War Protestors and Politicians PUT UP OR SHUT UP

Heres is your chance take it please

from JoeUser Forums
For all the whining crybabies protesting the war and bemoaning the treatment of the poor terrorist here is a great idea.

All you have to do is get a new bill together saying NO MORE FUNDING OF WAR>> THATS all

then sign your names to it, get on television and get together a coalition of the weak and cowardly to have petitions signed.

Its very simple really all you have to do is come out and tell america "we will not have part in the greater war on terror"

But of course then you have to live with all your neighbors knowing who you are.

The politicions knowing there re-election is in risk of failing WILL NOT HAVE THE BALLZ to do this.

If your so sure this war is a bad war, wrong war, wrong time, wrong reasons, step up to the national plate and take your swings, out front in view of everyone.

But since you value your jobs and eating at the public troth YOUR not going to do this, your just going to cry, and whine in the background, take sneak shots at the President.
politics
16,739 views 67 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

All you have to do is get a new bill together saying NO MORE FUNDING OF WAR>> THATS all

then sign your names to it

Actually, if they did that, they would not be cowardly.  Foolhardy perhaps, but not cowardly.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005All you have to do is get a new bill together saying NO MORE FUNDING OF WAR>> THATS allthen sign your names to itActually, if they did that, they would not be cowardly. Foolhardy perhaps, but not cowardly.


If the reason they do not do it is because of their clinging on to a job then its cowardly..
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: MyrranderPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005What's the "public troth?"Are we getting engaged?


um nope that would be pigame if we married lol and its what the pigs eat at even if I misspelled things as usual.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #4 By: Moderateman - 1/27/2005 12:58:51 PM
Reply By: MyrranderPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005What's the "public troth?"Are we getting engaged?


um nope that would be pigame if we married lol and its what the pigs eat at even if I misspelled things as usual.


Nope just a dyslexic finger. It's "gh" not " th".
Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top
Ah yes. Here is that wonderful old republican junk argument:

If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars.

The lunkhead Republicans love to use this one as well as the ever famous:

If you think this war was a stupid idea, then you love terrorists and saddam.

I like the way the original poster spun this one, it is even more clever:

If you are against this war, then you must want the troops to run out of equipment and funding so they all get killed.

When republicans can't win an argument, like for example the argument that "this war was a stupid idea, look at how it has turned out...." They always try to get into some different debate, that would be easier for them to win, like whether or not liberal senators should propose a resolution that would dissolve the armed forces, or whether or not french intelligence thought there were WMD in Iraq. IRRELEVANT!!!!

TOO BAD THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE!
Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top
If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars.



I dont recall anyone saying that. I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did. And isnt it the mantra of the left that he who resorts to name calling has lost the debate?

Seems you just cost your team a touchdown, and probably the game.
Reply #8 from PolMach Forums Top
I dont recall anyone saying that. I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did. And isnt it the mantra of the left that he who resorts to name calling has lost the debate?

Seems you just cost your team a touchdown, and probably the game


You just need to go back to the original post for the name calling. Weak, cowardly, whining crybabies.

You want us to stop talking about the war and Dubyah. Show me that he has a plan in Iraq to end it. He hasn't up to now, just wishful thinking. He thought he could come into Iraq with insufficient troops because they would not have to act as police in the post war. They thought everyone would forget they have no food, power as long as they had freedom and gotten rid of Saddam. Another way to get us to stop talking about the war is to find one reason originally presented that is even valid anymore. Put up or shut up.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Umm.. mod, the war against Iraq is NOT a war against terror.

And actually we have stood up and said we are against the War in Iraq.

So you put up or shut up.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
This really is a silly argument. Petitions have been signed and sent to the President with thousands of names. The antiwar movement would LOVE some tv exposure but they can't get it. But you are right about one thing, just about every national office holding politician is spineless, and the main one who sticks out in my mind who wasn't died in a plane crash in Minnesota.

And let's be clear as sandy just pointed out. Iraqi insurgents and foreign terrorists are quite different things. Last time I recall we invaded Iraq.

I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did.

And clearly from the beginning of this grammar error ridden rant there was name calling.

eating at the public troth YOUR not going to do this

YOUR = "You are" OR "You're"

Sorry man, I hate to nitpick but it's a pet-peeve of mine,
Suspeckted
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #9 By: sandy2 - 1/27/2005 5:53:34 PM
Umm.. mod, the war against Iraq is NOT a war against terror.

And actually we have stood up and said we are against the War in Iraq.

So you put up or shut up.


And just what would you like him to put up?
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sorry man, I hate to nitpick but it's a pet-peeve of mine,SuspecktedBonus Rating: Trolling Insightful


um know yur not ifin ya was yer wuldnt pik nits
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Nope just a dyslexic finger. It's "gh" not " th".


thanx doc
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: greggbertPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005Ah yes. Here is that wonderful old republican junk argument: If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars. The lunkhead Republicans love to use this one as well as the ever famous: If you think this war was a stupid idea, then you love terrorists and saddam. I like the way the original poster spun this one, it is even more clever:If you are against this war, then you must want the troops to run out of equipment and funding so they all get killed.When republicans can't win an argument, like for example the argument that "this war was a stupid idea, look at how it has turned out...." They always try to get into some different debate, that would be easier for them to win, like whether or not liberal senators should propose a resolution that would dissolve the armed forces, or whether or not french intelligence thought there were WMD in Iraq. IRRELEVANT!!!! TOO BAD THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE!


The ISSUE is we are fighting, wrongly or rightly, you get a grip,,, and stop crying all over my blog, btw would you like some cheese with your whine?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars. I dont recall anyone saying that. I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did. And isnt it the mantra of the left that he who resorts to name calling has lost the debate?Seems you just cost your team a touchdown, and probably the game.


and here I thought i was being well behaved, oh well.. let the flaming begin anew!!
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
You just need to go back to the original post for the name calling. Weak, cowardly, whining crybabies


I calls em as I sees em....weak,cowardly,whiney, also spineless, knock kneed, and dandruff filled brains.


I am backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk left leaning losers beware!!!!!!!!!!
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: sandy2Posted: Thursday, January 27, 2005Umm.. mod, the war against Iraq is NOT a war against terror.


ummmmmmm maybe it was not war on terror when WE STARTED BUT IIT IS NOW!!!
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk left leaning losers beware!!!!!!!!!!


And I thought we were making progress

I don't really support this war but cut all funding? That ain't gonna help anyone. I don't see how more people dieing will help end a war. Well, I do, but I would like a little less bloody alternative.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply #18 By: NJforever - 1/27/2005 8:42:32 PM
I am backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk left leaning losers beware!!!!!!!!!!


And I thought we were making progress


you and I are.... no need to fight between the 2 of us....we can agree or disagree or agree to disagree, like big boys and not throw rocks either. k?
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #18 By: NJforever - 1/27/2005 8:42:32 PM
I am backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk left leaning losers beware!!!!!!!!!!


And I thought we were making progress

I don't really support this war but cut all funding? That ain't gonna help anyone. I don't see how more people dieing will help end a war. Well, I do, but I would like a little less bloody alternative.


as someone that waded in blood up to my ankles in wartime I too hate war,,, but lets try to remember we were attacked.. k?
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
you and I are.... no need to fight between the 2 of us....we can agree or disagree or agree to disagree, like big boys and not throw rocks either. k?


as someone that waded in blood up to my ankles in wartime I too hate war,,, but lets try to remember we were attacked.. k?


I think we can agree here.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
and on furthure review I did not name one politician nor name the left either,,, why does anyone assume that i was shooting at the left and left pols? um could it be i hit the nail on the head?
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
and on furthure review I did not name one politician nor name the left either,,, why does anyone assume that i was shooting at the left and left pols? um could it be i hit the nail on the head?


No... but it could be the war protesters are the left.... which we are...
Reply #24 from PolMach Forums Top
ummmmmmm maybe it was not war on terror when WE STARTED BUT IIT IS NOW!!!


brilliant strategy, put our military where the terrorists can get to them in an area ripe for recruitment because we left the people to the looters, the kidnappers and couldn't even get basic utilities to them for weeks.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
You want us to stop talking about the war and Dubyah. Show me that he has a plan in Iraq to end it.


Prs. Bush has told us when he will bring the troops home. He said he would 1) When the job is done and 2) When the government of Iraq asks him to. That is about as much as he can (or should) tell us, without telling the enemy what they need to do to win the war. You don't win wars by telling the enemy your strategies beforehand.

War is not fought on a day planner, palm pilot, or calendar, it is based on a series of objectives and should only end when either the objectives are met, or either side has been broken down to the point they can no longer continue the fight. If the pentagon or the president did have a timetable in mind, It would be completely assanine to tell the enemy what that might be. All that does is signal to the enemy how much longer they have to push it before we just up and quit.

In war, secrets are lives, quit insisting that our government put our troops in even more danger than they already are, just to satisfy our own shortsightedness.