Posted on 08/12/2006 9:45:47 AM PDT by ImpBill
Edited on 08/12/2006 9:50:28 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
What's with the "our"?
You're definitely one of the clueless I was talking about. This place is full of them, unfortunately.
Thanks for the interesting cross-reference!
I agree that it would have been better to go in and really sock them (them being the Hezzies and their supporters). I think the problem was precisely that Olmert did lose the initiative, because he is weak and vacillating and wouldn't commit to large force - and then there really wasn't much we could do. To some extent Israel may be operating as our proxy in this, but it's also a separate country with its own objectives, and I never got the feeling that Olmert and Bush were quite on the same page.
And unfortunately, you're right. This war is inevitable. I'm not sure what's going to trigger the major outbreak of declared war, probably something trivial. But it's just a matter of time, and I hope we're putting the time to good use.
You cared enough to post that ridiculous graphic.
Why do you suppose I used quotation marks? Perhaps to make say it in a perogative sense? I don't know anyway, you are correct. I guess I am clueless. Can you clue us lessor folks in? I guess I haven't been able to get a clue how you really feel about the topic of the Thread?
"So what's your point? Get back to us in a few months."
My point would be lost on you, so don't worry your little head about it.
The problem is, you don't have a point if you knew anything about middle east geo politics and the history of the UN. Jusdt because a few countries say indicate they are "on board", that means nothing until they prove it. Which few countries do these days. Just look at our own Congress backing the war. Fewer and fewer do these days, and they were "on board." You are the uninformed, ignorant fool who believes that every day is a sunny day. Maybe you might wwnt to take a social studies or civics class when you get to the sixth grade.
The problem is, you don't have a point if you knew anything about middle east geo politics and the history of the UN. Jusdt because a few countries say indicate they are "on board", that means nothing until they prove it. Which few countries do these days. Just look at our own Congress backing the war. Fewer and fewer do these days, and they were "on board." You are the uninformed, ignorant fool who believes that every day is a sunny day. Maybe you might wwnt to take a social studies or civics class when you get to the sixth grade."
If I were you, I'd take that crystal ball you bought at K-Mart back for a refund.
The rest of us will just have to wait and see what happens.
See if your mommy will give you some milk and cookies in the meantime.
Well, just look at past performance of the UN and the ME in general. Those nations you mentioned who are "on board" will never support this cease fire. The same crap will erupt be the end of the year. Stay tuned.
Get real? We're still in the UN and we're not doing anything to stop this conflict. You can believe what you want, he's PRO UN to the point he'll never remove us from that bullsheet, and you know it.
'Bush welcomes UN MidEast resolution'
Ok he's not pro-UN because Bolton's in there. What was I thinking... oh wait...oh look ...the title of the thread tells different. I am real.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.