Iraq War Timeline: Lie by Lie

Billo_Really · 01-02-09, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMak

I see. So now we just change what words mean to suit our preferred narratives, eh?

Look, unilateralism ain't defined as not having a permission slip from the UN Security Council. Just as multilateralism ain't having a permission slip.

Who argued that any resolution contained the words, "regime change?"

I love this nonsense you spew implying that a permission slip from the UN Security Council is necessary before any war is right, just, noble, moral, whatever. What a joke.

Why stop there? Why not simply subordinate our national government to the will of the UN Security Council? I mean, if that counil is going to exercise control over US foreign policy why not have them determine US domestic policy, too? Maybe we can scrap our governing institutions altogether, eh?

First, who even argues like this? Who argues that one branch is to blame for this or that? This is the consequence of the lefty fetish with apologies. You people are constantly looking for someone to blame. No longer do you even talk about accountability or responsibility.

Second, what is impeachable is whatever the House of Representatives says it is. Your hyper-partisan crap abut what is impeachable or not is, well, childish.

WE ATTACKED A COUNTRY THAT DID NOT ATTACK US!

TAKE THIS BULL**** AND THROW IT IN THE RIVER!

Billo_Really · 01-02-09, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Probably because they haven't done anything to deserve seeing a courtroom... but hey, that there is crazy talk right?

THAT'S RIGHT!

WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS ****ING CRAZY!

Moon · 01-02-09, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

You are so ****ing wrong it makes me vomit!

Iraq had nothing to do with the USS Cole.

He didn't say that they did.

MrVicchio · 01-02-09, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moon

He didn't say that they did.

Shhhhh!!! You'll mess with his mind. Stopping to consider that I was making a point about low tech can be a threat is WAY too deep for him.

Moon · 01-02-09, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Shhhhh!!! You'll mess with his mind. Stopping to consider that I was making a point about low tech threats is WAY too deep for him.

Heh...just trying to help.

MrVicchio · 01-02-09, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

You are so ****ing wrong it makes me vomit!

Perhaps you should consider calming down? Yeah... using the brain unit instead of relying on pure hate and emotion... those things can be bad for your health. Much safer to think things through. I believe here is a study on that too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

Iraq had nothing to do with the USS Cole.

Please show where I said they did buddy. You were going on about how low tech Iraq was compared to the USA, where is the threat? So I used this thing called real world evidence, to show how you've got a LOT to learn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

You stated yourself, Curveball was "suspect".

All non-US humint sources of intel are "suspected". The more "single source" you use, the more you suspect it, if you cannot verify one way or the other if the information is legit.

Quick example, imagine we had an Iraqi General feeding us locations of WMD stockpiles before the war. We had no way to prove he was right, or wrong. Would he not be suspect? Of course he would. Common sense. That and intel analyst by nature always throw out a "but..."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

You're the one whose "wrong".

Be nice to see some proof of this wrongness, and please don't post a shot of your puke on the floor, that's just gross.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

Why don't you go educate your ****ing ass!

Just because I don't "feel" about the issue doesn't make me wrong, how about you try oh... looking at the information with common sense and logic and disengage the old emotions for a minute.

Cause that's all you have, is emotion.

DeeJayH · 01-02-09, 06:21 PM

Is ADK a SeargentStinger1 sockpuppet?

ADK_Forever · 01-02-09, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

WE ATTACKED A COUNTRY THAT DID NOT ATTACK US!

TAKE THIS BULL**** AND THROW IT IN THE RIVER!

These guys sound like Bush and Cheney. They believe if they say something enough times and nobody challenges it then it becomes... true. Some of them refuse to read provided evidence, or simply are unable to read. Others like to talk in circles.

None of that changes the truth.

Not so Kimmosabee!

MrVicchio · 01-02-09, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADK_Forever

These guys sound like Bush and Cheney. They believe if they say something enough times and nobody challenges it then it becomes... true. Some of them refuse to read provided evidence, or simply are unable to read. Others like to talk in circles.

None of that changes the truth.

Not so Kimmosabee!

Your evidence is flawed. You provide information from either compromised sources, or leave out pertinent information.. like posting a blurb of Bush saying "Nuke China" and going on about how he is ready to start a nuclear war when in fact he said "I think it would take a serious situation before we'd ever consider the option of Nuke China should a conflict arise."

And that's the problem with your "evidence" and the flaw with all the "truth" you've posted here. You take tid bits, insert assumptions and spin and then spew a false reality and then claim anyone that doesn't agree with you is uneducated and stupid.

You're almost as bad a "We didn't land on the moon, I have proof!" type in the way you present your "facts".

ADK_Forever · 01-02-09, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Your evidence is flawed. You provide information from either compromised sources, or leave out pertinent information.. like posting a blurb of Bush saying "Nuke China" and going on about how he is ready to start a nuclear war when in fact he said "I think it would take a serious situation before we'd ever consider the option of Nuke China should a conflict arise."

And that's the problem with your "evidence" and the flaw with all the "truth" you've posted here. You take tid bits, insert assumptions and spin and then spew a false reality and then claim anyone that doesn't agree with you is uneducated and stupid.

You're almost as bad a "We didn't land on the moon, I have proof!" type in the way you present your "facts".

So tell me, what is flawed about what I have presented? You're great at shooting your mouth off but, AWOL (that means Absent With Out Leave, or permission) when it comes to arguing with any substance.

Well???

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following User Says Thank You to Billo_Really For This Useful Post:
ADK_Forever

The Following User Says Thank You to Moon For This Useful Post:
MrVicchio

The Following User Says Thank You to MrVicchio For This Useful Post:
DeeJayH