[simmons latex mattress]

so, it looks like the Obama administration has some 'splainin' to do.

Source...newKerala.com



"US missile attacks kill 20 in Pakistan

Wana (Pakistan), Jan 23 : Twenty people, including foreigners, were killed and several others injured in two separate US missile attacks Friday in Pakistan's North and South Waziristan regions bordering Afghanistan, Geo TV reported."


I think we should bring him up on war crimes.

[lammaredder]

so, it looks like the Obama administration has some 'splainin' to do.

Source...newKerala.com



"US missile attacks kill 20 in Pakistan

Wana (Pakistan), Jan 23 : Twenty people, including foreigners, were killed and several others injured in two separate US missile attacks Friday in Pakistan's North and South Waziristan regions bordering Afghanistan, Geo TV reported."


I think we should bring him up on war crimes.

Really, why is that? He made it well publicized that he'd strike targets in Pakistan.

Your taking the comment that he made about civilian casualties out of context. He said MORE troops were needed on the ground in Afghanistan so that there was better intelligence and less strikes that missed high value targets and killed civillians. He didn't say the US was intentionally trying to target civilians.

You lose credibility when you use intellectually dishonest arguments to support your point.


Man, it's going to be a long four (possibly 8) years.

[simmons latex mattress]

Really, why is that? He made it well publicized that he'd strike targets in Pakistan.

Your taking the comment that he made about civilian casualties out of context. He said MORE troops were needed on the ground in Afghanistan so that there was better intelligence and less strikes that missed high value targets and killed civillians. He didn't say the US was intentionally trying to target civilians.

You lose credibility when you use intellectually dishonest arguments to support your point.


Man, it's going to be a long four (possibly 8) years.

The "chosen one" looks lost already. How does he know there were no civilians in those groups? Wasn't he the one who excoriated the Bush administration for "bombing civilian villages".

That's why high profile politicians should keep those opinions to themselves. He was playing to his base by trying to make a point about the evil Mr. Bush!
Now it's come full circle!

[lammaredder]

Wasn't he the one who excoriated the Bush administration for "bombing civilian villages".

No! He excoriated Bush for not having enough boots on the ground to loate the "hig-value" targets. Go back and listen to the interview -- the WHOLE interview.

[simmons latex mattress]

No! He excoriated Bush for not having enough boots on the ground to loate the "hig-value" targets. Go back and listen to the interview -- the WHOLE interview.

Don't try to rewrite history. You do not want to get stuck in a quagmire in Afghanistan. Just ask Russia.

Ever since the war on teror began, these loud mouth democrats have compared our troops to Nazi's and terrorists. They compared Gitmo to soviet gulags. Now they have to do what they said they would do. End the war in a manner that won't roll back the progress we've made. Find a way to deal with the inmates in Gitmo.

[JonatonM]

war crimes, are we talking about? Red Rooster, go find DICK Cheney first...should be easy to do. He's the bald a**hole in a wheel chair trying to find his next and best hiding spot yet, somewhere in northern VA.

[JonatonM]

btw, what are foreigners doing in the middle of the best Taliban Islamist proving grounds?! Not sure if even Pakistan would bother to press charges of war crimes against anyone for these killed...

Meanwhile, the bigger question is how in the hell can all of U.S. officialdom, Democrat and Republican, wink and nod at Pakistani leaders and army (ISI specially) when everyone there and outside of there knows they're the real protectors and funders of terrorists.

U.S., in its narrowly conceived notions of attacking Taliban only in Afghanistan, is even now sending billions into Pakistani hands, a lot of which is then rerouted to Islamism causes. Just like funding jihadists in Afghanistan in 1980s (to fight against the FSU) came back to haunt the U.S. in the next decade, the current myopic stance might have another recoil effect, and nobody knows what it might be...now that Pakistan also has nukes and some of those could possibly get diverted to some jihadists any given day 10 years from now...

[Verger99]

i think we should bring him up on war crimes.

Iraq

[simmons latex mattress]

btw, what are foreigners doing in the middle of the best Taliban Islamist proving grounds?! Not sure if even Pakistan would bother to press charges of war crimes against anyone for these killed...

Meanwhile, the bigger question is how in the hell can all of U.S. officialdom, Democrat and Republican, wink and nod at Pakistani leaders and army (ISI specially) when everyone there and outside of there knows they're the real protectors and funders of terrorists.

U.S., in its narrowly conceived notions of attacking Taliban only in Afghanistan, is even now sending billions into Pakistani hands, a lot of which is then rerouted to Islamism causes. Just like funding jihadists in Afghanistan in 1980s (to fight against the FSU) came back to haunt the U.S. in the next decade, the current myopic stance might have another recoil effect, and nobody knows what it might be...now that Pakistan also has nukes and some of those could possibly get diverted to some jihadists any given day 10 years from now...

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[simmons latex mattress]

war crimes, are we talking about? Red Rooster, go find DICK Cheney first...should be easy to do. He's the bald a**hole in a wheel chair trying to find his next and best hiding spot yet, somewhere in northern VA.

More intelligent dialect from the left!

[Verger99]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

So does that mean that since you, as a Republican, is an enemy of Democrats, and terrorists are enemies of Democrats, you're the terrorists' friend?

[JonatonM]

So does that mean that since you, as a Republican, is an enemy of Democrats, and terrorists are enemies of Democrats, you're the terrorists' friend?

good one, hammer!

[simmons latex mattress]

So does that mean that since you, as a Republican, is an enemy of Democrats, and terrorists are enemies of Democrats, you're the terrorists' friend?

Don't be ridiculous. Dems are FRIENDS of the terrorists. Enablers even.

Just because you disagree with someone, it doesn't make them your enemy, genius.

[Verger99]

Genius. Some would say the same thing about Republicans.

It was a joke. Sarcasm. A reductio ad absurdum .

[bMc8F9ZI]

Iraq

Thanks for making this post in HUGE letters, I was confused earlier.

[Verger99]

It's 'cuz I feel most strongly that GETTING INTO IRAQ was a war crime!

[simmons latex mattress]

It's 'cuz I feel most strongly that GETTING INTO IRAQ was a war crime!

You can thank the Clinton administration for that. Now his wife has to clean up his mess! Ha!

What goes around comes around!

[Fertassa]

I think people overuse the words "War Crime". War is not pretty. When it is fought it cities, there will be citizen deaths. A civilian deaths do not equal war crimes. Would you bring FDR or Churchill up on war crimes because of Allied bombing runs in Germany? Or Truman for Hiroshima or Nagasaki? I think we need perspective. Millions of people perished in WWII and our soldiers were considered heroes. A relative few die and our soldiers are now the villians? The idea of war crimes is a bias against the former administration. You can disagree with going to war in the first place and that is your right and you can protest. But war crimes? Please

[simmons latex mattress]

I think people overuse the words "War Crime". War is not pretty. When it is fought it cities, there will be citizen deaths. A civilian deaths do not equal war crimes. Would you bring FDR or Churchill up on war crimes because of Allied bombing runs in Germany? Or Truman for Hiroshima or Nagasaki? I think we need perspective. Millions of people perished in WWII and our soldiers were considered heroes. A relative few die and our soldiers are now the villians? The idea of war crimes is a bias against the former administration. You can disagree with going to war in the first place and that is your right and you can protest. But war crimes? Please

Thank you!