Platapus um where are you coming from, um have some proof do something besides "conjecture" what you think I mean and get back to me. Oh ya and point me to the post where Gbaji, Stok, or you said that we should have never gone to war with Iraq and should have instead concentrated on real threats.
Didnt think so, you provide no support, kowtow to the right, and try and discredit me?
Lol have a cracker Polly.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Well, it sure took, a lot of left wing lies, but we did it..
Well, it sure took, a lot of left wing lies, but we did it..Follow
Quote:
Oh ya and point me to the post where Gbaji, Stok, or you said that we should have never gone to war with Iraq and should have instead concentrated on real threats.
You're correct none of us ever said that. Iraq was a real threat and the regime that was the threat no longer exists (oh waitis this conjecture as well?). The other nations are being talked to through diplomatic measures, I'm too busy right now to post links that state the obvious.
Granted Bill is an opinionated conservative that people love to hate, but here is a national media celebrity who states the side of the discussion that I'm for.
Edited, Wed Jun 16 10:32:59 2004 by Platanum
Quote:
No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
By Bill O'Reilly
I bet that some time in your life, you've done a favor for somebody and suffered because of it. Well, that's what's happening to the USA right now. We did a favor for the world by removing a brutal dictator and giving millions of people a chance for freedom in Iraq (search). And now we're paying a huge price.
Take a look at these Iraqi morons, celebrating the murders of 13 people, an American, eight Iraqis and four others. A terrorist bomb killed those poor souls. And the disgusting people you are looking at in Baghdad think it's just great.
Now, that kind of image is tough to take, because even though I believe most Iraqis are decent people, there are far too many bad Iraqis. And America's losing fine soldiers trying to bring freedom to that country.
There's no question that we are the good guys in Iraq, just as we were in South Vietnam, Korea, and during World War II. All of those conflicts were fought to keep people free. But many ignorant people think we're the bad guys.
The truth is that waging aggressive war against terrorism is a must. We have to do it. Maybe Iraq is the wrong battlefield, but our intentions there are honorable.
Saddam was a terrorist and a mass murderer. There's no question about that. While the Bush administration was embarrassingly wrong about WMDs, and that hurt the moral clarity of the war, captured Iraqi documents are now proving that Saddam did indeed have ties to Al Qaeda and bin Laden.
Just today, the war criminal Abu al-Zarqawi, an Al Qaeda leader, claimed responsibility for killing the 13 human beings you saw when they died yesterday in Iraq. Zarqawi fled to Iraq after he was wounded in Afghanistan and was given safe harbor and medical treatment by Saddam.
So somebody alert Al Gore to that connection. The perception that America is somehow the villain in Iraq comes from America's enemies abroad, and that includes France, and from anti-Bush partisans here in the USA. Certainly Abu Ghraib was horrendous, but those soldiers don't represent this country. They committed crimes and they'll pay for those crimes.
And any government official or military brass that aided those crimes should also be punished.
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
By Bill O'Reilly
I bet that some time in your life, you've done a favor for somebody and suffered because of it. Well, that's what's happening to the USA right now. We did a favor for the world by removing a brutal dictator and giving millions of people a chance for freedom in Iraq (search). And now we're paying a huge price.
Take a look at these Iraqi morons, celebrating the murders of 13 people, an American, eight Iraqis and four others. A terrorist bomb killed those poor souls. And the disgusting people you are looking at in Baghdad think it's just great.
Now, that kind of image is tough to take, because even though I believe most Iraqis are decent people, there are far too many bad Iraqis. And America's losing fine soldiers trying to bring freedom to that country.
There's no question that we are the good guys in Iraq, just as we were in South Vietnam, Korea, and during World War II. All of those conflicts were fought to keep people free. But many ignorant people think we're the bad guys.
The truth is that waging aggressive war against terrorism is a must. We have to do it. Maybe Iraq is the wrong battlefield, but our intentions there are honorable.
Saddam was a terrorist and a mass murderer. There's no question about that. While the Bush administration was embarrassingly wrong about WMDs, and that hurt the moral clarity of the war, captured Iraqi documents are now proving that Saddam did indeed have ties to Al Qaeda and bin Laden.
Just today, the war criminal Abu al-Zarqawi, an Al Qaeda leader, claimed responsibility for killing the 13 human beings you saw when they died yesterday in Iraq. Zarqawi fled to Iraq after he was wounded in Afghanistan and was given safe harbor and medical treatment by Saddam.
So somebody alert Al Gore to that connection. The perception that America is somehow the villain in Iraq comes from America's enemies abroad, and that includes France, and from anti-Bush partisans here in the USA. Certainly Abu Ghraib was horrendous, but those soldiers don't represent this country. They committed crimes and they'll pay for those crimes.
And any government official or military brass that aided those crimes should also be punished.
Edited, Wed Jun 16 10:32:59 2004 by Platanum
Will y'all ever shut the fu[i][/i]ck up? War sucks. People die. Wha! Go cry your river somewhere else.
And life sucks, people die everyday from self inflicted stupidity to incurable diseases like cancer. But making life easier and free for people half a world away and dying for that cause is honorable and deserves respect. It is the liberal folks that don't grasp the concept of sacrifice that makes this issue a hot issue and politicizing it over facts that when all is said and done meant squat when the final decision was made by a full house of congress and a coalition of other nations.
Ever think that people need to live their own lives? Ever think that we're not the superpower we claim to be? Ever think they've existed for thousands of years because their systems works?
Oh, and it's not "the liberal folks that don't grasp the concept of sacrifice." I'm liberal and I quite understand the concept of sacrifice. Kinda fits right in with the concept of COMPROMISE. Whish is something "the conservative folks" don't understand.
Oh, and it's not "the liberal folks that don't grasp the concept of sacrifice." I'm liberal and I quite understand the concept of sacrifice. Kinda fits right in with the concept of COMPROMISE. Whish is something "the conservative folks" don't understand.
Hey, don't look at me, Smash-- you're the one scoffing at reports that Saddam was involved with terrorists. You've been asking us Right Wingers to give evidence Iraq had ties to terrorism and I gave it. Abu Nidal was directly responsible for a number of attacks around the world, he was found in a suburb north of Baghdad, and Saddam never turned him in for his crimes. By extention, it is logical to assume that because of those links Saddam had further ties to other terrorist groups-- unless you just think they had BBQs on the weekends and played golf, being close personal friends and all.
Totem
Totem
"This, of course, highlights the entire issue. The Dems have essentially been running a strawman argument the whole time.
The administration says that "Iraq is linked to terror".
Democrats reply that "there's no link between Saddam and Al-queda and 9/11".
Reps are then pressured by media to "prove a link between Saddam and Bin Laden".
Um... The original statement was a connection between Iraq and "terror" (specifically terrorist groups)." --Gbaji
That's because as you and I know, G., that when it comes to proof, the liberals require absolute, 100%, no conflicting evidence, unequivocal data-- unless it relates to Republicans. Then the wildest rumor is more than sufficient to convict them.
/rolleyes
Totem
The administration says that "Iraq is linked to terror".
Democrats reply that "there's no link between Saddam and Al-queda and 9/11".
Reps are then pressured by media to "prove a link between Saddam and Bin Laden".
Um... The original statement was a connection between Iraq and "terror" (specifically terrorist groups)." --Gbaji
That's because as you and I know, G., that when it comes to proof, the liberals require absolute, 100%, no conflicting evidence, unequivocal data-- unless it relates to Republicans. Then the wildest rumor is more than sufficient to convict them.
/rolleyes
Totem
Quote:
Hey, don't look at me, Smash-- you're the one scoffing at reports that Saddam was involved with terrorists. You've been asking us Right Wingers to give evidence Iraq had ties to terrorism and I gave it.
Show me where I asked you to give evidence about Iraq and any other terrorist group than Al Queda.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Quote:
Ever think that people need to live their own lives?
Quote:
Ever think that we're not the superpower we claim to be?
"Each nation, even the United States, the sole superpower with its economic, financial, military and technological dominance, is also interconnected with and interdependent on others."
Sole Superpower
Then there was no doubt.
Quote:
Ever think they've existed for thousands of years because their systems works?
The tyranical regime of Sadam Hussein that was in control did not exist for thousands of years. The Bible has existed for thousands of years yet it is the Liberals that state that the bible is an old outdated book whose time has past.
Quote:
Each nation, even the United States, the sole superpower with its economic, financial, military and technological dominance, is also interconnected with and interdependent on others
Yeah, I'll remind the PRC of that next time we offer our asses up to them by giving them MVN trade status and massive imballance of trade and currency markets.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Platapus, like how does that Bill O'Reilly quote support your position or disprove anything that I have offered, scientists, generals, politicians. There is only one half assed mention of Saddam and terrorism in the whole thing.
Dunno, Totem have **** Cheney on the record saying Saddam wasnt involved, but be that neither here nor there on a threat matrix to our future well being would you honestly before our invasion put them above 8th. I mean you have one guy who was in a suburb, how many criminals do you think hide out in the US under different names unknown to the government. To say Saddam knew about this 1 guy in a population of what 30 million is a bit of a stretch.
The truth is that this whole thing has been a mistake and we are now less safe then we were and squandered away American lives and money by attacking the wrong target.
Dunno, Totem have **** Cheney on the record saying Saddam wasnt involved, but be that neither here nor there on a threat matrix to our future well being would you honestly before our invasion put them above 8th. I mean you have one guy who was in a suburb, how many criminals do you think hide out in the US under different names unknown to the government. To say Saddam knew about this 1 guy in a population of what 30 million is a bit of a stretch.
The truth is that this whole thing has been a mistake and we are now less safe then we were and squandered away American lives and money by attacking the wrong target.
flishtaco wrote:
The truth is that this whole thing has been a mistake and we are now less safe then we were and squandered away American lives and money by attacking the wrong target.
Wait a minute!!!
Smash. Care to comment on this statement? After all, you're the one who said that "safe" meant "fewer attacks" back when you argued that we were safer under Clintons administration the Bush's.
So. Are we safer from terrorism today then we were in 2001? Or not? I'm ready to slam you with your own words depending on how you reply to this one...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Have a great night flishtaco. You have effectively demolished any arguements you had, by your childish name calling and antics. My time is not worth trying to have a debate with you regarding this topic.
No, Smash, not in this thread, but in others like it in the past you have pointedly said Iraq had no credible ties to terrorists, only innuendo and hearsay. I am just pointing out that Iraq had terrorist connections to give proof positive in contradiction of your previously stated position.
And flsihtaco, don't think for a minute that in Saddam's police state Adu Nidal was an anonymous figure who happened to slip in country unnoticed. He was an Iraqi sanctioned refugee from the international community hiding out from prosecution.
Totem
And flsihtaco, don't think for a minute that in Saddam's police state Adu Nidal was an anonymous figure who happened to slip in country unnoticed. He was an Iraqi sanctioned refugee from the international community hiding out from prosecution.
Totem
Quote:
No, Smash, not in this thread, but in others like it in the past you have pointedly said Iraq had no credible ties to terrorists, only innuendo and hearsay. I am just pointing out that Iraq had terrorist connections to give proof positive in contradiction of your previously stated position.
I'd imagine I probably said "relative to Saudi Arabia" or something simmilar.
Pull the quote please.
Quote:
Wait a minute!!!
Smash. Care to comment on this statement? After all, you're the one who said that "safe" meant "fewer attacks" back when you argued that we were safer under Clintons administration the Bush's.
So. Are we safer from terrorism today then we were in 2001? Or not? I'm ready to slam you with your own words depending on how you reply to this one...
"In 2001" is kind of vague. More American's have died since 911 because of terrorist attacks, although none in the US. I'd argue that we, meaning people currently residing in the US, are safer by virtue of us providing easier targets abroad.
Your question isn't terribly clear. I'd like to answer it honestly, but it if it's a mechanical device where you define what the terms mean after I answer, no thanks.
Be more specefic please.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Recent Visitors: 244
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (244)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Well, it sure took, a lot of left wing lies, but we did it..
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC