What you said a page ago was this:
You’ve just conceded that Iraq committed an act of terror.
Now, this thread exists for the purpose of holding me to words I said almost half a year ago.
It exists because even though I conceded the point about a month ago, some people thought I didn’t concede well or often enough.
Now instead of complaining about beating dead horses, I decided there would be no reason why I couldn’t concede the point again. After all, they were right, I was wrong. Why should they not enjoy the satisfaction and here it again.
So I conceded the point again, again, and again. I went through that ridiculous semantic exercise with Minty Green wherein he demonstrates how to accept a concession with a total absence of class and grace. And, I did it without complaint.
And now I’m being pissed on and called a weasel for not conceding other things, just because they would like me to.
So, what I’m kind of wondering is if you are going to stand behind your words, or, is it just me that does that?
I too would prefer security without cost.
Scylla they aren’t going to protect us. They’re going to protect Bush’ lie. and you know that.
A “concession” lasts more than three posts. If you return to the same old lie, the purported concession is no such thing.
And again I say, bring 'em on. Show us what you got, tough guy.
minty, he conceded exactly what he said he would. He conceded that the WMD claim was bogus, that they don’t exist. That was the only thing he said he would stipulate to, and he did, to his credit.
Now you guys are just beating him up for other stuff while you have the chance, stuff he never stipulated to, and you’re trying to say that he’s weaseling, or going back to old lies, when the stuff you’re going after him with now has nothing to do with the original deal.
He gave you the admission you longed for about the WMDs, and now you guys are arguing entirely different stuff. It’s kinda petty, if you ask me.
Oh, and Minty? Small apology, kinda ragged on you a bit. Saying it seemed like he was being straight with us, maybe you should cut some slack? You were right, I was wrong. Been too long away from Texas, forgot what deep dish bullshit smells like.
The above, Airman, is not an argument made by someone admitting he’s been lied to. Read that carefully. If Saddam had no weapons, which he obviously didn’t, exactly which program was he supposed to get with?
Saddam was being asked to prove a negative, which is impossible. So he couldn’t do the impossible, and his country was invaded.
The above, let’s be very crystal clear about this, is a lie, especially the part bolded. Pure and simple. Saddam didn’t have to shape up, because he already, demonstrably, had.
So what we have here is someone who first says he was lied to, then goes right back to stating the same fucking things again and thinking we’re going to be stupid enough to believe him a second time.
I’m not a moron. Neither is minty, wring, or luc. We can read English, and the above states in plain English that Saddam was doing something he wasn’t.
No, goddammit, that is NOT what The Usual Weasel promised he would concede by Thansksgiving. There is a vast difference between Oops! The President was mistaken! and Holy fucking shit, the motherfucker intentionally lied to us!
I didn’t read it the way you did at all, pantom. I read that as what one would imagine Bush’s policy towards Iraq would be. At no point did he say that any of that was true. He said that that was the rationale.
Just because you know it’s not true doesn’t mean you can’t restate the excuse for explanatory purposes.
Strangely enough, in that very same post he stated
That doesn’t look like somke blowing to me. It looks like a man who has conceded your every point about Bush’s dishonesty and is still taking a beating.
What do you want from him? You want him to get down on his knees and beg for forgiveness? You must want something, because you’re beating the piss out of him after he’s given up. Can’t you see that?
No sweat, man. Don’t forget that I’m trained to ferret out the weaseling. Hell, the fates of billion-dollar corporations depend upon my bullshit detecting skills. The Usual Weasel never stood a chance.
From the OP:
From Scylla on Page 2:
And yet again on Page 3:
I guess that’s not good enough for you?
Nope. If that’s really what he thinks, what does the last line of that quote mean? Read that: “He didn’t and we got thwarted by our own allies in doing something about it.” What didn’t he do and in what way did our allies thwart us? That sentence only makes sense in the context of him having weapons.
He has conceded exactly nothing. This is a dishonest bit of wordplay, worthy of a politician. He is not worthy of being defended by anyone.
Scylla, I read your big post and I only see a fall back to the same old “the end justify the means” The terrorists had a safe harbor in Afghanistan, it was totally justified to go there, not so Iraq.
Now that is a very dumb thing to say, I could not see anything there but granting Dubya carte blanche to attack any country he wishes to, even if Al-queda is not there.
Afghanistan showed me that sometimes wars have to be fought; Iraq showed me that this president is a swindler, willing to corrupt even the war on terror to support his preconceived course of action, and to benefit his cronies.
And Airman Doors, USAF, even if English was/is my second language I agree with pantom’s assessment, even I can read that.
I see the Friends of Saddam are babbling as much as ever. Still ignoring the fact that GW never stating a single casus beli; Rather, GW stated several. Of course, your twisted hatred of all things that bear the mark of Bush blinds you to mere facts. You only see and hear what you want to see and hear.
One day, I hope you will have the intellectual honesty to examine your absurd position: The world would have been a better place if Saddam was not removed from power. I know, probably too much to hope for. You will probably go to your dying days cursing Bush for removing Saddam from power. Heck, Saddam was a good Stalinist…
The lot of you certainly aren’t doing much to dispel the notion that you are morons.
Thanks for the compliment, Brutus. If I can provoke you, I know I’ve done the right thing.
The dude gave you what you wanted, and you still want more. Lotsa class you guys are showing here. You can’t even be gracious in victory.
Have fun beating down a helpless man.
I can’t help you if you can’t recognize a lie, even when it’s pointed out to you.
Good night.
Oh, wait, I see now. “The Prez done us dirt”. Why, the poor fellow has been mischaracterized and misrepresented again! See, he doesn’t mean “dirt”, he means, like, “earth”, the fertile soil from which all goodness springs!