You know groverat, Randycat, SDW, and the rest are just laughable. They don't stand behind what they say.
Hey by the way guys where's those WOMD? Hmmm?
I didn't like Saddam anymore than than the next guy but, the US did this only for their own interests. No one else.
I just caught the last of a news blurb about Iraqis celebrating in the streets of Saddam's home town waiving pictures of him. The soldiers stopped them of course.
Yeah sure the Iraqis will be able to choose. Yeah we're there to liberate them. Yeah we're just going to be in and out about this. This isn't about oil or stratigic manuvering. Besides Saddam is a threat and has WOMD!
If you believe all of that maybe I can sell you some swamp land in Florida. As my friend says about this ( He doesn't like Bush ether ) " Jim don't get worked up. Don't you know everyone lies on the internet. "
I think your main problem here is that you view everyone in one of two categories with regard to this issue. This explains why you lie about what someone else has said.
I think that's because the answer to the question can invalidate the main reason for going to war. You can pretend it doesn't matter, and it might not to you, but you're only you.
I don't see why WMD matter anymore... Saddam is gone.
It's pure political bickering, and it's silly.
Yes, yes, yes George got what he wanted and the conservatives and hawks got what they wanted so let's just sweep it under the rug. There's an old term for this one it's called " The Bums Rush ".
Pretty Convenient. This is why I don't take you seriously.
I think your main problem here is that you view everyone in one of two categories with regard to this issue. This explains why you lie about what someone else has said.
Perhaps you should pay more attention.
By the way ......it's not a lie. Convenient for you since you know I have a life and it's unlikely that I will go sifting through past threads looking for a quote that you may have already deleated.
As far as the two sides go I know the world isn't black or white but you ether believe this was a moral action or not. That's enough for me.
If no WMD are found and Bush said they were there... so what?
Politicians are liars. So what?
Clinton said he didn't get a blowjob but he did. So what?
At the end of the lie (which you KNOW is there) you look at the real effects. If the real effects are bad then I'll be angry. If the real effects are good then I won't be angry.
- Sanctions will soon be removed entirely (if France and Russia allow it).
- Hussein is gone.
- Self-determination for Iraq.
- A strong message that we aren't paper tigers.
4 HUGE good things. Even one of those would've been enough for me to not care too much about showing a satellite picture of a dump truck and saying it was holding VX.
You know groverat, Randycat, SDW, and the rest are just laughable. They don't stand behind what they say.
...and you seem to only pop your head out whenever there is significant opposition such that you never have to tow the "company line" yourself. You are an inconsequential parrot. The only things you seem to contribute are opportunistic hit'n'run digs. How is that not laughable all in its own?
...and you seem to only pop your head out whenever there is significant opposition such that you never have to tow the "company line" yourself. You are an inconsequential parrot. The only things you seem to contribute are opportunistic hit'n'run digs. How is that not laughable all in its own?
From what I see in The Bush admin is still lying to start a war it was the only thing on your list.
Because that was what the thread was about! NATCH! In a thread about WMD I talked about WMD, wow you're amazing.
And I think bunge might disagree with you, I've been arguing how war > sanctions on a humanitarian level for months, much to his chagrin. Try reading this thread and telling me WMD was the "only thing on my list."
I'm curious groverat...you used this a couple of times in that LONG discussion with me a while back. Why is this such an important issue for you? Is it because you think it'll serve as an effective deterrent to future terrorist attacks on US targets (foreign or domestic)?
Because that was what the thread was about! NATCH! In a thread about WMD I talked about WMD, wow you're amazing.
And I think bunge might disagree with you, I've been arguing how war > sanctions on a humanitarian level for months, much to his chagrin. Try reading this thread and telling me WMD was the "only thing on my list."
I found this part interesting......... " All roads lead to Saddam's ouster.
Remove sanctions with Saddam in power and say hello to nuclear/biological/chemical weapon proliferation. "
This implies that WOMD are a concern to you not low on your list as you would have us believe. Sounds like you were trying to use them in an argument to me.
Why is this such an important issue for you? Is it because you think it'll serve as an effective deterrent to future terrorist attacks on US targets (foreign or domestic)?
It is used by terrorist leaders to give those they command hope that they can succeed. It is not for show that bin Laden would talk about it in every jihad-speech and it is not a coincidence that 9/11 came after a decade of impotency WRT terrorism.
Does a father not feel proud of a son who learns how to stand up for himself?
It is very important.
---
jimmac:
Quote:
This implies that WOMD are a concern to you not low on your list as you would have us believe. Sounds like you were trying to use them in an argument to me.
In that hypothetical situation, where Hussein is free from contraints, yes WMD would be a concern. But you'll notice that's a hypothetical situation; a fiction.
The argument was a counter to the idea of just lifting sanctions with Hussein in power and then leaving. The UN's different programs made WMD development very very difficult for Hussein.
It is used by terrorist leaders to give those they command hope that they can succeed. It is not for show that bin Laden would talk about it in every jihad-speech and it is not a coincidence that 9/11 came after a decade of impotency WRT terrorism.
Does a father not feel proud of a son who learns how to stand up for himself?
It is very important.
---
jimmac:
In that hypothetical situation, where Hussein is free from contraints, yes WMD would be a concern. But you'll notice that's a hypothetical situation; a fiction.
The argument was a counter to the idea of just lifting sanctions with Hussein in power and then leaving. The UN's different programs made WMD development very very difficult for Hussein.
Comments
Hey by the way guys where's those WOMD? Hmmm?
I didn't like Saddam anymore than than the next guy but, the US did this only for their own interests. No one else.
I just caught the last of a news blurb about Iraqis celebrating in the streets of Saddam's home town waiving pictures of him. The soldiers stopped them of course.
Yeah sure the Iraqis will be able to choose. Yeah we're there to liberate them. Yeah we're just going to be in and out about this. This isn't about oil or stratigic manuvering. Besides Saddam is a threat and has WOMD!
If you believe all of that maybe I can sell you some swamp land in Florida. As my friend says about this ( He doesn't like Bush ether ) " Jim don't get worked up. Don't you know everyone lies on the internet. "
What a joke.
Hey by the way guys where's those WOMD? Hmmm?
Maybe there, maybe not.
I think your main problem here is that you view everyone in one of two categories with regard to this issue. This explains why you lie about what someone else has said.
Perhaps you should pay more attention.
guess we'll have to wait and see. maybe a fourth round of testing will give better results?
It's pure political bickering, and it's silly.
Originally posted by groverat
I don't see why WMD matter anymore....
I think that's because the answer to the question can invalidate the main reason for going to war. You can pretend it doesn't matter, and it might not to you, but you're only you.
Originally posted by groverat
I don't see why WMD matter anymore... Saddam is gone.
It's pure political bickering, and it's silly.
Yes, yes, yes George got what he wanted and the conservatives and hawks got what they wanted so let's just sweep it under the rug. There's an old term for this one it's called " The Bums Rush ".
Pretty Convenient. This is why I don't take you seriously.
Originally posted by groverat
jimmac:
Maybe there, maybe not.
I think your main problem here is that you view everyone in one of two categories with regard to this issue. This explains why you lie about what someone else has said.
Perhaps you should pay more attention.
By the way ......it's not a lie. Convenient for you since you know I have a life and it's unlikely that I will go sifting through past threads looking for a quote that you may have already deleated.
As far as the two sides go I know the world isn't black or white but you ether believe this was a moral action or not. That's enough for me.
Politicians are liars. So what?
Clinton said he didn't get a blowjob but he did. So what?
At the end of the lie (which you KNOW is there) you look at the real effects. If the real effects are bad then I'll be angry. If the real effects are good then I won't be angry.
- Sanctions will soon be removed entirely (if France and Russia allow it).
- Hussein is gone.
- Self-determination for Iraq.
- A strong message that we aren't paper tigers.
4 HUGE good things. Even one of those would've been enough for me to not care too much about showing a satellite picture of a dump truck and saying it was holding VX.
WMD was never really on my list.
Originally posted by groverat
WMD was never really on my list.
From what I see in The Bush admin is still lying to start a war it was the only thing on your list.
Are you a now politician, or just an amateur liar?
Originally posted by jimmac
You know groverat, Randycat, SDW, and the rest are just laughable. They don't stand behind what they say.
...and you seem to only pop your head out whenever there is significant opposition such that you never have to tow the "company line" yourself. You are an inconsequential parrot. The only things you seem to contribute are opportunistic hit'n'run digs. How is that not laughable all in its own?
Originally posted by Randycat99
...and you seem to only pop your head out whenever there is significant opposition such that you never have to tow the "company line" yourself. You are an inconsequential parrot. The only things you seem to contribute are opportunistic hit'n'run digs. How is that not laughable all in its own?
Whatever.
Originally posted by giant
From what I see in The Bush admin is still lying to start a war it was the only thing on your list.
Are you a now politician, or just an amateur liar?
From what I see in The Bush admin is still lying to start a war it was the only thing on your list.
Because that was what the thread was about! NATCH! In a thread about WMD I talked about WMD, wow you're amazing.
And I think bunge might disagree with you, I've been arguing how war > sanctions on a humanitarian level for months, much to his chagrin. Try reading this thread and telling me WMD was the "only thing on my list."
- A strong message that we aren't paper tigers.
I'm curious groverat...you used this a couple of times in that LONG discussion with me a while back. Why is this such an important issue for you? Is it because you think it'll serve as an effective deterrent to future terrorist attacks on US targets (foreign or domestic)?
Cheers
Scott
Originally posted by groverat
giant:
Because that was what the thread was about! NATCH! In a thread about WMD I talked about WMD, wow you're amazing.
And I think bunge might disagree with you, I've been arguing how war > sanctions on a humanitarian level for months, much to his chagrin. Try reading this thread and telling me WMD was the "only thing on my list."
I found this part interesting......... " All roads lead to Saddam's ouster.
Remove sanctions with Saddam in power and say hello to nuclear/biological/chemical weapon proliferation. "
This implies that WOMD are a concern to you not low on your list as you would have us believe. Sounds like you were trying to use them in an argument to me.
Wriggles like a snake doesn't he?
Why is this such an important issue for you? Is it because you think it'll serve as an effective deterrent to future terrorist attacks on US targets (foreign or domestic)?
It is used by terrorist leaders to give those they command hope that they can succeed. It is not for show that bin Laden would talk about it in every jihad-speech and it is not a coincidence that 9/11 came after a decade of impotency WRT terrorism.
Does a father not feel proud of a son who learns how to stand up for himself?
It is very important.
---
jimmac:
This implies that WOMD are a concern to you not low on your list as you would have us believe. Sounds like you were trying to use them in an argument to me.
In that hypothetical situation, where Hussein is free from contraints, yes WMD would be a concern. But you'll notice that's a hypothetical situation; a fiction.
The argument was a counter to the idea of just lifting sanctions with Hussein in power and then leaving. The UN's different programs made WMD development very very difficult for Hussein.
Originally posted by groverat
midwinter:
It is used by terrorist leaders to give those they command hope that they can succeed. It is not for show that bin Laden would talk about it in every jihad-speech and it is not a coincidence that 9/11 came after a decade of impotency WRT terrorism.
Does a father not feel proud of a son who learns how to stand up for himself?
It is very important.
---
jimmac:
In that hypothetical situation, where Hussein is free from contraints, yes WMD would be a concern. But you'll notice that's a hypothetical situation; a fiction.
The argument was a counter to the idea of just lifting sanctions with Hussein in power and then leaving. The UN's different programs made WMD development very very difficult for Hussein.
Uh, huh.