+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 41

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam
    By Gene on November 16, 2005 at 10:08 pm


    The historical and military ignorance of most of the people comparing the two is enormous. Let’s compare.

    Vietnam: The population heavily supported the insurgents. Anyone who has studied low-intensity conflict will tell you this is the number one prereq for success.
    Iraq:The baseline for support starts at perhaps 20% and then declines from there.

    Vietnam: 58,000 dead.
    Iraq: About 1/25th that number.

    Vietnam: The ARVN troops were for the most part corrupt, unmotivated and ineffectual.
    Iraq: The Kurdish Peshmurga are redoubtable fighters. The government troops are becoming more able and independent by the day.

    Vietnam: Lush foliage to conceal the enemy.
    Iraq: Open desert, friend to air power.

    Vietnam: The common people expected to be empowered by a Communist victory.
    Iraq: The Kurds and Shias would have only the boot of the Sunnis to expect. They won’t give up.

    Vietnam: The tech-gap between the two sides was relatively small. The NVA had Soviet aircraft, AA and equipment. US surveillance abilities were small, to the extent that we often dropped our bombs with little more than happy wishes of hitting something.
    Iraq: Predator drones, satellites, Ground Surveillance Radars, etc, etc, etc.

    Vietnam: The VC weren’t fighting alone. The North Vietnamese Army fielded full-on military divisions. In fact, Saigon fell to 4 corps of NVA regulars. From what I remember, no guerrillas in history have won without the help of a regular army.
    Iraq: The insurgents rely on homemade IEDs. They have no regular army support.

    Vietnam: A country-sized battle zone.
    Iraq: A relatively pacified country with a few very hot sections.

    Vietnam: The media and liberal Democrats undercut the war effort, sapping public morale and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
    Iraq: Well, maybe the two aren’t entirely dissimilar.

    Link

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    432

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    but lets not forget that the American people were deceived in both situations.

    The so-called Domino principle was the excuse used gather support for the Vietnam War. McNamara latter confirmed this was never the case.

    Bush used the excuse of Weapons of Mass destruction and immediate threat to gather support for the Iraq War. We now this was not true.

    In both cases US soldiers are dying for a reason that turned out to be false. Why?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    He gets his facts off a blog titled "Say Anything?" LOL. That's rich.

    And we are to believe that this war in nothing like Viet Nam because Cheney and Bush say so. Neither man ever fought in combat. What the hell do they know about war? http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=7345

    Nothing.

    Lady Mod

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    432

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    I think another question that should be asked now is...Who now owns Iraqs oil??

  5. #5
    umdkook Guest

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    ppffff great arguments Grim, as if the lowER amount of casulties and difference of insurgent support has ANYTHING to do with a pointless war that benefits NO ONE. not even Iraqis will benefit, thats a fact.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    a pointless war that benefits NO ONE
    Do you really believe that?

    If you do, then I would get on the phone with all the democrat that signed on to this war and give them hell.


    I think another question that should be asked now is...Who now owns Iraqs oil??
    I think you had better just take another big hit off that joint and concentrate on how your going to explain to your family you got stoned again today and couldn't look for a job.


    In both cases US soldiers are dying for a reason that turned out to be false. Why?
    Do you democrats/liberals ever read?

    1) The 9/11 Report
    2) The U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq
    3) The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction
    4) The Butler Report
    5) The Silverman Report

    And soon, we will have phase two to add to this collection. Another in a series of investigations that you on the left can pretend does not exist so you can continue lying to the American people to try and destroy the Bush Administration.

    .

  7. #7
    umdkook Guest

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Do you really believe that?

    If you do, then I would get on the phone with all the democrat that signed on to this war and give them hell.




    I think you had better just take another big hit off that joint and concentrate on how your going to explain to your family you got stoned again today and couldn't look for a job.




    Do you democrats/liberals ever read?

    1) The 9/11 Report
    2) The U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq
    3) The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction
    4) The Butler Report
    5) The Silverman Report

    And soon, we will have phase two to add to this collection. Another in a series of investigations that you on the left can pretend does not exist so you can continue lying to the American people to try and destroy the Bush Administration.

    .
    i guess you missed the part where he said "THAT TURNED OUT TO BE FALSE".

    HOW CAN you BELEIVE THAT THIS WAR HAS A POINT? what was it, to get rid of Saddam? Big deal, daddy could have done that years ago.

    Rid the region of a tyrant?? who teh heck are we to go halfway round the world to save a bunch of arabs who will never like the US anyways.

    Get oil prospects for the US?? We all know that cant happen lest the world hate us forever and brand us as warmongers after oil.

    Get rid of the WMD's that were GRAVELY threatening the country and the world?? well i dont think that one needs to be addressed.

    Promote freedom and equality in Iraq?? Yeah, thats something the US needed to take charge of for sure.

    im running out of ideas as to why it could possibly have a point, beyond saving the US image and the honor of those already fallen in "battle".

    i think you need to get off the Peyote that Bush has been selling you and realize whats going on.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam
    By Gene on November 16, 2005 at 10:08 pm


    The historical and military ignorance of most of the people comparing the two is enormous. Let’s compare.

    Vietnam: The population heavily supported the insurgents. Anyone who has studied low-intensity conflict will tell you this is the number one prereq for success.
    Iraq:The baseline for support starts at perhaps 20% and then declines from there.

    Vietnam: 58,000 dead.
    Iraq: About 1/25th that number.

    Vietnam: The ARVN troops were for the most part corrupt, unmotivated and ineffectual.
    Iraq: The Kurdish Peshmurga are redoubtable fighters. The government troops are becoming more able and independent by the day.

    Vietnam: Lush foliage to conceal the enemy.
    Iraq: Open desert, friend to air power.

    Vietnam: The common people expected to be empowered by a Communist victory.
    Iraq: The Kurds and Shias would have only the boot of the Sunnis to expect. They won’t give up.

    Vietnam: The tech-gap between the two sides was relatively small. The NVA had Soviet aircraft, AA and equipment. US surveillance abilities were small, to the extent that we often dropped our bombs with little more than happy wishes of hitting something.
    Iraq: Predator drones, satellites, Ground Surveillance Radars, etc, etc, etc.

    Vietnam: The VC weren’t fighting alone. The North Vietnamese Army fielded full-on military divisions. In fact, Saigon fell to 4 corps of NVA regulars. From what I remember, no guerrillas in history have won without the help of a regular army.
    Iraq: The insurgents rely on homemade IEDs. They have no regular army support.

    Vietnam: A country-sized battle zone.
    Iraq: A relatively pacified country with a few very hot sections.

    Vietnam: The media and liberal Democrats undercut the war effort, sapping public morale and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
    Iraq: Well, maybe the two aren’t entirely dissimilar.
    well this may shock my colleagues here but i actually understand and like this post!!to be breif,he points out the military advantages to winning this war outright with less loss of life,(especially "ours")and the underlying will of more of the conqered people to adopt western ways,and then says the dems/libs are gonna stop it again for the same reasons they did before!!i really cant find fault with it.i dont find it at all partisan!!i find it to be truthful and acceptable to my way of thinking.it's really very objective even if seen by some to be leaning to supporting the war.if there is a division in it it is between opportunistic/idealistic thought and it's critics.do i agree with the war in iraq!?no.but i agree with this limited assessment.i might add that his long list of the +'s is not a "weighting" factor for me.and public morale is like public anything.controlled by the promoters.the "king" still tells the "willing" servants what to think and feel!!and he plays to their nature!!the nature of ownership= freedom. :eek: :D :rolleyes:
    Last edited by lexx; 11-19-2005 at 09:07 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    i think you need to get off the Peyote that Bush has been selling you and realize whats going on.
    Ok, here is the major problem I'm having here with yours, as well as most on the lefts outlook on things. You said "HOW CAN you BELEIVE THAT THIS WAR HAS A POINT?" Well let me say this. When we started the invasion of Iraq, we had a very specific point. After 9/11, we as a nation realized that the ocean barrier between us and them was no longer good enough to protect us from terrorism, so we had to take the offensive and do what we could to put a stop to it. That meant that terrorists organizations and the countries of the world that supported terrorism had to be dealt with. I will quote the president:

    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

    So we went to the U.N. and forged resolution 1441. It was unanimously approved by the U.N. security council 11-0. It gave Saddam one last chance to account for his known wmd stocks as he had agreed to do 11 years earlier. We didn't ask anything of Saddam that he had not already agreed to before, but this time we made it clear that the time for games was over. I will once again quote the president:

    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

    Saddam did reject peace, so our POINT was to eliminate him as a threat, and destroy any chance for Saddam and his regime to develop nukes (which David Kay had stated in his final report that Saddam was fully intent on restarting as soon as sanctions were lifted).

    So the president now had to make the case to the American people and the leaders of the world, that Saddam needed to be dealt with. Here is another quote from Bush:

    "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

    The senate and the congress overwhelmingly voted to approve the president using force to remove Saddam, so he did.

    Whether or not he ended up having wmd's is irrelevant. Every major intelligence agency in the world agreed with the conclusions from our National Intelligence Estimate, which determined that Saddam did have WMD's and was a serious threat.

    That was the point of the war! A point that was validated by the approval of the presidents use of force from the senate, congress and the overwhelming majority of the American people.

    The point today of the war is to do the right thing by the people of Iraq, and provide the security and training necessary so that they can both develope their own government and have the adequate military and police forces needed to secure it.

    There's your answer.


    and p.s. I lied about those quotes. The first two were from the president, but it was president Clinton, not Bush. The last quote was from the senate intelligence committee's minority leader, democrat Jay Rockefeller.

    .

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,222

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Ok, here is the major problem I'm having here with yours, as well as most on the lefts outlook on things. You said "HOW CAN you BELEIVE THAT THIS WAR HAS A POINT?" Well let me say this. When we started the invasion of Iraq, we had a very specific point. After 9/11, we as a nation realized that the ocean barrier between us and them was no longer good enough to protect us from terrorism, so we had to take the offensive and do what we could to put a stop to it. That meant that terrorists organizations and the countries of the world that supported terrorism had to be dealt with. I will quote the president:

    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

    So we went to the U.N. and forged resolution 1441. It was unanimously approved by the U.N. security council 11-0. It gave Saddam one last chance to account for his known wmd stocks as he had agreed to do 11 years earlier. We didn't ask anything of Saddam that he had not already agreed to before, but this time we made it clear that the time for games was over. I will once again quote the president:

    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

    Saddam did reject peace, so our POINT was to eliminate him as a threat, and destroy any chance for Saddam and his regime to develop nukes (which David Kay had stated in his final report that Saddam was fully intent on restarting as soon as sanctions were lifted).

    So the president now had to make the case to the American people and the leaders of the world, that Saddam needed to be dealt with. Here is another quote from Bush:

    "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

    The senate and the congress overwhelmingly voted to approve the president using force to remove Saddam, so he did.

    Whether or not he ended up having wmd's is irrelevant. Every major intelligence agency in the world agreed with the conclusions from our National Intelligence Estimate, which determined that Saddam did have WMD's and was a serious threat.

    That was the point of the war! A point that was validated by the approval of the presidents use of force from the senate, congress and the overwhelming majority of the American people.

    The point today of the war is to do the right thing by the people of Iraq, and provide the security and training necessary so that they can both develope their own government and have the adequate military and police forces needed to secure it.

    There's your answer.


    and p.s. I lied about those quotes. The first two were from the president, but it was president Clinton, not Bush. The last quote was from the senate intelligence committee's minority leader, democrat Jay Rockefeller.

    .
    SHOULD CONGRESS BE IMPEACHED FOR ABANDONING THE RULE OF LAW?

    "We should follow the rule of law. The rule of law says that resolutions, to begin war, should come to the House of Representatives and pass by the Senate. But we have been too careless and too casual for many, many decades, and this is the reason we do not win wars any more.

    "We are in essentially perpetual war. We have granted too much authority to our President to wage war....We, as a House, must assume our responsibilities.

    "I cannot support this resolution because it is a rubber stamp, it is an endorsement for an illegal war. We should argue the case for peace. We should argue the case for national sovereignty. We should not allow our President to use U.N. resolutions to wage war...."


    FOR USA TO BE SOVEREIGN, WE MUST RESPECT THE SOVEREIGNTY OF OTHERS

    "There is an idea known as sovereignty, and that idea is integral to nationhood. Among other things, sovereignty dictates that a people be responsible for their own leadership, without the interference of other nations. Is it any wonder that the same American leaders who would invade other sovereign nations spend so much time surrendering the sovereignty of the United States? I think not. Simply, their efforts are designed to undermine the entire notion of sovereignty.

    "One evident outcome of the anti-sovereignty philosophy is our dependence on institutions such as the United Nations. It is an affront to our nation's sovereignty and our constitution that the President presently launches war on Iraq under the aegis of a UN resolution but without the Constitutionally required authorization by the United States Congress."






    and p.s. This stuff came from the Conservative Caucus organization in 1998 in opposition to Clinton launching operation Desert Fox.
    http://www.conservativeusa.org/wagdog.htm
    Last edited by bairdi; 11-19-2005 at 02:40 PM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17


    and p.s. I lied about those quotes. The first two were from the president, but it was president Clinton, not Bush. The last quote was from the senate intelligence committee's minority leader, democrat Jay Rockefeller.

    .
    So, now that you admit to lieing we are suppose to take what you say as something to seriously consider?

    How do we trust your information if you lie?

    Lady Mod

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,222

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by sojustask
    So, now that you admit to lieing we are suppose to take what you say as something to seriously consider?

    How do we trust your information if you lie?

    Lady Mod
    You mean to tell me that you've ever taken any of his drivel seriously? :p
    It's a real shame when you have to research most of what some of these guys put up on this board just to see if it's true or not. Most of the time I see them using just a part of the story instead of the whole story.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by sojustask
    So, now that you admit to lieing we are suppose to take what you say as something to seriously consider?

    How do we trust your information if you lie?

    Lady Mod
    Are you friken joking?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    You people on the left, want to talk about lies?

    Could any of you please explain this campaign speech given before last years election by West Virginia's Chief Justice, Warren R. McGraw? Please, explain this if you can.



    McGraw speech excerpt

    .

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Ok, here is the major problem I'm having here with yours, as well as most on the lefts outlook on things. You said "HOW CAN you BELEIVE THAT THIS WAR HAS A POINT?" Well let me say this. When we started the invasion of Iraq, we had a very specific point. (1.) After 9/11, we as a nation realized that the ocean barrier between us and them was no longer good enough to protect us from terrorism, so we had to take the offensive and do what we could to put a stop to it. That meant that terrorists organizations and the countries of the world that supported terrorism had to be dealt with.


    (2.) So we went to the U.N. and forged resolution 1441. It was unanimously approved by the U.N. security council 11-0. It gave Saddam one last chance to account for his known wmd stocks as he had agreed to do 11 years earlier. We didn't ask anything of Saddam that he had not already agreed to before, but this time we made it clear that the time for games was over.


    (3.) Saddam did reject peace, so our POINT was to eliminate him as a threat, and destroy any chance for Saddam and his regime to develop nukes (which David Kay had stated in his final report that Saddam was fully intent on restarting as soon as sanctions were lifted).


    (4.)Whether or not he ended up having wmd's is irrelevant. Every major intelligence agency in the world agreed with the conclusions from our National Intelligence Estimate, which determined that Saddam did have WMD's and was a serious threat.

    That was the point of the war! A point that was validated by the approval of the presidents use of force from the senate, congress and the overwhelming majority of the American people.

    The point today of the war is to do the right thing by the people of Iraq, and provide the security and training necessary so that they can both develope their own government and have the adequate military and police forces needed to secure it.

    There's your answer.

    and p.s. I lied about those quotes. The first two were from the president, but it was president Clinton, not Bush. The last quote was from the senate intelligence committee's minority leader, democrat Jay Rockefeller.
    .

    Grim,

    In quote #1, you say after September 11, 2001, the US realized the world was small, and our safely was in peril. However, unilateral offensive preemptive strikes are against international law. In quote #2 you bring up the UN resolution 1441. That resolution was made is response to the other 16 resolutions Iraq had not complied with in the since the end of The Gulf War, in 1991.

    In quotes #3 and #4, the notion that Saddam Hussein was still a threat, and he was not being forced to comply is not true. Hans Blix, and Mohamed ElBaradei were giving reports of the progress of disarmament process. Mr. Blix made it clear, it was not easy, but it WAS getting done.

    Resolution 1441 was used to JUSTIFY attacking Iraq. Not the reason. It had nothing to do with September 11, 2001. Tony Blair and Pres. Bush tried to use this resolution to obtain a "second resolution" to attack Iraq. It did not work. So the US went to war without the UN Security Council's support.


    Resolution 1441

    DeeDee1965

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Please Note: Iraq Is Not Vietnam

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    You people on the left, want to talk about lies?

    Could any of you please explain this campaign speech given before last years election by West Virginia's Chief Justice, Warren R. McGraw? Please, explain this if you can.



    McGraw speech excerpt

    .
    I knew that audio would have them running from this thread.

    .

Similar Threads

  1. Note Broker
    By blue101 in forum Work at Home Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-02-2008, 09:20 PM
  2. Lol - Well note this date, and see if it happens!!
    By Yeah Well Fine Then in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-17-2008, 05:19 PM
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-12-2007, 05:03 PM
  4. Bush Iraq policy stalked by specter of Vietnam
    By sojustask in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-15-2006, 11:21 PM
  5. Note in a Bottle
    By sojustask in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-18-2005, 08:40 PM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags
000, 2001, 9/11, abe, accepted, account, accurate, acknowledge, action, actions, add, added, address, administration, admit, ads, advantages, affairs, age, agen, agency, ages, agreed, agreement, ain, allowing, ama, america, american, amount, amp, and, annual, another, answer, anti, approval, approved, are, aren, army, ation, attacking, attacks, audio, aus, austria, authority, authorization, aware, away, back, bad, balls, based, basic, bat, battle, benefits, bet, better, big, blame, blaming, blatant, blue, body, bombed, bombs, boo, book, boot, brand, break, breaking, bring, bringing, broadcast, broke, bunch, busy, butler, called, campaign, cannot, cant, capabilities, captured, card, care, carolina, case, cease, cer, chance, che, cheney, chief, choose, clan, cli, clinto, collection, com, coming, commentary, commercial, commit, common, communist, community, comparison, complete, completely, compliance, compu, computer, conceal, confirmed, confusion, consequences, conservative, conservatives, constant, constantly, continue, cooperation, cop, correct, couldn, countries, country, county, culture, daddy, dam, damn, dangerous, date, david, day, days, dea, dead, deal, death, decades, december, decided, decision, defeat, defend, definition, deliver, democrat, democratic, democrats, dems, des, desert, designed, destruction, development, did, didn, difference, different, ding, disarm, disclosing, disputed, disturbing, doesn, don, dont, dow, dropped, dying, earlier, early, east, economic, eed, elected, electio, eliminate, ells, end, ended, enemy, entire, equipment, error, eva, events, exists, experience, eyes, fabulous, fac, face, factor, factual, fail, failed, false, family, fault, favor, feel, fence, final, finished, five, flame, fly, focus, fool, forces, forever, forget, fox, fra, france, freedom, fringe, front, fuel, fully, fusion, games, gave, gay, generals, george, getting, give, giving, goal, goebbels, gonna, good, great, greater, greatest, grim, ground, guess, guns, guy, guys, had, happen, happened, harbor, hard, harvey, has, hat, hate, hats, heard, hell, helms, help, hey, him, his, honor, hose, hot, house, howard, huge, hus, hussein, ial, ignorance, ignorant, ill, image, images, ime, imminent, impeached, important, inc, individual, info, insult, intelligence, inter, invade, investigations, involved, involves, ion, iraq, isn, issue, issues, its, jay, job, join, joint, just, justify, kind, knew, kurdish, last, laugh, launch, leaders, league, leaving, led, les, less, lets, liars, liberal, liberals, lied, limited, limits, line, lines, lis, lives, lol, long, longer, los, losing, loss, lot, lying, main, make, makes, making, many, marriage, mass, mea, meet, memories, mess, mind, minister, misinformed, misunderstood, mohamed, mor, more, move, nam, nation, national, nations, nature, need, needed, ner, never, nominatio, nomination, north, north carolina, not, note, november, now, nuclear, official, oil, ones, only, open, operation, operations, opportunity, options, order, ordered, org, organizations, our, overwhelming, owns, page, par, paranoid, part, pas, pass, passed, passionate, paying, peace, people, perfectly, phone, picture, pictures, piece, place, plans, played, playing, point, poland, policies, politician, popular, pos, positive, possible, post, posted, posting, posts, potential, power, predator, presiden, pretty, process, progress, protect, protecting, prove, proven, proves, public, pull, pure, putting, qualified, question, questions, quote, quotes, race, raids, raining, raise, ran, read, real, reason, reasonable, reasons, red, regarding, regime, reich, remember, removed, renewed, research, respect, response, responsibilities, responsible, rest, retarded, ria, rich, rid, risk, roy, run, running, rushed, safe, safety, scared, section, secure, seem, selling, senate, sending, sense, september, series, sex, shock, short, shows, sides, signed, simple, simply, site, small, soldiers, sometimes, soo, sorry, sounds, spend, standard, star, started, starts, state, stated, states, stone, stop, stopped, story, stupid, such, sul, sun, support, supported, supporter, supporting, suppose, supreme, supreme court, sure, surge, surveillance, system, take, taken, taking, talk, targets, tas, ted, tells, terms, terrible, terror, terrorist, than, the, they, thing, thought, thread, threads, threatening, time, times, today, told, tom, ton, tone, tony, top, totally, track, tracks, tries, troops, turned, u.s., ugly, unhinged, uni, united, united states, url, usa, ussr, ven, verification, victory, vietnam, vince, viola, virginia, voted, waiting, war, warren, wars, wav, ways, week, weeks, west, western, whats, when, wikipedia, will, win, winning, with, won, working, world, worse, wrong, year, years, yesterday, you, your, zone

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •