Four Years Ago Today...

**ARinNC** · 05-02-07, 11:38

It is fun to play dress-up!
More Dress up pix of "W"

(check the package

)

Here are other POTUS' that have dressed up over the years:
Ronny:

Clinton:

GHW Bush:

Jimmy Carter:

(oops)

**ARinNC** · 05-02-07, 11:55

Originally Posted by Pullo

The reason why George had to go into Iraq is very simple. The worlds oil supply which has about 10 to 15 years left (you go do some research on that if you want) is going to need to be controlled by us if you want to keep the shit from hitting the fan. Our freedom loving, flag waving, apple pie eatin way of life depends upon the production and refinement of oil. Iraq sits upon the largest untapped oil wells Suadi arabia has the 2nd. Anyway you look at it, the troops are there to keep all us soft bunch of webaholics living good. Thats why we will not leave Iraq until the oil is gone, then we will have to go fight for the next oil well. Irans oil supply already peaked, the only threat George sees from them is that they try and take the Iraqi or Saudi Oil fields. So chill out brothers in arms cause this has to be done if you want to keep your way of life as you have known it so far. But, I personally think something bad is going to happen in a few years. There are just to many variables to go wrong. God be with all your families.

I agree, and the reason he won't pull out is because the richest 1% of this country is getting richer off the no-bid contracts for construction, security, transportation and oil pumping that are being awarded to the US firms, owned/stockholders by the richest 1% of the Country. IE: GW, Cheney, etc...

The worse part is you and I are footing the bill to the tune of $400 BILLION dollars and the work is only being partially done if at all.

Case in point, we, the US Tax Payer footed the bill for the construction of 160 Hospitals and Clinics throughout Iraq, the money earmarked for the project has been spent completely, and there are 8 of the proposed 160...... And only 4 are operational, the other 4 lack the proper infrastructure to run.

Flame away, our job is done in Iraq, bring them home. I heard Glenn Beck talking the other night about a "Genocide" of Biblical proportions if the US pulls out. STFW? Thy Sunni' and Shiite's have both asked us to leave. That means they no longer want or will accept our help. OK, you are on your own. I heard a General say "It will be a logistical nightmare" to pull all of our troops out now", oh like it will get better with time? It will get worse. F**k it, let's leave all our gear over there. They will simply use it to kill each other. And when the vehicles run out of gas, they will sit, you honestly expect an Iraqi to get off his lazy ass and pump his own oil? No. I say bring them home NOW. Not another US Service Person should die for GW's retarded "Stay the course" mentality.

This is a perfect illustration of GW's "Stay the course mentality (Substitute GW for Americans and the world for Canadians.)

ACTUAL transcript of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. This radio conversation was released by the Chief of Naval Operations on 10-10-95.

Americans: "Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision."

Canadians: "Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision."

Americans: "This is the captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course."

Canadians: "No, I say again, you divert YOUR course."

Americans: "THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES' ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH. THAT'S ONE-FIVE DEGREES NORTH, OR COUNTER MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP."

Canadians: "This is a lighthouse. Your call."

**Patrick Aherne** · 05-02-07, 12:07

Originally Posted by ARinNC

This is a perfect illustration of GW's "Stay the course mentality (Substitute GW for Americans and the world for Canadians.)

ACTUAL transcript of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. This radio conversation was released by the Chief of Naval Operations on 10-10-95.

Americans: "Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision."

Canadians: "Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision."

Americans: "This is the captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course."

Canadians: "No, I say again, you divert YOUR course."

Americans: "THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES' ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH. THAT'S ONE-FIVE DEGREES NORTH, OR COUNTER MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP."

Canadians: "This is a lighthouse. Your call."

This might not be the best way to illustrate your point: http://www.snopes.com/military/lighthse.htm

**ARinNC** · 05-02-07, 12:33

Originally Posted by Patrick Aherne

This might not be the best way to illustrate your point: http://www.snopes.com/military/lighthse.htm

Why not?
I think it is perfect, GW, Mr. Stay the Course, vs. Common Sense/Reality. Which one will prevail? The lighthouse isn't going anywhere......

**Akrado** · 05-02-07, 13:30

Well I don't know about all that oil conspiracy stuff, but I don't beleive that we are in the last 15 years of oil.
But if we in the US are so concerned w/ getting all the oil possible why doesn't W just pen an executive order making ANWR open for drilling? Seems like a better way to do it that doesn't involve having our troops killed while "babysitting" oil or hajis.

And the fact that the borders and ports are not sealed is just insanity. If there is really any concern of W to stop future attacks on us then he would do that TODAY, and that would involve much fewer troops in harm's way.

I dont' hate W and I cert. don't like Clinton, but Clinton caught a hint and pulled us out of Somalia when it was clear that our pizza-delivery mission to the starving masses was unwelcome and undeserved. I really see some parralels between the failure of these two missions.
But still hoping for the best in Iraq and will support every troop until they are back.

**Striker5** · 05-02-07, 16:12

I don't think the Iraqis, as a whole, are worth it. But they are not the point. The point is to show the world that we won't quit and will back up our policies. I'm not saying I agree with everything we've done, policy wise. the idea of the Arab world cheering as we leave Iraq makes me want to vomit. Coulda, would, shoulda, we are THERE. Americans have been lulled into thinking wars are 20 minutes long and light on casualties.

The world wants America to be a docile, pliant place they can make money off of. They hate the war in Iraq because it is a display of almost unilateral American power. Not the kind of power they like to use which is derived from a lot of pinko chit-chat.

There is war profiteering, but that is nothing new. I personally don't buy the whole "fight 'em there so we don't fight 'em here" idea. There is no reason that Iraq should take up sufficient AlQaida resources that they don't pursue other operations. The 9/11 guys were Saudis and I haven't seen many of them in Iraq. I hope they're not doing anything because they are busy dodging our guys in stuff we'll never hear about.

We want a democracy in the Middle East and we got in alot deeper than we thought. PC played a big role, as a bunch of super brains got together, speculating what the Iraqis would do when they were free and ASSumed they would go back to work like good Americans. They were blind to the corruption, jackassery and chronic ineptitude that plagues Iraqi society. THEY are the weakest link and the "center of gravity" for us.

You can show me the picture of GW a million times and I could care less. This, ultimately, is bigger than him and John Q. Haji. It's about America. Effite lefty snobs and illiterate savages can just stand buy.

**Joseywales** · 05-02-07, 21:31

Originally Posted by Akrado

Well I don't believe that. Sorry, if anything we're just stirring them up for their next generation. If that is just a tactic to get them out in the open then maybe it will work and fine. But screw the idea of babysitting haji, they don't f'ing deserve it.

Like I said I work for the DOD, my co. happens to make some insane ordinance. I would recomend we use that to "babysit".
Drop bombs, has worked before...

I don't disagree in using overwhelming force. But I don't think we need to turn tail and run like a bunch of cowards. Secondly, we are not stirring anything up. What is going on there is being stirred up by Iran. Sorry, you may work for the DOD, but you don't know shit when it comes to the real goings on about this war. Throughout the entire middle east there is an elaborate network of political and religious leaders that are working to take over the world. It's called AlQuida. At least it is one of many factions with the same Hitler like goal. They are all also in the minority. The problem is that they have all the weapons and lots of money from Iran and other groups. The problem is not Iraq. The problem is that cowards and losers have sucked the life out of this war and made it impossible for us to knock down Iran and North Korea.

We are setting a dangerous precident in how we are treating this war. Never before have so many Americans embraced defeat.

If we can't win this war, then what war can we win. If we cannot win this war, then our military and our country is worthless.

**Joseywales** · 05-02-07, 21:39

Originally Posted by Akrado

I don't want to stir s*** on my first post, but i can't help but laugh at the last posts. Or should I cry? Did I read you right? You need 415k more of our brothers to die before you get concerned?
Heres a fact for you.
We are losing more troops each month now than we ever did during the MAJOR OPERATIONS as you and W put it. I'd say that is pretty major fact. Maybe it should have been mentioned in one of your numbered points.

I get kind of fired up over the issue because my little brother was blown off the top of his HumV in fallujah and is permanently disabled. He's good now and luckily no brain damage, but will always have a 10 inch scar on his dome and titanium fasteners in his skull to prove just what W accomplished.

Yes, you read me right. 425k more of MY brothers and cousins must die before I think this war is anything close to a failure. Sorry to hear about your brother, but his misfourtune means nothing to the worthiness of this war. Soldiers die and soldiers get wounded. It is the nature of the job. Only losers judge success by the ease of the task and the stumblings along the way. Those people are called quitters. They are the reason our nation has a welfare system.

Until I hear the hypocrite democrats use words to describe this war like "Victory" and "plan for winning", President George Bush is the best we got.

**Joseywales** · 05-02-07, 21:44

Originally Posted by Akrado

Well I don't know about all that oil conspiracy stuff, but I don't beleive that we are in the last 15 years of oil.
But if we in the US are so concerned w/ getting all the oil possible why doesn't W just pen an executive order making ANWR open for drilling? Seems like a better way to do it that doesn't involve having our troops killed while "babysitting" oil or hajis.

And the fact that the borders and ports are not sealed is just insanity. If there is really any concern of W to stop future attacks on us then he would do that TODAY, and that would involve much fewer troops in harm's way.

I dont' hate W and I cert. don't like Clinton, but Clinton caught a hint and pulled us out of Somalia when it was clear that our pizza-delivery mission to the starving masses was unwelcome and undeserved. I really see some parralels between the failure of these two missions.
But still hoping for the best in Iraq and will support every troop until they are back.

Where is your proof that this is about oil. Why didn't we just take the oil, we could have. If it is about oil, why didn't we take Iran. They have more of it.

I agree with exec order for ANWR. Secondly, Clinton did not "pull us out of Somolia". He FAILED and LOST. He RETREATED. Great plan. I Somolia we were welcomed by the masses. However, most of the place was being starved to death. So when we quit protecting the food shipments, the war lords used it to turn people against us. That is the ONLY reason we had masses fighting against us. We could have won there too. We just has a pussy at the helm who was afraid to escilate the "action" to a war. We had the means to eradicate all the war lords. Just not the guts.

**Joseywales** · 05-02-07, 22:07