wow..never even noticed the complain option..

Having whole sections of a dialogue edited out makes things real confusing, thanks for the clue in william.

How can we even argue this war, I support our troops, and yes they need to be pulled out as soon as possible but I also believe that we need to do everything in our power to stabilize the country. Saddam needed to be taken out, as well as his two sons. See my thread on the Best way to Srike terrorism for my further views. Am I happy with how the war turned out? Not really. Am I glad we went in there? Yes. If we had not, and entire ethnic group would have been wiped out, and a man who used to watch torture videos while wearing a cowboy hat and boots would still be in control of WMDs.

Why am I so angry Review the thread
did I indulge in name calling not untill I was missquoted
And told how to think...No

quote:
-------------
By Joshua: AchesonGroup is yet another non thinker
Who loves to repeat what hes told
By Idiots An Manipulators of Truth

Which is what I said not Joshua !!
lets examine the statement to which I was refering

They do not want to be in Iraq or Afghanistan. They certainly don't want to go to die in Syria or Iran. They want to be at home, safe, with their families, where they belong.

How does he Know ? A BS Statement


They know that most of the world opposes their presence in Iraq. They are doing their duty in the most difficult of circumstances

Did someone Poll the planet ? another B S statement

There was no legal or moral justification for attacking and occupying Iraq. The propaganda used to raise false support for the aggression was a flimsy patchwork of lies and distortions. Attacking Iraq and Afghanistan has made them both much, much worse places to live.


This is an outright Lie..........yes I can argue this in detail
If need be to evevate your understanding

Too many have died on both sides, for lies and for oil and for Israel

I agree with this statement...but
The best way to propagate a lie is to hide it amoung truths

Too many have died from the hatred that all stems from the illegal occupation of Palestine and US imperialism. That hatred gave birth to the desperation of the terrorist. The desperate and deplorable acts of the terrorist have been used as an excuse to attack oilcountries that oppose Israel.

I Agree and have stated the same



It is easy for armchair warmongers to shout their support for the criminal bloodshed without any understanding of the suffering of the victims and their families on both sides.


War is no Fun for anyone but sometimes necessary
The ability to comprehend this does not make one criminal


They think their blind ignorance makes them patriots.


Nonsence ..Who is They ? Ignorance of What ?



Cheering as your countrymen are sent to die is not patriotism

I agree

Like parrots these brainwashed fools repeat the nonsensical propaganda-soundbytes of oilfunded puppets like Bush. They use the same ridiculous, dramatic, simplistic, childish and misleading phrases like "War on Terror". And Axis of Evil".


Media Hype I Agree...


War on terror? The so-called "War on Terror" has elevated the threat of terrorism to unprecedented levels. There are more terrorists than ever before. They are now more furious, better funded, better peopled and more determined than ever before.


Threat levels are elevated thats the nature of conflict
More terrorists than before ? Are you counting ?
More furious..How would you Know ?
Better funded ..again how would you know
Better peopled...ect ...pure speculation


Axis of Evil? The threat from the "Axis of Evil" was created almost exclusively by the US government. The US government has funded and armed Afghanistan terrorists. They have armed and funded Iraq; Iran; Syria; and many others.



Axis of evil I agree
Afghanistan terrorists ???????Must be a soviet
They have armed and funded Iraq; Iran; Syria; and many others....... an inacurate statement



The United States government STILL helps to fund and arm Saudi Arabia - the so-called "Kernel of Evil" - according to the US government. Saudi is the homeland of Osama bin Laden. Most September-11 terrorists were Saudi. Saudi is the spiritual heart of Al Qaida.


I totally agree and its wrong.


Yet Afghanistan was attacked for the Centgas Caspian Sea oil pipeline. Then Iraq, with no links to terrorism whatsoever, was attacked for their oil. Now terrorists are flooding into Iraq, eager to kill Americans. Still more terrorism, thanks to the "war on terror."


Afghanistan was attacked for oil ?? that BS

Then Iraq, with no links to terrorism whatsoever, was attacked for their oil..??

If there is a statement her that made me Flip this is IT !!!!this is the most atrocious Lie ..If you believe this
I have aSerious Problem with your logic


They lied to us about September 11. They lied to us about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They will lie to us about attacking Syria and Iran and others.

What was the Lie you speak of ???
And now you presume to know the future
perhaps you do?

Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have died as a result of attacking Afghanistan and Iraq (together with a decade of sanctions and bombing of Iraqi civilians). Little wonder that Iraqis do not want to be "freed" by the United States military. They do not want to live under an illegal foreign occupation. They do not want the US oilgovernment to monopolize their oil.

This is a classic line spouted by those who wish to maintain the the anti war stance they dont want freedom....this is an obvious lie !
It insinuates that the only reason were there is Oil
while true in part our purpose is not to monopolize.. its to protect ourselves and our intrests


It's not just foreign innocent people that are dying. (They do not count in politics or the media because their deaths cannot be used for propaganda... 3000 on September 11: Tens of thousands in Afghanistan.)


True ...


Our troops are dying. Our civilians have died and will continue to die in terrorist attacks born of US & Israeli aggression

If it was phrased ..born of US support for Isreali aggression i would agree


The United States government doesn't want to send any more Americans to their deaths because it's bad for propaganda. Instead they want to send more British, Italian and other men to fight America's wars for her.


The US wants the World to do its part as it should



If you want to be patriotic then don't stand for the lies and corruption that have become institutionalized within the Western establishent


I agree ...


Don't let the world's biggest criminals get away with it just because their crimes are so immense or because they occupy prominent positions. They are subject to law and justice and humanity like everybody else.


All Leaders Are criminals ..says the opposition Party


If you want to support the troops then help to bring them safely home to their families, where they belong.


They are a tool of government ..they belong where their sent.

Don't stand by while more people die for a lie.

What Lie ?



I still like Joshuas' response
He says what many feel
In a way I admire that



PS if Mojom
corrects his misquotes
and moderates his delivery
I will retract my statements


[Edited on 14-11-2003 by straterx]

Originally posted by Dreamstone

and a man who used to watch torture videos while wearing a cowboy hat and boots would still be in control of WMDs.

you talkin bout bush??cuz he is still in control of weapons of mass destruction

[Edited on 11-14-2003 by sirCyco]

[Edited on 11-14-2003 by sirCyco]

Originally posted by Dreamstone
Having whole sections of a dialogue edited out makes things real confusing, thanks for the clue in william.

How can we even argue this war, I support our troops, and yes they need to be pulled out as soon as possible but I also believe that we need to do everything in our power to stabilize the country. Saddam needed to be taken out, as well as his two sons. See my thread on the Best way to Srike terrorism for my further views. Am I happy with how the war turned out? Not really. Am I glad we went in there? Yes. If we had not, and entire ethnic group would have been wiped out, and a man who used to watch torture videos while wearing a cowboy hat and boots would still be in control of WMDs.

what WMDs? there AREN'T any!
have you seen video footage of saddam in his outfit? have you seen this alleged videos?
why then, do you think it's true?
when the police investigate a murder, the first thing they look for are MOTIVES.
this is so tired. follow the MONEY. ignore the MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

Originally posted by tealc
joshua could not have said it any better and those men and woman out there will do there duty.

johsua is my little bro so be nice to him or ill kick your ass.

Originally posted by Dreamstone
Having whole sections of a dialogue edited out makes things real confusing, thanks for the clue in william.

How can we even argue this war, I support our troops, and yes they need to be pulled out as soon as possible but I also believe that we need to do everything in our power to stabilize the country. Saddam needed to be taken out, as well as his two sons. See my thread on the Best way to Srike terrorism for my further views. Am I happy with how the war turned out? Not really. Am I glad we went in there? Yes. If we had not, and entire ethnic group would have been wiped out, and a man who used to watch torture videos while wearing a cowboy hat and boots would still be in control of WMDs.

We should have done it the first time around (Desert Storm). It would have gone down much differently. And with much less loss of life. We had the hopes and support of the people back then. We also had 750,000 troops as opposed to the measley 130,000. Personally, I think Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Feith and Perle should ALL be made to stay in Baghdad until the last of the troops are pulled out. I betcha that shyte would happen lightning fast.

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

Originally posted by tealc
joshua could not have said it any better and those men and woman out there will do there duty.

johsua is my little bro so be nice to him or ill kick your ass.

uh, .....yeah. okay. that fits. can we call him crazy joshua now?

I totally agree with you, ECK, a rarity. We should have followed through the first time around, it would have been a lot better for the world.

Whoever made that comment about Bush, REAL clever, at the rate you're going you may just catch up to Michael Moore in terms of Loudmouth Liberal status. But I digress.

My comment about Saddam is not well known, and not in the mainstream media. It is based primarily on personal accounts of people who were Baathists. I was making a point on why it is necessary to take out of power a man who takes actual delight in the pain of others.

I agree that there was misrepresentaion on the reasons for going to war. i still believe that it was justified. The middle east was fast becoming the nexus of evil so to say, not that the people are evil, but the politics and methods were. There needs to be a solution to this problem, and while removing bad leaders is a large part of it, it is still only a part, not the whole.

No BillyBob! That would be KrazyJoshua!

I forgot another point, there were and still are WMDs. Some were shipped to Syria, some were destroyed, and some weren't found. You don't need a cold war arms build up to have WMDs.

Originally posted by Dreamstone
There needs to be a solution to this problem, and while removing bad leaders is a large part of it, it is still only a part, not the whole.

yeah we really fixed things over there.....if we want to remove evil from the goverments of the world maybe we should start with the white house...

Oooh clever! Bush is evil, what a jump in liberal thought!

People need someone to follow, and this holds true in the middle east. Taking out the eladers that pose so much of a threat is the first step to negating the problem.

Would there have been a holocaust if we had killed Hitler? Think on that.

Originally posted by sirCyco

Originally posted by Dreamstone
There needs to be a solution to this problem, and while removing bad leaders is a large part of it, it is still only a part, not the whole.

yeah we really fixed things over there.....if we want to remove evil from the goverments of the world maybe we should start with the white house...

totally. bush= coup d'etat, savings and loans bankruptcy bailouts, rape, cocaine and impaired charges, enron tie-ins, bin laden tie-ins, taliban tie-ins, back room royal bloodline pharaoh family, nazi supporting grandfather, skull and bones, bohemian grove, cabalist, enviroment killing, war mongering ANTICHRIST MOTHER#ER!!!
oh, sorry, did i say that out loud?

maybe not....but we didnt even go over there till they attack pearl harbor so even then our intentions were not to protect anything but our own intrests...and yes....bush is evil

Thats not the point and you know it. We need to go into these countries to stop any more atrocities from being committed.

And to all anti-bush people. Your precious Clinton hopefully has the clap. There, theres my childsihness for the night.

i never said i liked clinton...and there is about 20 other countries that needed our help 10 times more than iraq ever did.

We went into Iraq because of certain interests we had. But we also did a good thing by taking Saddam out. Sure, there are other places that need help more, but the US is not the World's charity. Some worthiness for our support is needed before we go in, or do anything.

Originally posted by Dreamstone
I forgot another point, there were and still are WMDs. Some were shipped to Syria, some were destroyed, and some weren't found. You don't need a cold war arms build up to have WMDs.

I disagree with that assertion. First of all, take chem/bio weapons, for example, many of the kind Saddam once possessed would have expired by now. And technically speaking, they are not weapons of mass destruction. That description was merely employed for its shock value. Weapons of mass destruction are nukes or missiles. Weapons that cause catastrophic numbers of casualties/deaths. Chem/bio weapons do not have that capability/reach. They are limited in that respect.

Secondly, I agree fully with every assessment former Marine and weapons inspector Scott Ridder has made. I believe, as he does, that most of Saddam's barred weapons capabilities were destroyed during the inspections throughout the 90's. He contends that by '98 they were rid of them. Saddam's son-in-law also defected and told the U.S. that he had destroyed them.

Ridder said also that they found what amounted to be plans for the exact kind of warfare we are seeing now: insurgency. A shift in strategy.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz himself conceded recently that they USED the argument of WMD because they knew America would buy into it. You can't get much more blatant than that. IT WAS ALL A LIE! Just like Joseph Geobbels (Hitler's minister of propaganda) said, "tell them the big lie long enough and they will believe it." Boy would he be proud.

Wait, Chemical and Bilogical weapons can't cause mass deaths? Go tell that to the families of those killed by Saddams use of WMDs That statement is a fallacy and I would hope that you, as a former soldier, would know it.

Its highly unlikely Saddam destroyed all of his WMDs. They were the only leverage he had against Iran, a country that would have loved to invade Iraq. He would not have thrown them away so quickly.