The Atomic bombs

Says the guy that didn't know that the "unconditional surrender" terms were laid out in Jan 1943 -- even though he was alive then and remembers it.


No, you haven't. You haven't done anything but evade, obfuscate, misdirect, mischaraterize and avoid.

Heck -- You wont even describe what you think the topic of conversation is.

Are you THAT afraid of being proven wrong?

C'mon, son. You can do it. Just try a little harder.

Read the damned title Idiot. that is your answer. The only people that will play your little game is those who don't recognize your own plays at misdirection. so don't try to palm that off on me. Have fun on your own. I'm through

























































































































































































































































































































































































n
misdirection. You are the one who is doing that. not me
. Have fun, but you are now on your ow
n.
 
Read the damned title Idiot. that is your answer. The only people that will play your little game is those who don't recognize your own plays at misdirection. so don't try to palm that off on me. Have fun on your own. I'm through
You were through 6 posts ago, you just don't have the capacity to recignize it.
 
I knew what we went to war for. It was because Saddam was out of compliance, AGAIN.

Sorry if the libs were too stupid to understand that, and when they finally did, blamed their own stupidity upon "lies" told to them.

Nobody told me any lies. Must be your own inconsistent ability to actually understand what's being said.

There want a liberal in the world that doubted the threat posed by Saddam, his WMDs and his WMD programs, in December of 1998 when Bill Clinton went to war.

The doubt ONLY came into play when it was apparent that GWB was actually going to do something about it (and then, only because GWB has an (R) next to his name).

If we knew they were there in December 1998, and Saddam didnt prove they were destroyed - where did they go?

And, how is any of this still relevant to tjhe topic at hand?
 
That's your entire respinse to your argument being utterly destoryed?

:rofl:

I guess it's no wonder you fell hook line and sinker for the phantom WMD line if you think my arguement has been utterly destroyed..

I notice you didn't respond to the alternate strategy that I provided... hmmm.. I guess you weren't expecting an answer on that one and found yourself having to reply with this lame shit, eh?


hehehehe... UTTERLY destroyed.. yea.. about like your credibility regarding when it's OK to use nukes, i suppose...
 
There want a liberal in the world that doubted the threat posed by Saddam, his WMDs and his WMD programs, in December of 1998 when Bill Clinton went to war.

The doubt ONLY came into play when it was apparent that GWB was actually going to do something about it (and then, only because GWB has an (R) next to his name).

If we knew they were there in December 1998, and Saddam didnt prove they were destroyed - where did they go?

And, how is any of this still relevant to tjhe topic at hand?

Wasn't a liberal in the world, eh? Care to support that with something beyond wishful thinking?



I know it sucks having to deal with the fact of US history and it's wanton use of the new toy of the day and the repercussions that followed but perhaps, someday, you'll figure out why your belief in PHANTOM WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION give you something in common with bigfoot hunters, loch ness monster observers, and people who swore they saw elvis at a gas station buying twinkies in the mid 80s.



Again, Saddam was about as capable of PROVING he didn't have what your kind INSISTED that he did have about like you can prove that you don't like sucking cock when I insist that you do. It's this same type of impossible criteria that made your kind look like a hindsight fool these days and what gave ample excuse to play with the brand new toy and flex a muscle then.


If you can't see the correlation then go ahead and generalize on some liberals.. I hear that's how all good conservative set their political compass.
 
I love your scruffy old mans face, you remind me of something I never had.:D
 
Again, Saddam was about as capable of PROVING he didn't have..
Not that I expect you to understand any of this, but....

He was known to have them. He was to prove that he destroyed them.
It is perfectly possible to prove that you destroyed something you were known to have.

And -that's- why your argument fails.
 
"known to have them", eh?


do you have any satellite pics with circles and arrows this time around or is "known to have them" good enough for you? Your side has been swinging strikes since the first day of the war, dude. One of these days you'll figure out what you have in common with that last trickle of elvis fans who insisted that they saw the king at a truckstop in Arizona..
 
oh hey... at least you can drag bill clinton into this.. I hope that works out for ya.


Elvissighting.jpg
 
Oh yea, dude...

I hear aspirin factories were to Billy what mobile chem labs are to bush.


But hey, as long as someone tells you something that you want to believe and there are yellow car magnets available, i guess....
 
Oh yea, dude...
I hear aspirin factories were to Billy what mobile chem labs are to bush.
But hey, as long as someone tells you something that you want to believe and there are yellow car magnets available, i guess....
I'm sorry -- I dont see where you answered the question.

Did we or did we not know, in December 1998, that Iraq still had WMDs and WMD programs that had not yet been destroyed?
 
someone may have thought lots of things. Hindsight becomes a little too itchy to wear these days, eh?

You also thought saddam was trucking around chem labs in the back of trucks too. Looks like "intelligence" doesn't turn out to be true lately, eh? Of course, don't let THAT keep you from spotting your Bigfoot, dude. I hope you are not thinking that some allegiance to slick willie will get me to validate your Elvis hysteria... PHANTOM WMDs will be your legacy.

:cool:
 
someone may have thought lots of things. Hindsight becomes a little too itchy to wear these days, eh?
C'mon boy -- answer the question:

Did we know, in December 1998, that Iraq still had WMDs and WMD programs that had not yet been destroyed?

A simple yes or no is all that is necessary.
 
No, I didn't know any such thing. AND I betting, neither did you.


Not to mention that what you are specifically bringing up illicited accusations of wagging the dog from your side anyway.. I guess it's ok to pretend ole Billy was THE MAN now that blowjobgate is over, eh?
 
Who is dancing here?


NO, WE didn't know any such thing beyond what we had been told by a sitting president with every reason to deflect national attention away from his upcoming impeachment.


You know.. like how we, APPARENTLY, didn't know half as much as we thought WE did when whipping out satellite images of those MOBILE CHEM LABS, right buddy? Just like WE don't know where all those phantom WMDs that we were told would be waiting for us went to.

but don't let that keep you from insisting they are burried in the desert or shipped to Syria and Iran or whatever the weekely excuse is today.


so, No. WE didn't KNOW shit, as hindsight seems to indicate.

IraqMobileProductionFacilities.jpg



did that little tangent pay off?
 
Who is dancing here?
NO, WE didn't know any such thing beyond what we had been told by a sitting president with every reason to deflect national attention away from his upcoming impeachment.
I see.

So, in order for your argument to be sound, you have to show that Bill Clinton lied about the presence of Iraqi WMD and WMD programs.

You may begin.
 

Forum List

Back
Top