If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   Iraq elections "a resounding success." You submitted this with a red-and-blue state headline   (msnbc.msn.com) divider line 1432
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

15257 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2005 at 3:45 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1432 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-01-30 10:05:22 PM
Wow, it's amazing you can devine what that lady is thinking just from looking at a photo, bbcrackmonkey. What other powers do you get when drink the kool-aid?

Wonder if this crossed her mind at all?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/26/sprj.irq.baghdad.market/index.html

Or this, maybe?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/01/20/uk.iraq.courtmartial/index.html

Nahh... none of that matters. 'Cause freedom is on the march!!

It just doesn't matter, it just doesn't matter, it just doesn't matter..
 
2005-01-30 10:05:38 PM
casaguapo

Now that we're done with Iraq, when do we invade North Korea?

We can't since - thanks to the Clinton/Albright Fantasy Plan of "Trust the North Koreans" to live up to their agreements - North Korea passed the point where they are now an imminent threat. They have nukes, so outright war is unthinkable. Nice job on that, Clinton.

Fortunately, there are other ways of dealing with North Korea than war (multilateral diplomacy, pressure on China, blockades - real blockades with warships, not fantasy UN sanctions).

Bush wanted to act before Saddam got to that point. BTW, Iran is about 18-36 months away from being in the same situation as North Korea: Madmen with nukes.

When a lib says, "OK, so now do we invade Iran?"

I think: 1) Please don't make arguments you don't actually believe in; 2) Yes, let's liberate Iran too, and let's include Syria as well. Careful what you ask for. Democracy is contagious.
 
2005-01-30 10:06:05 PM
that is, lbj expanded social security.
 
2005-01-30 10:06:11 PM
bbcrackmonkey: Emo-Bush is gonna go listen to Linkin Park and A Simple Plan now.

Emo-Bush LMAO. Thanks man I needed that.
 
2005-01-30 10:06:31 PM

For : Otto_E_Rodika

Still true today:

Remarks by Senator Robert C. Byrd (USA) on Iraq War and Lies

October 17, 2003

Final Passage of Iraq
Supplemental Appropriations Bill


In 1837, Danish author, Hans Christian Andersen, wrote a wonderful fairy tale which he titled The Emperor's New Clothes. It may be the very first example of the power of political correctness. It is the story of the Ruler of a distant land who was so enamored of his appearance and his clothing that he had a different suit for every hour of the day. One day two rogues arrived in town, claiming to be gifted weavers.

They convinced the Emperor that they could weave the most wonderful cloth, which had a magical property. The clothes were only visible to those who were completely pure in heart and spirit.

The Emperor was impressed and ordered the weavers to begin work immediately. The rogues, who had a deep understanding of human nature, began to feign work on empty looms.

Minister after minister went to view the new clothes and all came back exhorting the beauty of the cloth on the looms even though none of them could see a thing.

Finally a grand procession was planned for the Emperor to display his new finery. The Emperor went to view his clothes and was shocked to see absolutely nothing, but he pretended to admire the fabulous cloth, inspect the clothes with awe, and, after disrobing, go through the motions of carefully putting on a suit of the new garments.

Under a royal canopy the Emperor appeared to the admiring throng of his people - - all of whom cheered and clapped because they all knew the rogue weavers' tale and did not want to be seen as less than pure of heart.

But, the bubble burst when an innocent child loudly exclaimed, for the whole kingdom to hear, that the Emperor had nothing on at all. He had no clothes. That tale seems to me very like the way this nation was led to war.

We were told that we were threatened by weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but they have not been seen.

We were told that the throngs of Iraqi's would welcome our troops with flowers, but no throngs or flowers appeared.

We were led to believe that Saddam Hussein was connected to the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, but no evidence has ever been produced.

We were told in 16 words that Saddam Hussein tried to buy "yellow cake" from Africa for production of nuclear weapons, but the story has turned into empty air.

We were frightened with visions of mushroom clouds, but they turned out to be only vapors of the mind.

We were told that major combat was over but 101 [as of October 17] Americans have died in combat since that proclamation from the deck of an aircraft carrier by our very own Emperor in his new clothes.

Our emperor says that we are not occupiers, yet we show no inclination to relinquish the country of Iraq to its people.

Those who have dared to expose the nakedness of the Administration's policies in Iraq have been subjected to scorn. Those who have noticed the elephant in the room -- that is, the fact that this war was based on falsehoods - have had our patriotism questioned. Those who have spoken aloud the thought shared by hundreds of thousands of military families across this country, that our troops should return quickly and safely from the dangers half a world away, have been accused of cowardice. We have then seen the untruths, the dissembling, the fabrication, the misleading inferences surrounding this rush to war in Iraq wrapped quickly in the flag.

The right to ask questions, debate, and dissent is under attack. The drums of war are beaten ever louder in an attempt to drown out those who speak of our predicament in stark terms.

Even in the Senate, our history and tradition of being the world's greatest deliberative body is being snubbed. This huge spending bill has been rushed through this chamber in just one month. There were just three open hearings by the Senate Appropriations Committee on $87 billion, without a single outside witness called to challenge the Administration's line.

Ambassador Bremer went so far as to refuse to return to the appropriations Committee to answer additional questions because, and I quote: "I don't have time. I'm completely booked, and I have to get back to Baghdad to my duties."

Despite this callous stiff-arm of the Senate and its duties to ask questions in order to represent the American people, few dared to voice their opposition to rushing this bill through these halls of Congress. Perhaps they were intimidated by the false claims that our troops are in immediate need of more funds.

But the time has come for the sheep-like political correctness which has cowed members of this Senate to come to an end.

Mr. President, the Emperor has no clothes. This entire adventure in Iraq has been based on propaganda and manipulation. Eighty-seven billion dollars is too much to pay for the continuation of a war based on falsehoods.

Mr. President, taking the nation to war based on misleading rhetoric and hyped intelligence is a travesty and a tragedy. It is the most cynical of all cynical acts. It is dangerous to manipulate the truth. It is dangerous because once having lied, it is difficult to ever be believed again. Having misled the American people and stampeded them to war, this Administration must now attempt to sustain a policy predicated on falsehoods. The President asks for billions from those same citizens who know that they were misled about the need to go to war. We misinformed and insulted our friends and allies and now this Administration is having more than a little trouble getting help from the international community.

It is perilous to mislead.

The single-minded obsession of this Administration to now make sense of the chaos in Iraq, and the continuing propaganda which emanates from the White House painting Iraq as the geographical center of terrorism is distracting our attention from Afghanistan and the 60 other countries in the world where terrorists hide. It is sapping resources which could be used to make us safer from terrorists on our own shores. The body armor for our own citizens still has many, many chinks.

Have we forgotten that the most horrific terror attacks in history occurred right here at home!! Yet, this Administration turns back money for homeland security, while the President pours billions into security for Iraq. I am powerless to understand or explain such a policy.

I have tried mightily to improve this bill. I twice tried to separate the reconstruction money in this bill, so that those dollars could be considered separately from the military spending. I offered an amendment to force the Administration to craft a plan to get other nations to assist the troops and formulate a plan to get the U.N. in, and the U.S. out, of Iraq.

Twice I tried to rid the bill of expansive, flexible authorities that turn this $87 billion into a blank check. The American people should understand that we provide more foreign aid for Iraq in this bill, $20.3 billion, than we provide for the rest of the entire world! I attempted to remove from this bill billions in wasteful programs and divert those funds to better use. But, at every turn, my efforts were thwarted by the vapid argument that we must all support the requests of the Commander in Chief.

I cannot stand by and continue to watch our grandchildren become increasingly burdened by the billions that fly out of the Treasury for a war and a policy based largely on propaganda and prevarication. We are borrowing $87 billion to finance this adventure in Iraq. The President is asking this Senate to pay for this war with increased debt, a debt that will have to be paid by our children and by those same troops that are currently fighting this war. I cannot support outlandish tax cuts that plunge our country into potentially disastrous debt while our troops are fighting and dying in a war that the White House chose to begin.

I cannot support the continuation of a policy that unwisely ties down 150,000 American troops for the foreseeable future, with no end in sight.

I cannot support a President who refuses to authorize the reasonable change in course that would bring traditional allies to our side in Iraq.

I cannot support the politics of zeal and "might makes right" that created the new American arrogance and unilateralism which passes for foreign policy in this Administration.

I cannot support this foolish manifestation of the dangerous and destabilizing doctrine of preemption that changes the image of America into that of a reckless bully.

Mr. President, the emperor has no clothes. And our former allies around the world were the first to loudly observe it.

I shall vote against this bill because I cannot support a policy based on prevarication. I cannot support doling out 87 billion of our hard-earned tax dollars when I have so many doubts about the wisdom of its use.

Mr. President, I began my remarks with a fairy tale. I shall close my remarks with a horror story, in the form of a quote from the book Nuremberg Diaries, written by G.M. Gilbert, in which the author interviews Hermann Goering.

"We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

". . . But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
 
2005-01-30 10:07:54 PM
A wonderful day for the Iraqi people and an important first step toeard the long road towrd democracy and self rule.

Anyone who says otherwise is full of shiat.
 
2005-01-30 10:08:53 PM
re: 'but all people who hope the elections fail are lefties.'

Kurds and Sunnis are lefties?
Who knew?
 
2005-01-30 10:09:38 PM
uclajd:

We can't since - thanks to the Clinton/Albright Fantasy Plan of "Trust the North Koreans" to live up to their agreements - North Korea passed the point where they are now an imminent threat. They have nukes, so outright war is unthinkable. Nice job on that, Clinton.

Remember when Clinton was in office how every other republican complained how we should not be the worlds police?

Now its Clintons fault we did not attack them?

Start thinking beyond party lines man.
 
2005-01-30 10:10:07 PM
Funny how every other capitalist democracy has seen the value and importance of social welfare. How every other capitalist democracy makes some concessions toward a socialist perspective. How every other capitalist democracy is increasing in influence as the US declines (check GDP per-capita adjusted for PPP). How every other capitalist democracy (except the UK) fought the invasion of Iraq on a diplomatic level. Interesting that the US is so unique in our conservative views. I wonder if they know something we don't.
 
2005-01-30 10:10:08 PM
B82

Show me some righties talking like the people on DU.

/paleocons don't count


You want him to find neocons, who have always been for the invasion of Iraq under the guise of bringing democracy to the middle east, that are against the election? Why bother posting something so idiotic?
 
2005-01-30 10:10:21 PM
Steve French

The Kurds didn't want elections? That's news to me.
 
2005-01-30 10:10:22 PM
B82: /paleocons don't count

Is this an invented catch-phrase of your own, or is this really what neo-cons call conservatives that don't support the neo-con agenda?

Are we traitors to the cause?

Don't you see the inherent irony when the right is appealing to emotion and repeating lines that their leaders taught them, and the left is sounding far more rational and coherent?
 
2005-01-30 10:12:00 PM
mindbuzz, that looks like an accurate summary to me.
 
2005-01-30 10:13:27 PM
oh yeah, still waiting for the 101st fighting keyboarders to say they are enlisting.

Now this is funny. Again, even non-military personnel are allowed to have opinions in America. Still, 101st fighting keyboarders, that's classic.

Oh and if by "LBJ expanding Social Security" you mean that he and congressional Democrats took it out of a protected trust fund and allowed Congress to spend it on anything they wanted, meaning that every dime people paid into it after 1965 was gone by the time they retired, then yes, he expanded Social Security.
 
2005-01-30 10:15:24 PM
uclajd: Still, 101st fighting keyboarders, that's classic.

They often provide close support for the 82nd Chairborne.
 
2005-01-30 10:15:40 PM
uclajd:

If only liberals had such high standards for success in their own domestic programs like education, social security, welfare, the war on poverty, crime, etc.

Don't try to deflect focus from the topic we're talking about.

And I wish that just once that a "conservative" would stop using the term "liberals" as if it were a thing. Complain if you want about the Democrat's domestic programs, but for fark's sake stop acting like the liberal-leaning people all think the same.

You don't like it when all "conservatives" are lumped together, so have a _little_ common courtesy to not lump
"liberals" together.

Democracy is contagious.

So is imperialism. And we see how well that worked for people in the past.
 
2005-01-30 10:16:22 PM
GhostRider

I see noone can say anything worth a shiat in retaliation to your quotes section. My farking hat goes off you for posting those.

God Bless America, and let freedom ring.
 
2005-01-30 10:16:46 PM
Hey BillCosby

I've got a general rule of ignoring long, rambling quotes from senile, 90-yr-old former Klansmen. Maybe you could post the Cliff's Notes next time?
 
2005-01-30 10:17:18 PM
uclajd: Again, even non-military personnel are allowed to have opinions in America.

Yes, but it's about time that some of you farkers put up or shut up. It's pretty farking easy to be a hawk when it's not
YOUR ass on the line.
 
2005-01-30 10:17:24 PM
I'm guessing "paleocon" refers to the now-defunct wing of the Republican party that doesn't consist of spendcrazy warmongers.
 
2005-01-30 10:18:59 PM


Nah, you spelled it wrong... apparently it's "reign!"
 
2005-01-30 10:19:17 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre:

2005-01-30 09:09:24 PM ThrobblefootSpectre

No one has claimed that suddenly ALL problems in Iraq are magically solved. The same way that not all problems are magically solved in the U.S, Germany, France, Japan, or any other nation after an election. Reality doesnt work that way. Sorry to clue you in.


Well, Bush said it would, but I didnt believe him either... Do you not see the difference between Iraq and Germany, USA, France.....? Really? You think its exactly the same? Really?

Iraq is very different from the countries you mentioned, in so many ways i dont know where to start. Hate to "clue you in" on this, but not every country outside of the US is exactly the same.

But people ARE cheering an election that seemed impossible a few years ago. I am personally happy to see all of the photos of overjoyed Iraqis exercising their newly found right to self determination of a representative government.

I am happy to see this also. I have no problem with it. However, I fear that it is mostly symbolic.

The fantansyland you are looking for has nothing to do with this momentous occasion.

I think the Iraqi's would see this differently to you. Sure, you dont care if they get blown up, but they do. Security is a big issue for them.

If you are so naive to believe that things will go sweet in Iraq just because they had elections, you are a complete fool.

So, now that Iraq is done, I guess its time for the US to liberate Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia.....
 
2005-01-30 10:20:41 PM
farkdog, stupid Democracy! Democracy is for tools! What kind of stupid idiot actually believes in all that crap?

 
2005-01-30 10:21:45 PM
God Bless America, and let freedom ring.
I'll second that. This is a great day for the human race.
 
2005-01-30 10:21:49 PM




Anyone notice anything different about Bush lately?
 
2005-01-30 10:22:22 PM
lexslamman:

How every other capitalist democracy is increasing in influence as the US declines (check GDP per-capita adjusted for PPP)

i've seenn farkers stick a 'kick me' sign on themselves but you are taking things to a new level.

current unemployment in germany is 9.9%, spain, 10.5%, france 9.6%. in the eu as a whole, 8.9%. in the u.s. 5.4%.

growth in the u.s. is over 3%. german gdp is growing at 0.1%, in the u.k., its at 0.7%.

the u.s. declines? guess again. you may wish us to be a third rate nation, but the truth is that economically, we are the envy of the world. to become a thrid rate nation, we'd have to embrace the 'social welfare' ideals of taxing the most produuctive and redistributing that money as a reward to the least productive.
 
2005-01-30 10:23:01 PM
farkdog, I like your posts. Not sure if our politics are the same, but still ...

/hands you a giant foam finger of frivolity to use at your own discretion in the war against others taking themselves too seriously.
 
2005-01-30 10:23:44 PM
Consdubya: "If you are so naive to believe that things will go sweet in Iraq just because they had elections, you are a complete fool."

My entire post was stating that this is NOT what I believe. Go back and read it again more slowly. :-)
 
2005-01-30 10:24:19 PM
bbcrackmonkey:

farkdog, stupid Democracy! Democracy is for tools! What kind of stupid idiot actually believes in all that crap?

Crackhead, if you bothered to read some of my posts you'd see that I agree that progress has been made in Iraq. But hey, don't let that get in the way of your deluded Bush dick sucking.

Come back when you grow up. Maybe then you can have something that approximates an adult discussion.
 
2005-01-30 10:24:40 PM
re: 'Funny how every other capitalist democracy has seen the value and importance of social welfare.'

Murkins don't like that 'social' word. Sounds like socialism - national socialism - oh no! Makes them think they might be part of a community rather than the rugged individualist cowboy in the minds eye. Freedom seems to lurch to and fro in the US, great surges of rights and freedoms and creativity like in the 60's, the trade union movement, then slumps forward into the past with another conservatard resurgence of the olden days.
Freedom is in remission at the moment.
 
2005-01-30 10:24:50 PM
Okay, I heard somewhere a request for a list of right-wingers who publish/broadcast inconsitencies and act as PR engines for the republican party. So, here is a short list:

ALL of FOX news
Limbaugh
G. Gordon Liddy
Matt Drudge
George Will
Michelle Malkin
Ann Coulter
Bob Novak
Tucker Carlson
Cal Thomas
Peggy Noonan
Arianna Huffington
Scarborough (wtf is his first name?)
Mike Savage

And the repugs that sound like dems:

all of them. republicans and democrats occupy nearly the same space in the political spectrum. We americans love political homogeniety.
 
2005-01-30 10:25:17 PM
President Bush is yet again trying to fool the American people with this staged Iraqi election. Mr. President, are we to believe the Iraqis really wanted to vote? Quite frankly, this fits in very nicely with the President's grand conspiracy: To conquer this nation for every drop of its oil.


/sarcasm is obvious... if you're not a liberal.
 
2005-01-30 10:25:26 PM
Wow, somebody's got throbble in their name.

.
 
2005-01-30 10:26:38 PM
BearToy

You know I almost was about to do that but I fear banation.

/Respect Knuckles
 
2005-01-30 10:27:11 PM
Did I hit a nerve BearToy and farkdog? Not only am I a red-stater with ADD, but I am also engaged in a homosexual love affair with the president despite the fact I am not an adult.
 
2005-01-30 10:27:25 PM
farkdog

So is imperialism. And we see how well that worked for people in the past.

imperialism

n 1: a policy of extending your rule over foreign countries.

Last time I checked, we just established the rule of Iraq within the hands of the Iraqi people. We don't rule Iraq. They could vote in an anti-American regime, but then libs will complain about that. It's either a puppet government or anti-American, so why did we bother?

It never ceases to amaze me that libs, supposedly those guardians of "nuance" can sum up their arguments on bumper stickers.

Haliburton!
Bush Lied Kids Died!
War Is Not The Answer!
Imperialism!
No WMDs!

Look, the Soviets invading Afghanistan was imperialistic. Liberating Afghansitan or Iraq from unelected, repressive regimes so they can vote is not. Or is that too "nuanced" for you?

Calvin Hobbes

uclajd: Still, 101st fighting keyboarders, that's classic.

They often provide close support for the 82nd Chairborne.
OMG you're killing me. Isn't their motto the Flying Chickenhawks?
 
2005-01-30 10:27:40 PM
BearToy, freedom's on the march! Hooya!
 
2005-01-30 10:28:18 PM
I think Bear Toy might be headed to bannination valley for a while. Still his post makes a good counterpoint to all the kiss ass shiat in this thread.
 
2005-01-30 10:28:29 PM
Espertron
Okay, I'll concede to that point, but I have a feeling that once the security forces are trained, we'll be asked to leave without as so much a 'thank you.'

Congratulations, you have been paying attention. Yes, at some point we might be asked to leave. And when asked this qustion, President Bush has said that if the duly elected Iraqi government asks us to go, we will. But somehow I don't think history will record a lack of "thank you" from the Iraqi people. We'll see.

Plus, since when was it the United States' job to liberate every oppressed nation?

It isn't out job to liberate everyone. In fact, I don't think we're trying to liberate everyone. I haven't seen us invade... oh say, Saudi Arabia. Or Iran. Or Syria. IIRC, Syria was the big rumor of the next country we were going to invade for a while... now apparently the new hotness is Iran.

It is our job to encourage and support democracy wherever it may flourish. This is our job because we undertake it to ensure the freedom of the human race, regardless of color or faith. We undertake it because it is the moral thing to do, and the rest of the asshats in the world don't have the stones to do it.

If that is our job... then why don't we start with Saudi Arabia, probably one of the biggest, anti-american dictatorships in the world. But wait... whoa whoa whoa... they sell us oil. It's okay to invade Iran, but when it comes to a more rotten apple, I guess the words of MC Hammer ring true:

Sigh. We start with Iraq for several reasons:
1) Still had those 1991 UN agreements that SH was violating on a daily basis.
2) SH was a known supporter of terrorism. Terrorism is to be stamped out.
3) At the time, everyone thought he had buttloads of WMD around. Not stuff you want to hit the black market.
4) A democratic Iraq put Iran between Iraq and Afghanistan, putting pressure on the mullahs in charge of Iran.
5) We'd already been there once, so we knew the terrain and their capabilities.
6) After 1991, their military was still struggling to get back to full strength.
7) With staging areas in Saudi Arabia, we could get some effective logistical support in place beforehand.
8) Iraq's oil production was a fraction of previous levels, so disrupting their export wouldn't cripple anyone's economy
9) Etc...

Essentially, Iraq was the low hanging fruit. There were lots of reasons to start with Iraq, and damn few reasons to go somewhere else. If you think international opinion about the Iraq war was bad, can you imagine if we willy-nilly decided to ignore Iraq and invade Saudi Arabia? A country that hadn't attacked anyone? A country that was allowing us to base some of our forces on its soil?
 
2005-01-30 10:28:38 PM
mcflizzy - Thanks. I forgot to add that Michael Moore is fat and is much more relavant to NeoCons than Osama Bin Laden.
 
2005-01-30 10:29:41 PM


Is this the "thousand Bin Ladens" the Iraq war was supposed to create?
 
2005-01-30 10:30:48 PM
bbcrackmonkey: Did I hit a nerve BearToy and farkdog?

Not at all. I'm just calling you on you're asshattery.

You're not clever despite what you might think. You haven't had a single thing constructive to say in this entire thread.

You deserve every bit of shiat you get.

Did that hit a nerve, crackhead?
 
2005-01-30 10:31:16 PM
bbcrackmonkey:

Did I hit a nerve BearToy and farkdog? Not only am I a red-stater with ADD, but I am also engaged in a homosexual love affair with the president despite the fact I am not an adult.

No I think they are upset that you refuse to believe that anything is wrong in Iraq and you think its a perfect place of democracy and freedom.

I hope and pray one day it is but as its stands now it is still a war zone.
 
2005-01-30 10:31:17 PM
"Think about this for a second. If they did in fact find WMDs dont you think that Bush and Co. would jump on that and make it front page news?"

EXACTLY! Instead, you know what I saw on TV:

George W. Bush: We were wrong about WMD's.
Dick Cheney: We were wrong about WMD's.
Colin Powell: We were wrong about WMD's.
Condoleeza Rice: We were wrong about WMD's.

Not a single mention of whatever the hell you are talking about that they surely would have jumped on and instead of saying "Whoops" they would have said "See, we told you so!!!"
 
2005-01-30 10:32:15 PM
i didn't say you couldn't have an opinion. i said put your ass where your rhetoric is if you believe in it so much. our troops need your help. go spread democracy.

um and no i didn't mean that. i meant he created medicare.

my dad is retired. he paid into the system after '65. he gets a s.s. check every month.
 
2005-01-30 10:32:37 PM
For the life of me, I can't understand why these sorry saps are so happy. The evil US is blowing them up all the time! Stop voting and start frowning!

 
2005-01-30 10:32:48 PM
CreepyConservative:

It isn't out job to liberate everyone. In fact, I don't think we're trying to liberate everyone. I haven't seen us invade... oh say, Saudi Arabia. Or Iran. Or Syria. IIRC, Syria was the big rumor of the next country we were going to invade for a while... now apparently the new hotness is Iran.

The problem is that there are a lot of us who really feel that other "wayward" countries _are_ on the invasion list. I'd feel a _lot_ better if I had confidence that Iraq was
the last stop on the liberation train.
 
2005-01-30 10:33:26 PM
uclajd:


imperialism

n 1: a policy of extending your rule over foreign countries.


Right, so if the Iraqi government which was elected, was to decide that Iraq should be a Iran-style theocracy and demand that he US leave within a month, do you think the US will do exactly as they ask?
 
2005-01-30 10:33:33 PM
farkdog: Did that hit a nerve, crackhead?

Nope. Keep on talking.
 
2005-01-30 10:33:59 PM
bbcrackmonkey: Is this the "thousand Bin Ladens" the Iraq war was supposed to create?

Why dont you take the pictures BearToy posted and make witty comments about them too.

Oh wait my bad. You are trying to ignore the dirty side of the war right?
 
Displayed 50 of 1432 comments

First | « | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report