FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
LOL. I've actually heard a guy say that. Just an amusing anecdote about racial "progress" in the south.
Rorshach Test
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
yeah i am pretty awesome. sup t.
Whoah....slow down, I wouldn't say awesome, but you've had your moments.
why do you have to be such a kill joy? I think you're awesome 
why do you have to be such a kill joy? I think you're awesome
Kill joys are inherently awesome.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"Superfreak - still defending the decision to invade Iraq in 2007 tsk tsk tsk"
Saying that it was "inevitable that we go in" and "defending the decision to invade Iraq in 2003" are two different things.... goofball.
Saying that it was "inevitable that we go in" and "defending the decision to invade Iraq in 2003" are two different things.... goofball.
No. they are definitely the same. The fact that you say it was "inevitable" speaks volumes. Clearly it wasn't "inevitable".
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Just as clearly to me that it WAS inevitable. Or were the sanctions and no fly zones going to last until Saddam and his sons were dead?
TWELVE years went by with nothing accomplished by the UN.... yet somehow individuals like yourself seem to think that it would have been resolved in another manner. The second we put a large force on his border, Saddam began playing nice with the UN. That compliance would have lasted only as long as they were there.... and the chances of that large force being there for any extended period of time without going in, would have been minimal at best.
TWELVE years went by with nothing accomplished by the UN.... yet somehow individuals like yourself seem to think that it would have been resolved in another manner. The second we put a large force on his border, Saddam began playing nice with the UN. That compliance would have lasted only as long as they were there.... and the chances of that large force being there for any extended period of time without going in, would have been minimal at best.
Just as clearly to me that it WAS inevitable. Or were the sanctions and no fly zones going to last until Saddam and his sons were dead?
What's that got to do with the "inevitability" of invading Iraq?
Even if sanctions collapsed, and Saddam remained in power (a huge "if), how exactly was saddam - evil as he was - a threat to the american homeland, and how was he in any way assisting international jihaddist groups?
What's that got to do with the "inevitability" of invading Iraq?
Even if sanctions collapsed, and Saddam remained in power (a huge "if), how exactly was saddam - evil as he was - a threat to the american homeland, and how was he in any way assisting international jihaddist groups?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Cypress....
"What's that got to do with the "inevitability" of invading Iraq?"
How quickly we forget the all the crys of "the sanctions are starving the Iraqi people".... "the Iraqi children are dying due to the sanctions"... etc...
The sanctions were not working thanks to the UN's complete failure to monitor the oil-for-food program. Saddam had to be removed.
The timing was poor. The planning by the administration was horrid. No question on either count, but eventually something had to be done about Saddam. But again, you ignore the fact that for 12 years nothing was accomplished. What other course do you suggest would have been appropriate? Letting the sanctions go on for another 12 years?
"Even if sanctions collapsed, and Saddam remained in power (a huge "if), how exactly was saddam - evil as he was - a threat to the american homeland, and how was he in any way assisting international jihaddist groups?"
How exactly is that a "huge IF"???? Do you think Saddam would have been ousted? Or are you saying that it is a huge if that sanctions would have collapsed? If it is the latter, then please go back and look at all the crys that the sanctions were not working.
Who said ANYTHING about Saddam being a threat to the American homeland?
Very nice of you to mention "international" terrorists.... one point on that Cypress... there is always a first time. You are assuming that just because a group has not hit us here before that they wouldn't have done so if provided the means.
"What's that got to do with the "inevitability" of invading Iraq?"
How quickly we forget the all the crys of "the sanctions are starving the Iraqi people".... "the Iraqi children are dying due to the sanctions"... etc...
The sanctions were not working thanks to the UN's complete failure to monitor the oil-for-food program. Saddam had to be removed.
The timing was poor. The planning by the administration was horrid. No question on either count, but eventually something had to be done about Saddam. But again, you ignore the fact that for 12 years nothing was accomplished. What other course do you suggest would have been appropriate? Letting the sanctions go on for another 12 years?
"Even if sanctions collapsed, and Saddam remained in power (a huge "if), how exactly was saddam - evil as he was - a threat to the american homeland, and how was he in any way assisting international jihaddist groups?"
How exactly is that a "huge IF"???? Do you think Saddam would have been ousted? Or are you saying that it is a huge if that sanctions would have collapsed? If it is the latter, then please go back and look at all the crys that the sanctions were not working.
Who said ANYTHING about Saddam being a threat to the American homeland?
Very nice of you to mention "international" terrorists.... one point on that Cypress... there is always a first time. You are assuming that just because a group has not hit us here before that they wouldn't have done so if provided the means.
Fact: Saddam was contained. Where is the inevitability of occupying a state with a contained dictator? He had no WMD program nor did he harbor al Queda.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
FACT: Saddam was not "contained" if he was supplying terrorists with money, if he was circumventing the sanctions etc... and you fail again to tell me just how this situation would have been resolved otherwise????
I said the timing was wrong. We should not have gone in when we did. But the sanctions were not working.... so what was the other option Tiana? "Contain" him until he died? Keep troops on his border for the next 40 years?
and AGAIN... quit trying to imply that I am saying Saddam had anything to do with Al Queda. I have not said that.
I said the timing was wrong. We should not have gone in when we did. But the sanctions were not working.... so what was the other option Tiana? "Contain" him until he died? Keep troops on his border for the next 40 years?
and AGAIN... quit trying to imply that I am saying Saddam had anything to do with Al Queda. I have not said that.
Fact: He was contained. He didn't have an operational WMD program underway as suggested and he was no threat. Are you suggesting that financial support to terrorist organizations is justification for invading countries?
Yes. I'd much rather have troops on the border for the next 80 years to what we are currently doing.
Actually, the sanctions were working, that's why we didn't find the infamous wmd's that were going to kill us all in a "mushroom cloud.
Any "terrorists" he gave money to, were Palestinians. That's Israel's problem.
You want to die for Israel? I've always said, hey, be my guest. But I don't want to pay for it. You can probably emigrate and they will give you citizenship if you fight in their army. Leave the rest of the US out of it.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Actually, the sanctions were NOT working. If they were "working", then why exactly were they still in place 12 years later????
All Saddam had to do was allow the UN into his country as he did for the couple of months prior to the war starting and he could have remained in power. Why do you suppose he didn't do this?
Those terrorists he gave money to, hate the US second only to Israel. You are simply assuming that they would not have turned their eyes towards us after seeing the effects of 9/11.
By your logic, then we should not do anything for the people in Sudan either... they are not a threat to us... let the slaughter continue. Rwanda... no big deal... not a threat to the USA... kill away.
All Saddam had to do was allow the UN into his country as he did for the couple of months prior to the war starting and he could have remained in power. Why do you suppose he didn't do this?
Those terrorists he gave money to, hate the US second only to Israel. You are simply assuming that they would not have turned their eyes towards us after seeing the effects of 9/11.
By your logic, then we should not do anything for the people in Sudan either... they are not a threat to us... let the slaughter continue. Rwanda... no big deal... not a threat to the USA... kill away.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"But I don't want to pay for it. You can probably emigrate and they will give you citizenship if you fight in their army. Leave the rest of the US out of it."
By that same logic... I don't want to pay for national healthcare for a bunch of fat lazy people that refuse to try to improve their health.... so please, if you want to pay for them... be my guest... but leave the rest of the US out of it.
By that same logic... I don't want to pay for national healthcare for a bunch of fat lazy people that refuse to try to improve their health.... so please, if you want to pay for them... be my guest... but leave the rest of the US out of it.
No it's not the "same logic". Because "national healthcare" by definition, benefits Americans. Spending our blood and money because some dope who was no threat to us, gave some other dope's families some money after they blew themselves up in Israel, not our concern. Not our problem.
If the sanctions didn't work, where's the WMD? In a 12 year time span, a country like Iraq, should have been able to reconstitute a WMD program, easily. The military strength of Iraq in 2002, was a shadow of it's former self, back in 1990. Seems like the sanctions worked to me.
It is a huge "if". Granted, an incompetent leader like Bush, might not have had the diplomatic skills to keep iraq contained. But, don't assume all american leaders have the same skill level as Bush.
Containing Iraq, would have been challenging. But, I think if we contained the Soviet Union, I suspect we might be up to the task of containing Iraq. Heck, we spent 20 years successfully containing Libya. Remember when Libya and Qaddaffi were our biggest threat in the arab world? Well, now we contained them, and we are actually on pretty good terms with them.
Good point. He wasn't a threat to America. Please explain why we invaded, and why you supported it.
So, I'm supposed to support an invasion of Iraq, and the expenditure of half a trillion taxpayer dollars, because you have a gut feeling that Saddam, possibly, one day, just might, arm and aid Al Qaeda?
No thanks. I've yet to see a single significant NeoCon prediction about Iraq come true
in bold.
Newsflash: He did and inspections were working.
? So are you saying that we should attack every known terrorist group out there because we never know if they are going to turn their eyes toward us after the effects of 9/11? Ask yourself a serious question: does that even make sense to you?
Wrongo once a again.
#1) Iraq was stabilized when we went in and we completely turned it on its as s. Sudan is already destabilized.
#2) lastly and more importantly, Saddam was no committing genocide prior to us invading. I've always said that the US and the rest of the world should be proactive in breaking up governments and militias that engage in genocide. This was not the case. Here. But try another red herring. Maybe the next one will hold some weight.