"I Was Wrong!"

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: conjur
Same problems people have faced in Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Tibet and a number of other places.


Guess we should grow the military by ten-fold and do some more invadin'!!

would you object? that would seem to pacify your argument.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
I think that every human being desires freedom - the freedom to make his own decisions and control his own destiny.

If given the choice, how many people do you think would live in a democracy versus a dictatorship?

Think that Iraq was brimming with new immigrants?

Oh, the irony!

You make that claim yet you support a country (the U.S.) invading a sovereign nation and imposing its own style of government.

 

[Bowfinger]

So much disinformation. Where to begin?

Originally posted by: Edge3D
It did seem like a joke. Did it not? I mean, if you dont remember why removing Saddam has made us safer you have a much worse memory than the already famous American societal short-term memory.

Removing Hussein did did NOT make America safer, at least not for the next generation. Bush's invasion and wholesale slaughter of innocent Muslims is spawning a whole new generation of America-hating bin Laden wanna-bes. You can argue Hussein killed more Muslims than we did, but that's not the point. While they hated Hussein, he was still one of them. We are Christian infidels. From their perspective, this is just another Crusade against Islam.

I'll go ahead and state why I think he was a threat to us.. but if you arent convinced already, I dont know why you are asking as I doubt you're going to be changing your mind anytime soon.
I'm here to be as friendly as possible with you guys but it seems anything Pro-Bush or Pro-American is scorned by mobviolence around here.

Nonsense. Bush fan-boy delusion #33: Bush == America. He doesn't. Get over it.

That is fine, if you guys prefer to quell any ideas or thoughts that dont agree with yours and prefer to smash people down with replies like "blah blah blah" (as SMASHING of a reply as that might be), then you might as well talk to a tree about your leftist ideals because all the conservatives will simply leave the forum.

We knew exactly what he meant. The "blah, blah, blah" means you're parroting the same disinformation and rationalizations that have been floated -- and shot down -- a hundred times before here. Most of us are tired of having to dissect the same nonsense over and over and over.

Anyway, in response to your question- The war was fought for two reasons, first for 9/11 named an axis of evil and declared if you read the national security strategy paper of the US, you will see we live in a world where terrorists can deliver WMD to the US, we don't have borders, we have millions of containers coming in that don't get inspected, one nuclear device (which are getting smaller and smaller), one canister of anthrax or nerve gas delivered by a terrorist to the US will kill tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of people. Saddam Hussein is our declared enemy and he had the programs to develop these weapons, there's no disputing that.
We've only examined a dozen or so of the 120 sites. We don't know if the weapons he had are in Syria or Iran. We know he was developing them. So we know he was a threat.
He has aligned himself with Al Qaeda, even though he modeled himself after Mussolini literally. The Bathst party is a fascist party modeled on Italian fascism and German fascism of the 30s. That's who Saddam Hussein is. He later years began speaking in Islamic martyrdom, financing suicide bombers, anybody involved in suicide bombers is involved in radical Islam. That's what its about.

That's a couple of facts mixed with a whole bunch of lies. There is NO evidence Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, in spite of all the innuendo from Bush and his minions. In fact, Bush himself eventually acknowledged there was no connection. There is also no evidence Hussein "aligned" himself with al-Qaida. There is significant evidence they did NOT, including derogatory comments from bin Laden about Hussein.

It is no longer true we've examined only "a dozen or so of the 120 sites". That's an ancient number.

You comment that a single "canister of anthrax or nerve gas" might kill "possibly millions of people" is unrelated to reality. That's the same sort of fear-mongering Bush used to stampede Congress into supporting his authorization request. Also contrary to your assertion, there's plenty of reason to dispute he was developing WMDs after 1998. We do know he wanted those weapons, but all indications are he stopped active work on everything but a few "WMD-related program activities".

He was in defiance of 17 UN resolutions including one that by Dec 7th 2002 (4 months before he was attacked) he had to deliver a report accounting for the weapons that Hans Blix and the UN inspectors knew he had and he didn't do that. That's why we went to war.

In truth, Iraq did deliver such a report. Bush & Co. declared it unacceptable. The fact that Iraq violated U.N. resolutions is irrelevant in any case since the U.N. did NOT authorize the invasion. Cowboy Bush chose the vigilante approach, taking the "law" into his own hands instead of letting the "judge" (i.e., the U.N.) render a verdict.

Any candidate who accuses the president of lying or bringing us to war on under false circumstances and killing American troops for no reason, by that very statement should be disqualified for running for president, and is himself an enemy to this country.

Blah, blah, blah. Sorry, that's all it deserves. If you want to worship Lord Bush, that's your right. Don't expect us to join your delusion.

The only reason, we have not had a terrorist attack in the United States and Americans have not died in this country, is because George Bush has taken the war to the enemy camp. He took it to Afghanistan, he took it to Iraq. We have fought Al-Qaeda in Tikrit and Basra instead of New York and Washington. He has eliminated 2/3rds of the Al Qaeda leadership, he has them so off balance that the only attacks they are capable of are in Muslim countries where there are so many of them.

If you are not convinced, or even THINKING about this.. then you might as well go pay a visit to that tree I referred you too.

Given that we know al-Qaida has people all over the world, that's a dangerously ignorant point of view. We are fighting some of them on their turf. We are mostly attacking a country that had no connection to 9/11, but we already covered that. One would assume our domestic law enforcement agencies and intelligence are simultaneously fighting them on our turf, mostly out of the public eye. Coincidentally, that's the same thing Clinton was doing.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur
Same problems people have faced in Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Tibet and a number of other places.


Guess we should grow the military by ten-fold and do some more invadin'!!

would you object? that would seem to pacify your argument.

Hell yeah I would object!!!

You think we're open to terrorist attacks now, just wait until you invade 4-5 more countries.

Where the hell are you going to get the manpower to do that? How are you going to pay for the troops' salaries, benefits, training, equipment, deployment, food, etc.?

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Riprorin
I think that every human being desires freedom - the freedom to make his own decisions and control his own destiny.

If given the choice, how many people do you think would live in a democracy versus a dictatorship?

Think that Iraq was brimming with new immigrants?

Oh, the irony!

You make that claim yet you support a country (the U.S.) invading a sovereign nation and imposing its own style of government.

In case you haven't heard, Iraq is going to have free elections.

How many free elections were there under Saddam?

 

[Edge3D]

I hope you and your pals find true humor in mocking a serious and terrible situation such as the molestation scandals. All I will say, is that in public those words would most certainly not be held in high regard.. and you'd likely find yourself smashed into the bar REAL FAST.
Especially the Irish American pubs I frequent.

You are lucky that most conservatives are in a way, more "liberal" and accepting than you guys are, or alot of you would probably had been gone a long time ago from these forums.
It is the true revelation that "liberal" has turned into a dirty word.. because if you guys represent "liberalism" its a horrible thing and truly a hate-filled evil in the world.
No joke there.

None of us care that you guys march around in our cities with communist-front groups like ANSWER.. from what I've seen of you guys.. jobs and a shower wouldnt hurt immensely.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
So much disinformation. Where to begin?

Originally posted by: Edge3D
It did seem like a joke. Did it not? I mean, if you dont remember why removing Saddam has made us safer you have a much worse memory than the already famous American societal short-term memory.

Removing Hussein did did NOT make America safer, at least not for the next generation. Bush's invasion and wholesale slaughter of innocent Muslims is spawning a whole new generation of America-hating bin Laden wanna-bes. You can argue Hussein killed more Muslims than we did, but that's not the point. While they hated Hussein, he was still one of them. We are Christian infidels. From their perspective, this is just another Crusade against Islam.

I'll go ahead and state why I think he was a threat to us.. but if you arent convinced already, I dont know why you are asking as I doubt you're going to be changing your mind anytime soon.
I'm here to be as friendly as possible with you guys but it seems anything Pro-Bush or Pro-American is scorned by mobviolence around here.

Nonsense. Bush fan-boy delusion #33: Bush == America. He doesn't. Get over it.

That is fine, if you guys prefer to quell any ideas or thoughts that dont agree with yours and prefer to smash people down with replies like "blah blah blah" (as SMASHING of a reply as that might be), then you might as well talk to a tree about your leftist ideals because all the conservatives will simply leave the forum.

We knew exactly what he meant. The "blah, blah, blah" means you're parroting the same disinformation and rationalizations that have been floated -- and shot down -- a hundred times before here. Most of us are tired of having to dissect the same nonsense over and over and over.

Anyway, in response to your question- The war was fought for two reasons, first for 9/11 named an axis of evil and declared if you read the national security strategy paper of the US, you will see we live in a world where terrorists can deliver WMD to the US, we don't have borders, we have millions of containers coming in that don't get inspected, one nuclear device (which are getting smaller and smaller), one canister of anthrax or nerve gas delivered by a terrorist to the US will kill tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of people. Saddam Hussein is our declared enemy and he had the programs to develop these weapons, there's no disputing that.
We've only examined a dozen or so of the 120 sites. We don't know if the weapons he had are in Syria or Iran. We know he was developing them. So we know he was a threat.
He has aligned himself with Al Qaeda, even though he modeled himself after Mussolini literally. The Bathst party is a fascist party modeled on Italian fascism and German fascism of the 30s. That's who Saddam Hussein is. He later years began speaking in Islamic martyrdom, financing suicide bombers, anybody involved in suicide bombers is involved in radical Islam. That's what its about.

That's a couple of facts mixed with a whole bunch of lies. There is NO evidence Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, in spite of all the innuendo from Bush and his minions. In fact, Bush himself eventually acknowledged there was no connection. There is also no evidence Hussein "aligned" himself with al-Qaida. There is significant evidence they did NOT, including derogatory comments from bin Laden about Hussein.

It is no longer true we've examined only "a dozen or so of the 120 sites". That's an ancient number.

You comment that a single "canister of anthrax or nerve gas" might kill "possibly millions of people" is unrelated to reality. That's the same sort of fear-mongering Bush used to stampede Congress into supporting his authorization request. Also contrary to your assertion, there's plenty of reason to dispute he was developing WMDs after 1998. We do know he wanted those weapons, but all indications are he stopped active work on everything but a few "WMD-related program activities".

He was in defiance of 17 UN resolutions including one that by Dec 7th 2002 (4 months before he was attacked) he had to deliver a report accounting for the weapons that Hans Blix and the UN inspectors knew he had and he didn't do that. That's why we went to war.

In truth, Iraq did deliver such a report. Bush & Co. declared it unacceptable. The fact that Iraq violated U.N. resolutions is irrelevant in any case since the U.N. did NOT authorize the invasion. Cowboy Bush chose the vigilante approach, taking the "law" into his own hands instead of letting the "judge" (i.e., the U.N.) render a verdict.

Any candidate who accuses the president of lying or bringing us to war on under false circumstances and killing American troops for no reason, by that very statement should be disqualified for running for president, and is himself an enemy to this country.

Blah, blah, blah. Sorry, that's all it deserves. If you want to worship Lord Bush, that's your right. Don't expect us to join your delusion.

The only reason, we have not had a terrorist attack in the United States and Americans have not died in this country, is because George Bush has taken the war to the enemy camp. He took it to Afghanistan, he took it to Iraq. We have fought Al-Qaeda in Tikrit and Basra instead of New York and Washington. He has eliminated 2/3rds of the Al Qaeda leadership, he has them so off balance that the only attacks they are capable of are in Muslim countries where there are so many of them.

If you are not convinced, or even THINKING about this.. then you might as well go pay a visit to that tree I referred you too.

Given that we know al-Qaida has people all over the world, that's a dangerously ignorant point of view. We are fighting some of them on their turf. We are mostly attacking a country that had no connection to 9/11, but we already covered that. One would assume our domestic law enforcement agencies and intelligence are simultaneously fighting them on our turf, mostly out of the public eye. Coincidentally, that's the same thing Clinton was doing.

Excellent post, and you are right, this has been covered a hundered times before.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Conjur, if "parroting" bothers you, you must really be annoyed with Kerry.

Kerry's just parroting his speechwriters

"John Kerry said something amazing the other day. He was talking to the Wall Street Journal and was asked about his many attacks on ''Benedict Arnold CEOs'' -- for example: ''We will repeal every single benefit, every single loophole, every single reward for any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that take American jobs overseas and stick you with the bill.'' (Kerry in Virginia, Feb. 10)

Senator Flippy has now decided this line is nonoperative. As he told the chaps at the Journal, ''You know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said 'Look, that's not what I'm saying.' Benedict Arnold does not refer to somebody who in the normal course of business is going to go overseas and take jobs overseas. That happens. I support that. I understand that. I was referring to the people who take advantage of noneconomic transactions purely for tax purposes -- sham transactions -- and give up American citizenship. That's a Benedict Arnold. You give up your American citizenship but you want to continue to do business.''

Got that? When Kerry talks about ''any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that takes American jobs overseas,'' he's not referring to someone who ''takes jobs overseas.'' Perish the thought! He's all in favor of taking jobs overseas. It wasn't him who attacked all those ''Benedict Arnold CEOs,'' just his ''overzealous speechwriters.'' And the minute he discovered it was going on, he called them to say, ''Look, that's not what I'm saying.''"

Hahaha. Vinatge Kerry.

Hijacking your own thread already?

And, again, how is that parroting? He's corrected his speechwriters to change the wording to more accurately reflect his opinion on outsourcing of jobs. I suppose you want to Kerry to oppose ALL outsourcing, unlike Bush?

His comment suggests that he doesn't read his speeches before he delivers them. If that's not parroting, what is?

Either that, or he's falsely blaming his speech writers for his own stupid remarks.

So is he parroting or lying?

Which is it?

Neither.

He probably just realized the phrase wasn't getting his idea across.

Oh, so when he got called on it, he blames his speech writers. Nice.

I thought that Pre. Bush was the only one who never admited a mistake?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Riprorin
I think that every human being desires freedom - the freedom to make his own decisions and control his own destiny.

If given the choice, how many people do you think would live in a democracy versus a dictatorship?

Think that Iraq was brimming with new immigrants?

Oh, the irony!

You make that claim yet you support a country (the U.S.) invading a sovereign nation and imposing its own style of government.

In case you haven't heard, Iraq is going to have free elections.

How many free elections were there under Saddam?

I don't think everyone believes what the Administration says about Iraq, riprorin. The Administration was wrong about WMDs. People believed them.

"Trick me once, shame on you; trick me again, shame on me."

Don't drink the proverbial "coolaid" again.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Edge3D
I'd love to respond to the flurry of responses I seem to be getting. Did I strike a chord with you boys?
Alas, I dont have all the time in the world and have been spending much more time in this forum than originally intended.. so I am waiting for Zephr's response or questions.
He was the was the one my post was for, he was the one that asked me why we went to war.

I know you all want to chime in, but I should probably extend that courtesy to Zephyr.. he has been fairly courteous to me as well, refraining from the personal slurs I've seen tossed around my way.

LOL! In other words, you have no interest at all in actually discussing the issues. More importantly, you are unwilling to educate yourself and accept how much disinformation you're spreading.

This is one of the reasons you Bush fan-boys get such an unfriendly reception here. We've seen your type a hundred times. You aren't interested in discussion. You just want to bleat and run.

Ignorance is bliss. Bleat on.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Riprorin
I think that every human being desires freedom - the freedom to make his own decisions and control his own destiny.

If given the choice, how many people do you think would live in a democracy versus a dictatorship?

Think that Iraq was brimming with new immigrants?

Oh, the irony!

You make that claim yet you support a country (the U.S.) invading a sovereign nation and imposing its own style of government.

In case you haven't heard, Iraq is going to have free elections.

How many free elections were there under Saddam?

What if they vote for a fundamentalist that hates the US and wants the troops out asap?

Considering how many there are practicing Sharia law today, that is not a very unlikely scenario, the question is, would the US allow such a candidate to run?

"there ought to be limits to freedom" - GW Bush

Edited to get the quote right.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Edge3D
I hope you and your pals find true humor in mocking a serious and terrible situation such as the molestation scandals. All I will say, is that in public those words would most certainly not be held in high regard.. and you'd likely find yourself smashed into the bar REAL FAST.
Especially the Irish American pubs I frequent.

You are lucky that most conservatives are in a way, more "liberal" and accepting than you guys are, or alot of you would probably had been gone a long time ago from these forums.
It is the true revelation that "liberal" has turned into a dirty word.. because if you guys represent "liberalism" its a horrible thing and truly a hate-filled evil in the world.
No joke there.

None of us care that you guys march around in our cities with communist-front groups like ANSWER.. from what I've seen of you guys.. jobs and a shower wouldnt hurt immensely.

Nice of you to refrain from personal insults and slurs when none were directed your way by me.

And, I grew up Catholic. Went to Catholic school for 12 years. One of the priests at the church is one of the ones accused of molesting boys, no, not me. So, don't cop your holier-than-thou attitude. I call hypocrisy where I see it and the Catholic Church is full of it. So are you.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: Klixxer
"i think there needs to be limits to freedom" - GW Bush

its called responsibility.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Riprorin
I think that every human being desires freedom - the freedom to make his own decisions and control his own destiny.

If given the choice, how many people do you think would live in a democracy versus a dictatorship?

Think that Iraq was brimming with new immigrants?

Oh, the irony!

You make that claim yet you support a country (the U.S.) invading a sovereign nation and imposing its own style of government.

In case you haven't heard, Iraq is going to have free elections.

How many free elections were there under Saddam?

When? Bush still hasn't given us any details.

And, why do you think those will be happening? Because Bush has spent over $150 billion, cost the lives of 800 U.S. troops, injured thousands more, all over a LIE!

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: Klixxer
"i think there needs to be limits to freedom" - GW Bush

its called responsibility.

WTF does Bush know about responsibility?? Anytime his actions are questioned, he launches the R.A.M. into character-assassination mode.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: Klixxer
"i think there needs to be limits to freedom" - GW Bush

its called responsibility.

WTF does Bush know about responsibility?? Anytime his actions are questioned, he launches the R.A.M. into character-assassination mode.

same with all politicians. they dont want to accept responsibility for their actions, so they blame it on others and mobilize their attack armies.

i thought you knew that conjur.

 

[Edge3D]

I will discuss whatever Zephyr wants to discuss. I'm not going to cater to you guys who flame me and then expect some kind of attention.

Go find another "Bush-Boy" as you put it to argue with.

If I'm so silly, and you find me so ridiculous, then why reply? Just go to another thread.
It doesnt make any sense.

Too many liberal trolls. If you want to discuss the issues you sure arent providing the natural courtesy one would be expected to extend to expect ANY kind of semi-serious response.

I'll stick to speaking with people that has so far acted with decency. With the attitudes I've seen from many of you, I doubt you are "scholars" in any sense of the word.

Not only that. From reading your posts, you are grossly misinformed. But I'm not going to waste my time telling a bunch of online jerks WHY they are wrong.. just enjoy your ignorance in commentary such as "KTHXBYE" (a liberal favorite around here that I've seen more than once), and low blows regarding people of faith.

There are many of those raised in a poor family structure never learn how to be courteous and get results out of people.. just FYI, this is a small.. but potentially valuable lesson for you.

Continue spitting into the wind!

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: Klixxer
"i think there needs to be limits to freedom" - GW Bush

its called responsibility.

Limited freedom is called responsibility? Do you know in which context this was said?

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Edge3D
I hope you and your pals find true humor in mocking a serious and terrible situation such as the molestation scandals. All I will say, is that in public those words would most certainly not be held in high regard.. and you'd likely find yourself smashed into the bar REAL FAST.
Especially the Irish American pubs I frequent.

You are lucky that most conservatives are in a way, more "liberal" and accepting than you guys are, or alot of you would probably had been gone a long time ago from these forums.
It is the true revelation that "liberal" has turned into a dirty word.. because if you guys represent "liberalism" its a horrible thing and truly a hate-filled evil in the world.
No joke there.

None of us care that you guys march around in our cities with communist-front groups like ANSWER.. from what I've seen of you guys.. jobs and a shower wouldnt hurt immensely.

Nice of you to refrain from personal insults and slurs when none were directed your way by me.

And, I grew up Catholic. Went to Catholic school for 12 years. One of the priests at the church is one of the ones accused of molesting boys, no, not me. So, don't cop your holier-than-thou attitude. I call hypocrisy where I see it and the Catholic Church is full of it. So are you.

I grew up Catholic too and went to Catholic schools through college, and even though I'm no longer Catholic and diagree with the church doctrinally, I would never be so absurd as to blame the whole Catholic institution.

 

[Edge3D]

Well, a little bit of what comes around goes around. I was only really speaking from my heart.. I really wasnt "attacking" anyone per se.

You do not think many of the marches organized by ANSWER do not have some very unclean people within them??
Is that REALLY disingenuous? No, its not. In fact, to not recognize that is just an outright lie!

A lot different than the low blows about that Reverend and the POW abuse scandals.. which of course, have NO correlation.

Whatever. You guys see only what you will.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Edge3D
I will discuss whatever Zephyr wants to discuss. I'm not going to cater to you guys who flame me and then expect some kind of attention.

Go find another "Bush-Boy" as you put it to argue with.

If I'm so silly, and you find me so ridiculous, then why reply? Just go to another thread.
It doesnt make any sense.

Too many liberal trolls. If you want to discuss the issues you sure arent providing the natural courtesy one would be expected to extend to expect ANY kind of semi-serious response.

I'll stick to speaking with people that has so far acted with decency. With the attitudes I've seen from many of you, I doubt you are "scholars" in any sense of the word.

Not only that. From reading your posts, you are grossly misinformed. But I'm not going to waste my time telling a bunch of online jerks WHY they are wrong.. just enjoy your ignorance in commentary such as "KTHXBYE" (a liberal favorite around here that I've seen more than once), and low blows regarding people of faith.

There are many of those raised in a poor family structure never learn how to be courteous and get results out of people.. just FYI, this is a small.. but potentially valuable lesson for you.

Continue spitting into the wind!

You could try to answer Bowfingers post, or was that too insulting too?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Edge3D
[ ... ]
Not only that. From reading your posts, you are grossly misinformed. But I'm not going to waste my time telling a bunch of online jerks WHY they are wrong...

LOL! In other words, "I just got owned and I've run out of diversions."

 

[Edge3D]

What part of this dont you understand klixxer?

I will discuss whatever Zephyr wants to discuss. I'm not going to cater to you guys who flame me and then expect some kind of attention

edit- "Owned"?? How old are you bowfinger? I'd expect that more in a game of UT2004.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: Klixxer
"i think there needs to be limits to freedom" - GW Bush

its called responsibility.

WTF does Bush know about responsibility?? Anytime his actions are questioned, he launches the R.A.M. into character-assassination mode.

same with all politicians. they dont want to accept responsibility for their actions, so they blame it on others and mobilize their attack armies.

i thought you knew that conjur.

Oh, I know that. You apparently needed to be reminded.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Edge3D
What part of this dont you understand klixxer?

I will discuss whatever Zephyr wants to discuss. I'm not going to cater to you guys who flame me and then expect some kind of attention

Waaah....waaah....I'm a wittle baby.


waaaaah


STFU, you whiny little b!tch.