Can someone please explain to me the thought process of protesters? These people drive me insane. NO ONE really listens to protesters, and in the year 2003, protesters really don't change anything. Well, I won't put all protesters into the same category...let's just talk about the dirty hippies walking around banging the drums, looking like they desperately need a bath. These anti-war protesters, who clearly know little about the real world are examples of the fools that are wasting their time. War is sometimes necessary, and these hippies wouldn't approve military action against Hitler, even if he were sitting in their backyard, ready to attack. They would probably invite him in for tea and chant some foolish statements about love and peace and happiness.
I'm rather confused as to why anti-war protesters would be gearing up in London...what are they chanting for now? Removing the military in Iraq and letting the madmen in hiding take over once again? I'd really really really like to hear their solution to world problems...you'll notice, they rarely have any answers- only that what the evil U.S. is doing is bad and won't work. Sure, it might help if they had their own ideas of how to fix the problems of the world- but that's not really that important is it? Nah...
I love how the mayor of London, clearly a man with 2 brain cells left in his tiny head, said that President Bush is the biggest threat to world peace. Funny he would put Bush, the leader of a free nation, up in that position. I guess he might not have heard of any number of madmen across the globe. Or maybe he's just another peace hippie with no clue as to how the world really works. Oh, by the way, how can these people march in protest to stop a war that has ended? Maybe they'll share their own ideas as to how we should take care of Iraq- I guess we'll just leave the people of that nation without a government, cut off all the services we have restored for them, and let them become prisoners to another evil regime. Great idea...
Posted by Josh at November 18, 2003 06:21 AM | TrackBack[[I'm rather confused as to why anti-war protesters would be gearing up in London...what are they chanting for now?]]
THey are expressing their disgust and dis-approval for Bush. His recent campaign in Iraq has been clouded with so much bullshit and lies, even I (who fully supported the war at the begining) have my doubts...
You can imagine what THEY must think...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 18, 2003 07:54 AM[[Oh, by the way, how can these people march in protest to stop a war that has ended?]]
They aren't protesting to stop the war. Please read above..
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 18, 2003 07:57 AMblind hatred for bush. i love it. there was no bullshit or lies involved in the war in iraq.
i just read a report that said david kay just made the discovery that anthrax technology in iraq is more advanced than they ever thought- and the techniques they came up with to get it, mill it into a powder than can be carried by the wind, etc. are completely advanced. they probably have the most advanced anthrax weapons program in the world.
so WMD is a real concern- even the sec. council agreed iraq had WMD. and now, terrorists from around the globe are flocking to iraq- making it a realistic target for the war on terror. plus, new reports discuss the hussein connection to bin laden and others- meetings with top iraqi officials and attah- the 9/11 ringleader, and on and on. id say that the intel was fairly accurate in painting the picture of an iraq that indeed is a threat to stability in the mideast and the world.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 18, 2003 08:10 AM[[blind hatred for bush. i love it. there was no bullshit or lies involved in the war in iraq.]]
Sure there was? Where are these "mobile weaposn labs"? Where is this active nuclear program? Where are these stockpiles of chemical weapons?
It's easy to say "yes, they have them"...but when war is at stake, and the lives of the Iraqi people and US forces, you BETTER BE DAMN SURE you know EXACTLY where they are....
Not a year later, still have nothing, then give a speech saying "WMD is not a big issue, the main thing is we liberated the people from an evil man"...
Especially when your entire reason for going to war was to "protect the American people" from Saddams WMD program....
[[i just read a report that said david kay just made the discovery that anthrax technology in iraq is more advanced than they ever thought]]
I hope you realize it was the US that gave them anthrax in the first place....
Also, how old were these findings? The US administration seems to have this bad habbit of finding things that happened so long ago (when the US themselves didnt seem to mind) and all of a sudden saying "see, see...see how bad they are"...
I would like to see that link....something tells me there is more to it that that, or else it would be LL over CNN and FOX news...as their "smoking gun" (which it apparently isn't)
[[and the techniques they came up with to get it, mill it into a powder than can be carried by the wind, etc.]]
Milling anthrax into a powder is no miracle...
All of the anthrax sent through the mail following 9/11 was in powder form. And was found to be a US strain from some university in Iowa (if my memory serves me right)...
And blowing anthrax into the wind is not a good way to distribute the vrus. Injecting it into a water supply would be more effective.
So Iraq does not have the most advanced anthrax program in the world....their methods have been used before...time and time again.
Also, just how old are those Iraqi documents? Like I said, they're probably from way back and now being pawned off as some kind of "smoking gun"....
[[so WMD is a real concern- even the sec. council agreed iraq had WMD.]]
I really dont care of the Pope himself agreed Iraq has WMD....it's one thing "agreeing" they have them, and it's another proving they have them....
Otherwise anyone can say anything about any country. It doesnt necessairly make it true, but if everone "agrees on it", suddenly war is justifiable? Sorry, that doesn't sit well with me.
Why not call Blair a child molester. It's obvious he isn't, but say Bush and your Sec. council "agreed" he is...des that still make him one? Im assuming this will go over your head again...
[[plus, new reports discuss the hussein connection to bin laden and others- meetings with top iraqi officials and attah- the 9/11 ringleader, and on and on.]]
The US also has Saudi links to 9.11....but why are they not knocking down the Crown Princes door? It's the hipocracy behind it. Go after the weakest target...
[[ id say that the intel was fairly accurate in painting the picture of an iraq that indeed is a threat to stability in the mideast and the world.]]
Ok, stop for a minute here. Forget what everyone "agreed on" what Iraq had, and focus on what was actually found. How much of a threat did Iraq pose to the Middle East now?
The only threat he posed was to his own people. The Iraqi military was in no shape to take on any neighbour....
lol. the US gave hussein anthrax? almost. and he never once said the reason to go to war was the threat from WMD. that was ONE reason of many. youre showing your true colors, as always. youre a bush hater and you wouldnt agree with him or his administration no matter what. mobile weapons labs? they reported on the news channels months ago that they actually found one of those in iraq. havent heard much about it since, but i remember those reports.
about anthrax- david kay says they do have the most sophisticated anthrax program of any nation...and IT CAN be put into the air- thats why iraqs program was so advanced, because they found better ways to mill it (it IS a miracle, since anthrax cant be easily carried in the air)...and better ways to keep it afloat in the wind, carrying it around.
it doesnt matter that the entire sec council agreed hussein had WMD? you say that we must have 100% proof of everything he had/has before we use force against him? youre like the protesters...hate the current policy, but you have no answers yourself as to how to solve the problem. so, if some dictator was slaughtering millions...and the entire world agreed that he was doing so, but we didnt have 100% proof...we should just sit around and wait for all that proof to pop up? use some reasoning here- WMD, in its very nature, is something that can easily be hid, notsomething thats going to be out on display for anyoen to come on in and inspect. the UN inspectors were getting nowhere- over a decade of inspections...and blix and the IAEA agreed that there were huge amts of various chemical and bio agents that had not been accounted for...iraq was given a deadline to comply with the UN, to show where these stockpiles of WMD went- iraq refused. why would iraq refuse full disclosure if it had nothing to hide? just because no "smoking gun" has been found a few months later- the WMD was never there, they never had a weapons programs, tho the UN said they did? even the nations opposed to war said he had the weapons and could use them on his neighbors? hes not a threat? again...iran, kuwait, links to terrorists, terrorist traning camps, advanced anthrax programs- youre right...not a threat at all. you and the rest of the peace hippies would have let hitler slaughter innocent people for another decade or so before you did anything, am i right?
btw. none of that 'went over my head' since it was pure nonsense. blair is a child molestor if the UN says so? the UN didnt just SAY SO...they didnt just AGREE he had it. they had solid evidence from inspections that have been going on for over a decade. they agreed that the evidence supported the fact that hussein had an advanced weapons programs, he had made connections with terrorist- and now were hearing even bin laden himself...he was trying to gather materials for even more advanced programs.
like i said- as with other hippies, you clearly have no answers. and you havent shown where anyone lied about the reasons to go to war- you keep claiming bush said it was wmd and only wmd- he never said that...and very few nations on earth deny iraq had a WMD program and wanted to use it- and most agree there were serious ties with terrorist groups. i still dont see any lies or BS there, as you claim. you hate bush, just admit it. you even go as far as to claim he gave a speech where he said WMD is no big deal (lying to the world)- a speech we all know was never given.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 18, 2003 10:00 AM[[lol. the US gave hussein anthrax? almost. and he never once said the reason to go to war was the threat from WMD. that was ONE reason of many]]
Actually, it was the MAIN reason...
[[youre showing your true colors, as always. youre a bush hater and you wouldnt agree with him or his administration no matter what.]]
Actually, I was FOR the war in the begining. But as time went on, I saw through the bullshit and changed my opinion. It's a free country...
[[mobile weapons labs? they reported on the news channels months ago that they actually found one of those in iraq. havent heard much about it since, but i remember those reports.]]
Yeah, I remember those reports too. FOX News had jumped the gun on the findings (which turned out to be nothing more than someone's abandoned RV...)....thats why you never heard anything about it again...
[[about anthrax- david kay says they do have the most sophisticated anthrax program of any nation...and IT CAN be put into the air-]]
Like I said, show me this article. And of course anthrax can be put into the air. Any powder can become an airborn substance...
[[thats why iraqs program was so advanced, because they found better ways to mill it (it IS a miracle, since anthrax cant be easily carried in the air)...and better ways to keep it afloat in the wind, carrying it around.]]
Like I said, I would like to see this article. And until we know the EXACT methods of US manufacturing of Anthrax (which remains top secret) lets agree to disagree on the fact that "Iraq" has the most advanced anthrax production methods in the world...
[[it doesnt matter that the entire sec council agreed hussein had WMD? you say that we must have 100% proof of everything he had/has before we use force against him? youre like the protesters...hate the current policy, but you have no answers yourself as to how to solve the problem.]]
Not really. I just prefer the "innocent until proven guilty" mode of things. Had Saddam actually had WMD and an active program, I say bomb it into a parking lot...but even now there is no hard evidence of any such programs....
I'll bet you didn't expect a "hippie" to say that now did you?
[[so, if some dictator was slaughtering millions...and the entire world agreed that he was doing so, but we didnt have 100% proof...we should just sit around and wait for all that proof to pop up?]]
Oh but you see, there WOULD be proof. Bodies. Where is the proof of the WMD?
[[ use some reasoning here- WMD, in its very nature, is something that can easily be hid, notsomething thats going to be out on display for anyoen to come on in and inspect.]]
Use some reasoning here too...it's just as easy to say they have it without any real proof...
[[like i said- as with other hippies, you clearly have no answers.]]
And like so many hard liner yes men, you have no proof of anything. You just re-gurgetate what you see on the news. You're what normal people call a Media Whore....
But anyway....LONG LIVE BILL...LONG LIVE FOX NEWS!
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 18, 2003 06:08 PMdude. you show true stupidity when you say long live bill, long live fox news. you claimed that fox news jumped the gun on the mobile weapons lab...thats nonsense. every network covered that story, and they covered it when the news came out...youre trying to claim what many claim- a fox news lean to the right- as opposed to fair and balanced- which they are.
proof- bodies? outsiders can see into a country and find hidden mass graves? no, they cant. thats why many were shocked when nato forces went into serbia and the former yugoslavia...many other times in history have mass graves been found that werent known of- like in iraq just recently! innocent until proven guilty? bush made it clear that this was hussein last chance by the global community- that he had signed the war treaty but had been defying it for 12 yrs...hussein was already guilty and further digging his hole. there was proof of WMD, since hussein admitted to it- inspectors throughout the 90's found large stockpiles of weapons and destroyed them, and allied forced found and destroyed stockpiles of the stuff after the 1st gulf war. you keep saying there was no proof- but there was a mountain of proof.
again, as for anthrax- saying iraq has the most advnaced program in the world...thats not what i said- its what david kay said in new parts of his report. its not you disagreeing with me, its you disagreeing with him. and between the two of you, on the matters of bio weapons, im gonna have to side with the expert here.
you still didnt explain any supposed bullshit and lies that came from the pres. or the admin.
oh, and speaking of the president- he never said that wmd was the main reason to go to war. the main reason- if you want to pick one out of the many reasons, was that hussein had defied the gulf war treaty and over 16 UN resolutions for long enough...and inspections would have gone on forever, since hussein refused to fully comply. we went to war because 1441 was the final chance...a resolution agreed to by the entire sec. council, and it called for harsh punishment if iraq didnt comply this final time- they didnt...we did just what 1441 called for- we gave out harsh penalties. we even gave hussein a chance to leave iraq and not face war- but he even refused to do that. so, no, wmd was not the only or the main reason for going into iraq.
Ok Josh, whatever you say josh. Its obvious this is getting nowhere. We're 2 people with very different opinions, so lets agree to disagree before this gets ugly..
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 18, 2003 07:22 PMumm ok? why would it get ugly? its not about a difference of opinion anyhow. i just simply asked what you would have done instead of war and what bullshit and lies was told to the public. you never gave anything to support the claim of lies and you never gave an alternative to war in iraq. so. yeah.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 18, 2003 07:28 PMWhat would I have done? Considering I dont have a roster of advisors like bush does to help him not look as dumb as he actually is, I would have probably pushed for a military backed inspection force.
I would have had a few light recon units in the area looking for anything suspicious (the hiding fo weapons, etc etc) and maybe a unit of electrocin warfare drones combing the area while the military backed inspectors searched.
That way, Saddam would not have been able to pull any fast ones on us. We would have had a nice set of eyes and ears on the ground, It wouldn't have been THAT hard considering it is a country roughly the size of texas...
I would not have jumped into war, causing a massive strain in world allies, etc etc...
I would have made damn sure I knew what I knew about any WMD, and not what people told me Iraq had 10 years ago...
I would have made sure I had the proof to show to my allies to gather support for my cause.
Regardless of how you want to look at it, Busah handles it sloppy, which costed him A LOT of US influence and trust around the world...
But like a billion others in the world, thats just my opinion,..
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 18, 2003 08:13 PMsee? again, youre showing that youre a bush hater. saying hes stupid...but having no basis for that. he looks stupid because he decided to go to war with iraq? thats odd.
you said stuff that was in iraq 10 years ago, but we both know that isnt true. the inspectors found stuff in 1998 and later...iraq refused to fully comply with 1441, so they clearly had something to hide...the regime fell due to their refusal to cooperate with the UN.
how would a force backed inspection make any diff? its a large country, and theyve had 12 yrs to hide wmd. we would have never been able to track it down...and besides, wmd wasnt the only reason for war, like you falsely claimed. iraq is a better nation now...the people are free from the rule of saddam. the middle east will be transformed if we can get a democracy set up in iraq, and polling in iraq shows that most people do not want sharia rule. so- the middle east will have a large democracy in the middle of it, and soon- we will deal with other brutal dictators, and even more people will be free.
as for iraq...its about the size of california- and thats pretty big to search for weapons that can be stored in small containers. thats like saying- it would be simple to find a treasure chest in texas. it can be hidden anywhere in the state- or it can be moved around frequently, so youll never have a chance of finding it...it could be in someones back yard, it could be buried under the pool they built last yr, it could be hidden in someones hall closet, it could be in a cave somewhere or buried in a field, or it could be buried in a forest...it might be buried in a simple hole, or it could be buried in a complex system of tunnels very far underground. if you think thats so simple, be my guest and go to texas to find that treasure. ill talk to you again in a cpl hundred yrs.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 18, 2003 08:30 PM"wmd wasnt the only reason for war, like you falsely claimed"
-Good god man, if you can't read, don;'t respond. Please quote me where I said it was the ONLY reason for war...
As I recall, I said it was the MAIN reason, not the Only reason.
But anyway....it's pointless...
It's what FOX news says that counts to you, no matter what it is, and nothing is going to change that...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 19, 2003 05:08 PMlol. once again you make yourself look foolish. i just gave you facts...you cant support your hatred for bush, nor can you show me his supposed lies and B.S....you call the man stupid based on nothing, and all you can do is say -fox news, fox news, fox news as an argument. too funny.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 19, 2003 06:55 PMAnyone reading this knows you're in denial. (Eeverone I show your page to laughs at you. Even hardcore right wingers) but yes. "I" look foolish....
I showed you the BS, you just refuse to accept it.
But anyway. I have to get ready for work...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 20, 2003 06:52 AMhttp://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-08-11-rebuild-bill_x.htm
http://www.thesunlink.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=WAR-POLL-08-13-03&cat=AN
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 20, 2003 07:16 AMeveryone laughs at me, even hardcore right wingers? now, we know thats a lie. good try tho. on top of that lie- you lied about all this BS that you exposed...when you didnt expose anything. you wont admit that you hate bush- yet its clear, because you keep talking about how "stupid" he is, and what a liar he is...yet, no one denies that the sec council agreed iraq had wmd- based on evidence from 10 yrs of inspections. you claimed that bush said the main, and possibly only reason for war was WMD, when you know he never said that...then, you claimed that he changed his story and made a speech where he said that WMD wasnt a big deal- yet another lie. youre like many on the left, you hate bush- tho you have no reason, and you refuse to tell the truth about him or the iraq situation itself.
when you tell that many lies, its not good to add to them by claiming you ever KNOW any "hardcore right wingers" let alone claiming that they laugh at me saying what i say about iraq or bush- since 99% of the right is saying the same exact thing i am. odd "hardcore right wingers" you know there...hmm
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 20, 2003 07:54 AMIm allowed my own personal opinions on anyone I want. It's called "DEMOCRACY"....
My opinions on Bush are mostly rooted to his dodging of his armed forces duties. I didn't like how he was such a coward then, and now sending the US forces all over the world calling them "brave men and women"..
And yes, people at work laugh at you. A friend of mine (who shares different political opinions. Im more in between left and right, and he is total right) took a look at your site a few times and laughed saying, and I quote, "Is this guy for real? I thought people like this were payed to talk like this. You mean he does it for free?"
And yes. He's very right wing. He believes the middle east is the biggest threat and possible staging ground for the next world war, but he also thinks for himself. We often get political, and he has in some instances "seen the light" when I bring up facts. And vice versa. He doesn't call it "silly" because Fox News said otherwise.. (Oh...there I go mentioning youe beloved FOX news again...bad bad me...)
Think what you want...it makes no difference to me. I won't lose any Z's over it...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 20, 2003 06:41 PMagain, you prove youre full of shit. you hate bush- you showed that again...and you claim that i dont think for myself but am ruled by fox news- another absurd remark. i feel for the people you work with if theyre laughing at ME. fox new fox news fox news...bush is stupid, bush is stupid. and IM the one who cant think for myself? that is precious.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 20, 2003 08:13 PM[[again, you prove youre full of shit. you hate bush- you showed that again...]]
Im not full of shit. I admit. I dislike Bush, but not for the reasons you think. I dislike him because I see him as a war dodging coward, who with ease, sends OTHER men and women to do what he never had the balls to do (Im refering to his duty dodging during the VietNam war when he was in the air force in case that went over your head...)
[[and you claim that i dont think for myself but am ruled by fox news- another absurd remark.]]
Well, no matter how much reasoning myself or anyone else tell you, no matter HOW much, your opinions NEVER shift. Not that I come here to shift your opinion, I just enjoy the political debate from time to time, but you COMPLETELY dismiss EVERYTHING, as if we have some sort of vendetta agaisnt you or something....(hence the term "right wing paranoia")
No, im not hiding in your closet or under your bed....you can breath easy now.
[[i feel for the people you work with if theyre laughing at ME.]]
Ok, but you're the only one who shares that opinion.
[[ fox new fox news fox news...bush is stupid, bush is stupid. and IM the one who cant think for myself? that is precious.]]
Well, the way you so blaintly dismiss EVERYTHING "BUT" what FOX NEws says, it leads me to believe your obsession...
And like I said, im not the only one who thinks that way of you. But then again, im not here to name names or point fingers....im here for political debates...
again youre full of it, because i have never once said that the only thing i believe is fox news and only fox news and i get all my info from fox news, and i love fox news and on and on. you try to say that because its a tactic used by idiots on the left like yourself. its sad, but its funny...im sensing jealousy over fox news...you seem to blindly hate them as well.
you seem to be under the impression i dismiss everything you say...which is odd. its called having an opinion. you claim the president is stupid and that hes a liar..yet, you gave no evidence of any of that. i, live in the real world, and dont make such bogus claims because of any hatred i might have for someone...
as for bush- im sorry, but i dont think it went over my head...clearly its over your head since bush was never in the air force, as you say he was. he was in the tx air national guard...but, golly- thats probably over my head too. or as you would probably say 'hed'
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 21, 2003 08:19 AM[quote] clearly its over your head since bush was never in the air force, as you say he was. he was in the tx air national guard... [/quote]
I am well aware it was the ANG...I am also aware he "disappeared" during his call to duty between 1972-1973 and his dad pulled some strings for him so he didnt have to fight in Viet Nam....
I don;t know about you, but if I had a war-dodging leader, I would be pretty proud of him too...
I especially love the way he sends hundreds of thousands of men and women to do what he never had the balls to do.
As for the rest, lets let the jury decide ;)
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 21, 2003 08:32 AMhttp://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35692
Looks like your republicans are not shy about admitting just how bad it is in Iraq anymore...
Also, hwo come whenever I don;t totally agree with you, I must be "one of those lefites"?
I don;t agree with hard right, and I don't agree with hard left.
Does that still make me a lefite? Oh, I forgot who I was talking to...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 21, 2003 08:38 AMyoure clearly far left since you constantly say FOX NEWS FOX NEWS FOX NEWS like a chimpanzee on speed. its also not that you disagree that youre left, its that you hate bush- for his "draft dodging" as you call it. and, the aforementioned FOX NEWS FOX NEWS FOX NEWS- YOURE A BLIND SHEEP WHO CANT THINK FOR YOURSELF, YOU ONLY GET YOUR INFO. SPOONFED TO YOU BY FOX NEWS FOX NEWS FOX NEWS (no one in their right mind would see your comments and think that youre on the right or in the middle)
i also like how you said he was in the air force and now you suddenly realize that he wasnt in the air force but the national guard.
so...i guess you didnt like clinton sending troops out to battle anyone, right? many presidents have sent out troops, yet werent in the armed forces at all...with your logic, they shouldnt be allowed to do that, right? whats wrong with having a wealthy parent pull strings so you dont have to go to war and die? i wouldnt fight in a war no matter how much you paid me...does that mean i could never support troop deployment? thats ridiculous. you cant have an opinion on a war- whether it was wrong or right to go in, based on the presidents past. if we ever have a president who lies and lies and lies, then lies under oath, then lies to the american people (oh wait...clinton, i forgot)- he should never be allowed to use the armed forces ever, even if a world war broke out, right? he dodged the draft (which i would argue is clearly unconstitutional as it is- so i have no problem with draft dodgers- we are guaranteed the right to pursue happiness in the US, involuntary service is a clear violation of that in my book), so no matter what happened- he should never be allowed to use any force anywhere, for any reason.
as for your link...when youre off learning how to spell- learn how to read. first off. where do you get that theyre MY republicans? second- you must never have seen buchanan and press on MSNBC (wait, fox news! fox news! not msnbc!)...buchanan is a big time bush supporter, and in this article he agrees with bush's policy and clearly has faith in his motives. no one ever said it wasnt bad in iraq- you try to claim that SUDDENLY republicans see it as being bad over there to prove some point that you cant make...rather silly, since, as i mentioned, no one ever said it WASNT bad over there- dems or republicans. we know its not great over there...its better than it was under hussein- that much is clear, but terrorists are working around the clock, all over the globe, to kill innocent people- no newsflash there.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 21, 2003 09:55 AM[[so...i guess you didnt like clinton sending troops out to battle anyone, right? many presidents have sent out troops, yet werent in the armed forces at all...with your logic, they shouldnt be allowed to do that, right?]]
Actually, if bush wanted to fly planes, he could have gotten a private licence and daddy could have bought him a fighter jet to play with. When you join the forces, you're expected to perform a dity.
Every soldier enlisted is made aware of this duty. Bush wanted to play dress up in a fancy pilot uniform, not do his duty.
And no, you don;t have to have served in the armed forces to deploy troops. But when you join those same armed forces without the intention of doing what you're supposed to, that misses me off....especially when he makes his little "speeches" to the armed forces later...
I guess you will never know what Im talking about.
Lowdown hit the nail on the ehad when he said "and so the downward spiral begins.."
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 21, 2003 10:25 AM[[you try to claim that SUDDENLY republicans see it as being bad over there to prove some point that you cant make...rather silly]]
Actually, they are ONLY NOW admitting how bad it is. Over the past year, I have heard NOTHING more than "We have done such a great thing...the people of Iraq are free from Saddams Tyranny"....
Now they are finally telling it how it is...
But anyway...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 21, 2003 10:27 AMtheyre finally telling how it really is? how is it REALLY? thats a lie. no one said it was roses over there...not once. it is better than it was, the people ARE free...the free press IS up and running...schools ARE open for the first time in a long time...that sounds pretty good to me. no one ever tried to deny that there are terrorists in iraq trying to kill innocent people.
you link to an article where buchanan is supporting bush and saying that things are better without hussein- yet you say thats evidence of the republicans SUDDENLY changing their story? nonsense, and you know it.
again...i love your logic. bush should never give speeches to the military, he should never deploy troops, etc- because he's a "coward" in your opinion. funny. so, you make your opinion on the iraq war on BUSH, not hussein or the US in general...or wmd, or terrorist ties. thats silly, but if you want to have opinions about the war based on stuff OUTSIDE the war, thats your thing.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at November 21, 2003 10:41 AM[[it is better than it was, the people ARE free]]
Define free? THe people were free in terms of being allowed to come and go as they please...the were free to open up shop where they please, etc etc. Please elaborate.
Im not saying life was better under Saddam, but Im not saying it wasn't either. I really don't know. I only know what I see them say (and that's that they are worse off now than before...but thats just one source)
[[schools ARE open for the first time in a long time]]
Schools have always been open. Iraq had one of the best universities in the Middle East. That university is closed now. Go figure.
[[you link to an article where buchanan is supporting bush and saying that things are better without hussein- yet you say thats evidence of the republicans SUDDENLY changing their story? nonsense, and you know it.]]
I know it? Well, lets see what I know. I know that most US news sources ONLY talked about time and time again, how the US forces were freeing the Iraqi people, and they would show the SAME footage of the statue coming down, over and over.
FOr 5 months, I never heard any of the bad stories. I had to go to independant news sources (you know, the ones who "dont know anything?") for REAL news and not the "God Bless America" news...
Thats what I know...and you know it too ;)
[[again...i love your logic.]]
Thank you ;)
[[bush should never give speeches to the military, he should never deploy troops, etc-]]
Never said that. What I did say (before you tried to twist it around) is his speeches mean nothing to me. I know his past.
[[so, you make your opinion on the iraq war on BUSH, not hussein or the US in general...or wmd, or terrorist ties. thats silly, but if you want to have opinions about the war based on stuff OUTSIDE the war,]]
One thing has nothing to do with the other. Read my posts over. We got on a different topic. So I can't spell, and you can't comprehend sentences....we're the perfect match ;)
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at November 21, 2003 07:10 PMWith love comes strange currencies.
Posted by: Fischer Paul at January 20, 2004 03:52 PM