Vietnam Veteran, John Murtha (D-Pa), calls for Iraq withdrawal

E-Z-B

E-Z-B

CAGiversary!
WASHINGTON - An influential House Democrat who voted for the Iraq war called Thursday for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, another sign of growing unease in Congress about the conflict.

“It is time for a change in direction,” said Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., one of Congress’ most hawkish Democrats. “Our military is suffering, the future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region.”

Murtha estimated that all U.S. troops could be pulled out within six months. A decorated Vietnam veteran, he choked back tears during his remarks to reporters.

Murtha, a Marine intelligence officer in Vietnam, angrily shot back at Cheney: “I like guys who’ve never been there that criticize us who’ve been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don’t like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done.”

The top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, Murtha has earned bipartisan respect for his grasp of military issues over three decades in Congress. He planned to introduce a resolution Thursday that, if passed by both the House and the Senate, would force the president to withdraw U.S. troops.

Murtha could not say whether his caucus supports his position. And, although he is a close adviser to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., she was absent from his news conference.

For months, Pelosi has pushed for the Bush administration to outline an exit strategy, although she has stopped short of calling for an immediate troop pullout.

First elected to Congress in 1974, Murtha is known as an ally of uniformed officers in the Pentagon and on the battlefield. The perception on Capitol Hill is that when the congressman makes a statement on military issues, he’s talking for those in uniform.

Known to shun publicity, Murtha said he was standing up because he had a constitutional and moral obligation to speak for the troops.

His voice cracked and tears filled his eyes as he related several stories of visiting wounded troops, including one who was blinded and lost both his hands but had been denied a Purple Heart because friendly fire caused his injuries.

“I met with the commandant. I said, ’If you don’t give him a Purple Heart, I’ll give him one of mine.’ And they gave him a Purple Heart,” said Murtha, who has two.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10084428/

murtha-sized.jpg


It's over, Dubya. Iraq is a fucking mess. It's time to bring our boys and girls home. We didn't succeed with bringing "freedom" to those people, we didn't succeed with reestablishing order, we didn't succeed with "rooting out terrorism" when none was even there to being with, and we didn't succeed with increasing oil production which was your true intent anyway. Murtha represents America finally waking up and realizing the true fuck-up that you are.

Next comes the swiftboating of Murtha, of course.
 
I just listened to a few minutes of Sean Hannity on the way home; he was making the argument that Dick Cheney, as a former Sec'y of Defense, and through his work with Halliburton, had immeasurable military experience.

I hope those who read the vs. forums who have served or currently serve in the military find that extremely offensive; then again, some of them (PAD) don't seem to take exception to George Bush's military absence, and seem to think that John Kerry never bled, so I suppose my wishes are merely that.
 
There is one significant moral difference between withdrawing from vietnam and withdrawing from Iraq, the vietnamese, as a whole, wanted the unification of their country and wanted the north to win. The majority of Iraqi's do not want the current government to collapse.

If the police demolish a building because the landlord had the tenants living in run down buildings that had no water, electricity etc. it should be expected that they build the tennants new places to live. Pulling out of Iraq now would likely end up the equivalent to tearing down the building and then tossing all the tennants out to a life on the street, a worse fate than they previously endured.

Pulling out of Iraq immediately is the ultimate in international irresponsibility and treachery. You can't invade a country then let it go to hell when you decide you don't want to deal with the losses inflicted upon your army.

The u.s. military needs to become extremely strict in regards to abuses. Anyone accused should be immediately removed, and put on trial if evidence is found to back up those allegations. Heavy handed tactics (such as mass raids and arrests) need to be stopped. It will likely result in heavier u.s. losses for the short term, but we screwed it up and its something we should just deal with.
 
Alonzo, I definitely agree with you that pulling out of Iraq simply because its easier/cheaper than staying is a very immoral plan (roughly equal to the lies that got us into Iraq in the first place...) It's something that I've gotten into a lot of debates about on other boards. I don't think, though, that the decision is quite that easy. By staying, we are in a lot of ways making things worse. Even if we do manage to correct our problems with mistreating Iraqi prisoners, the fact that they've occured has badly, badly damaged our credibility (if/when we tell the Iraqi people 'we don't torture anymore, really!', how many of them are actually going to believe us? Our credibility on that issue is essentially at zero at this point.) As long as we stay in Iraq, we're going to infuriate the Muslim world, and the violence is almost certainly going to grow. Our chance to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people is over. We lost that battle.

We're in a difficult position without an easy answer: as long as we stay in Iraq, the violence is only going to get worse. If we fight back, we're going to kill civilians, which is going to cause even more hostility, attracting more people to the insurgency. If we DON'T fight back, the attackers are going to become bolder and the violence will escalate. Either way, innocent Iraqis are going to continue to die by the thousands. If we pull out of Iraq, there's a better-than-even chance that the country will collapse into civil war.

I honestly don't think there's a real answer left at this point. No matter what we do, innocent Iraqis are going to suffer. All we can really do is figure out under which path fewer people die, good old 'lesser of two evils'. Its an extremely complicated problem, and I don't know what the answer is. I don't think anyone else does, either - all we can really do at this point is guess.

One thing I do know for certain, though, is that the judgement of the people who got us into this mess cannot be trusted. They've proven themselves to be completely incompentent (assuming that they're not, in fact, outright evil) and should not be making decisions on these sort of important problems. They probably shouldn't even be trusted to dress themselves.
 
Pulling out of Iraq immediately is the ultimate in international irresponsibility and treachery. You can't invade a country then let it go to hell when you decide you don't want to deal with the losses inflicted upon your army.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. And I thought lying to the American people in order to gain their support in launching a war we have no business fighting in the first place was the ultimate in irresponsibility and treachery.

But seriously, Drocket nails it. You base your argument on the "fact" that our presence is the only thing from keeping all hell from breaking loose in Iraq. Maybe you haven't noticed, but all hell IS breaking loose despite our presence.

Sorry, but at this point, it is not an unquestionable fact that our continued presence in Iraq is good for the Iraqi people. It is a highly debatable point. And I think we desperately need to have that debate in our society ASAP. I think that's why Murtha spoke up today.
 
[quote name='Drocket']Alonzo, I definitely agree with you that pulling out of Iraq simply because its easier/cheaper than staying is a very immoral plan (roughly equal to the lies that got us into Iraq in the first place...) It's something that I've gotten into a lot of debates about on other boards. I don't think, though, that the decision is quite that easy. By staying, we are in a lot of ways making things worse. Even if we do manage to correct our problems with mistreating Iraqi prisoners, the fact that they've occured has badly, badly damaged our credibility (if/when we tell the Iraqi people 'we don't torture anymore, really!', how many of them are actually going to believe us? Our credibility on that issue is essentially at zero at this point.) As long as we stay in Iraq, we're going to infuriate the Muslim world, and the violence is almost certainly going to grow. Our chance to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people is over. We lost that battle.

We're in a difficult position without an easy answer: as long as we stay in Iraq, the violence is only going to get worse. If we fight back, we're going to kill civilians, which is going to cause even more hostility, attracting more people to the insurgency. If we DON'T fight back, the attackers are going to become bolder and the violence will escalate. Either way, innocent Iraqis are going to continue to die by the thousands. If we pull out of Iraq, there's a better-than-even chance that the country will collapse into civil war. [/quote]


But it is still possible to get them to work with us by improving our image, even if they don't actually like us. There is anger against many insurgent groups, we need to make the evidence clear who is actually more dangerous to the people, and that it is beneficial to do more to harm the insurgents. We also can do more to strengthen the current government, such as giving them military control of when and were our troops our deployed.

Theres also the issue of recent prisoner abuse committed by shia army forces against sunni prisoners (oddly enough, uncovered by u.s. troops). The sunni's have long complained of such abuses but now it's beyond simply allegations. The government has done it's best impresion of america, by downplaying reports as "exxagerated". I think the anger that results from things like that make it even harder for them to govern Iraq, not that I think they are currently capable of doing it succesfully anyway.

Also, if we leave and Iraq goes to hell our standing in the world, including the islamic world, will decrease even further. There will be nothing beneficial to say about it, we will have broken it and then just ran away. There will be nothing to soothe the wounds for liberals, conservatives or moderates in the islamic world.

Another thing we have to be careful about is terrorists, we have made Iraq the center of the war on terror, immediately withdrawing simply gives them a victory. The most spectacular attacks, the ones killing civilians and making the news, are the ones having the greatest effect on public opinion. Those are the attacks usually committed by the terrorist elements of the insurgency.

Though I agree that any position is a guess at this point. In war that's the norm.

Hmmm. And I thought lying to the American people in order to gain their support in launching a war we have no business fighting in the first place was the ultimate in irresponsibility and treachery.
Click to expand...

No, because a war does not mean the country will not be a better place 10 years down the road. It is much worse to invade a country and then leave it worse off than when you entered, the only legacy being increased hatred, dead soldiers and dead civilians. You can get good results by using horrible methods, but immediately withdrawing would be the worst of both worlds.

But seriously, Drocket nails it. You base your argument on the "fact" that our presence is the only thing from keeping all hell from breaking loose in Iraq. Maybe you haven't noticed, but all hell IS breaking loose despite our presence.
Click to expand...

And many insurgent groups also attack Iraqi police and military. What makes you think that they'd suddenly stop, when many have already shown their opposition to those groups? What in the Iraqi armies performance suggests that they are capable of putting down the insurgency and maintaining peace and stability in Iraq? They have not shown the capabilities, and do not appear to have the training or numbers to do that. Insurgents have taken over cities with our presence, and pulling out our troops can help prevent that?

Sorry, but at this point, it is not an unquestionable fact that our continued presence in Iraq is good for the Iraqi people. It is a highly debatable point. And I think we desperately need to have that debate in our society ASAP. I think that's why Murtha spoke up today.
Click to expand...

It's funny, if I say remaining there is better than leaving then that assumes that I think I'm 100% infallible. But if I say that the interest of Iraq are not served, then you don't assume that the individual thinks there opinion is infallible (or you just don't care). In Practically every argument I see people seem to assume their opinion is right, but not infallible.
 
A Traitor's Tirade: Rep. John Murtha Soils The Corps

In a statement that has angered, embarrassed and humiliated Marines around the globe, one of our own -- a retired Marine Corps Reserve colonel -- has called for the legendary fighting force to retreat from Iraq and surrender to the terrorist organization that has killed thousands of Americans at home and abroad. He has even called for the United States to enter into negotiations with al Qaeda. This vermin’s demand for retreat, surrender and negotiations with the enemy is so committed to assisting al Qaeda in their efforts in Iraq that he has posted his unspeakable demands on his website in the form of an official statement (www.house.gov/apps/list/press/pa12_murtha/pr051117iraq.html).

The traitor, Democratic Rep. John P. Murtha, agrees 100% with Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al Zarqawi that the Marine Corps, which is mangling the enemy on a daily basis in Iraq and suffering comparatively light casualties, should lay down its arms, call it quits, and abandon the people they are defending in the fledgling democracy of Iraq.

Furious Marines from wars as far back as World War II are spitting mad at the cowardly colonel and many want his head on a stake in the middle of the Marine Corps Commandant's lawn. Personally, I would not soil that good earth with so vile and despicable a piece of offal.

Encouraging retreat is viewed as aiding the enemy by the Marines and is a violation of Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is punishable by death. Currently serving Marines, active duty or reserve, who encourage surrender are in violation of Article 100 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, an offense also punishable by death. Because Murtha is retired, he is virtually assured of not being prosecuted.

However, he will be celebrated by al Qaeda and other terrorists around the world. At this very moment, al Qaeda communications specialists are likely prepping pieces of propaganda using Murtha’s traitorous tirade as a tool to recruit fresh killers by showing them that even an American Marine (apologies to Puller) believes his allegedly beloved Corps is so inept in battle that retreat and surrender are the Marines’ best option and perhaps should, in fact, be added for the first time to the Leathernecks’ vast, quasi-mythical repertoire of operational art and battlefield strategy.

Murtha joins the likes of traitor Clayton Lonetree, the Marine security guard who gave top-secret intelligence to the Soviets, and traitor Robert Garwood, the Marine who went over to the enemy during the Vietnam War and was involved in holding and abusing US prisoners of war in North Vietnam while wearing the uniform of the enemy.

The Marine Corps is famous for its members standing their ground and winning fights against outrageous odds. Battles with names like the Peking Legation, Belleau Wood, Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, the Chosin Reservoir, Khe Sanh and Fallujah decorate the hallowed halls of Corps history. Especially repugnant is how Murtha is insisting upon surrender while the Marines are decimating the enemy en masse.

Marines should ask Murtha if Chesty Puller would order retreat and surrender before the enemy.

John "The Jellyfish" Murtha should be shunned by all Marines and, if possible, legal steps should be taken to prevent this betrayer from being buried in a national cemetery upon his demise.
Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant Bob Newman

Just a note from me on this, since I agree with the guy, a Gunny in the Marine Corps is practically a god. They are the toughest, roughest of the hard charging devil dogs. R. Lee Ermey of the History Channel's "Mail Call", SE7EN and "Full Metal Jacket" is another well know ex-Marine Gunnery Sergeant.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']total "with us or against us" hogwash.[/QUOTE]

Do you have any idea how much money I would pay to have you say that to a gunny's face?

I would laugh my fucking ass off when you got dropped. Know what I'd tell a cop?

I'm sorry officer, I saw him slip on some spilled beer and he hit his face on the bar.

arial.gif

gordon450.gif

fumn9e.jpg
 
Well, as long as we're open to rational discourse around here... :roll:

Good to see that said Marines are all muscle and no brains; otherwise that article wouldn't look like "OMG! HE HATES THE WAR!" propoganda. That editorial is nothing more than the same kind of polemic the Republican party has been spewing the past few days; all threat and no substance. It's only dripping with more machismo because of the source.

EDIT: Glad to see that you're simple-minded enough to parallel Iraq and Al-Qaeda. This circular conversation has been going on for 3 years now, and I'm tired of pointing out that they are not the same fucking thing. I realize that, for you, a brown person is a brown person is a brown person; the world is a bit more complex than that, I'm afraid.

That third comic is particularly enlightening. Boy, we sure did spread democracy and single-handedly saved the Native Americans! The Iraqis should be half as lucky.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Do you have any idea how much money I would pay to have you say that to a gunny's face?

I would laugh my fucking ass off when you got dropped. Know what I'd tell a cop?

I'm sorry officer, I saw him slip on some spilled beer and he hit his face on the bar.[/QUOTE]

Yep, because the marines are beacons of INTELLIGENCE and ENLIGHTENMENT in our community. Why think for ourselves when we can have Enlisted men yell what we need to think at us?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']That third comic is particularly enlightening. Boy, we sure did spread democracy and single-handedly saved the Native Americans! The Iraqis should be half as lucky.[/QUOTE]
And in a few hundred years the Iraqis can set up casinos on their reservations while we root for our hometown teams the Baghdad Insurgents and the Fallujah Camel Jockeys.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']And in a few hundred years the Iraqis can set up casinos on their reservations while we root for our hometown teams the Baghdad Insurgents and the Fallujah Camel Jockeys.[/QUOTE]

:lol:
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']And in a few hundred years the Iraqis can set up casinos on their reservations while we root for our hometown teams the Baghdad Insurgents and the Fallujah Camel Jockeys.[/QUOTE]

But of course, we'll make sure that we're using it to honor them. :lol:
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']Yep, because the marines are beacons of INTELLIGENCE and ENLIGHTENMENT in our community.[/QUOTE]

You have neither the intelligence, the aptitude or fortitude to be one of...

marinesega2.jpg


But what's especially delicious here is you're painted into a corner since you're forced to say that this Marine is.

You're a disgrace to your citizenship. If you were my neighbor your tires would frequently strangely deflate and have numerous ice pick type puncture marks in your sidewalls created by angry swarms of bees.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']You have neither the intelligence, the aptitude or fortitude to be one of...

marinesega2.jpg
[/QUOTE]

If you mean a lack thereof to be enlisted, you hit it on the head.
 
I would pit a Marine Corps Sergeant against you in a straight IQ test and guarantee you the Sergeant I'd select would show more pure intelligence and aptitude than you.

However I could pick any buck private straight out of boot that would have more fortitude in his pinky than you have in your entire body.

I'm curious. What's it like knowing that any one of the thousands of female Marines that finish at Parris Island annually could kick your ass at anything?
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I'm curious. What's it like knowing that any one of the thousans of female Marines that finish at Parris Island annually could kick your ass at anything?[/QUOTE]

Not that I need to defend mao from anything, but you didn't prove anything, so it's not certainly something one "knows."

I "know" I'm wearing shoes, because I am.

I "know" I'm going to drink coffee, because I have a venti red eye in front of me.

I don't "know" that someone is going to walk into my office in a moment, because it's something I can't prove and remain uncertain of.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I'm curious. What's it like knowing that any one of the thousands of female Marines that finish at Parris Island annually could kick your ass at anything?[/QUOTE]

That's totally hot.
 
Wow, Scott McClellan is now equating Murtha with Michael Moore. Get that? A 37-year marine who retired as a Colonel is the same thing as a liberal anit-war filmmaker? The GOP really have no shame.

STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY

Congressman Murtha is a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting a strong America. So it is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051117-7.html
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']A Traitor's Tirade: Rep. John Murtha Soils The Corps

In a statement that has angered, embarrassed and humiliated Marines around the globe, one of our own -- a retired Marine Corps Reserve colonel -- has called for the legendary fighting force to retreat from Iraq and surrender to the terrorist organization that has killed thousands of Americans at home and abroad. He has even called for the United States to enter into negotiations with al Qaeda. This vermin’s demand for retreat, surrender and negotiations with the enemy is so committed to assisting al Qaeda in their efforts in Iraq that he has posted his unspeakable demands on his website in the form of an official statement (www.house.gov/apps/list/press/pa12_murtha/pr051117iraq.html).

The traitor, Democratic Rep. John P. Murtha, agrees 100% with Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al Zarqawi that the Marine Corps, which is mangling the enemy on a daily basis in Iraq and suffering comparatively light casualties, should lay down its arms, call it quits, and abandon the people they are defending in the fledgling democracy of Iraq.

Furious Marines from wars as far back as World War II are spitting mad at the cowardly colonel and many want his head on a stake in the middle of the Marine Corps Commandant's lawn. Personally, I would not soil that good earth with so vile and despicable a piece of offal.

Encouraging retreat is viewed as aiding the enemy by the Marines and is a violation of Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is punishable by death. Currently serving Marines, active duty or reserve, who encourage surrender are in violation of Article 100 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, an offense also punishable by death. Because Murtha is retired, he is virtually assured of not being prosecuted.

However, he will be celebrated by al Qaeda and other terrorists around the world. At this very moment, al Qaeda communications specialists are likely prepping pieces of propaganda using Murtha’s traitorous tirade as a tool to recruit fresh killers by showing them that even an American Marine (apologies to Puller) believes his allegedly beloved Corps is so inept in battle that retreat and surrender are the Marines’ best option and perhaps should, in fact, be added for the first time to the Leathernecks’ vast, quasi-mythical repertoire of operational art and battlefield strategy.

Murtha joins the likes of traitor Clayton Lonetree, the Marine security guard who gave top-secret intelligence to the Soviets, and traitor Robert Garwood, the Marine who went over to the enemy during the Vietnam War and was involved in holding and abusing US prisoners of war in North Vietnam while wearing the uniform of the enemy.

The Marine Corps is famous for its members standing their ground and winning fights against outrageous odds. Battles with names like the Peking Legation, Belleau Wood, Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, the Chosin Reservoir, Khe Sanh and Fallujah decorate the hallowed halls of Corps history. Especially repugnant is how Murtha is insisting upon surrender while the Marines are decimating the enemy en masse.

Marines should ask Murtha if Chesty Puller would order retreat and surrender before the enemy.

John "The Jellyfish" Murtha should be shunned by all Marines and, if possible, legal steps should be taken to prevent this betrayer from being buried in a national cemetery upon his demise.
Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant Bob Newman

Just a note from me on this, since I agree with the guy, a Gunny in the Marine Corps is practically a god. They are the toughest, roughest of the hard charging devil dogs. R. Lee Ermey of the History Channel's "Mail Call", SE7EN and "Full Metal Jacket" is another well know ex-Marine Gunnery Sergeant.[/QUOTE]

I think article 104 is meant to prevent marines from encouring their group to hand themselves over to enemy hands.

You really are going insane though. OMG he thinks Iraq is a lost cause and wants us to pull out! So does Osama! Kill the traitor! (sadly, I don't seem to be exaggerating like I intended to)

Osama and Zarqawi also believe in marriage, eating, sleeping, praying, fighting etc. They also made an effort to make Iraq the centerpoint of the war on terror. All things you and bush believe in.


Also, in reference to your cartoons, the democrats suggested timelines for withdrawal based on meeting certain conditions. If those conditions were not met in Iraq, then there would be no withdrawal.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I'm curious. What's it like knowing that any one of the thousands of female Marines that finish at Parris Island annually could kick your ass at anything?[/QUOTE]

I'm curious how you "KNOW" this. I have been body building for years, taken a few martial arts classes and played tons of sports. Is there something in the training that is super secret that sets them apart? Or is it the verbal and physical hazing and abuse that sets them apart? I've already endured that sort of stuff when I joined a frat or was a cadet in ROTC.

Moreover, rather than defending his claims, you basically say that he can beat me up. So, um, are you saying he's right because he can beat me up? Might makes right?

Also, since when are we colonizing Iraq? Wouldn't that be contrary to what the original point of invading Iraq was (old history version: To find WMDs. new history version: To liberate the Iraqis)? Otherwise, that pilgrims and plymouth rock comparison falls flat on its face.
 
[quote name='Cheese']That's totally hot.[/QUOTE]

I was just gonna say the same thing, though I didn't see that quote until mao mentioned it.

Though, can I give them a wip and a candle?
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']Wow, Scott McClellan is now equating Murtha with Michael Moore. Get that? A 37-year marine who retired as a Colonel is the same thing as a liberal anit-war filmmaker? The GOP really have no shame.[/QUOTE]
Along with no shame, they also have no support. Only 35% of Americans support Bush's Iraq policy. 54% say the invasion was a mistake.

They've dug themselves quite a hole here and all they can do it attack and smear any critic who dares to question them.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']I'm curious how you "KNOW" this. I have been body building for years, taken a few martial arts classes and played tons of sports. Is there something in the training that is super secret that sets them apart? Or is it the verbal and physical hazing and abuse that sets them apart? I've already endured that sort of stuff when I joined a frat or was a cadet in ROTC.

Moreover, rather than defending his claims, you basically say that he can beat me up. So, um, are you saying he's right because he can beat me up? Might makes right?

Also, since when are we colonizing Iraq? Wouldn't that be contrary to what the original point of invading Iraq was (old history version: To find WMDs. new history version: To liberate the Iraqis)? Otherwise, that pilgrims and plymouth rock comparison falls flat on its face.[/QUOTE]

Because Marines don't quit.

Female Marines would wipe the everloving floor with you you giant pussy.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Because Marines don't quit.

Female Marines would wipe the everloving floor with you you giant pussy.[/QUOTE]
So why then have conservatives fought against women serving in combat?
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Because Marines don't quit.

Female Marines would wipe the everloving floor with you you giant pussy.[/QUOTE]

Uh huh, so is the answer to all questions from now on going to be "marines can beat you up" and derogatory terms? Wonderful how your argumentation has more or less broken down. I'm surprised you haven't yelled "my dad can beat up your dad!".

However, I guess you are right. I wouldn't make the cut as a soldier. I'm not mindless enough to continuously follow orders. However, you have shown us (in spades, mind you!) that you still retain the greatest qualities of a sodlier: Unquestioned loyalty to follow. However, it just turns out your leaders have changed from military men to Rush, Hannity and other nutjobs.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']However, it just turns out your leaders have changed from military men to Rush, Hannity and other nutjobs.[/QUOTE]

All of whom, quite ironically, were far too big of pussies to serve in the military even when drafted. The fact that all of them enjoy beating their chests, declaring themselves manly-men, and demanding that our country send others off to die really can't be a coincidence: its impossible not to believe that they're overcompensating for their own cowardice.
 
Hey slut77, what's the matter? Unpopular speech should now be silenced in your view?

How PC.

How perfectly consistent with a totalitarian view.

capitalist_mao, I concede my point. I think you might make a terrific woman beater. I'm sure you could physically destroy a woman, after all, you took some martial arts classes and did some body building. How foolish of me not to recognize your superiority physically over the fairer sex.

Oh, I have to ask... Do you use your superior physical attributes to date rape as well? Seems perfectly consistent with your claims of being able to dominate a woman.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']capitalist_mao, I concede my point.[/QUOTE]
That's awesome. You're on the first step to healing.

[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Oh, I have to ask... Do you use your superior physical attributes to date rape as well? Seems perfectly consistent with your claims of being able to dominate a woman.[/QUOTE]
When did I claim that I dominate women?
 
I could care less if I'm popular or unpopular around here. This forum is mostly for my amusement.

Seems to me you favor censorship. So tell me, which totalitarian punishment would fit me best in your view? Isolation in a closed city? The gulag? Or just plain old hard labor.

Tell us how you would deal with people whose viewpoints you view as dangerous and worth silencing.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Seems to me you favor censorship.[/QUOTE]

Given your unwillingness to support the defense of a city in our nation as a result of their overwhelming tendency to vote the opposite of your belief system, I don't think that this is a claim that you can truly level at *anyone* without some self-disclosure, PAD.
 
Ah yes, call for me to be banned, censored and silenced then make me out to be a scumbag for questioning your totalitarian wishes.

How perfectly typical of a PC wannabe thug. When questioned directly about their tactics and wishes attack the questioner.
 
I know you hate me speaking my mind slut77. I know it infuriates you that I don't fall lockstep behind the anti-war, anti-military, anti-Bush mindset dominant on this board. I know you hate me calling traitorous ex-military types like John Kerry, Dick "The Turban" Durbin and now John "Jihad" Murtha idiots of the Nth degree who learned nothing about the nature of the world despite their time served.

However I will tell you right now, point blank to your mentally deranged face. I will not leave, I will not be silenced, I will not retreat in the face of your insane and misguided insults.

So I suggest you spend the rest of the night seething that I find you to be a cowardly loser with no understanding of how the world works and the true nature of the threat we're fighting in Iraq as opposed to on our streets, in our shopping malls, night clubs and gathering places. I didn't mind putting on the uniform to protect scum like you. I knew it was part of the job.

Oh, go find a mod. Any mod. Ask them to ban me. Demand that they ban me. Get back to me with their response. I suspect you'll be as disappointed with their response as you are with your meaningless, empty life where those that protect you and keep you free are the villians and cowards that sit behind their keyboards like yourself bitching about the world are the heroes in America.

You.

Are.

Pathetic.
 
It is freaking hilarious that the guy who spends every waking moment calling people traitors is accusing me of limiting free speech.

In a thread no less where you said you would laugh if you saw someone else get their ass kicked for voicing their opinion (which you would then lie to law enforcement about).

BTW I wasnt planning on asking a mod anything, it is simply my humble opinion that you should be banned.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']This forum is mostly for my amusement.[/QUOTE]

I used to think the same thing about christians, until they started voting. Argh!
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I know you hate me speaking my mind slut77. .[/QUOTE]


Actually we hate your unoriginal, unthinking, ctrl+v from Rush, lying (remember when you were black? lol) , inferiority -complex style of arguing.

other than that, you're just a cute distraction from serious debate.
 
It is freaking hilarious that the guy who spends every waking moment calling people traitors is accusing me of limiting free speech.
Click to expand...

I hate to defend PAD, but he's right. He called you a traitor, you called for his banning. He isn't advocating a measure that will prevent you from saying what you want but you are.

Now, his calling for murtha being arrested is censorship, but since his argument stems from military service. So, his censorship is directed at military individuals, yours focuses on the general public which is sorta worse, but he's calling for legal action.

I think I just lost my own argument.
 
They should call this the Ad Hominem forum...

Iraq was a deception and a mistake in my opinion, but we can't leave today, or it'll all go to shit. We need an exit strategy, a plan that'll get most of the troops out, while leaving the country stable enough to take care of itself, as soon as we're able.

Iraq would probably be better off if we could stay a little longer, but there are bigger threats in the world, I don't want all of our resources commited when they're needed elsewhere. Iran has or will soon have nukes, North Korea has nukes, Kim Jong Il is insane, and they're real live commys. China may make a move on Taiwan if they think we're too bogged down or unwilling to intervene (don't think they won't, they've been positioning military assets there for years).

Saddam was a bad guy that slaughtered his own people, but he didn't have WMD's, he wasn't involved in 9/11, and he was neither a direct, nor imminent threat to the United States. There are plenty of evil dictators in the world, in the same situation. What separated him from the rest? What was the justification for going to war? Why Iraq? Even though these are key issues for a lot of us, and they should be addressed, they are moot when it comes to what to do about Iraq, today. Iraq needs to be left in the best position possible in order to be stable at all, and our military needs to be in the best position possible in order to confront future threats. If we leave today, civil war. If we stay too long, it hinders our ability to project military power, notwithstanding what its costing us financially, and in lives.

I hope the recent events in Jordan have swayed public opinion among moderates in the Middle East, against these terrorists that kill civilians, and fellow Muslims, indiscriminately. Doing the work on the ground is only part of the equation, we need to win "hearts and minds". They're probably never going to like us, but hopefully, in time, they won't hate us as much as the Jews.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top