Jump to content

The Very Briefest of Neocon Retrospectives

Tigermike

By Tigermike
in Political Smack Talk

Recommended Posts





AURaptor Founding Father

AURaptor 1,126

Posted
Posted

FDR and Churchill met w/ Stalin too, to defeat Hitler.

Your absense of context is telling.

Pray tell?

It's self explanitory. If you don't get it, never mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bottomfeeder Founding Father

Bottomfeeder 244

Posted
Posted

Dead Soldiers to Saddam. Well, I guess you say 3000 plus to say ten or so, with Saddam's sons and Al Zarkawi in the mix. Thing is, it wasn't worth the blood of my comrades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tigermike Founding Father

Tigermike 3,053

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Surprise, surprise that Al would post that picture. There was no doubt it was coming, I could see the little wheels turning before I started the thread.

Why would a big-mouthed Democrat U.S. Senator, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, take a trip by himself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and tell each of the heads of state that it was his view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq – that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11. That would be the same Syria where it is believed Saddam Hussein shipped his WMD stockpiles to his brother Ba'athists for safekeeping several months prior to the March 2003 invasion that toppled his regime. The underlying strategy was self-evident: go limp before U.S. forces, discard uniforms and blend into the civilian population, and then, with al Qaeda's help, launch the post-war "insurgency" with the aim of inflicting enough casualties on Coalition troops, in combination with the apparent absence of the WMD that were the leading, if far from only, justification for the war, that American left-wing elites would turn against the mission, force a Vietnam-style retreat, and allow Saddam to return triumphantly to power with his arsenal in hand. Why isn't that being treated as the blockbuster scandal it is?

But now Saddam Hussein is dead and will never return to power to rape, murder and torture the people of Iraq. But that big-mouthed Democrat U.S. Senator is still a senator and now other Democrat U.S. Senator's are visiting Syria.

In Dec 2006, Sen. Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., both prospective 2008 presidential candidates, met with Syrian President Bashar Assad for about two hours as part of a Mideast trip. Kerry described the meeting as “a candid and thorough discussion.” That would be the same Syria listed on the State Department list of terrorists nations. That would be the same Syria which has been funding and supplying the insurgency in Iraq. And since Syria has been a long-time resident of the State Department's list of terrorism sponsors, and its troops have actively crossed over into Iraq to fight with the "insurgents" against Coalition forces, that makes them a hostile power. But none of those facts mean anything in your universe do they Al?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiger Al Founding Father

Tiger Al 0

Posted
Posted

Surprise, surprise that Al would post that picture. There was no doubt it was coming, I could see the little wheels turning before I started the thread.

Why would a big-mouthed Democrat U.S. Senator, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, take a trip by himself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and tell each of the heads of state that it was his view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq – that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11. That would be the same Syria where it is believed Saddam Hussein shipped his WMD stockpiles to his brother Ba'athists for safekeeping several months prior to the March 2003 invasion that toppled his regime. The underlying strategy was self-evident: go limp before U.S. forces, discard uniforms and blend into the civilian population, and then, with al Qaeda's help, launch the post-war "insurgency" with the aim of inflicting enough casualties on Coalition troops, in combination with the apparent absence of the WMD that were the leading, if far from only, justification for the war, that American left-wing elites would turn against the mission, force a Vietnam-style retreat, and allow Saddam to return triumphantly to power with his arsenal in hand. Why isn't that being treated as the blockbuster scandal it is?

But now Saddam Hussein is dead and will never return to power to rape, murder and torture the people of Iraq. But that big-mouthed Democrat U.S. Senator is still a senator and now other Democrat U.S. Senator's are visiting Syria.

In Dec 2006, Sen. Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., both prospective 2008 presidential candidates, met with Syrian President Bashar Assad for about two hours as part of a Mideast trip. Kerry described the meeting as “a candid and thorough discussion.” That would be the same Syria listed on the State Department list of terrorists nations. That would be the same Syria which has been funding and supplying the insurgency in Iraq. And since Syria has been a long-time resident of the State Department's list of terrorism sponsors, and its troops have actively crossed over into Iraq to fight with the "insurgents" against Coalition forces, that makes them a hostile power. But none of those facts mean anything in your universe do they Al?

There are very few facts in your diatribe, meaningful or otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tigermike Founding Father

Tigermike 3,053

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Surprise, surprise that Al would post that picture. There was no doubt it was coming, I could see the little wheels turning before I started the thread.

Why would a big-mouthed Democrat U.S. Senator, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, take a trip by himself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and tell each of the heads of state that it was his view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq – that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11. That would be the same Syria where it is believed Saddam Hussein shipped his WMD stockpiles to his brother Ba'athists for safekeeping several months prior to the March 2003 invasion that toppled his regime. The underlying strategy was self-evident: go limp before U.S. forces, discard uniforms and blend into the civilian population, and then, with al Qaeda's help, launch the post-war "insurgency" with the aim of inflicting enough casualties on Coalition troops, in combination with the apparent absence of the WMD that were the leading, if far from only, justification for the war, that American left-wing elites would turn against the mission, force a Vietnam-style retreat, and allow Saddam to return triumphantly to power with his arsenal in hand. Why isn't that being treated as the blockbuster scandal it is?

But now Saddam Hussein is dead and will never return to power to rape, murder and torture the people of Iraq. But that big-mouthed Democrat U.S. Senator is still a senator and now other Democrat U.S. Senator's are visiting Syria.

In Dec 2006, Sen. Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., both prospective 2008 presidential candidates, met with Syrian President Bashar Assad for about two hours as part of a Mideast trip. Kerry described the meeting as “a candid and thorough discussion.” That would be the same Syria listed on the State Department list of terrorists nations. That would be the same Syria which has been funding and supplying the insurgency in Iraq. And since Syria has been a long-time resident of the State Department's list of terrorism sponsors, and its troops have actively crossed over into Iraq to fight with the "insurgents" against Coalition forces, that makes them a hostile power. But none of those facts mean anything in your universe do they Al?

There are very few facts in your diatribe, meaningful or otherwise.

Maybe you should learn the meaning of diatribe, while you are at it look up deflection.

Very few facts. You must still be drunk from a long new years eve.

Did Democrats Kerry and Dodd recently visit and meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad? YES

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6653164

http://news.bostonherald.com/international...rticleid=173046

link

Did Democrat US Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria? YES

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1521893/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1754137/posts

link

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=R...G=Google+Search

Did Rockefeller make the following statement? YES

SENATOR ROCKEFELLER: No. The – I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I’ll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq – that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.

Your ignoring the facts in no way make them go away.

Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...