IMHO, this belongs somewhere other than IMHO. BBQ Pit is where I’m putting it.
Moved. samclem
And the “poor, oppressed conservative tough guy with a heart of gold” dance goes on and on and on and on…
ahh yes. You know you’re on the SDMB, when a slightly pro-Bush post is BBQ material.
Anyway, you are of course correct Leaffan. Excepte for:
Which should read millions or tens of millions.
Well Rune since you agree with them, maybe you can expand on why
is an accurate statement?
I just want to say that I’m appalled and disgusted that anyone would even conceive of this, let alone voice it as though it represented a concensus. For myself and everyone I knew, our foremost thought that day was a desperate fear for how many innocents might lose their lives in our retaliatory fury - yes, even ahead of our sorrow and anger. As devastating as the 9/11 attack was, the US is a strong, honorable, resilient nation, and terrorism would never pose a serious threat to our survival as a people. On the other hand, with a reactionary administration in the US harboring imperialist fantasies and in charge of more destructive potential than the rest of the world combined, things looked very, very dangerous for the desperate and powerless peoples of the near east.
With everything else in your post I can at least imagine how a sentient being might have that sequence of ideas (however deluded they may be). But this is subhuman.
In my not-so-humble opinion, Leaffan was went 6 for his first 6. However, he was only 4, maybe 5 for his last 13. Not bad, if this were baseball.
I really want to hear about the Iraqi terrorist camps. Or about all the Iraqi terrorists who have attacked the U.S. prior to our invasion of their country. Or about all the Iraqi attacks we’ve had to defend against outside of Iraq since we’ve invaded.
IMNSHO, there was absolutely no reason for a military intervention in Iraq. Any excuse about helping the Kurds or freeing the Iraqi people from tyranny fall flat when one considers all the tyrants and dictators we’ve ignored.
In my humble opinion, there is no conspiracy regarding the US government involvement in 9/11.
Agreed
In my humble opinion, George W. Bush didn’t know about the hijacked planes.
Agreed
In my humble opinion, the attacks on 9/11 were carried out by a group of fundamentalist Muslim extremists under the direction of Osama bin Laden.
Agreed
In my humble opinion, Afghanistan was a breeding ground for terrorists and required our intervention.
Agreed
In my humble opinion, Iraq refused to comply with UN WMD inspections on a number of occasions.
Have to agree on this too. although I don’t feel it was incumbant on the US to enforce this without UN backing
In my humble opinion, Saddam Hussein sanctioned the mass murder of Kurds under his regime.
Agreed. Although the US seemingly had nothing to say about it at the time.
In my humble opinion, Iraq was a breeding ground for terrorists.
Disagree here. I’d say that Saddam Hussein pretty much wanted to be the only one holding any power in Iraq.
In my humble opinion, the world will be a better place in years to come because of the proactive US stance on terrorism.
Hard to either agree or disagree on this. While Afganistan was a terrorist hotbed and going into there was a plus for the war on terrorism, I think that going into Iraq is a distraction from the war on terrorism.
In my humble opinion, an earlier intervention in 1930’s Germany would have resulted in hundreds of thousands fewer casualties,
I’m not sure about intervention so much, but letting Hitler do whatever he wanted and not preparing to use force to stop him if necessary was a mistake.
In my humble opinion, all of us were extremely upset on Sept. 11/2001, and were willing to use nuclear weapons to retaliate. Now we’re upset because it’s taking a wee bit longer than anticipated.
Sorry, but I was never in favor of using nukes, and I’m not mad about the time it’s taking… but rather the lack of a plan to remove us from the scene eventually.
In my humble opinion, George Bush is probably the exact right leader, at the exact right time in history. Although I’m willing to bet Ronald Regan would have acted accordingly.
I disagree on the first and although I didn’t really care for Reagan either, I think he would have done a better job than George.
In my humble opinion, you can’t molly-coddle terrorists.
Agree
In my humble opinion, things are proceeding as they must, after 3,000 innocent lives were lost on one fine September 11 morning.
I think Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack.
In my humble opinion, someone’s going to come back at me and tell me I’m wrong.
Agreed
In my humble opinion, I wish he or she were right. But the world is a scary place and I thank the United States of America for having the fortitude to stand up to it.
I think that this statement is political bullshit that means nothing.
In my humble opinion, I’m willing to stand by the allied forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and understand they’re fighting for our freedom, or lack of terrorism.
I think this statement is about the same as the last one. Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terrorism.
In my humble opinion, I’m willing to bet this post won’t be popular.
Many people make unpopular statements, no biggie.
In my humble opinion, I don’t give a shit.
Of course not, you think you’re right.
In my humble opinion, I think I’m in the majority.
Maybe.
Never mind the rest; this just doesn’t make any fucking sense at all. In Your Humble Opinion, everyone was willing to use nuclear weapons. Wuh Duh Fuh? Instead of having a humble opinion about whether people were willing to use nuclear weapons, why not just ask them? Then you don’t have to pretend you can read minds.
That’s the whole problem with the OP; they’re not Humble Opinions; they’re arguments. You’re just dressing them up as Humble Opinions for some reason.
Iraq financed Palestinian suicide terrorists with lavish cash bonuses. While this perhaps does not quite fulfill the exact literal meaning of Leaffan’s statement, it’s good enough for me. In addition, there’s the tiny matter with the Baathist genocidal campaigns waged in the north and the south and in between – don’t know if you’d label that state terrorism?
Like most others in this thread, you lost me with the Iraq business. It was not a breeding ground for terrorists. And I don’t know where you got the idea that most Americans were ready to use nukes. As for this:
Where do you get that idea? Most Americans oppose the war in Iraq and disapprove of Bush’s overall presidency. That’s a fact, not an opinion.
Thanks samclem…
In my humble opinion, Leaffan has no idea what he is talking about.
In my humble opinion, Leaffan is a fucking idiot.
In my humble opinion, Leaffan won’t agree with this post.
In my humble opinion, I don’t give a shit.
This is fun. Take whatever you want to say, put IMHO in front of it, and what do you get? Not much. What were you hoping to accomplish by this, Leaffan?
I am curious as to how you know so much about Saddam and Iraq. I don’t think anybody really knows what the hell was going on there, at least nobody posting on this board. Our only information comes from Bush or the press, and neither is reliable.
A textbook example of the dictum that we are all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own facts.
Actually that’s not a fact. Just another poll taken on some small percentage of a percentage of all Americans. But I suspect you’re right.
Of course we’re entitled to our own facts. Don’t mean they’re right. Or perhaps you want to set up a committee to decide once and for all what’s facts and what’s not – and make holding to illegal facts a crime?
In my humble opinion, you have no idea how polling works.
The bidding of the Iraqis, at least in the western Anbar province, appears to be chaos:
There’s a good deal more in that news article from the Washington Post, none of it at all reassuring.
In my humble opinion, you are a platypus. And not a very attractive platypus either.
:dubious:
And just how would you know what makes one platypus look hawt to another platypus?
This may very well be true, but it does not invalidate my opinions on pretty much anything. Your opinion of polling, however, does.
Arguments? Arguments suggests that there’s some underlying logic or priniciple that the OP is trying to convey.
And as for this statement:
“In my humble opinion, all of us were extremely upset on Sept. 11/2001, and were willing to use nuclear weapons to retaliate.”
Fucking wonderful. Just who and what were you willing to nuke in retaliation for the slaughter of 3000 innocent people?
Oh, and I can’t think of a worse insult to label the op with, other than they’d use the phrase “the proactive US stance on terrorism.” Seriously, could anyone other than a complete wanker ever say that?