had no WMDs nor any link to Al Qaida

So, yes. If you think that Bush is the Greatest Leader Ever, you won't understand the anger. Those of us who think that Bush has done more to destroy America and what it stands for than any of those enemies listed above, feel that our anger is not only justified, but a necessary step in trying to correct all the things Bush has done wrong.

As the bumper sticker says, "If you aren't outraged, you aren't paying attention."
Vir Modestus | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 11:15 am | #

That bumper-sticker should read, "If you are outraged, you're suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome," which a couple of the trolls are above.

From their bad spelling, atrocious writing, and spooky grammar, these libtards betray their defective education.

From their hysterical hyperventilating expostulations, they obviously believe that Bush's efforts to defend the USA is a greater evil than the terrorism being waged against America by deranged violent reactionary religious psychos.

By doing so, these fever-swampers unconsciously take sides with Al Qaeda and Hamas/Hezbollah fanatics supported, aided and abetted by Syria and Iran.

Judging from their spelling [it's Kool-Ade, dunce] and hilarious exaggerations, they are obviously dancing on that fine line between outright insanity & mere neurasthenic self-medicated delusionary la-la-land.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 11:39 am | #

From 2005: "47 percent believe that Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001" (http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/ index.asp?PID=544)

Which highly neurotic psychological defense mechanism was responsible for that?
PunditGuy | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 11:47 am | #

PunditGuy--which scenario do you think is more likely:

Bush planned and implemented 9/11

or

Saddam helped plan and support the 9/11 terrorists.

How you answer that question determines for me if you are verging on the psychotic, or are considering a reasonable explanation.
LLB | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 11:52 am | #

I know I am presenting evidence to people who cannot process evidence, but WTH:

*Iran didn't take away habeas corpus

Yes, I noticed my local police stealing into homes every night in my neighborhood hauling people off to jail. (large sarcasm)

*Syria has never destabilized an entire region, despite efforts to do so

Huuh..do you remember last summer; I'm sure the people in Israel do.

*North Korea never spied on US citizens without warrant or cause, never detained US citizens for daring to speak out against this president nor stolen any US elections

If you believe PRNK doesn't have spies in the US, then there really is no help for you. Again, the police just recently stormed into our local diner and arrested some friends who didn't like Bush (even more large sarcasm)


*Al Qaida never killed as many American Citizens as President Bush has in his disastrous, illegal, and immoral war against a country that never threatened us, a country he knew beforehand had no WMDs nor any link to Al Qaida

I seem to recall SH issuing money to any suicide bomber's family if they hit US or Israeli citizens..not much a threat there. Oh..did you hear about the chem vials just discovered in the UN and tracked to have come from... yep, Iraq, just around 2002 I believe. How many US citizens were killed on 9/11? I guess they don't count. For my part, I think body counting is repulsive, Just watching the Daniel Pearle video should be enough to convince any *sane* person that we are facing with some very ruthless people who need to be dealt with.
MM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:14 pm | #

I've gotten stuck behind the SUV in the cartoon! That two-lane backroad along Santiago Canyon in Orange County! Lots of times!

And something I've noticed about the car with all the "BUSHITLER STOLE THE ELECTION!" stickers. It's ALWAYS a top-of-the-line luxury SUV or Bling-Hummer or Beemer or Benz or the like that costs more than my house. (I'm just waiting to get stuck behind the Ferrari or Maserati with all the Champion of the Proletariat bumper stickers...)
Headless Unicorn Guy | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:14 pm | #

llb...
what kind of false choice is that? it's just this type of worthless logic that has gotten us to a place where we are forced to waste lives and bundles of cash in order to protect ourselves from our own mis-guided policies. and if your policies and arguments are based on faulty logic and half-truths and hyperbole and straw-men, then just how good are your policies or arguments?
jay k. | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:16 pm | #

its not a choice that I present. Those are two supposed "facts", like

the moon is made of green cheese

or

the moon is made of rocks similar to Earth's.

Which statement would you rationally consider (both may be false, but if you even consider the first one for more than a moment and don't laugh, your sanity is in question.
LLB | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:29 pm | #

Vir, Jay K., Tom et al:
ROTFLMFAO!

You MUST all be the products of our vaunted Publik Skool IndoKKKtrinayshun Sistum™ or you are the unlucky spawn of stupid parents and the recipients of stupid parenting.

Your day [ours, really] is going to come -- start learning how to use a weapon, if you have the stomach for it.
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:35 pm | #

Jake

Your comebacker is worthy of your other contribution---totally worthless! Face the fact that we are confronting an enemy that is attempting to blow us all into smithereens before literally enslaving us while dragging off our women into concubinage.

Of course, I speak and read Arabic and worked in several US embassies as a political officer in the Middle East, so what do I know?

Read Jeffrey Goldberg [a New Yorker writer] in his book Prisoner. Probably way above your literacy level, which probably thinks the NYT is the end-all for truth.

The New York Times and its pilot fish serve up "faulty logic and half-truths and hyperbole and straw-men" as the daily fodder for deluded half-educated ninnies like yourself.

You are just unread on the Middle East and don't understand the underlying menace that we confront.

And greatest insult of all you probably think like a lawyer, which proves your education is defective vis-a-vis foreign policy.

You and the silly cavalcade of Al Qaeda apologists infesting the blogosphere are a Fifth Column of craven cowardice, wishful thinking & half-baked Marxist tropes mouthing outdated silliness.

Move to Canada and make America a better and safer place to live in.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:36 pm | #

"Judging from their spelling [it's Kool-Ade, dunce] and hilarious exaggerations, they are obviously dancing on that fine line between outright insanity & mere neurasthenic self-medicated delusionary la-la-land."

No it's not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kool-aid

Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Reluctant Republican | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:40 pm | #

I'm sorry, but noone needs to see a bumpersticker to understand that we should despise bin-laden. It's not controversial, and would be a waste of time to argue for something we all agree on.

GWB, however, IS controversial, and people have every reason to try to point out what they think is right or wrong about him.

So get off your high horse and find something real to bitch about,
ME | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:43 pm | #

forget their atrocious spelling...it's their logic that's much funnier and more appropriate to mock.
LLB | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:44 pm | #

Reluctant Moby,

The spelling is not germane to this debate. What is germane is your willingness to drink it all up, ask for seconds and then deny you have partaken.

If it acts, speaks and smells like a troll ...
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:48 pm | #

"Face the fact that we are confronting an enemy that is attempting to blow us all into smithereens before literally enslaving us while dragging off our women into concubinage."

And you are saying that LEFTIES exaggerate things?

If you actually fear those things coming true, (other than the fact that it's hard to enslave someone you've blown to bits) you truly are paranoid and delusional.

I'm sorry someone has tried to scare you so much that you actually believe them.
ME | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:48 pm | #

ME, I see.

So next time a patient comes in saying that the CIA has implanted electrodes in his brain and is monitoring his thoughts, I should empathize with him because his comments are "controversial"?

You can like GWB or not, I don't give a flying F***. But when you start comparing his behavior with REAL PSYCHOPATHS like Bin Laden and Saddam, you bet your sweet bippie I have a problem with your cognitive processes. That is at best completely hysterical, and at worse totally paranoid and delusional.

I really am beginning to think that BDS should be included in the DSM...there are far more people who are disabled by this pathology than some other diagnoses that are already included.
Dr. Sanity | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 12:51 pm | #

Get in line, Dr. Hanity -

Before including your BDS invention, shouldn't we at least consider BOD (belief in an omnipotent diety)?

Maybe it falls under delusional disorder...
DavidCyrus | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:09 pm | #

The comparison between Bush and psychopaths began with that cartoon. A favorable comparison thats seems to imply that since Bush isn't as awful as those other guys, he doesn't deserve any criticism.

If there's any logic tying the two halves of that idea together, I'd like to hear it explained. You can find much at fault with our current president without the comparison, and it's fine American tradition to point such things out on back of your vehicle, or damn well wherever you like.

God Bless America!
Reluctant Republican | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:10 pm | #

empathize with? who said anything about empathy?

It's a good thing for GWB that all those really bad guys out there provide an excuse for his own psychopathic behavior. When you are responsible for, and don't care about, ruining thousands of lives, be it by bombs or by legislation, you are a psycopath. Just because you choose to rationalize GWB's actions, doesn't make their effects any less harsh.

All the right-wing body-counts of Saddam's brutal regime include the deaths of soldiers in the Iran-Iraq war, so, using the same "logic", I can include Americans killed in Iraq under GWB's death toll. Hey, it's your (the right wing's) logic.

For a psychologist, your emotional response to these statements and poor reading comprehension are surprising. For a right-winger, they are not. I'm just surprised you don't notice the inherent contradictions of your own philosophy.

Your self righteousness and holier-than-thou attitude are fun to mirror though.
ME | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:11 pm | #

You leftards are just simply incredible. Spin and twist, twist and spin.

Having fun on your little merry-go-rounds yet?

Spin on this you ugly leftard Americans

....................../??/)
....................,/?..//
.................../....//
............./??/'...'/???`??
........../'/.../..../......./??
........('(...?...?.... ?~/'...')
.........................'......../
.........''............... _.??
...........................(
...........................
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:21 pm | #

Am I the only one who noticed that cartoon doesn't mention Iraq at all?

I totally agree we SHOULD direct our anger at our enemies.

So then someone explain why we're not looking for Bin Laden? Or why we're letting the Taliban regain their foothold in Afghanistan? Or why we're not mad at Saudi Arabia (where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from)?

Oh that's right - because we're busy stretching our armed forces to the breaking point in a country that had zero to do with 9/11, and where we have no exit strategy, and where they've done nothing as a country to pull their own weight. All because Bush and his anti-American neocon frauds like Addington are literally WISHING for another terrorist attack on American soil so they can attain their political goals.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:25 pm | #

So Dr. Sanity, why was my post taken down?

Too much reality for you?

Please explain.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:33 pm | #

Whoops. My bad. Maybe next time I'll hit "reload."
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:33 pm | #

"when you start comparing his behavior with REAL PSYCHOPATHS like Bin Laden and Saddam, you bet your sweet bippie I have a problem with your cognitive processes. That is at best completely hysterical, and at worse totally paranoid and delusional.

I really am beginning to think that BDS should be included in the DSM...there are far more people who are disabled by this pathology than some other diagnoses that are already included."

Brava senora! People like ME & other craven cowards who think defending values is bad because they themselves have no values to speak of make me alternately laugh & cry. I lived in Lebanon, Saudi, and Egypt speaking and reading their language as an FSO.

I saw the result of Clinton's turning a blind eye to the first WTC hit in '93 and overlawyering our national security with "firewalls" erected by DAG Jamie Gorelick & her swamp-creature boss more concerned with privacy than defending the US from attack. And the attack came, same place as in '93. And the investigation of this attack was hindered by the NSC Advisor to Clinton Sandy Berger going into the National Archives and stealing & destroying the ORIGINAL Memos with annotations.

What don't half-wits like ME understand about the feckless cowardly shirking of responsibility the previous administration committed?

And why is Bush so severely chastised for "unilateral" intervention in Iraq when Clinton went into Bosnia without UN approval?

Could there be a colossal double-standard mentality so egregiously stupid, unethical, irresponsible and immoral that the demented legions of Kossacks, Puffingtons, and schizos like ME simply must be regarded as worthy only of scorn & derision? Not suitable for civil discourse?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Meanwhile Jamie Gorelick is preparing for her nomination as Hillary's Attorney General, rumor has it.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:36 pm | #

dave in boca...
what you aren't grasping is that a psychopath like bin laden got cheney and bush to do EXACTLY what he wanted them to do. i'm not sure what you call the pawns of a psycopath...but that is what bush is. i'll stand by for your definition.
jay k. | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:39 pm | #

I'm sorry. I'm trolling your site, I should be more straight forward.

None of those enemies listed above -- and I never said they weren't enemies -- can destroy the US, no matter how many planes they fly into however many buildings. Only Americans can destroy America. And the fact that anyone who dares to disagree with any of you here is called a "libtard" and worse, just goes to show who hates America -- and Americans -- more. It ain't the left, folks.

"Your day [ours, really] is going to come -- start learning how to use a weapon, if you have the stomach for it."

Sorry, but your day came 7 years ago when an activist and partisan court gave the country over to Bush. It has been all his show all the time until January of this year, and the country is pretty well screwed up because of it. You had your day. Now it is up to the left to clean up after you. Per usual.
Vir Modestus | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:39 pm | #

Que MattM to come forth spewing every single leftist meme known to man-kind. You and you lefty dribblers or so pathetic! You and your ilk make me so sick I want to literly puke. As someone said up the thread - why don't you leftards move the hell out of America and make this a better and safer country.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:40 pm | #

I over-reacted, but back in my day, the cite Reluctant linked also notes:
"This powder was named Kool-Ade..." First, I distrust wiki and second, dislike govt. regs, so perhaps this was unconscious overcompensation?
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:41 pm | #

Que Jack Ryan to try and discredit the messenger without actually answering any of the salient points I made...
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:44 pm | #

Actually, Jay K, Bin Laden APOLOGIZED to the Taliban leadership in Afghanistan for getting "cheney and bush to do EXACTLY what he wanted them to do" and the AQ in Iraq is now getting pounded by SUNNI Muslims who are finally realizing that they can't work with violent reactionary religious psychos like UbL & the Al Qaeda crime ring.

But that would be actually talking about events on the ground, which lefties avoid because FACTS are their greatest enemy.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:46 pm | #

You call yourself a "messenger"? Ha!! Well hells-bells MattM, when your off gathering up more of your "messages" don't forget to give OBH a big fat sloppy one while your at it.

Jerk.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 1:58 pm | #

Oh, by calling memes "salient points" is the same as putting lip-stick on a pig.

Idiot.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:00 pm | #

MattM:

Most of your points don't rise to the level of being worthy of discourse material. But let me educate you on one bit of trivia you probably won't understand, judging from your track record.

"why we're not mad at Saudi Arabia (where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from)?"

Actually, the fifteen "Saudi" hijackers were of Yemeni origin & descent. I was internal political affairs officer in Saudi and could give you a long dissertation on how the Treaty of Taif in 1930 took away almost all of Yemen [Prince Faisal conquered Sana, not that I expect you to know where that is] and left about three million Yemenis living in Saudi Arabia. During the '90-91 War, the enterprising Yemenis had ALL their businesses confiscated in Saudi because they were suspected of siding with Saddam in the invasion of Kuwait---a Fifth Column so to speak of quislings [I know this is close to the bone to Matt M, faced with his own identity problems]. So the Yemenis had, in addition to their irredentist drive to get their homeland turned back into Yemen, a desire to punish Saudi Arabia.

Osama bin Laden is of Yemeni descent and can best be understood as a Yemeni nationalist, who wishes to punish the Saudis.

Libtards are falling into his REAL trap, which is to blame the Saudis, because the hijackers were carrying SAG passports, for the 911 disaster.

And advance his own agenda, which is to "liberate" the northern part of Yemen [Irish parallel, anyone?] from Saudi rule.

This contains too many facts for the factually-challenged libtards to digest, as I noted above.

While blaming Bush & Cheney for their success in liberating Afghanistan & turning Iraqi Sunnis against AQ, the libs, in their ceaseless imbecility and moral degeneration, are urging us to attack our ally Saudi Arabia.

Juan Cole may be a fraud and an impostor, but he does have facts [which he usually ignores] in making an argument.

Of course, Jay K and Matt M come to this thread with a quiver full of glow-lights & wet noodles, simply out of their depth and aggressively trying to improve their self-absorbed conscience which secretly is aware of their serial cowardice, disloyalty, and, last but not least, encyclopedic ignorance of the subjects they talk about.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:03 pm | #

Jack, now you're just proving my point.

Thanks,
Matt
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:03 pm | #

So while I don't have time to actually research Daveinboca's rebuttal, at least he gave me one to one of my point.

That's more than I could say for poor Jack Ryan - who'd lose a debate with a 4-year-old.

So Dave, care to answer my other points? Since OBL was the mastermind behind 9/11, why isn't he the focus of our military? Why is he still at large? Why did Bush say (and I'm paraphrasing) "You know, he really doesn't concern me."?
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:09 pm | #

"That's more than I could say for poor Jack Ryan - who'd lose a debate with a 4-year-old."

LOL. So what, you're saying you're a 4 year old? Was I debating you? Crimeny pete man, get a friggin' clue. The ONLY reason jerkoffs like yourself come here and try to start "debates" is because of your lunatic obsession with beating dead horses.

I learned the hard way, never, EVER, try and debate with a leftist. It is thee purest form of futility one can ever experience.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:22 pm | #

Please Jack, do go take a good long puke. The toxic level of vitriol in your system can't be good for your health. Maybe all the hateful, traitorous leftards- as you like to call them-will go away after while and you, your compatriots and Dr. Sanity can safely find recourse in the unassailed comfort of your own equally unhinged delusions.

R.Mutt
R. Mutt | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:23 pm | #

"I learned the hard way, never, EVER, try and debate with a leftist."

That's because you always lose. Reality is a bitch that way, Jack.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:28 pm | #

Let's all come together to demand that our presidential candidates spend more time debating terrorism instead of Oprah and the missing Fred.

From these humble beginnings we can make a difference!
americafirst | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:43 pm | #

LOL The Doc does the left a service again, concentrate on our enemies? Like Syria, you mean the Syria that is cleaning up our Iraq mess? The Syria that that has allowed 1.5 million Iraqi refugees into their country? What about China who is arming Iran? Why don't take them on? Cause we can't that's why, one thing about you pukes you always go for the little because your natural bullies and cowards, but please don't ever change you us "leftards" a favor every time you open your mouths.
And oh Jack Ryan do you want Larry Craigs number or something (no I do not knowit) you seem really fixated on getting your finger? or something up some guys ass.
MnKatz | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:49 pm | #

"And the fact that anyone who dares to disagree with any of you here is called a "libtard" and worse, just goes to show who hates America -- and Americans -- more. It ain't the left, folks."


LOL! This one actually made me chuckle. Ever read DailyKos, the Huffington Post, DU? Yeah, that name-calling thing doesn't happen at these sites.

Nice to see the usual drive-by libs from Salon showing up...
Steve | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 2:51 pm | #

"Since OBL was the mastermind behind 9/11, why isn't he the focus of our military? Why is he still at large? Why did Bush say (and I'm paraphrasing) "You know, he really doesn't concern me."?"

Bush's statement refers to the fact that at the time [and even today], on an OPERATIONAL level UbL is a diversion from the main task. He really is more of a Colonel Sanders than anything else.

And if Afganistan, the military is preoccupied with insurgents in AFGHANISTAN. You have overlooked the fact that UbL is in Pakistan, and we are having serious problems with Mushareff giving us incursion rights into that country. He might lose his job or incite an insurrection in Lahore or Karachi---two cities I visited on several occasions teeming with Islamic radicals waiting for a Mushareff misstep. I myself have been to Pakistan a dozen times, though only once to Peshawar.

And Matt, I suggest you get a copy of Sir Olaf Caroe's The Pathans [MacMillan, New York, 1965] and turn to pp. 390-412 for Chapter xxiv entitled "Waziristan." with an insert fold-out map. Sir Olaf spoke fluent Urdu, Pushtu, and the Waziri dialect and was last British Commissioner of the N.W. Frontier Territories before Midnight, August 15, 1847.

Sir Olaf notes that despite two dozen invasions through the Khyber in recorded history, not one has been able to penetrate Waziristan [invasions from the east, ditto]. He goes down the list from Alexander the Great to the Durrani Afghanis to the British to the Pakistanis. No one. They are "indian country" on steroids.

Even today, with black helicopters so feared by libtards [only FACTS frighten them more], the Waziris have decided to shelter UbL and his tiny entourage and their dialysis equipment. Because he sought their hospitality more than he's paying them big bucks---the only argot Americans seem to understand and the reason UbL slipped away from Tora Bora.

No one has ever penetrated this enclave about the size of Vermont/NH and the rocky landscape defies any large-scale military operation. Even Green Beret-Army Ranger-Navy Seal type operations cannot penetrate the linguistic/ethnic fastness of the Waziri heartland.

Despite silly adult-wannabe Obama & his shallow vapid chest-thumping, the operation would require precision and assets beyond belief and life and treasure not worth the cost. But Dhimmi-crats are more interested in multi-culti kumbayeh gibberish and only pose as being interested in national security and force projection.

Remember that Jimmy Carter rescue operation in Iran? I did a screenplay/script/scene project with Tom Capra, son of Frank and legendary founder of ABC Evening News and 20/20.
CBS TV wanted a TV movie of the fiasco. Never came to be shot. I bring this up because a rescue operation in Waziristan would be ten times or more of the bungled eff-up Jimmy so typically engineered. Thank God George Bush is smarter than Jimmy Carter---not that that's saying much!

But since I'm 65, I can't get around as much. Why don't you volunteer to go to Afhanistan, which even libtards have to admit has been successful [hiccups from Taliban poppy-lords to the contrary notwithstanding] and put my suspicions about your fortitude to rest?

Or maybe you're hooked on a mental variant of Afghanistan's most exported physical product?

"Reality is a bitch that way" is why libtards hate local knowledge or, in the case of Juan Cole, purposely ignore the aspects of local knowledge that obstruct their agenda---defeat and submission.

I suggest that your "reality" is a deformed construct between your ears, MattM, and you should break out some books and get up to speed with on the ground facts, which are much more stubborn than libtard memes---endlessly repeated.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 3:11 pm | #

Now why would anyone imagine that Bush "Let it happen"?

Oh, nevermind.
MyPetGloat | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 3:18 pm | #

Dave, are you saying we CAN'T get ObL?

Nice way to support our troops. I think that qualifies as giving comfort to the enemy.

Why do you hate America so much?
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 3:57 pm | #

Never one with that rare ability to gamble the rest of my life on one step, political admiration walked out the door once power waswith the bush, held open and splayed by vain stupidity. I would sincerely like to embrace notions of deep meaning, leavened with the instant rice of informed social convention, yet find my self stranded, gape-mouthed, eyes akimbo, staring goose-like at that big rock candy mountain vanilla dollop of existential grab-assing with business partners, nankers, and profiteers of a conservative, nee, selfish demeanor, cut from a cloth both tattered and mollusk scented.

Some where out there run the gazelles of my idealistic humanism, stomachs swollen as they are with the earnest anticipation of even fouler digestive volition masquerading as “compasionate consevatism”, as I admit to myself, as if anybody ever cared, of my complicity, yeah, my cowardice in the face of candy-assed home field advantage granted at the point of a ballot box by numbskulls subseviant to the lord and lardasses.

All this because I dream of eating sandwiches on the train, sax bellowing in intense, ad-hoc, race horse piss-off meanderings, intergalactic sausages wrapped around the vertical column of the same, as I defy the extra gravity of the situation, desperate to recycle, along with the fish, chickens, and vegetables I grew up with, admixtures and there waste products.
Carl Gordon | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:12 pm | #

"libtard"

That has to be one of the most childish sounding epithets I've ever heard.

I think is says a lot about the person saying it.

Also, it's fun to watch people like Jack consume themselves with hate. I just hope they don't go postal one day!
angryflower | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:14 pm | #

It's a sad commentary on those who believe it, and a common phenomena. At one point in the Clinton presidency, some ridiculous percent of Republicans believed all sort of nonsense regarding the Clinton's murdering people. A significant percent of those who are not in power have a habit of resorting to paranoid theories to describe the world around them. I'm a Democrat and have these sorts of arguments with my WIFE, for crying out loud: she's one of those who believe that Bush let it happen! Lots of people think WMDs were found in Iraq and that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 (wrong, wrong), lots of people thing that Cheney fought this war for Halliburton (wrong), and some large part of our country would not be able to find Iraq on a map, even if it was colored differently. These survey results and general cluelessness bum me out because people VOTE these mis-beliefs (whether Democrat or Republican), and that's when paranoia and silliness get dangerous.

Anyway, I recognize that there is a lot of invective on both sides on this board, and I'll reach out to my Republican colleagues by saying "yeah, we got just about as many dummies than you guys do". Too bad there's more of us around these days, for you guys. But that's another argument. Have a good weekend, fellas.
hastingspete | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:38 pm | #

I too was mystified by the cartoon. Since it obviously requires so many presumptions to make sense, no wonder these posts from both sides have sunk to the level of kindergarten playground brawl. Bush admits that he made fatal mistakes in Iraq and in the war on terror. Liberals also want us to focus on the war on terror, to kill Bin Laden, to neutralize Al Quaida -- but, like nearly 3/4ths of America, we consider the job far too important to leave in the hands of the failed Bush administration. It's beyond time for impeachment and change, for the sake of the country.
psmarc93 | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:40 pm | #

daveinboca...
what does an apology to the taliban have to do with facts on the ground?
the bottom line...and this is not even arguable..is that we are in iraq because cheney and bush did exactly what ubl wanted them to, and we cannot leave because of their policies based upon this provoked and unnecesary over-reaction. in other words...today we are spending blood and treasure not because of any threat real or imagined- but only because cheney and bush chose to invade iraq. you say aqi is getting pounded. they didn't exist to pound until we attacked. you will say that if we leave there will be chaos. that problem was caused by our invasion. you will say if we leave the conflict will spill over to the region. that problem was caused by our invasion. and my own biggest concern is that when we finally do leave iraq will inevitably be closely aligned with iran. and that is because of our invasion.
and yet the people who blindly support the people who made the mistake of putting us in this position without options call those who question them delusional.
jay k. | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:46 pm | #

Shorter Dr. sanity:
Republicans should never be held accountable for their screw-ups.

Otherwise, good to see the Dr. come out against mob mentality.
Too bad he's 5 years too late.
Robert | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:55 pm | #

What is Carl Gordon talking about?
Please tell me it's some kind of satire!
librarygryffon | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:58 pm | #

You keep using that word, but I do not think it means what you think it does, Robert.

Oh, btw: pronoun trouble.
Patrick Chester | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:58 pm | #

Sorry, but your day came 7 years ago when an activist and partisan court gave the country over to Bush.

... but, like nearly 3/4ths of America, we consider the job far too important to leave in the hands of the failed Bush administration. It's beyond time for impeachment and change, for the sake of the country.

"libtard"

That has to be one of the most childish sounding epithets I've ever heard.

I think is says a lot about the person saying it.

Also, it's fun to watch people like Jack consume themselves with hate. I just hope they don't go postal one day!
angryflower | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 4:14 pm |

Sorry to ruin your fun my little angryflower but, I am not consumed with hate. No, far from it. I am consumed with family, music, love, and patriotism dear one.

But what the hey, projection can be a real neat hobby dontcha think?

~~~

Hey Carl, I understand that your post is a work in progress. Perhaps if you only could channel Ginsburg a little better you might just get the damn thing finished - finally.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:16 pm | #

gang of one...
describe winning? because what bush called winning he no longer calls winning. what do you call winning?
jay k. | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:17 pm | #

Since we are fighting an ideology and not a nation-state actor, I cannot tell you that winning is as we have done in previous conflicts; the unconditional surrender of the enemy and cessation of hostilities.
Winning is a matter of destroying the fascist ideology that is militant Islamism, supporting the nascent democracies in the ME [and elsewhere], introducing free-markets, securing our national interests.
I'll tell you what winning is not: it is not cutting and running, it is not giving in to political correctness, it is not negotiating with those who have no other desire than convert or kill us whilst destroying the only real democracy in the region. It is not endless posturing. It is on the order of ending the threat, as we did with Nazism, Fascism and Imperialism. Maybe a nuke or two would get their attention. It sure got the attention of the Japanese, neh?
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:26 pm | #

What do you call winning, Jay?
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:27 pm | #

what horrible, horrible people you far-righties are. all bluster and hate. have you looked in the mirror lately? or ever?
literalisp | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:31 pm | #

what horrible, horrible people you far-righties are. all bluster and hate. have you looked in the mirror lately? or ever?

literalsip: LOL. Thanks for the chuckle.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:33 pm | #

I'm a far-righty? Jack, are you a far-tighty too? LOL!
I thought I was just a fed up American whose patience with the anti-Americans has worn soap-bubble thin.
I hate no one that wishes me no harm. I tolerate no one who wishes to threaten me, and I tolerate even less those who minimize or fail to see the threat.
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:38 pm | #

and jack, you really take the cake. (though dave gives you a real run for your money, and the good doctor is no slouch either.) i suspect even most of your likeminded republidrone allies secretly roll their eyes at your every post.

so keep up the excellent work! if you only realized that what you do, principally, is make the democrocks look good by comparison--quite a feat.
literalisp | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:38 pm | #

wow, i'm just floored by the "i'm rubber, you're glue" debating skills. yawn. wake me up when someone says something.
literalisp | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:41 pm | #

Thank you Mssr. lowercase. Can my cake be chocolate? "i'm rubber, you're glue"....wha?

~~~~

Yeppers I'm a Faaaar rightie too Gang of One - LOL. Youbetcha. The boys in the band would find that one preeety damn amusing.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:52 pm | #

Everybody’s lookin’ in the mirror, an’ it’s a gang thang!

Founding fathers, tell us you’re not rolling over in your graves!
americafirst | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:56 pm | #

Lisp,

You offer nothing, I repeat: nothing, to debate.

Go away. Go to sleep. You and your ilk have been asleep for too damn long.
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 5:59 pm | #

"Winning is a matter of destroying the fascist ideology that is militant Islamism..."

What Gang of Dumb fails to realize is that the more we fight, the more we breed that fascist ideology that is militant Islamism.

So by always staying the course and fighting until we "win", we're actually losing.

But I'm sure Gang of Dumb doesn't care about that. Just like the thousands of American lives he doesn't care about sacrificing just to try and prove he was right.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:08 pm | #

Clinton turns out to be a much better President than I thought he was.
I always thought he was a crappy President (roving wiretaps, that horrific 1996 Immigration Act, etc.). Not Reagan bad, but bad nonetheless.

Then I read here that he ignored terrorism throughout his presidency.

Yet he stopped the millenium attacks, the airport attacks and the UN attack (to name 3).
And he brought the original WTC bombers to justice.

W couldn't stop the WTC attacks even though he had been warned about them a month earlier.

Hindsight being 20/20, I'd like to apologize to Mr. Clinton for thinking he was such a terrible President.

He's obviously too good at his job to be a Republican.
Robert | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:20 pm | #

"Did Bush also steal 2004?"

Nope. I'll admit he won that one. It is amazing what using fear as a bludgeon against the gullible can do for elections. I mean, look at the people on this site ... Jack and Gang of One are so afraid they can hardly put together complete sentences. The most they seem to manage is spewing schoolyard insults (really ... who writes your stuff? Twelve year olds?). At least daveinboca has actually read something more informative than THIS site and he tries to convey that information in comprehensible ways. I don't think he's reached the right conclusion on pretty much anything, but at least he's trying(well, the right conclusion possibly. The correct one, not at all). The rest of you seem to be cowering in front of your keyboards waiting for Dear Leader Bush to keep you safe.

Let me tell you something. Something you would have noticed if you ever watched anything other than Faux News. Bush isn't interested in keeping you safe. He isn't interested in governing the country for the benefit of the majority of Americans. The only thing he's interested in being the "wartime president" and "commander in chief" and being more important than Daddy ever was.

Well, that and making sure the top 1% ("his base" as he calls them) get even more of our money. And if in your abject terror you follow his course, you'll be doing him and his base a great big favor. You, and the rest of us, will just keep getting screwed.
Vir Modestus | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:22 pm | #

"what does an apology to the taliban have to do with facts on the ground?"

Nitwit JayK may not have realized that UbL's little stunt in NY got the Taliban kicked out of power [called a "fact on the ground"] by the US/NATO force. But his ignorance matches his illiteracy, as his frequent doltish comments reveal. Oh, and did you bother to read the REAL REASON libtards like you will never understand why UbL hit the WTC---again, after seven years of cretinous overlawyering by the ClyntOOns.

He wants us to turn against Saudi Arabia, something you and fellow libtard MattM will never comprehend, he being equally clueless and shallow. As he reveals in this hilarious self-parody of his moronic lunacy:
"Dave, are you saying we CAN'T get ObL? Nice way to support our troops. I think that qualifies as giving comfort to the enemy."

I mentioned above that MattM's comments weren't worthy of civil discourse.

Quod erat demonstrandum.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:25 pm | #

Patrick Chester,
I assume you mean the word "accountability".
Who lost their job from dropping the ball in the lead-up to 9/11?


BTW, sorry Dr. I didn't realize you are a woman.
Although I do realize your part in playing America's great shell game.
Robert | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:27 pm | #

"What Gang of Dumb fails to realize is that the more we fight, the more we breed that fascist ideology that is militant Islamism."

Yes, brilliant. I see how that worked considering all the Nazis left after WW2.

Here's some news for you, just because we can't kill all the roaches in your single room flat, doesn't mean we can't eliminate them to the point where they become a non factor...unless of course, you like roaches.( I just KNOW what your response on this will be, can't wait).

Seriously, I know you all got bent out of shape because the good Doc called you out with her cartoon post and now feel you must defend your silly immature bumper stickers...but just wait a day or two and allow her to really bring out your self loathing and bizzaro thinking.

I love this site.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:27 pm | #

I love Xman's equating of a Nazi government with an Islamic religion.

It's that lack of understanding that got us into this mess in the first place.

Thanks for showing your ignorance. Come back any time.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:34 pm | #

I wonder how lefties explain the stunning failure of their elected democrat leaders to "end the war" as they promised?

They're in charge. They can cut this war off tomorrow if they wanted to.

Do you grasp that, lefties? Even your democrat leaders (who aren't exactly rocket scientists themselves) see you as nothing but useful idiots.

Let that sink in.
bulbasaur | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:38 pm | #

Yes Vir, you nailed me on that one! *as I cower behind my keyboard laughing my ass off*

Whew doggie! This should be a good weekend.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:41 pm | #

MattM, you really are an idiot if you did not follow my train of thought with that. Actually, even if you did it would not change my opinion of you...
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:47 pm | #

It's the same train of thought as "Well, Bin Laden attacked us on 9/11 so...let's go make a quagmire in Iraq!"
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:51 pm | #

What Gang of Dumb fails to realize is that the more we fight, the more we breed that fascist ideology that is militant Islamism.

Bulbasaur

I wonder how the righties explain the stunning failure of their elected Republican leaders (for 6 straight years) to protect our borders, do anything about social security, address immigration, lower the national debt, make government smaller, enact any of the 9/11 commission recommendations, properly supply our troops, devise an exit strategy for Iraq, or help our own citizens after Katrina.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:54 pm | #

Really? The Iraq war isn't breeding more terrorists. That's not what the NIE thinks.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/ 09...ailyUpdate.html

Maybe you should, you know, actually read something before you spout off. I wasn't sureyou could sound any dumber, but you've proven me wrong.

And rest assured, it's the only time you'll prove me wrong.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 6:58 pm | #

I love Xman's equating of a Nazi government with an Islamic religion.

Christian Science Monitor.
Oh, no agenda there.
MattM you are as blind and ignorant as the rest of the so-called elitist intelligentsia. And you convince no one. Except for your fellow idiotarians.
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:05 pm | #

What stunning denial of islamic terrorism and the threat the entire world faces from some of the commenters here.

Case studies all.
darwin | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:10 pm | #

I just supplied a link to a government report that proved my original point, that the more we fight, the more we breed that fascist ideology that is militant Islamism.

Why can't you grasp this one obvious, screaming fact? You truly are either blind or willfully stupid.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:17 pm | #

"Maybe you should, you know, actually read something before you spout off. I wasn't sureyou could sound any dumber, but you've proven me wrong."

MattM, I've read 100 books for every one you have read concerning the Middle East[in English, French, and Arabic]. Your sophomoric [high school] silliness in quoting a year-old CSM [which published an article of mine concerning Iraq] doesn't refute Gang of One in the least. You might have at least mentioned that in the interim during the last 12 months, the "terrorists" in Iraq [grosso modo the AQ & its Sunni foreign allies] have been beaten back and seriously weakened, especially in Anbar. This is due partly to the surge and the confidence the US surge instilled in the Sunni tribal sheikhs, who are the most powerful element in Iraq's west. And it is due partly to the Saudis heightened assistance to the Sunni tribals to turn them against the AQ.

Get it, silly boy. The US & Saudis have turned the Sunni Sheikhs, easily the largest element of the "insurgents," against the "terrorists" who are foreign born for the most part.

The Sunni sheikhs have switched sides. Thought you might have noticed, but from your writing skills and silly remarks, it's evident you're probably a smart-ass freshman [in high school, that is].

Oh, almost forgot to mention. You are dishonest as well as an ignoramus.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:23 pm | #

MattM, I think you just stated a fact, let me quote you, and pay attention so you don't miss the irony:

"the more WE( meaning, YOU MatM) fight( your OWN COUNTRY- my observation), the more we breed that fascist ideology that is militant Islamism."

Get it?

Don't worry though, I even have a link to back up your statement with someone who wholeheartedly agrees with you and your friends!

http://www.dailymotion.com/video...t-en- video_news

Enjoy!
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:26 pm | #

oh, and besa mi culo!

Google it.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:28 pm | #

"proved my original point, that the more we fight, the more we breed that fascist ideology that is militant Islamism."

You are too witless to realize that the opposite of what you are saying, which would be "the less we fight.....the less we breed....militant Islamism" simply belies history. You are channelling Neville Chamberlain and saying, oh well, give them the Sudetenland and they'll be happy.

The Islamist ideology has been cranking out terrorists at an increasing level since oil money went big time in the early '70s, before a teeny-bopper like you was ever born.
Read Lawrence Wright's The Looming Tower, George Criles Charlie Wilson's War [I'm mentioned, though not by name], and Prisoners by Jeffrey Goldberg.

You read CSM & a couple other biased articles and think you are a hotshot?
Read Olaf Caroe and learn what the Middle East & Pakistan are really about. And Steve Coll in Ghost Wars.

Nothing more fun than to come to the arcade and play Whack-a-Mole [that Old Mole, the Revolution] with revolting libtards.

Lotsa luck pushing your defeatist agenda & go to firebiyotch & Huff-Puff to peddle your snake oil. They buy stuff like yours, though you'd better ramp up your reading list.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:37 pm | #

xman

Don't be too harsh. We'll scare the lil fellow right off this thread.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:39 pm | #

Strawman arguments all of them. Just because terrorists have been increasing since the early 70's doesn't mean the Iraq war isn't making MORE of them now.

Just beause we're killing lots of terrorists now, doesn't mean the Iraq war isn't making MORE than if we weren't fighting.

Just because we've turned former insurgents to fight against the terrorists doesn't meanthe Iraq war isn't making MORE than if we weren't fighting.

But in your world it makes sense to back off trying to find the mastermind of 9/11 and instead attack a country that never threatened us.
MattM | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:44 pm | #

"What is Carl Gordon talking about?
Please tell me it's some kind of satire!
librarygryffon |"

Appears to be channelling William Burroughs, a gay heroin addict heir to a fortune & always guilt-tripping/projecting. If you follow my drift.

And a little Alan Ginzburg---sophomoric stuff but what do you expect from a libtard? They are poorly read, think they're smart, and always know better. Insufferably arrogant, but finally harmless, because cowardly.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 7:53 pm | #

"And your nick, 'AngryFlower' says much about you"

That I like a webcomic?

"Sorry to ruin your fun my little angryflower but, I am not consumed with hate. No, far from it. I am consumed with family, music, love, and patriotism dear one."

Well, great! (seriously) I just didn't think so from the insult filled comments.

"They are poorly read, think they're smart, and always know better. Insufferably arrogant, but finally harmless, because cowardly."

With all the "projection" comebacks in this thread, you'd think you'd stop and revisit this comment.

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/cli...ine.pdf& id=3613

Have a good weekend all! Try not to wet the bed worrying about big bad islamoboogiemen!!
angryflower | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 8:07 pm | #

"Strawman arguments all of them. Just because terrorists have been increasing since the early 70's doesn't mean the Iraq war isn't making MORE of them now.

Just beause we're killing lots of terrorists now, doesn't mean the Iraq war isn't making MORE than if we weren't fighting.

Just because we've turned former insurgents to fight against the terrorists doesn't meanthe Iraq war isn't making MORE than if we weren't fighting."

"attack a country that never threatened us." Actually, Saddam was financing terror attacks in other parts of the Middle East against Americans. Christopher Hitchens told me personally he had met with Abu Iyad in Baghdad who told him Saddam offered the PFLP huge bounties on American heads [before SH became our temporary ally.] And there were AQ actively operational in Baghdad after the Gulf War I, with Saddam's knowledge. Camps in eastern Kurdistan were allowed to operate with SH's knowledge.

The straw is between your ears, Matt.
You can attest that in your opinion, we're making more, but you can't prove it. In any of the cases. It is a liberal meme driven by media attention to a perceived increase which actually is not happening in the USA and is being beaten back in Iraq. [Oops, a fact, and I know those scare you.] Once again, you generalize vapid arabesques of thought using sophomoric logic---citing the CSM!? And that's supposed to convince adults who have lived and visited dozens of countries in a few regions I'll bet you've never set foot in?

And from your other statements on this thread, you haven't earned the right to any credibility.

I think you should retire to your video games and leave the adults to a civil discussion.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 8:09 pm | #

Angryflower appears ready for a bouquet of Islamic love-blooms.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 8:11 pm | #

Angryflower is in full denial bloom.
darwin | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 8:22 pm | #

"Well, great! (seriously) I just didn't think so from the insult filled comments." - angryflower

Insult? Come on girl, I've tried before to get you to come to your sences. Apparently your full-time boyfriend has convinced you otherwise.

What a shame.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 10:48 pm | #

Oh shite, did I say "sences"? I meant Séances. Just FYI.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 10:54 pm | #

MattM, you ignorant slut, we created no terrorists but we gave them a banner to rally under, i.e., infidels in Allah's cesspool, the State of Israel once again where it always has been. The terrorists already exist, have existed, and will continue to exist and they are drawn to Iraq like a moth to light and flame -- better we exterminate this garbage on their turf than on ours. Their corrupted cult of death made them the killers that they are. This brand of Islamist psychosis has been around since Mo took a child for his concubine, called the moon his God, and acquiesced to conversion by force.
Like all moonbat libtards, you cannot conceive of personal accountability; it's always someone else's fault that shit happens.
Gang of One | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 10:57 pm | #

Like reality for instance. God do they hate that.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.07.07 - 11:07 pm | #

(The word Robert does not understand is "screw-up", which he shows by blaming the President for not miraculously stopping the 9/11 attacks with a whole month of a vague warning available to him.)

You do seem to understand "accountability" though... from the viewpoint of a commissar assigned to "discipline" conscripts for losing a battle.
Patrick Chester | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 3:19 am | #

"Quite simply, the fever-swamp areas of the Dhimmicratic Party appear to be suffering from a mass psychosis---although unlike what Freud did with Woodrow Wilson, I cannot state that as absolute fact without talking to the delusional lefties on a one-on-one basis.

It appears that a large segment of self-proclaimed Democrats suffer from double-digit IQs [though they'll be quick to deny native intelligence exists], dependence on drugs or alcohol, a need for a safety-net nanny-state to compensate for their career incompetence, plus a defective moral and public education. My guess is that a large portion are avowed atheists or agnostics.

I know I'm being hurtful, judgmental and non-compassionate, but these people deserve a long detox from their usual intake of bad food, drink, drugs and reading materials/porn films."

Spoken like the truest "I am so thankful that God gave me all this money" I've heard in a long time. You stay that way, daveinboca, it gives me something to hope for: all that isn't you and yours.
jmathison | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 6:45 am | #

Dr. Pat, you called it, exactly. BDS at its finest.

The liberals posting here seem to be able to only recycle the same old lame "talking points" about the war. The problem is that the "no Al Qaeda in Iraq" before the invasion claim is moot today because they are certainly there now, and our leaving before the job is done means that they will prevail, as bin Laden predicted. Al Qaeda will still be in Iraq if we leave now, but the Iraqis will be without the combat power of the US military to oppose them. The argument that our presence in Iraq is creating more terrorists around the world is sheer nonsense. They had plenty of terrorists and camps to train them long before we invaded Iraq, and even before 9/11, Al Qaeda was a world wide conspiracy. Our cut and run from Iraq will not stop their recruitment, but enhance them, because the Arab street will see that Jihad *works*.

So all these arguments raised by the liberals are moot and of no consequence since they are meaningless noise.

There are 3 reasons to be in Iraq now, today, irrespective of whatever happened in the past.

1. To destroy Al Qaeda. This is the most important reason to remain in Iraq. Iraq is where we are directly confronting the organization that struck us on 9/11/01. According to a recent NIE, Al Qaeda in Iraq is Al Qaeda’s “most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the [U.S.] homeland.” We are fighting and destroying our enemy in Iraq because that is where he is.

LTC Austin Bay (Ret.), author and a planner of OIF), wrote:

"The essence of strategic art is to force an enemy to fight on your terms, not his, and ideally in a fight he cannot refuse. The U.S.-led attack on Iraq changed al Qaeda's battlefield. Sunni-extremist al Qaeda has had to fight in a predominantly Shia country....Zarqawi's al Qaeda clan accepted the battle....Something that has been destroyed is the notion that al Qaeda's extremism dominates Islam. The idea that waging jihad against the West is easy has also been exposed as a lie. These are ideological defeats for al Qaeda..." [Austin Bay, "The Millennium War," 1/3/2005, http://www.weeklystandard.com/Co...05/ 076blgjq.asp]

This week, retired LTC Ralph Peters, columnist for the NY Sun, said this week that Al Qaeda is suffering a strategic defeat in Iraq. Not just ideologically, but their cadres, supply chains, and sanctuaries are facing complete destruction. They are becoming the "weak horse" in the middle east, and that perception spells doom for Al Qaeda's very existance.

Iraq is not the only place were we are confronting Al Qaeda, BTW. There is, of course, Afghanistan, as well as Djibouti, Mongolia, the other "stans" in south Asia, and the Philippines as well. But Iraq is Al Qaeda's "death ground," by their own choosing.


2. To prevent a genocide that would make Pol Pot’s 2.25 million murdered people look like a Teletubbies episode. If we pull out now, there will be no moderating force, and genocide up perhaps up to 8 million people will be the most probably result. Remember, the genocide in Cambodia plus the 800,000 murdered people in South Vietnam ONLY HAPPENED because liberal Democrats prohibited all aid, including ammunition and spare parts, to South Vietnam in December 1974, and refused to relent when the North invaded in early 1975. The result was genocide. Liberals and Democrats were responsible because they blocked US assistance. It ought to be inconceivable for liberal Democrats to even consider repeating the very same policies of theirs that caused the murder of millions. But here they are, bound and determine to directly cause the murders of millions, by getting the country to "cut and run" from Iraq for partisan political reasons.


3. It is in our national interest to keep the oil resources of Iraq OUT OF HOSTILE HANDS. Premature withdrawal from Iraq will mean that either Iran or Al Qaeda (or both) will control the second or third LARGEST OIL RESERVES on the planet. It will be used as a weapon to destroy our economy, given the fact that liberals absolutely refuse to allow us to expand our domestic oil production. You can take that to the bank — if you can afford the price of gas, that is. You’d almost think that liberals WANT our economy to crash and burn with their environmental policies and their willingness for us to surrender to Al Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan.

My country is at war with Al Qaeda. MattM's country (and the rest of the Bush-hatering liberals posting here) is at war too, but only against George Bush. And rather than stand with us against Al Qaeda, most liberal Democrats have chosen to stand with bin Laden.
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 7:29 am | #

My country is at war with Al Qaeda. MattM's country (and the rest of the Bush-hatering liberals posting here) is at war too, but only against George Bush. And rather than stand with us against Al Qaeda, most liberal Democrats have chosen to stand with bin Laden.

test
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 11:15 am | #

Dr. Sanity.

It's a good thing you are trying to focus the anger of the American people in the correct enemy. But by all means do the same with your Republican Right Wing crowd.

Let me explain.

President Bush's troop increase (surge) anonunced in January of '07-- was premised on the idea that increased security would provide "breathing space" for the Iraqi Government to make critical advances toward national reconciliation.

Whatever security gains our soldiers have died for these last few months, they have not been matched at all by any political progress. But instead of the Republicans putting pressure on the Iraqi Government to honor our troop's sacrifices, they turn their anger to the "surrendecrats" for trying their best to correct this mistaken policy.

Correcting a policy that has not worked is not "surrender" dear Republicans, and you know it. You are just too intellectualy dishonest to accept it, that's all.

Every time you present yourselfs as the "defenders" of some future "victory" in Iraq, you ignore the obvious. Any victory in Iraq requires the full cooperation of the Iraqi Government, and the Iraqi people. The same Iraqi Government that is corrupt to the core, collapsing, and going on a two month vacation right in the middle of the surge. The same Iraqi people that has left Iraq by the millions, or the same Iraqi people that belong not to an Iraq-Country concept in the delusional mind of some, but to a trive, and to a Religion.

But instead to get angry at a Government that honors the sacrifice of our troops by going on a vacation you get angry at your fellow Americans (and taxpayers I might add) because they don't agree with this idiocy. Well Dear Republicans, pardon me for being so loud... But I like you pay my taxes, and have the right to express my opinion and not be insulted.

But if what you want is an insult fest and a my way or the highway policy-- We can accomodate that and give you the highway in '08 Republicans. You see in the end the reazon Iraq has never been together since way before the times of Saddam, is because they can't live together. Some delusional nut thinking otherwise, or 10 million nuts thinking otherwise WILL NOT CHANGE THAT FACT.

That's why your policy willl not work dear Republicans, and calling Democrats names, while ignoring the real enemies, or at least the real foes to your policy is insulting, dishonest, and down right treasonous.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 11:37 am | #

"so I'll just let them prove everything I've ever said about their dysfunctional mental state"

Is that really the best you have?
jri | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 12:25 pm | #

"...should read, "If you are outraged, you're suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome," which a couple of the trolls are above.

From their bad spelling, atrocious writing, and spooky grammar, these libtards betray their defective education. "


ha ha ha ha ha

Comedy gold.
jri | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 12:26 pm | #

"Spoken like the truest "I am so thankful that God gave me all this money" I've heard in a long time. You stay that way, daveinboca, it gives me something to hope for: all that isn't you and yours. jmathison"

Your welfare check didn't bounce, or what? JM, yours is actually spoken like a bitter class warrior who projects his cartoons onto others based on ignorance and a faulty education. Actually I am on a low fixed income & not well off by Boca or even retired NEA/AFTA pension standards.

But keep listening to those voices in your head and write dwon all you hear. It keeps the rest of us assured that our understanding of leftist loo-zer mentality is right on the money.

Loo-zer because the loo is the most productive part of a leftard's day.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 1:37 pm | #

Georgej

Interesting reasons to "stay in Iraq" in your post.

1) "To destroy al-Quaida" . No Sir, you can't destroy al-Quaida in Iraq simply by "staying", for the simple reason that al-Quaida can re-group in other regions of Iraq, or Syria, or Iran, or Jordan and cross the border and attack again, and again , and again.

2) "To prevent genocide" . So in order for us to live you would propose our troops to basically be made hostages of an Iraqi Government unwilling to compromise. Or in other words we can't live now because the Iraqi people will kill each other. I will be the first one to tell you that America, in starting this war has now unavoidable responsibilities in the region. But dear sir the responsibility of our Army is not to prevent a genocide from happening, any more than a parent can't prevent a son or a daughter from killing himself or herself if he/she so wishes to. That in the end is the responsability of the Iraqi people, if there was ever any such thing.

3) "Guarding the oil" . That's the one true reason that we (and Bush) is so worried about "genocides" while the real ones going on in front of our noses go un-reported, and of course un-cared. Does the word Darfur, and Somalia brings any memories Sir? since you are so concerned about genocides you most be very worried about that too.

But yes, you are right the oil region of Iraq where every man and woman in knowledge warned Bush not to play with fire (or start unecessary wars)is indeed the most Economically startegic region in the world.

That is why regardless of the Republicans and Democrats intentions, our Army is traped in Iraq. Our Army will not live in a new Democratic administration any more than it will live in a new Republican Administration. Having said that Sir, mark my words; Our Army in a Republican or a Democratic Administration will not continue on it's present numbers after Bush lives office.

And that's the reality of our situation. In the end what you have is a President making the worst strategic mistake in our history. Bush's legacy is to have traped our military in the most volatile region in the world forever (ask the Israelies)where people like you will have the warrantee to "fight al-Quaida" till the end of days.

I for one know we will not be living Iraq any time soon . I just don't want the same kind of people that put's us there in the firstplace to ever again have a chance to power. Those people are the Right WIngers, and Osama would be very proud of you all.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 1:53 pm | #

For the most recent perfect example of the difference between a true American Patriot and total "misreckoner", scroll up and read Georgej's comment again and then scroll a tad down and read gil's.

Need I say more?
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 2:04 pm | #

Let's just give gil the lil spanking heshe deserves [and perhaps as a lefty, he/she desires].

"al-Quaida [sp] can re-group in other regions of Iraq, or Syria, or Iran, or Jordan and cross the border and attack again, and again , and again."

First, AQ has suffered a major setback in Iraq during the recent surge, as it has lost what the Viets called "the mandate of heaven" by its brutality & religious nuttiness. AQ was always basically from other countries, like the nutjob from Jordan we recently killed. The Sunni tribals are now doing for us what the Afghani tribals did to the Taliban & the AQ in Afghanistan. And all the ballyhoo in the media about the Taliban's comeback is overstated, as they're in the drug business, like FARC in Colombia. Despite your clinging to the liberal defeatist trope, we are gaining on the destruction of AQ especially in the man-on-the-Arab-street's outlook. When Osama dyed his beard, what do you think pious Muslims thought? That he's another Col. Sanders, that's what.

Oh, and the Third International led by the USSR attacked the US/UN again & again for fifty years. We held out and where are they? Too long for geopolitical gurus like yourself?

Second, the Iraqi govt might be defective, but did we not come back to liberate France despite the fact that Daladier & ASSNAT threw in the towel in '40? The Bosnian govt is defective until recently, but that's okay, cuz that was Billy Jeff's project. The Korean govt was defective and the Viet govt was defective, so the Dem Congress pulled their funding to ENSURE a South Viet defeat. That's only a footnote in history books because libtards have collared a monopoly/cabal on writing the defective brand of history that is taught in the groves of academicide.

BTW, with Darfur and Somalia, why don't you get your kumbayeh multiculti buddies in the UN to get with the program? Kofi is/was fiddling for years about Darfur after his Rwanda smash hit, hoping that something would turn up. The US and UK are leading the campaign for helping Darfur and does your Commie mentor Hu or your closet-Commie pin-up Putin send high-level emissaries to Darfur? Hmmm, wonder why? Mischief? Or Oil?

Somalia? Watch Blackhawk Down until it sinks in that "there's no there there."

"..the oil region of Iraq where every man and woman in knowledge warned Bush not to play with fire (or start unecessary wars)is indeed the most Economically startegic region in the world" is a sentence that reveals that either you believe every "every man and woman in knowledge" was against the whole Iraq project. Were you privy to their private councils? Or reading Al-Jezeera/BBC[sorry for the taurology]? Oil had something to do with the Iran/Iraq War, the Gulf War, and now this war. Actually, if you were well-versed in history, you'd know that it had a lot to do with the Greater East-Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere's desire for the Dutch East Indies. Yep, some people thought Iraq was a bad idea, and are now crowing because they think they were right. But the match is not over, although the Dems want to call a TKO and walk out of the ring. A TKO on the USA!!!

BTW again, "same kind of people that put's us there in the firstplace" reveals a high level of strategic planning. Don't they have spellcheck & grammar lessons on your Ivy League campus?
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 2:28 pm | #

Jack Ryan,

I want to get to George and his specious tendentious twaddle later, but the Marshall/WV game is getting hot! Then I drive my daughter to UMiami, who beat Marshall last week.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 2:30 pm | #

Georgie Girl/Boy

"Whatever security gains our soldiers have died for these last few months, they have not been matched at all by any political progress" overlooks the fact that turning the Sunni Sheikhs in Anbar, Nimrod and other tribal areas against Al Qaeda was a "political" triumph more than a "security gain."

And it overlooks a tentative agreement to share oil revenues that the Sunnis, odd third out, are regarding favorably.

So far george is factually dishonest, let's check out this moral paradigm on another level of certitude [his, not mine---he is often wrong, but never in doubt].

"Correcting a policy that has not worked is not "surrender" dear Republicans, and you know it. You are just too intellectualy [sic ] dishonest to accept it, that's all"

It's "intellectually dishonest" to call Dem cries for withdrawal "correcting a policy," so who's dishonest in throwing out misnomers, georgie-poo? The Dems have NO ALTERNATIVE POLICY save precipitous withdrawal or Biden's inane suggestion to divide the country in three with an independent Kurdistan. Biden knows full well that the Turks would invade Kurdistan at the first opportunity, but Joe the Mouth is too "intellectually dishonest" to say so.

"But instead to get angry at a Government that honors the sacrifice of our troops by going on a vacation you get angry at your fellow Americans (and taxpayers" is another straw man that scarecrow georgie puts forward as an argument.

The Republicans are "angry" with the Iraqi government, though going on vacation isn't the reason. Just like there is tentative agreement on oil-sharing, there is a need to get out of Baghdad. And getting angry at American defeatists is our prerogative, though I have yet to see a parallel to Cindy Sheehan's butch jamboree or picketers in front of Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein's homes---except by deranged moonbat leftards, of course.

The rest of your mini-rant is equal parts condescending and supercilious with a final dollop of self-parody.

After the old trick of "waving the bloody shirt" the Dems instituted back in the Reconstruction era, you go into hyper-drive by accusing Republicans who insist on actually persisting in executing a so-far successful surge of being "insulting, dishonest, and down right treasonous." Methinks the georgie-poo doth protest too much.

Look up "projection" in the DSM IV if you know what that book is. You are a classic clinical specimen of taking your colossal defect [treason] and projecting it onto the loyalists.

Study French history and you'll find that French supporting Hitler and opposing Gen DeGaulle behind the lines sound just like you and the Salon.com crowd do.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 2:59 pm | #

dave, that was gil's first post you tore to shreds at 2:59 (and another excellent thrasing I might add). *George* wrote a most excellent post at 7:29am. I understand the mix-up though, in as much that your attention is focused on your game and not to mention the fact that my post at 2:04pm had a typo. I wrote "For the most recent perfect example of the difference between a true American Patriot and total "misreckoner"...should have read "the difference between a true American Patriot (George) and *a* total "misreckoner" (gil). So in your 2:59 merely substitute the name George for gil and you're still spot on.

Just wanted to clear that up. There isn't spell-check on this old dinosaur I'm using.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 3:24 pm | #

I believe that for every drubbing I get on ThinkProgress and Washington Monthly, the home team has an advantage. When the Salon.com trolls venture onto neutral territory [and Dr. Sanity, an eminently sane & respectful clinically trained psychiatrist, is totally neutral, even if that means thrashing the silly condescending nitwittery of even "centrist" moonbats], they should expect a bit of the same stuff they dole out using f-bombs and n-word equivalents on Kossackville, Huff-Puff & other sites totally committed to a nanny-state dependence on BIG BROTHER, aka, big govt.

Orwell would have been another Hitchens were he alive today, flaying these pusillanimous twits before impaling them on spikes of sharp wit and sharper analytical dissection.

Salon.com doesn't let sane centrists post on their site, but they do send their orcs over here to train to become Uruk-hai. Or Nibelungs to train for big-league trollhood.

So, as usual, the left aggrandizes its sane opponents' territories by lying, cheating, and squatting. And you know if you were in Nam what squatting produces. Donkey-squat.

I think an early Salon pigeon-dropping signed ME was from Mary Elizabeth Williams, a senior agitpreppie on the Salon site.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 3:50 pm | #

Gil writes:

"1) "To destroy al-Quaida" . No Sir, you can't destroy al-Quaida in Iraq simply by "staying", for the simple reason that al-Quaida can re-group in other regions of Iraq, or Syria, or Iran, or Jordan and cross the border and attack again, and again , and again."

Then we follow them where ever they go and fight them until we do destroy them. Is this to difficult for you to understand? Maybe I ought to rephrase it for clarity: No matter where Al Qaeda goes, no matter where they run and hide, we hunt them down AND THEN WE KILL THEM.

And yes, this includes the tribal regions of Pakistan, where we are operating even now. And it includes Djibouti, the Philippines, the countries that neighbor Afghanistan (the other "stans"), and even Mongolia. The war we are fighting is global.

The point you seemed to have missed, is that Al Qaeda CHOSE Iraq as the place where *they* would fight us. Bin Laden and Al Zawahiri have made it clear that they intend to break America in Iraq; that they will prevail in Iraq; and that the path to their visioned Caliphate runs through Baghdad.

If Al Qaeda runs away from Iraq instead of prevailing, it means that everything that bin Laden was promising was a lie. An earlier NIE predicts that should this happen, the number of Jihadists "signing up" will drop. And we will have won a major victory against Al Qaeda, perhaps (as Ralph Peters writes) a "death blow."

We are prevailing in Iraq, not Al Qaeda. And no matter how deep your denial is (or your hatred for George W. Bush), Iraq is ours to lose.

Gil wrote:
"2) "To prevent genocide" . So in order for us to live you would propose our troops to basically be made hostages of an Iraqi Government unwilling to compromise."

Was I unclear about this?

YOU liberal Democrats are about to become the agents for the murder of perhaps 8 million people, IF YOU SUCCEED in forcing the USA to immediately cut and run from Iraq.

The GAO report this week said it. The "retired generals" this week said it. And no doubt Petraeus will say it too.

If you prevail and force America to cut and run, WE will make sure that YOU live with the responsibility of those deaths for the rest of your lives. You can count on that. Every one of YOU will have to confront the fact that YOU forced millions of Iraqis to die, and we will not let you forget it. As for Darfur, why do you care? You appear to be totally oblivious to genocide, if it involves Iraqis. And since you brought up Somalia, it must be mentioned, that it was REPUBLICAN President that sent the Marines into Somalia to insure that food aid got distributed to the people, and it was a DEMOCRATIC President that cut and run from Mogadishu.

Gil wrote:
"3) "Guarding the oil"."

Yep. Our national security (and the security of the west) depends upon preventing Al Qaeda and/or Iran from gaining control of it. Tis a fact.

Gil also wrote:

"our Army is traped in Iraq."

Nonsense. It is Al Qaeda who is trapped; trapped and about to be destroyed.

In his letter to the troops, Gen. Petraeus describes the military gains against Al Qaeda and the other militias. But he also writes:

"We are also building momentum in an emerging area of considerable importance - local reconciliation. Local Iraqi leaders are coming forward, opposing extremists, and establishing provisional units of neighborhood security volunteers. With growing Government of Iraq support, these volunteers are being integrated into legitimate security institutions to help improve local security. While this concept is playing out differently in various areas in Iraq, it is grounded in a desire shared by increasing numbers of Iraqis - to oppose extremist elements and their ideologies. This is very significant because as many of you know first-hand, extremists cannot survive without the support of the population."

What this means is that surge is not only defeating Al Qaeda, but is building the framework that will prevent the genocide of millions in Iraq after we withdraw.

Why would any American want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

Finally, Gil writes:
"I just don't want the same kind of people that put's us there in the firstplace to ever again have a chance to power. Those people are the Right WIngers, and Osama would be very proud of you all."

First, it was a liberal Democratic administration that "set up" America to be attacked on 9/11 by allowing 4 unanswered attacks upon America, her embassies, and her Navy by Al Qaeda, while at the same time, refusing to take him out when they had the opportunity on several occasions.

Second, that same liberal Democratic administration made it easier for Al Qaeda to reduce their attack cycle time from 4 years to 2 by ordering a WALL of separation between the CIA and the FBI. This was the proximate reason for Atta and his band to enter the United States and carry out their mission.

Third, if you bothered to read the translations of Osama's video, you would see that Osama considers you liberal Democrats as his natural allies and expresses his disappointment that *YOU* have not been able to give him what he cannot achieve on the battlefield - victory.

Dr Pat is right, your side lives in denial and in displacement.
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 3:51 pm | #

daveinboca wrote"

"Georgie Girl/Boy

"Whatever security gains our soldiers have died for these last few months, they have not been matched at all by any political progress" overlooks the fact that turning the Sunni Sheikhs in Anbar, Nimrod and other tribal areas against Al Qaeda was a "political" triumph more than a "security gain.""

EXCUSE ME? Do you have me confused with somebody else?
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 3:59 pm | #

Yes Georgej - he confused your first post with gils first post (the proceeding gil's "test" post).
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 4:25 pm | #

Sorry Georgej

I was blaming you for gil's gibberish. I could blame the computer or watching RedEye on Fox last night---the program is now getting blog-hotties from Gawker & Wonkette, so I love watching cute lefties take it mentally as they probably take it physically on a frequent basis!

Next time I'll squint better!
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 4:30 pm | #

Georgej.

"Then we follow them wherever they go and fight them, is that difficult for you to understand"

Is not dificult to understand. It is impossible to achieve. Or do we "follow them" into Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc. If that's what you propose it can' t be done. And furthermore Bush is not doing it. I would like to keep our "conversation" in the realm of what is real, if at all possible.

"al-Quaida chose Iraq as the place they will fight us" Yes, the "choise" came because Bush was dumb enough to start a war where they were not. And now guess what? We don't have a choice, because now they are there, a self fulfilling prophesy as I ever saw one. And guess what they can stay and fight, or cut and run as they see fit, and there not a darn thing we can do about it. If they feel treatened in one province, they run to the next, etc.

Our Army Sir, does not have enough soldiers to chase shadows trugh millions os square miles, and billions of people.

I noticed that you conveniently ignore the fact that in your hypotetical genocide, it is only our Army's responsibility to prevent it with their presence. And Bush's responsibility in the mess he created? , and people like you responsability in supporting it? and the Iraqi people responsability in not causing it?, and the Iraqi Government's responsability in not stoping it???

No, in your strange mind the responsibility falls in the Democrats and the Army's lap for trying to change your lunatic policies (The Democrats), and for carring the water for your mistaken policy (The Army). Very convenient way of seing the world. Very self-serving indeed. You are not accountable for nothing, and have to sacrifice for nothing.

At the end of the day only an idiot will give the responsability of any old, or new policy in Iraq, to the very same people that created the mess in the first place. You would not do it if you had any intellectual honesty left on the subject, and you know it.

OH, and one more thing. I mentioned Somalia because on one side of your mouth you are very worried abot a holocoust in Iraq of "8 million" people dead, and on your other side of the mouth you say "In Somalia why don't you get your UN pals to help"--- well, I trouw that ball right back at you "pal"

In your genocide ideas why don't you ask your Right Wing Country pals to help? Can it be because they will not, and why even bother????

Face it "pal" you, and your ideas are ALONE in the world. Want to know why? Because your ideas don't work.

Finally, you seem obsessed with us living Iraq. I tough I made myself perfectly clear that no one is living Iraq. If it does not fit your pre-ordeained ideas of how to properly debate a point, at least acknowledge it because we are talking about living, WHEN NO ONE IS LIVING.

Or in other words, what the hell are you talking about? WHo is living????
And you can make all the noice you want about the Iraqi Government is getting better, and we are winning, and everithing is honky- dory. At the end of the day we are still there, and our man still die every day, and the Iraqi Government is as corrupt as ever, and here we are going in circles and bull shitting.

Things will be better when our troops can come home, and only then.... But until that day comes, all the rest is pure, simple, and unadulterated bull shit.

So spare me, because after five years of listening to it I can smell it a mile off.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 5:03 pm | #

The ironically named Dr Sanity

One reason among many to hate GWB:

He is Osama's most usefull idiot. Bin Laden's goal was to provoke an over reaction, destabilize the mid-east and hope his brand of radical Islam could take over. He might have expected Saudi Arabia but he'll take Iraq. Mission mostly accomplished. He hopes Iran is next. Do you support Bush and Bin Laden's stategy? They appear to be the same.

Why do you support Bush? Is it because you pee your pants every night thinking about Big Bad Arabs imposing Sharia law: outlawing gays, feminists, porn, abortion, liberalism and many other things?

How Al Quada could possibly accomplish this, I have no idea, but then I am part of the reality based community.

Is Bush your Big Strong Daddy that will protect you? I have news for you. He is a self-centered, spoiled, dumb, rich brat that can barely take care of himself.

Our country and constitution likely will survive his reign but only because people like you are in the minority.
ec1009 | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 6:05 pm | #

Georgie girl,

"Third, if you bothered to read the translations of Osama's video, you would see that Osama considers you liberal Democrats as his natural allies and expresses his disappointment that *YOU* have not been able to give him what he cannot achieve on the battlefield - victory"

Your first two points were too stupid and filled with so many errors it would take too long to respond. Not worth the waste of my time: not that your third point isn't also stupid.

You believe EVERYTHING Binny Laden says! Wow! Did you ever think [Do you ever think?] that maybe he was trying to help Bush? Do you think he is dumb enough to think any endorsment by him would help an American politician. He would not get so far as a terrorist by being as dumb as you.
ec1009 | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 6:28 pm | #

Lastly georgie,

Doubtful Al Quiada will win on the battlefield. Doubtfull Americans can win this stupid war. We Americans have more to lose than Al Quaida but they would have no chance without Bush, you and your partners in self- delusion help.

Most likely only Iraqis, and maybe yet Iranian, American soldiers, and the rest of the world will lose.
ec1009 | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 6:37 pm | #

Your first two points were too stupid and filled with so many errors it would take too long to respond. Not worth the waste of my time: not that your third point isn't also stupid.

I have a life.
ec1009 | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 7:07 pm | #

I have a life.

ec1009

"I have a life." Appearance on this site to the contrary notwithstanding?

So why do you and your double-digit IQ pal gil insult intelligent people by skunking up a civil discourse with uninformed un-analyzed lefty gibberish that you pick up from people with triple-digit IQs and single-digit moral fiber. [zero is a single digit.]

One-trick ponies like you only can drop your trou and moon adults & then think you're clever.

To add on to Gang of One's note, what is life without the life of the mind?
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 8:55 pm | #

ec1009

Dr. Sanity is far more educated and adult than the lizards & spewers of received opinions and fixed ideas prevailing on the sewage dumps that spawn bacteria like yourself.

Kossackville, Huff-Puff, Salon.com, I could go on as these amoebae do their mitosis to generate more single-celled morons in an endless series......

Evolve yourselves by a long detox from your usual intake of bad food, drink, drugs and moronic porn films of the mind like Noam Chomsky.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.08.07 - 9:00 pm | #

Just a comment about Sodamn Insane. He was Hitler Lite. He even had numerous grandiose Berchtesgadens, a/k/a palaces. Sodamn violated the 1991 Cease-Fire Agreement for over a decade, including thumbing his nose at the vaunted UN and it's paper tiger resolutions (maybe for that he deserves a medal). His neck is now properly stretched. The problem with that is? Oh, and let's not forget Salman Pak and the plane fusilage located there used to practice plane hijackings. (Hijackings aren't terror. Right.) Anyone who thinks Sodamn didn't get what he deserved is a fool. And there are apparently a lot of fools clicking over here from the fever swamps.

As for the war in Iraq, I am one of those who is against the handling of the war: We have been far too lenient. We screwed the pooch with Monkey Boy al-Sadr and Fallujah in 2004. The place should have been leveled with al-Sadr's corpse put on display, which would have sent the appropriate message that we are not kidding around. I haven't seen a poll that has the 'against the war because we haven't been tough enough' option. Having such a possible response on such polls would be telling.
RickZ | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 3:35 am | #

Nice comment RickZ. Unfortunately, that's todays effin' politics filled with these leftist losers; I mean literally, they really want to lose. And most of the time it seems they want to lose at everysinglethingthattheytouch kinda syndrome. Pathologically linked together; united with their heads (plural) so far up their collective ideological ass (singular), they are compelled to keep on coming, - this thread for instance - tiresomely screeching the usual meme's, "points", and ideological postmodern/multiculti BS. It's sad to see them struggle so damn hard for such a loosing cause. And to witness their denial can be quite breathtaking to observe. I can only shake my head and hope and pray for the future of our country.

~~~

PS - I have a question:

If some Dummies are Dhimmies and most Dhimmies are Democrats, are all Dummies Democrats?
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 4:56 am | #

Thanks, Jack. Been reading the good doctor for quite a while now, just never posted.

"I can only shake my head and hope and pray for the future of our country."

My troubling addendum to your thought is: The ignorants of today lead to the ignorance of tomorrow. And since many ignorants today are ignorant of history, well, it speaks for itself. I would not bet money against someday PhD's being offered, and courses taught, on BDS and Trooferism. And not from a 'they are psychotic' point of view, either.
RickZ | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 6:40 am | #

daveinboca.

You are free to believe in wherever the hell you want to believe.

Just don't come here trying to make me believe that after five years of war, you guys will win this thing with a "surge" while the Iraqi Government goes out on vacation.

It insults my "double digit" IQ, and that of my single digit IQ'ed dog, that by the way already understands this war better than people like you.

To me is not even a point of argument, but a fact. Bush will not get out of Iraq in any significant way, and the Democrats do not have the votes to force him out of Iraq before the next election. So all this back andn forth of "gettin out" os a mute point.

The Bush Administration is simply in a holding battle to keep a "policy" they hope will only give them some sense of political cover until the end of their term. After that they live the mess for some other SOB to solve.

Some time ago the Bush Administration came to the obvious conclusion that there are no good solutions in Iraq after the intractable mess they made of the occupation. The solution DOES NOT DEPEND ON OUR ARMY, it depends on the Iraqi people, and all the "staying" in the world will not make the Iraqi Government do what we want them to do. In fact it does the opposite. What pressure does the Iraqi Government has to make the hard choices if they know that the American Army will allways bail them out? Why will the Iraqi Government make any compromises if he knows Bush can't get out, for his political legacy depends on some "victory", and that "victory" depends 100% on the Iraqi Government..... Any one ever heard the expression they have you by the balls?--- Well Right Wingers, they do.

How could Bush, and you Right Wingers be so stupid, will be the topic of many history books, and books on this Adminsitration way into the future.

Iraq and all it's consecuences of regional instability in the vital oil region, and the power we handed in a silver platter to Iran will be your legacy Right WIngers. So no, you can rest assured we will not be living the region any time in the next fifty years (just look at Israel)for thanks to you, our Army will remain traped "fighting" a never ending supply of nuts in their own land.

That is why I am making myself (again) clear. MY POINT IS I WILL CAST MY VOTE, AND THAT OF ANY ONE I CAN DRAG TO THE VOTING POLLS TO MAKE SURE THE LIKE OF YOU, RIGHT WINGERS NEVER AGAIN GAIN POWER.

We gave you our trust, and you people made a mess of things. Your admission, or lack of it is irrelevant. I would be a fool to expect any apologies from the likes of you,and your so called "leaders" any regret, any introspection, any second toughts.

You are just to low in the human chain of evolution to have that kind of a reaction to your actions.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 10:46 am | #

Jack Ryan.

OH, and you and only you want to win!!!!!!!!

Hey pal, please grow up. Life is more than America depending on you and your Nut WIng pals "saving" us from our cowardice.

If you judge by the RESULTS or LACK OF RESULTS I should say, we don't need your facors. With "saviors" like you who needs enemies.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 10:56 am | #

gil, I don't normally rag on peoples spelling errors or grammar since we are all guilty of these minor mistakes, but you definitely take the cake in this department.

Perhaps you are very young or unaccustomed to proof reading, but if your ideas don't already classify you as a complete demoralized fool, your grammar and spelling leaves no room for doubt.

You should really brush up in this area before you come posting in a place full of people who have more intellect and honesty in their pinky than an entire platoon of illiterate and demoralized gil's can muster. Come back in a few months when you can actually make some sense and don't sound like a 9 year old who just lost his favorite Barbie doll, we may actually take you seriously then.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 11:29 am | #

"OH, and you and only you want to win!!!!!!!!"

Oh poor deluded gil. How come you hate America so damn much? Good luck in '08 indeed.

PS - It's WIng Nut, you idiot and I sure as hell ain't your pal.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 11:41 am | #

Given gil's evident lack of several essential mental qualities, the number of friends who would vote Dem based on HIS recommendation can probably be counted on a minority of fingers on one hand.

"Sophomoric" is too kind for his ilk, unless it refers to high school.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 12:45 pm | #

xman.

Thank you. I will try and hire you as my secretary.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:04 pm | #

Jack Rayan.

You have been called a "Wing Nut" so much you know it by hearth don't you?

Hey, not my problem you are a delusional full--- Or a Wing Nut -- Or maibe a Bush Lover boy in a cute pink shirt.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:08 pm | #

Gil wrote: "Our Army Sir, does not have enough soldiers to chase shadows trugh millions os square miles, and billions of people."

For just one brief instant (a few milliseconds), I thought I just might be discussing this with a member of the Army's G1 or G3 staff. But then I realized that I was talking to just another opinionated, ignorant liberal troll, who knows jack squat about the capabilities of today's army, how it is organized, or deployed.

And it is just as obvious, he has no idea of how our forces are being used today around the world in the fight against the Jihadists and terrorists.

For everybody BUT Gil and ec1009 (who have no interest in being truly informed because their tiny shit-for-brains minds are already made up), I'd recommend Robert D. Kaplan's "Imperial Grunts: On the Ground with the American Military, from Mongolia to the Philippines to Iraq and Beyond" and Dr. James S. Corum's "Fighting the War on Terror: A Counterinsurgency Strategy."

Kapalan is an author who also writes for the Atlantic Monthly. His is also a consultant to the US Army Special Forces, the US Marines, and US Air Force. He is a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and lectures at US military war and staff colleges.

Kaplan, in this book, describes how the US military, which he calls the most lethal, and effective military force in world history, is doing exactly what I described - chasing the Jihadists down, wherever they go and where ever they hide.

Corum, is an associate professor at the US Army and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, KA, and visiting fellow at Oxford University's All Souls College. When he tough at the Air University, he developed the course "Terrorism and Small Wars."

Corum describes what has gone wrong in both Iraq and Afghanistan (and in the Army's bureaucracy) and what is needed to complete the transition to the new force.

Both authors, who really ARE subject experts (unlike ignoramuses and fools gil and ec1009) show that you do not need to send 180,000 troops into a country to root out terrorists, but with proper coordination of agencies withing the US government and the military, a far, far smaller force would be much more effective.

As for the probable genocide of millions in Iraq should we cut and run the way the liberal Democrats want, gil and ec1009 prove that they (like ALL liberals) don't give a flying fuck about them, or anybody else. They are nothing but hypocrites and disloyal fools.

Ignore them.
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:11 pm | #

ec1009

Well, sir, you are entitled to your opinion.

Opinions, however, are like assholes. Everybody has one, but YOU are one of the biggest assholes on the net.

Now, why don't you go back to downloading porn from the net and masturbating. That's where your real expertise lies.

Have a nice conservative day.
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:14 pm | #

Daveniwherever.

Given you complete lack of answers to all my points I take it that you guys have none.

We have xman trying to get a job as my Secretary, you have Jack Rayan going histerical beause my dog has a better IQ than he does, and then we have you.

All three come out to absolute cero. I only got insults (that I am trowing right back at you) , and job solicitations from starving Right-wingers.

But real dabate?

Of course not, I noticed none of you had any answers to my remarks.

Hey Right Wingers we are winning in Iraq right? Just never enough for our troops to live right?

Last I heard that's called Bull Shit from loosers that could never deliver. Hey, sorry I call it for what it is. By the end of the Bush Administration we'll still be hearing from you " We are making progress", "We are winning now"

PATHETIC.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:15 pm | #

GeorgeJ

Since you know that we do have the troops to go invading Syria, Iran, Jordan, etc. can you please be more specific and point to us "ignorant" people where they are??? Or if you can't then, admit that you are just your run-of-the-mill bull shitter Right Winger on LSD.

If as you say we don't need to send 180,00 troops to get al-Quaida then what on hearth are we doing in Iraq? Is it not going after al-Quida???? Or do you actually believe Bush's Bull that we are there to give Iraq peace and prosperity.... In the year 3000?

What a concept!!! We don't need 180,000 troops to go after al-Quaida no shit!!!!! Hey , don't tell me that, tell that to your fellow Right Wing nut Georgej, he was the one that said "We follow them wherever they go and fight them" In the context of INVADING the countries that harbor them. Is not my problem you are all nuts.

Our Army indeed does not have enough soldiers to INVADE all the countries where al-Quaida can hide, re-group, and vacation while going back and forth trough the Iraqi border at will. THAT'S WHAT I MENT.

In that context pal, you'll need a bit more than 180,000 troops. That is if you want to go after a billion Arabs.

The fact AGAIN is that no one is getting out of Iraq, we will down size our forces, and Bush is playing for time to get the hell out of office, and live the problem to some one else.

I notice you guys continue to ignore this FACTS. Your policy collapsed a long time ago. Your "fighting" al-Quaida is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the contention that the Right Wing contiues to make that the present surge will give us any "victory". No it will not, it will only buy time for Bush with the blood of our soldiers.

Bush is not man enough to finish the mess he created, and you guys are his enablers, it's as simple as that.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:33 pm | #

Georgej

I was not the asshole that said "We go get the terrorists wherever they are" . In the context of invading Iran, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Libia, Moroco, Sudan, Pakistan, etc, etc.

That remark was yours.

I might be an asshole, but in YOUR case the "asshole" part is frankly the least of your worries. Your ideas clearly show that you demented--- That's your problem --
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:40 pm | #

Since no one contradicted my idea that Bush is simply playing for time with this surge I'll take it you all agree, but can say it because that will give you an automatic ejection from your friendly Right WIng Nut Club.

The present "surge" just like the ones before will of course be successful. But then again our Army has allways been successfull. The problem is not the Army, the problem is Bush's (and his ass kissers) so called policy. The U.S. Army can win all the battles, but can't give Bush the balls to call them home becuase there's nothing more to do can they?

The Army can't give the Iraqi government the will to compromise can it? The Army can't stop the killing among Iraqies that goes on every day can they?

In short the Army can win and already did. The problem is that you idiots keep on giving our Army a mission that does not fit their responsabilities. Our Army is a fighting force, not a baby- sitting contractor, or a nation builder in perpetuity.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 5:56 pm | #

"I might be an asshole" gil

As your potential secretary, that statement would have been more accurate had the words "might be" been replaced with "am".

That one was free, you could not afford me otherwise.

.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 6:51 pm | #

Of course, I answered all nimrod's points, but his single-digit IQ simply doesn't register. He should read through the contributions of Georgej and others like myself and try to comprehend first, before responding.

But that would be grownup behavior and as the good Doctor Sanity knows, acting like an adult and responding to answers doesn't square with leftist gibberish like gil's.

Gil's grammar, spelling, and embryonic thought processes reveal a pre-school level of development---either K or pre-K, it's hard to tell.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.09.07 - 10:27 pm | #

Gil wrote:

"If as you say we don't need to send 180,00 troops to get al-Quaida then what on hearth are we doing in Iraq?"

Trying to rebuild it. Like we did Germany and Japan after WWII, and South Korea after the Korean Armistice. Have you forgotten history?

The war to topple Saddam was a conventional "state vs state" war, which required a large invasion force. Even so, our invasion force was much smaller than "conventional wisdom" called for.

Iraq was a state with well developed conventional forces, including (on paper) 6 Republican Guard divisions, 17 regular army divisions, organized artillery batteries and anti-aircraft defenses, and some 15 "people's army" units of irregulars. Included on his side there were also an undetermined number of Al Qaeda groups, including Ansar al-Islam, which was actively operating in the Kurdish part of Iraq, fighting the Kurds. Our invasion force was much smaller in size than the "conventional" 3 to 1 attacker to defender ratio of previous wars. That's because as Kaplan says, our military is the most lethal and efficient in history.

As n example, my recollection is that at Baghdad, the Army and Marines were (on paper again), outnumbered 3 to 1 before cutting through them like shit through a goose.

Watch the number of troops in Iraq start to come down next year to a level below that before the surge, as things improve and as Al Qaeda gets eradicated. That is as it should be, based upon the battlefield, not the arbitrary "cut and run" calendar that the Democratic Party defeatists would like to implement.

Gil wrote:

"Our Army indeed does not have enough soldiers to INVADE all the countries where al-Quaida can hide, re-group, and vacation while going back and forth trough the Iraqi border at will. THAT'S WHAT I MENT."

You are under the mistaken impression that we have to invade a country with massive number of troops to take out Al Qaeda.

We don't. And if you weren't an ignorant dilettante, you'd know that.

For example, in 2001-2002, the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan were taken down by less than 7,000 US troops.

We have
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 5:24 am | #

Apparently I exceeded the abilities of this blog when I used the "less than" sign.

Let me continue.

We have less than 3000 troops in the Horn of Africa, chasing down Al Qaeda in Somalia, Uganda, Djibouti, Senegal and São Tomé and Príncipe. We have a small number of troops in Jordan, working with the kingdom. We have troops working with the governments of Columbia and the Philippines fighting terrorists trying to gain a foothold there, expecially Al Qaeda affiliate Abu Sayyaf (founded by bin Laden's cousin). And he have troops and bases in the "stans" and Mongolia, eradicating the Jihadists there. And, of course, we are operating in Pakistan, in the tribal areas, taking shots at Al Qaeda's leadership whenever we get one.

As for Syria and Iran, we already have the troops necessary to deal with them in the region. Both countries are effectively surrounded. And Syria has the potential of a two front war with the second front being Israel.

Read Kaplan and Corum and get a clue, here.

Gil also wrote:

"Since no one contradicted my idea that Bush is simply playing for time with this surge I'll take it you all agree," and "you idiots keep on giving our Army a mission that does not fit their responsabilities. Our Army is a fighting force, not a baby- sitting contractor, or a nation builder in perpetuity."

I'm curious, did you get your "arm-chair general's" commission from cracker jack or did you self-promote yourself?

I mean, you know SOOOO much about our military and how it operates (not).

Did you feel this way about Kosovo and Bosnia? I bet you didn't, seeing as it was one of Bill Clinton's military adventures that had ZERO connection to America's national security needs.

Just for snicks, before you go back to salon.com to play with your fellow leftist wankers there, look up the post war occupation of Japan and Germany, and why we still have troops in South Korea.

Now, before I start ignoring you, do you have any other "points" you want to make? Or are you finished making meaningless noises?
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 5:49 am | #

Georgej

Nice spanking, nicely administered. I wish I had the patience to round on every troll with the meticulous accuracy you exhibit.

I read Fred Kaplan in Slate & Robert D. Kaplan in book form---Fred is first rate and Robert D. first-in-his-class as a long-term strategic thinker. His excellent hour-long piece on PBS was the best thing that liberal agitprop outfit has done to justify continuing to get taxpayer's dollars---though it still falls short. You left out our operation in Mali that the Kaplan PBS show covers.

I also like Ralph Peters & VDHanson [esp. in The War Like No Other. Drive-by MSM Green Zoners predominate, though I like John Byrnes & Michael Gordon episodically, and rarely George Packer, who did do a nice short page on my former mentor Hume Horan in Assassin's Gate. Who's Corum?

Sorry for my misguided and misdirected intemperate remarks---I'm drawing SocSec & occasionally miss a beat, as Jack Ryan noted.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 8:53 am | #

Though your rebuttals will fall on deaf ears considering it's intended target, I certainly appreciate the info. Always learn something new from the brain trust that regularly post on this site.

Have a fine day folks and keep up the good fight against misinformation.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 9:54 am | #

Dave, don't worry about it. I figured you confused my post with one of gil's.

What is important in the long run, ladies and gentlemen, is that the idiocy is answered with the truth. We laughed at the truthers, instead of ruthlessly crushing them at the very beginning, and now 42% of Democrats think that George W. Bush had something to do with 9/11, either causing it or allowing it to happen.

To those of you who bothered to reply to these morons, you are doing what is needed to combat the nonsense and lies. Thank you. The left has been using the "big lie" technique since 1917 because it works on their gullible followers (the "useful idiots" as Lenin called them) and such lies are best answered by truth.

Treating the moonbats for their paranoia, denial, and displacement is, thankfully, Dr. Pat's job. She's trained for it, after all. I wish her luck.
Georgej | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 1:18 pm | #

xman.

Since you are now my new secretary at a minimum wage please stop complaining about my ass or I will fire your ass.

OH, and shave your legs, and loose some weight you look like shit.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 6:26 pm | #

daveinboca.

You know pal, I have better debates with my dog. You are pathetic. Do you have any ideas at all on Iraq other than "The Leftards are loosing".

Wow!! You have some intellect!!

This blog predictable has degenerated into a bunch of idiotic Right WIngers insulting, and me counter-insulting them and lowering my IQ in the process.

I'll live you with my dog. I know he'll be angry with me, but he is more than enough to kick you all asses. Frankly you are not worth my time any longer.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 6:31 pm | #

GeorgeJ

We were trying to rebuild Europe and Japan.... But in Iraq every one is shooting at us, and the "Iraqi people" are killing themselves. You sense of history sucks pal.

Or do you remember the Germans, and Japanese attacking themselves, and U.S. troops???????

I am not under any mistaken understanding about al-Quaida ... What is going on is that you are not reading my posts.

I said that there is no way we can go around invading the countries that will harbor al-quaida fighters.... What part of that do you not understand? My coment came after one of your nut friends posted a reply that red " We go after them wherever they are ". That remark is delusional.

They are in Iran..... Are we going after them in Iran??????

They are in Syria..... Are we going after them in Syria?????

Because they can cross borders at will, al Quaida can pick their fights and since they are not obsessed with ego like you people, they don't mind "cutting and running" if it fits their tactic. They are in this fight for the long run, they want our Army in the region, and you people are playing into their hands.

Thepresent surge is a perfect example. How many surges has our Army done in Iraq????? What has been the result of all of them???? What makes you think that insurgents, militias, and al-Quaida will stay and fight our forces ????

Why don't you answer hose questions?
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 6:42 pm | #

GeorgeJ

"Idiocy is answered with the truth"

Yes, George.... Your idiocy needs to be answerd with the truth.

Or maibe you can elaborate about what "idiocy" are you talking about. But be careful..... You and your crowd are the ones that have us five years and counting in Iraq--- With shit to show for.

Now that pal is no talk, that is DEMONSTRATED, UNADULTERATED, AND PURE IDIOCY AT IT'S BEST.

Where's Rummy George??? Where's Wolfowitz George???? In fact where are all the IDIOT NEO-CONS your crowd worshiped George??????

I give you this tough. When it comes to Idiocy your crowd knows the subject.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 6:49 pm | #

If we leave iraq before the job is done, we'll look weak.

Thus the reason American soldiers will have to die in Iraq is due to the vanity of the American public.

BTW, nice job with that war. (LOL)
Robert | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 7:04 pm | #

Listen Right Wings.

I will try my best to go back to debating you and stop the insult fest you guys allways end up with.

This is my point.

George W Bush's "Presidency" is nothing but an extended holding action in many fronts, not just Iraq. And you people are the enabelers.

Donald Rumsfeld, your beloved (but fired) former Defense Secretary, once described the Iraqi resistance as a "few dead-enders" who refused to acknowledge that the world around them had changed. Increasingly this phrase applies as a self-portrait of the Bush Administration, and the Republican Party. So forget the "decider" and welcome the "dead-ender.

Don't you find it pathetic that the same "dead-enders" that Rumsfeld ignored, are now our allies Vs. al Quaida and the crowning achievement presented by Gen. Petraeus in the Ambar region, and our most resent surge? Is that what it has come to Right Wingers?????

Those "dead-enders" by Rummy now are our "allies", and Rummy is in the trash.... SO you tell me who was in the end the "dead-ender" here ??????

You Right Wingers have no strategy--- You just trow a bunch of shit to the wall, and see if it sticks-- That's your strategy.

In the end Bush will prolong this war until he gets out (THIS IS ABOUT THE TENTH TIME I SAY IT) and some other SOB get's to make the hard choices and solve the mess he created with your help.

That's the only real strategy you guys have.

All the rest is just noice on your part. At this time next year you'll still be asking for more time, and saying that results are just around the corner. At this time this year the Iraqi Government will still be dead locked, but you'll still be blaming the Democrats for it--- Go figure. At this time next year Bush will be saying that he is winning, and that it will be a cake walk for the next President to finish what he started--- But never finished.

Maibe you Right WIngers are really dumb, and not faking it for political reasons. Maibe you actually believe that the reason you guys never had a victory in Iraq was because the Democrats attacked your "policy", and not because the IRAQI GOVERNMENT, AND BY EXTENSION THE IRAQI PEOPLE, HAD THEIR OWN IDEAS AND NEVER GAVE A RAT'S ASS ABOUT YOURS.

But then again, maibe you just know it and can't accept it because that will be accepting that your ideas were wrong-- And your ideas are never wrong!!!! We have our Army to prove you right till the last man!!

What valor Right Wingers, what patriotism!!!! I am impresed.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 7:18 pm | #

Right Wingers.

Gen. Petraeus is saying that the surge is a success. He of course is talking about the MILITARY part.

When it comes to the poltical part, and if I mish add the MOST IMPORTANT PART, and reason why we had a surge in the first place--- Petraeus declared himslef disapointed.

No surprise there.

Petraeus also said that he will start sendin Soldiers back to America starting NOW. And that by next Spring aproximately 30,000 more troops will follow. Again no surprise here, because the units coming back can't be rotated any more after the 12 to 15 month extension. But an acceptance by Petraeus never the less, that WE NEED TO START PULLING OUT.

Of course at that moment you guys will like magic "change your minds" and start sayingthat we need to reduce our forces, re-deploy--- And in short start talking like Congresman Murtha.

For now you don't have the permission of your elders-- Or the talking points.

By the way, The "pull out" next Spring is the last one in the Bush Administration. After that Bush is off to the Golf course and some new President will have to figure out how to really solve the mess in Iraq.

At this point George W. Bush will go down in history as among the worst, if not the worst President in our history. Hell, the idiot makes you cry with nostalgia for the Nixon years.

Any WMD's found under your bed Right Wingers??? "W" still looking you know.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 7:37 pm | #

From your spelling, grammar, and punctuation, you have to be an ESL trying to work on his English-language skills.

Otherwise you are simply a johnny one-note repeating the same thing endlessly, like a broken record.

Your dishonesty is so transparent that there is no need to even debate someone who simply repeats himself endlessly, like a tantrum-prone toddler in his terrible twos.

Just to have to parse your semi-literate mis-spelled gibberish is an insult to literate people. Get some ideas and stop repeating a leftist trope you learned somewhere in a second-rate high school---your emotional development is two years old, your intellectual a freshman in high school.

I will admit that whenever idiots like gil come along, it's like five minutes in an arcade playing Whack-a-mole [Karl Marx's old mole, the revolution] with revolting mouth-breathing slack-jaws from south of the border like this silly-boy.

It's fun.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 7:40 pm | #

"You know pal, I have better debates with my dog." ~ gil

Well, of course you do. Your dog has more intelligent than you and is most assuredly a challenge for your level of intellect. Sheesh!

/Stating the obvious.
RickZ | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 9:51 pm | #

gil, take your meds, they are wearing off by your obvious mental brake down. I would also like to suggest you stop talking to your dog. It's weird and someone may call the state and have you sent to the loony bin. Not that you don't deserve to be there.

lol, daveinboca and RickZ, so true...I could not bring myself to read anymore of gil's melt down.

.
xman | Email | Homepage | 09.10.07 - 11:55 pm | #

daveincoca.

Since you have no idea how to answer my remarks, you go back in circles about my grammar.

Hey idiot. If you can't answer back about the topic of this blog just say so. Stop B.S. ing about grammar. Your grammar stinks to high heaven, and I am not complaining like you.

If you want a spelling bee blog get out of this one. Your last ten posts are not even related to the topic of Iraq.

In fact do you even know where Iraq is idiot? Consult your grammar and see if that can help you find Iraq in the map, and resove the mess your God Bush made.

Is your grammar giving you any answers now?????
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.11.07 - 6:13 pm | #

Rickz

This is Gil's dog.

Pal, you are not even worth my time. Get a life, and please get a brain.

By the way I noticed that all you loosers have not been able to answer any of the questions and remarks made by my owner limiting yourselves to insults. LOOSERS!!!!

I know that the ass-whipping you idiots got from Gil left you no option but to try to insult him. That's understandable from the low class bottom feeders you all are.

You can't answer back, so you insult.

Rickz I am demoting you to try and argue with the cat--- Like I said you are not worth my time.

BY the way dear Right WIngers I know you are all DUMB-- But let me remind you that the topic of this blog was not Gil, it was Iraq.
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.11.07 - 6:23 pm | #

xman.

I know you loosers can't stop talking about me because you got an ass-wipping on Iraq, but let me remind you that the topic of the blog IS IRAQ.

Now I know that you are too dumb to consider any of the ideas that I posted, or respond to them, or answer to any of my questions--- But at least to could try to make pretend you know jack shit about the subject of this blog.

It's getting enbarrassing for you all. Is that all you dumbos have?

I don't know about drugs Xman. I do know about assholes evading the subject--- this blog has plenty of them, right xman?
gil | Email | Homepage | 09.11.07 - 6:29 pm | #

This guy is dead above the neck. Look at several posts above, gil, if you can read that much, and see how I explain in exquisite detail what is wrong with Iraq, which I have personally visited if you check my posts. I lived in Saudi, Lebanon, and Egypt and visited Baghdad. You'd know that if you read my posts on this thread. Have you ever been outside Hoboken, or Belize, or whereever you never learned the English language?

And for you to insult someone else's grammar is like being called ugly by a frog. Or in your case, your smarter pet dog [than you, that is].

Amazing how idiots and fools don't bother to check the previous fifty posts or so in the same thread. But this dude gil is one rara avis, though he'll never know what that means.

Google it, moron, and learn. As they say in French [I also lived two years in Lyon, moron] "Va te faire foutre chez les Grecs."

Whacking moles is soooo much fun!!!
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 09.12.07 - 12:08 am | #