OT: Inteligence says that we're spreading terrorism

OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?

Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick the
Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi? Dingy
Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?

--
Charlie

"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=blue]
> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>
> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick the
> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?[/color]
Dingy[color=blue]
> Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>
> Charlie[/color]

What a twerp you are. I posted a link a while back to the effect that the
Saudis AND the Israelis had come to the same conclusion.

And you think claiming some "Clintonista" is running our intelligence
agencies will explain away bad news.

You ought to be asking, "Why did it take so long for Bush's intelligence
agency to figure this out?" Or, "Why didn't anybody see this coming BEFORE
they invaded Iraq?"

You wonder why people are angry? This is it. Bush screwed up. Big time.
We're going to be paying for that mistake for quite a while.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

"dh" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:451731e6$0$19721$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=blue]
> "n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=green]
>> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
>> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>>
>> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick
>> the
>> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?[/color]
> Dingy[color=green]
>> Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>>
>> Charlie[/color]
>
> What a twerp you are. I posted a link a while back to the effect that the
> Saudis AND the Israelis had come to the same conclusion.
>
> And you think claiming some "Clintonista" is running our intelligence
> agencies will explain away bad news.
>
> You ought to be asking, "Why did it take so long for Bush's intelligence
> agency to figure this out?" Or, "Why didn't anybody see this coming
> BEFORE
> they invaded Iraq?"[/color]

Yep; no foresight; was there even an attempt at foresight? Or did all game
plans end at the toppling of Saddam?
[color=blue]
> You wonder why people are angry? This is it. Bush screwed up. Big time.
> We're going to be paying for that mistake for quite a while.[/color]

Got it in one.

Cathy

[color=blue]
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]
>[/color]

"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=blue]
> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>
> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick the
> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?
> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>
> --
> Charlie[/color]

Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled the
DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html?referrer=email[/url]

But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton to
deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions. When is
your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going to hold
him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's supposed to
be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to erode civil
liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:42:36 -0500, "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=green]
>> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
>> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>>
>> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick the
>> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?
>> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>>
>> --
>> Charlie[/color]
>
>Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled the
>DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
>telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
>
>[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html?referrer=email[/url]
>
>But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton to
>deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions. When is
>your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going to hold
>him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's supposed to
>be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to erode civil
>liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).[/color]

I don't think they will ever hold GWB or any other Republican
responsible because they might then have to admit that they made a bad
decision in voting for them.

However, I am still a bit puzzled as to why so many of these righties
are so fascinated by Clinton's penis. There's something going on there
and I'm not sure I want to know what it is.

In article <83pfh2po0c5btok6852rud2n0qbj92ps7n@4ax.com>,
Stuart Krivis <jd@mongo.krivis.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:42:36 -0500, "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=darkred]
> >> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
> >> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
> >>
> >> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick the
> >> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?
> >> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Charlie[/color]
> >
> >Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled the
> >DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
> >telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
> >
> >[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR20060923011[/url]
> >30.html?referrer=email
> >
> >But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton to
> >deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions. When is
> >your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going to hold
> >him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's supposed to
> >be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to erode civil
> >liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).[/color]
>
> I don't think they will ever hold GWB or any other Republican
> responsible because they might then have to admit that they made a bad
> decision in voting for them.
>
> However, I am still a bit puzzled as to why so many of these righties
> are so fascinated by Clinton's penis. There's something going on there
> and I'm not sure I want to know what it is.[/color]

It is you who keeps mentioning it. You must be facinated by it.

We are only disturbed by his actions while in office, not his physical
characteristics as you are. Have you had a chance to view clintons
genitals by chance?
--

dh, 9/24/2006, 6:58:16 PM,
<451731e6$0$19721$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> You wonder why people are angry? This is it.[/color]

People are angry because the administration has not stomped the
insurgents down. The administration has not stomped the insurgents
down because they are afraid of the liberal media's spin. The
administration has failed the American people in this way only in
relation to the Iraq War.

--
"The greatest leader is not necessarily the one who does the greatest
things. He is the one who gets the people to do the greatest things." ~
Ronald Reagan

"dbu%" <howard@dynosadork.com> wrote in message
news:howard-6E9B34.09424325092006@news-rdr-03.rdc-kc.rr.com...[color=blue]
> In article <83pfh2po0c5btok6852rud2n0qbj92ps7n@4ax.com>,
> Stuart Krivis <jd@mongo.krivis.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:42:36 -0500, "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>> >"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> >news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says
>> >> we're
>> >> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>> >>
>> >> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick
>> >> the
>> >> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?
>> >> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Charlie
>> >
>> >Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled
>> >the
>> >DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
>> >telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
>> >
>> >[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR20060923011[/url]
>> >30.html?referrer=email
>> >
>> >But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton
>> >to
>> >deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions.
>> >When is
>> >your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going to
>> >hold
>> >him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's
>> >supposed to
>> >be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to erode civil
>> >liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).[/color]
>>
>> I don't think they will ever hold GWB or any other Republican
>> responsible because they might then have to admit that they made a bad
>> decision in voting for them.
>>
>> However, I am still a bit puzzled as to why so many of these righties
>> are so fascinated by Clinton's penis. There's something going on there
>> and I'm not sure I want to know what it is.[/color]
>
> It is you who keeps mentioning it. You must be facinated by it.
>
> We are only disturbed by his actions while in office, not his physical
> characteristics as you are. Have you had a chance to view clintons
> genitals by chance?
> --
>[/color]

No we haven't, and as far as we're concerned, you can keep the experience to
yourself, you deviant!!

On 25 Sep 2006 16:30:07 GMT, "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>dh, 9/24/2006, 6:58:16 PM,
><451731e6$0$19721$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> You wonder why people are angry? This is it.[/color]
>
>People are angry because the administration has not stomped the
>insurgents down. The administration has not stomped the insurgents
>down because they are afraid of the liberal media's spin. The
>administration has failed the American people in this way only in
>relation to the Iraq War.[/color]

That's funny. :-)

In article <6LTRg.8382$Wi1.877@trnddc06>,
"Truckdude" <notmymail@cox.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> "dbu%" <howard@dynosadork.com> wrote in message
> news:howard-6E9B34.09424325092006@news-rdr-03.rdc-kc.rr.com...[color=green]
> > In article <83pfh2po0c5btok6852rud2n0qbj92ps7n@4ax.com>,
> > Stuart Krivis <jd@mongo.krivis.com> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:42:36 -0500, "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> >> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says
> >> >> we're
> >> >> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
> >> >>
> >> >> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick
> >> >> the
> >> >> Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?
> >> >> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Charlie
> >> >
> >> >Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled
> >> >the
> >> >DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
> >> >telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
> >> >
> >> >[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR20060923[/url]
> >> >011
> >> >30.html?referrer=email
> >> >
> >> >But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton
> >> >to
> >> >deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions.
> >> >When is
> >> >your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going to
> >> >hold
> >> >him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's
> >> >supposed to
> >> >be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to erode civil
> >> >liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).
> >>
> >> I don't think they will ever hold GWB or any other Republican
> >> responsible because they might then have to admit that they made a bad
> >> decision in voting for them.
> >>
> >> However, I am still a bit puzzled as to why so many of these righties
> >> are so fascinated by Clinton's penis. There's something going on there
> >> and I'm not sure I want to know what it is.[/color]
> >
> > It is you who keeps mentioning it. You must be facinated by it.
> >
> > We are only disturbed by his actions while in office, not his physical
> > characteristics as you are. Have you had a chance to view clintons
> > genitals by chance?
> > --
> >[/color]
>
> No we haven't, and as far as we're concerned, you can keep the experience to
> yourself, you deviant!![/color]

I was pointing out your comrade and your own facination with clinton and
his u-know-watsit. What is that creature in the mirror looking at you
for.
--

"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:4517cfcb$0$19707$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=blue]
> "n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=green]
>> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
>> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>>
>> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick
>> the Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive deleted) -losi?
>> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>>
>> --
>> Charlie[/color]
>
> Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled the
> DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
> telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
>
> [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html?referrer=email[/url]
>
> But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton to
> deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions. When
> is your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going to
> hold him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's
> supposed to be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to erode
> civil liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]
>[/color]

Only at the top. There are still a lot of Apparachnicks among the career
people. Look at Norman Panacea at the FAA, for instance. We're having a
lot of the same problems we're having with the left over Carter and Clinton
judges, including the 9th Circuit Court of Bannana Peels.

Charles of Schaumburg

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0ern3czg0zdu7009@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> dh, 9/24/2006, 6:58:16 PM,
> <451731e6$0$19721$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > You wonder why people are angry? This is it.[/color]
>
> People are angry because the administration has not stomped the
> insurgents down. The administration has not stomped the insurgents
> down because they are afraid of the liberal media's spin. The
> administration has failed the American people in this way only in
> relation to the Iraq War.[/color]

What are you suggesting when you say, "stomp the insurgents down?"

More troops? The Administration rejected that prior to invasion, against
well-informed advice. Do you think they're willing to pay the political
price of ramping up now? And don't say, "The Democrats won't support it."
If it's the right thing to do, the Administration should say so and at least
attempt to make their case. I don't see it. This is the Presidet who,
famously, could not think of a single mistake he'd made. The Vice President
is recently on record as saying, knowing what he knows now, he wouldn't have
changed a thing about the war. You can't learn from your mistakes if you
won't admit them.

Or shoot more indiscriminately? We already have a serious "PR problem," and
violence against people who aren't insurgents is absolutely not going to
help. Shooting children is what's screwing the Israelis.

Or...?
[color=blue]
> "The greatest leader is not necessarily the one who does the greatest
> things. He is the one who gets the people to do the greatest things." ~
> Ronald Reagan[/color]

Look at where this thread started... n5hsr, a True Believer, thinks it's
"Clintonistas" in the Intelligence services, with leaders all picked by the
current Administration, that are painting a black picture of what's really
quite a rosy situation. Somehow, he thinks this in spite of Marine Colonel
Peter Devlin's (yeah, there's a "Clintonista," fer sure...) recent grim
assessment of Anbar province. Denial starts at the top and flows to the
bottom. Call me crazy but, somehow, I don't think denying facts is the way
to get ahead or your enemies.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8vudnSOQu-EF8oXYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=blue]
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:4517cfcb$0$19707$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=green]
> > "n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=darkred]
> >> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
> >> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
> >>
> >> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick
> >> the Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive[/color][/color][/color]
deleted) -losi?[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
> >>
> >> Charlie[/color]
> >
> > Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled[/color][/color]
the[color=blue][color=green]
> > DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
> > telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
> >
> >[/color][/color]
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html?referrer=email[/url][color=blue][color=green]
> >
> > But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton[/color][/color]
to[color=blue][color=green]
> > deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions.[/color][/color]
When[color=blue][color=green]
> > is your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going[/color][/color]
to[color=blue][color=green]
> > hold him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's
> > supposed to be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to[/color][/color]
erode[color=blue][color=green]
> > civil liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url][/color]
>
> Only at the top. There are still a lot of Apparachnicks among the career
> people. Look at Norman Panacea at the FAA, for instance. We're having a
> lot of the same problems we're having with the left over Carter and[/color]
Clinton[color=blue]
> judges, including the 9th Circuit Court of Bannana Peels.
>
> Charles of Schaumburg
>[/color]

If you believe ANY of that, you're in serious need of psychiatric help. In
the Civil Services, the people brought in in the Bush 41 and Reagan years
should be bubbling into important policy positions all through government.
Out of the last 25 years, the Democrats controlled the Administration a mere
8 and they had an enemy Congress for 6 of those.

Most of the federal bench was appointed by Republicans, either Dubya Bush,
Poppy Bush or Ray-Guns. There are very few Clinton appointees on the bench
and almost no Carter appointees.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:44:12 -0500, "dh" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>"n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:8vudnSOQu-EF8oXYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=green]
>> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
>> news:4517cfcb$0$19707$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=darkred]
>> > "n5hsr" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> > news:6LGdndwor41fJ4vYnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >> OK, What Clintonista is running the intelligence report that says we're
>> >> spreading terrorism by the war on terrorism?
>> >>
>> >> Teddy Obese One has already spoken up about this report, where is Dick
>> >> the Duck PLucker? Osama Yo' Mamma? Nancy the (explitive[/color][/color]
>deleted) -losi?[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> Dingy Harry Reid? Barbara the Boxer? Diane Whinestein?
>> >>
>> >> Charlie
>> >
>> > Are you a total twerp or are you just very ignorant? Bush has filled[/color][/color]
>the[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > DCI post with his own pick twice. This is his own intelligence service
>> > telling him he's screwed up, there are no "Clintonistas" involved.
>> >
>> >[/color][/color]
>[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html?referrer=email[/url][color=green][color=darkred]
>> >
>> > But, that's your knee-jerk reacion; try to blame everything on Clinton[/color][/color]
>to[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > deflect the result of your own leader's bad - very bad - decisions.[/color][/color]
>When[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > is your boy going to to take some responsibility and when are you going[/color][/color]
>to[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > hold him responsible? He's not a 22-year old frat boy any more; he's
>> > supposed to be the leader of the free world (as he actively works to[/color][/color]
>erode[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > civil liberties, of course, this becomes somewhat ironic).
>> > --
>> > Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url][/color]
>>
>> Only at the top. There are still a lot of Apparachnicks among the career
>> people. Look at Norman Panacea at the FAA, for instance. We're having a
>> lot of the same problems we're having with the left over Carter and[/color]
>Clinton[color=green]
>> judges, including the 9th Circuit Court of Bannana Peels.
>>
>> Charles of Schaumburg
>>[/color]
>
>If you believe ANY of that, you're in serious need of psychiatric help. In
>the Civil Services, the people brought in in the Bush 41 and Reagan years
>should be bubbling into important policy positions all through government.
>Out of the last 25 years, the Democrats controlled the Administration a mere
>8 and they had an enemy Congress for 6 of those.
>
>Most of the federal bench was appointed by Republicans, either Dubya Bush,
>Poppy Bush or Ray-Guns. There are very few Clinton appointees on the bench
>and almost no Carter appointees.[/color]

Please provide a list of Clinton, Ray Gun and W appointees....

You seem to have a list...


--

Scott in Florida

dh, 9/25/2006,9:34:19 PM, wrote:
[color=blue]
> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0ern3czg0zdu7009@news.readfreenews.net...[color=green]
> > dh, 9/24/2006, 6:58:16 PM,
> > <451731e6$0$19721$88260bb3@free.teranews.com> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > > You wonder why people are angry? This is it.[/color]
> >
> > People are angry because the administration has not stomped the
> > insurgents down. The administration has not stomped the insurgents
> > down because they are afraid of the liberal media's spin. The
> > administration has failed the American people in this way only in
> > relation to the Iraq War.[/color]
>
> What are you suggesting when you say, "stomp the insurgents down?"
>
> More troops? The Administration rejected that prior to invasion,
> against well-informed advice. Do you think they're willing to pay
> the political price of ramping up now? And don't say, "The Democrats
> won't support it." If it's the right thing to do, the Administration
> should say so and at least attempt to make their case. I don't see
> it. This is the Presidet who, famously, could not think of a single
> mistake he'd made. The Vice President is recently on record as
> saying, knowing what he knows now, he wouldn't have changed a thing
> about the war. You can't learn from your mistakes if you won't admit
> them.
>
> Or shoot more indiscriminately? We already have a serious "PR
> problem," and violence against people who aren't insurgents is
> absolutely not going to help. Shooting children is what's screwing
> the Israelis.
>
> Or...?
>[color=green]
> > "The greatest leader is not necessarily the one who does the
> > greatest things. He is the one who gets the people to do the
> > greatest things." ~ Ronald Reagan[/color]
>
> Look at where this thread started... n5hsr, a True Believer, thinks
> it's "Clintonistas" in the Intelligence services, with leaders all
> picked by the current Administration, that are painting a black
> picture of what's really quite a rosy situation. Somehow, he thinks
> this in spite of Marine Colonel Peter Devlin's (yeah, there's a
> "Clintonista," fer sure...) recent grim assessment of Anbar province.
> Denial starts at the top and flows to the bottom. Call me crazy but,
> somehow, I don't think denying facts is the way to get ahead or your
> enemies.[/color]

The way to get ahead of your enemies is to use more firepower than they
have. We are the greatest military in the world and we are handcuffed
by political correctness and unwillingness to use the weapons at our
hand. We should give fair warning to entire towns to get the hell out
and then bomb the hell out of whoever is left. I'm not entirely
serious about that but we should stop using kid's gloves against these
people. They only respect force and will get the message only one way.
We keep acting weak by holding back in the face of insurgency and they
keep advancing. Why shouldn't they? Who's going to stop them?