ISIS must be destroyed!

Sal wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:He owns it....owns getting handed a stable Iraq

Repetition is one of the keys to comedy.

You should do stand-up.

You should do something besides be a blathering idiot for the left. There is going to be an accounting of what you and people like you have done in an effort to cover up what the COWH has done/does/continues to do ....to include the 4th estate who has done so from the start. Only six years in even they see how fooled they were by the Empty Suit. It starts this Fall Sal and rolls beyond that. "Elections have consequences" is what the COWH once said.....yep they do....yes they certainly do. Can't wait for November.....

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

Sal wrote:

gatorfan wrote:

Apparently Democrats have the same memory problem. None other than Clinton, Kerry, Biden, Reid, Cantwell to name a few voted to invade.

But, Bush was "the decider".

Which he did and now semi-retired President Barack Hussein Obama is the "Decider" and does nothing but dither.  You got what you wanted and are you aware that fewer CITIZENS died as a result of violence during our invasion than did during the reign of terror by Saddam Hussein?

No, I didn't think so.

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

And going back in is going to save so many more lives.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuUBCF3KKxc

Wordslinger wrote:Here's more of Isis's onslaught ...

http://news.yahoo.com/jihadist-offensive-sparks-mass-iraq-exodus-084039459.html

Look, we can choose to stay out of it now ... but it appears Isis may very well achieve its goal of creating a huge Caliphist state in the Mideast.  And I am one who believes their stated objective of eventually forcing Europe and the United States to become Muslim ... or die.

It's probably cheaper -- in blood and money to destroy them now, rather than later.

I'm open to ideas.

As for Pacedog's wanting to blame Obama, as usual he's just like Markle, and can't stop himself from leaping at any chance to blame our 1st black president.  Obama didn't create the civil war in Syria --- of which Isis is now very much a part.  And we can't occupy and police a country like Iraq forever.  The truth is, and Pacedog knows it, Iraq was forcibly held together by Saddam and bonzo Dubya decided to take him out.  

The problem is, we don't have Saddam's balls.

As for Isis, maybe it's smarter to lay back and let them butcher all the non Sunnis in the whole region, and then, when they're a State, take them out.

Ideas?

A US attack is on the horizon.

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:Here's more of Isis's onslaught ...

http://news.yahoo.com/jihadist-offensive-sparks-mass-iraq-exodus-084039459.html

Look, we can choose to stay out of it now ... but it appears Isis may very well achieve its goal of creating a huge Caliphist state in the Mideast.  And I am one who believes their stated objective of eventually forcing Europe and the United States to become Muslim ... or die.

It's probably cheaper -- in blood and money to destroy them now, rather than later.

I'm open to ideas.

As for Pacedog's wanting to blame Obama, as usual he's just like Markle, and can't stop himself from leaping at any chance to blame our 1st black president.  Obama didn't create the civil war in Syria --- of which Isis is now very much a part.  And we can't occupy and police a country like Iraq forever.  The truth is, and Pacedog knows it, Iraq was forcibly held together by Saddam and bonzo Dubya decided to take him out.  

The problem is, we don't have Saddam's balls.

As for Isis, maybe it's smarter to lay back and let them butcher all the non Sunnis in the whole region, and then, when they're a State, take them out.

Ideas?

A US attack is on the horizon.

Hey Joani . . it just struck me that if Obama decides to bomb ISIS Herr Markle will lose his "semi retired" do-nothing crapola. It's interesting that in Herr Markle's comments today, rather than show any compassion for the thousands of non-Sunnis now trapped by Isis on a mountain in Iraq, he had nothing to say except it was all Obama's fault.

And Herr Markle says he doesn't hate Obama ... tell me somebody does Herr Markle ever say anything that's true?

Oh oh ... I think I just triggered Markle's paste-up of Hitler's train again ...

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

The only torocaca that exists in this thread are the numbers you pulled out your butt and posted above. We didn't kill 250k total in both wars against Iraq even considering the devastation we inflicted on all of Saddam's forces in 1991.

I had a friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Justice Authority who had the job of helping interview many Iraqis who claimed torture by the Hussein regime to include his sons Uday and Qusay. Day for day in a near year tour, he talked to folks who had been or had friends and family tortured by that regime. His boys often fed their foes to the lions that they owned. They also beat the feet (to a broken and bloody pulp) of each Iraqi soccer player who lost a match to Iran. And Saddam often used hot iron pokers to pierce the innards of a person's rectum to get them to admit to being disloyal to him. Don't tell me about anything that happened under Bush and Cheney. You're just a hot air piece who saying what the DailyKos lies about repeatedly and you armchair general while folks like me were actually in place putting foot in ass for our country.

Wrong again booby ...official American estimates of Iraqi civilians killed by us in our invasion and during our occupation exceed 250,000.

As for Saddam's torturing Iraqis ... so did we! For sure! No doubt you'll defend our right to torture anyone we want to ... being a real macho man and warfighter ... LOL

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

The only torocaca that exists in this thread are the numbers you pulled out your butt and posted above. We didn't kill 250k total in both wars against Iraq even considering the devastation we inflicted on all of Saddam's forces in 1991.

I had a friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Justice Authority who had the job of helping interview many Iraqis who claimed torture by the Hussein regime to include his sons Uday and Qusay. Day for day in a near year tour, he talked to folks who had been or had friends and family tortured by that regime. His boys often fed their foes to the lions that they owned. They also beat the feet (to a broken and bloody pulp) of each Iraqi soccer player who lost a match to Iran. And Saddam often used hot iron pokers to pierce the innards of a person's rectum to get them to admit to being disloyal to him. Don't tell me about anything that happened under Bush and Cheney. You're just a hot air piece who saying what the DailyKos lies about repeatedly and you armchair general while folks like me were actually in place putting foot in ass for our country.

Wrong again booby ...official American estimates of Iraqi civilians killed by us in our invasion and during our occupation exceed 250,000.

As for Saddam's torturing Iraqis ... so did we!  For sure!  No doubt you'll defend our right to torture anyone we want to ... being a real macho man and warfighter ... LOL

250,000 possibly more is the number of deaths at the hand of Saddam. US Satellite images documented many mass graves with thousands and thousands of bodies.

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

The only torocaca that exists in this thread are the numbers you pulled out your butt and posted above. We didn't kill 250k total in both wars against Iraq even considering the devastation we inflicted on all of Saddam's forces in 1991.

I had a friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Justice Authority who had the job of helping interview many Iraqis who claimed torture by the Hussein regime to include his sons Uday and Qusay. Day for day in a near year tour, he talked to folks who had been or had friends and family tortured by that regime. His boys often fed their foes to the lions that they owned. They also beat the feet (to a broken and bloody pulp) of each Iraqi soccer player who lost a match to Iran. And Saddam often used hot iron pokers to pierce the innards of a person's rectum to get them to admit to being disloyal to him. Don't tell me about anything that happened under Bush and Cheney. You're just a hot air piece who saying what the DailyKos lies about repeatedly and you armchair general while folks like me were actually in place putting foot in ass for our country.

Wrong again booby ...official American estimates of Iraqi civilians killed by us in our invasion and during our occupation exceed 250,000.

As for Saddam's torturing Iraqis ... so did we!  For sure!  No doubt you'll defend our right to torture anyone we want to ... being a real macho man and warfighter ... LOL

250,000 possibly more is the number of deaths at the hand of Saddam. US Satellite images documented many mass graves with thousands and thousands of bodies.

Wordslinger can't be persuaded by facts as he loves the DailyKos and such. They are his staples of information. He wouldn't know a terrorist if he were stealing his Depends. He is an armchair general at best when he is drinking the DAILY KOS koolaid.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

The only torocaca that exists in this thread are the numbers you pulled out your butt and posted above. We didn't kill 250k total in both wars against Iraq even considering the devastation we inflicted on all of Saddam's forces in 1991.

I had a friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Justice Authority who had the job of helping interview many Iraqis who claimed torture by the Hussein regime to include his sons Uday and Qusay. Day for day in a near year tour, he talked to folks who had been or had friends and family tortured by that regime. His boys often fed their foes to the lions that they owned. They also beat the feet (to a broken and bloody pulp) of each Iraqi soccer player who lost a match to Iran. And Saddam often used hot iron pokers to pierce the innards of a person's rectum to get them to admit to being disloyal to him. Don't tell me about anything that happened under Bush and Cheney. You're just a hot air piece who saying what the DailyKos lies about repeatedly and you armchair general while folks like me were actually in place putting foot in ass for our country.

Wrong again booby ...official American estimates of Iraqi civilians killed by us in our invasion and during our occupation exceed 250,000.

As for Saddam's torturing Iraqis ... so did we!  For sure!  No doubt you'll defend our right to torture anyone we want to ... being a real macho man and warfighter ... LOL

250,000 possibly more is the number of deaths at the hand of Saddam. US Satellite images documented many mass graves with thousands and thousands of bodies.

Wordslinger can't be persuaded by facts as he loves the DailyKos and such. They are his staples of information. He wouldn't know a terrorist if he were stealing his Depends. He is an armchair general at best when he is drinking the DAILY KOS koolaid.

C'mon, whine some more for us .... LOL

Hey soldier-boy, look at this evidence from National Geographic ...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/


Tell us how this is a left wing progressive rag ... LOL

It's crap....how about blame the appropriate folks...those involved in a civil war...but I guess you think Saddam's killing of his people was justifiable....

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we your butt and posted above. We didn't kill 250k total in both wars against Iraq even considering the devastation we inflicted on all of Saddam's forces in 1991.

I had a friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Justice Authority who killed them ... as "collateral" damage. How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

The only torocaca that exists in this thread are the numbers you pulled out had the job of helping interview many Iraqis who claimed torture by the Hussein regime to include his sons Uday and Qusay. Day for day in a near year tour, he talked to folks who had been or had friends and family tortured by that regime. His boys often fed their foes to the lions that they owned. They also beat the feet (to a broken and bloody pulp) of each Iraqi soccer player who lost a match to Iran. And Saddam often used hot iron pokers to pierce the innards of a person's rectum to get them to admit to being disloyal to him. Don't tell me about anything that happened under Bush and Cheney. You're just a hot air piece who saying what the DailyKos lies about repeatedly and you armchair general while folks like me were actually in place putting foot in ass for our country.

Wrong again booby ...official American estimates of Iraqi civilians killed by us in our invasion and during our occupation exceed 250,000.

As for Saddam's torturing Iraqis ... so did we!  For sure!  No doubt you'll defend our right to torture anyone we want to ... being a real macho man and warfighter ... LOL

250,000 possibly more is the number of deaths at the hand of Saddam. US Satellite images documented many mass graves with thousands and thousands of bodies.

Wordslinger can't be persuaded by facts as he loves the DailyKos and such. They are his staples of information. He wouldn't know a terrorist if he were stealing his Depends. He is an armchair general at best when he is drinking the DAILY KOS koolaid.

C'mon, whine some more for us ....  LOL

Sure MR DAILY KOS

Wordslinger wrote:Here's more of Isis's onslaught ...

http://news.yahoo.com/jihadist-offensive-sparks-mass-iraq-exodus-084039459.html

Look, we can choose to stay out of it now ... but it appears Isis may very well achieve its goal of creating a huge Caliphist state in the Mideast.  And I am one who believes their stated objective of eventually forcing Europe and the United States to become Muslim ... or die.

It's probably cheaper -- in blood and money to destroy them now, rather than later.

I'm open to ideas.

As for Pacedog's wanting to blame Obama, as usual he's just like Markle, and can't stop himself from leaping at any chance to blame our 1st black president.  Obama didn't create the civil war in Syria --- of which Isis is now very much a part.  And we can't occupy and police a country like Iraq forever.  The truth is, and Pacedog knows it, Iraq was forcibly held together by Saddam and bonzo Dubya decided to take him out.  

The problem is, we don't have Saddam's balls.

As for Isis, maybe it's smarter to lay back and let them butcher all the non Sunnis in the whole region, and then, when they're a State, take them out.

Ideas?

Yes, typically you are lying.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:It's crap....how about blame the appropriate folks...those involved in a civil war...but I guess you think Saddam's killing of his people was justifiable....

I know you have a terrible reading and comprehension problem, but the article in National Geographic refers to Iraqis killed --- by us.

Or guys like you... who hang photos of dead Iraqis in their bedrooms ...

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

Sal wrote:

gatorfan wrote:

Apparently Democrats have the same memory problem. None other than Clinton, Kerry, Biden, Reid, Cantwell to name a few voted to invade.

But, Bush was "the decider".

Which he did and now semi-retired President Barack Hussein Obama is the "Decider" and does nothing but dither.  You got what you wanted and are you aware that fewer CITIZENS died as a result of violence during our invasion than did during the reign of terror by Saddam Hussein?

No, I didn't think so.

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

Now you're even boasting of your ignorance of the issue. Thanks for your admission! You are a terrific foil.

Wordslinger wrote:Hey soldier-boy, look at this evidence from National Geographic ...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/

Tell us how this is a left wing progressive rag ... LOL

Your ignorance of the subject is stunning!

Here is the methodology used in coming up with a senseless number on the number of fatalities in Iraq.

They INTERVIEWED 1,960 households.

The way this works is they asked people if they knew someone who had been killed. The way that works is if there were three people who knew each other. One was killed. The interviewer asked one of the survivors if they personally knew of someone killed in the invasion. YES says the person. Then days or months later they ask the other person if THEY know anyone killed in the invasion. YES says the person. PRESTO...TWO FATALITIES.

As you well know. Saddam Hussein and his brutal regime killed more civilians than were killed during the invasion.

The fallacy of this bogus method was pointed out in the same sort of "study" done by a "study" done at the cost of your bud, George Soros. In that "study" they came up with ONE MILLION fatalities. That one appeared in Salon and was quickly debunked.

As you well know, semi-retired President Barack Hussein Obama grasped defeat from the jaws of victory and is now causing THOUSANDS of fatalities.

You just throw this up there hoping something will stick to the wall.

Sal wrote:The problem lies in the decision to invade and occupy, not when to withdraw.

Just as if you were raping a woman, the problem would not lie in how and when you pulled out.

Seek help!

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

That's utter bullshit Herr Markle, and you know it.  Since our invasion of Iraq the estimates run from 250,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis have died because we your butt and posted above. We didn't kill 250k total in both wars against Iraq even considering the devastation we inflicted on all of Saddam's forces in 1991.

I had a friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Justice Authority who killed them ... as "collateral" damage.  How many did Saddam kill before Dubya decided to make Cheney rich?

The only torocaca that exists in this thread are the numbers you pulled out had the job of helping interview many Iraqis who claimed torture by the Hussein regime to include his sons Uday and Qusay. Day for day in a near year tour, he talked to folks who had been or had friends and family tortured by that regime. His boys often fed their foes to the lions that they owned. They also beat the feet (to a broken and bloody pulp) of each Iraqi soccer player who lost a match to Iran. And Saddam often used hot iron pokers to pierce the innards of a person's rectum to get them to admit to being disloyal to him. Don't tell me about anything that happened under Bush and Cheney. You're just a hot air piece who saying what the DailyKos lies about repeatedly and you armchair general while folks like me were actually in place putting foot in ass for our country.

Wrong again booby ...official American estimates of Iraqi civilians killed by us in our invasion and during our occupation exceed 250,000.

As for Saddam's torturing Iraqis ... so did we!  For sure!  No doubt you'll defend our right to torture anyone we want to ... being a real macho man and warfighter ... LOL

250,000 possibly more is the number of deaths at the hand of Saddam. US Satellite images documented many mass graves with thousands and thousands of bodies.

Wordslinger can't be persuaded by facts as he loves the DailyKos and such. They are his staples of information. He wouldn't know a terrorist if he were stealing his Depends. He is an armchair general at best when he is drinking the DAILY KOS koolaid.

C'mon, whine some more for us ....  LOL

Sure MR DAILY KOS

In truth, Wordslinger's news site of choice is The Nation. A Socialist/Communist publication which has frequently advocated a violent overthrow of our country.

The bombing of iraq has begun. Progressives really should begin to learn about their doctrine.

It's not what you think. Look at woodrow wilson and fdr for larger rationalizations... but the scales don't really matter.

It's the "responsibility to protect" and nearly any justification can fit given a compelling "national interest" or humanitarian need.

If you say you do not support military adventurism... you can not be a progressive.

I thought
The war in Iraq was over? The COWH clearly stated our participation over in Dec 2011. Clearly a lie I guess.

The Iraqi army was NOT ready nor capable to fight the advances of ISIS......but with guidance it could..... The Kurds are capable but not equipped.

Too little too late.....ISIS needed to be stopped a year ago before obtaining massive weaponry and money. We armed rebels in Syria and the rebels began killing Christains.......OOPS!!!!!

ISIS is not just an Iraq problem.......it will soon target Israel and Saudi. Of course the US is a dream of ISIS. Infiltration to the US is probable. Terrorist disguised as Latino/Hispanic have already been found crossing our border.

ISIS needs to be completely destroyed.

Another war started without Congressional approval by the supposedly enlightened progressive liberal blood stained Nobel champion of peace who they said would bridge the gap...

Is 'bridging the gap' their catch phrase for carpet bombing sovereign nations without Congressional approval?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuUBCF3KKxc

It's becoming apparent that the Democratic liberals are a party of warmongers willing to use weapons at any excuse so they can feed the MIC.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbvTiMMlkNg

 

Joanimaroni wrote: The Iraqi army was NOT ready nor capable to fight the advances of ISIS......but with guidance it could..... The Kurds are capable but not equipped.

Too little too late.....ISIS needed to be stopped a year ago before obtaining massive weaponry and money. We armed rebels in Syria and the rebels began killing Christains.......OOPS!!!!!

ISIS is not just an Iraq problem.......it will soon target Israel and Saudi. Of course the US is a dream of ISIS.  Infiltration to the US is probable. Terrorist disguised as Latino/Hispanic have already been found crossing our border.

ISIS needs to be completely destroyed.

I agree Joani.

However what makes us any better than a tyrannical empire when we bomb a sovereign nation, without Congressional approval, when it has not become an immediate imminent threat?

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQzUCO7rG0M

  

ISIS is our target.....

Joanimaroni wrote:ISIS is our target.....

Not a threat to us though. Now, are they a threat to our folks in Ebril? Probably, but only because Obama sent a group of military .and diplomats there once Baghdad was threatened by ISIS. ISIS retreated after not being able to think of taking that city (Baghdad). So, if our folks die in Ebril, it is because the COWH ordered them to go there. Why doesn't he just exfil those people out and not have a replay of Benghazi? Or are they there for that reason exactly?