Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Phred]
    #10092752 -

Phred said:
How many more times must I say it before you will be satisfied?

My guess is 7.

Is there a prize for the closest guess?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Redstorm]
    #10092821 -

Redstorm said:
Your question about individual liberties after 9/11 is framed incorrectly. Liberties are not restricted to having the "freedom to", but also include "freedom from".  In this case, individual liberties have been reduced by various warrantless monitoring methods.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Phred]
    #10092860 -

Phred said:
not only was no such responsibility (on Hussein's part) ever explicitly stated by the Bush administration, it wasn't even implied. How many times have I said that already in this thread? How many more times must I say it before you will be satisfied?


You can say it a million times, but until you make a convincing counter-argument I doubt anyone who lived through the Bush administration as an adult will be "satisfied." Without 9/11 and the ensuing anti-terrorist fervor which was inevitable but exacerbated by the Bush administration, there never would have been enthusiastic support for an invasion of Iraq. It's so obvious that I don't really see why we are even discussing it.


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: gluke bastid]
    #10092899 -

i guess we are discussing it because of a few individual's complete refusal to believe anything of the sort happened.

we all agree no one ever explicitly linked the two together, so the difference of opinion arises in regards to whether or not links were implied, or if, like you said, the anti-terrorism hysteria was taken advantage of to invade Iraq.  This is where the real debate lies, and if people can still deny any possibility of such after reading all of the information contained in this thread, then absolutely nothing is going to change these opinions, and the discussion is truly dead and over. 

:beatadeadhorse:


i thought that this post by Twirling really summed up the whole thing well, and am surprised it didn't seem to get any recognition for being so well-constructed and on point.


--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Redstorm]
    #10092921 -

And what continues to be scrupulously ignored here by the BDS sufferers is that the American people had no say whatsoever in any decision regarding the Iraq war.  There was no proposition voted on, no election except for that of their representatives in Congress.  The People, that great unwashed and ignorant, easily duped mass of bubbling sheep protoplasm (So Sayeth The Left) simply was not involved in the process.  There was no effort to deceive, no intent to deceive, no need to deceive.  Not only is there no evidence of deception there is no motivation for it. 

I fully realize that the Left overinflate their own individual importance.  "If only Bush hadn't deceived me I could have stopped this horrible and unjust persecution of one of the great thugs of our time."

No, child, you were not asked.  And they label me as arrogant.  Puhleeze.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #10092941 -

luvdemshrooms said:
Phred said:
How many more times must I say it before you will be satisfied?

My guess is 7.

Is there a prize for the closest guess?


Dude, you need to put more zeros on that, as evidenced by the two posts immediately above my latest arrogant brilliance. 

Children, nobody ever cared what you thought about it.  Your counsel was not sought.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: zappaisgod]
    #10092999 -

zappaisgod said:
And what continues to be scrupulously ignored here by the BDS sufferers is that the American people had no say whatsoever in any decision regarding the Iraq war. There was no proposition voted on, no election except for that of their representatives in Congress.


So you're saying that it doesn't matter whether there was popular support for the war or not? Yeah you're right. It didn't figure at all in the 2004 presidential races no sireee bob. Anyway the point doesn't matter. We're not discussing the political implications of an administration that exploited the people's conception, the challenge was to prove whether or not the administration manipulated the public conception.

Quote:
The People, that great unwashed and ignorant, easily duped mass of bubbling sheep protoplasm (So Sayeth The Left) simply was not involved in the process.


As is par for the course, you are the only one in this thread calling the masses stupid. If I had a dime for everytime you described the average american citizen as either stupid or lazy, I would finally be in your tax bracket.

Quote:
There was no effort to deceive, no intent to deceive, no need to deceive.  Not only is there no evidence of deception there is no motivation for it.


Ridiculous. Every war needs popular support. This is another point that is so obvious its not even worth going into. All one need to do is open a history book to any war that has ever taken place to see the efforts governments or nations go to to ensure their citizens are offered a compelling war story. The current Iraq war is no exception. Terrorists blow up towers. Saddam friend of terrorists. Go get Saddam. The narrative may be true, false, or somewhere in between. But if its not there there is no war. 

Quote:
I fully realize that the Left overinflate their own individual importance.


Quit trollin :niggawhat:

Quote:
No, child, you were not asked.  And they label me as arrogant.  Puhleeze.


Phred asked, actually. That we have a discussion on this. So blame him, not me.


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Yrat]
    #10093043 -

Quote:
we all agree no one ever explicitly linked the two together, so the difference of opinion arises in regards to whether or not links were implied, or if, like you said, the anti-terrorism hysteria was taken advantage of to invade Iraq.


That is an entirely different kettle of fish and not at all what MAIA claims. Of course there was more support for deposing Hussein after the 9/11 attacks than before, duh! How could there not be?

Remember that it had been the official policy of the United States government since 1998 that Hussein's Ba'athist government  be deposed. Congress passed the Act to that effect with broad bi-partisan support, it's just that Billy Jeff didn't have a strong sense of urgency about it. He was content to lob a few cruise missiles into empty buildings whenever the Lewinsky affair heated up to a certain level and leave the heavy lifting to his successor. Bush didn't make it a priority of his either. Then 9/11 happened. And everything changed.

Quote:
This is where the real debate lies, and if people can still deny any possibility of such after reading all of the information contained in this thread, then absolutely nothing is going to change these opinions, and the discussion is truly dead and over. 


The ridiculous thing is that people are still trying to lie about how the Bush administration went about their decision-making. See MAIA's bullshit as a case in point. How anyone can still be trying to peddle this snake oil is just astonishing to me.  It was long ago established - like years and years ago - that the Bush administration did not build their case for resuming hostilities with Hussein's Ba'athist regime on any kind of "responsibility" Hussein bore for the 9/11 attacks.





Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Phred]
    #10093066 -

Excellent post.

For the record, I'm not out to demonize Bush but I do respond when history is being mis-characterized. Sometimes the two things intersect, however.


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: gluke bastid]
    #10093153 -

gluke bastid said:
zappaisgod said:
And what continues to be scrupulously ignored here by the BDS sufferers is that the American people had no say whatsoever in any decision regarding the Iraq war. There was no proposition voted on, no election except for that of their representatives in Congress.


So you're saying that it doesn't matter whether there was popular support for the war or not? Yeah you're right. It didn't figure at all in the 2004 presidential races no sireee bob. Anyway the point doesn't matter. We're not discussing the political implications of an administration that exploited the people's conception, the challenge was to prove whether or not the administration manipulated the public conception.


Which challenge you and your ilk have failed utterly to meet.  Abject failure.  And let's review, shall we, the time line of the war vis a vis the Presidential election of 2004.  The war commenced in early 2003.  Bush made his statements regarding the justification before that time.  The Presidential election was held in late 2004.  More than 18 months after any speeches were made for it.  Eighteen months, during which time there was ample opportunity, some seized some lost, for the anti war dipshits to get their message out that it was fraudulent.  Eighteen months for the NYTimes, Newsweek, Time, WaPo, etc to explain to the American People how they had been deceived in a real news article.  I exempt the deranged bleatings of the New York Times theater critic turned carnival geek, Frank Rich.  He was one of the original "Bush lied" 'tards but no one ever confuses his work as accurate.  Are you so paranoid as to believe that the biggest news organizations, which despise anything Republican, were in on the scam?  He didn't say it, he didn't imply it and if you were fooled then you, sir, were a fool.
Quote:
Quote:
The People, that great unwashed and ignorant, easily duped mass of bubbling sheep protoplasm (So Sayeth The Left) simply was not involved in the process.


As is par for the course, you are the only one in this thread calling the masses stupid. If I had a dime for everytime you described the average american citizen as either stupid or lazy, I would finally be in your tax bracket.


No, I am not.  Every pronouncement by the Bush Deranged that he fooled the people (but not us illuminated ones, OH NO!) is an indictment of the intelligence of the American People.  It is you on Far Left who make this argument, not I.  My argument is that English is English and whether some people do or do not understand it is irrelevant to an indictment for dishonesty.  Either you can find the lying statement or you can't.  And you haven't.  After all these years that tells me it  is a unicorn.  A holy grail for the BDS crowd.  Keep hunting, I think I saw a snipe whizz by over THERE.
Quote:
Quote:
There was no effort to deceive, no intent to deceive, no need to deceive.  Not only is there no evidence of deception there is no motivation for it.


Ridiculous. Every war needs popular support. This is another point that is so obvious its not even worth going into. All one need to do is open a history book to any war that has ever taken place to see the efforts governments or nations go to to ensure their citizens are offered a compelling war story. The current Iraq war is no exception. Terrorists blow up towers. Saddam friend of terrorists. Go get Saddam. The narrative may be true, false, or somewhere in between. But if its not there there is no war.


Although it is debatable about what popular support is necessary for wars to be prosecuted, (highly debatable, in my opinion), I will not be distracted from the point, which point being that there was no deception and you weren't asked your opinion.  The only people relevant to the prosecution of this war were members of Congress and they all had the information necessary to choose war.  Are you going to contend that they, the only people with an actual vote on the matter, were gulled as well?
Quote:
 

Quote:
I fully realize that the Left overinflate their own individual importance.


Quit trollin :niggawhat:


I don't troll.  I find it a disgusting characteristic of leftards everywhere.
Quote:


Quote:
No, child, you were not asked.  And they label me as arrogant.  Puhleeze.


Phred asked, actually. That we have a discussion on this. So blame him, not me.


Can you follow a point at all?  Phred did not ask your permission to invade Iraq.  Nor did anybody else, ever.  This continues to reinforce my belief that you cannot read what is written as opposed to inventing your own interpretation of what is written.  Phred has addressed this above.  Pirates.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: zappaisgod]
    #10093167 -

Quote:
I don't troll.  I find it a disgusting characteristic of leftards everywhere.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Phred]
    #10093319 -

Phred said:
The ridiculous thing is that people are still trying to lie about how the Bush administration went about their decision-making.




nobody is lying about anything.  people are simply providing numerous quotes which they feel demonstrate the administration's attempts to link the two in the public's mind.  some feel the quotations clearly demonstrate this, others can't or don't (or don't want to) see it. 

so it has come down to a difference of opinions, which i agree is different from your original requests.  but at the same time, your challenge set the bar impossibly high, you requested proof that did not exist, and thus you set yourself as the predetermined winner of the argument.  i get that MAIA may have laid claim that such proof existed, and perhaps wrongly so.  however i believe the majority in this thread are attempting to show you that they understand such quotes don't exist, but also that it's not such a pure black-and-white, all or nothing issue.


--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Redstorm]
    #10093337 -

Perhaps I misunderstand "trolling".  I thought it was the act of posting inflammatory rhetoric for the sole purpose of annoying the reader.  This I do not do.  I post what I post with total disregard for how much it might annoy some faggotty liberal twat.  That's just a derivative benefit.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Yrat]
    #10093437 -

Quote:
nobody is lying about anything.


Except MAIA.

Quote:
people are simply providing numerous quotes which they feel demonstrate the administration's attempts to link the two in the public's mind.


And these examples do nothing other than prove my point. None of the quotes provided do any such thing.

Quote:
so it has come down to a difference of opinions...


No, it hasn't. This isn't a matter of opinion, it is a matter of people reading into very simple, unequivocal statements things which simply are not there. In other words, people demonstrating their lack of reading (and listening) comprehension. It is not my opinion that the administration never said Hussein was responsible, or that the administration never implied Hussein was responsible, that is fact.

Quote:
but at the same time, your challenge set the bar impossibly high, you requested proof that did not exist, and thus you set yourself as the predetermined winner of the argument. 


You haven't the foggiest idea of how debate works, do you? I didn't set the bar impossibly high, MAIA did, by claiming something existed which does not in fact exist - statements from the Bush administration stating that Hussein bore responsibility for the attacks. I didn't set any bar, I merely demanded he back up his baseless claim. The fact that he can't back it up is not my doing, but his.

Quote:
however i believe the majority in this thread are attempting to show you that they understand such quotes don't exist, but also that it's not such a pure black-and-white, all or nothing issue.


And failing in those attempts.





Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Phred]
    #10093445 -

failing because you wont accept their arguments?


--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Redstorm]
    #10093469 -

Redstorm said:
Redstorm said:
Your question about individual liberties after 9/11 is framed incorrectly. Liberties are not restricted to having the "freedom to", but also include "freedom from".  In this case, individual liberties have been reduced by various warrantless monitoring methods.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Yrat]
    #10093481 -

Yrat said:
failing because you wont accept their arguments?


It's a religion with you, isn't it?  An article of faith.  This is why you are marginalized and, to all intents and purposes, ignored.  It is eminently easy to expose you as an acolyte and no kind of rational observer of fact, inconvenient as they are


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Yrat]
    #10093486 -

Yrat said:
failing because you wont accept their arguments?


Failing because they are wrong. Failing because the facts are against them.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: Redstorm]
    #10093527 -

Redstorm said:
Redstorm said:
Redstorm said:
Your question about individual liberties after 9/11 is framed incorrectly. Liberties are not restricted to having the "freedom to", but also include "freedom from".  In this case, individual liberties have been reduced by various warrantless monitoring methods.




i guess we could rephrase "freedom from" to ' "freedom to" not be subjected to various unconstitutional....'

Phred, you still have not addressed this half or your challenge


--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Answers from MAIA [Re: zappaisgod]
    #10093542 -

zappaisgod said:
And let's review, shall we, the time line of the war vis a vis the Presidential election of 2004.  The war commenced in early 2003.  Bush made his statements regarding the justification before that time.  The Presidential election was held in late 2004. More than 18 months after any speeches were made for it.


You're really going to argue that justification for the Iraq war is not still a contested issue today, in 2009, much less than during the 2004 presidential election? Really? Did you watch the debates? Do you want to pull up transcripts? No, probably not. Does the phrase "weapons of mass destruction" ring a bell? Do you deny that there was (is) a fear of WMD's that were supposedly in the hands of Saddam getting into the hands of terrorists? Do you deny that this was a factor in the war?

Quote:
He didn't say it, he didn't imply it and if you were fooled then you, sir, were a fool.


I was never fooled because I never believed Bush's war justifications, implied implicitly stated or otherwise. The whole thing was a fucking farce from day 1.

Quote:
No, I am not.  Every pronouncement by the Bush Deranged that he fooled the people (but not us illuminated ones, OH NO!) is an indictment of the intelligence of the American People.


Nope. You can call a politician a liar without calling the people he lied to stupid. Its easy, and you do it as often as the rest of us.

Quote:
It is you on Far Left who make this argument, not I.


:niggawhat:

Quote:
Although it is debatable about what popular support is necessary for wars to be prosecuted, (highly debatable, in my opinion),


Then debate it.
Quote:
I will not be distracted from the point, which point being that there was no deception and you weren't asked your opinion.


This is the crux of where I don't agree with you. I personally wasn't asked my opinion of course not no. But I stand by my assertion that a war needs popular support. You're going to have to get busy if you want to prove me wrong. The rest of my argument is that most of the support for the war in Iraq was stirred by the attacks on 9/11 and the American people's belief that a war in Iraq would make the world more difficult for terrorists and would remove Weapons of Mass Destruction from people who sympathize or even arm terrorists such as Al Q'aeda. I don't think the American people are stupid for believing this. I don't think they are stupid because I believe that the administration strategically played off of the 9/11 aftermath to justify an invasion of Iraq.

So to dismantle my argument you need to
1) Prove that it doesn't matter whether at all whether or not an administration needs support for a war if they are going to start and sustain it, including a the re-election of that administration.
2) Deny that the administration exploited widely held beliefs that there was a 9/11 Iraq connection.

Knowing your strageties, you will probably opt for option 3, in which case you insult me, then the left (earning yourself another eagle badge), and then divert the discussion in some new direction that re-defines the question on the table. Time will tell.

Quote:
Are you going to contend that they, the only people with an actual vote on the matter, were gulled as well?

 

I never contended that anyone was gulled. But I will continue to contend that the Bush administration exploited and exacerbated a post 9/11 anti-terrorist panic to enact a war that would have had little support otherwise. Again, please deny this instead of attacking me as a leftist or an elitist, of which I am neither...

Quote:
I don't troll.  I find it a disgusting characteristic of leftards everywhere.



...Oh wait, you can't. :niggawhat:

All in all, I'm getting frustrated because yet again this is turning into two people trying to prove who is right instead of trying to find out where they agree or where the truth is. Again, I'm not representing "the left" and I'm not trying to beat "the right," or prove that Bush is a monster. But it seems very clear to me that after 9/11 the administration saw an opportunity to roll out their plan to depose Saddam, which had been on the table for quite some time as Phred pointed out. That goes beyond Dem vs. Rep administrations and points to a government agenda that had been in place for some time. And that is what is and that is how governments work...you gotta strike when the iron is hot. But I think it is false to say that the Bush administration didn't play the 9/11 card over and over again in relation to the Iraq war, because they did. I think it is false to say that there wasn't a deliberate manipulation of public opinion because there was. That's basically it.


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* USA HAS GONE CRAZY - TERRORIST ATACKS!!!!!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 MAIA 15,695 143 09/12/11 11:34 AM
by wood_stones
* 9-11 moms want answers LearyfanS 938 8 08/23/03 08:02 PM
by Cornholio
* The September 11 X-Files wingnutx 1,575 9 08/17/03 01:34 AM
by BleaK
* Why Don't We Have Answers To These Questions?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Autonomous 3,706 41 09/15/03 02:53 PM
by Anonymous
* How to handle terrorists
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Phred 6,100 63 02/20/04 06:21 PM
by TheOneYouKnow
* Answers to the Hawk/Dove Quiz Evolving 704 4 01/31/03 09:59 AM
by pattern
* Rice Faults Past Administrations on Terror PsiloKitten 373 0 10/31/03 03:03 PM
by PsiloKitten
* Bush Administration Proposes System to Monitor Internet
( 1 2 3 all )		 Evolving 4,720 42 12/23/02 11:41 PM
by frogsheath

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
12,583 topic views. 2 members, 1,168 guests and 43 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 17 queries.