Serious discussion: Bush lovers lets debate. - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Centurion · 09-03-2004, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by alexg

Besides that, it has been proven already during Clinton's administration that the Iraqi government had connections with Al Qayeda, therefore the war in Iraq hurt Al Qayeda directly.

BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...WRONG!

Even Georgie boy has been forced to admit there was NO Al Qayeda connection.

It's amazing how people will continue to repeat lies even when the men they WORSHIP admit they were wrong.

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion

Just let me know when you/they/ANYONE finds Bin Laden & co. in Iraq along with the wmds.

WTF, AL QAEDA AKA "BIN LADEN'S TERRORIST GROUP" IS STATIONED IN IRAQ AT THIS TIME DUMBASS -

Here learn some shit -

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...3/527uwabl.asp

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=260

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...WRONG!

Even Georgie boy has been forced to admit there was NO Al Qayeda connection.

It's amazing how people will continue to repeat lies even when the men they WORSHIP admit they were wrong.

WTF, AL QAEDA AKA "BIN LADEN'S TERRORIST GROUP" IS STATIONED IN IRAQ AT THIS TIME DUMBASS -

Here learn some shit -

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conte...03/527uwabl.asp

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=260

Centurion · 09-03-2004, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AdnerAdvertising
For every con there is a pro-.

yeah..Bush is the CONman..and Kerry is the PRO to fix the mess!

crowkid · 09-03-2004, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
yeah..Bush is the CONman..and Kerry is the PRO to fix the mess!

that was weak man..

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crowkid
Some fun facts for you!

* Abdul Rahman Yasin was the only member of the al Qaeda cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb to remain at large in the Clinton years. He fled to Iraq. U.S. forces recently discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddam's hometown, that show that Iraq gave Mr. Yasin both a house and monthly salary.

* Bin Laden met at least eight times with officers of Iraq's Special Security Organization, a secret police agency run by Saddam's son Qusay, and met with officials from Saddam's mukhabarat, its external intelligence service, according to intelligence made public by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was speaking before the United Nations Security Council on February 6, 2003.

* Sudanese intelligence officials told me that their agents had observed meetings between Iraqi intelligence agents and bin Laden starting in 1994, when bin Laden lived in Khartoum.

* Bin Laden met the director of the Iraqi mukhabarat in 1996 in Khartoum, according to Mr. Powell.

* An al Qaeda operative now held by the U.S. confessed that in the mid-1990s, bin Laden had forged an agreement with Saddam's men to cease all terrorist activities against the Iraqi dictator, Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* In 1999 the Guardian, a British newspaper, reported that Farouk Hijazi, a senior officer in Iraq's mukhabarat, had journeyed deep into the icy mountains near Kandahar, Afghanistan, in December 1998 to meet with al Qaeda men. Mr. Hijazi is "thought to have offered bin Laden asylum in Iraq," the Guardian reported.

* In October 2000, another Iraqi intelligence operative, Salah Suleiman, was arrested near the Afghan border by Pakistani authorities, according to Jane's Foreign Report, a respected international newsletter. Jane's reported that Suleiman was shuttling between Iraqi intelligence and Ayman al Zawahiri, now al Qaeda's No. 2 man.

Finally some sense in this thread.

ryph · 09-03-2004, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nofx
Bush doesnt give a fuck about the environment

-I can give 2 shits myself

Bush doesnt give a fuck about all of the lower class americans

-neither do i

Bush took us from a 200 billion dollar SURPLUS to a 521 billion dollar budget DEFICIT

-well this does suck

Bush is anti gay marrige
-so am i

and anti abortion
-this should be up to the woman

i wish he had choked on that pretzel and died.
-not every1 thinks this way

Centurion · 09-03-2004, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crowkid
Some fun facts for you!

* Abdul Rahman Yasin was the only member of the al Qaeda cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb to remain at large in the Clinton years. He fled to Iraq. U.S. forces recently discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddam's hometown, that show that Iraq gave Mr. Yasin both a house and monthly salary.

* Bin Laden met at least eight times with officers of Iraq's Special Security Organization, a secret police agency run by Saddam's son Qusay, and met with officials from Saddam's mukhabarat, its external intelligence service, according to intelligence made public by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was speaking before the United Nations Security Council on February 6, 2003.

* Sudanese intelligence officials told me that their agents had observed meetings between Iraqi intelligence agents and bin Laden starting in 1994, when bin Laden lived in Khartoum.

* Bin Laden met the director of the Iraqi mukhabarat in 1996 in Khartoum, according to Mr. Powell.

* An al Qaeda operative now held by the U.S. confessed that in the mid-1990s, bin Laden had forged an agreement with Saddam's men to cease all terrorist activities against the Iraqi dictator, Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* In 1999 the Guardian, a British newspaper, reported that Farouk Hijazi, a senior officer in Iraq's mukhabarat, had journeyed deep into the icy mountains near Kandahar, Afghanistan, in December 1998 to meet with al Qaeda men. Mr. Hijazi is "thought to have offered bin Laden asylum in Iraq," the Guardian reported.

* In October 2000, another Iraqi intelligence operative, Salah Suleiman, was arrested near the Afghan border by Pakistani authorities, according to Jane's Foreign Report, a respected international newsletter. Jane's reported that Suleiman was shuttling between Iraqi intelligence and Ayman al Zawahiri, now al Qaeda's No. 2 man.

Thank you thank you thank you for the comic relief!

Out of WHAT Fox News wet dream did you pull out that bs?

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
yeah..Bush is the CONman..and Kerry is the PRO to fix the mess!

That was fucking lame

crowkid · 09-03-2004, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion

Thank you thank you thank you for the comic relief!

Out of WHAT Fox News wet dream did you pull out that bs?

proves my theory again, liberals ignore facts when you slam them with them..look them up son, try this magic called google..if you want to believe they are from fox news and false than believe that

Centurion · 09-03-2004, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crowkid
proves my theory again, liberals ignore facts when you slam them with them..look them up son, try this magic called google..if you want to believe they are from fox news and false than believe that

Hey Mr. "Fact Man"...put your money where your hallucinations are. Give links to the info you just posted so EVERYONE can see WHO is saying these things that you just posted.

Because you TYPED something on a message board doesn't make it TRUE!

If that was the case, Juicy would have every woman in the Tri-State area! (well, he has most of them I have to admit).

Tempest · 09-03-2004, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AdnerAdvertising
WTF, AL QAEDA AKA "BIN LADEN'S TERRORIST GROUP" IS STATIONED IN IRAQ AT THIS TIME DUMBASS -

Here learn some shit -

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conte...03/527uwabl.asp

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=260

You know what's really funny. You'll believe stuff like this and yet when others make the same sorts of connections between Bush, Cheney, Haliburton, the Saudis etc. you call them morons.

This is a great line in one of them "While it's hard to know what significance, if any, to ascribe to this information, it fits a pattern.....".

I didn't see any proof in those articles.

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
Hey Mr. "Fact Man"...put your money where your hallucinations are. Give links to the info you just posted so EVERYONE can see WHO is saying these things that you just posted.

Because you TYPED something on a message board doesn't make it TRUE!

If that was the case, Juicy would have every woman in the Tri-State area! (well, he has most of them I have to admit).

crowkid · 09-03-2004, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AdnerAdvertising

haha

Centurion · 09-03-2004, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crowkid
haha

No proof. Just as I thought.

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tempest
You know what's really funny. You'll believe stuff like this and yet when others make the same sorts of connections between Bush, Cheney, Haliburton, the Saudis etc. you call them morons.

This is a great line in one of them "While it's hard to know what significance, if any, to ascribe to this information, it fits a pattern.....".

I didn't see any proof in those articles.

You're not going to waste my time you liberal scum

READ.

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
No proof. Just as I thought.

There are dozens and dozens, why the fuck would anyone waste their time going through each one

you do it and tell us what you find or STFU

Agent White · 09-03-2004, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek
Concerning the war in Iraq, few people seem to really ever think about this...

Sure, he did it because it made America "stronger", whether it be from oil control, land control, yadda yadda (pick which you prefer)...

So you think it is the right of the US to arbitrarily attack other countries for no reason other than becoming an empire?

Quote:

However, I think it's SAFE to say that without Saddam, Iraq is probably a better place... I think we can all agree that the guy was a maniac and it is well documented that he has killed thousands upon thousands of his own people and really ruled in peculiar inhumane ways.

Saddam Hussein killed the Kurds when they attempted to revolt after the US promised the Kurds their assistance, because they are seperatist. The US left them out to dry, and they got owned. Saddam was particularily brutal in preventing those in his country who wanted a theocracy. He didn't want to be another "shah". That means he was suppressing THE VERY PEOPLE IN IRAQ RIGHT NOW WHO ARE SHOOTING AT US SOLDIERS. Learn some history. For the most part, the only Iraqis that Saddam treated poorly are the exact same Iraqis that US forces are shooting and killing. That is, inbetween the constant "thank you America" parades. You think Iraq is better off? Based on what? Maybe ask an Iraqi first.

Quote:

Now, a common retort to that would be "Well if America is so thoughtful and considerate, why aren't we helping out all of the other nations in need?" -- Maybe because there's nothing in it for us? Selfish it sounds, but do you see any other countries stepping to the plate and helping other nations in need?

Tell that to the Canadian Soldiers I'm paying for to clean up the mess you left in Afghanistan. You can thank me after you dismount from your stars and stripes high horse.

Quote:

Maybe we just decided "Fuck it, might as well control some land or oil, n' take out a sick twisted bastard causin trouble for everyone" -- whatever we gained out of it should be reward enough, and justification enough for going over there and helping a bad situation? (or at least attempting to)

Colin Powell in Cairo February 24, 2001:
"He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

Condoleeza Rice, July 2001:
"We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

WRONG.

I see that what the millions of Iraqis want doesn't mean shit to you. I guess they are just second class human beings.

Quote:

Now keep in mind, I'm going to vote for Kerry simply cause I don't like war and maybe his approach might not be so kill-crazy... I would have never preferred that bush go to war, but I'm looking at it from an angle most people choose not to.

Hugs and kisses.

Quote:

Perhaps they might have had some solid intelligence that saddam was going to do something crazy, maybe they had strong analysts that concluded if Saddam isn't taken out, there would be more bloodshed from his continuing precense than the bloodshed caused from a war.

WRONG.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...05-tenet_x.htm

Quote:

But irregardless, I don't agree with the war, but you can't deny the possibility that maybe he made life better for the iraqi people. If that is the case, I still don't believe it is worth the lives of our soldiers all in the name of property control.

Western Iraq is in the control of roving gangs of armed militants. The infrastructure is having the very wires that run things like telephone, TV and power ripped out of the ground, picked up by fleets of flatbed trucks and shipped to Jordan.

All these maybes your asking? The facts are out there, none of this shit is a mystery to solve.

Quote:

But this is just a thought, please refrain from the ignorant remarks. If you disagree, tell me why and use logic.

Google is your friend.

Tempest · 09-03-2004, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AdnerAdvertising
You're not going to waste my time you liberal scum

You mean like you wasted mine by posting links that didn't contain any proof?

Why is the best that you conservative/republican/Bush lovers can do is resort to name calling. I'd say 80% of the Bush lovers resort to name calling whereas 20% of the Bush haters do.. Why is that?

crowkid · 09-03-2004, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tempest
You mean like you wasted mine by posting links that didn't contain any proof?

Why is the best that you conservative/republican/Bush lovers can do is resort to name calling. I'd say 80% of the Bush lovers resort to name calling whereas 20% of the Bush haters do.. Why is that?

Because we get so mad when people ignore facts clearly available to the public anywhere.

mahoney · 09-03-2004, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Webby
mahoney:

Don't think you will get much dispute over whether it is better Saddam is gone or not.

It may be the "method" more than the result which is a problem.

When the method has resulted in alienating the world, killing many thousands more than were ever killed by Saddam, leaving a trail of deaths and malformations yet to come in that country from depleted uranium effects (which will last around 50 years) - to mention just a few "effects". It is clear this was not sane.

The logic is also warped in that there are many more "thug dicatators" in this world than just Saddam. Today the US still refuses to aid people in Sudan, despite being told loud and clear that this is a massive problem. Rest assured this will be a feeding ground for still more "terrorism" in the future.

On the eve of that "shock and awe" the lead weapons inspector just smirked at the suggestion that Iraq could possibly attack US forces with nuclear weaponary. Believe me, George Bush and his aids were well aware of the situation - they were told and refused to listen.

ok i agree with your points,on some levels but
how would YOU have handled it if you were President ?

clickhappy · 09-03-2004, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by juicylinks

I feel the war in Iraq was a BIG MISTAKE.

The argument is that there are pillars that support terrorism, and Iraq and Saddam were one of those pillars.
With them taken out there are less places for terrorists to go and less money to support them.
You can't get rid of terrorism without getting rid of Iraq and Saddam.

AdnerAdvertising · 09-03-2004, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tempest
You mean like you wasted mine by posting links that didn't contain any proof?

Why is the best that you conservative/republican/Bush lovers can do is resort to name calling. I'd say 80% of the Bush lovers resort to name calling whereas 20% of the Bush haters do.. Why is that?

Goodnight.

mahoney · 09-03-2004, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Webby
mahoney:

Don't think you will get much dispute over whether it is better Saddam is gone or not.

It may be the "method" more than the result which is a problem.

When the method has resulted in alienating the world, killing many thousands more than were ever killed by Saddam, leaving a trail of deaths and malformations yet to come in that country from depleted uranium effects (which will last around 50 years) - to mention just a few "effects". It is clear this was not sane.

The logic is also warped in that there are many more "thug dicatators" in this world than just Saddam. Today the US still refuses to aid people in Sudan, despite being told loud and clear that this is a massive problem. Rest assured this will be a feeding ground for still more "terrorism" in the future.

On the eve of that "shock and awe" the lead weapons inspector just smirked at the suggestion that Iraq could possibly attack US forces with nuclear weaponary. Believe me, George Bush and his aids were well aware of the situation - they were told and refused to listen.

how would YOU have handled it if you were President ?
Doing nothing is not a solution. Saadam was a threat if you don't know that you are ignorant to the facts. Who is a bigger threat to us ?

Agent White · 09-03-2004, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mahoney
Ok so what if Juicy was president and you had British Intelligence, Russian Intelligence and Us Intelligence telling you that Saadam was actively working towards weapons of mass destruction? The guy murdered thousand of his own people he was a modern day Hitler that needed to be put down like a rabid dog. If Saadam was so innocent why did he delay investigators so long during investigations? Don't you think it's possible that he delayed USA investigators so he could hide and/or dispose of evidence? Saadam was going to have to be dealt with
sooner or later.. I think it's better that he's gone.

Colin Powell in Cairo February 24, 2001:
"He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

Condoleeza Rice, July 2001:
"We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

"
In his first public defense of prewar intelligence, CIA Director George Tenet said Thursday U.S. analysts never claimed before the war that Iraq posed an imminent threat.
"

I guess you know something they don't, huh.

mahoney · 09-03-2004, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Agent White
Colin Powell in Cairo February 24, 2001:
"He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

Condoleeza Rice, July 2001:
"We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

"
In his first public defense of prewar intelligence, CIA Director George Tenet said Thursday U.S. analysts never claimed before the war that Iraq posed an imminent threat.
"

I guess you know something they don't, huh.

is this Michael Moore ? He was actively working on it. You don't think it's better that he's gone ? The man was bad news

Agent White · 09-03-2004, 01:55 AM

I dunno, does Michael Moore run state.gov?

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

Jeezus.

Agent White · 09-03-2004, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mahoney
how would YOU have handled it if you were President ?
Doing nothing is not a solution. Saadam was a threat if you don't know that you are ignorant to the facts. Who is a bigger threat to us ?

A threat in what way? He has no long range missiles, nor did the US claim he had any. The CIA didn't classify him as a threat. When the Bush administration was pushed on it, they backpedaled.

He has no navy.

He has no planes.

YOU THINK SADDAM WAS PERSONALLY GONNA TAKE A TAXI FULL OF BOMBS AND DRIVE IT TO DOWNTOWN USA?

Yeah, he was a real threat alright. Couldn't keep consistent power or water running in Baghdad, but you know he was poised to take over the US.

Pfft. Do you really believe this even though there is zero credible evidence in existence anywhere?

Do you hear voices in your head?

lawked · 09-03-2004, 02:02 AM

1. Bush stole the election.
2. Bush using the electronic machines will steal the election.
3. Republican's run the news.. therefore all these polls showing bush leading are just ways to validate the bullshit election results from these paperless machines.

4. US has so much fucking debt now, taxes are going up. Whether you pay today or tomorrow.. think about it

5. More and more of the world is starting to hate the US, I'm talking about allies.

6. Iraq was an invasion. I doubt there will be much grief shown when a few iraqies attack the US. (it's coming)...

7. Bush hurts the middle and lower classes, all these tax cuts for "those who make it". Well, those who make it haven't been paying taxes for a long ass time. Ask Warren Buffet if he thinks the tax cut was worth it.

8. Kids are dying needlessly.. there's a backdoor draft.. Oh i think it's called something like "Stop Loss". That's a real issue, not talked about before the election. Next year, you watch some poor ass kids will be flown over to fight this bullshit war, in the meantime Bush will be doing coke on the first ladies titties.

9. It doesn't take a genious to see why the US invaded Iraq. Halliburton has billions in no-bid contracts.. duhh. Cheney ran that company, it's not hard to see.

10. It's pretty sad when the US takes a few steps back. Country is more divided than ever before.... I'm thinking that that John Tittor (timetraveler) was right.. civil war is coming.

11. Most of the high paying jobs are being replaced with low paying jobs...

All these facts are offset with :

Kerry got a scratch and didn't deserve a purple heart.
Kerry voted against US body armor
Kerry is a blah blah blah.

It's the uneducated folks that are gonna bring the US down. Way to go, I can't wait to see the shit hit the fan.. makes good TV... and I wanna see how the republicans spin it this time.

Sad state of affairs

bhutocracy · 09-03-2004, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
Hey Mr. "Fact Man"...put your money where your hallucinations are. Give links to the info you just posted so EVERYONE can see WHO is saying these things that you just posted.

Because you TYPED something on a message board doesn't make it TRUE!

If that was the case, Juicy would have every woman in the Tri-State area! (well, he has most of them I have to admit).

he won't tell you the source because not only is he just some ignorant kid trolling, but the source is a crazy right wing nutjob site.. that lists howard dean and the guardian in the "axis of evil" the kind of site a loony liberal would be mercilessly written of for linking to like prisonplanet or something and the guy that wrote it has been on o'reilly and hannity etc and blames clinton for unleashing Bin Laden on the world.. so basically he's too scared to link to it and instead rants like a child about using google, when the only reason people don't post links is to hide the biases of their information .. one day he might grow up.

this is the site that turns up the most.

http://www.travelbrochuregraphics.co...victorious.htm

Agent White · 09-03-2004, 02:09 AM

Bills have been tabled that go beyond the draft, they've drawn up plans for mandatory service.

I've kind of seen it coming.

You know that "No child left behind" bill that gives extra money to school?

Guess what.

The schools only receive that money IF they make the personal information of all the students avaiable to... you guessed it... military recruiters.

No child left without a gun I guess.

Lev · 09-03-2004, 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lawked
1. Bush stole the election.
2. Bush using the electronic machines will steal the election.
3. Republican's run the news.. therefore all these polls showing bush leading are just ways to validate the bullshit election results from these paperless machines.

4. US has so much fucking debt now, taxes are going up. Whether you pay today or tomorrow.. think about it

5. More and more of the world is starting to hate the US, I'm talking about allies.

6. Iraq was an invasion. I doubt there will be much grief shown when a few iraqies attack the US. (it's coming)...

7. Bush hurts the middle and lower classes, all these tax cuts for "those who make it". Well, those who make it haven't been paying taxes for a long ass time. Ask Warren Buffet if he thinks the tax cut was worth it.

8. Kids are dying needlessly.. there's a backdoor draft.. Oh i think it's called something like "Stop Loss". That's a real issue, not talked about before the election. Next year, you watch some poor ass kids will be flown over to fight this bullshit war, in the meantime Bush will be doing coke on the first ladies titties.

9. It doesn't take a genious to see why the US invaded Iraq. Halliburton has billions in no-bid contracts.. duhh. Cheney ran that company, it's not hard to see.

10. It's pretty sad when the US takes a few steps back. Country is more divided than ever before.... I'm thinking that that John Tittor (timetraveler) was right.. civil war is coming.

11. Most of the high paying jobs are being replaced with low paying jobs...

All these facts are offset with :

Kerry got a scratch and didn't deserve a purple heart.
Kerry voted against US body armor
Kerry is a blah blah blah.

It's the uneducated folks that are gonna bring the US down. Way to go, I can't wait to see the shit hit the fan.. makes good TV... and I wanna see how the republicans spin it this time.

Sad state of affairs

Very well put. Unfortunately it's the dumb ass people who decide the fate of this country, the intelligent people (like the northeastern states) vote for democrats. All I heard in this RNC was 9/11, patriotism, terrorism, attacks on Kerry and nothing else, nothing about economy, or how those republican fucks are going to deal with the massive deficit, NOTHING.

If you, Bush lovers, believe that, that fuckhead made this country even 1% safer, I really pity you, you are nothing but SHEEP. Mark my words....terrorism can NOT be defeated. You kill one, hundreds more are born. All Bush did was to create more enemies in the Muslim world.

bhutocracy · 09-03-2004, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lev
nothing about economy, or how those republican fucks are going to deal with the massive deficit, NOTHING.

Not true.. Arnold essentially told the 1.8 million that have lost their jobs over the last few years and anyone else worried - not to complain about the economy or they'd be, and I quote "girly men".

Lev · 09-03-2004, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bhutocracy
Not true.. Arnold essentially told the 1.8 million that have lost their jobs over the last few years and anyone else worried - not to complain about the economy or they'd be, and I quote "girly men".

sorry I forgot about that

mahoney · 09-03-2004, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Agent White
A threat in what way? He has no long range missiles, nor did the US claim he had any. The CIA didn't classify him as a threat. When the Bush administration was pushed on it, they backpedaled.

He has no navy.

He has no planes.

YOU THINK SADDAM WAS PERSONALLY GONNA TAKE A TAXI FULL OF BOMBS AND DRIVE IT TO DOWNTOWN USA?

Yeah, he was a real threat alright. Couldn't keep consistent power or water running in Baghdad, but you know he was poised to take over the US.

Pfft. Do you really believe this even though there is zero credible evidence in existence anywhere?

Do you hear voices in your head?

Listen no one really dknow what he had except for High Ranking Officials.. don't kid yourself. The Government only let's you know what they want you to know. I think Bush is a jack ass but i definatley see the validity of going to war

lawked · 09-03-2004, 02:40 AM

Am I the only one here wishing a pretzel would take Bush out? Then maybe a heart failure on Cheney?

I wish ... that a democrat ran a pretzel company and donated daily shipments of them to the whitehouse.

Come on, don't seven out now..

nofx · 09-03-2004, 02:41 AM

Bush wants to cut healthcare benefits for war veterans ROFL

Ok lets review this..... he sends thousands of soldiers to war in Iraq to fight. But yet, he wants to cut healthcare for WAR VETERANS. How the fuck did this guy ever get elected? Oh yea, thats right, most of his campaign money is from CORPORATE donations.

I believe the death toll is now 1000+ and thousands more wounded. how could anyone want to die for this guy. I feel sorry for all the mindless troops in Iraq.

lawked · 09-03-2004, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nofx
Bush wants to cut healthcare benefits for war veterans ROFL

Ok lets review this..... he sends thousands of soldiers to war in Iraq to fight. But yet, he wants to cut healthcare for WAR VETERANS. How the fuck did this guy ever get elected? Oh yea, thats right, most of his campaign money is from CORPORATE donations.

I believe the death toll is now 1000+ and thousands more wounded. how could anyone want to die for this guy. I feel sorry for all the mindless troops in Iraq.

I'd love to see all the republican veterans have their healthcare cut. It's too bad that the whole shitload of them will suffer.. meanwhile the no-bid contracts go out daily and oil companies make record profits.

I"m sure a lot of those troops want to leave, but that "stop loss" shit is preventing it. I've heard of a lawsuit filed by a guy that gets out in december ... I'd find the link but republicans would call this guy a sissy...

CamChicks · 09-03-2004, 03:09 AM

All these people who keep insisting that Saddam was a threat, I ask you: What would Saddam have to gain by attacking the USA?

Absolutely nothing. He knew damn well he would lose power, lose his palaces and luxurious lifestyle, and most likely be killed along with his sons (whom he hoped to pass power down to after his death). It would make no sense at all for him to invite war.

He's not some mustache-twirling cartoon supervillain doing evil just for the sake of the plot - in the real world, people act with justification, pursuing goals than benefit them.

So even if he had these imaginary WMD, he would still not be a threat because he had no compelling motivation. If he was trying to obtain WMD, it was to secure his power and ward off just this kind of invasion. Having nukes is a powerful deterrent.

He's not the wacky religious nut - that is Osama (remember him?). Osama was the one who wanted the USA to attack Iraq. It benefits only Osamas plot, and (not ruling a nation) he was the one with nothing to lose. It gets rid of a secular regime in the 'holy land' which Osama hated. It now allows for the rise of an Islamic theocracy there. And it helps him recruit more jihadists than he ever could previously.

Forget that it's real for a moment... forget the distraction of all the noise on TV .... and just look at the whole situation as if it were a strategy game. The plan becomes embarrasingly obvious. The Islamic team has been thinking many moves further ahead than we have been.

12clicks · 09-03-2004, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by juicylinks
K lets keep this serious.

I dont like Bush.

I feel the war in Iraq was a BIG MISTAKE.

I feel alot of innocent lives were lost for this for no good reason.

I feel Bush handled the war in Iraq very badly and we shouldnt be there.

Now tell me why you think he is a good president?

Keep this thread serious please.

Post now your points. and we shall have a debate.

Someone grab 12clicks btw.

Iraq invaded kuwait. We went to war with Iraq. Iraq surrendered. Part of the terms of their surrender was for full unfettered access to all UN prohibited arms, all nuclear facilities, all chemical and biological weapons and facilities.
What this means is that in order for us to stop bombing you into the stone age, you *will* abide by this agreement.
Sadaam didn't abide by this agreement. After 9/11 being an enemy of ours who has not complied with its surrender and who is very likely to give terrorists WMDs if possible, it was time to clean up the mess that clinton allowed to fester.
We declared war against terrorism, not simply bin laden.
We're now killing terrorists in Iraq instead of America.
On the economy, only an idiot could expect the economy to be half as good as it is currently if told that we would have a terrorist attack on the twin towers that crippled the economy and punctuated the end of the internet/stockmarket bubble bursting.
The fact that our unemployment rate is as low as when clinton was basking in the shine of the internet bubble is amazing for anyone with an understanding of economics. More people own there own home now than in any time in our history. Interest rates are at record lows and inflation is almost nonexistent.
Across the board tax cuts where everyone gets the same % cut is always a good thing and while I think Bush mistepped by not riegning in spending, he'll be forced to do that now (since his only other option would be to raise taxes and we know that's not going to happen)

On foriegn policy issues, I want a president who does what is best for my country regardless of what meaningless, hasbeen countries like france and germany think.
despite what liberal liars say, most of europe and asia are behind us in our war with iraq. Of course the failing socialist economies of france germany and russia would be against losing billions of dollars in their oil deals with sadaam but too fucking bad.

Bottom line is Bush is a man of action, Kerry is all talk.
oh, and kerry's attempt at class warfare is sickening. Pretending the rich don't pay enough taxes is a bold faced lie that intellegent people should resent either because they are rich and know how much they pay or are not rich and resent being pandered too in such a cheap way.

This is in response to Juicy. you punks who don't know anything besides hating Bush, don't hold your breath waiting for me to respond to you.

Downtime · 09-03-2004, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks
Iraq invaded kuwait. We went to war with Iraq. Iraq surrendered. Part of the terms of their surrender was for full unfettered access to all UN prohibited arms, all nuclear facilities, all chemical and biological weapons and facilities.
What this means is that in order for us to stop bombing you into the stone age, you *will* abide by this agreement.
Sadaam didn't abide by this agreement. After 9/11 being an enemy of ours who has not complied with its surrender and who is very likely to give terrorists WMDs if possible, it was time to clean up the mess that clinton allowed to fester.
We declared war against terrorism, not simply bin laden.
We're now killing terrorists in Iraq instead of America.
On the economy, only an idiot could expect the economy to be half as good as it is currently if told that we would have a terrorist attack on the twin towers that crippled the economy and punctuated the end of the internet/stockmarket bubble bursting.
The fact that our unemployment rate is as low as when clinton was basking in the shine of the internet bubble is amazing for anyone with an understanding of economics. More people own there own home now than in any time in our history. Interest rates are at record lows and inflation is almost nonexistent.
Across the board tax cuts where everyone gets the same % cut is always a good thing and while I think Bush mistepped by not riegning in spending, he'll be forced to do that now (since his only other option would be to raise taxes and we know that's not going to happen)

On foriegn policy issues, I want a president who does what is best for my country regardless of what meaningless, hasbeen countries like france and germany think.
despite what liberal liars say, most of europe and asia are behind us in our war with iraq. Of course the failing socialist economies of france germany and russia would be against losing billions of dollars in their oil deals with sadaam but too fucking bad.

Bottom line is Bush is a man of action, Kerry is all talk.
oh, and kerry's attempt at class warfare is sickening. Pretending the rich don't pay enough taxes is a bold faced lie that intellegent people should resent either because they are rich and know how much they pay or are not rich and resent being pandered too in such a cheap way.

This is in response to Juicy. you punks who don't know anything besides hating Bush, don't hold your breath waiting for me to respond to you.

Very nicely put, it's good to see another realist on international relations.

mahoney · 09-03-2004, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion
Because Al Qaeda didn't EXIST in Iraq since Saddam hated Bin Laden and vice versa and Saddam made damn sure they couldn't even step into Iraq!

Now, we've provided them not only with a recruiting area, but a fucking planning and training area as well!

Yeah but Still

Webby · 09-03-2004, 02:03 PM

mahoney:

Quote:

how would YOU have handled it if you were President ?
Doing nothing is not a solution. Saadam was a threat if you don't know that you are ignorant to the facts. Who is a bigger threat to us ?

Hell... first, I is not my job to "handle it" - I am not the president.

Who ever suggested that anyone should "do nothing"? That sounds like the usual banal shit that comes from the current Admin, who seem to assume they are the only people on the planet that "do something". News... wrong :-)

Saddam was a threat? To whom?? I assume you are saying he was a threat to the United States? If so, think again.

The question about "who is the bigger threat to us"? I assume "us" is the United States? If so, I would have thought a terrorist organisation headed by Osama which has already attacked the US is more a threat to the US.

There is this common belief, especially in the US (wonder why?) that Hussein is some enemy on the US's war on terrorism. He is a thug dictator - of that there is no doubt - and "slightly" mental with it.

This was the same Saddam Hussein with the same "personality makeup" that the US engaged to be "partners" with in the assassination of a minister in a democratically elected government (Iran at that time). Saddam's qualifications as a thug were what got him this job.

It was the same Saddam Hussein that the US supplied both military and bio weapons to instigate and conduct a war with Iran.

It was the same Saddam Hussein that Rumsfield and others visited and shared some hospitality with - that was, when Saddam was a "friend" of the US.

Some need to quit trying to assassinate members of the government of other countries and also choose more stable "friends" to go to bed with.

On the bit about "what would I have done"... Hell ain't just me, but the whole world is wondering why the fuck the US felt this desire to invade Iraq. It was not based on any rational of "evidence" or balanced judgement. It was based on lies and a "hate" propaganda machine where there is only the need for anyone to have a retention span of five seconds.

It was never the "duty" of the US to engage in any "war" as some police officer - far less in a war in a country not even remotely near the US. The international community never asked for this "war" - clearly they are not going to "clean it up" either, least until the US is out of the place.

The damage this had done to the US is enormous - both in the "popularity figures" of US soldiers who died, but also in the more massive number of (not published) deaths in Iraq as a result on this action.
The damage within the international community is something that will last long after Bush has left the Whitehouse and "repercussions" will/are taking place on many areas - from economics to "cooperation".

Simply... I have no doubts the "judgement" of the current admin is warped. A war in Iraq has little to do with this chosen "war on terrorism". Osama has not been caught and his organization looks to be flourishing well and with far more members than were ever there in the first instance.

If that is "progress" and "good management" of a war against terrorism - there is much to learn.

The "target" should have been Mr bin Laden and his organization, but that never really happened, and there is little hope of "killing off" this organization until the "feeding grounds" for his recruitment are mininized. There are now more "feeding grounds" than ever existed before, thanks in large part, to the US admin.

Webby · 09-03-2004, 02:17 PM

mahoney:

Btw... I know this President of a country who is totally pissed about his country being listed on some government website in the US as being on the "coalition of the willing".

He, and his country are *not* part of any "coalition of the willing" tho they are in support of actions against terrorism.

No permission was sought to add his country to this list and, if sought, would be rejected since this is against the constitution of the country to be involved in shit like this.

When some talk of "the coalition of the cohersed and bribed" - this has some truth :-)

M_M · 09-03-2004, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks
Iraq invaded kuwait. We went to war with Iraq. Iraq surrendered. Part of the terms of their surrender was for full unfettered access to all UN prohibited arms, all nuclear facilities, all chemical and biological weapons and facilities.
What this means is that in order for us to stop bombing you into the stone age, you *will* abide by this agreement.
Sadaam didn't abide by this agreement. After 9/11 being an enemy of ours who has not complied with its surrender and who is very likely to give terrorists WMDs if possible, it was time to clean up the mess that clinton allowed to fester.
We declared war against terrorism, not simply bin laden.
We're now killing terrorists in Iraq instead of America.

UN also told Israel not to build a wall in someone elses land, but where is the enforcement?
If every rule that has been broken had received such response, like invasion of a country.... well nevermind, there isn't possibly such amount of resources to do that, so they'll chose to work on what profits the most, for certain people.

And who do you hold responsible for Iraq "not abiding" with the agreement? Thousands of civilians who lost their lives? Their families? Millions of workers losing jobs? Oh, I'm sure they learned their lesson now, and will stop supporting terrorism.

Now if I say USA (by that i mean certain powers in the administration) decided to create excuses to invade Iraq, and most likely with the help of certain puppets that have been installed during the previous invasion, I know I will get blamed for making up controversies.

I'm just shocked how anyone is thinking this war was the most effective way that US government could come up with to fight terrorism. And I am sick of arguments such as, "at least they did something, and democrats woundn't do anything". Well guess what, "doing something" is not acceptable. We should be expecting these officials to come up with the best possible solutions against these type of problems.

I have never seen a country go to a war with so much opposition from its own people, even though it has followed such a tragic event.

And it's ironic you blame clinton for the dot com crash and mention the increase % of homeownership as a success.. Just watch what's gonna happen in a few years when interest rates start going up again and people buying homes today start defaulting on their loan payments.

Webby · 09-03-2004, 02:46 PM

M_M:

Quote:

I'm just shocked how anyone is thinking this war was the most effective way that US government could come up with to fight terrorism. And I am sick of arguments such as, "at least they did something, and democrats woundn't do anything". Well guess what, "doing something" is not acceptable. We should be expecting these officials to come up with the best possible solutions against these type of problems.

An patient in a mental hospital can "do something" - it is the judgement/balance/effectiveness that means something.

Yeah.. been listening to the usual shit about people having the ability to of "doing something" or not. Seems this is usually tied into banal US politics at this time and has nothing to do with any sanity.

Tom_PMs · 09-03-2004, 02:50 PM

It was a war of opportunity, duh.

First it was Nuclear Weapons
Then it was Anthrax and Chem-Bio WMD's
Then it was link to al qeada
Now it's to liberate Iraq

Thats the problem I have with Bush. And to say he was only basing everything on things other people told him doesnt cut it. Nobody was fired, nobody was reprimanded for misinformation. British intelligence doesnt bring US to war. Putin doesnt decide that we should invade.

France and Germany were correct to try to give the inspections 4 more weeks (weeks mind you) to finish, and *THEN* form an invasion to depose Hussein.

And the argument that he gassed Kurds is such baloney. That happened before the Gulf War and invasion of Kuwait.

And lets not forget, all of this ammounted to a diversion from the actual War on Terror.

Saddam didn't bomb the twin towers and pentagon. We should not even be discussing Iraq most likely.

Thats why Bush has to go. Hope Laura is finding lots of empty boxes and old newspapers. Get the fuck out of our house. And clean the dog shit up before you go too.

Oh and to borrow 12clicks line. This is in response to Juicy. The rest of you dont hold your breath for replies from me.

09-03-2004, 02:41 AM	#87
nofx Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Virgin Mary's womb Posts: 16,826	Bush wants to cut healthcare benefits for war veterans ROFL Ok lets review this..... he sends thousands of soldiers to war in Iraq to fight. But yet, he wants to cut healthcare for WAR VETERANS. How the fuck did this guy ever get elected? Oh yea, thats right, most of his campaign money is from CORPORATE donations. I believe the death toll is now 1000+ and thousands more wounded. how could anyone want to die for this guy. I feel sorry for all the mindless troops in Iraq. __________________ Often times I wonder why There's love and hate, theres live or die. When sickness comes I must decide: When feelings go, theres suicide.

09-03-2004, 03:09 AM	#89
CamChicks Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: godless northwest Posts: 1,552	All these people who keep insisting that Saddam was a threat, I ask you: What would Saddam have to gain by attacking the USA? Absolutely nothing. He knew damn well he would lose power, lose his palaces and luxurious lifestyle, and most likely be killed along with his sons (whom he hoped to pass power down to after his death). It would make no sense at all for him to invite war. He's not some mustache-twirling cartoon supervillain doing evil just for the sake of the plot - in the real world, people act with justification, pursuing goals than benefit them. So even if he had these imaginary WMD, he would still not be a threat because he had no compelling motivation. If he was trying to obtain WMD, it was to secure his power and ward off just this kind of invasion. Having nukes is a powerful deterrent. He's not the wacky religious nut - that is Osama (remember him?). Osama was the one who wanted the USA to attack Iraq. It benefits only Osamas plot, and (not ruling a nation) he was the one with nothing to lose. It gets rid of a secular regime in the 'holy land' which Osama hated. It now allows for the rise of an Islamic theocracy there. And it helps him recruit more jihadists than he ever could previously. Forget that it's real for a moment... forget the distraction of all the noise on TV .... and just look at the whole situation as if it were a strategy game. The plan becomes embarrasingly obvious. The Islamic team has been thinking many moves further ahead than we have been. __________________ camchicks.com Last edited by CamChicks; 09-03-2004 at 03:11 AM..

09-03-2004, 02:50 PM	#97
Tom_PMs Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 2,049	It was a war of opportunity, duh. First it was Nuclear Weapons Then it was Anthrax and Chem-Bio WMD's Then it was link to al qeada Now it's to liberate Iraq Thats the problem I have with Bush. And to say he was only basing everything on things other people told him doesnt cut it. Nobody was fired, nobody was reprimanded for misinformation. British intelligence doesnt bring US to war. Putin doesnt decide that we should invade. France and Germany were correct to try to give the inspections 4 more weeks (weeks mind you) to finish, and THEN form an invasion to depose Hussein. And the argument that he gassed Kurds is such baloney. That happened before the Gulf War and invasion of Kuwait. And lets not forget, all of this ammounted to a diversion from the actual War on Terror. Saddam didn't bomb the twin towers and pentagon. We should not even be discussing Iraq most likely. Thats why Bush has to go. Hope Laura is finding lots of empty boxes and old newspapers. Get the fuck out of our house. And clean the dog shit up before you go too. Oh and to borrow 12clicks line. This is in response to Juicy. The rest of you dont hold your breath for replies from me. __________________ You've read it, you can't unread it.

09-03-2004, 01:55 AM	#77
Agent White Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 141	I dunno, does Michael Moore run state.gov? http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm Jeezus.

09-03-2004, 02:02 AM	#79
lawked Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 354	1. Bush stole the election. 2. Bush using the electronic machines will steal the election. 3. Republican's run the news.. therefore all these polls showing bush leading are just ways to validate the bullshit election results from these paperless machines. 4. US has so much fucking debt now, taxes are going up. Whether you pay today or tomorrow.. think about it 5. More and more of the world is starting to hate the US, I'm talking about allies. 6. Iraq was an invasion. I doubt there will be much grief shown when a few iraqies attack the US. (it's coming)... 7. Bush hurts the middle and lower classes, all these tax cuts for "those who make it". Well, those who make it haven't been paying taxes for a long ass time. Ask Warren Buffet if he thinks the tax cut was worth it. 8. Kids are dying needlessly.. there's a backdoor draft.. Oh i think it's called something like "Stop Loss". That's a real issue, not talked about before the election. Next year, you watch some poor ass kids will be flown over to fight this bullshit war, in the meantime Bush will be doing coke on the first ladies titties. 9. It doesn't take a genious to see why the US invaded Iraq. Halliburton has billions in no-bid contracts.. duhh. Cheney ran that company, it's not hard to see. 10. It's pretty sad when the US takes a few steps back. Country is more divided than ever before.... I'm thinking that that John Tittor (timetraveler) was right.. civil war is coming. 11. Most of the high paying jobs are being replaced with low paying jobs... All these facts are offset with : Kerry got a scratch and didn't deserve a purple heart. Kerry voted against US body armor Kerry is a blah blah blah. It's the uneducated folks that are gonna bring the US down. Way to go, I can't wait to see the shit hit the fan.. makes good TV... and I wanna see how the republicans spin it this time. Sad state of affairs

09-03-2004, 02:09 AM	#81
Agent White Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 141	Bills have been tabled that go beyond the draft, they've drawn up plans for mandatory service. I've kind of seen it coming. You know that "No child left behind" bill that gives extra money to school? Guess what. The schools only receive that money IF they make the personal information of all the students avaiable to... you guessed it... military recruiters. No child left without a gun I guess.

09-03-2004, 02:40 AM	#86
lawked Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 354	Am I the only one here wishing a pretzel would take Bush out? Then maybe a heart failure on Cheney? I wish ... that a democrat ran a pretzel company and donated daily shipments of them to the whitehouse. Come on, don't seven out now..

09-03-2004, 02:17 PM	#94
Webby Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Far far away - as possible Posts: 14,956	mahoney: Btw... I know this President of a country who is totally pissed about his country being listed on some government website in the US as being on the "coalition of the willing". He, and his country are not part of any "coalition of the willing" tho they are in support of actions against terrorism. No permission was sought to add his country to this list and, if sought, would be rejected since this is against the constitution of the country to be involved in shit like this. When some talk of "the coalition of the cohersed and bribed" - this has some truth :-)