AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why Do You Oppose Promoting Liberty and Tolerance in Iraq?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why Do You Oppose Promoting Liberty and Tolerance in Iraq? - Page 3  

post #81 of 122
12/30/07 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

Yep. Here are some more things this generally uneducated winger probably, 'made up.'

Do you recognize any of the instructions?

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles...amic_state.htm

As it happens I wrote a thesis on al-Ghazzali.

And no, I do not recognize that translation. It would be odd as a reference anyway as Al-Ghazzali is the most orthodox Sunni theologian and Khomeini was a Shi'i who opposed his philosophy.

Moreover, the doctrine of taqiyya is almost exclusively Shi'i and Ghazzali states in Ihya'ulum-id Din (which is the work I think that you quoted) that lying is permissible in relation to one's faith (ie to deny one is a Muslim) if one saves one's life by doing that and if one does not renounce one's faith.

To extrapolate it to lying as a generality is - well, stupid and thus to be expected.

But whatever.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #82 of 122
12/30/07 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

Prevent the possibility of Israel launching a pre-emptive strike and triggering a much larger war.

We did not know for sure that there were no WMD's.

All the points you've attempted to make in this trolling thread are either speculative or conjectural in nature.

Please provide some factual evidence (dates, names, etceteras) of when Israel would definitely have launched a preemptive strike against Iraq.

Your WMD statement is just ludicrous in and of itself.

Repeat it as many times as you wish, replace the word WMD with any other word, apply it to any situation. It's basically an open door statement for doing whatever the speaker wishes to do to whomever they so choose.

One thing I can say with absolute certainty is that your mindset is much more disturbing than any of the Islamic links you're posted.

And another thing I can say with absolute certainty is that I wouldn't trust you to do much of anything correctly considering your all too apparent tunnel vision.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
post #83 of 122
12/30/07 at 5:04pm
Happy New Year, everyone.

Though it actually starts tomorrow, I wanted to say that today just in case.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #84 of 122
12/30/07 at 5:42pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

As it happens I wrote a thesis on al-Ghazzali.

And no, I do not recognize that translation. It would be odd as a reference anyway as Al-Ghazzali is the most orthodox Sunni theologian and Khomeini was a Shi'i who opposed his philosophy.

Moreover, the doctrine of taqiyya is almost exclusively Shi'i and Ghazzali states in Ihya'ulum-id Din (which is the work I think that you quoted) that lying is permissible in relation to one's faith (ie to deny one is a Muslim) if one saves one's life by doing that and if one does not renounce one's faith.

To extrapolate it to lying as a generality is - well, stupid and thus to be expected.

But whatever.

Interesting you'd focus on just THAT portion.



Try again:

Quote:
5. Build the proper mind set, in both Muslims and Non-Muslims, slowly and carefully. Very slowly assume control of sources of information and education (religious and secular).
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...madrassas.html

Make sure the seed for Shariah is well implanted, as a long term solution for problems, so you have fertile ground to call for it once you do have the power to pursue it openly. Get your version of the truth out to the public. Tailor your presentation of Islam to the locals. Are they educated, impoverished, picked upon for their beliefs, or have common issues? New histories: always the attacked, never the unprovoked attacker. Become the spokes-people for the communities. Coordinate opposition to dissemination of information that runs counter to your goals.

http//www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/464ijlvz.asp
post #85 of 122
12/30/07 at 6:15pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

All the points you've attempted to make in this trolling thread are either speculative or conjectural in nature.

Please provide some factual evidence (dates, names, etceteras) of when Israel would definitely have launched a preemptive strike against Iraq.

Your WMD statement is just ludicrous in and of itself.

Repeat it as many times as you wish, replace the word WMD with any other word, apply it to any situation. It's basically an open door statement for doing whatever the speaker wishes to do to whomever they so choose.

One thing I can say with absolute certainty is that your mindset is much more disturbing than any of the Islamic links you're posted.

And another thing I can say with absolute certainty is that I wouldn't trust you to do much of anything correctly considering your all too apparent tunnel vision.

Well, you concede the Bush Administration has kept information from us, right?

Anything that they might know but hasn't been confirmed is called, conjecture and speculation. And let's be real, shall we?

Almost EVERYTHING you Bush bashers negatively allege about the president is nothing but conjecture and speculation.

I guess this just proves you can dish it out but you can't take it.

No, better than that.

It proves that anything good about the President or the USA automatically HAS to be wrong in your opinion.

No, better than that.

It proves that you are so thoroughly brainwashed that you are unable to accommodate a different possiblity even though nothing of what you bashers say has been acknowledged or confirmed, which makes it speculative and conjectural.

If you want to deal with logic and facts the way a detective might you would have to admit that at the time there was no REAL 100% assurance there weren't any WMD's.

And anything less than 100% means that Israel would be accepting a risk that you wouldn't abide when it comes to your own life or the lives of your family.

How can I prove that?

Take a pistol and get ten magazines each with a capacity of 10 rounds. That would mean 100 round capability. Then load just ONE round in a random mag. And then point the gun at your mother and pull the trigger 99 times.

That would be a 99% likelihood there was no danger. Just as there was a less than 100% certainty Saddam wasn't going to destroy Israel.

You wouldn't stand for those odds when your mom's life was at stake.

Israel wouldn't stand for those odds.

If you need proof of this you are an intellectual lightweight.

But I will give you this much.

Quote:
May 18, 2007

Six Days that Changed Everything
Israel has learned to be cautious.

By Charles Krauthammer

Israelis are cautious. They remember the terror of that unbearable May when, with Israel possessing no occupied territories whatsoever, the entire Arab world was furiously preparing Israels imminent extinction. And the world did nothing.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...ViOTg5NDEwMzk=

They were not going to trust their very existence on the smile and a backslap of someone else who might not really give a damn about their existence. (Such as you evidence.) They would have insisted the we take action or that they would defend themselves.

And then there is this, a PBS Frontline interview of former Terrorism expert for the Clinton & Bush administrations, Richard Clarke:

Quote:
Tell me the story about the post-Gulf War discovery and the vice president --

During the course of the first Gulf War, one of the things I did at the request of the secretary of state [James Baker] was to plan for what became the U.N. Special Commission that would go into Iraq after the war and look for weapons of mass destruction. In the first few months of that commission, it was filled with American and British special forces and intelligence officers dressed up in civilian clothes and carrying the U.N. flag.

One of the early operations we planned was a raid on what was the Agricultural Ministry but we had reason to believe was actually something else. And it was a surprise. We went there, broke down doors, blew off locks, got into the sanctum sanctorum. The Iraqis immediately reacted, surrounded the facility and prevented the U.N. inspectors from getting out.

We thought that might happen, too, so we had given them satellite telephones. They translated the nuclear reports on site into English from the Arabic and read them to us over the satellite telephones. My secretary stayed up all night transcribing these reports from Baghdad. What they said, very clearly, was there was a massive nuclear weapons development program that was probably nine to 18 months away from having its first nuclear weapons detonation and that CIA had totally missed it; we had bombed everything we could bomb in Iraq, but missed an enormous nuclear weapons development facility. Didn't know it was there; never dropped one bomb on it.

We prepared this report so that when the secretary of defense [Cheney] and the secretary of state arrived in the morning, it was on their desk. I know that Dick Cheney that morning looked at that report and said, "Here's what the Iraqis themselves are saying: that there's this huge facility that was never hit during the war; that they were very close to making a nuclear bomb, and CIA didn't know it." I'm sure he said to himself, "I can never trust CIA again to tell me when a country is about to make a nuclear bomb."

So he's probably carrying that bone in his throat for eight years out of government.

There's no doubt that the Dick Cheney who comes back into office nine years later has that as one of the things burnt into his memory: that Iraq wants a nuclear weapon; Iraq was that close to getting a nuclear weapon; and CIA hadn't a clue.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/clarke.html

You know there was considerable doubt. Israel's existence was on the line. If they attacked Saddam it could trigger nuclear war, a Holy War. A WWIII. An Armageddon scenario.

If we invade Iraq we could achieve the following:

Quote:
10 Things Accomplished by the Invasion

1) Disarm Saddam.

2) Prevent the possibility of Israel launching a pre-emptive strike and triggering a much larger war.

3) Secure the oil and assure the flow, the supplies and the deliveries.

4) Prevent futures market nervousness which could have driven prices above $200/bbl as was OBL's goal.

5) Stop Saddam's brutal reign and subjection of his people.

6) Halt any existing, planned or possible future terrorist activities (training, harboring, transiting, equipping) unilaterally or in concert with others (OBL or etc.)

7) Prevent the Iranians from annexing Iraq.

8) Plant the seeds of freedom so that future generations will be willing and able to fight for their freedom against those would-be dictators or Islamists who might try to enslave them and so we in the USA will not have to fight for their freedom as we are today. They will do all the future fighting.

9) Instead of people around the world wanting to come to America to experience freedom, they will be able to enjoy freedom in their own land and culture and our immigration backlogs won't be increased even more than they are.

10) Fighting the essence of Islamism at it's HEART. Not at it's fringes on a wild ghost chase.


You would have chosen to invade.

You'd have hated it. But you'd have done it.
post #86 of 122
12/30/07 at 6:25pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Happy New Year, everyone.

Though it actually starts tomorrow, I wanted to say that today just in case.

Thanks. Same to you!

God Bless America.

God Bless Our President.
post #87 of 122
12/30/07 at 6:44pm
You missed the point.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #88 of 122
12/30/07 at 7:53pm
You know how some former presidents make money by doing speaking engagements? Bush is going to open a "punch me in the face for a buck" booth and still make more money than all living presidents and vice-presidents do combined.
post #89 of 122
12/30/07 at 8:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

Well, you concede the Bush Administration has kept information from us, right?

Anything that they might know but hasn't been confirmed is called, conjecture and speculation. And let's be real, shall we?

Almost EVERYTHING you Bush bashers negatively allege about the president is nothing but conjecture and speculation.

I guess this just proves you can dish it out but you can't take it.

No, better than that.

It proves that anything good about the President or the USA automatically HAS to be wrong in your opinion.

No, better than that.

It proves that you are so thoroughly brainwashed that you are unable to accommodate a different possiblity even though nothing of what you bashers say has been acknowledged or confirmed, which makes it speculative and conjectural.

If you want to deal with logic and facts the way a detective might you would have to admit that at the time there was no REAL 100% assurance there weren't any WMD's.

And anything less than 100% means that Israel would be accepting a risk that you wouldn't abide when it comes to your own life or the lives of your family.

How can I prove that?

Take a pistol and get ten magazines each with a capacity of 10 rounds. That would mean 100 round capability. Then load just ONE round in a random mag. And then point the gun at your mother and pull the trigger 99 times.

That would be a 99% likelihood there was no danger. Just as there was a less than 100% certainty Saddam wasn't going to destroy Israel.

You wouldn't stand for those odds when your mom's life was at stake.

Israel wouldn't stand for those odds.

If you need proof of this you are an intellectual lightweight.

But I will give you this much.



They were not going to trust their very existence on the smile and a backslap of someone else who might not really give a damn about their existence. (Such as you evidence.) They would have insisted the we take action or that they would defend themselves.

And then there is this, a PBS Frontline interview of former Terrorism expert for the Clinton & Bush administrations, Richard Clarke:



You know there was considerable doubt. Israel's existence was on the line. If they attacked Saddam it could trigger nuclear war, a Holy War. A WWIII. An Armageddon scenario.

If we invade Iraq we could achieve the following:




You would have chosen to invade.

You'd have hated it. But you'd have done it.

... no comment!

[Except to say that you don't even have a rudimentary understanding of risk analyses or probability theories, the precautionary principle, and have employed at least a dozen straw men in whatever it is you are trying to say with regard to my understanding of the KNOWN facts of the matter, given 6+ years of public domain HINDSIGHT!

Your POV seems to be, summed up in six simple minded words;

[CENTER]Shoot first, don't ask questions later.

Kind of like Cheney on a dove hunt! ][/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
post #90 of 122
12/31/07 at 6:39am
The reality of liberty in Baghdad.

http://www.latimes.com/news/columnis...a-news-columns
Quote:
How do Iraqis feel about the walls springing up around their neighborhoods? Mixed, unsurprisingly: relieved by the lull in violence but dismayed by the cost. "Iraq is a prison, and now I live in my own little prison," one Iraqi told the Christian Science Monitor. "We are not free; our neighborhood is barricaded," complained another.

Quote:
The military isn't building walls as a training exercise, of course. The walls are meant to make it harder for militias, insurgents and death squads to coordinate and reach their intended victims. With enough troops and enough concrete, the theory goes, you can keep the bad guys from operating effectively and gradually reduce the sectarian violence that has been tearing Iraq apart.
post #91 of 122
12/31/07 at 10:42pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

The reality of liberty in Baghdad.

http://www.latimes.com/news/columnis...a-news-columns

And when I broke my leg and it was in a cast I didn't much like it, but I knew that when the bone mended and the cast came off I would have a chance to get back to normal. And that's just what happened.

That was the reality of a broken leg.
post #92 of 122
12/31/07 at 10:59pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

... no comment!

[Except to say that you don't even have a rudimentary understanding of risk analyses or probability theories, the precautionary principle, and have employed at least a dozen straw men in whatever it is you are trying to say with regard to my understanding of the KNOWN facts of the matter, given 6+ years of public domain HINDSIGHT!

Your POV seems to be, summed up in six simple minded words;

[CENTER]Shoot first, don't ask questions later.

Kind of like Cheney on a dove hunt! ][/CENTER]

It's too bad that your knowledge of risk analysis and probability theory doesn't mean a thing in this scenario. Furthermore, it's surprising you were unable to see these points yourself without a conservative's assistance.

The existence of the WMD's could not be confirmed nor denied with 100% certainty.

The Israelis have alleged nuclear weapons and medium range missiles for just this reason, to prevent existential threats from their Arab/Muslim neighbors.

If Saddam had launched the WMD's, Israeli retaliation would be useless in preventing the total annihilation of Israel.

If Israel was going to save it's own life they HAD to act first.

But if they acted first it could have set off a chain reaction which could not have been predicted nor controlled and possibly could have resulted in global nuclear Holy War.

You can't deny the truth of it and you needed me to point it out to you.

You need to study some more.
post #93 of 122
12/31/07 at 11:07pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

You know how some former presidents make money by doing speaking engagements? Bush is going to open a "punch me in the face for a buck" booth and still make more money than all living presidents and vice-presidents do combined.

If they ever make a stage play out of the Seinfeld TV show I suggest you might become a star portraying the role of George Costanza who was always saying ridiculous things and getting things wrong.
post #94 of 122
1/1/08 at 1:10am
Quote:
It's too bad that your knowledge of risk analysis and probability theory doesn't mean a thing in this scenario. Furthermore, it's surprising you were unable to see these points yourself without a conservative's assistance.

Try telling that to decision makers! Please elaborate AND be specific, don't do your dodgy dance of deliberate deception. Oh, and could you please stop talking in circles, you're making me dizzy!

Quote:
The existence of the WMD's could not be confirmed nor denied with 100% certainty.

Meaningless statement, we can apply that statement to nearly any situation (e. g. plane, trains, or automobiles and accidents thereof, 0 < p < 1) D'oh!

Quote:
The Israelis have alleged nuclear weapons and medium range missiles for just this reason, to prevent existential threats from their Arab/Muslim neighbors.

Now you've taken the bait, hook, line, and stinker! How do you know this to be a true statement (sans alleged), you know p = 1? Now I could speculate or conjecture on this, but I won't for obvious reasons because that's YOUR domain! What do we know about this? Only that Israel hasn't detonated a nuclear device within their borders. Beyond that, I've a fairly good idea of who may of helped Israel obtain nuclear WMD's if in fact they possess nuclear WMD's.

Quote:
If Saddam had launched the WMD's, Israeli retaliation would be useless in preventing the total annihilation of Israel.

The above statement is a complete lie and I can easily prove it to be a total lie! It's simple math, do you're homework before you suggest such a lie! \ But here's some hint's to get you started on you're first homework assignment; Israeli's geographic area, kill radius of chemical WMD's, number of ballistic missiles (of sufficient range) needed by Iraq to 100% wipe out Israel, the number is larger then the world's total stockpiles of nuclear WMD's, and this arsenal would have to be staged (in plain sight) for a simultaneous coordinated attack! D'oh!

Quote:
If Israel was going to save it's own life they HAD to act first.

Past tense? Israel is a single living entity?

Quote:
But if they acted first it could have set off a chain reaction which could not have been predicted nor controlled and possibly could have resulted in global nuclear Holy War.

Flawed premise, conjecture, speculation, ..., (repeated many times), ... , flawed premise, conjecture, speculation = NEVERLAND!

Quote:
You can't deny the truth of it and you needed me to point it out to you.

Now you're repeating yourself, or maybe you're talking to yourself, perhaps you have some memory issues? My advice would be to see a doctor ASAP, the kind that has a DSM-IV on their bookshelf!

Quote:
You need to study some more.

That's a rhetorical statement, it's known as a truism. \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
post #95 of 122
1/1/08 at 3:08am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Try telling that to decision makers! Please elaborate AND be specific, don't do your dodgy dance of deliberate deception. Oh, and could you please stop talking in circles, you're making me dizzy!

Meaningless statement, we can apply that statement to nearly any situation (e. g. plane, trains, or automobiles and accidents thereof, 0 < p < 1) D'oh!

Now you've taken the bait, hook, line, and stinker! How do you know this to be a true statement (sans alleged), you know p = 1? Now I could speculate or conjecture on this, but I won't for obvious reasons because that's YOUR domain! What do we know about this? Only that Israel hasn't detonated a nuclear device within their borders. Beyond that, I've a fairly good idea of who may of helped Israel obtain nuclear WMD's if in fact they possess nuclear WMD's.

The above statement is a complete lie and I can easily prove it to be a total lie! It's simple math, do you're homework before you suggest such a lie! \ But here's some hint's to get you started on you're first homework assignment; Israeli's geographic area, kill radius of chemical WMD's, number of ballistic missiles (of sufficient range) needed by Iraq to 100% wipe out Israel, the number is larger then the world's total stockpiles of nuclear WMD's, and this arsenal would have to be staged (in plain sight) for a simultaneous coordinated attack! D'oh!

Past tense? Israel is a single living entity?

Flawed premise, conjecture, speculation, ..., (repeated many times), ... , flawed premise, conjecture, speculation = NEVERLAND!

Now you're repeating yourself, or maybe you're talking to yourself, perhaps you have some memory issues? My advice would be to see a doctor ASAP, the kind that has a DSM-IV on their bookshelf!

That's a rhetorical statement, it's known as a truism. \

I'm not going to contest your nonsense point for point.

Let's see how academic you feel about this.

A mugger wants all your money and has an airsoft pistol held to your mom's head and you don't know whether it is a real gun or not.

What are you going to do, Einstain?
post #96 of 122
1/1/08 at 3:12am
I always thought it was E-I-N-S-T-E-I-N...

A simple Google would have done the trick... yep: Einstein.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #97 of 122
1/1/08 at 3:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

The reality of liberty in Baghdad.

Tiny pockets of ethnically-homogenous harmony.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #98 of 122
1/1/08 at 3:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

If they ever make a stage play out of the Seinfeld TV show I suggest you might become a star portraying the role of George Costanza who was always saying ridiculous things and getting things wrong.



From the guy who brought us Einstain, Bhutto and the PKK and Khomeini's Green Book - you just couldn't make this stuff up...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #99 of 122
1/1/08 at 4:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

I'm not going to contest your nonsense point for point.

Let's see how academic you feel about this.

A mugger wants all your money and has an airsoft pistol held to your mom's head and you don't know whether it is a real gun or not.

What are you going to do, Einstain?

Oh boy, a hippietheatrical.

Well, first they'd have to dig her up, so I guess I'd have to tell the mugger where to find her body right?

Oops, we're talking hippothematically right?

So I guess she's still alive and that we are in Israel right?

No I guess not, she is the state of Israel right?

And the mugger is Iraq right?

And I'm the badass USA, and I got my spurs on like GWB right?

I see where you're going now!

I'd let the mugger shoot my mommy, find out the mugger didn't kill mommy, give the mugger all my money anyway so that he purchase a real gun with real bullets, and make sure the mugger caps mommy properly.

Now I see where you're coming from!

Let's make up some more fake sh!t, shall we?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
post #100 of 122
1/1/08 at 9:45am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Oh boy, a hippietheatrical.

Well, first they'd have to dig her up, so I guess I'd have to tell the mugger where to find her body right?

Oops, we're talking hippothematically right?

So I guess she's still alive and that we are in Israel right?

No I guess not, she is the state of Israel right?

And the mugger is Iraq right?

And I'm the badass USA, and I got my spurs on like GWB right?

I see where you're going now!

I'd let the mugger shoot my mommy, find out the mugger didn't kill mommy, give the mugger all my money anyway so that he purchase a real gun with real bullets, and make sure the mugger caps mommy properly.

Now I see where you're coming from!

Let's make up some more fake sh!t, shall we?

Too bad we live in the real world.

And in the real world courts rule peoples' deaths to have been, 'justified homicides' every day.

Saddam bluffed to keep his enemies at bay. He bluffed too damned well. We had no way of being absolutely certain he was bluffing. Without 100% certainty that he was harmless Israel would have been forced to protect itself from annihilation which would have set off a chain reaction leading possibly to World War 3.

George W. Bush weighed that vs. the costs and advantages of invading and he made the only reasonable choice he could have made at the time.

And even though the war has been a real challenge, it hasn't been totally unrewarding.
post #101 of 122
1/1/08 at 9:53am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post



From the guy who brought us Einstain, Bhutto and the PKK and Khomeini's Green Book - you just couldn't make this stuff up...

And the really funny thing is that after the posters here take a day or two to think about the scenario I've presented, it won't seem so improbable and they will begin looking at the whole invasion with fresh eyes.

Will you continue to deny and ridicule?

If so, THAT will betray your true orientation.

Loyal Americans who just happen to oppose the war are open to reason.

Jihadist ideologues, not so much.

Let's see which one you are.

Your responses will tell the tale.
post #102 of 122
1/1/08 at 9:57am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I always thought it was E-I-N-S-T-E-I-N...

A simple Google would have done the trick... yep: Einstein.

Ooops, sorry. I meant to write, H-I-N-D-S-T-A-I-N.
post #103 of 122
1/1/08 at 10:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

Too bad we live in the real world.

And in the real world courts rule peoples' deaths to have been, 'justified homicides' every day.

Saddam bluffed to keep his enemies at bay. He bluffed too damned well. We had no way of being absolutely certain he was bluffing. Without 100% certainty that he was harmless Israel would have been forced to protect itself from annihilation which would have set off a chain reaction leading possibly to World War 3.

George W. Bush weighed that vs. the costs and advantages of invading and he made the only reasonable choice he could have made at the time.

And even though the war has been a real challenge, it hasn't been totally unrewarding.


Who's we?

Ps. I understand if you're talking about your reality.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #104 of 122
1/1/08 at 10:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

And the really funny thing is that after the posters here take a day or two to think about the scenario I've presented, it won't seem so improbable and they will begin looking at the whole invasion with fresh eyes.

Will you continue to deny and ridicule?

If so, THAT will betray your true orientation.

Loyal Americans who just happen to oppose the war are open to reason.

Jihadist ideologues, not so much.

Let's see which one you are.

Your responses will tell the tale.


Oh yes, the veil has been lifted from my eyes! The sheer power of your ludicrous analogy has simply struck a chord, and now I know, Mojo, that you were SO right all along. Anyone with half a brain and the ability to listen must clearly fall in line behind you.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
post #105 of 122
1/1/08 at 10:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

And the really funny thing is that after the posters here take a day or two to think about the scenario I've presented, it won't seem so improbable and they will begin looking at the whole invasion with fresh eyes.

Right.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #106 of 122
1/1/08 at 10:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

And the really funny thing is that after the posters here take a day or two to think about the scenario I've presented, it won't seem so improbable and they will begin looking at the whole invasion with fresh eyes.

Will you continue to deny and ridicule?

If so, THAT will betray your true orientation.

Loyal Americans who just happen to oppose the war are open to reason.

Jihadist ideologues, not so much.

Let's see which one you are.

Your responses will tell the tale.

Oh I see! So we're actually agreeing with you and don't know it!

Well after reading your take I'm wondering how's that new jacket?

Too tight?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #107 of 122
1/1/08 at 7:34pm
After reading through this thread...

Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
post #108 of 122
1/1/08 at 8:31pm
So now we see there are two types of people in the world: Loyal Americans and Jihadist ideologues. You are either one or the other, and they both desire world domination.

Those donuts are looking really yummy.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #109 of 122
1/2/08 at 1:08am
F0RWARD WITH THE GLOBAL JiHAD!

DEATH TO THE CRSAUDERS AND THE INFIDEL PIGS AND/OR DOGS, MOSTLY AMERIKANS,!

PASS ME THE DONUTS!
post #110 of 122
1/2/08 at 1:17am
Also, re-reading this thread, I notice that Mojo2 thinks it's good 'we' invaded Iraq, so that we could fight Turrism 'at its centre'. And this is good.

I thought we were already doing that in Afghanistan. Where Osama bin Laden was. You know, the place we diverted resources and men from in order to invade another place that had nothing to do with 9/11 and no terrorists in it before we arrived.

I want that donut bad.
post #111 of 122
1/2/08 at 1:42am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

Also, re-reading this thread, I notice that Mojo2 thinks it's good 'we' invaded Iraq, so that we could fight Turrism 'at its centre'. And this is good.

I thought we were already doing that in Afghanistan. Where Osama bin Laden was. You know, the place we diverted resources and men from in order to invade another place that had nothing to do with 9/11 and no terrorists in it before we arrived.

I want that donut bad.

Iran has wanted to expand it's brand of Islam since the inception of the Iranian Islamic Revolution in 1979.

What kept them in place?

Saddam.

When Saddam began to be a terrorist threat and a WMD threat to Israel you wanted Israel to nuke Iraq and start a Holy War?

Stick with donuts.
post #112 of 122
1/2/08 at 1:54am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Who's we?

Ps. I understand if you're talking about your reality.

You are a misfit toy.
post #113 of 122
1/2/08 at 1:57am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

Oh yes, the veil has been lifted from my eyes! The sheer power of your ludicrous analogy has simply struck a chord, and now I know, Mojo, that you were SO right all along. Anyone with half a brain and the ability to listen must clearly fall in line behind you.

I am a conveyance, like a telephone. You don't worship the phone for conveying good news.

Thank GWB.
post #114 of 122
1/2/08 at 1:59am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh I see! So we're actually agreeing with you and don't know it!

Well after reading your take I'm wondering how's that new jacket?

Too tight?

"Jihadist ideologues, not so much."
post #115 of 122
1/2/08 at 2:02am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

So now we see there are two types of people in the world: Loyal Americans and Jihadist ideologues. You are either one or the other, and they both desire world domination.

Those donuts are looking really yummy.

Where in the world did you get the idea that America wants domination?
Quote:

Wolf Blitzer at CNN reminded us a few years ago: "Almost every time U.S. military forces have been called into action to risk their lives and limbs, it's been on behalf of Muslims," to save the Afghanis against the Soviets, to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein, to help Somalis, to help Muslims in Bosnia and then Kosovo and to overthrow the Taliban. To Afghanistan in our current global war on terror, we can add Iraq--and come to the realization that our policies and our military have liberated over 50 million Muslims in just the past five years.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art..._on_earth.html
post #116 of 122
1/2/08 at 2:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

I am a conveyance, like a telephone.

Except a telephone has a better grasp of world politics.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #117 of 122
1/2/08 at 2:14am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

Also, re-reading this thread, I notice that Mojo2 thinks it's good 'we' invaded Iraq, so that we could fight Turrism 'at its centre'. And this is good.

I thought we were already doing that in Afghanistan. Where Osama bin Laden was. You know, the place we diverted resources and men from in order to invade another place that had nothing to do with 9/11 and no terrorists in it before we arrived.

I want that donut bad.

No wonder!

So you can be like Iran?

Surrounded by American troops in Afghanistan and in Iraq?

post #118 of 122
1/2/08 at 2:15am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Except a telephone has a better grasp of world politics.

But I rung your bell, didn't I?

post #119 of 122
1/2/08 at 2:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojo2 View Post

But I rung your bell, didn't I?


Yes.

Unfortunately though it is a crossed line - whenever someone on the other end says something intelligent they get a response from you that bears no relation to anything they said nor indeed, anything comprehensible to human consciousness and moreover, couched in a form of impenetrable gibberish that would defy the decryption capabilities of the combined forces of the CIA and 'Albert Einstain'.

I've had more stimulating dialogue with the speaking clock.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #120 of 122
1/2/08 at 2:36am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Yes.

Unfortunately though it is a crossed line - whenever someone on the other end says something intelligent they get a response from you that bears no relation to anything they said nor indeed, anything comprehensible to human consciousness and moreover, couched in a form of impenetrable gibberish that would defy the decryption capabilities of the combined forces of the CIA and 'Albert Einstain'.

I've had more stimulation with a spitting cLock.

Fixed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why Do You Oppose Promoting Liberty and Tolerance in Iraq?