How many?

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Hate to break it to you PVS, but what clinton did was [b]rape. He coerced those women using his power as the president to intimidate those women into giving him oral, or be out of a job. And SpellJammer doubts you have the balls to say **** you to the president, much less one who could not only leave you in the poor house, but ruin your life forever if you refuse to comply to his demands. Clinton was just more of a pig, like the old barbaric savages in the darkages who had women slaves and large glasses of ale to bask in thier debautchery. Where as Bush is more of a face, just a diversion away from our future overlord Dick Chenney.

Out of the two, SpellJammer would deffinitly choose Mr. Bush. He's just a man trying to get by and if that means being a pawn so be it. But atleast he doesn't rape women.. [/B]

Oh, No..if Chenny(sp?) is elected into office it will prove that America had become a bunch of hysterical ridden delusional idiots who have become puppets! If people vote Chenny, There is obviously something wrong in their heads. I hope Chenny doesn't win because if he does, I will lead the liberals into a revolt against our governmet.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Left the topic name vain on purpose so you'd actually have to [b]read it.. How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush? None..[/b]

Originally posted by Spelljammer

[b]SpellJammer smash puny liberal who makes him think naughty things! [/B]

HAHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

Originally posted by dragon milly
Hearing you refer to yourself in the third person over and over again just to defend a Republican, makes me think you are more of a Bob Dole fan than a Bush one. 😛

😂

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Actually a report was done on 60 min (or some other news show) where they followed a day in the life of an american soldier in afghanistan. He was actually in Iraq and said Afghanistan is so much worse (as did many of his companions). Also the Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan have been told that it is much worse gig than Iraq by American counterparts.

As for the membership of Al-Queda increasing, look around. The war in Afghanistan is continuing, the insurgency in Iraq is expanding, terrorist attacks claimed by Al-Queda have increased , Al Qaeda has established new local terror networks in northern Sinai and other locations around the world and Al-Qaeda websites are increasing.

"Type Al Qaeda intellgence" onto google and sort throught the results.

I'm assuming there some are anti-Bush soldiers fighting over there in Afghanistan and Iraq. All the journalists have to do is find a few of them and have them whine in front of the camera. I've also seen some documenteries done about the fighting in the middle east which were very positive.

Of course the war is continuing. They are trying to stop our progress. That's what happens in wars. Counter-attacks and so forth. The difference here is that there isn't a central point from which the U.S. can focus their attacks. It makes it a lot more difficult to win a war when things are like that.
I know that you are smart enough to understand that wars aren't won overnight so what's the deal?

Can I put this in perspective?

WWII- 5 years/more than 290,000 U.S. casualties

War in Iraq and Afghanistan- 4 years and counting/more than 1700 U.S. deaths

I think this war has done a whole fricken lot more than people are whining about

I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

Seriously, do you actually think the war in iraq is as justifiable as the us involvement in WWII?

Did Roosevelt get specific conversational instructions from god to go into WWII?

Originally posted by Echuu

I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

Did a Search on Al Qaida...got a nice 8 Million .....Google Search
Did a Search on Al Qaeda...got a nice 24 Million .....Googlle Search 2

Spelling is your Internet Search friend ✅

Hey guy's i have an idea . Lets take a noob , make him think he's real big . Feed him some bullshit about politics and how good he is and then tell him to refer to himself in the third person to make him look like a even bigger douchebag* then he already is .

*Note A douchebag = vexatious ******* that most people wish were killed with a Mortal Kombat fatality.

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm assuming there some are anti-Bush soldiers fighting over there in Afghanistan and Iraq. All the journalists have to do is find a few of them and have them whine in front of the camera. I've also seen some documenteries done about the fighting in the middle east which were very positive.

Of course the war is continuing. They are trying to stop our progress. That's what happens in wars. Counter-attacks and so forth. The difference here is that there isn't a central point from which the U.S. can focus their attacks. It makes it a lot more difficult to win a war when things are like that.
I know that you are smart enough to understand that wars aren't won overnight so what's the deal?

Can I put this in perspective?

WWII- 5 years/more than 290,000 U.S. casualties

War in Iraq and Afghanistan- 4 years and counting/more than 1700 U.S. deaths

I think this war has done a whole fricken lot more than people are whining about

I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
Seriously, do you actually think the war in iraq is as justifiable as the us involvement in WWII?

I was putting death tolls in perspective. Actually the wars have some similarities if you think about it. History DOES repeat itself; just slightly different.

Bardock42>......... Yeah I did some different spelling and I got a LOT of stuff. I meant that the stuff I found wasn't very significant to what he was talking about.

xmarksthespot>......... I never said anything even remotely close to suggesting that.

grey fox>.........That's EXACTLY the problem with KMC

Originally posted by Echuu
I was putting death tolls in perspective. Actually the wars have some similarities if you think about it. History DOES repeat itself; just slightly different.

you know actually I thought this war in Iraq reminded me more of Vietnam. I am not good at memorizing war facts or anything so I don't know all the death tolls for WWI and WWII or Vietnam. But just the way things are going. It seems like we will never get out of there. That the cost for this is basically pointless. I dont really think this war is going to change anything.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
you know actually I thought this war in Iraq reminded me more of Vietnam. I am not good at memorizing war facts or anything so I don't know all the death tolls for WWI and WWII or Vietnam. But just the way things are going. It seems like we will never get out of there. That the cost for this is basically pointless. I dont really think this war is going to change anything.

It is sort of like Vietnam. But our president isn't dumb(odd isn't it?) enough to withdraw the troops right away and create a mass slaughter.

Originally posted by Echuu
It is sort of like Vietnam. But our president isn't dumb(odd isn't it?) enough to withdraw the troops right away and create a mass slaughter.

Also, another startling revelation is the fact that he speaks in coherent sentences. People seem to think that misspeaking implies that one has the inability to complete a thought.

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm assuming there some are anti-Bush soldiers fighting over there in Afghanistan and Iraq. All the journalists have to do is find a few of them and have them whine in front of the camera. I've also seen some documenteries done about the fighting in the middle east which were very positive.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself? Positive documentaries? I'd love to have a few titles if you please.

Originally posted by Echuu
Of course the war is continuing. They are trying to stop our progress. That's what happens in wars. Counter-attacks and so forth. The difference here is that there isn't a central point from which the U.S. can focus their attacks. It makes it a lot more difficult to win a war when things are like that.
I know that you are smart enough to understand that wars aren't won overnight so what's the deal?

You cannot fight terrorism by declaring war on nations, that ain't gonna work, as has been made glaringly apparent.

Originally posted by Echuu

Can I put this in perspective?

WWII- 5 years/more than 290,000 U.S. casualties

War in Iraq and Afghanistan- 4 years and counting/more than 1700 U.S. deaths

Are you comparing a global conflict such as WW2 with an occupation and invasion of a country that was invaded under false pretences?

Not to mention comparing the deaths of U.S. soldiers is ridiculous considering the vast differences in modern conventional warfare to that of the 1940's.

I am curious if you hae statistics on Iraqi civilian deaths over the last 4 years?

Originally posted by Echuu
I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

You got 24 million results and couldn't find anything relevant to what I was talking about?

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Are you trying to convince me or yourself? Positive documentaries? I'd love to have a few titles if you please.

You cannot fight terrorism by declaring war on nations, that ain't gonna work, as has been made glaringly apparent.

Are you comparing a global conflict such as WW2 with an occupation and invasion of a country that was invaded under false pretences?

Not to mention comparing the deaths of U.S. soldiers is ridiculous considering the vast differences in modern conventional warfare to that of the 1940's.

I am curious if you hae statistics on Iraqi civilian deaths over the last 4 years?

You got 24 million results and couldn't find anything relevant to what I was talking about?

Okay documentaries... I believe BBC has some that I saw and then my local public television, MPTV, had some. Don't remember the exact names though, sorry. The one I remember most was about a sergeant(I think) and his men doing various door to door searchs and interviewing local civilians to find out information on possible terrorists. He was very positive.

Um; we haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet. Once again; wars aren't fought over night.

I am comparing the global conflict of WWII with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq(war on terror). I'm not saying that everything that happened was related, just that there are some interesting similarities if you think about it.

Errrr. Technologically yes, tactics wise; maybe.
Fine then we will look at Vietnam; 47, 369 deaths.
Or Korea...33,651 deaths.
I'm saying that casualties pale in comparison and the huge amounts of whining before we even see the full results of the war are pathetic. (Not that I don't value life. I am sorry for anyone who has lost a loved one in any war)
Like I said before; Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt are some examples of the short term effects of what we have accomplished in the Middle East.

I'm curious as to how many of those civilians were killed by terrorists. I am also curious as to how many civilians were slaughtered and put into mass graves, or how many people were raped while under Saddam's rule. I am also curious if you know how many terrorists(or insurgents) have been killed. I think if I remember correctly it's like one American soldier to ten terrorists in the death ratio. I kinda forgot since the liberal media never reports on how many terrorists die over there 🙄 .

Most of what I found was just stories on Al-Qaeda. i.e. 'Al-Qaeda training manual found','terrorism Q&A/Al-Qaeda', or Al-Qaeda leaders arrested.

Originally posted by Echuu
The one I remember most was about a sergeant(I think) and his men doing various door to door searchs and interviewing local civilians to find out information on possible terrorists. He was very positive.

One Sargent?

Originally posted by Echuu
Um; we haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet. Once again; wars aren't fought over night.

Not once have I said that wars ARE fought overnight, so stop saying that. We haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet because that in not a justifiable cause for war. The results that we have seen so far have not been promising as have been the results of other times in history when the U.S. has used military action to dictate the politics of another country.

Originally posted by Echuu
I am comparing the global conflict of WWII with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq(war on terror). I'm not saying that everything that happened was related, just that there are some interesting similarities if you think about it.

Please point out these similarities.

Originally posted by Echuu
Fine then we will look at Vietnam; 47, 369 deaths.
Or Korea...33,651 deaths.

Tactics and technology have also changed since these conflicts. Apparently you are only counting (or valuing) American deaths. Is that all that matters?

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm saying that casualties pale in comparison and the huge amounts of whining before we even see the full results of the war are pathetic. (Not that I don't value life. I am sorry for anyone who has lost a loved one in any war)

Read some stats on deaths and casualties of both Iraqi civilians and american military men. Saying that those deaths pale in comparison before we see the results of the war is very ignorant.

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm curious as to how many of those civilians were killed by terrorists

Far more were killed by the bombings from Allied forces planes and most have been women and children. If you are truly curious, look it up, I did a quick search and there is plenty of information.

Originally posted by Echuu
I am also curious as to how many civilians were slaughtered and put into mass graves, or how many people were raped while under Saddam's rule.

As terrible as life under Saddam's rule was, more Iraqis have died directly due to the military actions of George Bush Sr. and Jr. then ever by Saddam Hussein. As for rape and torture, apparently they are not too safe from that anymore as american military soldiers are also participating in that.

Originally posted by Echuu
I am also curious if you know how many terrorists(or insurgents) have been killed. I think if I remember correctly it's like one American soldier to ten terrorists in the death ratio. I kinda forgot since the liberal media never reports on how many terrorists die over there 🙄 .

Yes because the liberal media supports the terrorists, that must be it. As for the whole discussion on the liberal media, that has been done to death and proven a fallacy, search KMC forums for further info on that.

Originally posted by Echuu
Most of what I found was just stories on Al-Qaeda. i.e. 'Al-Qaeda training manual found','terrorism Q&A/Al-Qaeda', or Al-Qaeda leaders arrested.

If your truly interested, keep searching.

Yes, American deaths are all that matter. They are the enemy. Atleast we know whom to hate, you hate Americans and wish ill on your own people. Just shutup for once in your life kharmahdog, nobody wants to hear your hallow, liberal garbage..

Echuu, there's no point in arguing with a liberal. They don't understand ceartain human functions, they're just cold-blooded machines made from metal, wires, and carbs.. 😛

Ah, spelljammer, here's where you spew nonsense, I make you look foolish, and then you stop posting or run because you look stupid.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Yes, American deaths are all that matter. They are the enemy.

All Iraqis are the enemy? Then why are you over there trying to 'help' them?

Originally posted by Spelljammer
you hate Americans and wish ill on your own people. Just shutup for once in your life kharmahdog, nobody wants to hear your hallow, liberal garbage..

I missed where I said I hated americans and where I "wished ill" on my own people, you know why? Because I never said it. You see, you have to fabricate arguements because you can't prove anything you say and you never have a valid point.

I actually am not a liberal either, I'm independant.

SpellJammer is independant too.. You're one of those neo-socialist "anyone but Bush!" independants who aren't REALLY independant, you just don't want to get the vicous attacks from Republicans..

Where as SpellJammer is a real independant and thinks for himself. If it wouldn't have been a waste of vote because the independant party is so scatter-brained because most think like a ceartain someone on here.. He would've voted for Nader..