the surge is working!

[Irvine511]

i tried typing a response to the initial "just tell Israel what to do" suggestion, but found it impossible.

i apologize for the scorn. perhaps silence would have been better.

 

[struckpx]

After everything you're already calling people names again? Nice.

what should I say, thank you?

 

[BVS]

Scorn won't help the situation any.

It wasn't exactly scorn, at least it wasn't mean to be.

But fair enough.

 

[IrishDawg]

You can't honestly believe we still need to "stick to the path!!! lolz" when there was never any plan to begin with? When Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11?

 

[struckpx]

You can't honestly believe we still need to "stick to the path!!! lolz" when there was never any plan to begin with? When Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11?

Iraq has to do with Saddam Hussein. That has already been stated.

 

[BVS]

what should I say, thank you?

:bitestongue:

 

[LMP]

Iraq has to do with Saddam Hussein. That has already been stated.

So when the link between Saddam and Al-Queda proved to be false, how'd you react?

 

[struckpx]

So when the link between Saddam and Al-Queda proved to be false, how'd you react?

Fine. I supported the war all along. Who wouldn't? Saddam Hussein was an insane human being who could have attacked any of our allies at any given point and hurt our national interests.

 

[martha]

Fine. I supported the war all along.

When are you enlisting?

 

[LMP]

Fine. I supported the war all along. Who wouldn't? Saddam Hussein was an insane human being who could have attacked any of our allies at any given point and hurt our national interests.

There's no doubt Hussein was a autocratic tyrant, but using that same logic, why haven't we struck Kim Jong-Il North Korea?

 

[struckpx]

When are you enlisting?

what does that have to do with anything? in order to support wars you have to be enlisted? that's original.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Sting2, I hear you.
National interests = the oil that belongs to us, only to us, no one else, only us.

Saddam Hussein neither had any ABC weapons nor was his army in any shape to attack us. It just took sources from Afghanistan, which now doesn't look that good either.

 

[struckpx]

There's no doubt Hussein was a autocratic tyrant, but using that same logic, why haven't we struck Kim Jong-Il North Korea?

b/c he's giving up his technology. he is negotiating with us. Saddam Hussein was giving that opportunity, for 10+ years with the UN nuclear weapons inspection teams. He continually didn't allow them access to everything, therefore he lost his chance.

 

[LMP]

So it's okay for the US to take it upon themselves to bomb a country without UN sanctions?

As many have stated here before, it should've been between the UN and Iraq, never the US.

 

[Vincent Vega]

So there are not millions of people with a lack of proper food, starving, struggling for basic freedom rights, under a retarded dictator enjoying movies in his private cinema room in North Korea?

 

[struckpx]

I directly blame the CIA and other intelligence services, not Bush. I believe he was misled.

 

[struckpx]

So there are not millions of people with a lack of proper food, starving, struggling for basic freedom rights, under a retarded dictator enjoying movies in his private cinema room in North Korea?

So there were not hundreds of thousands Kurds, Shi'ite's that were executed and brutally murdered in Iraq b/c of Saddam Hussein. Not a good argument.

 

[BVS]

I directly blame the CIA and other intelligence services, not Bush. I believe he was misled.

Yet you blame Clinton? Wow, your bias isn't transparent...

 

[martha]

what does that have to do with anything? in order to support wars you have to be enlisted? that's original.

It has a lot to do with the ease of supporting a war you don't have to fight. I think if your "patriotic" ass were on the line for all these wars you want to start all over the world, you'd be singing a different tune.

 

[LMP]

So there were not hundreds of thousands Kurds, Shi'ite's that were dying in Iraq b/c of Saddam Hussein. Not a good argument.

No, it's a perfectly reasonable argument. Both are tyrants keeping their people in abject poverty while having absolute power.

Plus, it was at least confirmed that North Korea possessed nuclear weapons. Do you remember the nuclear bomb test in '06?

 

[martha]

I directly blame the CIA and other intelligence services, not Bush. I believe he was misled.

Did Rush tell you this?

 

[struckpx]

Yet you blame Clinton? Wow, your bias isn't transparent...

yes, for 9/11 i do blame clinton. for the iraqi war intelligence, i blame the CIA and FBI.

 

[struckpx]

It has a lot to do with the ease of supporting a war you don't have to fight. I think if your "patriotic" ass were on the line for all these wars you want to start all over the world, you'd be singing a different tune.

stfu. don't tell me when or how to be patriotic. if the time calls, i will proudly serve my country.

 

[BVS]

if the time calls, i will proudly serve my country.

It's not calling now?

 

[BVS]

yes, for 9/11 i do blame clinton. for the iraqi war intelligence, i blame the CIA and FBI.

 

[martha]

stfu.

Nice. What an intelligent response.

don't tell me when or how to be patriotic. if the time calls, i will proudly serve my country.

The time is here, son. If you genuinely believe this war is worth fighting, then the time is here.

 

[struckpx]

Nice. What an intelligent response.



The time is here, son. If you genuinely believe this war is worth fighting, then the time is here.

you don't know what i am doing, so don't make accusations. who says that i am not? i would be saying my future collegiate plans, but i have learned that i will not discuss personal situations on this forum.

 

[martha]

i would be saying my future collegiate plans, but i have learned that i will not discuss personal situations on this forum.

College to get out of serving in the military during a war?! I thought only Clinton did that!

 

[Vincent Vega]

So there were not hundreds of thousands Kurds, Shi'ite's that were executed and brutally murdered in Iraq b/c of Saddam Hussein. Not a good argument.

The argument is, that Kim Yong Ill isn't the better guy only because he "negotiated".
The argument is, that you can't say it was right to invade country X with dictator X, and leave out country Y with dictator Y, with such a poor justification, and such a low backing from other countries and the UN.
The argument is, that there was no deer need in ending the brutal dictatorship in Iraq, that wasn't in another country, either. Like the Darfur region in the Sudan, where at the same time the process of a genocide was already going on. Something we said "Never again!" in 1945, in 1993, in 1995, and in the years in between.

 

[yolland]

Forget it. Sorry Irvine, but this isn't going anywhere.

Several people in here could stand to bite their tongue a little more often when they know they've got nothing constructive to say. That would help a lot to avoid careening train wrecks like this ensuing.

stfu.

Remember what we talked about--you can consider this a second formal warning. I don't care what anyone's tone with you was like, this is never an acceptable response.