Another Dixie Prediction Goes Horribly Wrong

I guess this is a s good a post as any to single out. There are a number of equally stupid posts in this thread but this is the most recent and really stands out for its simple mindedness.

"Who and what are islamofacists?" The simple explaination is iran. Facism is considered to be a rightwing nomenclature in most meanings of the word. It is most normally used to name anti-semetic groups. In the way it is used as with islam is that they are a hate group. But they hate not just jews, but Christians and Hindus and Budhists and liberals as well. Its the most commonly known hate name that people can put on the these islamist. because that is what they preach and practice,,,hatred. You can spin it anyway you want but its a religious war. the western world verses islam. Your very way of life is at risk here and your blind Bush hatred keeps you from seeing that.

None of you ever even tries to look at the big picture. None of us even have access to most of that big picture. There's a lot going on you will never see and its going on in your behalf. It will be 20 to 30 years before many of the things going on now will come to light.

There will be US bases in iraq for many years to come. Deal with it. There will eventually be a war with iran and probably syria. Deal with it. Bush has two more years as president and will continue his policies regardless of polls. deal with it. If the libs don't come up with concrete ideas of things to do concerning the world and islam then they will not be in a position of power. Deal with it.

Dixie i don't think we have much to worry about as far as militant liberals. It would be like fighting the french. They like to name call but they would never stand up for themselves.

There will be US bases in iraq for many years to come. Deal with it. There will eventually be a war with iran and probably syria. Deal with it.

Damn, well done! Such honesty! I really appreciate it.

I can't tell you how many times over the past three years on these boards that republican posters screamed "LIAR!" at me, when I said one of Bush's goals in Iraq was to establish permanent bases, and that bush was hankering for more wars with Syria and Iran.

thank you!
 
There will be US bases in iraq for many years to come. Deal with it. There will eventually be a war with iran and probably syria. Deal with it.

Damn, well done! Such honesty! I really appreciate it.

I can't tell you how many times over the past three years on these boards that republican posters screamed "LIAR!" at me, when I said one of Bush's goals in Iraq was to establish permanent bases, and that bush was hankering for more wars with Syria and Iran.

thank you!

well I guess I made your day. But I will qualify things a bit for you. There will be bases in iraq not because Bush planned it that way. But because they will be needed to keep peace in the region and for future efforts against iran and syria.

He's not planning to take them down as a great conspiracy that has been plotted for years. They will force our hand by attacking Israel or attacking shipping in the gulf or any number of other offensive actions.

As for the others calling you a "LAIR" well they recongnize you for what you are. I would add fool to that as well and suggest you crawl back under that rock with howard dean. Your irrelevant.
 
well I guess I made your day. But I will qualify things a bit for you. There will be bases in iraq not because Bush planned it that way. But because they will be needed to keep peace in the region and for future efforts against iran and syria.

He's not planning to take them down as a great conspiracy that has been plotted for years. They will force our hand by attacking Israel or attacking shipping in the gulf or any number of other offensive actions.

As for the others calling you a "LAIR" well they recongnize you for what you are. I would add fool to that as well and suggest you crawl back under that rock with howard dean. Your irrelevant.
Gods I hope you're still around when we close those bases and write them off as a bad idea. That should be really entertaining.

:micro:
 
A permanent presence would not even be considered if Bush had not invaded Iraq in the first place. It is all Bushofascism.
 
well I guess I made your day. But I will qualify things a bit for you. There will be bases in iraq not because Bush planned it that way. But because they will be needed to keep peace in the region and for future efforts against iran and syria.

He's not planning to take them down as a great conspiracy that has been plotted for years. They will force our hand by attacking Israel or attacking shipping in the gulf or any number of other offensive actions.

As for the others calling you a "LAIR" well they recongnize you for what you are. I would add fool to that as well and suggest you crawl back under that rock with howard dean. Your irrelevant.

But I will qualify things a bit for you. There will be bases in iraq not because Bush planned it that way.

LMAO! Put down the kool aid man!

I'm so sure, putting permanent bases in Iraq just "recently" occured to bush. That it wasn't planned from the beginning. LOL

Face it dude, people like you spent the last three years calling anyone who said bush was using iraq for permanent bases, a "liar". And then when we're proven right, you quietly try to backpedal and tapdance away from your original postion.
 
But I will qualify things a bit for you. There will be bases in iraq not because Bush planned it that way.

LMAO! Put down the kool aid man!

I'm so sure, putting permanent bases in Iraq just "recently" occured to bush. That it wasn't planned from the beginning. LOL

Face it dude, people like you spent the last three years calling anyone who said bush was using iraq for permanent bases, a "liar". And then when we're proven right, you quietly try to backpedal and tapdance away from your original postion.
True.

I also believe, however, that the next administration, no matter who the president is, will eventually close the bases or hand them over to Iraq. They're just not tenable, politically. At least, I hope the next administration will be forced to abandon them.
 
Face it dude, people like you spent the last three years calling anyone who said bush was using iraq for permanent bases, a "liar". And then when we're proven right, you quietly try to backpedal and tapdance away from your original postion.

Well, that's because you ARE a liar, dufuss! Bush didn't "use" Iraq to put permanent bases there! What happens with you idots, is you get convoluted in your own rhetoric and false logic, and everything is digested through that.

Iraq has ALWAYS been a key aspect in the overall global war on Islamofascism. Primarily from a national security aspect, and well-established justification and reasoning in the task of eliminating Saddam Hussein, but more importantly, and I pointed this out on multiple occasions, because Iraq sits in the heart of the radical Islamic element we are at war with. Strategically, you just about couldn't pick a better base of operations to wage such a war. We simply couldn't stage attacks on terror groups from Kuwait, it's too small and too vulnerable, and too dependent on the Persian Gulf for access. We can't impose upon Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, or Turkey, to allow us to stage attacks on terrorist groups from their countries, because of the inherent danger to the people there, and the risk of jeopardizing relations with vital allies in the region.

Iraq provides the best strategical base to take out Iran or Syria, as well as defending Israel from further attack. So now we have a defiant dictator who has been given last chance after last chance, we have a secular government regime without ties to the Muslim religious faith, which we can take out because there will be no resounding religious outcry, as say...Pakistan or Syria, and everyone in the region pretty much despises Saddam anyway, and we have a very advantageous strategic location to wage war on the Islamofascist elements we are at war with in the region, when it's all said and done. At the end of the day, Iraq will prove to be the key strategical move that defeated Islamofascism in the War on Terror.

The down-side, is the sectarian violence, which has been fomented completely by the radicals (aka: the enemy) to prevent us from establishing this stronghold in the middle east. You have been brainwashed by propaganda to believe a whole different thing, I am sure, so I won't waste any more time on this. The point is, Iraq, as a strategic point in the war on terror, has always been vital and important... it was part of what we were telling you when you were looking through your soda straw at OBL and WMD's, and not seeing the Big Picture.
 
True.

I also believe, however, that the next administration, no matter who the president is, will eventually close the bases or hand them over to Iraq. They're just not tenable, politically. At least, I hope the next administration will be forced to abandon them.

You're an idiot if you believe that will happen, regardless of what party wins.
 
True.

I also believe, however, that the next administration, no matter who the president is, will eventually close the bases or hand them over to Iraq. They're just not tenable, politically. At least, I hope the next administration will be forced to abandon them.

Its possible that permanent bases in iraqi kurdistan are tenable. I think that's why John Murth's redeployment strategy makes the most sense. Franly, I think even a Democratic president would keep bases in Iraqi kurdistan.
 
Ummm, Dixie? It only took you four years, to admit what I said back in 2003.

I called Bullshit on the WMD-reason for war back in 2003. I said the REAL reason bush wanted to go into iraq was for strategic, geopolitical reasons - implmenting a NeoCon "theory" that you just outlined with regard to syria and iran.

And I clearly remember being called a liar by Bush fans, for calling bullshit on the WMD, and correctly stating the real strategic reasons.
 
Its possible that permanent bases in iraqi kurdistan are tenable. I think that's why John Murth's redeployment strategy makes the most sense. Franly, I think even a Democratic president would keep bases in Iraqi kurdistan.
I hope you're wrong, but I agree that it's possible. I *hope* and believe that there will be enough political pressure to force closure. Of course, the apologists will whine about how we need to get something out of the debacle.
 
Ummm, Dixie? It only took you four years, to admit what I said back in 2003.

I called Bullshit on the WMD-reason for war back in 2003. I said the REAL reason bush wanted to go into iraq was for strategic, geopolitical reasons - implmenting a NeoCon "theory" that you just outlined with regard to syria and iran.

And I clearly remember being called a liar by Bush fans, for calling bullshit on the WMD, and correctly stating the real strategic reasons.


No, you had some wacko theory about PNAC, which is not relevant. The WMD threat was real, he had them, he used them, and would have had them and used them again, he wasn't going to stop and the UN wasn't going to prevent him from it, just like the nut in Iran isn't going to stop. The legal justification was there, the UN agreed, then failed to back what they said.

I said all along, the WMD thing was a farce, as far as making it The Reason for War, and I've been saying it all along as well. So it looks like we were both right, huh?
 
Iraq has ALWAYS been a key aspect in the overall global war on Islamofascism
//

ROFLMAO, the islamo term has been in existance for what 5 days ?
Dixie is such a stupid arrogant fool.
 
No, you had some wacko theory about PNAC, which is not relevant. The WMD threat was real, he had them, he used them, and would have had them and used them again, he wasn't going to stop and the UN wasn't going to prevent him from it, just like the nut in Iran isn't going to stop. The legal justification was there, the UN agreed, then failed to back what they said.

I said all along, the WMD thing was a farce, as far as making it The Reason for War, and I've been saying it all along as well. So it looks like we were both right, huh?

BINGO! DING, DING, DING.

Well done Dixie.

Yes, we agree that Bush either lied about WMD, or misled the american people about the real reasons for invading Iraq.
 
BINGO! DING, DING, DING.

Well done Dixie.

Yes, we agree that Bush either lied about WMD, or misled the american people about the real reasons for invading Iraq.


I guess you must have selective reading ability. Bush didn't lie about anything, nor did he mislead anyone about the real reasons. They were there, they were legitimate, it was the legal basis on which we took the action taken, and it was substantiated. There were WMD issues, there were ties to terrorism, there was the cumulative defiance by Saddam to comply with world order, and there was also the opportunity to rid the world of a ruthless tyrant pain in our ass, as well as establish a base to fight terror, and gain an oil-rich ally. All of these, and more, comprise the "reasons for Iraq" not just one of them, as you continue to insist. The legal justifications and reasonings presented to the UN are not ALL the reasons and justifications for going to war in Iraq, that is your own misconception, and has been all along. The UN can't authorize us to invade Iraq so that we can establish a base to fight terrorism, that doesn't fly, you have to have a valid reason and justification, and that was Saddam's non-compliance with the UN and intrest in WMD's and terror. So, it's no big surprise the establishing of bases in Iraq wasn't one of the stated objectives to the UN in presenting our "case for war" in Iraq.
 
I said all along, the WMD thing was a farce, as far as making it The Reason for War, and I've been saying it all along as well. So it looks like we were both right, huh?
//

LIar liar pants on fire :)
 
removing Saddam has allowed the rise of Iranian hegemony and is directly responsible for the actions of Hezbollah in Lebanon...and our actions have destroyed any influence we may have had with the arab world necessary to stop it.

Rice was an ineffective joke in her sad attempts at "shuttle diplomacy" THe arab world universally dislikes and distrusts us..and that is all Bush's fault
 
IRAQ

-DIXIE, August 10, 2006: "….how utterly desperate the anti-war crowd is. Still trying to lie and mislead people with propaganda like this, and still chanting to "bring them home" when it's clear, they are coming home soon, the job is almost complete! Our forces will come back home when the job is finished, and not because you pinheads 'spirited' them back with your war protests."


Pentagon Report, December 2006: Iraq Violence Reaches Record Levels

The Pentagon said yesterday that violence in Iraq soared this fall to its highest level on record and acknowledged that anti-U.S. fighters have achieved a "strategic success" by unleashing a spiral of sectarian killings by Sunni and Shiite death squads that threatens Iraq's political institutions.

In its most pessimistic report yet on progress in Iraq, the Pentagon described a nation listing toward civil war, with violence at record highs of 959 attacks per week, declining public confidence in government and "little progress" toward political reconciliation.

"The violence has escalated at an unbelievably rapid pace," said Marine Lt. Gen. John F. Sattler, director of strategic plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who briefed journalists on the report. "We have to get ahead of that violent cycle, break that continuous chain of sectarian violence. . . . That is the premier challenge facing us now."




http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/18/AR2006121800791.html
 
Nonsense it is just the isloamofascist AQ.
They will really start trouble once they get those WMD's back from those tunnels in Syria. Just you wait and see.
 
Nonsense it is just the isloamofascist AQ.
They will really start trouble once they get those WMD's back from those tunnels in Syria. Just you wait and see.

I'm sure syria has plans for the WMD's. syria's just not going to flaunt the fact that they have them. And you will go blindly along believing they never existed.
 
Back
Top