"I'd much rather lose a campaign to lose a war."

Y

YoungJoonKim

Electoral Member
Aug 19, 2007
690
5
18
Lately, we have been witnessing John McCain Bullsh** OVER AND OVER AGAIN on CNN, MSNBC, and...Fox News...*cough*.


Its clear that his losing his mind.

His argument that Obama voted against the surge, kept going against the surge, urged to cut the bill from the surge, and rejected the reality of the surge, is bullsh**. He thinks that because he liked and still likes the surge, he deserves to be the worst president. Because Obama rejects the notion that surge is awesome and is so successful that Iraq is back to being in the state before Operation Iraqi Freedom, he shouldn't become a president.

LOL. Let's do some reality check AFTER the surge shall we?

1. Surge secured nothing but heavy military occupance of Iraq with "American troops."

2. Government is in total disarry.

3. Millions of Iraqis are lacking energy, water, and food each day--so much worse than the state before the invasion.

4. Surge is costing Americans billlions, if not trillions, of dollars each month.


So..my question is...
Why should this...idiot become a president? His argument lacks reality and fallen into deep fantasy of successful Iraq. His continuem of Iraq war will put United States into deeper debt at a faster rate than ever, his aggressive stance against global politic will damage America's image even worse (p.s. Obama is restoring America's image even BEFORE he comes a president), and his craziness will destroy America.

Honestly..when I first saw McCain debating against other republican presidential nominees, he looked tough and sensible. Now, I just feel sad for republicans...because they chose the wrong man. What they needed was Huckabee for heavens sake...gosh.
 
scratch

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
YoungJoonKim said:
Lately, we have been witnessing John McCain Bullsh** OVER AND OVER AGAIN on CNN, MSNBC, and...Fox News...*cough*.


Its clear that his losing his mind.

His argument that Obama voted against the surge, kept going against the surge, urged to cut the bill from the surge, and rejected the reality of the surge, is bullsh**. He thinks that because he liked and still likes the surge, he deserves to be the worst president. Because Obama rejects the notion that surge is awesome and is so successful that Iraq is back to being in the state before Operation Iraqi Freedom, he shouldn't become a president.

LOL. Let's do some reality check AFTER the surge shall we?

1. Surge secured nothing but heavy military occupance of Iraq with "American troops."

2. Government is in total disarry.

3. Millions of Iraqis are lacking energy, water, and food each day--so much worse than the state before the invasion.

4. Surge is costing Americans billlions, if not trillions, of dollars each month.


So..my question is...
Why should this...idiot become a president? His argument lacks reality and fallen into deep fantasy of successful Iraq. His continuem of Iraq war will put United States into deeper debt at a faster rate than ever, his aggressive stance against global politic will damage America's image even worse (p.s. Obama is restoring America's image even BEFORE he comes a president), and his craziness will destroy America.

Honestly..when I first saw McCain debating against other republican presidential nominees, he looked tough and sensible. Now, I just feel sad for republicans...because they chose the wrong man. What they needed was Huckabee for heavens sake...gosh.
Click to expand...

After almost 50 years of following American politics they do all the wrong things first until they have to to the right thing. McCain Is admired because he is able to communicate with both parties and because he decided to endure the HANOI HILTON. Yet that will only lead to more U.S. aggression, unfortunately.
 
scratch

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
talloola said:
He has an opinion and the side he chooses, he's not the final answer, just another opinion, like the rest of us.
Click to expand...

We all have choices and the sad part is when this election is over they will start haggling about 2012! One never wins.
 
talloola

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
Lineman said:
I won't disagree with you, I just respect his viewpoint more than other's and feel he could comment on this better than I could.
Click to expand...

I agree with some of his thoughts, and others I don't, oh well, that's life, I don't like
rejecting Obama just because he doesn't have the experience of McCain and others, as
the experience definitely wasn't positive, they have made a mess of things, and,
everyone starts somewhere, as they all did as well, so, lets give him a chance, he has
a more 'broad minded' view of the world, and doesn't seem so defensive and narrow minded as the republicans, he has caught the eye of the international community as well,
and that is positive too, as bush broke that relationship down with his close minded and
aggressive and arrogant attitude.
 
darkbeaver

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
talloola said:
I agree with some of his thoughts, and others I don't, oh well, that's life, I don't like
rejecting Obama just because he doesn't have the experience of McCain and others, as
the experience definitely wasn't positive, they have made a mess of things, and,
everyone starts somewhere, as they all did as well, so, lets give him a chance, he has
a more 'broad minded' view of the world, and doesn't seem so defensive and narrow minded as the republicans, he has caught the eye of the international community as well,
and that is positive too, as bush broke that relationship down with his close minded and
aggressive and arrogant attitude.
Click to expand...

Obama's going to break your heart Talloola.
 
Lineman

Lineman

No sparks please
Feb 27, 2006
452
7
18
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Sometimes you use the whip, sometimes you offer some sugar. In an country that was long dominated by successive dictators people tend to understand the use of force quicker than diplomacy. The surge came at an appropriate time when the Sunni had decided to work for instead of against peace. That combination is what advanced the process. Either by itself would not have brought the results that both accomplished together.

Obama voting against the surge, spending, and anything "Iraq" was nothing but a pure political gambit that succeeded in getting him up front of the voters. Now that he's been there, talked with the locals and the US military he will change his tune. An immediate withdrawal without a stable Iraq would be almost as criminal as the invasion.

( Guess I couldn't wait......)
 
darkbeaver

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Lineman said:
Sometimes you use the whip, sometimes you offer some sugar. In an country that was long dominated by successive dictators people tend to understand the use of force quicker than diplomacy. The surge came at an appropriate time when the Sunni had decided to work for instead of against peace. That combination is what advanced the process. Either by itself would not have brought the results that both accomplished together.

Obama voting against the surge, spending, and anything "Iraq" was nothing but a pure political gambit that succeeded in getting him up front of the voters. Now that he's been there, talked with the locals and the US military he will change his tune. An immediate withdrawal without a stable Iraq would be almost as criminal as the invasion.

( Guess I couldn't wait......)
Click to expand...

The Sunni's decided to work for money Lineman. There was no advance in any process but the propaganda. Obama will say and do anything for his Zionist masters, they all will, he is a very good orator but this is the work of an actor. The Iraqi are to be obliterated and the country carved up for the bankers.
 
darkbeaver

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Lineman said:
Money and they re-joined the government. Obliterated? No profit in that.
Click to expand...

Sure there is Lineman those obliterating machines and bullets sell for big bucks and when the obliteration winds down the oil and the region will be free and easy, no threat to Israel ever again.
The Military-Industrial Complex

It's Much Later Than You Think By Chalmers Johnson
28/07/08 "Tom Dispatch" -- -Most Americans have a rough idea what the term "military-industrial complex" means when they come across it in a newspaper or hear a politician mention it. President Dwight D. Eisenhower introduced the idea to the public in his farewell address of January 17, 1961. "Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime," he said, "or indeed by the fighting men of World War II and Korea… We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions… We must not fail to comprehend its grave implications… We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex."
Although Eisenhower's reference to the military-industrial complex is, by now, well-known, his warning against its "unwarranted influence" has, I believe, largely been ignored. Since 1961, there has been too little serious study of, or discussion of, the origins of the military-industrial complex, how it has changed over time, how governmental secrecy has hidden it from oversight by members of Congress or attentive citizens, and how it degrades our Constitutional structure of checks and balances.
From its origins in the early 1940s, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was building up his "arsenal of democracy," down to the present moment, public opinion has usually assumed that it involved more or less equitable relations -- often termed a "partnership" -- between the high command and civilian overlords of the United States military and privately-owned, for-profit manufacturing and service enterprises. Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that, from the time they first emerged, these relations were never equitable.
In the formative years of the military-industrial complex, the public still deeply distrusted privately owned industrial firms because of the way they had contributed to the Great Depression. Thus, the leading role in the newly emerging relationship was played by the official governmental sector. A deeply popular, charismatic president, FDR sponsored these public-private relationships. They gained further legitimacy because their purpose was to rearm the country, as w
 
Lineman

Lineman

No sparks please
Feb 27, 2006
452
7
18
Winnipeg, Manitoba
So If they obliterate the Iraqis then the new workers will be from???
Much easier and cheaper to give them the "I can get rich" dream and keep them around.
 
talloola

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
scratch said:
It's all done with mirrors. 'Roos lose big time.
Click to expand...

How will you save me from that fate. Should I be more of a skeptic?
I am a strong person, if he turns out to be a terrorist in disguise, or, a silly
weak sniffling wimp, or a great president, I will handle it well.
The only person who ever broke my heart was my dad, what could be worse that that, I say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom