| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Who will end Iraq war? Surely not the Democrats. |
Topic: Who will end Iraq war? Surely not the Democrats.
| Author | Message |
| Latin1 | Posted – 5/12/2008 7:35:37 PM | show profile It's just election talk... Obama says he will pull out troops from Iraq so fools will vote for him, but he really isn't going to. |
| Queen Kong | Posted – 5/13/2008 6:36:18 AM | show profile The irony is that the Iraq "War" was over when Hussein was removed from power. He and his government were the enemy. The U.S. defeated the enemy. Enemy vanquished = War over. What the U.S. is doing in Iraq now is nation-building, not fighting in a war. The insurgents are not a nation. They are guerillas and do not represent any recognized government. Since the current Iraq government allows the U.S. to fight against the guerilla uprisings in the country, then the U.S. is not at "war" with Iraq. The "Iraq War" no longer exists. Furthermore, regardless of what Obama says in front of a mic and what his supporters believe, the U.S. is not going anywhere out of Iraq anytime soon. There are too many behind-the-scenes political agreements in place and the secret commitments made between the U.S. government and another nation transcend any "I want to be elected" promises made by candidates. |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 5/13/2008 6:45:44 AM | show profile and the dead troops are, ergo, not dead. everything is fine. go back to what you were doing. |
| gman992 | Posted – 5/30/2008 2:14:14 PM | show profile Remember the good old days of FDR and Harry Truman when the Democrats actually fought for freedom instead of turning into a bunch of nancy boys?? (No-pun intended) |
| gman992 | Posted – 5/30/2008 2:14:17 PM | show profile Remember the good old days of FDR and Harry Truman when the Democrats actually fought for freedom instead of turning into a bunch of nancy boys?? (No-pun intended) |
| chucho | Posted – 5/30/2008 2:45:10 PM | show profile Yep, freedim! Freedim! Freedim to pass out Jesus coins! http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/8939 Yee haw. Git R Don! Republicans Own Freedim(tm). Boo-yeah! Ugga Bugga! (Series of monkey noises.) Where's yer lapel pin, commie? |
| Village Gal | Posted – 5/30/2008 3:02:44 PM | show profile Nancy boys??? Can we keep homophobia out of the mud slinging? |
| Nikongirl | Posted – 5/30/2008 8:06:35 PM | show profile How about all you NON- NANCY boys get out there and work on McCain?s campaign and help to elect the man YOU think will save the day. Stop yammering on the MB message board everyday about bad old boogey man Obama and put your money where your ever-lovin flappin mouths are. You make NO difference here whatsoever. Stop preachin to the converted and GO OUT IN THE BIG WORLD, THROW ALL YOUR BIG TALK BEHIND MCCAIN SO THAT HE WILL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE not so United States! How bout it boys? Are you big enough men to DO SOMETHING TO MAKE McCain the next president of the USA? Prove it. |
| Latin1 | Posted – 5/31/2008 1:32:17 AM | show profile Well Nikongirl Since I am a female and not a man. I guess you are not speaking to me...lol The reason people post is because it is called a "Bulletin Board" to dicuss matters...and that is what we are doing...discussing the failings of Obama AND Bush. |
| Nikongirl | Posted – 5/31/2008 10:33:24 AM | show profile Latin it is hard to tell what someone's gender is on a message board, your handle could go either way, no pun, but yes, I WAS talking to you. I am serious, I can tell you are very passionate about Obama not winning and it might help your cause if you got out there and worked to get the candidate you want in office elected. Even if it doesn't work, you will feel that at least you did something. I know because I have put my money where my mouth is and worked on someone's campaign - and they were elected. I am pretty sure Obama is going to win; but at the same time I am not going to go after McCain for every thing he may say or do, it's pointless. We all make mistakes. Personally, I almost feel the Republicans SHOULD win in the next election and clean up their own mess because no matter WHO gets in is inheriting enormous problem. |
| chucho | Posted – 5/31/2008 10:52:57 AM | show profile I agree with Nikon, I have issues with McCain but I'm not ranting about it every time something appears about him that makes him look bad. (In fact, I recall criticizing the NYT for it's appalling coverage on McCain's sex life -- although I hold strong views about his cavorting with lobbyists when he's supposed ot be the anti-lobbyist guy.) And though I don't want Clinton to win I've at least managed to muster up positive things about her platform. Nobody can claim to be completely non-biased, but it helps if you at least try to be critical in the classic sense: that is that you concede positive elements along with the negatives. Latin1 has proved herself to be completely, rabidly and irrationally obsessed with her hatred of Obama, ergo her opinions weight less. And before you retort (if you do, which is pointless): I admit that I am clearly and openly opposed to the Republican Party these days. But I will remind you that I have given Bush credit for aid to Africa and a couple of other side issues. And I don't consider him inherently. I will admit, however, that I feel about Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld (and Scooter and Rove, and the usual suspects from the early 80s that I thought were through but somehow were resurrected and managed to become wicked policymakers again) the same way Latin feels about Barack Obama, it just happens that I feel they earned this hatred much more than Barack has, but that's just me. |
| davidkay | Posted – 6/2/2008 2:32:20 PM | show profile Nikongirl: I gave $150 to the McCain campaign. I am getting a hand (not machine) signed copy of his book as thanks. I was invited to a function that I will attend. I am going to make this string of posts useful: I did the calculations. Should Barack Hussein Obama get elected, and keep his spend-thrift promises, I will have an additional $1000+ a month added to my already hideous tax bill. So, all of you out there should give until it hurts, because Obama will hurt us all. I just talked myself into another $150, I'll give my true patriot parents this additional copy, they are on a fixed income, and will have to sell their home should Obama get elected. |
| davidkay | Posted – 6/2/2008 2:36:17 PM | show profile End the War Regarding who will end the war, it has already been said, George Bush ended it. I take exception to the "nation building" term applied to what is going on right now. We are drawing terrorists to Iraq so we can kill them there instead of on U.S. soil. And they are dying, in huge numbers. Even the hugely liberal Washington Post included an editorial regarding the "war" in Iraq: "...the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments ? and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the ?this-war-is-lost? caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.)." |
| chucho | Posted – 6/2/2008 3:14:26 PM | show profile >> Should Barack Hussein Obama get elected, and keep his spend-thrift promises, I will have an additional $1000+ a month added to my already hideous tax bill. << Statement like that should be substantiated. Federal income tax varies, but as I understand it ? you pay nothing until about $40,000 (you get a tax return up about there) then you pay and it goes up to something like 32% for the highest income earners. Perhaps you are including FICA. Right now no FICA is paid after about $80,000 (I don?t have the exact figure.) But if you're paying an additional $12,000, then you're implying that you paid a sum upon which $12,000 will be added. These kind of things really need to be explained. I look forward to your in depth analysis of your hypothetical tax burden! Perhaps you are including FICA. If so, boo hoo. Everyone making between $400 and $80,000 pays 7% (or more if they're self employed) for the "investment" of FICA. FICA is a tax, period. I pay FICA to feed old people TODAY, not to feed myself if I live to 65. It's a tax, we should treat it as such. So if any of this includes raising the ceiling on FICA, you will get no sympathy from me or other real progressives. A progressive tax policy is just that: if you don't like it, move to one of those wonderful countries in the world that doesn't tax or where the are no entitlements. There's plenty of them to choose from, but none of them are developed, industrialized, democratic countries (except India, which effectively has no social security system, but Thomas Friedman loves it anyway). >> I'll give my true patriot parents this additional copy, they are on a fixed income, and will have to sell their home should Obama get elected.. << That same applies here. >> true patriot parents << Are you implying that anyone who doesn?t support McCain isn?t a ?true patriot?? Because if that?s what you?re saying then you are a douche bag. I?m not calling you a douche bag, unless you?re saying that McCain is the candidate of ?true patriots? and people who vote for Hussein (I can play that childish Obama-Hussein game, too!) aren?t. That's the kind of nationalist horse-crap "with us or against us" language my grandfather fought against. Real Americans do not talk this way. >> I take exception to the "nation building" term applied to what is going on right now. We are drawing terrorists to Iraq so we can kill them there instead of on U.S. soil. And they are dying, in huge numbers. Even the hugely liberal Washington Post included an editorial regarding the "war" in Iraq. << I love how the reasons for the war change with the times. First it was WMDs. Then it was to save the poor Kurds, no!, the poor Iraqis. Now the real reason was part of an elaborate plan to turn Iraq into a rat trap for terrorists. Never mind what the Iraqis think about America using their country as a rat trap or anything! Sure, we can just take any country we want, invade it, occupy it permanently in order to attract terrorism to it instead of our country. Awesome! That means Iraqi civilians die and Americans don't. How kool is dat! And this is written on the same day the farking Danish Embassy was blowed-up-reel-good in Pakistan. Yep, the terrorists are just about gone, except of course the guy who actually masterminded Al-Qaeda and 9/11. He?s still out there, but, you know, hey, we shouldn?t think about OBL that must. Bush doesn?t. |
| chucho | Posted – 6/2/2008 4:06:50 PM | show profile And looking at Obama's proposals we see: #1.) a $500 to $1,000 tax credit for people making under $75,000 (this sounds like it could increased the earned income tax credit of Bill Clinton, when every working-class, employed American likes to have) #2.) Tax exemption for seniors living on less than $50,000 a year. So your parents, whom you say will have to sell their house of Obama wins; I'd like to know more! #3.) Raising the FICA ceiling from $97,500 to whatever (I don't think he's said exactly what). If your complaining about that, then you shoudl be clear. Because if that's causing an inceares of $12,000 then you must be making a lot of money. SO sell your yacht. (One caveat: perhaps you are a business owner. In which case you might be having other issues. The problem is, WE don't know from what you said. So we're playing a guessing game. By all means: enlighten us oh sage! #4.) Raising the cap on federal income taxe. This is just a roll back. Under Clinton it was 28%, then he lowered it to 20%. Bush lowered THAT to 15%. Obama just wants to go back, maybe to 20% maybe higher. The American economoy GREW when this tax rate was 28%, so, again, no sympathy if this is the source of your increase of $12,000 in taxes. For your taxes to go up by $12,000 a year means you're doing just fine economically. As I say when I get into these debates: this the difference between "all men for themselves" and "the social contract". Progressive tax policy and entitlements are, across-the-board, characteristics of modern, wealthy, developed nations. If you want to go to a "all men for themselves" society, that's fine, but you shoudl be careful what you ask for: the have nots always outnumber the haves. By attrition when the revolution does come (because they always come in "all men for themselves" social-Darwinist societies) people like you will end up on the business end of the pike. The French Revolution began with a lack of bread. So which is it: #1.) Social Darwinism, all men for themselves, or #2.) Social contract, progressive taxes and social security. That's pretty plain and simple. |
