Will Congress actually come back to DC to authorize this war?

The Savior wrote:We could have stayed

Why don't you go over then? I'm so sick of people who have no real stake in this making the decisions or calling for action. If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

SK790 wrote:

The Savior wrote:We could have stayed

Why don't you go over then? I'm so sick of people who have no real stake in this making the decisions or calling for action. If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

Like the entire chicken hawk Bush administration?

Bunch a draft dodgers.

Speaking of chicken hawks, this is one if my favorite debate moments simply because Newt gets owned badly and especially in the last few seconds.

pacino wrote:310,000 people show up to largest climate change protest in history

This is unbelievable. And sad. The human race is doomed.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/8q3nmm/burn-noticed

SK790 wrote:

The Savior wrote:We could have stayed

Why don't you go over then? I'm so sick of people who have no real stake in this making the decisions or calling for action. If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

what's the point of that? would it shock you if 51% of the army, or at least 51% of officers felt we should stay? i don't know if that's the percentage, wouldn't shock me if it was lower or higher. but the point remains, we don't let the army decide who to fight just because they want to fight.

savior believes we should have stayed. You (and I) don't. totally reasonable to have the debate.

SK790 wrote:If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

If increasing the power of American labor is so important to you, quit your job and become a union organizer or shut up.

And you say my analogies are bad.

sydnor wrote:

SK790 wrote:

The Savior wrote:We could have stayed

Why don't you go over then? I'm so sick of people who have no real stake in this making the decisions or calling for action. If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

what's the point of that? would it shock you if 51% of the army, or at least 51% of officers felt we should stay? i don't know if that's the percentage, wouldn't shock me if it was lower or higher. but the point remains, we don't let the army decide who to fight just because they want to fight.

savior believes we should have stayed. You (and I) don't. totally reasonable to have the debate.

jeff, i'm just sick of upper middle class white people urging us to go to war when very few of them or their family members are willing to serve. the military is an escape for a lot of poor kids who have no other options. i don't really know or care what % of the army thinks we should stay or how it's relevant to my point, but i guess my point was a bit vague...

jerseyhoya wrote:

SK790 wrote:If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

If increasing the power of American labor is so important to you, quit your job and become a union organizer or shut up.

the things you write down are so crazy mixed up, nobody can understand you, could you please write in plain english sentences

SK790 wrote:

sydnor wrote:

SK790 wrote:

The Savior wrote:We could have stayed

Why don't you go over then? I'm so sick of people who have no real stake in this making the decisions or calling for action. If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

what's the point of that? would it shock you if 51% of the army, or at least 51% of officers felt we should stay? i don't know if that's the percentage, wouldn't shock me if it was lower or higher. but the point remains, we don't let the army decide who to fight just because they want to fight.

savior believes we should have stayed. You (and I) don't. totally reasonable to have the debate.

jeff, i'm just sick of upper middle class white people urging us to go to war when very few of them or their family members are willing to serve. the military is an escape for a lot of poor kids who have no other options. i don't really know or care what % of the army thinks we should stay or how it's relevant to my point, but i guess my point was a bit vague...

you know the risk of loss would be far less had we stayed, even with a relatively nominal presence, than the current situation we're facing, right? further, i have multiple friends who have served and are serving. you're the same age I am or at least in the relative ballpark. it's been our generation serving the frontlines.

suggesting we stay isn't said lightly. it's the simple fact that volatility in the area would be far more manageable if we possessed a presence. broadcasting to our enemies when we're leaving (e.g. deadlines) is never, ever good.

What sk said is such a small thing, of course that becomes the topic of conversation.


How about how this will balloon our debt?!?!?! Unchecked executive power! Partnering with nations like Saudi Arabia! Where are the hearings? What's this got to do with Benghazi?!

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

SK790 wrote:If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

If increasing the power of American labor is so important to you, quit your job and become a union organizer or shut up.

the things you write down are so crazy mixed up, nobody can understand you, could you please write in plain english sentences

where did you develop the habit of assuming the role of board thought leader? it's not hard to understand anything he says. whether or not you agree with him, and i don't the vast majority of the time, he's not typing in tongues or anything.

pacino wrote:What sk said is such a small thing, of course that becomes the topic of conversation.


How about how this will balloon our debt?!?!?!

it was as small as what savior said, except much less civil. obviously people will respond to it

pacino wrote:What sk said is such a small thing, of course that becomes the topic of conversation.


How about how this will balloon our debt?!?!?! Unchecked executive power! Partnering with nations like Saudi Arabia! Where are the hearings? What's this got to do with Benghazi?!

the debt thing is terrifying

The Savior wrote:

SK790 wrote:

sydnor wrote:

SK790 wrote:

The Savior wrote:We could have stayed

Why don't you go over then? I'm so sick of people who have no real stake in this making the decisions or calling for action. If securing Iraq is so important to you, go join the goddamn army or shut up.

what's the point of that? would it shock you if 51% of the army, or at least 51% of officers felt we should stay? i don't know if that's the percentage, wouldn't shock me if it was lower or higher. but the point remains, we don't let the army decide who to fight just because they want to fight.

savior believes we should have stayed. You (and I) don't. totally reasonable to have the debate.

jeff, i'm just sick of upper middle class white people urging us to go to war when very few of them or their family members are willing to serve. the military is an escape for a lot of poor kids who have no other options. i don't really know or care what % of the army thinks we should stay or how it's relevant to my point, but i guess my point was a bit vague...

you know the risk of loss would be far less had we stayed, even with a relatively nominal presence, than the current situation we're facing, right? further, i have multiple friends who have served and are serving. you're the same age I am or at least in the relative ballpark. it's been our generation serving the frontlines.

suggesting we stay isn't said lightly. it's the simple fact that volatility in the area would be far more manageable if we possessed a presence. broadcasting to our enemies when we're leaving (e.g. deadlines) is never, ever good.

It's not a part of our country. Why must we stay there in perpetuity? It will not stabilize because of any military action we take. There are many unstable regions of the world we dont give two shits about.

ISIS started because we broke the area. Once they're neutralized, then what?

our national security and the security of some of our closest allies extends far beyond their respective borders.

the suggestion that "we broke the area" is one of the most baffling comments/conclusions in this thread

We couldve not entered to begin with, we couldve helped with the Syrian drought, we couldve stopped backing the Saudis, we couldve done a lot of things differently. You have to start somewhere.

The Savior wrote:the suggestion that "we broke the area" is one of the most baffling comments/conclusions in this thread

No, not really all that baffling. But whatever. We hold different opinions obviously.