[QUOTE=GIGObuster]
There is no need to insist when you finally acknowledge the “confusion”.
[/QUOTE]
There was no “confusion.” You insisted on telling me what my position was in spite of the fact that I both denied and specifically disavowed it.
You never asked me if it was my position, you insisted. When I told you it wasn’t and explained why it wasn’t, you insisted that it was. That’s not confusion.
It’s deliberate lying.
[QUOTE=Scylla]
There was no “confusion.” You insisted on telling me what my position was in spite of the fact that I both denied and specifically disavowed it.
You never asked me if it was my position, you insisted. When I told you it wasn’t and explained why it wasn’t, you insisted that it was. That’s not confusion.
It’s deliberate lying.
[/QUOTE]
No can do, history is not on your side regarding the almost carbon copy equivocation, but I am willing to accept you are not being misled anymore.
So, do you still have a use for Bush?
[QUOTE=Scylla]
Col:
It’s been nice talking to you, and I hope to do so again. You’ve been very nice, and I apologize for exiting the discussion, but you excepted I don’t find the present company aggreable.
[/QUOTE]
Thats too bad because I have been trying to get into the mind of people who supported the war despite having all the right information. I can’t say that I agree with the rationale that you propose, the most practical criticism that comes to mind is why “making an example” of Afghanistan was not enough, and if Afghanistan wasn’t enough why did we invade Iraq instead of half a dozen other targets that (at least in my mind) make more sense.