Cut & Run Liberals

JustanObserver wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Yeah man! Let's go kick their rightie butts!

Right On!

Say Truth to The Power!

Gotta admit... 5 deferments for Cheney certainly doesn't look good. He sends our boys to war but didn't answer the call(s) himself.

He sent our boys to war?

You obviously are confusing the Vice President for the President.

I suspect, for some reason, that you are a relatively young man. Perhaps I'm wrong, but if you came of age during the Vietnam War you would know that it was not uncommon for young men to seek any deferment that might be available. I didn't then and I don't know think that this was a sign of their cowardice. I was lucky, the draft was ended a year before I turned 19, many of my friends were not so lucky. When we came along, deferments were gone. If they called your number, you were going.

The interesting thing is that during those days, Liberals would never criticize anyone for seeking a deferment. In fact, how many today would criticize another Liberal for doing so? Remember Billy Clinton? He sent our boys to war -- didn't he?

For some reason though Liberals have become ultra-patriotic warriors when it comes to conservative politicians who sought the same deferments in their youth as did liberals.

Of course the suggestion could be that the Cheney's of the world are hypocrites who in their youth avoided war but in their dotage, fomented it.

Again, I don't know how old you are, but my bet is that 40 years from now you will not want to be judged on the actions and decisions of your youth. I know that there are numerous actions and positions which I took in my youth of which I am proud, but which I would not agree with now. There are also numerous actions and positions which I took in my youth of which I am now somewhat embarrassed.

If the country made me president when I was 18 I would be quite a different chief executive than if it granted me the position now when I am 52.

Currently we have an all volunteer military; back then we relied upon the draft. Clearly this is a major distinction.

Sending our boys who signed up to fight for their country to war and sending our boys who would be doing anything else possible is quite different. I have great respect for our volunteer army, but I don't have any ill regard for those who sought to avoid the draft during the Vietnam War. Who knows what they would have done in the case of a different war and at a different time?

In any case it is a specious argument that the politicians who send young men and women into combat need to have experienced it themselves.

Be against the war in Iraq. There are plenty of reasons to find yourself in such a position without having to manufacture a plethora of inconsequential arguments.

0 Replies

Quote:

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

Quote:

"I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."

George W. Bush

source

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Let's be sure that every potential future enemy knows that they only have to hold out for a few years, and we'll cut and run, that a theat by us is not credible, because we don't have the resolve to make good on it.

nice to see you acknowledge that it's only a couple more years of you lie and die dickheads.....

You misunderstand what I said. I mean they will know that in any future conflict, if they can survive a few years, we'll lose our guts and go home.

That must be why North Korea and Iran are doing so much saber rattling. They know the US will only stay for 4 years.

Or is it because they know we are bogged down in a war that is taking a lot of time and treasure and stretching our military to its limit?

Which do you think it is?

0 Replies

Zarqawi's death marks bloody downturn for US in Iraq

Armchair warriors in the White House and in Congress continue to argue that in theory "staying the course" is better than "cutting and running." Meanwhile, in fact, our soldiers are dying by the dozen each week, not to mention dozens of innocent Iraqis.

When will this madness end? How many young lives must be obliterated before working Americans realize that this war is being fought so that a tiny minority of the world's population can live like kings?

0 Replies

Zarqawi's death marks bloody downturn for US in Iraq

Armchair warriors in the White House and in Congress continue to argue that in theory "staying the course" is better than "cutting and running." Meanwhile, in fact, our soldiers are dying by the dozen each week, not to mention dozens of innocent Iraqis.

When will this madness end? How many young lives must be obliterated before working Americans realize that this war is being fought so that a tiny minority of the world's population can live like kings?

0 Replies

Meanwhile the cut and run Pentagon has created a plan to pull the troops out.

Those dang liberals in the Pentagon. Why is Rummy letting them run the show?

0 Replies

Parados, right you are! I bet Gen. Casey voted for Clinton.

I gather that the cliche for the right is "stay and get killed." How patriotic!

Actually, cut and run sounds pretty good if it means getting our troops out of harm's way in this meat-grinder of a war, into which Bush lied us. Maybe we can win back some of the esteem of the rest of the world.

0 Replies

Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are saving the American public from certain death at the hands of the terrorists.

Do people place so little value on their lives that they would question the actions of our leaders?

Let us stop the partisan bickering and standy behind our leaders. Otherwise we may soon see the mushroom cloud.

0 Replies

George Jetson wrote:

Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are saving the American public from certain death at the hands of the terrorists.

Do people place so little value on their lives that they would question the actions of our leaders?

Let us stop the partisan bickering and standy behind our leaders. Otherwise we may soon see the mushroom cloud.

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/5890/laughing7zl.gif

0 Replies

George, please tell me whether you supported Clinton's actions against terrorism. I don't recall anyone from the right backing Clinton on anything.

As you well know, Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism, and was not a threat to us. Bush attacked Iraq for oil and political capital. Thus, backing Bush would be unpatriotic.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

George, please tell me whether you supported Clinton's actions against terrorism. I don't recall anyone from the right backing Clinton on anything.

As you well know, Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism, and was not a threat to us. Bush attacked Iraq for oil and political capital. Thus, backing Bush would be unpatriotic.

Frankly, I think that backing Bush is treasonous. Have we ever had any other person in the office of the presidency acting like the world's worst dictator? This administraton makes Nixon look like a kindly Sunday school teacher.

0 Replies

Magginkat wrote:

Advocate wrote:
George, please tell me whether you supported Clinton's actions against terrorism. I don't recall anyone from the right backing Clinton on anything.

As you well know, Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism, and was not a threat to us. Bush attacked Iraq for oil and political capital. Thus, backing Bush would be unpatriotic.

Frankly, I think that backing Bush is treasonous. Have we ever had any other person in the office of the presidency acting like the world's worst dictator? This administraton makes Nixon look like a kindly Sunday school teacher.

Do you really get off by spouting the same old tired and utterly hyperbolic crap?

Bush, "the world's worst dictator?"

Do you really and truly believe Bush is worse than

Al-Bashir
Anastacio Somaza
Breshnev
Caligula
Ceaucescu
Charles Taylor
Crown Prince Abdullah
Fidel Castro
Franco
Genghis Kahn
Hitler
Hu Jintao
Idi Amin
Islam Karimov
Ismail Enver
Ivan The Terrible
Kim Jung Il
Krushchev
Lenin
Mao
Milosevic
Mobutu Sese Seko
Mugabe
Mullah Omar
Mussolini
Napolean
Nero
Nicholas II
Oliver Cromwell
Papa Doc Duvalier
Pinochet
Pol Pot
Saddam
Salazar
Stalin
Suharto
Than Shwe
Theodore II of Absynnia
Tito
Tojo

(Just to name a few)

Do you ever come up for air and take a look at what you are writing or does it all flow forth in some sort of semi-orgasmic surge of idiocy?

You, and all those who come flocking to your lunatic banner might be laughable if there weren't so damn many of you.

0 Replies

If he had any brains, yes.

0 Replies

Amigo wrote:

If he had any brains, yes.

"If he had any brains, yes?"

"What's the frequency Kenneth?"

"Your ear."

"No soap, radio."

0 Replies

Amigo wrote:

If he had any brains, yes.

yeap.

The fukktard is a rank amateur monarch-wannabe so head-thickend and brow-lowered with caste-based inbreeding that the lowest markers of general intelligence - like sentence construction and primary mathematics - are debased to a point where the poor fukktard must weep every morning in sub-mongoloid rage that he is unable to carry out even the most basic functions of human existence and thought, like logic and a$$-wiping, so he is surrounded by stewards and toadies who do it all for him, all the "If a and b, then c" (for, surely, left to his own devices, the President's logical progression would be something like, "If a and b, then tuna") and ensuring that the Commander in Chief doesn't have a vague $hit smell coming off him.

I must congratulate Finn for his list of pyschopaths, the list also showed that each of those monsters at least had some innate intelligence and capabilites going for him, unlike George Walker Bush who attained his station in life by merely being the fastest swimming sperm in his daddy's nut sack.

(on correction, that last also goes for Kim Jung Il and his daddy's nut sack sperm)

0 Replies

George Jetson wrote:

Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are saving the American public from certain death at the hands of the terrorists.
Let us stop the partisan bickering and standy behind our leaders. Otherwise we may soon see the mushroom cloud.

We've seen the mushroom cloud, we perfected it. Now, with reason, we fear it.

Do people place so little value on their lives that they would question the actions of our leaders?

Are you kidding?

0 Replies

Quote:

Finn d'Abuzz
Do you really get off by spouting the same old tired and utterly hyperbolic crap?

Bush, "the world's worst dictator?"

Do you really and truly believe Bush is worse than

Saddam

YES! Because he has so many fools cheering every time he craps on the Constitution. If the shoe fits, wear it.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

George, please tell me whether you supported Clinton's actions against terrorism. I don't recall anyone from the right backing Clinton on anything.

As you well know, Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism, and was not a threat to us. Bush attacked Iraq for oil and political capital. Thus, backing Bush would be unpatriotic.

Not only did they not back any anti-terrorism bills that our last legally elected president tried to get through congress but idiots like Orin Hatch referred to the bills as a joke.

I wonder how big a joke Hatch now considers it, especially since we have the world's worst terrorist squatting in the White House?

0 Replies

A picture is worth a thousand words !

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v737/Magginkat/APresidentAFraud.jpg

0 Replies

k, you are eloquent and right on the mark.

A recent survey of terrorism analysts showed that the vast majority of them felt that our incursion in Iraq made world terrorism much worse. Bush and company love to say that fighting and killing terrorists in Iraq allows us not to have to fight and kill them here. Should any of you believe this, I have a wonderful bridge to sell to you.

0 Replies

Cut & Run Liberals

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know