It started as War commentary and ended in TV ad commentary

[Psychoblues]

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?

 

[Zhukov]

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.

 

[lilcountriegal]

I guess the "war" isn't taken very seriously in this group?

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

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

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

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.

Now the inclusion of "women" in the fight against a perceived American aggression somehow depicts desperation?

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

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

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

Don't you agree?

Not at all.

 

[jimnyc]

Outstanding, Zhukov, outstanding!

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

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

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.

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.

 

[Psychoblues]

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?

 

[Moi]

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.

 

[lilcountriegal]

I note the absense of any credible evidence that what I say is wrong, only that you "think" it is wrong

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.

 

[Psychoblues]

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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[lilcountriegal]

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.

 

[Psychoblues]

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.

 

[NightTrain]

I am not yet convinced that Iraq played any part in any Terror War against the United States or any place else.

A quick search turned these tidbits up:

1) Saddam did support terrorists and housed them as well. He sent money to Palestinian suicide bombers families to the tune of $25,000 per bomber.

2) Abu Abbas, architect of the 1985 Achille Lauro hijacking was found living in Iraq, as was Khala Khadr al-Salahat, the alleged designer of the radio-bomb that demolished Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988, killing all 259 on board and 11 on the ground.

3) Mansoor Ijaz cites an Iraqi intelligence document in which the secret Mukhabarat invited a senior al Qaeda operative to Baghdad from the Sudan. The correspondence said: "We may find in this envoy a way to maintain contacts with bin Laden." The al Qaeda representative indeed visited Baghdad in March 1998, five months before the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania exploded, killing 224 people, 12 of them American, and wounding some 5,000 others, many of them Africans and Muslims.

 

[Psychoblues]

Those even now disputed facts don't mean anything about any connection with SH and the Al Queda, Night Train. It is indisputed that the 19 terrorists that commandeered the doomed flights of 9-11 were residents of the US. Those and thousands more were/are desirous of ill will towards us as Americans. Even Timothy McVeigh resided amongst us. Does that make our president complicit in their evil deeds? I think not. The arabs are much more open to immigration than even ourselves, hard to believe, isn't it? I've been there, have you?

 

[lilcountriegal]

I'll take those links but be forewarned, I don't believe everything the internet or the evening news has to say.

Alright Psycho, I'll bite. However, as your post was the first in this thread and your post also lacked "credible evidence", I also want links to back up your statements.

Specifically:

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

also, a link showing President Bush knowingly lied about

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

and last:

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

Have fun and enjoy yourself. I'll be waiting.

 

[NightTrain]

That's not what you said.

I am not yet convinced that Iraq played any part in any Terror War against the United States or any place else.

Seems pretty clear that there was indeed connections with terrorists, doesn't it?

It is indisputed that the 19 terrorists that commandeered the doomed flights of 9-11 were residents of the US.

I'll admit that I've been pretty busy lately, but I missed this stunning revelation. All 19 were residents of the US of A? Really?

Please provide a link or two, this is news to me.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Those even now disputed facts don't mean anything about any connection with SH and the Al Queda, Night Train. It is indisputed that the 19 terrorists that commandeered the doomed flights of 9-11 were residents of the US. Those and thousands more were/are desirous of ill will towards us as Americans. Even Timothy McVeigh resided amongst us. Does that make our president complicit in their evil deeds? I think not. The arabs are much more open to immigration than even ourselves, hard to believe, isn't it? I've been there, have you?

Even if the 19 were RESIDENTS all that means is that our immigration is lax (no surprise to those of us who are conservatives) and that without stringent controls people can come into this country under lies and stay here (again, not a surprise to conservatives). The only compelling argument that 19 residents can possibly is to toughen immigration laws, properly police those immigrants who are here and give the INS some teeth.