Thompson on the rise

Expound, what makes me "pretty much" a tool but not fully?

What war?

That's not bull****, that's truth. I'm not obligated to fight any war.

No I don't.

For all you know I am going to join the military, bud.

And guess what? That's the plan.

The "war" that is over, but some people still think is going on.

No, and I am not obligated to support any either,

cool how that works huh? But if you want to pitch around that you support the fighting, so long as it's not you doing it, than I will continue to refer to you as a chickenhawk.

So, you don't think we should be in Iraq fighting, hmmmm...

Good for you, hope it all works out and you finally get to go support the Iraqis in Iraq, it'd be a real shame if we leave before you get a chance to give it all you got huh?

I never said you were.

I don't care about Bush. At all. I cared before the war started, but now that it HAS started, it's too late. We failed to stop him. Now our failure is our obligation.

You can surrender if you have an obligation. I don't care about Saddam. I don't care. I don't care. I don't care. I don't care. I care about our obligation. That's it. That's all. Got it yet?

Really? What makes it mine but not yours?

Yes, you are. It was every American citizen's failure to stop Iraq.

Further reason we're obligated, thanks.

I don't think anyone's obligated to fight in Iraq. I think the soldiers are obligated to follow their contract.

That's it.

Not really. I wouldn't make much of a difference in the long run.

You didn't?

Their contracts that have them fighting in Iraq.

You are a defeatist on all fronts huh? Your presidental candidate, your role in making Iraq better nation, what else?

Nope. Not once did I say you're obligated to support the war.

Yes, but it's not because it's Iraq nor the fact that we invaded it for no reason.

It's because they signed a contract.

Defeatist? No, a realist. I'm just not a blind optimist, believing something's true because I want it to be true.

I provided you with your own quotes, you might want to re-read them. Like the one where you say, and I quote (again) "Yes, you are (obligated). It was every American citizen's failure to stop Iraq."

Maybe you are diluted, damn, bad call on my part.

You mean like the occupation of Iraq? Or that if we continue to stay there they will magically become a stable nation? Very interesting, and contradicting view.

Nice backpeddling, maybe you have a future in politics.

We must keep fighting Terrorist Islam, directly, without hesitation or apology. At the same time, however, we can't allow this struggle to bankrupt us. We'll need our strength to fight Red China, someday.

Nice comeback, you must be getting tired?

Yes, we would be right in taking on Iran.

We have no right to "take on" Iran. I'd like to hear a self-proclaimed libertarian justify invading yet another sovereign nation. It'd probably be interesting considering the inconsistent logic you're using to justify the continued occupation of Iraq.

Who said anything about invasion, Detective?

Define "take on" Iran.

Bomb them.

Bomb them.