How should the US wage new wars?

Well I am bored enough to continue I suppose.

Lets see...

Facts are that it is you that are "replying" in that you jumped into the thread as I noted. People aren't replying to your posts, because there is little there to reply to. They are merely annoyed that an angry avatar spitting hatefull ideas has hijacked the discussion.

You could concieve of your posts as just the sort of tit for tat that goes on in any thread (i.e. on one is replying to anyone in that sense), but in that depiction, it is who is getting (or needing) the "last word" that becomes the salient point. I would argue (and I think the facts would back me up), that you, more often than not have, or seem to need to have, the "last word" overall.

Yes, I realise the irony of me replying to your last post by saying you need to have the last word as well as the fact that by simply not replying to this you can prove me wrong in the case of this particular thread. What I am referring to is a general behaviour pattern which is pretty clear to everyone but you.

Overall, it is you that "jumps in" to other peoples threads with your loony offensive ideas and you that posts a reply to every single post with a seemingly pathological need to be heard and to be heard last.

Stankleberry Sullivan seems so silent, suddenly.

Ah... no you didn't - and thats the point I've been making and you have been ignoring - you didn't find the capability - the inspectors found zilch and the administration said 'we have PROOF and we know where they are!' and they found ZILCH... THAT's the point.

Then please use english then... you said my 'religious beleifs' not 'you beleive religously' they have 2 different meanings.. Home Skool did gud 4 me huh?

Now please display how I hate America - no I don't - I don't even hate Bush - I think he's an incompetent tard, and I think you're a neocon zealot with no brain..

So now we have my stances on those 2 issues.


Why not go over his state of the union speeches and innauguration speeches, and the numerous abuses of 'presidential speeches' close to the election - I'm sure you have them.. it's what passes as porno for folks like yourself.

Big deal? I notice you skipped all the 'hippy' 'foreigner' and 'you hate hate hate america' stuff.. And everything else... also - his term aint over yet!

Now *pats head* be a good lil boy, eat your ice cream - and watch yourself some fine O'Reilly Factor

Try as hard as you can to silence me. You cannot, "Nolan". Keep telling people to not listen to me. You know why you do that? Because you can see that my ideas make a lot more sense than yours. Awww, poor "Nolan".

Nah - I look at it the same way as I like watching special olympics.

You are wrong here. I am not an American and not even sure what a "Republican" is. At least not enough to typecast them.

From what little perusing of American politics I have done, the most left-wing Democrat seems to be some kind of conservative to me. You dont know me at all though so how you can even say that stuff is beyond me. Clearly you are in some kind of dream reality.

See previous post.

The problem I have with that is I haven't heard you say anythign yet. Ulrika's (slight) rephrasing of your posts as "grrr (or der), hippies!" is about the sum of it. That's not an argument or a position. It's just a lot of name calling and shouting. If you calm down, leave out the colourful expletives and come back with a coherent argument, then yo umight have a point about "not being listened to." I for one would find it interesting to see if you *were* listened to in that case. Unfortunately if you are "not an act" as you say, then I believe this kind of discipline might be beyond you. I haven't seen a non-angry, rational or thoughtful post from you yet.

I have no enemies. Maybe your focus on emnity is the source of your forum misery.

I think you're dead-on Dianne, and I think that this statement can be applied to the current US administration as well. I suppose, given Skank's US centric, jingoistic worldview, that I am not suprised in the least that he shares this "quality" with this paranoid "you hate America", warmongering Bush administration...

Ooh. Phrase of the day.

~Ulrika~

Well said, Dianne.

Yes, I know that's all you can see. That's what you use to dismiss the valid points that I'm making. You pretend to be tremendously sensitive about certain words I use, then you pretend that I've not said anything of substance.

If you're going to whine to me, at least read and try to understand my posts. Don't pretend that they're something that they're not. That's pretty lame.

I'm not going to bother looking for the links to the stories about what we've found, I'm sure you've already found reasons to dismiss all of them so you can just keep saying, "what about the WMDs" and act like that's the only thing that matters in the world. You do that because you've been wrong about everything else that's happened in Iraq since the war, so you ignore all of the 22 other reasons spelled out by the US and our allies before the war. Those don't count because you want to whine. That's not what knowledgeable people do. They want to know all of the facts, not just the ones that give them things to whine about.

Well, when I talk about your religious beliefs, I am talking about the lefty religion. You haven't even considered that you are a part of a cult yet, though, so you can't understand what I mean when I say that. Lefties believe in a lot of wacky stuff, vast conspiracies that don't make any sense. That's a big part of your religion.

Yes, I've already searched Bush's speeches for where he said anything similar to "We are invading Iraq mainly because 9/11 happened". He has never said it, and I cannot find something that doesn't exist. You seem to be sure it exists, yet you cannot link to it? Why is that?

I have no problem accepting when I'm wrong about something I say, especially if someone proves it as well as I proved your bullcrap about Bush's "lowest presidential poll rating ever". When you act like you know what you're talking about and someone shows you that you're completely wrong, you should try to learn from your mistake. That's how people become more intelligent. You will have to do that a lot of times for a long time to catch up with us rational people. Good luck with that.

Ahhh so we found absolutely no references to 'in a post 911 world' or anything to do with the new policies of preemptive strikes, the 'war on terror' or any of that in any speeches before during or after the invasion or Iraq?

Yes I've worked out when you talk about my 'religious beliefs' you are talking out your arse... we've worked that out - as an athiest I have none, and your own mistake there sort of catches you in a piss poor backpedal.

Yep it keeps coming back to the WMD thing - because that was the #1 used phrase during all the 'pro invasion' speeches and press releases - the fact they never found them, the capability to make them, or secret stockpiles etc. catches them with their pants down in a huge pile of bullshit - can't make it clearer than that.

Anyways have a happy lil troll. Thats 3 for 3 that I still don't see you explaining.

Sorry - but Bush spun a web of BS - your country is at war under false pretenses - and you have no idea what a religion is..

Thank you for playing.

Thanks for the tip. I'm now tax deductable. Yay!

It's amazing isn't it, how before the war, "WMDs" was the neocons favorite term to toss around, when they were selling the war, but now they accuse of of it being our favorite thing to focus on. Well DER! The idiots tried to sell us a war based upong their "existence", yet now we're not supposed to talk about it!!!!

Don't mock me my friend. It's a condition of mental divergence. I find myself on the planet Ogo, part of an intellectual elite, preparing to subjugate the barbarian hordes on Pluto. But even though this is a totally convincing reality for me in every way, nevertheless Ogo is actually a construct of my psyche. I am mentally divergent, in that I am escaping certain unnamed realities that plague my life here. When I stop going there, I will be well. Are you also divergent, friend?

It's a shame that you don't have the ability to understand what I'm saying, but I have explained it to you. Again, you said that Bush said that the main reason we were attacking Iraq was because of 9/11. That is false. You know it's false, otherwise you would post links showing that he said that. So you can pretend all you like that he said that, if it makes you feel better. Thinking that also makes you wrong.

Yes, like I said, you do not have the ability to see that you are in a religious cult. People in cults never can see it. That's what I was referring to. I have no reason to backpedal. Do you think I care what you think of me? I meant what I said the first time, you are very religious. It's not necessary to believe in God to be religious. But you know everything, right? Wrong.

Hahaha, WMDs were the number 1 phrase used before the war! AGAIN, everyone thought they had WMDs. Chirac thought they had WMDs. The spy agencies in Europe thought they had WMDs. You are purposefully ignoring that fact so you can hate George Bush. When everyone thinks that something is true, it is correct to deal with the thing they think is true. If you aren't able to understand that, there is probably something wrong with you. Here, I'll say it a couple of times in different ways, so it might penetrate your religious beliefs about things. Everyone believed that Saddam had WMDs. It was not a conspiracy by George Bush because he had an erection. Many different spy agencies, many different heads of state, all said he had WMD stockpiles. Not just America. Not just George Bush. Many. Are you starting to get it? Of course you aren't. Because you just want to continue to whine about how the war was wrong because there were no WMDs.

Here is a spectacular web log that should be right up your alley:
http://iraqwarwrong.blogspot.com/

You and that guy are on the exact same level. It's not a very high level.

OMFGZORRRZ!!! TEH CULTZ!

Google. Bush Iraq al Qaeda. First Return.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/17/Bush.alqaeda/

Hahahaahah, holy cow. That article is from June 2004. Bush said the things in that article in June 2004. Operation Iraqi Freedom began in March 2003. Please try a little harder.

Dictionary.com. Nitpicking. First return.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nitpicking

I was asking this guy to show me when Bush talked about how 9/11 was the main reason for invading Iraq before the war. First of all, your link is from well after the war started. Secondly, in that article, Bush isn't saying anything about how 9/11 was the main reason for invading Iraq, he is just explaining that there were many links between Saddam's Iraq and Al Qaeda. The article doesn't say anything about 9/11 being the main reason for invading. That's not nitpicking.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/sprj.irq.bush.iraq/

Tauting links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein is using Sept 11 as a reason for invading.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

Where did these statistics come from then?

The guy you're trying to help said that Bush said that 9/11 was the main reason we needed to invade Iraq. The article you linked to only has quotes from Bush talking about how Saddam's Iraq had links to Al Qaeda. That was one of many reasons, 23 total, that the US and our allies had for invading Iraq. There's no such thing as a "main" reason. Many reasons, all put together, made the Iraq invasion the correct thing to do. That seems to be a really difficult concept for a lot of people to understand, though.

Just pull the troops out, let them think they've won it, then send in "Puff the Magic Dragon" or one or two ICBMs and just be done with it. Better yet, drill a hole down to the largest oil deposit and drop said nuke into the shaft. That'll end all the conflict right there in one fell swoop.


Frankly, I don't like either political party. I think the whole presidential system should be handled by annual lottery.

Remember. Soylient Green is people. Mmm-Mmm Good.

Show me its false - if its so damn easy - I don't NEED a link - listen to any of his speeches - its there - over and over again - any person can see for themselves. But you're just driving the party line - I know - its a shame - but thats way you and your ilk always are.



aaaah no it's not a cult - and that is the most boneheaded argument I've ever heard in my life.. I could say you're in a neoconservative cult -and they're brainwashing you , you have no actual thoughts of your own , but you cant see that over the brainwashing...

here's another one for you - I can turn invisible at will provided noone looks at me...



Everyone except the UN and the inspectors - who were looking for proof....
Nuff said.



Yah, like there are WMD in Iraq? everyone thought that apparantly - didn't make it true though did it.....

You are purposefully ignoring reality - I'm sorry - but thats the way it is.. Reality is out the window, and history will show the rest.. ignore it if you like.. crawl into a lil box and watch FNN - its all very comical and sad.