<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fun Friday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/</link>
	<description>Drinking the love from her Holy Grail</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 03:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Micky 2</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11525</link>
		<dc:creator>Micky 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 20:54:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11525</guid>
		<description>I'm going to listen to Jack before I listen to a guy who analogizes terrorists as unruly children.
Seems to me we need small precise forces that can give GPS locations for precision bombings etc...
Something along those lines


" in the end, war profiteering and oil were the real reasons for invading Iraq"

I already gave a much more logical and pragmatic explanation above but you still insist on taking your talking points from the 2003 looney leftist moonbat handbook.

Wheres this oil we went after ? HUH ?

Haliburton, Blackwater ?
The profits from that are a million to one in relation to the cost of the war. JEEZ.

"they were already there!"

No, only local revolutionaries hoping to gain control.
Al Queda and Uran cam later, gimme a break.

"As for your silly and innane question about the Dem majority on the Hill - ask me that two years from now, when they have a more sizeable majority and a Dem in the White House."

NO JERSEY !!!!!!
You asked me what our recent con majority had done.
I am asking you the same question in regards to the recent dem majority.

WHAT HAVE THEY DONE RIGHT ???

A MORE SIZABLE MAJORITY ???
ARE YOU OUTTA YOUR MIND ????
They only need a couple more seats and they'll have complete control.
Tell you what, if a dem has to be in office lets use the congress in place when Clinton was in office.

What a chicken you are man !
Total chicken of the worst kind.

My question is no more silly or inane than yours.
It is exactly the same question except that the word republican has been replaced with democrat.

Dissonative cognisance ?

Loose the word alreadyJersey.
You use it so much that half the time its outta place and doesnt even apply.
You're just using it so you can sound edumacated and fancyshmancy.

Whenever someone makes sense that you cant get past you attack their thinking, intellect or sanity.

It makes you look pathetically weak and feeble.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m going to listen to Jack before I listen to a guy who analogizes terrorists as unruly children.<br />
Seems to me we need small precise forces that can give GPS locations for precision bombings etc&#8230;<br />
Something along those lines</p>
<p>&#8221; in the end, war profiteering and oil were the real reasons for invading Iraq&#8221;</p>
<p>I already gave a much more logical and pragmatic explanation above but you still insist on taking your talking points from the 2003 looney leftist moonbat handbook.</p>
<p>Wheres this oil we went after ? HUH ?</p>
<p>Haliburton, Blackwater ?<br />
The profits from that are a million to one in relation to the cost of the war. JEEZ.</p>
<p>&#8220;they were already there!&#8221;</p>
<p>No, only local revolutionaries hoping to gain control.<br />
Al Queda and Uran cam later, gimme a break.</p>
<p>&#8220;As for your silly and innane question about the Dem majority on the Hill - ask me that two years from now, when they have a more sizeable majority and a Dem in the White House.&#8221;</p>
<p>NO JERSEY !!!!!!<br />
You asked me what our recent con majority had done.<br />
I am asking you the same question in regards to the recent dem majority.</p>
<p>WHAT HAVE THEY DONE RIGHT ???</p>
<p>A MORE SIZABLE MAJORITY ???<br />
ARE YOU OUTTA YOUR MIND ????<br />
They only need a couple more seats and they&#8217;ll have complete control.<br />
Tell you what, if a dem has to be in office lets use the congress in place when Clinton was in office.</p>
<p>What a chicken you are man !<br />
Total chicken of the worst kind.</p>
<p>My question is no more silly or inane than yours.<br />
It is exactly the same question except that the word republican has been replaced with democrat.</p>
<p>Dissonative cognisance ?</p>
<p>Loose the word alreadyJersey.<br />
You use it so much that half the time its outta place and doesnt even apply.<br />
You&#8217;re just using it so you can sound edumacated and fancyshmancy.</p>
<p>Whenever someone makes sense that you cant get past you attack their thinking, intellect or sanity.</p>
<p>It makes you look pathetically weak and feeble.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jersey McJones</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11524</link>
		<dc:creator>Jersey McJones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 19:37:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11524</guid>
		<description>Micky, you said, "All military stratrgists agree that a full blown invasion (of Afghanistan) as you suggest would have more misses than hits because of the demographics and the lay outs."  I have no idea where you get that from or why "misses then hits" is even relevent to the conversation.  Of course, the larger the assault the greater the misses - but also the greater the hits.  And a larger assault doesn't imply what sort of tactics to be employed by a larger force.  Just dropping bombs all over the place has never won a war.  But a larger ground presence could secure the urban centers, the ports and farms.  It could squash the opium trade, and keep the Taliban at bay.  It could better secure the Afghan/Pakistan border.

And all this is beside the point.  One of the main rhetorical reasons to invade Iraq was to lure the terrorists there.  Why did we do that?  There were few terrorists there to start with.  Meanwhile, in Afghanistan we knew for a fact that terrorists found safe haven there and were using the country as a central base and headquarters.  We didn't ave to lure them there - they were already there!  A full scale invasion of Afghanistan would have accomplished more in the GWOT than any other strategy.  But Afghanistan has no OIL, and in the end, war profiteering and oil were the real reasons for invading Iraq.  And that gets to the main reason I wouldn't sign up for that - I don't want to risk my life for war profiteers and oil.

As for your silly and innane question about the Dem majority on the Hill - ask me that two years from now, when they have a more sizeable majority and a Dem in the White House.

"Our fight has never been in Afghanistan and never will be."

Well, Eagle, you have finally gone over the cliff of eternal and infinite cognitive dissonance.  I just don't know what else to say about this.

JMJ</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Micky, you said, &#8220;All military stratrgists agree that a full blown invasion (of Afghanistan) as you suggest would have more misses than hits because of the demographics and the lay outs.&#8221;  I have no idea where you get that from or why &#8220;misses then hits&#8221; is even relevent to the conversation.  Of course, the larger the assault the greater the misses - but also the greater the hits.  And a larger assault doesn&#8217;t imply what sort of tactics to be employed by a larger force.  Just dropping bombs all over the place has never won a war.  But a larger ground presence could secure the urban centers, the ports and farms.  It could squash the opium trade, and keep the Taliban at bay.  It could better secure the Afghan/Pakistan border.</p>
<p>And all this is beside the point.  One of the main rhetorical reasons to invade Iraq was to lure the terrorists there.  Why did we do that?  There were few terrorists there to start with.  Meanwhile, in Afghanistan we knew for a fact that terrorists found safe haven there and were using the country as a central base and headquarters.  We didn&#8217;t ave to lure them there - they were already there!  A full scale invasion of Afghanistan would have accomplished more in the GWOT than any other strategy.  But Afghanistan has no OIL, and in the end, war profiteering and oil were the real reasons for invading Iraq.  And that gets to the main reason I wouldn&#8217;t sign up for that - I don&#8217;t want to risk my life for war profiteers and oil.</p>
<p>As for your silly and innane question about the Dem majority on the Hill - ask me that two years from now, when they have a more sizeable majority and a Dem in the White House.</p>
<p>&#8220;Our fight has never been in Afghanistan and never will be.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, Eagle, you have finally gone over the cliff of eternal and infinite cognitive dissonance.  I just don&#8217;t know what else to say about this.</p>
<p>JMJ</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eagle 6</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11519</link>
		<dc:creator>Eagle 6</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 16:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11519</guid>
		<description>Our fight has never been in Afghanistan and never will be.  As noted in the great Marine's letter, there's nothing there - so if there is no infrastructure to take out, and there isn't, and there are no jobs to be deleted, there aren't, then go there?  The Afghans didn't have an Army.  They are trying to build one, but they are a lifetime away from self-reliance.  The Iraqis have an infrastructure.  They had an Army.  They had a program called the artist formerly known as investigative reporting that was swapped for agenda and is still killing the US with bile.  Iraq is all but won.  Yes, we got rocketed the other night.  They missed.  There were three civilians killed in the local village.  The Iraqi police killed the two suspects.  Wow.  Just like any city USA!  The tip of the spear was, and still is, Iraq.  Afghanistan is a ....hole and always will be.  Peace, love, and all that hippie stuff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Our fight has never been in Afghanistan and never will be.  As noted in the great Marine&#8217;s letter, there&#8217;s nothing there - so if there is no infrastructure to take out, and there isn&#8217;t, and there are no jobs to be deleted, there aren&#8217;t, then go there?  The Afghans didn&#8217;t have an Army.  They are trying to build one, but they are a lifetime away from self-reliance.  The Iraqis have an infrastructure.  They had an Army.  They had a program called the artist formerly known as investigative reporting that was swapped for agenda and is still killing the US with bile.  Iraq is all but won.  Yes, we got rocketed the other night.  They missed.  There were three civilians killed in the local village.  The Iraqi police killed the two suspects.  Wow.  Just like any city USA!  The tip of the spear was, and still is, Iraq.  Afghanistan is a &#8230;.hole and always will be.  Peace, love, and all that hippie stuff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Micky 2</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11513</link>
		<dc:creator>Micky 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 02:59:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11513</guid>
		<description>You cant do Afghanistan right or for any other way than what it is.
All military stratrgists agree that a full blown invasion as you suggest would have more misses than hits because of the demographics and the lay outs.
Yea, real good analysis after the fact.
These no honesty in after the fact armchair quarterbacking.

I guess its safe to say that you dont support the troops unless you approve of the war they're fighting. anything different are just a buch of nuts right ?

"I wouldn’t sign up under this president for a million bucks."

I'll remember this next time one of you asks us on the right to reach across, lets work together with this new pres and abandon our partisanship.
Not that nomne of you entertained that thought before Obama was elected anyway.

"But as usual and always, the cons got everything wrong."
Of course, this statement is a clear reprtesentative of pure bigotry and stupidity.
Its just about as true as saying the left always gets everything wrong.
Especially since Clinton had 8 years to catch Bin Laden or deal with Al Queda and got that way way way wrong.
Which reminds me, you chickened out and never answered my question from Wednesday.

Now, lets try this so that I can point out just what you’re being.

Tell me one thing good thats come out of the Dem majority in the last 2 years ?

(thats the 4th time I asked you)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You cant do Afghanistan right or for any other way than what it is.<br />
All military stratrgists agree that a full blown invasion as you suggest would have more misses than hits because of the demographics and the lay outs.<br />
Yea, real good analysis after the fact.<br />
These no honesty in after the fact armchair quarterbacking.</p>
<p>I guess its safe to say that you dont support the troops unless you approve of the war they&#8217;re fighting. anything different are just a buch of nuts right ?</p>
<p>&#8220;I wouldn’t sign up under this president for a million bucks.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll remember this next time one of you asks us on the right to reach across, lets work together with this new pres and abandon our partisanship.<br />
Not that nomne of you entertained that thought before Obama was elected anyway.</p>
<p>&#8220;But as usual and always, the cons got everything wrong.&#8221;<br />
Of course, this statement is a clear reprtesentative of pure bigotry and stupidity.<br />
Its just about as true as saying the left always gets everything wrong.<br />
Especially since Clinton had 8 years to catch Bin Laden or deal with Al Queda and got that way way way wrong.<br />
Which reminds me, you chickened out and never answered my question from Wednesday.</p>
<p>Now, lets try this so that I can point out just what you’re being.</p>
<p>Tell me one thing good thats come out of the Dem majority in the last 2 years ?</p>
<p>(thats the 4th time I asked you)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jersey McJones</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11510</link>
		<dc:creator>Jersey McJones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11510</guid>
		<description>Sorry man.  Just being honest.  I wouldn't sign up under this president for a million bucks.  If somebody wants to sign up and fight in Iraq, then good for them.  Whatever floats their boats.  Me?  I think you'd have to have a screw loose.  It's not contempt or anything.  I just think that you'd have to have one pretty crazy level of valor to sign up under this commander in chief and administration.

And Afghanistan wouldn't be such a $#@!hole if we'd done it right.  But as usual and always, the cons got everything wrong.

JMJ</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry man.  Just being honest.  I wouldn&#8217;t sign up under this president for a million bucks.  If somebody wants to sign up and fight in Iraq, then good for them.  Whatever floats their boats.  Me?  I think you&#8217;d have to have a screw loose.  It&#8217;s not contempt or anything.  I just think that you&#8217;d have to have one pretty crazy level of valor to sign up under this commander in chief and administration.</p>
<p>And Afghanistan wouldn&#8217;t be such a $#@!hole if we&#8217;d done it right.  But as usual and always, the cons got everything wrong.</p>
<p>JMJ</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Micky 2</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11509</link>
		<dc:creator>Micky 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11509</guid>
		<description>Yea, you're not alone.
I have the same list of choice words for all the others like you.

So, now you're calling our troops "nuts" also.
Smooth move exlax

You had no foresight.
All you had was a position from the beggining drawn of hatred for anything the right does.
Foresight involves looking past hatred ond bigotry in order to see that there is a definite strategic relation to our being there.
Its not about hearts and minds or oil or any of that crap.
Its about placing ourselves in and with an ally that has the foundation for a decent economy therby being a viable partner in our fight against radical Islam.
We have the largest embassy there that weve ever had anywhere, we will have bases in a centralized location in the middle east. We will be to Israel and Iraq what we are to South Korea and Japan. Ensuring ours and there stability in that part of the world.
Only the narrow minded BDS far left conspiracy theorists think that its about Cheny and Haliburton, Us stealing oil, or political trade offs for contracts.
You guys are clueless as you only look at what your BS partisanship, suspicions and hatred lead you to see.
There is no way we could implement the same kind of prescence and relationship in Afghanistan with the crappy economy (almost none at all) and destabalizing elements coming from everywhere along with neighbors worse than those of Iraq
As Jack said, theres pretty much nothing to do there but grow dope or enlist.
The action is not really in Afghanistan anymore half as much as it is in northern Pakistan, Syria and other states that skirt the middle east.

One of these days the left is going to learn to look at the big picture instead of focusing on localized minute issues.
Were trying to strategically deal with hundreds of various unfriendly elements across the globe, each with their own set of logistical and cultural problems and you guys are under the delusional impression that all these elements in the world will just come togeteher because Obama says he can do it.
You had no foresight, you had contempt for any military leadership under Bush.
Anyone who thinks it was all about toppling one man is the one whos truly nuts.
One or two F 14s could of done that.

When you can make a case for pulling out of Iraq thats half as good as my case for staying and going in the first place then I'll be impressed.
Until then, you're just denegrating and disrespecting our troops.

As usual.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yea, you&#8217;re not alone.<br />
I have the same list of choice words for all the others like you.</p>
<p>So, now you&#8217;re calling our troops &#8220;nuts&#8221; also.<br />
Smooth move exlax</p>
<p>You had no foresight.<br />
All you had was a position from the beggining drawn of hatred for anything the right does.<br />
Foresight involves looking past hatred ond bigotry in order to see that there is a definite strategic relation to our being there.<br />
Its not about hearts and minds or oil or any of that crap.<br />
Its about placing ourselves in and with an ally that has the foundation for a decent economy therby being a viable partner in our fight against radical Islam.<br />
We have the largest embassy there that weve ever had anywhere, we will have bases in a centralized location in the middle east. We will be to Israel and Iraq what we are to South Korea and Japan. Ensuring ours and there stability in that part of the world.<br />
Only the narrow minded BDS far left conspiracy theorists think that its about Cheny and Haliburton, Us stealing oil, or political trade offs for contracts.<br />
You guys are clueless as you only look at what your BS partisanship, suspicions and hatred lead you to see.<br />
There is no way we could implement the same kind of prescence and relationship in Afghanistan with the crappy economy (almost none at all) and destabalizing elements coming from everywhere along with neighbors worse than those of Iraq<br />
As Jack said, theres pretty much nothing to do there but grow dope or enlist.<br />
The action is not really in Afghanistan anymore half as much as it is in northern Pakistan, Syria and other states that skirt the middle east.</p>
<p>One of these days the left is going to learn to look at the big picture instead of focusing on localized minute issues.<br />
Were trying to strategically deal with hundreds of various unfriendly elements across the globe, each with their own set of logistical and cultural problems and you guys are under the delusional impression that all these elements in the world will just come togeteher because Obama says he can do it.<br />
You had no foresight, you had contempt for any military leadership under Bush.<br />
Anyone who thinks it was all about toppling one man is the one whos truly nuts.<br />
One or two F 14s could of done that.</p>
<p>When you can make a case for pulling out of Iraq thats half as good as my case for staying and going in the first place then I&#8217;ll be impressed.<br />
Until then, you&#8217;re just denegrating and disrespecting our troops.</p>
<p>As usual.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jersey McJones</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11508</link>
		<dc:creator>Jersey McJones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 22:41:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11508</guid>
		<description>I think you'd have to be nuts to enlist post-invasion of Iraq.  But that's just me.  To each his or her own.  I still think Iraq was stupid and counter-productive, and worse still, it tok away from Afghanistan, where we truly needed an all-out invasion.

But hey, I'm far from alone thinking this.  I think most people now agree with me.  I just have the foresight to have seen it from the beginning.

JMJ</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you&#8217;d have to be nuts to enlist post-invasion of Iraq.  But that&#8217;s just me.  To each his or her own.  I still think Iraq was stupid and counter-productive, and worse still, it tok away from Afghanistan, where we truly needed an all-out invasion.</p>
<p>But hey, I&#8217;m far from alone thinking this.  I think most people now agree with me.  I just have the foresight to have seen it from the beginning.</p>
<p>JMJ</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Micky 2</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11504</link>
		<dc:creator>Micky 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:24:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11504</guid>
		<description>Yea right Jersey.
You never fail to put a negative spin on things by implying that the guys in Iraq are doing the wrong thing.
You can guess that with more troops in Afghanistan the job would be finished, but anyone who can shove their rabid hatred for anything Bush for just one second would at least have the clarity of mind and the honesty to say that they "MIGHT" be home for the holidays.
That frame of mind and logic (or lack of) only reflects the ignorance on the left that explains why you all inadvertantly or out of stupidity minimize the efforts and job to be done.
If this, if that bla bla bla, when the man just got done telling us;

The worst thing you guys can do right now is sit around analyzing what
we’re doing over here because you have no idea what
we’re doing "

And I would think the same applies to our guys in Iraq.

I do know this much.
These men and women volunteered, enlisted, stepped up to the plate all on their own long after they knew where they were going, what the deal was, what the mission was, what the stakes were, all in the name of believing in the same mission that their commander n chief believes in.

That alone right there makes what they are doing honorable and with purpose other than the  disgusting labels you and the idiotic left give to this war.
Basically what your telling any troops who enlisted after it was clear why were in Iraq is that they are voluntarily contributing to, being a part of  "excuses to steal our tax dollars for an ill-planned, ill-advised, ill-conceived, ill-willed, just-plain-ol'-ill occupation of Iraq."

Way to go bro, you really know how to make a soldier feel good

We need to be in Iraq for many strategic reasons that have more to do with securing a stabalizing force in the middle east and not this BS label of our prescence being an ill concieved colonial occupancy with oil as a motivator.
Whats going on right in India is a perfect example of why we need to be there and weed out these bastards and impact their movement enough so that this crap comes to a manageable level.

Then again, if the war were fought in Afganistan with the left in charge the casualty rate would probably be thru the roof cuz you guys would be  too busy setting up your pre conditions for your fellow "freedom fighters".
While you were making the camp fire and putting the marshmallows on the sticks you'd get your brains blown out from under you.
(this is not why troops sit on their helmets)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yea right Jersey.<br />
You never fail to put a negative spin on things by implying that the guys in Iraq are doing the wrong thing.<br />
You can guess that with more troops in Afghanistan the job would be finished, but anyone who can shove their rabid hatred for anything Bush for just one second would at least have the clarity of mind and the honesty to say that they &#8220;MIGHT&#8221; be home for the holidays.<br />
That frame of mind and logic (or lack of) only reflects the ignorance on the left that explains why you all inadvertantly or out of stupidity minimize the efforts and job to be done.<br />
If this, if that bla bla bla, when the man just got done telling us;</p>
<p>The worst thing you guys can do right now is sit around analyzing what<br />
we’re doing over here because you have no idea what<br />
we’re doing &#8221;</p>
<p>And I would think the same applies to our guys in Iraq.</p>
<p>I do know this much.<br />
These men and women volunteered, enlisted, stepped up to the plate all on their own long after they knew where they were going, what the deal was, what the mission was, what the stakes were, all in the name of believing in the same mission that their commander n chief believes in.</p>
<p>That alone right there makes what they are doing honorable and with purpose other than the  disgusting labels you and the idiotic left give to this war.<br />
Basically what your telling any troops who enlisted after it was clear why were in Iraq is that they are voluntarily contributing to, being a part of  &#8220;excuses to steal our tax dollars for an ill-planned, ill-advised, ill-conceived, ill-willed, just-plain-ol&#8217;-ill occupation of Iraq.&#8221;</p>
<p>Way to go bro, you really know how to make a soldier feel good</p>
<p>We need to be in Iraq for many strategic reasons that have more to do with securing a stabalizing force in the middle east and not this BS label of our prescence being an ill concieved colonial occupancy with oil as a motivator.<br />
Whats going on right in India is a perfect example of why we need to be there and weed out these bastards and impact their movement enough so that this crap comes to a manageable level.</p>
<p>Then again, if the war were fought in Afganistan with the left in charge the casualty rate would probably be thru the roof cuz you guys would be  too busy setting up your pre conditions for your fellow &#8220;freedom fighters&#8221;.<br />
While you were making the camp fire and putting the marshmallows on the sticks you&#8217;d get your brains blown out from under you.<br />
(this is not why troops sit on their helmets)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jersey McJones</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11502</link>
		<dc:creator>Jersey McJones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:06:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11502</guid>
		<description>If only we'd concentrated on Afghanistan in the first place and left Iraq alone - Jack and all the rest of them would be home for the holidays right now.

JMJ</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If only we&#8217;d concentrated on Afghanistan in the first place and left Iraq alone - Jack and all the rest of them would be home for the holidays right now.</p>
<p>JMJ</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Micky 2</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/11/fun-friday/#comment-11501</link>
		<dc:creator>Micky 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/?p=2182#comment-11501</guid>
		<description>God bless you Jack, I cant thank you enough, do what cha gotta do bro.
No questions asked on this end.
While I'm worryied if the hues of red in my cranberry sauce will compliment the platter I picked out you're probably trying not to think about your next MRE.

Thanks for pegging CNN for the sack of crap they can be.
Nothing pleasures me more than to hear straight from the mouths of our brave how destructive and counter productive the leftist media can be.
next time dont forget to include Jackass Cafferty in your line up.

Prayers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>God bless you Jack, I cant thank you enough, do what cha gotta do bro.<br />
No questions asked on this end.<br />
While I&#8217;m worryied if the hues of red in my cranberry sauce will compliment the platter I picked out you&#8217;re probably trying not to think about your next MRE.</p>
<p>Thanks for pegging CNN for the sack of crap they can be.<br />
Nothing pleasures me more than to hear straight from the mouths of our brave how destructive and counter productive the leftist media can be.<br />
next time dont forget to include Jackass Cafferty in your line up.</p>
<p>Prayers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
