George Bush has dropped the ball horribly. - Page 2 - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Off Topic Forums > The Bar



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 01-15-2007, 02:33 PM   #36
Registered Member
Regular
 
Stumpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Region: Texas
Posts: 317
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
Where was the reasoning for going full scale into Iraq?
at the time it was the poor intel that led the government to believe that Hussein was a contributor to Al-Queda.

Brent, are you converting on us?
__________________
~Roman~

2003 Mustang V6 Vert with a Flowmaster Super 40 series dual exhaust
I'm not a target in the sights of your mercy. I've never asked for anything. I'm not asking now.
Stumpy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-15-2007, 02:40 PM   #37
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stumpy View Post
at the time it was the poor intel that led the government to believe that Hussein was a contributor to Al-Queda.

Brent, are you converting on us?
So therefore, due to the poor intelligence, this war was not needed. Over 3,000 soldiers have died for Iraq's freedom, something they could give a damn about.

I'm not converting to anything. I'm still conservative as they get. I believe in doing things right and winning. Something Bush and his cabinet are not doing.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 03:10 PM   #38
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

The only way things can change over there is to tell the pantywaists to STFU and take things down properly. Open up the rules of engagement. **** all this compassionate bull****. When militants piss us off, take down the village/city that is housing the militants...wipe it out. Eventually you will either run out of militants or villages/cities. It's a win/win situation.

Also, tell the Iraqi gov't to get its head out of its *** and start running things.

Also, tell Pakistan to either put up or shut up. We should be TELLING them we are going to go onto your land to find the pieces of **** that are hiding over there. **** the rules...

Until all this "let's talk about it" BS gets put to bed, nothing will ever work out for us. This includes any future dealings with Iran, N. Korea, and any other pain in the *** that jumps up trying to piss us off. It is time to go back to the days of putting foot to *** and not worrying about all the PC BS. Until that happens, you can't blame any president for how they are running things...other than to say they don't have the back bone to stand up to the media, and PC nutjobs.

/soapbox
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-15-2007, 03:16 PM   #39
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Thomas91169's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Region: California
Posts: 2,280
Send a message via AIM to Thomas91169
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post

I guess if you want to think of it that way. So how long are we going to fight millions of millions of terrorist over in Iraq just so they won't come over here? How many "military" are we going to lose (aka Americans in a Uniform) before we say... well this probably wasn't a great idea.
works for me, id rather those that sign up to fight and die for this country fight and die, than those that have no idea and are just going about their casual lives die for an even more worthless cause.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
Where was the reasoning for going full scale into Iraq?
oh i dont know, maybe we got sick of the UN trying countless Iraqi Resolutions and failing miserably :dunno:



brent your ideas are good. IMO i wish we could have just carpet-nuked the entire region from the beginning, and turn america into a isolationist country, seeing as the rest of the world hates us anyways.
__________________
-Thomas-

1998 Eclipse GST Spyder - 14b turbo | 3" Catback | Evo8 BoV | 170fwhp if that

2003 Redfire Cobra - 448whp/435wtq - Sold
Thomas91169 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 03:18 PM   #40
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas91169 View Post
...turn america into a isolationist country, seeing as the rest of the world hates us anyways.
This is something that really needs to happen. Get out of all the **** we keep helping people with for about 5-10 years. Then, the others that "hate" us will be sending their most prized virgins as an offering for our help...
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 03:18 PM   #41
Moderator Emeritus
Legacy
Regular
 
SpectorV's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Alabama
Posts: 26,049
Send a message via AIM to SpectorV
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

I also know its not nearly as clear cut as just take them out, if they wont do what we want then just kill them... its not that simple. Sure we could be much more forceful and do more im just saying its not an easy problem to navigate. I am not saying he is doing a great job or a bad job, im not talking about that at all. All I am saying is any of you that think you could hop into the hot seat and sort this out in a week and have everything in perfect shape are sadly mistaken.
__________________
2003 Cobra Vert (Redfire) #3938 of 5082 @ 05/27/2003
472rwhp/493rwtq -Modification List - Dyno Sheet
2012 Mustang 3.7L M6 (Kona Blue)
2011 Ford Edge Sport (Red Metallic)
SpectorV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 03:54 PM   #42
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurfin View Post

Until all this "let's talk about it" BS gets put to bed, nothing will ever work out for us. This includes any future dealings with Iran, N. Korea, and any other pain in the *** that jumps up trying to piss us off. It is time to go back to the days of putting foot to *** and not worrying about all the PC BS. Until that happens, you can't blame any president......
So who is going to start the change? The guy working at the grocery store of the guy in charge of leading us? Aka the President.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 04:04 PM   #43
Moderator Emeritus
Legacy
Regular
 
SpectorV's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Alabama
Posts: 26,049
Send a message via AIM to SpectorV
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

it takes FAR more than a position to be a leader sadly.
__________________
2003 Cobra Vert (Redfire) #3938 of 5082 @ 05/27/2003
472rwhp/493rwtq -Modification List - Dyno Sheet
2012 Mustang 3.7L M6 (Kona Blue)
2011 Ford Edge Sport (Red Metallic)
SpectorV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 04:04 PM   #44
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
So who is going to start the change? The guy working at the grocery store of the guy in charge of leading us? Aka the President.
The president can't start the change. The people to start the change are the ones that are driving the puppets in washington...the interest groups, the lobbies, etc. Everyone in Washington is so scared of what this group or that group will think if they do the right thing, that they just do what the money says.

The problem lies in that we have politicians in office and not leaders. This is true from most local gov'ts all the way up through the president.

As it stands right now, if Bush were to do the "right" thing...meaning taking care of business and not being such a *****, he would be convicted of war crimes not only by the world court of opinion, but by the multitude of groups here in the states...who will probably be the most ruthless. This would hold true no matter who was in office.

I think you said it right in one of your posts, maybe the first one, this party line **** has to stop. No one in DC is thinking for themselves or their constituents. They are only thinking of their party unity. It is just like the white/black tension. Blame the other guy.

So, to answer your question, it starts with the corner store clerk. I think that is the only way to change this stuff. People need to get tired of the politics and start electing leaders that have the ability to think, not just sell themselves.

Unfortunately, there is no test before you can vote. Too many uneducated (meaning ignorant of any candidate's stances and probably their names) people vote. Case in point is the recent elections in New Orleans. One guy wants a chocolate city, the other was caught red handed receiving illegal money by the FBI...and was even found with 100k in his freezer...yet was still re-elected. Until the people of this country, as a unit, take a stance and stand up and make themselves heard, the current state of affairs will be the status quo...no matter which party is in office. You can't get elected without following party lines...and too many people just vote R or D..whatever is next to the person's name on the ballot.
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 04:06 PM   #45
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas91169 View Post
works for me, id rather those that sign up to fight and die for this country fight and die, than those that have no idea and are just going about their casual lives die for an even more worthless cause.
Well that doesn't work for me. At all. What have we improved in the Middle East since 2003 by fighting? We have improved nothing. In fact things have gotten worse. IMO we should have stuck to where we have superiority. Air and sea. We should have kept Iraq in check and nothing more. Send in special units to take out/remove Saddam and then let the Kurds have their rising again and back them with resources, not American troops.

It's the same thing we should have done to the Northern Alliance in Afgan during Clinton. Clinton screwed it up though. He left the Northern Alliance hanging. The Northern Alliance could have toppled the Taliban with nothing more than US backing. We just had to keep them supplied. However he didn't do it. He let the Taliban assasinate the leader of the Northern Alliance, a true US ally. One of the best Allies we could have ever asked for. He would have setup a Pro US democracy in Afghanastan. Instead we lost him and ended up toppling them ourselves in 2003.

This whole invade the country and do it ourself was dumb. We had many options at our disposale. They would have taken time but it'd been someone else fighting and not us. They'd be fighting for their right to live instead of us fighting for theirs. When you are the one fighting for your own life you appreciate it a lot more.

Quote:
oh i dont know, maybe we got sick of the UN trying countless Iraqi Resolutions and failing miserably :dunno:
Failed resolutions enough to send our country to two concurrent full blown wars? Why was it necessary to invade?


Quote:
brent your ideas are good. IMO i wish we could have just carpet-nuked the entire region from the beginning, and turn america into a isolationist country, seeing as the rest of the world hates us anyways.
I'd be up for fighting the WWII way. That's part of the President's fault too. We adhere to this retarded Geneva convention. Islamic terrorists don't. I don't care what the human rights nuts say. I'm not putting my life at greater risk by fighting by these stupid guidelines when the enemy can fight how they see fit. There is no one way to fight a way. The thing is that Americans can fight dirty and respectable at the same time. We do not intentionally target innocent civilians. They may die in the line of fire but they are not the target.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 04:07 PM   #46
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurfin View Post
The president can't start the change. The people to start the change are the ones that are driving the puppets in washington...the interest groups, the lobbies, etc. Everyone in Washington is so scared of what this group or that group will think if they do the right thing, that they just do what the money says.

The problem lies in that we have politicians in office and not leaders. This is true from most local gov'ts all the way up through the president.

As it stands right now, if Bush were to do the "right" thing...meaning taking care of business and not being such a *****, he would be convicted of war crimes not only by the world court of opinion, but by the multitude of groups here in the states...who will probably be the most ruthless. This would hold true no matter who was in office.

I think you said it right in one of your posts, maybe the first one, this party line **** has to stop. No one in DC is thinking for themselves or their constituents. They are only thinking of their party unity. It is just like the white/black tension. Blame the other guy.

So, to answer your question, it starts with the corner store clerk. I think that is the only way to change this stuff. People need to get tired of the politics and start electing leaders that have the ability to think, not just sell themselves.

Unfortunately, there is no test before you can vote. Too many uneducated (meaning ignorant of any candidate's stances and probably their names) people vote. Case in point is the recent elections in New Orleans. One guy wants a chocolate city, the other was caught red handed receiving illegal money by the FBI...and was even found with 100k in his freezer...yet was still re-elected. Until the people of this country, as a unit, take a stance and stand up and make themselves heard, the current state of affairs will be the status quo...no matter which party is in office. You can't get elected without following party lines...and too many people just vote R or D..whatever is next to the person's name on the ballot.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 04:09 PM   #47
15.3 Second V8 Killer Yo
Legacy
Regular
 
PureVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 7,212
Send a message via AIM to PureVenom Send a message via MSN to PureVenom Send a message via Yahoo to PureVenom
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
I'd be up for fighting the WWII way. That's part of the President's fault too. We adhere to this retarded Geneva convention. Islamic terrorists don't. I don't care what the human rights nuts say. I'm not putting my life at greater risk by fighting by these stupid guidelines when the enemy can fight how they see fit. There is no one way to fight a way. The thing is that Americans can fight dirty and respectable at the same time. We do not intentionally target innocent civilians. They may die in the line of fire but they are not the target.
You know what is funny? The conventions only cover uniformed fighters fighting for a flag (if I remember correctly). Technically, this nut jobs aren't covered under them. Unfortunately, too many bleeding hearts on all sides of the coin force us to. We, as a country, are not adhering to what made us.
__________________
"When I know more, I'll be forthcoming. Or I won't be forthcoming, and I'll be honestly deceptive." - Les Miles
PureVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 05:22 PM   #48
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
We shouldn't have gone into Iraq. The timing was horrible, the decision was rushed and a solid plan was not there.

At the very least, we should have gone in, removed Saddam from power, and then left and let them battle it out for 20 years in an unorganized mess. Would have been no threat to us.
Sure it would have been a threat. It would have been an absolutely huge threat. Just imagine what that unorganized mess would have become. A hot bed for terrorists across the world. You would probably have ended up with an entire nation controlled by Al-Qaeda.

So... we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, but we aren't being tough enough with Iran? I'm confused.

The real problem is not the fact that we went into Iraq. The real problem is that Bush listened to all the cry-baby left *****es who care so much about all the "innocent" lives over there. So instead of going in there, ****ing the whole country up, and making Iraq an American-run country, he went and tried to force the people to want a democracy. A democracy is not a viable option yet for a country like Iraq. It is far too unstable. It should have been entirely controlled by the US for at least 5 years before attempting to give the Iraqi people a democracy. But no... that's not acceptable.

"They need a democracy now. We need to turn and run. We don't have time to wait. My mother's cousin's college roomate (who willingly signed up for the marines and I have absolutely no idea how they really felt about the war because I knew absolutely nothing about them) died. We have to bring the troops home."

**** the left.

These cry-baby left *****es are the same ones who are now complaining that the "surge" of troops is part of a cover-up to begin a war on Iran. I say so what if it is. All these insurgents are coming from somewhere. They sure as hell aren't just popping up out of the sand from nowhere. They are coming through Iran and Syria. If those countries choose to allow such things to happen, I say we **** them up to.

We have had 3,000 troops die in Iraq. In a way, that's 3,000 too many. In another way, that isn't ****. I seem to remember a day when more innocent Americans than that died. It's called a sacrifice. The men and women that go over there go because they are willing to sacrifice their lives for the good of their country. And they are not dying because we went to war. They are dying because of the *****-*** PC *****es who run this world. Not just this country, this world.

Bush is not one of them. If it was up to Bush, I'm sure he would have obliterated the entire country from the air before even stepping foot into it. The problem isn't Bush. The problem is we have too many stupid ****s who aren't like Bush. That and the fact that Bush is forced to listen to them because of the way our political and social system works.

Think of how many American fatalities there would probably be if we just went in and took care of business. 500 maybe? Less?

I think I know of a way that we can take out Iran without a single damn one...
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 06:44 PM   #49
n8r
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
n8r's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Alabama
Posts: 3,216
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

I am going to have to side with Ben on this one.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Nothing is ever official until its official
n8r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 06:45 PM   #50
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Thomas91169's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Region: California
Posts: 2,280
Send a message via AIM to Thomas91169
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by n8r View Post
I am going to have to side with Ben on this one.
+eleventybillion

mmhmms
__________________
-Thomas-

1998 Eclipse GST Spyder - 14b turbo | 3" Catback | Evo8 BoV | 170fwhp if that

2003 Redfire Cobra - 448whp/435wtq - Sold
Thomas91169 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 07:39 PM   #51
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbunt302 View Post
Sure it would have been a threat. It would have been an absolutely huge threat. Just imagine what that unorganized mess would have become. A hot bed for terrorists across the world. You would probably have ended up with an entire nation controlled by Al-Qaeda.
I don't think so at all. Al Qaeda is in Iraq right now fighting us because we are there. Al Qaeda would not go into Iraq after we left to fight the Kurds and Shiites. Those two would be at war with each other over control of Iraq. They are too powerful of a force for Al-Qaeda to fight off and have their own goals in mind to side with Al-Qaeda. It's not like I said we just pull out and don't lend support to anyone anyways. We support the Kurds and let them fight their war.

Quote:
So... we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, but we aren't being tough enough with Iran? I'm confused.
Iran: Building Nuclear reactors and seeking Nuclear Weapons
Iraq: What were they doing again?

Quote:
The real problem is not the fact that we went into Iraq. The real problem is that Bush listened to all the cry-baby left *****es who care so much about all the "innocent" lives over there. So instead of going in there, ****ing the whole country up, and making Iraq an American-run country, he went and tried to force the people to want a democracy. A democracy is not a viable option yet for a country like Iraq. It is far too unstable. It should have been entirely controlled by the US for at least 5 years before attempting to give the Iraqi people a democracy. But no... that's not acceptable.
Regardless of how long we control Iraq the point is still the same. We are not getting anywhere at all period. Our death toll has already exceeded that of 9/11. The only difference between these Americans in uniform and those in the towers is that the one in Uniforms volunteered to go over there. They are still Americans. Now there have been over 3,000 Americans sent back from Iraq in boxes. For what? The better good of Iraq? My point is Bush is not going to do anything to fix it. You can sit here and cry about how the left is unfair all you want. The fact of the matter is the situation still exists as it is. Iraq is a mess and nothing is being done about it. Do you really believe 21,000 more troops is going to fix anything? If that is all it took why weren't those 21,000 troops over in Iraq 2 years ago? What was Bush thinking then? I mean what the hell? Did Bush just wake up one morning and say "Damn maybe I screwed up. A lot." That is exactly what he did. He woke up the day after the Democrats took over the Senate and the House and figured "Maybe I should do something now.".

So the left is causing all the problems in Iraq. I got ya. So in the 4 years that the right had complete control over this country, what happened there? Bush dropped the damn ball, that's what happened there. It's 2000 and freaking 7 and the only thing Bush has done since January 2001 is look good after 9/11, pass some tax cuts, use a veto to stop the advancement of science, try to get gay marriage banned atleast twice and then slowly screw everything up in Iraq and watch everyone in the country slowly turn on him. We still don't have any kind of solution to social security, medicare and Iraq. It just keeps getting worse in worse. I don't give a damn if the democrats wouldn't do any better. Bush isn't doing anything worth a damn right now. I'm about tired of both sides blaming everything on the other. OMG we'd be worse off if x was in office. Well x isn't in office. W is in office and he is sucking it up

Quote:
"They need a democracy now. We need to turn and run. We don't have time to wait. My mother's cousin's college roomate (who willingly signed up for the marines and I have absolutely no idea how they really felt about the war because I knew absolutely nothing about them) died. We have to bring the troops home."

**** the left.
"Stay the course, change nothing."
"We don't need more troops"
"We suddenly need 21,000 more troops"
"Rumsfeld will be here until January 2009"
"Rumsfeld has resigned"
"Ban gay marriage"
"OMG ban gay Marriage!"
"The left doesn't offer any suggestions all they do is whine, so we aren't going to try to make things better, we are just going to keep doing the same thing regardless of whether it is working or not"

**** the right.

Quote:
These cry-baby left *****es are the same ones who are now complaining that the "surge" of troops is part of a cover-up to begin a war on Iran. I say so what if it is. All these insurgents are coming from somewhere. They sure as hell aren't just popping up out of the sand from nowhere. They are coming through Iran and Syria. If those countries choose to allow such things to happen, I say we **** them up to.
How do we "**** them up" Bbunt? Do we invade? Drop some bombs? What do we do? Don't say Nuke them. We aren't going to do that. Offer me a viable solution to "****ing them up" That doesn't call for more and more Americans dieing in the middle east?

They just keep pouring in, so do we just keep throwing more troops in Iraq? What happens when Iran tests their first nuke while we are fighting off all these insurgents that just keep pouring in? We go to war with Iran? Sweet now what happens when North Korea notices America is at war with three countries with no support from Russia, China, France or Germany? Russia isn't going to support an Iran invasion. Who's to say Russia won't start backing Iran? Do we attack North Korea when they attack South Korea?

Where does it stop? When do we stop "****ing them up"?

Quote:
We have had 3,000 troops die in Iraq. In a way, that's 3,000 too many. In another way, that isn't ****. I seem to remember a day when more innocent Americans than that died.
Me too. Not one Iraqi was on those planes. Pakistan has more active Al Qaeda cells than Iraq ever thought of having. Why aren't we in Pakistan in the name of 9/11? Why did we take an organized Iraq with very little support for Al Qaeda inside of Iraq and turn it into the extremist playground where they can blow up Americans in a uniform?

Quote:
It's called a sacrifice. The men and women that go over there go because they are willing to sacrifice their lives for the good of their country. And they are not dying because we went to war. They are dying because of the *****-*** PC *****es who run this world. Not just this country, this world.

Quote:
Bush is not one of them. If it was up to Bush, I'm sure he would have obliterated the entire country from the air before even stepping foot into it.
It is up to Bush. It is up to Bush to manage the war correctly, in which he hasn't.

Quote:
The problem isn't Bush.
Bush is just as much of the problem as the whiny left that all the right complains about. [b]He has managed this war horribly. Just horribly. There is no end in sight and on top of that other countries are threatening to become or have become Nuclear powers.

Quote:
The problem is we have too many stupid ****s who aren't like Bush. That and the fact that Bush is forced to listen to him because of the way our political and social system works.
Bush can do what he can do. He can manage a war correctly. Presidents before him have done it. Hell look at what FDR did in WWII. Bush hasn't done that though. He has dropped the damn ball. He fails to listen to people who know what is going on. He failed to send adequate troops to Iraq. He failed to remove key members of his staff when the time called for it, not when the democrats finally took over the house and senate.



Again, why didn't we need 21,000 troops 2 years ago when the war was starting to get worse and worse? When nothing was improving and when America was making no grounds? Bush didn't listen to his generals. He has had generals resign over Bush not listening to them. I'm sorry but Bush is no military expert by any means. The generals were calling for more troops 2 years ago. Only now that the democrats are in power is Bush doing anything about it. It's like he's scared now. Oh know the Democrats got power back, guess I better start listening to people again

Quote:
Think of how many American fatalities there would probably be if we just went in and took care of business. 500 maybe? Less?
Yep. Go in, kick Saddam out, setup a new government like we have, tell them we are leaving in x years so you better get your damn *** in gear and get ready to take care of this country. You know... kind what Bush should have done instead of letting Iraq slap him around like he is their *****.

That's not what we did though. No... we have been over there training Iraqi troops since 2004. Where did that get us? Obviously no where. Iraq still isn't even CLOSE to being able to support themselves.

Great job Republicans You guys had 4 years. From 2002 to 2006 you guys rocked the White House and both houses. During that time our troops were over there training monkeys apparently. Still ain't worth a damn.

Quote:
I think I know of a way that we can take out Iran without a single damn one...
I can't think of one. We aren't going to Nuke Iran. It's like that is the answer to everything. Just nuke them. Well we aren't. The backlash would be horrible. It's not going to happen. So give me a way to "**** Iran up" without causing 3,000 more Americans to return home in a box.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 08:15 PM   #52
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
dark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 1,389
Send a message via AIM to dark Send a message via Yahoo to dark
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

i think a better statement to make would be "george bush never possessed the ball"

:pnoid:
__________________
I don't own a mustang at the moment
dark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 08:25 PM   #53
n8r
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
n8r's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Alabama
Posts: 3,216
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

I say, we take all the damn politicians out of office and throw in some god damned leaders!!! Career politicians don't know two ****s about leading. The joke goes a politician is someone who couldn't cut it in the business world. Our greatest presidents were great because why? Anybody? Because they were damn great leaders! All the ******* we have up there anymore couldn't even lead a thirsty horse to water! All they care about is face time on the news, how to make the other side look bad, and do what is best for their pockets. **** politicians. I'm no leader, but I bet I could lead better than a lot of those money sluts in office now.

In my opinion, the whole damn government is to blame for this cluster**** war.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Nothing is ever official until its official
n8r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 08:44 PM   #54
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

You know I love ya' Brent. But I gotta disagree with you here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
I don't think so at all. Al Qaeda is in Iraq right now fighting us because we are there. Al Qaeda would not go into Iraq after we left to fight the Kurds and Shiites. Those two would be at war with each other over control of Iraq. They are too powerful of a force for Al-Qaeda to fight off and have their own goals in mind to side with Al-Qaeda. It's not like I said we just pull out and don't lend support to anyone anyways. We support the Kurds and let them fight their war.
Al Qaeda would have been in Iraq regardless. Afghanistan was their stronghold, but we pretty much flushed them out of there. Just imagine for a second if there was a country in the Middle East with no clear leadership... Bin Laden would have showed up. And he very likely would have taken power and become a very dangerous adversary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Iran: Building Nuclear reactors and seeking Nuclear Weapons
Iraq: What were they doing again?
I agree. Iran should be handled as well (see original post). But Iraq was (to me) a bigger threat. Iran was sort of shaky in its defiance. Iraq openly told us to go **** ourselves.


Quote:
Regardless of how long we control Iraq the point is still the same. We are not getting anywhere at all period. Our death toll has already exceeded that of 9/11. The only difference between these Americans in uniform and those in the towers is that the one in Uniforms volunteered to go over there. They are still Americans. Now there have been over 3,000 Americans sent back from Iraq in boxes. For what? The better good of Iraq? My point is Bush is not going to do anything to fix it. You can sit here and cry about how the left is unfair all you want. The fact of the matter is the situation still exists as it is. Iraq is a mess and nothing is being done about it. Do you really believe 21,000 more troops is going to fix anything? If that is all it took why weren't those 21,000 troops over in Iraq 2 years ago? What was Bush thinking then? I mean what the hell? Did Bush just wake up one morning and say "Damn maybe I screwed up. A lot." That is exactly what he did. He woke up the day after the Democrats took over the Senate and the House and figured "Maybe I should do something now.".
You are right. We are not getting anywhere, and they are still Americans. But why? Because we didn't take care of business. Bush can't do anything to take care of business. He has done all he can and has been called a heartless murderer and an idiot all the way. Iraq is a mess. And nothing is being done about it. But stop listening to CNN and ask yourself why. Bush did screw up. No doubt. He listened to all the doubters when he should have been listening to himself.

Quote:
So the left is causing all the problems in Iraq. I got ya. So in the 4 years that the right had complete control over this country, what happened there? Bush dropped the damn ball, that's what happened there. It's 2000 and freaking 7 and the only thing Bush has done since January 2001 is look good after 9/11, pass some tax cuts, use a veto to stop the advancement of science, try to get gay marriage banned atleast twice and then slowly screw everything up in Iraq and watch everyone in the country slowly turn on him. We still don't have any kind of solution to social security, medicare and Iraq. It just keeps getting worse in worse. I don't give a damn if the democrats wouldn't do any better. Bush isn't doing anything worth a damn right now. I'm about tired of both sides blaming everything on the other. OMG we'd be worse off if x was in office. Well x isn't in office. W is in office and he is sucking it up
No, not all the problems. 99% of the problems are being caused by fundamentalist Muslims who desire nothing more than the death of US citizens. The right never had complete control over this country. It's a very sad fact too. The fact is that they had to put on a nice "leftish" face so they could come back for another four. That's what is wrong with this country. In my opinion, Presidents should not be allowed to be re-elected. Period. That way you are not concerned about what happens four years from now, but rather what you can do to prove to everyone that you were worth the vote.

Quote:
"Stay the course, change nothing."
"We don't need more troops"
"We suddenly need 21,000 more troops"
"Rumsfeld will be here until January 2009"
"Rumsfeld has resigned"
"Ban gay marriage"
"OMG ban gay Marriage!"
"The left doesn't offer any suggestions all they do is whine, so we aren't going to try to make things better, we are just going to keep doing the same thing regardless of whether it is working or not"

**** the right.

Well, #1) Gay marriage is pretty retarded. But, trust me, that's not the focus of our President. That may be what the media makes his focus out to be, but I guarandamntee you that he is much more concerned with other things. #2) You're right, all the left does is whine. When do they make any real, practical suggestions about the current situation? I haven't heard any. Because any real, practical suggestions do not involve pulling out of Iraq, which is what they all seem to want. We can't leave Iraq. It's impossible. Doing so is asking for innocent American blood to be spilt.

Quote:
How do we "**** them up" Bbunt? Do we invade? Drop some bombs? What do we do? Don't say Nuke them. We aren't going to do that. Offer me a viable solution to "****ing them up" That doesn't call for more and more Americans dieing in the middle east?
No, we do not have to nuke them. And yes, we could **** them up without doing so. Trust me on this one. I don't think that some people realize just how much more technologically advanced we are than a country like Iraq. I can't blame them though really. I didn't either until I learned better. In all honesty, Iraq is a joke. If we would have treated the country as if every citizen was a terrorist... it would pretty much be wiped off the face of the Earth right now, without nukes.

Quote:
They just keep pouring in, so do we just keep throwing more troops in Iraq? What happens when Iran tests their first nuke while we are fighting off all these insurgents that just keep pouring in? We go to war with Iran? Sweet now what happens when North Korea notices America is at war with three countries with no support from Russia, China, France or Germany? Russia isn't going to support an Iran invasion. Who's to say Russia won't start backing Iran? Do we attack North Korea when they attack South Korea?
No. We don't keep throwing more troops. We throw a little bit of anger, a little lack of giving a **** about being politically correct, and a little bit of ego and self righteousness. That would be the end of that. Then we throw the same at Iran. That would be the end of that too. North Korea? Over as soon as we are really ready for it to be.

Quote:
Where does it stop? When do we stop "****ing them up"?
In my opinion? When they stop regarding the death of American citizens as something to be celebrated. Until then, keep on killing. I refuse to see my son or daughter die just so Mohammed can get a hard on.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Me too. Not one Iraqi was on those planes. Pakistan has more active Al Qaeda cells than Iraq ever thought of having. Why aren't we in Pakistan in the name of 9/11? Why did we take an organized Iraq with very little support for Al Qaeda inside of Iraq and turn it into the extremist playground where they can blow up Americans in a uniform?
So you really think that Hussein knew absolutely nothing about 9/11.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
It is up to Bush. It is up to Bush to manage the war correctly, in which he hasn't.
Unfortunately... no. It's up to the American people. At the end of the day (and as disbelieving as some people are), that's what it comes down to. Bush had to do what he could to come back in 2004. I agree, that's ****ed up.


Quote:
Bush is just as much of the problem as the whiny left that all the right complains about. [b]He has managed this war horribly. Just horribly. There is no end in sight and on top of that other countries are threatening to become or have become Nuclear powers.
Possibly. I agree that Bush should have never given in to the whiny left. It is, therefore, his fault in a way. But, nuclear powers are not that much of a concern. There are worse threats in this world than that of a nuclear bomb. Trust me, no one wants to be the next country to make use of nuclear weapons.


Quote:
Bush can do what he can do. He can manage a war correctly. Presidents before him have done it. Hell look at what FDR did in WWII. Bush hasn't done that though. He has dropped the damn ball. He fails to listen to people who know what is going on. He failed to send adequate troops to Iraq. He failed to remove key members of his staff when the time called for it, not when the democrats finally took over the house and senate.
Bush has done what Bush has been allowed to do. What did FDR do in WWII??? That's right... He was allowed to begin a draft and send hundreds of thousands of American troops to their death in the name of life and liberty. I forgot, Bush wasn't allowed to do that, was he? Hell, he sure as **** wasn't allowed to drop the "big ones". Isn't that what eventually ended WWII or is my history just a little rusty? Look up the Burke-Wadsworth Act of 1940.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Again, why didn't we need 21,000 troops 2 years ago when the war was starting to get worse and worse? When nothing was improving and when America was making no grounds? Bush didn't listen to his generals. He has had generals resign over Bush not listening to them. I'm sorry but Bush is no military expert by any means. The generals were calling for more troops 2 years ago. Only now that the democrats are in power is Bush doing anything about it. It's like he's scared now. Oh know the Democrats got power back, guess I better start listening to people again
We did need 21,000 troops 2 years ago. Unfortunately, no one was desperate enough (including Mr. Bush) to send them. So the generals were calling for more troops... And what were the American people calling for? The ones whom Mr. Bush was supposed to represent? That's right. They were calling for the complete withdrawal from Iraq. So, what would you do? Do what you felt is right, or do what the majority was calling for you to do? Don't forget, this is a democracy, and you do want to either get re-elected or at least get your party back in.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Yep. Go in, kick Saddam out, setup a new government like we have, tell them we are leaving in x years so you better get your damn *** in gear and get ready to take care of this country. You know... kind what Bush should have done instead of letting Iraq slap him around like he is their *****.
More like let the American *****-*** people slap him around like he is their *****.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's not what we did though. No... we have been over there training Iraqi troops since 2004. Where did that get us? Obviously no where. Iraq still isn't even CLOSE to being able to support themselves.
Oh noes!!! Not two whole years!!! That's a long time to train an efficient army in a region who would like to see nothing more than to **** that army up!!! Not to mention the hundreds of women and children (which you love to mention when hating on Bush) that are quick to strap a bomb to themselves and blow that army the **** up!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Great job Republicans You guys had 4 years. From 2002 to 2006 you guys rocked the White House and both houses. During that time our troops were over there training monkeys apparently. Still ain't worth a damn.
Believe what you will. Just wait till we get some Democrats in and try to go over and just smoke the peace pipe with these crazy mother****ers.


Quote:
I can't think of one. We aren't going to Nuke Iran. It's like that is the answer to everything. Just nuke them. Well we aren't. The backlash would be horrible. It's not going to happen. So give me a way to "**** Iran up" without causing 3,000 more Americans to return home in a box.
Nuclear bombs are the worst way to answer anything. You apparently don't understand what I mean by "**** them up". We do not have to resort to nuclear weapons. That is the last thing we would have to do. The US would only use nuclear bombs if it was a survive or die situation. Iran definitely would not be that. You underestimate the power of our country. We could destroy all of Iran in a single night if we saw fit, without a single atom of radiation being spread. It's all a matter of politics. Never forget that. America is what America makes it. Unfortunately, America as of late has been overrun with a bunch of weak-***, punk-***, trick-***, mark-***, KY Jelly packin', take it up the *** *****es. And that my friends, is what holds us back.

America used to have a policy of isolation. It was simple. Don't **** with us, and we won't **** with you. In time, that has changed. We decided that we should be heroes to the world. Protect everyone. And now look at what we have got for it. Everyone hates us. They think we put our noses in places they did not belong. Yet at the same time, they expect us to be a sort of "police" to the world. We are responsible for correcting all injustices. We are responsible for ensuring peace and good will to everyone on this Earth.

I say **** them. **** them all. We have tried our best. We have done everything we can do. If everyone still wants to blame us for the world's problems, I say we take a couple steps back and just let them handle it on their own.

Then we can see how ****ed up the world would really be without the likes of Mr. Bush.
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 09:14 PM   #55
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

In addition to what I've just said... I ran across this quote which sorta sums up my feelings on everything:

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature, and has no chance of being free unless made or kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
- John Stuart Mill
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 09:44 PM   #56
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbunt302 View Post
Al Qaeda would have been in Iraq regardless.
Bu they weren't in there in March 2003. They were in Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries. They weren't in Iraq.

Quote:
Afghanistan was their stronghold, but we pretty much flushed them out of there. Just imagine for a second if there was a country in the Middle East with no clear leadership... Bin Laden would have showed up. And he very likely would have taken power and become a very dangerous adversary.
However had we not invaded Iraq in 2003 there would be clear leadership. Then where would Al Qaeda setup camp?


Quote:
Iraq openly told us to go **** ourselves.
Hmmm interesting. I didn't realize telling someone to go screw themselves was more of a risk than a country that is seeking nuclear weapons :chin:


Quote:
You are right. We are not getting anywhere, and they are still Americans. But why? Because we didn't take care of business. Bush can't do anything to take care of business. He has done all he can and has been called a heartless murderer and an idiot all the way.
How many times do we have to go over the way he has personally handled this war? He has dropped the ball where he has had complete control. He controls how many troops are in Iraq, he controls who he listens to and who he ignores. He controls a lot. You act like he is just up there smiling and has no control what our troops do in Iraq.

Quote:
Iraq is a mess. And nothing is being done about it. But stop listening to CNN and ask yourself why. Bush did screw up. No doubt. He listened to all the doubters when he should have been listening to himself.
Are you joking? Listened to all the doubters? Please! I can't believe this. He has dropped the ball in so many ways. He has not listened to his generals who for the last 3 years have said there aren't enough troops in Iraq. He kept people like Rumsfeld on his staff to long.

Then look what happens! November 2006 rolls around and suddenly Iraq needs change! Shoot maybe we do need them extra troops those generals were asking for 3 years ago. Shoot maybe Rumsfeld was an idiot.

Quote:
No, not all the problems. 99% of the problems are being caused by fundamentalist Muslims who desire nothing more than the death of US citizens.
The same Muslims Bush chose to go to war with. The war that he has mis managed and caused to be a complete and utter mess.

Quote:
The right never had complete control over this country. It's a very sad fact too. The fact is that they had to put on a nice "leftish" face so they could come back for another four.
Nope. Americans saw how Bush was falling apart. How his generals were abadoning him and his staff was slowly leaving him behind.

Quote:
That's what is wrong with this country. In my opinion, Presidents should not be allowed to be re-elected. Period. That way you are not concerned about what happens four years from now, but rather what you can do to prove to everyone that you were worth the vote.
I agree with you there


Quote:
Well, #1) Gay marriage is pretty retarded. But, trust me, that's not the focus of our President. That may be what the media makes his focus out to be, but I guarandamntee you that he is much more concerned with other things.
Oh give me a break. This President has put forth legislation, not once, but twice since he got elected in 2000 to ban it on a Federal level. Not once has this President put forth legislation for vote to help Social Security or Medicare.

Quote:
#2) You're right, all the left does is whine. When do they make any real, practical suggestions about the current situation? I haven't heard any. Because any real, practical suggestions do not involve pulling out of Iraq, which is what they all seem to want. We can't leave Iraq. It's impossible. Doing so is asking for innocent American blood to be spilt.
Again you spin the point around. The point is regardless of what the left has as a plan, the current admin is not doing a damn thing to fix the problems that it has encountered only choosing to ignore them until 1) they were too big of a problem 2) they lost power

Quote:
No, we do not have to nuke them. And yes, we could **** them up without doing so. Trust me on this one. I don't think that some people realize just how much more technologically advanced we are than a country like Iraq. I can't blame them though really. I didn't either until I learned better. In all honesty, Iraq is a joke. If we would have treated the country as if every citizen was a terrorist... it would pretty much be wiped off the face of the Earth right now, without nukes.
So achieve the same effect but without radiation. Got ya You get the same backlash as a nuke and nothing solved.


Quote:
No. We don't keep throwing more troops. We throw a little bit of anger, a little lack of giving a **** about being politically correct, and a little bit of ego and self righteousness. That would be the end of that. Then we throw the same at Iran. That would be the end of that too. North Korea? Over as soon as we are really ready for it to be.
We should. But we won't. That isn't even the problems I am talking about with Bush. It's the fact that he refuses to listen to anyone. Are you seriously that big on Bush that you think he knows everything about the military and can't do wrong? I mean so the guy has the guts to invade Iraq. That doesn't give him a free ride to disregard intelligent information from people that know what they are doing.


Quote:
In my opinion? When they stop regarding the death of American citizens as something to be celebrated. Until then, keep on killing. I refuse to see my son or daughter die just so Mohammed can get a hard on.
and I refuse to watch a President so clearly mismanage a war. It's been 4 years since we invaded and we haven't even come close to correctly training the Iraqi army. Bush has let the Iraqi President tell him how to run the war. You can make excuses for him all you want. The guy just doesn't listen to people who know what they are talking about.


Quote:
So you really think that Hussein knew absolutely nothing about 9/11.
Nope. Whether or not he did really is irrelevant. Did you expect him to warn us The point is there were/are bigger threats out there. There were countries harboring more Al Qaeda members that still have the same leadership intact today.


Quote:
Unfortunately... no. It's up to the American people.
No it's up to Bush. To listen to his generals, to do what he is doing now ([b]only after Democrats have taken office mind you) to put more troops on the ground and to listen to his damn Generals in Iraq. The American people have nothing to do with the Generals on the ground or the rate that the Iraqi troops get trained. Bush put us in this war. If he can't properly manage it then he needs to let someone else do it.

Quote:
Possibly. I agree that Bush should have never given in to the whiny left. It is, therefore, his fault in a way. But, nuclear powers are not that much of a concern. There are worse threats in this world than that of a nuclear bomb. Trust me, no one wants to be the next country to make use of nuclear weapons.
lol that makes absolutely no sense at all. Iraq without any WOMD capabilities, hardly any presence of Al Qaeda, was a bigger threat than Iran, whom has already called for the destruction of Israel and the United States, and is currently in the process of securing a bomb, that even if he doesn't use it, will enable him to gain much more leeway to push us and the world around with.

Doesn't make any sense.


Quote:
Bush has done what Bush has been allowed to do.
More troops have been requested by the Generals since 2004. He could have sent more troops. These troops will help stabilize certain areas in Iraq and be used to train Iraqi troops. Instead he has chose to "Stay the course and not change anything".

Quote:
What did FDR do in WWII??? That's right... He was allowed to begin a draft and send hundreds of thousands of American troops to their death in the name of life and liberty.
Correct he was. I've already stated that we need to go back to the way WWII was fought in this thread

Quote:
I forgot, Bush wasn't allowed to do that, was he?
*Broken Record* Bush has been given many chances to make changes in Iraq 2-3 years ago and chose not to. Now he suddenly wants to, only after losing the house and senate. 3 years to train Iraqi troops and look where we are. 3 years of "We have enough troops" and look where we are.

Quote:
Hell, he sure as **** wasn't allowed to drop the "big ones". Isn't that what eventually ended WWII or is my history just a little rusty? Look up the Burke-Wadsworth Act of 1940.
No he wasn't. FDR choose not to go into Japan, knowing the consequences of doing so would result into years of war and thousands upon thousands of US deaths.

Bush chose to go into Iraq, full out invasion, thinking it'd be a walk in the park obviously. With no end in sight, 3 years and 10 months from the first time we crossed into Iraq, we have already lost 3,000+ soldiers and are now about to send over 21,000 more. Iraqi troops still lack training, US soldiers are stretched thin inside of Iraq and it's 3 years too late for President Bush. I'm not defending him anymore. His decisions have absolutely sucked since this war started. He was riding 9/11 into Iraq thinking it would be a walk in the park and everyone would still love him. How wrong he was.



Quote:
We did need 21,000 troops 2 years ago. Unfortunately, no one was desperate enough (including Mr. Bush) to send them. So the generals were calling for more troops... And what were the American people calling for? The ones whom Mr. Bush was supposed to represent? That's right. They were calling for the complete withdrawal from Iraq.
I bet you'd be hard pressed to find 51% of Americans that 3 years ago would have called for a complete withdrawal out of Iraq instead of a surge to help win the war.

Quote:
So, what would you do?
I'd listen to my Generals. You know the ones on the ground in Iraq. Not the ones watching it from CNN from their Lazy Boy recliner.

Quote:
Do what you felt is right, or do what the majority was calling for you to do? Don't forget, this is a democracy, and you do want to either get re-elected or at least get your party back in.
He didn't do either! He didn't send more troops and he didn't withdraw.

And I could give a damn about my party. I'm going to do what I think is the best thing to win this damn war and get the hell out of there.

Quote:
More like let the American *****-*** people slap him around like he is their *****.
He is our *****. We elected him. He is not Iraq's *****. Iraq is our ***** and will forever be our *****.

Quote:
Oh noes!!! Not two whole years!!! That's a long time to train an efficient army in a region who would like to see nothing more than to **** that army up!!!
It's more than enough time to make PROGRESS when you have the adequate troops to do so. Which we don't. Thanks to Bush.

Quote:
Not to mention the hundreds of women and children (which you love to mention when hating on Bush) that are quick to strap a bomb to themselves and blow that army the **** up!!!
Exactly. The ones that have caused our troops to be stretched thin in Iraq for the last 3 years.



Quote:
Believe what you will. Just wait till we get some Democrats in and try to go over and just smoke the peace pipe with these crazy mother****ers.
The Democrats want the opposite of what I want. I mean this is what really frustrates me to no end. I can't disagree with a damn thing President Bush does with out some George Bush fanatic coming in and saying something about "OMG JUST WAIT TILL THE DEMOCRATS GET IN."

I don't give a **** about the democrats. They haven't had the ability to send more troops to Iraq for the last 3 years. George Bush has. He chose not to. He chose to keep things EXACTLY like they are. He chose to make no progress. In fact the Democrats are now threatening to block sending the 21,000 troops in. In which case they are idiots as well. So now not only is Bush 3 years late, he has given the Democrats even more power to block attempts at helping the situation. Just lovely!



Quote:
America used to have a policy of isolation. It was simple. Don't **** with us, and we won't **** with you. In time, that has changed. We decided that we should be heroes to the world. Protect everyone. And now look at what we have got for it. Everyone hates us. They think we put our noses in places they did not belong. Yet at the same time, they expect us to be a sort of "police" to the world. We are responsible for correcting all injustices. We are responsible for ensuring peace and good will to everyone on this Earth.
I agree. We should go back to Isolationists. It'd be nice to. We can't though. Eventually **** would get so bad in the world that it'd start effecting us. Then it'd be too late.

Quote:
I say **** them. **** them all. We have tried our best. We have done everything we can do. If everyone still wants to blame us for the world's problems, I say we take a couple steps back and just let them handle it on their own.


Quote:
Then we can see how ****ed up the world would really be without the likes of Mr. Bush.
Again this thread has lost it's main goal that I wrote about in the first thread. I am not saying George Bush is the worst thing to happen to the world. I am saying he has screwed up and that he has chose to do nothing to fix it until he was forced to. There are people that could do a hell of a lot better job than Bush and there are people that could do worse.

He doesn't get a free pass just because he had the balls to start a war though. He has to finish what he started and he is no where near close to doing that.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 09:46 PM   #57
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbunt302 View Post
In addition to what I've just said... I ran across this quote which sorta sums up my feelings on everything:

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature, and has no chance of being free unless made or kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
- John Stuart Mill
That's a great quote. Doesn't warrant going and attacking just anybody either. Just because a country tells us to **** off is no reason to attack them and start a decades war while other countries become greater threats.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2007, 09:49 PM   #58
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
Thomas91169's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Region: California
Posts: 2,280
Send a message via AIM to Thomas91169
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

holy ****, a quote war of epic proportions! i thought the IRS vs Solid Rear debates got messy.
__________________
-Thomas-

1998 Eclipse GST Spyder - 14b turbo | 3" Catback | Evo8 BoV | 170fwhp if that

2003 Redfire Cobra - 448whp/435wtq - Sold
Thomas91169 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2007, 12:08 AM   #59
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent View Post
Bu they weren't in there in March 2003. They were in Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries. They weren't in Iraq.
We drove them out of Afghanistan. Where did you expect them to go? The UK? Ok... maybe that's not the best example (because they are going there)... Ivory Coast? New Zealand?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
However had we not invaded Iraq in 2003 there would be clear leadership. Then where would Al Qaeda setup camp?
Yes, clear leadership whom which had an obvious grudge against America and was probably more than willing to support Al Qaeda in any way, regardless of whether we have 110% rock-hard evidence of that or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Hmmm interesting. I didn't realize telling someone to go screw themselves was more of a risk than a country that is seeking nuclear weapons :chin:
Do you really think Iran would be willing to drop a nuclear weapon on the United States? Stop and think about that one for a minute. Do you have any idea of what that would mean for them and the world as a whole?

If nuclear bombs are dropped on the United States, regardless of who is in office at the time, we will not hesitate to retaliate in a way in which the world has never seen. I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that no country, I repeat, no country is willing to accept that fate. There are some things worse than suicide, and that would be it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
How many times do we have to go over the way he has personally handled this war? He has dropped the ball where he has had complete control. He controls how many troops are in Iraq, he controls who he listens to and who he ignores. He controls a lot. You act like he is just up there smiling and has no control what our troops do in Iraq.
So you think he is really doing more than being up there smiling? No, he's pretty much a puppet. A puppet who tried to do what he wanted, only to realize that it could never really happen. The President isn't in charge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Are you joking? Listened to all the doubters? Please! I can't believe this. He has dropped the ball in so many ways. He has not listened to his generals who for the last 3 years have said there aren't enough troops in Iraq. He kept people like Rumsfeld on his staff to long.
Where is this proverbial ball we speak of? Too bad it isn't a couple of nukes over Iraq... Why hasn't he listened to his generals? Huh? And why is keeping Rumsfield a bad thing??? Trust me, Rumsfield would have been for the complete and udder destruction of Iraq too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Then look what happens! November 2006 rolls around and suddenly Iraq needs change! Shoot maybe we do need them extra troops those generals were asking for 3 years ago. Shoot maybe Rumsfeld was an idiot.
No. Bush is desperate for votes for the Republican party and to support his own legacy. As we both agreed on, it is a downfall of the American political system, not of Bush himself.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
The same Muslims Bush chose to go to war with. The war that he has mis managed and caused to be a complete and utter mess.
Just sounds like more CNN analyst **** to me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Nope. Americans saw how Bush was falling apart. How his generals were abadoning him and his staff was slowly leaving him behind.
You really think Americans see anything that's real? Open your eyes. Americans see exactly what they are told. Face it, our nation is full of ****ing idiots who listen to anything and everything they are told. How many Americans turn their TV to MTV every day? And these are the people whose opinion polls matter to you?

His generals were abandoning him because they thought he was not doing what he should have been doing. They were 100% right. He should have been making Iraq a wasteland, just like the generals wanted. But no, he had to play to the hearts of the Americans. Bush would have been a great President if he would have truly "stayed the course". But instead, he listened to the left-wing nuts whom would just as well assume see Bush hung as Saddam.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Oh give me a break. This President has put forth legislation, not once, but twice since he got elected in 2000 to ban it on a Federal level. Not once has this President put forth legislation for vote to help Social Security or Medicare.
Maybe because "Social" Security and Medicare are both "socialist" ideals which he, and I, do not agree with.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Again you spin the point around. The point is regardless of what the left has as a plan, the current admin is not doing a damn thing to fix the problems that it has encountered only choosing to ignore them until 1) they were too big of a problem 2) they lost power
So if the left doesn't have a plan, then what's the point? Do you really think Bush has just "ignored" the problem? The fact is, there is no easy solution. The left has absolutely no solution whatsoever. Bush has a solution, you just don't happen to agree with it. I'd rather have a bad solution than no solution whatsoever.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
So achieve the same effect but without radiation. Got ya You get the same backlash as a nuke and nothing solved.
Exactly. You act like the lack of radiation is a moot point. It's not. Have you seen the aftermath of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Chernobyl? Death is a blessing compared to what the after effects of nuclear radiation may cause.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
We should. But we won't. That isn't even the problems I am talking about with Bush. It's the fact that he refuses to listen to anyone. Are you seriously that big on Bush that you think he knows everything about the military and can't do wrong? I mean so the guy has the guts to invade Iraq. That doesn't give him a free ride to disregard intelligent information from people that know what they are doing.
So who do you trust these days then? The media? Your cabinet? I would rather have a President trust himself more than anyone else. We elect the President. We don't elect CNN reporters and we don't elect the chiefs of staff. I'm damn glad he doesn't listen to anyone else. Trust your instincts.

Besides, I'm really not that big on Bush. I'm just tired of seeing him made out to be either an evil, Satanic leader or a complete, blubbering idiot, both of which he is not. Put yourself in his boots one ****ing day, and I'll guarantee you that you'll wish you never had.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
and I refuse to watch a President so clearly mismanage a war. It's been 4 years since we invaded and we haven't even come close to correctly training the Iraqi army. Bush has let the Iraqi President tell him how to run the war. You can make excuses for him all you want. The guy just doesn't listen to people who know what they are talking about.
You're right, he doesn't listen to the people that tell him that this can be done in 3 days. Thank God. If you think you can train an army to run a country as big as Iraq effectively given the area in which it is located, I'd love to see it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Nope. Whether or not he did really is irrelevant. Did you expect him to warn us The point is there were/are bigger threats out there. There were countries harboring more Al Qaeda members that still have the same leadership intact today.
No, it is not irrelevant. He continually defied UN sanctions. He should have been removed from power forcefully during the Clinton administration. Unfortunately, all Clinton had the balls to do was fly a couple of planes over and drop some bombs. Saddam was a serious threat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
No it's up to Bush. To listen to his generals, to do what he is doing now ([b]only after Democrats have taken office mind you) to put more troops on the ground and to listen to his damn Generals in Iraq. The American people have nothing to do with the Generals on the ground or the rate that the Iraqi troops get trained. Bush put us in this war. If he can't properly manage it then he needs to let someone else do it.
No, it is not up to Bush. American politics decide who it is up to, and it's definitely not up to Mr. Bush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
lol that makes absolutely no sense at all. Iraq without any WOMD capabilities, hardly any presence of Al Qaeda, was a bigger threat than Iran, whom has already called for the destruction of Israel and the United States, and is currently in the process of securing a bomb, that even if he doesn't use it, will enable him to gain much more leeway to push us and the world around with.

Doesn't make any sense.
You don't seem to understand the lack of importance of a nuclear threat. #1) They don't have any way of getting the bombs over here. Israel has much more reason to be concerned about this than we do. Thankfully, Israel can take care of itself (in no small part due to our support in the past). #2) Iran nor North Korea would ever risk a nuclear attack on the United States. They can threaten all day, but in the end they and we both know the true story. Any conflict will come down to much more conventional types of warfare.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
More troops have been requested by the Generals since 2004. He could have sent more troops. These troops will help stabilize certain areas in Iraq and be used to train Iraqi troops. Instead he has chose to "Stay the course and not change anything".
Bush would have been sending 21,000 more troops every month if he could get away with it. He couldn't though, and he knew this. He's just doing it now because he knows the left is just as desperate for an answer as he is and will finally accept it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Correct he was. I've already stated that we need to go back to the way WWII was fought in this thread
We are definitely on the same page here. None of this mess would have come about if that's the way things were handled.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
*Broken Record* Bush has been given many chances to make changes in Iraq 2-3 years ago and chose not to. Now he suddenly wants to, only after losing the house and senate. 3 years to train Iraqi troops and look where we are. 3 years of "We have enough troops" and look where we are.
Read between the lines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
No he wasn't. FDR choose not to go into Japan, knowing the consequences of doing so would result into years of war and thousands upon thousands of US deaths.
Yup, and look at how many died in the Pacific because FDR couldn't drop the "big ones" at the time either. Hundreds of thousands. Makes 3,000 almost seem insignificant, doesn't it? Yet FDR is regarded as a hero, while Bush is regarded as a coward. Makes me a little sick to my stomach.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Bush chose to go into Iraq, full out invasion, thinking it'd be a walk in the park obviously. With no end in sight, 3 years and 10 months from the first time we crossed into Iraq, we have already lost 3,000+ soldiers and are now about to send over 21,000 more. Iraqi troops still lack training, US soldiers are stretched thin inside of Iraq and it's 3 years too late for President Bush. I'm not defending him anymore. His decisions have absolutely sucked since this war started. He was riding 9/11 into Iraq thinking it would be a walk in the park and everyone would still love him. How wrong he was.
A walk in the park? I don't think so. No war is ever a walk in the park. Still, think about what you are saying. 3 years and 10 months since we first crossed into Iraq... yet only 3,000 soldiers lost. Once again, 3,000 is 3,000 too many, but in war, that is an almost insignificant number. That many died in an hour at Gettysburgh. So how do you feel about Mr. Lincoln? Should he just let the South prevail? What about Mr. Lee?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
I bet you'd be hard pressed to find 51% of Americans that 3 years ago would have called for a complete withdrawal out of Iraq instead of a surge to help win the war.
Just like I'd be hard pressed to find a redneck dumbass in Walmart.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
I'd listen to my Generals. You know the ones on the ground in Iraq. Not the ones watching it from CNN from their Lazy Boy recliner.
We should have elected you then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
He didn't do either! He didn't send more troops and he didn't withdraw.
Nope, he didn't. Why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
And I could give a damn about my party. I'm going to do what I think is the best thing to win this damn war and get the hell out of there.
Good for you. I don't even have a party. I didn't vote last election, and I'll probably vote independent next time I do. But the Bush bashing has gotten ridiculous and I'm sorry to see you jump on board. It is not one man's fault. It is the fault of a nation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
He is our *****. We elected him. He is not Iraq's *****. Iraq is our ***** and will forever be our *****.
And that's exactly the problem. He is the ***** of the American people. The same people who have made Walmart and Big Macs famous.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
It's more than enough time to make PROGRESS when you have the adequate troops to do so. Which we don't. Thanks to Bush.
I've already stated this a thousand times, but the lack of troops is definitely not Bush's fault.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Exactly. The ones that have caused our troops to be stretched thin in Iraq for the last 3 years.
Yup, because more couldn't be brought over at the time without the public cruxifiction of our President.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
The Democrats want the opposite of what I want. I mean this is what really frustrates me to no end. I can't disagree with a damn thing President Bush does with out some George Bush fanatic coming in and saying something about "OMG JUST WAIT TILL THE DEMOCRATS GET IN."

I don't give a **** about the democrats. They haven't had the ability to send more troops to Iraq for the last 3 years. George Bush has. He chose not to. He chose to keep things EXACTLY like they are. He chose to make no progress. In fact the Democrats are now threatening to block sending the 21,000 troops in. In which case they are idiots as well. So now not only is Bush 3 years late, he has given the Democrats even more power to block attempts at helping the situation. Just lovely!
No. George Bush has not had the ability to send more troops to Iraq for the last 3 years. This is the critical misunderstanding here. There is a system in America which works to hold anyone down who thinks outside of its lines. Bush thinks outside of those lines. Therefore, he is viewed as a problem. Everyone thought he would conform and be a nice little centric Republican president. Everything these days is moving towards the center, just because people do not have the balls to really commit one way or the other. Mr. Bush has those balls and chooses to stick to his beliefs.

Unfortunately, it today's political theater, that does not work. You have to want what everyone else wants. Otherwise, you don't last. So politicians are forced to walk a tight rope. They try to support the things they truly believe in, but in the end, they are forced to give in to the things everyone tells them they should believe in.

This is Bush's problem. He's a politician. Just like all the rest. If you want to wave your finger, wave it at me, and you, and everyone else that calls themself American. It's our collective fault. Not one man's.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
I agree. We should go back to Isolationists. It'd be nice to. We can't though. Eventually **** would get so bad in the world that it'd start effecting us. Then it'd be too late.
You're right. The world has become too closely tied, and it's really not an option at this point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
Again this thread has lost it's main goal that I wrote about in the first thread. I am not saying George Bush is the worst thing to happen to the world. I am saying he has screwed up and that he has chose to do nothing to fix it until he was forced to. There are people that could do a hell of a lot better job than Bush and there are people that could do worse.

He doesn't get a free pass just because he had the balls to start a war though. He has to finish what he started and he is no where near close to doing that.
In the end, I pretty much agree with you. The only thing that I disagree with is the fact that there are people out there who could have done a better job than Bush. He is the victim of both circumstance and American society. Both of which can be a real *****.

I just think that it is a true shame that many people are so willing and ready to place the blame of the problems of our country so squarely on the shoulders of a single man. We are all responsible, and as Americans, we all have the responsibility to do something about it.

So please, vote Independent in 2008.

__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2007, 02:48 AM   #60
Registered User
Regular
 
Brent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 11,873
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

I'm not going to respond to all that piece by piece. Whatever. I disagree with you on Bush. He had the oppurtunity 3 years ago to increase the amount of troops in Iraq and he didn't listen to his generals. If you think things don't need to change in Iraq and Bush is doing a peachy job then I don't know what to tell you. That's what it sounds like you are saying because if I even drop a hint at Bush not handling the war right then that's unacceptable. Of course he is just a victim of circumstance. If he needed more troops 3 years ago and didn't do it then he is at fault. I don't see how anyone can deny that.

Iraq was not the threat every thought it was. There were much bigger threats out there and now we are having to face them all at the same time on top of being at war with Iraq.

Quote:
I've already stated this a thousand times, but the lack of troops is definitely not Bush's fault.
Yes. It. Was.

It sure wasn't the democrats fault because they weren't in power. If Bush was too scared of the American backlash (which there would not have been anymore than what there is right now, with him having to send more troops anyway) then he sounds more like Clinton, scared to act on his own beliefs in fear of what the polls will do.

Quote:
A walk in the park? I don't think so. No war is ever a walk in the park. Still, think about what you are saying. 3 years and 10 months since we first crossed into Iraq... yet only 3,000 soldiers lost. Once again, 3,000 is 3,000 too many, but in war, that is an almost insignificant number. That many died in an hour at Gettysburgh. So how do you feel about Mr. Lincoln? Should he just let the South prevail? What about Mr. Lee?
Last time I checked they didn't have F-22 raptors, stealth bombers, night vision and everything else we have right now in the Civil war either. So how about not comparing a 2007 war to that of the 1700's?

Quote:
Bush would have been sending 21,000 more troops every month if he could get away with it. He couldn't though, and he knew this. He's just doing it now because he knows the left is just as desperate for an answer as he is and will finally accept it.
So you admit it then? Bush didn't send more troops, in effect thinning the ones we had in Iraq and causing more causualties because he didn't want the American people to vote him out of office. That sure sounds like what you are saying. So while everyone was wondering why we weren't making progress in Iraq he just did nothing because "he couldn't get away with it".

Sounds like someone that doesn't need to be leading the country.

Quote:
Good for you. I don't even have a party. I didn't vote last election, and I'll probably vote independent next time I do. But the Bush bashing has gotten ridiculous and I'm sorry to see you jump on board. It is not one man's fault. It is the fault of a nation.
What has gotten ridiculous is this Iraq war. I am not trying to place the blame all on him for crying out loud! **** man you just aren't getting it. You are putting Bush on some kind of shrine, like the poor guy just didn't have any choice.

He had a choice and according to you he backed down on the tough one by not acting and sending more troops to help in Iraq for fear of a public backlash.

Quote:
We drove them out of Afghanistan. Where did you expect them to go? The UK? Ok... maybe that's not the best example (because they are going there)... Ivory Coast? New Zealand?
and of course Iraq would be where they go! You know this how? Based on what? Why not Iran? Why not Pakistan where they already have a strong hold in the mountains area? Of course it's Iraq though cause that's what fits into your idea

Quote:
So who do you trust these days then? The media? Your cabinet? I would rather have a President trust himself more than anyone else.
Trust himself? Like how? Knowing he needs more troops and not doing anything about it? Sounds great....

Quote:
Just sounds like more CNN analyst **** to me.
Of course the bbunt302 analysis is better I forgot everyone was out to get Bush and no matter what they tell you, if it's bad about Bush its wrong! You can't criticize Bush without supporting the Democrats some people seem to think and they just can't handle the thought of supporting those guys so all they do is go along with whatever Bush and the republicans do.
__________________

Reddit
Brent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2007, 04:12 AM   #61
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Region: South Carolina
Posts: 996
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

I haven't read all the long posts that ya'll wrote, I'm too tired right now.

I don't agree with everything about this war, and to be honest I thought it was a stupid idea to go there to begin with. I wanted to catch that Bin Laden ****er, and I thought going to Iraq was a waste of time. But one thing this war does do well is keeping those bastard terrorist over there and not here.(I hope) IMO they did not expect us to fight back so hard. If we quit now they will start praising Ahlah(spelling) for giving them the victory over the infadels, and will be motivated to carry out more attack against us. It would also give them the perfect oppurtunity to build back up and be stronger than ever, and Iraq would be overran with terrorist running the country. Bush said from the beginning that this was going to be a drawn out war that would probably last many years, and at the time most Americans were for it, 9/11 had everybody really pissed off. Even the U.N. was saying that they thought Iraq had Chemical weapons, and then when it turn out they didn't the U.N. wants to look down on us, when we pretty much fund their whole operation. I do agree that we need to stop trying to apiece the rest of the world and just go in there and woop their asses
JROC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2007, 07:13 AM   #62
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
bbunt302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to bbunt302
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

I'm not going to go quote by quote either. I think in the end, you and I agree on a lot of things here (as crazy as that seems). We just see a slightly different reason for the way things are.

In my opinion, Bush is not really a great President. Trust me, I'm not putting him on a shrine. My point is that even if we did have another FDR in office, the same **** would be going on. The President is nothing more than a puppet these days.

Bush is not where the blame should lie. Bush tried to act tough. He acted as tough as he could. Do you not remember the talk of impeachment, just because people disagreed with his decisions? That to me is what is ridiculous. Yes, Bush was afraid to be voted out of office. It was a very real fear. Had he run the war as truly need be, he would have been.

I don't care who you put in the oval office, at this rate, nothing effective is being done. Both parties are really all the same anyway. They have different views on many issues, but when it comes down to the fundamental core of how the government is run, they both see things the same way.

Until this changes, no President will ever really have the power to effectively lead the kind of war Iraq should have been.
__________________

Scary stuff.
bbunt302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2007, 12:55 AM   #63
Registered Member
Regular
 
silverstangboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Region: Alabama
Posts: 583
Re: George Bush has dropped the ball horribly.

brent the war was never supposed to be a get in and pull out plan, kill saddam and then pull out and the next guy down on in the ranks (who could be twice the sadistic killer as well) gets his office. this is how their government has been running for decades, its going to take some time to bring that down to its knees and turn it into something thats benifitial to the people. look at our own history, how long did it take us to overpower the monarchies?

this war will take some time, if nothing more its great for the PR for the US to the rest of the world.. if you haven't noticed the rest of the world was starting to look at us similarly to what we do now france.

as a nation we once fought battles and our freedoms are what we won, that will never change through time, we will continually have to fight to keep the lifestyles that this great nation has established. Finally IMO the only thing I don't like about the war in Iraq is that it took and takes too much attention away from afganistan where I truthfully have not seen much progress..

just calm down and keep your cool soldier, keep your mind on the big prize at the end of the tunnel.
__________________


93 mustang notch
~450hp 331 stroker - Sold
silverstangboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Off Topic Forums > The Bar

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Orleans pissed off George Bush again Brent The Bar 20 08-28-2008 01:06 PM
So George Bush Goes To Hell... [Joke] Brent The Bar 7 03-06-2008 02:51 PM
I hate George Bush: MarkuzLS1 The Bar 106 07-21-2006 01:58 PM
OMG George Bush gets Jedi Powers Brent The Bar 15 06-06-2006 03:55 PM
George Bush Cost me my job Brent The Bar 16 02-11-2004 01:22 PM

» Like Us On Facebook



01:40 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.