Unprecedent Criticism!!!!!

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
We neutralized the enemy without pounding thousands of drafted civilians to pieces, as in the Persian Gulf War.

Point of information here: while the "war" part was far quicker and more effective than anybody expected, thousands of civilians have indeed been killed, we just don't know how many because nobody is counting.

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Was I speaking to you?

Are you talkin' to me? I don't see anyone else here so you must be talkin' to me.

Technically.... no, but then I can't hear you from here.

....and apparently you don't remember.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Are you talkin' to me? I don't see anyone else here so you must be talkin' to me.

Technically.... no, but then I can't hear you from here.

....and apparently you don't remember.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Not unprecedented at all... The media is still playing to ratings and with the swing in public opinion now the war is "bad". It's those bleeding parasites that helped the administration into whipping up that terrible fear of "mushroom clouds". Now, instead of a weak, crippled enemy, we have a weak, dependent satellite state. And all it cost was hundreds of billions of dollars, thousands of lives, international credibility, worse terrorism casualties, and an over extended military unprepared for unforeseen requirements.

Why would anyone criticize that?

When you fall back on what Putin has to say you *are* truely desparate to prove a point that cannot be made. Even the administration won't touch that one.

I disagree with your assessment of the situation actually. First - it's no more of a satellite state than Germany and Japan were, second - you really think that Bin Ladin wouldn't be doing this terrorism without the war in Iraq? I seriously doubt you have a full grasp of what Bin Ladin's goals were and I think you are blind if you think that Hussein wouldn't have made a deal with Bin Ladin. YOu and others repeatedly said that bin Ladin would never make allies with Hussein - now it comes out from the 9/11 commission that there is proof that bin Ladin had gone to Hussein for a deal. Doesn't seem like the hatred you tried to convey before. But hey - I don't expect you to admit your mistakes or anything. You'll just go on and on and on with your same complaining about the war - no matter how much new information comes out from the UN, 9/11 Commission and now Russia. You really are desperate to support your views - because you don't want to look at any of the other evidence and statements.

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I disagree with your assessment of the situation actually. First - it's no more of a satellite state than Germany and Japan were, second - you really think that Bin Ladin wouldn't be doing this terrorism without the war in Iraq? I seriously doubt you have a full grasp of what Bin Ladin's goals were and I think you are blind if you think that Hussein wouldn't have made a deal with Bin Ladin. YOu and others repeatedly said that bin Ladin would never make allies with Hussein - now it comes out from the 9/11 commission that there is proof that bin Ladin had gone to Hussein for a deal. Doesn't seem like the hatred you tried to convey before. But hey - I don't expect you to admit your mistakes or anything. You'll just go on and on and on with your same complaining about the war - no matter how much new information comes out from the UN, 9/11 Commission and now Russia. You really are desperate to support your views - because you don't want to look at any of the other evidence and statements.

Yes, I'm sure you are deep into Bin Laden's motives. I doubt that you can grasp the idea that our occupying forces are also a very large target. As usual you are generalizing uour comments about me as if I represent the "Voice of Opposition". Of course Bin Laden would look for a deal just like he had in Afganistan; he's after power. Do you really think that Hussein would have ever shared power with him? Putin's dubious point was that Hussein had considered a terrorist act. Wow... that IS some hard evidence. You even gave arguement that the war did more to disburse any WMD there might have been. The UN inspection process should have continued. I'm not desparate to prove anything. It isn't my pet candidate that is stinking in the polls. You brayed on about the majority of what Americans thought when the cause was popular. Now that most Americans think Iraq was a mistake you're falling back on those weak arguements from before the war that few truely believe anymore. You were the one crying about nukes and millions of deaths at "Hitler's" hands. I've looked at the evidence and it consistently agrees with the position I have held since before the war; it was a waste of resources and failed to address the larger security problems in the war on terrorism and the potential problems outweighed the most optimistic outlook. But then I was never afaid even when I was 3 blocks from the White House on 9/11. Fear is the mind killer. But I should stop before I go on and on and on because we know you would never be so rude.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Yes, I'm sure you are deep into Bin Laden's motives. I doubt that you can grasp the idea that our occupying forces are also a very large target. As usual you are generalizing uour comments about me as if I represent the "Voice of Opposition".

I am am perfectly AWARE that our forces are a very large target. Don't even say that to me - because my brother IS IN the Middle East right now.

But that is what happens in war - the soldiers become targets - what do expect to happen? As far as I'm concerned it doesn't change anything.

Of course Bin Laden would look for a deal just like he had in Afganistan; he's after power. Do you really think that Hussein would have ever shared power with him?

Who said anything about SHARING power? Does being allies with Britain mean that we are giving up OUR soverienty? What does working together to go after a common enemy have to do with "sharing power"? Bin Ladin would not have required having power initially - until he got what he wanted.

Putin's dubious point was that Hussein had considered a terrorist act. Wow... that IS some hard evidence. You even gave arguement that the war did more to disburse any WMD there might have been. The UN inspection process should have continued.

I guess you didn't read the article - since it said that Hussein was smuggling the stuff out BEFORE the war also, not just during or after the war.

I'm not desparate to prove anything. It isn't my pet candidate that is stinking in the polls.

See - that's where you are ignorant of me. Because Bush isn't my pet candidate - if he was - I would have supported him in the 2000 Republican primary. I just support him MORE than Kerry. Funny - my brother is in the military as I said. This was his comment toward Kerry sending him campaign crap...

... and guys who wasted money sending me a campaign package. Yeah Stupid John Kerry. I threw that crap away the second i got it!!!

Does that mean that Bush is my brother's pet candidate or does it mean what it says - that he can't stand Kerry? I hope you will stop from twisting my words and erroneously assuming things about me just because I support this war and the actions Bush has taken in terms of terrorism - because there are many things I disagree with him on. And there are several people who I wish was president instead of him. But hey - we have enough Bush bashers and I support him for the most important issue in my mind and that is the war on terrorism. I don't support Kerry at all.

You brayed on about the majority of what Americans thought when the cause was popular. Now that most Americans think Iraq was a mistake you're falling back on those weak arguements from before the war that few truely believe anymore.

No - it was people against the war that said this stuff was all false. Now it is coming out that there is more evidence that much of this was true. I guess we were supposed to wait until we had a 9/11 type attack that we could actually PROVE from Hussein - right?

You were the one crying about nukes and millions of deaths at "Hitler's" hands. I've looked at the evidence and it consistently agrees with the position I have held since before the war; it was a waste of resources and failed to address the larger security problems in the war on terrorism and the potential problems outweighed the most optimistic outlook.

I went on the possibility of Hussein using nukes not the certainty of it. I also supported the war for many other reasons. Such as ithe Middle East MUST be changed. Geographically - Iraq is a good place to bring demoncracy and work to establish it there. See you look at playing DEFENSE - that's all security does - we have to take OFFENSE to defeat terrorism. As has been routinely stated - the government has to be correct 100% of the time - the terrorist just have to be right once. No amount of security is going to keep us safe forever - that is why we have to take the fight to the Middle East.

As for you referring to my references of Hussein to Hitler. I think there are similarities. I don't care if you disagree with me or not. Since he's out of the picture now - thank god we will never know that's all I have to say.

But then I was never afaid even when I was 3 blocks from the White House on 9/11. Fear is the mind killer. But I should stop before I go on and on and on because we know you would never be so rude.

Oh - the sarcasm is great there. Good to see you are able to be sarcastic toward me - but for some reason I'm just supposed to accept you twisting my words and being condescending. You are routinely rude actually - but you don't see it because you're just trying to get your points across. As for being afraid - neither was I. So I'm not really sure what your point is? I'm not afraid to go to the store, the mall, or NY or Philadelphia or anywhere else. I went to Times Sqaure on New Years Eve 2000 when it was known there were plans for terrorists to bomb there. Anythign coudl have happened there. Being watchful isn't the same as being afraid you know.