Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Crabtownboy, Jan 28, 2016.
You're trying to trick me into an Air Force joke, but it's not going to work.
Yea, Crabby is right - especailly seeing that all the Dem candidates have military service.
Yes, even Hillary - remember, she disembarked off a chopper under heavy fire......
One thing is for certain. No GOP candidate will send out military to a foreign country (Lybia) and then abandon them for political purposes.However, Shrillary has recent experience in doing this.
Makes me sick. Hillary is a traitor.
Really Rev. What about Bush. He sent troops into Afghanistan and then pretty much abandoned them when he started his misadventure in Iraq.
In fact, he did not really support the troops in Iraq the way he should have. Remember the flap about the under-armored and inadequate weapons supplied to the troops there? Rumsfeld simply brushed off the issue and continued to refuse to seek a solution.
Here are 13 Benghazi that occurred under Bush:
January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.
June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al-Qaida attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.
October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of “Bali Bombings.” No fatalities.
February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.
May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al-Qaida terrorists storm the diplomatic compound killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.
July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.
December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaida terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.
March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name “David Foy.” This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what’s considered American soil.)
September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting “Allahu akbar” storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.
January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.
March 18, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaida-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.
July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.
September 17, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had beenmarried for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
No he didin't that is just a flat out lie. Far left wing propoganda.
Actually they did get them armor plated vehicles. sorry another left wing lie debunked. Further, you are making poor comparisons as usual. Shrillary refused them help. they had troops ready to go and was told to stand down. they had security just a mile away and tried to tell them to stand down. this was all politics and illegally supplying gins to Syria.
Further, Bush still hangs out with troops who return home. He visits them in the hospital, he stands tall with angry parents, he takes part in fund raisers for wounded troops regularly. He neither abandoned them in the field nor at home.
Unlike shrillary who has clearly done so. Unlike obama who has left Americans in prisons unjustly in Iran for political purposes. Some of them are still there. unlike Obama who let our Navy troops hang when Iran unlawfully captured them recently. Obama, and shrillary are pure evil. Not just wrong, not just different but pure evil. Shrillary should be in prison for the rest of her life.
Sorry Rev., but as much as you do not like it, it is true.
Yes, after much pressure was put on his administration. It was political pressure that convinced them to do so, not concern about the troops. Rumsfeld's asnwer when questioned about his shows his lack of concern.
And I am glad he does. I expect it is partly from a guilty conscious at the harm he did to so many thousands of young Americans.
Sorry Rev. the 13 Benghazi's under Bush show this is not true.
And his lack of concern initially on 9/11, just keeps reading to the kids, and his total failure with Hurricane Katrina shows the lack of concern about people. Now, I will give Bush one thing. I believe he meant well but that he was surrounded by very poor advisors who totally failed him and gave him disastrous advice, which to his detriment he followed.
There is nothing in this post that is even remotely true. Nothing. Not very Christian behavior.
For CTB's "13 Benghazis" to be true, he needs to show where politicians in the White House administration ordered troops to not respond or provide support in each of those situations, resulting in the deaths of Americans.
If people died as a result of the initial attack, or died while assistance was enroute, then these 13 examples are not valid comparisons.
And to try and present them as if they are lacks integrity and is just poor behavior. I don't know what it is about extremist liberals that they cannot make legitimate comparisons. Other than they have none and just reach in desperation at anything they can.
Sorry Rev., you are wrong again. By the way I thought you ask for forgiveness for insulting comments and said you were going to refrain from such comments in the future. Here in this thread you have twice used insulting words.
Rev., you have to face the truth someday. Your hatred of Obama is irrational as if your total blindness to the sins of the Bush administration.
Allowed looting. Remember the early days, we did nothing to stop the looting that was rampant in Iraq.
Selective protection. Bush ordered the protection of the Ministry of Oil, but of no other ministries.
Bush allowed allied forces to act as an occupation army instead of an army come to instill law and order.
Failed to restore basic services.
Disbanded the police allowing the lawless a free hand.
Disbanded the Iraqi army, again allowing the lawless a free hand and allowing disorder.
Failed to control the boarders, allowing terrorists and US enemies to cross and conducts acts of terror.
Failure and no attempt to understand Iraqi culture, customs and people.
Used Saddam's tactics such as arresting people, having them disappear with no word to their families or others. Other similar tactics.
Instead of rapidly pushing for a Democracy in Iraq as we had said we would do, postponed efforts to establish one.
Rev, CTB's done it again. GW isn't running for office; Hillary is. It's her record that's on trial, not Bush's. Engaging in discussion about erroneous "Benghazis" under Bush merely deflects from Hillary's criminality, and strengthens the point that she can't be defended without deflection.
Ha....I forgot about that. I was in there when she visited Bosnia. We had spent weeks in preparation. But most of us passed on the show.
What is interesting is CTB's methods. Basically he tries to make the Republicans look at least as bad as the Democrats as a justification for his position. Frankly, I washed my hands of the Democratic party decades ago when they steeply declined into immorality and am considering doing the same with the Republicans.
But the whole "they're just as bad as us" argument has always amazed me.
Sent from my TARDIS
Unfortunately you have engaged in unChristian behavior. There is a distinct difference in attacking the person and pointing out ungodly behavior. I have done the latter.
Of course we will ignore the fact that you run around calling everyone who disagrees with you or this President racist and I have not been left out of your list. I think you need to consider yourself first.
What I hate is Obama's policies. They are contrary to America, the constitution, and decent behavior. Much like your positions. I was a huge critic of Bush especially of his spending policies and immigration. When it comes to how he treated the troops the clear evidence is in. The troops love Bush even to this day. They hate Obama with a passion and he has been the reason why far too many experienced soldiers did not and will not re-enlist. they have no respect for him because he has not respect for them. Same with Shrillary.
So you say.
As you said above, Unfortunately, I'm only telling the truth. This is especially true with doctors I have
Sorry, I don't believe your at all in this reply.
Please give me a credible link showing this is true.
Not soldiers I've talked with.
Here is how they are reported to feel:
*Nearly six out of every 10 military families disapprove of Bush’s job performance and the way he has run the war.
*Among those families with soldiers, sailors and Marines who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, 60% say that the war in Iraq was not worth the cost.
There is one glaring--GLARING--dishonesty in that article, that YOU repeated. Because you repeated it, it places your mental faculties in question.
The error? Both the article and you said that 60% of troops disagreed with Bush.
What was actually said? 60% of families disagreed with Bush.
Families are not the troops themselves. Family members are expected to be afraid for their military member; and their response reflects that fear.
You need to learn intellectual discernment.
Not very rational is it?
What was actually said? 60% of families disagreed with Bush.
Families are not the troops themselves. Family members are expected to be afraid for their military member; and their response reflects that fear[/quote]
And that could mean the percentage of soldiers is even greater than the 60% of families.
Or much, much less, right?