or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Iraq's WMDs went to Syria.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Iraq's WMDs went to Syria. - Page 2

post #41 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Do they mean the WMD that Iraq wasn't capable of producing or the WMD stocks that weren't viable since a few weeks to a month after they were produced back in the 80s? Oh, wait. Those are both the same.

Funny how close to 15 years of inspections detailing Iraqi WMD, including now ~2 years of inspections by the UN and US, all of which demonstrated there were no large stocks and Iraq coulnd't produce anything, some kids are still going on about this.

Only someone really desperate for attention would have started this thread at this point, since the premise automatically precludes any possibility of a rational discussion.

I knew you couldn't resist.

I think sammy and jimbo are starting a new thread you might be interested in...
post #42 of 134
Ok NapleX, you are officialls Sisyphus where all things WMD are concerned. You can't escape the fact that you were lied to and that you bought into those lies. Iraq didn't have WMD. Syria probably has some, but these weapons are from their own programs. Additionally you have no proof to back your claims. The Bush admin isn't even venturing into your troubled waters.



Enjoy.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #43 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Ok NapleX, you are officialls Sisyphus where all things WMD are concerned. You can't escape the fact that you were lied to and that you bought into those lies. Iraq didn't have WMD. Syria probably has some, but these weapons are from their own programs. Additionally you have no proof to back your claims. The Bush admin isn't even venturing into your troubled waters.



Enjoy.

Well that clenches it.

I am totally wrong and that picture proves it.

Thank you for setting me straight?
post #44 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Well that clenches it.

I am totally wrong and that picture proves it.

Thank you for setting me straight?

That last sentence should have a period, not a question mark.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #45 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Couple of things.

The UN is in principle a good thing. Many members are Arab fundamentalist nations. Right now it is a corrupt entity and you know it. If you don't then please don't reply because you are living in a parallel universe, and the fact that you are talking to us here in this one could have serious repercussions.

Ok, who would you strike off the list of UN members?

Quote:
Who made a fuss about GWB going to the UN for approval?
The left wing democrats. that's who. GWB was trying to play nice and did it do him any good? No.

Going to the UN was a charade. No matter what the UN came out with, GWB was going to war. The inspections were real, but the eventual outcome was eched in stone. WMD or no WMD, GWB was going to war.

Quote:
The intel community is being pummeled right now, why?
Because the left wing Democrats want someone to point a finger at for 9/11 and the trivial detail of "stockpiles of weapons" issue. Forget that everything was in place to produce said WMD's, who cares. Forget that SH had major clean up time before the war started to do what he wanted. Let's blame someone. As usual who do they blame? Well, there is an easy republican "war mongering" racist, oil puppet, target in the white house. The intelligence community is getting blamed.

No. The intelligence community had it right. Numerous 20-30 year CIA veterans knew there were no WMDs there. The intel community is taking the can for the Pentagon's and the admin's lies.

Quote:
$200 billion figure you used includes the ongoing war in Afghanistan along with other WOT efforts.

The war in Afghanistan had little or nothing to do with the WOT. If it was, how come a large contingent of US forces were in the region, ready to roll. 9-11 was the excuse used to justify the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, and overthrowing the Taliban to a shocked American public who would otherwise have never swallowed it. Similar things have happened before, for example the fictitious incident in the Gulf of Tonkin to start Vietnam, Pearl Harbor to start WW2, and 9-11 to start the PNAC agenda. Don't you recall Operation Northwoods, where a homebrew "terrorist" attack on American interests was mooted in order to blame Cuba, thereby raising US public anger, to justify and launch a war to oust Castro. This was presented to JFK by the Pentagon, and he gave it the thumbs down. These are thekind of people we are dealing with.

Quote:
So Israel is the problem? Now I see it.

Israel has been a problem since it was started. It need not have been. The people in charge in both Israel and Palestine stand to lose if peace breaks out, and thats not going to happen soon.

Quote:
You are posting canned arguments from other threads and on things that do not relate to the thread at hand.

True, I did go off topic. Its tough not to!

Quote:
I thought that anyone could start a thread. That means that you can start a thread called "Bush Lied, Bush deceived, Bush Lied, US and Israel are evil. Oh did I mention Bush Lied." if you so desire. You and Jimbo can impress each other with your wit and cunning. It would be the best thread of all time. So many people would visit from around the globe to see the intellectual marvel that it is. I bet you might even set a world record on amount of posts and maybe even longevity.



Quote:
It would actually cause me to have some respect for you. Being that we are discussing the possibility of Iraq moving weapons into Syria PRIOR to this current war, and not the current war in Iraq.

Watcha think?

Well, if you look thru the archives of this topic, I did suggest in one thread that Saddam would have been tempted to stash WMDs over the border (in remote parts of Syria, Saudi, Jordan,Turkey or Iran...forget Kuwait). But that was assuming he possessed WMDs. At the time of this thread, it was shortly after Powell made his February 5th 2003 speech to the UNSC and he was pretty convincing; he fooled lots of people, including himself.

But re. the practicality of moving WMDs to Syria:

*The few major roads between the two nations would have been closely and continuously monitored in the US by spy satellite for suspicious activity, such as truck movements, materials being buried etc. The technology in space is of such high resolution that small text can be deciphered.

*The movement of high level radiological material is extremely tough to conceal without specialized shielding.

*The whole region is a desert climate with lots of cloudless days and clear nights, making such a task even tougher to conceal.

*In the months before the war, there were not only inspectors roaming at will throughout Iraq with no notice or forewarning of location, but also advance US forces checking things out under cover.

*There were rewards offered to former Baathist officials to reveal the whereabouts of WMDs. Nothing has come of that.

*Then there's the issue getting these materials past Syrian border guards and officials, and somehow concealing it all.

*The Syrian government, even if sympathetic towards Saddam, would never have risked a war with the US/Coalition by voluntarily harboring Iraqi WMDs. Assad may not be a man of integrity, but he isn't a complete idiot!

The task of concealing WMDs in Syria (or elsewhere outside of Iraq ) could have been done in theory, I will give you that. But it would have been damned difficult to pull off successfully, without leaving a multitude of traces. Which implies (a) They did an incrediblly fine job of concealment, obliterating all the traces in the process, and pulled a fast one over the eyes of US intelligence with their $$billions worth of high technology and skilled manpower, or (b) there were no WMDs to hide. Take your pick.

We all know that Saddam in the past (1980-1991) had WMDs..thats a given. But I tend towards Kamal Hussein's testimony re. credibilty; Iraq wanted to return towards normalcy and the regime regarded such weapons not as a asset, but a liability. And since they have never used them against anyone since the Iraq-Iran war, despite two huge invasions, this also implies that the weapons were absent, both from Iraq and from Syria, where they could conceivably have been retrieved in the event of a national emergency.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #46 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I knew you couldn't resist.

I think sammy and jimbo are starting a new thread you might be interested in...

But you didn't really answer the question. It's because Giant's question pokes holes in your logic.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #47 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
But you didn't really answer the question. It's because Giant's question pokes holes in your logic.

No, it's because I refuse to engage him, I know his tricks, and yours too.

Hey look... quick a new "Bash Bush" thread, go get it.
post #48 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
No, it's because I refuse to engage him, I know his tricks, and yours too.

Hey look... quick a new "Bash Bush" thread, go get it.

So waitaminute. You're now refusing to participate in your own thread where you laid out all your evidence for WMDs in Iraq having been moved to Syria because...people pointed out that 99% of it wasn't actually evidence?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #49 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
So waitaminute. You're now refusing to participate in your own thread where you laid out all your evidence for WMDs in Iraq having been moved to Syria because...people pointed out that 99% of it wasn't actually evidence?

He's doomed to forever push the WMD rock up a hill no matter what evidence is provided. Push Naples push.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #50 of 134
What's so baffling about Naples's position on all of this is simply that everyone, including the Administration, State, and the CIA has admitted that they got this one wrong. There were congressional hearings to figure out why, for god's sake.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #51 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
What's so baffling about Naples's position on all of this is simply that everyone, including the Administration, State, and the CIA has admitted that they got this one wrong. There were congressional hearings to figure out why, for god's sake.

I hear ya.. "Some peoples kids" as an old chief of mine used to say.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #52 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
No, it's because I refuse to engage him, I know his tricks, and yours too.

Hey look... quick a new "Bash Bush" thread, go get it.


Uh, huh........
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #53 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
What's so baffling about Naples's position on all of this is simply that everyone, including the Administration, State, and the CIA has admitted that they got this one wrong. There were congressional hearings to figure out why, for god's sake.

I think that if you look back you will see you are reading into it what you want to hear.

I believe that that they have acknowledged that they have found no "stockpiles" which is way different than what you are asserting.

I don't think that they have ruled out the fact they may not exist in Iraq.

I always felt that they would be found inside Iraq. I was wrong. But the more I read, I can't rule out that they may be in syria or who knows where by now.

The fact that AQ is now planning a big attack using WMDs is very interesting also. And let's not forget the foiled AQ WMD attack foiled in Jordan. It was estimated that it could have killed 20,000 people there.
post #54 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
But the more I read, I can't rule out that they may be in syria or who knows where by now.

I got news for you. No matter how much people have written claiming otherwise, no matter how many pseudo-scientific studies there are, aliens do not make crop circles.

This is just your newest Clinton Body Count.
post #55 of 134
Weapons of Mass Delusion
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #56 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think that if you look back you will see you are reading into it what you want to hear

Projection ain't just a river in Egypt. I'm just reading the headlines.

Quote:
I believe that that they have acknowledged that they have found no "stockpiles" which is way different than what you are asserting.

They have acknowledged that the intel was wrong. There were no WMD. Everyone got it wrong.

Quote:
I don't think that they have ruled out the fact they may not exist in Iraq.

Think again.

Quote:
I always felt that they would be found inside Iraq. I was wrong. But the more I read, I can't rule out that they may be in syria or who knows where by now.

What you are experiencing is called "cognitive dissonance." When you start "feeling," "thinking," or "believing" that aliens snatched up the weapons, let us know.

Quote:
The fact that AQ is now planning a big attack using WMDs is very interesting also.

Indeed. The simple fact that we know about it should make you scared of this admin. How many of the millennium plots did you know about beforehand? Also, AQ is not Iraq.

Quote:
And let's not forget the foiled AQ WMD attack foiled in Jordan. It was estimated that it could have killed 20,000 people there.

AQ is not Iraq.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #57 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
...
Also, AQ is not Iraq.

AQ is not Iraq.

I don't think NaplesX will ever make this distinction.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #58 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Projection ain't just a river in Egypt. I'm just reading the headlines.



They have acknowledged that the intel was wrong. There were no WMD. Everyone got it wrong.



Think again.



What you are experiencing is called "cognitive dissonance." When you start "feeling," "thinking," or "believing" that aliens snatched up the weapons, let us know.



Indeed. The simple fact that we know about it should make you scared of this admin. How many of the millennium plots did you know about beforehand? Also, AQ is not Iraq.



AQ is not Iraq.

It seems interesting to me how, in many instances, you (meaning you and some here with the same mindset) are more than willing to make large leaps in faith/reasoning/judgment when it suits you.

The truth be told, none of know what is going on in these rogue states. We are all operating off of limited knowledge, and could be wrong about any given point. We are all living on a prayer, if you will - on faith. For you, it is faith in GWB being evil (or something to that effect), and I am sure you have your reasons for feeling that way. Me, it is faith that the government, however flawed, is working to protect you and I because our government and its members live among us - if for no other reason than it's to protect itself, it protects us. Individuals in the government may buck that trend but overall I believe this to be true.

I have never ever stated that Iraq=AQ. Iraq has proven ties to Iraq, going back long before this war - this I have said and am in the process of outlining in another thread. Once again here is a leap that you are willing to make to fit your view - that AQ existed and hid everywhere else in the world except Iraq. There exists one person that personifies this tie, in Iraq right now. Anyone?

As far as the intel being wrong, sure, but not all of it. Yet another leap on your part.

That the Bush admin is informing the citizenry of possible future threats, is a good thing. And for you to imply that they know exactly what is going to happen and using it for political gain, or perhaps they or just making it up, is yet another leap that you are more than willing to take.

I knew when I posted the links above, that many would argue the way they are now. But from the posts many of you either read too fast or did not objectively look at them, perhaps not at all.

Please tell me which sources you find are not credible. Then we can apply that to both sides of the argument. I'm willing. Are you?
post #59 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
It seems interesting to me how, in many instances, you (meaning you and some here with the same mindset) are more than willing to make large leaps in faith/reasoning/judgment when it suits you.

The irony, of course, is that you're the one talking about what you think, feel, and believe. The rest of us are talking about what is being reported.

Quote:
The truth be told, none of know what is going on in these rogue states. We are all operating off of limited knowledge, and could be wrong about any given point. We are all living on a prayer, if you will - on faith.

Again, how can you get onto me about "making large leaps" and then claim that everything is about "faith"?

Quote:
For you, it is faith in GWB being evil (or something to that effect), and I am sure you have your reasons for feeling that way.

Don't be silly. I don't think GWB is evil. I think he's a terrible president for a variety of reasons, and I think he has made the world less safe than it was before.

Quote:
Me, it is faith that the government, however flawed, is working to protect you and I because our government and its members live among us - if for no other reason than it's to protect itself, it protects us. Individuals in the government may buck that trend but overall I believe this to be true.

Why would you think I disagree with this? The only caveat here is that I think that this particular administration tested out a theory in Iraq, and that theory has failed. However noble the theory might've been, it has been, up until now, an abysmal failure.


Quote:
I have never ever stated that Iraq=AQ. Iraq has proven ties to Iraq, going back long before this war - this I have said and am in the process of outlining in another thread.

And those ties have been all disproven. Both on this board and in the press.

Quote:
Once again here is a leap that you are willing to make to fit your view - that AQ existed and hid everywhere else in the world except Iraq.

Existing in Iraq and hiding in Iraq is not a tie. When people say "tie," they mean some kind of formal state-sponsorship of terrorism, which is what the utterly discredited Mylroie theory you're using relies on. It is your leap of faith to argue that something that has not been proven and cannot be seen is in fact there. Thomas Aquinas.

Quote:
There exists one person that personifies this tie, in Iraq right now. Anyone?

I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. There are 25 million people in Iraq. I haven't had time to talk to them all.

Quote:
As far as the intel being wrong, sure, but not all of it. Yet another leap on your part.

What the hell do you think those HEARINGS were about?

Quote:
That the Bush admin is informing the citizenry of possible future threats, is a good thing. And for you to imply that they know exactly what is going to happen and using it for political gain, or perhaps they or just making it up, is yet another leap that you are more than willing to take.

Tell me this, then: what good does it do you, as average citizen joe, to know that there has been increased chatter? What are you supposed to do about it other than a) be afraid and b) look for a "strong leader" when you're afraid?

Quote:
I knew when I posted the links above, that many would argue the way they are now. But from the posts many of you either read too fast or did not objectively look at them, perhaps not at all.

I thought your links were pretty thoroughly gone through in the other thread.

Please tell me which sources you find are not credible. Then we can apply that to both sides of the argument. I'm willing. Are you? [/QUOTE]

Sure. I'll plow through them as soon as I get some time. Work work work.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #60 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
It seems interesting to me how, in many instances, you (meaning you and some here with the same mindset) are more than willing to make large leaps in faith/reasoning/judgment when it suits you.

Ineresting, since that's actually the exact opposite of what has gone on here from the beginning. Since day 1, there has been very little evidence to support the theories about Iraq, but the argument from the "WMD!" folks has always been that the lack of evidence is the evidence. According to them, the fact that the inspectors couldn't find anything showed that Saddam was hiding something. That's why these "WMD!" folks have been dead wrong since that same day 1. The evidence never was there.
Quote:
Please tell me which sources you find are not credible.

The problem with your challenge is that you dump a bunch of CRAP into a post and then challenge us to waste our time pointing out all of the various flaws. We have better shit to do than argue with such a moronic position. Look at the crap you linked to. Just from clicking a couple times I see a headline saying "KAY SAYS WMD IN SYRIA" when he said no such thing. You also have links to world tribune. You must be fucking joking.

And your position is fucking moronic from the get-go because you ignore the fundamental problem with your belief system: the breakdown in the "WMD!" theory isn't on the stockpile end, it's on the production end. How can saddam have weapons when he can't fucking produce them?!?! And on the stockpile end, how can he stockpile them when they don't last longer than a month or so?!?!

That's why you are already wrong even if some mustard gas was shipped to syria. The model you are working from is fatally flawed from every damn direction. Anything you may or may not get right is pure chance. You can't take credit for the wind blowing the dart into the board when you are throwing it in completely the opposite direction.

Personally, if this thread wasn't at the top of the forum I wouldn't respond. All this thread is for you is a way to get attention you so desperately crave. It works. You come in here and make the most inane comments and everyone keeps bumping the thread for you because they are so in shock that someone could be so misguided.
post #61 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
What the hell do you think those HEARINGS were about?

If you are referring to the 9/11 commission, it has concluded there were ties between Iraq and AQ. but no proof that Iraq helped with the 9/11 attacks.

You do know those are two separate issues? Should I quote it for you, or is that just another unreliable source?

Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Tell me this, then: what good does it do you, as average citizen joe, to know that there has been increased chatter? What are you supposed to do about it other than a) be afraid and b) look for a "strong leader" when you're afraid?

I am not afraid. Are you? I am informed, and so are you.

What do you think should be done?

Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I thought your links were pretty thoroughly gone through in the other thread.

Um, these are totally different links...
post #62 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Ineresting, since that's actually the exact opposite of what has gone on here from the beginning. Since day 1, there has been very little evidence to support the theories about Iraq, but the argument from the "WMD!" folks has always been that the lack of evidence is the evidence. That's why they have been dead wrong since that same day 1.

The problem with your challenge is that you dump a bunch of CRAP into a post and then challenge us to waste our time pointing out all of the various flaws. We have better shit to do than argue with such a moronic position. Look at the crap you linked to. Just from clicking a couple times I see a headline saying "KAY SAYS WMD IN SYRIA" when he said no such thing. You also have links to world tribune. You must be fucking joking.

And your position is fucking moronic from the get-go because you ignore the fundamental problem with your belief system: the breakdown in the "WMD!" theory isn't on the stockpile end, it's on the production end. How can saddam have weapons when he can't fucking produce them?!?! And on the stockpile end, how can he stockpile them when they don't last longer than a month or so?!?!

That's why you are already wrong even if some mustard gas was shipped to syria. The model you are working from is fatally flawed from every damn direction. Anything you may or may not get right is pure chance. You can't take credit for the wind blowing the dart into the board when you are throwing it in completely the opposite direction.

Personally, if this thread wasn't at the top of the forum I wouldn't respond. All this thread is for you is a way to get attention you so desperately crave. It works. You come in here and make the most inane comments and everyone keeps bumping the thread for you because they are so in shock that someone could be so misguided.

PUT UP or SHUT UP.

It's that simple. I read every one of those links, you admittedly don't care to do the same. You are in no position, at your own admission, to preach. Besides, I know what you will say before you say it. You are no-one's mental or intellectual superior as you have consistently put forth, and the fact that you embrace that persona proves just the opposite every time you post.

I very carefully word my posts so that it is clear to all what I "feel" or "believe". I back up my assertions with documentation that supports my argument. I have never said that anyone here has to agree with me. I don't call people names just because they don't agree with me. Why are you so insecure in your beliefs, that you can conduct yourself in a civil manner? Do you really need that bad for everyone to agree with you on everything?

There are many people here, despite fundamental disagreement on different issues, remember they are dealing with fellow humans. I can carry on conversations with them for that reason.

You seem pretty smart, and I am sure that you are. But you are not smart enough to figure out how to talk to people. We are all people - all of us here behind your screen. Even me - sad little misinformed nappy from naples.

I may not be very smart, but I am smart enough to know when something is futile. Trying to have a civil conversation with you is just that.

I know you will read this and dismiss everything except what you want to hear but read this please...

RESPECT OTHERS IF YOU WANT RESPECT.

PS. I learned that when I was 5.
post #63 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
PUT UP or SHUT UP.

I have put up, naples, for years now. And you know what? I have been right on this for years now. I started posting in FC in Sept 2002 (and that was just when I got fed up with posters on my then favorite mac site making ridiculous comments about Iraq) saying the exact same shit that everyone found out after the war. And what's the secret? I actually go by the facts and look at the evidence. It's an interesting method that should try some time.
Quote:
RESPECT OTHERS IF YOU WANT RESPECT.

You're out in Clinton Body Count land where most of your info comes from websites with animated backgrounds. Since that's the kind of garbage you look up to, the last thing I want is your respect. Gaining your respect requires being a crackpot and being dead wrong.

If you want my respect, adopt a logical worldview based on authorative sources with transparent and thorough research methods.
post #64 of 134
Boo. Yah.
post #65 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
I have put up, naples, for years now. And you know what? I have been right on this for years now. I started posting in FC in Sept 2002 (and that was just when I got fed up with posters on my then favorite mac site making ridiculous comments about Iraq) saying the exact same shit that everyone found out after the war. And what's the secret? I actually go by the facts and look at the evidence. It's an interesting method that should try some time.

You're out in Clinton Body Count land where most of your info comes from websites with animated backgrounds. Since that's the kind of garbage you look up to, the last thing I want is your respect. Gaining your respect requires being a crackpot and being dead wrong.

If you want my respect, adopt a logical worldview based on authorative sources with transparent and thorough research methods.

Respect commands itself and it can neither be given nor withheld when it is due. - Eldridge Cleaver

Men are respectable only as they respect. - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Only those who respect the personality of others can be of real use to them. - Albert Schweitzer

There is no respect for others without humility in one's self. - Henri Frederic Amiel

Respect yourself if you would have others respect you. - Baltasar Gracian

We confide in our strength, without boasting of it; we respect that of others, without fearing it. - Thomas Jefferson
post #66 of 134
R - E - S - P - E - C - T
Find out what it means to me
R - E - S - P - E - C - T
Take care, TCB

Franklin
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #67 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
R - E - S - P - E - C - T
Find out what it means to me
R - E - S - P - E - C - T
Take care, TCB

Franklin

Actually I should pull a giant on you and mention that although that song was sang by Aretha, it was written by Otis Redding.

/giant - You have no credibility. I am the expert. (although I refuse to state why) You are not an expert/authority/professional and should shut up and refrain from posting until I declare you to be one. You are but a sad little forum dweller attempting to feign intelligence via Google searches while taking the subject off track. /giant off.


Sorry, sorry. Couldn't resist.

/begging for forgiveness in advance

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #68 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
RESPECT OTHERS IF YOU WANT RESPECT.

PS. I learned that when I was 5.

This coming from the man who said I was "small and sad" in another thread because I dared to point out Republican hypocrisy with regards to their treatment of Democrat veterans.

"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #69 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
I have put up, naples, for years now. And you know what? I have been right on this for years now. I started posting in FC in Sept 2002 (and that was just when I got fed up with posters on my then favorite mac site making ridiculous comments about Iraq) saying the exact same shit that everyone found out after the war. And what's the secret? I actually go by the facts and look at the evidence. It's an interesting method that should try some time.

You're out in Clinton Body Count land where most of your info comes from websites with animated backgrounds. Since that's the kind of garbage you look up to, the last thing I want is your respect. Gaining your respect requires being a crackpot and being dead wrong.

If you want my respect, adopt a logical worldview based on authorative sources with transparent and thorough research methods.


Hahahahahaha... you are a funny, funny man/child.

Perhaps you should take your own advice.

Better yet, you could have someone claim that since Iraq and WMD aren't your area of expertise, that you can't even understand the authoratative sources you would attempt to read to adopt said worldview. They they could just tell you to shut up and sit on your thumb until someone who is authoritative (and we don't just mean in the tone of their posts) comes along and tells you what to think.

Because that is basically what you say in every post.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #70 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Actually I should pull a giant on you and mention that although that song was sang by Aretha, it was written by Otis Redding.

/giant - You have no credibility. I am the expert. (although I refuse to state why) You are not an expert/authority/professional and should shut up and refrain from posting until I declare you to be one. You are but a sad little forum dweller attempting to feign intelligence via Google searches while taking the subject off track. /giant off.


Sorry, sorry. Couldn't resist.

/begging for forgiveness in advance

Nick

Track record, Nick. Track record.

Giant was right on WMD. You were not.
Giant was right on links. You were not.
Giant was right on Niger. You were not.

Who should I trust as more of an "expert"?
post #71 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
This coming from the man who said I was "small and sad" in another thread because I dared to point out Republican hypocrisy with regards to their treatment of Democrat veterans.


Correction: I said that your post made you appear small and sad. I did not call you anything.

Poopy face... there I said it...
post #72 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Track record, Nick. Track record.

Giant was right on WMD. You were not.
Giant was right on links. You were not.
Giant was right on Niger. You were not.

Who should I trust as more of an "expert"?

I see you have not read the 9/11 commission report.
post #73 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Giant was right on WMD. You were not.
Giant was right on links. You were not.
Giant was right on Niger. You were not.

Who should I trust as more of an "expert"?

Just to be fair:
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
And what's the secret? I actually go by the facts and look at the evidence

AFAIAC, I deserve no credit, the facts do. I still have yet to figure out how so many millions of people got so carried away by the mass hysteria when we had such a good accounting of the most scrutinized military of the past 15 years. After all, the whole "WMD!" argument always was just a leap of faith in the face of a mountain of opposing evidence.

The saddest part is that the country as a whole still can't have a measured discussion about the reality of what happened with Iraq's WMD programs over the years, as evidenced by the sarin shell IED frenzy. Those that followed the Bush admin's lead and got burned are now so desperate for any vindication that literally even a few drops of anything somehow means that Saddam of course was poised to strike the US with a vast arsenal. God forbid we actually find a few buried barrels of mustard that come anywhere near a single ton.

If anyone needs another refresher on the vast disparity between the claims and the actual facts, glen rangwala's Claims and Evaluations continues to be the best one stop shop.
post #74 of 134
Thread Starter 
You gotta love a man that quotes himself to bolster his own argument.

How can you argue with that?
post #75 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
You gotta love a man that quotes himself to bolster his own argument.

How can you argue with that?

You disagree with what I said there? That's fine. If you want to believe that I am an expert rather than simply one of many rational consumers of information, you are free to have that opinion.
post #76 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I see you have not read the 9/11 commission report.

I know I can understand Tonton saying something about WOMD, but Niger?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #77 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
You disagree with what I said there? That's fine. If you want to believe that I am an expert rather than simply one of many rational consumers of information, you are free to have that opinion.

Woe, hey... you are an EXPERT. No arguing with that.

I am just glad that you take time out of your busy day, as I know that you are no doubt inundated with calls and work, to spread scraps of knowledge to us.

You are a giant among men.

post #78 of 134
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
You are a giant among men.

And apparently some boys, as well.
post #79 of 134
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
And apparently some boys, as well.

That sounds a little weird, GN.
post #80 of 134
Not one of you has offered the slightest speck of evidence against the claim that Saddam's WMD are stockpiled in Liechtenstein.

In fact, the way you've all so obviously skirted around the topic -- save one very weak denial -- makes it clear that you just can't face the truth. The world will rue the day it turned a blind eye to the crypto-Ba'athists running the show in Vaduz!
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Iraq's WMDs went to Syria.