2 things the col. doesn't want you to know!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
So whats the bodycount in Iraq?
And Afghanistan?


Iraq?
390 for US as of today.

Any reason to wonder about Afghanistan?




posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Perhaps to try and make the US look bad, i'm guessing that was his point.

But it's not our fault the soldiers are getting killed. Soldiers die in war, thats a simple fact. They signed up for the job, fully knowing that they might have to take a bullet for the nation.



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:39 PM
link   
time for a lesson in perspectives.....

lets keep some things in perspective.

ever feel hate? anger? loathing? sad?

well we dont like to feel these things (normal people dont anyway) but we still feel them. try as you might you cant stop from feeling upset or sad every so often, i am no exception.

trying to remove things like hate is a noble albeit saint jude like task.

whether we want to agree with this or not war and killing is a part of this world. we are not perfect and neither is this world. its great to raise our standards and hope other follow suit but we shouldnt expect it or demand it happen. we love and hate, we create life foster it and destroy it as well. all life is sacred to me but all life ends eventually, whther our life is lost in a heart attack or a war is pretty moot, we're going to die anyway. our loathing of "innocent" people dying in a war is just a thought of our own but those people will die anyway regardless. this may seem cold and i agree but its not that i dont care, i just know that when i'm dead all the things i've done on this planet wont be remembered or cared about by many people let alone anyone so my death whether foolish or noble is rather silly as i am going to die anyway. life will continue after we pass, life carried on before us didnt it? it certainly will afterwards.

i guess i see things in a different way than most people.

i dont think i worded this very well but i hope it made some sense to somebody. i might elaborate a bit further in a thread of my own....



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:47 PM
link   
[Edited on 7-11-2003 by ewqazxcv]



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
www.iraqbodycount.net...

More than a few, then again, any civilian killed is one too many,collateral damage can only kill so many, the rest is down to neglect and incompetence.



you likn looks like just and anti-war site and nothing more. i do not find it credible



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:47 PM
link   
the one person this post is about has not spoken a single word
1 he doesent know
2 or he has learned to hold is tonge

so obviously the answer is 1



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysteriousbob
Damn, didn't think I would get this many people to post much.

I would just like to say that even though we went into war in Iraq, we didn't kill civilians on purpose. If they tried to attack our soliders, what do you think was going to happen. It's this PC crap that is going to make our army get shot up all the time.

What the hell do you want us to do, put flowers in our guns and sing kumbayah?


i just got done saying that, but nicely put



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 10:02 PM
link   
What is worse, lying to the American public about getting your dick sucked or lying to the American public about WMD resulting in the deaths of thousands of innocent Iraqis? Oh, but they are just sand 'n-word's so you don't give a # about them, they are barely even human.



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
More than a few, then again, any civilian killed is one too many,collateral damage can only kill so many, the rest is down to neglect and incompetence.


Nerdling,
You have not seen the war at first hand. You're lucky. Collateral damage is a part of it. This is a second millenium and US has done a damned good job avoiding civilian casualties. Have you seen or heard of a war more surgical than this?

But then again, all republicans just want to nuke everybody flat. Isn't that your opinion?



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by greenkoolaid
What is worse, lying to the American public about getting your dick sucked or lying to the American public about WMD resulting in the deaths of thousands of innocent Iraqis? Oh, but they are just sand 'n-word's so you don't give a # about them, they are barely even human.


i view all lies to be the same, worthy of my contempt and the person who tells them loses any possibility of having my respect.

but like i've been saying all along they are ALL the same, they are just politicians with their own agernda being put first except during election years and then they start making token efforts to appease enough people in the hopes they'll be duped into voting for these #sticks again and more often than not the sheeple vote for them over and over. apparently people LOVE being lied to.



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysteriousbob
1. Just what the hell a Repugnant is, I have tried to ask him to no avail. Perhaps I shall never know

2. That Bill Clinton was one of the worst morally corrupt presidents....oh wait, we already knew that.

Make that 1 thing the col. doesn't want you to know!


I always thought he used "Repugnant" to be a replacement for Republican because of it's similarity to the word and because it refers to something that is abhorrent, detestable, obscene, offensive, or repulsive.

This is not necessarily my opinion of Republicans any more than it is of the Democrats or any other party, since they all have those members that are good and those that are bad. I do find his use of the word amusing, even with it's offensive intent

As for Clinton being the most morally corrupt President ever, I don't think that's a fair statement. I think that Clinton was maybe one of the stupidest Presidents. And he was one of only one's who got called on his immorality. But he was far from being the most morally corrupt Presidents. Kennedy was a notorious lady's man, Nixon had to resign due to political burglary, bribery, extortion, wiretapping, conspiracy, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, tax fraud, illegal use of the CIA and FBI, as well as campaign contributions and use of taxpayers money for private purposes all as a result of the Watergate scandal.

Oh yeah, then there's that President, can't recall which one, that signed more laws and executive orders circumventing the Constitution than any president in US history, lied to start a war so that he could make money, sent hundreds of our boys and girls off to die for a bull# cause, appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history, cut healthcare benefits for war veterans, etc. If you want more go to: www.buzzflash.com...

It is just being blindly biased to claim one party is more moral than the other.



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 10:13 PM
link   
I hate the whole labelling of people democrat and republican. I am a republican so this is what I believe in, low taxes, guns for everybody, pro-life, fags go to hell. I am democrat so I believe the opposite. In the last 2 elections here (the only 2 I could vote for) I voted for conservative parties (the equivalent of republicans), but that does not mean I support all of its views. One party does not share all of my views, and it seems that they do for you guys, which makes me think you are brainwashed.

I do not like lots of social programs, I do not like high taxes, I do not like abortions, and I don't like guns, and I certainly don't like indiscriminately declaring wars. So where does that leave me? Most of you would say wishy washy and in the middle. I say it makes me someone who can think for myself, and not rely on a political party to tell me what to think.

Just because you voted for a guy doesn't mean you have to support everything he does.



posted on Nov, 7 2003 @ 11:41 PM
link   
So many morons so little tiime.

Jez: I liked what you said.

In any event, most of you know what a repugnant is without explanation, outside the intellectually inept who started this thread. I would hope that you use it in your everyday speech when you describe a degenerate republican as I do. It is the proper term.


But, what amazes me is why the mouth-breathing, knuckle-draggin sexually repressed repugnant would want to call me out in this fashion. We all know what's gonna happen. You say some moronic nonsese. I slam you with the truth. Then, you skulk back to your cave somewhere until you can bang something out on the keyboard with your monkey hands so you can get the the next beating.

It just perplexes me.

Then, again, I know you repugnants are sexually repressed in-the-closet deviants so I really shouldn't be surprised.

Just leave the gimp gear at home, ok?



posted on Nov, 8 2003 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
I'm not a commie or a pinko or a socialist, i'm a liberal and i believe in our ideals, just like republicans believe in their ideals...

Personally, I side with The People...The Citizens. I never will ally myself with a political party *because* they *all* try to be as elusive as possible. That's why I'll sling mud a *any* career politician (& those who follow any career politician) that crosses my path...Those are whom I consider to be the Repugnants.


IMO, those who are as elusive as the Colonel is are the very same type of people who *wish* they were a career politician, but don't have the family or the connections to do it...Those are the dangerous types that need to stay *out of government*...



Originally posted by mysteriousbob
They signed up for the job, fully knowing that they might have to take a bullet for the nation.

What I *don't* like is that the *reasons* for them taking bullets are falsified...In such a case, they're getting killed for a lie to The People & the Nation they swear to defend.



posted on Nov, 8 2003 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reference.allrefer.com...


man is this ancient rome?



posted on Nov, 8 2003 @ 09:54 AM
link   
if civliians start shooting at our troops what the # are our guys supposed to do? just ignore it? once a civilian picks up a AK-47 and starts blasting away at our troops, he turns into an enemy soldier. if he gets killed well BOO FRICKIN' HOO!. you people dont know jack and # about combat and jack just left town!!



posted on Nov, 8 2003 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel
So many morons so little tiime.

Jez: I liked what you said.

In any event, most of you know what a repugnant is without explanation, outside the intellectually inept who started this thread. I would hope that you use it in your everyday speech when you describe a degenerate republican as I do. It is the proper term.


But, what amazes me is why the mouth-breathing, knuckle-draggin sexually repressed repugnant would want to call me out in this fashion. We all know what's gonna happen. You say some moronic nonsese. I slam you with the truth. Then, you skulk back to your cave somewhere until you can bang something out on the keyboard with your monkey hands so you can get the the next beating.

It just perplexes me.

Then, again, I know you repugnants are sexually repressed in-the-closet deviants so I really shouldn't be surprised.

Just leave the gimp gear at home, ok?






If anyone sees fit to join me in my cave, come on over. We got lots of gimp gear, but my monkey hands can't work it. Oh yeah, and i'm a degenerate republican.....damn





posted on Nov, 8 2003 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
if civliians start shooting at our troops what the # are our guys supposed to do? just ignore it? once a civilian picks up a AK-47 and starts blasting away at our troops, he turns into an enemy soldier. if he gets killed well BOO FRICKIN' HOO!. you people dont know jack and # about combat and jack just left town!!


Ohhhhhhhhhhh...so I guess the only Iraqi civilians that have gotten killed in Iraq are the ones that pick up an AK-47.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by mysteriousbob
They signed up for the job, fully knowing that they might have to take a bullet for the nation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yup, you pretty much said it here, they might take a bullet for the nation. I don't see how taking a bullet for Bush's own personal agenda is taking a bullet for the nation.



posted on Nov, 9 2003 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by greenkoolaid

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
if civliians start shooting at our troops what the # are our guys supposed to do? just ignore it? once a civilian picks up a AK-47 and starts blasting away at our troops, he turns into an enemy soldier. if he gets killed well BOO FRICKIN' HOO!. you people dont know jack and # about combat and jack just left town!!


Ohhhhhhhhhhh...so I guess the only Iraqi civilians that have gotten killed in Iraq are the ones that pick up an AK-47.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by mysteriousbob
They signed up for the job, fully knowing that they might have to take a bullet for the nation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yup, you pretty much said it here, they might take a bullet for the nation. I don't see how taking a bullet for Bush's own personal agenda is taking a bullet for the nation.



If senet voted to go to war, then it isn't bush's own personal agenda. Its the democrats and Republicans who decided we should go to war. The bleeding heart liberals over here decided that after people were unhappy with the war, that they should go against it. Hence the rhetoric about anti-war from all the dems.



posted on Nov, 9 2003 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
www.iraqbodycount.net...

More than a few, then again, any civilian killed is one too many,collateral damage can only kill so many, the rest is down to neglect and incompetence.



ok...but what would you do if a civilian took up an ak-47 and started shooting at you? it it were me, that civilian just lost his/her civilian status and becam an enemy soldier





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join