KidRocks
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 16
- Location
- right here
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
:roll:
More US soldiers died in the first hour of D-Day.
He's not saying it's insignificant, you just like to spin everything people say in your threads and expect the posters that come into this thread to say "oh, look what Bush has done, he's murdering our American soldiers, damn idiot.".Sorry, but that's not the case, and it's not as if they died fighting for nothing.My condolences to their families, but what is there to say, people pass in wars.
Compared to any of those, our death rate in Iraq is miniscule.Oh, so does that make our troops death rate in Iraq trivial in comparison to WW2 and D-Day? Is that what you mean? Is that what, in effect, you're saying?
He's not saying it's insignificant, you just like to spin everything people say in your threads and expect the posters that come into this thread to say "oh, look what Bush has done, he's murdering our American soldiers, damn idiot.".Sorry, but that's not the case, and it's not as if they died fighting for nothing.My condolences to their families, but what is there to say, people pass in wars.
That is exactly what he is saying and I am sick and tired of you r-wingers, with your sad comparisons, in effect saying that our troops deaths in Iraq are inconsequential.
Shame on you extremists!
Et tu Brute?
Oh, so does that make our troops death rate in Iraq trivial in comparison to WW2 and D-Day? Is that what you mean? Is that what, in effect, you're saying?
If more of our troops died in record numbers in accordance with D-Day would that justify the war in your mind?
Think, Goobieman, before you downgrade the sacrifice of the lives of our brave troops in Iraq. That you think American troops dying is of very little importance or value speaks volumes of you conservatives.
Their deaths are not insignificant when compared to WW1, WW2, D-Day, Vietnam or any other comparison your minds can conjure up!
Welcome to KR's MO.Because he pointed out that lie, you launch a personal attack on him by accusing him of not caring about the sacrifice of our troops.
What he is saying is that the title of this thread is an out-and-out lie.
It is a lie to say that more US troops have died in Iraq in the past four months than any similar period of war.
It's a stupid lie that is easily shown to be a lie.
Because he pointed out that lie, you launch a personal attack on him by accusing him of not caring about the sacrifice of our troops.
Oh, so does that make our troops death rate in Iraq trivial in comparison to WW2 and D-Day? Is that what you mean? Is that what, in effect, you're saying?
We should just pull leave Iraq and let the rape squads take control again, start up the torture factories again, let people be oppressed into the stability that only the dead and cowering have. Yeah, that's it. Freedom for Americans and to hell with everyone else. :roll:
<sarcasm off>
The premise here is based on the idea that the Iraqi people dont want to be "Revolutionized" -- that is, in this case, they dont want to have a functioning western-style democracy over what they had under Saddam.We shouldn't care if our views of representative government are popular with those we wish to free. We should ignore a long history of failed attempts to revolutionize nations that don't wish our aid and provide it anyway.</sarcasm>
Yes everyone, don't you see? Congress is making more and more cries that Bush is wrong and we must pull out immediately because there are so many deaths. The media is crying and crying that we must pull out immediately because there are so many deaths. And WOW, low and behold...more deaths happen.
Now lets see...that HAS to just be a coincidence. It couldn't be because that just tells those on the other side that "Hey, if we ramp things up and give it a last gas, we may be able to get them to leave early". Nah, that'd be to logical and focus on common sense. We're not allowed to use that.
Kidrock is always looking to celebrate.
The premise here is based on the idea that the Iraqi people dont want to be "Revolutionized" -- that is, in this case, they dont want to have a functioning western-style democracy over what they had under Saddam.
You'd be hard pressed to find many non-Sunnis to go along with that statement.
Now please excuse me. I was thanked by KidRocks and must now take a very very long shower
~unclean..scrubscrubscrub....unclean....~
And how is that premise flawed? You seem to assume that our actions -can't- lead to that government. Why?the premise is that our actions can lead to a functioning government that is somehow better. It matters not if they want to be "revolutionized". The argument is if their ideas of a revolution are worthy of American lives.
Your premise is ridiculous. No, they aren't going to want a return to Saddam. That in no way means the form of government they do want is deserving of risking life and limb.Like I said - if you asked the Iraqis, I think you'd find it difficult to fiond non-Sunni support for returning to what they had under Saddam.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?