USA Today: "Surge's Success Holds Chance To Seize The Moment; Democrats 'Lost In Time'"

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: feralkid
Perhaps you could comment on the actual article you post next time, instead of simply trolling, mmmkay?

Perhaps you can start your own fucking thread if you want. Now quit trolling mine. :|

He's right. YOU are one of the brown nosed Bushwhacko sycophant who keep pimping this kind of crap like it would actually undo the monumental damage done to our nation by your TRAITOR IN CHIEF and his lying, murdering band of thugs over their entire time in office.

This is a discussion forum. You posted the topic and with your bullshit spin, and others are busting your chops for it. If you can't stand truthful replies to your bullshit, DON'T POST IT! :roll:

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Harvey
If you can't stand truthful replies to your bullshit, DON'T POST IT! :roll:

Trolling does not constitute "truthful replies".

Somehow I'm not surprised to see you defending such Harvey. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Harvey
If you can't stand truthful replies to your bullshit, DON'T POST IT! :roll:

Trolling does not constitute "truthful replies".

Somehow I'm not surprised to see you defending such Harvey. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

"Truthful replies" do not constitute "trolling."

Somehow I'm not surprised to see you defending your TRAITOR IN CHIEF with your continuous flood of bullshit.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Pabster

Where did I say Democrats are "rooting for failure"? (Although a poll in the not-so-distant past did find that 1 in 5 Democrats hope the USA loses in Iraq). I never said that. I said they are vested in defeat by their policies and political strategy.

The question was not "Do you hope the US loses the war in Iraq?" which would have given support to the statement you posted. Had that question been asked, the poll results would have undoubtedly been much closer to zero, including the 5% of republicans who responded in the affirmative.

The actual question asked was "Do you think the world will be better off if the US loses in Iraq?" Now besides being vague since we don't even know what constitutes winning or losing (Saddam? gone. Elections? Had em. When do we win exactly??) the question more closely resembles "do you think the US should get the hell out of Iraq right now regardless of it being seen as 'losing'?" A natural response from democrats who see an unending occupation in the works is Yes, let's get out even if its considered a loss, it will be better for everyone if we leave.

This only translates to "I hope the US loses" in your head.

PS. that was question 40 on the poll. 41-43 asked people how much they pray, and 1-39 are not listed on the published pdf Fox posted. Context and lead-in questions are kinda relevant when asking a question like that.

I'll add another interpretation of the question:

Do you think the world is better off if the world's most powerful nation is rewarded for the behavior of illegally invading another nation who has not attacked it, with an agenda to increase its own power outside its borders, on grounds so false they had to force the interruption of the UN inspectors from completing the task of verifying the grounds were accurate, setting a precedent for aggressive, 'pre-emptive' war under flimsy pretense making it more likely such wars will be started again?

It raises the question about how it's wrong to say, 'my nation, right or wrong'. When your nation is doing wrong, how should citizens answer 'is the world better off if it 'loses''?

Did citizens who wanted the US out of the war in Vietnam want the US to lose, or did they want the US out of a war it should not be in? If the US was fighting against the Vietnamese right to have their own country free of being controlled by an outside power, aren't the people who think the world is better off if the US is not able to win that fight and keep them colonized fighting for freedom as much or more than they're 'wanting the US to lose'?

It's a lot of spin to use the phrase want the US to lose.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Craig234
It's a lot of spin to use the phrase want the US to lose.

Not much of a stretch, IMHO. If you think the world will be better off if we lose, and you want the world to be better off, you are going to be rooting for the enemy. I don't see a big stretch there.

That said, the whole discussion began because some clown accused me of saying "they want the terrorists to win" which I never said.

 

[Braznor]

The Iraq invasion was a mistake, abandoning her will be a greater mistake. Iraq is the moral successor to the trench warfare of WW1, just this time the trenches are the hearts and minds of the people.

If the U.S abandons Iraq, be prepared to say goodbye to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Qatar etc and the rest of the Middle East. Potent by their coercive power over their United States, regime after regime will fall to the same chaos as we watch helplessly twiddling our thumbs.

I wish the world will stop being selfish over Iraq.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
It's a lot of spin to use the phrase want the US to lose.

Not much of a stretch, IMHO. If you think the world will be better off if we lose, and you want the world to be better off, you are going to be rooting for the enemy. I don't see a big stretch there.

That said, the whole discussion began because some clown accused me of saying "they want the terrorists to win" which I never said.

For the record, I neither said or implied YOU said it, I clearly wrote Republicans said it. It was in response to your complaint that democrats spew poisonous rhetoric, which implied Reps do not. In your response you stated both sides use such rhetoric, so I dropped it and then addressed a subpoint you made in my follow up. And I object to your calling me a clown, someone might confuse me with moonie.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
For the record, I neither said or implied YOU said it, I clearly wrote Republicans said it. It was in response to your complaint that democrats spew poisonous rhetoric, which implied Reps do not. In your response you stated both sides use such rhetoric, so I dropped it and then addressed a subpoint you made in my follow up. And I object to your calling me a clown, someone might confuse me with moonie.

You're right, you never said that *I* said it. I apologize.

I've made it clear that both sides are guilty of spewing poisonous rhetoric, and lots of it, and it is shameful and disgusting.

As for you being confused with a certain other poster here, I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy :laugh:

 

[Atreus21]

Well, then I guess I'll say it.

Democrats in general want the US to lose in Iraq.

Hope the server running this site has enough bandwidth capability for the deluge of criticism I'm about to receive.

 

[0roo0roo]

the interesting warp is that the better we do in iraq, the more the press raves about obama who is actually seen as weaker in defense and thus unelectable by general public.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
Well, then I guess I'll say it.

Democrats in general want the US to lose in Iraq.

Hope the server running this site has enough bandwidth capability for the deluge of criticism I'm about to receive.

And we should care what you think because........??

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
Well, then I guess I'll say it.

Democrats in general want the US to lose in Iraq.

Hope the server running this site has enough bandwidth capability for the deluge of criticism I'm about to receive.

Well the way this administration has fucked things up over there you'd think it was them and their enablers like you who were trying to lose this thing.

 

[Jhhnn]

Democrats in general want the US to lose in Iraq.

Depends on how one defines "losing"... Bushfans automagically define withdrawal as "losing", anyway, because they predict doom and gloom, a mideast version of the domino theory, as a result... even as they continuously redefine the opposite, "winning" in increasingly nebulous terms of time, money, and effect...

And that's because "winning" isn't really an obtainable goal, certainly not in the terms used by the Admin.

And this-

the interesting warp is that the better we do in iraq, the more the press raves about obama who is actually seen as weaker in defense and thus unelectable by general public.

Or maybe "better" isn't good enough, no matter the spin on it, and your "unelectability" meme merely false attribution...

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: 1prophet
If this is the outcome of success, I don't want to know what failure would bring.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22235804">Iraq's young fighters build power through fear
Schoolgirls told to wear scarves, under threat of death</a>

I think in the end, Iraq will look more like Saudi Arabia than anything even resembling a democracy. That's what is in the US's interest. Dumb Iraqi's, who won't use their own oil, which instead will be sold to the US, cheaply, by a totalitarian government.

What so Iraq is going to be the source of the next wave of 9/11 style terrorist to strike the US just like Saudi Arabia was. Wow that's freaking great.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Braznor

The Iraq invasion was a mistake, abandoning her will be a greater mistake. Iraq is the moral successor to the trench warfare of WW1, just this time the trenches are the hearts and minds of the people.

If the U.S abandons Iraq, be prepared to say goodbye to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Qatar etc and the rest of the Middle East. Potent by their coercive power over their United States, regime after regime will fall to the same chaos as we watch helplessly twiddling our thumbs.

I wish the world will stop being selfish over Iraq.

Domino effect ala Vietnam right? Chances are if those nations crumble it was not because of Iraq but rather because of their decrepit and corrupt regimes that only served themselves and not their own people. We have been very adamant in our foreign policy at never supporting true Democracy in the region. Supporting true Democracy in the region would mean we could never drum up false wars to invade those nations and those nation's peoples would have a real voice that more then likely would not be pro-American and support our lackies.

 

[Lemon law]

I think the only time warp on this thread will be the one the GOP gets stuck in immediately after
11/4/2008. The question is will the remaining GOP congressional members be able to field a five member basketball team?

The GOP has only 10.5 months and change to show some REAL PROGRESS IN IRAQ. And there is zero way that the GOP can blame the dems when all their inputs have been rejected.