The real reason for war

Note what's not on the list:

1.) Chemical and biological weapons. Yes, they believe he has them, no, they don't think they're a threat to us.

2.) Terrorism. They know Saddam has no ties to 9/11 or to Al Qaeda.

3.) UN resolutions. The Bush administration doesn't give a rat's ass about the UN.

What's galling about this is not just that the Bush Administration is lying to us to secure support for the war. It's that they think we're stupid.
 
I don't know which is more irritating...Red's predictability or his stupidity.

Halliburton is the best company for the job. They are the leading oil exploration and production support company in the world.

Should they just close thier doors and lay off their entire workforce because Dick Cheney used to be CEO? Fucking ridiculous.
 
Sandia said:
What's galling about this is not just that the Bush Administration is lying to us to secure support for the war. It's that they think we're stupid.

If they could read some of these posts, they'd probably adopt that point of view very quickly.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: The real reason for war

LovetoGiveRoses said:
Thank you. Good morning to you too.

I guess no one's been able to sway Red's perspective to a more reasonable outlook. He's an advocate for "people", especially the proletariat, I wonder why he doesn't embrace capitalism and business interests which have been shown to be the only system that truly provides a good living to proletariats and why he still holds to the bankrupt teachings of Marx which results in pain and turmoil for everyone but the tyrannizing leaders.

Unless he wants to be one of the tyrannical leaders?

What say you RED?

Bet he won't answer......Probably sitting on the toilet with the "trotsky's".....
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The real reason for war

Tungwagger said:
Unless he wants to be one of the tyrannical leaders?

What say you RED?

Bet he won't answer......Probably sitting on the toilet with the "trotsky's".....

I daresay he squats. He's probably afraid that the innocent killing, warmongering, Capitalist Bush Regime, covered his toilet with crabs.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The real reason for war

8ball said:
I daresay he squats. He's probably afraid that the innocent killing, warmongering, Capitalist Bush Regime, covered his toilet with crabs.

But I thought Bush was worse than Saddam?

If that truly is the case, wouldn't the toilet seat be covered with some sort of chemical compound that would make RED denounce his homosexuality, turn him white, and a capitalist all at the same time?
 
Sandia said:
Note what's not on the list:

1.) Chemical and biological weapons. Yes, they believe he has them, no, they don't think they're a threat to us.

2.) Terrorism. They know Saddam has no ties to 9/11 or to Al Qaeda.

3.) UN resolutions. The Bush administration doesn't give a rat's ass about the UN.

What's galling about this is not just that the Bush Administration is lying to us to secure support for the war. It's that they think we're stupid.


When havent our leaders thought of us as stupid? Remember Clinton's denial of having smoked pot? "I never inhaled!" MY ASS! Oh, How bout Big George, and "Read my lips, no new taxes!" OK George, but hey, think maybe you could add to the ones that already exist? Ron Reagan? "I dont recall"....ok, so he was senile....Richard Nixon and his watergate cover-up...It goes on and on and on. Our leaders have ALWAYS considered the rank and file of american citizens as thickheaded imbiciles.
 
8ball said:
Kool! Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

And of course, don't forget the omnipresent DonkeyDork.....

Public service is my goal....:D
 
Same old threads huh Redwanger.....


Please C&P the below replies and save me some time:


You're an idiot.

You're a fucking retard.

I'm suprised you remember how to breathe.

Why hasn't your head caved in?



Feel free to use these in any order... suprise me ok?
 
Sandia said:
What's galling about this is not just that the Bush Administration is lying to us to secure support for the war. It's that they think we're stupid.


"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of sanctions and ignore the commitments he's made? Well, he will conclude that the international community's lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. The stakes could not be higher. Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."

President Bill Clinton in 1998
 
Pookie_grrl said:
"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of sanctions and ignore the commitments he's made? Well, he will conclude that the international community's lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. The stakes could not be higher. Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."

President Bill Clinton in 1998

I love that quote, Pookie, thank you. ;)
 
Sandia said:
Terrorism. They know Saddam has no ties to 9/11 or to Al Qaeda.

The confidence in which you state this makes me think you might be privy to some intelligence reports you would like to share. If you are waiting for the photo of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden shaking hands in downtown Baghdad, you'll likely be waiting for a while. Even Jordanian intelligence has reported on possible links through Al-Ansar Islam and the senior leader that sought medical treatment in Baghdad. So much like you would like to see an Al-Qaeda and Iraqi link proven, I say disprove it. If you can't, then the best we could agree upon was this it is undecided or we are unable to determine one way or the other. You do not know that Saddam has no ties to 9/11 or Al Qaeda.

Aside from that, Hussein's links to Hamas, Al Aqs-Martyr brigade and several other smaller terrorist organizations is well documented. Hussein encourages and supports terrorism, that much is documented. You should understand, the people supporting this war do not need to see an Al Qaeda-Iraqi link to justify it.

Thinking in practical terms, do you really think that Hussein would have any reservations about passing along WMD's to terrorist organizations to strike the US, UK or Israel...? Who cares if Al Qaeda and Iraq do not share the same religious ideologies, the desire to strike America outweighs that anyday. You are oblivious to reality if you don't think this war on Iraq is part of the war on terrorism.
 
Why in hell would a national government give away WMDs to any kind of group, terrorist or otherwise, that just might use those WMDs to attack them instead?

Especially when the group in question hates that country's government and has vowed to topple them?

You're not making any sense at all.

If Saddam Hussein is so hated by his own people and the arab world like you yanks keep insisting, then what contradictory madness makes you think that he'd give WMDs that could be used to fight against him to the very people who want to destroy him?
 
ImpWizard said:
Why in hell would a national government give away WMDs to any kind of group, terrorist or otherwise, that just might use those WMDs to attack them instead?

Especially when the group in question hates that country's government and has vowed to topple them?

You're not making any sense at all.

If Saddam Hussein is so hated by his own people and the arab world like you yanks keep insisting, then what contradictory madness makes you think that he'd give WMDs that could be used to fight against him to the very people who want to destroy him?

Who said the terrorists, that he might give WMD's to, want to destroy Iraq? Your comments, sir, are the ones that don't make any sense. The many terrorist networks and organizations and Iraq, have a mutual enemy. The US and the Western world.
 
ImpWizard said:
Why in hell would a national government give away WMDs to any kind of group, terrorist or otherwise, that just might use those WMDs to attack them instead?

Especially when the group in question hates that country's government and has vowed to topple them?

You're not making any sense at all.

If Saddam Hussein is so hated by his own people and the arab world like you yanks keep insisting, then what contradictory madness makes you think that he'd give WMDs that could be used to fight against him to the very people who want to destroy him?

If you think Iraq using a terrorist organization to attack the US is not a possibility, you need to wake up. The scenerio you just outlayed makes absolutely no sense.
 
The Al-Queda leaders such as Osama bin Laden have repeatedly called for the destruction of Saddam Hussein's regime.
 
ImpWizard said:
The Al-Queda leaders such as Osama bin Laden have repeatedly called for the destruction of Saddam Hussein's regime.

Oh yeah! Al-Queda is the only one out there, I forgot. :rolleyes:
 
They would gladly put aside ideological differences if it meant setting of a WMD in an American city. Would you be worried if there was a Christian terrorist group that resided in the US, and our government provided them with weapons, intelligence and means to carry out attacks against our enemies...the entire time refusing to acknowledge any ties to terrorism by our government.
 
Back
Top