Make up your mind :: Free Realms

Quote Reply

#1 Jan 11 2007 at 2:56 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1593971628284

Scholar

1,076 posts

do we need more troops or do we not need more troops

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/06/29/national/w075030D43.DTL

Democrats wanted more troops on the ground. Now that bush is putting more troops on the ground

Democrats Don't want more troops on the ground. 0.o

Quote:

Sen. John McCain, interviewed on CBS's "The Early Show," maintained that "one of the very big mistakes early on was that he didn't have enough troops on the ground, particularly after the initial victory, and that's still the case."

Sen. John Kerry, Bush's Democratic opponent in last year's presidential election, told NBC's "Today" show that the borders of Iraq "are porous" and said "we don't have enough troops" there.

Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., appearing on ABC's "Good Morning America," disputed Bush's notion that sufficient troops are in place.

Edited, Jan 11th 2007 5:49pm by ccstwocents

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#2 Jan 11 2007 at 2:59 PM Rating: Good

Nobby

Ministry of Silly Cnuts

19,524 posts

I think the bigger question is "What For?"

To enable the Iraqi Army & Police to develop capability to rule their own domain, or to keep getting killed by the endless tide of insurgents from the Syrian and Iranian regimes that your prezzydunt has demonised?

____________________________

"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#3 Jan 11 2007 at 3:06 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

As Paulsol pointed out in the other thread, the total number of troops, even with the "surge" won't even equal the initial number we sent in.

Comparing it to criticisms that we should have had perhaps twice the initial number of troops going into the conflict is a bit disingenuous.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#4 Jan 11 2007 at 3:09 PM Rating: Good

Nobby

Ministry of Silly Cnuts

19,524 posts

Jophiel wrote:

disingenuous.

That means "fUcking stupid", right?

____________________________

"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#5 Jan 11 2007 at 3:10 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1592295225947

View User Forum

Scholar

3,040 posts

Jophiel wrote:

As Paulsol pointed out in the other thread, the total number of troops, even with the "surge" won't even equal the initial number we sent in.

Comparing it to criticisms that we should have had perhaps twice the initial number of troops going into the conflict is a bit disingenuous.

"Disingenuous" is Joph's nice way of saying "retarded."

EDIT: Damn you, Nobby.

Edited, Jan 11th 2007 5:02pm by bloodywilliam

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#6 Jan 11 2007 at 3:12 PM Rating: Good

Nobby

Ministry of Silly Cnuts

19,524 posts

bloodywilliam the Brilliant wrote:

EDIT: Damn you, Nobby.

There's no need for language like that, pottymouth.

____________________________

"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#7 Jan 11 2007 at 3:14 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1592295225947

View User Forum

Scholar

3,040 posts

King Nobby wrote:

bloodywilliam the Brilliant wrote:

EDIT: Damn you, Nobby.

There's no need for language like that, pottymouth.

Oh great. Does that mean I have to post more pictures of Samantha Fox?

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#8 Jan 11 2007 at 3:17 PM Rating: Good

Nobby

Ministry of Silly Cnuts

19,524 posts

bloodywilliam the Brilliant wrote:

King Nobby wrote:

bloodywilliam the Brilliant wrote:

EDIT: Damn you, Nobby.

There's no need for language like that, pottymouth.

Oh great. Does that mean I have to post more pictures of Samantha Fox?

Finally, you're learning!

although it must be said, that DF makes her look like an ironing board

____________________________

"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#9 Jan 11 2007 at 3:17 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592347675501

Scholar

2,501 posts

At this point I'm waiting for:

W: "WE WIN!!! NOW WE'RE GETTING THE F OUT!!!"

W to the dems: "Did I make you guys happy yet? I can suck you off if I didn't."

I'm so tired of politics and politicians. Can we just get someone competent in office, or are all of you people going to keep voting for the same two parties that have been ******** us for decades now?

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#10 Jan 11 2007 at 3:18 PM Rating: Good

Nobby

Ministry of Silly Cnuts

19,524 posts

Metastophicleas wrote:

Can we just get someone competent in office, or are all of you people going to keep voting for the same two parties that have been ******** us for decades now?

Vote Varrus

____________________________

"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#11 Jan 11 2007 at 3:21 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1592295225947

View User Forum

Scholar

3,040 posts

King Nobby wrote:

Metastophicleas wrote:

Can we just get someone competent in office, or are all of you people going to keep voting for the same two parties that have been ******** us for decades now?

Vote Varrus

Isn't Varus the leader of the **** for Brains Party? Or was he the Republican Party Leader?

I get them confused.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#12 Jan 11 2007 at 3:52 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592347675501

Scholar

2,501 posts

I wouldn't vote for him/her if they were the only person running. I'd vote for myself again.

▲ Page top

Make up your mindFollow