Is he back for just a short period of time and then heading back?

I'm speechless. One second you're all for taking out dictators and oppression and whatever and the other you're here telling me that you shouldn't be policing the world.

perhaps the troop numbers were an indication. Idiot.

Go for it, make sure to include those idiots in the US who suggested that you deserved it because you're living in sin, you don't love Jesus, etc.

You don't seem to mind collecting Saudi oil and buying Chinese products even though you love to bash them.

why don't you just make us wear yellow stars too.

god bless freedom fries.

He's back for a few weeks then off to kansas then maybe back to iraq in a year...

oh? when did I say that?

My position has always been that we are damned if we do, and damned if we don't

again, when have I done either?

So you weren't in favour of taking out Saddam?

Making Saddam abide by the agreement he made after Desert Storm, and policing the world are two different things.

What kind of position is that? It doesn't say much. Of course some people are always gonna disagree. You can't take a decision that 6 billion people are gonna agree with. That doesn't justify taking over a country.

I have contact with between 20-30 people that I served with that are currently serving or...have served in Iraq...or have sons/daughers that are serving. All that I served with are career soldiers and they all are gung ho about their mission. A couple of the sons/daughters are impatient to leave Iraq and or to finish out their hitch.

Most career soldiers understand their mission but younger people on their first hitch don't always understand...and don't always like the Army. Lack of understanding is common among the young and the Army is not for everyone.

An odd thing for a battlefield veteran to say considering how Bush chickened out of the Vietnam War. How Bush the coward is able to look these guys in the eyes I'll never know.

Not volunteering for duty in Vietnam...does not a coward make. Being ordered to go to Vietnam and refusing...might qualify.

fuck you. gas in't any cheaper, its more expensive. $2.40 a gal in san diego, worse in the UK from what I hear here.

does not supporting war in vietnam make you a coward?

oil prices weren't going to get lower overnight.. Get a fucking clue.

they have been steadily rising . . . a lot

Iraq's production is well below what it was, in 5 yrs with investment in new technology from american oil companies (which is happening now) Iraq should be able to produce 5 million barrels /day compared to it's previous 2.8 and current 1.1.

baddog, I'll take that ride. Get me away from this place...the sheer intellect is too overwhelming. We can argue much better. :Graucho

Amen! I told someone last night, we are fucked which ever way.... Thats what happens when your #1. You get everyone attacking you from all angles.

The question as posed is not a yes or no question because there are too many varibles in "not supporting". BTW the word coward...in my opinion...is an often mis-applied and over used word.

ummmm, is Venturi reading this thread? :winkwink:

I suspect that oil production from Iraq will be very low...unless the US intends to place a squad of combat troops for every one hundred yards of pipleline and at each well head...for the next several years...or the Iraqi's do the same.

"NBC News has obtained, exclusively, extraordinary secret video, shot by the U.S. government. It illustrates an enormous opportunity the Clinton administration had to kill or capture bin Laden. Critics call it a missed opportunity"



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/


Fucking Clinton had his head too far up Monicas ass.... Where are all the Clinton Haters?

yeah, still it probably all depends where the money goes.

So it's about oil.

Taken from your article.....

"Ms Albright said: "It's nice to be popular, but it's not a popularity contest."

Thats right... I dont give a shit about our popularity. I care about the saftey of our ppl. If that means playing defensively or offensively it doesnt matter to me.

How much was Clinton hampered by having to defend himself over getting a BJ is also a question that should be asked. But he should have done more to combat terrorism.

And whos fault is that? Did he not get the blowjob? Did he not LIE about the blowjob?

You are out of your mind. Clinton was caught with his pannts down. Dont try to spin the facts to meet your needs.

Agreed but it also says this.

Plus the more haters the more terrorsts and supporters. Did the British putting down the rebels in the US work? So no reason it will work today. Win the hearts and minds and you fight terrorism, kill peoples family and you do not.

Ms Albright said: "It's nice to be popular, but it's not a popularity contest. It's a matter of making sure that many other countries come along with your policies."

In the long term, many believe the US will have increasing difficulty in getting other countries to come on board.

Countries have no incentive to go along with a deeply unpopular America.

Even the Bush administration accepts that they need some kind of multilateral support for its policies such as expanding international support for the military commitment in Iraq.

Politicians in any country will not take the risk looking at the numbers in this survey.

Tell him he got lotst of support from this forum

To quote "Don Imus" of the "Imus In The Morning" show......"its terrible to say but we are going to have to kill them all....yes ALL of them before they kill all of us. I see no other way to stop the madness. They dont want peace, their religion tells them to kill all infadels and according to their beliefs, we are the infidels. I dont need to be caught in a downpour before I know its raining out."


So how exactly are we going to change their minds again?

Never heard of the show or him, but he sounds like an idiot.

He has been around for years and years and is one of the most popular talk radio hosts on the air.

ah, some people are so dumb or sometimes just downright nazi.

Duh! thus my point!
Like I said, if the war was about oil, I WOULD NOT be paying $1.75 gallon, more like $1.25.

Reading comphrehinsion can be a bitch sometimes

if it was about oil, would our prices have risen $.60 a gallon in the last 2 months?

If oil had anything to do with the war why do you think lower prices at the pump would be a good thing for big oil companies? Oh, you think it might have something to do with cheaper gas for you? hahahahahahah.

It's not about price, it's about supply.

:ak47: :ak47:

what's he gonna do now?

I am Happy your buddy is alive...

Now Puff Puff... Pass... Anyone?

Good to hear your brother is back nice and safe. War can have a bad effect on some people!