IBTG81 Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Buckey HAS to be BF. Anyway, we could always implement "The Ed Plan." Bombs, missles, and nukes oh my! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 I'm neither tolerant or compassionate, and I have just as much loathing for conservatives as liberals. The fact is, this country seems to consist of three hundred million ignorant boneheads and seven or eight people who can discuss this rationally...of which, you are not. 372390[/snapback] But obviously you think enough of yourself to get up on a pedestal high above the rest of us sheep. We surly don't really give people like you enough credit for gracing us with your presence and opinions. Thank God for the Crap Throwing Monkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 But obviously you think enough of yourself to get up on a pedestal high above the rest of us sheep. 372652[/snapback] No. Just you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Buckey? Gene? Have you read the policies and applied it to current events over the last few years? We can go onto the next readings if you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Buckey? Gene? Have you read the policies and applied it to current events over the last few years? We can go onto the next readings if you have. 373165[/snapback] Quote from either of them: "OOOh Shiny Thing!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckey Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 BIB... your transformation of facts are interesting but very tilted... You guys all kill me. I say we bring in the UN add another 300,000 men and whip em quick. The chiken hawks are cluless with the military... but great at deception for power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 BIB... your transformation of facts are interesting but very tilted...You guys all kill me. I say we bring in the UN add another 300,000 men and whip em quick. The chiken hawks are cluless with the military... but great at deception for power. 373453[/snapback] The UN isn't interested in our National Security, and for the most part prefers we don't have any. We're going it essentially alone, with what is in OUR best interests. Tilted? In what way? I'm not sure what "transformation of facts" means anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Tilted? In what way? I'm not sure what "transformation of facts" means anyway. 373495[/snapback] You know, kind of like I voted for it before I voted against it. It's the new paradigm of fact shifting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 The chiken hawks are cluless with the military... 373453[/snapback] Following I say we bring in the UN add another 300,000 menand whip em quick. 373453[/snapback] Is absolutely priceless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Again, global war on TERROR. the 9/11 hijackers werent the first or last TERRORISTS to come down the pike. Is this THAT hard for you to understand? 372303[/snapback] First...Did you actually compare the war in Iraq/GWOT to a game of Risk????? AHHHAAAHAAA! Now, everone keeps throwing the line above out there like everyone is an idiot for not seeing it. THERE ARE MORE TERRORISTS THAN JUST THOSE OF 9/11! Then why is 9/11 consistently the main standing point for every Bush speach? Why does he continually have to throw that in everyone face? I think the critisism of his latest speach is well earned. IMO, he really needs to stop trying to pull on everyones heart strings and by bringing up 9/11. Stop sending out the cronies to tell us how safe America is now that we are in Iraq, and tell us how much safer Iraq is now that we are in Iraq. Perhaps we, as a society, don't deserve it, but I think it would be in everyones interest to have a major public speach filled with facts instead of sound bites. And to the poster who brought up Hitler as an opposition to how Bush works, I couldn't disagree more. Hitler had the idea of how to bring his country together, but from most accounts he was not a military genius. He happened to have some very brilliant men in key positions taking care of main planning and execution of the war. His best attribute was as a figurehead who was extremely capable of turning the tide of public opinion in his favor. Pretty much sums up, for better or worse, my opinion of Bush. I really can't imagine how screwed up the world would be if people like Kerry or Bush were actually the ones coming up with military strategy. It's scary enough knowing they are even involved in the decision making process. Of course, how scary is it that people like you (all of you), and I are the ones deciding on who is involved in the decision making process! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 BIB... your transformation of facts are interesting but very tilted...You guys all kill me. I say we bring in the UN add another 300,000 men and whip em quick. The chiken hawks are cluless with the military... but great at deception for power. 373453[/snapback] This is seriously a joke right? "Bring in the UN add another 300,000 men"??????? 1. Does the UN give a crap about the United States? 2. Aside from U.S. forces, does the UN have any military power to speak of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 This is seriously a joke right? "Bring in the UN add another 300,000 men"??????? 1. Does the UN give a crap about the United States? 2. Aside from U.S. forces, does the UN have any military power to speak of? 373702[/snapback] 3. Do the insurgents/terrorists see ANY difference between the US and UN? 4. Where are you going to get the extra 300k troops? From a military that already admits they're overstretched? 5. If, by some stretch of the imagination, you do find the 300k troops for Iraq...aren't you, Buckey, just going to complain that we didn't send them to the REAL war in Afghanistan? But hey, of course... The chiken hawks are cluless with the military... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 3. Do the insurgents/terrorists see ANY difference between the US and UN? 4. Where are you going to get the extra 300k troops? From a military that already admits they're overstretched? 5. If, by some stretch of the imagination, you do find the 300k troops for Iraq...aren't you, Buckey, just going to complain that we didn't send them to the REAL war in Afghanistan? 373707[/snapback] 6. Buckey thinks this is America's fault anyway. 7. Where did the number 300,000 come from anyway? How did we arrive at that exact figure? 8. Again, since when does the UN care about doing anything besides trying to stand in the way of everything the United States does? 9. Is the UN doing anything useful with all the other human rights disasters around the world? Why not? I'm sure the list could go on forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 First...Did you actually compare the war in Iraq/GWOT to a game of Risk?????AHHHAAAHAAA! Now, everone keeps throwing the line above out there like everyone is an idiot for not seeing it. THERE ARE MORE TERRORISTS THAN JUST THOSE OF 9/11! Then why is 9/11 consistently the main standing point for every Bush speach? Why does he continually have to throw that in everyone face? I think the critisism of his latest speach is well earned. IMO, he really needs to stop trying to pull on everyones heart strings and by bringing up 9/11. Stop sending out the cronies to tell us how safe America is now that we are in Iraq, and tell us how much safer Iraq is now that we are in Iraq. Perhaps we, as a society, don't deserve it, but I think it would be in everyones interest to have a major public speach filled with facts instead of sound bites. And to the poster who brought up Hitler as an opposition to how Bush works, I couldn't disagree more. Hitler had the idea of how to bring his country together, but from most accounts he was not a military genius. He happened to have some very brilliant men in key positions taking care of main planning and execution of the war. His best attribute was as a figurehead who was extremely capable of turning the tide of public opinion in his favor. Pretty much sums up, for better or worse, my opinion of Bush. I really can't imagine how screwed up the world would be if people like Kerry or Bush were actually the ones coming up with military strategy. It's scary enough knowing they are even involved in the decision making process. Of course, how scary is it that people like you (all of you), and I are the ones deciding on who is involved in the decision making process! 373558[/snapback] Perhaps he keeps bringing up 9/11 because it SHOULD serve as America's wakeup call but unfortunately many people like yourself have let American Idol and your love of MTV news lull you back to sleep. Oh and you forgot to put your hatred of Halliburton into your post despite the fact that you probably have no idea what Halliburton does except be mildly linked to Dick Cheney. DING! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawnboy1977 Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 I actually thought the lying and constant falacies about the situation in Iraq was the best part of the speech. Having said that we all support the troops. Some fact checking is in order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Perhaps he keeps bringing up 9/11 because it SHOULD serve as America's wakeup call but unfortunately many people like yourself have let American Idol and your love of MTV news lull you back to sleep. Oh and you forgot to put your hatred of Halliburton into your post despite the fact that you probably have no idea what Halliburton does except be mildly linked to Dick Cheney. DING! 373777[/snapback] Sorry, I forgot who I was dealing with. Your knowledge of Risk should have shut me up. I find it funny that I never mentioned anything other than how Bush himself has talked about the war, yet now all of a sudden you know everything about me, how much I know and feelings about current issues. Do you even know, from what I wrote, if I am republican or not? Oh, and the DING at the end was very clever. Way to use a tired response to really drive your point home. I suppose I'll stop trying to reasonably discuss anything. You keep striking out even though you are making a fool out of yourself with those people around here who actually know me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Yeah, because Iraq wasn't already a hotbed of activity for terrorists. Abu Nidal wasn't there. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi wasn't there. Ramzi Yousef didn't travel to America on an Iraqi passport. Abu Abbas wasn't captured by the Marines in Baghdad. Khala al Salahat didn't surrender in Iraq, nor did Farouk Hijazi. Saddam Hussein wasn't paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers $25K. The Phillipines didn't expell an Iraqi diplomat after learning of meetings between them and terrorist groups in that country. 370826[/snapback] I agree with your points and also agree that Saddam had to go. What I don't agree with is the logic that states that: A. 9/11 was the work of terrorists B. Iraq supports terrorism Therefore, Iraq is responsible for 9/11 and should be bombed. The Saudis left some pretty big fingerprints on 9/11, but got a free pass as they supply us with oil. Every day it seems more and more apparent that Bush went for Iraq first because he had a hard-on for Saddam. Since a hard-on is not usually a good reason to start a war, we had to do the WMD song and dance first. Now that that was a myth, let's call ti a war for the victims of 9/11. It would mean much more to the memory of those who died on 9/11 to seek revenge against those responsible rather than use their blood to justify a war against someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 I agree with your points and also agree that Saddam had to go. What I don't agree with is the logic that states that: A. 9/11 was the work of terrorists B. Iraq supports terrorism Therefore, Iraq is responsible for 9/11 and should be bombed. Nice strawman. No one has ever said that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. After 9/11, the Bush administration declared war on Islamofascist terrorism wherever it existed. That includes Iraq. The Saudis left some pretty big fingerprints on 9/11, but got a free pass as they supply us with oil. We had the legal authority to invade Iraq because of Iraq's violations of the '91 cease-fire. To my knowledge, no such ituation exists with Saudi Arabia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 The Saudis left some pretty big fingerprints on 9/11, but got a free pass as they supply us with oil. 373829[/snapback] I love this logic. How did "The Saudis" leave their fingerprints all over that? Because bin Laden was Saudi? Because a majority of the hijackers were Saudi? Last I checked, Western New Yorkers left some pretty big fingerprints all over the Oklahoma City bombing...I guess that means ALL of WNY should be indicted? Please... I have yet to see ANYONE who claims "The Saudis are responsible for 9/11" show any actual evidence that any official representative of Saudi Arabia had any direct involvement...much less that it represents the policy of the entire country. As for Iraq and 9/11...Iraq wasn't invaded because of 9/11, it was invaded because of the war on terrorism. That you think that because 9/11 is terrorism you therefore think that terrorism is 9/11 is your own problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Saudi Counter Terror Operations Seems to me, that the Saudis have as big or bigger problem with the same people than we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts