Did you Support War in Iraq??

[NotfooledbyW]

Because I clearly and completely addressed that point.

NFBW wrote: No. Your answer contained no reference to the “nobody will start a war to do nation building” part of the question you were asked. POST#3414

Here is your answer.

Correll wrote: Because it could serve as a real contribution to the security and defense of the nation from a real threat.
That is a very valid reason for war. POST#3375

You are a liar.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Seriously, what the fuck are you doing?

NFBW wrote: Opposing your disinformation campaign about the ramp up to war in Iraq by exposing your huge Iraq war lie that there was an argument for war based on sending in a ground invasion to do nation building in Iraq. The AUMF set the reason (WMD) for war in stone so it is a lie when you say we went into Iraq to do national building. POST#3422

NFBW wrote: Do you Correll believe it is acceptable Christian moral policy to support killing innocent Iraqis (accidentally as collateral damage) for the purpose of reconstructing Iraq into a system of government and civil society that would begin to emulate the exceptional shining city on a hill that America is alleged to be. POST#3422

NFBW wrote: Is it aligned with the teaching of JESUS to claim that you supported your fabricated story that there was a humanitarian reason for starting a war when there is no historical justification or record of that being the case for war that you can cite. POST#3422

NFBW wrote: The invasion of Iraq was evil. Half a million Iraqis died as a result. POST#3422

NFBW wrote: I agree with this Christian’s general perspective on the Jan 6 insurrection at Capitol Hill as a fitting application to your dishonest misuse of the flag by trying to legitimize the invasion of Iraq as a national intent to reduce the threat of terrorists by helping Iraqis to live in a better system of government. POST#3422

NFBW POST#3422 QUOTE: “””Now we’re forced to reckon collectively with how the misuse of Christianity and the abuse of the American flag can easily legitimate such evil.

The survival and soul of our democracy require virtue in leadership, not lore

The myth of American exceptionalism is crumbling

www.christiancentury.org

Moral values and national virtues are not self-enforcing. They require people willing to stand up for them, a citizenry convinced that integrity, honesty, and civility are essential to American life. “””

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: Not only did I answer the point about "was it a valid reason", but, everytime you say, "half a million iraqis" you are being a dishonest anti-American troll. POST#3412.

NFBW POST#3423 Where in this question were you asked, “was it a valid reason”?

NFBW wrote: How can nation building be a valid argument for war if nobody will start a war to do it? POST#3372

or

NFBW wrote: How can nation building be a valid reason for war if nobody will start a war to do it? POST#3423

NFBW wrote: Was nation building a reason given to the President by Congress for the use of military force in Iraq in the specific AUMF that was passed in October 2003? POST#3423


NFBW POST#3423 Will you answer this question?

NFBW wrote: In recognition of your claim of pre-war support for “nation building” as a valid reason for starting the invasion and war with Iraq in March 2003 do you accept the fact that Congress did not authorize the use of military force for any reason other than that which was directly tied to UNSC Resolutions that involved disarming Iraq of the threat of the dictatorship’s continued possession of WMD? POST#3423

NFBW wrote: If you need help recalling what you have already written regarding the AUMF here is a couple of your posts.
POST#3423 :

Correll wrote: I never said that it was in the Authorization. POST#3369

Correll wrote: Authorization was the END of the debate on support for the war, not the whole of it. POST#3361

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll Wrote: The case for war was made in the authorization bill. There were many stated reasons, of which wmds, were only one. POST#1552

NFBW wrote: I’m taking you at your word that the case for war to do nation building in Iraq was not made in the authorization bill. The AUMF. POST#3424

Correll wrote: I never said that it {nation building} was in the Authorization. POST#3360

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Nuff said.

Correll Wrote: The case for war was made in the authorization bill. POST#1552

Correll wrote: I never said that it {nation building} was in the Authorization. POST#3360

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: Is that really what you want to do here, rather than actually face the Truth like a Man? POST#3420

NFBW #3426 wrote: This is the type of exchange that adds to the explanation as to what I am doing here:

Correll Wrote: The case for war was made in the authorization bill. There were many of stated reasons, of which wmds, were only one. POST#1552

NFBW wrote: There is no UNSC resolution to do nation building in Iraq and out of a zillion words W sent to Congress as required by the AUMF as justification for war, nation building is nowhere close to being mentioned. POST#3357

Correll wrote: I never said that it was in the Authorization. POST#3360

NFBW wrote: There is zero truth to your huge Iraq lie and claim Correll that there was a supportable argument for war during the infamous ramp up to war that was based on removing a threat based on nation building. POST#3426

 

[NotfooledbyW]

NFBW wrote: Tell us Correll - was removing SH from his access to Oil revenues and his authority to issue oil contracts to France and Russia instead of the US and UK a valid pre-war argument to start a war that caused the deaths of half a million Iraqis in a needless war? POST#3427

NFBW wrote: Tell us Correll - was ending SH’s brutal dictatorship to satisfy the burning desire and yearning of the Arab Street for freedom a valid pre-war argument to start a war that caused the deaths of half a million Iraqis in a needless war? POST#3427

 

[NotfooledbyW]

This is a test of your Moral Courage and you are failing miserably.

NFBW wrote: Do you understand why your post demonstrates the fact that you are a racist and religious bigot? POST#3428

Correll wrote: But yes. believing that the Iraqis were yearning for Freedom and Democracy was pretty stupid. Next time we should just put some sane person on a throne. POST #216 November 17 2015

Next time we should just put some sane person on a throne.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: 4. My being a cultural Christian has nothing to do with my logic, or my support of the invasion. You are just being a religious bigot. 21MAY17-POST#857

NFBW wrote: @Correl’s religious belief is at the root of his expressed logic and support of the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003. He has a higher regard for myth than for facts and truth about things. - His concept about the founding of America as a Christian Nation is based on myths of his own creation as well as myths he has come across over the years. Here are a couple of Correll core myths. 21SEP02-POST#3429

Correll wrote: The Enlightenment Era principles of the Founders, is an outgrowth of Christian thought. The idea of equality of man, comes from the idea that God, the CHRISTIAN God, created all of us, equally. - They state that clearly in the Declaration. 20MAR08-POST#1066

NFBW wrote: The Declaration does not refer to the Christian God but Correll swears by that myth. 21SEP02-POST#3429

NFBW wrote: On Iraq Correll operates under the belief that there was a pre-invasion argument to start the war to nation build Iraq into a functional democracy. 21SEP02-POST#3429

NFBW wrote: Neither myth is true or tied to reality but they are fundamentally a big part of @Correll’s belief system. 21SEP02-POST#3429

 

[Correll]

NFBW wrote: No. ....

I stopped reading here. Your refusal to move the discussion forward is....tiresome.

 

[Correll]

NFBW wrote: Opposing your disinformation campaign about the ramp up to war in Iraq by exposing your huge Iraq war lie that there was an argument for war based on sending in a ground invasion to do nation building in Iraq. The AUMF set the reason ....

Stopped reading here. Stop being a spam bot. Make a new point or just let it drop.

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: Not only did I answer the point about "was it a valid reason", but, everytime you say, "half a million iraqis" you are being a dishonest anti-American troll. POST#3412.

NFBW POST#3423 Where in this question were you asked, “was it a valid reason”?

NFBW wrote: How can nation building be a valid argument for war if nobody will start a war to do it? POST#3372

or

NFBW wrote: How can nation building be a valid reason for war if nobody will start a war to do it? POST#3423
.....

Stopped reading here. I'm more and more done with your talking in circles bullshit. Make a new point. Move the discussion forward. Say something new or drop it.

 

[Correll]

Correll Wrote: The case for war was made in the authorization bill. There were many stated reasons, of which wmds, were only one. POST#1552

NFBW wrote: I’m taking you at your word that the case for war to do nation building in Iraq was not made in the authorization bill. The AUMF. POST#3424

Correll wrote: I never said that it {nation building} was in the Authorization. POST#3360

WHY THE FUCK DID YOU POST THIS?

 

[Correll]

Nuff said.

Correll Wrote: The case for war was made in the authorization bill. POST#1552

Correll wrote: I never said that it {nation building} was in the Authorization. POST#3360

Dude. That is pathetic of you. Have you really sunk to this level?

Taking out of context quote and playing gotcha games like a child?

 

[Correll]

NFBW wrote: Tell us Correll - was removing SH from his access to Oil revenues and his authority to issue oil contracts to France and Russia instead of the US and UK a valid pre-war argument to start a war that caused the deaths of half a million Iraqis in a needless war? POST#3427

NFBW wrote: Tell us Correll - was ending SH’s brutal dictatorship to satisfy the burning desire and yearning of the Arab Street for freedom a valid pre-war argument to start a war that caused the deaths of half a million Iraqis in a needless war? POST#3427

You have accepted the principle of collateral damage. Thus, every time you whine about "half a million iraqis", you are lying.

 

[Correll]

NFBW wrote: Do you understand why your post demonstrates the fact that you are a racist and religious bigot? POST#3428

Correll wrote: But yes. believing that the Iraqis were yearning for Freedom and Democracy was pretty stupid. Next time we should just put some sane person on a throne. POST #216 November 17 2015

You made no point. WHY THE FUCK DID YOU POST THIS?

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: 4. My being a cultural Christian has nothing to do with my logic, or my support of the invasion. You are just being a religious bigot. 21MAY17-POST#857

NFBW wrote: @Correl’s religious belief is at the root of his expressed logic and support of the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003.....

i stopped reading here. I'm bored with your anti-Christian bigotry. It has been well established.


If you have a new point to make, LEAD with it, because if you bury in such garbage, I will never see it. Cause, i've lost my patience with your bullshit.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: Taking out of context quote and playing gotcha games like a child? 21SEP03- POST#3420

NFBW wrote: What is out of context? Are you now arguing that ‘nation building’ is in the AUMF as a case for starting a war if necessary? 21SEP03-POST#3438

 

[NotfooledbyW]

@emilyngheim wrote: However, even though I believe the arguments about WMD were valid, and these chemical weapons were most likely moved into Syria and used later, this was not PROVEN as in due process before making a decision to act and deprive citizens of liberty. 16SEP28-POST#443-SyriaWMD

chemical weapons were most likely moved into Syria

NFBW wrote: As a very thoughtful Christian as your post stands out amongst the mess - I am curious as to why you believed Iraq’s WMD were moved into Syria. Do you still think that was a possibility. 21SEP06-POST#3439

 

[Correll]

@emilyngheim wrote: However, even though I believe the arguments about WMD were valid, and these chemical weapons were most likely moved into Syria and used later, this was not PROVEN as in due process before making a decision to act and deprive citizens of liberty. 16SEP28-POST#443-SyriaWMD




NFBW wrote: As a very thoughtful Christian as your post stands out amongst the mess - I am curious as to why you believed Iraq’s WMD were moved into Syria. Do you still think that was a possibility. 21SEP06-POST#3439

Bullshit. Your goal is to find an excuse to smear her, and White Christians as "bloodthirsty:.