VABills Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 On Saddam's dime. Everyones cool with that. Just checking, because me, I look at it as treason.
Chilly Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Hay is anyone upset at some random event that happened 6 years ago but is no longer relevant except to promote my jackass party over someone else's jackass party?
VABills Posted March 27, 2008 Author Posted March 27, 2008 Hay is anyone upset at some random event that happened 6 years ago but is no longer relevant except to promote my jackass party over someone else's jackass party? Really a country that we pretty much have been keeping in check and bombing since 1991, even under your hero Bill Clinton. A country that was deemed rogue by the UN and was restricted in oil sales and import to basically food and water. A country that was not too long before using WMD's on Iran and it's own people. A country that slaughter 100k's and was known to do that in southern Iraq after the first Gulf war because some of them supported us? You're okay with them teking money from this guy and getting the royal treatment, and then coming back here and supporting him?
Alaska Darin Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 I'm pretty sure we beat that to death when it happened.
Chilly Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Really a country that we pretty much have been keeping in check and bombing since 1991, even under your hero Bill Clinton. A country that was deemed rogue by the UN and was restricted in oil sales and import to basically food and water. A country that was not too long before using WMD's on Iran and it's own people. A country that slaughter 100k's and was known to do that in southern Iraq after the first Gulf war because some of them supported us? You're okay with them teking money from this guy and getting the royal treatment, and then coming back here and supporting him? Hay is anyone upset at some random event that happened 6 years ago but is no longer relevant except to promote my jackass party over someone else's jackass party? (Nice attempt at trolling by calling Bill Clinton my "hero")
Clinton, Bill Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 (Nice attempt at trolling by calling Bill Clinton my "hero") I'm not? Damn.
KD in CA Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 I'm not? Damn. I liked your old avatar better Mr. President.
Chilly Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Who the hell cares WHEN it happenned? Thats got ZERO to do with this. But...from what I heard tonight....they didnt know the trip was funded by Hussein. If its dug up they did know, string 'em up. Yeah, here's the In all seriousness, do you not recognize the difference between treating it as a legitimate news story, and VA's trolling?
DC Tom Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Who the hell cares WHEN it happenned? Thats got ZERO to do with this. Oh, okay...remember when Rumsfeld went to Iraq in the '80s?
molson_golden2002 Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Pay for every dance, selling each romance, people know the part I'm playin.... http://justimage.org/blog/media/1/20061229...eld-hussein.jpg I'm just a gigolo and everywhere I go......
blzrul Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 The time to be upset was in 2002 when they went. Six years later it comes out that money may have come from Saddam and funneled through third parties, none of which was known by the travelers. You can't unring the bell. Do you really think ANY of them would be STUPID enough to knowingly let Saddam pay for their visit? Puh-lease. It wouldn't be the first time an unsavory individual or company turned out to be a "benefactor", unknown to the beneficiaries. If proof is offered that they knowingly let Saddam pay for a visit which then influenced them to take action in Saddam's favor, then we can be outraged. We have plenty of other things to be outraged about until that happens.
DC Tom Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 The time to be upset was in 2002 when they went. Six years later it comes out that money may have come from Saddam and funneled through third parties, none of which was known by the travelers. You can't unring the bell. Do you really think ANY of them would be STUPID enough to knowingly let Saddam pay for their visit? Puh-lease. It wouldn't be the first time an unsavory individual or company turned out to be a "benefactor", unknown to the beneficiaries. If proof is offered that they knowingly let Saddam pay for a visit which then influenced them to take action in Saddam's favor, then we can be outraged. We have plenty of other things to be outraged about until that happens. I agree. And I'd also say that that observation would probably mean more coming from someone who DIDN'T TAKE THE EXACT OPPOSITE STANCE EVERY TIME AN UNSAVORY CHARACTER SUPPORTS A REPUBLICAN!!!
Sketch Soland Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Hay is anyone upset at some random event that happened 6 years ago but is no longer relevant except to promote my jackass party over someone else's jackass party?
KD in CA Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 Hay is anyone upset at some random event that happened 6 years ago but is no longer relevant except to promote my jackass party over someone else's jackass party? See? You should be promoting your jackass candidate, not your jackass party!
erynthered Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSF...nt_mind_bei.asp
blzrul Posted March 27, 2008 Posted March 27, 2008 I agree. And I'd also say that that observation would probably mean more coming from someone who DIDN'T TAKE THE EXACT OPPOSITE STANCE EVERY TIME AN UNSAVORY CHARACTER SUPPORTS A REPUBLICAN!!! I don't recall there being any issues with Repigs going trips that turned out to be funded by scumbags? I recall Repigs BEING scumbags (mostly in public restrooms but other places too). But maybe you can refresh my memory.
VABills Posted March 27, 2008 Author Posted March 27, 2008 I don't recall there being any issues with Repigs going trips that turned out to be funded by scumbags? I recall Repigs BEING scumbags (mostly in public restrooms but other places too). But maybe you can refresh my memory. Because we know it's so much worse to take one up the butt in a bathroom stall then it is to aid a country and their dictator in getting lot of money and support to build his nuclear arsonal.
Sketch Soland Posted March 28, 2008 Posted March 28, 2008 Because we know it's so much worse to take one up the butt in a bathroom stall then it is to aid a country and their dictator in getting lot of money and support to build his nuclear arsonal. Yes, true.
blzrul Posted March 28, 2008 Posted March 28, 2008 Because we know it's so much worse to take one up the butt in a bathroom stall then it is to aid a country and their dictator in getting lot of money and support to build his nuclear arsonal. Explain to me how a trip in 2002, at a time when you neocon nutjobs were going orgasmic over invading Iraq, raised money for said Iraq to build a "nucular" arsenal? Did said three congressional reps come back and get an aid bill passed that we don't know about? Or did they smuggle nukes in their briefcases and hand them over? Your boys Ronny and GHWB handed over money and WMDs to said Iraq in the 1980's....maybe you are confused. It would not surprise me at all.
DC Tom Posted March 28, 2008 Posted March 28, 2008 Your boys Ronny and GHWB handed over money and WMDs to said Iraq in the 1980's....maybe you are confused. It would not surprise me at all. Where does this urban myth come from? The Iraqi weapons programs were almost entirely European in origin. Off the top of my head, the only Iraqi WMD materials I can think of that were of US origin were some biological seed stock sent to Baghdad University as a legitimate scientific transaction. Most everything else was French, German, Russian, or home-grown. When you people (on both sides of the aisle) keep revising history, how the hell do you expect to discuss it rationally?
Recommended Posts