The argument of the NAZI party of America then is the same argument made today. The parallels are striking considering the background of some of the characters here.
Let's just say I'm not surprised you know so much about them. Throw around your personal attacks because you've got nothing else to say. Your trolling is as bad as scott's trolling.
Sorry, this is what you said. I did misunderstand because now I see the statement for the crap it is.
If he knowingly "beleived" a lie perpatrated to him, that also is a lie. Right?
So the statement should read:
Even if he didn't lie and he lied thats just as bad.
Please god, is it my time yet?
What he's saying is that if you choose to listen to only one source simply because that one source is telling you what you want to hear, and you purposely ignore other sources that you know will give contradictory information, then that's as bad as a lie.
What he's saying is that if you choose to listen to only one source simply because that one source is telling you what you want to hear, and you purposely ignore other sources that you know will give contradictory information, then that's as bad as a lie.
You know it is so don't play games.
Hey, i agree. But the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing. This is not a one source issue. What was the purpose of all the UN sanctions? Were they just picking on poor lil SH?
Yes, you are right if you factor out hell bent killers, terrorists. rogue nations and SH's willingness, in fact pledge, to kill americans.
I'm sorry NaplesX, but you're just too far gone. The standard required to start a war is higher than SH going on Iraqi TV and calling the U.S. the great satan. That's just not threatening enough to justify the killing and the cost of the war.
Hey, i agree. But the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing. This is not a one source issue. What was the purpose of all the UN sanctions? Were they just picking on poor lil SH?
The WHOLE WORLD didn't say the same thing. That's why some countries supported the war while others didn't. If the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing millions of people wouldn't have been protesting. Leaders wouldn't have been against the war. The countries surrounding Iraq would have at least supported it.
But most didn't agree. Most knew it was a scam, and most people realize that Bush knew it was a scam too.
I'm sorry NaplesX, but you're just too far gone. The standard required to start a war is higher than SH going on Iraqi TV and calling the U.S. the great satan. That's just not threatening enough to justify the killing and the cost of the war.
Hell bent killers? You're just lost.
Ok then, what would you call the terrorists all around the world that are training themselves to kill you and your loved ones, based on the claims of a guy hiding in a cave right now?
The WHOLE WORLD didn't say the same thing. That's why some countries supported the war while others didn't. If the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing millions of people wouldn't have been protesting. Leaders wouldn't have been against the war. The countries surrounding Iraq would have at least supported it.
But most didn't agree. Most knew it was a scam, and most people realize that Bush knew it was a scam too.
Ok then, smarty, here is a quiz for you:
What was the number of nations that made up the allies in WWII?
What are the number of nations that are involved with this campaign?
Compare. make sure you consider that that was a world war and this is just one small battle it this war.
You are so fscking clueless tiz not even funny. Btw, I really think that some army boys paying you a visit wouldn't be a bad idea.
Like I said, as long as someone else is doing the dirty work for you, right ? Why don't YOU pay me a visit? Cause you're a little coward that's why. Besides, like you would know anyone in the armed forces lmao. I'm still giving you the benefit of the doubt, but it's looking more and more like you may actually not just be pretending to be a total idiot after all.
The incidents, causes, locations and numbers are there for you to see....currently running at between about 7500 and 9700 Iraqi civilians killed in 2003. This may be a "human rights promotion" site, apologies...but the Pentagon and admin. is unconcerned about collateral damage that they don't bother even attempting a tally. I did hear a quote from another "human rights promotion site" which has estimated that up to 50000 Iraqis (civilians and military) have been killed so far. It is very difficult to estimate numbers of dead in Muslim nations because it is the custom to bury their dead within 24 hours.[/B]
Some quick calculations i made:
Cost of 9/11 estimated from 35 Billion to 125 Billion (based on a variaty of views I have read many are much much more, but I am trying to be fair)
Casualties of 9/11 3030
Cost per casualty 11.5 Million to 39.6 Million
Cost of war on Terrror 168 Billion
Casualties of WOT 60,000 (I have no clue, this is a guess, but based on previous claims I should be close, right?)
cost per casualty 2.8 million
Preventing terrorism seems to be more cost effective to me.
Ok then, what would you call the terrorists all around the world that are training themselves to kill you and your loved ones, based on the claims of a guy hiding in a cave right now?
What was the number of nations that made up the allies in WWII?
What are the number of nations that are involved with this campaign?
Compare. make sure you consider that that was a world war and this is just one small battle it this war.
Well since the League of Nations had I think less than 50 nations, it's a bit of a tough comparison. The Allies were comprised of approximately 20 countries.
If you're really trying to say that the U.S. went to war with Iraq with equivalent or greater support than the Allies fought in WWII, they you are being silly. I don't think anyone else will agree with that.
Comments
Originally posted by majorspunk
The argument of the NAZI party of America then is the same argument made today. The parallels are striking considering the background of some of the characters here.
Let's just say I'm not surprised you know so much about them. Throw around your personal attacks because you've got nothing else to say. Your trolling is as bad as scott's trolling.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Sorry, this is what you said. I did misunderstand because now I see the statement for the crap it is.
If he knowingly "beleived" a lie perpatrated to him, that also is a lie. Right?
So the statement should read:
Even if he didn't lie and he lied thats just as bad.
Please god, is it my time yet?
What he's saying is that if you choose to listen to only one source simply because that one source is telling you what you want to hear, and you purposely ignore other sources that you know will give contradictory information, then that's as bad as a lie.
You know it is so don't play games.
Originally posted by jimmac
The thing is it's looking like the U.S. wasn't threatened here.
Yes, you are right if you factor out hell bent killers, terrorists. rogue nations and SH's willingness, in fact pledge, to kill americans.
Originally posted by bunge
What he's saying is that if you choose to listen to only one source simply because that one source is telling you what you want to hear, and you purposely ignore other sources that you know will give contradictory information, then that's as bad as a lie.
You know it is so don't play games.
Hey, i agree. But the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing. This is not a one source issue. What was the purpose of all the UN sanctions? Were they just picking on poor lil SH?
Originally posted by NaplesX
Yes, you are right if you factor out hell bent killers, terrorists. rogue nations and SH's willingness, in fact pledge, to kill americans.
I'm sorry NaplesX, but you're just too far gone. The standard required to start a war is higher than SH going on Iraqi TV and calling the U.S. the great satan. That's just not threatening enough to justify the killing and the cost of the war.
Hell bent killers? You're just lost.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Hey, i agree. But the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing. This is not a one source issue. What was the purpose of all the UN sanctions? Were they just picking on poor lil SH?
The WHOLE WORLD didn't say the same thing. That's why some countries supported the war while others didn't. If the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing millions of people wouldn't have been protesting. Leaders wouldn't have been against the war. The countries surrounding Iraq would have at least supported it.
But most didn't agree. Most knew it was a scam, and most people realize that Bush knew it was a scam too.
Originally posted by bunge
I'm sorry NaplesX, but you're just too far gone. The standard required to start a war is higher than SH going on Iraqi TV and calling the U.S. the great satan. That's just not threatening enough to justify the killing and the cost of the war.
Hell bent killers? You're just lost.
Ok then, what would you call the terrorists all around the world that are training themselves to kill you and your loved ones, based on the claims of a guy hiding in a cave right now?
Originally posted by bunge
The WHOLE WORLD didn't say the same thing. That's why some countries supported the war while others didn't. If the WHOLE WORLD community said the same thing millions of people wouldn't have been protesting. Leaders wouldn't have been against the war. The countries surrounding Iraq would have at least supported it.
But most didn't agree. Most knew it was a scam, and most people realize that Bush knew it was a scam too.
Ok then, smarty, here is a quiz for you:
What was the number of nations that made up the allies in WWII?
What are the number of nations that are involved with this campaign?
Compare. make sure you consider that that was a world war and this is just one small battle it this war.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Sorry, this is what you said. I did misunderstand because now I see the statement for the crap it is.
If he knowingly "beleived" a lie perpatrated to him, that also is a lie. Right?
So the statement should read:
Even if he didn't lie and he lied thats just as bad.
Please god, is it my time yet?
This :
-----------------------------------------------------------
" Sorry, this is what you said. I did misunderstand because now I see the statement for the crap it is. "
-----------------------------------------------------------
is at the heart of the prolem here.
Originally posted by jimmac
This :
-----------------------------------------------------------
" Sorry, this is what you said. I did misunderstand because now I see the statement for the crap it is. "
-----------------------------------------------------------
is at the heart of the prolem here.
yes I agree the problem is crap statements on your part.
Sorry i could not resist.
Hey, I said i read it wrong, what do you want from me.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Ok then, smarty, here is a quiz for you:
What was the number of nations that made up the allies in WWII?
What are the number of nations that are involved with this campaign?
Compare. make sure you consider that that was a world war and this is just one small battle it this war.
What the hell does that have to do with anything?
Originally posted by NaplesX
yes I agree the problem is crap statements on your part.
Sorry i could not resist.
Hey, I said i read it wrong, what do you want from me.
Now we've gone back to the childish tact.
This is making me start to snore.
Originally posted by majormistake
You are so fscking clueless tiz not even funny. Btw, I really think that some army boys paying you a visit wouldn't be a bad idea.
Like I said, as long as someone else is doing the dirty work for you, right ? Why don't YOU pay me a visit? Cause you're a little coward that's why. Besides, like you would know anyone in the armed forces lmao. I'm still giving you the benefit of the doubt, but it's looking more and more like you may actually not just be pretending to be a total idiot after all.
The incidents, causes, locations and numbers are there for you to see....currently running at between about 7500 and 9700 Iraqi civilians killed in 2003. This may be a "human rights promotion" site, apologies...but the Pentagon and admin. is unconcerned about collateral damage that they don't bother even attempting a tally. I did hear a quote from another "human rights promotion site" which has estimated that up to 50000 Iraqis (civilians and military) have been killed so far. It is very difficult to estimate numbers of dead in Muslim nations because it is the custom to bury their dead within 24 hours.[/B]
Some quick calculations i made:
Cost of 9/11 estimated from 35 Billion to 125 Billion (based on a variaty of views I have read many are much much more, but I am trying to be fair)
Casualties of 9/11 3030
Cost per casualty 11.5 Million to 39.6 Million
Cost of war on Terrror 168 Billion
Casualties of WOT 60,000 (I have no clue, this is a guess, but based on previous claims I should be close, right?)
cost per casualty 2.8 million
Preventing terrorism seems to be more cost effective to me.
Come on, laugh at yourself. You made a dumb statement. It was actually kind of funny.
Man
Originally posted by jimmac
What the hell does that have to do with anything?
World War 2, world war. Um...
The "world" community fought for freedom and won.
The "world" community declared SH was a threat to piece.
Compare the numbers to see if what we have today might be considered a world view based on historical facts.
Just a suggestion.
Originally posted by jimmac
Even if that's the case it doesn't get him off the hot seat.
Agreed, there are questions begging for answers. But that does not equate to lies.
The AO streets are barren, all of the sudden.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Ok then, what would you call the terrorists all around the world that are training themselves to kill you and your loved ones, based on the claims of a guy hiding in a cave right now?
But what does that have to do with Iraq?
Originally posted by NaplesX
Ok then, smarty, here is a quiz for you:
What was the number of nations that made up the allies in WWII?
What are the number of nations that are involved with this campaign?
Compare. make sure you consider that that was a world war and this is just one small battle it this war.
Well since the League of Nations had I think less than 50 nations, it's a bit of a tough comparison. The Allies were comprised of approximately 20 countries.
If you're really trying to say that the U.S. went to war with Iraq with equivalent or greater support than the Allies fought in WWII, they you are being silly. I don't think anyone else will agree with that.