"You're wasting your time daniel. Col is the king of contradictions and he now has a side-kick. Dan probably thinks that 2 heads are better than 1 but that's only true if both heads have a brain."

I'm not a side kick to anybody Charles. Just because you chime in here with 2 sentences total doesn't mean your brain is working overtime on this issue. If you don't agree with my thoughts fine, but don't feel the need to criticize me by saying I'm some "sidekick" by not having the guts to bring your own solution forward or offer your own thoughts. What price have you paid for this shitty war and the fact that it has been mismanaged from the start? Do you know anybody who has given their life for it? Do you have family who are dead now because their head was dismembered by an IED?

If you do or if you have, then you got more then two sentences to speak on the issue, if not spend your time speaking on something you know something about.

The facts are this. We have the maximum total commitment of US troops in Iraq. There is no reserve of troops, in fact the levels there are so great, in a few months we will be forced to either extend some of them beyond an 18 MONTH deployment, or add troops not fully trained, or draw down the force, by not replacing troops returned home.

To this day, there have never, since the original gulf war that is, been more US troops in a mission of occupation in Iraq, then there are now. With this peak or surge, you can still read or watch about daily car bombings and chaos inside the country, you can still read about the politicians in Iraq not coming together to solve their problems, and you can still, still, see that no matter what the time, effort, and money commitment is, that the people in Iraq are not making the sacrifices necessary at the local level to stop this insurgency.

Yes things are moving along, progress is being made, but the continued cost in lives and money is much larger than we are being told. The nation doesn't want to be fighting this war of occupation and refereeing the politics in Iraq. They want to get the bastards that knocked the towers down, and they want to make sure that we can sleep at night without having to worry about Orange or Red alerts on the TV.

We don't want to wake up to another perfect September day, shattered because our government didn't connect the dots, that somebody didn't do their job at the TSA and the enemies of our nation were able to perform another sneak attack. Occupying Iraq isn't furthering any of those goals at all and it is bankrupting our financial future.

Beyond that, it just isn't working in Iraq.

Dan,

While I would rather ignore you when you start acting this way I will say this. I have not had any loses in Iraq. My step-brother came back from Iraq in 1 piece (thank God), but we never know when he's going back since he is a Navy Seal. That doesn't mean I have to keep my mouth shut or make long explanations about anything.

I need not to argue any point on this article because Col is a tired broken record that repeats itself over and over. He jumps from one issue to another within the same article and somehow relates them to each other just because Bush has something to do with them. He never sticks to his own words, he contradicts himself more that Bush says says we're winning. Col does not look at the facts, he takes other peoples words for it. he doesn't even research those who quotes. He claims to be against the are not enough soldiers to do then job then he complains about how we are not taken them out all in the same day and sometimes same article. He even complains about how Bush controls all Gov't agencies when they say good things about Iraq but then quotes these same agencies when they have some bad news.

If you wanna side with Col, that's fine by me. There's an old saying in Puerto Rico: "Dime con quien andas y te dire quien eres". Roughly translated "tell me who you hang with and I'll tell you what you are".

In case you haven't noticed Col is usually left to fend for himself on his article, some that many here would normally agree on. In this case, you decided to back him up. Well, if we dish it out to him, you will get it to.

“He never sticks to his own words; he contradicts himself more that Bush says we're winning. Col does not look at the facts; he takes other peoples words for it.”

When I shift to other topics it is generally because of comments that were made by others that do not conform to the subject. In many cases I believe that is because they do not want to address the facts I post. As to "Takes other peoples words” I use facts from agencies and statements from people who are knowledgeable of a subject.

i haven't backed up that idiot on this article for anything that i know of.

that doesn't mean i will not say when he might say something that might be right. so far it has happened once.

LOL.  You mean you use selected and outdated "facts", and misrepresent them at every turn.

Stop the BS Col. People here stick to what you argue, it is you who changes issues. In the same article (not necessarily this one) you start by arguing about how Bush should not have gone to Iraq with so few soldiers, when people refute your claim you jump to the amount of money being spent, once that is debated you will jump to how the baby boomers will not get their SS money, then you jump on the countries infrastructure and stem cell research. Notice how you covered 5 issues that are not related to each other, or at least not directly? You can not follow one argument without lashing out 10 thousand other issues to confuse and throw off the first one that you were losing.



I hope you know I wasn't talking about you daniel but dan greene.

Reply By: Island Dog Posted: Tuesday, September 04, 2007
I use facts from agencies and statements from people who are knowledgeable of a subject.


. You mean you use selected and outdated "facts", and misrepresent them at every turn.


I use current and relevant facts and expert opinion that shows things you do not want to accept.

The agencies you use are the same ones you claim to be under Bush's control when the facts are opposing to your views. One day you say they can't be trusted, the next you are using their words to defend your position. Talk about being a hypocrite. And the people you claim "are knowledgeable of a subject" are not always right and are usually opinions which don't always make them correct. Several times you have claimed some of the Generals to be wrong, aren't they "are knowledgeable of a subject" when it comes to how to handle the war? Funny how you will criticize those who, according to you, are "are knowledgeable of a subject" just because they do not side with your position and the use them as credible sources when they do.

The same can be said about you Col, or are you that thick that you don't even realize it? Kettle calling pt black comes to mind here, hypocrisy as well.

Just as you ignore the facts that we present to you?  LOL. 

Reply By: Island Dog Posted: Tuesday, September 04, 2007
“I use current and relevant facts and expert opinion that shows things you do not want to accept.


Just as you ignore the facts that we present to you? .”


You present facts that do not deal with the issues I post and do not show that what I post is not correct. I will stand on what I have written and you can look back in a few years and you will see that what I said in my book is what, for the most part; the future will prove to be correct.

Do you think putting something in bold makes you correct?  Your "facts" and opinions have been debunked here countless times along with the nonsense in your book.  LOL.

Reply By: Island Dog Posted: Tuesday, September 04, 2007
I will stand on what I have written and you can look back in a few years and you will see that what I said in my book is what, for the most part; the future will prove to be correct.


Do you think putting something in bold makes you correct? Your "facts" and opinions have been debunked here countless times along with the nonsense in your book. >


You have not debunked ANYTHING I have said and what I have written can be compared in the future when all the results of the disaster called the Bush Administration is fully known!