Political history being re wrote as we watch

[idb]

As I understand it there are way more UN resolutions that Israel has failed to comply with, when are you suggesting that the US invade?not JRK's quote

name them please
Also I would think taking scud missile attacks killing innocent people during the Iraq war makes me wonder why you would defend Saddam in this manner, do not waste you breath saying your not defending Saddam, you are
Trying to create a tie that one is the same as the other is stupid, and a waste of our time

There're too many to list.
A very simple search will provide all the information you need.

 

[JRK]

name them please
Also I would think taking scud missile attacks killing innocent people during the Iraq war makes me wonder why you would defend Saddam in this manner, do not waste you breath saying your not defending Saddam, you are
Trying to create a tie that one is the same as the other is stupid, and a waste of our time

There're too many to list.
A very simple search will provide all the information you need.

As I understand it there are way more UN resolutions that Israel has failed to comply with, when are you suggesting that the US invade?
this is not my quote, how it got attached to my ID worries me and should worry those who run this site

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh really? SNIP

Really! The OP has been debunked over and over again by real honest-to-goodness evidence. Go back and read it you want, but don't think you have any reason for the rest of us to run and get it for you if you have not been reading. If you have been reading, and you say it isn't there, then you are a liar. Name calling; you ask about name calling?

Yes you are very good at supplying us with your own ideological "opinion" on this thread, however I'll say it again, when did YOU JakeStarkey start supplying facts? Let me help you to understand and make it clear, so we are both on the same page:
FACT: a piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article. Do you think in your next response, you can give me a 'for instance' JakeStarkey when you provided us with any facts? (you know something with a "link" attached perhaps?) Do you want to simply try to dodge this question again? . . . . or is this all that's really left:

The bushie leaders do not agree with you, JRK, on the signficance of what you are posting here. The blunder's tragedies will continue through the decades for us as the Iraqi and the Iranians and other ME allies rally against us, our people, and our national interests. Iraq is the single greatest US foreign policy mistake in our history.

You are not "we", JRK. You are you, an universe of one, who the rest of us find very risible. You lost this OP so long ago, so that now we play along to watch you continue to act so silly. Universe are one? What???

Where are these "FACTS" you claim to have contributed? All I see is the same old rambling babble and insults that goes on, and on, and on, and on . . . .

JRK continues to bumble and mumble, mutter and splutter, as all of his "facts" have been so clearly refuted and put to rest. His call for a review of the facts is typical and risible neo-con progressive wailing for their failing. We are not going over yet one more time that has been posted.

He has been weighed and found wanting. OP fail.

 

[JRK]

Really! The OP has been debunked over and over again by real honest-to-goodness evidence. Go back and read it you want, but don't think you have any reason for the rest of us to run and get it for you if you have not been reading. If you have been reading, and you say it isn't there, then you are a liar. Name calling; you ask about name calling?

Yes you are very good at supplying us with your own ideological "opinion" on this thread, however I'll say it again, when did YOU JakeStarkey start supplying facts? Let me help you to understand and make it clear, so we are both on the same page:
FACT: a piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article. Do you think in your next response, you can give me a 'for instance' JakeStarkey when you provided us with any facts? (you know something with a "link" attached perhaps?) Do you want to simply try to dodge this question again? . . . . or is this all that's really left:

You are not "we", JRK. You are you, an universe of one, who the rest of us find very risible. You lost this OP so long ago, so that now we play along to watch you continue to act so silly. Universe are one? What???

Where are these "FACTS" you claim to have contributed? All I see is the same old rambling babble and insults that goes on, and on, and on, and on . . . .

JRK continues to bumble and mumble, mutter and splutter, as all of his "facts" have been so clearly refuted and put to rest. His call for a review of the facts is typical and risible neo-con progressive wailing for their failing. We are not going over yet one more time that has been posted.

He has been weighed and found wanting. OP fail.

Jake why the personal attcks?
hehehe
what does all of this BS mean?
you never discuss the issues Jake and its time to start, if not you will never get another respose from me

 

[del]

There're too many to list.
A very simple search will provide all the information you need.

As I understand it there are way more UN resolutions that Israel has failed to comply with, when are you suggesting that the US invade?
this is not my quote, how it got attached to my ID worries me and should worry those who run this site

somebody messed up the quote function upstream.

shit happens

 

[JRK]

As I understand it there are way more UN resolutions that Israel has failed to comply with, when are you suggesting that the US invade?
this is not my quote, how it got attached to my ID worries me and should worry those who run this site

somebody messed up the quote function upstream.

shit happens

Thanks

 

[idb]

As I understand it there are way more UN resolutions that Israel has failed to comply with, when are you suggesting that the US invade?
this is not my quote, how it got attached to my ID worries me and should worry those who run this site

somebody messed up the quote function upstream.

shit happens

Shit NEVER just happens del.
IT MUST BE SOMEONE'S FAULT!!!!

 

[JRK]

somebody messed up the quote function upstream.

shit happens

Shit NEVER just happens del.
IT MUST BE SOMEONE'S FAULT!!!!

Yea I wonder whose?

 

[jgarden]

5% UE
deficits in the 100 billions with 2 war, 7 major hurricanes, 2 recessions and 9-11
won Iraq
removed Saddam

And the left wing media still are trying to claim GWB was one of the worst. What does this make BHO?

Seriously

Many presidents have had to deal with wars, hurricanes and recessions, but only one president has inherited a budget surplus and then went on to run up the largest federal debt/GDP ratio since WW2!

GWB inherited a federal debt/GDP ratio of 56.4% in 2001 (largely due to the spending of the Reagan and GHW Bush Administrations) and left with a debt/GDP ratio of 64.2% - up 27.8%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

 

[jgarden]

5% UE
deficits in the 100 billions with 2 war, 7 major hurricanes, 2 recessions and 9-11
won Iraq
removed Saddam

And the left wing media still are trying to claim GWB was one of the worst. What does this make BHO?

Seriously

Document 52: Department of State Cable from George P. Shultz to the United States Embassy in Lebanon [et al.]. "Department Press Briefing, March 30, 1984," March 31, 1984.

The State Department announces it has imposed foreign policy controls on Iran and Iraq for exports of chemical weapons precursors. It responds to questions from the press about U.S. policy regarding the Iran-Iraq war, and a department spokesperson says Iraq's chemical weapons use will not change U.S. interest in pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/#docs

Apparently Saddam's use of chemical weapons against a neighboring country and even against his own people (the Kurds), was not enough to deter the Reagan Administration (in which GWB's father served as Vice President) from "pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

So much for the argument that America had the moral authority to protect the world from a dictator who would use WMD!

 

[JRK]

5% UE
deficits in the 100 billions with 2 war, 7 major hurricanes, 2 recessions and 9-11
won Iraq
removed Saddam

And the left wing media still are trying to claim GWB was one of the worst. What does this make BHO?

Seriously

Document 52: Department of State Cable from George P. Shultz to the United States Embassy in Lebanon [et al.]. "Department Press Briefing, March 30, 1984," March 31, 1984.

The State Department announces it has imposed foreign policy controls on Iran and Iraq for exports of chemical weapons precursors. It responds to questions from the press about U.S. policy regarding the Iran-Iraq war, and a department spokesperson says Iraq's chemical weapons use will not change U.S. interest in pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

Apparently Saddam's use of chemical weapons against a neighboring country and even against his own people (the Kurds), was not enough to deter the Reagan Administration (in which GWB's father served as Vice President) from "pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

So much for the argument that America had the moral authority to protect the world from a dictator who would use WMD!

I do not get it. your saying any president other than FDR has dealt with what GWB has dealt with?
What medication are you taking?
what does RR have to do with this thread? and I am sure that what ever role the USA had with Saddam in the 80s was not to kill 100s of thousands of Iraqis

You libs, your anger, you brain washed ideals are killing this nation

 

[JakeStarkey]

why the personal attcks? what does all of this BS mean?
you never discuss the issues Jake and its time to start, if not you will never get another respose from me

You attacked me, podjo, so better accept responsibility and the fact that if you hit, you are going to get hit back harder.

We have discussed your failed evidence over and over and over.

Until you either give us something worthwhile or give up defending the indefensible, this is where we are at.

 

[JRK]

why the personal attcks? what does all of this BS mean?
you never discuss the issues Jake and its time to start, if not you will never get another respose from me

You attacked me, podjo, so better accept responsibility and the fact that if you hit, you are going to get hit back harder.

We have discussed your failed evidence over and over and over.

Until you either give us something worthwhile or give up defending the indefensible, this is where we are at.

jake there is nothing to attack. It would be a waste of my time and energy, besides Jake, I feel sorry for you.
You need help, not harm

 

[BlindBoo]

5% UE
deficits in the 100 billions with 2 war, 7 major hurricanes, 2 recessions and 9-11
won Iraq
removed Saddam

And the left wing media still are trying to claim GWB was one of the worst. What does this make BHO?

Seriously

Document 52: Department of State Cable from George P. Shultz to the United States Embassy in Lebanon [et al.]. "Department Press Briefing, March 30, 1984," March 31, 1984.

The State Department announces it has imposed foreign policy controls on Iran and Iraq for exports of chemical weapons precursors. It responds to questions from the press about U.S. policy regarding the Iran-Iraq war, and a department spokesperson says Iraq's chemical weapons use will not change U.S. interest in pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

Apparently Saddam's use of chemical weapons against a neighboring country and even against his own people (the Kurds), was not enough to deter the Reagan Administration (in which GWB's father served as Vice President) from "pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

So much for the argument that America had the moral authority to protect the world from a dictator who would use WMD!

I do not get it. your saying any president other than FDR has dealt with what GWB has dealt with?
What medication are you taking?
what does RR have to do with this thread? and I am sure that what ever role the USA had with Saddam in the 80s was not to kill 100s of thousands of Iraqis

You libs, your anger, you brain washed ideals are killing this nation

Modern day pseudo-conservatism started with RR. RR didn't care how many Arab Muslims (Iranian or Iraqis) were killed due to his policies of supplying arms to both side of that conflict.

 

[JRK]

Apparently Saddam's use of chemical weapons against a neighboring country and even against his own people (the Kurds), was not enough to deter the Reagan Administration (in which GWB's father served as Vice President) from "pursuing closer U.S.-Iraq relations.

So much for the argument that America had the moral authority to protect the world from a dictator who would use WMD!

I do not get it. your saying any president other than FDR has dealt with what GWB has dealt with?
What medication are you taking?
what does RR have to do with this thread? and I am sure that what ever role the USA had with Saddam in the 80s was not to kill 100s of thousands of Iraqis

You libs, your anger, you brain washed ideals are killing this nation

Modern day pseudo-conservatism started with RR. RR didn't care how many Arab Muslims (Iranian or Iraqis) were killed due to his policies of supplying arms to both side of that conflict.

Boo the issue is jobs and debt, not what RR id in 1984 besides the start of this run we had the next 25 years
what is wrong with the tax rates as well as the 40 million jobs created sense then?
yea BC raised the rates as well as W sr, not close to the rates as they were prior to RR cut them

And as far as the truth of what really occcured with Iraq, Iran during that time is any-ones guess
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 4 TRILLIONS IN DEBT AND 6 MILLION JOBS GONE SENSE 2008

 

[BlindBoo]

Do you wish to invade and occupy every nation that doesn't conform the UN Resolutions?

Everybody didn't give the order invade. President Bush did. He made the claims. He made the decision after the head of the CIA told him point blank that there was credible evidence that Iraq had no new WMD programs. That information was never passed on to members of Congress before they voted on the authorization.

There was no level of new chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons found, none.

Anything else?

every nation that has a Saddam and is stupid enough to give the world a reason to put the mandates on them the UN did after Kuwait
sure

The US congress gave the order also. I just provided for you dem. congressmen made the same conclusions on the intel we had as GWB
By the way, why did you ignore that

As stated before Congress cannot order the military to do anything. Furthermore Congess did not get the same breifing in Sept 2002 by the head of the CIA that said we had credible evidence that Saddam has no WMD programs.

 

[JakeStarkey]

why the personal attcks? what does all of this BS mean?
you never discuss the issues Jake and its time to start, if not you will never get another respose from me

You attacked me, podjo, so better accept responsibility and the fact that if you hit, you are going to get hit back harder.

We have discussed your failed evidence over and over and over.

Until you either give us something worthwhile or give up defending the indefensible, this is where we are at.

jake there is nothing to attack. It would be a waste of my time and energy, besides Jake, I feel sorry for you. You need help, not harm

You can't give either. You are harmless and your OP is in absolute smithereens.

End of story.

 

[BlindBoo]

The concept is your selective progressive neo-con reasoning of why it is OK to attack Iraq and not Israel.

The USA had no internationally legal mandate to use UN resolutions to attack Iraq. When it did so, it turned the USA into an aggressor nation with its leadership criminally culpable for war crimes.

Jake
thats the 1000th time. We know your a supporter of Saddam and his murdering/weapon/torture way he run his country. GIVE IT A REST

Here is JR, with his back against the wall lashing out with another one of his prejudice and unprovable lies. Why don't you give that shit a rest.

 

[BlindBoo]

You are trying the ploy of affirmative silence. The British crown used it against Thomas More to try and cut off his head. So, I will use it as well in the future with you.

Saddam was going to fall sooner or later, and I would support that fall.

Now do you support pre-emptive wars against enemies of the United States, whether they are a danger to the United States or not? Your refusal to answer will be taken as "yes" you do.

Thank you for doing this. You are not going to be able to deflect at all in this ensuing dialogue.

your on ignore dude
you think the way you have talked to me I owe you anything?
by the way, the pre- emptive war was Nam, no other
Iraq was not, It was an Iraqi who bombed te WTC in 93 and ignored UN mandates that were a condition of surrender to US in 1991
do not waste your time Jake, no-one cares what you say

Taken as yes JR does support pre-emptive wars against enemies of the United States, whether they are a danger to the United States or not?

 

[BlindBoo]

There're too many to list.
A very simple search will provide all the information you need.

As I understand it there are way more UN resolutions that Israel has failed to comply with, when are you suggesting that the US invade?
this is not my quote, how it got attached to my ID worries me and should worry those who run this site

Don';t **** with the tags......