Printable View
The Dems screwed up Vietnam, and the Reps are screwing up Iraq...
I just don't see an answer in either party for a war leader, look what a sorry job Willy Jeff Clinton did in Samolia, and that was just a tiny scirmish, not a war...
Good war leaders are an extinct species since the end of WWII, and it won't get any better with the three jokers we got running in November...
Exactly what business did we have in Somalia...that wasn't a war, it was part of a NATO mission. We need to keep our noses in our own business and the rest will take care of itself.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sup-rbeast</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That refers to the backing of the Palestinians...not Al Queda or the Taliban. Every Arab nation funds the Palistinians. BTW, I don't consider what they do to Isreal any more of a terrorist activity than what the Isrealis do to them. But, the Palistinians have been in the Middle East since biblical times...they are just fighting for what was taken from them 40 years ago...and I don't blame them. In closing, your proof is no proof as far as I'm concerned. </div></div>
"war on terror" means against all terrorist groups and those who fund said groups not any one group in particular
You need to find 1 before you get a hat trick...funding the Palistinians has nothing to do with the Taliban or Al Queda...and that's who started this war. Using your logic the US and NATO fund terrorism by backing and giving money to Isreal.
Oh bull$hit...that is nothing more than BUSH-speak...the war on terror is just an open mandate to fight whenever ya please. Bush trumped up reasons to go to Iraq, and it nothing to do with terror. The mission of the war on terror is almost as clear as the mission of the war on drugs...and both are doomed to faliure cuz they have no clear objective...just whiney a$$ pu$$ie$ in DC wanting to play cowboys and indians. I can't believe some of you fall for this $hit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sup-rbeast</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You need to find 1 before you get a hat trick...funding the Palistinians has nothing to do with the Taliban or Al Queda...and that's who started this war. Using your logic the US and NATO fund terrorism by backing and giving money to Isreal. </div></div>
wrong......its the palentians not the isrealis that are the problem
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sup-rbeast</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh bull$hit...that is nothing more than BUSH-speak...the war on terror is just an open mandate to fight whenever ya please. Bush trumped up reasons to go to Iraq, and it nothing to do with terror. The mission of the war on terror is almost as clear as the mission of the war on drugs...and both are doomed to faliure cuz they have no clear objective...just whiney a$$ pu$$ie$ in DC wanting to play cowboys and indians. I can't believe some of you fall for this $hit. </div></div>
what was it then?
i cant wait for this answer
let me go to the bathroom first so i dont piss myself from laughing
So, let's say a bunch of other countries brought a bunch of Canadians to NJ (because they didn't want them in their country)and threw you and your family out of NJ and told ya to go away that wasn't where you were from anymore, would you just tuck your tail and go? I sure as hell wouldn't. The Isrealis are as much of the problem as the Palistinians.
OK...list for me what you think the mission of the war on terror is...and then list what objectives you think we can possibly accomplish. Then do the same for the war on drugs. Get the point?