On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:19:01 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

*sigh*... And you even replied to the post where I stated it previously!
What defines military success in Iraq? Succintly: Replacing Saddam Hussein
and his regime with a democratic styled govt that can stand on it's own.
We've removed Saddam. We've removed his regime. They have already had free
and open elections once. They are about to ratify their constitution. I'd
say we are well on the way to acheiving our goal there. I can't wait to
hear your dissappointment!

-=jd=-
By ''democratic styled govt'' you of course mean an Islamic Theocracy
aligned with Iran. OK. We did it. Now let's flee. Peace with
honor.

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:20:32 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


It means the Taliban are regaining control of Afghanistan.



That would be incorrect as well. Any other guesses? Or, would you rather
just visit the U.N. site and read it for yourself?

-=jd=-
The UN is not to be trusted.

David wrote:

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:19:01 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

*sigh*... And you even replied to the post where I stated it previously!
What defines military success in Iraq? Succintly: Replacing Saddam Hussein
and his regime with a democratic styled govt that can stand on it's own.
We've removed Saddam. We've removed his regime. They have already had free
and open elections once. They are about to ratify their constitution. I'd
say we are well on the way to acheiving our goal there. I can't wait to
hear your dissappointment!

-=jd=-
By ''democratic styled govt'' you of course mean an Islamic Theocracy
aligned with Iran. OK. We did it. Now let's flee. Peace with
honor.

'Tard boy... you wouldn't know honour if it crawled up your mentally retarded
ass and decided to spend the winter.

Now get on out there and tote it whilst you still have a little daylight left.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

He would probally trust a 'snow snake' though.
cuhulin

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:04:16 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


Fail to succeed in it's military efforts, whether in large part or in small
part, regardless of the various goals of those efforts. Rather, in your
blind hatred for Bush, you would probably go so far as to sacrifice (in
every sense of the word) the entire Republic to slake your thirst for spite
and vengeance at being marginalized and rejected politically. Ain't that
so...

I'm sorry, you must not have gotten the word that purple prose
is no longer allowed on usenet. Please cancel your posting.

On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 19:35:44 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Thu 01 Sep 2005 10:05:35p, wrote in message
:

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:04:16 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


Fail to succeed in it's military efforts, whether in large part or in
small part, regardless of the various goals of those efforts. Rather, in
your blind hatred for Bush, you would probably go so far as to sacrifice
(in every sense of the word) the entire Republic to slake your thirst
for spite and vengeance at being marginalized and rejected politically.
Ain't that so...

I'm sorry, you must not have gotten the word that purple prose
is no longer allowed on usenet. Please cancel your posting.


If you can't deny my truths, just say so. There's no need to camoflage your
lack of a substantive reply by ignoring the issue. That you feel too
inadequate to frame a response, sans ad-hominem, is duly noted!

-=jd=-

Note my ass -- it's pointed in our general direction.

America is Beautifull. www.devilfinder.com Kate Smith God Bless
America
cuhulin

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 15:22:26 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Sat 03 Sep 2005 02:26:32a, wrote in message
news
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 19:35:44 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Thu 01 Sep 2005 10:05:35p, wrote in message
:

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:04:16 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


Fail to succeed in it's military efforts, whether in large part or in
small part, regardless of the various goals of those efforts. Rather,
in your blind hatred for Bush, you would probably go so far as to
sacrifice (in every sense of the word) the entire Republic to slake
your thirst for spite and vengeance at being marginalized and rejected
politically. Ain't that so...

I'm sorry, you must not have gotten the word that purple prose
is no longer allowed on usenet. Please cancel your posting.


If you can't deny my truths, just say so. There's no need to camoflage
your lack of a substantive reply by ignoring the issue. That you feel
too inadequate to frame a response, sans ad-hominem, is duly noted!

-=jd=-

Note my ass -- it's pointed in our general direction.


As I said, and which you so un-subtly evaded yet again, "If you can't deny
my truths, just say so. There's no need to camoflage your lack of a
substantive reply by ignoring the issue. That you feel too inadequate to
frame a response, sans ad-hominem, is duly noted!" Now, are ya' done yet or
would you like another drubbing?

-=jd=-

Maybe, when you're through drubbing your dick. The corrct
construction, by the way, is sine ad hominem. slopping a bt if French
before a Latin phrase only makes you look dumb. But you continue to do
pompous well. "Noted" -- how ****ing superior.

You need to learn how to operate a spelling book and learn how to spell.
cuhulin

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 18:01:35 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


So nice to see we have another college poseur on staff here in R.R.S.
"Sans" is a perfectly acceptable when used to indicate a "lack of" or
"without". If you would like to get technical, there's this: [Sans: Middle
English, from Old French, blend of Latin sine, without, and absenti, in the
absence of, ablative of absentia, absence from absns, absent- present
participle of abesse, to be away. See absent.] Also, since you are now
resorting to a "grammer-dodge", I won't mention your substandard spelling.
I'll leave the desperate "grammer-dodge" tactic to you. Now, where were we.
Oh Yes! As I said, and which you so un-subtly evaded yet again AND AGAIN,
"If you can't deny my truths, just say so. There's no need to camoflage
your lack of a substantive reply by ignoring the issue. That you feel too
inadequate to frame a response, sans ad-hominem, is duly noted!" Now, would
you like YET ANOTHER drubbing or are ya' done yet?

Spank you very much,

Your pal,

-=jd=-
You just stood there screaming
Fearing no one was listening to you
They say the empty can rattles the most
The sound of your voice must soothe you
Hearing only what you want to hear
And knowing only what you’ve heard
You you’re smothered in tragedy
You’re out to save the world

Misery
You insist that the weight of the world
Should be on your shoulders
Misery
There’s much more to life than what you see
My friend of misery

You still stood there screaming
No one caring about these words you tell
My friend before your voice is gone
One man’s fun is another’s hell
These times are sent to try men’s souls
But something’s wrong with all you see
You you’ll take it on all yourself
Remember, misery loves company

Misery
You insist that the weight of the world
Should be on your shoulders
Misery
There’s much more to life than what you see
My friend of misery

You just stood there creaming
My friend of misery
-Hetfield/Ulrich