If that’s true, he should also not smugly state that he knows more than the rest of us. It’s inconsequential to the debate since he can’t share the information anyway, and possibly dangerous for the people whose safety is protected by his discretion.
Dumb on many levels, if you ask me.
I agree that is very likely you can find me given enough determination. Not much, even. But so you find me, are you going to pull out my fingernails until I tell what I know? Kill me? Kidnap my cat? (Would that be a Cat Nap?) To what benefit? I presume I would work with more folks who knew the same stuff, so the data would not be lost. And if it were important enough stuff, your ass would be snapped up by the FBI’s HRT (or some such badass group) in about three quarters of a heartbeat.
I agree it was not the best form for him to intimate he has this knowledge. I also know it was hard to read and see some of that stuff in absolute silence. He is human, I’ve seen him.
Well Bill, I’ve met you, but the jury’s still out on your humanity. 
why were all the hawks so eager to report smugly every unverified report that WMD had been found?
I’m sorry dave, but you cant have it both ways. Bluesman came into that thread to gloat. now, when it looks like there won’t be any WMD found II’m going out on a limb here) It’s perfectly fair to be called on it.
Don’t want to back up your claims or get called on them? don’t make them.
I have a specific reason for asking you this question - it’s an ongoing debate at home. 
Would you be at all interested in engaging in an email conversation with me about this? I don’t want to bother you if not…
Sorry to interrupt, folks.
Oh, and by the way, I just now saw this gem from carrot:
<snip>
You can shut the fuck up, too. First, your cute “quote” number one from you I never said, nor implied in the manner in which you portrayed it. Second, I never said or implied that spooje wanted to see Bluesman or Doors dead. You are an idiot.
Are you stupid, or just a freaking tool?
spooje is a long time poster whom I enjoy alot - and make a point of doing searches on his username knowing I’ll usually find something that will amuse or intrigue me - but that doesn’t mean I have to freaking agree about foreign policy with him. For the sake of all that is holy and revered, could you please just kiss my ass, carrot?
If you’re going to fucking take me to task, do it and back it up, shithead. Otherwise, bite me.
Yep, folks, it’s PMS. Really.
First, I take exception to your categorizing me as a “hawk”. The hawks, as a matter of fact, are the ones that bother me, I’m worried that they are going to try and impose a Pax Americana upon the whole world and militarily threaten anyone they want. I supported this war on the basis that Saddam was an evil, evil man and he needed to be deposed by any means necessary. I deplore all of the naysayers who kept thinking that an organization like the U.N. could actually do anything effective. That was a pipe dream, he was going to hang on to power until it was pried from his greedy, grubby fingers, which is pretty much what happened. Holding hands and singing “Kum-Ba-Yah” may make you feel all warm and fuzzy but in the real world it usually acomplishes nothing. Sometime the people and countries that have the ability to eliminate a dictator at minimal cost have the duty to their humanity to do so.
Second, I challenge your assertation that I have been"eager to report smugly every unverified report that WMD had been found" I think I said that once- the first time when WMD were reported and seemed to have been confirmed. Since then I’ve taken the same wait and see attitude that I’ve always had. I am currently waiting and seeing if WMD are found, I know it’s far too early to make a definative statement either way. I already said in this thread that if WMD are not found within a year, I’ll happily admit that the administraton was wrong about that and off base to use it as a reason for war. I have yet to hear ANY of the appeasement idiots say that if WMD are found, they will admit “Hey, maybe there was something to this after all” ( Since the eradication of a regime that has killed over a million civilians in the last 10 years aparently isn’t “justification” enough. :rolleyes: )
And that’s what makes it so much fun. 
It would be a dull thread if we all agreed. And we probably wouldn’t learn anything from it.
I find myself agreeing with istara (except for the ‘treason’ bit). I think (and I could a wrong) that if someone was privy to such sensitive information, they wouldn’t tell us they were privy to such information.
This from the guy so quick to call others “bleeding hearts”. Nice line in double standards you got there.
Now this, by the way, is the sort of valid reason for invading Iraq that the administrations of the US and the UK should have relied on all along.
Oh? Really? I’ve always maintained that removing SH was something that needed to be done reguardless, because he was evil. My posts back this up. Show me the “double standard”, with cites and links, please. What you got, Cumtwat, except a burning need to justify cowardace?
That kind of thing has always been my main reason for supporting the war. I ask you again to justify your stance for letting a madman get away with torture. I ask yet again, what you got, skippy?
Ah, so you can call me a bleeding heart, but I can’t call you a hawk?
I would have supported a war if it had the full backing of the UN. Colin Powell went to the UN to feed them a big lie about WMD. when it became clear they weren’t going to find any WMD, they rolled out the “Liberators!” flag. It’s bullshit.
Yes, Saddam was evil, but he was evil when the US backed him against Iran. He was a tyrant then, and a tyrant now. so none of this “We went there to remove a tyrant” bullshit. The Administration commited American forces to war in their own damn self interests.
Saddam had to go. I absolutely agree with that. But I would have rather seen it happen under the U.N. flag.
Ummm Gary was talking about the double standards of throwing names like “bleeding heart idiots” around but taking exception to being called a hawk. BTW you seem pretty hawkish to me. Throwing around words like cowardice and evil.
We’ll try again with small words, suitable for someone with your…challenges.
The double standard is you protesting at someone labelling you a hawk, yet being quick to label me as a “bleeding heart”.
Out of interest, if you have a look at my posts you’ll find very little objection to invading Iraq and/or deposing SH. What you’ll find objection to is the sheer stupidity of using “we have proof of WMD’s but cannot tell you” as a reason to get rid of a maniac. It’s dishonest and stupid. Now Bluesman was a very vocal exponent of this logic on these boards, so I’m going to do all I can to get some follow up from him on his previous boasts.
Very nice strawman. Shame no-one has that stance, but thanks for playing anyway. You’ll note I even went to the trouble of linking to the mass graves post as an example of what I thought was a valid reason for this war. I am duly impressed that you somehow see this as evidence that I’m anti-war. Are you really this stupid, or just recovering from recent receive massive trauma to the head?
Maybe his knee gave him a good smack while jerking?
Does he not strike you as having far too much jerking experience to make that mistake?
Right on Weirddave! How unpatriotic to question the US government. After all they wouldn’t lie to us would they?
And if they were wrong, it’s not big deal. After a year or so we can send a box of chocolates to the Iraqis with a little note saying “sorry we bombed you under false pretenses” and then it’ll all be better.
You mean the regime that the US was supporting with financial aid and weapons sales before the Kuwait invasion? Yeah, that one.
Another thought has crossed my “appeasement idiot” brain, Mr. Hawk (oh wait, I forgot I’m not allowed to call you a hawk because that would be insulting to you - my apologies :rolleyes: ) - what will it take for you to admit that the war was wrong?
If the US pulls out leaving a destroyed country and no government, then would you admit that the war was wrong?
If Iraq becomes a civil war battleground with the Shiites fighting the Kurds fighting the Baath party survivors, then would you admit that the war was wrong?
If the US paves the way for an oppressive Islamic fundamentalist government, like the US did in Afghanistan, then would you admit that the war was wrong?
As I’ve posted before, so would I. It wasn’t happening, however and I think it foolish to hold out hope for countries like France and Russia to act with common decency when they have huge ammounts of money tied up supporting a brutal dictatorship.
Ah, right.
Now why is it that the US are so determined to get the sanctions lifted now?