It started as War commentary and ended in TV ad commentary

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Psychoblues, Jan 22, 2004.

  1. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    Wow, I'm amazed. I guess the "war" isn't taken very seriously in this group? I allude to the thread started earlier by myself that attempted to illuminate how this "war" might not be going so well.

    I think we can reasonably ascertain from the evidence thusfar discovered that there were no WMD's. I think we can further ascertain that our pResident lied when he claimed he knew about them, where they were, and that they presented some kind of an "immediate threat" to our Country, the US of A, or even that they presented a threat to the immediate Iraqi neighbors. Pipe dream at this point, don't you think?

    Now the inclusion of "women" in the fight against a perceived American aggression somehow depicts desperation? What about the "women" that WE send and that suffer in this war? Even our most famous female POW says it's all a bunch of propaganda from the Pentagon. I'm almost left speechless, "almost".

    Anyhow, how do you think this dilemma might escape congressional scrutiny? Will the media be involved? Will the election year hysterics play a large part? Will the American people ever know the truth? If high school history is an indicator, I would have to say NO to the latter and YES to the former. Don't you agree?
     
  2. Zhukov
    Offline

    Zhukov VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    3,492
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Everywhere, simultaneously.
    Ratings:
    +301
    You think the war isn't going well; I think the war is over. You believe we are in a quagmire; I believe the country of Iraq was conquered months ago, some few terrorists and old Baathists stuck around to cause some trouble, and now most of them are captured or dead. You think this is a new Vietnam; I think by election day Iraq will have a democraticaly elected government, and we'll be on our way out. You assume because we haven't found WMD, and may never, that that must mean Bush deliberately lied to the world; that is a logical fallacy. You believe Bush is an evil man who sent american soldiers to a foreign country so he could make a profit from it; I believe he didn't like Saddam and wanted him gone, and while he was doing so he believed it was best for our country and the world, and still does.

    You believe the war isn't taken seriously on this board; I believe few people see the war in the way you see it.
     
  3. lilcountriegal
    Offline

    lilcountriegal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,633
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +59
    Quite to the contrary, I everyone on this board (minus a few) take this war VERY seriously. We all have friends, family, or someone we know serving in this conflict. No one takes that with a grain of salt. Just because we happen to agree with the war and you do not does not mean we take it any less seriously.

    I have seen no evidence thus far to come to this conclusion.

    I'd like to see proof that President Bush lied. Intel from around the world all concluded the same: they believed Saddam had WMD and he has proved in the past that he will use them. Again, Jim made a comment that sums up this: even IF Saddam didnt have WMD, he shouldnt have bluffed. Sucks to be him that we called him on it.

    Women stationed in Iraq in the middle of this conflict is hardly new.

    I believe what Private Lynch stated was that the hoop-la around her rescue was staged propaganda, not the entire war. However, if I'm mistaken, I would request a link to her statement

    Not at all.
     
  4. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Outstanding, Zhukov, outstanding! :clap: :clap:

    I think it all it means is that none have been found.

    It was 'imminent' threat, and he never stated it in the context you imply. Here is what he said:

    "Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

    I don't see any lies, sorry.
     
  5. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    Well, at least this begins to typify perceptions. That's better than no discussion at all. I note the absense of any credible evidence that what I say is wrong, only that you "think" it is wrong. Be that as it is, I sincerely supported and continue to support the President's War On Terror. I am not yet convinced that Iraq played any part in any Terror War against the United
    States or any place else. The people of Iraq are even more peaceful than the people of the USA, IMHO. This doesn't discount that there are/were a few serious violators of this premise but I never liked seeing or hearing about farmers being killed in Viet Nam either. And I especially didn't like seeing or hearing about our own being maimed and killed due to some idiotic miscalculation from on-high. Does this add to any perceptioon?
     
  6. Moi
    Offline

    Moi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,859
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    The ONLY GOOD place
    Ratings:
    +11
    Wow, I'm amazed. I guess the "war" isn't taken very seriously in this group? I allude to the thread started earlier by myself that attempted to illuminate how this "war" might not be going so well.

    I’m not sure why, because we don’t agree with you, we’re not taking this war seriously. I take it very seriously.

    I think we can reasonably ascertain from the evidence thusfar discovered that there were no WMD's.

    The only evidence that I’ve seen is that there are still clues left to follow. Nothing in any reports has indicated that there were no WMD’s only that they hadn’t found certain items they were looking for through October. Anecdotal evidence suggests that they still haven't found it - but that doesn't mean they won't.

    I think we can further ascertain that our pResident lied when he claimed he knew about them, where they were, and that they presented some kind of an "immediate threat" to our Country, the US of A, or even that they presented a threat to the immediate Iraqi neighbors.

    No, once again, nothing has proven what he did or did not know. If indeed the intelligence that he relied upon is false you’d have to prove that he KNEW it was false. Nothing could be further from proven at this point.

    Pipe dream at this point, don't you think?

    Never smoked a pipe, wouldn’t know what dreams it causes.

    Now the inclusion of "women" in the fight against a perceived American aggression somehow depicts desperation? What about the "women" that WE send and that suffer in this war?

    Since I don’t understand your reference, no comment.

    Even our most famous female POW says it's all a bunch of propaganda from the Pentagon.

    The word of a supply person, going in the wrong direction who was captured and beaten…not a source I’m going to listen to without prejudice. No disrespect to her, but I doubt she was aware of the intelligence reports that were given to the president and the cabinet & congress, I doubt she was made aware of the military strategy and I doubt she has any clue what those who are enacting the civilian government in Iraq have or will be doing.

    I'm almost left speechless, "almost".

    Well, whatever.

    Anyhow, how do you think this dilemma might escape congressional scrutiny? Will the media be involved? Will the election year hysterics play a large part? Will the American people ever know the truth? If high school history is an indicator, I would have to say NO to the latter and YES to the former. Don't you agree?

    We may never know the entire truth. Not the least of which because of attitudes from people like you who seem to think that just because you don’t agree with someone they are lying and evil; political antagonism; and, lastly, because of the mentality that just because something fails or is ultimately proven untrue means that there was never any use to do it in the first place.
     
  7. lilcountriegal
    Offline

    lilcountriegal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,633
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +59
    Really, Psycho? Can you please point me to the portion of your post where you listed credible evidence? You posted with your opinion and were given the same in reply.
     
  8. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    Ladies And Gentlemen!!!!!!!!! lilcountrygal has an announcement to make!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Please list your credible evidence below, lcg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tell us something that we don't already know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  9. lilcountriegal
    Offline

    lilcountriegal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,633
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +59
    Next time you get gas Psycho, do us all a favor and pull into a full-service station. Those fumes are going to your head.

    I simply pointed out that your post lacked credible evidence as well. I can link you to your little heart's content and you'd still claim media bias.

    Crying foul that no one presented credible evidence when your post lacked the same is ludicrous.

    Next time, try not to push the cotton swab so far in. I fear you may be doing damage.
     
  10. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    I apologise, lcg. I thought you had something substantive to say but you were only breaking wind. I'll take those links but be forewarned, I don't believe everything the internet or the evening news has to say. So far both tend to indicate you are just full of it.
     

Share This Page