Conservative case against Iraq

[Annie]

Nice. I tried to rep ya', but it appears I am once again in gridlock. I don't spread it around enough.

I hit him for ya! Spreading it around, spreading it around...

 

[Gunny]

I hit him for ya! Spreading it around, spreading it around...

Damn, I bet he's happy I couldn't! 25 points is 21 better than 4.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Anyway, back on topic, so none of you have anything to say about Iraq turning into an Islamic fundamentalist state that will most likely buddy up with Iran and be worse for us than Saddam was?

I mean, we keep hearing that it's now a "free Iraq," but is it?

For example


So, will women be forced to wear full Islamic garb, and if so, will they still be considered free?

"turn into...???" an Islamic state. Hmmm, every time things arent going how the liberals want them to go, they start talking about how its gonna be so bad in the future.

 

[F-Bomb_Bulldawg]

Why does it nor surprise me that a Left wing, socialism is the best, liberal ding-bat breaks the rules about posting blatant lies? You may not agree, such as I myself, with a single, solitary thing that this man with smelly diatribe is trying to push, but in his opening statement, "A conservative case against Iraq", he blatantly and unobtrusivly lies to all of us. Being taht he has already lied saying that he is a Conservative, why do I want to take anything he has to say after that as truth? It holds up in court just as much as it does on the streets, lie to me once, your always a lier. I may be just a retired Army Conservative proud that we did and are doing what we did oin Afghanistan and Iraq, but at least i'm not lieinbg to you about my intentions.

 

[Gunny]

Why does it nor surprise me that a Left wing, socialism is the best, liberal ding-bat breaks the rules about posting blatant lies? You may not agree, such as I myself, with a single, solitary thing that this man with smelly diatribe is trying to push, but in his opening statement, "A conservative case against Iraq", he blatantly and unobtrusivly lies to all of us. Being taht he has already lied saying that he is a Conservative, why do I want to take anything he has to say after that as truth? It holds up in court just as much as it does on the streets, lie to me once, your always a lier. I may be just a retired Army Conservative proud that we did and are doing what we did oin Afghanistan and Iraq, but at least i'm not lieinbg to you about my intentions.

The flaw in your theory is that you have to assume a baseline of honesty. When have you heard an honest argument from a left-wingnut? I mean, they're blaming a natural disaster on the President. With a mentality like that, you have to just set your expectations of the left a wee bit (okay -- a LOT) lower.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Welcome, Bulldawg! Some welcome rep points headed your way.

 

[William Joyce]

The New American is hard-right, not "left-wing" as one poster alleges.

Being against the Iraq war is a hard-right (not "neocon") position, for those who didn't get the memo. Because: the war is for Israel, not America, and we are for America First.

JBS is also hard-right, though they work hard to avoid the "bigot" charge.

I don't.

You can call me a bigot all damn day, but it still won't change the fact that I'm RIGHT.

 

[Gunny]

The New American is hard-right, not "left-wing" as one poster alleges.

Being against the Iraq war is a hard-right (not "neocon") position, for those who didn't get the memo. Because: the war is for Israel, not America, and we are for America First.

JBS is also hard-right, though they work hard to avoid the "bigot" charge.

I don't.

You can call me a bigot all damn day, but it still won't change the fact that I'm RIGHT.

Dude, I hate to point it out to you, but the "new American" is not a damned xenophobic skin who sees everything as supporting Israel, and fascism is "hard LEFT," not right.

First, Israel is deserving of our support. They are a democracy in a sea of idiots, and it is our National claim to fame to support democracy world-wide. Israel is not exempt because they are Jews.

Second, i don't suppose it ever occured to you we are in the Middle East to protect our oil supply, has it? It comes from THERE and a wise man would want to have some influence with his source, if not some friendly sources.

 

[William Joyce]

I think the "war is for oil" idea is just too lefty. They love that theory because it allows them to stick it to their big enemy, white capitalists. But the logic is weak. If we really just wanted oil, there would be much cheaper ways to go about it. In fact, secular regimes like Saddam's --- which resemble the Saudis --- are probably BETTER for that, because the Islamists would nationalize the oil and keep the U.S. from getting it at all. Which is what we risk now. Keeping oil would be about using the CIA to prop up anti-Muslim regimes like the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein and the Saudi Royal Family.

But it's not about oil. It's about Israel. And Israel is not a democracy any more than the Third Reich. It's about a homeland for a racio-ethnic group, the Jews. Christian Americans should not be dying for that cause. It's un-American.

 

[Gunny]

I think the "war is for oil" idea is just too lefty. They love that theory because it allows them to stick it to their big enemy, white capitalists. But the logic is weak. If we really just wanted oil, there would be much cheaper ways to go about it. In fact, secular regimes like Saddam's --- which resemble the Saudis --- are probably BETTER for that, because the Islamists would nationalize the oil and keep the U.S. from getting it at all. Which is what we risk now. Keeping oil would be about using the CIA to prop up anti-Muslim regimes like the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein and the Saudi Royal Family.

But it's not about oil. It's about Israel. And Israel is not a democracy any more than the Third Reich. It's about a homeland for a racio-ethnic group, the Jews. Christian Americans should not be dying for that cause. It's un-American.

Dude, STEALING oil is the lefty argument. I said no such thing. Protecting our interest is my point. Without oil, we're screwed. Simple as that.

And dude, Israel is a parliamentary democracy.

Somebody need to de-program all that hate they instilled in you. I don't see much difference in what you preach, and what AQ preaches -- everyone but ME must go.

 

[ThomasPaine]

I think the "war is for oil" idea is just too lefty. They love that theory because it allows them to stick it to their big enemy, white capitalists. But the logic is weak. If we really just wanted oil, there would be much cheaper ways to go about it. In fact, secular regimes like Saddam's --- which resemble the Saudis --- are probably BETTER for that, because the Islamists would nationalize the oil and keep the U.S. from getting it at all. Which is what we risk now. Keeping oil would be about using the CIA to prop up anti-Muslim regimes like the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein and the Saudi Royal Family.

But it's not about oil. It's about Israel. And Israel is not a democracy any more than the Third Reich. It's about a homeland for a racio-ethnic group, the Jews. Christian Americans should not be dying for that cause. It's un-American.

thought we stopped that third reich in may 1945 but guess I'm wrong. You simply are the most advanced form of idiocy on this board. I'm not a Jew but I'd sure like to give you a matza ball to the kisser. What ignorant drivel you spout. What color is the sky in your world? And how many anti-depressants, mood controllers, and mind altering drugs do you imbibe in a given 24 hour period?

 

[move_right]

boo hoo. too bad so sad. I Can't believe you would cry about moderators flaming members. are you serious? KAthianne has a pretty decent point of view and I would hardly consider her carrying on your debate a flame. I'm with gunny.

Gunny, this guy needs to spend a little time in the sand pits if you ask me.

 

[Avatar4321]

So, according to you, since the John Birch Society endorses something, that makes it bigoted?

Does that mean that anyone who appreciates Beethoven is a Nazi because Hitler liked him?

This has got to be the dumbest analogy I've ever seen. Beethoven was dead long before Hitler was even dreamed of. Besides, you have it completely backwards. If the John BS was bigotted for endorsing something, it would be Hitler who was bigotted, not Beethoven, because Beethoven never endorsed him! Now if you were saying that Beethoven was bigotted before he endorsed Hitler. That would be a different argument and Beethoven would have been bigotted. But we know that is impossible.

 

[ProudDem]

Not playing your weird games. You seem to have nothing of substance, regardless of topic. Unlike the normal signoff, I'll just say, "I'll be here tomorrow, don't bother me, unless you find some gravitas."

Good night.

It is very interesting to me to see the way Kathianne is behaving in this thread. Very telling.................

 

[Annie]

It is very interesting to me to see the way Kathianne is behaving in this thread. Very telling.................

You go back over a month and post on dead thread. This is crossing into flaming a moderator.

 

[ProudDem]

You go back over a month and post on dead thread. This is crossing into flaming a moderator.

Kathianne, you criticized me for an opinion I based upon my experience with a poster. So I was going back into past threads to see what people had said in the past. I was not looking to attack anyone. But it made me feel better to see you attacking someone else the very same way you did me.

 

[Annie]

Kathianne, you criticized me for an opinion I based upon my experience with a poster. So I was going back into past threads to see what people had said in the past. I was not looking to attack anyone. But it made me feel better to see you attacking someone else the very same way you did me.

Take it to pm. For the record, the previous poster and the reasoning were in no way similar.