Where did they come from? Do you just believe them out of hand, because they fit your dogma?Did you read anything else I wrote? Even if they're all true (and I'd wager most of not all are nonsense, unless you can substantiate them), the invasion of Iraq was wrong. It was not in our country's best interests. That's true even if the war were executed competently -- which it wasn't.Mow we have thousands of dead Americans, and many more seriously injured ones, and an eventual bill of probably 2 TRILLION dollars, *** and *** a civil war in Iraq, with Iran in the ascendency. and for what?For what?We were told a series of pathetic lies to whip us up so we'd go to war. 3000 soldiers died for a set of lies. And now our president wants to send thousands more into harms way. Is he stupid or crazy? It doesn't matter. He just needs to be stopped. It looks like the Congress is finally developing a backbone.You, my friend, are now on the fringe. Justify it all you want; it was a huge mistake that will pay painful dividends for years to come.
-
Hussein Execution
-
Hang bush too!If there were any justice, Hussein and Bush would have been locked in a room, and they could have slapped each other to death.I'd gladly trade Bush's life for the life of any one of the thousands of soldiers he sent to their deaths -- for a fraudulent mistake.
-
I saw him on the video... he looked really scared right before they hung him. I feel bad he had to die like that I thought that was abolished for obvious reasons.oh wait... wrong country
-
Damien, you still don't seem to grasp the idea of "proving the negative" I discussed above in this thread. You listed a bunch of claims, but gave no sources (for the most part) or reasoning as to why they should be believed. Do you understand what the word "substantiated" means?I claim that Elvis Presley was God and has come back and spoken to me. Prove me wrong.
-
What's so strange? You thought everything would be peaceful if he went away?
-
Wait a second. There were terrorists from Saudi Arabia, who trained in Afghanistan, who took down some American buildings, and killed 3000 people. Under Saddam in Iraq, there was a dictatorship that exercised terror over its citizens, but no terrorism from that country in the West (plus or minus an assassination attempt on W.'s father).
Now the U.S. has removed Saddam, and there's a civil war going on, and 3000 Iraqi civilians are dying every month. In the middle of that mess, real terrorists are getting real-life experience in a war zone.
The U.S. is keeping the civil war in Iraq at a low boil, which will continue as long as the U.S. is there. So far 3000 U.S. soldiers have died.
\> terrorism in Iraq is still going on
What do you mean by "terrorism"? It's a guerrilla war. The U.S. went there to fight, and they're getting pushed back mostly by Iraqi militia. -
Hopefully the American public has learned something and will remember it when filled with blind flag waving patriotism in the future. OldFolks I guarantee you that this will not and will never be the case. It is truly a tragedy, but this kind of learning never seems to happen. I'm kind of an old folk too, and have lost any illusion about the manipulability of the American public, not to mention their ahistoricism. Simply put: One thing the Iraq war shows is that all the lessons of Vietnam have been lost. We may ulitmately end up with an "Iraqi syndrome," like the "Vietnam syndrome." And it might last for a few years or decades. But then, surely more right wing ass holes will come along, and we'll do this all over again.
-
Originally Posted By: Steve_ADamien, you still don't seem to grasp the idea of "proving the negative" I discussed above in this thread. You listed a bunch of claims, but gave no sources (for the most part) or reasoning as to why they should be believed. Do you understand what the word "substantiated" means?I claim that Elvis Presley was God and has come back and spoken to me. Prove me wrong. ***Excuse the lateness of this reply. Haven't been here for a while.***Steve - what the fuck do you know about what I grasp and what I don't. I understand very well the concept of "proving the negative" and, as usual, I could care less most of the time what you discuss in this or other threads. Frankly, I am tired of you and your shit. You accuse me of being on the fringe and adhering to dogma...I swear Steve, if you believe 2+2=789, than no research/proof/refutation that anyone on this board could offer up would make you believe different. So why the hell would I bother. You are arrogant, smug, harsh, relentless, and about 95% of the reason I haven't been coming here as of late.If I really felt like you cared about whatever documentation I could offer up to back up my claims, I would certainly take the effort to get it to you. Unfortunately, like too many people, you seem to be more interested in arguing and being right and making people look inferior than you are in learning anything outside your dogma.Carry on...
-
You need to separate your opinion of me from the idea of making a logical case for your position. I'm sorry, but just saying that Iraq had WMDs is not good enough, especially when the politicians who would benefit from our believing that Saddam had WMDs (like the president) don't support that claim now.You want me to prove that Iraq had no WMDs, and I can't do that any more than I can prove that there isn't an Indian tribe living or Mars, or that Elvis Presley wasn't God. It would be interesting if someone had good evidence to the contrary, though.It appears that the reason you won't put up anything reasonable to support your case is that no such thing exists (or surely Dick Cheney would be all over it). The only thing I've heard of in support of the the idea is the observations of some pilots who saw trucks moving toward the Syrian border before the war started. It's more likely that they were filled with American currency than nukes or nerve gas, according to what the U.N. weapons inspectors found. Keep in mind that the U.N. weapons inspectors were in place in Iraq at the time of the invasion, and had to evacuate before bombing commenced. By the way, they were given access to wherever they wanted to go.There's no law that says that you need to convince me of anything, but understand that I'm not the only person reading this thread. Whether you like me or not, 1+1=2, not 3.In conclusion, if you make a seemingly outrageous statement, you need something beyond your saying it's so in order not to sound like a kook.--------------------------------If you think that the war is a worthy endeavor, and you you have no family obligations, why don't you sign up for the reserves? The military seems not to be able to recruit enough people, and they've raised the cutoff age. Perhaps you should read the National Intelligence Estimate first, the one that came out last week, explaining how the situation in Iraq is like a civil war, but worse. You shouldn't just take Dick Cheney's word for how things are going.
-
Originally Posted By: Steve_AIt appears that the reason you won't put up anything reasonable to support your case is that no such thing exists Let me say this for you one more time Steve. Apparently you're not catching on.The reason I won't put up anything for you is that it's pointless. I'm tired of arguing with you...over anything. It's pointless. You believe what you want to believe. And you continue to smokescreen with your stellar vocabulary and relentless, badgering arguing. But in the end it's pointless. You are never wrong. I've never seen it. So why bother?...and I hope my harshness and name-calling (I'll admit it) didn't in the sligtest dampen your fine Superbowl weekend.
-
Well I'm pretty much open to any evidence/proof. Could you post some stuff for me? Thor once mention evidence of WMDs being transported out of the country but the only evidence he provided was his own account of watching a report on the news that only played once.
-
I keep trying to tell him that I'm not the only one who reads this stuff, but he won't listen to me. He's apparently too busy disliking me to get it.I did see a list of unsubstantiated claims, some of which I researched further (the ones I could actually find anything on). Some were from very questionable sources, some had some merit, but all together, it didn't add up to very much. To have invaded Iraq over it is beyond absurd, if it were true. To have executed the war in the incompetent manner that the people Damien voted for did is way, way beyond absurd.I suspect that if there was anything worthwhile in his argument, we would have heard about it by now. Bush and Cheney are not limited by the "liberal media". Or maybe the intelligence agencies have gone lefty.I still don't understand why anyone who's young and supports the war, but has no family obligations, hasn't volunteered to go fight. I just don't get it. I guess they're just taking a page from the draft-dodging book of Bush and Cheney.
-
Because I'd make a lousy f*ing soldier, that's why. I know where I'm needed and that's where I am.
I also support the efforts to find a cure for AIDS. Does that mean I'm a hypocrite for not putting on a lab coat?
And what the hell do you know about my family and my family obligations? Not a damned thing. So please don't make the false assumption that I have none. That is incredibly presumptive and pisses me off cause you are clueless to the things that are happening in my family right now and the reasons I packed up and moved down here with them. -
Why do you keep on trying, Damien?
Doesn't seem to look like anyone is getting it.
-
Cause I was a little pissed off.
Good point, though.