Home | Community | Message Board


Cannabis Seeds - Original Sensible Seeds
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

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: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
InvisibleEonTan
bird
 User Gallery
Registered: 08/18/04
Posts: 468
Loc: very south
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: Xlea321]
    #3243375 - 10/11/04 04:05 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Do you always argue the past with the future? WE DID NOT KNOW UNTIL AFTER THE WAR. Everything else was taking Saadam at his own word. Something he did not live up to for over a decade.

Read Butler's account of the inspections. HAVE YOU YET? He isn't American, and he is for the stop of nuclear proliferation. He also agrees with you that going to War with Iraq, without a consensus in the security council would lead to problems. But he still thinks it was serious enough to go to war to MAKE SURE. We just didn't get his consensus.

Are you opposed to the war itself? The timing? What if the inspectors went back in and Saadam continued his games? Would you feel differently?

I am trying to understand why you oppose holding Saadam accountable for his Invasion of Kuwait, and subsequent violations. Nowhere in your thousands upon thousands of posts can I find an answer to anything. You provide no solutions to any problems that exist in the world, you just argue against others positions.

What would Alex123 do if Saadam continued his games? I know, you argue the validity of the claims that he was not cooperating!!! We say Saadam has to be 100 % cooperative, and you argue he was 96%. We demand a A+, you except the B+. We quote Butler at any time throughout the last 13 years, you quote Ritter when he agrees with you only.

Explain to me Why I should feel safe with letting a Guy like Saadam continue to ignore aouthority that he himself agreed to. Why should anyone on the planet feel safe. Do you think sanctions should have continued? Or should we have just said, you win. WHAT IF ANYTHING WOULD YOU HAVE DONE?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: EonTan]
    #3243637 - 10/11/04 05:03 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

WE DID NOT KNOW UNTIL AFTER THE WAR.

But we had a fucking good idea. That's why Bush was so desperate to remove the weapons inspectors before they proved him wrong.

But he still thinks it was serious enough to go to war to MAKE SURE.

Make sure of what?

Are you opposed to the war itself?

Yes.

The timing?

Yes.

I am trying to understand why you oppose holding Saadam accountable for his Invasion of Kuwait

I don't. Kuwait was "liberated", or at least handed over back to the psychotic bunch of dictators who obey Washington.

You provide no solutions to any problems that exist in the world, you just argue against others positions.

And what solutions do you offer? Invade Iraq in 2003 on the basis of lies? What kind of "solution" is that?

We say Saadam has to be 100 % cooperative, and you argue he was 96%

Oh come on for fucks sake. This is the real world. Since when is anything ever "100%"? The law says you arn't supposed to take drugs 100% of the time too. Have you ever taken a drug? Then why havn't you given yourself up to the police and asked them to imprison you?

Ritter said Saddam co-operated 96% of the time, the other 4% was times when the CIA infiltrated "weapons inspectors" wanted access to his palaces to install intelligence equipment. He said Iraq was 95% disarmed - a figure greater than any other country on earth. That's pretty good going in the real world.

Explain to me Why I should feel safe with letting a Guy like Saadam continue to ignore aouthority that he himself agreed to.

There are dozens of other countries defying UN resolutions. Why arn't you screaming to invade them?

Why should anyone on the planet feel safe.

Were you hiding under your bed because Saddam was in Iraq? What were you afraid of exactly?

WHAT IF ANYTHING WOULD YOU HAVE DONE?

I wouldn't have propped up his dictatorship when he was committing the bulk of his crimes throughout the 80's. Just like I wouldn't have funded and armed Bin Laden and the fundamentalists in Afghanistan.


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEonTan
bird
 User Gallery
Registered: 08/18/04
Posts: 468
Loc: very south
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: Xlea321]
    #3243794 - 10/11/04 05:38 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

You are absurd.

We are dealing with Weapons and disarmarment and you use individual drug use as an argument.

We did not have a good idea. This is an assumption by you. So is the notion that the Inspectors were pulled to cover this up.

Withdrawl from Kuwait was not his only responsibility. He agreed to Disarm under supervision. He did not live up to that.

Were talking WMD, not marijuana smoke. We are talking populations not indiciduals. 100% is where you need to be.  Do you think it odd that a country with WMD would be responsible enough to account for 100% of there weapons. Why hold Saadam to a lesser degree, certainly Why when he agreed to it.

Ritter, Ritter, Ritter. Read Butler!!!  He had the big picture. Ritter was a piece of the pie, Bultler ws in charge of the whole pie.

Othr countries violate sanctions. Saadam violated his cease fire agreements. Big difference.  One is violating something we say, and they did not agree to.  I do support holding people accountable to the choices THEY MAKE.

I'm afraid that more people in the world will be like you. I am afraid that this will make it very easy for BAD shit to take Place.
Ex. Nazi Germany.

Yes you wouldn't do this, you wouldn't do that. Well guess what, someone has to do something or nothing ever gets done. 

What I get out of you is that you have NO SOLUTIONS, just complaints.

I never was screaming Invade. Just quietly supporting it.

I go to work every day, so I can't hide under my bed.

Show me a nation of Alex123, it doesn't exist ANYWHERE. If it did it wouldn't be a nation of ALEX123 for long.  A band of 80 year old cripples could take it in a day.

I am convinced that most Nations just did not want to PAY for enfocing there own International laws. Pay with lives or money.

Your inability to take REAL WORLD VIOLENCE SERIOUSLY is disturbing.  I mean really, your 100% argument is just  :shocked: weird.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: EonTan]
    #3246169 - 10/12/04 03:47 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

We are dealing with Weapons and disarmarment and you use individual drug use as an argument.

No, I'm making the point that in the real world getting people to obey you 100% is always going to impossible and an unreasonable position to take. Hitler couldn't make the jews obey 100% in Auschwitz for christs sake.

He agreed to Disarm under supervision. He did not live up to that.

He did. There were no WMD in Iraq. How can you even argue this?

Othr countries violate sanctions. Saadam violated his cease fire agreements

No he didn't. If you can find me a "ceasefire agreement" saying "We have every right to invade Iraq" please do so. What you will find is UN resolution 641. Resolution 641 calls on Saddam to "ACCEPT" the terms of the ceasefire. That's a very important legal point. It does not say "We will invade you in 12 years time if we feel like it". The only body who can decide the suitable punishment if he disobeys sanctions is the UN. They decided against invasion.

What I get out of you is that you have NO SOLUTIONS

I've told you my solution. Never prop up brutal dictators in power in the first place. That really is the only solution worthy of the name.

I am convinced that most Nations just did not want to PAY for enfocing there own International laws

I'm sorry but you seem to have this ass backwards. Launching an invasion of another country 3000 miles away in blatant defiance of the UN and all international law IS against international law.

Your inability to take REAL WORLD VIOLENCE SERIOUSLY is disturbing

I take it seriously. That's why I'm against launching illegal invasions in defiance of the UN.

Why do you think Bush invaded Iraq? Do you seriously believe that in his discussions with his men he sat there going "They've not obeyed UN resolutions and I'm terrified about WMD, it really is time to invade". Seriously?


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEonTan
bird
 User Gallery
Registered: 08/18/04
Posts: 468
Loc: very south
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: Xlea321]
    #3246840 - 10/12/04 12:50 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Your a funny guy.  :tongue:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineunbeliever
Yo Daddy!
 User Gallery
Registered: 05/22/04
Posts: 5,158
Loc: Gallifrey
Last seen: 11 years, 4 months
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: EonTan]
    #3246852 - 10/12/04 12:53 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

EonTan said:
Your a funny guy.  :tongue:




If by "funny" you mean "right" and "stomped your ass" then yes. :thumbup:

Nice post Alex.


--------------------
Happiness is a warm gun...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: Xlea321]
    #3247182 - 10/12/04 02:24 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

No, I'm making the point that in the real world getting people to obey you 100% is always going to impossible and an unreasonable position to take.

what was preventing saddam hussein from complying 100%?

I've told you my solution. Never prop up brutal dictators in power in the first place.

and what if it's too late for that and they're already in place? what if someone else props them up? what if they come to power on their own?

not propping up dictators is probably a good idea, but it's not a cure-all solution.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: unbeliever]
    #3247221 - 10/12/04 02:34 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Nice post Alex.

:laugh:


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: ]
    #3247233 - 10/12/04 02:38 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

what was preventing saddam hussein from complying 100%?

Because he was aware the CIA had infiltrated the weapons inspections team and knew that they were trying to get access to his palaces to install god knows what intelligence equipment in there?

and what if it's too late for that and they're already in place?

Ok, lets take Allawi as an example. You've just had to go to war to get rid of the last fucking maniac you propped up surely the sensible thing to do is not install another fucking maniac? Allawi is a guy who walks into a police station and personally executes 6 prisoners. To me, that sounds deranged enough to assume that he could be a problem one day. Get rid of him now.


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEonTan
bird
 User Gallery
Registered: 08/18/04
Posts: 468
Loc: very south
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: unbeliever]
    #3247293 - 10/12/04 02:54 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Oh yah I feel really worked over by the same POINTLESS argument.

You either sided with ENGLANd and THE USA or you sided with RUSSIA, GERMANY, CHINA, FRANCE and SAADAM.

I think the list alone should tell you something.

The UN did not have the balls to be taken seriously. Saadam new this, the USA knew this, and England Knew this. Apparently you don't give a shit about ACCOUNTABILITY. I do. Certainly when the STAKES are WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

THIS IS MY JUSTIFICATION. You can't defeat my justification, by citing arguments against BUSH's percieved(by you)intentions for entering the war. GET IT.

Argue to me WHY a NATION THAT AGREED TO INSPECTIONS but DID EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO PREVENT THEM, is RIGHT.

But there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction is not an argument. Only to me. We are not absolutely positive that there are none, were none. We are positive that SAADAM has none. Thanks to the WAR you did not support.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: EonTan]
    #3247317 - 10/12/04 03:00 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

You're a funny guy Eon  :smile:


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEonTan
bird
 User Gallery
Registered: 08/18/04
Posts: 468
Loc: very south
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: Xlea321]
    #3247333 - 10/12/04 03:03 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

So you take the word of Saadam over the words of Butler. The CIA? Come on that is not an argument. That is an Excuse for ignoring your own agreements. I can't believe you actually use that one!!!!

Who would you put in charge of a provisional governmnet in Iraq? Who would take the Job? The point is to only have a provisional governmnet until the people of Iraq can vote in their own Governmnet. It is not a permanent position. It is a temporary job.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineunbeliever
Yo Daddy!
 User Gallery
Registered: 05/22/04
Posts: 5,158
Loc: Gallifrey
Last seen: 11 years, 4 months
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: EonTan]
    #3247385 - 10/12/04 03:13 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

EonTan said:
Oh yah I feel really worked over by the same POINTLESS argument.





I understand it's frustrating to keep running into those pesky facts that debunk your argument.

Quote:

EonTan said:
You either sided with ENGLANd and THE USA or you sided with RUSSIA, GERMANY, CHINA, FRANCE and SAADAM.

I think the list alone should tell you something.





What's wrong with france, germany or even russia? You're trying to paint this strict black and white picture, like Bush does, of good and evil with no room for the peaceful protest of neutrality. I actually admire France and Germany for not being bullied into a rushed war based on flimy evidence.

Quote:

EonTan said:
The UN did not have the balls to be taken seriously. Saadam new this, the USA knew this, and England Knew this. Apparently you don't give a shit about ACCOUNTABILITY. I do. Certainly when the STAKES are WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.





Lets see. Over a decade ago, Saddam invaded Kuwait. Bush Sr. went in, stopped that and we increased the sanctions and inspections on Saddam, insisting that he disarm. Since that time he has not invaded his neighbors, he has not acquired or had the ability to aquire any WMD and generally he was simply not a threat, let alone an immediate threat warranting a rush to war. And if you're so concerned about those WMD, how about Iran and North Korea, both countries have moved forward in their weapons programs while we were busy playing cowboys and indians in Iraq. Hell, the U.S. has been ramping up their WMD programs.

Quote:

EonTan said:
THIS IS MY JUSTIFICATION. You can't defeat my justification, by citing arguments against BUSH's percieved(by you)intentions for entering the war. GET IT.





It isn't a matter of perceived intentions. It's a matter of direct facts presented to us by the Bush administration as absolute truth. All of which have been proven wrong.

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
- Dick Cheney, speech to VFW National Convention, Aug. 26, 2002

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.
- Donald Rumsfeld, ABC interview, March 30, 2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.
- Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clark, press briefing, March 22, 2003

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
- George W. Bush, address to the U.S., March 17, 2003

Quote:

EonTan said:
Argue to me WHY a NATION THAT AGREED TO INSPECTIONS but DID EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO PREVENT THEM, is RIGHT.




Everything possible? Oh please, they cooperated except when we tried to spy on them. You know what our response to that was? WE pulled out the inspectors and then promptly bombed the country. Brilliant eh?

Quote:

EonTan said:
But there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction is not an argument. Only to me. We are not absolutely positive that there are none, were none. We are positive that SAADAM has none. Thanks to the WAR you did not support.




The war had nothing to do with Saddam's lack of WMD. The Duefler report that Bush himself comissioned made it clear that there were no WMD and haven't been since the gulf war. It was explicitely stated that Iraq today is less of a threat than it was in the early 90s. In contrast, Iran is now MORE dangerous than it was just a couple of years ago.

The American people and the world were sold the idea that this pre-emptive attack and invasion on Iraq was because they possessed weapons of mass destruction, the ability to fire them at enemies and the intent to do so. The only part of that which is true is the intent, and even that is arguably just a bluff. I think Saddam understood the concept of mutally assured destruction. I think he was counting on it. Without his neighbors and the world thinking he had WMD, he was a lame duck that would be torn apart in a second. Which is why we attacked them, because Bush likely knew the WMD story was bullshit. You only have to compare it to the countries we know for a fact have WMD, Iran and North Korea for example, and realize that we're letting them go un-checked because of the real threat of a war involving WMD.


--------------------
Happiness is a warm gun...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: WMD: The Final Judgement [Re: unbeliever]
    #3250514 - 10/13/04 03:15 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Nice post. No wonder Eon's gone quiet  :thumbup:


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Pentagon WMD Report Stokes Doubts About Prewar Intel Zahid 363 0 09/30/03 01:10 AM
by Zahid
* Cheney: War was justified BECAUSE NO WMD's FOUND
( 1 2 3 4 all )
1stimer 6,449 72 10/11/04 03:28 PM
by EonTan
* To those concerned with the lack of WMD's in Iraq:
( 1 2 3 4 all )
JohnnyRespect 4,127 70 06/30/03 07:17 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* UN Inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before and after war HagbardCeline 779 17 06/12/04 01:04 PM
by Xlea321
* Part of Saddam's WMD found!
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Snobrdr311 7,807 97 02/14/04 12:55 PM
by Anonymous
* Blix - "No WMD since 1991" Xlea321 799 8 12/25/03 11:46 PM
by enimatpyrt
* WMDs found in Iraq???
( 1 2 all )
SirTripAlot 1,724 21 06/23/06 12:20 PM
by Vvellum
* Inspectors conclude "No WMD since 1994" Xlea321 1,288 8 03/05/04 01:53 AM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
6,048 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
Mycohaus
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2020 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.069 seconds spending 0.013 seconds on 16 queries.