• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

US families want troops home

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Zebo
Bush-bitches
Bwahahaha:D

The Bush-bitches seem to have abandoned this thread. There are things even they cannot support. So they remain true to their supreme leader in silence.....Bush-bitches to the end.
The theme of this thread has already been discussed. The fact that you and the rest of the hypocritical c0cksuckers turned it into something else doesn't bear discussing.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,386
2
81
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Zebo
Bush-bitches
Bwahahaha:D

The Bush-bitches seem to have abandoned this thread. There are things even they cannot support. So they remain true to their supreme leader in silence.....Bush-bitches to the end.
Between you and UQ we should change this forum to SYMFM (speak your MF mind) because the rules mean nothing. I like it though for pure entertainment value.:)
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Zebo
Bush-bitches
Bwahahaha:D

The Bush-bitches seem to have abandoned this thread. There are things even they cannot support. So they remain true to their supreme leader in silence.....Bush-bitches to the end.
Between you and UQ we should change this forum to SYMFM (speak your MF mind) because the rules mean nothing. I like it though for pure entertainment value.:)
Agreed, I enjoy watching you and the rest of the extreme lefties show the stupidity of the US. :D
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Check out this link.

This just keeps getting worse! How will the Bush-bitches defend their supreme leader on this one?
Oh brother. Drooling again over a subject in which you have absolutely no clue about WTF is going on.

Concurrent receipt: First instituted in 1891. :Q

Since 1891, very little has been done about full Concurrent Receipt. So if either Dubya or Congress does not approve full Concurrent Receipt, does that make them worse in this respect than every other President or Congressman since 1891?

Hell yes, I'd love to see full Concurrent Receipt because I'm qualified (20 percent disabled - duty related). So guess what, BOBDN? I'll be able to receive more of your refusenik tax dollars as an addition to my military pension.

But weren't you the one whining incessantly in other threads about the government spending too much money anyway? Nah, couldn't have been you. Nahhh.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: burnedout
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Check out this link.

This just keeps getting worse! How will the Bush-bitches defend their supreme leader on this one?
Oh brother. Drooling again over a subject in which you have absolutely no clue about WTF is going on.

Concurrent receipt: First instituted in 1891. :Q

Since 1891, very little has been done about full Concurrent Receipt. So if either Dubya or Congress does not approve full Concurrent Receipt, does that make them worse in this respect than every other President or Congressman since 1891?

Hell yes, I'd love to see full Concurrent Receipt because I'm qualified (20 percent disabled - duty related). So guess what, BOBDN? I'll be able to receive more of your refusenik tax dollars as an addition to my military pension.

But weren't you the one whining incessantly in other threads about the government spending too much money anyway? Nah, couldn't have been you. Nahhh.
Hey Bush-bitch. I was "whining" in other threads about spending money to invade Iraq for no reason rather than spending the money on the real threat - terrorism. You and your supreme leader can't seem to differentiate between the two.

Throwing away money in Iraq to combat no threat while denying money to combat a real threat. It's almost like you bozos want to see another tragedy happen.

Show me the thread you're referring to Bush-bitch.

 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: burnedout
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Check out this link.

This just keeps getting worse! How will the Bush-bitches defend their supreme leader on this one?
Oh brother. Drooling again over a subject in which you have absolutely no clue about WTF is going on.

Concurrent receipt: First instituted in 1891. :Q

Since 1891, very little has been done about full Concurrent Receipt. So if either Dubya or Congress does not approve full Concurrent Receipt, does that make them worse in this respect than every other President or Congressman since 1891?

Hell yes, I'd love to see full Concurrent Receipt because I'm qualified (20 percent disabled - duty related). So guess what, BOBDN? I'll be able to receive more of your refusenik tax dollars as an addition to my military pension.

But weren't you the one whining incessantly in other threads about the government spending too much money anyway? Nah, couldn't have been you. Nahhh.
Hey Bush-bitch. I was "whining" in other threads about spending money to invade Iraq for no reason rather than spending the money on the real threat - terrorism. You and your supreme leader can't seem to differentiate between the two.

Throwing away money in Iraq to combat no threat while denying money to combat a real threat. It's almost like you bozos want to see another tragedy happen.

Show me the thread you're referring to Bush-bitch.
I think BOBDN needs a vacation? We are spending money on anti-terrorism measures. Didnt we have homeland security created or I am a dreaming?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,375
3,499
126
I think the comparison with Vietnam has some merit. Whatever the outcome, US troops are stuck in Iraq for years. If the attacks by Iraqi's or others continue thousands of US soldiers will be killed and many more thousands injured. Like the Vietnam situation, Conscription may become necessary as Americans will be discouraged from voluntarily serving after a few years.

If the US decides to pull out, someone will need to go in and take their place, unless turning Iraq into mess(worse than now which is quite the mess by itself) becomes acceptable. As long as Bush is in office, there will be no nations(beyond the Coalition of the Willing) volunteering to relieve the US of this duty. Bush burned his bridges out.

As for the War on Terrorism, about the only thing the invasion of Iraq has accomplished is to make US troops in Iraq a lightening rod. As such, perhaps terrorists won't bother attacking targets on US soil or perhaps not. It likely just succeeded in hitting the bees nest with a stick, causing terrorists who would never have attacked US interests(Israel doesn't apply) to now choose to attack US interests. Other groups, like Al Queda, are now free to attack US soil, if they are not overly tempted by the US's close proximity in Iraq.

Iraq may have seemed to be a logical target in the War on Terrorism to the Bush admin, but it appears to really have been a detour that has left Al Queda intact, remember them?
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: sandorski
I think the comparison with Vietnam has some merit. Whatever the outcome, US troops are stuck in Iraq for years. If the attacks by Iraqi's or others continue thousands of US soldiers will be killed and many more thousands injured. Like the Vietnam situation, Conscription may become necessary as Americans will be discouraged from voluntarily serving after a few years.

If the US decides to pull out, someone will need to go in and take their place, unless turning Iraq into mess(worse than now which is quite the mess by itself) becomes acceptable. As long as Bush is in office, there will be no nations(beyond the Coalition of the Willing) volunteering to relieve the US of this duty. Bush burned his bridges out.

As for the War on Terrorism, about the only thing the invasion of Iraq has accomplished is to make US troops in Iraq a lightening rod. As such, perhaps terrorists won't bother attacking targets on US soil or perhaps not. It likely just succeeded in hitting the bees nest with a stick, causing terrorists who would never have attacked US interests(Israel doesn't apply) to now choose to attack US interests. Other groups, like Al Queda, are now free to attack US soil, if they are not overly tempted by the US's close proximity in Iraq.

Iraq may have seemed to be a logical target in the War on Terrorism to the Bush admin, but it appears to really have been a detour that has left Al Queda intact, remember them?
1)Their isnt a draft, so why are you talking about it?

2)France and Germany more than willing to help rebuild. I wonder why :eek:

3)Your forgotten al Qaeda
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,375
3,499
126
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: sandorski
I think the comparison with Vietnam has some merit. Whatever the outcome, US troops are stuck in Iraq for years. If the attacks by Iraqi's or others continue thousands of US soldiers will be killed and many more thousands injured. Like the Vietnam situation, Conscription may become necessary as Americans will be discouraged from voluntarily serving after a few years.

If the US decides to pull out, someone will need to go in and take their place, unless turning Iraq into mess(worse than now which is quite the mess by itself) becomes acceptable. As long as Bush is in office, there will be no nations(beyond the Coalition of the Willing) volunteering to relieve the US of this duty. Bush burned his bridges out.

As for the War on Terrorism, about the only thing the invasion of Iraq has accomplished is to make US troops in Iraq a lightening rod. As such, perhaps terrorists won't bother attacking targets on US soil or perhaps not. It likely just succeeded in hitting the bees nest with a stick, causing terrorists who would never have attacked US interests(Israel doesn't apply) to now choose to attack US interests. Other groups, like Al Queda, are now free to attack US soil, if they are not overly tempted by the US's close proximity in Iraq.

Iraq may have seemed to be a logical target in the War on Terrorism to the Bush admin, but it appears to really have been a detour that has left Al Queda intact, remember them?
1)Their isnt a draft, so why are you talking about it?

2)France and Germany more than willing to help rebuild. I wonder why :eek:

3)Your forgotten al Qaeda
1) someone brought it up, I responded
2) so does the US. ??
3) Al Queda still exists
 

pickel

Member
Jul 29, 2003
49
0
0
With all the wonderful rhetoric, when you look at the reality of it all, who REALLy gives a schitt and who has the nads to do anything about it while we sit and ponder our next response ??????????????
 

Trezza

Senior member
Sep 18, 2002
522
0
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: sandorski
I think the comparison with Vietnam has some merit. Whatever the outcome, US troops are stuck in Iraq for years. If the attacks by Iraqi's or others continue thousands of US soldiers will be killed and many more thousands injured. Like the Vietnam situation, Conscription may become necessary as Americans will be discouraged from voluntarily serving after a few years.

If the US decides to pull out, someone will need to go in and take their place, unless turning Iraq into mess(worse than now which is quite the mess by itself) becomes acceptable. As long as Bush is in office, there will be no nations(beyond the Coalition of the Willing) volunteering to relieve the US of this duty. Bush burned his bridges out.

As for the War on Terrorism, about the only thing the invasion of Iraq has accomplished is to make US troops in Iraq a lightening rod. As such, perhaps terrorists won't bother attacking targets on US soil or perhaps not. It likely just succeeded in hitting the bees nest with a stick, causing terrorists who would never have attacked US interests(Israel doesn't apply) to now choose to attack US interests. Other groups, like Al Queda, are now free to attack US soil, if they are not overly tempted by the US's close proximity in Iraq.

Iraq may have seemed to be a logical target in the War on Terrorism to the Bush admin, but it appears to really have been a detour that has left Al Queda intact, remember them?
1)Their isnt a draft, so why are you talking about it?

2)France and Germany more than willing to help rebuild. I wonder why :eek:

3)Your forgotten al Qaeda
1) someone brought it up, I responded
2) so does the US. ??
3) Al Queda still exists
2) Yes the US and other countries that fought in the war are wanting to be the ones who repair Iraq. What would you say if they just up and left after ripping Saddam a new one? Point of the matter is, you break it you fix it. If you don't want to help us fight, then we don't want your opinion/help when we are fixing it.

3) So is our soldiers presence in Afganiland. Not to mention the fact that we don't exactly have china's population in our army that we can be everywhere at once. Currently the US is in Afganiland, Iraq and Africa. Where else would you like to go today and where are they coming from?

Also many other countries have stated that they will disrupt terror cells and fight terror. What are other countries outside those involved in the Iraq War doing about, I tell you this much I haven't heard anything from France and Germany about what they are doing. I mean for Christ sake even Iran caught terrorist and sent them to jail!!!
 

Rogue

Banned
Jan 28, 2000
5,774
0
0
BOBDN,

First off, don't talk to me about $hit unless you work directly with the people working in Iraq like I do. I see them every day. I deal with then when they come back from over there with injuries from lawless Iraqis who attack them by throwing grendades in their vehicles, etc. My brother fought hard over there after spending nearly a year in the Middle East. All I'm gonna say is that you are a mindless, gutless dolt who feels it necessary to fight this war with words on the internet. That makes you nothing more than a coward. I'd venture to say you'd not be so brave speaking those words around soldiers. Hey, here's an idea. Go to the nearest military installation and voice your opinion publicly there and see what type of response you get. Posting your thoughts and bull$hit on military matters on a public forum filled mostly with virgins, teenagers and computer geeks on serves to show your ignorance of world politics and theirs.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: Rogue
BOBDN,

First off, don't talk to me about $hit unless you work directly with the people working in Iraq like I do. I see them every day. I deal with then when they come back from over there with injuries from lawless Iraqis who attack them by throwing grendades in their vehicles, etc. My brother fought hard over there after spending nearly a year in the Middle East. All I'm gonna say is that you are a mindless, gutless dolt who feels it necessary to fight this war with words on the internet. That makes you nothing more than a coward. I'd venture to say you'd not be so brave speaking those words around soldiers. Hey, here's an idea. Go to the nearest military installation and voice your opinion publicly there and see what type of response you get. Posting your thoughts and bull$hit on military matters on a public forum filled mostly with virgins, teenagers and computer geeks on serves to show your ignorance of world politics and theirs.
Hey rogue

Don't kid yourself. The grunts know where the truth lies. They know Bush started this entire mess based on lies. They are paying for Bush's lies everyday they are in Iraq.

Why don't you go to the nearest military installation and spew your BS around their families instead of making Bush-bitch propaganda statements on the internet?

Their families want them home. Not off somewhere making Iraq safe for Halliburton.

We don't need another Nam.
 

Rogue

Banned
Jan 28, 2000
5,774
0
0
I AM A FVCKING GRUNT YOU MORON!!!! WHAT PART OF THAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? I TALK WITH THEIR SPOUSES AND THE AFFECTED SOLDIERS ON A DAILY BASIS!!!! I'M TELLING YOU THAT WHAT YOU'RE READING IS A SMALL SAMPLING AND AN UNFAIR REPRESENTATION OF THE MAJORITY!!! YOUR OWN IGNORANCE OF THE ISSUE AND YOUR BLIND FAITH IN THE MEDIA WHEN IT SUITS YOU MAKES YOU IGNORANT, PURE AND SIMPLE!!!

To continue in a less angry response. I deal with the guys that come back physically injured from the war over there. You know what? Most of them want to go back and finish their job they left. The spouses, while burdened from the absence, support their soldiers and sure they want them home, anyone who has someone living and working in an area where you can get killed at any time would want their loved one home. However, don't take that as a representation that military support is wavering or that the mission is unsuccessful or that we shouldn't be over there. That's virtually equivalent to assuming that because someone doesn't want to get surgery, that all surgery is bad.

I also find it decidedly funny that everytime you people are confronted with real evidence and real truth from the real world, you double back to some bull$hit, smart assed excuse for why you act like you do. When you're wrong, admit you're wrong and move on.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Rogue
BOBDN,

First off, don't talk to me about $hit unless you work directly with the people working in Iraq like I do. I see them every day. I deal with then when they come back from over there with injuries from lawless Iraqis who attack them by throwing grendades in their vehicles, etc. My brother fought hard over there after spending nearly a year in the Middle East. All I'm gonna say is that you are a mindless, gutless dolt who feels it necessary to fight this war with words on the internet. That makes you nothing more than a coward. I'd venture to say you'd not be so brave speaking those words around soldiers. Hey, here's an idea. Go to the nearest military installation and voice your opinion publicly there and see what type of response you get. Posting your thoughts and bull$hit on military matters on a public forum filled mostly with virgins, teenagers and computer geeks on serves to show your ignorance of world politics and theirs.
Hey rogue

Don't kid yourself. The grunts know where the truth lies. They know Bush started this entire mess based on lies. They are paying for Bush's lies everyday they are in Iraq.

Why don't you go to the nearest military installation and spew your BS around their families instead of making Bush-bitch propaganda statements on the internet?

Their families want them home. Not off somewhere making Iraq safe for Halliburton.

We don't need another Nam.
Wow, look at the current death toll of americans its around 100? That looks so much simaller to nam! Great comparission. Guess what everyone right now in the military willfully joined it, its not like bush got his texan dick out and made them his bitch.
 

Rogue

Banned
Jan 28, 2000
5,774
0
0
<scarcasm>Where are all you hippy whores now? Seems you've abandoned this thread. It figures. HIPPY WHORES!</sarcasm>
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,375
3,499
126
Originally posted by: Trezza
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: sandorski
I think the comparison with Vietnam has some merit. Whatever the outcome, US troops are stuck in Iraq for years. If the attacks by Iraqi's or others continue thousands of US soldiers will be killed and many more thousands injured. Like the Vietnam situation, Conscription may become necessary as Americans will be discouraged from voluntarily serving after a few years.

If the US decides to pull out, someone will need to go in and take their place, unless turning Iraq into mess(worse than now which is quite the mess by itself) becomes acceptable. As long as Bush is in office, there will be no nations(beyond the Coalition of the Willing) volunteering to relieve the US of this duty. Bush burned his bridges out.

As for the War on Terrorism, about the only thing the invasion of Iraq has accomplished is to make US troops in Iraq a lightening rod. As such, perhaps terrorists won't bother attacking targets on US soil or perhaps not. It likely just succeeded in hitting the bees nest with a stick, causing terrorists who would never have attacked US interests(Israel doesn't apply) to now choose to attack US interests. Other groups, like Al Queda, are now free to attack US soil, if they are not overly tempted by the US's close proximity in Iraq.

Iraq may have seemed to be a logical target in the War on Terrorism to the Bush admin, but it appears to really have been a detour that has left Al Queda intact, remember them?
1)Their isnt a draft, so why are you talking about it?

2)France and Germany more than willing to help rebuild. I wonder why :eek:

3)Your forgotten al Qaeda
1) someone brought it up, I responded
2) so does the US. ??
3) Al Queda still exists
2) Yes the US and other countries that fought in the war are wanting to be the ones who repair Iraq. What would you say if they just up and left after ripping Saddam a new one? Point of the matter is, you break it you fix it. If you don't want to help us fight, then we don't want your opinion/help when we are fixing it.

3) So is our soldiers presence in Afganiland. Not to mention the fact that we don't exactly have china's population in our army that we can be everywhere at once. Currently the US is in Afganiland, Iraq and Africa. Where else would you like to go today and where are they coming from?

Also many other countries have stated that they will disrupt terror cells and fight terror. What are other countries outside those involved in the Iraq War doing about, I tell you this much I haven't heard anything from France and Germany about what they are doing. I mean for Christ sake even Iran caught terrorist and sent them to jail!!!
2) Agree, it's primarily a US responsibility. My comment was directed at the previous "France/Germany" comment, implying some kind sinster motive for something that needed doing anyway.

3) Iraq has tied up the bulk of the US army, for what? To fight Terrorism? Al Queda still operates within Afghanistan and it was the cause of 9/11, shouldn't they have been rooted out before going off on tangents?

Other countries are doing plenty, Canada recently found a suspected Al Queda(not sure yet) member, European nations are still working, the recent sting op was from Russian/US cooperation.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
0
76
Originally posted by: Rogue

I also find it decidedly funny that everytime you people are confronted with real evidence and real truth from the real world, you double back to some bull$hit, smart assed excuse for why you act like you do. When you're wrong, admit you're wrong and move on.
It's pretty funny that you expect everyone to consider your own myopic opinion "real evidence and real truth" instead of all the other reports we're getting and the army times. Did you really think that was going to fly?
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: Rogue

I also find it decidedly funny that everytime you people are confronted with real evidence and real truth from the real world, you double back to some bull$hit, smart assed excuse for why you act like you do. When you're wrong, admit you're wrong and move on.
It's pretty funny that you expect everyone to consider your own myopic opinion "real evidence and real truth" as opposed instead of all the other reports we're getting and the army times. Did you really think that was going to fly?
You know, I'm pretty sure those families want their troops home. Bottom line.
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN

I hope we don't wait 10 years to bring 'em home.

You probably want them to stay in Iraq longer, since they are losers, right? Remember?

Originally posted by: BOBDN


These morons all believe if you aren't stupid enough to have to join up to make a living you aren't a "real" American.

Their only real asset is the ease with which they're brainwashed. Makes them all perfect candidates to become grunts.

They need the "structure" of military life. They need someone to tell them how exactly to do everything. They don't possess the mental faculties to figure it out on their own.

Now that their brainwashing is complete they think they've made some "contribution."

The only contribution made was us contributing our tax dollars to keep these dullards employed until they could be taught how to march in a straight line.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY