Anything useful to contribute to the conversation?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bush Lost the War in Afghanistan and We now need to accept that
- Thread starter alatide
- Start date
Anything useful to contribute to the conversation?
Why is the State Department still offering a $25 million reward for his death or capture?
Read the FBI charges. he's wanted for crimes in 1998.
Aside from having no basis for this...I find it humorous that alatide only castigates his own personal satan (G.W. Bush) for this, and doesn't slam Obama for also "going after Obama."
Bless his heart, that selective memory must cause headaches...
Bumped for the bannedleader...
Did the enemy declare victory in Afghanistan again? I didn't hear the latest from them! Is this the same group that predicted we'd be destroyed in Iraq during the initial invasion? I don't remember that we conceded defeat. You'll have a difficult time convincing the US veterans of this war that they lost anything. They haven't! While some of you have been busy forecasting defeat for the past several years another group of people have been busy racking up success step by step in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It was stated that it would be difficult and it is. It will be frustrating from time to time. There will be steps forward and backwards. We can not guarantee permanent victory after we leave. But we can finish what we set out to do - true leaders will continue to stress that and build confidence. We can do it well no thanks to all the naysayers along the way.
Bumped for the bannedleader...
I'll ask you the same question I asked on another thread. Do you seriously believe we'd be in Afghanistan or Iraq right now if your hero, the worst president in history, hadn't invaded those countries for no justifiable reason?
I'll ask you the same question I asked on another thread. Do you seriously believe we'd be in Afghanistan or Iraq right now if your hero, the worst president in history, hadn't invaded those countries for no justifiable reason?
Obama campaigned for office on a promise of doing it "better and smarter".
When is he going to get started on that in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan?
Read the FBI charges. he's wanted for crimes in 1998.
Bin Laden was indicted in 1998 and a reward of $5 million offered. After 9/11 the reward was increased to $25 million.
Do you seriously believe we'd be in Afghanistan or Iraq right now if your hero, the worst president in history, hadn't invaded those countries for no justifiable reason?
Your hero Obama said that the war in Afghanistan was a "war of necessity" so I'm assuming that yes we would. Unless thay was just hyperbole.
I'll ask you the same question I asked on another thread. Do you seriously believe we'd be in Afghanistan or Iraq right now if your hero, the worst president in history, hadn't invaded those countries for no justifiable reason?
If you had any intellectual honesty, you would note I have been quite critical of Bush, on many occasions.
But you don't.
Neither did any of your banned predecessors.
Neither will whatever sockpuppet you return with, a day or two after you're banned this time.
Bin Laden was indicted in 1998 and a reward of $5 million offered. After 9/11 the reward was increased to $25 million.
Your hero Obama said that the war in Afghanistan was a "war of necessity" so I'm assuming that yes we would. Unless thay was just hyperbole.
The FBI said that they have no hard evidence linking bim Laden to 9/11. I don't know why the reward was increased. maybe Bush did that to make it look like they had something on him.
If you had any intellectual honesty, you would note I have been quite critical of Bush, on many occasions.
But you don't.
Neither did any of your banned predecessors.
Neither will whatever sockpuppet you return with, a day or two after you're banned this time.
Troll feeding is not cool.
If you had any intellectual honesty, you would note I have been quite critical of Bush, on many occasions.
But you don't.
Neither did any of your banned predecessors.
Neither will whatever sockpuppet you return with, a day or two after you're banned this time.
This board is so heavily conservative Republican / pro Bush that I think I tend to assume that everyone outside a few that I'm familiar with think that way. it's not a question of intellectual honesty. When you're outnumbered about 9 to 1 if someone continually harasses you on most things its hard to remember that they agreed with you a few times in the past.
If you want want to continue to call me names I'll do one of two things, put you on ignore or respond in kind. I'm tired of responding in kind so ignore is probably the best bet.
saturneptune
New Member
I could read a "Three Stooges" script, and it would make more sense than anything you have ever posted.Anything useful to contribute to the conversation?
saturneptune
New Member
This post is a classic to illustrate your lack of understanding of the issues of the day, history, or government. As has been pointed out many times ad nauseum, the terms pro Bush, Republican, and conservative have no connection. The term pro Bush would mean a moderately liberal, inept form of governing. Republican means creating a false difference with Democrats then governing like them once elected. Conservative is the term you cited that comes closest to meaning governing by the Constitution.This board is so heavily conservative Republican / pro Bush that I think I tend to assume that everyone outside a few that I'm familiar with think that way. it's not a question of intellectual honesty. When you're outnumbered about 9 to 1 if someone continually harasses you on most things its hard to remember that they agreed with you a few times in the past.
Since you choose to lump all catagories together outside being a Democrat apologist, the ratio may be 9 to 1. Since Democrat apologists and Republican apologists (which you are a part) are basically the same stripe, the ratio is more like 50-50.
You talk of intellectual honesty. There is none in your posts for two reasons.
1. Democrat apologists are in fact, aiding a abetting abortion and gay rights.
2. Everyone knows down deep inside both parties are stealing from the American people, and your promoting of the myth of a difference is intellectually dishonest.
Troll feeding is bad.
Troll feeding is bad.
From http://communitiesonline.homestead.com/dealingwithtrolls.html
Remember the golden rule: In all cases, the best response to a malicious or destructive troll is absolutely NO RESPONSE. Trolls will only stay where they are well fed. In a community where sharking or personal attack is not permitted, where members have been educated and further, taken prudent precautions to protect themselves from the worst forms of harassment, where the community-at-large has been trained to not feed conflict, and where officials are empowered to act in the community's best interest, TROLLS CANNOT FLOURISH.
If the community is moderated, inform the administrator(s) of the troll's presence at your earliest opportunity--preferably privately. Those who use public channels of communication may become a target of the troll.
No response means just that. That means no responses to his/her every post to inform the community it is a troll post; no sly innuendo, no veiled implications or threats - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. If members wish to discuss the troll, they should do so in a private venue such as e-mail. At the very most, an administrator or member can initiate a new thread directing members to the community's stated policy on trolls, or a link to this page, or any other page on the net dedicated to dealing with trolls within the community setting.
From http://communitiesonline.homestead.com/dealingwithtrolls.html
Remember the golden rule: In all cases, the best response to a malicious or destructive troll is absolutely NO RESPONSE. Trolls will only stay where they are well fed. In a community where sharking or personal attack is not permitted, where members have been educated and further, taken prudent precautions to protect themselves from the worst forms of harassment, where the community-at-large has been trained to not feed conflict, and where officials are empowered to act in the community's best interest, TROLLS CANNOT FLOURISH.
If the community is moderated, inform the administrator(s) of the troll's presence at your earliest opportunity--preferably privately. Those who use public channels of communication may become a target of the troll.
No response means just that. That means no responses to his/her every post to inform the community it is a troll post; no sly innuendo, no veiled implications or threats - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. If members wish to discuss the troll, they should do so in a private venue such as e-mail. At the very most, an administrator or member can initiate a new thread directing members to the community's stated policy on trolls, or a link to this page, or any other page on the net dedicated to dealing with trolls within the community setting.
Totally unnecessary to "QUOTE" , 'cept it needed to be seen/said again.
I'm in total agreement with these "instructions", since I have responded several times in good faith, only to see either a total ignoring OR , worse, a total maligning of what I said by inferences, misquoting, and flat out lying.
Therefore, I'm gonna attempt to follow this advice; the same that Rev Mitchell has repeatedly advised!!!!!
This post is a classic to illustrate your lack of understanding of the issues of the day, history, or government. As has been pointed out many times ad nauseum, the terms pro Bush, Republican, and conservative have no connection. The term pro Bush would mean a moderately liberal, inept form of governing. Republican means creating a false difference with Democrats then governing like them once elected. Conservative is the term you cited that comes closest to meaning governing by the Constitution.
Since you choose to lump all catagories together outside being a Democrat apologist, the ratio may be 9 to 1. Since Democrat apologists and Republican apologists (which you are a part) are basically the same stripe, the ratio is more like 50-50.
You talk of intellectual honesty. There is none in your posts for two reasons.
1. Democrat apologists are in fact, aiding a abetting abortion and gay rights.
2. Everyone knows down deep inside both parties are stealing from the American people, and your promoting of the myth of a difference is intellectually dishonest.
Lumping a large group of people together and assuming that they all believe the same thing is not only discriminatory but unChristian. saying all Democrats believe this or that is exactly that.
"Everyone knows down deep" is not a valid rational argument. No, I don't know down deep that the parties are the same. for one thing, the republicans have duped the Christian Right into thinking that all democrats are not Christians. This has gone a long ways towards destroying the effectiveness of Christ's church in the last 25 years. Most of the younger generations (Busters and the Mosaic generation) think of Christians as being:
1. Too political (I wonder which party.)
2. Hypocritical
3. Uncaring about their problems (e.g. health care)
4. Supportive of every war the U.S. might get itself into
5. Discriminatory
6. Not "walking the walk" but merely mouthing platitudes which they themselves don't follow.
By failing to recognize the terrible damage this unholy alliance between the Christian Right and the Republican Party has done to the church you become a part of the problem.
Troll feeding is bad.
Another worthless post by the master of worthless posts.
Totally unnecessary to "QUOTE" , 'cept it needed to be seen/said again.
I'm in total agreement with these "instructions", since I have responded several times in good faith, only to see either a total ignoring OR , worse, a total maligning of what I said by inferences, misquoting, and flat out lying.
Therefore, I'm gonna attempt to follow this advice; the same that Rev Mitchell has repeatedly advised!!!!!
As funny as alatide is I agree and will attempt the same.
Nonsequitur
New Member
Another worthless post by the master of worthless posts.
Getting hungry, sweetheart? Go tell Daddy his little girl wants a Taco Bell burrito.