Why does the left continue to HUMILIATE themselves on the WMD issue?

[Faun]

::yawn::

It never ceases to amaze and amuse me how righties on the internet repatedly show what troglodytes they are when it comes to the wonderful, subtle nuances available to educated folks who really can use words and the english language like artists use paint. In contrast, righties can only use words like a house painter uses paint.

An experienced reader would quickly ascertain that only one of those many quotes from democrats actually DOES express absolute certainty that Saddam possessed stockpiles of WMD's.

To educated adults, words have meanings, not merely approximations of meaning. That difference is ONE of the reasons folks on opposite sides seem to be talking PAST each other instead of communicating WITH each other. For all intents and purposes, we speak two different languages

You're right douche, words can be used in many different ways, and any educated person reading these quotes can tell that EVERY one of them was implying that sadam not only had WMD's but was looking to expand his arsenal of them and the abillity to deliver them. It's obvious by their words, that they where not only worried about his stockpiles, but his delivery capabilities and his furtherence of his WMD programs, and they thought we had to put a stop to them. I understand you may lack decent reading comprehension skills as you're probably a product of the US PS system, so I did you a favor and boldened the relevent portions of the quotes for you. See son, when speaking to educated adults people don't have to resort to such 2nd grade english as See Dick run. Run Dick, run. Educated people can read the nuances in what is written and determine what the speaker is implying from reading their words, but in this case there isn't even any need to do that as they CLEARLY state that they beleive Sadam has weapons of mass destruction, he's working on getting more, he expanidng his WMD delivery programs and he is a threat to the region and maybe the US.

Yes.

But you are addressing a bunch of idiot true believer liberals who ignore evidence and logic.

It's like talking to a wall.

My apologies to walls.

You must think Bush was an "idiot true believer liberal who ignored evidence and logic" ...

"...the main reason we went into Iraq, at the time, was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, ... " ~ George Bush, 8.21.2006​

 

[Faun]

So what?

You accuse President Bush of lying outright, but when he says something you happen to agree with, he can't be mistaken?

Bush told a lot of lies.

We spent over a trillion US taxpayer dollars on this illegal and immoral war and I'd like to know what we got in return for that investment?

I'd like someone to tell me how I have personally benefited from this war and how my life is better because of it?

You got the stones to answer that?

Wrong.

He said lots of things and you happen not to believe them. Some turned out to be incorrect. But your mindless repetition that he lied is still not proof, not even evidence, that he "lied."

The money spent on war is not an "investment," you pathetic fucking moron.

The reasons we went to war were spelled out by Congress, you hapless, helpless, hopeless fuckwit.

You don't have the stones to admit that.

Saddam is no longer in power, killing his own people, defying the sanctions, threatening his neighbors or invading them. He is no longer a threat to have or secure WMDs and thus poses far less of a risk to the region, the world and to us.

You will never have the stones to tell the truth.

WTF? Bush didn't lie???

Hussein allowed U.N. inspectors back into Iraq in November, 2002. Hans Blix said they were granted access to wherever they went. Yet the following July, Bush said ...

"The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power..." ~ George Bush, 7.14.2003​

Bush said he went into Iraq after Hussein wouldn't let the inspectors in.

How the hell is that not a lie, you Bush fluffer??

 

[Faun]

Wrong.

He said lots of things and you happen not to believe them. Some turned out to be incorrect. But your mindless repetition that he lied is still not proof, not even evidence, that he "lied."

The money spent on war is not an "investment," you pathetic fucking moron.

The reasons we went to war were spelled out by Congress, you hapless, helpless, hopeless fuckwit.

You don't have the stones to admit that.

Saddam is no longer in power, killing his own people, defying the sanctions, threatening his neighbors or invading them. He is no longer a threat to have or secure WMDs and thus poses far less of a risk to the region, the world and to us.

You will never have the stones to tell the truth.

He never was a threat, that was Bush's biggest lie.

But feel free to have your own fantasy debate and make up your own reasons for the things I say. You don't need me for that. We both know when you have to make up my own point for me, it's because you're too big of a pussy to deal with reality on it's own terms. So you make up your own thing to argue against and ride like the wind, wild one.

Seriously folks, this is how unhinged idiot here has become. He's one of the few who will actually try to rewrite history and claim Saddam Hussein was "never a threat". This is a man who invaded Iran. This was a man who invaded Kuwait. This was a man who used WMD's against his own people.

But idiot here is going to try and convince the world that he was an innocent man living a life of peace. Can you say flat-earther?

Hisses the forum moron who is soooo stupid, he actually claimed Bush confessed that Hussein did not have the WMD for which he invaded ... get this (are ya sitting down?) ... because he needed to get re-elected!!!



But Bush made that comment in 2006 -- when he was no longer Constitutionally eligible to run again for president!



You proved you're an imbecile of measurable ignorance -- and you broke the needle!

 

[jtpr312]

And I also am amazed that jtpr312 felt compelled to spam the board with identical lengthy cut and paste jobs in consecutive posts. I see moronic American tourists like him walking the streets of my town all the time. They ask a native a question in English, and when they are met with an incomprehending stare, they simply repeat themselves... usually at a higher volume. I expect jtpr312 to use a larger font next time.

Answers to different people douche.

Do you think that they each needed the same lengthy spam piece addressed to them individually?

I don't read every post on this thread and rarely read posts where two other posters are going back and forth, so yeah, and as far as "lengthy" goes, sorry if there where too many words in the post for you. I mean that's obvious by the fact that you had so much trouble comprehending the content of the post.

 

[Mac1958]

Bush told a lot of lies.

We spent over a trillion US taxpayer dollars on this illegal and immoral war and I'd like to know what we got in return for that investment?

I'd like someone to tell me how I have personally benefited from this war and how my life is better because of it?

You got the stones to answer that?

Well, isn't it obvious?

Sure, we've lost thousands of American lives, limbs and minds, sure we've destroyed thousands of American families, sure the war killed thousands of innocent Iraqis, sure it cost us trillions of borrowed dollars, but look at the bright side!

We kicked Mooooooooooslim ass! We blew the SHIT outta that place! We showed THEM who's boss 'n stuff!

U-S-A!! U-S-A!!

<burp>

<drink some Budweiser>

<scratch>

U-S-A!! U-S-A!!

hyuk hyuk!!

.

Spoken like true, new wave, 100% pure American pussy...

The weak spined pussies who can't stomach what it takes to win a fight forget how much they cried and sniffled-sniffled over 9/11. They literally completely forget that even happened until you remind them that's what first took us into the first military operations.

Oh yeah, that's right.

I forgot about how Saddam was responsible for 9/11.

Wow.

.

 

[jtpr312]

::yawn::

It never ceases to amaze and amuse me how righties on the internet repatedly show what troglodytes they are when it comes to the wonderful, subtle nuances available to educated folks who really can use words and the english language like artists use paint. In contrast, righties can only use words like a house painter uses paint.

An experienced reader would quickly ascertain that only one of those many quotes from democrats actually DOES express absolute certainty that Saddam possessed stockpiles of WMD's.

To educated adults, words have meanings, not merely approximations of meaning. That difference is ONE of the reasons folks on opposite sides seem to be talking PAST each other instead of communicating WITH each other. For all intents and purposes, we speak two different languages

You're right douche, words can be used in many different ways, and any educated person reading these quotes can tell that EVERY one of them was implying that sadam not only had WMD's but was looking to expand his arsenal of them and the abillity to deliver them. It's obvious by their words, that they where not only worried about his stockpiles, but his delivery capabilities and his furtherence of his WMD programs, and they thought we had to put a stop to them. I understand you may lack decent reading comprehension skills as you're probably a product of the US PS system, so I did you a favor and boldened the relevent portions of the quotes for you. See son, when speaking to educated adults people don't have to resort to such 2nd grade english as See Dick run. Run Dick, run. Educated people can read the nuances in what is written and determine what the speaker is implying from reading their words, but in this case there isn't even any need to do that as they CLEARLY state that they beleive Sadam has weapons of mass destruction, he's working on getting more, he expanidng his WMD delivery programs and he is a threat to the region and maybe the US.

The fact remains...only one democrat quoted in your repetitive spam post expresses absolute certainty concerning Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's... which shows your lack of understanding of the nuances of our language. And I will match my educational pedigree up with yours any fucking day. I AM a product of US public schools. I am a graduate of a federally funded military service academy, and went on to get a graduate business degree after retiring from the service. You?

I always thought our Military Academies required more than a 5th grade readling comprehension level of it's students. If you realy did attend one of our Military Acadamies I must have been wrong about that one. You certainly don't sound like a West Point or Annapolis Grad. You sound much more like some sleazeball lawyer trying to explain to a jury how your client didn't mean what you think he meant on those survellience tapes you're listening to, "only one expresses ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY concerning Sadam's STOCKPILES", lol. Flipping tool. Let's take a look shall we. I'll make it easier for you. I'm thinking there may be too many words for you to be able to decipher the meaning of what's said, so I'll just give you the relvent portions of each quote and try my best to explain them to you. See douche, you don't have to SPECIFICALLY say the words, "It's an absolute certainty" to impy that you think something to be true. You wsih to tell us how words are used like an artist's brush, ok, but the problem seems to be that you may need the boldness of a Gaffitti artist's sray paint can to get the message as the soft mild strokes of the brush seem to go over your head.

We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."--Says that Iraq has a WMD program and the weapons produced by that program are a threat.

He will use those weapons of mass destruction again--Says that Saddam had and still has WMD's.

threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs--Implies that Iraq has a WMD program current in effect and is producing weapons.

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology--Says that saddam has developed WMD's and their delivery systems.

Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction--Says saddam has WMD's

Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status--Guess you would have to know what Iraq's pre-Gulf War NBC Program status means so I'll give you this one. I mean you obviously can't read beyond a 4th grade level so I doubt you know what Iraq'a pre-Gulf War NBC weapons stockpiles and programs actaully included.

Saddam Hussein is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." I don't even know how to dumb this one down for you. I mean it just says, Saddam IS building WMD's. Is it the defintion of the word "is" you're having trouble with? Maybe, so I'll help you out. Is-3rd person singular present of be (Verb). I know this may be above your comprehension level, but I'm not an elementary school teacher so probably not much help to you.


he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."--Says Saddam has WMD's

Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction--Says Saddam currently has WMDs and is seeking more.

We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.--Says Saddam has WMDs and is lloking to enlarge his number of WMDs.

Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."--Hmm, disarm him of what? His gold plated .45's? Nope, this says he has WMDs and we need to take them from him.


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons,-- Destroy what? This one also says he has WMDs that need to be destroyed.

intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock/ Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare,--Says that Saddam has rebuilt his WMD sockpile, and is continuing to develop more.

Now if you want to sit there and spew crap like some shyster lawyer, whining "They didn't say certainly, absolutely, without a doubt, .......be my guest, but EVERY person with more than a 4th grade comprehension level, forget that, I bet most 4th graders can get this stuff, will come to the conclusion that EVERY quote shows the speaker believed that Saddam Hussein had WMDs and wanted more WMDs.

It's a sad state of affairs when a supposed US Military Officer, rather than standing for the black and white of truth and honesty, must insted delve into the shady grey area like some two bit shyster lawyer to make his point. No need to "match pedigrees", it's obvious you're either a dishonest scrote or a moron, so you keep holding on to those "pedigrees" son, it's all you got, but then again my dog has one too.

 

[jtpr312]

Do you think that they each needed the same lengthy spam piece addressed to them individually?

Did it cause you discomfort to have to see it submitted multiple times?

Didn't submitting it multiple times increase the prospect that each intended recipient would actually see it?

You have a lot on your mind. But, it's all petty.

Spam by any other name is still spam.... Filling the board with other people's word instead of one's own.

And my point still stands unrefuted. Only ONE of those democratic quotes expressed absolute certainty in Saddam's possession of stockpiles of WMD's. Even Dubya admitted that he was wrong and that Saddam did not have them.

Wow! It's not an act, you really are a flipping dumbass aren't you? How can I use my own words when the topic of the post is WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP SAID. You do understand that when you are telling what other's said, you use THEIR quotes right? You must have me confused with some slimy liberal democrat who when telling others what the opposition says, ignore what the actual person is quoted as saying and instead make up their own quotes and attribute them to their enemies. I don't do that son, most honest people don't. When I'm trying to tell people what the opposition says, I acutally use their own words. Man if you really are a US Miliatry Academy Grad, which I'm doubting more and more, you speak volumes for the decline of our Academy's academic standards in the name of diversity.

 

[jtpr312]

So what?

You accuse President Bush of lying outright, but when he says something you happen to agree with, he can't be mistaken?

Bush told a lot of lies.

We spent over a trillion US taxpayer dollars on this illegal and immoral war and I'd like to know what we got in return for that investment?

I'd like someone to tell me how I have personally benefited from this war and how my life is better because of it?

You got the stones to answer that?

Saying killing muslims is immoral, is much like saying killing rabid dogs is immoral. Both pose a danger to innocent people, both need to be put down.

 

[Mac1958]

.

What in the world is the GOP going to do with people like this?

.

 

[Billo_Really]

Saying killing muslims is immoral, is much like saying killing rabid dogs is immoral. Both pose a danger to innocent people, both need to be put down.

That's what the nazis said about the jews and we all know who got "put down" in that one!

You treat them like dogs, yet claim "they're the animals?"


People like you, are the reason God made at least one sin, from which there is no salvation. No forgiveness.

 

[Billo_Really]

.

What in the world is the GOP going to do with people like this?

.

Purge them from government.

Show the world that's how we solve problems in this country (word to Shiite's and Sunni's).

 

[Billo_Really]

Wow! It's not an act, you really are a flipping dumbass aren't you? How can I use my own words when the topic of the post is WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP SAID. You do understand that when you are telling what other's said, you use THEIR quotes right? You must have me confused with some slimy liberal democrat who when telling others what the opposition says, ignore what the actual person is quoted as saying and instead make up their own quotes and attribute them to their enemies. I don't do that son, most honest people don't. When I'm trying to tell people others what the opposition says, I acutally use their own words. Man if you really are a US Miliatry Academy Grad, which I'm doubting more and more, you speak volumes for the decline of our Academy's academic standards in the name of diversity.

People that go along with a lie that someone else created, are guilty of complicity, not guilty of the whole lie.

Just because you believed a lie someone else created, does not absolve them of any blame.

 

[jtpr312]

Umm, which of those Democrats had access to the full 96 page classified NIE that Bush had?

You're kidding right? Most of these democrats had access to ALL the intelligence available. You do understand that Bill Clinton WAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, right? You do know Madeleine Albright Sectratary of State right? You do know that Pelosi was a member of the House Intelligence Committee right? You do know that Sandy Berger was the NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISON right? You do know that Sen Bob Graham was a 10yr member of the Senate Intelligence committee right? You do know that Sen Hillary Clinton was married to THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, right?

Holy fuck, are you ever retarded.

That NIE was released in late 2002. Neither Bill Clinton nor Albright nor Berger were in office, so they didn't have access to it. Neither did Hillary Clinton since she was not on the Senate Intelligence Committee. So yeah, Graham, Bayh, Pelosi, and Rockefeller were the only ones you quoted who sat on intelligence committees and had access to the full NIE. So no, "most" of those Democrats did not have access to "all" of the intel available.

Strike #1

Piss off dude, it's obvious you get your information from Chris Matthews, Kieth Oberlman or Racheal Madcow. It would be a good idea to actually research a subjectbefore you bloviate on that subject.

No, I don't watch any of those people. My information comes mostly from news agencies like AP, CNN, and Reuters.

Strike #2

You also do know that the NIE you're speaking of came out in Oct 02 right? These dems where warning aobut he weapons they KNEW sadam had WMD's throughout the 90's and after.

With the exception of Albright's quote, the quotes from the 90's were exclusively from before Operation Desert Fox, at which time, Hussein's abilities to build and store WMD were destroyed. And even Albright's comment, made in 1999, does not state he currently had WMD. So it's entirely possible that Hussein still had some WMD prior to Desert Fox, but there were none built after that and there was no "gathering threat" as Bush proclaimed.

Strike #3 -- you're out for being too stupid to compete.

No, it's you whose dumb as a rock. I never said they all had access to the NIE you refrenced because like I said it didn't come out until Oct 02, what I said, and I quote, "Most of these democrats had access to ALL the intelligence available'. You're the jackass that asked Did they have access to the NIE bush did? I showed some did some didnt't and the ones that didn't, because it wasn't yet available, DID have access to ALL the intelligence available when they made their remarks. You have loust reading comrehension skills son\
Strike 1.

"News" agencies? Lol, that's funny, you calling Pravda West "News" agencies.
Strike 2

Operation Desert Fox was launched Dec 16th of 98. You'll notice ALL these "In the Know Democrats are quote AFTER operation Desert Fox was completed.

There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Strike 3.

Now run along son.

 

[jtpr312]

Saying killing muslims is immoral, is much like saying killing rabid dogs is immoral. Both pose a danger to innocent people, both need to be put down.

That's what the nazis said about the jews and we all know who got "put down" in that one!

You treat them like dogs, yet claim "they're the animals?"


People like you, are the reason God made at least one sin, from which there is no salvation. No forgiveness.

The Nazis where wrong about the Jews and based their beliefs regarding them on nothing that showed them as a threat to the German's security or the lives of the German Citizens. I am right and base my belief on the over 20,000 murderous terrorist attacks, with tens of thousands of innocents murdered by muslims, just since 9/11 and the tens of thousands murdered by them in the thousands upon thousands of murderous attacks prior to 9/11. By the way dumbass, there is ONLY one unpardonable sin and it's not No forgiveness, it is Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. By the way, I don't think of them as dogs, I actually like dogs and think they contribute greatly to society, I think of them as RABID dogs, with the key word being rabid.

 

[Mac1958]

By the way dumbass, there is ONLY one unpardonable sin and it's not No forgiveness, it is Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. By the way, I don't think of them as dogs, I actually like dogs and think they contribute greatly to society, I think of them as RABID dogs, with the key word being rabid.

Oh no.

This one's claiming to be a Christian.

Yikes.

.

 

[jtpr312]

By the way dumbass, there is ONLY one unpardonable sin and it's not No forgiveness, it is Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. By the way, I don't think of them as dogs, I actually like dogs and think they contribute greatly to society, I think of them as RABID dogs, with the key word being rabid.

Oh no.

This one's claiming to be a Christian.

Yikes.

.

Here's a clue son, God hates muslims also.

 

[zeke]

By the way dumbass, there is ONLY one unpardonable sin and it's not No forgiveness, it is Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. By the way, I don't think of them as dogs, I actually like dogs and think they contribute greatly to society, I think of them as RABID dogs, with the key word being rabid.

Oh no.

This one's claiming to be a Christian.

Yikes.

.

Here's a clue son, God hates muslims also.

LMAO. Hey, post up your "proof" that God hates Muslims any more than God hates supposed Chrisitians. btw. Does it say God hates Muslims in your bible?

No really what you should have said is JTPR hates Muslims and that makes you feel very god like.

But I don't think God has much to do with your hate. It's all on you. Son.

 

[Billo_Really]

I always thought our Military Academies required more than a 5th grade readling comprehension level of it's students. If you realy did attend one of our Military Acadamies I must have been wrong about that one. You certainly don't sound like a West Point or Annapolis Grad. You sound much more like some sleazeball lawyer trying to explain to a jury how your client didn't mean what you think he meant on those survellience tapes you're listening to, "only one expresses ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY concerning Sadam's STOCKPILES", lol. Flipping tool. Let's take a look shall we. I'll make it easier for you. I'm thinking there may be too many words for you to be able to decipher the meaning of what's said, so I'll just give you the relvent...

"relvent"? And you're the one giving the lecture?

portions of each quote and try my best to explain them to you. See douche, you don't have to SPECIFICALLY say the words, "It's an absolute certainty" to impy that you think something to be true.

But he didn't say he "thought" something, he said he "knew" something.

When you tell people you "know" something, it imply's that you've already done your due diligence to prove it.

You wsih to tell us how words are used like an artist's brush, ok, but the problem seems to be that you may need the boldness of a Gaffitti artist's sray paint can to get the message as the soft mild strokes of the brush seem to go over your head.

We'll see about that?

We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."--Says that Iraq has a WMD program and the weapons produced by that program are a threat.

That is dependent on whether or not you have proven he has them. If you do not have a "smoking gun", then you cannot make this claim.

He will use those weapons of mass destruction again--Says that Saddam had and still has WMD's.

Another dependent claim. See above.

threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs--Implies that Iraq has a WMD program current in effect and is producing weapons.

Another dependent claim. See above.

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology--Says that saddam has developed WMD's and their delivery systems.

Another dependent claim. See above.

Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction--Says saddam has WMD's

Another dependent claim. See above.

Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status--Guess you would have to know what Iraq's pre-Gulf War NBC Program status means so I'll give you this one. I mean you obviously can't read beyond a 4th grade level so I doubt you know what Iraq'a pre-Gulf War NBC weapons stockpiles and programs actaully included.

Now this is a "lie". The only credible reports on this subject at the time, came from Hans Blix, whose "job" it was to determine this. And everyone of those reports, did not make this claim.

Saddam Hussein is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." I don't even know how to dumb this one down for you. I mean it just says, Saddam IS building WMD's. Is it the defintion of the word "is" you're having trouble with? Maybe, so I'll help you out. Is-3rd person singular present of be (Verb). I know this may be above your comprehension level, but I'm not an elementary school teacher so probably not much help to you.

And we all know now your source for this one was a cokehead named "curveball" that British and Italian intelligence told us couldn't be trusted.

he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."--Says Saddam has WMD's

Another dependent claim. See above.

Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction--Says Saddam currently has WMDs and is seeking more.

At the same time UN inspectors were driving all around his country in white vans? Right?

We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.--Says Saddam has WMDs and is lloking to enlarge his number of WMDs.

Earlier, he said he "knew", which has now been downgraded to "confident".

Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."--Hmm, disarm him of what? His gold plated .45's? Nope, this says he has WMDs and we need to take them from him.

You disarm someone from "arms they have". You cannot disarm someone from "arms they don't have".

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons,-- Destroy what? This one also says he has WMDs that need to be destroyed.

Which was the jurisdiction of the UNSC to decide, not a member state assisting in the resolution's (1441) compliance.

intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock/ Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare,--Says that Saddam has rebuilt his WMD sockpile, and is continuing to develop more.

At the same time UN inspectors were driving all around his country in white vans? Right?

Now if you want to sit there and spew crap like some shyster lawyer, whining "They didn't say certainly, absolutely, without a doubt, .......be my guest, but EVERY person with more than a 4th grade comprehension level, forget that, I bet most 4th graders can get this stuff, will come to the conclusion that EVERY quote shows the speaker believed that Saddam Hussein had WMDs and wanted more WMDs.

"confident", has now been downgraded to "believe", when earlier, we were told he "knew".

Now we know that was a lie.

It's a sad state of affairs when a supposed US Military Officer, rather than standing for the black and white of truth and honesty, must insted delve into the shady grey area like some two bit shyster lawyer to make his point. No need to "match pedigrees", it's obvious you're either a dishonest scrote or a moron, so you keep holding on to those "pedigrees" son, it's all you got, but then again my dog has one too.

Okay, since you brought up "US Military Officer(s)", let's take a look at this from their perspective.

There is…considerable evidence that Bush's plans are fundamentally illegal, from both an international and domestic perspective. If the war is indeed illegal, members of the armed forces have a legal and moral obligation to resist illegal orders, according to their oath of induction.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

And according to West Point grads, here are the laws they say Bush broke...

Among the international laws and treaties that a U.S. pre-emptive attack on Iraq may violate are:

The Hague Convention on Land Warfare of 1899, which was reaffirmed by the U.S. at the 1946 Nuremberg International Military Tribunals.

Resolution on the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons and Prevention of Nuclear War, adopted UN General Assembly, Dec 12, 1980.

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; December 9, 1948, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the UN General Assembly.

Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, adopted on August 12, 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, 1108 U.N.T.S. 151, Oct. 5, 1978.

The Charter of the United Nations.

The Nuremberg Principles, which define as a crime against peace, "planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements, or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for accomplishment of any of the forgoing."

So now, why don't you tell me why your comments contradict the conclusions of what these Military Academics (with a higher than 5th grade education), have said?

 

[Billo_Really]

The Nazis where wrong about the Jews and based their beliefs regarding them on nothing that showed them as a threat to the German's security or the lives of the German Citizens.

Just like you're doing to the muslims now.

I am right and base my belief on the over 20,000 murderous terrorist attacks, with tens of thousands of innocents murdered by muslims, just since 9/11 and the tens of thousands murdered by them in the thousands upon thousands of murderous attacks prior to 9/11.

Just like Hitler claimed jews were responsible for the Reistag Fire.

You're making up your own proof.

By the way dumbass, there is ONLY one unpardonable sin and it's not No forgiveness, it is Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. By the way, I don't think of them as dogs, I actually like dogs and think they contribute greatly to society, I think of them as RABID dogs, with the key word being rabid.

Someone GOD probably doesn't like, shouldn't be commenting on HIS message.

"Hypocrisy" is the only sin from which there is no salvation.

You can be foregiven of "blasphemy", by accepting Jesus Christ as your savior. Which shows that you have truly changed as a human being, kind of like St. Paul.

Hypocrites, on the otherhand, cannot be trusted for anything they say, because they have proven whatever they said, they don't mean.

 

[jtpr312]

Oh no.

This one's claiming to be a Christian.

Yikes.

.

Here's a clue son, God hates muslims also.

LMAO. Hey, post up your "proof" that God hates Muslims any more than God hates supposed Chrisitians. btw. Does it say God hates Muslims in your bible?

No really what you should have said is JTPR hates Muslims and that makes you feel very god like.

But I don't think God has much to do with your hate. It's all on you. Son.

Sure I'll post my proof.
The bible says God hates;
Workers of iniquity (Psalm 5:5)
The wicked (Psalm 11:5)
Those who love violence (Psalm 11:5)
(All attributes the muslim posses in abundance.)

Hands that shed innocent blood (Proverbs 6:17)
(One of the main actions of the muslim)

A false witness who speaks lies (Proverbs 6:19)
(Muslims spread the lie that allah is God and that God has no Son)

Those who justify the wicked (Proverbs 17:15)
Those who condemn the just (Proverbs 17:15)
(Which includes EVERY muslim that believes the words of their pedophilic prophet)

Now as far as His love for Christians goes;
Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),

Eph 1:5,6 "Having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will. To the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved."

Rom. 8:38-39 "For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created things, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."



There's your biblical proof that God hates muslims but loves Christians son. Carry on.