That so called war on terror... - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-07-2007, 09:11 PM   #61
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Zoots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the great beyond
Posts: 36,802
Local Time: 02:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bluer White

I'm wondering if you think the 'war on terror' is a bumper sticker, or not. I'm confused.
Bumper sticker, tag line... whatever you wanna call it.. some words to cover up the fact that we launched an attack on a country that never did us any harm.
__________________

__________________
Zoots is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:13 PM   #62
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:54 AM
so harbouring Osama Bin Laden after the terrorist attacks is not doing any harm? The term was promulgated for the war in Afghanistan and the wider operations elsewhere before Iraq.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:14 PM   #63
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
If Bin Laden, al Queda hates America and President Bush is the leader.

Then why do they want to kill the Democratic Leader of the Senate and the Democratic Chair of the Judicial Appointments Committee in October 2001?

These two people were at the top of Cheney and the conservatives "hit list".
Quote:
Oct 2001 WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Government officials told The Washington Post that top FBI and CIA officials think the anthrax attacks in Washington, New York and Florida are likely the doing of United States extremists probably not connected to the al Qaeda terror network.

In a report published Saturday, a senior official was quoted in the Post as saying that "everything seems to lean toward a domestic source. Nothing seems to fit with an overseas terrorist type operation."

Officials say none of the 60 to 80 threat reports gathered every day by U.S. intelligence agencies has connected the letters containing anthrax spores to al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. They say evidence from the spore samples provides no links to a foreign government or lab.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:15 PM   #64
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 29% they are trying to shore up the base - Indy bought it

Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


Excuse me?

Are you implying that if you dont buy into evolution that you are stupid? I have to very much disagree with you.

Not to hijack the thread, but I'm curious to hear why you don't agree
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:16 PM   #65
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Split it into a new thread
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:18 PM   #66
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,253
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zootlesque

we launched an attack on a country that never did us any harm.
Nobody has said that Iraq did us harm. At least, no Republican that I can think of. We didnt invade Iraq because they attack us.

We went to Iraq because Saddam was a threat to us and to the Iraqi people. Iraq is the next step in the United States' post-9/11 foreign policy. Is Iraq a mess right now? Of course. Are more terrorists in Iraq than there were pre-invasion? Possibly. But Saddam was very, very dangerous and the world (and that includes Iraq) is better without him.
__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:20 PM   #67
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Zoots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the great beyond
Posts: 36,802
Local Time: 02:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
so harbouring Osama Bin Laden after the terrorist attacks is not doing any harm? The term was promulgated for the war in Afghanistan and the wider operations elsewhere before Iraq.
Well, it developed into the pointless war in Iraq, didn't it? That's the war I was referring to, not the one they started in Afghanistan!
__________________
Zoots is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:20 PM   #68
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 29% they are trying to shore up the base - Indy bough

Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


Give me a break.

*sigh*

I disagree with most people in FYM more and more everyday. I can't watch Keith Olbermann before I go to bed because it gets my BP going, and I'm starting to feel the same about this forum.
come on Redbird

you would probably call me a lib
and
I am listening to "the Savage Nation" right now, and I do tune in to 'Rush and Sean occasionally.
That way I can at least get the same information as the people I don't agree with.

If I listen to NPR all the time 24/7 am I not just getting programed in that one direction.

Why not take in information from all sides? If what we believe is well-grounded in reason, hearing a contrary opinion should not raise our blood pressure
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:23 PM   #69
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Zoots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the great beyond
Posts: 36,802
Local Time: 02:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
We went to Iraq because Saddam was a threat to us and to the Iraqi people. Iraq is the next step in the United States' post-9/11 foreign policy.
But why go after Tyrant Dictator B before finishing off Terrorist Leader A? The priority was Osama, not Saddam.

How can Iraq be the next step in the United States' post-9/11 foreign policy when Iraq/Saddam had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11?
__________________
Zoots is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:24 PM   #70
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


We went to Iraq because Saddam was a threat to us and to the Iraqi people. Iraq is the next step in the United States' post-9/11 foreign policy. Is Iraq a mess right now? Of course. Are more terrorists in Iraq than there were pre-invasion? Possibly. But Saddam was very, very dangerous and the world (and that includes Iraq) is better without him.
Good luck with that argument around here. Most people in this forum are of the opinion that the wrong president was hanged in Iraq for war crimes.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:24 PM   #71
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 29% they are trying to shore up the base - Indy bought it

Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


Give me a break.

*sigh*

I disagree with most people in FYM more and more everyday. I can't watch Keith Olbermann before I go to bed because it gets my BP going, and I'm starting to feel the same about this forum.


how else are you going to defend creationism?

do you not believe in the Theory of Gravity or the Theory of Plate Tectonics either?

the blood pressure thing is a sign that your beliefs are being challenged. accept the challenge, or don't.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:25 PM   #72
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 29% they are trying to shore up the base - In

Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Hey, thats unfair and Islamophobic - they get walls collapsed on them in the proper humane fashion.


i stand(/kneel?) corrected.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:27 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 12:54 AM
Man this thread is flying, it's hard to keep up!

Olbermann


Tells it like it is
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:28 PM   #74
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2

Are more terrorists in Iraq than there were pre-invasion? Possibly.
Haha. Possibly? How much do you know about Iraq pre-invasion?
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:28 PM   #75
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


Good luck with that argument around here. Most people in this forum are of the opinion that the wrong president was hanged in Iraq for war crimes.


that's totally unfair.

firstly, it's not even an argument. it's an article of naive faith, and our chief Kool Aid maker has all but given up as his "arguments" degrade in the face of reality.

secondly, i'm of the opinion that they both should have been hung.

sheesh.

though, hanging was botched -- what isn't! -- by the Bushies. all those shouts of "MOQTADA!" that's some big-assed trouble for you right there.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com