sorry, you faint of hearts...just making a general statement!! 4got about your sensitivities as compassionate Libs...cry, and then get over it!!

You were the sensitive one, I just responded to your complaint...I guess you could say I brought the cheese and crackers to go with your whine...

Ever consider giving up the steroids?

KJ

Glad u didnt come back with that old Lib retort of "better take your meds!' That went out with a certain Lib Lesbian here awhile back...

No, dont take 'steroids,' but do watch John Wayne, Lee Marvin, Steven Segal movies 24/7...!!

Most of the treaty nukes were already destroyed in the Ron, Billy Bob, and Herbert years. What nukes was he suppose to destroy that he did not? The only controversy I can remember is him bending on the treaty about DEFENSIVE systems. (anti-missile systems). What am I forgetting?

Please give an example.

Saddam invaded Kuwait, was removed from Kuwait and then disobeyed 17 UN Sanctions. When did we first strike him?

So, what city is an acceptable lose for you? How many people can die before we should retaliate? Because something tells me, after 9/11 you where one that was crying "Why did we not do anything to prevent this". If we could have truly prevented it, should we have?
What law did Israel break? What law did we break? 17 UN resolutions stated what would happen if he did not live up to the sanctions. That was international law and I think 17 chances in addition to the genocide is plenty of time.
Now that IS a neoconservative idea that I am proud of. I am happy and proud to support my military or the Israeli even. I support the troops PERIOD. and I don't regret it. I know what its about, I have been in the shoes.

Well thats just stupid. I agree that that is just bogus. Carter may not have been the greatest president ever, but he was not racist. Far from it. I think he truly tried (at least he tried) to get these people to talk and give and take.
So, you are the government head in Israel, you get attacked by Hamas on a daily basis even after making concessions and relocating an entire pools of your population. Hamas says they will not stop until there is no Israeli state period. What do you do?

Lebanon terrorist cells operating with the support of Beirut shell your country from over the border. What do you do?

Egypt attacks your country, do you not defend? What do you do?

Iran's head of state tells his people the goal of their country is to join together and wipe Israel off the face of the map, and that they are close to being able to do it. What do you do?

The list goes on. please make one of your own.

I think your confused? What villages and land? Outside what boundaries? What illegal settlements? There has never been a Palestine other then the land that Israel set aside for them to settle INSIDE of Israel. This was Carters idea, it was a good shot, but you can't reason with terrorist's. Even after setting aside these areas, Hamas and Palestinians shelled and bombed adjoining areas inside of Israel. Again I ask you, what do you do if your the leader? They sit at the table again and again, and Humas continues to engage.

Again, like NeoCon, you assume it is some derogatory grouping of racist people. Racist Zionists in a group speaking racist does not make all Zionist racist, it makes the people in the room racist. I am very pro-Israel as you can see, which makes me a Zionist. You will be amazed maybe however. I believe the ONLY way to end this multi-centuries old feud is a Palestinian state. The people of Palestine, as the people of East Germany have got the short end of the stick in all of this. The Palestinians however are not the largest segment of a Nationless people. The largest group of Nationless people are the Kurds, the very people that Saddam was exterminating from his land like roaches. But its not popular to talk about them right? So back to Palestine.... The problem with Palastine is it is ran (now officially) by a terrorist group called Hamas. They have no intention of a road map to success. Its all ideology to them. And now, the Palestinian people have shared in the blame by officially voting in Hamas to government.

Or better yet, go there! And talk to people! Ya, thats even better. But wait, already did. Have you? Its actually an awesome trip. Lots of history and people are amazing. Well I digress...

Again, you say its a description, but you don't use neocon by definition, you redefine it as negative connotation that basically means evil view not of your own. Thats not what it means, and grouping it with these other words just blows my mind. If you mean Islamic fundamentalist, I would say thats a pretty big entity when they are blowing buildings and ships and lives up. I am also guessing you mean Christian Fanatical like people that bomb Abortion Clinics. None of these people are accepted by Islam or Christians, so lets say what they are, terrorists. But how does NeoCon even fit in to the other two? LOL It sounds like you have some hate issues you need to work through.

What aggression? Just us being an ally?

WOOOOHHH, slow down there Kujo, I never said I knew what you thought. I only said what I think. I asked you questions yes, but the previous post, you asked the question. Give examples. In which I did. If you don't like examples, or disagreement gets you that upset, you might want to try something outside the politics threads. We are just a couple guys talking about current events. If you can't handle it, go drink a coffee, don't take it personal, and try the jokes thread.

KJ[/quote]

But you have no clue what this phrase even means. In your own context you say "Bush adopted this policy after 9/11". That does not even make sense. Let alone the fact that it is not even a POLICY! You ARE trying to insert a big word that you think is derogatory sounding when all it means is ---Neoconservatism is the political philosophy that emerged in the United States from the rejection of [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Truck Forum Link. ! Conservatives know this and it just comes off as silly when liberals use it or at least try to use it when they don't even know what it means. They try to use it as an adverb or something. Its comical. Neoconservatives is just saying one is not a modern Social Liberal. Thats all its saying! Basically saying its Reagonism on Social issues! It has nothing to do with Israel or Military Power! You guys just sound ridicules and it lessens the value in a whole of the rest of your arguement.

All I can say is "THANK GOD" the intel report was actually given to the American people before we nuked Iran. Now, bush has not much of a chance of doing this without a friggin revolution taking place.
Though Bush, is still saying that Iran is still a threat. Totally disregarding the intel.
I hope this will shed some light on the intel about the Iraq war. Which was actually the same. The CIA told Bush that Iraq didn't have any Nuclear Capabilities before we bombed Iraq. But, he still made a big enough case/lie that "America would be safer without Saddam".

leads me to believe that Fitzgerald went after Libby, to take the heat off the Downing street memo's and the CIA information about the WMD's in Iraq.

I should take the word of a truckdriver? And my answer is STILL the same, I have NEVER heard anyone say we should hate ALL MUSLIMS.

__________________

Well, The Intel on IRAQ was WRONG, because Saddam had no WMD. How much faith do we now place in Intel that says IRAN doesn't have, and isn't building NUKES? You can't have it both ways...

Would your reaction be the same it it were Billy "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton that took Saddam out of power? After-all, it was William Jefferson Clinton that signed the legislation authorizing the removal of Saddam from power.

__________________

[yt=Billy Bob's Truth]BnceSIxxOYg[/yt]

Bush knew there were no WMD's. And the Intel told him that. But that intel was cherry picked by Cheney. That has been proven. Your still basing your facts on the ones that Bush gave. The facts that he gave just after being forced to tell the American people that there were no WMD's.
The facts about the CIA suggestions. And other intel. As in Bush's own inspector reporting "There were no WMD's in iraq, and that there was no evidence that WMD's were taken to Syria."
Those my friend, are the facts. And your facts have cost almost 4,000 soldiers. Be sure to thank Mr. Bush for your facts.

[yt="Real Facts"]SCTpNDkBqmM[/yt]