freeflir29 0 #51 September 26, 2006 Quoteyou know.. without the filters provided "in country" where its much better to only supply the party line for moral. No "filters" here. I had forgotten that I read an article today or yesterday on Yahoo news about it. That article was a bit more thorough than the one you pointed out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #52 September 26, 2006 QuoteIts been all over the news here..... you know.. without the filters provided "in country" where its much better to only supply the party line for moral. Ah yes... the USA is SOOOOoooo fascist... which, of course, is why Michael Moore, Dan Rather and Keith Olberman are all rotting in prison for "crimes against the State"... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #53 September 26, 2006 Its in line with previous reports by the NIC. Plus, there is some common sense to it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #54 September 26, 2006 QuotePlus, there is some common sense to it. Shouldn't your little Canuk brain have thawed out by now from last winter? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #55 September 26, 2006 Canuck is with a c. You don't think there is some common sense that Iraq is currently a breeding ground for terrorirsts? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #56 September 26, 2006 QuoteYou don't think there is some common sense that Iraq is currently a breeding ground for terrorirsts? Sure it is. But so was Chechnya before that and Afghanistan before that and Lebanon before that. Your little liberal mind just can't get over the "Blame Bush" syndrone long enough to see that. Iraq is merely a venue. If it goes away the terrorists will find another...........and another...........and another............. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #57 September 26, 2006 QuoteIraq is merely a venue. That's where we disagree. Iraq is not just a venue. What is happening in Iraq is directly fueling the hatred. That is the common sense part I was talking about. It is constant that fundamentalist leaders can point to, to recruit from and to spin in such a way to use as an indication how evil the US is. This is especially so, since all the original reasons given for entering Iraq were false and Iraq really had no ties to 911. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #58 September 26, 2006 QuoteAh yes... the USA is SOOOOoooo fascist... which, of course, is why Michael Moore, Dan Rather and Keith Olberman are all rotting in prison for "crimes against the State"... Right and you would be behind it in a heartbeat if you can get away with it. Shall I bring up Tommy Franks yeat again.. just one more terrorist attack on US Soil and martial law WILL be declared. Would I put it past the Ultra Right wing to sponsor something like that to get to their ultimate goal???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #59 September 26, 2006 Quoteto recruit from and to spin in such a way to use as an indication how evil the US is. LONG before the US invaded Iraq there were plenty of recruits for terrorist organizations. Once again.......the war is a venue. In fact it has taken some of the "popularity" from Afghanistan. Jihadists from all over the world fought the Russians in Afghanistan and then Chechnya. Why would it be any differen't now that the US is there? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #60 September 26, 2006 QuoteLONG before the US invaded Iraq there were plenty of recruits for terrorist organizations. No disputing that. This current situation just makes it worse. In my eyes that is not a good thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #61 September 26, 2006 QuoteThis current situation just makes it worse. I think it was a worsening situation already. This war may have fanned the flames a little but something was going to sooner or later. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #62 September 26, 2006 Except there was no reason to invade Iraq nor did SH have anything to do with 911. So in the War on Terror it really had no benefit and made things worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #63 September 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteAh yes... the USA is SOOOOoooo fascist... which, of course, is why Michael Moore, Dan Rather and Keith Olberman are all rotting in prison for "crimes against the State"... Right and you would be behind it in a heartbeat if you can get away with it. Shall I bring up Tommy Franks yeat again.. just one more terrorist attack on US Soil and martial law WILL be declared. Would I put it past the Ultra Right wing to sponsor something like that to get to their ultimate goal???? Painting with that broad brush again, eh, Jeannie? I suppose I torture animals and slap women around, too, huh?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #64 September 26, 2006 QuoteExcept there was no reason to invade Iraq Are you also one of those people that cries every time something awful happens in Africa and the US doesn't rush to their aid? Like the Rwanda genocide? Yep..........certainly Bush just attacked a peaceful nation for no apparent reason. Have you been to Halabja? I have.........I think invading Iraq was a great idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #65 September 26, 2006 QuoteAre you also one of those people that cries every time something awful happens in Africa and the US doesn't rush to their aid? No. But, it is hard to invade one country under the pretense of humanitarian reasons, but forego much more dire situations. It puts in great doubt the reason given. I doubt there are many people left that think we went into Iraq because he treated the people so badly. Specially given the fact that it greatly decreased troop strength available for the actual war on terror in Afghanistan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #66 September 26, 2006 QuoteIt puts in great doubt the reason given. Question #1 Do you consider chemical weapons WMD? Plenty of those have been found. No doubt he had those......the West sold them to him! Question #2 Can you at least agree with me that there were MANY good reasons? Why does it matter what they used as a pretext to gain political support? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #67 September 26, 2006 QuoteQuoteExcept there was no reason to invade Iraq Are you also one of those people that cries every time something awful happens in Africa and the US doesn't rush to their aid? Like the Rwanda genocide? Yep..........certainly Bush just attacked a peaceful nation for no apparent reason. Have you been to Halabja? I have.........I think invading Iraq was a great idea. SkyDekker made a simple and clear statement about Iraq and not Rwanda. The world knows the Iraq invasion was based on deliberate lies. Coate it as long as you like, the lie keeps shining through. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #68 September 26, 2006 Please refer to the post just above yours. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,461 #69 September 26, 2006 I think the problem is that what you consider to be adequate reason isn't universally accepted. Of course, neither is what I consider to be adequate reason. We invaded another country. Of course they're pissed -- don't you think the US would get their backs up if another country were to invade us? Even if it were over something that's negative (yes, there are negative things about the US). We'd be all over that like fire ants on a candy bar. The key to having allies is stating your reason in a way that they will accept. Saying "because I said so and I believe the intelligence that says so" isn't usually enough for violating the integrity of another country. They also have to believe that intelligence. In this case, there was plenty of contradictory intelligence. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #70 September 26, 2006 QuoteDo you consider chemical weapons WMD? Plenty of those have been found. No doubt he had those......the West sold them to him! Correct and I do. But how do you invade a country for having a substance you yourself openly provided to them? Its like giving your child a candy and then punishing him for eating a candy. On top of that, SH had no method of delivering those chemical weapons to the US. Plus, the great majority, if not all of those found were not really in usable shape. There were some good reasons, though they were made up after the fact. Once they got caught with their pants down. It is like a police officer beating up a supposed suspect, then finding out the guy was innocent of the original charges says: he was an asshole anyways. lastly, the decision to invade Iraq greatly reduced the ability to wage war in the actual war on terror, which I find much more important that a supposed humanitarian mission in Iraq. All in all, it shows some incredibly stupid decision making. Those who have pointed that out have been fired. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #71 September 26, 2006 QuotePainting with that broad brush again, eh, Jeannie? I suppose I torture animals and slap women around, too, huh? No idea.. do you??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #72 September 26, 2006 QuoteQuotePainting with that broad brush again, eh, Jeannie? I suppose I torture animals and slap women around, too, huh? No idea.. do you??? In your mind, probably... you seem to have few problems making "leaps of faith" ( ) with your logic....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #73 September 26, 2006 QuoteIn your mind, probably... you seem to have few problems making "leaps of faith" ( ) with your logic.... Based on what I have seen from other good ole boys....I can only surmise what you would do... People have assumptions based on what they have seen and learned in life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #74 September 26, 2006 QuoteCorrect and I do. So you're saying he DID have WMD but since we gave it to him we should ignore the fact that he might attack other nations besides Iran with it? Interesting......... QuoteOn top of that, SH had no method of delivering those chemical weapons to the US. So we should have just ignored the threat he posed to the entire middle east? What about the threat he posed to US personnel in Saudi Arabia and civilians in all those other countries? Ignore that too? You aren't making a very credible argument. Quotethough they were made up after the fact. Made up? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #75 September 26, 2006 QuoteSo you're saying he DID have WMD but since we gave it to him we should ignore the fact that he might attack other nations besides Iran with it? Interesting......... Maybe you should have considered that prior to giving it to him? Plsu, he was so well watched, he wouldn't have had many oportunities for any large scale attackw ith those weapons. On top of that, they weren't in that great of shape, in all likelihood they could not be used for any warfare pusposes. QuoteSo we should have just ignored the threat he posed to the entire middle east? What about the threat he posed to US personnel in Saudi Arabia and civilians in all those other countries? Ignore that too? I thought the US had the ability to shoot down missiles? I thought the US knew exactly where all the WMD were? Why would they not be able to monitor and intervene when it looked like they were going to be used? And again, the majority if not all the chemicals left were not usable. QuoteMade up? Made up in the sense that it was thrown in when the original stated reasons turned out to be false. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
