Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 46): Now Obama wants to get the coalition forces out of there as fast as logistically possible and in order to do that they need to ensure that the Iraqi forces can operate on their own.

This is what the goal was from day one! Giving credit to Obama regarding this issue is disingenuous, since without the success of the Surge, or if we didn't communes with the Surge [which was Obama's plan] talk of any kind of withdraw with a somewhat stable Iraq in it's wake, would not be possible! Obama was against the Surge, now you're trying to say his say on this matter is legitimate, when it is not!!!

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 46): From the fact that the Generals on the ground nor President Bush are not coming up with a timetable for withdrawal or even talking about it to the public (why wouldn't they, it makes them look good)

Publicly stating a specific, concrete date of withdraw is foolish, because it would enable our enemies to plan accordingly and wait until we leave. The Bush administration and Generals probably were already thinking of a 12 to 18 month time frame, because of the recent stability achieved by the Surge, but felt stating it puplicly was the wrong thing to do. But now, since Obama saw the progress, he talks of a 16 month time frame and people give him credit. Total smarmy BS if you ask me!

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 46): if you wanted out of Iraq anytime soon the current plan has failed up to this point.

Obama's plan was a failure, because the very core of his plan was to quite, admit defeat and run! The only way to be successful in Iraq is first: Stability, which appears to be the case now. Then maintain order, so the Iraqi army can mature, then take the lead in the defense of their nation.

Cheerio

BTW, has anyone considered that Obama may be able to actually get NATO, UN, and/or other nations to actually assist Iraq and send "supporting forces" to help with the drawdown and transition.

It would be nice to actually have a coalition....

Tugg

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 48): Of course in all of that dribble you weren't able to answer even one of my questions. Just one cheap and easy shot after another. Why am I not surprised?

Obi-Wan [Falcon84] has taught him well! There goal is to personally attack those that dare speak against the Dark side, in order to derail thread!

Personally, I like Dave. I feel the good in him. However, find it disappointing when he followings the actions of the dreaded Falconator.   

Cheerio

Quoting Tugger (Reply 49): I found and interesting article that broke out the "other" actions that are making life in Iraq better.

There are more as stated before, such as the internal displacement you could witness in i.e. Baghdad..

Quoting Platypus (Reply 50): since without the success of the Surge, or if we didn't communes with the Surge [which was Obama's plan] talk of any kind of withdraw with a somewhat stable Iraq in it's wake, would not be possible!

"The surge" does have it's merits, but how much it contributed to the comparatively(!) calm situation in Iraq is questionable. You are far too absolute in your assertions.

Quoting Tugger (Reply 51): BTW, has anyone considered that Obama may be able to actually get NATO, UN, and/or other nations to actually assist Iraq and send "supporting forces" to help with the drawdown and transition.

Other nations contribute and train security forces, just not in Iraq. I think it would be a wrong signal to "deploy troops to support the American withdrawal".

[Edited 2008-07-29 18:00:41]

Quoting Platypus (Reply 50): Publicly stating a specific, concrete date of withdraw is foolish, because it would enable our enemies to plan accordingly and wait until we leave. The Bush administration and Generals probably were already thinking of a 12 to 18 month time frame, because of the recent stability achieved by the Surge, but felt stating it puplicly was the wrong thing to do. But now, since Obama saw the progress, he talks of a 16 month time frame and people give him credit. Total smarmy BS if you ask me!

And you really think the terrorists who may want to take over Iraq which is the case of Al-Queda is a militant Sunni organization really wants to plant themselves withing easy striking distance of Israel and also be right next door to a very skeptical Iran which is has a Shiite government. These groups both hate America but I would bet that they hate each other more, this is the Islam version of the Protestant vs Catholic thing in Ireland.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 50): Obama's plan was a failure, because the very core of his plan was to quite, admit defeat and run! The only way to be successful in Iraq is first: Stability, which appears to be the case now. Then maintain order, so the Iraqi army can mature, then take the lead in the defense of their nation.

Obama never wanted into Iraq and his plan was never tried, he wanted the US to stay to Iraq what a parent would say to his freeloading kid which is get your act together or your cut off. Something the US hasn't done yet, but not have an opportunity to. Also stability was the before when Saddam was in charge, he kept these different tribes from killing each other, was he a good man no but he got results.

I'm not advocating the loss of the US in this case but knowing from life experience you learn more from losing than from winning and the current US government has much to learn about the lifestyle there and that is the only way that they can learn to work effectively with the people of the middle east in the future. So maybe losing can be a long term blessing in disguise.

Quoting Tugger (Reply 51): BTW, has anyone considered that Obama may be able to actually get NATO, UN, and/or other nations to actually assist Iraq and send "supporting forces" to help with the drawdown and transition.

To be fair McCain could do that too, he just has to show respect to the counties of NATO and drop the "Your with us or against us attitude." Sadly Bush's chance to do this has faded because the rest of NATO doesn't trust him.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 48): Of course in all of that dribble you weren't able to answer even one of my questions.

One of your questions? If I'm not mistaken, you only asked me one, and I honestly couldn't understand it. Perhaps I should have asked for clarification. I apologize. I just don't take too kindly to being alluded to as unintelligent. Think what you must, but, base that on something substantial. I was only going off of what you said. You expected me to understand the underlying tone of your words. Again, this is the internet, and that is nearly impossible to do.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 48): Just one cheap and easy shot after another.

Just following your lead. Again I apologize if I offended you, but you're the one who said this:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 43): I figured the smart people would be able to read and comprehend the underlying basis of the thread which is politics.

Not exactly the most complimentary thing to say, is it?

Quoting Platypus (Reply 52): Personally, I like Dave. I feel the good in him.

Lol, cheers Platy.

Good day gentlemen.

Dave

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 56): One of your questions? If I'm not mistaken, you only asked me one,

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24): Are those professions political?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 43): Let's start with something easy, name one liberal leader that isn't has not been for defeat in Iraq over the past 5 years.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 56): expected me to understand the underlying tone of your words

Then don't play stupid.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 56): You expected me to understand the underlying tone of your words.

My words? The entire tone of the thread is political. From the subjet matter to the conversation. Not just me, everyone. It's in virtually every post in the thread.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 56): Not exactly the most complimentary thing to say, is it?

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 57): Then don't play stupid.

Let's play your game. I was only referring to your questions on post 43. What, you didn't understand that? Can't you tell the underlying subtext to my posts? Hmmmm, not so easy is it, champ.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 57): My words?

Yup. You remember. These words:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 22): Again, why is it so difficult for liberals to wrap their heads around more than one idea at once? Perhaps because it takes intellect and all liberals have is emotion?

No mention about anything political there, bud. Just a statement that you made that was factually incorrect. But, keep trying to weasel yourself out of that one. It's sad at the lengths you go to to avoid admitting you were wrong. Well done.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 57): Sometimes the truth hurts.

Name me one time I isn't has not been smart. Oops.  .

Good day oh wise one. Hehehehe.

Dave

[Edited 2008-07-29 19:17:19]

Quoting Tugger (Reply 49): Lessons learned from the Surge include having a well-developed and evaluated plan

Interesting article Tug, but when you get to this right near the end "a plan" oh is that what is needed does tend to float to the surface.

Most of the positives above that point could easily be rewritten to show how simply appalling actions had been to the time of "the surge".

As NoUFO writes, it remains a moot point whether the extra troops or the state of ethnic cleansing started to produce a situation with lesser instability.

Becoming allies with some of your enemies usually helps in reducing the number of enemies.

But as for the surge having worked to remove the underlying stability, that is far from decided as the continuing suicide bombings show.

5 years into the war, and having "a plan" is something sufficiently new to be a talking point - amazing! Not (it appears) that the likes of Powell did not have a plan for occupation way back in 2002, just they were thrown away by Rummie. Why is that guy not in Gitmo?

Someone wanted to know of liberals that wanted to go into Iraq. Well Howard WAS leader of the Liberal party in Aus, and Blair was supposed to be a socialist. Those attributes suggest that those who are prone to "label politics" had best explain the logic of removing those labels before they rabbit on much more on that topic.

But as one of them has posted in another thread that he will not change his opinion, even if there is demonstrated and accepted contrary evidence, there is not much point in trying a discussion is there?

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 58): Hmmmm, not so easy is it, champ.

Sure, the underlying meaning of your words is that you are playing stupid. You can't dispute the statement I made with any logic, nor can you back up your statement by answering even one of my questions. Instead you're going to post yet another child like response.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 58): No mention about anything political there, bud. Just a statement that you made that was factually incorrect. But, keep trying to weasel yourself out of that one. It's sad at the lengths you go to to avoid admitting you were wrong. Well done.

In true liberal fashion, you take a quote out of context and try and make it out to be something that it isn't as anyone who cares to read the entire string of posts will easily see.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 58): Name me one time I isn't has not been smart.

You haven't been smart in this entire thread. A smart person would have stopped digging a long time ago when they saw they weren't getting any traction. See, I'm an adult and when someone doesn't use the spell check or has a bad edit I 99% of the time let them go on it. But the child in you couldn't and the liberal in you wouldn't. So rather than back yourself up using facts you have to use a bad edit to try and prove a point. Hey, it's the liberal way.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): In true liberal fashion, you take a quote out of context and try and make it out to be something that it isn't as anyone who cares to read the entire string of posts will easily see

Sorry Dave, but RJdxer is correct here. You've pulled the Super Dave Dodge Maneuver on me multiple times. Where you blatantly take what is said out of context, and contribute little if anything relevant to the thread. At least you're not vile like the Falconator!

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 54): Obama never wanted into Iraq and his plan was never tried, he wanted the US to stay to Iraq what a parent would say to his freeloading kid which is get your act together or your cut off.

That's irrelevant now. What Obama wanted to do was make a bad situation worse. As I stated multiple times in this thread: Obama's plan was to fail! McCain's was for success, which appears to be materializing at present! Now Obama is in spin mode, so to avoid looking foolish, not to mention flat out wrong!!!

Cheerio

Quoting Platypus (Reply 61): That's irrelevant now. What Obama wanted to do was make a bad situation worse. As I stated multiple times in this thread: Obama's plan was to fail! McCain's was for success, which appears to be materializing at present! Now Obama is in spin mode, so to avoid looking foolish, not to mention flat out wrong!!!

It wasn't just Obama but the entire Democratic party's mandate for getting elected in 2006. They were banking on the Surge being a failed policy. I think you've quoted Harry Reid saying Iraq was lost and we should just leave..

The media clowns were jumping on the bandwagon with their inaccurate comparisons to Vietnam, highlighting every mistake the US military made, and spent weeks discussing whether it was a "Civil War" and banging on Bush's head to "admit it."

Want a real civil war? Look at the Balkans, that's a REAL civil war.

The Dems resolved to withdraw the troops but they didn't. They resolved to set a hard timetable, but they didn't...

Funny how that happens...I can bet you a ton of money once they saw the surge was working they didn't have the guts to go against General Petraeus and pull the plug..After all the Dems control Congress right?

Quoting Baroque (Reply 59): But as for the surge having worked to remove the underlying stability, that is far from decided as the continuing suicide bombings show.

Confusing connection with causation is a common enough thing, methinks.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 63): Quoting Baroque (Reply 59): But as for the surge having worked to remove the underlying stability, that is far from decided as the continuing suicide bombings show. Confusing connection with causation is a common enough thing, methinks.

That too, but the durability of the actual phenomena that are being celebrated has yet to be demonstrated. And taking that from a "maybe" to a causal relation is, as you say, a bridge too far.

About the only thing that is clear, is that probably nobody understands the true complexities at this stage including the Iraqis. Judging from the reactions to some local laws, there are a lot of tensions still to be played out - and unhappily it seems likely that bombing will be the opening gambit in most cases.

It will also be interesting to see the history written of the various approaches recommended and just who determined what would actually be done and when it was done.

There was probably always going to be an insurgency, but the way Rummie "organized" it looks to be close to the worst of paths. I seem to remember that "Bring it on" was a phrase uttered when the possibility of an insurgency was mentioned. Worse than the other one which is more commonly quoted.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 64): That too, but the durability of the actual phenomena that are being celebrated has yet to be demonstrated. And taking that from a "maybe" to a causal relation is, as you say, a bridge too far.

My mother always says "One robin doesn't make spring, either."

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 65): My mother always says "One robin doesn't make spring, either."

And then there was also the story of the independent minded sparrow who decided not to fly south for the winter. A cautionary tale for those who declare triumph a shade on the early side.

Since I learned the story in a US oil company, I assume that it is well known in the US.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): Instead you're going to post yet another child like response.

      Now that is funny coming from you. Maybe you should quit your job as a dispatcher and become a comedian. I can't believe you have the audacity to say my posts are child like when in virtually every post you make, you attack someone. You name call left and right, well in your case, it would only be only far right, if you get my drift (which I'm sure you do, considering how smart you are, HA). Look how many times you've used the word liberal on this thread. Here, I'll point it out to you, simply on your last post:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): liberal

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): liberal

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): liberal

Obsessed much? Can you have a congnitive thought without classifying things as "liberal." You come off as a grumpy, frustrated, man who gets his jollies off by trying to insult people over the internet.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): In true liberal fashion, you take a quote out of context and try and make it out to be something that it isn't as anyone who cares to read the entire string of posts will easily see.

You gotta be freaking kidding me. What have I taken out of context? Please, show me. Where have I quoted anything other than your EXACT WORDS? I'll do it again:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 22): Again, why is it so difficult for liberals to wrap their heads around more than one idea at once? Perhaps because it takes intellect and all liberals have is emotion?

Please show me the word "political" in that statement. Please do it. Wait, I'm supposed to understand the underlying tone of your words. Gee, how am I feeling as I'm typing this. How am I? Am I happy? Tell me, please. That would be sure dandy oh wise one.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): You haven't been smart in this entire thread.

As opposed to you, where your intellect shines through on every post you make.  .

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): See, I'm an adult and when someone doesn't use the spell check or has a bad edit I 99% of the time let them go on it.

Please, you are anything but adult in the manner in which you conduct yourself in this forum. Don't insult real adults by trying to equate yourself with one. Please. M'kay thanks.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): But the child in you couldn't and the liberal in you wouldn't.

Did you not catch this part, oh wise one:

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 45): I'm only saying that because you think I'm not intelligent. Pretty ironic you would say that while constructing such a poor sentence.

I guess while being so smart, you skipped over this. Probably taking to your Mensa buddies on the phone. I'll excuse it this time.  .

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 60): So rather than back yourself up using facts you have to use a bad edit to try and prove a point. Hey, it's the liberal way.

Again, the only reason I did that was because you alluded to me as being dumb. I just found it very ironic that you would do that while making a poor sentence. That's all. Sorry if I offended you in any way.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 61): Where you blatantly take what is said out of context, and contribute little if anything relevant to the thread

Hey OU812. But I thought you liked me. Hehe.

Oh yes, show me where I took anything out of context please. Thanks. By the way, not to sound cocky, but I think my contributions to the forum far outweigh yours. All you do is parrot other people's articles. That's what you base most of your arguments on. That, and make absurd statements like a "triumphant" war. Even your buddy RJdxer thought that was a stupid statement. But, hey, he thinks I'm stupid as well, so maybe we can start a club.  .

Lucky Charms Platy. (As opposed to Cheerio). HA, I made a funny. 

Dave

Quoting Greggarious (Reply 26): Jesus Christ, what's with you people?!?!?! First off, I'm sorry if I view America's actions (actions, mind you... not the United States itself) that have led to the worst humanitarian crisis in recent history, the creation of a failed state out of a rogue one, and the precarious position that the U.S. currently finds itself on the global stage. The Iraq War is the cornucopia from hell, and that's wholly on George W. Bush and his cabinet of thugs. Senator Obama had nothing to do with the creation of the hellstorm that is the war. And I'm sorry if you feel that liberalism is code word for "unpatriotic defeatist", but this mentality is just asinine. Open your eyes! Get out of your rut and see this war for what it is. Mind you, I am supporting Barack Obama for the presidency, but I'll be the first one to hold his feet to the fire if he doesn't execute the presidency to the best of his abilities. It would serve you well to have the same mentality towards your party's politicians. Sometimes you've just got to say, "What the f*ck". Stop and think before you go right back to bashing the left for the mess we've created...

Well put.   

Toting the party line always leads to problems, on both sides of the aisle.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 67): Quoting Platypus (Reply 61): Where you blatantly take what is said out of context, and contribute little if anything relevant to the thread Hey OU812. But I thought you liked me. Hehe. Oh yes, show me where I took anything out of context please. Thanks. By the way, not to sound cocky, but I think my contributions to the forum far outweigh yours. All you do is parrot other people's articles. That's what you base most of your arguments on. That, and make absurd statements like a "triumphant" war. Even your buddy RJdxer thought that was a stupid statement. But, hey, he thinks I'm stupid as well, so maybe we can start a club. . Lucky Charms Platy. (As opposed to Cheerio). HA, I made a funny.

He's more machine now, twisted and evil!   

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 67): Hey OU812. But I thought you liked me. Hehe.

You and halfa have to come to a consensus here! One of you thinks I'm another a-netter and you someone else! Now who's the ones showing signs of Alzheimer's?   

And I did like you, but before you turned to the Dark side!

Super Dave,
Do you feel Obama was wrong to oppose the Surge???

Cheerio

Quoting Platypus (Reply 69): He's more machine now, twisted and evil!

So, you gunna point out where I took your buddy's quote out of context, or you just gunna say random things? Which will it be Platy?

Quoting Platypus (Reply 69): Do you feel Obama was wrong to oppose the Surge???

No.

OU812, it's good to see you back. Oh, please don't send me another creepy PM. Thanks in advance.  .

Dave

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 70): So, you gunna point out where I took your buddy's quote out of context, or you just gunna say random things? Which will it be Platy?

You have yet to say anything relevant regarding this topic, you have yet to even mention the word Obama! If you have an issue with someone to the level you have displayed here, please do so via PM! Thanks in advance!   

Quoting Platypus (Reply 69): Super Dave, Do you feel Obama was wrong to oppose the Surge???

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 70): OU812, it's good to see you back. Oh, please don't send me another creepy PM. Thanks in advance. .

I'll be whoever you and halfa want, if you makes you happy. And, BTW, you're the one with the creepy messages. You were the one talking about your friend trying to make it with a cow!


Cheerio

Quoting Platypus (Reply 71): And, BTW, you're the one with the creepy messages. You were the one talking about your friend trying to make it with a cow!

Haha. Really? I did? Post it please. Go ahead, do it. Don't make up lies and post them. You are creepy, and a liar.

Please stop your nonsense. Thanks.

Good day.

Dave

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 67): Obsessed much?

If the shoe fits. All that and you still have been unable to answer a couple of relatively simple questions.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 67): What have I taken out of context? Please, show me. Where have I quoted anything other than your EXACT WORDS? I'll do it again: Quoting RJdxer (Reply 22): Again, why is it so difficult for liberals to wrap their heads around more than one idea at once? Perhaps because it takes intellect and all liberals have is emotion?

And again you've taken the quote out of context because you don't include the posts that led up to it.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 21): Quoting RJdxer (Reply 19): How many would have continued to die by his hand? And since when is the internal politics of ANY NATION our business? There are dictators all over the world killing like Saddam did. Where is our invasion of those places? Answer: Saddam wasn't an old enemy. The fact is the WMD was just a ploy, and we all know that now. If we're so righteous, then we should be going after all dictators. We're not. So toss that one out the window.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 22): Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 21): The fact is the WMD was just a ploy, and we all know that now. If we're so righteous, then we should be going after all dictators. We're not. So toss that one out the window. Again, why is it so difficult for liberals to wrap their heads around more than one idea at once? Perhaps because it takes intellect and all liberals have is emotion?

So when taken in context the exact meaning is clear and it is political. Before that there were a couple of posts referenced by these. Had you cared to look you would have seen that, but since it didn't fit the childish rant you wanted to go on you ignored those and took one quote out of context. Hey, it's the liberal way.

Got an answer to either one of those questions I asked or are you going to continue to ignore them in favor of digging an ever deeper hole for yourself?

Quoting Platypus (Reply 61): That's irrelevant now. What Obama wanted to do was make a bad situation worse. As I stated multiple times in this thread: Obama's plan was to fail! McCain's was for success, which appears to be materializing at present! Now Obama is in spin mode, so to avoid looking foolish, not to mention flat out wrong!!!

We'll agree to disagree there because its obvious your definition of success is different from mine.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 74): We'll agree to disagree there because its obvious your definition of success is different from mine.

I would define success being a functioning government, and stability! I think the Surge enabled the government to mature some, and the stability achieved allowed the nation to get a better taste of freedom, while discouraging our enemies, wanting to kill the innocent!

Cheerio

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 72): Haha. Really? I did? Post it please

My friend Chris wants to "Bleep" a cow! He taped it.

Here's the link you sent me: www.menothim.com

Cheerio

Quoting Platypus (Reply 71): You have yet to say anything relevant regarding this topic

     

Coming from you-Mr. other-peoples'-one-liners-as-a-reply, that's absolutely hysterical!

Wake me up when YOU say anything relavant to the subject, except to sound like a modern-day Conservative Manifesto.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 75): I would define success being a functioning government, and stability!

So success is defined by a stable Iraqi government that is increasingly looking to Iran for friendship and support?

Quoting Platypus (Reply 75): I think the Surge enabled the government to mature some, and the stability achieved allowed the nation to get a better taste of freedom

You certainly have a taste for hyperbole.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 47): I'd like you to post the relevant section of the Berlin speech where America was "defamed". If you can't, then never post on this topic again.

Btw, in your incessant parade of diatribes throughout the thread, you neglected to provide any kind of answer for the above.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 73): If the shoe fits.

So you're admitting you have an obsession. Nice.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 73): All that and you still have been unable to answer a couple of relatively simple questions.

To the first one: No, but again, your quote didn't have the word political in it. To the second: please clarify your question.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 73): So when taken in context the exact meaning is clear and it is political.

Sigh. Again, it's sad at the lengths you will go to not admit you're wrong. The context wasn't clear. You expect me to understand the feelings behind your words on an internet forum. Again, that's almost impossible to do.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 73): Hey, it's the liberal way.

If it's the liberal way to call you out on your BS then, hey, I guess I'm the biggest liberal there it.  .

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 73): Got an answer to either one of those questions I asked or are you going to continue to ignore them in favor of digging an ever deeper hole for yourself?

LOL. Yeah, that's another funny statement coming from you. This coming from the guy who tries to insult others just to weasel his way out of admitting to being wrong. Classy.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 76): My friend Chris wants to "Bleep" a cow! He taped it. Here's the link you sent me: www.menothim.com

   Stop spreading lies about me. Do it now. You're a damn liar. You're pathetic. If I truly said that, take a screen shot of it. That should be easy. Just hint Print Screen. Come on, Platy, do it.

I don't think that's possible, because I never sent you anything of the sort. Some sort of sick fantasy you have Platy? You trying to tell us something? Do you love cows or the GOP more? Maybe you could have a date with a Republican cow. That would be a grand old time for you I bet. Moooo, lol.

Good day.

Dave

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 77): Wake me up when YOU say anything relavant to the subject

Applesauce

Your prodigy "Super Dave" has said nothing significant, nor relevant regarding this topic. All you need to do is look, and you will see that is true! You have taught him well Falconator!   

Cheerio

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 79): So you're admitting you have an obsession. Nice.

I don't believe so. You posted liberal 3 times and I am replying that if the shoe fits. Obsession would be going on something like 3 or 4 different threads trying to prove I'm wrong for some strange reason, and failing miserably every time, like you are doing now.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 79): To the first one: No, but again, your quote didn't have the word political in it. To the second: please clarify your question.

? No? How is than an answer to either question? Let's try again and this time pay attention.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24): Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 23): Obsessed much? I think there's an underlying problem here RJ. In your other posts all you seem to do is paint liberals all the same. Your clairvoyance is astounding. When you're ready dispute the assertion with some facts bring it on.

Got some facts? "No" does not cut it.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 43): Again, if you have facts that dispute what I am saying, present them for debate. Let's start with something easy, name one liberal leader that isn't has not been for defeat in Iraq over the past 5 years.

Care to name that leader? There are no leaders in the House or Senate named "No" that I know of so maybe you want to try again? Skip the amateur hour about the edit you should have guessed by now that it doesn't affect me.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 79): The context wasn't clear.

Because you didn't bother to read the exchanges preceding it. You just saw, made up your mind on the spur of the moment, and got things wrong. Or, even worse, you ignored the preceding exchanges hoping no one would notice for some strange reason. One is just playing stupid, the other is just the old liberal way of repeating a lie, which is it?

Wow, so super Dave is prodigious, we agree at last!

Anybody remember some of the Smothers Brothers best comedy routines?

Some of the posts on this thread remind me of the battles I used to have with my sister when I was six and really smart, and she was seven and really stupid. We're both older now.

Why is it that intelligent, well argued -- but scathing -- comments on either side of an issue often get bleeped by the moderators -- but some of the stuff on this thread lives on?

Quoting Arrow (Reply 83): Why is it that intelligent, well argued -- but scathing -- comments on either side of an issue often get bleeped by the moderators -- but some of the stuff on this thread lives on?

Below the radar as well as the belt must be the explanation.   

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 81): Obsession would be going on something like 3 or 4 different threads trying to prove I'm wrong for some strange reason, and failing miserably every time, like you are doing now.

Well, that's your opinion. Failing miserably? Hardly. I just confirmed by opinion of you, that's all. I believe you have an obsession with liberals. You can hardly make a post without mentioning one. Maybe it's time you did some soul searching.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 81): ? No? How is than an answer to either question? Let's try again and this time pay attention.

On the contrary, I believe I am paying closer attention than you, my dear Watson. Was this not your first question to me:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24): Are those professions political?

Is "no but you didn't mention political in your statement" not an adequate answer? Can you admit you made a mistake now? I believe you should pay closer attention before claiming others are not. Just for future references.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 81): Care to name that leader?

Again, please clarify your question. I've asked you to do that, but you haven't.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 81): Because you didn't bother to read the exchanges preceding it. You just saw, made up your mind on the spur of the moment, and got things wrong.

Actually, I did read the whole thread. I saw one of your predictable rants, called you on it, and then you threw a hissy fit.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 81): One is just playing stupid, the other is just the old liberal way of repeating a lie, which is it?

See, this is what I'm talking about. Your posts are so predictable. I believe there is a third option. That is, I caught you again making an outlandish remark, called you on it, and thus the exchange we're having started to take place.

Are you really this grumpy, and angry in real life? Or do you like to come on the internet and try and insult liberals all day?

Whatever floats your boat I guess.

Good day.

Dave

[Edited 2008-07-31 14:23:23]

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 85): I believe you have an obsession with liberals.

I believe you have an obsession with posting way way off topic! The title of this thread is: "Obama: The Surge Will Not Work! Wrong Mr Obama!" Would you care to join us?

Cheerio

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 85): I believe you have an obsession with liberals. You can hardly make a post without mentioning one. Maybe it's time you did some soul searching.

A quick check of the threads I post the most in would reveal they mostly have to do with politics so go figure. Don't have to do a whole lot of soul searching, just use the search function provided by A.net.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 85): Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24): Are those professions political?

Is not the first question I asked you.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24): When you're ready dispute the assertion with some facts bring it on.

Is a form of a question. You have yet to provide any facts disputing my assertions, zilch, not one.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 85): Quoting RJdxer (Reply 81): Care to name that leader? Again, please clarify your question. I've asked you to do that, but you haven't.

If that question needs clarification then there is no hope for you. Just asking for a name. The question is clear.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 85): and then you threw a hissy fit.

Considering you are the one who is, again, trying to prove something by quoting me out of context and demanding I admit something that isn't true just whom is having any kind of fit?

And I'm anything but grumpy unless I'm forced into a death march in eastern Europe by some maniacal Czech girl.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 86): I believe you have an obsession with posting way way off topic! The title of this thread is: "Obama: The Surge Will Not Work! Wrong Mr Obama!" Would you care to join us?

Oh for Pete's sake, you haven't been on that topic in the last five posts and have still failed to respond to pertinent questions about your fallacious position on the issue.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 78): So success is defined by a stable Iraqi government that is increasingly looking to Iran for friendship and support?

If we leave prematurely, [which Obama wanted to do] that might just happen. President Bush and the military generals have a far more prudent plan for a more secure Iraq.

Thank you Aaron747, you just debunked Obama's brilliant plan for success in Iraq. Because if the US did as Obama wished back in 07', and leaving Iraq in May of 08' the Iraqis would have been far less able to defend themselves, more vulnerable to Iran!

        

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 88): Oh for Pete's sake, you haven't been on that topic in the last five posts and have still failed to respond to pertinent questions about your fallacious position on the issue.

Absurd,
Super Dave has posted roughly a dozen replies, none of which had any relevance regarding the thread!

Cheerio

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 87): Is not the first question I asked you.

Then why didn't you include it here:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 57): Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 56): One of your questions? If I'm not mistaken, you only asked me one, Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24): Are those professions political? Quoting RJdxer (Reply 43): Let's start with something easy, name one liberal leader that isn't has not been for defeat in Iraq over the past 5 years.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 87): Is a form of a question.

Oh boy. This is getting sad. I show that you were wrong again, and you can't even admit this mistake. Again, why didn't you include that in reply 57?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 87): You have yet to provide any facts disputing my assertions, zilch, not one.

Actually I have. I told you unless you interview every single liberal, you can't lump them all together.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 87): The question is clear.

No it's not. Instead of typing all that out, why can't you just rephrase the question in a proper way?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 87): And I'm anything but grumpy unless I'm forced into a death march in eastern Europe by some maniacal Czech girl.

LOL that would something.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 88): Oh for Pete's sake, you haven't been on that topic in the last five posts and have still failed to respond to pertinent questions about your fallacious position on the issue.

   Thank you Aaron.

Dave

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 90): Again, why didn't you include that in reply 57?

As you say, you thought I only asked you one, I showed you where you were mistaken. You didn't ask for all the questions I had asked.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 90): Actually I have. I told you unless you interview every single liberal, you can't lump them all together.

That is not a fact that disputes my assertion. That is a prerequisite you require.

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 90): No it's not. Instead of typing all that out, why can't you just rephrase the question in a proper way?

Why can't you just answer it. It's a pretty simple question. Are there too many syllables in the words for you to understand?

Quoting DavestanKSAN (Reply 90): LOL that would something.

I could say something but 99% of the time I just let these go.