[quote]lixy wrote:
“The dems have repeatedly stated that Iraq is Bush’s War. Therefore, it’s failure would be laid at his door.”
That statement was the one that don’t make sense.[/quote]
No, just watch. This will come to fruition. Politics at it’s finest. Guaranteed.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
tme!!!
What a treat!!! Wait, that was an overstatement.
The Iraq War was and should still be our war.
Unfortunately, the dems have decided to jump ship.
Politics over principle.
We love our dems.
JeffR
[/quote]
Sorry douchebag, but it was never “our” war, it was just Bush/Cheney/Rummy’s war. That was The Decider’s great mistake: he never really got the country to go to war with him. He took the military to war, but never really got the country to follow. Even Hitler could have told him that was gonna be a big-time fuck up.
[quote]tme wrote:
JeffR wrote:
tme!!!
What a treat!!! Wait, that was an overstatement.
The Iraq War was and should still be our war.
Unfortunately, the dems have decided to jump ship.
Politics over principle.
We love our dems.
JeffR
Sorry douchebag, but it was never “our” war, it was just Bush/Cheney/Rummy’s war. That was The Decider’s great mistake: he never really got the country to go to war with him. He took the military to war, but never really got the country to follow. Even Hitler could have told him that was gonna be a big-time fuck up.
[/quote]
Insults make me happy.
Ok, runt, how many democrats voted for the war again?
Did the guy you voted for for President in 2004 vote for the war?
Did your choice in 2008 (rodham) vote for the war?
Let me know.
JeffR
[quote]JeffRo wrote:
Insults make me happy.[/quote]
Me too.
Ok, fat boy, how many had prior knowledge that the intel they based their voting decision on was falsified?
Who’d I vote for in 2004?
Don’t know who my choice for 2008 will be yet, so I’m pretty sure you don’t either. I’m going to bet that the right wing God patrol isn’t going to let your boy Rudy be an option, though.
You will never know, no matter what I or anyone else tells you.
JeffR
[/quote]
[quote]tme wrote:
JeffRo wrote:
Insults make me happy.
Me too.
JeffRo wrote:Ok, runt, how many democrats voted for the war again?
Ok, fat boy, how many had prior knowledge that the intel they based their voting decision on was falsified?
JeffRo wrote:Did the guy you voted for for President in 2004 vote for the war?
Who’d I vote for in 2004?
JeffRo wrote:Did your choice in 2008 (rodham) vote for the war?
Don’t know who my choice for 2008 will be yet, so I’m pretty sure you don’t either. I’m going to bet that the right wing God patrol isn’t going to let your boy Rudy be an option, though.
JeffRo wrote:Let me know.
You will never know, no matter what I or anyone else tells you.
JeffR
Me, too.
Sure, fat boy.
[/quote]
Hey, runt,
The fat boy thing was pretty mean.
Second, let’s get the quote thing down,
Third, who did you vote for in 2004?
Fourth, you will vote for rodham.
Fifth, please provide proof of falsification of intel. In fact, a bipartisan commission dismissed that false claim.
Look it up.
Sixth, Rudy is a rarity in politics: He has cross-over appeal. He’s too good to pass up and people will see this.
Seventh: If Rudy is the nominee, will you man up and admit that the far right crowd has less power or is more open to ideas than you have given them credit for?
JeffR
[quote]JeffRo wrote:
Hey, runt,
The fat boy thing was pretty mean.
Second, let’s get the quote thing down,[/quote]
Sorry, missed a /, but it’s fixed now. Too bad about the fat boy thing though. Cut out the Ho-Ho’s, maybe?
I actually wrote in “HeadHunter, the fat gay skinhead wheezer wannabe hero chickenhawk from T-Nation”. Really, I’m not shitting. I live in Wyoming, we’re voting for Republicans no matter what I vote for.
Want me to write in “Jeffro, the fat pom-pom waving chickenhawk shill” in '08? Consider it done.
[quote]JeffRo wrote:Fifth, please provide proof of falsification of intel. In fact, a bipartisan commission dismissed that false claim.
Look it up.[/quote]
You know that’s not true, so I’m not going to waste any time on it. We’ve been over this too many times already.
Rudy is fucking scab who’s only in this shit because he gets to keep his unspent campaign donations.
Tell you what, if that scumbag is the nominee, I’ll not only write in your name, I’ll concede that the fix is so fucking in that Rudy the Retard will be our next Presidential Appointee. Justice Scalirobelito guarantees it!
[quote]JeffRo wrote:
Fifth, please provide proof of falsification of intel. In fact, a bipartisan commission dismissed that false claim.[/quote]
Let’s see…Powell himself said: “it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading.”
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=1442
And there are a ton of CIA agents who say they were pressured to falsify the reports.
Then there’s the fact that “a year after Bush administration claims about Iraqi “bioweapons trailers” were discredited by American experts, a biological weapons specialist from Australia has claimed that U.S. officials were still suppressing the findings, and that a CIA officer told him it was “politically not possible” to report that the White House claims (about WMD) were untrue”
http://www.registerguard.com/news/2006/05/14/a2.int.wmd.0514.p1.php?section=nation_world
Then there’s Hans Blix who in an interview on BBC TV, accused the US and British governments of deliberately dramatising the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And let’s not forget the prophetic Scott Ritter, and how Sean Hannity claimed Scott was biased and on Saddam’s payroll to support that Iraq had no WMDs.
Finally, please name that bipartisan commission so we can examine it in details. Is it the Iraq Intelligence Commission you have in mind?
Seriously, are you so naive to believe that a government wouldn’t falsify intelligence to get what it wants? You’re a joke.
P.S: If you don’t want to be called “fat boy”, maybe you should stop calling others “muffin boy” and other insults. Charity starts at home…
[quote]lixy wrote:
JeffRo wrote:
Fifth, please provide proof of falsification of intel. In fact, a bipartisan commission dismissed that false claim.
Let’s see…Powell himself said: “it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading.”
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=1442
And there are a ton of CIA agents who say they were pressured to falsify the reports.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4086361.stm
Then there’s the fact that “a year after Bush administration claims about Iraqi “bioweapons trailers” were discredited by American experts, a biological weapons specialist from Australia has claimed that U.S. officials were still suppressing the findings, and that a CIA officer told him it was “politically not possible” to report that the White House claims (about WMD) were untrue”
http://www.registerguard.com/news/2006/05/14/a2.int.wmd.0514.p1.php?section=nation_world
Then there’s Hans Blix who in an interview on BBC TV, accused the US and British governments of deliberately dramatising the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And let’s not forget the prophetic Scott Ritter, and how Sean Hannity claimed Scott was biased and on Saddam’s payroll to support that Iraq had no WMDs.
Finally, please name that bipartisan commission so we can examine it in details. Is it the Iraq Intelligence Commission you have in mind?
Seriously, are you so naive to believe that a government wouldn’t falsify intelligence to get what it wants? You’re a joke.
P.S: If you don’t want to be called “fat boy”, maybe you should stop calling others “muffin boy” and other insults. Charity starts at home…[/quote]
lixy,
You need to sharpen up. I’ll deal with your first Powell claim.
First, you left this out:
Therefore, the CIA didn’t catch the error. Is this deliberate?
No. Unless you can prove they deliberately falsified the intel.
The rest of your post is as easily refuted.
Finally, I was just poking fun at tme. The best he has is “fat boy.” I’m not, therefore, it meant nothing.
However, I was taunting him a little about his weak retort.
I like “runt.” So much more demeaning.
JeffR
[quote]lixy wrote:
And let’s not forget the prophetic Scott Ritter, and how Sean Hannity claimed Scott was biased and on Saddam’s payroll to support that Iraq had no WMDs.
[/quote]
Oh, I couldn’t resist pointing out that in the saddam tapes, his henchman are pointing out that they haven’t declared the WMD they have to the U.N. The date is 1995. This is the same date that ritter claims Iraq as WMD free.
Nope.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Therefore, the CIA didn’t catch the error. Is this deliberate? [/quote]
Powell’s own words were “deliberately misleading”. Take it up with him.
I don’t need to prove squat. On the other hand, Bush should be held accountable for the war, all the ensuing deaths, and plunging the region into chaos. He is the one that needs to prove such bloodshed was inevitable. Morally as well as legally, the burden of proof lies on the one using force.
Give it a try then.
By the way, you didn’t name your “bipartisan commission”. I’m interested in studying that.
The troop surge has not really worked, our troops are dead tired and are being pushed harder than any American troops in history(as far as time on duty and breaks)…
If we leave Iraq, it will fall apart and Iran will likely double in size.
If we stay, we have much to small a force to actually control the country and will just be delaying the inevitable…
We could “win in Iraq” with another 100 thousand+ troops…but we don’t have nearly that many and the ones in Iraq are pretty damn far from being “battle-ready”.
[quote]tme wrote:
JeffRo wrote:
Hey, runt,
The fat boy thing was pretty mean.
Second, let’s get the quote thing down,
Sorry, missed a /, but it’s fixed now. Too bad about the fat boy thing though. Cut out the Ho-Ho’s, maybe?
JeffRo wrote:Third, who did you vote for in 2004?
I actually wrote in “HeadHunter, the fat gay skinhead wheezer wannabe hero chickenhawk from T-Nation”. Really, I’m not shitting. I live in Wyoming, we’re voting for Republicans no matter what I vote for.
JeffRo wrote:Fourth, you will vote for rodham.
Want me to write in “Jeffro, the fat pom-pom waving chickenhawk shill” in '08? Consider it done.
JeffRo wrote:Fifth, please provide proof of falsification of intel. In fact, a bipartisan commission dismissed that false claim.
Look it up.
You know that’s not true, so I’m not going to waste any time on it. We’ve been over this too many times already.
JeffRo wrote:Sixth, Rudy is a rarity in politics: He has cross-over appeal. He’s too good to pass up and people will see this.
Rudy is fucking scab who’s only in this shit because he gets to keep his unspent campaign donations.
JeffRo wrote:Seventh: If Rudy is the nominee, will you man up and admit that the far right crowd has less power or is more open to ideas than you have given them credit for?
Tell you what, if that scumbag is the nominee, I’ll not only write in your name, I’ll concede that the fix is so fucking in that Rudy the Retard will be our next Presidential Appointee. Justice Scalirobelito guarantees it!
[/quote]
tme: 6 foot… 215… I smell high school basketball player. That would explain lack of debate skill here.
I kind of like the argument though. Jeff makes a point, scarecrow says: fat boy! You represent your side well little feller.
[quote]ChuckyT wrote:
tme: 6 foot… 215… I smell high school basketball player. That would explain lack of debate skill here.
[/quote]
Chucky: 6 foot…273… I smell high school jock turned fat tow truck driver. I think that’s a typo on the body fat, you probably meant 36%.
And Jeffro has never made a valid point in his sad little life.
[quote]tme wrote:
ChuckyT wrote:
tme: 6 foot… 215… I smell high school basketball player. That would explain lack of debate skill here.
Chucky: 6 foot…273… I smell high school jock turned fat tow truck driver. I think that’s a typo on the body fat, you probably meant 36%.
And Jeffro has never made a valid point in his sad little life.
[/quote]
tme (runt):
My response: I have never made a valid point in my sad, little life.
Think about it.
Either I just made a valid point (therefore, you were wrong), or you say I still haven’t (therefore, you are wrong).
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Either I just made a valid point (therefore, you were wrong), or you say I still haven’t (therefore, you are wrong). [/quote]
What is that? Kindergarden?
Grow up!
[quote]lixy wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Either I just made a valid point (therefore, you were wrong), or you say I still haven’t (therefore, you are wrong).
What is that? Kindergarden?
Grow up!
[/quote]
Die.
JeffR
[quote]tme wrote:
ChuckyT wrote:
tme: 6 foot… 215… I smell high school basketball player. That would explain lack of debate skill here.
Chucky: 6 foot…273… I smell high school jock turned fat tow truck driver. I think that’s a typo on the body fat, you probably meant 36%.
And Jeffro has never made a valid point in his sad little life.
[/quote]
I know you’re used to hearing this whenever you argue, try open peanut butter jars for women, or generally when you’re around full-grown men, but… WEAK.
[quote]lixy wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Therefore, the CIA didn’t catch the error. Is this deliberate?
Powell’s own words were “deliberately misleading”. Take it up with him.[/quote]
lixy, your quote was deliberately misleading. You left out pertinent context. To further your own point of view. In itself, not bad, but when called out, you should own up to it. Poor sport, especially when in a debate. But you consistently leave out pertinent information. Old hat for you; I expect this, all the time.
[quote]No. Unless you can prove they deliberately falsified the intel.
I don’t need to prove squat. On the other hand, Bush should be held accountable for the war, all the ensuing deaths, and plunging the region into chaos. He is the one that needs to prove such bloodshed was inevitable. Morally as well as legally, the burden of proof lies on the one using force.[/quote]
Completely off tangent and a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the point. What does accountablilty have to do with deliberately falsifying intel? You saying that Bush did this? Fine. Please offer proof. No? No proof? Fine. Please present further text with the caveat: “I’m speculating and adding to the conspiracy theories of the day.” At least new participants to the discussion will know exactly where you’re coming from, right from the start.
As for plunging the area into chaos… are you fucking kidding me? You must be, because the whole of the middle east has been very far from the tranquil Garden of Eden you seem to think it was prior to 1990. 1945, even.
Ah, yes, just another attempt to blame the ills of the region to, yes, I guessed it: imperialist capitalist dogs of the West.
lixy, being the pacifist you claim to be… had you any right to try Pres. Bush, what would YOUR punishment be to fit the crime? Hm? And by the way, predicate your response with a reason why you have any right to stand judge.
Hi Jeffy
Ted Turner dropped out of CNN years ago. I realize that you don’t keep up with current events, though (which explains your highly comedic posts here).
You mentioned “Politics over principle”. That brings up a good point about the Republican party. Little by little, Republicans in the House and Senate are breaking rank with Bush on the war. Do you know why? Because there’s a big election coming up in 2008, and they are afraid of losing their jobs. Is that politics over principle, when you brown-nose Bush’s war for years, then change positions just in time for an election? A simple Yes or No will do.
Lets see, I think the latest defector is Senator Olympia Snowe from Maine. All of a sudden, she thinks the troops should come home soon. There’s Voinovich and Dick Lugar, and Senator Hagel too. Between now and November 2008, how many more Republicans will change their position based on their election chances? Can you give an estimated number?
Can I just take a moment to say that those Republican Senators planning on switching at the last minute are the worst sort of spineless maggots? The kind that you like to vote for, Jeffy.
There are 22 Republican Senate seats up for grabs in 2008, and only 12 Democratic seats in play. Good luck with that. Maybe the voters will forget their Republican senators’ voting records? That’s kind of unlikely, I guess.
By the way, the majority of Democrats in the House voted against invading Iraq. To bring it current, you have the Senate split along party lines, with Republican Senators filibustering proper training time and proper equipment for our military, voting against pay raises, voting to defund the VA, and so on. That won’t look good on their records.
This has always been a Republican war, and that’s not going to change until Bush is finally gone. You right wingers were all pumped up and cocky when it seemed like everything was going good. Now that it’s obviously not going so good, you want to try to spread the responsiblity around equally, and say the Democrats are responsible.
Pussies.
Wow. I want my five minutes back.