Obama begins buildup in Afghanistan

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

wahoo, we get a new president, we begin ramping up a new/old war... yes we have been in afghanistan but we dont need to police the world... wtf..

Get a clue. Al Qaeda... you remember... the guys who actually hit us on 9-11... were holed up in Afghanistan where they were given sanctuary by the Taliban. Going after them, there is the war we were right to pursue, and it's the war we should have, and WOULD have won by now if the EX Traitor In Chief hadn't taken his eye off the ball to pursue his petty ego trip in Iraq.

The threat they pose is still real, and the fact that the Bushwhackos so totally screwed the pooch in every respect just allowed them to regain strength and renew their attacks on us and the rest of the world and made us that much less secure.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

wahoo, we get a new president, we begin ramping up a new/old war... yes we have been in afghanistan but we dont need to police the world... wtf..

Get a clue. Al Qaeda... you remember... the guys who actually hit us on 9-11... were holed up in Afghanistan where they were given sanctuary by the Taliban. Going after them, there is the war we were right to pursue, and it's the war we should have, and WOULD have won by now if the EX Traitor In Chief hadn't taken his eye off the ball to pursue his petty ego trip in Iraq.

The threat they pose is still real, and the fact that the Bushwhackos so totally screwed the pooch in every respect just allowed them to regain strength and renew their attacks on us and the rest of the world and made us that much less secure.

The only way to we get AQ is to invade Pakistan, a nuclear nation. There is a tight rope to walk in Afghanistan. Should be interesting to see how Obama handles it. Bush stayed with the remote drone\covert operation plan.

 

[Zebo]

I feel for our boys manning hilltop bunkers under daily assaults w/o adequate reinforcement and material support and think Obama is doing the right thing but until he seriously loosens ROG to include bombing of AQ/taliban funerals and follow thugs into wherever they go we are spinning our wheels. Better to GTFO than play tit for tat.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

wahoo, we get a new president, we begin ramping up a new/old war... yes we have been in afghanistan but we dont need to police the world... wtf..

Get a clue. Al Qaeda... you remember... the guys who actually hit us on 9-11... were holed up in Afghanistan where they were given sanctuary by the Taliban. Going after them, there is the war we were right to pursue, and it's the war we should have, and WOULD have won by now if the EX Traitor In Chief hadn't taken his eye off the ball to pursue his petty ego trip in Iraq.

The threat they pose is still real, and the fact that the Bushwhackos so totally screwed the pooch in every respect just allowed them to regain strength and renew their attacks on us and the rest of the world and made us that much less secure.

The only way to we get AQ is to invade Pakistan, a nuclear nation. There is a tight rope to walk in Afghanistan. Should be interesting to see how Obama handles it. Bush stayed with the remote drone\covert operation plan.

I think what we are doing in Pakistan is enough. Those cave-dwellers cant even take a comfortable dump now without thinking that a Hellfire may come through the window at any moment.

 

[Lemon law]

My only comment is that if Obama tries the same ole same ole Bush policies with a slightly higher troop count, he will flop worse than GWB did. Simply because the Taliban has adapted to the conditions and Nato and the USA have not, meaning we are rapidly running out of time. And if we can't come up with a new non military political strategy to address the problem, various institutions of stability in the region will soon totally collapse, on both the Afghan and Pakistani side of the border.

While Mullah Omer is somewhat the initial founder of the Taliban, and a rather dumb fellow in MHO, its now other less ideological leaders who are driving the agenda, and hopefully those new leaders will be more interested in political negotiations.

Any military solutions are total counterproductive pipe dreams unless we can come up with 600,000+ Nato troops for a starter. And that is for Afghanistan alone, any widening of the war will take far more troops
than a mere 600,000.

Just in 2008 alone, the civilian death toll is up 40%, 2008 looks to be far worse. Petraeus is totally correct, we will not kill our way out of the problem as the past seven years has shown.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

wahoo, we get a new president, we begin ramping up a new/old war... yes we have been in afghanistan but we dont need to police the world... wtf..

Get a clue. Al Qaeda... you remember... the guys who actually hit us on 9-11... were holed up in Afghanistan where they were given sanctuary by the Taliban. Going after them, there is the war we were right to pursue, and it's the war we should have, and WOULD have won by now if the EX Traitor In Chief hadn't taken his eye off the ball to pursue his petty ego trip in Iraq.

The threat they pose is still real, and the fact that the Bushwhackos so totally screwed the pooch in every respect just allowed them to regain strength and renew their attacks on us and the rest of the world and made us that much less secure.

Harvey, since no one else answered my question, perhaps you can. What exactly is our exit strategy in Afghanistan? What goals do we have?

I supported going in there, but since OBL and al-Zawahiri were allowed to escape into Pakistan, aren't we just now nation-building in Afghanistan?

Those who planned the attacks on 9/11 may have been overseas, but those who carried out the attacks were inside our borders. I support going after OBL and al-Zawahiri, but I don't support the nation-building, especially in countries that are no longer a threat to us. The casualties aren't worth it, and the financial costs aren't worth it, hell we can't afford either, IMO.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

wahoo, we get a new president, we begin ramping up a new/old war... yes we have been in afghanistan but we dont need to police the world... wtf..

Get a clue. Al Qaeda... you remember... the guys who actually hit us on 9-11... were holed up in Afghanistan where they were given sanctuary by the Taliban. Going after them, there is the war we were right to pursue, and it's the war we should have, and WOULD have won by now if the EX Traitor In Chief hadn't taken his eye off the ball to pursue his petty ego trip in Iraq.

The threat they pose is still real, and the fact that the Bushwhackos so totally screwed the pooch in every respect just allowed them to regain strength and renew their attacks on us and the rest of the world and made us that much less secure.

The only way to we get AQ is to invade Pakistan, a nuclear nation. There is a tight rope to walk in Afghanistan. Should be interesting to see how Obama handles it. Bush stayed with the remote drone\covert operation plan.

I think what we are doing in Pakistan is enough. Those cave-dwellers cant even take a comfortable dump now without thinking that a Hellfire may come through the window at any moment.

Problem is they are not in caves anymore , if they ever were in the first place. IMO this was a rouse to dehumanize them but anyway they have taken over huge cities in Pakistan.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Yes, we need to concentrate on Afghanistan. If we dumped the soldiers there instead of Iraq, we would at least have a chance at an exit-strategy by now.

:Q WTF are you smoking? This is the same war, different theater.

Body bags containing soldiers from Iraq = bad.
Body bags containing soldiers from Afghanistan = OK.

Afghanistan- Taliban government harbored and fostered AQ which attacked US interests in the US, Middle East, and Africa

Iraq- Not so much




How are they the same war again?

afghan war = legit war
iraq = bs that shouldn't of been started

All the fuckers who are in Iraq taking shots at us (because they can) will simply move and take shots at us in Afghanistan. Same fucking war.

Wrong. Iraq is a civil-war type issue. 2 Islamic factions who are in an armed struggle to control the country, and a seperatist Kurd faction in the North.

Yes, we catch Persian fighters and weapons, but that is Iran just meddling in some cold-war style action. Nothing new.

Afghanistan has a fragile and limited central government that we put in place. However, most of the country is lawless and some is under control of the Taliban and AQ, who need to be wiped out.

Oh OK. So we arent going to replace the government, because we like 'em. Instead, we're going to put tens of thousands of boots on the ground and do what we're doing in Iraq...patrol looking for bad guys, and get shot at by said bad guys.

Got it. Different war.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Yes, we need to concentrate on Afghanistan. If we dumped the soldiers there instead of Iraq, we would at least have a chance at an exit-strategy by now.

:Q WTF are you smoking? This is the same war, different theater.

Body bags containing soldiers from Iraq = bad.
Body bags containing soldiers from Afghanistan = OK.

Afghanistan- Taliban government harbored and fostered AQ which attacked US interests in the US, Middle East, and Africa

Iraq- Not so much




How are they the same war again?

afghan war = legit war
iraq = bs that shouldn't of been started

All the fuckers who are in Iraq taking shots at us (because they can) will simply move and take shots at us in Afghanistan. Same fucking war.

Wrong. Iraq is a civil-war type issue. 2 Islamic factions who are in an armed struggle to control the country, and a seperatist Kurd faction in the North.

Yes, we catch Persian fighters and weapons, but that is Iran just meddling in some cold-war style action. Nothing new.

Afghanistan has a fragile and limited central government that we put in place. However, most of the country is lawless and some is under control of the Taliban and AQ, who need to be wiped out.

Oh OK. So we arent going to replace the government, because we like 'em. Instead, we're going to put tens of thousands of boots on the ground and do what we're doing in Iraq...patrol looking for bad guys, and get shot at by said bad guys.

Got it. Different war.

So the fact that we "get shot at by bad guys" makes it the same war?


Ok, then.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Yes, we need to concentrate on Afghanistan. If we dumped the soldiers there instead of Iraq, we would at least have a chance at an exit-strategy by now.

:Q WTF are you smoking? This is the same war, different theater.

Body bags containing soldiers from Iraq = bad.
Body bags containing soldiers from Afghanistan = OK.

Afghanistan- Taliban government harbored and fostered AQ which attacked US interests in the US, Middle East, and Africa

Iraq- Not so much




How are they the same war again?

afghan war = legit war
iraq = bs that shouldn't of been started

All the fuckers who are in Iraq taking shots at us (because they can) will simply move and take shots at us in Afghanistan. Same fucking war.

Wrong. Iraq is a civil-war type issue. 2 Islamic factions who are in an armed struggle to control the country, and a seperatist Kurd faction in the North.

Yes, we catch Persian fighters and weapons, but that is Iran just meddling in some cold-war style action. Nothing new.

Afghanistan has a fragile and limited central government that we put in place. However, most of the country is lawless and some is under control of the Taliban and AQ, who need to be wiped out.

Oh OK. So we arent going to replace the government, because we like 'em. Instead, we're going to put tens of thousands of boots on the ground and do what we're doing in Iraq...patrol looking for bad guys, and get shot at by said bad guys.

Got it. Different war.

So the fact that we "get shot at by bad guys" makes it the same war?


Ok, then.

We will be in a country that poses no threat to us.

The government is a shell, and the country is run by the Taliban, whom we will be hunting by foot. Arent we hunting the bad guys on foot in Iraq?

The Taliban will be planting bombs for us to walk and drive over.

The Taliban has the support of the people (mostly by fear I suppose) and will be able to recruit others in their fight.

I guess in Iraq we have two factions that dont want us there, in Afghanastan we'll have one. Same net result.

We will be sending body bags home because of this.

Is any of this sounding familiar?

 

[Lemon law]

bamacre asks, " I supported going in there, but since OBL and al-Zawahiri were allowed to escape into Pakistan, aren't we just now nation-building in Afghanistan?"

Certainly nation building is what we should be doing in Afghanistan, but its been a tee total failure because we have allocated no resources towards any nation building. So call it what it is, nation tearing down leaving a legacy of total corruption and anarchy in Afghanistan. Somewhat the Afghan track record, Afghanistan has not had a stable government since 1937.

And now we wonder why the tribal areas of Pakistan want no part of that glorious Nato export of violence and anarchy?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Yes, we need to concentrate on Afghanistan. If we dumped the soldiers there instead of Iraq, we would at least have a chance at an exit-strategy by now.

:Q WTF are you smoking? This is the same war, different theater.

Body bags containing soldiers from Iraq = bad.
Body bags containing soldiers from Afghanistan = OK.

Afghanistan- Taliban government harbored and fostered AQ which attacked US interests in the US, Middle East, and Africa

Iraq- Not so much




How are they the same war again?

afghan war = legit war
iraq = bs that shouldn't of been started

All the fuckers who are in Iraq taking shots at us (because they can) will simply move and take shots at us in Afghanistan. Same fucking war.

Wrong. Iraq is a civil-war type issue. 2 Islamic factions who are in an armed struggle to control the country, and a seperatist Kurd faction in the North.

Yes, we catch Persian fighters and weapons, but that is Iran just meddling in some cold-war style action. Nothing new.

Afghanistan has a fragile and limited central government that we put in place. However, most of the country is lawless and some is under control of the Taliban and AQ, who need to be wiped out.

Oh OK. So we arent going to replace the government, because we like 'em. Instead, we're going to put tens of thousands of boots on the ground and do what we're doing in Iraq...patrol looking for bad guys, and get shot at by said bad guys.

Got it. Different war.

So the fact that we "get shot at by bad guys" makes it the same war?


Ok, then.

We will be in a country that poses no threat to us.

The government is a shell, and the country is run by the Taliban, whom we will be hunting by foot. Arent we hunting the bad guys on foot in Iraq?

The Taliban will be planting bombs for us to walk and drive over.

The Taliban has the support of the people (mostly by fear I suppose) and will be able to recruit others in their fight.

We will be sending body bags home because of this.

Is any of this sounding familiar?

You get it.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Zebo
-snip-
If by 'won' you mean we replaced a secular leadership ....... with Sharia law and fundis loyal to fundi Iran I guess you could conclude we 'won'. A victory for Shi'a Islam.

Seems to me you're saying that the curent Iraqi government is sectarian/religious fundi's etc.? If so, this is completely different than what I've read lately.

I've heard in the most recent elections that the "religious' candidates/parties got wiped out and replaced by secular candidates/parties. It looks to be widely considered an huge set-back to Iran also, as the party/candidates they were aligned with got wiped out too. By all indications I've seen those elections looked to be extremely positive and a very promising sign for the further improvement/development of Iraq etc.

Fern

 

[jpeyton]

OBL's head will make a nice trophy for the 2012 campaign. Not that Obama doesn't have his second term locked up already.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

We will be in a country that poses no threat to us.

The government is a shell, and the country is run by the Taliban, whom we will be hunting by foot. Arent we hunting the bad guys on foot in Iraq?

The Taliban will be planting bombs for us to walk and drive over.

The Taliban has the support of the people (mostly by fear I suppose) and will be able to recruit others in their fight.

I guess in Iraq we have two factions that dont want us there, in Afghanastan we'll have one. Same net result.

We will be sending body bags home because of this.

Is any of this sounding familiar?

LOL Keep going..


In Iraq, our soldiers wear pants. In Afghanistan, they wear pants as well.







If you seriously dont see the difference between the two, then you arent really someone who should be discussing the issue. The bolded part gives you away. Both (D) and (R) are united in the stand against AQ and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That speaks volumes.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
bamacre asks, " I supported going in there, but since OBL and al-Zawahiri were allowed to escape into Pakistan, aren't we just now nation-building in Afghanistan?"

Certainly nation building is what we should be doing in Afghanistan, but its been a tee total failure because we have allocated no resources towards any nation building. So call it what it is, nation tearing down leaving a legacy of total corruption and anarchy in Afghanistan. Somewhat the Afghan track record, Afghanistan has not had a stable government since 1937.

And now we wonder why the tribal areas of Pakistan want no part of that glorious Nato export of violence and anarchy?

And yet our government thinks we can put a stable gov't there?

Maybe I am pessimistic, but I see us throwing away more men and women, and more trillions of dollars into another failure.

This isn't change.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: blackangst1

We will be in a country that poses no threat to us.

The government is a shell, and the country is run by the Taliban, whom we will be hunting by foot. Arent we hunting the bad guys on foot in Iraq?

The Taliban will be planting bombs for us to walk and drive over.

The Taliban has the support of the people (mostly by fear I suppose) and will be able to recruit others in their fight.

I guess in Iraq we have two factions that dont want us there, in Afghanastan we'll have one. Same net result.

We will be sending body bags home because of this.

Is any of this sounding familiar?

LOL Keep going..


In Iraq, our soldiers wear pants. In Afghanistan, they wear pants as well.







If you seriously dont see the difference between the two, then you arent really someone who should be discussing the issue. The bolded part gives you away. Both (D) and (R) are united in the stand against AQ and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That speaks volumes.

And if you dont see there are more similarities than differences, you are blind as hell.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Zebo
-snip-
If by 'won' you mean we replaced a secular leadership ....... with Sharia law and fundis loyal to fundi Iran I guess you could conclude we 'won'. A victory for Shi'a Islam.

Seems to me you're saying that the curent Iraqi government is sectarian/religious fundi's etc.? If so, this is completely different than what I've read lately.

I've heard in the most recent elections that the "religious' candidates/parties got wiped out and replaced by secular candidates/parties. It looks to be widely considered an huge set-back to Iran also, as the party/candidates they were aligned with got wiped out too. By all indications I've seen those elections looked to be extremely positive and a very promising sign for the further improvement/development of Iraq etc.

Fern

I hesitant to reply to a snippet, out of context and such but google some of the parties I mentioned and add "killed in Iraq" then get back to me on great democracy we made in iraq. While you're at it listen here http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/02/13/dahr-jamail-9/ about the rising discontent among members of Sunni ?Awakening? groups, the incredibly high potential for violence in a politically unstable country. Anf if that wasnt enough read the Iraq const - sharia trough and through. Dont believe the hype.

 

[magomago]

I think Afghanistan is more about its geographic location more than anything else. We can put pressure on a lot of countries from there - I doubt the chinese would really like us there to counter their growing influence in central Asia.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The one nation in the world that has never been conquered. We ain't winning without nukes. We use nukes .I guess we all know than who the next World want to be ruler is.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: bamacre
So what exactly are we still doing in Afghanistan, and what exactly is our exit strategy?

Well considering we haven't really done anything there up until now we have a lot to do. Bush really made shit hard for his successor.

How so? We won in iraq, now focus elsewhere. If anything Bush left things pretty much cleaned up war wise.

You have an interesting way of looking at 'won'

If by 'won' you mean we replaced a secular leadership where minorities of Chirstains, Druze, Liquor sellers, discos, barbers, homosexuals, etc were protected but instead replaced with Sharia law and fundis loyal to fundi Iran I guess you could conclude we 'won'. A victory for Shi'a Islam.


If by 'won' you mean bribes paying the thugs off so they pretty please stop killing us so we can make a somewhat honorable retreat to the simple minded, then we won.

Stop kidding yourself, soon as we leave, all hell will break loose. Because the Sunni will never accept second class status to the 'rarefied dogs' Shia.


I need not mention the 3 trillion spent and 4500 American lives wasted for the 'winning' ways GWB brought us:thumbsdown:

Exactly . and thats what they seem to want. Doesn't matter what they say. Setting it up like this is a disaster. Tell me again why were in Afgan. Many are starting yo believe other than in the past. I have seen zero proof that 9/11 was anything other than an inside job. Proof it was inside is > than proof of terrorism from Arabs.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Harvey, since no one else answered my question, perhaps you can. What exactly is our exit strategy in Afghanistan? What goals do we have?

I don't have an answer. When it comes to running a miltary, I'm good electronic design engineer and a competent musician.

The Bushwhackos had plenty of good advice about that before they launched, almost all of which they ignored with the obviously pathetic results. We now have a real President with a real brain. I can only hope he's asked those questions and come up with some realistic answers.

Those who planned the attacks on 9/11 may have been overseas, but those who carried out the attacks were inside our borders. I support going after OBL and al-Zawahiri, but I don't support the nation-building, especially in countries that are no longer a threat to us. The casualties aren't worth it, and the financial costs aren't worth it, hell we can't afford either, IMO.

Those who carried out the attacks didn't start out, here, and the attacks were planned in Afghanistan and coordinated by Al Qaeda.

As far as "nation building" goes, call it whatever you want, I hope we're up to doing whatever it takes to help the Afghani's establish a peaceful nation free of Al Qaeda and Taliban tyranny. Along the way, it would be nice if we could leave them free of the need to continue supplying the world with opium.

We can only hope we can convince the Afghani people that's in their best interests, as well. We certainly can't impose all of that on them without their cooperation and participation.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: bamacre
So what exactly are we still doing in Afghanistan, and what exactly is our exit strategy?

Well considering we haven't really done anything there up until now we have a lot to do. Bush really made shit hard for his successor.

How so? We won in iraq, now focus elsewhere. If anything Bush left things pretty much cleaned up war wise.

You have an interesting way of looking at 'won'

If by 'won' you mean we replaced a secular leadership where minorities of Chirstains, Druze, Liquor sellers, discos, barbers, homosexuals, etc were protected but instead replaced with Sharia law and fundis loyal to fundi Iran I guess you could conclude we 'won'. A victory for Shi'a Islam.


If by 'won' you mean bribes paying the thugs off so they pretty please stop killing us so we can make a somewhat honorable retreat to the simple minded, then we won.

Stop kidding yourself, soon as we leave, all hell will break loose. Because the Sunni will never accept second class status to the 'rarefied dogs' Shia.


I need not mention the 3 trillion spent and 4500 American lives wasted for the 'winning' ways GWB brought us:thumbsdown:

Why do people skip over reality posts like this and keep on going with their GI Joe fantasies?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: bamacre

Harvey, since no one else answered my question, perhaps you can. What exactly is our exit strategy in Afghanistan? What goals do we have?

I don't have an answer. When it comes to running a miltary, I'm good electronic design engineer and a competent musician.

The Bushwhackos had plenty of good advice about that before they launched, almost all of which they ignored with the obviously pathetic results. We now have a real President with a real brain. I can only hope he's asked those questions and come up with some realistic answers.

Those who planned the attacks on 9/11 may have been overseas, but those who carried out the attacks were inside our borders. I support going after OBL and al-Zawahiri, but I don't support the nation-building, especially in countries that are no longer a threat to us. The casualties aren't worth it, and the financial costs aren't worth it, hell we can't afford either, IMO.

Those who carried out the attacks didn't start out, here, and the attacks were planned in Afghanistan and coordinated by Al Qaeda.

As far as "nation building" goes, call it whatever you want, I hope we're up to doing whatever it takes to help the Afghani's establish a peaceful nation free of Al Qaeda and Taliban tyranny. Along the way, it would be nice if we could leave them free of the need to continue supplying the world with opium.

We can only hope we can convince the Afghani people that's in their best interests, as well. We certainly can't impose all of that on them without their cooperation and participation.

Your kidding right. Do you even understand this part of the World. Afganistan is a Miafia like government, Their cash crop is opium. This didn't just start . Its been going on for thousands of years. In a real world . Filled with people who actually cared . Afgan. Should have died centries ago. But none in reality careabout the drugs that cause so much hardship. They been dealing these drugs for centuries. Yet you people point at Afgans. As the country that hide the terrorist of 9/11 . Show any proof that anyone other than inside job. Ya don't give a rats ass about about the millions threw time they harmed.

You don't even have the balls to admit . This has nothing to do with 9/11.

As others seem to be aware in this thread . Afganistan is our door to the caspien sea. and 1/3 of the worlds known oil reserves.

At least have the balls to admit. That we are beinging Imperial. In all our actions since 1950. Than you will become a recovering puppet. Who may find enough courage to cut the puppet masters strings.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
OBL's head will make a nice trophy for the 2012 campaign. Not that Obama doesn't have his second term locked up already.

How so, by passing the biggest piece of crap bill ever?