Five Years Later We Still Need Same Troop Levels In Iraq? That is winning the war?

Quote from hapaboy:

And if you are going to do a 180 and change your position mid-stream, which is a favorite tactic of trolls but in your case probably just a symptom of your schizophrenia
More...

Another clear example of The Idiotic Troll contradicting itself and then posting bizarre images from its personal library in response to requests for clarification. Nicely done, hap.

Hey ZZZzzzenu... when you joined up with the Scientologists, did they tell you you'd meet Tom Cruise?
 
Quote from traderNik:

Another clear example of The Idiotic Troll contradicting itself and then posting bizarre images from its personal library in response to requests for clarification. Nicely done, hap.

Hey ZZZzzzenu... when you joined up with the Scientologists, did they tell you you'd meet Tom Cruise?
More...
Yeah, you know the troll is in extreme discomfort when it starts posting bizarre images. Trollologists that have studied the Zzz species recognize it as a clear sign that the creature is trapped and cannot reply coherently. Having nowhere to run, its only defense is ad hominem and posting and playing with jpegs and PhotoShop.

I will recommend to RM that he add this characteristic to his fine 101 analysis of the animal. :)
 
The reason why we have and will have in the next 10 years 100+K troops in Iraq:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1310847,00.html

"Saboteurs have blown up one of Iraq's two main oil export pipelines and dozens of people have been killed in fresh clashes between government forces and Shia militias.

The saboteurs' attack on the pipeline cut off a third of the exports from Basra, which provides 80% of the government's revenue, pushing the price of US crude oil up more than $1 to around $107 a barrel."

-----------------------------------

Unless the US and the world go on a non-petroleum based energy source, the value of Iraq will INCREASE with each passing day, specially that peak oil will be more and more obvious....
 
Liberals would have more credibility on Iraq if they were not so tainted by the Kosovo experience. For the record, we're STILL in Kosovo, protecting a new muslim state. Where was the concern for civilians when Clinton was orchestrating a high altitude terror bombing campaign on serbia? All we heard was how brilliant Wesley Clark was.

Let's total up the Kosovo experience. We attacked a country that had been a solid ally in WW II. We did it to establish a muslim beachhead in the balkans. We sent in troops to protect muslim criminals who were engaged in ethnic cleansing of Christians from Kosovo. We used our own forces to do all this, even though it is in europe's back yard and their concern, not ours. Then we did it in a way calculated to alienate the Russians, which we continue to do. A bunch of drug smugglers and terrorists in Kosovo is more important to our national intersts than good relations with Russia? I don't see it.

Of course, I can't blame this totally on clinton. Bush continued the policy and pushed for independence for Kosovo. Bush's Iraq disaster looks like his biggest blunder now, but in the fullness of time his mismanaging our relationship with Russia may turn out to be worse.

This is one area that really concerns me about McCain. He has never gotten past the Cold War and is bristling for confrontation with Putin.
 
Quote from traderNik:


Hey ZZZzzzenu... when you joined up with the Scientologists, did they tell you you'd meet Tom Cruise?
More...

every time you use "ZZZzzzenu" i want a royalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top