I hate both wings equally.
However, I'm on a mission to find partisan trolls who read through threads looking for opportunities to:
1. Demand sources (though they rarely provide any themselves)
2. Attack sources (apdst's attack on wikipedia yesterday was priceless)
3. Attack folks personally
4. Repeat talking points they heard on TV or radio.
5. Ignore valid rebuttals and bring up something totally non-germane to the topic at hand.
Everyone knows the game and who the worst violators are. I'm trying to beat them at their own game. So, I'm going to troll all the trolls and annoy the **** out of them. (when I have time, I have a job and kids)
From what I've observed on this forum (and others), left wingers generally start threads with rediculous topics to bait the conservatives into a fight. But the right-wingers usually fail to come through because they concentrate most of their effort asking for sources, attacking sources, making personal attacks or bringing up something unrelated, rather than making counterpoints to support their opinion. It's vicious cycle. And wastes a lot of GB here and on other forums. Both parties are to blame.
Last edited by kansaswhig; 10-25-09 at 01:51 PM.
Bush wasn't a loser.
Obama can heed the sage advice of Lewis Sorley (post #102 http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1058325803 ) to avoid losing in Afghanistan.
Thanks! But I'm not into the nerdy artillery stuff like red socks. I make fun of those guys usually! I'll get St. Barbs someday, I'm sure. I'm not sweating it.
I don't care how nerdy it is, it's tradition. You think I liked wearing that stetson? That's not the way to wear a friggin cowboy hat! But, I wore the dorky looking thing, anyway. Oh, and spurs on my jump boots? That was just to much for me, but, I did it. You just suck it up and drive on, keep your cassons full, your horses fresh and I'll wave to you as you pass through Fiddler's Green, on your way to hell.
As long as you don't show up with that little superiority complex you have and you'll be ok. Don't piss off your NCO's, they can make you, or break you.I'd rather bring all my boys home safely from combat...
My question would this:
Will the Europissants in NATO actually send soliders to help out our boys or is this so called "broad support" more Euro-garbage?
Obama needs to make a decision either follow General McChrystal's advice and send help to our boys or bring them home. Hell for Christ sake he can flip a coin and he still would have a 50% chance of making the right call.
Jackboots always come in matched pairs, a left boot and a right boot.
NATO - Topic: Afghanistan, NATO's role inSince NATO took command of ISAF in 2003, the Alliance has gradually expanded the reach of its mission, originally limited to Kabul, to cover Afghanistan’s whole territory. The number of ISAF troops has grown accordingly from the initial 5,000 to around 50.000 troops coming from 42 countries, including all 28 NATO members.
NATO provides 50,000 troops.
And I think Obama wants to see how the run off elections go.
I am not partisan.
I'm moderate, I guess, but I hate political labels.
I'm thankful I'm not chained to a political ideology that dictates what I think. I feel sorry for those who are and who feel such ardent loyalty to parties and ideology that they sacrifice rational thought, common sense the the virtue of being honest.