christian right and Bush; cozy bed fellows

[operative x]

I agree, you have been trying to get into iraq since 91

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :cheers:

saddam was never a threat, although that particular lie is the reason why you went

Saddam was a threat, he killed his own people (and if you say that’s not the US’s problem, don’t make threads saying “Bush ignores Sudan's genocide” Because, after all, according to your logic that’s not the US’s problem.), he invaded other countries, and in fact he did use Bio/Chem weapons in the past. That's a threat.

you didnt seem to care when he was at his worst, in fact you shielded him on nurmerous occasions

We've fought him since 91, you can't expect one nation to do all the fighting, wheres Canada, and the UK in all this mess? Blaming it on the US is completely unfair.

yes no thanks to the US ..hear read these de-classified documents ..it details the lengths the US went to help iraq fight the war including arming BOTH sides with WMD

Theres no denying that was a mistake, and now where fixing it. That situation proves that, if given the chance, Saddam won't hesitate to use WMD's. I don't know about you, but i don't wan't to wait for him to get the chance.

 

[baxter]

We've fought him since 91, you can't expect one nation to do all the fighting, wheres Canada, and the UK in all this mess? Blaming it on the US is completely unfair.

Fought him? Try scapegoating him.
He was a dictator, tyrant, bully and a nasty so and so.
He was not a threat to world peace, did not have WMD, and did not harbour terrorists.
Who paid the price for your ever so popular presidents desisions?

 

[operative x]

It is easy to attack Bush because he is wrong. Despite what you might think America doen’t actually rule the world and there are other countries on this planet.

Well, it would be nice if they bothered to help, rather than criticize the only nation doing something about it.

As for the deep philosophical argument that my children won’t have to worry about Saddam, did you?

I'd replay on that, if it only made any sense.

As for your , again deep and philosophical believes that that people simply parrot other peoples believes about your government, I’m sorry I thought it was a basic human right to believe what you wanted.

I don't think you know what parroting means, it's when you listen to what the people around you say, and you just repeat what they said to other people, without having your own opinion. I'm fine with people having their own opinion.

Your president of action has achieved nothing by his declaration of the “war on terror”

If that were true, Saddam would still be in power torturing his people, obviously this tyrant is gone.

The terrorists will continue to come and his war will not stop them.

And we should be blamed for their killing? Why don't you blame the people who actually strap on a bomb and run into a crowd.

There is actually a world outside the US. Clinton saw this and did something about it,

I agree, he bombed the shit out of Kosovo.

 

[CptStern]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :cheers:



Saddam was a threat, he killed his own people (and if you say that’s not the US’s problem, don’t make threads saying “Bush ignores Sudan's genocide” Because, after all, according to your logic that’s not the US’s problem.), he invaded other countries, and in fact he did use Bio/Chem weapons in the past. That's a threat.

you're missing the point. saddam has been killing his own people for over 30 years, much of those as an ally to the US ..what's different now? and if you're going to say he was a threat to the US, the facts just dont agree with you

We've fought him since 91, you can't expect one nation to do all the fighting, wheres Canada, and the UK in all this mess? Blaming it on the US is completely unfair.

? canada and the UK were both part of the coalition that fought in 91

Theres no denying that was a mistake, and now where fixing it.

fixing what? what mistake? what revisionist history are you referring to? the only mistake here is that the US invaded iraq based on lies

That situation proves that, if given the chance, Saddam won't hesitate to use WMD's.

I don't know about you, but i don't wan't to wait for him to get the chance.

....sigh look there's a hundred threads in this very forum that completely proves you wrong ..I'm too tired to rehash the endless reams of articles, declassied documents, sworn statements, cross referenced, cross checked, names, dates, figures and what not. Have a browse, do some reading, research it yourself, knowledge is power, power is knowledge and all that jazz

 

[gh0st]

you're missing the point. saddam has been killing his own people for over 30 years, much of those as an ally to the US ..what's different now? and if you're going to say he was a threat to the US, the facts just dont agree with you

Where do you get this bullshit theory that we have to maintain the same diplomatic ties throughout the course of ones life? We didnt use to be allied with Britain either, is it wrong that now we are? Russia killed about 20 million people under stalin, should we not be allied with them?

 

[baxter]

Well, it would be nice if they bothered to help, rather than critic the only nation doing something

Doing what precisely? Getting bogged down in an foreign country, patrolling streets and having the odd suicide bomber drive at you now and again

I'd replay on that, if it only made any sense

Of course it doesn’t make sense, how could it? The fact that you fall back on the oldest trick in the book to justify an unjustifiable war. Ever heard of the war that was meant to end all wars … it was the First World War.

I don't think you know what parroting means, it's when you listen to what the people around you say, and you just repeat what they said to other people, with having your own opinion. I'm fine with people having their own opinion

No argument here

If that were true, Saddam would still be in power torturing his people, obviously this tyrant is gone

And the sole purpose of invading Iraq was to stop this; sorry I thought it was an issue over WMD.

And we should be blamed for their killing? Why don't you blame the people who actually strap on a bomb and run into a crowd?

I blame the politicians who rather than address the issues resort to military might to resolve it.

If you really believe that invading Iraq and over throwing Saddum has had any effect on global terrorism then fine, you are welcome to your opinion.
In my opinion it has not.

 

[CptStern]

Where do you get this bullshit theory that we have to maintain the same diplomatic ties throughout the course of ones life? We didnt use to be allied with Britain either, is it wrong that now we are? Russia killed about 20 million people under stalin, should we not be allied with them?

nothing short of a factual kick to the head would convince you of the truth ....and here it is . read it, ALL OF IT (I have), get back to me when you're done

 

[gh0st]

nothing short of a factual kick to the head would convince you of the truth ....and here it is . read it, ALL OF IT (I have), get back to me when you're done

Too long. Post bullets next time, I'm not going to read through a big ass thing. I read the summary, but why cant we support them against what, at the time, was a greater threat? This has happened thousands of times in history. Yes we gave him weapons, in accordance with Trumans containment policy. Yes our corporations made illegal deals with them, were charged, and summarily convicted. We were at war with Canada once, good thing we arent now, It would pain me to roll over you.

 

[Sparta]

It would pain me to roll over you.

Suuuuuuuuure it would

 

[Cole]

Before we start saying that "Bush didn't do anything good" or anything like that by taking out sadam..well in truth it kind of did.

Libya a TERROIST country has it's dictator a little nicer as he knows Bush dun just sit on his ass and let things happen.

Now lets go look twords the future of Iraq. What if Iraq become an amazing democracy that fit them, and brought its economy up and other nations around it began to "look up to it" other countries citizens seeing what Iraq become and how much better it was. Don't you the citizens that would rather have something that Iraq has may try and overthrow the goverment?

Yes america does want to spread democracy. Infact we already did through europe. The democracy may not be excatly how it here is in the states, but one democracy does not suit all.
America wants to spread democracy, maybe not exactly like ours but a way that fits there culture and a way that there people want it to be.

Where do you get this bullshit theory that we have to maintain the same diplomatic ties throughout the course of ones life? We didnt use to be allied with Britain either, is it wrong that now we are?

Actually many countries keep there ties to there "conquerers". In South Africa for instance, France had conquered many countries down there. Alot of those countries today are great "friends" with france.

If you really believe that invading Iraq and over throwing Saddum has had any effect on global terrorism then fine

Saddam harbored terroists. So what you may think? Lets see..terroist gets into Iraq..well guess what we can't really pursue them because Saddam says, "No American Army Men in me country!! Me love Terroism!"
Thus we lost a terroist a person who wanted to attack our goverment.
He would also give money to terroists and terroists that died he would give money to there families.

 

[gh0st]

Actually many countries keep there ties to there "conquerers". In South Africa for instance, France had conquered many countries down there. Alot of those countries today are great "friends" with france.

Yeah but we never conquered Iraq up til a few years ago.

 

[baxter]

Yeah but we never conquered Iraq up til a few years ago.

Are you for real mate?

Conquered? Is that how you see it?

 

[gh0st]

Are you for real mate?

Conquered? Is that how you see it?

No. Its called reality.

v. con·quered, con·quer·ing, con·quers
v. tr.
To defeat or subdue by force, especially by force of arms.
To gain or secure control of by or as if by force of arms

 

[baxter]

I know the definition of conquered.

Hence the reason I am so appalled by your off hand brandishing of the word.
I am too drunk to argue right now but if you really think, that as a US citizen, your purpose is to conquer, you should maybe reflect on 20th century history

 

[gh0st]

I know the definition of conquered.

Hence the reason I am so appalled by your off hand brandishing of the word.
I am too drunk to argue right now but if you really think, that as a US citizen, your purpose is to conquer, you should maybe reflect on 20th century history

And thank you for that. :upstare: Tragically, if you knew the definition of conquered you wouldnt be so appalled.

 

[Foxtrot]

And thank you for that. :upstare: Tragically, if you knew the definition of conquered you wouldnt be so appalled.

He also wouldn't be so drunk

 

[kmack]

Too long. Post bullets next time, I'm not going to read through a big ass thing.

 

[gh0st]

This piece of refuse brought to you by kmack, dispenser of horse shit.

 

[kmack]

This piece of refuse brought to you by kmack, dispenser of horse shit.

im surprised you took the time to read it

Too long. Post bullets next time, I'm not going to read through a big ass thing. I read the summary, but why cant we support them against what, at the time, was a greater threat? This has happened thousands of times in history. Yes we gave him weapons, in accordance with Trumans containment policy. Yes our corporations made illegal deals with them, were charged, and summarily convicted. We were at war with Canada once, good thing we arent now, It would pain me to roll over you.

 

[bliink]

Get back to real discussion, please, or the thread "gets it".

Ghost, if you don't want to read what people are saying, I suggest you refrain from responding to their posts; I can't see how someone can continue an argument if they're not even listening to the person they're arguing with.

 

[Tr0n]

*chants*
Close it close it close it close it close it.

 

[baxter]

*chants*
Close it close it close it close it close it.

seconded

 

[bliink]

Doesn't look like theres much point continuing it I guess.

Closed