|
Grex > Agora56 > #96: Cheney shoots fellow hunter in South Texas. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 218 responses total. |
mcnally
|
|
response 163 of 218:
| 
Feb 22 18:39 UTC 2006 |
re #162: Report to Room 101, Citizen Plesco. We have *always* been at
war with Eurasia, and don't you forget it..
|
tod
|
|
response 164 of 218:
|
Feb 22 18:58 UTC 2006 |
<studies his Newspeak and parishes the thought of an Eastasian Iraq>
|
rcurl
|
|
response 165 of 218:
|
Feb 22 20:19 UTC 2006 |
Re: "The world better off without Saddam Hussein just doesn't excuse the
lies told to our country." It not only doesn't excuse the lies, but it
hardly even comes near to excusing the death and destruction that has been
going on now for three years.
|
bru
|
|
response 166 of 218:
|
Feb 22 21:38 UTC 2006 |
Once again, what lies?
Russian intelligence said he had WMD's.
French intelligence said he had WMD's.
British intelligence said he had WMD's.
Italian intelligence said he had WMD's.
Indian intelligence said he had WMD's.
Pakistan intelligence said he had WMD's.
Bill Clinton said he had WMD's.
He used WMDs against the Kurds.
He used WMD's against Iran.
He gassed thousands.
His own military were sure he had WMD's and told him so regularly.
Every General under Saddam KNEW they had WMD's but not where they were.
Remember they Threatened to use them to defend Baghdad?
But they disappeared at some point.
Now, It looks to me like they had them at one point, (dead Kurds and Iranians)
That he thought he had them, (threats to use and reports from generals)(and
scientists), That every major and minor intell agency in the world thought
he had them ( reports from same generals).
Conclusion! He had them.
Fact! we cannot find them.
Final Conclusion. We Either made a mistake, or he hid them.
Now there are still millions of documents out there that need to be translated
because our intelligence agencies do not have the manpower to translate them.
They are classified as secret.
Question? How long does it take to translate a page of farsi into english?
|
nharmon
|
|
response 167 of 218:
|
Feb 22 21:40 UTC 2006 |
European or African?
|
jadecat
|
|
response 168 of 218:
|
Feb 22 21:49 UTC 2006 |
resp:167 Wow, that provoked and honest to goodness outloud laugh...
|
tod
|
|
response 169 of 218:
|
Feb 22 21:52 UTC 2006 |
re #166
#166 of 167: by bruce allen price (bru) on Wed, Feb 22, 2006 (16:38):
Once again, what lies?
"Iraq is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and
biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons
program. These are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on
a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein can hold the threat over
the head of any one he chooses. What we must not do in the face of this mortal
threat is to give in to wishful thinking or to willful blindness."
-Vice President Dick Cheney, 8/29/02
"Iraq poses a serious and mounting threat to our country. His regime has the
design for a nuclear weapon, was working on several different methods of
enriching uranium, and recently was discovered seeking significant quantities
of uranium from Africa."
-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/29/03
Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that
Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not
be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat
from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons."
-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02
You see the trend: NUCLEAR WEAPONS ? Right there. Lies.
|
keesan
|
|
response 170 of 218:
|
Feb 22 22:46 UTC 2006 |
Yes, lies.
|
tod
|
|
response 171 of 218:
|
Feb 22 23:20 UTC 2006 |
GW is wondering why everyone is so wigged out over the management of US ports?
Look at how he ramrodded the Iraq war in our faces with big talk of nukes..
Should we trust the jerk with "his word" from the Finance Committee that our
ports will be secure?
|
happyboy
|
|
response 172 of 218:
|
Feb 22 23:23 UTC 2006 |
"will be"
they are not secure now, fer shore.
|
tod
|
|
response 173 of 218:
|
Feb 22 23:45 UTC 2006 |
Give em to the UAE, they'll help us!! 8D
|
cyklone
|
|
response 174 of 218:
|
Feb 23 00:50 UTC 2006 |
Hey bap, you left out the part where all those other countries actually paid
attention to the weapons inspectors who said "wait a minute, it doesn't appear
that he has any WMDs." Those countries (except for England) wanted to give
inspections more time. Bush and his cronies didn't appreciate their BS excuse
blowing up in their faces before they could get in, so of course they pushed
on. That's the TRUTH. Deal with it.
|
drew
|
|
response 175 of 218:
|
Feb 23 01:04 UTC 2006 |
We knew Saddam had WMDs ebcause we had our copies of the sales receipts...
|
cross
|
|
response 176 of 218:
|
Feb 23 01:18 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 177 of 218:
|
Feb 23 03:15 UTC 2006 |
That's sort of the punch line, isn't it? We blew our wad attacking the
only country in the "axis of evil" that *didn't* have a nuclear program.
|
bru
|
|
response 178 of 218:
|
Feb 23 04:01 UTC 2006 |
thats about the size of it. But that hao nothing to do with telling a lie.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 179 of 218:
|
Feb 23 12:29 UTC 2006 |
Deliberately refusing to ascertain the truth, and making decisions based on
wilful ignorance, is just as bad as lying.
|
jep
|
|
response 180 of 218:
|
Feb 23 13:14 UTC 2006 |
I believe that Saddam Hussein didn't have the advanced nuclear weapons
program that the Bush Administration said he had, when they were
persuading us all to start the War in Iraq. I think it's possible he
had some nuclear weapons and that they were removed from the country,
but I haven't seen any convincing evidence of that since we invaded. I
think the war was not justified and I believe we were lied to by Bush
and his subordinates.
I'm still happier that Saddam Hussein is in jail, rather than in
control of Iraq. I'd rather have Hussein in jail than Osama bin Laden
or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. I don't like the way Iraq was invaded but the
outcome was a positive.
|
johnnie
|
|
response 181 of 218:
|
Feb 23 16:30 UTC 2006 |
>I'd rather have Hussein in jail than Osama bin Laden
Why? You think Hussein is/was a bigger threat to the USA and world than
ObL? Certainly SH is a Really Bad Guy, but his influence in recent
years was pretty much limited to making life hell for his own people,
whereas ObL is still causing trouble around the globe, and godonlyknows
what he's got in store for us next.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 182 of 218:
|
Feb 23 17:28 UTC 2006 |
re #181: I can't speak for John, but *I* think Saddam Hussein was a
bigger threat to the world, though not to the USA, than Osama bin Laden.
|
tod
|
|
response 183 of 218:
|
Feb 23 17:34 UTC 2006 |
I always felt that Saddam ruled the way he did because its the only possible
way that a single government could exist without being ultra Islamic. I'm
not saying that I condone anything about it but just that I understood what
was going on there.
As for comparing him with Osama, I think its a herring. Osama should never
have been taken off the radar screen by GW Bush. You can look at North Korea
and Venezuela and see something just as evil as Iraq yet we could still live
a while without touching them with military action.
I do not understand why GW was ever let off the hook for screwing up
Afghanistan's black-ops hunt for Osama. Nor do I understand why GW was ever
let off the hook for putting the Saudis and Pakistan on our BUDDY list.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 184 of 218:
|
Feb 23 17:44 UTC 2006 |
so how is everybody enjoying the civil war in iraq!?
8D
jep....how many american civilians did osama murder?
|
twenex
|
|
response 185 of 218:
|
Feb 23 18:17 UTC 2006 |
so how is everybody enjoying the civil war in iraq!?
Apparently there isn't one, yet. No guesses as to who said that.
|
twenex
|
|
response 186 of 218:
|
Feb 23 18:18 UTC 2006 |
Er, no prizes for guessing who.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 187 of 218:
|
Feb 23 18:23 UTC 2006 |
"We're gunna rebuild that there mosque!"
---gw bush
|