Sunday News Show Factoid

[RickSp]

Dieval is the war party supporter who consistently argues that the war was justified because Saddam didn't keep up on his paperwork. Sort of the capital punishment for late library books approach.

No WMDs, no Al Queda, no real threat to our security, but Saddam did a terrible job with his accounting. The destruction of a country and a thousand dead GIS, all Saddams's fault!

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Zeebadee,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Zeebadee,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Ah, again with the request for more time. It's funny that the pro-war people are always saying they need more time to find this stuff, and yet they were the ones that told us that this war simply couldn't wait. Isn't that kind of backwards?? More time to find the evidence that they can use to justify the war, but no delays at all in actually committing troops to combat.[/b]

I know that the anti-war/anti-Bush people think that anything worth doing can be done instantaneously, but in the real world it doesn't work like that.

Originally posted by Ricksp+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ricksp)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Dieval is the war party supporter who consistently argues that the war was justified because Saddam didn't keep up on his paperwork. Sort of the capital punishment for late library books approach.[/b]

I know you believe that Saddam was a great man who was good to his people, complied with all the UN resolutions, and wasn't hiding anything...and then there's reality.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ricksp@

No WMDs, no Al Queda, no real threat to our security, but Saddam did a terrible job with his accounting.[/quote]Like I said, keep telling yourself those things..that's the only way their going to become true.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ricksp
The destruction of a country and a thousand dead GIS, all Saddams's fault![/quote]I actually agree with you on this(although you were probably just being sarcastic)...it was Saddam's fault, well, except for the insurgents/terrorits causing problems now, but Saddam is ultimately responsible.

[macnpat]

Originally posted by bishop, bullshit. we purportedly found documents and some random crap buried under a bush. hold me while i faint from fright!

Even after being adequately warned that we were going in, traces of mustard gas, buried migs, and live deadly viruses, among other things were still obtainable in Iraq. These items were not in keeping with the Sanctions the U.N. put on Iraq. It's not a matter of whether or not you are afraid.

find me evidence of an active nuke program please.

We'd start by looking at Iran's situation, then we would determine whether another M.E. leader could gain the same access to nuclear sources as Iran, if he was bent on destruction. That is where you would find your answer.

and fyi, migs aren't wmd's.

oooo, yer slick alright. Guess what a migs payload could be?

loving your pride more than your country is failing to critically evaluate the "intelligence" before the war - today a new report was released showing that an independent intelligence agency warned bush about the post-war situation BEFORE the fool invaded. pride is continuously claiming victory when we're years from this hypothetical victory. etc...

That does not show me that going into Iraq was not a necessary adjunct to our war againt global terrorism. By the way we have pissed off the Al Qaida, I think we should have gone into Iraq before we did Afghanistan!

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by Dieval,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dieval,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by Zeebadee,@ Ah, again with the request for more time. It's funny that the pro-war people are always saying they need more time to find this stuff, and yet they were the ones that told us that this war simply couldn't wait. Isn't that kind of backwards?? More time to find the evidence that they can use to justify the war, but no delays at all in actually committing troops to combat. I know that the anti-war/anti-Bush people think that anything worth doing can be done instantaneously, but in the real world it doesn't work like that. Then why the big rush to get this war started?? Why not take some time and verify the intel reports?? <!--QuoteBegin-Ricksp Dieval is the war party supporter who consistently argues that the war was justified because Saddam didn't keep up on his paperwork. Sort of the capital punishment for late library books approach.

I know you believe that Saddam was a great man who was good to his people, complied with all the UN resolutions, and wasn't hiding anything...and then there's reality.

To quote Ronnie Reagan, "there you go again....". Anyone that disagrees with the war has to support saddam. It just never occurs to some people that someone can actually be against BOTH. Reality to some is whatever Bush tells them it is.


[/b][/quote]

[macnpat]

Originally posted by Zeebadee,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Zeebadee,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-macnpat, The reality is there. You deny it because you would have to say that you had it wrong and when you love your pride over your Country, it's not likely you will ever admit that maybe the U.S. is doing something right somewhere.

That's a very offensive statement that shows your ignorance.[/b][/quote]

Well, then, prove I am ignorant. Admit to me that the U.S. is doing something right by being in Iraq during the reconstructive phase of liberating Iraq from Saddam. This would be a catch-22 for you. If you admit there have been positive results from going into Iraq, you will contradict your previous statements. If you do not, then you deserve to be offended because if you cannot see an advantage in democratizing Iraq, you are the ignorant one.

You can't win this one unless you say, "I'm wrong". I'll bet you are too proud to say that. Now, how does that make me ignorant?

You are not remotely qualified to judge either what I put my pride in or what I feel about my country. I may indeed be wrong, as you may be also, but the reason I oppose this war is precisely because I love my country. I spent almost 40 years in and serving with our military defending this country, in all parts of the world. How much time have you served? I doubt very much that you'd make such a statement to my face, and I guarantee you wouldn't do it twice.

Foremost, thank you for your service to this great Nation.

But, secondly, I know people who, having served, would not tolerate your berating and degrading our efforts in the Middle East. Checkmate, dude.

[RickSp]

I know you believe that Saddam was a great man who was good to his people, complied with all the UN resolutions, and wasn't hiding anything...and then there's reality.

I suspect this is as close as we are likely to come to you admitting how little you know.

I actually agree with you on this(although you were probably just being sarcastic)...it was Saddam's fault, well, except for the insurgents/terrorits causing problems now, but Saddam is ultimately responsible.

I see the problenm now, you are confusing Saddam and Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld was the one providing the weapons. Saddam was the one using them. (Saddam is on the right.)

]

[Zeebadee]

[quote=macnpat,]

Quote by: Zeebadee, Quote by: macnpat, The reality is there. You deny it because you would have to say that you had it wrong and when you love your pride over your Country, it's not likely you will ever admit that maybe the U.S. is doing something right somewhere. Well, then, prove I am ignorant. Admit to me that the U.S. is doing something right by being in Iraq during the reconstructive phase of liberating Iraq from Saddam. This would be a catch-22 for you. If you admit there have been positive results from going into Iraq, you will contradict your previous statements. If you do not, then you deserve to be offended because if you cannot see an advantage in democratizing Iraq, you are the ignorant one. You can't win this one unless you say, "I'm wrong". I'll bet you are too proud to say that. Now, how does that make me ignorant? And I know people who, having served, would not tolerate your berating and degrading our efforts in the Middle East. Checkmate, dude.

You're nothing but a two-bit chickenhawk. "we should have gone into Iraq before we did Afghanistan", yeah, right. Lots of "we" crap as long as it doesn't include you. You have neither the courage, integrity, or breeding to apologize for your slanderous post. And if you really know people that, "would not tolerate your berating and degrading our efforts in the Middle East", have them contact me. I'll be glad to discuss it with them, because as we all know, we are fighting for freedom in Iraq, which includes the freedom to disagree with the "Go get 'em boys, I'll wait for you here" attitude of chickenhawks like you.

[macnpat]

Originally posted by Zeebadee, You're nothing but a two-bit chickenhawk. "we should have gone into Iraq before we did Afghanistan", yeah, right. Lots of "we" crap as long as it doesn't include you.

If you are going to take what I say out of context, screw this convo.