OMG! NOW there was no 'victory dance' on an aircraft carrier... ;)

(911, the day when stupid folk took over my country... a day to remember, lest I forget.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

yes, bush said so, but like most of the time, he does not understand what he was saying.

Yeah, no way in heck he just declared an end to major combat operations and the left trumped up the rest of the story. I mean keeping the peace and ousting a dictator are the same thing "in your opinion", right?

Keeping in mind that we put him in power and gave him weapons, chemicals, maps, and targets, I'd say we gave him the Noriega treatment. Just like we did with Iran. Divide and conquer. Food for oil. Things start looking to peaceful we send in the CIA to blow something up and blame it on a faction.

Transparent to some of us. Unthinkable or condoned by others.

Standard BS liberal response

"It's not the criminal's fault, he's just a victim of circumstance".

Is it also our fault that Saddam didn't study recent American history and was unprepared for the "Noriega treatment"?

---

Circumstances we empowered him to attain,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5267640865741878159&q=en

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Circumstances we empowered him to attain,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5267640865741878159&q=en

A comedian...LOL

Hey, you have any rockstar or actor's opinions... because I REALLY care what they think too!!!!

---

Circumstances we empowered him to attain,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5267640865741878159&q=en

A comedian...LOL

Hey, you have any rockstar or actor's opinions... because I REALLY care what they think too!!!!

The comedic presentation makes the history of oil bearable,

You should watch it. It's not opinions. It's history.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Deliberate killing of civilians is a war crime, whether Japan was suing for peace or not.

Meh. That's empty rhetoric. I mean, you're right on paper, but that isn't really how all-out wars are fought. If they're ALL war criminals, then none of them are war criminals.

I am feeling very old. I was born in World War 2 and the atrocities, under whatever guise, continue...

Of course. Because some/most individuals think that it's OK to initiate force on others to ram their ideas down someone else's throat.

Why should that surprise you?

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

I just LOVE how liberals think we're supposed to win wars with both hands tied behind our back by rules no one else follows.

Are you actually PROUD of how this mentality has dragged out the War on Terror?

Right, it's the liberals fault that the War on Terror has latest this long. Just for the record, how long did the liberal President GW Bush say we should expect this war would last?

You seemed to have missed the subtle difference between protecting a foreign land and crushing it's populace/government into submission.

When's the last time Japan or Germany stepped out of line? Or is that just another one of those "coincidences" like not having another terrorist attack on our homeland since the invasion of the middle east?

Umm, looks like that's a response to a different post. My post on the firebombing was not about it's effectiveness (which was not lost one me) but that it's been characterized as a war crime by one of its organizers. I think it's a given that casualties would have been significantly higher on both sides if an invasion had been attempted instead.

As for Germany/Japan "stepping out of line", a significant difference between the end of WWI and WWII was the US's continued involvement in world affairs and support for post war rebuilding of both countries.

Be that as it may, you suggested the length of the War on Terror had been extended by the liberals tying of both hands, when we were told this 'war' could last for decades. It's still less than 7 years old, so a little premature to start blaming the liberals for dragging it out, no?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Circumstances we empowered him to attain,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5267640865741878159&q=en

A comedian...LOL

Hey, you have any rockstar or actor's opinions... because I REALLY care what they think too!!!!

The comedic presentation makes the history of oil bearable,

You should watch it. It's not opinions. It's history.


.

Rush Limbaugh and Jon Stewart also put their own spin on "the facts"...but they are STILL just entertainers.

---

I just LOVE how liberals think we're supposed to win wars with both hands tied behind our back by rules no one else follows.

Are you actually PROUD of how this mentality has dragged out the War on Terror?

Right, it's the liberals fault that the War on Terror has latest this long. Just for the record, how long did the liberal President GW Bush say we should expect this war would last?

You seemed to have missed the subtle difference between protecting a foreign land and crushing it's populace/government into submission.

When's the last time Japan or Germany stepped out of line? Or is that just another one of those "coincidences" like not having another terrorist attack on our homeland since the invasion of the middle east?

Umm, looks like that's a response to a different post. My post on the firebombing was not about it's effectiveness (which was not lost one me) but that it's been characterized as a war crime by one of its organizers. I think it's a given that casualties would have been significantly higher on both sides if an invasion had been attempted instead.

As for Germany/Japan "stepping out of line", a significant difference between the end of WWI and WWII was the US's continued involvement in world affairs and support for post war rebuilding of both countries.

Be that as it may, you suggested the length of the War on Terror had been extended by the liberals tying of both hands, when we were told this 'war' could last for decades. It's still less than 7 years old, so a little premature to start blaming the liberals for dragging it out, no?

Look at it as a rodent problem, Bobby.

Getting a house full of rats to change their ways is going to take significantly longer than simply exterminating them.

And who do we have to blame for the way we've fought wars since the end of WW2? Here's a hint, it's not the guys who say screw their civilian population.

Oh BTW, last time I checked, we were still in Iraq, still involved in their affairs, and still spending billions of dollars rebuilding it.

---

I just LOVE how liberals think we're supposed to win wars with both hands tied behind our back by rules no one else follows.

Are you actually PROUD of how this mentality has dragged out the War on Terror?

Right, it's the liberals fault that the War on Terror has latest this long. Just for the record, how long did the liberal President GW Bush say we should expect this war would last?

You seemed to have missed the subtle difference between protecting a foreign land and crushing it's populace/government into submission.

When's the last time Japan or Germany stepped out of line? Or is that just another one of those "coincidences" like not having another terrorist attack on our homeland since the invasion of the middle east?

Umm, looks like that's a response to a different post. My post on the firebombing was not about it's effectiveness (which was not lost one me) but that it's been characterized as a war crime by one of its organizers. I think it's a given that casualties would have been significantly higher on both sides if an invasion had been attempted instead.

As for Germany/Japan "stepping out of line", a significant difference between the end of WWI and WWII was the US's continued involvement in world affairs and support for post war rebuilding of both countries.

Be that as it may, you suggested the length of the War on Terror had been extended by the liberals tying of both hands, when we were told this 'war' could last for decades. It's still less than 7 years old, so a little premature to start blaming the liberals for dragging it out, no?

Look at it as a rodent problem, Bobby.

Getting a house full of rats to change their ways is going to take significantly longer than simply exterminating them.

And who do we have to blame for the way we've fought wars since the end of WW2? Here's a hint, it's not the guys who say screw their civilian population.

Oh BTW, last time I checked, we were still in Iraq, still involved in their affairs, and still spending billions of dollars rebuilding it.

Not sure this is an answer to how long the liberals have caused the War on Terror to be dragged out...

My comment about "stepping out of line" was meant to address issues around winning the peace after a war has been won, I don't think we're at that stage just yet in Iraq.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Not sure this is an answer to how long the liberals have caused the War on Terror to be dragged out...

Cause and effect, Bobby. It takes longer to single out targets than to carpet bomb the entire area. Why do we do that? Specifically to minimize damage and causalities....not something a "warmonger" does, correct?

My comment about "stepping out of line" was meant to address issues around winning the peace after a war has been won, I don't think we're at that stage just yet in Iraq.

As if to say an unconditional surrender, under threat of a 3rd nuclear strike (they didn't know we only had 2 bombs) and a continued military presence ensuring that resource were not used to rebuild military strength and/or weapons of war, had nothing to do with it...

---

Circumstances we empowered him to attain,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5267640865741878159&q=en



A comedian...LOL

Hey, you have any rockstar or actor's opinions... because I REALLY care what they think too!!!!




The comedic presentation makes the history of oil bearable,

You should watch it. It's not opinions. It's history.

Rush Limbaugh and Jon Stewart also put their own spin on "the facts"...but they are STILL just entertainers.

But Limbaugh and Stewart are imbeciles.

:)


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Not sure this is an answer to how long the liberals have caused the War on Terror to be dragged out...

Cause and effect, Bobby. It takes longer to single out targets than to carpet bomb the entire area. Why do we do that? Specifically to minimize damage and causalities....not something a "warmonger" does, correct?

You seem to be talking more about what's happening in Iraq, than the more general War on Terror. But are you saying that this behavior is a result of the liberals, and an unfettered Republican Congress and Presidency would've done things differently? I'm not sure what you're attributing to the liberals is something you disagree with, I mean are we not behaving that way because of the liberals or because we're not 'warmongers'? If the latter then the reason the conflict in Iraq has lasted as long is not the fault of the liberals, or did I miss something?

My comment about "stepping out of line" was meant to address issues around winning the peace after a war has been won, I don't think we're at that stage just yet in Iraq.

As if to say an unconditional surrender, under threat of a 3rd nuclear strike (they didn't know we only had 2 bombs) and a continued military presence ensuring that resource were not used to rebuild military strength and/or weapons of war, had nothing to do with it...

Germany after WWI also offered an unconditional surrender, was also occupied (at least in part), etc, etc. I am not saying the things you list had nothing to do with Japan not "stepping out of line" once WWII was over, I am saying that the US's continued presence there has helped matters. I'm not sure we're disagreeing on this, when you said Germany and Japan have shown little to no indication of returning to their previous aggressive behavior since WWII I agreed. I certainly do not mean to say that the US is in any way at fault for not remaining involved in Europe after WWI, that continent should have been able to keep it's house in order. I am saying that a good part of Germany being the place it is today, in marked difference to how it was between WWI and WWII is thanks to the US after WWII.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Not sure this is an answer to how long the liberals have caused the War on Terror to be dragged out...

Cause and effect, Bobby. It takes longer to single out targets than to carpet bomb the entire area. Why do we do that? Specifically to minimize damage and causalities....not something a "warmonger" does, correct?

You seem to be talking more about what's happening in Iraq, than the more general War on Terror. But are you saying that this behavior is a result of the liberals, and an unfettered Republican Congress and Presidency would've done things differently? I'm not sure what you're attributing to the liberals is something you disagree with, I mean are we not behaving that way because of the liberals or because we're not 'warmongers'? If the latter then the reason the conflict in Iraq has lasted as long is not the fault of the liberals, or did I miss something?

I used the term "warmonger" in quotes to indicate it's a term the left uses.

Obviously I don't consider fighting to win the same as looking for a fight.

My comment about "stepping out of line" was meant to address issues around winning the peace after a war has been won, I don't think we're at that stage just yet in Iraq.

As if to say an unconditional surrender, under threat of a 3rd nuclear strike (they didn't know we only had 2 bombs) and a continued military presence ensuring that resource were not used to rebuild military strength and/or weapons of war, had nothing to do with it...

Germany after WWI also offered an unconditional surrender, was also occupied (at least in part), etc, etc. I am not saying the things you list had nothing to do with Japan not "stepping out of line" once WWII was over, I am saying that the US's continued presence there has helped matters. I'm not sure we're disagreeing on this, when you said Germany and Japan have shown little to no indication of returning to their previous aggressive behavior since WWII I agreed. I certainly do not mean to say that the US is in any way at fault for not remaining involved in Europe after WWI, that continent should have been able to keep it's house in order. I am saying that a good part of Germany being the place it is today, in marked difference to how it was between WWI and WWII is thanks to the US after WWII.

And I'm saying it's not working in the middle east because we didn't thoroughly kick their butt, WW2 style, BEFORE trying to establish that presence. It's not enough to eliminate your enemies ability to fight, you must also eliminate his will to fight.

---

the atomics bombs
fell on nagasaki and hirosima,
beause of the sneak japanese attack,
in pearl harbor , on a sunday !!!!!!!!!,
and because of some thousand dead american
sailors,
if the japanese acted like men,
the bombs wouldnt fell,

i am not american, no,
i am from greece,
and this is called war,
you kill, and you will be killed

the atomics bombs
fell on nagasaki and hirosima,
beause of the sneak japanese attack,
in pearl harbor , on a sunday !!!!!!!!!,
and because of some thousand dead american
sailors,
if the japanese acted like men,
the bombs wouldnt fell,

i am not american, no,
i am from greece,
and this is called war,
you kill, and you will be killed

Japanese targeted the naval vessels at Pearl Harbor.

We targeted cities of civilians.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

the atomics bombs
fell on nagasaki and hirosima,
beause of the sneak japanese attack,
in pearl harbor , on a sunday !!!!!!!!!,
and because of some thousand dead american
sailors,
if the japanese acted like men,
the bombs wouldnt fell,

i am not american, no,
i am from greece,
and this is called war,
you kill, and you will be killed

Japanese targeted the naval vessels at Pearl Harbor.

We targeted cities of civilians.

As Rush has noted, the Japanese did target civilians (17 million of them).

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

the atomics bombs
fell on nagasaki and hirosima,
beause of the sneak japanese attack,
in pearl harbor , on a sunday !!!!!!!!!,
and because of some thousand dead american
sailors,
if the japanese acted like men,
the bombs wouldnt fell,

i am not american, no,
i am from greece,
and this is called war,
you kill, and you will be killed

Japanese targeted the naval vessels at Pearl Harbor.

We targeted cities of civilians.

As Rush has noted, the Japanese did target civilians (17 million of them).

17 million Americans? We jump on the bandwagon only when it's traveling in our direction.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

the atomics bombs
fell on nagasaki and hirosima,
beause of the sneak japanese attack,
in pearl harbor , on a sunday !!!!!!!!!,
and because of some thousand dead american
sailors,
if the japanese acted like men,
the bombs wouldnt fell,

i am not american, no,
i am from greece,
and this is called war,
you kill, and you will be killed

Japanese targeted the naval vessels at Pearl Harbor.

We targeted cities of civilians.

As Rush has noted, the Japanese did target civilians (17 million of them).

17 million Americans? We jump on the bandwagon only when it's traveling in our direction.

Did I (or Rush) say American civilians?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Japanese targeted the naval vessels at Pearl Harbor.

We targeted cities of civilians.

Dear jeebus. The Japanese suffered about 3(?) million deaths total, the vast majority of which (2.5 million?) were soldiers.

They had, like I said, slaughtered something like 17 million civilians since the early/mid 30s. And they repeatedly refused to unconditional surrender. So their spine had to be utterly and irretrievably broken.

It was.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...