ok, alter ego, I was mistaken. You can be my alter ego, your ideas are well thought out. I'm slummin it tonight, you're right, in chit chat. I agree with much of what you say in your quote. But I also remember 9/11, probably hit closer to home for me more than most. And I, as such, disagree with the "bogus war" stuff, and the "too much blood is spilt" part as well. Less than 300 soldiers lost in Iraq. Not to take away from any single life, but less than 300 is a low figure during wartime. I also agree that taxpayer money has been misapproriated, but its better spent now, then when a nuclear disaster may or may not happen in a major U.S. city. I say, "wipe out all the terrorist assholes", and you know they're in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria etc. Keep going til the end! btw, what's with step #7?
In case some of you may have missed this, our President is urging Middle East leaders from Iran to Syria to embrace Democracy, and warned the US must install democratic freedoms in Iraq: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20031107/pl_afp/mideast_us_bush_031107143235 Yo Romeo, I stand by what I said. And it wasn't "misguided". Peace.
U.S. Opposes Money for Troops Jailed in Iraq By PHILIP SHENON November 10, 2003 WASHINGTON, Nov. 9 â The Bush administration is seeking to block a group of American troops who were tortured in Iraqi prisons during the Persian Gulf war in 1991 from collecting any of the hundreds of millions of dollars in frozen Iraqi assets they won last summer in a federal court ruling against the government of Saddam Hussein. In a court challenge that the administration is winning so far but is not eager to publicize, administration lawyers have argued that Iraqi assets frozen in bank accounts in the United States are needed for Iraqi reconstruction and that the judgment won by the 17 former American prisoners should be overturned. If the administration succeeds, the former prisoners would be deprived of the money they won and, they say, of the validation of a judge's ruling that documented their accounts of torture by the Iraqis â including beatings, burnings, starvation, mock executions and repeated threats of castration and dismemberment. "I don't want to say that I feel betrayed, because I still believe in my country," said Lt. Col. Dale Storr, whose Air Force A-10 fighter jet was shot down by Iraqi fire in February 1991. "I've always tried to keep in the back of my mind that we were never going to see any of the money," said Colonel Storr, who was held by the Iraqis for 33 days â a period in which he says his captors beat him with clubs, broke his nose, urinated on him and threatened to cut off his fingers if he did not disclose military secrets. "But it goes beyond frustration when I see our government trying to pretend that this whole case never happened." Another former prisoner, David Eberly, a retired Air Force colonel whose F-15 fighter was shot down over northwest Iraq and who said his interrogators repeatedly pointed a gun at his head and pulled the trigger on an empty chamber, said he was surprised by the administration's eagerness to overturn the judgment. "The administration wants $87 billion for Iraq," he said. "The money in our case is just a drop of blood in the bucket." Officials at the Justice and State Departments, which are overseeing the administration's response to the case, say they are sensitive to the claims of the former prisoners, who brought suit against Iraq under a 1996 law that allows foreign governments designated as terrorist sponsors to be sued for injuries. But they say the case cannot be allowed to hinder American foreign policy and get in the way of the administration's multibillion-dollar reconstruction efforts in Iraq â an argument that federal appeals courts seem likely to accept. "No amount of money can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through at the hands of a truly brutal regime," said Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman. "It was determined earlier this year by Congress and the administration that those assets were no longer assets of Iraq, but they were resources required for the urgent national security needs of rebuilding Iraq." In a related case, a federal judge in New York ruled in September that the families of people killed in the Sept. 11 attacks could not claim any part of about $1.7 billion in frozen Iraqi assets in the United States. The judge noted that President Bush had signed an executive order in March, on the eve of the American invasion of Iraq, that confiscated Iraqi assets and converted them into assets of the United States government. In May, after Mr. Hussein was ousted, Mr. Bush issued a declaration that effectively removed Iraq from a list of countries liable for some court judgments involving past rights abuses and links to terrorism. In a sworn court filing in the case for the former prisoners, L. Paul Bremer III, the American administrator in Iraq, said the money won by the former prisoners had already been "completely obligated or expended" in reconstruction efforts. "These funds are critical to maintaining peace and stability in Iraq," he said. "Restricting these funds as a result of this litigation would affect adversely the ability of the United States to achieve security and stability in the region." http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/10/i...449dc3ddaad92fec&ex=1069045200&partner=GOOGLE
dummya IS A TRUE DISGRACE to our citizens in uniform:eek: 87 more billion handouts for the military industrial complex rebuilding Iraq after THEY damage it. In the meantime our bravest take the shaft :eek: Maverick go tell him to show some respect -------------dumya's new motto------------ f*ck our soldiers, the money is all mine, all mine, all mine I tell you and HAL's and Betchel's... long live the stupid American taxpayer. My 7 step solution still stands
what a bunch of tools !!!!!!!!!! http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/neuharth/2003-11-06-neuharth_x.htm
don't laugh yet my friend triple M! there *has* been some success: al qaeda, wmd, "terrorism," Nigerian yellow cake, unmanned bioweapon drones, the US budget, pvt. lynch, Rape Rooms (tm), etc -- ok, maybe the jury's still out on those. but reducing a modern city to sewage-drenched rubble? splattering children against their bedroom walls in the middle of the night with laser-guided bombs? showing the world that the US doesn't give a crap about their laws or their opinions? fostering even more anti-US hatred? breeding thousands of new terrorists? -- success!
ummmmm NEXT TIME please quote my whole post not just 2 words This is what I see bumya doing... just in case you missed it... "dummya IS A TRUE DISGRACE to our citizens in uniform 87 more billion handouts for the military industrial complex rebuilding Iraq after THEY damage it. In the meantime our bravest take the shaft Maverick go tell him to show some respect -------------dumya's new motto------------ f*ck our soldiers, the money is all mine, all mine, all mine I tell you and HAL's and Betchel's... long live the stupid American taxpayer. My 7 step solution still stands " You don't happen to be Mavman's ego?
The full quote does nothing to enhance any sense of decorum of good taste. It is this kind of behavior that gives those who disagree with the president a bad name. I am all in favor of lampooning, but when the discussion of young American men dying is used to get a laugh, there is a lack of common decency in play by the author. There is absolutely nothing funny about any U.S. soldier dying overseas by acts of terrorism. Having to stoop to such levels simply illustrates a complete lack of class on your part. While I disagree with our president on many different policies, I don't view him as fully removed from the feelings of loss and sadness when one of our soldiers perish.