See curator..

This example alone should explain very well to you what I meant to you yesterday on Ken Sheperd's thread about you being part of the problem if you are with the msm as you claim you are by the posts you have put here on NBs for quite a bit now.

I just wanted to thank you real quick...

...and you know very well what I am talking about.

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill

"
I don't know where you got that from."

It's one of many reasons to go to war that people seem to forget...

"
I didn't say I would forget. I can not forget about 9/11 and not be scared into voting for republicans. "

Of course not, you would rather vote for people who want you to... uh..forget? Oh just forget about it, it didn't really happen.. there is no threat.

"Of course we do. But, those were different circumstances. Japan
attacked us first... and Hitler was threatening to take over the world."

Uh, maybe you should look up the definition of "Emperial Dictatorship". That would be a dictator who invades other countries to expand his Empire. You can even try wiki, I won't complain.

"Saddam never attacked us... and he was fully contained. In no way was he a threat."

The same could be said for Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, I mean Europe is so far away can't they keep their squables to themselves?

Jeeze, how old are you kid?

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

"
I didn't say I would forget. I can not forget about 9/11 and not be scared into voting for republicans. "

Yet, you'll willingly be scared of Republicans, Global Warming and Karl Rove.

(Maybe I watch too much BOR?)

But at least an agreement.

Bush called for a ceasefire on Feb 27th and whimped out making it necessary for his son to finish the job. A peace conference was held in Iraqi territory occupied by the coalition. But if you think about it, the original congressional approval was still in effect! So Dubya didn't even need a second approval from congress to go in the second time!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

More like re:fart...

But what right did the US have to invade Afghanistan?

The Afghans didn't attack America. None of the 9/11 hijackers were Afghans.

Most Afghans have probaly never even heard of America, and couldn't find it on a map.

Please justify why the mightiest military in the world had any right to invade the poor backward country of Afghanistan?

Where in international law does it say you can invade a sovereign nation, stay there seven years.. and all because a few hundred foreign national militants took safe harbor there?

Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate.

You keep wanting to compare WWII with the War on Terror and the War in Iraq.  They are all different.  And if you can't recognize that, there's no use in my trying to teach you.  Considering your horrific journalistic skills, I'd worry much more about re-acquiring THEM than teaching other people, especially people much more knowledgeable of the subject at hand than you are.  I am drawing a very accurate analogy here, but you desperately want to ignore it.  To say that Iraq does not represent a front on the War on Terror is just the same as whining about opening a second front in Europe, instead of focusing and concentrating exclusively on Japan.  Listen to what Air Force officers tell you from time to time.  You MIGHT learn something.  Especially AF officers with a bird's eye view of what is happening in the Middle East.

Yeah, I do.  The fact that you're surprised I have personal opinions and beliefs shouldn't be a surprise.  We all do.  But, I have the ability to separate my personal beliefs from my work.  Your first three sentences make total sense!  But you COMPLETELY BLEW IT on the last one.  From what I have seen, you totally lack that ability.  I know I would.  I say that because I am human, after all. 

Not at all.  I would just deal with the new reality differently and more reponsibly than this president has.  I am curious to see how.  Let me guess.  You'll take the following approach: talk endlessly to the bad guys, and hope and pray all works out in the end.  The Neville Chamberlain/modern-day Democratic Party school of thought. 

The difference from some (on the left and right) is when differences of opinion turn into personal attacks.  What personal attacks?  I call you a poor journalist because you ARE one, and that is something that can be corrected.  Maybe you can actually do MORE RESEARCH and talk to more people who know the subject matter better than you do.  Is that too hard to ask? 

If you want to bomb people into peace, feel free.  Sweetie, there is a cold, hard fact of life you constantly run away from.  The best way to peace is VIOLENCE or the credible threat of violence.  What, do you think the Soviet Union left Western Europe alone out of the kindness of their hearts?  Um, NO...that was because if they valued their lives, they kept their hands off of it.  Violence ALWAYS works.  It is time tested and true.  Don't believe me?  I'll fly you to Carthage and there you can explain to them how talking your way to peace works (h/t to Heinlein).   But, there are ways of doing it.  Remember: VIOLENCE.  It WORKS. Which this president has failed at miserably.  Well, I am really sorry that the President didn't go up to the bad guys on his hands and knees, crying like a b#$!h the whole time, begging them not to inflict a 11 September 2001 on us a second time, as you would have him do.  (But then, I don't want to live in a nation that is positively whiny as badly as you do.)

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

Leave it to a Leftist to have an intense fetish for diplomacy and the instruments thereof. I didn't realize that Germany's war declaration led to the deaths of...well, anybody...on 8 December 1941.  I didn't realize that IT, not the day previous, was "the day of infamy".  I presume that FDR called it that because he paper cut himself on the war declaration after (I presume) it was presented to him by the German ambassador. 

A state of war already existed between Germany and the United States at that time, as I would count the sinking of U.S. shipping to be an act of war.  (But note that the Germans didn't, say, bomb New York a la the way the Japanese bombed Pearl.)  And even with a war declaration...so what?  Who said that the United States HAD to run after Germany immediately after that?  According to Leftist logic, we still could have TALKED and TALKED and TALKED to Hitler and von Ribbentrop so they would see just how super-nice we were as a country. 

You seem to presume I am a card-carrying Republican or a hard-core McCain supporter.  I disagree with his statement on bin Laden.  After all, growing up in the 1980s, I don't seem to remember a push to withdraw entirely from Western Europe so that we could concentrate on hunting down Abu Nidal.  But then, Leftists...and some unfortunately elsewhere, see the capture of one marginalized pissant as the KEY to world peace.   

Also, for the record, as you seem to have ignored, I believe justice is best accomplished with swiftly fired bullets in the backs of heads of our enemies, not Mirandizing and coddling (I leave that to the Left).  If I thought for ONE SECOND that capturing bin Laden would do ANYTHING beyond slaking the thirst for justice, I'd be all for plunging 10 million troops into Afghanistan to hunt him down.  But, as it won't do much else, I don't see that as a priority as much as you do.  But then, not only will the capture of bin laden lead to perpetual World Peace in the eyes of Leftists, it will also lead to them saying "We don't need a military anymore!  YAY!"  Anything to avoid the truths of national survival...

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

No, the Typing Mounties. :-) 

Crystal clear.  We have it already.  Now if you want to increase the amount of government involvement in the healthcare system, we can discuss how much is appropriate.  Here's another interesting tidbit - every president from Truman through Regan (yes, my fellow small government advocates, Reagan) sent a bill to congress to close the loop on socialized medicine. Not sure about Bush I. 

My point is, no one in the United States is denied health care.  It's not a perfect system, and I doubt it ever will be, and I can't say for sure where lies the answer.  I'm pretty sure, however, given its propensity to jack up nearly everything, the federal government should not get any more involved in it then it already is.  (Ended that last sentence on a prep, I know). 

Excuse me, but I have to go after another refill.

curator, hope you have a really good pair of tweezers around, as picking those splinters out of your ass is going to take some work.

Just ask rhayes. :-)

What the American people are looking for is somebody who can solve their problems. - Barack Obama, April 27, 2008

It appears as tho the "Curator" has absconded....IOW....hauled a**.

LOL.

Okay, UpC.....I think I've talked myself into fishing for blues and blacks....long flight...but it might be kind of fun! 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive