captain1 0 #76 July 29, 2004 OK, Botellines. When I come over to Spain, if I ever get there, I am going to make you get in front of that big bad bull or many angry bulls in the tiny little alleyway. You are getting a little bit ahead of yourself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonto 1 #77 July 29, 2004 QuoteBut then true, 'warmonger' is a term which can be easily misinterpreted. Really? Oxford defines it as n Person who seeks to bring about war. Is there anyone here who thinks that President George W Bush did not seek to bring about this war? Anyone? tIt's the year of the Pig. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #78 July 29, 2004 QuoteBy reading other threads i have come to realize that not even war supporters come to an agreement about why they went to war. Even Arbustito doesn´t make up his mind!!! I made this little poll to see if you conservatives, can find some common ground in this subject. While we are at this, I am very interested in seeing how the options you chose related to the next. To free Iraquies Citizens: I am sure you are aware what is going on in Sudan. Guerrillas are assaulting villages and killing many of the people who live there. One of the things they do is to rape every woman in the village (8 to 80 years old) in front of everybody. They know that after that, they will be outcast. There is many more deaths than what saddam has in his account, and the human rights are watched much, much less. http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR540762004 So i ask, why Irak and not Sudan who needs it much more? To get rid of WMD: Not only they have not been found yet (or at least not as many as we claimed there were) but also there is other countries that pose a much bigger threat than Irak. Korea Has WMD and is building more. When Korea has enough WMD, they will be able to blackmail and threat not only his neighbours but by extension all the world. Wouldn´t it has made more sense to start with Korea (just a hint, Diplomacy was not working either) To stop Terrorism: It was known from the begginig that Irak didn´t have terrorist. If we wanted to strike Terrorism, we could have gone after Pakistan (we know that have terrorists AND WMD) or the country where most of the Hijackers were Saudi Arab. so why Irak? The two left seem to me the correct ones, so i will let other people to rebate them. You make three statements as fact. 1) The question is not if Sadam had or has WMD's. We all know he did as he used some of them on his own people. Also, information coming out of Iraq shows he was trying to build more. So the question is not if, but where are the WMD's (Korea is a whole different situation) 2) There is a terorism link to Iraq. The SIR states only that they could not find a link between Iraq and 911 3)Freeing the people was secondary benifit. And despite what you want to believe or print here the stories from Iraq are largely more positive than negative. But that is not what the media chooses to report. By the way........I see the libs can't help but vote........typical......"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #79 July 29, 2004 QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your antics with posting this poll are essentially why a good guy is banned right now. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not really. _I_ am why that happened. No use blaming anyone else. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah its funny you can't admit you were wrong about that....And its funny that you let the guy who is trolling by posting this thread go ahead... Again another case of a greenie using his power to get his view accross and propel his political agenda... You and Bill get along just great together."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #80 July 29, 2004 QuoteAgain another case of a greenie using his power to get his view accross and propel his political agenda... BAWAAAHAAAAAA.... I think you're confusing Tom for a liberal! Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
