Here I am

Bunch of Whiners ..............

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

***Newspaper headlines in the year 2035 ***

Funniest video ever - man steals salmon from bear!

(Source Unknown)



Whine, whine, whine



The Democrats are complaining

about how long the

war on terrorism is taking,

but consider this:



It took less time

to take Iraq

than it took Janet Reno

to take the Branch Davidian Compound.

That was a 51 day operation.



It took less time

to find evidence of chemical weapons

in Iraq than it took Hillary Clinton

to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.



It took less time

for the 3rd Infantry Division

and the US Marines

to destroy the Medina Republican Guard

than it took Ted Kennedy

to call the police

after his Oldsmobile

sunk at Chappaquiddick

killing Mary Jo Kopeckne.



It took less time

to take Iraq

than it took to

count the votes in Florida!



and it took less time

for Bill Clinton to drop his pants

in the oval office

than for the Yellow Democrats to

to belly ache about everything.



Too Embarrassed



It was the first day of school and the teacher thought she'd get to know the new kids by asking them their name and what their father does for a living.



The first little girl says: "My name is Mary and my daddy is a postman. "



The next little boy says: "I'm Andy and my Dad is mechanic. "



Then one little boy says: "My name is Jimmy and my father is a strip tease dancer in a cabaret for gay men. "



The teacher gasps and quickly changes the subject. Later in the school yard,the teacher approaches Jimmy privately and asks if it was really true thathis Dad dances nude in a gay bar.



He blushed and said, "No, my dad raises money for the Democrat Party, but I was just too embarrassed to say it. "
 
Illflem - just how the he!! you know that it is going to take longer? We might elect another GREAT Democrat like Bill Clinton who has all the mystical, magical powers to single handedly pull this worthless nation out of it's foundering economic climate and back on the road to prosperity. I'm willing to give more $ the rest of my life to see that JUSTICE is delivered to the people that took the 3,000+ lives in the Pentagon/WTC destruction.



Speaking of debt ... .....



The reason France, Germany, and Russia are so adamant about the US not having any political control over Iraq is all about money that is owed to them. 4 times the annual Iraqi GDP. And that is exactly what you get when you deal with a ruthless dictator like Saddam Hussein - a promissory note that you can't repay. Bush is asking them to forgive Iraq of it's debt - since the debt was accumulated by Saddam and not the average Iraqi.



How about forgiveness of debt? The USA forgave $Billions in debt to the European and African countries after WWII.
 
Yes

Originally posted by Straight6Jeff

Iraq has the means to repay the debt that we incurred to liberate thier country. It's called oil. We should tap that resource.



And that's exactly the plan. Its all about oil.



Lowell
 
Originally posted by illflem

And it's going to take longer to repay the Iraq debt than any one in history...



you might feel a bit different if someone from your family was serving there country for a just cause or if you had lost an acquaintance, friend or a family member like myself



Robert A. Campbell

born August 26,1976

assumed dead September 11,2001

funeral mass Nov 5,2001

confirmed July 16,2003

laid to rest August 1,2003
 
And that's exactly the plan. Its all about oil.



Maybe..... but also about stability in the Mideast where the world's oil price is set.



If you are happy with $30/barrel oil and nearly $2/gal diesel fuel that will only climb in price - hey, bring the boys home, let Saddam come back into power and disrupt the oil supply from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, etc. , etc.



See how far that CTD will run on BS. Which by the way, there is a conversion process for chicken litter into fuel for diesel engine types.
 
BreaksEverything- sorry to hear about your friend/ relative.



to the rest-



We havent spent that much money on the war. We spend 5 times what we've spent so far "educating" our mediocre kids every year that get pumped out of our schools like cars off an asembly line. I graduated in the top 10% of my class, never put forth ANY effort to finish that high, and was GROSSLY underprepared for college or the real world. I'll post that in another thread sometime.

Anyway, the point is, we were attacked, unprovokedly, by the biggest act of cowardice the world has ever seen, by the biggest group of cowards in the world. We must do something. We cant just bend over and take it like the Democrats want us to. What exactly, I'm not sure, nor will I make any claims to know. Sure, people are going to die, money is going to have to be spent, and it isnt going to be easy. We are the lone superpower in the world, and we need to use it for good once in a while. The Mid-easterners hate us for our fredom, the fact we treat our women as equals, and our religious tolerance. War is a way of life for them; to not fight back is a sign of weakness. If we are truly the Great Satan, as some religious fanatics claim, let's not disappoint them. Were it not for religion and everyone's trying to force their own beliefs on everyone else, we'd all be better off, and there would not be 90% of the fighting in the world there is today.



Daniel
 
BreaksEverything, I'm sorry for your loss and see how you would want retribution, but don't you think the families of 10,000 minimum (military won't release real figures) Iraqi civilians killed thus far in this war feel much the same?

Don't you think that they most likely now hate Americans and want to see us dead?

All we have done by attacking Iraq is created more terrorists.
 
Bill,



I don't see your logic. When we take down say, a violent member of an outlaw biker gang, are we creating more criminals? Or are we preventing more crime?



We're going to be hated whether we're defending ourselves or not. Whether we're weak or strong. Whether we swing a big stick or just talk tough, there are going to be those that hate us.



No doubt that our actions in Iraq have created more who do hate the US. Many of them went into Iraq to get a piece of us and met Allah as a result. This is part of the strategy IMHO. Kill them there so they won't/can't kill us here.



And where oh where was all this hand wringing about civilian deaths when the previous admin was bombing Kosovo, launching cruise missles into Iraq or blowing up aspirin factories in Sudan?



Is it the American's fault when so many military targets are placed in civilian areas? The US has gone to great lengths to prevent civilian casulties. Unfortunately, they're unavoidable even with our precision weapons.



And furthermore, why all of a sudden is Bush so wrong about WMD's when in '98 any Democrat you care to mention was all wound up (and signed a letter to Clinton about their concerns about same) about WMD's in Iraq?



Bush didn't say this was going to be easy. In fact, quite the opposite. He has always been forthright about the difficulties we will face in this war. Anyone who has been paying attention knows this.



OBL stated that people will naturally be inclined to walk alongside "the strong horse. " It's time for the US to be the strong horse again.



What are our alternatives? Let the UN negotiate with the bad guys? Negotiations with the PLO has brought peace to Isreal, hasn't it? NOT!!! The terrorist types are not reasonable and I don't believe that they can be reasoned with.



I wish those so vigorously criticizing Bush would take time out from their *****ing and offer their better way, assuming that's driving their *****in' anyway. Thus far though, I have yet to hear any real solutions for the war on terrorism. Just criticism.



On a side note, I often wonder what Hitler and Co. wouldn't have given for the attitudes currently demonstrated by far too many Americans.



And finally, anybody who joins the military expecting not to get shot at isn't thinking things through.





Tim
 
The problems with the war on Iraq are many: first, the US went in after the UN said 'no', but now we're whining 'cause the UN STILL say's 'no'. President Bush said it was about WMD's, but there don't seem to be any. President Bush said it was about terrorism, but we can't find any links between Saddam and al Qaeda. President Clinton lied about getting some in the White House. President Bush's lies are getting American's killed. See the difference?

I hate to defend Saddam Hussein, but he was at least a known quantity. He ran a secular (though brutal) nation that didn't allow the Islamic extremists a foothold. Now that he's gone, the Iranians and Saudi extremists are setting up shop. And since the White House didn't bother to think about what to do after our Army drove over the Iraqi Army, now we've got a quagmire.

Oh, and the day you see a democratic election in Iraq, with the US allowing the results to stand, I'll eat my hat. We aren't going to like the results 'cause there will be plenty of virulent anti-American clerics winning those elections. Iraq was once an ally - why didn't we work to make them one once again? THAT's my better way - but it's too late now. They could've been like Pakistan - an ally in the war on terrorism. Instead, we've put them in the perfect position to completely destabilize the region. And Iraqis that might've once wanted a taste of American-style democracy are now turning against us - because their country is a mess and the clerics are teaching them all about the Great Satan. So we are indeed creating more criminals.
 
Originally posted by loncray

President Bush's lies are getting American's killed.



Please give me an EXACT quote from Bush where he openly lied to the American People.



The definition of a lie, as presented by Mr. Webster:

1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.





To me, that means he had to KNOW it wasn't true, BEFORE saying it. If the intelligence shows something and your advisors say that's what is correct, and you believe that is what's correct, how can it be a lie?



It ain't over in Iraq, and you never know what will come of the WMD's.



I at least think you should be thankful you were not a citizen of Sodamn-Insane's Iraq... you'd probably be in one of those mass graves for speaking out against your government (but that's ok, we shoulda let that fella keep on ruling... he was doing a great job w/ the tortures, rapes, and everything else that is considered good "dictatoring").



Josh
 
To those who say because we haven't found any WMD yet that there must not be any, Iraq is a huge country wtih rough terrain. It's not like the installations are labelled with red tape.



It took the Mass State Police almost a year to find the body of Molly Bish, a lifeguard who dissappeared from her post. They roughly knew they would find her in a 20 sq mile area, and it took a year. In actuality, a hunter remembered seeing some garments in the woods resembling the ones last worn.
 
The definition of a lie

Either Bush lied or just selectively ignored the truth as a basis for his actions. It certainly seems that many around him had facts contrary to what he presented, here's one;



Colin Powell speaking to Egypt's Foreign Minister in February of 2001 (pre 9/11)-



"We will always try to consult with our friends in the region so that they are not surprised and do everything we can to explain the purpose of our responses. We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place, but we are always willing to review them to make sure that they are being carried out in a way that does not affect the Iraqi people but does affect the Iraqi regime's ambitions and the ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and we had a good conversation on this issue. If they are continuing to try to acquire weapons of mass destruction, I would have no doubt in my mind who those weapons were aimed at. They are being aimed at Arabs, not at the United States. "
 
And I'm not saying there definitely AREN'T any WMD's - but there's not enough evidence of them to support a preemptive war. Same thing for the terrorism - though it's becoming more and more clear that Saddam and al Qaeda had no more links than they both operated in the Middle East. Saddam wouldn't support those guys - they would've been a threat to his regime.

And I AM glad I live in the United States, where you and I can sit here at our keyboards and type about what a bad guy the President is (not like there wasn't a lot of that going on over the past 11 years!) or what a bad guy Saddam was. I support our troops (used to be one) and am darned glad they took out the Taliban in Afghanistan, and that they continue to hunt al Qaeda now. I wonder how many more al Qaeda guys they coulda gotten over the past 6 months if they weren't in Iraq? I wonder how many Iraqis will join al Qaeda (and other such groups) now that Saddam isn't there to keep the Islamist groups out, or now that the Americans have killed their friend's father's cousin's best friend?
 
Chamberlin (sp?) negotiated peace(?) with Hitler, letting him have most of Europe. The English let Churchill do the dirty work, and then vote Chamberlin back in because Churchill "led us into war!" I believe WE were attacked on 9-11. And a little MORE force is in order. The basic islamic tenets are to either convert the infidels, or kill them. (The capital I was left off on purpose. ) Not much room for negotiation there. Respect from these folks is out of the question, but we can induce a little fear. Hell, they hated us before, why worry. I got pushed around by a kid at school until I finallyasked the old man what to do about it. His reply was simple,fight back. Know what? Didn`t have to, just told the other kid I was gonna punch his lights out. Some people understand diplomacy,some blood. Just use the dialogue they ask for. And be ready & willing to back it up. Don
 
Don, I agree with you 100% - the problem is, Saddam wasn't supporting the Islamic extremists. He couldn't, they would have been too big a threat to his regime. Now that we've removed his stabilizing (albeit brutal) secular influence, didja notice that the Islamic extremists are moving in? We've deliberately taken out the biggest, most stable NON-religious governments in the area and replaced it with... . vacuum and religious extremists. (Now that I think of it, that sentence describes the US elections of 2000!)
 
It ain't the prostitutes and riff-raff that are blowing themselves up, and things like the UN compound with them. My personal guess is that the surviving members of Saddam's old security forces are starting to sell their services to the Islamists who most want the US out.
 
Back
Top