I didn't understand you, only because I'm piss drunk. But I got the jist of it all...
'
Cheers,
Matt

just agreeing w/ you friend, many do down here south of you... despite what you may hear in the carefully pruned media..

http://twash.com/temp/curly.gif http://twash.com/temp/moe.gif http://twash.com/temp/sven.gif

Nice dodge. Just and honorable aren't the words I would have chosen, but they were in response to a previous post. Since you must obviously be so much more enlightened than me, please help me understand which part of the proof is circlar or self serving?

Are you saying that Saddam is not evil?

Or are you saying that it is wrong to oppose evil?

dodge, eh? well... before you can ask me to tell you "which part of the proof is circ(u)lar or self serving?", you would have had to have presented some proof to start w/... since you didn't, and only spouted a series of trite phrases, i'm not sure what i can do for you.

if your convinced Saddam is the embodiment of evil, good for you... if some of us find other dictators out there w/ actual nuclear weapons more threatening to the US and her holdings, thats our right too. don't assume everyone should believe something just because *you* have been convinced of such, it doesn't work that way. or, at least it didn't used to... i do realize we here in the states are entering a period in which our leaders wish us to believe that "if they aren't w/ us, they are against us...". i can tell your sold, enjoy..

Just that you are off-topic....

The thread was" France , Russia and NOW China"....

But you came with your fixation and brainwashing of Sadaam is this and that...

ALL countries wanted to get IRAQ to disarm: they voted for that.
Not ALL countries believes that war is the ONLY solution.


Once you comprehend that, you will be on your way to the shining light ....

ps NetRodent, i'm out for the night... almost 2:45am here and am heading to bed. love to trade barbs w/ you any time however, heated and interesting discourse are always welcome and stimulating. i'm sure we can both agree that it would be nice to wake up tomorrow safe and warm..

http://twash.com/temp/curly.gif http://twash.com/temp/curly.gif http://twash.com/temp/laugh.gif http://twash.com/temp/curly.gif

City of Los Angeles passed a resolution Friday against a unilateral war in Iraq. LA is not the only city. Should true loyalists and Dixie Twin haters also boycott Hollywood movies and porn?

San Diego military papers seemed less-than-ecstatic about a mideast war and the commander in chief. That they continue professionally is all the more impressive in an indecisive country and world. When they raised their right hand they committed to the leadership of this land and the wisdom of the people in it.

Is there a follow-up plan for stabilizing Iraq that contends with the complexities of 5 religions and ethnicities in the birthplace of civilization? Or will a loyal puppet be installed who be haggle in OPEC negotiations and require another visit by U.S. troops in 20 years?

50 miles outside Chinese airspace and it was on a test flight! :1orglaugh

You realize they can do test flights at home don't you?

And you know what... the moon IS made of green cheese!

Jesus Christ... are people REALLY this gullible?

Actually, I posed a series of questions not statements. Depending on how you answer them you can render the "proof" valid or invalid. Its odd that even though you say the proof is circular or self serving, you won't go on record answering any of the questions. I'll ask them again here.

Is Saddam evil?

Is good to depose evil?

The real flaw with this "proof" is that its black and white, while life is shades of gray. There's nothing circular about it and whether it is self-serving or not is irrelevant.


The embodiment of evil? I wouldn't go that far. I can't even say Stalin or Hitler embody evil much less Saddam.

The world is a dangerous place. I never said there aren't other threats to our safety.

Of course not, but boards debates would be much less interesting if statements were presented as opinions and not arguments. Is the goal to share or feelings or to convince the other party of our viewpoint?

This is the part of the affair that troubles me most.

Quite frankly I'm not entirely sold on the whole thing, however when faced with rabid peaceniks I find it much more entertaining to make my arguments that much more extreme.

How is off topic to respond to lapses of logic in a previous post? Since when did GFY care about staying on topic? And its not far off topic either, its not like I brought politics into a discussion on the finer points of midget fisting.

Brainwashing? I asked a question, "Do you dispute that Saddam is evil?" Hardly seems like a brainwashed fixation of this and that. Curious you took the time to respond but oddly avoided answering the question. Could it be that you know your position is unsupportable?

I would like to think that war isn't the only solution. However, twelve years have passed for Iraq to disarm. Iraq does not appear to have done so. Iraq appeared to have no intention of doing so, until troops started to be deployed. If war isn't the answer, what is? The French wanted to give Saddam another 30 days. He's had 4300 days. Will 30 more make a difference? Probably not, although I do think the US should have gone along with the French proposal if it really was a "last chance" and not a "next to last, last chance".

Here's one more question for you. Do you seriously expect Iraq would have allowed the weapons inspectors back in if it wasn't for troops being deployed nearby?

Have you considered the possiblity that this shining light you're walking towards is an oncoming train?