NationStates Jolt Archive

And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.

From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html) :

BAGHDAD, Aug. 13 -- U.S. troops raiding a warehouse in the northern city of Mosul uncovered a suspected chemical weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons of chemicals believed destined for attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces and civilians, military officials said Saturday.

Monday's early morning raid found 11 precursor agents, "some of them quite dangerous by themselves," a military spokesman, Lt. Col. Steven A. Boylan, said in Baghdad.

One thousand five hundred gallons is a little more than a trace by any measure, is it?

What our dear friend neglects to mention is that this is a post-invasion built lab. I hear water coming in fast.

And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.

From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html) :

One thousand five hundred gallons is a little more than a trace by any measure, is it?
Anyone else thinking Suddam is sitting there going "Allyah be damned! I knew I left those somewhere..."

Boylan said the suspected lab was new, dating from some time after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. The Bush administration cited evidence that Saddam Hussein's government was manufacturing weapons of mass destruction as the main justification for the invasion. No such weapons or factories were found.

Ah, no. This was AFTER the invasion.

This isn't the WMDs we've been looking for.

And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.

From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html) :

One thousand five hundred gallons is a little more than a trace by any measure, is it?
"Post-Invasion Cache Could Have Been For Use in Weapons"

Have problems reading, do you?

I am still for the war and in support of it.

But.. "Boylan said the suspected lab was new, dating from some time after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003."

That's from your source. Though it could of been with materials from Saddam's former chemical stash.

It's the biggest crock of shit since Corneliu tried arguing climate change. Let this die.

Though it could of been with materials from Saddam's former chemical stash.
We'll have to wait and see, but it doesn't look like it. The article said the equipment was new.

WMDs or not, the war is justified.

But if they do find them, hey, great.

These aren't the WMDs you're looking for.
Move along.

It looks post-invasion.

So, you're saying it was right to send in US troops to provoke insurgents into importing chemical agents for use against said troops, so the chemicals can be seized with much fanfare.

Someone didn't think this story through... :rolleyes:

Cause. Effect.

We'll have to wait and see, but it doesn't look like it. The article said the equipment was new.

Saddam may have bought new equipment in the 1990s... but I will wait and see, not speculating. I'm always in support of the war, regardless of the outcome.

I am still for the war and in support of it.

But.. "Boylan said the suspected lab was new, dating from some time after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003."

That's from your source. Though it could of been with materials from Saddam's former chemical stash.
Except it isn't illegal to have precursors around.

BAGHDAD, Aug. 13 -- U.S. troops raiding a warehouse in the northern city of Mosul uncovered a suspected chemical weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons of chemicals believed destined for attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces and civilians, military officials said Saturday.

Monday's early morning raid found 11 precursor agents, "some of them quite dangerous by themselves," a military spokesman, Lt. Col. Steven A. Boylan, said in Baghdad.Please direct your attention to the bold part and tell me again that these weapons were definitely in the country when Saddam was still in power.

I'm always in support of the war, regardless of the outcome.
Yeah, the Republicans are clearly preaching to the faithful by press-release.

Saddam may have bought new equipment in the 1990s... but I will wait and see, not speculating. I'm always in support of the war, regardless of the outcome.Mesa, you disappoint me... :(

Mesa, you disappoint me... :(

I'm pretty sure he meant 'regardless of the existence of WMDs'.

I've always been surprised that the US Military didn't just take some of our own WMD's and plant them in Iraq, after the invasion, so that they could be "found" later, and then justified Bush's war. Not like I put dishonesty past Republicans.

These aren't the WMDs you're looking for.
Move along.


*moves along with the rest of the storm troopers* :D

I've always been surprised that the US Military didn't just take some of our own WMD's and plant them in Iraq, after the invasion, so that they could be "found" later, and then justified Bush's war. Not like I put dishonesty past Republicans.

Just like Saddam wasn't really captured, the U.S. is pulling a stunt :rolleyes:

It also could have been with new chemcials imported to the country through those oh-so-many gaps in the borders.

A post-invasion lab does not justify the far, in fact, it only shows that the US is creating a higher danger level for itself by being in the country. When people start to build chemical labs to use against an occupying force, its a sign that there are at least a few significant individuals that don't like you. How about we start putting all of the energy of the multiple armies and corporations into building infrastructre so we can get the hell out.

Just like Saddam wasn't really captured, the U.S. is pulling a stunt :rolleyes:
Oh I dunno, was I the only one who thought that the pics we were shown looked like some of the homeless I've seen in San Francisco?

(No, I don't really believe that, but that's what I thought the photos looked like)

Sigh. You know, fuck this WMD thing. People trying to control the spread of chemical weapons are hopelessly deluded and remind me of people who support gun control. The genie of technology can't be stuffed in it's bottle again. Nukes will proliferate, and if the idea of any and every industrial nation that wants one having one frightens you, you better suck in your gut and tough it out, little soldiers, cuz it's going to happen no matter what you do.

Nukes will proliferate, and if the idea of any and every industrial nation that wants one having one frightens you, you better suck in your gut and tough it out, little soldiers, cuz it's going to happen no matter what you do.

Too bad that this nations getting frightened bit tends to result in certain nations who I won't name, try to bomb the nuclear aspirants back to the stone age or at least their facilities.

Just like Saddam wasn't really captured, the U.S. is pulling a stunt :rolleyes:

Actually, I do believe Saddam was captured, and not one of his many body doubles. I also believe Saddam's capture very much WAS a stunt. Firstly, it was Kurds that found him, and led the U.S. to him...and then the US Military takes all the credit. And secondly...the capture of Saddam was just what Bush needed to make everyone forget WE STILL HAVEN'T GOTTEN OSAMA BIN LADEN!!

Everything Bush does is a stunt. Mission Accomplished my ass! And speaking of that particular photo-op, could it have been any more obvious Bush was wearing a fucking codpiece for that particular photo-op?

Anyone remember a plastic turkey? Another Bush stunt.

Bush is basically a serious asshole...he won't even meet with Cindy. Why not? Because he's afraid of her! He's afraid of the questions she would ask...and who has better earned the right to ask them, and get honest answers, than a grieving mom whose son was lost to Bush's illegal fucking war for oil?

War on Terror my ass...try Operation Anigo Montoya!

[QUOTE=Myrmidonisia]And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.
QUOTE]
I could only say it in this way:

Short Round, "Very funny. Very funny." Clapping enthusiastically.

Actually, I do believe Saddam was captured, and not one of his many body doubles. I also believe Saddam's capture very much WAS a stunt. Firstly, it was Kurds that found him, and led the U.S. to him...and then the US Military takes all the credit. And secondly...the capture of Saddam was just what Bush needed to make everyone forget WE STILL HAVEN'T GOTTEN OSAMA BIN LADEN!!

Everything Bush does is a stunt. Mission Accomplished my ass! And speaking of that particular photo-op, could it have been any more obvious Bush was wearing a fucking codpiece for that particular photo-op?

Anyone remember a plastic turkey? Another Bush stunt.

Bush is basically a serious asshole...he won't even meet with Cindy. Why not? Because he's afraid of her! He's afraid of the questions she would ask...and who has better earned the right to ask them, and get honest answers, than a grieving mom whose son was lost to Bush's illegal fucking war for oil?

War on Terror my ass...try Operation Anigo Montoya!

Can you prove that it was the kurds? I doubt it. Put up or shut up. And can you prove that the turkey was plastic? I'd like to see proof of this...Photo ops my ass...what was that about Kerry...hunting? That was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

Note: George has already met with Sheehan, and made a statement about her loss just recently. He doesn't need to meet her again. She's not doing anything productive. And now we have protester at wal-mart in my small ass Missouri town about 'save my son from Iraq' and 'it's Bush's fault my son is dead'. Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...

If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...

Well despite what our strangely simion looking president says the war is still in full swing, this little thing we like to call the insurgency, liberal propeganda if you ask me
Oh and if you cant put 2 and 2 together, its probably not the easiest thing to remove the oil amidst all the fighting.

I wonder why the original poster hasn't been back in the thread since posting it? Hmmmm?

I wonder why the original poster hasn't been back in the thread since posting it? Hmmmm?

Mortified over overlooking the timetable of these chemicals no doubt

Can you prove that it was the kurds? I doubt it. Put up or shut up. And can you prove that the turkey was plastic? I'd like to see proof of this...Photo ops my ass...what was that about Kerry...hunting? That was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

Note: George has already met with Sheehan, and made a statement about her loss just recently. He doesn't need to meet her again. She's not doing anything productive. And now we have protester at wal-mart in my small ass Missouri town about 'save my son from Iraq' and 'it's Bush's fault my son is dead'. Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...

"But as a small sign of the many ways the White House maximized the impact of the 2½-hour stop at the Baghdad airport, administration officials said yesterday that Bush picked up a decoration, not a serving platter."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2001806972_bushturkey04.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1101131,00.html
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3660806/
http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000742.html

"The PUK and Rasul Ali’s special “Ba’athist hunters” have, it seems, been doing what the Americans have consistently failed to do. In an interview with the PUK’s al-Hurriyah radio station last Wednesday, Adil Murad, a member of the PUK’s political bureau, confirmed that the Kurdish unit had been pursuing fugitive Ba’athists for the past months in Mosul, Samarra, Tikrit and areas to the south including al-Dwar where Saddam was eventually cornered. Murad even says that the day before Saddam’s capture he was tipped off by PUK General Thamir al-Sultan, that Saddam would be arrested within the next 72 hours."
http://www.sundayherald.com/38816
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/
http://www.wokr13.tv/news/national/story.aspx?content_id=422B960A-26BA-4891-9E60-21C8818788D4

And for a bunch more: http://www.oldamericancentury.org/saddam_capture.htm

Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...

I'm not going to bother claiming whether the war was for oil or not, but if you are still paying what is being charged for gas and oil byproducts, why on earth would any right minded corporation lower their prices? Lowering it only gives you a very short window to profit with long term loss on potential profit.

I was surpised it didn't link to the article "Saddam's WMDs Have Been Found" in Insight Magizine of the Washington Times:

http://www.insightmag.com/media/paper441/news/2004/05/11/World/Investigative.Reportsaddams.Wmd.Have.Been.Found-670120.shtml

I am totally in support of the war. Nobody is capable of convincing my overly-propagandised mind that those weapons weren't in Iraq or moved to Syria by Saddam.

I am totally in support of the war. Nobody is capable of convincing my overly-propagandised mind that those weapons weren't in Iraq or moved to Syria by Saddam.

Speaking of Iraq WMDs in Syria.... Look at this article: http://www.insightmag.com/media/paper441/news/2004/05/11/World/Iraqi.Weapons.In.Syria-670123.shtml

Speaking of Iraq WMDs in Syria.... Look at this article: http://www.insightmag.com/media/paper441/news/2004/05/11/World/Iraqi.Weapons.In.Syria-670123.shtml
Lookit, a rag!

Lookit, a rag!
A Moonie rag at that.

Oh, and once again, we do not achieve our goal, and we piss people off at the same time, making things worse!

Yeah, that's what happens when you go to war against people who in no way provoked you. THEY didn't attack us. THEY didn't send the terrorists (I hear that they were actually from Saudi Arabia, although the responsibility was from Al Qaeda, hence why we attacked Afghanistan for not giving us Osama Bin Laden). What they didn't do was let in the UN inspectors (not a wise move, don't misunderstand me, but is it worth lives? And it was UN inspectors not allowed in, so it ought to have been a UN decision).

Um, so I'm against the war, in case you didn't figure it out.

It doesn't matter if this is true or not. All that matters is that now, nothing stands between the Middle East and the world. The veil was lifted, and now it is time for the plastic surgery.

Mesa, you disappoint me... :(

No you disappoint me for failing to do reading comprehension. I clearly meant about the outcome whether these chemical weapons date to Saddam's time.. or not.

Actually, I do believe Saddam was captured, and not one of his many body doubles. I also believe Saddam's capture very much WAS a stunt. Firstly, it was Kurds that found him, and led the U.S. to him...and then the US Military takes all the credit. And secondly...the capture of Saddam was just what Bush needed to make everyone forget WE STILL HAVEN'T GOTTEN OSAMA BIN LADEN!!

Everything Bush does is a stunt. Mission Accomplished my ass! And speaking of that particular photo-op, could it have been any more obvious Bush was wearing a fucking codpiece for that particular photo-op?

Anyone remember a plastic turkey? Another Bush stunt.

Bush is basically a serious asshole...he won't even meet with Cindy. Why not? Because he's afraid of her! He's afraid of the questions she would ask...and who has better earned the right to ask them, and get honest answers, than a grieving mom whose son was lost to Bush's illegal fucking war for oil?

War on Terror my ass...try Operation Anigo Montoya!

"Mah naim is Niggo Montana. You tried to kill my Daddy. Prepaid to dye!"

I don;t care when they were built, it's only so many less weapons the insurgents have.

Also, to the people who say "Saddam didn't do anything to us."

Neither did Hitler...

I don;t care when they were built, it's only so many less weapons the insurgents have.

Also, to the people who say "Saddam didn't do anything to us."

Neither did Hitler...

Yay Godwin's Law!

Yes.... not doing something to us is now a JUSTIFICATION for war. You know, Brazil hasn't done anything to us, too! It's just like HITLER! GET 'EM!

Yay Godwin's Law!

Yes.... not doing something to us is now a JUSTIFICATION for war. You know, Brazil hasn't done anything to us, too! It's just like HITLER! GET 'EM!
I've always hated those sneaky eyed Brazilians.

It looks post-invasion.

So, you're saying it was right to send in US troops to provoke insurgents into importing chemical agents for use against said troops, so the chemicals can be seized with much fanfare.

Someone didn't think this story through... :rolleyes:

Cause. Effect.

:Puffs: Open your linear mind man! The lab was going to be there all along. We had to go into in there because of the lab that would be found. And the lab was there because we went in. The lab wouldn't have been there if we hadn't gone in, but it was there, so we had to have gone in. Did I just blow your mind? :eek:

And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.

From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html) :

One thousand five hundred gallons is a little more than a trace by any measure, is it?
Damn, I can't believe how long it's taken the US agencies to plant the evidence! Or maybe this was the minimum amount of time to allay suspicion? :p

...and before anyone gets a hair up their ass, it was a joke...see the simley? :D

Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...


You not understanding it does not mean it makes no logical sense.

You have a government seriously in the control of the oil companies.
Oil companies want to make money from oil.

Cheap oil does them no favours
Control of the source of the oil does.

That doesn't make logical sense to you?

You not understanding it does not mean it makes no logical sense.

You have a government seriously in the control of the oil companies.
Oil companies want to make money from oil.

Cheap oil does them no favours
Control of the source of the oil does.

That doesn't make logical sense to you?

It makes logical sense to me, at least. :p

WMDs or not, the war is justified.

But if they do find them, hey, great.

If at this point you still believe the war was justified, then I'm not even going to try to change your mind. It would be a waste of my time and yours.

Originally Posted by Haloman
WMDs or not, the war is justified.
But if they do find them, hey, great.

I have a real problem with this. For one wasnt that the primary reason to invade the country in the first place? WMDs? Or was it to find Osama Bin Laden?
Oh thats right. Human rights were being violated. Big freaking deal. Ever heard of sovereignty? Violations occur in every country. And besides. Whos next? Did Iraq really pose a threat to America or even the local region? Come to think of it how did Saddam get there in the first place? Shall we arm the men and invade every country who is undemocratic or is treating its citizens badly?

It makes logical sense to me, at least. :p

Whether intentional or not, it is stomach churning that Oil companies are making record profits.

Oh thats right. Human rights were being violated. Big freaking deal. Ever heard of sovereignty?

dude.

just... dude

WMDs or not, the war is justified.

But if they do find them, hey, great.


Ok now I would really like you to explain this to me.

Because the justification given for the war was WMD

So it seems to me that what you are saying is

justified or not the war is justified.

You not understanding it does not mean it makes no logical sense.

You have a government seriously in the control of the oil companies.
Oil companies want to make money from oil.

Cheap oil does them no favours
Control of the source of the oil does.

That doesn't make logical sense to you?

I'll make it easier to understand.

If the war in Iraq was against terrorism and Islamic fundalmentalism; Saddam would have been our ally, since he was one of the most secular national leaders in the Middle East. Now, the place is a breeding ground for terrorists.

We say we fight for freedom now, despite that we support and make oil deals with Libya, mineral deals with the dictator of Uzbekistan who boils political opennents alive; allied with Pakistan that suppresses women's rights and allows rape of women as a legal punishment, as well as having a horrible human rights record. And don't forget Bush's bed partner; the Saudi Royal Family. :rolleyes:

It was for the oil; only logical answer

"Supermarket in the US raided by the UN. Tons of chemicals capable of being turned into chemical weapons and explosives found."
"Pharmacy plant in the UK raided, ten thousand gallons of liquid mustard gas found. UK claim these are used to make every day drugs."

What bollocks will they think up next to justify the war?

Just admit they wanted rid of the power crazed, murderous nut and be done with it.

Just admit they wanted rid of the power crazed, murderous nut and be done with it.


How on earth can you say that

they re-elected him.

How on earth can you say that

they re-elected him.
LMTO

There are plenty of people to be found in any country who believe that war is justified when their government says it is justified, and that other details are of purely historical value and not relevant to the righteousness of any war.

Haloman is one of these people, and obviously, there are many like him.

How on earth can you say that

they re-elected him.

We have a winner. That's it folks, you can all go home.

This thread died with the mention of hitler.

Though I will mention, when at weekend training(army), one of the instructors got onto the subject of Iraq. He was a higher rank, and it was fun to watch the look on his face when he asked why the war was started, and the first two answers were human rights and terrorism(not approving looks). Then he mentioned wmd's, everyone grumbled in agreement(me, laughing in my head), when another instructor decided to mention that just that morning(it was the 13th, last saturday), they had found chemical weapons in iraq.

He too didnt mention they were post-invasion.

Post-invasion, pre-invasion, what does it matter? Saddam had weapons, and probably still had them on March 22, 2003. What did he do with them? I don't know. I don't know anyone who knows. I can only speculate that he gave it to the Syrians or dispersed them among Iraqi soldiers who would keep fighting for the Ba'ath party.

Post-invasion, pre-invasion, what does it matter? Saddam had weapons, and probably still had them on March 22, 2003. What did he do with them? I don't know. I don't know anyone who knows. I can only speculate that he gave it to the Syrians or dispersed them among Iraqi soldiers who would keep fighting for the Ba'ath party.

I hear it's quite common for nations to have weapons now adays. Maybe they got them from Saddam?

Post-invasion, pre-invasion, what does it matter? Saddam had weapons, and probably still had them on March 22, 2003. What did he do with them? I don't know. I don't know anyone who knows. I can only speculate that he gave it to the Syrians or dispersed them among Iraqi soldiers who would keep fighting for the Ba'ath party.


Geez, the US administrations weapons inspectors have stated otherwise.

Stupidity can lead to credulity
but remarkably selective credulity has to be the work of a mastermind

Post-invasion, pre-invasion, what does it matter? Saddam had weapons, and probably still had them on March 22, 2003. What did he do with them? I don't know. I don't know anyone who knows. I can only speculate that he gave it to the Syrians or dispersed them among Iraqi soldiers who would keep fighting for the Ba'ath party.


Well given your inability to connect with reality
perhaps the martians have them.

You can speculate that the imaginary and non existent WMD that the
US administration lied about existing in 2002 and 2003 went anywhere you
like, its not hard to ship imaginary WMD anywhere and in the blink of an eye.

Maybe they are hidden in your pockets, have you checked them?

Post-invasion, pre-invasion, what does it matter?

It matters because if the weapons were pre-invasion, we actually accomplished the goal of disarming Saddam, even if in the process our actions resulted in crazy insrugents getting their hands on them. So in a sense the invasion could be somewhat justified.

However if they were post-invasion, that means our actions not only failed to accomplish our goals, but also resulted in the proliferation of WMDs by the subsequent insurgency. So that would mean we actually made things worse by invading, creating a threat of WMD where there was none.

Pre-invasion means slight redemption, post-invasion means even worse ignomony.

Here's my take on this post-invasion find. I would have weighed in sooner, but the hotel had a wireless failure.

First, we suspected that Iraq had a chemical weapon production capability. Second, there are a lot of Sadam loyalists still running around the country. Third, this was a large quantity of chemicals. Fifteen hundred gallons of chemicals would fill up a gasoline tank truck. Last, this find was described as a new lab, not just a bunch of barrels in someones garage.

So my conclusion is that that some of the Sadam loyalists are using their knowledge and terrorist money to rebuild chemical weapons production facilities. These are the same guys that were engaged in the production of chemical weapons from 1991 until 2002. Or whenever Sadam dismantled the labs and shipped his material off to Syria or Jordan.

So it's only deduction, but I suspect that if there are folks capable of producing large amounts of CW now, there were also folks that could produce them during the last decade. Why GWB doesn't release some intelligence data about what happened to those facilities is a mystery, but I still think he was on the right track.

Does anyone else think it is somewhat ironic that the US invading seems to have caused WMDs to be made?

There were none there before.
The US invades.
Iraq starts making them.

And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.

From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html) :

One thousand five hundred gallons is a little more than a trace by any measure, is it?


This is bullshit.

Its a chemical factory....

Show me some shells, waiting to be filled with the stuff, as opposed to having industrial purposes, and Im with ya.

Furthermore...if this were truly a bombshell...the WhiteHouse would be trumpeting it as a victory.

"Look everyone..we were right!"

Also....this isnt a news-breaking discovery, as any and all official searches for WMD;s stopped a month ago.

Again I say...its bullshit.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled asshattery.

All I can say is, it's amazing what you can find in a factory making paint.

Or pharmaceuticals.

Or fertiliser.

But no, the Iraqis must not produce any medicine, must not take advantage of industrial agricultural methods, and above all, must not rust-proof the corrugated steel roofs of their shacks. :rolleyes:

:upyours:

Bush is basically a serious asshole...he won't even meet with Cindy. Why not? Because he's afraid of her! He's afraid of the questions she would ask...and who has better earned the right to ask them, and get honest answers, than a grieving mom whose son was lost to Bush's illegal fucking war for oil?

War on Terror my ass...try Operation Anigo Montoya!


"move along", "let it die" and "war for oil"- the mantra of the bitter and simple. I guess chanting and shreiking this soothes the self-loathing soul. At least I hope it does, otherwise its a complete waste of my air.

President Bush already spent an hour with this woman, before she flipped and flopped and became directly aligned with the George Soros groups.
Only a fool would knowingly give a nut job a second chance to do everything they can to make him look bad. Plus maybe he wont have the time, after all- he personally has to meet with the parents of 2,000 other soldier's KIA parents-they've "earned" it too, right?

Were is all the oil we are stealing, Lyric? Are you somehow getting some? no one I know is. I paid $2.54 a gallon yesterday-over $40.00 to fill a Seville-same time last year it was a little over $20.00.

Were is the oil? Can we start chanting that? Is there a conga line of oil laden tankers headed here right now?

Were is the oil?

Iraqi oil output is below pre-invasion levels.

So, like, duh. You might want to read the US EIA archives sometime, it's your information agency. :rolleyes:

What matters is that the Iraqi oil revenues are flowing into US bank accounts, not Iraqi ones. It's not who buys the oil, but who keeps the cash.

Iraqi oil output is below pre-invasion levels.

So, like, duh. You might want to read the US EIA archives sometime, it's your information agency. :rolleyes:

What matters is that the Iraqi oil revenues are flowing into US bank accounts, not Iraqi ones. It's not who buys the oil, but who keeps the cash.


Whose US bank accounts, TG? I know this whole conspiracy story is elementary to those who need to believe it, but not so clear to the rest of us.

Lickers,

Would like to ask yourself who the only president thus far, when hit with soaring oil prices, has refused to release some of the national reserve, thus lowering the price?

No...you probably wouldnt.

Lickers,

Would like to ask yourself who the only president thus far, when hit with soaring oil prices, has refused to release some of the national reserve, thus lowering the price?

No...you probably wouldnt.

The national reserve is for emergencies, if we were cut off from outside sources, not simply high prices. I'm sure there are many that would love to see us start using that up.
The upside might be a faster plan to start efficient extraction of the tremendous deposits of oil in Utah & Colorado.

So, No-I wouldnt ask myself that question as its foolish.

The national reserve is for emergencies, if we were cut off from outside sources, not simply high prices. I'm sure there are many that would love to see us start using that up.
The upside might be a faster plan to start efficient extraction of the tremendous deposits of oil in Utah & Colorado.

So, No-I wouldnt ask myself that question as its foolish.


I think YOU'RE foolish.

Bush is the ONLY one not to have done so.

Why on earth do you not see this for what it is?

Whose US bank accounts, TG?

Abt Associates Inc., Advanced Systems Development, Inc., AECOM, AllWorld Language Consultants, American International Contractors, Inc., American President Lines Ltd., AOS, Inc., Artel, Atlas Case, Inc., Bald Industries, Bea Mauer, Inc., BearingPoint Inc., Bechtel Group Inc., Blackwater Security Consulting L.L.C., CACI International Inc., Capital Shredder Corporation, Cartridge Discounters, CDW Government, Inc., Cellhire USA, CH2M Hill, Chugach McKinley, Inc., Comfort Inn, Complement, Inc., Contrack International Inc., Creative Associates International Inc., Dataline Inc., Dell Marketing L.P., Detection Monitoring Technologies, Development Alternatives Inc., DHS Logistics Company, DynCorp (Computer Sciences Corp.), Earth Tech, Inc., EGL Eagle Global Logistics, EHI Company, Electric Generator Store, Environmental Chemical Corporation, EOD Technology Inc., Expedited World Cargo Inc., Explosive Ordnance Technologies Inc., Export Depot, Fluor Corp., Force 3, Foster Wheeler Co., General Electric Company, Giesecke & Devrient America, Global Container Lines Ltd., Global Professional Solutions, Global Services, GPS Store, Inc., Hardware Associates, Harris Corporation, Inglett and Stubbs LLC, Intelligent Enterprise Solutions, International American Products Inc., International Global Systems, Inc., International Resources Group, John S. Connor Inc., JSI Inc., Kellogg, Brown & Root (Halliburton), Kollsman Inc, Kroll Inc., Kropp Holdings, Lab Safety Supply, Laguna Construction Company, Inc., LandSea Systems, Inc., Landstar Express America Inc., Liberty Shipping Group Ltd., Logenix International L.L.C., Louis Berger Group, Lucent Technologies World Services, Inc., Management Systems International, McNeil Technologies, Inc., Mediterranean Shipping Company, MEI Research Corporation, Michael Baker Jr., Inc., Midwest Research Institute, Military Professional Resources Inc., Motorola Inc., MZM Inc., NANA Pacific, Native American Industrial Distributors Inc., Night Vision Equipment Company, Ocean Bulkships Inc., Odebrect-Austin, Outfitter Satellite, Inc., Parsons Corp., Parsons Energy and Chemicals Group, Perini Corporation, Raytheon Technical Services, Readiness Management Support LC (Johnson Controls Inc.), Red River Computer Company, Research Triangle Institute, Ronco Consulting Corporation, S&K Technologies Inc., Science Applications International Corp., Sealift Inc., Segovia Inc., SETA Corporation, Shaw Group/Shaw E & I, Signature Science, Simmonds Precision Products, SkyLink Air and Logistic Support (USA) Inc., Smith Office Machines Corporation, SPARCO, Stanley Baker Hill L.L.C., Stanley Consultants, Staples National Advantage, Stevedoring Services of America, Structural Engineers, TECO Ocean Shipping Co., Tetra Tech Inc., Titan Corporation, Transfair North America International, Triumph Technologies, Unisys Corporation, United Defense Industries, L.P., USA Environmental Inc., Vinnell Corporation (Northrop Grumman), Ward Transformer Sales & Services, Washington Group International, WECSYS, Weston Solutions, Inc. and Zapata Engineering.

Whose US bank accounts, TG? I know this whole conspiracy story is elementary to those who need to believe it, but not so clear to the rest of us.
Some of the companies to whom I have considered applying recently. :p

LOL, look at engineering recruitment sites, you will see pages of vacancies in Iraq, some in Afghanistan too. Basically every UK construction conglomerate and utility services company. Somehow I doubt it's all being paid for by benevolent donations from the rest of the world. :rolleyes:

And there's not much work being done, to be honest. But the bills are still being paid.

I have also not mentioned the US culture of corruption, where agents managing accounts add on millions of dollars in bribes to contracts. That was covered in the newspapers here recently, KPMG got really pissed off the US Army prevented them from reporting on it for a year.

Yadda yadda. Everyone in there is looting the place.

I don't see how a warehouse full of chemicals is a WMD

I don't see how a warehouse full of chemicals is a WMD

This is what happens when people get desperate - making mountains of molehills.

I think YOU'RE foolish.

Bush is the ONLY one not to have done so.

Why on earth do you not see this for what it is?


Oop-you got me there. I was so trying to get on your bandwagon.

So, Bush is stealing Iraqi oil and not even releasing our emergency national reserves? he's trying to hurt the US?

Oop-you got me there. I was so trying to get on your bandwagon.

So, Bush is stealing Iraqi oil and not even releasing our emergency national reserves? he's trying to hurt the US?



All I can do is point some things out, and hope you can draw your own conclusions.
However, you will probably rationalize them towards your own beliefs.

When faced with high gas prices in the past, every Pres, including republican ones, have released an amout of crude, from the national reserves, to lower prices at the pump.

Why do you suppose Bush is the only one who hasnt?

Maybe becuase his "base" consists of Oil Companies and those who profit greatly from such exhorbitant prices?

Maybe its becuase of his close ties to the Saudi Royal family?

Or his close personal relationship with Enron?

Are you telling me that m mistaken, or lying?

The SPR was never intended as an economic device, it was designed with cataclysmic events in mind, in response to the 1973 and 1979 crises, as a counter-measure to a similar event.

It makes no sense to release the oil just because prices are a little high. It's there for the event that France nukes Washington.

Were Bush to release any oil from the SPR, he would be a real dumbass. Even the Pentagon and DoE wouldn't heisitate to say so in public.

All I can do is point some things out, and hope you can draw your own conclusions.
However, you will probably rationalize them towards your own beliefs.




As you have an assortment of facts that support what you want to believe.

It doesnt mean thats the whole story and I'm wrong.

The SPR was never intended as an economic device, it was designed with cataclysmic events in mind, in response to the 1973 and 1979 crises, as a counter-measure to a similar event.

It makes no sense to release the oil just because prices are a little high. It's there for the event that France nukes Washington.

Were Bush to release any oil from the SPR, he would be a real dumbass. Even the Pentagon and DoE wouldn't heisitate to say so in public.

Why?

Its worked before, hasnt it?
In fact..if hes the only one who wont....I fail to see your logic.

As you have an assortment of facts that support what you want to believe.

It doesnt mean thats the whole story and I'm wrong.


No..it doesnt...but maybe at least you could consider...truly consider another option?

Can you not admit that Bush has strong ties to the Oil industry, and would be making enemies among his own camp, if he were to take such an action as presidents before him?

The SPR was never intended as an economic device, it was designed with cataclysmic events in mind, in response to the 1973 and 1979 crises, as a counter-measure to a similar event.

It makes no sense to release the oil just because prices are a little high. It's there for the event that France nukes Washington.

Were Bush to release any oil from the SPR, he would be a real dumbass. Even the Pentagon and DoE wouldn't heisitate to say so in public.


This is what I was to beliee, though I didnt have proof or a source.

Its strictly for emergency. I dont know what price at the pump would constitute emergency, but I hope we dont find out.

I have drastically limited my dependency on petrolem fuel in that both my wife and I work from home now, for 90% of our jobs. Neither of our cars is used for more than 15 miles a week on average.

I'm mostly concerned about home heating oil prices. I have an oil furnace and if the prices stay high, this winter will hurt us. I'm planning a wood stove for our basement right now as I have a large source of wood. Hopefully, that will take the edge off.

Why?

Its worked before, hasnt it?
In fact..if hes the only one who wont....I fail to see your logic.
I'm sure you have noticed the changed security situation. :p

All very well to tweak prices with the USSR on the way out, and then during the good times of the 1990s. Now you'd have to be an idiot, you never know when Saudi Arabia will go tits-up, or Israel nukes Iran, etc.

I'm sure you have noticed the changed security situation. :p

All very well to tweak prices with the USSR on the way out, and then during the good times of the 1990s. Now you'd have to be an idiot, you never know when Saudi Arabia will go tits-up, or Israel nukes Iran, etc.


Bullocks.

The US has always faced danger from one source or another, wether imagined or real.

In fact, If im not mistaken, even Bush SR did the same thing, during Iraq 1.

We get more of our oil from South America, than Iraq, or Saudi Arabia.

No..it doesnt...but maybe at least you could consider...truly consider another option?

Can you not admit that Bush has strong ties to the Oil industry, and would be making enemies among his own camp, if he were to take such an action as presidents before him?

I do consider other options, but I see things differently than you. I didnt say YOU were foolish, BTW. I said the question was foolish. And I'm actually sorry I worded it that way-if you dont know the answer, its foolish for me to critcize it, so-I take my comment there back.

I see President Bush differently than you do. Your facts-that are actually factual- still do not convince me of him being a villain.
Maybe I need to believe he is good as much as you need to believe he is bad.
I dont see this as reason to go into the national reserve.

I see it as a reason to increase research and developement into alternate and more efficient,less pollution fuel sources, encourage conservation and give incentives to start improvements. Also-to start tapping our own sources in North Amercia. And he just started that last week.

Better for our troops to find these then to have them detonated by the enemy

We get more of our oil from South America, than Iraq, or Saudi Arabia.
When spare capacity is zero, oil from the sunny islands of Trinidad and Tobago is as important as that from Saudi Arabia. :p

Can you prove that it was the kurds? I doubt it. Put up or shut up. And can you prove that the turkey was plastic? I'd like to see proof of this...Photo ops my ass...what was that about Kerry...hunting? That was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

Note: George has already met with Sheehan, and made a statement about her loss just recently. He doesn't need to meet her again. She's not doing anything productive. And now we have protester at wal-mart in my small ass Missouri town about 'save my son from Iraq' and 'it's Bush's fault my son is dead'. Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...

First, the Kurds finding Saddam and the plastic turkey were both widely reported. Do your own fucking homework. I'm not gonna do it for you, because I already know you are a Bush butt-kisser, and any proof I shove in your face, you will discount, anyway. I've dealt with your type before.

Second, I agree, Kerry hunting DID make him look like an ass. I was far from a Kerry supporter. I was an Edwards supporter from way back. I supported the K/E ticket for two reasons....One, Edwards was on it. Two, it wasn't George Fucking Bush! I hate that motherfucker. As if you couldn't already tell. Which is why I refuse to do your homework for you. You already know my biases, and you will therefore claim my sources are biased, and discount them out of hand. So why waste my time to shove it in your face when you still won't believe it?

Yeah, Bush won't meet with Cindy, because "he needs to get on with his life...and his vacation." Sure'd be nice if CASEY could get on with HIS life!! But he can't, can he? Because he is D-E-A-D...thanks to George Fucking Bush and Operation Anigo Montoya! But I bet you think Mr. Larry Northern is a true patriotic wonderboy, mowing down those memorial crosses with his pickup truck (which probably bore a "Support Our Troops" bumpersticker, while his OWN kids are nice and safe at home, huh?) At least you counterprotestors are finally being honest, shouting "WE DON'T CARE!" Tell us something we didn't already know! We've known from the get-go that you guys never gave a shit about anything, or anyone, but your own damn selves. The defining mark of the true Republican.

And if the war WASN'T for oil...then why were the oil fields the FIRST thing secured...leaving weapons and ammunitions depots unprotected, so that insurgents could get their hands on all those goodies to turn into car and roadside bombs, the better to kill and maim or boys and girls over there (who, by the way, were sent in with no exit plan, no plan for post-war Iraq, insufficient force numbers, and insufficient body and vehicle armor, whilst Halliburton makes off with about 8 billion in unaccounted-for funds!)

Oil prices are high for three reasons. The main one is FEAR. FEAR of supply problems is keeping oil prices high. The second reason is because refining capacity is close to running out, supply not keeping up with demand, mainly because of all the Republicans who "don't care" going out and driving around behemoth SUV's that guzzle gas like no tomorrow...the better to sport their "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers, and the better to fix chains and pipes to the back to mow down memorial crosses!

The third reason oil prices are high is because Bush and his cronies stand to make a lot of money from high oil prices. Notice how the prices stabilized, and even went DOWN some, right around election time...only to spiral out of control shortly after the election? coincidence? I think not!

Then again, I put no level of evil or cruelty past Republicans. They have earned nothing but my utter and complete contempt. I wouldn't vote a fucking Republican to the position of DOG-CATCHER....let alone President.

Thank God Bush is out in a few years. Meanwhile, here in my home of Pennsylvania, Prick Santorectum is gonna go down in flames, too. And good riddance to his ass, too. Let him go back to Virginia where he belongs, and quit taking my state, and the school district of Penn Hills for a ride!

And if this war is so "noble" and such a great cause, then why aren't Bush's party-animal daughters over there?? It's good enough for plenty of other daughters, so why not Jenna and Barbara?

I sincerely hope this, and a bunch of other scandals that are brewing finally come to a head, and we get to pay you guys back for impeaching Clinton! I say IMPEACH BUSH....NOW!!!

"But as a small sign of the many ways the White House maximized the impact of the 2½-hour stop at the Baghdad airport, administration officials said yesterday that Bush picked up a decoration, not a serving platter."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2001806972_bushturkey04.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1101131,00.html
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3660806/
http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000742.html

"The PUK and Rasul Ali’s special “Ba’athist hunters” have, it seems, been doing what the Americans have consistently failed to do. In an interview with the PUK’s al-Hurriyah radio station last Wednesday, Adil Murad, a member of the PUK’s political bureau, confirmed that the Kurdish unit had been pursuing fugitive Ba’athists for the past months in Mosul, Samarra, Tikrit and areas to the south including al-Dwar where Saddam was eventually cornered. Murad even says that the day before Saddam’s capture he was tipped off by PUK General Thamir al-Sultan, that Saddam would be arrested within the next 72 hours."
http://www.sundayherald.com/38816
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/
http://www.wokr13.tv/news/national/story.aspx?content_id=422B960A-26BA-4891-9E60-21C8818788D4

And for a bunch more: http://www.oldamericancentury.org/saddam_capture.htm


Hey, thanks for all that! But you know, he will reject that out of hand, because it tells a story he does not want to believe.

Oh, and once again, we do not achieve our goal, and we piss people off at the same time, making things worse!

Yeah, that's what happens when you go to war against people who in no way provoked you. THEY didn't attack us. THEY didn't send the terrorists (I hear that they were actually from Saudi Arabia, although the responsibility was from Al Qaeda, hence why we attacked Afghanistan for not giving us Osama Bin Laden). What they didn't do was let in the UN inspectors (not a wise move, don't misunderstand me, but is it worth lives? And it was UN inspectors not allowed in, so it ought to have been a UN decision).

Um, so I'm against the war, in case you didn't figure it out.

If Saddam didn't let the inspectors in, then just what, exactly, did you think Hans Blix was DOING over there? Vacationing at Club Med, Baghdad??

"I see it as a reason to increase research and developement into alternate and more efficient,less pollution fuel sources, encourage conservation and give incentives to start improvements. Also-to start tapping our own sources in North Amercia. And he just started that last week."

Oh the irony of it all....

The Bush Administration is looking for 'alternative fuel sources' ! Unless his oil lobby backers have a stake in this technology/output, can you see this happening at any pace ?? It's a lovely thought to know that the US is giving lip service to the notions, but as experience has shown, The Americo-centric view of the world means that Bush et al will be scratching alot of his friends backs first. Just look at the Kyoto summit and the consequent debacle.

Oh, and you complain of high fuel prices - Come and live in Britain, you might moan a little less !!

And so back to WMD.....

Alright, to the idiot who mentioned hitler, you really made me so very angry! First off, you boob, no, Hitler didn't attack us. His allies did. Al Quada attacked america on September 11. There has been no proof that Saddam was at all conected to Al Quada, unless you count the six degrees of seperation. You thought you were being funny? Was that it? Hitler has nothing to do with this war, just like liberating the Iraqis! Oh, mercy, I gotta shove my head in a bucket of ice water and never, ever return to this thread.

I've always been surprised that the US Military didn't just take some of our own WMD's and plant them in Iraq, after the invasion, so that they could be "found" later, and then justified Bush's war. Not like I put dishonesty past Republicans.

In this case, one should exonerate the U.S. military since senior Pentagon officials (those in uniform as opposed to those civilians without military experience who were planted there by Bush) repeatedly reminded the Bush régime that a) an attack against Iraq would represent an unfortunate shift in America's longstanding 'no first strike' policy; b) that an attack against Iraq would unsettle the Islamic world and especially western Asia (Middle East); c) unlike the Gulf war, our allies (except perfidious Albion) would not stand with us and would never agree to an unprovoked attack against Iraq, especially one based on 'doctored' intelligence; d) the U.S.forces would not be able to maintain a long occupation of Iraq.

Rumsfeld evidently told the Joint Chiefs of Staff to get in line or find other jobs, and the White House source said at the time (January 2003) that 'the President considers this nation to be at war, and, as such, considers any opposition to his policies to be no less than an act of treason."

It is true that the military is fighting this war, but it is also true that the Bush régime instigated it, lied about the WMD and the ties of Hussein to Al Qaeda, and has tried to silence all opposition. The blame for the war and for the death and destruction must lie with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.

The national reserve is for emergencies, if we were cut off from outside sources, not simply high prices. I'm sure there are many that would love to see us start using that up.
The upside might be a faster plan to start efficient extraction of the tremendous deposits of oil in Utah & Colorado.

So, No-I wouldnt ask myself that question as its foolish.

Yeah, go defend Bush some more, why don't you? If it were a DEMOCRAT in the White House, you guys would be SCREAMING for him to release some from the Reserves to lower prices...and you'd be castigating him if he failed to. but, since it's YOUR boy...Bushie the wonderfuck King Sadim (reverse Midas, everything HE touches turns into a big pile of shit...the economy, the war in Iraq, etc, etc...) you won't say a word against him...and you won't HEAR a word against him, will you?

I think YOU'RE foolish.

Bush is the ONLY one not to have done so.

Why on earth do you not see this for what it is?

Because Lickers is brainwashed and blinded by loyalty to Bush to the point where Lickers can see none of the evil that Bush does.

Yeah, go defend Bush some more, why don't you? If it were a DEMOCRAT in the White House, you guys would be SCREAMING for him to release some from the Reserves to lower prices...and you'd be castigating him if he failed to. but, since it's YOUR boy...Bushie the wonderfuck King Sadim (reverse Midas, everything HE touches turns into a big pile of shit...the economy, the war in Iraq, etc, etc...) you won't say a word against him...and you won't HEAR a word against him, will you?


Calm down. I cant listen to a word when there is that much spittle in the air.

And dont assume what I would say or do.

Because Lickers is brainwashed and blinded by loyalty to Bush to the point where Lickers can see none of the evil that Bush does.


Dont you realize if you had a point, its greatly over shadowed by this bullshit?

Get off my back-you're annoying.

Oop-you got me there. I was so trying to get on your bandwagon.

So, Bush is stealing Iraqi oil and not even releasing our emergency national reserves? he's trying to hurt the US?

no...he's trying to help his cronies and buddies in the oil business. The fact that it is hurting the U.S.?? Well, he just doesn't CARE!! It's helping his cronies and that is all he cares about.

Bush is like a cockroach, see? The cockroach who falls into your bag of flour is just trying to feed himself...he's not really trying to fuck up your bag of flour. But, that is the effect the cockroach has. He's just trying to feed himself, and, in the process of that, he just fucked up your whole bag of flour.

Perfect analogy.

I don't really think whether I agree or disagree with the war at this point is relevent. The war is a fact now and nothing can change that. The decision was made by my legally and freely elected government - part of living in a democracy (ok representative republic) is that we all agree to accept and abide by the decisions made either by the majority of voters or by the officials the majority elects. If I don't agree with the actions of those elected officials then my recourse is to do my darndest to get them out of office the next election - luckily I won't have to worry about Bush anymore as he is at his 2 term limit. Actively trying to undermine the decisions and efforts of my government is not acceptable recourse IMHO.

Bullocks.

The US has always faced danger from one source or another, wether imagined or real.

In fact, If im not mistaken, even Bush SR did the same thing, during Iraq 1.

We get more of our oil from South America, than Iraq, or Saudi Arabia.

And we get the LARGEST PORTION of our oil from...guess where???

CANADA!!!

All Im saying is, Saddam couldnt have just conjured weapons, could he?

It is not often I say 'w00t', but I will now.

w00t, 500 posts! :cool:

And this is probably just the beginning. I expect that in time, events will prove that Bush was completely justified in the invasion and regime change in Iraq.

One thousand five hundred gallons is a little more than a trace by any measure, is it?

The question is not if the have any Weapon of Mass Destruction.
The question is ... do they have oil?

Since the answer is "yes" then the war is justified.
Always remember: is the money that makes a war.

On the news the other day there was a slight hint at iran next as he claimed that they also had nukes. hypocryte

In this case, one should exonerate the U.S. military since senior Pentagon officials (those in uniform as opposed to those civilians without military experience who were planted there by Bush) repeatedly reminded the Bush régime that a) an attack against Iraq would represent an unfortunate shift in America's longstanding 'no first strike' policy; b) that an attack against Iraq would unsettle the Islamic world and especially western Asia (Middle East); c) unlike the Gulf war, our allies (except perfidious Albion) would not stand with us and would never agree to an unprovoked attack against Iraq, especially one based on 'doctored' intelligence; d) the U.S.forces would not be able to maintain a long occupation of Iraq.

Rumsfeld evidently told the Joint Chiefs of Staff to get in line or find other jobs, and the White House source said at the time (January 2003) that 'the President considers this nation to be at war, and, as such, considers any opposition to his policies to be no less than an act of treason."

It is true that the military is fighting this war, but it is also true that the Bush régime instigated it, lied about the WMD and the ties of Hussein to Al Qaeda, and has tried to silence all opposition. The blame for the war and for the death and destruction must lie with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.


I couldn't agree more. You got it pretty much down perfect.

no mater how many chemicals he finds, it'll never justify the killing of 100,000 innocent iraqis

Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...
Oil prices are sky high because of instability in the region, among other structural causes like OPEC. Even if lower prices were the objective (which they weren't) we wouldn't see it for many years. And, may I repeat, it wasn't the objective. However, strategic control of parts of the oil rich region was a large reason why the US wanted to go to war. If you think US oil companies/Bush pals are not benefiting simply because they aren’t passing benefits onto you….think again.

Darn it stop bashing the conservatives! If you liberals can't come up with good dabate then shut up because I won't debate with someone who uses " your a mindless pawn" as an argument. :sniper: :mp5: :gundge: :headbang:

Yes I suppoert the war and I'm happy to see some WMDs finally.

Yes I suppoert the war and I'm happy to see some WMDs finally. Umm, did you read the thread?

Darn it stop bashing the conservatives! If you liberals can't come up with good dabate then shut up because I won't debate with someone who uses " your a mindless pawn" as an argument. :sniper: :mp5: :gundge: :headbang:

Yes I suppoert the war and I'm happy to see some WMDs finally.

That's post-invasion WMDs - under the guard of liberation forces.

Darn it stop bashing the conservatives! If you liberals can't come up with good dabate then shut up because I won't debate with someone who uses " your a mindless pawn" as an argument. :sniper: :mp5: :gundge: :headbang:

Yes I suppoert the war and I'm happy to see some WMDs finally.

Hmmm. Extensive use of emoticons. Failure to read the article posted completely. Making general assumptions while failing to bother notice contradicting evidence. Hmmmm.

I'd say that debating with a mindless pawn is pointless anyways. It's not like a mindless pawn has a mind to debate with. =p

Hmmm. Extensive use of emoticons. Failure to read the article posted completely. Making general assumptions while failing to bother notice contradicting evidence. Hmmmm.
I'll put it more succinctly - nub. :headbang:

The linked article clearly states that this is a post-war facility. This is nonetheless a serious threat, and brings up some misunderstandings about chemical weapons.

While everyone has concerned themselves with finding the 'smoking gun', the stockpiles of nerve gas shells or warheads, they have ignored the fact that large amounts of nerve gas precursors are unaccounted for. Most of the chemical warheads had a short shelf-life and are unuseable today even if found, whereas the chemicals are ready to be put to use.

It is not particularly difficult to make fresh Sarin, Tabun, Mustard gas, and GF given the chemicals. The chemicals are difficult to import, and Saddam built manufacturing facilities to make his own. These precursors are apparently easy to store and hide, and the fact that they have shown up in this home-built lab should be a matter of some concern to all.

Saddam's regime accounts for the missing 1,065 tons of precursors by claiming unilateral destruction. Unverified, of course, and therefor the claim is suspect. There are possibly thousands of tons of precursors potentially hidden away ready to assemble. He didn't need to hide the weapons themselves, just the chemicals - and from my reading while some of these chemicals are relatively common, many are not and they are difficult to procure on the open market. Hence the need to manufacture and hide their own.

"Chemicals that serve as ingredients for making chemical weapon agents are known as "precursors." In the early stages of its chemical weapon program Iraq imported the necessary precursors. However, from 1986 to 1990, Iraq constructed and operated numerous plants and facilities (such as Fallujah 1, 2 and 3) for producing precursors on its own. Iraq told UNSCOM that during Iraq's entire chemical weapon program, which lasted from the mid-1970s through at least 1991, it produced and procured 20,150 tons of key precursor chemicals. Of that amount, Iraq claimed to have used 14,500 tons to produce chemical agents or other key precursor chemicals, leaving 5,650 tons of precursors unaccounted for. However, Iraq also claimed that only 3,915 tons of precursor agents remained inside the country as of January 1991, a noticeable discrepancy. Of that 3,915 tons, a total of 2,850 tons were destroyed under UNSCOM supervision and the rest was said by Iraq to have been destroyed during the first Gulf War or destroyed by Iraq unilaterally."

Additonal indications that should cause concern regarding the existence of chemical weapons precursors in Iraq:

"After UNSCOM inspectors left Iraq in December 1998, U.S.-led forces bombed many sites believed to be chemical weapon plants. After the bombing, reports emerged that Iraq had rebuilt many of those sites, and that the sites appeared to be operating. It was inferred that Iraq had resumed its production of chemical weapons, and was adding new elements to the portion of its previous stockpile that had never been accounted for. No evidence confirming these inferences has emerged to date."

http://www.iraqwatch.org/profiles/chemical.html

How on earth can you say that

they re-elected him.

[comicbook guy]Best reply, ever.[/comicbook guy]

That still doesn't qualify the "immediate threat" that led us to go to war.

Then again, I put no level of evil or cruelty past Republicans. They have earned nothing but my utter and complete contempt. I wouldn't vote a fucking Republican to the position of DOG-CATCHER....let alone President.
Ouch. Got some suppressed memories of Republicans under your bed? Calm down some, and wipe the spittle from your mouth. It's bad form. ;)
I sincerely hope this, and a bunch of other scandals that are brewing finally come to a head, and we get to pay you guys back for impeaching Clinton! I say IMPEACH BUSH....NOW!!!
He did nothing illegal, at least to the point where anyone can prove it. It'd be a rather short waste of time for everyone to set him on trial when the charge would quite easily be dismissed.

Hmm...so to summarise, the Iraqis couldn't make weapons of mass destruction BEFORE the war...and now they can! Well done, Mr Bush!

Can you prove that the war is for oil? If it is, then why are gas prices, as well as oil prices, sky high? That makes no logical sense...

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Who benefits from high oil prices? Have you taken a look at the energy stocks lately? The higher the price of crude, the more money the producers(Saudis) and middlemen(Oil Companies) make.

Also Your logic is based on the assumption that Bush and oil companies would never dream of screwing the American populace over just to make more money. eg If they invaded to get more oil, they must have done so with the intention of easing our burden, thus the fact that our burden has not been eased means they can't have been after oil. That is tragically misplaced faith.

What our dear friend neglects to mention is that this is a post-invasion built lab. I hear water coming in fast.

Indeed, he also fails to mention that the chemicals found were dual purpose and had not been weaponized. They are willing to grab at any straw though.. and yes, they have already said they believe it to be an "insurgent" lab, not a Saddam one. Even on that they admit they can't say for sure if said chemicals were meant for weapons.

Stephistan! I didn't know you were back!

Stephistan! I didn't know you were back!

I am, I am! :)

Didn't we go through this bullshit parade in 2004?

I just want to say, lyric is not the representative for the anti-war cause. We get our share of his people too.

Darn it stop bashing the conservatives! If you liberals can't come up with good dabate then shut up because I won't debate with someone who uses " your a mindless pawn" as an argument. :sniper: :mp5: :gundge: :headbang:

Yes I suppoert the war and I'm happy to see some WMDs finally.

It isn't "bashing" the conservatives when you point out FACTS. And we damn well have a right to have a different fucking opinion than you do. I'm sick and tired of YOU GUYS "bashing" the Liberals.

I just want to say, lyric is not the representative for the anti-war cause. We get our share of his people too.

First...I am a SHE...not a he.

Second, Did I ever CLAIM to be a representative for ANYTHING, let alone the anti-war cause? No, I don't think so!

Third, the only thing I am representative of is my own views, and my own cause. And that view and cause is that Bush is a fucking asshole that I hate with every fucking fiber of my being!! Can I make that any clearer?

As far as I am concerned, Bush is the fucking Anti-Christ! He is The. Worst. President. Ever.

He is a A-one, choice, prime, blue-ribbon, state-of-the-art, high-tech, Olympic-class ASSHOLE!

Can I make very clear for the record that I absolutely HATE George Fucking Bush, and I'll jump at any chance to trash him! ANY CHANCE!!

I just wish the fucker would go eat another few pretzels...or maybe ride his bike in heavy traffic....or maybe his Segway in heavy traffic. Preferably, with Dick Cheney, too.

First...I am a SHE...not a he.

Second, Did I ever CLAIM to be a representative for ANYTHING, let alone the anti-war cause? No, I don't think so!

Third, the only thing I am representative of is my own views, and my own cause. And that view and cause is that Bush is a fucking asshole that I hate with every fucking fiber of my being!! Can I make that any clearer?

As far as I am concerned, Bush is the fucking Anti-Christ! He is The. Worst. President. Ever.

He is a A-one, choice, prime, blue-ribbon, state-of-the-art, high-tech, Olympic-class ASSHOLE!

Can I make very clear for the record that I absolutely HATE George Fucking Bush, and I'll jump at any chance to trash him! ANY CHANCE!!

I just wish the fucker would go eat another few pretzels...or maybe ride his bike in heavy traffic....or maybe his Segway in heavy traffic. Preferably, with Dick Cheney, too.

You need to watch your language. Bush is no anti-christ, and he's certainly not the worst president. I'm reporting you not for flaming or anything, but because of the absurd amount of swearing in your posts. I'm tired of it. If you can't express yourself without it, don't say anything at all. Obviously anger management classes need to be considered.

Oh, and in case anyone was wondering, why do I hate GWB so badly?? Well, it is really on General Principles. He has an "R" in front of his name, and that is enough, right there, to make me hate him.

I can think of only one Republican who isn't worthy of my hate. Used to be that there were two of them, but one of them became an Independent (Jim Jeffords.)

The other one happens to be one of my Senators. And I'll give you a hint, it isn't Prick Santorectum.

You need to watch your language. Bush is no anti-christ, and he's certainly not the worst president. I'm reporting you not for flaming or anything, but because of the absurd amount of swearing in your posts. I'm tired of it. If you can't express yourself without it, don't say anything at all. Obviously anger management classes need to be considered.

Oh, go ahead and report me. You just LOVE reporting anyone with a different opinion from yourself! Why don't you put me on your ignore list, if you can't handle my opinion? I've had YOU on my ignore list forever, because I can't stand you! I don't go and report you, trying to get you in trouble, though God knows I could...on several occasions! so how about you just put me on ignore and leve me the hell alone?

I have every damn right to hate Republicans! They have caused me nothing but pain. I hate every one of them.

Oh, and in case anyone was wondering, why do I hate GWB so badly?? Well, it is really on General Principles. He has an "R" in front of his name, and that is enough, right there, to make me hate him.

I can think of only one Republican who isn't worthy of my hate. Used to be that there were two of them, but one of them became an Independent (Jim Jeffords.)

The other one happens to be one of my Senators. And I'll give you a hint, it isn't Prick Santorectum.

If you google Santorum, you'll find that there is no need to modify his name to make it an insult :D

Oh, go ahead and report me. You just LOVE reporting anyone with a different opinion from yourself! Why don't you put me on your ignore list, if you can't handle my opinion? I've had YOU on my ignore list forever, because I can't stand you! I don't go and report you, trying to get you in trouble, though God knows I could...on several occasions! so how about you just put me on ignore and leve me the hell alone?

I have every damn right to hate Republicans! They have caused me nothing but pain. I hate every one of them.Lyric, I have to agree with Mesa. You really need to chill. Opinions are one thing, offensive posts are something completely different.
You need to find nice ways of saying you hate Republicans like everyone else or not say it at all.

Oh, go ahead and report me. You just LOVE reporting anyone with a different opinion from yourself! Why don't you put me on your ignore list, if you can't handle my opinion? I've had YOU on my ignore list forever, because I can't stand you! I don't go and report you, trying to get you in trouble, though God knows I could...on several occasions! so how about you just put me on ignore and leve me the hell alone?

I have every damn right to hate Republicans! They have caused me nothing but pain. I hate every one of them.

Actually I was talking to some greens today at freshmen orientation and I have no problem with them. Those people were actually nice to talk to and they were understanding. You on the other hand call people a-holes because they have different opinions then you. I did not do that to you, so please don't push these accusations on me. All I'm saying for anyone to take your seriously, you need to control your temper better.

They have caused you nothing but pain? From what I hear, most of your predictment was caused by you. Take personal responsibility of yourself, like I have.

Lyric, I have to agree with Mesa. You really need to chill. Opinions are one thing, offensive posts are something completely different.
You need to find nice ways of saying you hate Republicans like everyone else or not say it at all.

Learod, you are getting on my nerves. Back off. Or you'll be on my ignore list next. I'm tired of having you act like you're a Mod and looking over MY shoulder all the time.

In fact, I'll tell you what...since I NEVER see you correcting anyone else, EVER...even when they post things worse than I ever have...the very next time I see you correcting me about anything, I am going to consider it harassment, and take the appropriate action.

I have simply HAD it with you always after ME.

Incidentally, there IS no nice way of saying I hate Republicans. I CAN'T say anything nice about them. They are the cause of every single problem in the entire world.

Lyric I don't know if you are ignoring me or not. But we are just trying to give you some reasoned advice.. try to cool down.. we aren't acting like mods. We just find you unreasonable to interact with.

Actually I was talking to some greens today at freshmen orientation and I have no problem with them. Those people were actually nice to talk to and they were understanding. You on the other hand call people a-holes because they have different opinions then you. I did not do that to you, so please don't push these accusations on me. All I'm saying for anyone to take your seriously, you need to control your temper better.

They have caused you nothing but pain? From what I hear, most of your predictment was caused by you. Take personal responsibility of yourself, like I have.

Yeah, right. I asked the company I was working for to lose the contract I was working on. I asked the new company to hire me in and lie to me about what my salary would be. Yep, all my fault. You don't know doodly-squat about my situation, so how about you just keep it to yourself?

The White House has already said that they were mistaken about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, so I'm not clear on what the debate is about.

Incidentally, everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs, that wasn't the debate. At the time, opponents of the war griped that the U.S. should have greater support from the U.N. before going in, but nobody questioned the validity of the information. You can't turn around after the fact and cry about misinformation that you also relied on.

Learod, you are getting on my nerves. Back off. Or you'll be on my ignore list next. I'm tired of having you act like you're a Mod and looking over MY shoulder all the time.
Lyric, in all my time here I have only ever found it necessary to put two posters on 'ignore'. One no longer posts on NS, while the other... let's just say they're currently present and accounted for, here and now.

Simply put, it's not worth your energy. Ignore 'em. God knows my nemesis did the same in my case, and while it's a somewhat-less-than-satisfying solution, I've been mercifully free from the 'deep end' of the sort of blinkered, drooling idiocy that more often than not prompts responses from me that land me in the Moderation shit-house.

The White House has already said that they were mistaken about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, so I'm not clear on what the debate is about.

Incidentally, everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs, that wasn't the debate. At the time, opponents of the war griped that the U.S. should have greater support from the U.N. before going in, but nobody questioned the validity of the information. You can't turn around after the fact and cry about misinformation that you also relied on.

Oh, yes we can, when we find irrefutable proof, after the fact, that the Pretzeldent knowingly, and willfully LIED to us about those WMD's. Heard of the Downing Street Memo, by any chance?

Yeah, right. I asked the company I was working for to lose the contract I was working on. I asked the new company to hire me in and lie to me about what my salary would be. Yep, all my fault. You don't know doodly-squat about my situation, so how about you just keep it to yourself?

So what this company did is Bush's fault? How so? There are plenty of other jobs out there. My friend is getting re-training for another career (in computer graphics).

Well, I'm not going to get into this.

Lyric, in all my time here I have only ever found it necessary to put two posters on 'ignore'. One no longer posts on NS, while the other... let's just say they're currently present and accounted for, here and now.

Simply put, it's not worth your energy. Ignore 'em. God knows my nemesis did the same in my case, and while it's a somewhat-less-than-satisfying solution, I've been mercifully free from the 'deep end' of the sort of blinkered, drooling idiocy that more often than not prompts responses from me that land me in the Moderation shit-house.

True enough, Dobbs....but I get a feeling I'm being deliberately TARGETED by a actual GROUP of conservatives that want to get me in trouble. I wish there was a way to Ignore all known conservatives. All they do is make me angry.

True enough, Dobbs....but I get a feeling I'm being deliberately TARGETED by a actual GROUP of conservatives that want to get me in trouble. I wish there was a way to Ignore all known conservatives. All they do is make me angry.

The issue is here, I was simply giving you a suggestion. I'm not targeting you. But you did not take my suggestion so I posted a complaint in the moderation forum. You use a ridiculous, excessive amount of swearing that does nothing to help your point. I'm not a conservative either.

The White House has already said that they were mistaken about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, so I'm not clear on what the debate is about.

Incidentally, everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs, that wasn't the debate. At the time, opponents of the war griped that the U.S. should have greater support from the U.N. before going in, but nobody questioned the validity of the information. You can't turn around after the fact and cry about misinformation that you also relied on.

I thought it was quite obvious at the time that Dubya was presenting an incredibly misleading case for WMDs in Iraq. He clearly used any source, no matter how unreliable, as long as they fit his conclusions, while ignoring those that didn't. Although no national leaders had the guts to call him a liar, which is fair enough since that could put them in the "against" camp...

The White House has already said that they were mistaken about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, so I'm not clear on what the debate is about.

Incidentally, everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs, that wasn't the debate. At the time, opponents of the war griped that the U.S. should have greater support from the U.N. before going in, but nobody questioned the validity of the information. You can't turn around after the fact and cry about misinformation that you also relied on.That's a bunch of crap Brian, and you should realise it. Everyone over here was questioning the "proof" that Powell showed the SC and wanted to wait until Blix finished his report.
I have no clue where you got the idea that we believed the crap (No, wait, I DO (http://www.foxnews.com)). We just didn't call it that before it wasn't proven.

So what this company did is Bush's fault? How so? There are plenty of other jobs out there. My friend is getting re-training for another career (in computer graphics).

Well, I'm not going to get into this.

Bush and his policies tanked the economy, thus making it possible for businesses to pay employees less. Because businesses were able to pay less, the company I worked for had the ability to screw around with our salaries. If the economy had been booming, late 90's style, they never would have gotten away with it, because everyone would have walked out, en masse, and they never would have been able to replace anyone...not for what they were willing to pay.

THAT is how Bush is responsible.

The issue is here, I was simply giving you a suggestion. I'm not targeting you. But you did not take my suggestion so I posted a complaint in the moderation forum. You use a ridiculous, excessive amount of swearing that does nothing to help your point. I'm not a conservative either.


Yeah...right you're not! That's why you ignore anything and everything that might cast Bushie-boy in a bad light, right? You're not a conservative....puh-leeeze. A more obvious conservative I have never encountered. As to the rest, exactly who died and made YOU a Mod? The way you bait people? The reason you are on my ignore is because of your constant baiting of me.

Bush and his policies tanked the economy, thus making it possible for businesses to pay employees less. Because businesses were able to pay less, the company I worked for had the ability to screw around with our salaries. If the economy had been booming, late 90's style, they never would have gotten away with it, because everyone would have walked out, en masse, and they never would have been able to replace anyone...not for what they were willing to pay.

THAT is how Bush is responsible.

Tank the economy? Being an economics minor and doing reports on the economy, I can say the economy is the opposite of tanking. In fact it is growing rapidly. I'm hoping the economy will cool down a bit because of inflation issues. So he didn't tank the economy.. and if anything your skills need to be updated. That's why i'm going for a degree that's highly dynamic. The economy is doing great right now, even with high oil prices. i'm hoping for a bit of a cool-down, so demand will cool off a bit.

So re-take economics 101.

I'm outta here for now...this is pissing me off too badly. My blood pressure has shot up about a thousand degrees, and I just cannot take it. This is not good for my health and well-being.

Yeah...right you're not! That's why you ignore anything and everything that might cast Bushie-boy in a bad light, right? You're not a conservative....puh-leeeze. A more obvious conservative I have never encountered. As to the rest, exactly who died and made YOU a Mod? The way you bait people? The reason you are on my ignore is because of your constant baiting of me.

You have apparent issues with the facts. I'm not fond of Bush with issues like religion and gay marriage. I'm no conservative. So please, get with reality. i'm no moderator. I'm just saying you don't need to use an excessive amount of swearing to make points. It makes you look immature. I'm not baiting you. I'm just saying.. dude... CHILL. Then people will listen to you more.

If I'm on your ignore list, how are you responding to my posts?

You have apparent issues with the facts. I'm not fond of Bush with issues like religion and gay marriage. I'm no conservative. So please, get with reality. i'm no moderator. I'm just saying you don't need to use an excessive amount of swearing to make points. It makes you look immature. I'm not baiting you. I'm just saying.. dude... CHILL. Then people will listen to you more.

If I'm on your ignore list, how are you responding to my posts?I think the "ignore list" and "mod" statements were directed at me.

Tank the economy? Being an economics minor and doing reports on the economy, I can say the economy is the opposite of tanking. In fact it is growing rapidly. I'm hoping the economy will cool down a bit because of inflation issues. So he didn't tank the economy.. and if anything your skills need to be updated. That's why i'm going for a degree that's highly dynamic. The economy is doing great right now, even with high oil prices. i'm hoping for a bit of a cool-down, so demand will cool off a bit.

So re-take economics 101.


Seriously... this person either doesn't know what the term "tank the economy" means or is visiting us from a parallel universe :D We're doing just great, economically.

The White House has already said that they were mistaken about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, so I'm not clear on what the debate is about.

Incidentally, everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs, that wasn't the debate. At the time, opponents of the war griped that the U.S. should have greater support from the U.N. before going in, but nobody questioned the validity of the information. You can't turn around after the fact and cry about misinformation that you also relied on.


Nobody and I mean nobody who feels the need for evidence ever
accepted that there were WMD in Iraq, all the indications were that
there were not and could not be any in Iraq in 2002.

No checkable proof of WMD was ever confirmed,
anything that was checkable was discredited and proven to be untrue.

The validity was constantly questioned.
The events leading up to the war are incredibly well documented
in detail and are widely available all over the net.
I posted an unfortunately rather long but less than complete
chain of events on the 2nd page of this thread.
Where I also included my opinion that no one
believed the WMD claims including the people making them and
some of the reasons why that was my opinion.


It was quite clear that the U.S. administration had already made up
its mind to go to war and the efforts to get them to go the legal route
with proper authorisation from the U.N. was an effort to prevent
them starting an illegal war that would kill lots of people.

The White House has already said that they were mistaken about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, so I'm not clear on what the debate is about.

Incidentally, everyone thought that Iraq had WMDs, that wasn't the debate. At the time, opponents of the war griped that the U.S. should have greater support from the U.N. before going in, but nobody questioned the validity of the information. You can't turn around after the fact and cry about misinformation that you also relied on.
There were many people who did not believe that Iraq had WMD. Because... we uh... listened to the weapons inspectors. We should have had greater support from the UN but maybe minimum support would have held us over for a bit. I can see why we didn't get the support, though.

There were many people who did not believe that Iraq had WMD. Because... we uh... listened to the weapons inspectors. We should have had greater support from the UN but maybe minimum support would have held us over for a bit. I can see why we didn't get the support, though.


What the US really needed was friends who told them the truth.
Who stood up to them and told them to back off.

Just like individuals need when they are about to go off half cocked.

It seems to only real friends that the US had at the time
were the French and the UN secretary general.

It seems though that America doesn't recognize friendship and has
it confused with sycophancy and toadying.

You have apparent issues with the facts. I'm not fond of Bush with issues like religion and gay marriage. I'm no conservative. So please, get with reality. i'm no moderator. I'm just saying you don't need to use an excessive amount of swearing to make points. It makes you look immature. I'm not baiting you. I'm just saying.. dude... CHILL. Then people will listen to you more.

If I'm on your ignore list, how are you responding to my posts?

Because I can still see when you HAVE posted something, and have an option to look at it. I only look when your posting is close to mine, because I just know you'll have some snarky comment to or about me, and I'm not letting you get away with that unchallenged.

Try putting ME on your ignore list, and you'll see what I mean. You can still see WHEN and WHERE I have posted, and you will have an option to READ my post, too.

Seriously... this person either doesn't know what the term "tank the economy" means or is visiting us from a parallel universe :D We're doing just great, economically.

Let's see YOUR ass out on the job market, and see how great you think the economy is THEN.

Because I can still see when you HAVE posted something, and have an option to look at it. I only look when your posting is close to mine, because I just know you'll have some snarky comment to or about me, and I'm not letting you get away with that unchallenged.

Try putting ME on your ignore list, and you'll see what I mean. You can still see WHEN and WHERE I have posted, and you will have an option to READ my post, too.


Then what is the point of putting them on your ignore list if your going
to read their posts about you which is why you put them on your ignore list
in the first place.

Or am I missing something or are you missing something

It took a US invasion for WMDs to be created in Iraq. So ironic its not humorous... like most of the rhetoric and conduct of this war.

Because I can still see when you HAVE posted something, and have an option to look at it. I only look when your posting is close to mine, because I just know you'll have some snarky comment to or about me, and I'm not letting you get away with that unchallenged.

Try putting ME on your ignore list, and you'll see what I mean. You can still see WHEN and WHERE I have posted, and you will have an option to READ my post, too.

That means you are not ignoring me, and you are therefore hollow to your word. You don't have to read my post. You can ignore them. You can't challenge me anyways.. your attacks are woefully inadequate.

I bet that's just propoganda to boost bush's support

Then what is the point of putting them on your ignore list if your going
to read their posts about you which is why you put them on your ignore list
in the first place.

Or am I missing something or are you missing something

Because I don't have to see any of the other inane nonsense they say. But I'm not going to let them make snarky comments to or about me without a response.

So, if their post is CLOSE to mine, I assume it's about me, and look. If it proves not to be, I close the screen and quit reading.

Quite frankly, I want to block out ANY opinion that is diametrically opposed to my own. Some disagreement is one thing. But someone who holds the diametric opposite of opinion than I do can only do one thing...piss me off!

That means you are not ignoring me, and you are therefore hollow to your word. You don't have to read my post. You can ignore them. You can't challenge me anyways.. your attacks are woefully inadequate.

why the hell do you think I am all but BEGGING you to put me on your ignore list?? I really DON'T want to see you...or hear from you....ever again. You have baited me way too many times for me to feel any other way.

why the hell do you think I am all but BEGGING you to put me on your ignore list?? I really DON'T want to see you...or hear from you....ever again. You have baited me way too many times for me to feel any other way.

I'm not the one who can't take personal responsibility for my actions, and I'm not the one who can't keep my cool. :mad:

Because I don't have to see any of the other inane nonsense they say. But I'm not going to let them make snarky comments to or about me without a response.

So, if their post is CLOSE to mine, I assume it's about me, and look. If it proves not to be, I close the screen and quit reading.

Quite frankly, I want to block out ANY opinion that is diametrically opposed to my own. Some disagreement is one thing. But someone who holds the diametric opposite of opinion than I do can only do one thing...piss me off!


So what your saying is that you want to see if they are baiting you
and you said you put them on ignore for baiting you
but the only purpose for the ignore now is to not see the posts where they
aren't baiting you?

I'm sorry but you are making no sense at all and are seeming rather foolish.


Best thing to do would be to take a break

I'm not the one who can't take personal responsibility for my actions, and I'm not the one who can't keep my cool. :mad:

Then take personal responisbility and quit fucking baiting me!!

You have been told and told and told and told and told and told....that your replies are not welcome or wanted. Just leave me the fuck alone, okay??

I don't like you, and you don't like me. So leave me alone!

Dammit!! Is it really THAT much to ask for you to just leave me the fuck alone?!!?!?

So what your saying is that you want to see if they are baiting you
and you said you put them on ignore for baiting you
but the only purpose for the ignore now is to not see the posts where they
aren't baiting you?

I'm sorry but you are making no sense at all and are seeming rather foolish.


Best thing to do would be to take a break

I don't want them to get away with baiting me. I want them to simply leave me alone. Once they have been informed they are on my ignore list, I would expect a common-courtesy that they would, in turn, put me on their ignore list, and just leave me the hell alone!

I have a problem with high blood pressure that requires medication, as it is...and I don't need that kind of aggrivation. All's I'm asking for is for certain people to simply leave me the hell alone! Before they make me blow a fuse!

No, but Mesa won't stop, will he? He won't be happy until he puts me in a fucking hospital!!

There are not many...but there are a few...NS posters who have the ability to push all my buttons in a way as to cause me to end up in the hospital over high blood pressure. Most of them know exactly who they are...and most have actually complied with my requests to just simply leave me alone.

I wish Mesa would.

JUST LEAVE ME ALONE, MESA!!! IS IT REALLY THAT HARD TO JUST LEAVE ME ALONE?!?!?

I have asked, I have begged, and I have PLEADED with you to just leave me the helll alone! So why won't you?!?!? Do you enjoy the prospect of sending someone to the hospital?? do you really want to hurt me?? Haven't I been hurt ENOUGH in this life already, without having to deal with YOU??

Please, for the love of GOD...just leave me alone, okay?

. All's I'm asking for is for certain people to simply leave me the hell alone! Before they make me blow a fuse!

No, but Mesa won't stop, will he? He won't be happy until he puts me in a fucking hospital!!


I would suggest anger management as you clearly have issues.

Mesa is not responsible for your blood pressure or the management of it.

If you get upset by them, do actually ignore them and don't read their posts.

Growing up a bit would help I guess.

I would suggest anger management as you clearly have issues.

Mesa is not responsible for your blood pressure or the management of it.

If you get upset by them, do actually ignore them and don't read their posts.

Growing up a bit would help I guess.

I CAN'T ignore them when they are responding directly to my posts!

These aren't the WMDs you're looking for.
Move along.
Gotta love the Star Wars reference. Besides, even if they werent, anyone here hear of the massive convoy of Iraqi army trucks caught by satellite crossing the border into Syria only days before the invasion? I expect in time we'll find many more similar sites. The Dems out there fail to realize that Iraq is a huge desolate country covered in sand. These conditions make it extremely easy to hide things but damn near impossible to find them.

I'm not the one who can't take personal responsibility for my actions, and I'm not the one who can't keep my cool. :mad:You're also the one that "[doesn't give] a fuck about WMD's" (source (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9472826&postcount=48)), so I don't understand why you even came to this thread in the first place.

Gotta love the Star Wars reference. Besides, even if they werent, anyone here hear of the massive convoy of Iraqi army trucks caught by satellite crossing the border into Syria only days before the invasion. I expect in time we'll find many more similar sites. The Dems out there fail to realize that Iraq is a huge desolate country covered in sand. These conditions make it easy to hide things but damn near impossible to find them.I recall that they figured out a rather nice technique with infra red to discover Iraqi SCUD launchers buried in sand...

I CAN'T ignore them when they are responding directly to my posts!

That is very much entirely your problem for you to deal with.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the thread or Mesa or anyone else.

Efforts by you to try to place your responsibility for your own issues
onto anyone elses shoulders is juvenile and pathetic.

Find your co-dependents elsewhere.

You're also the one that "[doesn't give] a fuck about WMD's" (source (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9472826&postcount=48)), so I don't understand why you even came to this thread in the first place.

congrats on taking that out of context. You need to read the whole thing before you make your ridiculous statements. :rolleyes:

There are not many...but there are a few...NS posters who have the ability to push all my buttons in a way as to cause me to end up in the hospital over high blood pressure. Most of them know exactly who they are...and most have actually complied with my requests to just simply leave me alone.

I wish Mesa would.

JUST LEAVE ME ALONE, MESA!!! IS IT REALLY THAT HARD TO JUST LEAVE ME ALONE?!?!?

I have asked, I have begged, and I have PLEADED with you to just leave me the helll alone! So why won't you?!?!? Do you enjoy the prospect of sending someone to the hospital?? do you really want to hurt me?? Haven't I been hurt ENOUGH in this life already, without having to deal with YOU??

Please, for the love of GOD...just leave me alone, okay?

Actually it seems you are unstable. Why do I come to that conclusion? why do you care so much over what someone says over the internet? I certainly don't. I don't really care about what anyone says here... it doesn't impact me. Why it impacts you.. well.. I kept my cool. I've been trying to be at ease. I don't know how that can send you to the hospital. You are the one that is getting mad at someone over the internet.

Gotta love the Star Wars reference. Besides, even if they werent, anyone here hear of the massive convoy of Iraqi army trucks caught by satellite crossing the border into Syria only days before the invasion? I expect in time we'll find many more similar sites. The Dems out there fail to realize that Iraq is a huge desolate country covered in sand. These conditions make it extremely easy to hide things but damn near impossible to find them.


There were lots and lots of stories about all kinds of things as the US
administration prepared to go to war.

The first being that they knew precisely where WMD were and
where the factories producing WMD were.

This was demonstrated false and that is when the US administration fell
back on Iraq being a big country the size of Texas.

After all the changing stories that came from the administration
most people assumed that stories about convoys heading to Syria
and ships in the Indian Ocean were put in place to explain the certain
lack of WMD in Iraq once the invasion had taken place.

I can understand people being fooled once,
I understand that there is a natural inclination in some to believe
their leaders, although I am confused a little as on the whole
when asked most people say politicians are all liars and they seem
to be mostly the same people who accepted without question
the non evidence regarding WMD's

but as the saying goes
fool me once shame on you
fool me twice shame on me

i quick thing to think about....

yeah the cache is new and post iraq invasion, but who is to know if the chemicals are? Chemicals could have very well been stolen during the pillaging of the cities post invasion or hidden away by a pre planned insurgency to be used later or, they could have been easliy brought in from surrounding nations...

but you have to question that at the very least...the lab is new..but what about the chemicals used in the lab, where did they come from and how old are they?

I recall that they figured out a rather nice technique with infra red to discover Iraqi SCUD launchers buried in sand...

Launchers are active, they contain active electronics they produce heat and other means of finding them. A drum of mustard gas or a missile buried underneath the sand will not be an easy find. Infrared works on heat sensativity. Besides, my point is that we are still finding things and doubtless will continue to find things and just because we havent found what we're looking for yet doesn't mean it isn't there. What dou you think Saddam was doing those 14 years he wasn't allowing the inspectors in? If he wasn't starting a weapons program or hiding weapons then what was he doing? Remember, he had almost a decade and a half to hide those weapons, do not expect us to find them that quickly.

And in regards to Relative's response, these pictures exist and they were on the news if you occaisionally watch anything other than CNN. I am not saying they were full of WMD's but there was something in that convoy that Saddam wanted to get out of there before we came in.

congrats on taking that out of context. You need to read the whole thing before you make your ridiculous statements. :rolleyes:And you need to learn to separate opinion from fact. It's not like I didn't link a source.

congrats on taking that out of context. You need to read the whole thing before you make your ridiculous statements. :rolleyes:

I don't see how full context makes it look any better

Originally Posted by Laerod
Mesa, denying the facts (that there were no WMDs and that Bush said there were some are qualified for that) isn't going to change anything. Fact is, the protesters aren't saying that anything will happen, they just want the troops back. It has been proven that Bush misled the public. He "lied". If you are unwilling to admit that and are willing to say that these protesters are lying, then there's something wrong with your definition of a lie.
I'm not mocking your views, unless your view is that telling people something that is not true is not a lie while telling people something that isn't exactly prudent is. In that case, your views deserve mockery.



Laerod, I don't give a fuck about the WMDs. So please, the protesters can kiss my rear end. I'm not going to give any respect to those people out there and I would rather spit at them in great disgust. I want the job done. I'm not going to admit to your beliefs and adopt them as my own. You deserve mockery. Bush went by what he had and I'd pin a medal on the guy for having guts.


I would ask though what job is it that you want done.
Why does Laerod deserve mockery.
What was it Bush had that he went by and what guts did it take for him
to do what he has done?

The first being that they knew precisely where WMD were and
where the factories producing WMD were.




Wasnt just the USA saying this, the british, french, germany, russian intell agencies all believed iraq had chemicals, and its been reported that saddam believed it as well. The people that worked for saddam were terrifed of him, they could never tell him no we dont have the capacity to do this anymore, our country is broke...so they told him they were making stuff when in fact they werent.

Launchers are active, they contain active electronics they produce heat and other means of finding them. A drum of mustard gas or a missile buried underneath the sand will not be an easy find. Infrared works on heat sensativity. Besides, my point is that we are still finding things and doubtless will continue to find things and just because we havent found what we're looking for yet doesn't mean it isn't there. What dou you think Saddam was doing those 14 years he wasn't allowing the inspectors in? If he wasn't starting a weapons program or hiding weapons then what was he doing? Remember, he had almost a decade and a half to hide those weapons, do not expect us to find them that quickly.That's cute. The reason they managed to find them was because metal retains heat longer than sand does.
And why do you think Saddam didn't mind letting inspectors in? I doubt that if he hid the weapons they would have been in any state to be used against anyone.

Gotta love the Star Wars reference. Besides, even if they werent, anyone here hear of the massive convoy of Iraqi army trucks caught by satellite crossing the border into Syria only days before the invasion? I expect in time we'll find many more similar sites. The Dems out there fail to realize that Iraq is a huge desolate country covered in sand. These conditions make it extremely easy to hide things but damn near impossible to find them.

Source?

I am reminded of Schroedingers (sp?) cat. Except this time it would be WMDs I guess. Problem is that the pesky waveform won't collapse for them neo-cons eh? You can't trumpet possible WMDs after all. =p

Shakespeare got it wrong. It's not longer "To be or not to be" It's more like "Maybe...I hope."


And in regards to Relative's response, these pictures exist and they were on the news if you occaisionally watch anything other than CNN. I am not saying they were full of WMD's but there was something in that convoy that Saddam wanted to get out of there before we came in.

It could be money and valuables. Or it could be just that years load of rubbish that he wanted to offload to Syria. Could be anything really. Makes for a lousy justification for war though.

Wasnt just the USA saying this, the british, french, germany, russian intell agencies all believed iraq had chemicals, and its been reported that saddam believed it as well. The people that worked for saddam were terrifed of him, they could never tell him no we dont have the capacity to do this anymore, our country is broke...so they told him they were making stuff when in fact they werent.Source it please. I don't recall anyone but Powell and Bush and Rumsfeld claiming that.

Edit: Add that I've read about the British intel claiming that there was no indication that the situation had gotten any worse, but that there most certainly wasn't enough intel.

Wasnt just the USA saying this, the british, french, germany, russian intell agencies all believed iraq had chemicals, and its been reported that saddam believed it as well. The people that worked for saddam were terrifed of him, they could never tell him no we dont have the capacity to do this anymore, our country is broke...so they told him they were making stuff when in fact they werent.

Actually when you look at what the intelligence agencies said
it boiled down to well he could have I suppose theres no real way to be sure.

Which somehow became established fact in the mouths of some politicians.

Or at least seemed to.

There was an awful lot of very careful language.

Such as when Bush referred to the British having recently published
that Iraq had sought Yellowcake or somesuch in Africa.

Bush and his administration were already aware that the the claim
was untrue.
So the language doesn't actually make the claim
it just rather disingenuously implies that it's true
If they had said it they would have been lying
but they were only telling the truth when they said the British government
had published it.

I have every damn right to hate Republicans! They have caused me nothing but pain. I hate every one of them.
Did I throw a baseball at you or something a while back? What did I do to deserve your hate? (Thanks for generalizing by the by...)

I get a feeling I'm being deliberately TARGETED by a actual GROUP of conservatives that want to get me in trouble. I wish there was a way to Ignore all known conservatives. All they do is make me angry.
Not even knowing Mesa or Laerod (although I've heard of them), I'd have to agree with them. You're overreacting just a bit when it comes to their posts. I've read through this all with a neutral outlook (or so I hope) and it seems that they're not attempting--at least on purpose--to upset you to the point that you're at. I don't disagree with ignoring them if you must, and, in fact, if that's the best way to keep you feeling good, then do ignore them. Again, it just seems that you're blowing your top over nothing worth your while. (No offense, Mesa and/or anyone else)

Now, through this post, I had absolutely no intention to anger you (as I'm conservative and all conservatives seem to make you angry). I am merely trying to help you breathe deeper and better. Don't let anyone--especially online users--get to you at a personal level. Even if they respond directly to you, you can still ignore them. Should someone decide to attack you personally, just breathe deep and say to yourself that they're not worth the time.

Okies?

Just trying to do some good for you, and nothing more. :) *gives friend-cookie*

Now, through this post, I had absolutely no intention to anger you (as I'm conservative and all conservatives seem to make you angry).I'm not conservative, actually. (unless you limit the political spectrum to only encompass the Greens)

I'm not conservative, actually. (unless you limit the political spectrum to only encompass the Greens)

Ah. My mistake. I was just going off of what Lyric was talking about when it came to conservatives angering her.

*cookie to you too*

<snip> Besides, my point is that we are still finding things and doubtless will continue to find things and just because we havent found what we're looking for yet doesn't mean it isn't there. What dou you think Saddam was doing those 14 years he wasn't allowing the inspectors in? If he wasn't starting a weapons program or hiding weapons then what was he doing? Remember, he had almost a decade and a half to hide those weapons, do not expect us to find them that quickly.

UN weapons inspectors were in Iraq from 1991/2 to 1998 when they were
withdrawn.

UN weapons inspectors went back into Iraq in 2002

At the time they went in for the second time the US was claiming
it knew where WMD were being manufactured.

For some reason they didn't think to inform the weapons inspectors
When the weapons inspectors finally went public through the newspapers
the US claimed they had never officially asked them for information.

None of the information later provided by the US led to any facilities
where WMD were or could be being made.

US weapons inspectors went in after the invasion.
They spent 2 years on the job and declared there was nothing to find
They also declared that all means of manufacture of WMD had been
destroyed by 1996 and that little actual WMD in the way of chemical
or biological agents could possibly have been in the country at that time.

Which was exactly what some of the UN weapons inspectors who
had been involved in the period up to 1998 had said all along.

Ah. My mistake. I was just going off of what Lyric was talking about when it came to conservatives angering her.

*cookie to you too*She got pissed because she felt like I was acting like a mod. I don't blame her, but I do feel offended when peoply refuse what I would consider good advice.

Actually when you look at what the intelligence agencies said
it boiled down to well he could have I suppose theres no real way to be sure.

Which somehow became established fact in the mouths of some politicians.

Or at least seemed to.

There was an awful lot of very careful language.

Such as when Bush referred to the British having recently published
that Iraq had sought Yellowcake or somesuch in Africa.

Bush and his administration were already aware that the the claim
was untrue.
So the language doesn't actually make the claim
it just rather disingenuously implies that it's true
If they had said it they would have been lying
but they were only telling the truth when they said the British government
had published it.

Actually, if you look it up on google about the Niger Yellowcake, the british got that intel from France ironicly, since Niger was a former french colony AND the company that actively mined that site was French. AND The government of Niger as openly said Iraq has tried to buy Yellowcake...though they rebuffed them a long time ago. But nobody cares about what Niger says they are a crappy country anyways this fight is for the big countries of USA France and others.

Also, i refer to the resolution itself, paragraph 2 where it openly states that iraq has WMD. This resolution was approved by the SC (the one that France, Russia, and others are on).


http://www.un.org/News/dh/iraq/iraq-blue-e-110702-1198.pdf

Also, i refer to the resolution itself, paragraph 2 where it openly states that iraq has WMD. This resolution was approved by the SC (the one that France, Russia, and others are on).
Preambs don't mean jack shit in the UN...

Also, i refer to the resolution itself, paragraph 2 where it openly states that iraq has WMD. This resolution was approved by the SC (the one that France, Russia, and others are on).


http://www.un.org/News/dh/iraq/iraq-blue-e-110702-1198.pdf


This was the only wording that the US would accept.
You will notice it also deplores that weapons inspectors have not
been in the country since 1998 without noting that that they
had been withdrawn by the US and no-one had ever tried to put them
back in.


The SC agreed to it to put weapons inspectors back in Iraq
so that whether there were WMD could be determined.
This we know from their statements in relation to this.

If the US had been acting in good faith on this,
the weapons inspectors would have been given full co-operation
by the country that claimed it had evidence of WMD and the
manufacture of WMD in Iraq.

If the US had been acting in good faith they would not have
gone to war without proof and would have waited for the
weapons inspectors to advise that they had done all they could.

That it was clear that they were not acting in good faith at the time
of that resolution is clear
firstly by their refusal to allow in the resolution a requirement that the
SC itself would decide if Iraq was in breach and if action needed to be taken
and
secondly by the lengths a number of members of the SC made
to announce after the resolution was passed that this resolution did
not give a trigger for war.

in relation to the niger yellowcake thing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3056626.stm

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/030331fa_fact1

Preambs don't mean jack shit in the UN...

gosh I wish I could be that concise

edit
and yes I do reckon I'm not the only one either

gosh I wish I could be that concise

edit
and yes I do reckon I'm not the only one eitherCan't stand it when people talk about the UN and have no clue how it runs. Had someone tell me a while back that the SC can overrule the GA and there's nothing to stop 'em.

Some of the companies to whom I have considered applying recently. :p

LOL, look at engineering recruitment sites, you will see pages of vacancies in Iraq, some in Afghanistan too. Basically every UK construction conglomerate and utility services company. Somehow I doubt it's all being paid for by benevolent donations from the rest of the world. :rolleyes:

And there's not much work being done, to be honest. But the bills are still being paid.

I have also not mentioned the US culture of corruption, where agents managing accounts add on millions of dollars in bribes to contracts. That was covered in the newspapers here recently, KPMG got really pissed off the US Army prevented them from reporting on it for a year.

Yadda yadda. Everyone in there is looting the place.
And all of this business is spurred on courtesy of Bremer's Orders (http://www.iraqcoalition.org/regulations/20031220_CPAORD_39_Foreign_Investment_.pdf):

This Order promotes and safeguards the general welfare and interests of the Iraqi people by promoting foreign investment through the protection of the rights and property of foreign investors in Iraq and the regulation through transparent processes of matters relating to foreign investment in Iraq. This Order specifies the terms and procedures for making foreign investments and is intended to attract new foreign investment to Iraq.

Treatment of Foreign Investors

1) A foreign investor shall be entitled to make foreign investments in Iraq on terms no less favorable than those applicable to an Iraqi investor, unless otherwise provided herein.

2) The amount of foreign participation in newly formed or existing business entities in Iraq shall not be limited, unless otherwise expressly provided herein.


WMD = W's Massive Deception

This was the only wording that the US would accept.
You will notice it also deplores that weapons inspectors have not
been in the country since 1998 without noting that that they
had been withdrawn by the US and no-one had ever tried to put them
back in.


The SC agreed to it to put weapons inspectors back in Iraq
so that whether there were WMD could be determined.
This we know from their statements in relation to this.

If the US had been acting in good faith on this,
the weapons inspectors would have been given full co-operation
by the country that claimed it had evidence of WMD and the
manufacture of WMD in Iraq.

If the US had been acting in good faith they would not have
gone to war without proof and would have waited for the
weapons inspectors to advise that they had done all they could.

That it was clear that they were not acting in good faith at the time
of that resolution is clear
firstly by their refusal to allow in the resolution a requirement that the
SC itself would decide if Iraq was in breach and if action needed to be taken
and
secondly by the lengths a number of members of the SC made
to announce after the resolution was passed that this resolution did
not give a trigger for war.

in relation to the niger yellowcake thing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3056626.stm

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/030331fa_fact1
By George, I think you nailed it.

Blix was not finding any WMD's in Iraq and that seriously pissed off Bush, so on false pretenses he ordered the illegal invasion of Iraq.

All hail....King George the Lesser.

That is very much entirely your problem for you to deal with.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the thread or Mesa or anyone else.

Efforts by you to try to place your responsibility for your own issues
onto anyone elses shoulders is juvenile and pathetic.

Find your co-dependents elsewhere.

All I am asking is that he not contribute to a problem. HOW goddamn hard is it for him to just simply leave me the hell alone?!!? He knows damn well he absolutely ENRAGES me...so why does he have to keep it up and keep it up and keep it up and keep it up!?!!?!

I have asked him...for the love of GOD....to just leave me alone!! Now, why he cannot respect that, and not contribute to a problem...is quite frankly beyond me. Unless he really WANTS to cause someone to get hospitalized!

Did I throw a baseball at you or something a while back? What did I do to deserve your hate? (Thanks for generalizing by the by...)


Not even knowing Mesa or Laerod (although I've heard of them), I'd have to agree with them. You're overreacting just a bit when it comes to their posts. I've read through this all with a neutral outlook (or so I hope) and it seems that they're not attempting--at least on purpose--to upset you to the point that you're at. I don't disagree with ignoring them if you must, and, in fact, if that's the best way to keep you feeling good, then do ignore them. Again, it just seems that you're blowing your top over nothing worth your while. (No offense, Mesa and/or anyone else)

Now, through this post, I had absolutely no intention to anger you (as I'm conservative and all conservatives seem to make you angry). I am merely trying to help you breathe deeper and better. Don't let anyone--especially online users--get to you at a personal level. Even if they respond directly to you, you can still ignore them. Should someone decide to attack you personally, just breathe deep and say to yourself that they're not worth the time.

Okies?

Just trying to do some good for you, and nothing more. :) *gives friend-cookie*


Look, I can TG you if you want, I'm not going to go into a long dissertation here...but, suffice to say that first...Republicans stand FOR everything I'm against....and AGAINST everything I'm for. That, in itself, is enough to cause severe anger towards the Republicans.

But my anger goes deeper than that, because Republicans have DELIBERATELY gone out of the way to make life harder for people who happen to lead alternative lifestyles...and that major-league pisses me off!! What the HELL did we EVER do to y'all to deserve the kind of hatred you all Republicans spew at us?!?!

Look, I can TG you if you want, I'm not going to go into a long dissertation here...but, suffice to say that first...Republicans stand FOR everything I'm against....and AGAINST everything I'm for. That, in itself, is enough to cause severe anger towards the Republicans.

But my anger goes deeper than that, because Republicans have DELIBERATELY gone out of the way to make life harder for people who happen to lead alternative lifestyles...and that major-league pisses me off!! What the HELL did we EVER do to y'all to deserve the kind of hatred you all Republicans spew at us?!?!

Hey, now-

I'm a lifelong Democrat and proud to be a liberal. In the part of the country I live in, I'd have no friends or social life if I had your, uh, "aversion?" - to conservative Republicans.

Some of them are very cute and squeezable, and quite loving once you get to know them. Just don't get them started on Iraq, or WMD's. ;)

~woot

Hey, now-

I'm a lifelong Democrat and proud to be a liberal. In the part of the country I live in, I'd have no friends or social life if I had your, uh, "aversion?" - to conservative Republicans.

Some of them are very cute and squeezable, and quite loving once you get to know them. Just don't get them started on Iraq, or WMD's. ;)

~woot

"Aversion," my ass! Call it what it is....OUTRIGHT PURE BLOODY HATRED!!!

I cannot STAND them. And I never will...until they learn to lay off the GLBT folk. I'm sick and tired of them trying, and going out of their way...to make our lives even more miserable than they already are.

i'm sorry, but I take it as a PERSONAL AFFRONT AND A PERSONAL ATTACK.

When Republican legislators REFUSE to stand up and tell people it is not okay to discriminate against me...when they stand up there and fuel the fires of hatred by passing anti-GLBT legislation, I TAKE IT AS A PERSONAL ATTACK!!

They are not just against GLBT folk....THEY ARE AGAINST ME PERSONALLY!!

And in my eyes, they are doing what they are doing, intentionally to get me. Specifically. I really do feel that way. You would, too.

Look, I can TG you if you want, I'm not going to go into a long dissertation here...but, suffice to say that first...Republicans stand FOR everything I'm against....and AGAINST everything I'm for. That, in itself, is enough to cause severe anger towards the Republicans.

But my anger goes deeper than that, because Republicans have DELIBERATELY gone out of the way to make life harder for people who happen to lead alternative lifestyles...and that major-league pisses me off!! What the HELL did we EVER do to y'all to deserve the kind of hatred you all Republicans spew at us?!?!

Hmm.. the different viewpoints (of polar proportions, from what I gather) is understandable. However, I don't think you should place all Republicans in one boat. There are plenty who have similar fiscal and social stances, but there are just as much who have different agendas--some with good intentions and some...not so good. But remember that the same can be said for Democrats, Greens, Independants, and all other parties. All I'm trying to say is, while it may be from the Republican party that sparks your frustration, it isn't every Republican that's sparking it... at least, I hope not.

As for hatred, sure there are prejudiced and discriminatory people within the party (but again, I can point that out in other parties), but even though I'd consider myself more along Republican thinking than any other party, I was taught to never hate another soul. Now, I may dislike others, but I'd happily love others, even if I don't know them. It's never my intent to push my agenda on others, and in fact, I believe that personal beliefs should stay out of politics. For example, while I'm personally against homosexual practice, I support gay unions. I find abortion abhorrable, but women have the right to choose the outcome of what grows inside them--I won't and can't change that.

So don't think that we're an army of Dopplegangers out to get you (I'm certainly not). We all have faces, and we're all different, just as you and others of your party (or lack thereof) are different.

Now, another cookie? *offers*

EDIT: By the way, what's "TG"?

Hey, now-

I'm a lifelong Democrat and proud to be a liberal. In the part of the country I live in, I'd have no friends or social life if I had your, uh, "aversion?" - to conservative Republicans.

Some of them are very cute and squeezable, and quite loving once you get to know them. Just don't get them started on Iraq, or WMD's. ;)

~woot

Hee. Why thank you. My previous girlfriend has labelled me "cuddly teddy-bear" (Although use that against me and I'll turn grizzly on yer arse! ;)). And no, I tend to stay away from the Iraqi subject (as why I haven't actually posted about this thread's topic).

Hee. Why thank you. My previous girlfriend has labelled me "cuddly teddy-bear" (Although use that against me and I'll turn grizzly on yer arse! ;)). And no, I tend to stay away from the Iraqi subject (as why I haven't actually posted about this thread's topic).

Lmao-

Too damn funny Romanore.. No worries mate, unless you're going to suddenly "Trangender Equality Act" on me into a 5' 8ish slinky blonde ball of female Republican fire I'll keep my paws off ya ;) Anybody ever figger out WTF 'TG' is, anyway?

I'm having problems somehow imagining where in this country Lyric actually lives that he/they/whatever only come into contact with likeminded GLT's (Great Liberal Thinkers).

I find there's nothing quite as boring or non-invigorating than being surrounded by folks who completely agree with my political viewpoints. Debate is the spice of life!! Obviously others disagree, but I'm kind of surprised that they'd choose voluntarily to post here? I dunno, maybe Lyric lost a bet, or has to do this as part of a prison sentence.

Here's to the Good Debate-

Cheers!

Uber Liberal Grub44 (aka FLG)

Lmao-

Too damn funny Romanore.. No worries mate, unless you're going to suddenly "Trangender Equality Act" on me into a 5' 8ish slinky blonde ball of female Republican fire I'll keep my paws off ya ;) Anybody ever figger out WTF 'TG' is, anyway?

I'm having problems somehow imagining where in this country Lyric actually lives that he/they/whatever only come into contact with likeminded GLT's (Great Liberal Thinkers).

I find there's nothing quite as boring or non-invigorating than being surrounded by folks who completely agree with my political viewpoints. Debate is the spice of life!! Obviously others disagree, but I'm kind of surprised that they'd choose voluntarily to post here? I dunno, maybe Lyric lost a bet, or has to do this as part of a prison sentence.

Here's to the Good Debate-

Cheers!

Uber Liberal Grub44 (aka FLG)
Well, considering that I'm 6'1" and very male, you won't have that problem arise. ;)

But yes, debate is yay so long as it remains civil and both sides keep a healthy amount of respect for the other (as well as themselves--a vital key in standing their ground). I enjoy debating, especially in philosophical/theological topics. It envigorates the mind and enlightens you to where others stand and what they stand for. Most importantly though, it seems to help myself find where I stand.

*lifts glass to clink Grub's* Slainte!

Well, considering that I'm 6'1" and very male, you won't have that problem arise. ;)

But yes, debate is yay so long as it remains civil and both sides keep a healthy amount of respect for the other (as well as themselves--a vital key in standing their ground). I enjoy debating, especially in philosophical/theological topics. It envigorates the mind and enlightens you to where others stand and what they stand for. Most importantly though, it seems to help myself find where I stand.

*lifts glass to clink Grub's* Slainte!

Damn well said Romanore.

Next pint of Guinness on me :D

To tip my bowler back toward the topic, I as a proud Liberal Democrat-voting American have chosen to compose the following Haiku about (theoretically, anyway) WMD's in Iraq:

WMD, are you
Fictitious, or just hiding?
You may be Elvis

There-

Take *THAT*, you evil, evil, steeeeeinking NeoCon, Jackbooted, :p
(If I keep talking like that my Republican Girlfriend will send me to the magical, magical land of "Not Gittin' Any")

**End Sillypost**

Grub44 aka Finger Lickin Goodness

Damn well said Romanore.

Next pint of Guinness on me :D

To tip my bowler back toward the topic, I as a proud Liberal Democrat-voting American have chosen to compose the following Haiku about (theoretically, anyway) WMD's in Iraq:

WMD, are you
Fictitious, or just hiding?
You may be Elvis

There-

Take *THAT*, you evil, evil, steeeeeinking NeoCon, Jackbooted, :p
(If I keep talking like that my Republican Girlfriend will send me to the magical, magical land of "Not Gittin' Any")

**End Sillypost**

Grub44 aka Finger Lickin Goodness

Sanity, will you
stay or wander in the breeze?
You slip away free.

There's my haiku for stupid people. Don't worry, you weren't thought of when it farted from my brain. You can use it yourself if you like.

That means you are not ignoring me, and you are therefore hollow to your word. You don't have to read my post. You can ignore them. You can't challenge me anyways.. your attacks are woefully inadequate.


Why are you always so disruptive, always flaming, and inciting arguements on every single thread you enter?

Why no one has gone to the mods about you, I just cant undertand.

dude.

just... dude


This is going way back but i feel the need to defend myself in some way. Ive been a while and ive missed out so it appears. But anyway...

For one. You took one line out of my post. One line!
My point is that where does a country draw a line at accepting the sovereignty of another country? It is not viable to invade every country that commits crimes against humanity. That is not sane.
So why are we happy to let Zimbabwe continue to oppress its citizens, North Korea to do what it wants (hey and they OPENLY ADMIT they have WMDs) and what about America? Just off the top of my head - Guantanamo bay? Abuse of Iraqi prisoners of war? You see what im getting at here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesatecala
That means you are not ignoring me, and you are therefore hollow to your word. You don't have to read my post. You can ignore them. You can't challenge me anyways.. your attacks are woefully inadequate.



Quote:
By Backwoods Sasquatches:
Why are you always so disruptive, always flaming, and inciting arguements on every single thread you enter?

Why no one has gone to the mods about you, I just cant undertand.


Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but the main reason I haven't gone to the Mods over this guy are twofold. One, I'm really not out to get this guy in trouble, or to use Mods to further my own vendetta, as he obviously is, since he LOVES reporting people. I can't count how many times he has publically posted that he was going to report someone...which, in and of itself, could be considered baiting. I just want him to leave me the hell alone.

I go off and attack Republican leaders, among them, Bush. His response is not to defend the people he so obviously loves...but to attack ME, PERSONALLY, instead. whcih is why he pisses me off so badly. I'm tired of his snarky comments, his insinuations, and his personal attacks. I just want him to leave me the hell alone, act like I don't exist, we can go back to not knowing each other, and I'd be very happy with that final outcome...I've no need to get him into trouble with the Mods, or use the Mods to carry out attacks against people I simply don't like...even though this guy has, on multiple occasions, done things to WARRANT a Mod report, I personally have never filed one.

The second reason I haven't gone to the Mods is because I think they are largely ineffective. Usually, it seems the one who GOT PROVOKED is often punished worse than the guy who did the provoking. This is because the one who does provoking doesn't really care, he has maybe a hundred puppet nations, and he will just come right back after being DEATed and keep it up and keep it up, and keep it up...under a new name.
Meanwhile, his target...ends up also getting an old nation DEATed...one that they cared very much about...and the provoker walks away laughing.

This has been my experience with Mods. They can't stop harrassment. It's beyond their capabilities, because the harasser only has to go ahead and form a new nation, and come right back, and continue the harassment.

It's nothing against Mods...but they have not the power to stop someone who is really determined to harass someone. So I am merely appealing, hoping this guy has a better nature...to just find another target and please do not worsen a medical condition I have.

I don't have a problem with someone who has a different opinion and expresses it clearly, and cites his sources, and does not resort to personal attacks. Mesa fails this on all three levels, and this is why he pisses me off so badly.

Mesa just continues to make the same "arguments" thread by thread...keeps rejecting the ideas and opinions of anyone who expresses a different one...never cites his sources, and always has to put a final personal insult into every post he makes when responding to someone he doesn't agree with.

All I really want is to just be left alone by him. I can only beat my head against a brick wall for so long. This is WHY he is on my ignore list. But I will not allow him to have the upper hand by allowing him to continue making snarky comments that I can't see, and therefore, respond to. Which is why I have asked him to likewise put me on his Ignore, and then we can simply pretend each other doesn't exist. I mean, how hard is it, really? Does this guy have no compassion, and no heart? He's worsening a medical condition I have...and has been TOLD so...yet, he seems determined to continue worsening it, as if he gets some kind of joy out of hurting other people.

Hmm.. the different viewpoints (of polar proportions, from what I gather) is understandable. However, I don't think you should place all Republicans in one boat. There are plenty who have similar fiscal and social stances, but there are just as much who have different agendas--some with good intentions and some...not so good. But remember that the same can be said for Democrats, Greens, Independants, and all other parties. All I'm trying to say is, while it may be from the Republican party that sparks your frustration, it isn't every Republican that's sparking it... at least, I hope not.

As for hatred, sure there are prejudiced and discriminatory people within the party (but again, I can point that out in other parties), but even though I'd consider myself more along Republican thinking than any other party, I was taught to never hate another soul. Now, I may dislike others, but I'd happily love others, even if I don't know them. It's never my intent to push my agenda on others, and in fact, I believe that personal beliefs should stay out of politics. For example, while I'm personally against homosexual practice, I support gay unions. I find abortion abhorrable, but women have the right to choose the outcome of what grows inside them--I won't and can't change that.

So don't think that we're an army of Dopplegangers out to get you (I'm certainly not). We all have faces, and we're all different, just as you and others of your party (or lack thereof) are different.

Now, another cookie? *offers*

EDIT: By the way, what's "TG"?


TG = Transgender. Those who know me on this list, who have been here long-term, alrerady long ago knew this about me.
what I did...I did to my own body...it hurt no one else...and so WHY do people have to discriminate against me in employment for it? It isn't fair, and it isn't right!! I, too, have to earn a living. Just like them, I, too, am a human being who bleeds red when you cut me.

But Republicans don't seem to see it that way. It's almost as if they have decided they have a personal mission from God to punish us, here on Earth, as hard as they possibly can...for something I did which didn't hurt anyone, and is perfectly legal.

I mean, come on...don't YOU hate the people who go out of their way to make YOUR life harder? Now do you understand why I hate Republicans? The vast majority of the anti-GLBT people are Republicans. And they seem, also, to take a special joy in hurting certain people.

I will NEVER forget Louisville, 1997. I was coming out of City Hall, after we had lost a vote on the Fairness Amendment, which would have banned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, in employment, housing, and public accomodations. We lost that vote 7-3 with 2 abstentions.

Well, we came out of City Hall to a THRONG of "Christians," and most of them Republicans, too...shouting "WE LOVE YOU!! WE LOVE YOU!!" They didn't love us!! They were TAUNTING us!! This view is proved by the fact that someone in that crowd threw a rock at me, which hit me just over the left eye, and nearly blinded me! I still have the scar from that, it took four stitches to close the wound!

I went down like a ton of bricks. Fortunately, two of my friends who were coming out of City Hall, saw what had happened and had a cell phone. They called 911. Another friend was a paramedic, and she immediately came to my aid until the ambulance arrived. Later, I was quoted in the paper as saying, "If these people love me, I'm sure as hell glad they DON'T hate me!!"

On the other hand...in 1999, we PASSED the Fairness Amendment. This time, the vote was 7-5 in favor. This time...there was no throng of Christian Republicans to tell us how much they loved us...they took off in their busses the second they knew we had won the vote. They didn't hang out to tell us how much they loved us THEN. They didn't even hang out to say, we don't agree with you, but we still love you.

So, now, tell me what you think. Those people didn't love us, did they?

And maybe NOW you have a much clearer picture of why I so badly hate Republicans. They have done everything in their power to hurt me at every possible turn. And, in spite of what the Bible says about loving your enemies...I find myself quite incapable of loving people like them. Or forgiving them. Or ever forgetting what they have done.

I will carry my anger, and my hatred, and my spite, and my contempt and disgust for them to my grave. You would, too. Believe me, you would, too.