This is a bit off topic, but this fucking amazing. We all heard about how the adminstration wanted to go after Iraq the second 9/11 happened, right?
Well, Clarke, the Cassandra-like screaming anti-Al Queda canary that no one listened to before 9/11, has provided more detail on that charge:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml
I am sorry but MeanJoe was not talking about a government looking out for the welfare of its citizens. He pretty much implied that he didn’t care about the govt. putting foreign nationals in jail and stripping them of civil rights but doing that to US citizens angered him. This has everything to do with his personal values/morals.
I am convinced this is a chat bot.
That’s OK, I’m still convinced you’re an idiot.
Nah. Chat bots have more intelligence.
I don’t recall anyone asking your opinion. Don’t you have a thread to scurry back to? Hurry along now.
The USA, as occupying power is responsible for keeping order and, clearly, it is not doing so, so there is no doubt that the USA is responsible for the state of things in Iraq and indirectly for the crimes being committed. But, furthermore, it is directly responsible for the killing, looting, kidnaping done by its own forces and there is a fair amount of that going on. Thousands of innocent Iraqis have been killed by US forces. Looting is officially not allowed (as it should be) but the fact is that it is going on, you can buy some of the stuff brought home on eBay, US authorities know it and look the other way. I am not making a huge deal out of this but there it is. And the people being held in Gitmo and other camps, without any kind of due judicial process, well, if that is not kidnapping I don’t kno what is.
And yes, add my concurring opinion that milroyj is an idiot.
If your mother/wife/daughter/sister were raped, would you blame the rapist, or his upbringing, poverty, racial discrimination, or what?
milroyj raises an interesting point there, sailor.
I’ve got another hypothetical for you, too.
Suppose that aliens from Altair 7 anally probed milroyj. Would you blame:
a) the aliens, who actually did it, or
b) the Bush administration, who are responsible for all evil in the world?
Or would you simply stand by and snigger at the misfortunes of a half-wit?
Or, © Saddam Hussein, who we know has ties to the anal-probing aliens from Altair 7 and their 1920’s style death rays.
Nice try at baiting fellow posters, guys, but it ain’t gonna work. Besides, anyone like sailor, who thinks that rapes in Iraq are the fault of the US, isn’t worth it.
I ain’t baiting you, milroyj, you already went belly-up a couple of pages ago.
I’m milking you for any remaining comic content.
I see. so. . . let me see if I am getting this straight. If good things happen in Iraq the US government can claim credit for them but if bad things happen in Iraq the USA is in no way to blame. Right?
And yes, if due to the actions of the government of the USA the public order in my city turns into chaos and the crime rate increases and I am the victim of such a crime then I think I am quite entitled to blame the US government.
I have answered your question. Yes, I would blame the US government in that situation. Now please answer mine:
As you probably know In Spain they have elected a Communist-Muslim-Terrorist government into office. Suppose agents of this government take you from your home and deposit you in Iran where you are promptly sodomised and then killed. You are telling me the government of Spain who ordered your deportation to Iran knowing full well what would happen to you is not responsible in any way for your death and only the people who actually did it are responsible? Those who enabled it have no responsibility?
Disclaimer: The above logical exercise does not imply in any way that I expect any kind of rational or logical response from milroyj. It is for entertainment purposes only.
Someone took one too many stupid pills, i think.
If you’ll look back at the first page, you’ll see that this thread was never even about whether or not the invasion had been a “good thing.” It was about one thing specificially, to wit: the fact that Donald Rumsfeld lied when he said that neither he nor the President had ever used the term “immediate threat” to describe Iraq.
If you agree with the invasion, good for you. You have a right to your opinion, and i realize that there’s very little i can do to change your mind about that. But if Rumsfeld and Bush still think the whole war was such a good idea, the least they can do is be honest about the reasons they gave for going into Iraq in the first place. And one of the reasons Rumsfeld gave–in prepared testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, no less–was that “No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world and the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.”
Do you get it, dimwit? Whether or not you agree with the war itself is irrelevant. I would think that the fact that the Administration is now telling baldfaced lies about its reasons for invading would even upset conservatives just a little bit. But there are still people, presumably those who also move their lips when reading, who can’t even bring themselves to admit that the Republicans might not be telling the truth about something.
Some of you dribblers could take your cue from conservatives who at least have the intelligence and the moral fibre to admit that Bush and co. dropped the ball (best case scenario) or outright lied (worst case scenario) on the WMD issue, and who are also sick of ongoing administration spin and lies about the reasons for invasion. Airman Doors USAF, on this message board, is a good example. He was a very strong supporter of the war beforehand and, if i interpret him correctly, he still thinks that the invasion was generally a good thing because it got rid of an awful dictator and gave the Iraqis hope for the future. But he is also mad that the President and his sidekicks sent American men and women to kill and be killed under what now appear to have been false pretences. I haven’t seen Airman’s response to Rumsfeld’s latest lies, but i’ll bet he wouldn’t be the same sort of apologist for lying that you and milroyj are.
Speaking of milroyj, i see he’s actually got the balls to re-enter this thread, after being so completely shredded just a couple of pages ago. Even when it was demonstrated what an idiot he was being, and that he either didn’t watch the video or read the transcript before blathering about “liberal porn,” or that he deliberately chose to ignore the quote that didn’t fit his argument, all he could come up with was an accusation that i had moved the goals. And then, when it was pointed out that he was the only person in the whole fucking thread who couldn’t understand what was going on, he had the balls to finish with:
I let this weaseling go, deciding that it wasn’t worth rubbing milroyj’s face in his own stupidity any further. But now that he’s marched back in with the boots on, i feel the need to point out that, even after he so clearly got it wrong, he still hasn’t shown the cojones necessary to admit that Rumsfeld actually lied.
Furthermore, in a post related to his use of the term “liberal porn,” he said:
Completely ignoring, of course, the issue of whether or not Rumsfeld did, in fact, lie. Apparently, for milroyj, any criticism at all of the Bush administration constitutes a priori evidence that the persons making the criticism are nothing more than liberal pornographers. The actual content of the argument, the issue of whether or not the criticism is justified, is evidently irrelevant.
What argument? That the Bush Administration lies? You’ve been saying that for a year now. You’ve been saying that Bush is evil since December 2000. Why start the 14,001 thread on the subject? Just to have 30 people come in and agree with you? Is your self-esteem that low? Because you haven’t made any “argument” at all, and your underlying point, such as it is, has been done to death.
This is just funny to see how he refuses to answer the questions put to him. I suppose we should not expect to see milroyj post in any thread saying Clinton lied or Saddam is evil because, after all, it has been said so many times already. :rolleyes:
Perhaps, but i can’t recall a single instance in which you’ve admitted that it might actually happen once in a while. Perhaps if Bush’s lapdogs were willing to concede that he’s been less than truthful on occasion, some of us wouldn’t feel compelled to keep trying to convince you.
Actually, i’ve been saying it since early in his term as Governor of Texas. What’s your point?
No. As i said, we continue to marshall evidence of the Bush administration’s malfeasance because so many people refuse to admit that he’s ever done anything wrong. We live in hope that one day you’ll find the intestinal fortitude to admit that your star-spangled hero is less than perfect. Actually, thinking about, maybe you’re right that it is a rather pointless pursuit, given your intransigence in the face of the most damning evidence.
Even those who defend Clinton have the courage to admit that he lied.
It has been done to death, and yet you still don’t have the intellectual integrity to admit that there may be a smidgen of truth to it.
Bush has been less than truthful on occasion. Will you stop Bush-bashing now? I seriously doubt it.
Hmm, further evidence of your myopia on the subject.
If you’re so sure of his “malfeasance” “in the face of the most damning evidence”, why haven’t the Articles of Impeachment been drawn up?
You mean why hasn’t a Republican controlled House and a Republican controlled Senate not voted to impeach a Republican controlled President?
Gosh, milroy, thats a stumper. Ponder, ponder. Nope, can’t come up with a thing! Boy, you really got us good that time!
(By the way, the Cognitive Dissonance Foundation (“The Number One Threat to the Republic”) needs a new poster child. Do you have a recent picture available, preferably one that emphasizes your endearingly pugnacious attitude. If you have one with you wearing one of those Burmese-made “Bush-Cheney” sweatshirts, that would be a big help…)
You want to appease us with this pathetic tidbit in the hopes we will stop? Of course not. Appeasement never works. Look at Hitler. They gave him Austria and then he wanted Poland. We will not stop. Now we demand that you admit that president Bush talks funny. that is our last demand (for now).
BTW, it was Rumsfeld who lied in this case.