Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 2, 2005 The American government isn't correcting a mistake and has yet to admit to one. The whole not sending Saddam any money or weaponry is correcting a mistake. Truly stunning concept, I agree. Their simply re-affirming what they sent Saddam in to do in the first place. No, they are saying that when they learned what Saddam was doing with what they sent him, they stopped sending him stuff. Really, not that complex. And sorry doesn't bring back the dead. It does more than continuing to send him shit to use to kill people. -=Mike ...Yeah, you're not just blindly anti-American. Why would ANYBODY think that?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbacon 0 Report post Posted March 3, 2005 No, they are saying that when they learned what Saddam was doing with what they sent him, they stopped sending him stuff. That's bullshit. Saddam's worst crimes, by far, were committed during the war with Iran, but he remained a friend of the US until the day of the invasion of Kuwait. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 3, 2005 No, they are saying that when they learned what Saddam was doing with what they sent him, they stopped sending him stuff. That's bullshit. Saddam's worst crimes, by far, were committed during the war with Iran, but he remained a friend of the US until the day of the invasion of Kuwait. No, he'd already fallen out of favor before that point. And you seem to mistake the US supporting him so he and Iran would wipe each other out for the US actually liking the guy. -=Mike ...Gee, you mis-understanding the US? Shocking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbacon 0 Report post Posted March 3, 2005 The whole not sending Saddam any money or weaponry is correcting a mistake. Truly stunning concept, I agree. No, it's not sending support to a man slipping away from supporting America, and more towards Russia/France. But we've already been down this road, so I refuse to start looping points. It does more than continuing to send him shit to use to kill people. Now they're just doing it for him Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbacon 0 Report post Posted March 3, 2005 Vermont Town Hall Meetings Produce Opposition To Iraq War The results of the recent Town Hall Meetings: 48 towns voted in favour 4 voted against 3 passed on the vote The resolution voted on (summary) • The war in Iraq was advanced and the Joint Congressional Resolution authorizing U.S. action in Iraq was adopted on the basis of erroneous factual claims. Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction and was never shown to have a connection to the 9/11 attacks. • The costs of deploying Vermont National Guard members in Iraq has been substantial, reckoned in deaths, injuries, and personal trauma, as well as dislocation and financial hardship to businesses and communities. • We call on the members of the Congressional Delegation to work to restore a proper balance between the powers of the States and the power of the federal government over state National Guard units. • We call on the Legislature to investigate and discuss the role of Vermont in the governance of its National Guard, as the Vermont Constitution authorizes it to do, and to set up a commission to study how Guard deployments affect readiness here in Vermont. • We call on the President and the Congress take steps to withdraw American troops from Iraq, consistently with the mandate of international humanitarian law. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 3, 2005 The whole not sending Saddam any money or weaponry is correcting a mistake. Truly stunning concept, I agree. No, it's not sending support to a man slipping away from supporting America, and more towards Russia/France. Yes, that is EXACTLY what it was all about. Of course. Gee, why would ANYBODY get the idea that you blindly hate America? But we've already been down this road, so I refuse to start looping points. You'd need to make one before you could loop it. It does more than continuing to send him shit to use to kill people. Now they're just doing it for him Yup. Amazing that the people "tortured" in Abu Gharib tended to SURVIVE their stay there. That didn't happen with Saddam all that often. Your blind loathing of America is transparent. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 3, 2005 Vermont Town Hall Meetings Produce Opposition To Iraq War The results of the recent Town Hall Meetings: 48 towns voted in favour 4 voted against 3 passed on the vote The resolution voted on (summary) • The war in Iraq was advanced and the Joint Congressional Resolution authorizing U.S. action in Iraq was adopted on the basis of erroneous factual claims. Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction and was never shown to have a connection to the 9/11 attacks. • The costs of deploying Vermont National Guard members in Iraq has been substantial, reckoned in deaths, injuries, and personal trauma, as well as dislocation and financial hardship to businesses and communities. • We call on the members of the Congressional Delegation to work to restore a proper balance between the powers of the States and the power of the federal government over state National Guard units. • We call on the Legislature to investigate and discuss the role of Vermont in the governance of its National Guard, as the Vermont Constitution authorizes it to do, and to set up a commission to study how Guard deployments affect readiness here in Vermont. • We call on the President and the Congress take steps to withdraw American troops from Iraq, consistently with the mandate of international humanitarian law. And the country responds to this with a hearty... Yawn. Yup, I can see how Howard Dean can seem like a sane governor, considering the utter whackjobs who inhabit that state. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Justice 0 Report post Posted March 3, 2005 Wow. You know you are desperate when you are producing a resolution from a Vermont Townhall Meeting. Dear God, 57 votes! That's obviously a stunning cross-section of America. God, if you weren't a joke before, you certainly are now... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 3, 2005 Wow. You know you are desperate when you are producing a resolution from a Vermont Townhall Meeting. Dear God, 57 votes! That's obviously a stunning cross-section of America. God, if you weren't a joke before, you certainly are now... Would it be rude to mention that "Nuremberg" is misspelled in his joke of a sig from that Jew-hater Chomsky? Well, at least Bacon can pretend for one post to not totally hate America. -=Mike "If the Numerberg laws were applied today, then every Post-War American president would have to be hanged" - Noam Chomsky"? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted March 3, 2005 While I agree that using a Vermont town hall meeting as a measuring stick for the success of the war is hilariously idiotic, saying stuff like "utter whackjobs who inhabit that state" is just tearing apart this stupid red/blue state divide even further. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 3, 2005 While I agree that using a Vermont town hall meeting as a measuring stick for the success of the war is hilariously idiotic, saying stuff like "utter whackjobs who inhabit that state" is just tearing apart this stupid red/blue state divide even further. Umm, VT IS laden with utter whackjobs. Ditto San Fran and Berkeley. Not saying so doesn't make it not so. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted March 3, 2005 You know, I opposed the war on Iraq then and still do now, but watching Mike continously pWn C-Bacon in this thread is nothing short of entertaining. I mean, this guy can actually take a worthwhile argument that could hold up so much better making simpler, smarter statements, in the process goes overboard with his own rhetoric and gets reamed for it. Awesome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Ol' Smitty 0 Report post Posted March 4, 2005 Wasn't sure where to post this, but this seems as good a place as any. I would like for someone who has claimed that "democracy" & "freedom" were justifications (for the Iraq war, made by the Bush administration) on par with the "WMD" & "security" justifications to respond to the following: Mar. 6, news conference. Bush stated that there was: a single question: Has the Iraqi regime fully and unconditionally disarmed as required by 1441, or has it not? Ari Fleischer (cited by Adams & Huband, Financial Times, April 12-13, 2003) stated that Iraq's possesion of WMD: is what this war was about and is about British Foreign Minister Jack Straw (cited by Sanger & Barringer, March 7, 2003 NYT) announced that if Saddam disarmed: we accept that the government of Iraq stays in place Colin Powell (March 6, 2003, NYT): The question simply is: has Saddam Hussein made a strategic, political decision to comply with the UNSC resolutions & to get rid of his WMD? That's it in a nutshell..That's the question. Powell (March 23, 2003, NYT) stated that Iraq: was being attacked because it had violated its international obligations under its 1991 surrender agreement, which required the disclosure & disarmament of its dangerous weapons. Condi Rice (Foreign Affairs, January-February 2000, Mearsheimer/Walt): if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration Anyone? Beuler? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 4, 2005 Wow, an ability to pick and choose quotes to go along with your view. Truly impressive. Really. I'm WOWED! -=Mike ...I'm sorry, did somebody say WMD concerns WEREN'T part of the reasons to go to war?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted March 4, 2005 Umm, VT IS laden with utter whackjobs. Ditto San Fran and Berkeley. Having lived in San Fran, I will say that while it does have wackjobs, they're not as numerous as you choose to believe. There's plenty of people who don't have any strong political opinions on "the big issues" and a lot who think all politicians from all side are corrupt idiots who tell you what you want to hear, so why bother participating. The people who really are set out to make a difference, though, are majorily the "Come on, people, let's close every gun store so that shooting deaths drop to 0%!" types. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Ol' Smitty 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2005 Wow, an ability to pick and choose quotes to go along with your view. Truly impressive. Really. I'm WOWED! -=Mike ...I'm sorry, did somebody say WMD concerns WEREN'T part of the reasons to go to war?... All of these quotes suggest that it was *the* reason. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 5, 2005 Wow, an ability to pick and choose quotes to go along with your view. Truly impressive. Really. I'm WOWED! -=Mike ...I'm sorry, did somebody say WMD concerns WEREN'T part of the reasons to go to war?... All of these quotes suggest that it was *the* reason. Which is an easy thing to prove when you ignore all of the quotes that don't go along with your preconceived notion. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Ol' Smitty 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2005 Q for SJ: Have you read/do you know about Confessions of an Economic Hitman? Thoughts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
