It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it. I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

B.H.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:56:34 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:

He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined.

How noble, how ****ing noble!

On 28 Aug 2005 15:42:37 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?

Try learning how to compose a meangful question or a sentence
and maybe he can answer!

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:20:43 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:

Yes and if we can get rid of all the Sadam's and Bin Laden's maybe we wont
even have to train so hard.

Only the brainless fantasize thath you can get rid of ALL of them.
YOu can descourage, you can limit. You can even kill a few, but there
are many more. This is a fallen world. You cannot destroy "terrorism"
and more than you can destroy human greed.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:54:32 GMT, m II wrote:

Some would say that is BS. Thanks to neocon idiocy, there is now a
fundamentalist Islamic State where previously there was none. Hussein hated the
fundamentalists and that is why Bin Laden had contracts out on him on at least
two occasions. Nice going, BUSH.

Is it really an Islamic State already? You may have a point.
If it becomes that, then we have not only lost the war on non-exitent
WMD that
we lied about, but we have also handed a victory to the militant
Muslims.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:56:34 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:


It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it. I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

B.H.


This has nothing to do with numbers.

It has everything to do with making things worse. It has to do with
creating new generations of enemies.

The United States should lead the world by example. Not like a ****ty
parent who says ''do as I say, not as I do''.

On 28 Aug 2005 15:42:37 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

BH - DaviD lacks the courage to stand-up for the words
that he so freely uses when posting here so frequently.
.
SO TELL US - WHAT ARE 'YOU' DAVID ?
.
1. DaviD - Tell me, are 'you' now advocating (inciting) an
active rebellion against the current US Federal Government ?
.
2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?
.
So David - Which is it #1 or #2 : Do 'you' have the personal
courage to publicly answer "Yes" or "No" to either ?
.
DaviD - Are 'you' a Man of Your Words . . .
{ Or simply a very wordy man of no real standing ? }
.
.
i want to know ~ RHF
. . . . .

I will not answer any of your questions until you use proper
punctuation. Otherwise I must assume you are mentally ill.

David wrote:

On 28 Aug 2005 15:42:37 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

BH - DaviD lacks the courage to stand-up for the words
that he so freely uses when posting here so frequently.
.
SO TELL US - WHAT ARE 'YOU' DAVID ?
.
1. DaviD - Tell me, are 'you' now advocating (inciting) an
active rebellion against the current US Federal Government ?
.
2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?
.
So David - Which is it #1 or #2 : Do 'you' have the personal
courage to publicly answer "Yes" or "No" to either ?
.
DaviD - Are 'you' a Man of Your Words . . .
{ Or simply a very wordy man of no real standing ? }
.
.
i want to know ~ RHF
. . . . .

I will not answer any of your questions until you use proper
punctuation. Otherwise I must assume you are mentally ill.

Like you?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Brian Hill wrote:
It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it.

Who is he.....
Which government...



I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years.

Who is he......
1,800 people seems like a lot of people to have die needlessly, and the
number is a lot higher if you include contractors and other
nationalities. And how could we forget the tens of thougnds of Iraqis
who have been killed so far. I'm certain the parents and loved ones of
those killed would think the losses were of some significance, wouldn't
you?

We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

And that justifies the invasion of a soverign country? It must,
because the Bush administration has given no other credible
justification.

George Bush is goiung to do just what Lyndon Johnson did in Viet Nam -
leave the cleanup and inevtiable messy exit to another president.
That's a fine legacy George!!




B.H.

"John S." wrote:

Brian Hill wrote:
It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it.

Who is he.....
Which government...

I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years.

Who is he......
1,800 people seems like a lot of people to have die needlessly, and the
number is a lot higher if you include contractors and other
nationalities. And how could we forget the tens of thougnds of Iraqis
who have been killed so far. I'm certain the parents and loved ones of
those killed would think the losses were of some significance, wouldn't
you?

We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

And that justifies the invasion of a soverign country? It must,
because the Bush administration has given no other credible
justification.

Yada, yada, yada... more left-wing propaganda. Plenty of justification out threre,
'tard. It's just that you and your minions continually dismiss it as false.

If you can't come up with anything better you'd best be prepared to lose a lot of
nationwide elections in 2006 and 2008.

George Bush is goiung to do just what Lyndon Johnson did in Viet Nam -
leave the cleanup and inevtiable messy exit to another president.
That's a fine legacy George!!

Rather than let him leave the cleanup to someone else would you support changing
things so that GWB could run again in 2008? That would give you at least one less
thing to whine about, wouldn't it?

dxAce
Michigan
USA