Where’s that smilie for puking your guts out now?
Sam
Sorry to interrupt. I came back to see if anyone had posted this, and they had not.
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60629,00.html
I’ll let you guys get back to your hijack 
No, I’m pretty sure as soon as Bush is out of office, the credibility counter will be reset.
**
Our action? If in our action you mean the war that Bush started, I guess you have a point.
**
It didn’t.
**
Who said their sacrifice was meaningless? The troops have nothing to do with this, leave them out of it.
It’s a shitty attitude to not like Bush because we believe he lied to start a war and may have stirred up a hornet’s nest?
Boy, I must try some of that neocrack you are smoking.
**
Leave Clinton out of this, he was a schmuck in his own right, who the fuck cares?
**
Not liking Bush or being against the war = Betting against the country?
Yes or no?
**
Or, how about this?
No WMD are found, the WMD charges were discovered to be trumped up, and Bush is voted the fuck out of office. Some new integrity is elected into office and the lessons of the past are applied to the situations of the tomorrow. Our servicemen still died for something, a better future.
No, I’m pretty sure as soon as Bush is out of office, the credibility counter will be reset.
**
Our action? If in our action you mean the war that Bush started, I guess you have a point.
**
It didn’t.
**
Who said their sacrifice was meaningless? The troops have nothing to do with this, leave them out of it.
It’s a shitty attitude to not like Bush because we believe he lied to start a war and may have stirred up a hornet’s nest?
Boy, I must try some of that neocrack you are smoking.
**
Leave Clinton out of this, he was a schmuck in his own right, who the fuck cares?
**
Not liking Bush or being against the war = Betting against the country?
Yes or no?
**
Or, how about this?
No WMD are found, the WMD charges were discovered to be trumped up, and Bush is voted the fuck out of office. Some new integrity is elected into office and the lessons of the past are applied to the situations of the tomorrow. Our servicemen still died for something, a better future.
Too bad they won’t be able to enjoy it.
Well that goes without saying. The point is, no matter what happens, they’ll have died for something good, or something bad.
Only time will tell which one it turns out to be.
**
Then why are you taking issue with my statement? It is clearly not addressed to such things.
I did not make a general indictment of those who oppose the way. I made a specific indictment of a subset of that the group.
That’s the third time I’ve clarified that statement of mine, and I stand behind it as I worded it.
Yes. And one potential end to that embarassment and failure would be that we actually find what is that Bush said was there in convincing fashion.
There are some here and elsewhere that ** clearly** would be unhappy with such a result. Such a person is a shithead.
No comment on the weapons inspectors being thrown out?
I guess if you are actually an American hoping for a fall in US Diplomatic status can be considered shitheaded.
Realistic people have already come to the conclusion that any immediate threat of WMDs was false. We can quibble for years perhaps about programs going on and intentions but the complete lack of evidence to this point indicates nothing was ready to strike in 45 minutes. You may want to wait for thanksgiving but really there should already be some investigation going on the Admins evidence presentations. Shouldn’t Bush et al be getting at least as grilled as Blair?
And BTW if those soldiers died to take over a land devoid of WMD and the US Admin is exposed to all the world as a pack of lying warmongers then it won’t have been in vain. Their sacrifice and exposure of truth afterwards may pull American foreign policy from the brink of insanity. Your dream scenario is the first link in a chain of wars.
My apologies. You were right, I was wrong. I stand corrected, though my error seems to be fairly common.
I would have been more impressed had you done without the insulting accusations.
:rolleyes:
Neocon persecution porn.
Actually I am being persecuted.
No, your not. You’re getting called on having a position that doesn’t jive with the facts. this is not persecution. Call me when you have numbers tatooed in your arm and elephants burned on your yard.
Elephants burned on my yard?
Don’t get histrionic. Just because I’m not being persecuted like the jews in WWII doesn’t mean I’m not being persecuted.
I can give you several examples right here in this thread.
-
When I said Saddam expelled the inspectors I was immediately insulted and called a liar by Demostylus.
-
Tejota called me a liar.
-
People are lying about me. It is being said that I think anybody who criticizes the war is a traitor. This false attribution is being used as an excuse to attack me. Despite the fact that I have clarified my actual position four times the original false attribution is still being used against me.
…that’s just the last few posts.
So yeah, I am being persecuted. Certainly not auschwitz, revoke my civil rights burn a cross in my yard and string me from a tree persecuted, but persecuted nonetheless.
Well, if he ever is he can still run for Mayor of Washington DC.
<rimshot>
Come and see the violence inherent in the message board!
Oh and Demostylus said I was incapable of independant thought so maybe I just think I’m persecuted because Debaser told me I am.
I find it totally unrealistic to hope that Bush will be vindicated by the facts. It’s like hoping that Saddam Hussein will have a change of heart, confess to the crimes he committed, throw himself on the mercy of the Hague, and promise to spend the rest of his life knitting sweaters for penguins as penance.
And if he DOES somehow have evidence, that’s even worse. It won’t change the fundamental fucked-upedness of how he went about this war – i.e., demanding the rest of the world fall into line even though he presented no good evidence for the need to do so, relying on demonstrably faulty and falsified evidence to make his case, misrepresenting international attitudes to the home audience, and promoting the dangerous doctrine of preemptive strike. As I’ve said before, the cop who plants evidence on a suspect might turn out to have collared the right guy, but that doesn’t make the cop’s actions right. I don’t want his dangerous and corrupt practices to receive any further justification. I consider his foreign policy strategies to be very risky and unwise, and I think it benefits everyone (except him) if they’re thoroughly discredited, so that nobody else will ever use them. For that reason, I’ll be unhappy if he’s able to find any facts that he can twist around into providing support for his methods.
However, that’s not my real fear. My real fear is that he’ll trot out something unconvincing, but something that gives him plausible deniability. “Look,” he’ll say, “Here’s a weapons canister with traces of a chemical on it that could be decayed sarin gas! [sub]sure, it could be decayed DDT, but details, details[/sub] We were right to go to war, we protected America from Saddam’s WMDs!” And my fear is that his line will be bought by enough people that his doctrine won’t be discredited, and might be used by future leaders, and might REALLY get our country into trouble next time.
To sum up:
- I don’t think it’s realistic to hope evidence will surface that really vindicates him.
- I hope evidence doesn’t surface that gives him plausible deniability.
- I also hope evidence doesn’t surface that seems to provide post-hoc justification for the war, since he’ll almost certainly spin such evidence to provide post-hoc justification for his foreign policy doctrines, which are intellectually and morally bankrupt and risky for both our nation and other nations.
Sorry if you think that makes me a shithead.
Here’s an example of what could surface that would change my mind:
-Evidence that Hussein was planning an imminent act that would kill hundreds of thousands of people; COMBINED WITH
-Evidence that had Bush revealed this evidence, even more people would have died, COMBINED WITH
-An apology from Bush for having to hide this evidence from the rest of the world, coupled with an oath not to use the preemptive-strike doctrine ever again.
If that happens, I’ll eat crow. I’ll give him till, let’s say, St. Patrick’s day to provide such evidence.
Daniel
See, Scylla, this is ironic. You seem to expect people to give you the benefit of the doubt – when you apparently misunderstand what Saddam did, you get angry when people assume you were lying. But when people apparently misunderstand what you’re saying, you assume they’re lying, and extend them no benefit of the doubt whatsoever.
Either be a lot less cavalier with accusations of other people lying, or else be a lot more thickskinned when people throw similar accusations at you.
Daniel
Persecutions, and martyrdom.
St. Steven - stoned to death
St. Andrew - pierced with arrows
St. Scylla - hoist on his own petard.