Top Commander Downplays Impact Of Escalation, No Significant Effect ‘Until Summer Or Fall’
Top Commander Downplays Impact Of Escalation, No Significant Effect ‘Until Summer Or Fall’
President Bush’s plan for escalating the war in Iraq has begun and, barring an intervention from Congress, over 20,000 more U.S. troops will soon be in the crossfire of a brutal civil war.
The top generals on the ground are trying to keep expectations low. Yesterday, Gen. George Casey, the outgoing top U.S. military commander in Iraq, warned that it is “going to take time” and no one should evaluate the impact of the plan until “summer or Fall.” Watch it:
Transcript:
ANNOUNCER: Meanwhile, the U.S. troop surge ordered by President Bush is underway and for the if the first time, we’re hearing about a timeline.
CASEY: I think you will see a gradual evolution over the next two to three months and things get better through the summer and fall. It’s going to take time.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
90 Responses to “Top Commander Downplays Impact Of Escalation, No Significant Effect ‘Until Summer Or Fall’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
or 300 more dead soldiers.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:39 amor 300 more dead soldiers.
Comment by Juan C
At least…
January 16th, 2007 at 10:42 amAs predicted, Bush is stalling until the next President comes in.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:45 amBubble Boy needs to redeploy the troops in the region… Idiot in Chief is has screwed up too many times already…
He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men’s weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue… In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy’s country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:47 am-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
This latest surge will but a total of 157,000 us Troops on the ground. That is less than the total at earlier times. How will this help us move forward when we will have less troops there than earlier times? Of course we shouldn’t expect much. This is a political move and not a military move.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:51 am“Generals are trying to keep expectations low”. Hey they don’t have to work to hard on that one. LOF
January 16th, 2007 at 10:54 amor 300 more dead soldiers.
Comment by Juan C
That’s a under estimate.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:55 amThis is a political move and not a military move.
Comment by hellinabucket
Correct me if I’m wrong, but did the troops sign up to put their lives on the line for a political move?
January 16th, 2007 at 10:55 amtoo bad we have yes men/wehrmacht generals that think;
1. hitler is too scary to kill
2. I can’t be convicted of war crimes if the preznit told me to kill em’
funny thing is, this hitler hasn’t had a single victory to give the generals the impression it knows doodley squat. hitler did.
the wehrmacht generals did go to trial, and many did the last dance with the rope as their partner
this may indicate our generals are really stupid. we don’t appear to have had anyone competent since Norman, but he had a 30:1 superiority working for him, complete control of all facets on the field, and he only went for a strategic objective. Wes Clark didn’t have to win, he was there to prevent death, and did a damn good job.
madness.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:56 amTripmaster:
My response to you is posted on last nights thread.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:57 amThe first impact will be the injury or death of the first of the new troops added for the “surge”—but the Bush administration doesn’t care about that…except from a PR standpoint.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:05 amSo, a new measurement. Every 300 dead soldiers will be a “Casey”
January 16th, 2007 at 11:06 amWe’ve had 10 Caseys so far, expect a new Casey each month, perhaps a Casey and a half this summer.
What a fustercluck.
The Summer or Fall?
How,O How many Friedman’s or Warner’s will it take?
Folks,I’ll never forget the T.V. Generals and the ‘experts’ telling us we have 3 months to get this insurgency under control,way back in June ‘03.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:08 amMark my word;after we sack Maliki, they will tell us once again we need six more months for the new Prime Ministers (puppet) policies to be effective.
CASEY: I think you will see a gradual evolution over the next two to three months and things get better through the summer and fall. It’s going to take time.
That’s only half a Friedman. What’s half a Friedman? Only 300 dead soldiers or so.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:09 amMore troops = more potential dead soldiers
ToTheCenter.com
January 16th, 2007 at 11:10 amJust wait til summer. Things will be better in six months. Let’s see how things pan out. Just another six months… Its all they ask…
…EVERY SIX MONTHS!!!!
No wonder the justification has so many versions…
January 16th, 2007 at 11:11 amCasey failed to mention which year to which he is referring. Given the successes of the “Decider in President” we can expect to have six month benchmarks laid out before us for another two years….
January 16th, 2007 at 11:18 amBe fair- they need another six months to come up with a reason that they need another six months.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:21 amYup drag that stuff out for 2 more years, just 2 more years. Yup that’s the ticket.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:23 amIs that one or two FUs (Friedman Units)?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:26 amManaging expectations while running out the clock.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:30 amIs that one or two FUs (Friedman Units)?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:31 amComment by klyde
In the picture above I see two FUs (F*cked Ups)
“….The top generals on the ground are trying to keep expectations low….” - Judd, from the article
*******Of course the generals are going to keep expectations low - one fewer “lie” for Progs and Progettes to blame on the administration. This way, IF the Iraqis step up and winnow the insurgents from the populace, we can claim victory, and wind down the operation. As NO ONE knows how fully PM Maliki will honour his committment, it would be foolhardy for the generals to predict otherwise. Reading the viciousness of many Progs on this and other forums, I can understand why.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:36 amCasey to the press: Hi guys why do you concern yourselves with our illegal occupation of a sovereign country and the absurd deaths of american soldiers..?
We are doin the right thing, stayin’ the f***ing course!
January 16th, 2007 at 11:36 amace,
I have replied to your response.
Thank you.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:36 amIs that one or two FUs (Friedman Units)?
Comment by klyde — January 16, 2007 @ 11:26 am
Friedman Unit = 6 months
January 16th, 2007 at 11:38 amWarner Unit = 3 months
McCain Unit = It will be quick or it will take years and years.
Notice the deletions?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:39 amFree speech appears to be as “quaint” a concept as the Geneva Conventions.
Welcome to the New World Order…Your papers please?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:40 am“More troops = more potential dead soldiers”
Comment by TotheCenter
*****Dear 2 - That’s ONE way to look at the surge. Another POV, more troops hopefully will equal more dead insurgents……Still another POV, more troops will equal Iraqis taking the lead in their security …..
January 16th, 2007 at 11:41 ammore troops will equal Iraqis taking the lead in their security …..
Comment by mighty aphrodite
How will more troops do that?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:43 amThis way, IF the Iraqis step up and winnow the insurgents from the populace, we can claim victory, and wind down the operation.
mighty aphrodite
Pretty big IF there MA. Glad to see that you are for throwing good troops after dead on false hope and promises.
Here’s an idea… Follow the advice of your generals and put more pressure on Maliki by NOT enabling him with more lives of US soldiers.
You mean the president “lied” about that TOO?
Pull your head out.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:48 amHow will more troops do that?
Comment by ForTruth — January 16, 2007 @ 11:43 am
Because Bush says so. Haven’t you been paying attention?
(/sarcasm)
January 16th, 2007 at 11:50 amTime for a flashback.
From TP, 11/22/05:
Bush Said He Would Withdraw U.S. Forces If The Iraqis Asked
On Monday, Iraqi political leaders called on the U.S. to set a timetable for withdrawal. In January, President Bush said that if asked by the Iraqis, U.S. forces would leave the country:
President Bush said in an interview on Thursday that he would withdraw American forces from Iraq if the new government that is elected on Sunday asked him to do so, but that he expected Iraq’s first democratically elected leaders would want the troops to remain as helpers, not as occupiers.
Bush has now been asked to withdraw. Will he stick to his word?
That’s a big fat NO. And people say that Bush doesn’t lie.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:57 amAs predicted, Bush is stalling until the next President comes in.
Comment by BS
no he’s not. escalations take time. do you even understand how a “surge” works?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:59 amStill another POV, more troops will equal Iraqis taking the lead in their security …..
*******Of course the generals are going to keep expectations low - one fewer “lie†for Progs and Progettes to blame on the administration.
Comments by mighty aphrodite
First comment, this the opposite of what GW told us 6 months ago and you fervently stood behind him. He flops in the wind and you fold like a sheet in said wind.
Second comment, You want to stand behind this? The military and all it’s might are positioning themselves, putting soldier’s lives on the line just so they don’t get bad things written about them? These are the kind of baseless bullshit statements the lead me to believe you were never in the service and have no clear, independent thought whatsoever.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:59 amDear Tech - I didn’t think you were up to discussing the reason for generals to downplay any sort of optimism. Why feed the larder of ProgLieSpin. Thank you for not exceeding my expectations…..
January 16th, 2007 at 12:01 pmUSA Today/Gallup 1/12-14/07
Approve 34%
Disapprove 63%
Huh? 4%
Difference -29
Bush approval rating drops a full four points from previous USA Yesterday/Galloping poll.
USA Today/Gallup 12/8-10/06 38, 59, 4?, -21
for an eight point swing.
January 16th, 2007 at 12:04 pmAren’t elected officials suppos….never mind.
WC, Technodaoist, good ones! Even Bush said in his ’speech’ (sorry, but he looked more like a kid delivering an oral report in front of the class), “Even if everything works out exactly the way we plan…” “Even if” ??!! So obviously even he has doubts about his escalation working?! That’s just focked up!
January 16th, 2007 at 12:04 pmJane - I did check with Barney, and all I got was some really bad wind.
January 16th, 2007 at 12:07 pmWhat the hell are they feeding that poor mutt, GeorgieO’s?
(For explanation of what the hell I’m referring to, see Wayne’s blog)
An appropriate observation of Iraqi Troopers:
When the general is weak and without authority; when his orders are not clear and distinct; when there are no fixes duties assigned to officers and men, and the ranks are formed in a slovenly haphazard manner, the result is utter disorganization.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
When the common soldiers are too strong and their officers too weak, the result is INSUBORDINATION. When the officers are too strong and the common soldiers too weak, the result is COLLAPSE. When the higher officers are angry and insubordinate, and on meeting the enemy give battle on their own account from a feeling of resentment, before the commander-in-chief can tell whether or no he is in a position to fight, the result is RUIN.
- Sun Tzu
This is the problem for our troopers when they get inbeded into Iraqi units:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
January 16th, 2007 at 12:08 pm- Sun Tzu
“more troops will equal Iraqis taking the lead in their security …..”
Comment by MA
“How will more troops do that?” Comment by ForTruth
******The plan calls for a huge insertion of Iraqi forces backed up by the US. If these Iraqis can act in a federal capacity and splinter the IED and suicide bombers, it may demonstrate to the average citizen of Bagdhad and the perimeter the knitting together of the various cultures. If not, it may be time to leave and let them kill each other - they seem quite good at that……
January 16th, 2007 at 12:09 pmLast September Casey said he expected we’d be withdrawing by year’s end and be down to 80,000 to 100,000 by now. So don’t bank on his guestimates. He’s only trying to please the Decider to keep his job.
January 16th, 2007 at 12:12 pmIf anyone here still has some hope for success with this “augmentation,” check out Matt Taibbi’s latest posting on Rollingstone.com
January 16th, 2007 at 12:16 pmHe argues rather successfully we’re not even using the troops we already have in Baghdad.
“The military and all it’s might are positioning themselves, putting soldier’s lives on the line just so they don’t get bad things written about them?”
Comment by hellinabucket
*****Dear Helen - You never disappoint!! I don’t give many Progs much credit and YOU are an excellent example WHY. Why give people high expectations when NOTHING this President does (short of resigning or dying) will be approved of by “Progs”??? I said ABSOLUTELY nothing about soldiers lives on the line “so they don’t get bad things written about them?” - Naturally you extrapolate what I did NOT say……but we don’t call you the dim bulb in our chandelier for NOTHing - you’ve earned the title….Congrats!
January 16th, 2007 at 12:17 pmMA
The plan calls for a huge insertion of Iraqi forces backed up by the US.
This is more of the same “stand up, stand down” kool-aid BushCo has been giving for much too long already.
If these Iraqis can act in a federal capacity and splinter the IED and suicide bombers, it may demonstrate to the average citizen of Bagdhad and the perimeter the knitting together of the various cultures.
Big “if”, because it assumes that they actually want to end the sectarian violence as opposed to participate in it. There is no “federal capacity” in this world of “tribal, sectarian” culture.
If not, it may be time to leave and let them kill each other - they seem quite good at that……
January 16th, 2007 at 12:32 pmSo, you might actually see a time when you can agree with PROGs that the U.S. has no further role in Iraq militarily. We will welcome you if and when that happens.
RUCerious, okay NOW I know what you mean!:-D I hadn’t actually read Wayne’s introduction to “Escalation”, although I did have a finger in the parody itself.
I think they’re feeding Barney lies, too, that’s what the stink is.
January 16th, 2007 at 12:51 pm“We will welcome you if and when that happens.”
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC)
*****Dear PlC - Don’t do me any favours - Progs who oppose the US stance on EVERY level have aligned themselves wittingly or unwittingly (this is most likely the case) with C*mmu^ist and anarchist front organizations……Look up who is behind those you support…….Dupe….
January 16th, 2007 at 12:56 pmOK mighty aphrodite, I’ll keep it simple for you. Here is your direct quote.
Now you do understand that the General’s have our soldiers lives in their hands correct?
Now if the expectations The Generals are giving out are low but the danger and commitment the soldiers will be undertaking is high (we can go into the details of what is being asked of them) The Generals are either not telling us the truth or the troops the truth.
It’s this whole accountability thing that you skate around. Tell me you aren’t saying the Generals are lying to us or the soldiers and then stand by your opinion with some facts.
you were never in the service.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:06 pmDear Helen - My service in the military was limited to JAG. Mr. Aphrodite was THE warrior outside the courtroom…….
January 16th, 2007 at 1:15 pmOf course the generals are going to keep expectations low - one fewer “lie†for Progs and Progettes to blame on the administration. Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 11:36 am
But MA, Bush, along with his minions, has already stated that, after reviewing all other options, he decided that this escalation was the only course that would lead to success. He’s not downplaying expectations, so don’t pull any crap about anyone lying about ‘blaming’ the administration for high expectations on this one.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:31 pmMighty thermite…i advice you to think about the role of the military and armed forces in democratic regimes, democratic countries.
Hey mighty thermite…do you note the difference between “empire” and “sovereign country” ?
January 16th, 2007 at 1:33 pmThanks Quality Controll. So 1.5 FUs or 3 WUs.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:38 pmSummer or Fall…of ‘08? Say, around the 1st Tuesday of November? Of course, then it will really be in the dead of winter, or Jan. 21, 2009.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:47 pmMighty are you saying your husband doesn’t have his little soldier doing the work in the bedroom? Or is this where your S&M fantasies take flight. Now I’m sorry for you and your husband.
Back to the point. Are you stating the Generals aren’t giving accurate information (ie low expectations)? Then support your case if you are because it would (and you being a lawyer would see this) infer whether correct, or exageratated orders were handed down.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:53 pmAs predicted, Bush is stalling until the next President comes in.
Comment by BS
no he’s not. escalations take time. do you even understand how a “surge†works?
Comment by wingnutt
wingnutt - do you even realize that the escalation IS the stalling tactic? BECAUSE they take time?
January 16th, 2007 at 1:57 pmJane - - The only option in Bagdhad appears to be clearing the vermin. And since Iraqi’s have the familiarity of dialects and accents that native English speakers lack, even YOU might see the impetus for utilizing Iraqi troop in the forefront. Unfortunately, there are few guarantees in life - looking for a guarantee in wartime is like trying to nail jello to the wall…. Maybe you had better go back to proof-reading for Wayne……..
January 16th, 2007 at 2:03 pmDear Helen - Once again, you demonstrate your difficulty with the English language and/or reading comprehension. If the Generals publicize TOOO high or swift an expectation, you’ll get your thong in a twist (ouch!). If the Generals “keep expectations low,” or more slowly than YOU would like, you might be less likely to run the military down….I know you a bit better than General Casey, so I fully expect you to run anything and everything down regarding the execution of the US military plan in and around Bagdhad…..It must be uncomfortable twisting and contorting the English language the way you do…..
Tooodles…..(translation: “I’ve wasted enough time on you - verdict: you’re unteachable…)….)
January 16th, 2007 at 2:11 pmMA, first of all, I voiced no objection in my post to embedding our troops with the Iraqi troops. So don’t impute that to me. In fact, here’s my post:
But MA, Bush, along with his minions, has already stated that, after reviewing all other options, he decided that this escalation was the only course that would lead to success. He’s not downplaying expectations, so don’t pull any crap about anyone lying about ‘blaming’ the administration for high expectations on this one.
Maybe you had better go back to your remedial reading classes, as your response has nothing whatsoever to do with what I posted.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:12 pmJane,
I applaud your patience, but I have found engaging the so called mighty aphrodite in a debate is akin to explaining to your two year old, why they can’t have more candy. A basically useless conversation.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:19 pmJudd notes in the TITLE of THIS piece,
Top Commander Downplays Impact Of Escalation, No Significant Effect ‘Until Summer Or Fall’
We were discussing E-X-P-E-C-T-A-T-I-O-N-S, Jane. The fact that your post had nothing whatsoever to do with my assertion is not surprising The timeframe Judd references is a downplayed expectation…..I was discussing the reason to not over-emphasize a force we cannot be sure of - namely the Iraqis.
Thank you for playing, Jane…..
January 16th, 2007 at 2:21 pmDear MA, Thank you so much for your continued viewpoint (translation…. you are a miserable hack that has delusions of “teaching” us all). I’m taken back by your thong comment (translation….you have an unhealthy fixation with underwear and your own sexuality).
You have a habit of running on your tangents (translation…..none needed) and twisting the english language isn’t a tool needed to show discontent with the direction of this country (translation….none needed)
I’ll just ask one question. How can you support this president (who has not been for accountability) and say you support oversight and accountability? It is a contradiction whether you want to believe it or not.
Sorry to hear Commander Dite isn’t the “warrior” in the bedroom.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:25 pmAnd I was emphasizing that Bush himself was NOT downplaying HIS expectations for success with this gambit. Pretty simple, even Bush could have understood my comment. And amazingly enough, I think even Barney could have understood that your response does not negate my comment. F*ck you for playing, MA. Have some candy.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:27 pmThe fact really speak for itself… Iraq now belongs to the Shia Crescent. Actually The Iranian controlled Shia Crescent… The President’s blunders helped Iran complete the puzzle. Nothing including the Military might of the US can change this fact. The Shia’s are in complete control of their quadrant of Iraq… They will never share power in their region.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:28 pmWhy do I feel like I’ve heard this “just give it 3 months” before? Oh yeah, I remember. Tom Friedman has said it about seven times. Cheney has said it about 5 times. Hadley has said it a few times. And, of course, the Bush cultists on this site have said it many times.
MA, I’m sure a person as smart as you can understand the skepticism.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:30 pmMA: “Tooodles…..(translation: “I’ve wasted enough time on you - verdict: you’re unteachable…)….)”
POT, MEET KETTLE!
January 16th, 2007 at 2:31 pmThe “politics” of low expectations…
…a branch of “creating reality”…
…a TREASONOUS criminal Bushite conned’selfservative strategem…
…since the 2000 SEelection…
…patent pending….
January 16th, 2007 at 2:49 pmDoesn’t the whole issue of escalation lead us to several points that republicans and the president have been dead wrong on? Ignoring the fact that we should not have gone there in the first place the contradictions with this one action are: 1) We needed more troops since day one and that the generals president Bush claims to listen to, but chose to ignore on this issue, were correct all along? 2) sending more troops contradicts the “as they stand up we will stand down” doctrine. 3) sending more troops indicates things are not as rosy as the president has claimed in the past and perhaps the mainstream media has had it right all along. 4) Things are getting worse, not better, if they were getting better maybe 21,000 troops would come home. 5) since the generals in charge in Iraq came out against the additional troops, we know the president does not really listen to the generals, he only listens to what he wants to hear. 6) once again we have a new horizon to look over. it seems like every six months we are told that the next few months will be crucial. 7) the fighting is in no way even close to being in it’s last throes.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:57 pmMA, apparently my cats are smarter than you are.
January 16th, 2007 at 3:15 pm“MA, apparently my cats are smarter than you are.”
Comment by JaneESchneider
*******Someone, or something, HAS to be smart in your house….might as well be your cats…..Thank them for turning on the computer for you…
Oh that’s right you’re at “work”….. Nice of your boss to let you play…..
January 16th, 2007 at 3:25 pm“If the Generals “keep expectations low,†or more slowly than YOU would like, you might be less likely to run the military down….I know you a bit better than General Casey, so I fully expect you to run anything and everything down regarding the execution of the US military plan in and around Bagdhad….. Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 2:11 pm”
****Don’t you ’silly’ progs know that the time to set unrealistic expectations was when we were selling the war! Now that we’ve created a quagmire we can’t win, setting unrealistic expectations will mean we’ll lose the 2008 election as well. And we can’t have that happen!
“It must be uncomfortable twisting and contorting the English language the way you do….. Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 2:11 pm”
***Of course I can only judge you by my own personal standards. English is always so difficult for me. So I assume that you have as much difficulty as I do with simple constructions. Then again it’s much harder to construct *strawmen* arguments like I’m so fond of, than it is to repeat those annoying *facts* like you do!
“Tooodles…..(translation: “I’ve wasted enough time on you - verdict: you’re unteachable…)….) Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 2:11 pm”
****Don’t you know that the *rapture* is going to happen soon thanks to our *savior* George? What’s wrong with you, you unchristian peacenik!
January 16th, 2007 at 3:31 pmAnd you’re in the courtroom, I suppose?
January 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pm“*******Someone, or something, HAS to be smart in your house….might as well be your cats…..Thank them for turning on the computer for you… Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 3:25 pm”
****I can say that, because even on your worst day, you’re smarter than I am! I’m so glad that they have a *special-ed* service that comes and helps me to do this *cum*puter stuff!
“Oh that’s right you’re at “workâ€â€¦.. Nice of your boss to let you play…..Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 3:25 pm”
****Me, I just get to *cheat* my fictional clients out of billable hours that my *children* and my illegal *maid* Consuela do for me! Isn’t being the head b!tch of a conservative household great!
When the *rapture* happens, you’ll have to eat your cats. Me, I’ll be eating my children - they taste better than cats!
January 16th, 2007 at 3:35 pmRe#75 - IF I were a whiny, crybaby Prog, Iwould wail to TP about I_am_mighty_aphrodite_and_a_zionist_fool . But as an example to you, in the spirit of compassion and generosity, engaging this poor dear keeps him/her off the streets, out of our parks and playgrounds and and away from children everywhere. Now you see what a valuable “Public Service†conservative participation here constitutes…..
Off to a conference….Toooodles……
January 16th, 2007 at 3:41 pmJane - When you own your business or practice, your time is YOUR time….I notice you enjoy playing on your employers dime…..
Off to a status conference…..
January 16th, 2007 at 3:42 pmFlighty far Righty never lets me down. Always bouncing to her strong points (snippy little “I’m better than you” shots) and fading from her weak points (facts and examples).
Don’t know if she’s a zionist fool but she’s one of the head mixers at the local kool aid factory.
January 16th, 2007 at 3:51 pmWhen you own your business or practice, your time is YOUR time….
January 16th, 2007 at 3:59 pmComment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
With all the time you spend lying around here, your poor “clients” must be suffering! (As if they’re not suffering enough with you ‘representing’ them.)
Don’t do me any favours - Progs who oppose the US stance on EVERY level have aligned themselves wittingly or unwittingly (this is most likely the case) with C*mmu^ist and anarchist front organizations……Look up who is behind those you support…….Dupe….
Comment by mighty aphrodite
So when Clinton was running the government were you a Communist or an anarchist?
January 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmWow. I think if I had married mighty aphrodite eighteen years ago instead of Jane, I do believe I would have spent the last seventeen years in prison for murdering my shrew of a condescending phony wife.
Good thing I made the right choice and married Jane, instead.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:17 pmBut Wayne you would have saved us from her breeding. I would think a medal of honor would be in order in my opinion.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:20 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — January 16, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
“Who’s the luckiest guy in the world?” “You are!” The Jerk
January 16th, 2007 at 5:40 pmThat’s right!
January 16th, 2007 at 5:43 pm“Wow. I think if I had married mighty aphrodite eighteen years ago instead of Jane, I do believe I would have spent the last seventeen years in prison for murdering my shrew of a condescending phony wife.
Good thing I made the right choice and married Jane, instead.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
******Whew! Your “concern” is misplaced - as usual. You needn’t worry about doing time for murder, Wayne - I prefer more manly men - in short, you’re NOT my type. (I never understood women who want feminized men - I have enough girlfriends.) The way you say, “Good thing I made the right choice…” doesn’t sound like Jane had much of a say in the matter….So much for that fem-man thinking……
January 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pmI prefer more manly men - Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 16, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Translation: I like it rough.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:10 pm“I like it rough.” Comment by JaneESchneider
******Whatever trips your trigger……
January 16th, 2007 at 6:19 pmI guess the next six months are crucial, eh. Only six months until the next turning point!
January 16th, 2007 at 6:19 pmAgree with some of the above. Bush’s problems will be over in under 2 years. He just needs to keep stalling them… Crazy
January 16th, 2007 at 6:46 pmThe only option in Bagdhad appears to be clearing the vermin.
Which vermin would that be? The Sunni vermin we used to be allied with , or the Shia vermin we are allied with now? Please identify which political parties are the “good guys” who are going to make Iraq the place you want it to be.. don’t give me some “they will all come together and hold hands” crap…. name specifics parties you think will form form of government that doesnt transform into an islamic theocracy…
If not, it may be time to leave and let them kill each other wow, you may some day realize what the more intelligent could see all along…. that Sunni and Shia are just two gangs, and we just turned the conflict in the other gangs favor. probably the gang thats harder to bargain with, to be honest…
After months, nay, years of Dumbya insisting “we’re winning”,
now we have Tony Snow, the official mouthpiece of the idiot these trolls worship, telling reporters.. well … what do YOU mean by “winning”?….
I wonder what Slur Egg Pelvins means by winning? Supporting a democratically elected Hamas-esque government in Iraq no doubt. If they think like Hamas, no problem, as long as they have been DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED.
Perphaps Slue Elvis Egg can also explain to us how we are going to prevent the people we are training from being infiltrated by militias. Dude, imagine how much security surrounded the execution of hussien.. they couldnt even keep Sadr militiamen out of a frikking high level execution. How are they supposed to keep the militias out of recruits they are training all over the country?.word to the wise.. its pretty hard to do many background checks when the electricity is only on 2 hours a day…
. especially when politicians connected to militias were DEMOCRATICALLY elected and run various government ministries…
Slur Egg Nelvis has probably replaced MA as “most retarded troll on TP” award.
Hey Geg Nevlis, let me offer some predictions you can understand. THrow insults all you want, but no matter what:
1) Your hero dumbya is going to fail at everything he tries to do for the rest of his pathetic life.
2) Any predictions you or your idiot imaginary GI Jew buddy MA make will end up being wrong.
3) Your deranged mental state is strongly indicitave of some mental defect, most likely caused by inbreeding.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:37 amComment by Sir Greg Nevins
Comment by Jewish Liberator
Comment by Jews are Gods chosen people —
Rachel . . .
You must get awfully tired doing all that cutting and pasting. What are you really, a trust-fund baby? ‘Cause we all work, yet you can be found posting here under any one of, what? thirty names, not counting the ones you steal, any time day or night. For what? Do you think this is going to drive us away? I’ve been here for over three years, and have seen many trolls come and go. I’ll still be here, after you’ve decided on some more important target, and so will the others. We have the patience to wait you out. We waited for six years to resume control, and we’ve got a mission to restore this country to the America we once knew and still love.
And I’m still Barfly.
January 17th, 2007 at 5:14 amWhat’s all the talk about Kool-Aid drinking? I know it’s a little sugary but Imo, it’s not that great an insult. Wow, you drink a sugary beverage!?
Sir Greg Nevins, while I think your style of posting, how do the kids say, sucks Donkey balls, I do believe your a man of principle. Your a purist typer. You would never use the caps lock function on your keyboard. Sir Nevins is one of the old school, he uses the shift function with every capital letter he types. For that he should be applauded and rose petals should be thrown at his feet wherever he sets foot.
Oh, Kool-Aid! I get it. It’s that Jonestown Massacre thing. Where Jim Jones kept talking about his mother and yelling at the gathering to drink their Kool-Aid. I bet their last thought were, ‘it’s a little sweet’.
January 17th, 2007 at 7:44 amCum Asian Cum Ass Cum
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 12:01 pm