| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
Comments:
<0> haha
<1> Lamont; Clinton wasn't so bad
<2> Libertarian stance is that they are against the fight with Iraq...
<3> Lockeian, actually Iraq was a nuclear threat... just not an imminent nuclear threat... not to mention to lie means you knowingly divuldge fulse information.
<2> see..I even disagree with them...
<4> Bush lied when he claimed that the IAEA concluded that Iraq was 6 months away from producing a nuclear weapon
<5> Cryolas: we are, but we're also realists, pulling out now is currently a bad idea.
<2> but we do NOT need to attackIran
<1> he signed almost all of the Republican agenda into law
<6> Lockeian -- but they did claim that
<1> sure, he claimed he thought if it, which drives peolpe nuts...
<4> no they didn't
<6> Lockeian - yes they did - was in memos
<5> Lockeian: I tend to side with you on that; im withholding judgement on bush for now.
<7> there are Haitians, Yugoslavians, Iraqis, and a bunch of other bombed or invaded people who might disagree with that US
<2> Libertarian approach is tha unless they directly attack us..or delcare war on us..leave it be
<4> By the way, Bush got the agency wrong
<1> and the other half of the time, he was signing bills and saying they ****ed on the same day
<3> I must admit though the 6 month figure might be somewhat accurate
<1> which drives republicans nutty
<4> Kaliuna, not true - btw, it wasn't the IAEA
<1> but, he did sign them
<3> especially the number of reports on the centrifuges and nuclear material found.
<7> that **** was left over from the 1980s, the Inspectors knew about it and had it under guard and monitering it
<8> one of the centrifuges turned out to be a Tilt-a-Whirl, though
<6> Lockeian -- makes no difference -- the memo from intell was 6mo and for purchases from Ukraine for nuke warheads, plus plans that were existing for purchases - but you really need to learn to read decl***ified stuff
<3> I believe even the deurfur (sp) report stated that sadaam could have easily started his weapons programs VERY quickly.
<4> I can't recall the name of the agency but they concluded that IF IRAQ HAD FISSIONABLE material they could produce a nuclear weapon in 6 months. Bush used the ole lie of ommission
<3> occ, intresting. It's hard enough trying to find a news report on the centrifuges anyway... same with the nuclear material.
<2> Fernin...Saddam could have been ready to go within 60 days
<2> he already invaded Kuwait once
<8> are we talking about iraq?
<3> Didn't they find something like 5 tons of already enriched uranium?
<9> the deulfer report is generally ignored. it's too damaging to some peoples agendas
<4> Kaliuna, you're avoiding the question
<6> Cry -- yup but seems even Saddam was a bit mislead by his intel people too
<10> House Hears Iraq Could Construct a Nuclear Device in Six Months, September 11, 2002 --- http://www.usemb***y.it/file2002_09/alia/a2091207.htm
<8> there was no evidence of WMDs in iraq
<3> bud`, I enjoyed watching the congressional hearing on it.
<8> is this stil detatable?
<8> even the admin admits it
<2> Iraq hadits WMDs removed via airlift to Damascus
<6> Lockeian - no because I don't give a d.... what alphabet groups initials were existing -- the report existed thats all that really matters
<3> Cryolas, we might find some of this out in the DOCEX project too...
<4> Kaliuna, right, Bush lied about the report
<8> i support the iraq war, but the reasons given were bull****
<8> lets face it
<2> If Saddam were allowed to stay in power.... WW III would have occured within 10 years
<7> but guess what, after the invasion when no guards were placed on the conventional weapons stockpiles and they were quickly looted, the same exact thing with the remains of Iraqis nuclear, biological and chemcial weapons industry, where all manufacturing equipment has now gone is anyones guess
<6> Lockeian - no he didn't lie about the REPORT -- it existed -
<10> House Hears Iraq Could Construct a Nuclear Device in Six Months, September 11, 2002 --- http://www.usemb***y.it/file2002_09/alia/a2091207.htm
<2> occ..no they were not
<8> yes they were
<11> Kaliuna: About the school system problem...I think the kids can see that there isn't as much hope. I think the kids don't care as much about school today because they can see it doesn't pay off...A person who gets straight A's will probably end up in the same mill that the person who dropped out did.
<4> Kaliuna, Bush omitted (i.e lied) the most important fact of that report to scare the pants off of people
<8> there was no nuclear or chemical threat in iraq
<8> for one
<3> occ, agreed, well, not all of them.
<7> bull**** Cryolas - his military was poorly armed and poorly trained conscripts, he had no WMDs, etc
<2> occ..I disagree...
<4> Kaliuna, right, the report existed but Bush lied about it's content
<3> occ, the whitehouse had a policy site up with 5 or 6 reasons.
<8> sadaam was a "stable dictator"
<6> Vemo perhaps
<3> occ, only a few ere BS.
<2> Saddami carted his WMDs out of the country before we invaded
<10> Lockeian, I'm sorry you don't understand the meaning of the word "could" but most of us English speakers are quite familiar with it
<8> sadaam had no desire to bring on the wrath of the US
<2> occ..no he was not
<8> why would he possibly do that?
<3> occ, the main was was the fact he broke un resolutions... and we did find the weapons that broke the resolutions.
<8> it would be unbelievably foolish
<2> he had force majeure in the Gulf...
<7> that is an insane fantasy Cryolas
<8> he had no islamist agenda
<4> Kaliuna, your playing the same game that Clinton apologist played in the oral *** is not *** debate
<3> occ, and said un resolutions said we could go in unilateraly.
<8> he wanted to maintain power
<6> Lockeian -- keep on believing - no one was SCARED here about that
<12> Amnesty publishes details of so-called secret prisons allegedly being run by the CIA in eastern Europe.
<6> Lockeian - and you are being totally naive
<2> Fernin the Accord said we could
<3> occ, indeed he did, he just didn't cover all his tracks.
<4> Rockfish, I'm sorry you can't honesty examine Bush statment
<8> we chose to go into iraq, and for good reason
<8> but not for the reasons given
<8> period
<3> Cryolas, yah, there was a resolution though that stated it, used to have the number.
<10> occ, Saddam had no desire to bring on the wrath of the US? Attempting to ******inate a former President is pretty sure to do that
<8> sure, rockfish
<3> Rockfish, he's stating lately.
<2> An Accordis far more binding...though we had 1441
<4> Kaliuna, right, I'm naive and you can't admit Lord Bush lied
<8> saddam knew he was lucky to maintain power after 91
<2> Hussein was bound under that Accord...
<3> Rockfish, since Iraq didn't want us to get pissed, and was paying off members of the U.N. security council to get the sanctions dropped.
<12> occ: i think the fact iraq may have had WMD's or may be seeking them is roughly the same reasoning
<2> he had 12 years to comply..he didn't
<12> as "we have intelligence that says this.."
<8> we went into iraq to attempt to stabilize the Middle East
<8> does anyone disagree?
<11> kaliuna: Big business taking over everything...I think its going full circle...the way to make money today will be to be an organic farmer ;)
<8> not because iraq was a particular threat, which they weren't
<6> Lockeian - quite simply because he didn't lie, he use the information he had - which by the way was similar to information the DEMS had and talked about as well -- so go play your stupid games with someone who will believe you
<3> Also, thanks to the DOCEX project, it's VERY VERY likely that saddam had terrorist ties.
<8> obviously, we couldn't announce that as the reason for invasion -- it would be political suicide
<10> occ, there were several reasons, that was a good ways down on the list
<8> they made the best argument they could
<2> we went in there to prevent WW III in the immediate future
<13> Cryolas: I am getting a pretty thorough education on Hussein tonight...who is contesting Iraq at the moment?
<6> VemoD I dunno about that -- I own a biz - do ok! :)
<11> kaliuna: I dunno...but I think money is why marriages don't last also
<2> Germany and Japan are still bound under their Accords...
<7> well all the sanctions were doing were crushing the people and forcing them to rely on Saddam just live, not to mention it was an attempt to force the generals to depose Saddam and thus give washington the best of both worlds 'an iron fisted junta in Baghdad without Saddam at the head'
<11> kaliuna: My work at my families business...we're going to be closing. Its an Appliance business though. Curious, what is yours?
<6> VemoD -- highest reason for failures in marriages - more with infidelity -- by stats
<2> Publius..inside the country...three factions...
<4> Kaliuna, my example has nothing to do with the "bad intelligence" excuse. You keep trying to introduce it but it's irrelevant
<2> Ba'athists/Sunn'ites....
<6> VemoD -- on internet - where I've been since 1993 :)
<13> Cryolas: nowadays, yes
<3> Lamont, didn't exactly help that Saddam kept a lot of the money...
<2> Shi'a ( majority)
<14> VemoD - isn't everybody appliance using IRC?
<2> and Kurds
<3> Lamont, the sanctions wouldn't have been NEARLY as bad if Saddam actually cared about his people.
<1> what a gay argument
<7> it wasn't bad intelligence, the intelligence agencies kept telling them the truth, they didn't want to hear and so went and made their own or dug up really shoddy evidence no sane person believed
<15> wow illegals are going on strike in protest
<15> of immigration reform
<15> hahaha
<2> Nightmare scenario is when Kurds and Shi'a exterminate the Sunni'tes
<14> VemoD- I think most here are refridgerants
<6> Lockeian -- oh lets see - everyone in intel community says A -- but you claim B -- now hmm who to believe -- intelligent people or some character on irc
<1> I'd rather talk about Clinton's BJ's
<15> they should just fire anyone who doesnt show up
<3> US_Male, I'd rather talk about how good Monica gave BJs...
<6> US - rather discuss the problem that is building up right now -- ILLEGALS...
<2> call the INS...they can deport a lot of illegals at once
<4> Fernin, but, we knew he didn't care about Iraqis. On that basis, I would have to say it wasn't the right policy.
<3> US_Male, I've always heard larger women give a better blowjob.
<6> US - but soon as two gets here -- well you guys...
<14> I bet some people here are washer dryer or oven appliance salespeople - it might be some odd high statistic
<1> Fernin: yeha ya think she was talented ?
<1> must be right?
<15> yah, the illegal immigrants have seriously ****ed up
<6> big time
<13> anyone here think Hussein was not a threat?
<14> you can't group people like that though can you ?
<3> US_Male, Clinton was a very experienced womanizer, to have her around for so long, she musta been good.
<14> that's a big canopy
Return to
#politics
or
Go to some related
logs:
#cisco
anals of the lords of chilum balum
ever have your shit pushed in
Password Protect Microsoft Outlook -express
#politics
#windows
#worldcup
#computers
#sex
#politics
|
|