Bush Supporters' Aftermath Thread III

JTT wrote:

Please check yourself back in, Okie. Do it for your family.

JTT, actually, I am not in favor of more troops. But I have been listening to many Democrats say for the last couple of years or more that more troops were needed and that Bush is not running the war correctly. Now, he admitted mistakes and is sending more troops. To be fair, some Democrats did not call for more troops, but for those that did, it seems now they totally forgot what they said. The obvious goal of many key Democrats from the very beginning of this is to "get Bush," which means to disagree with him no matter what he does.

Good advice. I will try to be more disciplined, but I admit my weakness. I know it isn't good for the trolls either, because the park rangers in Yellowstone had to make us quit giving the bears potato chips. They became spoiled and just made a habit of living out of the trash dumpsters. Thats probably what could happen here!

But I still can't resist pointing out again we've accomplished much of cicerone's 4 points: No WMD programs in Iraq, Hussein is gone, and there have been democratic elections in Iraq. Not bad so far.

okie wrote:

JTT wrote:

Please check yourself back in, Okie. Do it for your family.

JTT, actually, I am not in favor of more troops. But I have been listening to many Democrats say for the last couple of years or more that more troops were needed and that Bush is not running the war correctly. Now, he admitted mistakes and is sending more troops. To be fair, some Democrats did not call for more troops, but for those that did, it seems now they totally forgot what they said. The obvious goal of many key Democrats from the very beginning of this is to "get Bush," which means to disagree with him no matter what he does.

As I remember, Mr Rumsfeld declined to agree with the generals when they stated how many troops would be needed, at the outset.

Well I don't know what circles you move in, but I would lay odds that the large majority of Americans in most places consider unjustifiable killing of non-Americans to be every bit as offensive and reprehensible as killing of Americans. To listen to some of the rhetoric on this board (and the threads devoted to the Middle East) you might think many Americans find killing of non-Americans to be much more offensive and reprehensible as killing of Americans.

You especially see few, if any, liberals complaining when the terrorists kill Americans or anybody else. They blame George Bush for putting Americans in the line of fire or for giving the terrorists a reason to shoot at somebody, but you don't see much demanding that the terrorists pay any kind of penalty or retribution for the deaths.

The whole basis for this current line of discussion seems to be the notion of who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Many of the more anti-Bush, anti-military, and/or anti-American crowd seem to have the good guys and bad guys mixed up.

I totally disagree with Fox's opinion. According to her position, liberals don't have their parents, children or friends fighting in Iraq. Only conservatives understand this war for what it is; they have all of their relatives or friends in Iraq, and only they have losses.

Here I go feeding the trolls again. Man what a tough habit to break!

There is but one troll who infests this neck of the woods on a regular basis. It's not McT.

McT is a thoughtful, reasonably articulate poster, usually completely wrong in his views, but not given to invective or troll-like behavior.

Ticomaya wrote:

There is but one troll who infests this neck of the woods on a regular basis. It's not McT.

McT is a thoughtful, reasonably articulate poster, usually completely wrong in his views, but not given to invective or troll-like behavior.

My apologies to McTag then. I know it is not me because I am not regular. Now I am going back to bed.

okie wrote:

Here I go feeding the trolls again. Man what a tough habit to break!

You're okay.

c.i. is not a troll.

Ticomaya wrote:

okie wrote:

Here I go feeding the trolls again. Man what a tough habit to break!

You're okay.

c.i. is not a troll.

Perhaps not a troll, but he is a liberal who, deliberately and/or unintentionally, often reads as uncarefully as do many (most?) of the liberals who visit this thread; and he, like many of the other liberals, draws assumptions that are not only incorrect and unsubstantiated, but sometimes really over the top.

I think Okie can be forgiven for his so minutely minor gaffe in assigning troll status in this case.