WMD

[Dylflon]

Bond, I don't deny that Americans have done good things in Iraq. But if you put those accomplishments on a scale with dead children...

These are kids who not only have nothing to do with this war but I'm sure most of them don't understand it.

I just want you to answer me this one question. Is this war worth those children's lives?

[Professor S]

Bond, don't even bother anymore. Dyflon does not care about anything that doesn't support his point of view. He does not care about the 1.5 million slaughtered by Saddam and the countless others tortured. He doesn't care about the thousands of lives that the US military is in reality SAVING by keeping the control of Iraq for now. He does not care about the real story behind WMD. He doesn't care about how the UN used the oil for food program to scam billions of dollars at the expense of the Iraqi people while giving Saddam the funds to build his military and help train the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center (this is proven FACT, in case you dodn't know).

He cares abour a couple of pictures of hurt children and some SEVERELY manipulated footage from Iraq. Why does he put so much credence behind such things and ignore actual FACTS and the reality of the situation? Because they pat him on the back for repeating what some other schmoe told him. The truth does not do that, so its better that he ignores it.

Typhoid, I'm going to do you a favor and explain the obvious to you. My whole point was that The Daily Show IS A COMEDY SHOW. THATS WHY I SAID THAT EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS, YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO NOW.

Why did I say that?

BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO FIGGIN' CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TO THE POINT THAT FAKE NEWS WOULD BE AN EDUCATION.

And with that, I will excuse myself from this conversation.

[GT News]

Originally Posted by The Strangler

Bond, don't even bother anymore. Dyflon does not care about anything that doesn't support his point of view. He does not care about the 1.5 million slaughtered by Saddam and the countless others tortured. He doesn't care about the thousands of lives that the US military is in reality SAVING by keeping the control of Iraq for now. He does not care about the real story behind WMD. He doesn't care about how the UN used the oil for food program to scam billions of dollars at the expense of the Iraqi people while giving Saddam the funds to build his military and help train the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center (this is proven FACT, in case you dodn't know).

He cares abour a couple of pictures of hurt children and some SEVERELY manipulated footage from Iraq. Why does he put so much credence behind such things and ignore actual FACTS and the reality of the situation? Because they pat him on the back for repeating what some other schmoe told him. The truth does not do that, so its better that he ignores it.

Typhoid, I'm going to do you a favor and explain the obvious to you. My whole point was that The Daily Show IS A COMEDY SHOW. THATS WHY I SAID THAT EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS, YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO NOW.

Why did I say that?

BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO FIGGIN' CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TO THE POINT THAT FAKE NEWS WOULD BE AN EDUCATION.

And with that, I will excuse myself from this conversation.

What do you have that is ?
How did you hear about Program E?
And you would like him to care about the 1point 5 million slaughtered by Saddam and the countless others tortured ?Just for now?And you would like him to care about the thousands of lives that the US military is in reality SAVING by keeping the control of Iraq ?And you would like him to care about the real story behind WMD ?And you would like him to care about how the UN used the oil for food program to scam billions of dollars at the expense of the Iraqi people while giving Saddam the funds to build his military and help train the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center this is proven FACT in case you dodn't know ?I get it.
cares abour a couple of pictures of hurt children and some SEVERELY manipulated footage from Iraq.If a tree falls in the forest, and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound?That makes sense to me.
Who does "they" refer to?What is your real name?Enough about me, let's talk about my dress.Your
whole point was that The Daily Show IS A COMEDY SHOW?Oh.
So? What did you mean by THAT EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO? "" EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO ?
I understand.I don't know why it happened, but we should try to figure it out.Interesting explanation.
Doesn't everyone have a
FIGGIN' CLUE WHAT you are TALKING ABOUT TO THE POINT THAT FAKE NEWS WOULD BE AN EDUCATION.


I have
a whole lot of original answers. You and your that I will excuse myself from this conversation.

[Professor S]

Does anyone else hate CanFuBot?

[GT News]

Originally Posted by The Strangler

Does anyone else hate CanFuBot?

Suppose they do.Oh, you are a poet.

[Professor S]

I can only hope to one day be able to weave such a tapestry of prose as you do on a daily basis. I bow to thine literary genius.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by The Strangler

Does anyone else hate CanFuBot?

His one liners are generally humerous. However, when he responds to a really long post, it's just too much of a jumble to care about reading.

By the way, did Neo turn up the frequency with which he posts? It seems he's posting a lot more frequently lately.

[Dylflon]

I thought he was at 5% but it looks like he's at 15%.

What's the real story behind WMD? As far as I can tell, there weren't any. And the UN scamming people and funding Saddam? That doesn't sound like the most credible thing i've ever heard. I do remember that American funded Iraq a long time ago to fight Iran whch Russia was backing. I also remember that America backed Saddam and wished for him to be in a position of power. Also, the fact that Americans have killed many more Iraqis than Saddam over the last two decades sort of bothers me. I couldn't find the total estimate. Only the estimate of children. I think I remember 500,000.

I don't feel that trying to take one guy out of power calls for killing children and other civilians. You side step that when you argue and continue to talk about how just the war is and how ignorant I am. People have been taken out of power without shooting up the entire place before. And sure, you probably still should be there until a new leader is put in power. But that still doesn't warrant shooting innocent people.

But,hey, if America wants to become the iron fist all of a sudden and crack down on these evil men, there's a few other ruthless murderous dictators that America has put in power or backed that are also senslessly killing people. A prime example is the Saudi Arabian royal family (Bin Laden's family). They've killed far more people than Saddam. But America doesn't go after them even though the terrorists who bombed the WTC were Saudi Arabian. Oh, I forgot. The Saudi Royal family is a business partner with the Bush family and have invested a lot of money in American economy. But wait, they're killnig more people than Saddam has. There are many ruthless murderous leaders out there (some of which America put in power). I wonder why nobody is going after them.

[TheGame]

Whoo... I missed a lot over the weekend (I haven't read over all I missed, so what I'm about to say could have been said before)

"Also, the fact that Americans have killed many more Iraqis than Saddam over the last two decades sort of bothers me."
-Dyflon-

The fact that Saddam killed his own people in such a painful way for no reason bothers me even more. That's the equiveant of Bush dropping a Nuke on the US or poisoning the water supply... have you ever thought about that?

I think there are two problems with the war:

#1: US citezens were not able to put a face on many of the people who died september 11th. No superstars died, no faces that everybody in the country is famillair with died, and a building that most of the population has never went and seen was destroied. While in the war on terrorism people can put a face on a lot of soldiers who are going out to die. By soldiers dying and going out to die every corner of the country is affected to some extent

#2: America is way too soft. If you are going to fight in a war, fight by there rukes not your own. America looks at war as a boxing match, where how you fight is "honerable" while Iraq is looking at the war as a wrestling match, where you do everything it takes to win. Right now only one side is wearing the gloves, and that's why so many of the soldiers are dying. If Iraq had nukes they would try and Nuke US, if Iraq had the millitary of US they would go in and kill us mercylessly... Right now by our "Boxing match" rules the war is over, but we are still getting smashed over the back of the head with a chair

I say US should stoop to there level... drop a Nuke in the desert and scare the **** out of the Iraqi citezens, and say that if they don't obey we are going to drop another right on Baghdad. That would lower the death toll by a huge amount and if they don't obey even then, that will prove that they are incapible of following our orders and every man should be either killed or put in prison.

People don't understand that Iraq has a whole different society than us, they have different thoughts than us on what's right and what's wrong, what's weak and what's strong. Right now we are weak... and if we back out that's only going to make other countries' (who hate us) will power against us stronger. They will know that us weak americans will eventually give in if you keep fighting... hell, they already think that way because of past events! But this war is the ultimate example war, if we back out we will never EVER be able to win a war again without wiping out another country's whole population, period.

Ether they are going to learn that we will keep fighting until the smaller country obeys, or they are going to learn that if they keep fighting as long as there is a breath in there body, America may give in. Thus this war is one of the most important wars ever.

[Jonbo298]

The second we drop a Nuke in Iraq is the day the whole world turns on the US.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Jonbo298

The second we drop a Nuke in Iraq is the day the whole world turns on the US.

I can't say I disagree... but the main point I was trying to make with the post is:

1) What we are doing now will not slow down american casualties due to the Middle east mentality, because in there eyes we are viewed as weak and it would take somthing as outragous as a Nuke to stop them.
2) And at the same time we can't pull out because we would only make things harder for us in the future, in the middle east or otherwise.

[Professor S]

I was just going to leave this alone, but I can't let this stand the way Dyflon wants to portray it.

Originally Posted by Dylflon

What's the real story behind WMD? As far as I can tell, there weren't any.

If you actually bothered to go check out the thread that I posted IN THIS THREAD you would see that I explained the WMD situation pretty thoroughly. I don't feelthe need to do it again. Go back to my earlier post and check out the link and then respond.

And the UN scamming people and funding Saddam? That doesn't sound like the most credible thing i've ever heard.

Well I will repeat myself in this area, as I have done numerous times before:

The UN set up the Oil for Food program after the first Gulf War in a veiled attempt to continue to profit from such an oil rich country as Iraq while there were still sanctions. The premise was that Iraq would sell oil to countries in the UN, such as Russia, France and Germany (GO FIGURE!), in exchange for Food and Medicine. What was happening was that these UN countries were purchasing back these supplies at a greatly discounted rate for nearly a decade. Saddam would then take that money and purchase equipment from Germany (biological and chemical equipment) and Russia (military equipment, the Republican Guard used Russian tanks if you remember).

All of this was against UN regulations, and yet these same countries came out against the US invading because they felt it was wrong, even though Iraq was in flagrant violation of UN resolutions. Personally I think allowing Saddam to starve his own people and let them die of famine so he can spend top dollar for illegal equipment and build 25 palaces from 1994 to 2003 is wrong, bordering on disgusting.

I won't even mention the clandestine oil deals that had nothing to do with the Oil for Food program.

And this is all FACT, even though I'm not surprised you haven't head about it. Not many people heard about Saddam training the terrorists that bombed the world trade center either. Hell, that barely got out of the London Telegraph.

I do remember that American funded Iraq a long time ago to fight Iran whch Russia was backing. I also remember that America backed Saddam and wished for him to be in a position of power.

You also have to remember that at that time Russia was the US's greatest enemy and that Iran had a hostage fetish for Americans. You can't always look through history with today's eyes.

Also, the fact that Americans have killed many more Iraqis than Saddam over the last two decades sort of bothers me. I couldn't find the total estimate. Only the estimate of children. I think I remember 500,000.

PLEASE show me the resource for that little tidbit of information. I'm begging you, post a link.

I don't feel that trying to take one guy out of power calls for killing children and other civilians. You side step that when you argue and continue to talk about how just the war is and how ignorant I am.

Do I need to show you the posts that directly answered that charge? Its called WAR and innocents get caught in the middle sometimes. The US has done everything they can do to avoid civilian casualties, which I've already said in this thread.

People have been taken out of power without shooting up the entire place before. And sure, you probably still should be there until a new leader is put in power. But that still doesn't warrant shooting innocent people.

As I mentioned before, again in this thread, if we were going to remove Saddam we HAD to take contol of the government for the sake of the Iraqi people. Just removing Saddam would have led to choas and death. Even you would hav eto agree with that assumption. And in the end it would have probably led to a worse authoritarian government.

I agree that shooting innocents is wrong, but I also know that US troops aren't just walking around shooting Iraqi civilians. The video you posted is one fo the more horrible pieces of yellow journalism I've ever seen. The interview with the soldier is edited with the intent of making him look as evil as possible. In the end we have no idea what the situation surrounding that shooting really was. We don't know if he was a bomber, had a gun, or what have you. The enemy doesn't wear uniforms anymore.

You photos are equally out of context, but still very sad to see. But once again, this is a war and you have to keep your eye on the big picture.

But,hey, if America wants to become the iron fist all of a sudden and crack down on these evil men, there's a few other ruthless murderous dictators that America has put in power or backed that are also senslessly killing people. A prime example is the Saudi Arabian royal family (Bin Laden's family). They've killed far more people than Saddam.

I'd like to see documentation on that. I have a feeling your counting bodies without a sense of why the bodies are there.

But America doesn't go after them even though the terrorists who bombed the WTC were Saudi Arabian. Oh, I forgot. The Saudi Royal family is a business partner with the Bush family and have invested a lot of money in American economy.

They're also one of the two Arab nations that allow us to have a presence in the Middle East. Without them Kuwait would still be under Saddam's rule and who knows who else would have gone down next. Without Saudi Arabia the world might be a much more scary place right now.

There are many ruthless murderous leaders out there (some of which America put in power). I wonder why nobody is going after them.

One at a time, please. One at a time. Plus, the war is actually acting as a warning to many ruthless dictators, such as Khadafi (sp?) who ahs just agreed to UN inspections and promised to stop harboring terrorists (we'll see how that works out). The word is out.

As for the other arab nations that are considered despotic, the plan is for a democratic Iraq to help change the entire area. No one ing the Middle East has EVER known a true democracy. Once they see one operating with leaders chosen by the people, that may change. You just can't go around bopping everyone you don't like on the head. You have to have a long term plan, and by long term I mean years and not months.

By the way, you've quoted some pretty interesting numbers in your last post, please back them up.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by TheGame

1) What we are doing now will not slow down american casualties due to the Middle east mentality, because in there eyes we are viewed as weak and it would take somthing as outragous as a Nuke to stop them.

No, in their eyes, and most of the rest of the world, you are viewed as pushy a**holes

[Dylflon]

Lol, Strangler. Knew that would hook you back in.

But I am in fact done. This has gone on for quite the long time and peace should once again return to these boards. I have resources for the Saudi thing and some of the other things I said but it's in books and magazines and it would be a lot of writing.

[Jonbo298]

I heard on CBS that a month or 2 before the elections, the Saudi's are gonna drop gas prices so it makes the US look like the economy is getting better thus giving Bush the win. Now I dont give a damn what party you're in but if your gonna do tactics like this, you dont deserve to be president. The gov't needs a serious overhaul.