Is it just me, or can anyone else feel Tars’ spittle as it comes screaming from his raving mouth and hurtling through the stratosphere?
just an example, not an accusation
The problem here is the UN was supposed to be the police we were showing the evidence to, and the evidence we did show was weaker than Popeye pre-spinach. I’m sure it is possible the US had secret evidence, but why didn’t Bush show it to Putin or Hu or Chirac in private?
that was in response to Weirddave getting insulting in the first sentaence of his reply to me. The whole tone of this thread is an insult to the anti-war movement with the neener neener neener comment and it has gone downhill from there on both sides. That’s not an excuse for my behavior, i am not the better persone to rise above the filth at this juncture, since i can attack prowar people here who come off all gung ho as opposed to directly debating Shrubya as to the merrits of invading on little to no evidence.
I’m not sure I see your point. Since more than two-thirds of Americans support the war, according to the Pew Research Center, one can argue that the will of the people is being carried out by the government.
I’m not sure I agree with going to war in the first place. But even if we were in a true democracy, the sovereign will of the people would dictate that we went to war.
You know, this whole Iraq thing is just like the fighting in Vietnam during WWII.
I dunno, SPOOFE, I’m having a hard time distinguishing it from the spittle emanating from Stinkpalm’s raspberry in the OP.
Seems to me if he didn’t wish to engage in a spitting war, he shouldn’t have started one.
<shrug>
Actually, you said, "Please provide cite for the French saying that they had positive proof that no WMDs were in existence. "
To which I still reply, “This right here is fucking stupid. How do you prove that something doesn’t exist? Does this make sense to anyone?”
I’m not going to play nice just because this is the Internet.
What the hell is the point of this stupid fucking OP, until we have independent verification of WMD?
Anyone else noticing that we’re having a goddamn mother spanking, cricket fucking culture clash here?
I’m seeing two groups of people here… 1 group treating this closer to how arguements go in the rest of the SDMB and the other group of people acting like this is a pit thread and kinda being rude to each other and making fun of everyone involved in the news story.
[Medium-range hijack]
But apparently at least one net thinks it’s reason enough for some people. Has anyone seen those promos for the war coverage on CNN where a clip pops up of Wolf Blitzer saying “Huge Explosions…”, with the rest cut off?
[/Medium-range hijack]
Dagnamit Captain, you are a fool if you think this is the case! It’s clearly analogous to when we were fighting the French during the Spanish-American War! Saddam is so like Ghengis Khan it’s frightening. I’m surprised you missed this…
PLANT!
You heard it here first.
Shayna…
Good point. Maybe it’s just all of these “April Showers” I keep hearing about.
DTC…
RELEVANCE?!?
Why, I am always happy to respond politely to polite people.
No, my position would not change in support of the war, even if no WMD are ever found. Now, I believe they will be, and the latest reports I’ve heard ( ABC radio news, 8PM, EST ) are still confirming the presence of Mustard agents and positive field tests for Sarin, but even if it turns out to be Franch’s Mustard and Saran Wrap, it won’t change my position. Saddam has used WMD in the past and thus certainly possesses the ability to produce more. He has been engaging in a 12 year game of hide and go fuck yourself with the U.N, regularly tortures and kills thousands of his own civilians and when oil was allowed to be sold for humanitarian reasons he diverted the money to build lavish palaces. Tons of food has been found stockpiled while Iraqi civilians were going hungry. I honestly believe the man was/is truly, monumentaly, evil and needs to be removed with extreme predjudice. I honestly believe that the average “man on the street” in Iraq will be much better off when he is gone. These are some of my reasons for supporting the war, I make no claims, indeed, I have no great love for, the Bush administration. My greatest fear is that they will completely screw up what comes after the war, but I’m willing to wait and see if they do or not without proclaiming a post war screwup a fait accompli.
Oh thank God, I was afraid none of the lunatic fringe was going to bring this one up, it’s why I made the point earlier about the discoveries being confirmed by the embedded reporter with that unit, he’s a neutral observer. Besides, if it was a plant, I seriously doubt the administration would be taking the stance “We haven’t confirmed what it is, don’t go jumping to conclusions”… Or maybe that’s exactly what we’re supposed to think, eh Diogenes?
**bluetrust **:
"To which I still reply, “This right here is fucking stupid. How do you prove that something doesn’t exist? Does this make sense to anyone?”
So your point is that the French position is actually the appropriate one?
“I’m not going to play nice just because this is the Internet.”
I did gather. I was only suggesting you choose a venue where your baseless hostility might not look so out of place.
CR: sorry I mistook your sarcasm for high serious French-baiting. There is, as you doubtless know, no shortage of that around.
Naturally. If they were capably if thinking clearly and rationally, they wouldn’t be pro-war. 
So you’re saying that what should determine whether we go to war is the level of popular support for the war, once it’s underway?
To implement your theory, all we need is a good time machine.
Seems to me (and I could quite likely be wrong) that all this shouting about finding WMD’s is much much louder than the subsequent retractions. Even if nothing is ever found, I expect 40+% of Americans to believe that WMD’s were found, simply because the media carried on about it so often.
History repeats, only this time it’s Iraq / WMD that are continually being shouted, not Saddam and 9/11.
This is more a comment on media reporting, rather than whether or not there are WMD, or other political matters.
Kinda locked in with Reuters there aren’t you Tars???
From one of them, I got this:
and this
Obviously Arab lawyers have an entirely different agenda than our local ones. :rolleyes:
Isn’t he cute, everybody? They’re so adorable when they begin to mimic human behavior! Pretty amazing, really, when they posess little more than a brain stem to regulate their autonomic nerve functions with no real higher brain functions at all.
O.K., Skippy, let’s start with this: You claim that I have complained about a “Liberal Media Bias”. Prove it. I want one cite where I have said such a thing. Guess what? You won’t find it because I never said anything of the kind. In point of fact, I happen to think that the media has a bit of a conservative bias
No, Reuters is fine, although I find it curious that someone harping on how I’m supposedly exibiting bias post all of their counter “evidence” from one single news source. No evidence of bias in that, is there?. :dubious: It’s even more remarkable when you consider that the information presented could easily have been gleaned from any one of a dozen different news sources, something that would have given your claims at least the surface appearence of objectivity.
In any event, not one of your links proved what you claimed they prove. Most of them detailed one of two things:
A: ) Many Arabs want to go fight the U.S. in Iraq.
B: ) Many more Arabs are protesting against the war.
The closest you came was this link (note the correct use of vB code? It’s really not that hard, you can do it!) which features the opinion of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak who says that he thinks the war will create “100 bin Ladens”. Gee, a politician in a country that opposes the war, with a population that opposes the war, saying something against the war. That’s shocking! Nowhere have you linked to anything, other than President Mubarak’s opinion, which proves “turned thousands of Arabs into terrorists who want us all dead”. YOU said that the war has created these new terrorists. Linking to stories about how the U.S. is unpopular in the Middle East isn’t even close to proving this, Sparky. We’ve been the “Great Satan” over there for years. I want evidence of new terrorists created in the last 2 weeks, specifically in response to the war.
Again, where did I say that? The embedded reporter with that unit happened to be from CNN. I wish it had been am al-Jazira reporter ( Several of them are embedded as well, did you even know that? ) I would have loved to see the verbal tap dancing you’d have engaged in to explain away that.
You’re going to have to try a lot harder to try for an insult that will upset me. Reposting an “insult” that was stupid the first 700 times I saw it used by the anti-war folks isn’t even close. Unlike you, my opinions are carefully thought out and are my own, not given to me by idiots while I drool and nod vacantly.
What I particularly love about the SDMB is the willingness of posters to withdraw our opinions once they have been proven false. The sheer grace and goodwill as we retract our unfounded accusations or outright lies is breathtaking.
Because we all realise, of course, that it is better to apologise and withdraw with dignity than blithely pretend the opposing viewpoint has not been established.
:rolleyes: