Question for Iraq war supporters

[AllieBaba]

Whoops, I thought you were referring to Quote #770.

You should have hit the quote button, I guess, so I'd known what the hell you were talking about!

 

[Taomon]

They blew their method of doing if for sure. Doesn't mean they were wrong though...

I actually read an interview with the Colonel from that unit who signed Bush's papers at the behest of George HW Bush so lil W could get in and avoid the draft.

He also stated that Bush was an inept pilot and worse soldier. He went AWOL when a drug screen was due and showed up with a note from the family doctor claiming Bush was drug free.

That Colonel died and there are no other witnesses who are able or willing to testify to those statements. And yet, somehow Dan Rather is wrong?

 

[Taomon]

Whoops, I thought you were referring to Quote #770.

You should have hit the quote button, I guess, so I'd known what the hell you were talking about!

I did kidlet. But that is not the only post. You habitually post disconnected statements. It is hard to tell who you are addressing and why.

So why were we attacked on 9/11 and where did HIV come from?

 

[AllieBaba]

Omg, you really are clueless.

Dan Rather admitted he was wrong, admitted his source was not checked, admitted the story was botched, badly, and didn't prove anything.

CHeck your sources, bud.

 

[AllieBaba]

I did kidlet. But that is not the only post. You habitually post disconnected statements. It is hard to tell who you are addressing and why.

So why were we attacked on 9/11 and where did HIV come from?

We were attacked on 911 because there are pigs who want us to die, without rhyme, without reason. They hate us, they hate our women and children because we are Christian and western.

And I never claimed to know where HIV came from. You did. Why don't you share your knowledge with us, again?

 

[Taomon]

Omg, you really are clueless.

Dan Rather admitted he was wrong, admitted his source was not checked, admitted the story was botched, badly, and didn't prove anything.

CHeck your sources, bud.

I did. A year before Dan Rather did that story, I read the interview with the Colonel. Dan Rather was told to announce that he was wrong...not unlike a criminal making a plea bargain and announcing that they are guilty for a lighter sentence.

Don't believe everything you hear on FoxNews dude. Read a fucking book, read academic research, read Seymour Hirsch for Christ's sake.

 

[Dr Grump]

He admitted the way the story was handled was wrong and he sure can wear that aspect of it. Not that the story itself was wrong..

 

[AllieBaba]

The part that he admitted was the part that involved using non-existent proof.

 

[Annie]

They needed resources like Bush has to cover up all truths and a the PR firms to offer a slick repackaging of HISstory.

I can back up what I posted, can you?

 

[Taomon]

We were attacked on 911 because there are pigs who want us to die, without rhyme, without reason. They hate us, they hate our women and children because we are Christian and western.

And I never claimed to know where HIV came from. You did. Why don't you share your knowledge with us, again?

You are such a dink. You never claimed to know where HIV came from and yet you have the nerve to attack me for making an observation? The anus has bacteria because of it's main function. This bacteria is all through the colon and so on. To have unprotected anal sex is to introduce all types of bacteria to your own system through the penis. Not exactly healthy.

9/11 is a direct result of our military actions in the Middle East, our covert actions in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and our trans-national companies like Unocal's attempt to lay pipe through the region to sap more resources from the poor Muslims in the area to maximize profits for NY banks.

Now al Qaeda is a radical group. Their ideology is zealous interpretations of the Koran and Islamic justice. They are dangerous. Not unlike our own Evangelicals.

The reason why the clerics are dangerous is because they can easily point their fingers at all of our Middle East policies (installing despots to marginalize citizens and funnel wealth, oil & natural gas from the region) that cause great suffering. It doesn't take much to radicalize someone who has nothing or has been brutalized by a regime that we installed. The clerics give them money, food, shelter and an education.

Incidentally, we are the ones who helped build & finance the Madrases in Pakistan and Afghanistan because of Reagan's fanatical zeal to destroy Russia.

Is Russia less of a threat now?

We fulfill all of the rhetoric of the clerics about us being the great Satan with our foreign policies in the Middle East...all of which is fueled by our greed and hubris.

Do I think we deserved 9/11? No. But we were complicit while we fostered Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, The Shah of Iran, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. And now you believe that BS story that Bush spewed about how we are hated because we are Christian.

We are hated because we are in the Holy Land and we have a perverse sense of entitlement. If we develop alternate sources of energy, we will not need oil or natural gas and this problem can be eradicated.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

[maineman]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/misinformation_study

seems two non-partisan groups are saying what we've been saying all along.

LIARS!

 

[Annie]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/misinformation_study

seems two non-partisan groups are saying what we've been saying all along.

LIARS!

I saw those. Let me ask you this, to someone who claims to have the US interests at heart. Do you think that GW, et al, really were trying to bring us to war for personal benefit? May not be monetary, but say legacy? Do you believe that true? They 'lied' to the American people, nay, the world for selfish reasons? I that your position?

 

[Alucard]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/misinformation_study

seems two non-partisan groups are saying what we've been saying all along.

LIARS!

Non patisan... Charles Lewis... and Mark Reading Smith conducted that study...

They are left wing wackjob hacks that have been attacking the Bushes for ever...

Why would you decieve to push your agenda... You just cant do it honestly...

 

[Annie]

Non patisan... Charles Lewis... and Mark Reading Smith conducted that study...

They are left wing wackjob hacks that have been attacking the Bushes for ever...

Why would you decieve to push your agenda... You just cant do it honestly...

C'mon, we grant them something. It's been a long time. I feel we are going to know what that feels like, real soon.

 

[Taomon]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/misinformation_study

seems two non-partisan groups are saying what we've been saying all along.

LIARS!

"White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat."

Oh, so the world community (not the UN?) felt Saddam was a threat. The whole notion of the preemptive strike was to protect America from an imminent attack by Iraq.

They are liars and now they are back peddling.

 

[Taomon]

I saw those. Let me ask you this, to someone who claims to have the US interests at heart. Do you think that GW, et al, really were trying to bring us to war for personal benefit? May not be monetary, but say legacy? Do you believe that true? They 'lied' to the American people, nay, the world for selfish reasons? I that your position?

Monetary reasons are initial (war profiteering has become an industry unto itself). But control of oil is the main reason. That means a Shah of Iraq to ensure that the region does not profit from the oil and that who ever the US dems as hostile towards US policy will have an economic stranglehold on their industries that rely on oil and natural gas.

This is about power, domination and capital.

 

[Taomon]

Non patisan... Charles Lewis... and Mark Reading Smith conducted that study...

They are left wing wackjob hacks that have been attacking the Bushes for ever...

Why would you decieve to push your agenda... You just cant do it honestly...

Is Bush an innocent and honest politician? I must have missed that memo.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's not just proving the record, it's looking at the man himself over a period of time. He had no doubt - therefore he must have had irrefutable proof.

That doesnt follow at all.
To wit:

Neither of us has ever suggested that we can prove our opinions in a court of law....but we both know what we believe to be the facts.
-Maineman
http://www.usmessageboard.com/showpo...&postcount=439

If so, where are they? If not, he lied. Simple.

Only to those that start with "I hate Bush" and work backwards from there.

 

[maineman]

I saw those. Let me ask you this, to someone who claims to have the US interests at heart. Do you think that GW, et al, really were trying to bring us to war for personal benefit? May not be monetary, but say legacy? Do you believe that true? They 'lied' to the American people, nay, the world for selfish reasons? I that your position?

I think that they believed the neocon premise as delineated in the Project for a New American Century... that American needed to aggressively sow the seeds of democracy in the middle east, and that we needed another Pearl Harbor to reawaken the American people to that need. I believe that they all saw 9/11 as just such an event and decided to channel the public outcry that followed in their plan to jumpstart the PNAC vision and for them, Iraq was the perfect place to start.

All that Bush needed to do was to create the belief that Saddam was an imminent and credible threat, and that he and OBL were on the same page. If Bush could get people to believe that Saddam had stockpiles of dangerour weapons AND that he was in cahoots with Al Qaeda, then Americans would support his PNAC inspired vision for a democratic Iraq... so he sexed up the intell and painted a picture that was less than accurate.

I have never said that Bush was selfish or that he was doing this solely for financial benefit. I have said that he was and remains misguided and mishandled.

 

[AllieBaba]

Of course this premise requires the belief that the American people are so stupid they can't figure things out on their own, and the only people we listen to are politicians. Whom we believe blindly.

What a load.