From the bastion of the left....

"We could have tried to stay another 300 years on the border "


Anytime you have to employ such hyperbole, you've pretty much lost the debate.

Iraq was contained & not a threat, even to its immediate neighbors. We would have had to keep troops there 1-2 years tops to allow inspectors to finish their job. I know, I know - Saddam would keep "thumbing his nose." So, we go back in 10 years, to inspect again. And then again in another 10 years. And eventually Saddam dies.

War was never inevitable. War is a last resort, when all other options have been exhausted. If there is any silver lining, it's that maybe we have learned that.

Well, most of us, anyway, whose names don't rhyme with "Tush" or "Stuporbeak"...

Actually, I meant to put 30 years rather than 300. I would have edited it, but Cypress gets really bent when you edit posts.

and yes, I know I know... the UN sanctions "worked" blah blah blah... which is why they lifted the sanctions.... no wait... sanctions were still in place... hmmm....

War is a last resort. After 12 years of failure with the diplomatic route... war began. But it is ok. I understand you feel compelled to back the UN... Most people understand that is the effects the kool aid has on people named lameass or dunceler.
 
Actually, I meant to put 30 years rather than 300. I would have edited it, but Cypress gets really bent when you edit posts.

and yes, I know I know... the UN sanctions "worked" blah blah blah... which is why they lifted the sanctions.... no wait... sanctions were still in place... hmmm....

War is a last resort. After 12 years of failure with the diplomatic route... war began. But it is ok. I understand you feel compelled to back the UN... Most people understand that is the effects the kool aid has on people named lameass or dunceler.

Actually I feel compelled to keep our troops out of harms way and have them give up their lives, sanity and limbs for lost and unjustifiable causes. Clearly you don't care about them.

Why do you hate our troops SF?
 
I give props to the UN.

We know now, that the UN inspections were successful. What have you been reading - NewsMax? Saddam destroyed his WMD, and the UN inspectors made him blow up or dismantle all his WMD facilities.

The fact that Saddam played some cat and mouse, to keep his main enemy iran guessing about what weapons he had, does not strike me as a reason to invade. A reason to continue to containd Saddam, yes - but not a reason to invade and occupy Iraq.

ahh... the poster boy of UN apologists.... After 12 years.... the sanctions actually had worked... Saddam was just trying to keep Iran "guessing". Right. Who cares if it meant he would be overthrown and put to death...as long as Iran was still "guessing". What a pathetic argrument from yet another UN apologist. 12 years of failure and they still act like the UN was successful.
 
"War is a last resort. After 12 years of failure with the diplomatic route... war began. But it is ok. I understand you feel compelled to back the UN... Most people understand that is the effects the kool aid has on people named lameass or dunceler."


I feel like Sigourney Weaver's character in "Aliens", slamming Paul Reiser into the wall and screaming, "Don't you get it! These people are DEAD, Burke!"

War is a last resort when there is a direct threat to the U.S., you numbskull, not when a dictator who posed no threat, is contained & has no WMD's keeps 'thumbing his nose."

Once again - a half trillion spent, 3,000 Americans dead, 30,000 casualties, over 100,000 Iraqis dead. AL QUAIDA STRENGTHENED, and in a better position to strike the U.S. again.

How can you be so thick? How can you not get this?
 
ahh... the poster boy of UN apologists.... After 12 years.... the sanctions actually had worked... Saddam was just trying to keep Iran "guessing". Right. Who cares if it meant he would be overthrown and put to death...as long as Iran was still "guessing". What a pathetic argrument from yet another UN apologist. 12 years of failure and they still act like the UN was successful.

He didn't say sanctions worked, he said inspections were working.
 
Actually I feel compelled to keep our troops out of harms way and have them give up their lives, sanity and limbs for lost and unjustifiable causes. Clearly you don't care about them.

Why do you hate our troops SF?

Keeping our troops out of harm's way? What does that mean? If any casualties are unacceptable, why in the world would we have a military?
 
"War is a last resort. After 12 years of failure with the diplomatic route... war began. But it is ok. I understand you feel compelled to back the UN... Most people understand that is the effects the kool aid has on people named lameass or dunceler."


I feel like Sigourney Weaver's character in "Aliens", slamming Paul Reiser into the wall and screaming, "Don't you get it! These people are DEAD, Burke!"

War is a last resort when there is a direct threat to the U.S., you numbskull, not when a dictator who posed no threat, is contained & has no WMD's keeps 'thumbing his nose."

Once again - a half trillion spent, 3,000 Americans dead, 30,000 casualties, over 100,000 Iraqis dead. AL QUAIDA STRENGTHENED, and in a better position to strike the U.S. again.

How can you be so thick? How can you not get this?

It isn't because you haven't communicated it well. SF doesn't want to get it. He is one of those who will, even when there are only 15% of them left (which is fast coming, and I figure rock bottom), never admit he was wrong.

He will find a way to justify all of these deaths, all of these lives in ruin, all of these suicides, all of these maimings. Always.
 
Keeping our troops out of harm's way? What does that mean? If any casualties are unacceptable, why in the world would we have a military?

You conveniently left out the last part of my statement, "..... for lost and unjustifiable causes. "

Iraq is neither justifiable or and is a lost cause. Unless you count this one positive article that SF posted as an indicator and dismiss everything else any study group, AID agency or economic agencies say about Iraq.
 
ahh... the poster boy of UN apologists.... After 12 years.... the sanctions actually had worked... Saddam was just trying to keep Iran "guessing". Right. Who cares if it meant he would be overthrown and put to death...as long as Iran was still "guessing". What a pathetic argrument from yet another UN apologist. 12 years of failure and they still act like the UN was successful.

He didn't have any WMD, SF.

By definition, the UN inspections were successful. They made saddam destroy all his industrial infrastructure for building WMD, and they uncovered his bio-weapons programs. And saddam destroyed his WMD.


Your hero (Bush's) own inspector, Duelfer, said that Saddam considered even the illusion of having WMD valuable in detering his enemy iran.


Your war was unneccessary dude. The UN ain't perfect, but they did a better job on inspections, than anything Bush had done in 6 years.
 
Keeping our troops out of harm's way? What does that mean? If any casualties are unacceptable, why in the world would we have a military?

To use when war is unavoidable. As a last resort. They place that trust in us, and we, the people, abused it. We were negligent. We did not do our duty as citizens.

Their blood is on our hands too.
 
And inspections WERE working. Unless Superfreak knows more than Hans Blix?

Maybe that's the issue.

SF, do you know something we don't know?

Unless........yes......this makes perfect sense....Superfreak is Rumsfeld.
 
And inspections WERE working. Unless Superfreak knows more than Hans Blix?

We're through the looking glass now. The logic of SF appears to be:

"Saddam had no WMD - therefore Inspection and santions DIDN'T work!"


If you can explain that one to me Lorax, I'd appreciate it. It seems like the illogical ramblings of a mad man.
 
To use when war is unavoidable. As a last resort. They place that trust in us, and we, the people, abused it. <strike> We were negligent</strike>. We did not do our duty as citizens.

Their blood is on our hands too.

Bush apologists and supporters were negligent. We tried to avoid this mess feverently.
 
We're through the looking glass now. The logic of SF appears to be:

"Saddam had no WMD - therefore Inspection and santions DIDN'T work!"


If you can explain that one to me Lorax, I'd appreciate it. It seems like the illogical ramblings of a mad man.



I believe this logic runs along the same lines as "Saddam wasn't a threat, but war was inevitable!"

One of the other casualties of Bush's folly is the permanent sanity of his followers...
 
"Saddam had no WMD - therefore Inspection and santions DIDN'T work!"

"Saddam wasn't a threat, but war was inevitable!"

You know, if so many people weren't dead, and so many small children didn't have their faces burned off, that would be really funny. Because I think it's true. Very weird.
 
Back
Top