lmao...no. I can't recall the sources. Quite a few, though. I was initially looking into that way before it was mainstream news...so it's been a while since I've looked into it...but I do remember that.
I'm sorry, I know conservatives are struggling to keep up the facade that invading and occupying Iraq was a good idea. But the latest round where you try and point to any happy Iraqi you can find just gets under my skin. Bottom line, the happiness of any number of Iraqis is not worth the life of one American servicemember. Not one. Find another excuse.
Did someone forget to make a point instead of trying fresh new one liners? I'm curious about your math on this. How many happy Iraqis would you say is worth one American soldier's life? Come on conservatives. Don't be shy, anybody want to take this one?
Yeah! ^_^ If the HAPPINESS of all the Iraqis doesn't = 1 American soldier, then do you think that Iraqis' lives are less valuable than 1 American life? Granted, it's sad to have people die, etc, etc, but that's war. Mathematical or not, you can't put a price on life.
Nah, someone forgot to take the blue pill My math? I haven't asserted any such thing. Most of the soldiers I've seen on TV in interviews strongly believe they are doing good work in Iraq. This may be why the retention rate is at an all time high, with many Iraq veterans re-enlisting. Sounds to me like you've gotten "soft" over the years. Sometimes, at night, when you are alone...do you hear voices in your head?
As if they'd be caught on tape saying anything to the contrary? No that's called "stop loss". Look it up. Sounds to me like you've been out too long. The military is a whole other animal today. Who fed you that line of bull anyway and why would you believe it? We're at all time high retention rates yet we are sending national guard troops to Iraq? Does that even make sense to you? I speak with soldiers on a daily basis and when the cameras aren't in their face the story is different. Yeah I got a little more soggy around the middle. So what! The same ones that told Bush he needed to attack Iraq first. Oh wait... that was "God" wasn't it? And I wasn't implying that you asserted anything. I was merely asking you a question. Here' I'll ask it again for you: How many happy Iraqis would you say is worth one American soldier's life?
Always an excuse, right? Doom and gloom! Spin it georgie boy No, it's called re-enlistment. And it has continued to exceed expectations. You just sort of make up things as you go along, don't you? No worry on credibility, only the message matters. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...,1,3166361.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed Wow, just as I noted. 95% of the yearly goal reached in 10 months. But what's this, there's more? It's not your middle that's in question. Just kind of make it up as you go along, right? Actually, you were. And your question has no basis because lives are not being traded for happiness. A 100% reenlistment rate will clearly tell you that you are wrong, and that you've lost touch with reality. But then you weren't working on your credibility, were you?
Ok I'll make this clear and sweet by asking you a simple question as I usually do. Who do you think sets those goals that we're so easily meeting? Hint, Their initials are DoD You see you try to say I'm making things up but here's a fact for you. I don't have to go out and use Google to find any conservative article to back what I say. I WORK for the U.S. DoD. I KNOW what's going on. I SPEAK to guys every so often who happen to be Army recruiters. How can I sit here and speak about the government in detail (especially where the DoD is concerned)? 13 Years of continued service to this day. I'm sorry that it's hard for you to hear the truth instead of piecing it together from biased reports but I understand that when you've been brainwashed for so long the truth can seem like made up lies. I forgive you. You may kiss my ring.
Not going to work. It's not the site's polls, they are just noting the numbers from the actual poll. What you need to do is get your facts straight. Then you should be ashamed of intentionally lying to justify your hatred for Bush. Because the numbers are coming straight out of a credible source and it's not the only source out there. It's been this way and despite your self-loathing disappointment, you can't spin it away. It's not "stop loss" as you suggested, it's reenlistment, as I noted and as I provided a source to verify. And not only that, but missions across the board are being met. It's time to take a step back and think about what you are doing and if your hatred for Bush is blinding you to the truth. You are risking what little credibility you have based on pure hatred. You are above the "only the message matters" crowd. Or at least I thought you were. You have done nothing to earn my trust. In fact, with every passing post, you reinforce exactly why I, nor anyone else, should take what you say as being honest. While I source and backup what I say, you simply espouse the typical Bush hatred talking points with nothing to back up your claims. You have a credibility problem, sir
Hey gtech they raised the age limit to 42 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/5278654.stm Maybe Mia can go sign up
I think we went into Iraq with a cudgel, when a scalpel was needed, if anything was to work at all. Transplanting some notion of "western democracy" onto a society, willy-nilly, without thinking more deeply about what lay under the surface was inanely wrongheaded, and it is wastefully costing lives. The shia-sunni split in Iraq is not the only cleavage, but it is a salient one, an obvious one, with deadly consequences. This administration's ham-fisted approach has touched the match to the bomb. I would have hoped we would have learned something in 100 years - Wilson's 14 points, or Bush's Doctrine - it's all the same, what that most eloquent of conservatives, Edmund Burke, would have vilified as "metaphysical abstraction," a dreamer's concoction drawn up with no sense of the reality on the ground. I agree with George B. on this one. Iraqi "happiness" should not drive foreign policy, nor should it be worth losing 1000's of servicemen and servicewomen lives. Much as I disagreed with this president on many things, on the immediate aftermath of 911, I applauded him in his early statements on what we would now have to do. I also heard GWB, and his officials, decry nation-building: -Condoleeza Rice, Foreign Affairs, 2000 -Years later, in what has now congealed into "the Bush Doctrine," I see a president who has launched a campaign of worldwide, well, nation-building as the centerpiece of his administration. And he has done so, I would argue, filled with a missionary's sense of righteousness that has no place in foreign policy. From even the most severe of realpolitik viewpoints, this administration has confused ideological zeal with prudent national self-interest. And I fear it has unleashed a maelstrom which we will not recover from any time soon. This man leaves office soon, but my son will live with his mishandlings, and for that I am angry.
Well I guess you're right. My problem is that if I recorded what I see and hear on a daily basis and posted the sound clips here for you to listen to I'd lose my job for leaking classified info. GTech doesn't trust me (or at least that's his excuse of convenience) so I guess I'm in a real pickle And get it straight, I don't hate bush as a man anymore than I can hate anyone for being stupid. It's what he's done that I don't like and the few conservatives left that are still defending him. Get a clue, if he were so great his approval ratings would reflect that and the term lame duck wouldn't have any justification to be floating around. That's just a fact you can't dispute.