FINALLY! Our whorish mainstream media reports on the memo

dude, did you even read anything i wrote after the part you quoted? first of all, the UN legal jargon was not used as a selling point to the public (you included) because they knew that there was entirely too much grey area on which to base an act of aggression. do a little research on the UN resolutions. particularly, read the consequences of each one. the idea that it's as simple as 'the cease fire breach justified invasion' is nothing more than conjecture and is littered with legal voids. the biggest issue regarding 1441 and it's failure to allow the use of force is that what prevents other countries from invading whomever they damn well please if they see fit. seceond of all, do you think we should sign resolutions against israel and continue to let them not stick to it and do whatever they want?

 

Interesting you should say that. Chamberlain, Munich, 1938, Czechoslovakia...any of this ring a bell?

 

relavence?

 

If you can't see what I'm getting at, then you're a living embodiment of the original quote.

 

that's a typical retort from a man who can't defend his statement. i see what you're getting at, but i'm challenging YOU to establish a factual connection. the only thing saddam has in common with hitler is that he is an extremely sick bastard. he does not have the manpower that hitler did, he did not have a plan to wipe out an entire race, and he had no plans to take over the world. don't kid yourself, this war has A LOT more in common with vietnam than it does with WWII.

 

And that's a smug retort from somebody who had to think about it for a minute.

Who says I can't defend my statement?

Did the powers that be in 1938 realize what Hitler's plans were? They should have, given that it was all spelled out for them in Mein Kampf. But they didn't. They really had no track record to go on. We already
knew that Saddam was capable of aggression.

He didn't have Hitler's manpower? Probably not. No plans to take over the world? Maybe not the entire world geographically speaking, but just remember this...the man viewed himself as a modern day Nebuchadnezzar. He certainly had designs upon conquering at least the Middle East...and with control of the oil, you control the world at least in the economic sense. No plans to wipe out an entire race? Laughable. Tell that to the thousands of Kurds slaughtered by Saddam.

I have no problem stating something and then defending it. I just didn't feel the need to waste my time explaining something so blatantly obvious to a guy who's already made up his mind that he's right, and anybody else w/ a differing opinion is wrong. That's just beating your head against a stone wall...which I've now done enough of, already.

I leave you the last word. Have a nice day.

 

in all honesty dude, it wasnt a personal shot. it happens far too often that others say 'if you don't know what i'm talking about, then you're exactly what you've spoken out against.' IMO, you might as well not say anything at all if you're not going to substantiate your claims. but you did, so i digress...

that's a pretty blanket statement there, buddy. at risk of sounding like a broken record, any idea how many ruthless individuals out there are capable of aggression? should we just go ahead and wipe out anyone else who is capable, so that we can be the only one?

oh did he? first i've heard of it. look, he was a sick, demented bastard. but he wasn't that ignorant. his lone act of border-crossing aggression was a well-documented trainwreck. you remember '91, don't you? there's no way in hell he thought that he had the capability of pulling off a much larger task.

friend, i don't know how to break this to you, but first of all, i defended the invasion for about the first year of it. i put up many a long-winded defense, very similar to yours, against countless individuals. i bought the whole thing, and i was pretty sure of myself. but you know, eventually, like a responsible citizen/patriot, i had questions, and wanted answers. i wanted accountability. i wanted an explanation as to why so many 'mistakes' were made. i wanted to know why we assured the world that we were protecting them against an imminent threat, only to look like a lying bunch of bullies. things simply were NOT adding up. before long, the questions became just too abundant. so i took a huge step back. i stopped arguing with people about it so that i could do my own research, and answer my own questions. and for me to give up arguing anything is a tremendous feat. but the fact is, i just CANNOT argue for something that i don't truly believe is right. and i needed time on my own to do some critical thinking, and to arrive at conclusions that were unfettered by others' political agendas. in due time, i began feeling extremely betrayed by our government...duped, if you will. after a while, it almost seemed like a no-brainer. i began asking myself how i ever fell for it in the first place. not only was i angry at the government, but also at myself for not taking as critical approach as i should have from the get-go.

second of all, if you want to talk about bullheaded, stubborn bastards who 'know' they're right, you need not look any further than this administration. it is well known that they are very much unwelcoming to opposing viewpoints and differing opinions. remember the whole 'if you're not for us, you're against us' slogan? that's the same kind of dangerous, blind mentality that allowed the rise to power of such parties as the nazi's. remember the FBI memo that leaked out when the new director was appointed? the whole statement about 'opposition to the administration will not be tolerated'? that's a pretty bold embodiment of that mentality. hell, o'reilly himself, a stubborn bastard in his own right, has said very similar things about this admin.

 

If those ruthless individuals are invading other countries then we just might.

Not sure how its blanket when it was already shown that he is capable of trying to take over another country with his force.

 

if those ruthless individuals are invading other countries then you will here not a peep of opposition from this not-so-ruthless individual.

 

"Liberals don't hate Bush because of the war. Liberals hate the war because of Bush."

A more true statement has never been spoken.

This thread is getting real boring. Liberals are never going to accept the fact that what Bush is doing is a good thing only because it is Bush that is doing it. We can preach until we are blue in the face and show them mountains of proof and it will do no good. The self hating, immoral, socialist left are never going to back anything that is done by this administration. No matter how righteous it may be.

Canada is a good role model in their eyes
Israel and the Jews are evil in their eyes
Hillary and Bill are the second coming in their eyes
Movies like fahrenheit 911 are entertaining in their eyes
Stopping illegal immigration is racism in their eyes
Christianity is dangerous in their eyes
Islam is the religion of peace in their eyes :hihi:
Abstinence is a four letter word in their eyes
Senior citizens are expendable in their eyes
Homosexuality is a race in their eyes (ie white, black, and homos)
The American military are a bunch of lawless murderers in their eyes
Saddam was no threat to us or the rest of the world in their eyes
President Bush is the devil in their eyes

The list goes on and on.

If clinton, or kerry, or even sharpton was the president and we were in this same war, we would not be hearing any of this bull crap. :dis: