Which is the worst?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cancel4
  • Start date Start date
Onceler said:
This is actually funny, bravo.

I didn't think you had a sense of humor....
Click to expand...

I would be funny if I didn't witness it with my own eyes....

I'm glad some of the quotes exist today or they would surely be denied....but they can't be denied, can they....they exist, going back to 1996....
 
bravo said:
Declassified Excerpts Released by the White House on July 18, 2003
Key Judgments (from October 2002 NIE)

Confidence Levels for Selected Key Judgments in This Estimate

High Confidence:

* Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding, its chemical, biological, nuclear and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

* We are not detecting portions of these weapons programs.

* Iraq possesses proscribed chemical and biological weapons and missiles.

* Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

Moderate Confidence:

* Iraq does not yet have a nuclear weapon or sufficient material to make one but is likely to have a weapon by 2007 to 2009. (see INR alternative view, page 84).

Low Confidence:

* When Saddam would use weapons of mass destruction

* Whether Saddam would engage in clandestine attacks against the US Homeland.

* Whether in desperation Saddam would share chemical or biological weapons with al-Qa'ida.

----------------------------------------------
I freely admit, Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research(Carl W. Ford Jr.) under Colin Powell claimed the intell wasn't solid enough...so what....
I'd go with the 16 intelligence agencys that write the NIE first....as any President would....


So now that you've been schooled again, why don't you give it a fuckin' rest.
Being a patriot isn't all that bad, give it a try....
Click to expand...

Maineman pwned. :clink:
 
uscitizen said:
they were wrong or lying. Perhaps they were all using the same incorrect data pushed by Israel or something.

they were wrong, I was correct. So I must be mental?
What kind of logic is that?
Click to expand...

Obviously they were wrong....we know that now in later years.....

No one can deny they were wrong....being wrong is not lying, thats the point...whether you're talking about Al Gore, Kennedy, Bush or a number of others...
 
bravo said:
Obviously they were wrong....we know that now in later years.....

No one can deny they were wrong....being wrong is not lying, thats the point...whether you're talking about Al Gore, Kennedy, Bush or a number of others...
Click to expand...

saying that there IS NO DOUBT, when they knew that there was....IS lying.

sorry.
 
bravo said:
You have quotes covering years .... 1996 up into 2003.....all saying relatively the same thing...all having the same theme about Saddam and Iraq...

and you latch onto ONE guy that makes a counterclaim, and suddenly "hes telling the truth" and 7 years of undeniable facts go poof....

Is that your belief..???

you're telling me this conspiracy covers 2 Presidents, from 2 different parties...? is that right?
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? One guy?

Colin Powell's aide. Paul O'Neil. Richard Clarke. Paul Wolfowicz. British intel. An entire Senate (bipartisan) committee & investigation. The list goes on & on & on. A lot of people have to be lying for your version of reality to be true.

And the idea that the Dems were beating the drums of war in 2002-03 is preposterous. It's an immediate credibility nosedive to make such a claim.

But look at you; who would have thought you'd ever be so interested in giving Dems so much credit for one of Bush's decisions?
 
maineman said:
until you show me that high confidence equates to THERE IS NO DOUBT, you can take you pwned assertion and cram it up your well travelled ass, pedo boy
Click to expand...

NIE...
Iraq possesses proscribed chemical and biological weapons and missiles.

Not might possess
Not may possess
Not we think they possess

Iraq possesses

Its plain to 'normal' people....


Whats a "pedo boy" preacher man....????
 
bravo said:
NIE...
Iraq possesses proscribed chemical and biological weapons and missiles.

Not might possess
Not may possess
Not we think they possess

Iraq possesses

Its plain to 'normal' people....


Whats a "pedo boy" preacher man....????
Click to expand...

not "no doubt" possesses either.

shucks
 
maineman said:
until you show me that high confidence equates to THERE IS NO DOUBT, you can take you pwned assertion and cram it up your well travelled ass, pedo boy
Click to expand...
It's not about showing you, Mr. Pedophile, but making the case to a reasonable person.
 
Onceler said:
It's amazing how important that is to you, in light of what has happened. The scope of the debacle that is Iraq is incomprehensible.

I do not excuse Dems for their actions & words on this issue. However, the admin DID see intel to the contrary as late as 2002 and '03, and ignored it. Because they wanted to make the case for war.

The Dems were not the architects of this war; they did not make the decision to invade, or even call for it. Bush, Cheney, Wolfowicz, PNAC - stop making excuses for these people. It's embarassing, partisan & pathetic.
Click to expand...

great....it seemed as if you were....:clink:

your pal maineman is....and that is part of what i was debating, his lies about what the dems said....
 
maineman said:
not "no doubt" possesses either.

shucks
Click to expand...


I see no point in debating one is so stupid as to make the claim that a person that murders his wife, for example, is not quilty of murder unless
a jury says hes guilty.....
that kind of reasoning is beyond stupid.....
so it serves no point for me, in trying to reason with one that limited in common sense and normal logic....
You're a pathetic partisan, soaked in Koolade....
 
Yurt said:
great....it seemed as if you were....:clink:

your pal maineman is....and that is part of what i was debating, his lies about what the dems said....
Click to expand...

It certainly seems appropriate to ask: do you have anything negative to say about the way Bush and Cheney spoke & acted in the lead-up to war?
 
maineman said:
the quotes did not say that there is no doubt that saddam has stockpiles of WMD's.

so...you are a fucking LIAR for saying that it is the same thing as Team Bush said...

your intellectual dishonesty is quite frankly, so intellectually dishonest that it makes any further intellectually dishonest claims of yours of intellectual dishonesty to be profoundly intellectually dishonest on their very face.

go fuck yourself, JB
Click to expand...

(yawn)....is that all you have preacher....

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Joe Lieberman (D-CT), John McCain (Rino-AZ) and others, Dec. 5, 2001
Click to expand...

note the letter is TO bush :pke:

There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
Click to expand...

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.”—Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002
Click to expand...

its so easy.....
 
bravo said:
I see no point in debating one is so stupid as to make the claim that a person that murders his wife, for example, is not quilty of murder unless
a jury says hes guilty.....
that kind of reasoning is beyond stupid.....
so it serves no point for me, in trying to reason with one that limited in common sense and normal logic....
You're a pathetic partisan, soaked in Koolade....
Click to expand...

I have never made the claims that you ascribe to me.

I have made the claims that, to say that there was NO DOUBT that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's when the intelligence summaries about that very subject contained caveats and qualifiers as to the certainty of that intelligence, was, in fact, a LIE...and that is certainly true.

there WAS doubt... and Team Bush claimed there wasn't.

LIES
 
Yurt said:
(yawn)....is that all you have preacher....



note the letter is TO bush :pke:





its so easy.....
Click to expand...

none of those statements say that there is no doubt that saddam had stockpiles of WMD's - that he could immediately dole out to AQ.

Do you comprehend the difference, or is it beyond your moronic match book degree, hb?
 
maineman said:
I have never made the claims that you ascribe to me.

I have made the claims that, to say that there was NO DOUBT that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's when the intelligence summaries about that very subject contained caveats and qualifiers as to the certainty of that intelligence, was, in fact, a LIE...and that is certainly true.

there WAS doubt... and Team Bush claimed there wasn't.

LIES
Click to expand...

Argumentum ad nauseam (argument to the point of disgust; i.e., by repitition). This is the fallacy of trying to prove something by saying it again and again. But no matter how many times you repeat something, it will not become any more or less true than it was in the first place.
Click to expand...
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Argumentum ad nauseam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top