Home | Community | Message Board

MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq:
    #1600074 - 06/01/03 11:51 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Greets
From the recent outrage over no WMD's being found, and in response to some posters statement that he would give Bush&Co 6 months to find the weapons, I would like to ask a question. It seems that the point of your argument is that we attacked a nation that did not have the WMD's that we claimed it did, thus we acted in a reprehensible way. When we fail to prove that WMD's exist, the (from a liberal standpoint) only justification for our war goes to crap! Now, let me ask you this. Using your same standards of logic, what would you think of an invasion of N. Korea (they have them, and the missiles to drop them on LA), or on Iran, with their nuclear weapons program? These certaintly fit the billet of WMD's, both nations are prohibited from manufacturing them (N Korea is violating an agreement that they signed onto), and Iran has sponsored terrorism that was directed towards America. Now, if you are saying that NO Wmd's means we should NOT have gone to war, wouldn't the overt, obvious existance of WMD's mean we SHOULD go to war? Would you support a war on Iran, or North Korea, to rid them of their WMD's? IF not, why not? If not, what criteron would you say WOULD be justification for war on another nation?



--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesunyata
nonexistentexistentialist
Registered: 12/26/02
Posts: 133
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600090 - 06/01/03 11:56 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

being attacked by that nation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: sunyata]
    #1600114 - 06/02/03 12:03 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Best defense? good offense!


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesunyata
nonexistentexistentialist
Registered: 12/26/02
Posts: 133
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: *DELETED* [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600123 - 06/02/03 12:07 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Post deleted by sunyata

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: sunyata]
    #1600135 - 06/02/03 12:10 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Should we wait until N. Korea can say "Ok USA, you do what we say, or we launch our nuke at Los Angeles?" I personally think we should disarm them through economic means, or exhaust every means necessary, war is a last option. But, it is an option.


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesunyata
nonexistentexistentialist
Registered: 12/26/02
Posts: 133
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600152 - 06/02/03 12:16 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

Should we wait until N. Korea can say "Ok USA, you do what we say, or we launch our nuke at Los Angeles?"




So you seem to believe that the only nation in the world that should have this power is the United States. I can't believe you don't see the hipocrisy inherent in this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesunyata
nonexistentexistentialist
Registered: 12/26/02
Posts: 133
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: sunyata]
    #1600155 - 06/02/03 12:17 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Oh wait. The United States is only concerned about peace and global justice. I must have forgot.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: sunyata]
    #1600171 - 06/02/03 12:23 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I notice that the US doesn't,hm, STARVE ITS PEOPLE!! Nor does it fund attacks on civilians as Iran does. Do you think that EVERY nation deserves this awesome power? Do you think that, say, the Palestineans would fare well if they had a nuke? or the Syrians? Or most of the warring factions in Africa, would they do well with nukes? Maybe we should just spread ours around some, give a SSBN to Iran so they can be "equal", give one to Idi Amin so he can have one to use as he wants, geez, lets give every whack some nukes!


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesunyata
nonexistentexistentialist
Registered: 12/26/02
Posts: 133
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600187 - 06/02/03 12:28 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Yeah, nobody starves in the United States. And the US has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians around the world, by the way.

The point is no nation deserves these powers, not that they all do.

Edited by sunyata (06/02/03 12:28 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600214 - 06/02/03 12:38 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

The US is the country with the most WMD and the most history of using them.

Perhaps the US should invade itself?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRadioActiveSlug
addict

Registered: 03/14/03
Posts: 530
Last seen: 20 years, 11 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600261 - 06/02/03 12:56 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

Best defense? good offense!




isn't that the terroists frame of mind?

or is it only terroisum when someone else does it? preferably someone poor.

Remeber it was the US actions that envoked 9-11, and its the US's actions in the most recent war that will envoke more attacks.

SO yes, if we want to get attacked by people that actually have WMD (like we do) then attacting korea is a good idea.





--------------------
"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one getting burned." -Buddha
www.impeach-bush-now.org

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSkikid16
fungus fan

Registered: 06/27/02
Posts: 5,666
Loc: In the middle of the nort...
Last seen: 19 years, 2 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600281 - 06/02/03 01:04 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

what would you think of an invasion of N. Korea (they have them, and the missiles to drop them on LA),


I think that all other options should be exhausted. Options like diplomatic talks and economic embargos should be used to show that we are trying to preserve peace. Also, I think there should be better evidence, and wider support from the rest of the world. I don't think it should be as hasty as we were in our last "liberation". But I would support an invasion of North Korea much more than I supported the invasion of Iraq.



--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezeronio
Stranger
Male

Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600383 - 06/02/03 01:42 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineStrumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1600414 - 06/02/03 01:53 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I don't support attacking any of these people - I just think its stupid that they said they were going in because there were "WMDs" but they didn't find any = I think its stupid that they lie to us.


--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE

Edited by Strumpling (06/02/03 01:54 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601030 - 06/02/03 09:50 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

My god...do you even read what you post? I don't even know where to start...first of all, I highly doubt that the U.S. is going to do anything with North Korea besides throw more money at them. why you say? 1)North Korea isn't Iraq and actually has the capability to harm the U.S. if provoked and 2)It has no oil to plunder....how's this for an idea? The U.S. stops playing "holier than thou" with the rest of the world and focuses it's attention to it's own borders? in case you missed it, the U.S. has the largest deficit the world has ever seen and is on the brink of financial ruin. Personal freedoms are rapidly becoming extinct with the likes of the Patriot act 1 and the sequel close behind.

I need to stop now before I have to ban myself for flaming...


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601034 - 06/02/03 09:55 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Incidentally if you want WMD to fall into terrorists hands I can't think of a more effective way than invading a country and the chaos and lawlessness that follows.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleangryshroom
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/18/01
Posts: 7,264
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601190 - 06/02/03 11:25 AM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I dont get it. The US is allowed to have WMD's, but, no other country is allowed. Just because they have them doesn't mean that they will use them just at us.

The US does starve its people. There are a hell of a lot of people living in poverty at the moment. They starve other countries people as well. We'd be starving a lot more people if we went and attacked any of those nations, who are already suffereing.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: angryshroom]
    #1601335 - 06/02/03 12:23 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I hate the USA! GRR I'm grizzled! Fucking USA, man fuck the USA! Fucking goddamned president bush. Man I fucking wish I had enough fo an education to really make some points, but, geez, fuck the usa! MAN that rage against the machine song tells me everything I need to know! grr!

you sound like a bunch of parrots that escaped bill clintons house. Well, as i've said beore, at least your anti-war, anti-USA, anti-everything-that-isn't-pussy-liberla attitudes are SEVERLY in the minority. When Gee Dub gets reelected, I'll be laughing in the streets :-)

As for him taking away "our" rights, I'd like to see some concrete EXAMPLES fo this being used (not merely an act that opens the possibility for misuse, but REAL misuse on American citizens sic Waco, FileGate, etc) Do you have to gouge out one eye to be as blind as you are? or to only see one side of the issue? I'm just curious in a medical reference.


Maybe it's just that "vast" right-wing conspiracy hillary talked about, hm?


I think that the US is able to have nuclear weapons because we have the morality to use them properly. Most other nations can't even be trusted with TNT (read: Iran sponsors attack on US Marines in Beiruit), let alone with missles that can reach anywhere, and vaporize that spot and 30 miles around it. I don't understand where this vehement anti USA attitude coems from, have you been reading Shiek Wahabi recently?




--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601339 - 06/02/03 12:24 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

You must be high on crack when you post or something.

Quote:

if you are saying that NO Wmd's means we should NOT have gone to war, wouldn't the overt, obvious existance of WMD's mean we SHOULD go to war




Read what you just wrote up there. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I also have no idea why you think that the sole reason anyone didn't want the war to happen is that they didn't believe there were WMDs there. Even the Bush gang knew there weren't WMDs there, the only people who didn't were the morons who think they are incredibly smart because they watch FoxNews and Bill Oreilley.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601362 - 06/02/03 12:31 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

You are so blinded by your love for George Bush that you assume that anyone who doesn't like him must love Clinton, or has a deep seeded hate for the U.S.

As far as I know, not one person on this board has said that Clinton was a great man, on the contrary many (including myself) have said that he was liar, a crook etc...

Perhaps consider the chance that it's just YOUR opinions that need work? Your opinion is just that...Just another opinion unless you have some kind of facts to back it up.


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"

Edited by Rono (06/02/03 12:32 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: ]
    #1601369 - 06/02/03 12:33 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

If the bush gang, as part of their massive conspiracy, didn't think their were WMD's there, they could have easily had the media (Which they own, in conspiracy-nut land) hype up how Iraq pays 30,000$ to the familyof every suicide bomber in Palestine, used that as a cause, and I think that the majority of Americans STILL would have supported it. To say that they were cognizant that no WMD's existed and still used that as their main support is stupid. If this conspiracy was set up like that, then they would have planted some WMD's for the troops to find. However, that didn'th appen. The best conspiracies aren't filled with holes like that.


Also, my post was not illogical at all. If no WMD's = No reason for war, the WMD's = a reason for war? That doesn't contradict itself at all.

You are stating that the same conspiracy that managed to pull off the 9/11 attakcs with presidential knowledge didn't have the foresite to plant the WMD's to justify their cause. IF anything, the LACK of WMD's shows that Bush was NOT aware that they didn't exist. Geez, is he an evil mastermind or ISNt he?


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601412 - 06/02/03 12:44 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Bush isn't an Evil mastermind...he's a just a puppet that is going to end up taking the heat for his handlers actions. (i.e. Ashcroft)


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601592 - 06/02/03 01:52 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

***edited by Rono***


Edited by Rono (06/02/03 01:59 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1601625 - 06/02/03 01:58 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

they could have easily had the media (Which they own, in conspiracy-nut land) hype up how Iraq pays 30,000$ to the familyof every suicide bomber in Palestine

That's not going to convince anyone to invade Iraq. It's not even logical. If you wanted to stop suicide bombers you'd invade Palestine.

then they would have planted some WMD's for the troops to find.

Planting WMD's ain't that easy. Maintaining a cover-up like that is going to be incredibly difficult. You'd need to hire Iraqi scientists to say they worked on them - how could you trust people to maintain silence without killing them all?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Xlea321]
    #1602098 - 06/02/03 04:46 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I see, It would be "difficult" to have some anthrax taken from USAAMRID and placed in Iraq, but it wouldn't be difficult for the president to have been in on the 9/11 conspiracy? You need to decide what level of intelligence our president has, the culpability in specific issues, and who he must be working with in order to carry out these vast (rightwing?) conspiricies. Now, various posts have implied that Bush was somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks, that he at least had knowledge BEFORE they attacked, and he is somehow using that to gain popularity. Now, if someone has the level of technical competence to carry out such a conspiracy as that, surely they could place some anthrax in iraq, have an anti-saddam dissident state that he worked on it, and that would be that.


Alex- I think that if Bush would have pushed the Iraqi' government MORE as a terror threat, and less with teh WMD's, he still would have had public support for the war. Shortly after the anthrax attacks began, certain elements were suggesting we nuke Iraq (Not me, Ithink thats insane), however, it shows that people have hated Iraq/Saddam since the first Bush whupped his ass so badly. I think that it would have been quite easy to attack Iraq based soley on their support for terrorism around the world.

jr


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602154 - 06/02/03 05:05 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

Also, my post was not illogical at all.  If no WMD's = No reason for war, the WMD's = a reason for war? That doesn't contradict itself at all. 




Only in johnny land... :smirk:
(Its monday again, and after a cleansing weekend i feel ready to befoul myself reading more of johnnys posts....and worse!....responding to them. :frown:)


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1602157 - 06/02/03 05:06 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

You are wrong! nanner nanner boo boo!!


Sorry, someone told me to try to think like a liberal, and from what I've seen of Azmo, this is how they all "think". Go back to school, young boy, I need not your ignorance.


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602168 - 06/02/03 05:11 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Johnny, your problem is you take all the most radical ideas most contriversial to your own, and assume everyone else who doesn't think like you, believes them.

...well that and your horribly clouded incomprehendible ignorance....

(darn, im off work gotta go) :cool:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602173 - 06/02/03 05:13 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Sorry, someone told me to try to think like a liberal, and from what I've seen of Azmo,....

Yep you sure see alot of me in the text i type. I'd tell you what i think of you, but we have certain rulz here...


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Edited by Azmodeus (06/02/03 06:45 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1602209 - 06/02/03 05:25 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

So, you first state that my use of the word "see" was wrong due to the medium we are expressing ourselves on, then you use the same verb to express how you feel about me. Interesting.


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRadioActiveSlug
addict

Registered: 03/14/03
Posts: 530
Last seen: 20 years, 11 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602263 - 06/02/03 05:46 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

I hate the USA! GRR I'm grizzled! Fucking USA, man fuck the USA! Fucking goddamned president bush. Man I fucking wish I had enough fo an education to really make some points, but, geez, fuck the usa! MAN that rage against the machine song tells me everything I need to know! grr!

you sound like a bunch of parrots that escaped bill clintons house. Well, as i've said beore, at least your anti-war, anti-USA, anti-everything-that-isn't-pussy-liberla attitudes are SEVERLY in the minority. When Gee Dub gets reelected, I'll be laughing in the streets :-)





ROFL


--------------------
"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one getting burned." -Buddha
www.impeach-bush-now.org

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602296 - 06/02/03 05:55 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I've decided that I will never respond to you again, since you are incapable of reason. The only exception will be if you demand a response, in which case I will simply remind you that I have decided to stop replying to you.


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


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisible1stimer
Religion=Rape
Registered: 11/18/01
Posts: 1,280
Loc: Amerika
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: silversoul7]
    #1602362 - 06/02/03 06:17 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

I will also boycott responding to ignorant johny. he can go debate his bigotry on a kkk website.


--------------------
ash dingy donker mo gollyhopper patty popiton rockstop bueno mayo riggedy jig bobber johnathan pattywhacker gogboob t-shirt monkey.

There is such emotion in the distortion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602431 - 06/02/03 06:41 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

I hate the USA! GRR I'm grizzled! Fucking USA, man fuck the USA! Fucking goddamned president bush. Man I fucking wish I had enough fo an education to really make some points, but, geez, fuck the usa!  MAN that rage against the machine song tells me everything I need to know! grr!




Oh god bless america...ahyuk, good ol' U S of A, yeppers!!!  In support of liberty and justice they are the embodiment of just and morality.  George bush is my hero, and i'll be dancing in the streets in 2004 when he gets re-elected! 
YEEEE-HAWWWWWwwwww...../fires guns into air

Quote:

As for him taking away "our" rights, I'd like to see some concrete EXAMPLES fo this being used (not merely an act that opens the possibility for misuse, but REAL misuse on American citizens...  Do you have to gouge out one eye to be as blind as you are?




Well aparently you have, because the very passing of the patriot act is a violation of the freedoms, and liberty you hold so dear.  Its a shame you cant see past your fear of terrorists and blind government support, and see this errosion of your rights.  You'd like to see concrete examples?!  think of all the possible misuses and have no doubt that they will be taken advantage of....

Quote:

I think that the US is able to have nuclear weapons because we have the morality to use them properly. 




Are.....you......S E R I O U S!!!!!!! 
...Ignorance must truly be bliss. :smirk:
 


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602504 - 06/02/03 07:08 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

You know... not all people who dislike George Bush, or his current foreign policy for that matter, are "liberal." Many are libertarians or jaded conservatives.

Edited by Max Headroom (06/02/03 11:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleangryshroom
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/18/01
Posts: 7,264
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602673 - 06/02/03 07:58 PM (21 years, 24 days ago)

Dude, you should open your mind in seeing other ways than just the modeled one-way of thinking.

Not everything you hear/read in the news is absoultely correct, journalists really can skew things into the way that they want.

I had a professor who once told us that we should read everything, thinking to ourselfs: "BULLSHIT", just so we would question EVERYTHING. The same professor told us about a law passed about 10 years ago which basically made it illegal for mainstream news companies to report anything negative about the government. So you are basically just hearing half the truth when you read the news...especially if you just read USA mainstream news. Try looking to other sources once in a while to get different perspectives of different situations.

Another thing. Just because I am liberal, and don't agree with GEE DUBYA BUSH doesn't mean that I am anti-american!!!! I love my country. I am just scared that we will destroy the environment and humanity with this guy in the office...among other issues which I am a little worried about of course. Its ignorant to say that I hate my country because I am against war too. I dont want my fucking friends and family dying in a war over oil. We are just creating more and more hatred and anti-american sentiment...something that you obviously don't like.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1602940 - 06/02/03 09:16 PM (21 years, 23 days ago)

How bout those Yankees ....

Edited by Rono (06/03/03 09:23 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: ]
    #1603160 - 06/02/03 10:35 PM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Also, my post was not illogical at all. If no WMD's = No reason for war, the WMD's = a reason for war? That doesn't contradict itself at all.

think about that for a minute... the anti-war people aren't the ones who brought up WMD. they're asking "where are the weapons" now, NOT because it was THEIR justification for going to war but because it was BUSH's main reason for war. they're just trying to hold HIM to HIS own words. get it?

I think that the US is able to have nuclear weapons because we have the morality to use them properly.

you need help. I'm serious here. seek some professional help, you might have a tumor or something... chemical imbalance maybe... and it wouldn't hurt to study some history.

Edited by infidelGOD (06/02/03 10:37 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1603354 - 06/02/03 11:53 PM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Alex- I think that if Bush would have pushed the Iraqi' government MORE as a terror threat, and less with teh WMD's, he still would have had public support for the war.

Bush obviously didn't agree with you. Neither did the CIA or the UN who could find no evidence of Saddams involvement in terrorism.

Shortly after the anthrax attacks began, certain elements were suggesting we nuke Iraq

And Saddam had nothing whatsoever to do with the anthrax attacks. Do we now attack countries for things they havn't done?

I think that it would have been quite easy to attack Iraq based soley on their support for terrorism around the world.

They'dve needed proof he was involved in terrorism. As the CIA have repeatedly admitted - there is none.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Xlea321]
    #1603414 - 06/03/03 12:20 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

WHAT?! NO PROOF HE WAS INVOLVED IN TERRORISM? This will be my last post to you, ***deleted by Rono...user warned*** Saddam paid 30,000$ to the families of every suicide bomber in Palestine. you are ignorant. Also, where youquoted my "shortly after.. nuke iraq", you cleverly forgot to finish my post, where I stated I DID NOT AGREE WITH THAT. the ENTIRE point of that comment was to show that bush could have easily drummed up public support, WITHOUT ever mentioning WMD's.


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Edited by Rono (06/03/03 09:23 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1603423 - 06/03/03 12:25 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

bush could have easily drummed up public support, WITHOUT ever mentioning WMD's.

if this is true, then why did Bush feel it was necessary to make WMD the centerpiece for his argument for going to war? what the hell was he thinking?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1603427 - 06/03/03 12:27 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

WHAT?! NO PROOF HE WAS INVOLVED IN TERRORISM?

Yep. Even the CIA said so.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: infidelGOD]
    #1603437 - 06/03/03 12:31 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Quote:

bush could have easily drummed up public support, WITHOUT ever mentioning WMD's.

if this is true, then why did Bush feel it was necessary to make WMD the centerpiece for his argument for going to war? what the hell was he thinking?





Exactly. If bush KNEW that their were no WMD's, and he just wanted an excuse to invade, what the hell was eh thinking? That noone would care that they weren't found?



--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Xlea321]
    #1603440 - 06/03/03 12:34 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Quote:

WHAT?! NO PROOF HE WAS INVOLVED IN TERRORISM?

Yep. Even the CIA said so.




Is that so?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect5.html
Home > News & Policies > Policies in Focus



Saddam Hussein's Support for International Terrorism

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

Iraq is one of seven countries that have been designated by the Secretary of State as state sponsors of international terrorism. UNSCR 687 prohibits Saddam Hussein from committing or supporting terrorism, or allowing terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Saddam continues to violate these UNSCR provisions.



In 1993, the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) directed and pursued an attempt to assassinate, through the use of a powerful car bomb, former U.S. President George Bush and the Emir of Kuwait. Kuwaiti authorities thwarted the terrorist plot and arrested 16 suspects, led by two Iraqi nationals.



Iraq shelters terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians.



Iraq shelters several prominent Palestinian terrorist organizations in Baghdad, including the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), which is known for aerial attacks against Israel and is headed by Abu Abbas, who carried out the 1985 hijacking of the cruise ship Achille Lauro and murdered U.S. citizen Leon Klinghoffer.



Iraq shelters the Abu Nidal Organization, an international terrorist organization that has carried out terrorist attacks in twenty countries, killing or injuring almost 900 people. Targets have included the United States and several other Western nations. Each of these groups have offices in Baghdad and receive training, logistical assistance, and financial aid from the government of Iraq.



In April 2002, Saddam Hussein increased from $10,000 to $25,000 the money offered to families of Palestinian suicide/homicide bombers. The rules for rewarding suicide/homicide bombers are strict and insist that only someone who blows himself up with a belt of explosives gets the full payment. Payments are made on a strict scale, with different amounts for wounds, disablement, death as a "martyr" and $25,000 for a suicide bomber. Mahmoud Besharat, a representative on the West Bank who is handing out to families the money from Saddam, said, "You would have to ask President Saddam why he is being so generous. But he is a revolutionary and he wants this distinguished struggle, the intifada, to continue."



Former Iraqi military officers have described a highly secret terrorist training facility in Iraq known as Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations.





Is this the CIA and US Gov'ts denial that Saddam participated in terrorism? I'd like to see your information where the CIA refudiates any of these claims.

Jr

*steps gently over your argument, gasping for air as it dies on the floor*


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1603467 - 06/03/03 12:54 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

I don't know if Bush knew or not, but if he was going to start a war that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands, he SHOULD have known that Iraq indeed possesed WMD. He should have been CERTAIN of it. you can't just go to war based on conjecture, you need some kind of EVIDENCE. he didn't have any evidence before the war (although he said he did) and now he can't come up any evidence after the war. If he can't find any WMD soon, he will be guilty of misleading a nation, intentional or not. He is the president. He is ultimately responsible.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezeronio
Stranger
Male

Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: infidelGOD]
    #1603662 - 06/03/03 03:45 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Anyone remember the "hard evidence about Iraqui WMD" that was presented in UN by Powell? Nobody beleived it and the countries who dared to speak up are now being punished.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1603938 - 06/03/03 08:46 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Your theory makes plenty of sense if you think there is one single reason that is solely why we went in. If you think like someone who isn't mentally ill, you realize maybe there are multiple conditions that need to be met to make for a just war.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1604121 - 06/03/03 09:59 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Is that it? "Evidence" from the whitehouse?  :grin:

*stifles chuckles*

You do realise these are the same people who lied through their teeth that he had WMD? Get some proof any of this actually exists before you believe it. I thought you'dve learned that after the WMD fiasco. 


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Xlea321]
    #1604372 - 06/03/03 11:37 AM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Alex - It's not that I consider that per se evidence, it's that YOU stated that the US Govt, particularlly the CIA, stated Saddam had NO Terrorist ties. I didn't post it to debate the quality of the article, but to prove that you were mistaken. The proof of those are irrelevant, since I am not proving to you that saddam is a terrorist, I am proving to you (to contradict your statement) that he is considered a terrorist by the US Gov't, and if they had wanted to, they could have drummed these incidences up and used it as justificaion for the wra


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1604504 - 06/03/03 12:20 PM (21 years, 23 days ago)

Quote:

could have drummed these incidences up and used it as justificaion for the war 




Moral responsibility eh?...Sounds to me like the US drummed up any number of reasons already to "justify" the war...to bad they didn't pick the most logical, ie: WMD... :tongue:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1604755 - 06/03/03 01:22 PM (21 years, 23 days ago)

It's not that I consider that per se evidence, it's that YOU stated that the US Govt, particularlly the CIA, stated Saddam had NO Terrorist ties.

I said the CIA, not Bush. I'm sure Bush would say anything.

I was indeed one of several journalists--and members of Congress--who considered it significant that Tenet, in an October 8 letter to the Senate intelligence committee, reported the CIA had concluded that "Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW [chemical and biological weapons] against the United States." The agency eggheads also believed that Saddam Hussein "probably would become much less constrained in adopting terrorist actions" and in "assisting Islamist terrorists in conducting a WMD [weapons of mass destruction] attack against the United States," if Washington were about to strike Iraq. In other words, Saddam is not likely to hit the United States or collaborate with al Qaeda, unless the United States assaults Iraq.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1606811 - 06/04/03 12:55 AM (21 years, 22 days ago)

Way to ignore the post that completely invalidates your moronic premise.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: ]
    #1607902 - 06/04/03 12:36 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

Well its a fact that he disapears whenever he is thouroughly humiliated. :smirk:
ie, ifartblues' little lesson in economics... :smirk:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineStrumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1608080 - 06/04/03 01:50 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

I know you're not a moron dude.... but what the hell are you talking about?

Its not the fact that there are or aren't WMDs in Iraq; its the fact that these guys constantly lie to us.

WHY DO YOU THINK WE ATTACKED IRAQ, JOHNNY? WHAT'S YOUR OPINION?


--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Strumpling]
    #1608115 - 06/04/03 01:59 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

I think that we attacked IRaq because the best information we had showed that hte IRaqi's had dangerous weapons. the clinton administration felt the same way. Iraq obviouilsy HAS had chemical weapons, because he used them on a the Iranians, and on the Kurds. The premise that Saddam wanted us to believe is that AFTER using the WMD's (so we KNOW he had them), and AFTER kicking out UN inspectors, THAT is when he destroyed them. Does that, honestly now, make sense? Did YOU beleive it?


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1608127 - 06/04/03 02:02 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

JR...as it's been repeatedly pointed out, the only reason that Iraq had those weapons is because the U.S. supplied them in the first place...and they have a little thing called "shelf-life"..in other words, they don't last forever...stop me if I'm going too fast...


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1608136 - 06/04/03 02:05 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

Iraq obviouilsy HAS had chemical weapons, because he used them on a the Iranians,

Well we know that cos Rumsfield and Reagan sold them to him. That was in the 80's tho. No UN inspectors have found any evidence Saddam had weapons since 1994. All they know is when Saddam destroyed stuff it was impossible to know exactly how much he destroyed - so they say things are "unaccounted" for - meaning they may well have been destroyed but it's not 100% certain. Now of course it turns out Saddam had destroyed all the weapons. Finding a few litres of degraded chemicals is the best Bush can hope for now - and that is a long way away from the standard definition of a WMD.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 21 years, 17 days
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Xlea321]
    #1608213 - 06/04/03 02:29 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

Well, who cares now, hm? Bush is in, Saddam is out, we have more oil, and you liberals ***Edited by Rono*** are in the very quiet, very ignored, minority :-) Nah nah!


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!

Edited by Rono (06/04/03 03:05 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1608238 - 06/04/03 02:36 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

Quote:

you liberal pussies


Was that a flame?...because I'm sure you know that we have very strict rules about flaming in this forum...and I know for a fact that you have already been warned. Care to save me the effort and edit that before I have to issue a temporary ban?


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"

Edited by Rono (06/04/03 02:41 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1608283 - 06/04/03 02:47 PM (21 years, 22 days ago)

The wheel turns tho johnny. Us liberal pussies will have our day  :laugh:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1611052 - 06/05/03 10:40 AM (21 years, 21 days ago)

Quote:

Well, who cares now, hm? Bush is in, Saddam is out, we have more oil, and you liberals ***Edited by Rono*** are in the very quiet, very ignored, minority :-) Nah nah! 




You must have been head of the debating team...
But im sure bush feels the same way. :smirk:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Rono]
    #1611058 - 06/05/03 10:42 AM (21 years, 21 days ago)

Well, who cares now, hm? Bush is in, Saddam is out, we have more oil, and you liberals ***Edited by Rono*** are in the very quiet, very ignored, minority :-) Nah nah!


Quote:

Was that a flame?...because I'm sure you know that we have very strict rules about flaming in this forum...and I know for a fact that you have already been warned.  Care to save me the effort and edit that before I have to issue a temporary ban?




Since it says edited by rono does that mean someones taken a little holiday? :smile:....one can only hope!


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1611093 - 06/05/03 10:58 AM (21 years, 21 days ago)

Yes..."someone" is taking a forced "time out" to work on their social skills...


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"

Edited by Rono (06/05/03 10:58 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Rono]
    #1611211 - 06/05/03 11:52 AM (21 years, 21 days ago)

:grin: :grin: :grin:

Well i think i speak for all, if not most of us when i say THANK YOU!!!....you know, cus we all need to... um....follow the rulz.....


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Rono]
    #1612834 - 06/05/03 07:43 PM (21 years, 21 days ago)

Not that it matters, he would have completely ignored my post which more than aptly demonstrated that his pathetic attempt at political commentary managed to say, logically speaking, absolutely nothing.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineuno
enthusiast

Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 448
Last seen: 1 month, 18 hours
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Xlea321]
    #1622542 - 06/09/03 10:42 PM (21 years, 16 days ago)

Quote:

Incidentally if you want WMD to fall into terrorists hands I can't think of a more effective way than invading a country and the chaos and lawlessness that follows.


I'm sure people had a lot of fun looting the nuclear plants waste barrels full on low-erinched uranium.


--------------------
- uno

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineuno
enthusiast

Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 448
Last seen: 1 month, 18 hours
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: angryshroom]
    #1622544 - 06/09/03 10:42 PM (21 years, 16 days ago)

Our Allies and non-hostile large countries such as china and russia can have them too.


--------------------
- uno

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineuno
enthusiast

Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 448
Last seen: 1 month, 18 hours
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: infidelGOD]
    #1622611 - 06/09/03 11:03 PM (21 years, 16 days ago)

Quote:

Also, my post was not illogical at all. If no WMD's = No reason for war, the WMD's = a reason for war? That doesn't contradict itself at all.

think about that for a minute... the anti-war people aren't the ones who brought up WMD. they're asking "where are the weapons" now, NOT because it was THEIR justification for going to war but because it was BUSH's main reason for war. they're just trying to hold HIM to HIS own words. get it?

I think that the US is able to have nuclear weapons because we have the morality to use them properly.

you need help. I'm serious here. seek some professional help, you might have a tumor or something... chemical imbalance maybe... and it wouldn't hurt to study some history.



Obviously Bush needs to get a blowjob for right wingers to be mad about him lying.


--------------------
- uno

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineuno
enthusiast

Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 448
Last seen: 1 month, 18 hours
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: Rono]
    #1622636 - 06/09/03 11:11 PM (21 years, 16 days ago)

Quote:

Yes..."someone" is taking a forced "time out" to work on their social skills...


Why does anyone even reply to him?


--------------------
- uno

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 5 months
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: uno]
    #1623824 - 06/10/03 02:08 PM (21 years, 16 days ago)

Well its like a bad habit....or an itch you cant quite scratch.....we just keep doint it. :smirk:

....and fuck YOUR avatar! :shocked: :mad: :grin:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq: [Re: JohnnyRespect]
    #1674635 - 06/30/03 05:17 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)


The link


AFTER THE WAR

The Politics of Mass Destruction
Of course Iraq had forbidden weapons.

BY RICHARD SPERTZEL
Sunday, June 29, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT

Even as evidence is uncovered that Saddam Hussein was planning to revive his nuclear-weapons program at the earliest possible date, politicians and pundits alike lament the failure of coalition forces to find a "smoking gun." Despite the recent discovery of plans and parts for a uranium-enrichment centrifuge, some presidential candidates have accused the Bush administration of lying about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to justify the war with Iraq.

Such assertions ignore all that has been learned and has transpired during the past 12-plus years. As I've said time and again, expecting any inspection regime to find a massive cache of WMDs is a lesson in self-delusion. Such folly can only bring cheer to those who opposed the war in the first place and to those who simply oppose the Bush administration.

Recall that during the first Gulf War, Iraq stored its biological-agent-filled munitions in pits dug in the sand or in abandoned railroad tunnels. Such sites are not easily found. Good intelligence emanating from those Iraqi personnel responsible for the deployment, protection and control of such storage sites will be required. Indeed, it was an Iraqi scientist who last week led coalition forces to the site where the uranium-enrichment equipment was buried. But many WMD personnel were part of the Special Security Organization under Saddam's younger son, Qusay. The information is not likely to be obtained easily.





Some pundits question, if Iraq had WMDs, why did it not use them? Iraq learned from the first Gulf War that coalition forces headed by the U.S. could advance very rapidly. Iraq also indicated in testimony to the U.N. Special Commission, or Unscom, that biological weapons would have little effect in stopping an advancing military force. Rather, their interest was to use biological weapons to intimidate their neighbors and cause them to "see things Iraq's way." Thus its failure to use biological WMDs should not be a surprise to anyone. The failure to use chemical WMDs is also not surprising considering the apparent confusion within the Iraqi command structure during the race to Baghdad.
Then, why have such weapons not been found? The answer may lie in the training and experience of the inspectors. The initial team looking for WMDs in Iraq was more reminiscent of site exploiters than inspectors. True, if they found a bomb or missile warhead, they were capable of further exploitation of the find to determine its contents. But they apparently did not have testing instruments capable of detecting trace amounts of biological-weapons agents.

The next iteration of the coalition inspectors was supposed to have a number of inspectors that had extensive experience in Iraq and has been so misrepresented in the media. I was asked in February to propose a list of Unscom experienced biological inspectors (a so-called A team) that had multiple inspection trips to Iraq. These were to be from the U.S., the U.K. and Australia. In March, after the concept was approved, I was asked to contact those on my list to assure they were willing and able to devote the time. All but one agreed to the deployment. None of the individuals on that list ever made it to Iraq.

A few weeks ago David Albright, writing in the Washington Post, stated that he had been contacted by several Iraqi nuclear scientists who asserted that they were afraid to talk to the coalition inspectors because of the way they were being treated by the inspectors--interrogation, threats, etc., rather than with any degree of respect. The interviewing of Iraqi scientists is where extensive experience would have been most valuable. One doesn't need to like what was done or the individual scientist to treat them with respect. Experienced inspectors knew this. Furthermore, experienced inspectors knew what, when, and how to pursue a subject that is unlikely to occur to a neophyte.

There is nothing that the U.S. could threaten the Iraqi scientists with that could approach what they've endured these past 30 to 40 years. A scientist I remain in contact with had been imprisoned by Iraq for 17 months in the 1990s. In early March this year, with tensions building, he was again arrested for fear he would disclose information Iraq did not want disclosed.





It is encouraging that the third and current iteration under the CIA is headed by David Kay, which may account for the recent breakthrough in uncovering the uranium-enrichment plans. In regard to other WMDs, Iraq imported or retained over the last several years key pieces of equipment that could not readily be carried off by looters. If located, extensive intrusive sampling with the right test system might tell wonders about Iraq's biological-weapons programs.
Let there be no doubt, Iraq retained an active biological-weapons program. Unscom had adequate evidence of such. In 1998, presented with the evidence, the leading biological-weapons experts from the U.S., U.K., Russia, France, Sweden, Australia, Germany, Switzerland, Ukraine, Romania and Canada all agreed with the Unscom findings and observations. Incredibly, U.S. and British politicians with little or no knowledge of biological weapons and biological warfare are choosing to believe otherwise.

Mr. Spertzel was head of the biological-weapons section of Unscom from 1994-99.


--------------------
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
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Cultivation Supplies


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Kay: WMD never existed
( 1 2 3 all )
Xlea321 3,813 41 02/15/04 12:35 AM
by The_Red_Crayon
* Iraq Lenore 1,010 2 12/06/01 08:17 PM
by Innvertigo
* Blix - "No WMD since 1991" Xlea321 932 8 12/25/03 09:46 PM
by enimatpyrt
* 51% still believe Saddam had WMD
( 1 2 all )
zeronio 2,554 21 05/07/04 07:28 PM
by Crobih
* Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Xlea321 6,518 106 09/23/03 03:43 PM
by infidelGOD
* Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11 RonoS 1,063 10 09/26/02 11:00 PM
by Phred
* Support US war on IRAQ
( 1 2 all )
LordMorham 4,596 29 09/20/02 09:56 AM
by LordMorham
* Why the war in Iraq was a mistake phi1618 1,126 18 03/20/04 08:12 PM
by valour

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,855 topic views. 3 members, 6 guests and 22 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.039 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 14 queries.