Because...you're still wallowing on that it was about Iraq only. And you're wrong. Again.



No, I responded three posts in a row...after your lame and tired spilled milk analogy that I cut off and then destroyed



that's correct, my argument does INCLUDE Iraq.


Sorry, I'm right right and dead on f'n right.


I am not.

 
Again, 5 links, 2 global, 3 about Afghanistan. Oops and A is way off again. Consistent error take practice or is it innate?



Pointing out that your analogy sucks after making a point regarding global gains against al0Qaeda was spot on and at the same time, exposed you.



Your analogy ignores that Iraq was a thug led regime of murder, torture, and rape hardly resembling a clean floor. I've dissected this cat and nailed it flailing to the wall, I;ve already asked for something better. It's obvious by your error prone beating of this dead horse that you ain't got crap. Go figure.


Provide a scintilla of it and I'll still probably be able to f with it. It's the source you see.


Your post started with "let's get one thing straight"...then some crap about milk...when I was clearly focused globally and then corrected what you;ve already admitted was a mistake. Let's move on, you're high.



You ain't done nothin, that's the whole point!



Whatever....milkboy.



But...you don't believe that anymore do you? And there ARE real gains against al-Qaeda.


Firstly, I have a monster storied on about numerous times, clearly dickless is not accurate, I was actually considering reduction surgery. Secondly, I'm far from know-nothing, I'm absolutely dominating you on your own forum. C'mon.

No I'm pointing out that it was a natural conclusion to come to given the wording of your original post, and pointing out that because of that and the fact that you argued specifically on the basis of Iraq alone by taking on the argument I made on that basis, and then losing. You rushed to tell me that my 'clean floor' analogy about Iraq having no al Qaeda then some al Qaeda and now less was invalid because "Iraq wasn't a clean floor to begin with" -- which of course is patiently wrong. There was 'no al Qaeda' in Iraq before, so yes the floor was clean, the analogy was valid and you argued on the basis of Iraq alone. It's only after you failed miserably at this and it took another poster to come along to introduce the idea of the issue globally before you took up the argument on that basis as well --- not to enlighten anyone with any relevant information or insight mind you, but just so you could try and dance around like a puppy with a bone acting like you 'won' something.

The whole issue would've dissolved if you acted like an adult but pretensions aside, well, we both know you can't do that.


lol. There's that yappy little puppy dog again . No, Mouth, that's just something you keep telling yourself. You argued on the basis of Iraq and Iraq alone for 3 posts and you failed. Then you tried to cover up by getting mouthy. The rest of your contributions here have been optimistic guesses you pulled out of your ass.



Again nothing, Mouth. You snip out a quote where I show your posts arguing on the basis of Iraq alone and need to cut it out to lie. Lets look at those posts again, since it seems you dont want to face up to what you said:

..And:

^ You took up my analogy, (hilarious how in the example above you still managed to fail to understand it -- the analog is of al Qaeda presence  alone, not the state of affairs of Iraq -- just can't seem to argue without redefining what people are saying, can you? An intelligent person could.), and argued on the basis of Iraq and Iraq alone no matter how many times you wanna try and hide that. And you were wrong.
There was zero al Qaeda in Iraq then there was plenty and now there's less. Simple. So simple you can't even argue it unless you can bring in unrelated side issues. It was a clean floor before - clean of al Qaeda. That's what we're talking about. Not no-fly zones, al Qaeda. Your subject wasnt "no-fly zones and sanctions don't work", your subject was al Qaeda presence. If you can't even stick to our own definitions....well you sure as shit aren't about to 'dominate' any argument here with that level of scatter-brained 'say-anything' crap.

You took up the argument on the basis of Iraq alone and lost it, and now like a child you need to snip and cut in order to hide what you said.

You're not fooling anyone Chuckles. Debate, discussing ideas, information and substance and the value of honesty are as alien to you as any teenager.

Ahk

Just a news flash Mr. Martel, you are not the first to claim that.  It's a pretty common claim in fact.  And unless you either outright break the rules, or make yourself a real royal pain in our admin asses, you won't get banned.  We're big enough boys and girls that a difference of opinion can be tolerated. 

I do too.  And I wish I had access to all those user names and associated IP addresses.  Too bad Chovey couldn't make it 'read only'.

The gains aside, what concerns me is always perspective. The tribal regions of Pakistan are no doubt helping Afghan Taliban. They continue to opertate, I feel they will always be able to operate. Any attack coming from those trained in these regions will be interpretted as a loss for American or Western policies. Even though we can militarily control their homelands, we cannot limit their spheres of influence. There are recent reports of western white anglo-saxon looking terrorists being trained, that the Western habit of judging by ethnicity can be exploited.

"Gains" against al-Qaeda can be a very difficult definition, I'll be the first to admit. However...there is another reality here. Al-Qaeda and organizations like it that Israel wages wars with everyday(and Iran supports to the hilt)...seem to respond to raw military power. They cannot withstand American might, it does affect their operations, it does create chaos for their stated goals and aspirations.

Sitting here trying to 'talk' to al-Qaeda isn't gonna work. We must take a proactive stance here, does anyone deny that? Argue what you will about how we got to war, who got you there....yer there. Your nation is at war, youth in harms way, boots in country, flag snapping over Iraq and Afghanistan. And real progress is being made.

I ask that each of you read OBL's Fatwa, his and al-Qaeda's declaration of war, see the reason the conflict exists. Are we making progress, are you all skippy if you're OBL this fine morning? Look to your front, look to the status of this planet, look at your reality...who is dictating events? Who is the central figure on the planet?

Yeah....denial ain't no river in Egypt, Boys.

Are you serious?  Now the right is claiming that MSM coverage is proof of big gains against Al Qaeda?  When all we hear from the right is bleating about how the media coverage is skewed, they never show good stuff, yada yada yada ad-nauseum?  And NOW it's proof of something?  Unfucking believable.

Always the same. They come here and dish out the attitude, name-calling and flame but as soon as they get some in return it's time to start crying.


Phffft. Whatever. You think 0 + 10 - 5 equals zero, and you can't seem to understand straight forward analogies, and you can't argue against anyone's point unless you distort or change it outright. You took up the argument specifically on the level of al Qaeda in Iraq, (period. full stop), and as soon as you can't argue that you need to start talking about the sanctions or the no-fly zones which have fuck all to do with it and when that failed you exited the argument all together and started your puppy-victory-dance.

You can keep prancing around here throwing around accusations of grade school level intelligence and 'domination' (lol!!) but you're not impressing anyone and there isn't anyone on the forum who hasn't been able to hold their own or better against you. You need to actually get smart and get educated instead of dancing around claiming to be.






Ahk