Have Our Troops Taken Needless Casualties To Appease Mulsims?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AAAintheBeltway, Mar 1, 2006.

  1. Towards them. Yeah, why not? In my perfect world, we have nothing to do with Muslims. We certainly don't permit Islam or Muslims into our countries. Who cares what they think of us? As far as I'm concerned, they are our mortal enemies. Always were, always will be.

    All very illiberal of course. But one is permitted to dream of the end of liberalism.
     
    #21     Mar 3, 2006
  2. FredBloggs

    FredBloggs Guest

    you mean like bush?

    you know - that coward who was snorting coke and drinking bourbon with his feet up back home during nam cos daddy pulled a few of the ol right wing strings. is he the kind of liberal that never served?

    anyway, if it is a moral obligation to prevent us soldiers taking casualties, why needlessly invade another country, fight an illegal war based upon a lie?

    i believe your position is about as deep underwater as new orleans - another bush made disaster i believe!

    nice try.
     
    #22     Mar 3, 2006
  3. 1,000 words....

    <img src=http://www.terra.com.mx/galeria_de_fotos/images/49/097221.jpg>

     
    #23     Mar 3, 2006
  4. That's not what we're saying at all. If we were, it would justify indiscriminate terrorist bombings of neighborhoods in Iraq that harbored insurgents, assasinations of thugs like al-Sadr and religious repression.

    In fact, we're arguing the opposite, namely that Bush and his crowd have been overly cowed by pressure to appease these people. Instead of fighting them like we're in a war, we have bent over backwards to minimize damage to mosques, even when they were being used as bases for attacks. We have forced soldiers to engage in deadly house to house combat, rather than bomb hostile areas. We ceded political control to religious fanatics rather than confront them and be accused of being latter day Crusaders.

    If we had used the same approach in WW II, we'd still be fighting it.
     
    #24     Mar 3, 2006
  5. FredBloggs

    FredBloggs Guest

    lolpmp!!

    wonder what sweet little nothings hes whispering into that dogs ear. probably a job offer of the next head of the cia!
     
    #25     Mar 3, 2006
  6. Geez, you right wingers are sure funny.

    For the longest time it was pro Bush, pro war, yada, yada, yada.

    Now that we are failing, it is time to say Bush didn't fight the war correctly.

    Too much......

    More chickenhawks telling others how to fight wars.

    Pathetic.....

     
    #26     Mar 3, 2006
  7. FredBloggs

    FredBloggs Guest

    hey einstein - whats the solution then?

    i know, why dont we carpet bomb the whole darn place! i mean get rid of ALL the iraqis. after all, they asked for it because they never had any wmds!! - and all that good ol american oil hidden under their sand in those deserts.

    im sure if we were to kill all iraqis there wouldnt be any more terrorist attacks would there? also, i cant see this as generating any more anti us feeling than there already is, and im sure no disaffected directionless muslim kids wouldnt want to become terrorists for needlessly killing thier relatives.

    do you?

    lets not forget that as donny pointed out in the days after 9-11, that the attacks were made by the iraqis. in fact, all americas problems are due to iraq and not the shit for brains president you have.
     
    #27     Mar 3, 2006
  8. FredBloggs

    FredBloggs Guest

    aa- dont worry, there is hope. the main thing is that you show a concern for us soldiers lives. this could be the start of something beautiful for you as you start to become aware of the value of all human life. i hope so.

    perhaps, while you spare a thought for the lives of the brave us forces in iraq (sent out to do a job by the worlds biggest moron - that they probably never signed up to do - ie fight an illegal war), you could also spare a thought for the people of iraq who:

    - never asked for saddam,
    - never asked for the fundamental terrorists who now wreck more destruction,
    - and never asked for their country to be invaded, turned upside down, and their sacred places ruined.

    i am sure that if someone rolled a tank through your neighbourhood, threatened your parents at the end of a gun in case they were terrorists, that you to would feel some bitterness.

    peace.
     
    #28     Mar 3, 2006
  9. OK, we get it. You're vastly morally superior to the rest of us. You don't need to repeat it endlessly.

    What we are concerned about is sending troops out to fight what was called a war, but now has somehow become some sort of nation-building exercise for islamic radicals, only missing the UN Blue Helmets, of the sort we criticized Clinton for.
     
    #29     Mar 3, 2006
  10. You're just dead wrong. I criticised the way the occupation was handled from the beginning, when they let mobs run wild. I said the case for going to war was something reasonable people could differ over, but once you are there and occupy the country, you have to take control of it. Instead we used the warm and fuzzy approach and it got us a lot of soldiers killed and maimed, thugs like al Sadr running the government and a government that is scarely distinguishable from iran.
     
    #30     Mar 3, 2006