No body bags and stories of collateral damage to innocent civilians

Warph · October 14, 2009, 11:00:57 AM

Where are the body bags NYTimes, Washington Post and the rest of you liberal, Obama loving freaks??

Virtually every day during the Iraq War when George Bush was president, the New York Times featured a dead soldier, or many dead soldiers, on its front page. Every day the paper tugged at the heart-strings of Americans at home for their young men and women sent to die by a presidential liar for "no reason" in an "unnecessary war."

Barack Obama has continued both wars started by President Bush (and what does that tell you about liberal lies?) but there are no body bags to be seen, no heart-wrenching stories on the front pages of the liberal newspapers and cable outlets that Obama has in his back pocket, no tales of needlessly dead American soldiers, no stories of American torturers, and no stories of collateral damage to innocent civilians (and how many civilians do you think has Obama blown up)?

And why is that? Maybe Flint or anmar or greatguns or you far-lefties can explain why this is? I think it's because the American left was willing to give victory to America's enemies for political gain at home.

jarhead · October 14, 2009, 11:47:58 AM

Amen to that WARPH

Anmar · October 14, 2009, 11:55:18 AM

I don't read those papers, so i wouldn't know whats going on. I would say you don't follow the news very closely. The Obama administration is trying to prevent the release of more Abu Ghraib photos, and it looks like they were successful, the battle is still ongoing. Furthermore, soldiers aren't dying 3-4 a day like they were during the Bush administration. Then, we were losing 90-100 a month. In afghanistan, we are losing that many in a year.

Now while bush was president, it was military policy that photos of the dead soldiers returning from the wars were not allowed. I think once a photographer snuck in and took some pics, so if you meant that literally, you're just plain wrong. But, i imagine like my last post, instead of trying to talk about actual points, you are going to ignore the facts and call me names. I think it's funny how when you get shown up, you just move on to the next post. At any rate, keep em coming.

edit: or maybe you'll just go back and delete your posts

Diane Amberg · October 14, 2009, 01:54:27 PM

Warph, I thought you were supposed to stop throwing names around when the person wasn't part of the conversation. Why the pot stirring and muck raking...isn't that what Varmit was talking about?What's your point? Ya want body bags? Come here and I'll get you an escort.

greatguns · October 14, 2009, 04:00:25 PM

Warph, you must be a little mixed up, I'm not in the newspaper business and never have been. I wouln't be privy to that information and I have never been a fill in host to any talk show. Keep trying!

Warph · October 15, 2009, 07:13:56 AM

Thanks, JarHead. I guess it took someone with military savviness to see what I meant. Thanks for the "Amen."

Well anmar.... (geez... I feel like I'm talking to some 10 yr. old spoiled punk)... you started out fairly well with the first sentence admitting you don't know shit about what's going on in the news today... then it went waaay downhill after that. Your little muslim brain took a left turn and headed to ObamaLand and the Abu Ghraib photos. Lets see, were their muslims in those photos? By golly, I believe there was. That the best you can do. That's old news. I guess you're trying hard to get back at this "old man" for calling you an idiot, which I have all ideas you enjoyed. You talk like someone who is a little limp in the wrist.... Example: To Pep on another thread:

Quote from: Anmar on October 09, 2009, 03:13:36 PM
I'm not going to bother having a discussion with you. You're prior post shows that you really aren't interested in broadening your horizons and participating in any kind of intelligent discourse. Yes, i can go back and pick out posts from various threads that are incredibly rude and I'll bet most of the authors are gun owners. I recognize that correllation doesn't necessarily support causation, however the post was intended to have a degree of humor, which apparantly was over your head. However, if you want to take my post seriously, then you are living proof that you don't have to be a gun owner to be rude. Your little angry rant proved that much.
You seem so proud of your rudeness, and for that, i leave you with Matthew 5:22

Geez.... that sounded like the one you wrote me back a few months ago. (Oh me... will it ever stop) And as far as the deletions go, anmar, that seems to really bother you... I didn't know you were a fan.

Diane.... I guess you got as far as the first 3 words of the title and decided I was up to no good. tsk...tsk... You evidently didn't read or understand what I was asking, I guess, as you couldn't figure out.... the point. I guess Batman will have to pay you another visit and explain it to you. Do you know you are getting as bad as that 10 yr. old kid anmar? Quit drinking that water.

frawin · October 15, 2009, 07:41:28 AM

Warph you are the Master Statesman, both of your posts on this thread were good. You remind me of the old saying, "mess with the bull and you get the horn".

Jo McDonald · October 15, 2009, 08:16:25 AM

Warph -- I think Anwar's remark about deleting the post was directed to me -- I DID delete the post, buttttt I have NOT changed my thoughts that were posted.

Warph · October 15, 2009, 08:56:03 AM

Thanks, Frank.... Here at the 19th Hole, I tell everyone they need to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer.

Quote from: Jo McDonald on October 15, 2009, 08:16:25 AM
Warph -- I think Anwar's remark about deleting the post was directed to me -- I DID delete the post, buttttt I have NOT changed my thoughts that were posted.

And a great post it was, Jo... thank you for sticking up with me. No... I believe anmar was referring to my deletions on some post that were old and weren't getting anymore play. And you can be sure that anmar "gets off" on these negative posts against him. Strange dude.

Diane Amberg · October 15, 2009, 11:37:19 AM

Warph, I know exactly what I meant. You expected answers from 3 people, whose names you posted, who could not possibly have answered the questions you asked. You sniped them unnecessarily. I think that's rude and is meant to discourage anyone from having a different opinion. Some people have dropped off because they were too often trampled. Some know they will be bullied and don't say much any more and some don't care and will fight back for their right to be heard. As far as bad water, that's Howard's problem not mine. I always did stand up to bullies, so be rude all you want, I'll just tune it out. I've been cussed out worse by angry third graders, but at least I know they are still a work in progress. For a few of you, I don't know how you can go to church on Sunday and then talk so far down to people on Monday. I just wasn't used to that on this forum. Didn't expect it from Kansas folk. What ever happened to simply saying that you disagree and leaving it at that? Why attack the person who doesn't agree with you? What does that prove? There's that old saying that is so true, "If you can't attack the issue, attack the person."
When I joined this group 2 years ago, there was a lot of light sarcasm that was tossed around in fun and the kidding around wasn't mean. Now there are hurt feelings and intentional "victims" of some people with real mean streaks. I don't get it. Now you think you can offend me by comparing me to Anmar? Shall I comment on the IQ of people with tattoos? Especially smokers who have tattoos. What idiots! (not really, just an example) What is the point of all this? Are you going to "save" the country by verbally attacking a few people on here and telling lies about some of us? To what benefit? President O. will still be Pres. tomorrow, Joe Biden will still have hair plugs, and Michael Jackson will still be dead.