Alaska Darin Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Well it looks like this time the Itallians are rightfully upset... 279929[/snapback] That post says everything about you that anyone here needs to know. Where's Gene Freckle to laud you for your "informed" opinion while downgrading the rest of the board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 I don't know this broad from shinola but I have a tendency to not trust the military's version moreso given their track record as well. 280170[/snapback] Despite the fact that she's the one changing her story repeatedly and once claimed over 300 bullets hit the car? And as for "Gannon", Conyers' House resolution died before the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday so we'll probably never know who Jeff Gannon was, or what he was up to. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.Res.136: I'm sure you'll assume the worst. Occam's Razor be damned! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 Occam's Razor. Was he another poster around the time of RCow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 Nope. Occam's Razor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 Nope. Occam's Razor 280431[/snapback] I was just joking Silver. I mean who hasn't seen Contact. Anyway Big "Jeff Gannon" is scheduled to be interviewed in tomorrow's NY Times. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1000846672 Only then do I think we'll find out about the real Big Jeff Gannon/Guckert. You know, his turn-ons...turn-offs. His idea of the ideal military escort and how does he act on a first date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 I was just joking Silver. I mean who hasn't seen Contact.Anyway Big "Jeff Gannon" is scheduled to be interviewed in tomorrow's NY Times. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1000846672 Only then do I think we'll find out about the real Big Jeff Gannon/Guckert. You know, his turn-ons...turn-offs. His idea of the ideal military escort and how does he act on a first date. 280437[/snapback] Wait....I thought a person's secuality doesnt matter, right? Funny how its always the LEFT bringing up matters of race, gender and sexual orientation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 NY Daily News Lead Editorial 3/19/05: World warms to W's war Fascinating it's been to rooster the ear and listen as the once-keening cry of the Bush-basher dims toward mufflement. You were hearing it as recently as weeks ago: Lied us into war, single-handedly cost us the world's respect, hurtled us all to the brink of annihilation. All at once, even European journals are wondering out loud, as are many home-grown scolds now hastening to reconsider their views: Good Lord, is it possible that American foreign policy is actually sane? You mean this Iraq thing looks like it might be working after all? You mean George W. Bush was - choke - right? Granted, there remains the stray voice of distemper, forlornly refusing to concede that this warmongering cowboy who stole the presidency could possibly have done anything correctly. Those of a more sensible persuasion will today, two years after U.S. troops started whooping their way toward Baghdad, recognize how profoundly better a place the world is on its way to becoming. This at the very least being a corollary result of Washington's bold stroke to take matters into its own hands, regardless of what this and that faintheart thought about such rude unilateralism. For the astonishing tilt toward a sort of democratization in assorted sectors of the Arab world is a planet-rattling phenomenon that was literally unthinkable practically yesterday. Not every one of these historic developments can be directly attributed to the Bush White House, but on the other hand it is mush-brained to imagine, for example, that Syria would today be swiftly retreating from Lebanon had not Washington demonstrated what becomes of tinhorn dictators who defy United Nations resolutions that the UN has not the viscera to enforce on its own. It is ludicrous to think that Libya would have abandoned its weapons programs had not Saddam Hussein's statues been toppled. It is improbable that Europe would today at last be talking tough with Iran's nuclear-happy mullahs were it not for Washington's own unflaggingly hard-line attitude. "Bush may end up being just as right as Reagan was," mused Germany's Der Spiegel the other day, referring to Ronald Reagan's famously deranged idea that Soviet Communism might be dismantled. Many current notions in the arena of foreign affairs run toward the same kind of confident lunacy, and the President's critics will certainly continue their carping. But less noisily, we think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 No, it sounds like the single dumbest and most ineffective "conspiracy" ever conceived. It achieved nothing and, even if they *were* looking for a sleeper cell reporter, why pick someone like that? They couldn't groom someone with a clean background and actual experience in the field? None of the Guckart theories make any sense. Who is linking him to Valerie Plame (last scene in a photo shoot for Vanity Fair)? Why would they need him to 'out' Valerie Plame? As for WMD's, I recall just about every intelligence agency both in the U.S. and abroad being pretty confident about Saddam's capabilities and there is still question as to whether or not materials were transported to Syria on the eve of the war. 280133[/snapback] Ahhhh, but that is the beauty of the plan... Make it so unbelievebly stupid that no one could accept it. These are the 'pubes your dealing with. Can I atriculate myself better without putting myself in a TBD "trick-bag?" If I am being overtly cryptic, I apologize, just let it go. Not hard to get everybody on board out of fear of being wrong. And what about my belief I floated out there in 2002 as a young annonymous poster, soon to be registered. You guys lambasted him as a person who was stirring the "pot". All the while the drums of war were beating, I was saying hey wait... "What if we attack and find nothing". I really wish the "way back machine" would "crawl" over 12-02, we would sure to find the mass hysteria that abounded on this board while a "fresh" voice gets tossed (it is the same now). Still don't dare to voice those opinions here with the rhetoric dogs, emotional midgits at your heels. Yes, and this has to do with WMD's and nothing else. Again, I apolgize if other things get tangled up in it... My point is the VOICES WERE THERE, they just failed to listen to them and look deeper. After 12 years, they crapped it all away for a lousy 6 months... Out of what? Fear of the truth? How would they ever explained that intelligence had failed them for so long? The war was the easy way to "tack" around this problem! I'd really hate to go shopping with you guys when you are determined to buy something, anything. Even if it fails your in store inspection, I fear it would be going home with somebody! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Ahhhh, but that is the beauty of the plan... Make it so unbelievebly stupid that no one could accept it. These are the 'pubes your dealing with. Can I atriculate myself better without putting myself in a TBD "trick-bag?" If I am being overtly cryptic, I apologize, just let it go. Not hard to get everybody on board out of fear of being wrong. 281499[/snapback] If a plan achieves nothing, why even bother? Whatever, just add "JEFF GANNON!" to the list that already includes "HALLIBURTON!" and "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!" And what about my belief I floated out there in 2002 as a young annonymous poster, soon to be registered. You guys lambasted him as a person who was stirring the "pot". All the while the drums of war were beating, I was saying hey wait... "What if we attack and find nothing". I really wish the "way back machine" would "crawl" over 12-02, we would sure to find the mass hysteria that abounded on this board while a "fresh" voice gets tossed (it is the same now). Still don't dare to voice those opinions here with the rhetoric dogs, emotional midgits at your heels. Yes, and this has to do with WMD's and nothing else. Again, I apolgize if other things get tangled up in it... My point is the VOICES WERE THERE, they just failed to listen to them and look deeper. After 12 years, they crapped it all away for a lousy 6 months... Out of what? Fear of the truth? How would they ever explained that intelligence had failed them for so long? The war was the easy way to "tack" around this problem! I'd really hate to go shopping with you guys when you are determined to buy something, anything. Even if it fails your in store inspection, I fear it would be going home with somebody! But we didn't find "nothing." We found everything short of weapons stockpiles, including a dictator thriving by bribing UN officials and weapons programs that were alive and well, if not active. The Duelfer Report, if you can get past the ridiculous headlines when it was released, made that clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Anyone hear the recent claim from a US soldier that the Saddam capture in the "hole" was staged? Don't know if we can throw it on the pile just yet along with Jessica Lynch, the toppling of the Saddam statue, Mission accomplished and a plastic turkey but it wouldn't surprise me. Just not enough information yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 "Still don't dare to voice those opinions here with the rhetoric dogs, emotional midgits at your heels. Yes, and this has to do with WMD's and nothing else.' Nonsense! I do! And its too fun and easy pushing their "ow, you hurt me" buttons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 If a plan achieves nothing, why even bother? Whatever, just add "JEFF GANNON!" to the list that already includes "HALLIBURTON!" and "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!"But we didn't find "nothing." We found everything short of weapons stockpiles, including a dictator thriving by bribing UN officials and weapons programs that were alive and well, if not active. The Duelfer Report, if you can get past the ridiculous headlines when it was released, made that clear. 281507[/snapback] I got to admit saturating everybody with your opposition's buzzwords are good at doing the trick. The more you staurate, the less effective they become. To see the truth you have to look beyond those buzzwords. Most people stop right there, finding no need to argue on. That is not what I am about, look past those words. I isn't that simple. And the fact of the matter is that we still didn't find those stockpiles. So is it fair to say, they (if existed) couldn't be used with 45 minutes? I just don't believe it, never did and never will. My life is too short to worry about the boogy man. Is that what it really boils down to? A dictator thriving? I can try and make it simple: Mass government bungling and incompetence. Wait, what are you paying for a gallon of gas? Just wait till we start paying $3.00 a gallon regularly... I gonna laugh my arse off, while everybody panics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 And the fact of the matter is that we still didn't find those stockpiles. So is it fair to say, they (if existed) couldn't be used with 45 minutes? 281517[/snapback] That's the point. There were no stockpiles - Saddam just kept the program quiet and ready to go whenever he decided he did want to make weapons. That way, he never really had to disarm and his 'allies' at the UN would never do anything to him. I just don't believe it, never did and never will. My life is too short to worry about the boogy man. Is that what it really boils down to? A dictator thriving? The point is NOT that Saddam was well-off. The point is that he turned the UN sanctions completely upside down - tens of thousands died each year because the country was so poor (which fueled movements within the UN to lift sanctions) all while his weapons programs were ready to re-activate whenever he gave the order. The choice was maintain sanctions to keep him in check (and kill tens of thousands annually indefinitely) or remove sanctions and let him run wild with weapons (and then you have another North Korea in a much more important part of the world). Not to mention the prospect of bringing democracy to the Middle East which is off to a better start than anyone (definitely not me) could have anticipated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTS Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 What a bunk poll. Asking this question now is like asking Americans if WWII was worth it the day after D-Day when over 6000+ US soldiers were killed. Only time will tell, but let me say this, terrorist fighting our professionally trained soldiers is a lot better than them sneaking into our borders and killing innocent civilians. So yes, this war is definitely worth it because the best defense is a great offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimshiz Posted March 21, 2005 Author Share Posted March 21, 2005 What a bunk poll. Asking this question now is like asking Americans if WWII was worth it the day after D-Day when over 6000+ US soldiers were killed. Only time will tell, but let me say this, terrorist fighting our professionally trained soldiers is a lot better than them sneaking into our borders and killing innocent civilians. So yes, this war is definitely worth it because the best defense is a great offense. 281937[/snapback] I only created the poll because Bishop Hedd linked to a stupid article that showed a majority of Americans did not think "it was worth it"... I know that it was worth it; and I understand that others will need to wait 20 years to see that it was worth it; but they'll also try to point out that it was John Kerry's good idea the whole time. Here's that other stupid thread: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=20806 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 I know that it was worth it; and I understand that others will need to wait 20 years to see that it was worth it; but they'll also try to point out that it was John Kerry's good idea the whole time. 282022[/snapback] Really? I'm the one who said it'll take 20 years to know what the repercussions/end game are and there's a better chance of RCow manning up and taking his medicine here than me pointing out it was John Kerry's good idea the whole time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 terrorist fighting our professionally trained soldiers is a lot better than them sneaking into our borders and killing innocent civilians How many Iraqis were doing that before the war? And if you think that our borders are now secure you haven't been paying attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 How many Iraqis were doing that before the war? 282207[/snapback] Abu Nidal was in Iraq when he committed "suicide" (if shooting yourself in the head 4 times can be considered suicide)? AP reporter S. Yacoub reported that Nidal arrived in IRAQ with the full knowledge of the Iraqi government. Ever take the time to wonder why Nidal would shoot himself in the head 4 times? Can't be because he refused to reengage in his prior activities at the behest of his hosts (the government of Iraq, headed by Saddam Hussein). Nah. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (terrorist) was known to be in Iraq before the war and was treated in Baghdad for injuries suffered in Afghanistan. Ramzi Yousef (terrorist) traveled to America on an Iraqi passport. Abu Abbas (terrorist) was captured in Baghdad. It is a well documented fact that the Iraqi government paid $25K to the families of suicide bombers (terrorists). 11 Americans are known dead because of these bombings (by terrorists). Khala al Salahat (terrorist) who furnished the semtex that killed 189 Americans on Pan Am 103 surrendered to the 1st Marine Division in IRAQ. Coalition Troops shut down at least 3 terrorist camps including Salman Pak, a base 15 miles from Baghdad. There was a full mock up passenger plane there used for training terrorists. The camp specialized in training terrorists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States according to PBS' Frontline and testimony from Iraqi's in front of Congress in the spring of 2002. The Phillipino government expelled a high ranking Iraqi diplomat after seizing cell phone records showing conversations between the official and leaders of Abu Sayyaf (terrorists). Farouk Hijazi (terrorist) was captured by US forces in IRAQ, near the Syrian border this year. He admitted to meeting with Al Qaeda on Saddam's behalf various times since 1994. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Just as unconvincing as the last time you posted that list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts