Ithink your guy raindrop must be Cheny's teacher because his profanity is way better than Cheney's

OK Geoff,

I'll play. My riposte is up at http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/07/radio_left_call.html

, and it leaves a little more of a scar than yours.

Cordially,

Uncle J

I took the bait and wasted 5 minutes watching this guy take my comments out of context for the purpose of ridicule. But, he has yet to address any of the issues raised about Bush incompetence and why he isn't in Iraq saving our country from terrorists.

At least in the previous video, his cussing was laugable. This time he's just pitiful and boring.

LMFAO Jimbo! You're my hero. Great job showing this typical pussified liberal dipshit how it's done. He gets his ass handed to him and all he can come up with is the same, old, tired bullshit about how Bush lied. My favorite part is him essentially calling you a chickenhawk. Its a classic weak liberal trick turned around and shoved up his ass. Hooah!

I'm sure your brother is so proud of you. There's nothing like having a whiny brother to make you appreciate the way a real man handles himself. Hey Geoff, I just got back from two tours in Iraq. Guess I'm a chickenhawk too, only this one caught himself quite a few chickens.

Go back to your safe, comfy bed tonight knowing that men far superior to you are protecting your sorry ass.

LMFAO - Laugh your fat ass off.

As our great Pesident Bill Clinton said, "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what is right with America."

One of the things going right with our country is Bushwipe and the Repugnant congress popularity rating. Most Americans have discovered what you refuse to acknowledge: Bush and his gang of corrupt bullies is taking our country and our planet in the wrong direction.

You guys are so desperate because your idol, Bushwipe is going to get flushed down the sewer, the Democrats will get in power and straighten out the country, and you are in serious denial.

Too bad. So sad.

Yup.

Straighten it out all right. Straight down the toilet.

This 42 year old is waiting for US Army Reserve MEPS processing tomorrow at 0500. Does that make me a Chickenhawk? Or does that make me a member of the 'corrupt gang of bullies'? Do I get a jacket?

Orion

I am opposed to Bushwipe's war because people like you are getting killed unnecessarily. My cousin was killed in Iraq last year.

Since you are in the armed forces, that means you are not a hypocrit if you support the war. In fact, it means that you have the courage of your convictions. I don't agree with you that the war is justified or even a smart thing to do. But, I respect your courage and integrity because you are risking your life for what you think is right.

The problem I have is all of the right-wingers who claim the Iraq war is required for the survival of the United States but haven't enlisted and volunteered for Iraq.

If they actually believe that the war is necessary for the survival of the United States, then they would have enlisted unless they are cowards, hypocrits, or war profiteers.

Further, I object to the fact that Bushwipe has conducted the war incompetently. He refuses to commit sufficient troops, making it even more dangerous for the troops that are there.

The worst possible betrayal of our troops is to send them into war and then refuse to put the resources into it to win. We have the most powerful military in the world. As I said, I am opposed to the war. But, now that we are committed to it, I expect the materiel and troops required to win and to improve the safety and security of the troops in theater to be committed to winning the war as quickly and cleanly as possible. Bushwipe has refused to do that.

Finally, I object to Bushwipe, Cheney, and Rumsfeld refusing to admit the problems and doing something about them. They have been running around calling anyone who disagrees with them traitors and worse.

Bushwipe refuses to listen to his generals, has consistently undermined the military by refusing to commit sufficient resources, and refuses to adjust his strategy to reality. Instead he lies about how great things are going.

As a result, we have no choice but to demand that our troops be brought home.

The Bushwipes attacked Max Cleland for being soft on defense and morphed his picture into Saddam Hussein despite the fact that Max lost three limbs in Vietnam. Then when they were criticized about it, they attacked Max for the way he was injured.

They attacked the military records of John Murtha and John Kerry.

These are the despicable acts of persons totally lacking in human decency.

To summarize: I opposed the war. I am appalled at Bushwipes unwillingness to do what is required to win. And, I resent being called a traitor and a coward by the very people that support Bushwipe in his betrayal of our country and our troops.

Long winded illogical buffoon.

So are you pro fighting crime? How come you're not a policeman then? So by your own logic you're a hypocrite without the courage of your convictions? Oops.

You're hoisted by your own petard, moron.

What in the hell are you ranting about?

"As our great Pesident Bill Clinton said,"

You mean great chickenhawk.

Whether Bill Clinton is a chickenhawk or not is irrelvent to your previous comment - which as I have said makes no sense.

Are you on drugs?

Are you on drugs?

You just can't accept the truth, so you simply change the topic. And John Kerry really won Ohio. Ms. Cleo made a fortune off of gullible liberal wack jobs like you.

I am opposed to Bushwipe's war because people like you are getting killed unnecessarily.

People die everywhere, every day. We certainly disagree on 'unnecessarily' - Personally, I've always thought that the war in Iraq was a necessary stage in the overall Terror War. Very much like Guadalcanal was a necessary stage in the Pacific Theater of WWII. A battle that cost us over 6,000 dead, 29 ships sunk and over 600 aircraft destroyed. But it got us a critical staging ground - Very much like Iraq has.

My cousin was killed in Iraq last year.

You have my condolances, and gratitude to your family for producing men willing to serve this nation in difficult times. I am sorry for your loss. I do *NOT* mean to be flippant, but would his death be any easier to take had he been killed by a drunk driver? At least in this way, you can, perhaps, gain some small comfort from knowing that his death served some higher purpose.

Since you are in the armed forces, that means you are not a hypocrit if you support the war. In fact, it means that you have the courage of your convictions.

Thank you. That is high praise from anyone.

I don't agree with you that the war is justified or even a smart thing to do.

I'm guessing that you disagree with the entire Iraq theater - After Afghanistan, what do you think the US should have done next? And once that we were *IN* Iraq, what do you think we should have done next? The fact is, we *ARE* in Iraq now. We cannot undo what has been done. What would you recommend the United States do now?
I am hoping that you are not suggesting that the US remove our forces immediately - I don't think there are too many people who believe that would be a good idea, and certainly none with any sense.

But, I respect your courage and integrity because you are risking your life for what you think is right. The problem I have is all of the right-wingers who claim the Iraq war is required for the survival of the United States but haven't enlisted and volunteered for Iraq.

Thank you again. However, your next statement is illogical. What you are implying is that the only people who are allowed to have a supportive opinion on any matter should immediately become part of that matter - That is NOT part of the American democratic concept. As others have pointed out, to extend that idea, the only people who could call for more Police protection would be active Beat Cops. Only interior-qualified Firefighters could call for increased fire protection.
Do you really want a country where only the Warriors are allowed to discuss the conduct of a war? Where the Military Class is the only one trusted with the decisions to go to - or get out of - a war?
You'll also note that a large number of the 'right-wingers' who claim the Iraq war is required are ex-military, many with front-line service. From what I can tell by skimming, the vast majority of current-duty and former military believe in and support the Iraq theater.
Further, it is impossible for many people to join the military due to either age or physical or mental issues. For example, if you've ever had an ulcer, you cannot join the military. Ever been on anti-depressants? Same deal. Asthma? DQ'd. Lots of people try HARD to join and are turned down.
Finally, if you took everyone who supported the war and had them join the military (we'll ignore the qualifications for the sake of argument), we'd have a military of about 200 million people and no one fighting fires, doing police work, making steel, building weapons, ammunition, farming food or doing the thousands of other jobs that are required to run a nation.
Besides, can you imagine the taxes you'd have to pay to support a military of 200 million people??

If they actually believe that the war is necessary for the survival of the United States, then they would have enlisted unless they are cowards, hypocrits, or war profiteers.

As I pointed out above, that statment is false. Many have tried, or are too old, have disqualifying factors, or other reasons. Others are simply not suited to a military life. Others are in critical jobs supporting our society. I'm sure there are some who support the war who are cowards, hypocrites, and war profiteers. Just as there are MANY on the left who are the same. Cowardice, hypocrisy, and war profiteering are equal opprotunity positions.

Further, I object to the fact that Bushwipe has conducted the war incompetently.

What qualifications do you have to make that determination? And what do you base the accusation of "incompetently" upon? There are a lot of decisions he's made that I disagree with. But I also recognize that an awful lot of the decisions made are made by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, CENTCOM Commanders, Generals, Colonels, Majors and so on - Bush doesn't give every order himself, nor does Rove, Cheyney, etc. They set the global parameters and it's up the the commanders to make it work with what they have.
As has been said many times before, "You go to war with the military you have, not the one you wish you have."

He refuses to commit sufficient troops,

Based upon who's assessment? And do you fully understand the geopolitical and military commitments that the US Military has as well as their troop and logistical requirements? Do you know for a fact that those forces are available for use? Do you feel that it is strategically sound to commit the reserve forces that may or may not be available? What do you base this decision on?
Until you've got access to the same military data that the President, Joint Chiefs, and CENTCOM have, I think I'd be hesitant to make statements as to exactly what our military deployments should be.

making it even more dangerous for the troops that are there.

How do you know? It is also dangerous when we have a large 'footprint' as thatcan inflame the locals who are not happy with the presence of foreign troops. Again, you are quoting a 'talking point' without the knowledge, data, nor expertise to really understand or support it.

The worst possible betrayal of our troops is to send them into war and then refuse to put the resources into it to win.

You obviously do not believe we are winning. Most of the folks I've read over there think we are. By almost any assessment, we ARE winning. More and more provinces are being turned over to complete Iraqi sovereignty, control, and policing. Even the Shiia are involved in the government now. More and more terror groups are being rolled up or laying down their arms. Attacks and casualty rates are decreasing. And so on...
Personally, I think the worst possibly betrayal of our troops is to send them into combat and then betray their mission and/or their sacrifices, in effect, making them pay in blood to win the same ground twice. We HAVE sufficient resources - and as more Iraqai troops come into play every day and more provinces are placed under Iraqi control, more resources are freed up every day as well.
Even worse is the usual Leftist support for terrorists - Providing huge moral boosts, propoganda broadcasts, financial support, re-broadcast of their message, and making troopers feel abandoned by the US population.
So we differ on our definition of "the worst possible betrayal of our troops."

We have the most powerful military in the world. As I said, I am opposed to the war. But, now that we are committed to it, I expect the materiel and troops required to win and to improve the safety and security of the troops in theater to be committed to winning the war as quickly and cleanly as possible.

So you are in favor of a massive increase in our deployments into Iraq? Why? What do you intend to do with them? You evidently have a strategic vision of how to proceed that is very different than CENTCOM's. And why do you feel qualified to MAKE that assessment?

Bushwipe has refused to do that. Finally, I object to Bushwipe, Cheney, and Rumsfeld refusing to admit the problems and doing something about them.

Perhaps they have access to different data than you do?
Do you feel qualified to go into a hospital and tell doctors that you object to their treatment of various patients because there are 'problems' that they refuse to admit to or treat? Do you perhaps think that the Doctors might have a better knowledge-base and set of data on their problems than you might?

They have been running around calling anyone who disagrees with them traitors and worse.

I don't recall them calling anyone traitors - or worse. When did the President call anyone a Traitor? But no mind, I'll accept your premise, though I think it's false, for the sake of the discussion.
Do you consider it treason to support our enemies in time of war? To provide moral boosts for their troops? To provide them hope of victory? TO broadcast their messages? To do everything one can to decrease the effectiveness of our troops' missions while helping the terrorists? I do.

Bushwipe refuses to listen to his generals,

Not true. he refuses to listen to SOME of his generals. You may not know this, but the military is not a monolithic structure where everyone plays from the same sheet of music - especially at the higher levels of command. Generals frequently have political aspirations and play that game as well. There are generals Bush listens to, and some he won't. This is part of being President. I've run my own business and been involved in some major businesses at the executive level. A good executive listens to everyone and then makes his decisions - and of course, the folks whose advice he DOESN'T take are always pissed about it.

has consistently undermined the military by refusing to commit sufficient resources,

We've covered that already, I think.

and refuses to adjust his strategy to reality.

As I said above, I consider it a strong possibility that President Bush has access to more information and more experts on the situation than you do. This gives him a better view of 'reality' than you have, methinks.

Instead he lies about how great things are going.

Please provide some evidence of what lies he's told about how things are going? And what do you think is going so poorly? Are you unhappy with provinces being handed over to the Iraqis? Are you unhappy with the increasing numbers of dead terrorists and rolled up networks? Or are you unhappy with the increasing 'buy-in' to the Iraqi government from insurgent organizations? Do you feel that the decreasing casualty rates is bad? What is it that you feel is going so horribly wrong? Especially if you look at the big picture and see Iraq where it is today in contrast to where it was in t past.

As a result, we have no choice but to demand that our troops be brought home.

"We have no choice" - How do you have no choice? I'm assuming you're using a rehetorical device and not believing that you have no choice. You always have a choice. And believing that bringing our troops home will be a GOOD thing is surely in opposition to your liberal beliefs.
Let's assume that Bush suddenly makes you SecDef and you pull our troops out of Iraq with a massive airlift over the next week.
What do you think will happen in Iraq? In Iran? With terrorist networks the world over? And what do you think will happen the next time that the United States undertakes military action, anywhere for any reason? I'll e interested in your comments on this topic, particularly.

The Bushwipes attacked Max Cleland for being soft on defense and morphed his picture into Saddam Hussein despite the fact that Max lost three limbs in Vietnam. Then when they were criticized about it, they attacked Max for the way he was injured.

Definitely not a good idea. I've seen liberal commercials that were just as bad. Both sides deserve ridicule for that sort of idiocy.

They attacked the military records of John Murtha and John Kerry.

I don't recall too many people attacking Murtha's record. Kerry's record needs some serious looking at. Murtha's military record is unassailable. His current record is shameful. So is Kerry's.

These are the despicable acts of persons totally lacking in human decency.

Hyperbole, or do you actually believe that?

To summarize: I opposed the war. I am appalled at Bushwipes unwillingness to do what is required to win. And, I resent being called a traitor and a coward by the very people that support Bushwipe in his betrayal of our country and our troops.

I'll be curious to see your comments on the above.

Orion

No response to that comment at all? Or did it scroll off the page before you noticed it?

Orion

George and I were talking with Dick the other night.

We told him he should start a Farting School. Jimbozo and MadMonkey are so full of it, they'd be star pupils.

Haha Geoff is a fucking retard. A retired special forces soldier is a chickenhawk now? Comical straw grasping. So is someone a 'chickenhawk' if he doesn't sign up for the police if he believes in fighting crime? Oops that makes you the equivalent of a 'chickenhawk' now, dipshit. Now STFU you lily livered shit for brains douchebag.

You have no right to "demand" anything. You disgrace your cousin's sacrifice, but he fought for your right to a jack ass.

Uncle Jimbo served his country. YOU have not.

The bottom line is you are against the Iraq War and nothing else matters but your hate for Boooooooooooosh.

You are a ChickenDove. After you found out Jimbo had been Army Special Forces that would have been a good time to STFU and move on, but like a no nothing abou the military or the on the ground action in Iraq you continue with your tired cliche' bull shit.

Your rebuttal was spot Uncle Jimbo. Another pussified liberal will be in the fetal position tonight.

"Another pussified liberal will be in the fetal position tonight."

That is HILARIOUS! Thanks for the laugh.

Hi Geoff! As a recently discharged Marine who has served in Iraq, let me tell you in no uncertain terms that I find your weakass rant against Jimbo laughable. Are you actually trying to pimp your BROTHER'S service in an attack on a former SF senior NCO? Wow, nothing like touting other people's service to try to hide your own lack of any personal hardship more onerous than running out of some Ben & Jerry's late enough at night that the stores are closed.

I'm appalled that you would attempt to speak for veterans by attacking one of our own. Jimbo's one of us, partner-hell, he's more of one than most- which is far more than you will ever be able to claim. So you may want to find another target for your soft little tirade.

I love it. A couple of actual heros log on and all the lefties have headed for the tall grass. Where are your nasty snotty replies. Afraid that the heros might have a few arguments that you can't refute?

Always good to see the lefties running for cover.

I responded in kind to Jimbozo's attack on Democrats.

I am happy to have a civil discussion with those who are willing to have a civil discussion.

Your problem is that Republicans are used to attacking Democrats and not having Democrats respond to them in kind. I am not that kind of Democrat. When I am attacked, I will respond with the same or greater ferocity with which I was attacked.

When Jimbozo attacked me and Democrats with his ridiculous F*ck you rant, I decided to have a little fun. Judging from the responses to my commentary and ridicule, and the fact that Jimbozo was compelled to do another video rant attacking me, I'd say I hit home.

You see when people attack you in the way that Jimbozo did, the most fun thing is to respond in a way intended to get them even more riled up and angry. Then, you just sit back, keep throwing a little more gasoline on the fire and bask in the warmth of the fire as you watch the flames go completely out of control.

Or, to put it another way, It's kinda like Bushwipe blowing frogs with firecrackers.

So, I have enjoyed all of the sancimonious scalded dog yelps and rabid attacks against Democrats and against me. It simply proves that the DCCC ad hit home.

As for you, I responded to another person who challenged me on what I had to say to Jimbozo and his f*cked up buddies.

It's just further up the page, but here's a link to it:

Click here for my comment

Once you read it, if you are interested in a civil discussion, please respond.

Well Geoff, or Jeff, or Geoffry or whatever. It's great to see you want to have a civil discussion, 'cause I was kind of worried when you started calling someone who actually served this country "Chickenhawk"and "Jimbozo". Imagine my unease when you continually used words like "Bushwipe" and "liar" to describe the president. I mean, that's not really "civil", right? When you you say "Jimbozo and his fucked up buddies",and "chickenhawks" are you trying to make a point by NOT being "civil"? If so, what is that point?
Do you realize that you are talking about men who have actually served their country? Most likely shed blood for it?
Now, I know that for someone who has not worn the uniform it is probably a little difficult to understand why Uncle Jimbo and other veterans (myself included) might take offense at the political ad that started the whole thing, particularly when you are a leftist fucktard without the most elementary of reasoning skills. So here it is: that ad was offensive because it took images of DEAD MEN (who had given their lives to the service of their country) in caskets covered with the NATIONAL COLORS, to brazenly promote a political platform that advocates for the subversion of the very mission they died for! And if someone disagrees with that platform that person is by default a "chickenhawk"? "Fucked up"'?

Well Geoff, a hearty "fuck you and your buddies too" from a Marine.

In case you didn't get it, I'm telling you that I wouldn't cross the street to piss in your mouth if your teeth were on fire. I know how stupid you moonbat fucktards can be.

Uncle Jimbo - Loved both of your videos!

Dread Pirate Roberts VIII
De Oppresso Liber
Semper Fidelis

"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill

You tell jimbuttface you love his f*ck you video and then criticze me for being uncivil?

I'd be rolling on the floor laugning, but you are so pitiful and so dumb you don't even understand what provocation is. If you are a military person, you should understand the concept of responding to an attack with sufficient and appropriate force.

You really are that stupid. Huh. Go figure. Let me break it down for you, Geoff. I was MAKING FUN of you calling for a "civil" discourse while slinging invective at your targeted "I hate them because they don't agree with me" group.

By making fun of your hypocrisy, I was CRITICIZING you for being a moonbat fucktard.

Sheesh.

And don't try to wow me with your grasp of the concept of appropriate force, k? K.

Loved your videos, Uncle Jimbo!

OK. You got me on that one. That makes the score:

Geoff 87 You guys 1

sufficient and appropriate force in the case of the 9/11 attacks should have been turning the entire middle east into a solid sheet of glass but we have held back by trying to keep casualties to a minimum. We would still be fighting WW II if we had not fire bombed Dresdin and droped the big ones on Japan. War is nasty stuff but since WW II this country has fought every war with one hand tied behind its back and as such we have messes like Korea and the Middle east.

Finally we have given Isreal the go ahead to take out their enemies before stopping the war. Wish we had done that in several places rather than doing the leftist pussy foot.

"Your problem is that Republicans are used to attacking Democrats and not having Democrats respond to them in kind." I am not that kind of Democrat."

No, You worship your chickenhawk hero Bill Clinton. Hey Joff, when did you volunteer to go to Mogadishu?