N.O.W. says Ted Kennedy guilty of "the ultimate betrayal"!!!

uscitizen said:
Lets see how this shakes out within NOW for the longterm.
Click to expand...

Looks like some people here don't want to "see", that or anything else WRT this thread's original article. The subject got changed with unbelievable speed, right after Dungheap proved the OP to be right and the usual screamers wrong. They're now energetically rehashing the old fibs about Saddam not having WMDs, probably for about the 327th time.

Then again, who can blame the screamers for running away at such high velocity? :cuss:
 
I only call you a Bush apologist because you are apoligizing for Bush, in the same way I'd be apologizing for Clinton if I said "it's okay that he had sex with an intern, if only he had timed the affair better."

You'll have to show me what diplomacy "failed" in doing that brought Iraq to a point where they were a direct, imminent threat to our national security, and therefore all of our options were exhausted, or soon would be.
 
"They're now energetically rehashing the old fibs about Saddam not having WMDs, probably for about the 327th time"

No really, can you imagine?
 
Onceler said:
I only call you a Bush apologist because you are apoligizing for Bush, in the same way I'd be apologizing for Clinton if I said "it's okay that he had sex with an intern, if only he had timed the affair better."

You'll have to show me what diplomacy "failed" in doing that brought Iraq to a point where they were a direct, imminent threat to our national security, and therefore all of our options were exhausted, or soon would be.
Click to expand...

1) Which is bullshit. Because it is not simply the timing of the war that Bush fucked up. Had I said, "Bush should have waited six months and then done everything else the same" THEN you are correct. It would be condoning how he has managed the war. Is that what I am doing Lorax? Or is it simply what you want to attempt to "project" upon me?

2) STRAWMAN alert.... AGAIN Lorax.... for the fucking 1,000,000th time.... I DO NOT THINK SADDAM WAS AN IMMINENT THREAT. I don't know how to state that any clearer for you. If I thought he was an immenent threat I would not be suggesting that Bush should have waited until Afghanistan was done. I would be suggesting that we had to go in immediately. So enough of your fucking strawman games.

TWELVE FUCKING YEARS LORAX. THERE WERE 12 FUCKING YEARS, (EIGHT UNDER CLINTON) THAT DIPLOMACY HAD ITS CHANCE.

But I know.... in your opinion it would have worked this time.
 
Onceler said:
I don't think Superfreak knows what a strawman is....
Click to expand...

Lets see.... you have stated a couple of times on this post....

Show me where Saddam was an immenant threat, implying that it was a position that I held and needed to defend..... KNOWING this is not my position and KNOWING that I have already stated he was not an imminent threat.

Yeah, I call that a fucking strawman. When you start making up a position and acting as though it were mine, yes, that is a strawman lorax.
 
LMAO...........

Superfreak said:
Lets see.... you have stated a couple of times on this post....

Show me where Saddam was an immenant threat, implying that it was a position that I held and needed to defend..... KNOWING this is not my position and KNOWING that I have already stated he was not an imminent threat.


exactly...and thats what onno,darla and soco do regularly...they try to put words in ones mouth and claim they said them!
Click to expand...
 
Superfreak said:
Lets see.... you have stated a couple of times on this post....

Show me where Saddam was an immenant threat, implying that it was a position that I held and needed to defend..... KNOWING this is not my position and KNOWING that I have already stated he was not an imminent threat.

Yeah, I call that a fucking strawman. When you start making up a position and acting as though it were mine, yes, that is a strawman lorax.
Click to expand...

Okey, dokey; soooooo....if he was not an imminent threat, and did not have WMD's, and represented no threat, even to his neighbors...

Why was war inevitable, again? Because of 12 years of some sort of ill-defined "failure" (and again - just to remind you - no WMD's, no threat to security)?

You're talking yourself in circles. You don't know what is meant by 'war as a last resort' if you accept that Saddam was no threat.

Wanna try again? This time without the special Texas Rangers giveaway sunglasses....
 
Darla said:
I have to tell you Onceler, I am very impressed with how you turned this thread around. I owe you one!
Click to expand...

Yours was an honest mistake. I think it's a testament to how often & decisively you humiliate the righties here that they jumped on it and acted like it was the greatest victory they've ever had.

Calling Iraq "inevitable," however....much different story.
 
Onceler said:
Okey, dokey; soooooo....if he was not an imminent threat, and did not have WMD's, and represented no threat, even to his neighbors...

Why was war inevitable, again? Because of 12 years of some sort of ill-defined "failure" (and again - just to remind you - no WMD's, no threat to security)?

You're talking yourself in circles. You don't know what is meant by 'war as a last resort' if you accept that Saddam was no threat.

Wanna try again? This time without the special Texas Rangers giveaway sunglasses....
Click to expand...

Nice try. But again, we did not know at the time that he did not have WMDs.

I also stated he was not an immenent threat. Meaning the war could have waited. I did not state that he was all sunshine and roses. As stated by both parties and many intel sources, he remained a threat.... just not an immediate threat.

So, again, nice try at trying to warp my position. Did you at least have fun in Cypress's strawman 101 class? Because you obviously did not depart class educated.
 
Wow, this thread went from a Darla skewering to a Superfreak Superskewering in no time at all.

That's very generous of Superfreak, to suddenly, voluntarily pull Darla off the skewer, and hop on himself.
 
"Nice try. But again, we did not know at the time that he did not have WMDs."

You're acting like this is irrlevant, when, in fact, it is the most important point.

How can anyone, who is not a Bush-loving idiot, STILL say war was "inevitable," knowing what we now know?

I'm convinced that you can't hear yourself, because if you could, you'd be backtracking furiously by now...
 
Onceler said:
"Nice try. But again, we did not know at the time that he did not have WMDs."

You're acting like this is irrlevant, when, in fact, it is the most important point.

How can anyone, who is not a Bush-loving idiot, STILL say war was "inevitable," knowing what we now know?

I'm convinced that you can't hear yourself, because if you could, you'd be backtracking furiously by now...
Click to expand...

No, it is very relevant. But YOU are acting like we would have found out for sure that Saddam did not have WMDs by simply "containing" him and letting the UN do what it had not been able to do for 12 years. Massive forces on the border or not, THIS is the point where we disagree.

I do not believe we would have found this out for sure without going in. I have no faith in the UN's ability to do so. YOU on the other hand do believe we would have found out via having mass troops on the border and the UN suddenly being able to succeed where previously they had failed.

THAT is our difference. THAT is why I think the war was inevitable, while you think that concept is ignorant.

The point Lorax, is that we are both forming our opinions based on what we THINK would have happened. I think your argument is ridiculous and simplistic and you think the same of mine. Neither of us can prove "what might have happened".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top