Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 133
  1.    #41  
    and NO, you cannot compare beheading to the prisoner abuses.

    chulup -> they dont even fall into the same category. did we behead, dismember, or mutilate any of them?

    nope. so you are wrong with that one.

    i agree iraq is a mess. do you think attacking afghanistan alone would have put an end to all the al qaeda terrorist cells in the whole world, chulup?

    i dont think so. they are all over the world - syria, iran, we thought iraq, south africa, algeria, ALL OVER!!.

    saddam was a powerful, corrupt, and devious - hated the us.... it made sense that he might be a source that would finance al qaeda. facts MAY have proved otherwise. but was leaving iraq alone a risk many people were willing to take after 9/11? the trust for the middle east was not high then.

    like i said, hindsight is 20/20. we are fighting the alqaeda in iraq. better there than here.
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    we are fighting the alqaeda in iraq. better there than here.
    All politics aside, I hope the war against Al Queda stays there, rather than here.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  3.    #43  
    im with you on that, heberman. i hope so too
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    i didnt tie 911 to iraq, so take it easy and ease that choke back in ok, comrade!?

    i DID say we needed to respond to what was done to us in a strong and definitive manner to make someone pay for what was done to us.
    That wasn't a nice way of saying it, that choking part, was it?

    Well, you said "what i am in agreement with as far as the decision to move on iraq was that we really did need to retaliate and make somebody pay for 9/11", as you repeated above. Since there is no connection between 9/11 and Iraq, this sounds a bit as if anybody is ok, as long as somebody has to pay.
    we wont lie and wait for you to do it again. consequences are coming and we will occupy your lands to root out the terrorists that did this. you dont like that we are in iraq, well thats a damn shame. those people shouldnt have attacked us then.
    So which country will you try to occupy after the next terrorist attack? Will Rumsfeld thow darts at a map of the Middle East? Most terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, none from Iraq... Will it be Saudi Arabia next time? I doubt it!

    And the "rooting out" plan does not really look promising in Iraq either. There were no terrorists to speak of in Iraq before the war, now they kill dozens each day, including US citizens... that does not look like "rooting out" for me.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  5.    #45  
    dannoz, i have to agree with you again.
    he represents the " absolution of personal responsibility."

    very well said!

    i agree he is appears conciliatory, and agreeable to many people, but at the same time, he appeared very agreeably way when he proceeded to lie through his teeth to the grand jury - under oath!

    i understand people's affection for his personality, but i, for one, cant trust him. hes a lady's man. these are easy people to melt down with and find to be likeable fellows, but not always the ones youd trust, guys. during the times his attention was needed for national security, it was instead muddled around interns and numerous others of the female persuasion.

    nope. not me. sorry. i wouldnt place trust in a guy like that. as gleaming a smile as he has. there's just an association with the refusal to hold yourself accountable for anything important in life, and that habit tends to spill over into OTHER areas of your life - AND THIS -is where i see a serious problem with the guy.
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    and NO, you cannot compare beheading to the prisoner abuses.

    chulup -> they dont even fall into the same category. did we behead, dismember, or mutilate any of them?

    nope. so you are wrong with that one.
    I never said beheadings and prisoner abuse are comparable. Dannoz said one should also mention the beheadings, that was all. Apart from that: yes, US actions beheaded, dismembered, mutilated many Iraqi civilians, but for different reasons and with different means (bombs, mostly).
    they are all over the world - syria, iran, we thought iraq, south africa, algeria, ALL OVER!!.
    Exactely. That's why you wont get anywhere by occupying countries...
    it made sense that he might be a source that would finance al qaeda. facts MAY have proved otherwise.
    I never heard anybody claim Al Qaida was financed by Iraq. Al Qaida is mostly financed by Saudi money plus lots of other sources.
    we are fighting the alqaeda in iraq.
    You are now, but they were not there before...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  7. #47  
    there's a fundamental difference between our cultures, US, Europe etc and these Middle Eastern extremist chappies, one that we fail to grasp and which makes me think we can never 'defeat" them. We torture a few prisoners and we're all shocked because we can't accept that type of behaviour, they shoot / cut off people's heads on live TV and think NOTHING of it. We may never win a war with these people because they are prepared to sacrifice everything to get what they want, they are extremist in their beliefs and will act accordingly...thankfully, we won't
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    i, for one, cant trust him.
    Considering how you're the guy who would invade a foreign nation and try to figure out if that was the right thing to do afterwards with your 20/20 hindsight, I, for one, can't trust you. I'd actually trust a guy who jams cigars in his *** before asking for your advice.

    You are scared and confused. That's completely understandable. I'm scared and confused, too. Nothing is going to help, though, unless we solve the confusion first. We need to work on the confused part first.
  9. #49  
    Oh, Snerdy ...it's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read your comment
  10.    #50  
    what do you think should have been done, chulup? let's hear it. im all ears
  11.    #51  
    you know what chulup? you sound like an armchair quarterback. about the cigars - i think youve outdone yourself with the mudslinging.

    you know, one thing i have noticed about you, is that you appear to enjoy being obnoxious. just go ahead and be as irritating as ya wanna be. consistent pattern all throughout these threads.

    ya know what? you know how far youll get convincing anyone of your point with a chip like that on your shoulder?
    people stop listening to you - hence my original request to keep this thread clean. but here comes chulup to go and muddy up the place. class act, dude. so whats your mastermind plan now?
    what , your highness, shalt we do oh wise and benevolent one?
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    what do you think should have been done, chulup? let's hear it. im all ears
    Keep Saddam under the close surveillance he had prior to the war - then, if you have good reasons to believe (not just bogus claims) that he doesn't behave, use force to deal with him, as when he occupied Kuwait. Bring some friends like last time, and get UN blessing so that the muslim countries don't feel too bad - just like last time. Do it right, with enough support (even from neighbours like Turkey who were too pissed about the US behaviour to help) and troops in order to prevent chaos after the fighting is over. This way, Iraq would be under UN occupation, and also the Iraqis would feel much better about the whole thing. You could bring in troops from Muslim countries to guard the holy cities, gain the trust of the Iraqis, everything would be MUCH better - still not perfect, but much better.
    Last edited by clulup; 08/05/2004 at 03:31 PM.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  13. #53  
    Clulup, you're reasoning is a bit crazy:

    "Keep Saddam under the close surveillance he had prior to the war" - Did you forget he kicked the inspectors out? What surveilance did we have?

    "If you have good reasons that he doesn't behave" - That is what the intelligence from the U.S., Brittish, Russian, Israelis all said - he was seeking, and had WMD.

    "Bring some friends like last time" - We did. With the notable exceptions of France and Germany, the coalition was huge and diverse.

    "Get UN blessing" - The security council was unanimous. What better "blessing" can you get?

    It seems like you're hatred for Bush has caused you some amnesia as to what really happened.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  14.    #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Keep Saddam under the close surveillance he had prior to the war - then, if you have good reasons (not just bogus claims) that he doesn't behave, use force to deal with him, as when he occupied Kuwait, bring some friends like last time, and get UN blessing so that the muslim countries don't feel too bad - just like last time. Do it right, with enough support (even from neighbours like Turkey who were too pissed about the US behaviour to help) and troops in order to prevent chaos after the fighting is over...
    UN blessing? well, that would have been the ideal solution. i agree it would have been a much more secure move with more worldwide support.

    but saddam blew off resolution after resolution. not that he was involved with 9/11, but he behaved previously in such a shady manner as to give the idea that there was something very suspicious going on. if there were no weapons, let all the inspectors in. and dont restrict them to certain locations, let them inspect all of iraq.

    the guy blew off anything the un passed. bad behavior? he was in a constant state of bad behavior and defiance. if he was straightforward, he could have saved his country.

    the guy was an *****. when you play that way in with another country that was bombed by a nearly invisible foe, what do you expect is going to happen?

    if hussein was anything other than a moron, he would have allowed all inspectors to go anywhere, and in doing so have given bush no reason to go on for invading iraq.

    it was hussein`s country to lose, and he lost it due to his own stupidity.
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    you know what chulup? you sound like an armchair quarterback. about the cigars - i think youve outdone yourself with the mudslinging.
    Sorry, but I am not the cigar guy, so no mudsliding from my side (username is clulup, but I don't really mind if you call me chlulup)
    you know, one thing i have noticed about you, is that you appear to enjoy being obnoxious.
    No comment.
    ya know what? you know how far youll get convincing anyone of your point with a chip like that on your shoulder?
    Chip? What chip?
    hence my original request to keep this thread clean. but here comes chulup to go and muddy up the place.
    Where did I muddy up this place? Any name-calling from my side?
    so whats your mastermind plan now?
    Go on with the discussion, without name-calling?
    Last edited by clulup; 08/05/2004 at 03:50 PM.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    you know what chulup? you sound like an armchair quarterback. about the cigars - i think youve outdone yourself with the mudslinging.

    you know, one thing i have noticed about you, is that you appear to enjoy being obnoxious. just go ahead and be as irritating as ya wanna be. consistent pattern all throughout these threads.

    ya know what? you know how far youll get convincing anyone of your point with a chip like that on your shoulder?
    people stop listening to you - hence my original request to keep this thread clean. but here comes chulup to go and muddy up the place. class act, dude. so whats your mastermind plan now?
    what , your highness, shalt we do oh wise and benevolent one?

    It seems you have a chip on your shoulder, as you're consistently misspelling clulup's name (it's comparable to misspronouncing someone's name over and over...it becomes rude) and blaming him for comments someone else made. The comments in this particular post seem worst of all. You've got far better debating skills than this...let's keep it civil.
  17.    #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by snerdy
    Considering how you're the guy who would invade a foreign nation and try to figure out if that was the right thing to do afterwards with your 20/20 hindsight, I, for one, can't trust you. I'd actually trust a guy who jams cigars in his *** before asking for your advice.

    You are scared and confused. That's completely understandable. I'm scared and confused, too. Nothing is going to help, though, unless we solve the confusion first. We need to work on the confused part first.
    ya know what snerdy? was i giving any advice? lol. nope. and i most certainly wouldnt lend advice to a guy who consoles himself with those of YOUR particular cigar fetish.
  18. #58  
    Edit: oh, you figured it out ^^^^ ...Of course, you have no idea what I was talking about, do you? As I say: confused.

    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    you know what chulup? you sound like an armchair quarterback. about the cigars - i think youve outdone yourself with the mudslinging.
    Hey, that was me! Sheesh.
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    Clulup, you're reasoning is a bit crazy:

    "Keep Saddam under the close surveillance he had prior to the war" - Did you forget he kicked the inspectors out? What surveilance did we have?
    That is not true. UN inspections were progressing fast, inspectors were pulled out because the US attack was imminent.

    "If you have good reasons that he doesn't behave" - That is what the intelligence from the U.S., Brittish, Russian, Israelis all said - he was seeking, and had WMD.
    The UN inspectors never said Saddam still had WMD, they just said "we can't be sure yet he destroyed everything, we need more time" - They didn't get it due to US attack. If others said Saddam still had WMD, they were wrong.
    "Bring some friends like last time" - We did. With the notable exceptions of France and Germany, the coalition was huge and diverse.
    The number of troops was FAR greater in the Kuwait war, and international support was FAR stronger. Diplomacy was something Bush senior understood, in contrast to his son.
    It seems like you're hatred for Bush has caused you some amnesia as to what really happened.
    I don't hate Bush, I just think he does stupid things. I am an outside observer, I don't have such strong feelings about him.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by Tribalenvy
    It seems you have a chip on your shoulder, as you're consistently misspelling clulup's name (it's comparable to misspronouncing someone's name over and over...it becomes rude) and blaming him for comments someone else made. The comments in this particular post seem worst of all. You've got far better debating skills than this...let's keep it civil.
    It seems to me that treobk214 has done a very good job at keeping things civil.

    And misspelling someone's screen name? Sheesh, who cares!
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions