• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Haven't any of you figured out

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Twotimer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Location
north of Texas
Why there are only about 5 people who post here regularly? So far there are few threads with pleasant factual debates. The rest are dominated by some fringe polarizing posts. Everytime a decent thread starts up, it gets hijacked by the fringe.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
7
I know you are right...if you disagree slightly, in any degree or fashion, with the Pro-Bush Bunch...you get hammered and called all sort of names.

I guess being 'conservative" doesn't apply to your manners!
 

passin thru

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
2,603
Reaction score
0
I know you are right...if you disagree slightly, in any degree or fashion, with the Hate-Bush Bunch...you get hammered and called all sort of names.

I guess being 'liberal" doesn't apply to your manners!
 

passin thru

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
2,603
Reaction score
0
Two Timer come back in six months and tell us your analysis. Things have evolved on this board and to come up with a conclusion without seeing the beginning of the race is very narrowminded.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
Twotimer said:
Why there are only about 5 people who post here regularly? So far there are few threads with pleasant factual debates. The rest are dominated by some fringe polarizing posts. Everytime a decent thread starts up, it gets hijacked by the fringe.

OK, let’s have a reasonable discussion on Iraq. I’ll try not to rant and rave. Here’s my take:

President Bush mislead the American people when he used information that the CIA told him was unreliable as a cornerstone of his justification to invade Iraq. We can follow that up with Carl Rove outing a CIA agent because her husband told the public that the Administration was not telling the truth about Saddam buying uranium from Niger. But that’s a whole other can of worms; I won’t even go there right now.

General Shinseki told Congress that it would take “several hundred thousand” troops several years to invade and pacify Iraq. Immediately, Bush minions disrespected this professional soldier and assured Congress he was totally wrong. They assured Congress and the American people that Iraqis would welcome us with open arms. They assured us that Iraq had the money to rebuild their own country. Sec Rumsfeld assured us the war would only last a few weeks. They named Gen Shinseki’s replacement and didn’t give him a new assignment, thus forcing him to retire. That’s another can of worms; I won’t go there now either, but this link has a lot to offer:

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2003/0228pentagoncontra.htm

President Bush promised us that he would use all diplomatic channels to avoid war with Iraq. He didn’t do that. Saddam allowed UN weapons inspectors back into the country, but Bush ordered them out before they had time to complete their inspections. I think he did that because if they announced there were no WMDs, he’d have no excuse to invade. Some of our oldest allies, France, Germany, Canada, very sensibly refused to join in this fiasco. Toppling Saddam was a piece of cake. There’s no military in the world that can stand up to ours and it was at the top if its game for this invasion.

Immediately after Baghdad fell, France, Germany, the UN, all offered to send help in the rebuilding of Iraq. The Bush Bunch refused all those offers of aid. They would only take UN help if the UN troops were under the control of the US. The War College released a paper last year that was written before the invasion. It correctly said the US had a window of about a year to make life for Iraqis better than it had been under Saddam or a resistance group would likely form. Well, the Bush Bunch dillied and dallied around for that year. They threw money at Bush’s Buddies, Halliburton, Bechtel, Shaw, got nothing done and, guess what, an insurgency developed. Bush’s “Coalition of the Willing” has fallen apart. Member after member has withdrawn their troops from Iraq and more will withdraw after the Constitution is approved. Some of Iraq’s neighbors claim to support the new government, but they won’t send diplomats into the country. They also refuse to send military troops to support the “establishment of Democracy”.

We were told that the insurgency was a few Saddam loyalist and when he was captured/killed, they’d go away. He was captured. The insurgency is stronger than when he was on the loose. We were told the insurgency was only a few diehards. But the military has killed thousands and there’s no end of insurgents or terrorist bombers in sight. Several credible agencies, including US generals on the ground in Iraq, say that Iraq has become a training ground for terrorism. That was not true before the invasion. Saudi Arabia says the Saudis that have been captured trying to enter Iraq were motivated to join a terrorist organization because the US invaded a Muslim country.

We were told that when an election was held and Iraqis elected a government, the insurgency would go away. Didn’t happen. It’s only gotten worse. The “government” can’t agree on a new Constitution. Though there’s one being printed and will be voted on next month, the Sunnis will try to defeat it and it certainly won’t defuse the insurgency. There are also serious concerns about the ties of this new government to Iran, the rights of women, and the part Sharia Law will pay in the everyday life of Iraqis. Abu Musab Zarqawi has announced a war on the Shiites. Baghdad has been a bloody mess for about a week now, 150 civilians die one day, 30 the next, 20 the next, who knows tomorrow? Neighborhoods where Sunnis and Shiites once lived side by side in peace are coming apart. Almost every day bodies of men bound, gagged, tortured, shot in the head, are found in different neighborhoods. Some of them are killed by government agencies, some by Shiite milita, some by Sunni militia, some by Kurds.

And yet the President of Iraq stood up at the UN yesterday and told them “"We are marching toward political stability and economic prosperity.” Is the man an idiot? Or does he think the rest of the world isn’t watching this bloodbath?

The US Army has not met its recruitment goals for this year, even though they’ve drawn down their waiting lists. Normally, they like to have several thousand delayed entry recruits, but they’ve had to use them, too. If this thing drags on another year, the Army will simply be broke and I don’t mean just moneywise. The cost of recruiting has gone up tremendously. They’ve increased advertising, increased bonuses, shortened the enlistment term, raised the enlistment age and still can’t get the new bodies they need. The National Guard belongs to the various states and I don’t know of a site that tells how, overall, Guard recruiting is going. Both the Army and Guard are doing well in retaining their soldiers, but new recruits are the lifeblood of a strong military. The Air Force and Navy met their recruiting goals apparently without much trouble. But there aren’t a lot of Air Force puks on the ground in Iraq.

The Cost of War calculator is set to reach $204.6 billion on Iraq at the end of fiscal year 2005. Story after story tells us of corruption and mishandling of the money we’re trying to spend in rebuilding the country. There are millions of dollars unaccounted for in Iraq. Some money designated for rebuilding Iraq has had to be spent on security because no one can rebuild a hospital if they’re under attack. 1,899 American military members have died since the invasion.

We’re running one of the largest Federal budget deficits ever. A deficit run up by an Administration that claims to be Conservative. And now we’ve got Katrina. Some experts say it will take $200 Billion to rebuild the Gulf Coast. Republicans in Congress say we have to be careful how much money we devote to helping out Americans in that region. But very few of them, if any, are saying we have to be careful how much money we spend in Iraq. I say that’s wrong. Poll after poll shows that the American people think Bush’s priorities are in the wrong place. But he’s the Commander in Chief. He’s the only person who can bring out troops back from Iraq. If he refuses to do that, I think he should be impeached.

I won’t go into what I consider fraud in the passing of “Medicare Reform” last year. Or the passing out of $million contracts to Bush Buddies in New Orleans. Or allowing setting aside the Davis-Bacon Act. Why should this disaster allow contractors to pay employees less money for doing the same work? I say it’s a sell out to big business again. Or the Abu Grahib. Or torture at Guantanamo Bay.

There’s no doubt in my mind that this country is less secure than we were before the invasion of Iraq. Look at the thousands of illegals that cross our southern border every year, and the thousands of containers that aren’t inspected at our major ports. Homeland Security is a joke, filled with political pals of the president.

All right, so I couldn’t refrain from a rant or two, :) but I can link everything in this post to a newspaper or government report. Believe me, I could go on and on. But I won’t. I’ve laid out my case against this war; let’s hear what you’ve got to say.
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Whatever happened to all those crazy vegans? I was reading some of the "classic veg sessions" and a lot of it was just hilarious. Is it possible they've all died of malnutrition?
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
mp.freelance said:
Whatever happened to all those crazy vegans? I was reading some of the "classic veg sessions" and a lot of it was just hilarious. Is it possible they've all died of malnutrition?

Oh, no. When it comes to their own health, animals take second or third place. They're still around. They've mostly withdrawn to sites restricted to vegan or vegetarian-only posts.

By the way, I can discuss two topics at once. If this is your effort to change the direction of the Iraqi discussion, it won't work.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Everytime a decent thread starts up, it gets hijacked by the fringe.

I agree this time and as ussual it is hijacked by a one single minded far left liberal, again, and as ussual no one from the left will take her to task for hijacking the thread,,,


Maybe because most of US are tired of her whining and complaining with no real solution for anything other then to continue to whine and complain, that we ignore most of the hundreds of threads that she starts, so she hijacks other threads to promote her hatred for the military and the President. ,, then for some reason the liberals blame it on the conservatives, that respond...

But to respond to this; about our Great Military From Disagreable? I'll open up another Thread,,,,
But there aren’t a lot of Air Force puks on the ground in Iraq.
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Disagreeable said:
mp.freelance said:
Whatever happened to all those crazy vegans? I was reading some of the "classic veg sessions" and a lot of it was just hilarious. Is it possible they've all died of malnutrition?

Oh, no. When it comes to their own health, animals take second or third place. They're still around. They've mostly withdrawn to sites restricted to vegan or vegetarian-only posts.

By the way, I can discuss two topics at once. If this is your effort to change the direction of the Iraqi discussion, it won't work.

I watched a documentary about Saddam Hussein and how he came to power yesterday. In one example of his compassionate rule, the producers interviewed a man whose friend was brutally tortured (burning of genitals, etc.) then made to watch as they raped his wife twice. As a finale, they threw his baby boy against the wall, exploding his brains. Then they killed the guy. They released his wife, however, so that she could go out and tell everyone what had happened.

This kind of story is pretty much all the discussion I need to believe invading Iraq was right, and no amount of whining will change my mind. So no, I wasn't changing the topic. Just curious about those wacky vegans.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
MP, first of all George W. Bush didn't invade Iraq because Saddam was a bad man. He justified the invasion with the claim that Saddam had WMDs and could/would give them to terrorist to use on this country. But I have to ask: Since you're such a bleeding heart, are you also in favor of sending American troops to the Sudan, to North Korea, to China where their strict population controls allow them to force women to have abortions?

I'm interested in hearing this answer.
 

Denny

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
5,624
Reaction score
0
Location
Mn usa
Disagreeable said:
mp.freelance said:
Whatever happened to all those crazy vegans? I was reading some of the "classic veg sessions" and a lot of it was just hilarious. Is it possible they've all died of malnutrition?

Oh, no. When it comes to their own health, animals take second or third place. They're still around. They've mostly withdrawn to sites restricted to vegan or vegetarian-only posts.

By the way, I can discuss two topics at once. If this is your effort to change the direction of the Iraqi discussion, it won't work.

Well they got so skinny they fell thru their asshole's and hung themselves..
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Disagreeable said:
MP, first of all George W. Bush didn't invade Iraq because Saddam was a bad man. He justified the invasion with the claim that Saddam had WMDs and could/would give them to terrorist to use on this country. But I have to ask: Since you're such a bleeding heart, are you also in favor of sending American troops to the Sudan, to North Korea, to China where their strict population controls allow them to force women to have abortions?

I'm interested in hearing this answer.

First of all, you'd have cut all the useless pork barrel social programs that don't work and put more money into the military. If we paid soldiers better, we'd raise recruitment. By allowing ourselves more freedom in the rules of engagement, and didn't give up our sovereignity to the UN, we could be more effective. If all this could be accomplished, then yes, we should invade Sudan, North Korea, Iran, etc. (China's is a bit more complicated, for obvious reasons, but we could afford to intimidate them more.) Is it currently feasible? No.

(I'll spare you the typical ad hominem attack: "Go join the army then!"

Of course, this would require the kind of planning and foresight that Bush probably isn't capable of. I'm willing to agree that the plan for rebuilding Iraq was pretty much non-existent, and that was a huge mistake. The invasion itself, however, was executed very well, with a minimum of lives lost. Had we been better prepared, you and I wouldn't be having this conversation.

But on actual moral terms, it was definitely justified. If Hitler was just peacefully killing Jews in Germany without invading other countries or trying to take over the world, would you have allowed it to continue?

Sadly, had you lived back then, the answer probably would have been yes.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
First of all, you'd have cut all the useless pork barrel social programs that don't work and put more money into the military. If we paid soldiers better, we'd raise recruitment. By allowing ourselves more freedom in the rules of engagement, and didn't give up our sovereignity to the UN, we could be more effective. If all this could be accomplished, then yes, we should invade Sudan, North Korea, Iran, etc. (China's is a bit more complicated, for obvious reasons, but we could afford to intimidate them more.) Is it currently feasible? No.

Do you have any idea what a MSG in the US Army makes? With all due credit to George W. Bush, the pay scale for our military is good. Money is not what's keeping our Army from meeting their recruting goals. Since they've increased signing bonuses, enlistment has gone up. This disaster in Iraq is the reason people are discouraging their children from joining the Army. Our soldiers will pay if we don't follow the international rules of engagement. Don't kid yourself that everyone follows those rules. And if the US doesn't set an example, future engagements will only be worse. Bush's refusal to recognize the Geneva Convention is one of the worst things he's done to our military since he's been in the office. Intimidation doesn't work when the entire world knows we're tied up in a quagmire in Iraq. That's one of the ways he's made us more vulnerable. The world sees the strongest military nation in the world being stopped by a relatively small insurgent group.

We haven't given up our sovereignity to the UN. Bush has practically begged the UN to come into Iraq and they refuse to do so unless it's on their terms. Bush refuses to agree. So we're stuck. You can't blame this mess in Iraq on anyone but George W. Bush and his inept minons.

(I'll spare you the typical ad hominem attack: "Go join the army then!"

Well, gee, one wouldn't expect you to endanger yourself! You will simply set on the sidelines and encourage other people's children to put themselves at risk. Look at yourself in the mirror and think about the families of those four who died yesterday in your war.

Of course, this would require the kind of planning and foresight that Bush probably isn't capable of. I'm willing to agree that the plan for rebuilding Iraq was pretty much non-existent, and that was a huge mistake. The invasion itself, however, was executed very well, with a minimum of lives lost. Had we been better prepared, you and I wouldn't be having this conversation.

Glad to see that you can realize Bush messed up. Polls show more and more Americans agree with us. So what's your suggestion at this time to make peace in Iraq? Even in the British zone, violence is heating up and they expect to send more troops to Iraq instead of drawing down their numbers. Do you seriously think this finally released "Constitution" is going to stop the violence?

But on actual moral terms, it was definitely justified. If Hitler was just peacefully killing Jews in Germany without invading other countries or trying to take over the world, would you have allowed it to continue?

We're allowing it to happen in Dufar. I hear nothing from the Bush Bunch or people on this board about invading that country. Millions of North Koreans have starved the last several winters. I see nothing from the Bush Bunch or people on this board about giving them aid. China is forcing women to have abortions to enforce their reproductive policies. I don't see the Bush Bunch calling for UN sanctions on them. But George W. Bush had a thing for Saddam. It was a personal vendetta in his mind and he took my country into a disaster area for his own personal reasons. You're right, I don't think the US should be the policeman of the world. Bush claimed he believed the same thing. He's not "nationbuilder" he said in one of the debates with Al Gore. But now he has the US taxpayer on the hook to rebuild two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan. Rumsfeld is trying to get NATO to take more responsibility for Afghanistan! The country where Osama Bin Laden is probably still hiding, where the actual attack on this country was staged, and Rumsfeld is trying to shove that war off on NATO! That tells you where the Bush Bunch's priorities are.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Now that disagreeable has again completly HiJacked this thread, and is continueing to Rant, I'll respond to some of her crap.....

So what's your suggestion at this time to make peace in Iraq?

Your proposal to surrender and just leave was tried in Nam, 2 million paid for that policy with thier lives, ( find your own link it is common Knowledge) (direct Quote from one source: Other figures run as high as 4 million civilian casualties with 1 million casualties being NVA or VC fighters.) 5 million dead by following your anti military policy........

I would not leave, in fact I would double amount of the soldiers on the ground, I would even cross train security forces from the Navy, and Air Force, ,,that could be used to train the New Iraq Police, ( the Iraqis would not have a military, in my plan.)

as for them having trouble with thier constitution, rewrite ours in a simple two, or three page document and give it to them, when they get organized they can amend it just as we can amend ours.....

thirdly I would brake the country into at least six small countries...each with thier own Goverment, ( worked with the Kurds and should have been done after WW2)



The world sees the strongest military nation in the world being stopped by a relatively small insurgent group.

NO!, you see the military stopped, because that is what you want to see,,,in reality they are prevailing in every battle they engage in,,,,but with your blind hatred, all you can see is failure....
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Dis said: "You're right, I don't think the US should be the policeman of the world. "
So, in other words, you would have allowed Hitler to continue... Interesting.
 

Latest posts

Top