I think we're going to be saying "that was to be expected" for every troop number increase...
Maybe not for every one, But the people I know in the military were told to be ready for this quite a while before the attacks started. Dont forget you have to allow for backups, re-enforcements, plus tour of duty's,ect.. I know someone in Afghanistan, he is supposed to be there for 6 months. (he just went over there) but they told him they may extend it. So stuff like this is not unexpected and should be expected to continue.
The photo above is from these guys and their funny "infiltrations" of various "peace" marches.
Check out the gallery on their site, of some of their posters. Notice how oblivious everyone around them is to their signs. They apparently aren't even reading what is on them!
"Oh cool...another protest sign. Let's welcome them to the fold and not actually realize they're tweaking us...".
If there's one group out there BEGGING to be made fun of, it's the hardcore, lay-in-the-street, march-at-the-drop-of-a-hat, "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!!!" goobers who are going to hate anything and everything done by a Republican administration and are looking for any excuse to scream, tote signs, march, fight with cops, etc.
The UN will sit, twiddling its thumbs and whistling while hundreds of thousands of people are slaughtered. It reminds me of Eddie Izzard talking about Pol Pot and Stalin, how we don't care if a brutal regime is slaughtering millions, as long as it is their own people.
Yeah, hilarous. Those anti-war types don't care about Saddam slaughtering his own people, while the pro-war crowd started caring when exactly?
Oh yeah, I remember, when people saw right through their pathetic attempts to tie Saddam to 9/11, and rejected outright any suggestion that Saddam's weapons (of mass destruction, natch) posed any threat to his neighbours, much less the wider world. But the troops were in place, and we needed another excuse so...free the Iraqi people!
Something was bound to stick eventually, right?
This attempt to seize the moral high ground on this issue sickens me to my stomach.
Yeah, hilarous. Those anti-war types don't care about Saddam slaughtering his own people, while the pro-war crowd started caring when exactly?
Oh yeah, I remember, when people saw right through their pathetic attempts to tie Saddam to 9/11, and rejected outright any suggestion that Saddam's weapons (of mass destruction, natch) posed any threat to his neighbours, much less the wider world. But the troops were in place, and we needed another excuse so...free the Iraqi people!
Something was bound to stick eventually, right?
This attempt to seize the moral high ground on this issue sickens me to my stomach.
you should have read all the post : this banner is a fake, made by pro-war people wanting to ridiculize anti-war protests. See the post of Pscates.
The [US] will sit, twiddling its thumbs and whistling while hundreds of thousands of people are slaughtered [and ultimately take advantage of their own grevious mistakes and use said mistakes as a false pretense for war].
I couldn't have said it better myself. Only don't forget that it goes against the principles of our democracy to forge an opportunity to use military force.
you should have read all the post : this banner is a fake, made by pro-war people wanting to ridiculize anti-war protests. See the post of Pscates.
Yes, the banner was a fake, and yet the protestors still seemed to have no problem with him being there. Interesting isn' t it. There was also this one:
I only posted it because of the post previous by Groverat.
Comments
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
I think we're going to be saying "that was to be expected" for every troop number increase...
Maybe not for every one, But the people I know in the military were told to be ready for this quite a while before the attacks started. Dont forget you have to allow for backups, re-enforcements, plus tour of duty's,ect.. I know someone in Afghanistan, he is supposed to be there for 6 months. (he just went over there) but they told him they may extend it. So stuff like this is not unexpected and should be expected to continue.
Originally posted by pscates
For Noah, Scott, the 'rat, Fellowship, SDW, etc., here's a site you might dig:
http://www.protestwarrior.com/
The photo above is from these guys and their funny "infiltrations" of various "peace" marches.
Check out the gallery on their site, of some of their posters. Notice how oblivious everyone around them is to their signs. They apparently aren't even reading what is on them!
"Oh cool...another protest sign. Let's welcome them to the fold and not actually realize they're tweaking us...".
If there's one group out there BEGGING to be made fun of, it's the hardcore, lay-in-the-street, march-at-the-drop-of-a-hat, "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!!!" goobers who are going to hate anything and everything done by a Republican administration and are looking for any excuse to scream, tote signs, march, fight with cops, etc.
Good catch Pscates.
Originally posted by groverat
The UN will sit, twiddling its thumbs and whistling while hundreds of thousands of people are slaughtered. It reminds me of Eddie Izzard talking about Pol Pot and Stalin, how we don't care if a brutal regime is slaughtering millions, as long as it is their own people.
Yeah, hilarous. Those anti-war types don't care about Saddam slaughtering his own people, while the pro-war crowd started caring when exactly?
Oh yeah, I remember, when people saw right through their pathetic attempts to tie Saddam to 9/11, and rejected outright any suggestion that Saddam's weapons (of mass destruction, natch) posed any threat to his neighbours, much less the wider world. But the troops were in place, and we needed another excuse so...free the Iraqi people!
Something was bound to stick eventually, right?
This attempt to seize the moral high ground on this issue sickens me to my stomach.
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
Yeah, hilarous. Those anti-war types don't care about Saddam slaughtering his own people, while the pro-war crowd started caring when exactly?
Oh yeah, I remember, when people saw right through their pathetic attempts to tie Saddam to 9/11, and rejected outright any suggestion that Saddam's weapons (of mass destruction, natch) posed any threat to his neighbours, much less the wider world. But the troops were in place, and we needed another excuse so...free the Iraqi people!
Something was bound to stick eventually, right?
This attempt to seize the moral high ground on this issue sickens me to my stomach.
you should have read all the post : this banner is a fake, made by pro-war people wanting to ridiculize anti-war protests. See the post of Pscates.
Originally posted by groverat
The [US] will sit, twiddling its thumbs and whistling while hundreds of thousands of people are slaughtered [and ultimately take advantage of their own grevious mistakes and use said mistakes as a false pretense for war].
I couldn't have said it better myself. Only don't forget that it goes against the principles of our democracy to forge an opportunity to use military force.
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
This attempt to seize the moral high ground on this issue sickens me to my stomach.
The conservatives know no limits, it sickens me too.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
you should have read all the post : this banner is a fake, made by pro-war people wanting to ridiculize anti-war protests. See the post of Pscates.
Yes, the banner was a fake, and yet the protestors still seemed to have no problem with him being there. Interesting isn' t it. There was also this one:
I only posted it because of the post previous by Groverat.
Originally posted by bunge
The conservatives know no limits, it sickens me too.
Boy, you have a really sensitive stomach. I would be interested to know what causes you the most sickness?