dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
I'd vote for McCain or Guiliani in a heartbeat.
I'd vote for a crippled horse before I voted for Hillary, btw.
I'd vote for a crippled horse before I voted for Hillary, btw.
Rally against war in Iraq
- Thread starter GSRCRXsi
- Start date
- Replies 78
- Views 4K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
That's good. Because if you follow the entire process beginning with the planes hitting the WTC, you can clearly see that invading iraq at this time for the reasons given was the worst idea anyone could have possibly had.
Just an observation. The way you construct your posts make you seem kind of ignorant. Either that or simply in denial toward any possible evil committed by a republican.
phyregod
!!YTINASNI
We were already in iraq when the planes hit.....
And I am stating my pov on the subject.. I'm not one to be wishy washy. I'm going to tell it like its fact, because that is what I believe. Like I said, I do not expect everyone to conform.
And the word evil. Evil seems to be in the fucking driver's seat these days.
"Evil" is a point of view. Just depends on what angle you are looking at it.
And if any man did NOTHING evil his entire life they would make a book about him and worship him. Sound familiar?
Yeah, I touched that subject, so fucking what.
dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
Alright, not so much with McCain...I mean, I remember thinking I liked some of what he was saying when he was running against W, but that was so long ago, that it's kinda fuzzy. I'm getting old, you know.
Guiliani...I've always thought he did a terrific job, from start to finish. The aftermath of the WTC was a high point, but his performance overall was on the good side of things. Of course he had his low points, just like every politician. The positives far outweigh the negatives, though.
BTW, the whole getting arrested for smoking - I'm totally OK with that.
Celerity
Well-Known Member
Ode to the WMD,
By Steven Earl, AKA Celerity.
Attention! You are all bitches. And, while it's not fair of me to say this, I don't expect ANY OF YOU to come back at me until you're done reading the following. The following exerpts are from real sources, with the URL in plain site. These are results of Gas Attacks and WMD news makers since 2003. Yes, 2003. Not the 1988 Iran / Iraq war. This is all recent shit.
A while back there were challenges to back up statements with URL sources. While I never wanted to invest the 2 hours time doing so, I decided I was bored enough to do it today. More will follow.
Iraq HAD and may even continue to HAVE Chemical agents, delivery systems, and "weapons of mass destruction", including designs on Nuclear weapons. Stay tuned for part 2 - Where I point out to you specifically and exactly when and where Saddam Hussein has threatened to use it's weapons on the US and it's european allies. Without further adieu: Choke on this
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm#01
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/chemicalali.htm
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/
http://www.rediff.com/us/2003/mar/29iraq2.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/200...0211-mopp01.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20030306-8.html
Following through that: [url=http://www.un.org/Depts/unmov...//www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm[/url]
Libyan Al Fatah missiles, sold by Libya, who published the human rights reports to UN: http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm
A word from New zealand: http://www.gendercide.org/case_anfal.html
By Steven Earl, AKA Celerity.
Attention! You are all bitches. And, while it's not fair of me to say this, I don't expect ANY OF YOU to come back at me until you're done reading the following. The following exerpts are from real sources, with the URL in plain site. These are results of Gas Attacks and WMD news makers since 2003. Yes, 2003. Not the 1988 Iran / Iraq war. This is all recent shit.
A while back there were challenges to back up statements with URL sources. While I never wanted to invest the 2 hours time doing so, I decided I was bored enough to do it today. More will follow.
Iraq HAD and may even continue to HAVE Chemical agents, delivery systems, and "weapons of mass destruction", including designs on Nuclear weapons. Stay tuned for part 2 - Where I point out to you specifically and exactly when and where Saddam Hussein has threatened to use it's weapons on the US and it's european allies. Without further adieu: Choke on this
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm#01
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/chemicalali.htm
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/
http://www.rediff.com/us/2003/mar/29iraq2.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/200...0211-mopp01.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20030306-8.html
Following through that: [url=http://www.un.org/Depts/unmov...//www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm[/url]
Libyan Al Fatah missiles, sold by Libya, who published the human rights reports to UN: http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm
A word from New zealand: http://www.gendercide.org/case_anfal.html
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
Look! I'm responding without reading your links! ohhhhh nooooess!!
I speak strictly for myself in saying that I personally have never seen undeniable proof of WMDs and an immediate threat. That proof may be contained in those links (which I intend to read later when I have more time), but if the proof was there - why didn't they just show us that info and say "we told you so"? I don't have any problem with deposing Saddam. He was an unquestionably terrible person and ruler. My problem is with the president, who not only threw the country directly into another fray right after Afghanistan, but relied on falsified information to do it. As Sabz said - You want my support? Just tell me the damned truth.
Only a fool trusts a liar, Mr. President.
I speak strictly for myself in saying that I personally have never seen undeniable proof of WMDs and an immediate threat. That proof may be contained in those links (which I intend to read later when I have more time), but if the proof was there - why didn't they just show us that info and say "we told you so"? I don't have any problem with deposing Saddam. He was an unquestionably terrible person and ruler. My problem is with the president, who not only threw the country directly into another fray right after Afghanistan, but relied on falsified information to do it. As Sabz said - You want my support? Just tell me the damned truth.
Only a fool trusts a liar, Mr. President.
Sabz5150
FALCON PUNCH!!!
Originally posted by Celerity@Sep 26 2005, 04:07 PM
Ode to the WMD,
By Steven Earl, AKA Celerity.
Attention! You are all bitches. And, while it's not fair of me to say this, I don't expect ANY OF YOU to come back at me until you're done reading the following. The following exerpts are from real sources, with the URL in plain site. These are results of Gas Attacks and WMD news makers since 2003. Yes, 2003. Not the 1988 Iran / Iraq war. This is all recent shit.
A while back there were challenges to back up statements with URL sources. While I never wanted to invest the 2 hours time doing so, I decided I was bored enough to do it today. More will follow.
Iraq HAD and may even continue to HAVE Chemical agents, delivery systems, and "weapons of mass destruction", including designs on Nuclear weapons. Stay tuned for part 2 - Where I point out to you specifically and exactly when and where Saddam Hussein has threatened to use it's weapons on the US and it's european allies. Without further adieu: Choke on this
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm#01
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/chemicalali.htm
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/
http://www.rediff.com/us/2003/mar/29iraq2.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/200...0211-mopp01.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20030306-8.html
Following through that: [url=http://www.un.org/Depts/unmov...//www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm[/url]
Libyan Al Fatah missiles, sold by Libya, who published the human rights reports to UN: http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm
A word from New zealand: http://www.gendercide.org/case_anfal.html
[post=560636]Quoted post[/post]
The one thing that gets me is if Saddie still had these chemical weapons, why in the world didn't he use them when we were invading? I'd think that if there was a force bearing down on you, that would be the best time to use 'em. He'd kill his own people? You have said time and time again that he's done it and wouldn't hesitate to do it again, so why didn't he use them? At that point, he had nothing to lose, right?
Either way, none of those links point any proof to him having WMDs when we said he did. Chemical Ali talked about his weapons programs back in the 80's. Others talk about what he may have and may be able to do. You covered the Kurds and the government protecting the troops from chemicals, yet no diehard proof showing one of our troops standing next to a missile tank carrying illegal payloads.
It's still all heresay, and that brings up lots of reasonable doubt. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
That one gets me, too. I can't understand why, if he routinely slaughters his own people, why he would hesitate to do it while an invading western presence was barrelling toward his capital.
so, like 12 or so years ago or more, he had a couple idaes that you being, what, 15, liked?
i think you should renew your opionion on him before jumping to conclusions...
honestly, what did he do? the police and firefighters were the only ones who really did a thing... with 2 days, the feds took over all the WTC crap...
BTW, the whole getting arrested for smoking - I'm totally OK with that.
[post=560635]Quoted post[/post]
sure... to non-smokers this may seem like a good idea.
but do you NOT see it as a violation of the constitition of the united states--- "... and the persuit of happiness" ring a bell? take away a cig from a smoker, and you have taken away his happiness, i guarantee you that one
sure, the same can be said for crack, or whatever.. and i understand. not all things can be this way.. etc etc.
but, if he's willing to take away THAT, what's next? liquor? nyquil? oxycodone because it gets on the streets? or morphine??
what gives HIM the right to take away from a person's own choice to do things they wish to do?
dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
Originally posted by pissedoffsol+Sep 26 2005, 02:29 PM-->
so, like 12 or so years ago or more, he had a couple idaes that you being, what, 15, liked?
i think you should renew your opionion on him before jumping to conclusions...
honestly, what did he do? the police and firefighters were the only ones who really did a thing... with 2 days, the feds took over all the WTC crap...
BTW, the whole getting arrested for smoking - I'm totally OK with that.
[post=560635]Quoted post[/post]
sure... to non-smokers this may seem like a good idea.
but do you NOT see it as a violation of the constitition of the united states--- "... and the persuit of happiness" ring a bell? take away a cig from a smoker, and you have taken away his happiness, i guarantee you that one
sure, the same can be said for crack, or whatever.. and i understand. not all things can be this way.. etc etc.
but, if he's willing to take away THAT, what's next? liquor? nyquil? oxycodone because it gets on the streets? or morphine??
what gives HIM the right to take away from a person's own choice to do things they wish to do?
[post=560648]Quoted post[/post]
Like I said when correcting myself..."not so much".
Guiliani was a good leader in times of oppression. What COULD he do? He's not a firefighter or policeman himself, but he showed strength and leadership, something Bush should have taken note of in the past few months.
I do believe that the smoking ban was an effort to protect non-smokers - people who choose to keep themselves healthy and cancer-free - and not the smokers themselves. We allow drinking in this country, which is obviously detrimental to one's health. If smoking only harmed the smoker, I guarantee you it would be a non-issue. The fact that non-smokers are being imposed upon by smokers - THERE'S your problem.
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
Yup. Proves that I don't have the time to read through 8 or 9 links right now.
Who are you to tell me that I would or would not belive anyone? Someone could walk up to me and say, "Hey. Pigs can fly." And as long as he could produce a real live flying pig I would believe him. Exactly the same thing here. If Bush could produce honest-to-god Saddam-developed WMDs I would believe him.
And it doesn't matter if he's a coward. The fact is, he has NO PROBLEM with killing his own people, and certainly shouldn't have any about killing american soldiers - the fact of the matter is, he didn't USE them because he didn't HAVE THEM.
dohcvtec_accord
WRX Sellout
Even though I usually side on the Republican side of things, I gotta take issue with one of those.
Actually, most people believed Bush when his administration told everyone that Iraq had WMD's. I know I did. People were riding high on the victory in Afghanistan, and even though they were skeptical, they still believed Bush and Co. when they told us Iraq had WMD's. We'll probably never know for sure, but things don't (nor have they ever) looked good in our favor.
FUCK, even Powell admitted a few weeks ago (I read it in Newsweek) that we screwed up. He called it a black spot on his record. He was pretty embarassed.
Actually, most people believed Bush when his administration told everyone that Iraq had WMD's. I know I did. People were riding high on the victory in Afghanistan, and even though they were skeptical, they still believed Bush and Co. when they told us Iraq had WMD's. We'll probably never know for sure, but things don't (nor have they ever) looked good in our favor.
FUCK, even Powell admitted a few weeks ago (I read it in Newsweek) that we screwed up. He called it a black spot on his record. He was pretty embarassed.
phyregod
!!YTINASNI
Now that IS an ignorant statement.
Can you back that up? Can I disprove it? Can anyone go one way or another with that?
A hand full of people know the real deal. The president, saddam, and a close circle of people around each of them. CNN doesn't have a fucking clue. Nor does NBC or FOX or anyone else. Hell, the UN is probably clueless as to EXACTLY what is going on here.
Ever think that saddam might have been hoarding things so fucking powerful that he could have taken out 3/4ths of the world on a whim? Would the government publish that shit? Hell no they wouldnt.
Lets stick to opinions here, folks
Similar threads
