just saw FauxNews report that the Palistinian pictures of celebration about Saddam's capture they were showing were actually file pictures of something else...that the Palistinians aren't actually celebrating.
non answers #'s 119 and 120. Go ahead and compare the leader of the free world to a murderous dictator, crabs. Please continue to show everyone what a stupid dickhead you really are.
You tow the Party-Line pretty well, and quote their newest Attack-Ad fodder, even better.
You know better than that. I don't tow any party line. And I don't know what you're talking about in regards to attack ads.
But since Dean isn'r President, and since he wasn't President when 9-11 occurred and since NOBODY knows what he actually WOULD have done, then it is preposterous to say such a mean spirited thing.
Dean has stated exactly what he would have done. Just today in the NY Times I was reading him state that his stance on Iraq hasn't changed.
Dean may not be a "Hawk", but to accually accuse him of preferring to see people murdered? That is nonsense.
It's the truth.
I might add that, if those planes had not plunged into the WTC? Bush would most likely be watching as Saddam continued to murder women and children, since he was against any attack on Iraq, was not preparing for any attack on Iraq, and wasn't even preparing to attack Afghanistan, the day BEFORE 9-11.
And? Dean is STILL, TODAY against the war in Iraq.
By the way... BEFORE the Army caught Saddman, Bush's numbers were in the tank, going lower, and most polls had Dean ahead of him, in an "if the election were held today" questionaire.
We're a long way from Nov 2004. Care to make any predictions, Mr. "Arnold will lose this election"?
When Iraq used chemical weapons against the Kurds in 1987, there was anger in Congress and the White House. But a memo in 1988 from Assistant Secretary of State Richard W. Murphy stated that "The U.S.-Iraqi relationship is ... important to our long-term political and economic objectives."
"We believe that economic sanctions will be useless or counterproductive to influence the Iraqis," the Post quoted the memo as saying.
do you suppose that when Saddam is on trial, Rumsfeld will be there?
Saddam: Hey Don, remember back when you can over to visit me all those times as a private envoy for the President and you set me up with all those bitchin' weapons? Good times, Rummy...good times. But what's up with this making me out to be the bad guy now? You wanted me to have that shit. You wanted me to use it. But now I'm the bad guy? What's up with that Donny?
Rumsfeld: Shut the fuck up and play along and maybe we won't kill you.
I suppose if you shake hands with someone that makes you responsible for all of the acts that they commit. For instance Johnny Cochrane must be responsible for the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson.
I suppose if you shake hands with someone that makes you responsible for all of the acts that they commit.
what do you think they were shaking hands about?
he was over there making a deal with him to buy weapons of mass destruction.
you guys are being played
now, if some con men want to swindle you and you want to go along with it, fine...but people are getting killed and the monies are coming from everyone's taxes.
you are such a simpleton, crabs. Saddam was the leader of a country that gave aid to the US in our struggle with Iran. I know you know this but you don't understand it.
Saddam was the leader of a country that gave aid to the US in our struggle with Iran
and we gave him WoMD to do it with.
Now you have Saddam as some sort of good guy who was our friend....and bin Laden was our buddy who helped us with Russia...and we gave him training camps for his terrorist buddies.
It's weird how the friends become the most evil men on the planet like that.
They are working it wonderfully...One World Order...it's the plan.
That you think it's just a coincidence that the guys we arm and train to be terrorists are all of a sudden "evil" without our participation is to laugh at.
you are being suckered...it's a con and you are falling for it.
these are the same fellows who lied to Congress about conducting an illegal covert war and trading guns for hostages (dispite a policy to not make deals with terrorists)
they are a pack of war profiteers...a group of Yojimbos.
They aren't screwing up at all if you see it for what it is instead of for what they are telling you it is.
Let's not tip toe around this. If you believe that the United States should not have initiated its military action against Iraq, then you believe that Saddam Hussein should have been left to do whatever it is he was doing as the Iraqi dictator. Simple linear logic. To say that you oppose the very action that deposed the dictator is to say that you would prefer that Saddam still be in power. Don't give me that "Yes, I'm glad that Saddam is out of power, but we shouldn't have done this" nonsense.
This is like telling a friend "Yes, I'm glad to see that that nasty little compound fracture of your left leg is healed, but I'm still really upset with you for going to a doctor." If you didn't want your friend to go to a doctor, then you didn't want your friend's leg to heal. If you didn't want the US to take military action against Saddam Hussein, then you didn't want him deposed. You wanted him to remain in power.
Oh ... and let's mention Howard Dean yesterday. He says that the capture of Saddam Hussein has not made America any safer. We now know for a certainty that Howard Dean is a fool. He has eliminated all doubt. Here is a man who wants to be the president of the United States who believes that America would be just as safe if Saddam were still free as it is with Saddam in custody. He may be a fine doctor ... don't know. But with that statement Howard Dean has proved himself to be spectacularly unprepared and incapable. -Neal Boortz
If you believe that the United States should not have initiated its military action against Iraq, then you believe that Saddam Hussein should have been left to do whatever it is he was doing as the Iraqi dictator.
actually, that is so wrong as to be laughable...we weren't "doing nothing" before we invaded them.
an entire country perhaps?
but at the very least the taxes and tariffs the King was imposing.
and land...lots of land.
Stop the madness Torp.
Hey JT! BLAM-BLAM-BLAM.
did torp just commit suicide?
The colonists had no idea how much land there actually was. That was no motive.
The colonists didn't want profits. They wanted freedom.
So tell me crabs, if you were alive then, you wouldn't have joined the fight because someone might have turned a nickel in profits?
you still pay your taxes to the King?
non answer #118
Saddam the chicken shit hiding in a hole. Big tough guy.
Hey it works.
where was Bush on 9/11?
I don't know. Why don't you go ask him?
when you say this, you are redundant by default.
Why don't you go ask him?
just saw FauxNews report that the Palistinian pictures of celebration about Saddam's capture they were showing were actually file pictures of something else...that the Palistinians aren't actually celebrating.
non answers #'s 119 and 120. Go ahead and compare the leader of the free world to a murderous dictator, crabs. Please continue to show everyone what a stupid dickhead you really are.
hiding is hiding
to non-questions numbers 183 and...well...183
If Howard Dean were President, Saddam would still be murdering women and children.
I'll never applaud that chickenshit bastard.
I see...it's murder when Saddam does it, but it's collateral damage when Bush does it.
got it.
I see...it's murder when Saddam does it, but it's collateral damage when Bush does it.
Yes.
And if you can't see the difference, I can't help you.
you understand that we aren't as pure as the driven snow either, don't you?
we backed Saddam when he was gassing towns in an attempt to get Iranians.
we did business with him afterhe gassed all those people.
For once, just for today, I will agree with fold. Except the vote part.
"Why don't you go ask him?", isn't a question, crabs?
Why not?
Were you with the President on 9/11?...WERE YOU?
You have no idea what he was doing.
So Bush gave the order to kill Iraqi civilians and if the Iraqi military got in the way, all the better?
got it, crabs.
of course not
and neither do you...and therein lies the problem.
Bush gave no orders...he got someone else for that...a thug named Saddam....and when we wanted to fight the Soviets in Afganistan, who did Bush get?
You tow the Party-Line pretty well, and quote their newest Attack-Ad fodder, even better.
You know better than that. I don't tow any party line. And I don't know what you're talking about in regards to attack ads.
But since Dean isn'r President, and since he wasn't President when 9-11 occurred and since NOBODY knows what he actually WOULD have done, then it is preposterous to say such a mean spirited thing.
Dean has stated exactly what he would have done. Just today in the NY Times I was reading him state that his stance on Iraq hasn't changed.
Dean may not be a "Hawk", but to accually accuse him of preferring to see people murdered? That is nonsense.
It's the truth.
I might add that, if those planes had not plunged into the WTC? Bush would most likely be watching as Saddam continued to murder women and children, since he was against any attack on Iraq, was not preparing for any attack on Iraq, and wasn't even preparing to attack Afghanistan, the day BEFORE 9-11.
And? Dean is STILL, TODAY against the war in Iraq.
By the way... BEFORE the Army caught Saddman, Bush's numbers were in the tank, going lower, and most polls had Dean ahead of him, in an "if the election were held today" questionaire.
We're a long way from Nov 2004. Care to make any predictions, Mr. "Arnold will lose this election"?
Wake up crabs. I didn't imply that GW was hiding like you did.
So don't go twisting shit.
So GW was responsible for saddam killing his civilians?
You're a sick little prick, crabs.
he supported it....he authorized the permits to sell them the chemical and biological weapons...he kept doing business with him after he did it...
you tell me.
I'd like to see exactly what he sold saddam in the last 2 years.
story
but if the war were to stop today, the economy would tank, tomorrow. Just a fact. It, more than any other single factor, is keeping the economy going.
Got any evidence to support that "Fact"?
I said in the last (2) years crabs. Not (20) years ago.
You said GW authorized the sales.
you don't think these people can do any long term planning?
first you give them weapons, then you take them away.
it's an old game and you are falling for it again.
you can't see the big picture, can you?
you seem to think that these people are somehow different than those other people...they aren't.
do you suppose that when Saddam is on trial, Rumsfeld will be there?
Saddam: Hey Don, remember back when you can over to visit me all those times as a private envoy for the President and you set me up with all those bitchin' weapons? Good times, Rummy...good times. But what's up with this making me out to be the bad guy now? You wanted me to have that shit. You wanted me to use it. But now I'm the bad guy? What's up with that Donny?
Rumsfeld: Shut the fuck up and play along and maybe we won't kill you.
And Colin Powell met with Arafat.
I suppose he shouldn't have done that, and just let the Palestinians keep on killing innocent Jews?
tell us why Rummy was meeting with Saddam and say that again.
I suppose if you shake hands with someone that makes you responsible for all of the acts that they commit. For instance Johnny Cochrane must be responsible for the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson.
what do you think they were shaking hands about?
he was over there making a deal with him to buy weapons of mass destruction.
you guys are being played
now, if some con men want to swindle you and you want to go along with it, fine...but people are getting killed and the monies are coming from everyone's taxes.
if Johnny Cochran was selling OJ a knife and telling it's so he can kill her, yeah...he'd have some responsibility
you are such a simpleton, crabs. Saddam was the leader of a country that gave aid to the US in our struggle with Iran. I know you know this but you don't understand it.
and we gave him WoMD to do it with.
Now you have Saddam as some sort of good guy who was our friend....and bin Laden was our buddy who helped us with Russia...and we gave him training camps for his terrorist buddies.
It's weird how the friends become the most evil men on the planet like that.
like I said, crabs, you can't trust anyone.
not any of these guys, that's for sure.
and we gave him WoMD to do it with.
What if I said, "yes, we screwed up with Iraq", "we shouldn't have sided with him against Iraq", do you think that would have changed anything?
In my opinion Saddam still would have been a murdering psychopath that needed to be taken out.
they didn't screw up in Iraq.
They are working it wonderfully...One World Order...it's the plan.
That you think it's just a coincidence that the guys we arm and train to be terrorists are all of a sudden "evil" without our participation is to laugh at.
you are being suckered...it's a con and you are falling for it.
these are the same fellows who lied to Congress about conducting an illegal covert war and trading guns for hostages (dispite a policy to not make deals with terrorists)
they are a pack of war profiteers...a group of Yojimbos.
They aren't screwing up at all if you see it for what it is instead of for what they are telling you it is.
BOTTOM LINE
Let's not tip toe around this. If you believe that the United States should not have initiated its military action against Iraq, then you believe that Saddam Hussein should have been left to do whatever it is he was doing as the Iraqi dictator. Simple linear logic. To say that you oppose the very action that deposed the dictator is to say that you would prefer that Saddam still be in power. Don't give me that "Yes, I'm glad that Saddam is out of power, but we shouldn't have done this" nonsense.
This is like telling a friend "Yes, I'm glad to see that that nasty little compound fracture of your left leg is healed, but I'm still really upset with you for going to a doctor." If you didn't want your friend to go to a doctor, then you didn't want your friend's leg to heal. If you didn't want the US to take military action against Saddam Hussein, then you didn't want him deposed. You wanted him to remain in power.
Oh ... and let's mention Howard Dean yesterday. He says that the capture of Saddam Hussein has not made America any safer. We now know for a certainty that Howard Dean is a fool. He has eliminated all doubt. Here is a man who wants to be the president of the United States who believes that America would be just as safe if Saddam were still free as it is with Saddam in custody. He may be a fine doctor ... don't know. But with that statement Howard Dean has proved himself to be spectacularly unprepared and incapable. -Neal Boortz
actually, that is so wrong as to be laughable...we weren't "doing nothing" before we invaded them.
"What about the WMD? Bush lied to get into us into war. Bush lied, people died," etc, etc, etc. Well, now when someone says, "what about the WMD," just send them here.
A good read and will be ignored by most liberals.