From the bastion of the left....

Onceler said:
Had the UN done it's job, Bush never would have had to invade! Poor Bush!

Gimme a break, SF - you missed the point of the whole post. I'm not saying the UN is perfect, and never did. BUT...if Saddam did not have WMD's, was not a threat, and was contained...

Um...why did we invade again? Where is the 'inevitability'?

There's only one apologist on this thread. Starts with a "Su," ends with an "eak"...
Click to expand...

Listen apologist... give me a break. YOU missed the whole point of this thread. That there was some positive news out of Iraq... but you and your ilk have once again decided to spin this away into a bashing of Bush rather than on a "hey, at least we are starting to move in the right direction". Then you go off on your normal "the UN sanctions were working" or "we had him contained and thus could have maintained that forever and ever and ever and ever with no repurcussions blah blah blah" line of crap. Completely ignoring the fact that the UN failed. The fact that there were TWO reasons Al Queda gave for the attacks... one was as always... Israel... the second was the presence of US troops on holy land. Funny how you apologists always forget about the second one.

Quit apologizing for the UN's failures. Put the kool-aid down.
 
SF, if you read the link I gave to you, you'll see this is not the first time these two neocon war supporters have pulled this.

This is more Freidman nonsense. "Six more months!'

There is no improvement SF.

And people are dying because for years now people like you have lept into the air to grab at and hold onto every hail mary the neocons have thrown up. Because you've never said die. And so, others have died for you.

It's time to say die SF.
 
LadyT said:
LMAO, the 'poor Bush' cracks me up everytime.
Click to expand...

Funny, I never said poor Bush.... but lorax the apologist has to make shit up... I simply told him that if his precious UN had done their job, that Bush never would have had the opportunity to fubar this war. Bush chose his course of action to be sure. He made critical mistakes in how this war was handled. But the UN has no one to blame but itself. They could have prevented the monster that is Bush from ever warmongering in Iraq.... if only they had bothered to do their job. But lorax the apologist won't hear of it... will you apologist supreme de la UN?
 
Well said, Darla.

If I had a buck for every time O'Reilly has come out w/..."okay, this is the last chance. Iraq is a disaster, but we owe it to the effort to give it this ONE LAST CHANCE"...
 
Superfreak said:
Funny, I never said poor Bush.... but lorax the apologist has to make shit up... I simply told him that if his precious UN had done their job, that Bush never would have had the opportunity to fubar this war. Bush chose his course of action to be sure. He made critical mistakes in how this war was handled. But the UN has no one to blame but itself. They could have prevented the monster that is Bush from ever warmongering in Iraq.... if only they had bothered to do their job. But lorax the apologist won't hear of it... will you apologist supreme de la UN?
Click to expand...


Okay, 'poor Bush' is a bit extreme, but seriously, you make him sound like a bystander in all of this. It's pitiful.

There is no justification for invading Iraq - none. "If the UN had done their job"...then, what? Saddam wouldn't have "thumbed his nose"?

It's idiotic to portray this as "we had to go in & clean up the UN's mess." I can think the UN was awful, and did nothing about Iraq, and still see - very clearly - that Iraq was no threat to America, and was completely contained.

Give it up...
 
Superfreak said:
Funny, I never said poor Bush.... but lorax the apologist has to make shit up... I simply told him that if his precious UN had done their job, that Bush never would have had the opportunity to fubar this war. Bush chose his course of action to be sure. He made critical mistakes in how this war was handled. But the UN has no one to blame but itself. They could have prevented the monster that is Bush from ever warmongering in Iraq.... if only they had bothered to do their job. But lorax the apologist won't hear of it... will you apologist supreme de la UN?
Click to expand...

The 'poor Bush' comments are sarcasm. They weren't supposed to be quotes, but rather implications of you're war apologist behaviour.
 
LadyT said:
Ummmmm, because the negatives far outweigh the positives. And what you consider positives are merely getting Iraq back on track to when Saddam was in power which further highlights the futility of the war. And when you talk about gaining grounds on Al Queda, that merely pisses us off more because again we're reminded that there was no fcking Al Queda in Iraq before we got there.

Its like going into a china shop, smashing a expensive piece and glueing one or two pieces back together an marveling at your progress. Its ridiculous.
Click to expand...
This is a far cry from, "They'll never turn this around and there is no way that the military can do anything more there!" as I had heard for the past year or so.

That there is some sign of a turnaround and a solution that may result in a stability that allows us to leave is a good thing, regardless of why we got there, it is far better than just leaving a morass by moving out immediately.
 
Onceler said:
Well said, Darla.

If I had a buck for every time O'Reilly has come out w/..."okay, this is the last chance. Iraq is a disaster, but we owe it to the effort to give it this ONE LAST CHANCE"...
Click to expand...

Yes, while making sure no one he loves has their butt on the line. I remember years ago, he was having one of his bullying matches, and he was asked if he would send his kids.

He would not.

But he did say that he would go himself.

He's certainly had time enough, yet I noticed he's still in NY.

No more time when the lives of others are at stake. Time's up.
 
Damocles said:
This is a far cry from, "They'll never turn this around and there is no way that the military can do anything more there!" as I had heard for the past year or so.

That there is some sign of a turnaround and a solution that may result in a stability that allows us to leave is a good thing, regardless of why we got there, it is far better than just leaving a morass by moving out immediately.
Click to expand...

Actually, rational people are still saying that.

But let's wait three more years, and, heck, I'll give it 3,000 more white lives, and say, 150,000 more brown ones? And then we'll see where we are.
 
Onceler said:
Well said, Darla.

If I had a buck for every time O'Reilly has come out w/..."okay, this is the last chance. Iraq is a disaster, but we owe it to the effort to give it this ONE LAST CHANCE"...
Click to expand...

kind of like I wish I had a buck for everytime a UN apologist said they would give it more time and then declared the next day that it was already a failure. another buck for every time some good news came out of Iraq and an apologist immediately dismisses it would also be nice. I could have been retired by now.
 
Damocles said:
This is a far cry from, "They'll never turn this around and there is no way that the military can do anything more there!" as I had heard for the past year or so.

That there is some sign of a turnaround and a solution that may result in a stability that allows us to leave is a good thing, regardless of why we got there, it is far better than just leaving a morass by moving out immediately.
Click to expand...

Again, one positive editorial. Do you really want me to spam the board with the negative news that has come out just this month?
 
"everytime a UN apologist said they would give it more time and then declared the next day that it was already a failure"

Can you name one?

I can't even find any UN apologists on this thread. I can only find one apologist, period, and his name rhymes with "Dupersneak"...
 
Darla said:
Actually, rational people are still saying that.

But let's wait three more years, and, heck, I'll give it 3,000 more white lives, and say, 150,000 more brown ones? And then we'll see where we are.
Click to expand...
I doubt we'll be there that long.

I didn't support invasion. Don't confuse "signs that we might be able to leave without just dumping brown lives down the toilet" with "boy! we really should have gone!"
 
LadyT said:
Again, one positive editorial. Do you really want me to spam the board with the negative news that has come out just this month?
Click to expand...

Typical UN apologist response... "I will find as many negative things to report on that I can"...

Tell you what... find me the articles from people who actually went to Iraq in the past month. spam away like the good little apologist that you are.
 
Superfreak said:
kind of like I wish I had a buck for everytime a UN apologist said they would give it more time and then declared the next day that it was already a failure. another buck for every time some good news came out of Iraq and an apologist immediately dismisses it would also be nice. I could have been retired by now.
Click to expand...

I wish I could a buck for everytime you say this war was "inevitable" I could have a really nice diamond pendant by now.
 
Darla said:
Actually, rational people are still saying that.

But let's wait three more years, and, heck, I'll give it 3,000 more white lives, and say, 150,000 more brown ones? And then we'll see where we are.
Click to expand...

right... because somehow this is now a RACE issue? Please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top