No, they are using bombs and RPGs; pistols and rifles don’t do anything to armor. And, they aren’t doing “a hell of a job at it”; something like the old time British Empire would sneer at us flinching a a mere few thousand casualties. The Iraqi’s advantage is that we are fundamentally narcissistic cowards; uncaring of the casualties to others, but very sensitive to our own.
I like to think that I would. But in that case, I’d be trying to blow things up with a bomb or RPG, not shoot a tank with a pistol.
And, at least as often they are used by thugs and warlords to oppress people.
Iraq had an armed population. It didn’t stop him or us from oppressing them.
>The Democrats will stand up for every amendment except the second one. I guess they are willing to skip that part of the Bill of Rights, because, you know, it’s not important anymore, or something like that.
I think what they’d question is whether it’s still true that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…”. The 2nd amendment is unique in explaining its purpose. It also seems to make uniquely confusing use of commas.
It’s not that they sound the same. It’s that they are both equally devoid of any rational arguemnt. That’s my point. An irrational argument whether shouted with insults added or spoken calmly, is still an irrational argument.
I know several modern conservatives with whom none of these things are true with the exception of sex oriented entertainment. I assume the majority of people want some controls on that. So, by personal experience I have to say your “complete crap” stance is a bit off. Not to confuse the issue but the republican party was formed in part by anti slavery activists and elected Lincoln as the first republican president.
How many Dems voted for the patriot act?
I know very little about George. I was commenting on a philospohical point he made on a TV show. From my personal experience with talking with some conservatives it rings true in part. I recognize there is a varied spectrum of people from extreme right to extreme left. I’m speaking more of the smart thoughtful conservatives that are more toward the middle.
I know it is all polite and everything to say YMMV and so forth, but it is objectively wrong to pretend that Der Trihs’ drivel is at all equivalent to, say, Sam Stone’s careful and fair-minded post.
I chime in to compliment another poster on his formulation. Der Trihs and Stoid chime in to rant some more about how Republicans and conservatives are evil and bad people and all the rest of their standard rot.
This is irrelevant since nobody made any such comparison. The “both” I referred to are very specific posts. *Yours *and DTs
Then comment on their specific posts rather than make a general and very inaccurate observation. Answering one irrational argument with another hardly seems productive.
Yes the terrorists are doing a sterling job of murdering people who are guilty of being from the wrong culture(The West)not so much based on ideology as a cultural jealousy and low self esteem.
Its SO unfair that the followers of gods word are in the nation stakes strictly third team whereas the infidels run the world so lets take it out on them with an orgy of senseless and cowardly murder.
Yep there not doing a bad job of slaughtering those who are the wrong kind of Muslim either.
I wonder if the locals feel more oppressed by the Coalition troops or of the liklihood of being kidnapped,tortured and executed or killed by seemingly random IEDs both courtesy of the insurgents.
Destruction is nothing to brag about,its not difficult.
It takes a genius to create the Mona Lisa but any retarded four year old can destroy it in seconds.
Give it a few thousand years and maybe the ME will manage to arrive kicking and screaming into the eighteenth century though I have my doubts.
I’m not really sure what to make of the rest of that post (I’m not saying I disagree with it, I’m just not sure how it pertains as a reply to mine) - but that is a great quote there. “Kicking and screaming into the eighteenth century.” Heh.
Considering that the “coalition” are a bunch of foreign conquerers, unbelievers, the ruiners of the country, AND are the reason that those “insurgents” are running around in the first place, I expect the answer would be “coalition.”
There’s lots of bad shit going on. A lot of it is Arab to Arab. Lot’s of it isn’t. Innocent people are being killed and imprisioned by Americans on our behalf. Americans are being killed and maimed for a cause that has no clear positive outcome, and while friends of the administration are getting rich off their blood.
I imagine the locals would rather live in, peace and be able to live and watch their kids grow the same as locals here would. Do you think that will *ever * happen wjhile we maintain a presence there? Do you think the citizens of any nation want an occupying force to patrol the streets and maintain a puppet government? Is our presence there saving any lives and maintaining the peace or is our presence maintaining unrest and violence?
Or a retarded president? Or A lying scumbag lawbreaking traitorous one.
You’re right. That’s one of the problems. The ME has not advanced as quickly as other regions. Their own corrupt rulers are largely to blame. The war in Iraq does nothing to correct that issue. America as a nation has done little to help them progress because we were busy serving our own economic interests. Turns out that attitude wound up being the more exspensive way to go.