Actual chemical weapons found in Iraq!!!

[waedoe]

it's this last sentance of your post gh0st. it's pretty evident what you're saying: the liberal mindset (like mine) excuses (see "without ramifications") the use of weapons that we gave iraq. if you didn't mean it, perhaps you should be more careful with your words.


waedoe, why do you assume that i think that? plz point to where i ever implied that.

im thinking that because you keep on railing on people for selling the mortars and shit to saddam, im getting the impression that its our fault for what he did wit them.

 

[GhostValkyrie]

once again you didnt answer the question timmy.

They're really good about doing that, aren't they?

 

[gh0st]

yeah over the past couple of posts he's just been avoiding them all together, i wonder what will happen when he decides to excuse saddam for using technology that we gave him against his own citizens, and shouldent be held accountable, or maybe when he starts to actually read my posts and give a half-assed response besides the liberal rhetoric that is constantly shoved down our throats.

 

[waedoe]

I'd like to use this moment to christen what will go down as an offensive signature.
/me points to his new sig.

Gr8 pics

 

[waedoe]

the left is strong with timmy.

 

[waedoe]

hahahah john i got ahead of u in posts <sorry for spam

 

[gh0st]

hey i just noticed something! where there is left there is also the stench of their own asses being handed to them.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

once again you didnt answer the question timmy.

what question are you harping about? whether it's excuseable to let countries run amok with the tech we've given them?? of course not. gee, i assumed it was a rhetorical question. we shouldn't have let saddam run amok with our technology when he actually was running amok with it (gasing iranians/kurds/whoever). attacking him now for his past atrocities that we (reagan/bush/clinton) were fully aware of and infact supported (both politically and finacially) seems a tad hypocritical to me. the hypocrisy of the US government is an important thing to recognize, b/c it's an important aspect of the hatred aimed at the US. the hatred that creates terrorism, the hatred i'm interested in reducing b/c i don't want to see another 9/11.

happy?

edit: some spelling

 

[Lil' Timmy]

im thinking that because you keep on railing on people for selling the mortars and shit to saddam, im getting the impression that its our fault for what he did wit them.

well, i'm sorry you get that impression. again, you seem to be overly preoccupied with notions of fault and guilt. it's about knowledge, not guilt.

 

[waedoe]

what question are you harping about? whether it's excuseable to let countries run amok with the tech we've given them?? of course not. gee, i assumed it was a rhetorical question. we shouldn't have let saddam run amok with our technology when he actually was running amok with it (gasing iranians/kurds/whoever). attacking him now for his past atrocities that we (reagan/bush/clinton) were fully aware of and infact supported (both politically and finacially) seems a tad hypocritical to me. the hypocrisy of the US government is an important thing to recognize, b/c it's an important aspect of the hatred aimed at the US. the hated that creates terrorism, the hated i'm interested in reducing b/c i don't want to see another 9/11.

happy?

timmy lets go to roots rather than the branches of the problem, its the UN..... it started when we ousted palestine, u know it i know it, we all know it. Thats when the UN went down hill. ever since them the middle east has been extremely unstable, leading to todays probs. Now the UN wont do shit about the middle eastern problems. sitting idle hasnt helped ne one. it only helps the oppreser.

 

[waedoe]

well, i'm sorry you get that impression. again, you seem to be overly preoccupied with notions of fault and guilt. it's about knowledge, not guilt.

more philosopical idealistic crap. its really simple, KILLING PEOPLE IS WRONG. saddam used our technology to kill innocent people. WE DIDNT SAY HERE SADDAM GO GAS SOME KURDS. no we never said that. its sad your so parinoid.

with out guilt there is no right and wrong

 

[gh0st]

ahh so it would have been right to attack him THEN but not now... that totally erases genocide. gosh times a good thing. and frankly, no u.s leader has ever supported the use of chemical weapons at least publically... i still wonder why you attribute past actions to now. this is a different man in charge, and in many ways a different country. the fact is, it was politically best for the united states to contribute weapons to iraq then. as i said before we arent friends with EVERYONE forever. also, why attribute these actions to bush? i think that the word "hated" (hatRED), should be replaced by ignorance. the thing is, this like your brother shooting someone and me hating you because of it. its totally ignorant, stupid, and wrong. much of the "hated" towards the united states is the result of moronic propoganda shoved down the citizens of these poorly run middle eastern nations. the oppressed dont WANT to be oppressed.

as for hypocrisy, i see none here. you think that were attacking him for past atrocities is horribly wrong. the reasons for the iraq war is because our administration had ample evidence that iraq had weapons of mass distruction, and now that we've found one theres no hypocrisy to be found.

 

[gh0st]

timmy lets go to roots rather than the branches of the problem, its the UN..... it started when we ousted palestine, u know it i know it, we all know it. Thats when the UN went down hill. ever since them the middle east has been extremely unstable, leading to todays probs. Now the UN wont do shit about the middle eastern problems. sitting idle hasnt helped ne one. it only helps the oppreser.

not to mention it falls squarely into our laps, as the nations global enforcer (whether we do it with un mandates or not)

 

[gh0st]

more philosopical idealistic crap. its really simple, KILLING PEOPLE IS WRONG. saddam used our technology to kill innocent people. WE DIDNT SAY HERE SADDAM GO GAS SOME KURDS. no we never said that. its sad your so parinoid.

with out guilt there is no right and wrong

he isnt paranoid, he is ignorant. apparently its ok for saddam to use the weapons we give him against others immorally.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

timmy lets go to roots rather than the branches of the problem, its the UN..... it started when we ousted palestine, u know it i know it, we all know it. Thats when the UN went down hill. ever since them the middle east has been extremely unstable, leading to todays probs. Now the UN wont do shit about the middle eastern problems. sitting idle hasnt helped ne one. it only helps the oppreser.

well, i'm not exactly sure what you mean about the UN ousting the palestinians. the british are the ones who setup a jewish nation-state when they withdrew from imperial occupation of palestine in the 1940s, right? admittedly i need to check my facts on this. personally, i have problems with the UN, sure, but no more so than I have problems with US foreign policy in the middle (among other regions).

 

[waedoe]

well, i'm not exactly sure what you mean about the UN ousting the palestinians. the british are the ones who setup a jewish nation-state when they withdrew from imperial occupation of palestine in the 1940s, right? admittedly i need to check my facts on this. personally, i have problems with the UN, sure, but no more so than I have problems with US foreign policy in the middle (among other regions).

yes but more nations had to reconise isreal as a state I.E. the UN reconised em thus creating the instablity.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

he isnt paranoid, he is ignorant. apparently its ok for saddam to use the weapons we give him against others immorally.

i've already disputed this felonious claim gh0st, grow up and get some real arguments plz.

 

[gh0st]

i do give you real arguments but you dont respond to them, despite the fact that many are worded better, contain more insightful and intellectual material and are generally less stupid. it seems that you are the one not presenting an argument.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

more philosopical idealistic crap. its really simple, KILLING PEOPLE IS WRONG. saddam used our technology to kill innocent people. WE DIDNT SAY HERE SADDAM GO GAS SOME KURDS. no we never said that. its sad your so parinoid.

with out guilt there is no right and wrong

the point is that we gave saddam the materials to create weapons. if you don't think that we didn't know that saddam would use our weapons to gas people.. well, i guess we'll just have to disagree on that point. i'd encourage you to read up on the various reports that came out after the iran-contra business (from whitehouse staff) about rumsfeld and reagan's policies with iraq.

where does paranoia come into it? ignoring the facts of the history is just that, pure ignorance. and ignorance is what is perpetuating this at a very basic level, that and poor judgment.

 

[waedoe]

i do give you real arguments but you dont respond to them, despite the fact that many are worded better, contain more insightful and intellectual material and are generally less stupid. it seems that you are the one not presenting an argument.

are you refering to me?

 

[Lil' Timmy]

are you refering to me?

no, he's talking to me.

 

[gh0st]

no im referring to timmahh.

 

[waedoe]

no, he's talking to me.

so timmy now that we have rambled on about this stuff. (i dont know exactly where it is going ne more) wtf do you want to happen in iraq? or what did you want to happen?

 

[gh0st]

edit: double post

 

[gh0st]

this has turned into a ginantic post. these bush debates really start a wildfire. too bad most people cant actually give an argument

 

[MultiVaC]

You three are really persistant. The arguement is just running in circles now. I don't think we can get much more out of this for a while, maybe give it a rest?

 

[gh0st]

i think thats what were trying to do, if timmy agrees too. waedoe and i cant let him get the last lick in

 

[Lil' Timmy]

"do" is more important than 'should have done' right now, imo. i think we need to do all we can to dispel the notion that we are trying impose hegemony over the region (the first step of which would be to actually NOT try to do that). we need to internationalize the economic and political rebuilding of iraq. ESPESCIALLY bringing in the UN, france and germany, as they actually have experience doing this. more of a focus need to be made on finding osama bin laden, and destroying this al qaeda network that apparently spans the globe. just a few things.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

You three are really persistant. The arguement is just running in circles now. I don't think we can get much more out of this for a while, maybe give it a rest?

yeah, "arguing" with a couple of 15 yr-olds (no offense guys) is kinda dumb, and clearly others gave up a long time ago, as i should have. simply, i'm bored.

 

[gh0st]

i point you to bosnia, a massive failure by the UN, whose inane triumverate have made virtually no progress. france and germany im not sure have nearly as much experiance as we do - since we virtually rebuild both of them, and japan, and afghanistan (who is improving notably esp over the past couple years).

 

[gh0st]

yeah, "arguing" with a couple of 15 yr-olds (no offense guys) is kinda dumb, and clearly others gave up a long time ago, as i should have. simply, i'm bored.

ok big 27 year old who cant spell "hatred". im afraid i did NOT know that 15 year olds were unable to have opinions.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

you can have all the opinions you want, i just should not waste my time arguing with you. that's all i meant, obviously. you should try to be a little less defensive and.. paranoid?..

 

[gh0st]

defensive maybe, not paranoid. good arguing with you im off to bed.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

goodnight.

 

[GhostValkyrie]

you can have all the opinions you want, i just should not waste my time arguing with you. that's all i meant, obviously. you should try to be a little less defensive and.. paranoid?..

And what do you think of those 15 year olds who agree with you?
Are their opinions invalid?

 

[Lil' Timmy]

And what do you think of those 15 year olds who agree with you?
Are their opinions invalid?

i never said anyone's opinion was invalid. agree with me or not, i value the opinions of more learned/experienced view points more.

 

[GhostValkyrie]

agree with me or not, i value the opinions of more learned/experienced view points more.

Are you sure about that?

 

[Lil' Timmy]

as sure as one can be.

 

[waedoe]

i never said anyone's opinion was invalid. agree with me or not, i value the opinions of more learned/experienced view points more.

so you dont take a lesser aged persons view point as seriously?

 

[GhostValkyrie]

I understand your stance, Timmy. I tend to value the opinions of those who are older, and more learned. But, I must admit that doing so can lead to over-looking some important insights. gh0st and waedoe have valid opinions, regardless of experience.