• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Series of Blasts in Baghdad Kill 58, Injure 300

apdst said:
Well, here's your actual post, where you feel the need to explain to me why you think the war is wrong, so therefore, you must have thought that I thought the invasion was the neatest thing sliced bread. Next time, post the whole thing
Click to expand...

Wow. You're a regular Miss Cleo aren't you?

Here's your post :

Iraq has to appear to be a defeat for America so the Libbos can blame it one Bush and bitch for the next forty years about how we lost the war in Iraq, just like they've done with Vietnam. If the war was considered a victory, the Libbos couldn't use it as an example why we shouldn't get into the next war and if we did get into the next war they couldn't use it as an example of how we're going to lose anyway, so we might as well give up now. They'll never admit that it was their side that gave the whole show away.
Click to expand...

Here is my reply :

.....yeah...I'm pretty sure I'd still have problem with sacrificing 4,000 soldiers for non-existent WMDs and a 3rd rate dictator with less firepower then some of my wife's relatives regardless of the war's outcome. Have you not been following the last 6 years of liberalism? Here, I'll explain to you some of the reasons as to why we're opposed to the war :

1. It was started over information which was inflated and false pretenses. Regardless of who agreed or disagreed with them.
2. Because of these false pretenses 4,000+ American soldiers died needlessly.
3. We've come out worse then before. Iraq is still a ****hole. The Iraqis still aren't ready to support themselves or even care enough to do so.

The war being a complete failure is pretty much one of the last reasons Liberals are opposed to it.
Click to expand...

Notice my post. Read it carefully. What does it say? It deals specifically with the reasons liberals oppose the war. Now you, clear as a black and white panda in a rainbow, do not teach reading comprehension but if your post speaks on why liberals wouldn't be able to oppose the war if it had been a total success and mine speaks on why liberals would still be opposed to the war. What in Katrina's name would that have to do with your opinion of the invasion?

Please stop this?
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Wow. You're a regular Miss Cleo aren't you?

Here's your post :



Here is my reply :



Notice my post. Read it carefully. What does it say? It deals specifically with the reasons liberals oppose the war. Now you, clear as a black and white panda in a rainbow, do not teach reading comprehension but if your post speaks on why liberals wouldn't be able to oppose the war if it had been a total success and mine speaks on why liberals would still be opposed to the war. What in Katrina's name would that have to do with your opinion of the invasion?

Please stop this?
Click to expand...

And the only reason you would feel the need to explain that, is because you think I supported the invasion.

Please stop this?
Click to expand...

I'm only responding to your assaults, my friend.
 
apdst said:
And the only reason you would feel the need to explain that, is because you think I supported the invasion.

I'm only responding to your assaults, my friend.
Click to expand...

Do you not understand what a strawman-nonsequitur is?

Here I'll give you a rundown :

#1. You state that liberals wouldn't oppose the war if it had been a success.

#2. I state that liberals would for A,B,C and D reasons.

#3. You state that I claimed you supported the invasion.

#2 is a direct response to #1. It has absolutely nothing to do with whatever your views towards the invasion are(#3). #3 is a strawman. You try to attribute to my person an argument I never made. And on top of that it has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation at hand. Seriously. Stop. You do not want to go against me on this.
 
Last edited:
You state that liberals wouldn't oppose the war if it had been a success.
Click to expand...

I NEVER said that.
 
apdst said:
I NEVER said that.
Click to expand...

Iraq has to appear to be a defeat for America so the Libbos can blame it one Bush and bitch for the next forty years about how we lost the war in Iraq, just like they've done with Vietnam. If the war was considered a victory, the Libbos couldn't use it as an example why we shouldn't get into the next war and if we did get into the next war they couldn't use it as an example of how we're going to lose anyway, so we might as well give up now. They'll never admit that it was their side that gave the whole show away.
 
I said, that if the war wasn't a defeat, the Libbos wouldn't have anything to bitch about, the way they have Vietnam to bitch about. I never claimed that they wouldn't oppose the war, win, or lose. Maybe I'm not the one that needs the reading classes?

Maybe Redress can come in and cover for you, some more. Looks like you need it at this point.
 
Last edited:
Me :

Hatuey said:
You state that liberals wouldn't oppose the war if it had been a success
Click to expand...

You :

apdst said:
I said, that if the war wasn't a defeat, the Libbos wouldn't have anything to bitch about,
Click to expand...

Do you not understand what you're writing? Liberals would still oppose or in your words 'bitch' about the war on the same basis they have because the arguments against the war itself aren't based on whether it's a success or not. They are based on the reasons I stated in this post :

1. It was started over information which was inflated and false pretenses. Regardless of who agreed or disagreed with them.
2. Because of these false pretenses 4,000+ American soldiers died needlessly.
3. We've come out worse then before. Iraq is still a ****hole. The Iraqis still aren't ready to support themselves or even care enough to do so.
Click to expand...

the way they have Vietnam to bitch about. I never claimed that they wouldn't oppose the war, win, or lose. Maybe I'm not the one that needs the reading classes?
Click to expand...

apdst said:
Iraq has to appear to be a defeat for America so the Libbos can blame it one Bush and bitch for the next forty years
Click to expand...

Seriously. You don't understand that opposition to the war has nothing to do with the Iraq war being a success or defeat. It has to do with why we're there in the first place.

Maybe Redress can come in and cover for you, some more. Looks like you need it at this point.
Click to expand...

What are you blabbering about? This is the second time you mention Redress and I still don't know why. Is there a particular reason?
 
Seriously. You don't understand that opposition to the war has nothing to do with the Iraq war being a success or defeat.
Click to expand...

I never said it did...:rofl

I can't understand why suggest that I did say that.
 
apdst said:
I never said it did...:rofl

I can't understand why suggest that I did say that.
Click to expand...

apdst said:
Iraq has to appear to be a defeat for America so the Libbos can blame it one Bush and bitch for the next forty years about how we lost the war in Iraq, just like they've done with Vietnam. If the war was considered a victory, the Libbos couldn't use it as an example why we shouldn't get into the next war and if we did get into the next war they couldn't use it as an example of how we're going to lose anyway, so we might as well give up now. They'll never admit that it was their side that gave the whole show away.
Click to expand...

Wow. You seriously do need to proofread your posts. Or at least make an attempt at remembering what you wrote.
 
Hatuey said:
Wow. You seriously do need to proofread your posts. Or at least make an attempt at remembering what you wrote.
Click to expand...

I never said what you say I said. Maybe Redress needs to scold you for twisting other poster's comments?

Just like this one. It's an outright lie.

You state that liberals wouldn't oppose the war if it had been a success.
Click to expand...

I'm ready to accept your apology at anytime, sir.
 
apdst said:
I never said what you say I said. Maybe Redress needs to scold you for twisting other poster's comments?

Just like this one. It's an outright lie.

I'm ready to accept your apology at anytime, sir.
Click to expand...

Iraq has to appear to be a defeat for America so the Libbos can blame it one Bush and bitch for the next forty years about how we lost the war in Iraq, just like they've done with Vietnam. If the war was considered a victory, the Libbos couldn't use it as an example why we shouldn't get into the next war and if we did get into the next war they couldn't use it as an example of how we're going to lose anyway, so we might as well give up now. They'll never admit that it was their side that gave the whole show away.
Click to expand...

You really need to reread your posts. Please stop this? And what is your obsession with Redress? 2nd time I ask you.
 
Hatuey said:
You really need to reread your posts. Please stop this? And what is your obsession with Redress? 2nd time I ask you.
Click to expand...

How many different parts of that post are you going to use in an attempt to prove that I said what you said I said, but didn't actually say?
 
apdst said:
How many different parts of that post are you going to use in an attempt to prove that I said what you said I said, but didn't actually say?
Click to expand...

If you state that if Iraq had been a success Liberals wouldn't have 'something' complain('bitch') about you obviously do not understand that the opposition to the Iraq war isn't based on it being a failure or 'success', whatever definition we have for that now. It(keep up, the opposition) originates from the fact that the reasons for the war were founded on nothing more then weak intelligence overblown by an administration that saw itself as a crusader for freedom and democracy. Seriously, what do you not understand from what you yourself wrote? Maybe we could help you out.
 
All you can do is lie about what I said and insult me? I remember someone acting like you were someone special around here. Must be one of you fellow click'sters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom