Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

And the "No ****, Sherlock" award goes to....Follow

QuoteReply
#27 Aug 24 2007 at 6:01 PM Rating: Decent
Debalic
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Baron von tarv wrote:
and while we are on the topic of the UN and it's methods, how many WMD where found after the UN inspection team said REPEATEDLY that there where none.

But there was always the risk that they might have been close to trying to acquire the means to possibly be able to build the equipment used to manufacture parts needed for potato-gun-launched smokebombs! There was no way we were ever going to let the idea of that even take seed in Saddam's mind!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#28 Aug 24 2007 at 6:17 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Baron von tarv wrote:
and while we are on the topic of the UN and it's methods, how many WMD where found after the UN inspection team said REPEATEDLY that there where none.


Hah. Missed that.

Sure. While we're on the topic, exactly how many WMDs did the US claim were in Iraq in the Joint Resolution Authorizing the use of US armed forces in Iraq?

Would that be "zero"? Why yes. It would. Strawman much?

However, while the UN inspectors never said that there were constructed, usable, WMDs in Iraq (much less how many), they *did* say that Iraq showed no sign of abandoning its WND programs, and appeared to be actively working to conceal any data or material related to WMDs that they could.

Which facts, not surprisingly, *do* appear in said joint resolution.


In related news, there's no evidence that Hitler ever invaded Zimbabwe... So WW2 was unjustified!!!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#29 Aug 24 2007 at 8:30 PM Rating: Default
__DEL__1607905031065
Scholar
**
403 posts
If Clinton wasn't such a *********** president for 8 years Sadam would have been ousted sooner. It's understandable though. Which would you rather do; get a ******* from an intern or stand up to a dictator that funds terrorists?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#30 Aug 24 2007 at 8:47 PM Rating: Good
Debalic
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
So general consensus is that the UN is completely useless and ineffectual and should just be disbanded?

US to UN: "You're doing it wrong."
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#31 Aug 24 2007 at 8:56 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1591906448492
**
788 posts
Quote:
3,706 US troops dead to figure out something we all knew 4 years ago.

What the news hasnt told you probably is the thousands of innocent men, women, and child civilians that have dies there too.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#32 Aug 25 2007 at 1:00 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1670199487804
Scholar
****
8,619 posts
Gbaji please please please don't tell me you are trying to say that the American administration didn't state on many occasions during the lead up to GW2 that the reason they where going in was because:

Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons, and diseases, and gases, and atomic weapons.

Not even you are stupid enough to try and backtrack on that one.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#33 Aug 25 2007 at 1:06 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1670199487804
Scholar
****
8,619 posts
Quote:
Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

lets just examine this a little shall we.

continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability

No Iraq in 2002 had no Chemical or Biological weapons, no way to produce them and no way to deliver them.

actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability

Since it had no way to obtain or produce weapons grade material they where about as activly seeking it as I am.

supporting and harboring terrorist organizations

There is no evidence nor has there ever been any evidence linking the Hussain regime with terrorism, they where secular and Saddam would not permit them to use iraqi soil as he considered them a rival not an Ally.



▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#34 Aug 25 2007 at 3:31 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1606090802605
View User Forum
Sage
*****
11,742 posts
We must stay the course! Smiley: rolleyes
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#35 Aug 25 2007 at 6:08 AM Rating: Good
bodhisattva
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Gbaji why do you have to use arguments that were disproven 2 years ago?

But but but he tried to buy yellow cake!
But but he was in contact with al-qaeda!

Why not claim that he was trying to buy sharks with frickin lasers on their heads? If you are going to make up **** that has been disproven you may as well be interested about it.
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#36 Aug 25 2007 at 8:13 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1606090802605
View User Forum
Sage
*****
11,742 posts
I believe every animal should have a warm meal.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#37 Aug 25 2007 at 9:32 AM Rating: Excellent
Smasharoo
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Gbaji why do you have to use arguments that were disproven 2 years ago?

Lack of options.

____________________________
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.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#38 Aug 27 2007 at 12:54 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Baron von tarv wrote:
Gbaji please please please don't tell me you are trying to say that the American administration didn't state on many occasions during the lead up to GW2 that the reason they where going in was because:

Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons, and diseases, and gases, and atomic weapons.

Not even you are stupid enough to try and backtrack on that one.


Why would I need to backtrack?

Note that the statement you italicized is "future tense". As in "we're going to prevent somethig from happening in the future".

But the "we didn't find WMDs" is "past tense" (arguably, present tense at the moment we invaded).

Those are *not* inconsistent things. No matter how many times people on the Left try to make them sound like they are. It's like your father saying "let's go to the tire store and buy new tires so that we don't get a flat". Then you go to the tire store, and buy new tires. Then after doing so, someone says "You didn't need to buy new tires, because the ones you had weren't flat!!!". (*cough* and then proceeds to prance around, sounding all proud of himself and chanting "there were no flat tires!!!" over and over as though it has some special meaning or something...).


See how that logic makes no sense? If the stated goal is to act before something bad happens, it's a bit silly to then say that the act was unjustified because the thing you were trying to prevent didn't happen...

Edited, Aug 27th 2007 2:28pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#39 Aug 27 2007 at 1:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
In related news, there's no evidence that Hitler ever invaded Zimbabwe... So WW2 was unjustified!!!
WWII was justified in that, one day, Republicans would need it so they could keep saying "What if we just gave up after Normandy?!!" over and over in regards to any critique of the war dead.

For that reason alone, it was essential that we actually had a battle at Normandy. The rest of the war was just filler leading up to it and falling action giving it a nice conclusion.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#40 Aug 27 2007 at 1:25 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
bodhisattva wrote:
Gbaji why do you have to use arguments that were disproven 2 years ago?

But but but he tried to buy yellow cake!


Are you seriously arguing that he *didn't* try to buy uranium?


And people wonder when I argue that the whole smokescreen with Valerie Plame had to do with making sure people dind't realize that Joe Wilson's whole "debunk" was a sham...

Clearly, it worked on you because you bought the whole thing hook, line, and sinker.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#41 Aug 27 2007 at 1:28 PM Rating: Good
Nobby
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
*Trying* to be ebil doth not ebil make, tit-head.

Now go back to 1996. You'd be happy there
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#42 Aug 27 2007 at 1:29 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Lord Nobby wrote:
*Trying* to be ebil doth not ebil make, tit-head.


Lol! You're kidding right?

I'm not evil! I only tried to sacrifice small children to the Dark Lord(tm)! See. Since I failed to do so, I'm not really a bad person... Really!


Did you stop and say that to yourself outloud before you wrote it down? Cause you really should have IMO...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#43 Aug 27 2007 at 1:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Smasharoo
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Did you stop and say that to yourself outloud before you wrote it down? Cause you really should have IMO...

No kidding. That would be like punishing people who failed at murder differently than people who succeeded. Crazy talk.
____________________________
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.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#44 Aug 27 2007 at 1:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Nobby
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
gbaji wrote:
Lord Nobby wrote:
*Trying* to be ebil doth not ebil make, tit-head.


Lol! You're kidding right?
OK. So when you have a bajillion troopers with fricken "Lazer Beam" helmets, you may be in a position to invade every country on planet earth.

Meanwhile, let's skip over your president and my Prime Minister saying that Saddam *did* have WMD, and acknowledge the fact that every nation on earth from China to Nowherestan is *trying* to acquire WMDs.

By the way. Those pants and that shirt don't go with that revolving bow tie
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#45 Aug 27 2007 at 4:16 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Did you stop and say that to yourself outloud before you wrote it down? Cause you really should have IMO...

No kidding. That would be like punishing people who failed at murder differently than people who succeeded. Crazy talk.


Which has nothing to do with the argument Nobby made.

He implied that failing to succeed at the evil thing makes you less evil. It does not. It just makes you less competant.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#46 Aug 27 2007 at 4:18 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Lord Nobby wrote:
Meanwhile, let's skip over your president and my Prime Minister saying that Saddam *did* have WMD, and acknowledge the fact that every nation on earth from China to Nowherestan is *trying* to acquire WMDs.


But if we did that, then you'd have no argument...


Maybe if you *make* the argument instead of kinda stepping around it and hoping that everyone will agree with you out of some Pavlovian training? Just a thought.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#47 Aug 27 2007 at 5:01 PM Rating: Good
paulsol
View User Forum
Sage
****
4,158 posts
Gbaji said

Quote:
I'm not evil!


No, you're right you're not. You arn't smart enough to be evil.

Blofeld was evil. Darth Vader was evil. For all their 'evilness' they were smart too.

You on the other hand, are not smart.

Every time I read your posts relating to your 'heroes' illegal and disastrous attempts at remaking the ME in your own image, I get a mental image of you as a nodding dog on GWB's dashboard, stupidly nodding along to whatever comes your way.

Quote:
As in "we're going to prevent somethig from happening in the future".


Unless you possess an ability to see into the future, only a noddy like yourself could see pre-emptively invading someone elses country on the vague and obviously false assumption that they might one day sometime in 'the future' be a problem, as a positive change in foreign policy.

And really dude, if you cant remember the endless statements by people in the administration, stating unequivically that Saddaam HAD WMD's, then you are in a state of denial that is at least equal to the one that your president is in......
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#48 Aug 27 2007 at 6:32 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Well, then take that up with Congress:

US Congress wrote:
Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;


Bush didn't write that. Or do I need to explain how the different branches of the US government work?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#49 Aug 27 2007 at 6:35 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
paulsol the Righteous wrote:
And really dude, if you cant remember the endless statements by people in the administration, stating unequivically that Saddaam HAD WMD's, then you are in a state of denial that is at least equal to the one that your president is in......


Everyone said that Iraq had WMDs. Everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs.

What's your point? Did we go to war because Iraq "had WMDs"? No. We didn't.

There's a difference between what people believe about a country, and what substantiated justifications are used to declare a war against that country. Leading up to WW2, you'll find loads of propaganda talking about the horrible "****" and how they are canibals and subhuman.

Guess what? That's not why we went to war with them either...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#50 Aug 27 2007 at 6:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
WWII comparisons make everything awesome.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
#51gbaji, Posted: Aug 27 2007 at 7:00 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) /shrug
1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 322 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (322)
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC