What are you talking about?

Current Events » in reply to Since when is having your country controlled by a foreign army "freedom"?

What are you talking about?

REB — 9/21/2004 7:02:29 PM (archived)

First of all, our liberation force was legal.

Second, donâ€™t you have any vision of the future, or are you stuck in only this moment.

Our forces are trying to bring peace, freedom and democracy to a trouble region. Once that is done, we are out of there.

Now if we were picking out names on what to call Iraq when it became the 51st state, then you would have a valid point.

Our troops kicked out Saddam, and now they are getting rid of terrorist (Mainly non-Iraq terrorist).

You still will not admit it is a good thing we got rid of Saddam.

The whole thread (28 posts)

Bush's speech to the U.N. - Tom Brosz - 9/21/2004 4:12:59 PM
- Not TOO shabby - Tony - 9/21/2004 5:16:04 PM
- "A beacon of freedom". And talk about a flip-flop, that's costing lives. - Bowser - 9/21/2004 5:05:56 PM
  - The freedom you inherited cost lives. - REB - 9/21/2004 5:13:54 PM
    - American lives. And he's killing the ones that don't like a foreign army controlling the country. - Bowser - 9/21/2004 5:18:25 PM
      - Apparently Bowser's Missed The News About Who Is Deliberately Targeting Children, Women, & Civilians - Mark Eby - 9/22/2004 2:45:55 AM
      - Calling American solders baby killers was hip during Vietnam. - REB - 9/21/2004 7:29:45 PM
      - "Killing the ones that want freedom?" Suggest engaging the front end of your brain before replying? - Tom Brosz - 9/21/2004 5:31:59 PM
        
        Since when is having your country controlled by a foreign army "freedom"? - Bowser - 9/21/2004 6:50:58 PM
        
        Q.E.D. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 9/21/2004 7:05:51 PM
        
        proved what? (n/t) - alcaray - 9/21/2004 10:14:03 PM
        
        Follow the thread. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 9/22/2004 12:19:57 AM
        
        I'm not going to read it again to try to puzzle it out. (n/t) - alcaray - 9/22/2004 3:08:34 PM
        
        quod erat demonstrandum? - REB - 9/21/2004 7:10:50 PM
        
        Latin for That which was to be demonstrated - REB - 9/21/2004 7:22:23 PM
        
        That's what he regards as "freedom". Doesn't make sense to me, either. (n/t) - Bowser - 9/21/2004 7:20:02 PM
        
        What you don't understand is this is the path to freedom. - REB - 9/21/2004 7:25:38 PM
        
        Some people expect instant gratification - Larry J - 9/21/2004 8:39:37 PM
        
        You're trying to imply the US is on the side of the Iraqis. - Bowser - 9/21/2004 10:44:50 PM
        
        No Implying At All - Mark Eby - 9/22/2004 2:02:37 AM
        
        What are you talking about? - REB - 9/21/2004 7:02:29 PM
        
        re: This... - Raoul - 9/21/2004 7:53:52 PM
        
        re: This... - REB - 9/21/2004 8:40:41 PM
        
        Raoul Has Yet To Admit We Attacked Germany Without "Provocation" Too - Mark Eby - 9/22/2004 2:00:22 AM
        
        re: What would Churchill think about that? (n/t) - Raoul - 9/22/2004 5:49:57 AM
      - Still saying our solders are the bad guys. How sad. - REB - 9/21/2004 5:25:11 PM
        
        re: If Bush gets re-elected the dog will shift into "Its a genocide" mode. (n/t) - Scott Evil - 9/21/2004 5:29:46 PM
      - Sorta like killing Nazis in Germany, except a lot of the fighters are not Iraqi. - ebnelson - 9/21/2004 5:24:06 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (28 posts)