and for MP

[SDSteve]

OK we believe you :wink: :wink: :nod: :liar:

You are such a chicken-sh*t that you can't even list your home state. Alot of credibility there.

 

[passin thru]

no need to get your pantyhose in a wad

PS I am not in the state of denial as some wing nuts are

 

[kolanuraven]

Oh yeah...owing a baseball team...now that's a REAL JOB!!! Working for ya Daddy's friends....what a nut busted job that must've been.....

Put'em out in your country...about March...calving time...about 2AM....snow a-hole deep and about 15 degrees....now THAT's A JOB!!!

 

[passin thru]

reader, You don't need to come on here high and mighty and giving anyone a reprimand.

"Please argue based on party position and not on hero worship for a particular individual or dynasty. The Republican party and even the Conservative wing of the party are quite fed up with Bush themselves. To ignore this is to subscribe to the same type of cult of personality that the Stalinists you so hate subscribed to." you have to make some assumptions to come up with this bunk Also in your posts on here you base your claims on "party position and not on hero worship for a particular individual or dynasty". Maybe a different party, but same tactic.

If someone can't take some good natured ribbing then they do not belong on the net, or they do not have to respond, especially like when SDSteve said "Judging by what you look like I doubt that I could look any worse in pantyhose then you would" I don't care what anyone said to resort to that personal attack was over the line..........period.

 

[passin thru]

You can't show where I crossed the line, I just kidded about a picture. When someone attacks someones personal looks that is over the line especially when they are 100% wrong in their claim.

Good day

 

[Liberty Belle]

You are such a chicken-sh*t that you can't even list your home state. Alot of credibility there.

Stevie baby, you should take note that your hero, little old disagreeable, not only doesn't post a state, he/she/it will not even claim a gender.

Now if you want to grow up and post something of substance here instead of screaming your childish insults and getting your feelings hurt, we may be able to have a normal, adult discussion on the issues.

Oh yeah...owing a baseball team...now that's a REAL JOB!!! Working for ya Daddy's friends....what a nut busted job that must've been.....

Same goes for you kolanuraven, is this rant anything but an infantile taunt when you are bereft of ideas? It is on the order of "Did not! Did too!", that you hear on the playground at recess and as such, has no place on a board that is supposed to involve a serious discussion of issues.

Put'em out in your country...about March...calving time...about 2AM....snow a-hole deep and about 15 degrees....now THAT's A JOB!!!

This IS one of my jobs and I don't think it proves my intelligence, any more than it does yours. And what does this topic have to do with anything anyway?

reader, you seem to have drifted into the middle of this school yard brawl. Maybe you should have read back a few posts to see what these folks have posted in the past.

 

[Disagreeable]

How much do you think it will cost if the whole Middle East becomes a war zone?

During his debate with Al Gore, George W. Bush told the American people that he was NOT a "nation builder." So you tell me why the US should bear the cost of a Middle Eastern war? Why aren't Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc., out there helping bring "peace and democracy" to Iraq. They haven't even sent diplomats! At least since Egypt sent a diplomat and the insurgents killed him! Where's the security for anyone in Iraq?

And just because some agency whose name you don't even know said it's a civil war doesn't make it so. Not every definition of civil war includes full-scale combat, but that's definitely what we'll have if we leave Iraq.

You're right, a "civil war" doesn't necessarily include full scale combat. But you don't answer the questions. I responded to your questions with straightforward answers. No spin. So, let's try again:

1. Do you believe that when Iraqis approve the proposed constitution Saturday, peace will break out in that country?

2. What will it take for you to say bring out troops home from Iraq?

 

[kolanuraven]

LB: I was saying that what YOU do IS a real job...that was a statement...not a jab at you. I do the same thing in March....and it's hard, I know it and you do to.

Calm down...you can't even see when someone is backing you up on ONE point.

 

[mp.freelance]

Disagreeable,

I'm glad you decided to come back. This thread has started to sound like a junior highschool locker room for some reason, so I didn't even comment.

That said, I don't know what about my previous post you don't understand. I answered your 2 questions to the best of my ability, but obviously nobody has all the answers.

Yes, George Bush pulled a 180 on nation building. Get over it. The election is over, so bashing Bush is going to get us no where. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not exactly enthralled with him.

No, I don't think peace will "break out" on Saturday. But that's a pretty unfair way to phrase the question. If I said yes, I'd sound like an idiot. Nonetheless, progress that has been made with the constitution could lead the way to disintegrating nationalist support for the insurgency.

Consider this recent AP article:

Iraqi Lawmakers OK Last-Minute Amendments By THOMAS WAGNER, Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Parliament on Wednesday approved a set of last-minute amendments to Iraq's draft constitution, sealing a compromise aimed at gaining Sunni support in this weekend's crucial referendum, the parliament speaker said.

The deal — which greatly increases the chances the constitution will be passed in Saturday's vote — came as insurgents pressed their campaign to wreck the referendum. A suicide bomber killed 30 Iraqis at an army recruitment center in a northern town where another bomber had struck just a day earlier.

Iraq's top leaders, including the Kurdish president, Sunni Arab vice-president, and Shiite prime minister, lined up on stage before the gathered lawmakers in parliament, lauding the deal as a show of unity between the country's often divided factions and communities.

The hour-long session, attended by 157 of parliament's 275 members — ended without the lawmakers voting on the amendments, but Parliament Speaker Hajim al-Hassani said no actual vote was necessary and that the compromise was approved.

"Today with the presence of the National Assembly members, it is considered to be adopted," he told The Associated Press.

The deal had already been accepted by the main parties in parliament after it was reached Tuesday night after three days of marathon negotiations, shepherded by U.S. officials who are eager to see the constitution pass. U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad attended Wednesday's parliament session.

The constitution's sucess is key to political progress in Iraq as it is torn by the relentless insurgency — and to prospects for the U.S. military to start pulling out troops next year.

At least one Sunni party has said it will now support the constitution Saturday, though others have rejected the deal and say they will continue their "no" campaign.

The compromise involves amendments or additions to nine articles in the draft constitution.

The central change gives Sunnis the opportunity — once the constitution is passed and a new parliament is elected in December — to try to make major changes to the charter.

Sunnis are hoping to have a larger representation in the next parliament and want to try to water down the autonomous powers that Shiite and Kurdish regions will hold under the constitution's federal system. But the current additions give no guarantee that the Sunnis will be able to push through the changes in the future — only that they'll have the chance to try.

Another significant amendment assures Sunni Arabs that they will not be purged in Iraq's De-Baathification program simply for belonging to Saddam's ousted Baath Party.

But others are more superficial, tweaking words to assure the preservation of Iraq's Arab identity and unity, a concern of the Sunni Arab minority, which fears Iranian influence among the country's Shiite majority and sucessionist tendencies among the non-Arab Kurds.

(I'm assuming the writer meant secessionist in that last sentence.)

Things aren't exactly running like a well-oiled engine, but you can see the pistons of democracy beginning to churn. As to when the troops should come home, I don't have time to write a encyclopedic explanation of what "when we establish security" means. Perhaps a good sign would be when Egyptian diplomats would no longer need to worry about being killed. Like pornography, I know security when I see it.

Iraqis are mostly regular people like us, from what my friend tells me (he went over there.) They don't feel like getting blown up, and most people just want to go on with their lives. If a political compromise is reached, there's no way that the insurgency won't dry up, simply because most people don't aspire to be suicide bombers.

So you tell me why the US should bear the cost of a Middle Eastern war?

Because we can't afford not to. Limiting the war to Iraq is the best thing we can do both economically and in terms of loss of life. How many more people would die if this turned into a full-scale regional conflict? There's no way the U.S. could ignore the situation if it did turn into a major international war, primarily because we'd be blamed for instigating it.

 

[SDSteve]

You are such a chicken-sh*t that you can't even list your home state. Alot of credibility there.

Stevie baby, you should take note that your hero, little old disagreeable, not only doesn't post a state, he/she/it will not even claim a gender.

Now if you want to grow up and post something of substance here instead of screaming your childish insults and getting your feelings hurt, we may be able to have a normal, adult discussion on the issues.

Oh yeah...owing a baseball team...now that's a REAL JOB!!! Working for ya Daddy's friends....what a nut busted job that must've been.....

Same goes for you kolanuraven, is this rant anything but an infantile taunt when you are bereft of ideas? It is on the order of "Did not! Did too!", that you hear on the playground at recess and as such, has no place on a board that is supposed to involve a serious discussion of issues.

Put'em out in your country...about March...calving time...about 2AM....snow a-hole deep and about 15 degrees....now THAT's A JOB!!!

This IS one of my jobs and I don't think it proves my intelligence, any more than it does yours. And what does this topic have to do with anything anyway?

reader, you seem to have drifted into the middle of this school yard brawl. Maybe you should have read back a few posts to see what these folks have posted in the past.

I have lurked here a long time LB. I have seen all of your childish insults for far too long. You are a nice lady on here until someone dares to disagree with you. You seem so concerned about Disagragreable's identity but not for Passingthru. You can't respond to someone who disagrees with you WITHOUT a childish insult. So get off your damn highhorse. You had it coming.

 

[SDSteve]

reader, You don't need to come on here high and mighty and giving anyone a reprimand.

"Please argue based on party position and not on hero worship for a particular individual or dynasty. The Republican party and even the Conservative wing of the party are quite fed up with Bush themselves. To ignore this is to subscribe to the same type of cult of personality that the Stalinists you so hate subscribed to." you have to make some assumptions to come up with this bunk Also in your posts on here you base your claims on "party position and not on hero worship for a particular individual or dynasty". Maybe a different party, but same tactic.

If someone can't take some good natured ribbing then they do not belong on the net, or they do not have to respond, especially like when SDSteve said "Judging by what you look like I doubt that I could look any worse in pantyhose then you would" I don't care what anyone said to resort to that personal attack was over the line..........period.

For the record I set Katrina straight a week ago. She chose to bring it up again. I see you are still too much of a chicken sh*t to list your home state. You are probably the troll on here.

 

[passin thru]

It makes no difference what state I am from. The reason I don't list it is because of jerks like you who can not be trusted. You know it makes no difference, it is just a feeble attempt to attack someone,s credibility. I was attacked on here before, I just didn't respond and it ended after a while. That is one reason I do not get in any serious discussions, only lighthearted jabs. You my friend have a problem.

Have a nice Day

 

[Steve]

2. What will it take for you to say bring out troops home from Iraq?

I would recommend we bring them home one week after we bring home the troops from Germany, Japan and South Korea...

 

[Disagreeable]

That said, I don't know what about my previous post you don't understand. I answered your 2 questions to the best of my ability, but obviously nobody has all the answers.

Yes, George Bush pulled a 180 on nation building. Get over it. The election is over, so bashing Bush is going to get us no where. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not exactly enthralled with him.

No, I don't think peace will "break out" on Saturday. But that's a pretty unfair way to phrase the question. If I said yes, I'd sound like an idiot. Nonetheless, progress that has been made with the constitution could lead the way to disintegrating nationalist support for the insurgency.

You'd sound like an idiot because only an idiot would say "yes." So you just spin and pretend everything will be OK. There is nothing going on over there that indicates anything will be OK. Did you read that the Iraqi Assembly has never approved the Constitution. Or the changes just made? Or that most Iraqis have not seen the proposed Constitution before they vote? If/when the Constitution is approved, which one is approved? The one they disagreed to in August or the one some of them agreed to this week? Get real. This is a very bad joke.

Your article:

The hour-long session, attended by 157 of parliament's 275 members — ended without the lawmakers voting on the amendments, but Parliament Speaker Hajim al-Hassani said no actual vote was necessary and that the compromise was approved.

(My emphasis)

Why didn't they vote? That's what democracy's do: they vote. Why do only 157 members show up? Because they're afraid of being murdered.

At least one Sunni party has said it will now support the constitution Saturday, though others have rejected the deal and say they will continue their "no" campaign.

So it's not accepted by all the Sunnis. And the Sunnis are the backbone of the insurgency.

Things aren't exactly running like a well-oiled engine, but you can see the pistons of democracy beginning to churn. As to when the troops should come home, I don't have time to write a encyclopedic explanation of what "when we establish security" means. Perhaps a good sign would be when Egyptian diplomats would no longer need to worry about being killed. Like pornography, I know security when I see it.

Democracy? The Constitution was not voted on; the changes were not voted on. Where do you see "pistons of democracy beginning to churn."? If you can't write what "security" means, maybe you don't know what you will accept as a point of bringing our toops home. Take time and try to put "security" into words.

Iraqis are mostly regular people like us, from what my friend tells me (he went over there.) They don't feel like getting blown up, and most people just want to go on with their lives. If a political compromise is reached, there's no way that the insurgency won't dry up, simply because most people don't aspire to be suicide bombers.

"If a political compromise is reached...." Why do you think that's going to happen? The Sunnis are the backbone of the insurgency. Some of them reject the Constitution. A group of Sunnis attacked the offices of the Sunni party that accepted the changes in the Constitution. What do you think will make them change their mind?

Because we can't afford not to. Limiting the war to Iraq is the best thing we can do both economically and in terms of loss of life. How many more people would die if this turned into a full-scale regional conflict? There's no way the U.S. could ignore the situation if it did turn into a major international war, primarily because we'd be blamed for instigating it.

Yes, we can afford not to. After Baghdad fell, Bush had the opportunity to accept help from other countries and the UN. He rejected those offers. But I think that if he asked, politely, we could turn this mess over to the UN. But he won't do it because he won't admit that he made a mistake. So more Americans and Iraqis die because of his ego. I honestly don't see how you look yourself in the eye every morning in the mirror as you continue to defend and spin this disaster.