Iv'e never called for any more war or occupation so you are just making shit up. I just refuse to believe that an action which directs Bush to do NOTHING and expects him to notice or care enough about some funding shortfall to end the occupation is overly optimistic and unbelievably trusting of what Bush would do in response. You don't have any grounds at all to take my concern for what would occur as a result of the op's defunding scheme and twist it into me accepting an illegal occupation. You're talking out of your ass to someone you know absolutely NOTHING about (and apparently don't care to). Who the fuck are you to tell me what I believe or substitute my words with your biased own? Save that crap for the REAL opposition. This is a discussion, not a campaign.
You are arguing against a tool that is viable to use against the continuing war effort, on a premise that is laughable- and many have addressed it here besides me. Those troops are in more danger due to continued funding that is not going to them anyway- it's going to the private corporations.
Since you continue to use the same talking point that this is somehow harming the troops(who are already being harmed), I'm done arguing with you. Either you believe this talking point beyond the point of accepting evidence presented against it, or you have a stake in preventing this discussion.
Personally, I don't think the Dems care enough about the troops to do anything to bring them home, so your side wins anyway. Congrats.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
