# A Dick smacking reminder...



## manifold (Apr 9, 2008)

I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious. I think if we were going to remove Saddam Hussein we would have had to go all the way to Baghdad, we would have to commit a lot of force because I do not believe he would wait in the Presidential Palace for us to arrive. I think we'd have had to hunt him down. And once we'd done that and we'd gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and his government, then we'd have had to put another government in its place. What kind of government? Should it be a Sunni government or Shi'i government or a Kurdish government or Ba'athist regime? Or maybe we want to bring in some of the Islamic fundamentalists? How long would we have had to stay in Baghdad to keep that government in place? What would happen to the government once U.S. forces withdrew? How many casualties should the United States accept in that effort to try to create clarity and stability in a situation that is inherently unstable? I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force. I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq.
     Cheney at the Washington Institute's Soref Symposium, April 29, 1991


"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." --March 16, 2003 


"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." -- on the Iraq insurgency, June 20, 2005


----------



## Ravi (Apr 9, 2008)

Why do you hate Dick?


----------



## jillian (Apr 9, 2008)

Amazing how his brain deteriorated between 1991 and 2003. 

Or maybe it's that he went to work for Haliburton in 1995.....


----------



## manifold (Apr 9, 2008)

jillian said:


> Amazing how his brain deteriorated between 1991 and 2003.
> 
> Or maybe it's that he went to work for Haliburton in 1995.....




No no no!  It was 9/11, remember?  That changed everything.  Enemies of America spent over a decade planning and executing their once in a lifetime coup de grâce, resulting in casualties totalling ~.001% of the US population and that made plunging into an intractable quagmire well worth the cost in lives and tax dollars.  How is that not obvious?


----------



## jillian (Apr 9, 2008)

manifold said:


> No no no!  It was 9/11, remember?  That changed everything.  Enemies of America spent over a decade planning and executing their once in a lifetime coup de grâce, resulting in casualties totalling ~.001% of the US population and that made plunging into an intractable quagmire well worth the cost in lives and tax dollars.  How is that not obvious?



Silly moi!


----------



## manifold (Apr 9, 2008)

jillian said:


> Silly moi!



And lets not forget that included among the 9/11 terrorists were exactly zero Iraqis.


----------



## jillian (Apr 9, 2008)

manifold said:


> And lets not forget that included among the 9/11 terrorists were exactly zero Iraqis.



I noticed that too. Always felt that attacking Iraq after being attacked by a bunch of Saudi Nationals was kind of like if we had attacked mexico after the japanese bombed pearl harbor.

but you know, we might have upset brother bandar.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 9, 2008)

jillian said:


> Amazing how his brain deteriorated between 1991 and 2003.
> 
> Or maybe it's that he went to work for Haliburton in 1995.....



RADDATZ: Two-third of Americans say its not worth fighting.

CHENEY: So?


----------



## AllieBaba (Apr 9, 2008)

manifold said:


> No no no!  It was 9/11, remember?  That changed everything.  Enemies of America spent over a decade planning and executing their once in a lifetime coup de grâce, resulting in casualties totalling ~.001% of the US population and that made plunging into an intractable quagmire well worth the cost in lives and tax dollars.  How is that not obvious?



Well, so long as there weren't THAT many innocent Americans killed, I guess we can sympathize with the killers....

Americans deserve to die, after all....


----------



## AllieBaba (Apr 9, 2008)

Ravir said:


> RADDATZ: Two-third of Americans say its not worth fighting.
> 
> CHENEY: So?



He has as much respect for those numbers as I do. Where did they come from? A CNN poll of CNN viewers?  Peer pressure isn't everything, jello minded friends. Sometimes you just need to do the right thing.


----------



## manifold (Apr 9, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Well, so long as there weren't THAT many innocent Americans killed, I guess we can sympathize with the killers....
> 
> Americans deserve to die, after all....




THAT many???


There were exactly zero Americans killed by Iraqis on 9/11.


----------



## manifold (Apr 9, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> He has as much respect for those numbers as I do. Where did they come from? A CNN poll of CNN viewers?  Peer pressure isn't everything, jello minded friends. Sometimes you just need to do the right thing.



You're quite the laughable fucking hypocrite in case you didn't know.  If it were a democrat that got us into Iraq, you'd be dead set against it.  You know it, I know it and God knows it.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 9, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> He has as much respect for those numbers as I do. Where did they come from? A CNN poll of CNN viewers?  Peer pressure isn't everything, jello minded friends. Sometimes you just need to do the right thing.



They are a reflection of every poll done in the last year.

I agree, Cheney has as much respect for those Americans as you do. Basically, none.


----------



## Larkinn (Apr 9, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Well, so long as there weren't THAT many innocent Americans killed, I guess we can sympathize with the killers....



Who was sympathizing with the hijackers?   I think they were sympathizing with the people, who had nothing to do with 9/11, who got attacked in the aftermath.



> Americans deserve to die, after all....



Who said that?   Oh wait, nobody.   Nice lie there.


----------



## AllieBaba (Apr 9, 2008)

manifold said:


> THAT many???
> 
> 
> There were exactly zero Americans killed by Iraqis on 9/11.



I wasn't talking about Iraqis. I was talking about terrorists.


----------



## AllieBaba (Apr 9, 2008)

manifold said:


> No no no!  It was 9/11, remember?  That changed everything.  Enemies of America spent over a decade planning and executing their once in a lifetime coup de grâce, resulting in casualties totalling ~.001% of the US population and that made plunging into an intractable quagmire well worth the cost in lives and tax dollars.  How is that not obvious?



Obviously you sympathize.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

manifold said:


> You're quite the laughable fucking hypocrite in case you didn't know.  If it were a democrat that got us into Iraq, you'd be dead set against it.  You know it, I know it and God knows it.



And if it were a democrat that got us in Iraq YOU would be all FOR it, demanding we stay the course insisting it was the right thing to do. You know it,I know it and God knows it.

And if a dem wins the Presidency this year and does not pull out, you and your buddies will all be explaining how they just have no choice.


----------



## Diuretic (Apr 9, 2008)

The observable phenomenon of people who still think the the invasion and occupation of Iraq was about terrorists is astounding.  It was about the oil.  It's still about the oil.  Being in Iraq for a hundred years is about the oil.  

Despite the wilful blindness of some, it's about the oil.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> The observable phenomenon of people who still think the the invasion and occupation of Iraq was about terrorists is astounding.  It was about the oil.  It's still about the oil.  Being in Iraq for a hundred years is about the oil.
> 
> Despite the wilful blindness of some, it's about the oil.



And we invaded Afghanistan to build a pipe line for... oil.... of course.


----------



## jillian (Apr 9, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> I wasn't talking about Iraqis. I was talking about terrorists.



You do know that his point was we didn't attack "terrorists". We attacked Iraqis.... who had nothing to do with attacking us.

Seems a bit counterproductive.


----------



## midcan5 (Apr 9, 2008)

Iraq, wasn't that about WMD and being an imminent threat to us. You know, they had such a powerful army, and suppose they would have carried those weapons across the oceans in say canoes or something, why next thing you knew, they be taking back Manhattan or something like that. Cheney knew exactly where they were, he told us so every day. 

For some of us it is like deja vu all over again as those pesky Vietnamese were going to be invading the shores of California if we didn't bomb those reds back to the stone age, whenever they were. But now I see 'made in Vietnam' on a shirt I bought, so I guess they must have attacked and took over a clothing factory. Who knows what will be next.


----------



## Diuretic (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> And we invaded Afghanistan to build a pipe line for... oil.... of course.



I think it was gas, anyway it was an energy pipeline, yes.  But that was after the effort to get bin Laden was stranded by the diversion of effort to get Iraq's oil.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

midcan5 said:


> Iraq, wasn't that about WMD and being an imminent threat to us. You know, they had such a powerful army, and suppose they would have carried those weapons across the oceans in say canoes or something, why next thing you knew, they be taking back Manhattan or something like that. Cheney knew exactly where they were, he told us so every day.
> 
> For some of us it is like deja vu all over again as those pesky Vietnamese were going to be invading the shores of California if we didn't bomb those reds back to the stone age, whenever they were. But now I see 'made in Vietnam' on a shirt I bought, so I guess they must have attacked and took over a clothing factory. Who knows what will be next.



Provide one shred of evidence the war was ever only about WMD's and that it had anything to do with Imminent threat. I won't hold my breath for that proof of course. Further you moron we did not fight in Viet Nam because the North Vietnamese were going to invade us. But then you would need to have a brain to know that.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

jillian said:


> You do know that his point was we didn't attack "terrorists". We attacked Iraqis.... who had nothing to do with attacking us.
> 
> Seems a bit counterproductive.



You realize of course the Taliban never attacked us either? How many Afghans were amongst the 19 terrorists on 9/11? If that is your criteria we should have done nothing at all.


----------



## Diuretic (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> You realize of course the Taliban never attacked us either? How many Afghans were amongst the 19 terrorists on 9/11? If that is your criteria we should have done nothing at all.



The Taleban were incidental.  They were the government of Afghanistan.  Afghanistan was where bin Laden and his gang were hanging out.  Going in to get bin Laden and his gang entailed entering Afghanistan.  Defending Afghanistan were the Taleban.  Hence the western coalition together with non-Taleban warlords, took the Taleban on.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> The Taleban were incidental.  They were the government of Afghanistan.  Afghanistan was where bin Laden and his gang were hanging out.  Going in to get bin Laden and his gang entailed entering Afghanistan.  Defending Afghanistan were the Taleban.  Hence the western coalition together with non-Taleban warlords, took the Taleban on.



That does not matter. No afghan was involved in the 9/11 attacks, No Taliban government wasa  threat to the US at all. Using the logic of the left, we never should have invaded Afghanistan.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> That does not matter. No afghan was involved in the 9/11 attacks, No Taliban government wasa  threat to the US at all. Using the logic of the left, we never should have invaded Afghanistan.



bullshit.  they were known to have harbored the folks who attacked us.  Iraq had ZERO to do with 9/11.


----------



## jillian (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> That does not matter. No afghan was involved in the 9/11 attacks, No Taliban government wasa  threat to the US at all. Using the logic of the left, we never should have invaded Afghanistan.



No one believes that... keep making stuff up, though.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> bullshit.  they were known to have harbored the folks who attacked us.  Iraq had ZERO to do with 9/11.



And no one claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. or perhaps you now have that evidence you have been unable for the last year to provide?


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

Cheney certainly claimed there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda before 9/11.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

jillian said:


> No one believes that... keep making stuff up, though.



Ohh look, Jillian responded to me. But wait, as I recall she does not respond to me. So what is this? And when called on to answer this claim of hers her response will be to claim, again, she does not respond to me.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Ohh look, Jillian responded to me. But wait, as I recall she does not respond to me. So what is this? And when called on to answer this claim of hers her response will be to claim, again, she does not respond to me.


for a retired gunny sergeant, you sure as hell sound like a fucking teenaged girl.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> Cheney certainly claimed there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda before 9/11.



That does not mean he ever claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, as a matter of fact he stated for the record Iraq did NOT have anything to do with 9/11. Or are you going to provide that evidence now?


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> for a retired gunny sergeant, you sure as hell sound like a fucking teenaged girl.



For a retired Naval Officer you sure can not back up anything you claim.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> That does not mean he ever claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, as a matter of fact he stated for the record Iraq did NOT have anything to do with 9/11. Or are you going to provide that evidence now?




all he needed to do was to claim that Iraq was meeting before 9/11 with the guys who pulled off 9/11.  A majority of the American sheeple made the desired connection.  for you to claim otherwise is laughable.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> For a retired Naval Officer you sure can not back up anything you claim.



What do you mean? Logic is convincing to most intelligent people....obviously not retired gunny sergeants who think they're teenaged girls, obviously.


----------



## jillian (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> for a retired gunny sergeant, you sure as hell sound like a fucking teenaged girl.



That's an insult to teenaged girls everywhere.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> all he needed to do was to claim that Iraq was meeting before 9/11 with the guys who pulled off 9/11.  A majority of the American sheeple made the desired connection.  for you to claim otherwise is laughable.



It is simple, you have made a claim, back it up. Provide us one SHRED of evidence Cheney EVER claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. You keep making the claim and then after pages of lies innuendo and semantics you finally admit it is just your " opinion". As for Iraq and Al Queda, there was evidence that Iraq HAD meet with them before 9/11. That is a truthful statement. ALl Cheney did is report what the Czech Intel had claimed. But then you ALEADY know that.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> What do you mean? Logic is convincing to most intelligent people....obviously not retired gunny sergeants who think they're teenaged girls, obviously.



You have no logic, no evidence, no proof. And have always had to admit it is nothing more than your PERSONAL OPINION. And shall I remind you of what you think of personal opinions?

And we have been down this road, you want to call me a teemage girl, then prove to us your not a 12 year old girl.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> It is simple, you have made a claim, back it up. Provide us one SHRED of evidence Cheney EVER claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. You keep making the claim and then after pages of lies innuendo and semantics you finally admit it is just your " opinion". As for Iraq and Al Queda, there was evidence that Iraq HAD meet with them before 9/11. That is a truthful statement. ALl Cheney did is report what the Czech Intel had claimed. But then you ALEADY know that.



did you read the post you quoted?

Let me say it again:

all he needed to do was to claim that Iraq was meeting before 9/11 with the guys who pulled off 9/11. A majority of the American sheeple made the desired connection. for you to claim otherwise is laughable.

and for you to completely ignore speech after speech after speech in which Team Bush spoke of 9/11 and Iraq and Al Qaeda and Saddam and Weapons of Mass Destruction over and over again and not admit that the underlying message was clear - and understood - is patently disingenuous.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> You have no logic, no evidence, no proof. And have always had to admit it is nothing more than your PERSONAL OPINION. And shall I remind you of what you think of personal opinions?
> 
> And we have been down this road, you want to call me a teemage girl, then prove to us your not a 12 year old girl.



I neve said you WERE a teenaged girl, I said that you sounded like one.

*Ohh look, Jillian responded to me. But wait, as I recall she does not respond to me. So what is this? And when called on to answer this claim of hers her response will be to claim, again, she does not respond to me.*

that sounds like something my 18 year old daughter would have said....three years ago.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> did you read the post you quoted?
> 
> Let me say it again:
> 
> ...



I am waiting for evidence, other then your opinion. Come on it can not be hard to provide, you insist it is true. Provide us with evidence Bush or Cheny ever said Iraq was involved in 9/11.

It is nothing more than YOUR personal OPINION. with that and 3 bucks I can probably buy a cup of coffee.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> I neve said you WERE a teenaged girl, I said that you sounded like one.
> 
> *Ohh look, Jillian responded to me. But wait, as I recall she does not respond to me. So what is this? And when called on to answer this claim of hers her response will be to claim, again, she does not respond to me.*
> 
> that sounds like something my 18 year old daughter would have said....three years ago.



And your little tirades about apologies and whining about assumed offenses sounds like something a 12 year old girl would say. Thanks for playing though.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> I am waiting for evidence, other then your opinion. Come on it can not be hard to provide, you insist it is true. Provide us with evidence Bush or Cheny ever said Iraq was involved in 9/11.
> 
> It is nothing more than YOUR personal OPINION. with that and 3 bucks I can probably buy a cup of coffee.



that is the point.  they never said it, but the implication was unmistakable...and it worked! On 9/13/01,nearly everyone in America knew who attacked us.  By 2003, well over half of us thought that Saddam had planned and executed 9/11.  Now you can claim that Team Bush never made that implication, and you and I both know that you would be lying your ass off...because they most certainly DID make the implication....they just never came out and said it directly....RGS.... pigs.... fucking....farm.... FLDS... teenaged girls.... incest....pigs...fucking....RGS.... mormon... pigs.... RGS... fucking....

if I gave speeches that had those words in close proximity long enough, what sort of implication do you think that people would draw?


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> And your little tirades about apologies and whining about assumed offenses sounds like something a 12 year old girl would say. Thanks for playing though.



I need no apologies from you.  YOu are a worm.  I step on worms, I don't ask them for anything.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Apr 9, 2008)

maineman said:


> I need no apologies from you.  YOu are a worm.  I step on worms, I don't ask them for anything.



Sure thing Commodore.


----------



## maineman (Apr 9, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Sure thing Commodore.



only a commander. but big enough to squash a worm.


----------



## manifold (Apr 10, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> And if it were a democrat that got us in Iraq YOU would be all FOR it, demanding we stay the course insisting it was the right thing to do. You know it,I know it and God knows it.
> 
> And if a dem wins the Presidency this year and does not pull out, you and your buddies will all be explaining how they just have no choice.




BULL SHIT!  BULL SHIT!  BULL SHIT!

You obviously don't know me very well.  I was all for it for the first year or so, when I still believed many of the Bush lies (I voted for Bush too btw).

I was wrong.  Dead wrong.


----------



## Ravi (Apr 10, 2008)

I just heard an interview with Doug Feith about his new book. He blamed the Iraq invasion on Colin Powell because Colin Powell didn't come up with an alternative solution to containing Saddam.

He sounded just like an eight year old boy.

Unbelievable.


----------



## midcan5 (Apr 10, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Provide one shred of evidence the war was ever only about WMD's and that it had anything to do with Imminent threat. I won't hold my breath for that proof of course. Further you moron we did not fight in Viet Nam because the North Vietnamese were going to invade us. But then you would need to have a brain to know that.



Huh !!!!!!!!  Are you crazy?

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYI7JXGqd0o[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNws6IG696M[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0f6dGRmzVw[/ame]


----------

