M
Man of 1951
Guest
for the link....scroll up to the top or....http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/index.html#yugo
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Originally posted by Bry
BTW, there is NO connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq.
So, given that there was no 9-11 connection, given that there were no WMDs ( in spite of Jimnyc's fabulous source at freakin Hindustaan that says nothing more than what the Kuwaiti's say they've got.)
Originally posted by jimnyc
"Farouk Hijazi, former Iraqi ambassador to Turkey and Saddam's longtime outreach agent to Islamic fundamentalists, has been captured. In his initial interrogations, Hijazi admitted meeting with senior al Qaeda leaders at Saddam's behest in 1994. According to administration officials familiar with his questioning, he has subsequently admitted additional contacts, including a meeting in late 1997."
Please point me to where the CIA or ANYONE has proven these false.
http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp
LOL
You have a real knack for criticising the sources of others, then you come up with the weekly fucking standard. Why not go directly to the George Bush home page: http://www.president-bush.com/alqaeda-iraqlink.html. Same bull shit there. Congratulations.
I guess you neglected to read the link from WorldNetDaily in addition to the Hindustaan link.
I didn't neglect it, I just thought the Hindustaan was so funny, i couldn't help it.
There is plenty of proof listed in the link above outlining ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq. I've done the legwork to find it, now why don't YOU do some to prove they are wrong. After all, it's "common fucking knowledge", it should be very easy for you to prove everything on that page wrong.
whoa! some legwork! an article in the weekly standard! congratulations. If you call that leg work, you must get really worn out walking a whole half mile a day with your son on top of washing dishes almost every day.
Here are a couple, and a little fresher.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/20030919/pl_usatoday/11857429
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...mideast_afp/us_attacks_iraq_bush_030918015457
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030917/pl_afp/us_iraq_whouse_030917171452
You are my bitch.
Haliburton got one of the first contracts offered, and they got it without being required to bid. That's where the war starts to make sense.
Here is what Bush has managed in a few short months. By not waiting the few weeks that France, Germany, Russia, and even England was asking of us, we alienated the entire international community, we broke the agreements, and we left the UN a smouldering heap of uselessness.
Why did we do those things? So we could rush into Iraq, destroy the infrastructure and beaurocracy; create new generations of orphans to be seduced into terrorism; exchange a predictable and secular dictator with a destabalized and deeply divided religious population; demonstrate to the world as quickly and efficiently as possible that EVERY JUSTIFICATION FOR STARTING THE WAR WAS PATENTLY FALSE, IF NOT AN OUTRIGHT LIE. No connection to Al Qaeda, no WMDS and therefore no plea of self defence. And they only asked that we give the inspectors a few more weeks.
Originally posted by NightTrain
Hey, you speak pretty decent english for a Spaniard. Not bad.
Thanks, but I'm not a Spaniard.
Did you like my imitation? Did it sound authentic? Thanks!
No, it was fuckin' retarded.
As Jim pointed out, and evidently you read other threads here, why are you trying to discredit the Al Qaeda / Iraq connection? There are facts galore, do you sit there in Spain with your hands over your eyes shouting 'No! I can't accept it!!' At least be honest and see the 'sources' for the discredited Czech incident. What stories you're going to find discrediting it will not be legitimate news services.
The czechs don't stand by shit. My sources are AP. But as with all of your rebuttals, you're okay with simply announcing that other people's source's are invalid and then burrying your head in the sand.
The Czechs stand by their report. I just know you'll hate me, but I just have to see your proof.
They are widely known as the best in the world to extinguish oil well fires. If they're the best, why shouldn't they get the work? Would you rather that the Spanish company, 'Mama Mia's Flame Out' got the work, instead? Even if they were considered much less competent to perform the work? I would think as a liberal, you'd be overjoyed that they were extinguished as fast as they were. Environment didn't get polluted as much.
Yes, contracts should be opened to bidding on the international market. That would be the only way for Chimp to save face, but apparently saving face is high on his priorities.
Really? You must have missed the part where France announced that they would veto any resolution to use force BEFORE IT WAS EVEN SUBMITTED!
A few more weeks? That's pretty funny. Yep, after over a decade, a couple more weeks would have done wonders. Especially when France said flat out 'No at all costs!' I'd research that a little, if I were you.
France resorted to no at no costs in the moment when the US was desperately trying to push things forward: delays in the invasion would have cost the US that many more billions. The invasion force was in place, the trigger had to be pulled. Iraq was bluffing all along. As has became clear, the only insurance against a US invasion is convincing them you have nukes. Look at your own commentaries regarding NK.
Wow, you must shop for your Crystal Balls where Spilly does! You seem to know exactly what's going to happen, with utter disregard for historical precedence!
As for your 'LIES' statement... are you saying that there weren't Bio and Chem weapons in Iraq, in clear breach of UN resolutions?
There were not significant amounts of anything. Iraq wasn't a threat to anyone. The war was a comical farce from beginning to end.
BTW - I would give a year worth of pay to watch you and Spilly stand in front of the millions of people that suffered & watched their families suffer under Saddam and spout your bullshit that the war wasn't justified.
Then again, maybe not... that would be one helluva bloody 5 minutes. Dismemberment makes me queasy.
Yes, contracts should be opened to bidding on the international market. That would be the only way for Chimp to save face, but apparently saving face is high on his priorities.
France resorted to no at no costs in the moment when the US was desperately trying to push things forward: delays in the invasion would have cost the US that many more billions. The invasion force was in place, the trigger had to be pulled. Iraq was bluffing all along. As has became clear, the only insurance against a US invasion is convincing them you have nukes. Look at your own commentaries regarding NK.
If I were you, I wouldn't be so confident in the reception the Iraqis have given their new found status without electricity, water, phones, jobs, economy, food. And that hotbed is NOT going to support a democracy, not now, not ever.
Wow, to think a nation of oppressed people would not or could not embrace freedom and their own power over that freedom because of obstacles, shows little faith in our fellow man.Originally posted by Bry
If I were you, I wouldn't be so confident in the reception the Iraqis have given their new found status without electricity, water, phones, jobs, economy, food. And that hotbed is NOT going to support a democracy, not now, not ever.
I'm going to bed. Any further replies will have to wait until tomorrow.
Originally posted by Bry
Originally posted by jimnyc
"Farouk Hijazi, former Iraqi ambassador to Turkey and Saddam's longtime outreach agent to Islamic fundamentalists, has been captured. In his initial interrogations, Hijazi admitted meeting with senior al Qaeda leaders at Saddam's behest in 1994. According to administration officials familiar with his questioning, he has subsequently admitted additional contacts, including a meeting in late 1997."
Please point me to where the CIA or ANYONE has proven these false.
http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp
LOL
You have a real knack for criticising the sources of others, then you come up with the weekly fucking standard. Why not go directly to the George Bush home page: http://www.president-bush.com/alqaeda-iraqlink.html. Same bull shit there. Congratulations.
I guess you neglected to read the link from WorldNetDaily in addition to the Hindustaan link.
I didn't neglect it, I just thought the Hindustaan was so funny, i couldn't help it.
There is plenty of proof listed in the link above outlining ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq. I've done the legwork to find it, now why don't YOU do some to prove they are wrong. After all, it's "common fucking knowledge", it should be very easy for you to prove everything on that page wrong.
whoa! some legwork! an article in the weekly standard! congratulations. If you call that leg work, you must get really worn out walking a whole half mile a day with your son on top of washing dishes almost every day.
Here are a couple, and a little fresher.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/20030919/pl_usatoday/11857429
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...mideast_afp/us_attacks_iraq_bush_030918015457
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030917/pl_afp/us_iraq_whouse_030917171452
You are my bitch.
I'm YOU'RE bitch? LOL
Those links are completely useless as they don't cover Iraq - Al Qaeda links at all. I foresee nighttime adult education courses on the horizon for you! A bit of advice: Comprehension 101.
Try ANY of the major media organizations as they all have built in search engines for their sites. Just type in "Iraq Al Qaeda ties" and you'll find all the information you need to look like the drooling mongoloid you are. Here are a couple from "reputable" new sources for you to choke on:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/09/25/us.iraq.alqaeda/
Now grab your ears and pull - you may just be able to yank your head out of your ass.
Originally posted by MtnBiker
Wow, to think a nation of oppressed people would not or could not embrace freedom and their own power over that freedom because of obstacles, shows little faith in our fellow man.
Uh, you and Spilly have the same problem distinguishing between the Iraq / Al Qaeda connection and Iraq / 911.
I guess that's why you're not the most powerful man in the world, as Dubya is. He knew he wanted the best, and got them. When you people in Spain buy brakes for your car, do you search for the cheapest set you can find?
So, France was right to say no, even before the proposal was submitted for debate & revision, right? Bullshit.
We had to get things moving because we had troops in the area? Bullshit.
Iraq was bluffing? Really? I'm sure you have loads of documents that back up your assinine statement, no? Let's see it, Pedro.
Originally posted by MtnBiker
Well the U.S. became a nation. There were many obstacles that had to be overcome. I'm glad you weren't around then to add to them.
Originally posted by Bry
The case of the US Revolution is not comparable to that of Iraq, except that in both cases, the real motive was piracy and profiteering.
Say something smart or be relegated to the list of people I will not dialogue with.
Originally posted by gop_jeff
So who exactly was profiteering in colonial America that convinved 13 separate colonies to give the finger to Great Britian? Which pirates convinced the colonists to fight the most well-trained army in the world?