Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Decker on January 17, 2008, 08:43:36 AM
-
http://www.buffalobeast.com/122/50mostloathsome2007.html
Here are my top 3:
10. Alberto Gonzales
Crimes: The most truckling, amoral flunky to ever serve as Attorney General. A jurisprudent organelle, he manifests no concept of the law independent of its expediency to the president. Would smilingly accuse himself of providing material support to al Qaeda at President Bush's request, hurriedly plead guilty, sign his own death warrant and flip the switch himself. His testimony before congressional committees is to public service what cholera is to the small intestine. As first Hispanic Attorney General, Gonzo typifies the self-betrayal and ethical compromise necessary for minorities to become successful Republicans. Been felching sweet approval from Bush's lily-white ass since Texas. A conscienceless, memo-drafting, loophole-crafting liar for hire, pushing for all the worst administration policies, including nixing habeas corpus, denying and then defending rendition, torture, political firings, and a ton of other evil stuff. He even visited a seriously ill and disoriented John Ashcroft at the hospital, attempting to coax him into reauthorizing a clearly illegal wiretapping program. The only Attorney General who ever could have made John Ashcroft a sympathetic character by contrast.
Exhibit A: "The fact that the Constitution -- again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away."
Sentence: Death by dull guillotine, head bent by Beckham.
2. Dick Cheney
Charges: Worst president ever. So openly horrible, he now makes jokes about being Darth Vader. Unashamedly advocating for executive abuse of power and corporate theft. In and out of public office since his congressional internship during the Nixon Administration. Didn't care about the quagmire he foresaw in '94, because since then he'd deftly maneuvered to profit from it. Polling lower than HPV.
Exhibit A: His Halliburton stock options rose 3000% in value from 2004-2005. No joke.
Punishment: Raped by the sun.
9. You
Charges: You believe in freedom of speech, until someone says something that offends you. You suddenly give a damn about border integrity, because the automated voice system at your pharmacy asked you to press 9 for Spanish. You cling to every scrap of bullshit you can find to support your ludicrous belief system, and reject all empirical evidence to the contrary. You know the difference between patriotism and nationalism -- it's nationalism when foreigners do it. You hate anyone who seems smarter than you. You care more about zygotes than actual people. You love to blame people for their misfortunes, even if it means screwing yourself over. You still think Republicans favor limited government. Your knowledge of politics and government are dwarfed by your concern for Britney Spears' children. You think buying Chinese goods stimulates our economy. You think you're going to get universal health care. You tolerate the phrase "enhanced interrogation techniques." You think the government is actually trying to improve education. You think watching CNN makes you smarter. You think two parties is enough. You can't spell. You think $9 trillion in debt is manageable. You believe in an afterlife for the sole reason that you don't want to die. You think lowering taxes raises revenue. You think the economy's doing well. You're an idiot.
Exhibit A: You couldn't get enough Anna Nicole Smith coverage.
Sentence: A gradual decline into abject poverty as you continue to vote against your own self-interest. Death by an easily treated disorder that your health insurance doesn't cover. You deserve it, chump.
-
Only an American hating Liberal would give credence to a "Worst People" list that gave # 28 to our troops.
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
Real nice Decker... :o :o :o
-
Only an American hating Liberal would give credence to a "Worst People" list that gave # 28 to our troops.
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
Real nice Decker... :o :o :o
Hi Nordic
-
Hi Nordic
Not me comrade...
I find it amusing that you find it impossible more than one person shares my views.
You don't think that listing the troops is insulting? Down right pathetic if you ask me Toxic, wups I mean "Berserker".
-
Only an American hating Liberal would give credence to a "Worst People" list that gave # 28 to our troops.
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
Real nice Decker... :o :o :o
I didn't write the list. Only a picayune right winger would point out such drivel.
-
Not me comrade...
I find it amusing that you find it impossible more than one person shares my views.
You don't think that listing the troops is insulting? Down right pathetic if you ask me Toxic, wups I mean "Berserker".
I didn't say that, but it's clear Nordic=Eldon... You're not so good at gimmicks ;D
-
I didn't say that, but it's clear Nordic=Eldon... You're not so good at gimmicks ;D
Seriously, are you retarded? ???
Stating I was xxxLinda was the worst. Not to mention thinking I was some Nigerian torpedo head ::)
Of course you know I have no gimmicks, it's all a little meme you've got going.
-
Only an American hating Liberal would give credence to a "Worst People" list that gave # 28 to our troops.
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
Real nice Decker... :o :o :o
The fact they would attack our troops like this discredits the entire list IMO. I guess that makes me a "picayune right winger" too? :)
-
The fact they would attack our troops like this discredits the entire list IMO. I guess that makes me a "picayune right winger" too? :)
Yes and it makes your intolerance of opinions different from your own quite obvious.
This list is a sarcastic commentary. I guess right wingers have no capacity for that art form.
So Beach Bum, you dismiss the Hillary Clinton entry too?
-
Yes and it makes your intolerance of opinions different from your own quite obvious.
This list is a sarcastic commentary. I guess right wingers have no capacity for that art form.
So Beach Bum, you dismiss the Hillary Clinton entry too?
Dude I am hardly intolerant of different opinions. Nothing could be further from the truth. Disagreement does not equal intolerance.
And yes I dismiss the Hillary Clinton entry. She should have been in the top 5, easy. :)
-
Dude I am hardly intolerant of different opinions. Nothing could be further from the truth. Disagreement does not equal intolerance.
And yes I dismiss the Hillary Clinton entry. She should have been in the top 5, easy. :)
I see. So you don't think it's funny.
The list's entry for the troops is sarcastic humor. The entire list is.
But as a matter of course, I don't support the troops either. I don't support their mission so how on earth could I support them. That doesn't mean I wish them harm.
I don't think any topic is inviolable....even the topic of our troops.
-
I see. So you don't think it's funny.
The lists entry for the troops is sarcastic humor. The entire list is.
But as a matter of course, I don't support the troops either. I don't support their mission so how on earth could I support them. That doesn't mean I wish them harm.
I don't think any topic is inviolable....even the topic of our troops.
I didn't find it particularly funny, but to each his own. I was chastised for laughing at T.O. and his "It's really unfair . . . That's my quarterback" whining session. Now that was funny. :)
I always support the troops, whether I agree with the mission or not. They're laying their lives on the line for all of us. Very brave men and women. Genuine American heroes.
-
...
I always support the troops, whether I agree with the mission or not. They're laying their lives on the line for all of us. Very brave men and women. Genuine American heroes.
The moral or legal context of the US's use of its troops are irrelevant to you?
You support the troops no matter what the situation is or how their destructive abilities are used by our government?
That does not seem consistent with your character of being an analytical person.
You don't care for George Carlin either?
-
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
You want to make jokes about a politician, one who sits as his or her desk , safe from harm, then go for it .
but anyone that finds humor in the above statement, is a piece of shit, and nothing more.
-
The moral or legal context of the US's use of its troops are irrelevant to you?
You support the troops no matter what the situation is or how their destructive abilities are used by our government?
That does not seem consistent with your character of being an analytical person.
You don't care for George Carlin either?
Sure I care about morality and legality. We disagree on whether or not the troops are involved in an immoral, illegal campaign.
My view is colored by the fact I served and have many active duty and retired military friends. I greatly respect what they do. I don't believe they are some evil force being used by a sinister government. They're just doing their jobs, literally putting their lives on the line, while we sit in our air conditioned offices. It's a huge sacrifice.
Carlin is funny.
-
You want to make jokes about a politician, one who sits as his or her desk , safe from harm, then go for it .
but anyone that finds humor in the above statement, is a piece of shit, and nothing more.
You humans. Attacking the author of the article when he cannot hear you.
"Once you leave the womb, conservatives don’t care about you until you reach military age. Then you’re just what they’re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers."
"I don't understand why prostitution is illegal. Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal? You know, why should it be illegal to sell something that's perfectly legal to give away? I can't follow the logic on that one at all! Of all the things you can do, giving someone an orgasm is hardly the worst thing in the world. In the army they give you a medal for spraying napalm on people! In civilian life you go to jail for giving someone an orgasm!"
George Carlin
-
Sure I care about morality and legality. We disagree on whether or not the troops are involved in an immoral, illegal campaign.
My view is colored by the fact I served and have many active duty and retired military friends. I greatly respect what they do. I don't believe they are some evil force being used by a sinister government. They're just doing their jobs, literally putting their lives on the line, while we sit in our air conditioned offices. It's a huge sacrifice.
Carlin is funny.
I believe that the military is a tool that can be used for good or evil purposes. I think that just stands to reason.
The soldiers put there lives on the line b/c they chose to put their lives on the line. They wanted to be in the military. They get paid for their duty and some receive a pretty decent education.
For the present context of use of military force in Iraq, for the life of me, I can't figure out how conquering Iraq has any positive effect at all on my constitutional rights and the safety of the USA.
-
I believe that the military is a tool that can be used for good or evil purposes. I think that just stands to reason.
The soldiers put there lives on the line b/c they chose to put their lives on the line. They wanted to be in the military. They get paid for their duty and some receive a pretty decent education.
For the present context of use of military force in Iraq, for the life of me, I can't figure out how conquering Iraq has any positive effect at all on my constitutional rights and the safety of the USA.
You would've have rather waited until they DID fuck with us... real smart. ::)
-
The soldiers put there lives on the line b/c they chose to put their lives on the line. They wanted to be in the military. They get paid for their duty and some receive a pretty decent education.
Are you kidding? Police officers and firefighters volunteer to put their lives in danger for us too. Do you feel the same way about them?
The fact that people volunteer to put themselves in harm's way for the benefit of others just makes their sacrifice that much greater and their service that much more impressive.
-
You would've have rather waited until they DID fuck with us... real smart. ::)
Your comment is not thought out.
How is a disarmed country the size of California going to fuck with the mightiest military force on the planet?
-
You would've have rather waited until they DID fuck with us... real smart. ::)
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA HAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH HA!!!
-
Are you kidding? Police officers and firefighters volunteer to put their lives in danger for us too. Do you feel the same way about them?
The fact that people volunteer to put themselves in harm's way for the benefit of others just makes their sacrifice that much greater and their service that much more impressive.
Yes I do feel the same way about cops and firemen. What's wrong with that? Everyone acts out of self-interest...even priests.
-
Yes I do feel the same way about cops and firemen. What's wrong with that? Everyone acts out of self-interest...even priests.
It demeans their service. There is obviously a self-interest/preservation aspect to gainful employment, but it takes a great amount of sacrifice to put your life in danger to serve your community.
-
It demeans their service. There is obviously a self-interest/preservation aspect to gainful employment, but it takes a great amount of sacrifice to put your life in danger to serve your community.
Pointing out a fact that everyone acts out of ego demeans their service in what way?
And how does that change the fact that the troops can be used for evil purposes as well as good ones?
How are the killings in Iraq by US soldiers protecting me and my constitutional rights?
-
How are the killings in Iraq by US soldiers protecting me and my constitutional rights?
Explain this to me also while you're at it please.
-
Your comment is not thought out.
How is a disarmed country the size of California going to fuck with the mightiest military force on the planet?
Uh...
Let's think about this, okay guy? An armed, aggressive, radical Islamic, murderous regime the size of California BECAME DISARMED THROUGH THE INTERVENTION OF THE MIGHTIEST MILITARY FORCE ON THE PLANET.
Maybe you should take a step back from the keyboard for a while, okay?
-
Pointing out a fact that everyone acts out of ego demeans their service in what way?
And how does that change the fact that the troops can be used for evil purposes as well as good ones?
How are the killings in Iraq by US soldiers protecting me and my constitutional rights?
If our soldiers are killing insurgents (ie. terrorists) then isn't that protecting anyones rights (including the right to LIVE, duh) who would've eventually been targets of those terrorists (whether that would've been people at work in an office building here in the states, commuters on the subway in Spain, or Iraqi citizens at a market in Baghdad)?
It's just logic.. not that hard people.
-
If our soldiers are killing insurgents (ie. terrorists) then isn't that protecting anyones rights (including the right to LIVE, duh) who would've eventually been targets of those terrorists (whether that would've been people at work in an office building here in the states, commuters on the subway in Spain, or Iraqi citizens at a market in Baghdad)?
It's just logic.. not that hard people.
So you disagree with the 16 intelligent agencies that say invading Iraq created more terrorism?
-
Uh...
Let's think about this, okay guy? An armed, aggressive, radical Islamic, murderous regime the size of California BECAME DISARMED THROUGH THE INTERVENTION OF THE MIGHTIEST MILITARY FORCE ON THE PLANET.
Maybe you should take a step back from the keyboard for a while, okay?
I'd answer this but I don't understand what you are saying.
On one hand you say that Iraq could attack us, and then you point out that the US had disarmed Iraq obviously before the 2002 invasion b/c the WMD inspectors were finding nothing.
So Iraq was disarmed from Desert Storm and subsequent sanctions but was able to hurt the US even though it was disarmed.
-
If our soldiers are killing insurgents (ie. terrorists) then isn't that protecting anyones rights (including the right to LIVE, duh) who would've eventually been targets of those terrorists (whether that would've been people at work in an office building here in the states, commuters on the subway in Spain, or Iraqi citizens at a market in Baghdad)?
It's just logic.. not that hard people.
Al Qaeda was not an ally of Hussein.
Insurgents are Iraqis defending themselves from the invading US forces. Only 5-15% of the insurgents are foreign fighters and only a small part of that number is Al Qaeda drawn to to Iraq to join the party.
In short, our rights and our lives are not any better off for the invasion of Iraq.
-
So you disagree with the 16 intelligent agencies that say invading Iraq created more terrorism?
No.
It didn't "create" terrorism. Terrorism existed and was growing before we ever went there. The fact that we're fighting it there with troops (and making a difference, apparently) seems like a better idea than having it here with civilian casualties after ignoring the problem.
Yet another easy to understand concept from yours truly :D
-
I'd answer this but I don't understand what you are saying.
On one hand you say that Iraq could attack us, and then you point out that the US had disarmed Iraq obviously before the 2002 invasion b/c the WMD inspectors were finding nothing.
So Iraq was disarmed from Desert Storm and subsequent sanctions but was able to hurt the US even though it was disarmed.
WMD inspectors can't find much when they're consistently being denied access. ::)
The point is that they were TRYING to rebuild their weapons and once they did do you honestly believe another Kuwait wouldn't happen? I didn't think so.
-
Insurgents are Iraqis defending themselves from the invading US forces.
I can't believe you actually believe this. Defending themselves?? Yeah ok, like we're attacking their country, raping and pillaging. Holy Cow.
In short, our rights and our lives are not any better off for the invasion of Iraq.
How safe we are here is a direct result of handling problems before they become BIG problems. This is PRECISELY why we are the most powerful nation and will remain so.
-
WMD inspectors can't find much when they're consistently being denied access. ::)
The point is that they were TRYING to rebuild their weapons and once they did do you honestly believe another Kuwait wouldn't happen? I didn't think so.
You should know the facts before you draw your conclusions:
"Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming."
"This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that have never been declared or inspected, as well as to presidential sites and private residences."
http://216.219.216.117/news/2003/bfeb/20_blix.html
That's from Blix's report to the UN.
He's the expert WMD inspector.
-
I can't believe you actually believe this. Defending themselves?? Yeah ok, like we're attacking their country, raping and pillaging. Holy Cow.
How safe we are here is a direct result of handling problems before they become BIG problems. This is PRECISELY why we are the most powerful nation and will remain so.
If Iraq was unarmed, then why did the US use military force to invade the country to enforce a resolution compelling Iraqi disarmament?
Again, how was a disarmed Iraq a threat to the US?
-
You should know the facts before you draw your conclusions:
"Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming."
"This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that have never been declared or inspected, as well as to presidential sites and private residences."
http://216.219.216.117/news/2003/bfeb/20_blix.html
That's from Blix's report to the UN.
He's the expert WMD inspector.
Read the entire report again buddy.. Saddam didn't exactly work with us on this.
-
Read the entire report again buddy.. Saddam didn't exactly work with us on this.
Yes he did. It was a grudging relationship but ultimately he did comply.
-
If Iraq was unarmed, then why did the US use military force to invade the country to enforce a resolution compelling Iraqi disarmament?
Again, how was a disarmed Iraq a threat to the US?
You're still not listening are you...
obviously we weren't going to wait until he WAS a threat
.. not to mention any of the other reasons to invade iraq
-
I'm hesitant to use blogs but this one is right on the money. IMO number 5 is reason enough.
http://www.randomjottings.net/archives/002558.html
-
You're still not listening are you...
obviously we weren't going to wait until he WAS a threat
.. not to mention any of the other reasons to invade iraq
"The justification for the war - the existence of weapons of mass destruction - was without foundation," Blix said. "The military operation was successful, but the diagnosis was wrong.
"Saddam was dangerous to his own people but not a great, and certainly not an immediate, danger to his neighbors and the world," he added.
Again on Tuesday he criticized the United States and Britain for trusting their own intelligence more than that of the weapons inspectors, who had not found "a smoking gun."
Again BB, if there were no WMDs, why did the US attack Iraq?
THERE WAS NO THREAT POSED BY IRAQ.
-
I'm hesitant to use blogs but this one is right on the money. IMO number 5 is reason enough.
http://www.randomjottings.net/archives/002558.html
You have got to be kidding.
Humanitarian reasons are why we invaded Iraq?
So we killed btn 80-650,000 Iraqis, displace another 2-4 million of them, co-opted their natural resources and destroyed the country's infrastructure on humanitarian grounds?
You have to do a little better than that. On it's face, such a claim of justification is incredulous.
We won't even address the legal basis for such a claim.
-
"The justification for the war - the existence of weapons of mass destruction - was without foundation," Blix said. "The military operation was successful, but the diagnosis was wrong.
"Saddam was dangerous to his own people but not a great, and certainly not an immediate, danger to his neighbors and the world," he added.
Again on Tuesday he criticized the United States and Britain for trusting their own intelligence more than that of the weapons inspectors, who had not found "a smoking gun."
Again BB, if there were no WMDs, why did the US attack Iraq?
THERE WAS NO THREAT POSED BY IRAQ.
... because Hans Blix has the best interests of the US in mind, right? lol...
Read the reasons to invade again if you have to.
-
You have got to be kidding.
Humanitarian reasons are why we invaded Iraq?
So we killed btn 80-650,000 Iraqis, displace another 2-4 million of them, co-opted their natural resources and destroyed the country's infrastructure on humanitarian grounds?
You have to do a little better than that. On it's face, such a claim of justification is incredulous.
We won't even address the legal basis for such a claim.
I don't have the time to wait for you to pull your head out of your ass. What you're saying is along the same lines as saying killing the attacking nazi forces in WW2 is just like murdering innocent german citizens. It's a silly argument and makes no sense.
And I do feel stupid now.. for assuming I was talking to a reasonable and thinking person versus what appears to be just the opposite.
Read the list a few times if you have to.
-
On that note... I bet you think we should do something about the human rights atrocities in Africa, without considering (and thinking) for one second that doing so would involve many of the same actions that we've been forced to go through in Iraq.
-
I don't have the time to wait for you to pull your head out of your ass. What you're saying is along the same lines as saying killing the attacking nazi forces in WW2 is just like murdering innocent german citizens. It's a silly argument and makes no sense.
And I do feel stupid now.. for assuming I was talking to a reasonable and thinking person versus what appears to be just the opposite.
Read the list a few times if you have to.
The Nazis were taking over Europe. Who did Iraq attack? Which of our allies did Iraq attack?
Your method of argumentation is uneven and illogical.
Why should I read 'the list' a few more times? The BS will be the same.
Under the holdings of the Nuremberg Trials, the invasion of Iraq was an war of aggression. That's the same thing we nailed the Nazis and Japs with.
Under the UN Charter, the invasion was an unauthorized use of force. Again, a war crime.
And finally, you call me names b/c that's all you really have left.
It's seems hard for you to stomach the fact that we attacked and brutalized a tiny country for no really good reason at all.
-
On that note... I bet you think we should do something about the human rights atrocities in Africa, without considering (and thinking) for one second that doing so would involve many of the same actions that we've been forced to go through in Iraq.
If you are referring to the on-going genocide in Darfur, how is that relevant to Iraq?
That list you provide of justifications for attacking the toothless tiger aka Iraq is so pathetic that only a pro-war ideologue could look at that and say, "see, we were doing the right thing all along!"
I'm sorry, but that's just not the case.
-
The Nazis were taking over Europe. Who did Iraq attack? Which of our allies did Iraq attack?
Your method of argumentation is uneven and illogical.
Why should I read 'the list' a few more times? The BS will be the same.
Under the holdings of the Nuremberg Trials, the invasion of Iraq was an war of aggression. That's the same thing we nailed the Nazis and Japs with.
Under the UN Charter, the invasion was an unauthorized use of force. Again, a war crime.
And finally, you call me names b/c that's all you really have left.
It's seems hard for you to stomach the fact that we attacked and brutalized a tiny country for no really good reason at all.
The point was calling out who the bad guys are (or enemy) versus your attempt to alleviate their earned title and deem them as innocents.. but obviously you missed the point yet again.
That is why I call you names.. because you do not respond to rational debate and logic.
I say read the list a few more times in the vain attempt that you might see through the cloud of BS you have apparently been living within and come back down to earth.
War of aggression? Yeah right.. we intervened as we should. And as the most powerful nation we do bear some responsibility for standing by and doing nothing while countries like iraq do whatever they want. The UN was prepared to do exactly nothing no matter how many violations Iraq committed. I guess the fact that we put an end to that bothers you as it did the leaders AT the UN, a corrupt, and impotent organization.
-
If you are referring to the on-going genocide in Darfur, how is that relevant to Iraq?
That list you provide of justifications for attacking the toothless tiger aka Iraq is so pathetic that only a pro-war ideologue could look at that and say, "see, we were doing the right thing all along!"
I'm sorry, but that's just not the case.
It is relevant in order to uncover the hypocrisy you and those that think as you do participate in. I guess you don't like that either, sorry.
::)
-
The point was calling out who the bad guys are (or enemy) versus your attempt to alleviate their earned title and deem them as innocents.. but obviously you missed the point yet again.
That is why I call you names.. because you do not respond to rational debate and logic.
I say read the list a few more times in the vain attempt that you might see through the cloud of BS you have apparently been living within and come back down to earth.
War of aggression? Yeah right.. we intervened as we should. And as the most powerful nation we do bear some responsibility for standing by and doing nothing while countries like iraq do whatever they want. The UN was prepared to do exactly nothing no matter how many violations Iraq committed. I guess the fact that we put an end to that bothers you as it did the leaders AT the UN, a corrupt, and impotent organization.
We intervened into what? Hussein gassed the Kurds 20 years ago and Bush I's reaction was to ignore it and continue his golf game.
The sanctions on Iraq that devastated the country was imposed at the US's behest.
What did the Iraqi people do to the US to merit our invading their country, blowing it up, killing them, and taking their property rights?
What did they do?
-
It is relevant in order to uncover the hypocrisy you and those that think as you do participate in. I guess you don't like that either, sorry.
::)
For god's sake one of the justifications for attacking the country was "Revenge".
If an attack is not legal, which this one wasn't, then using force predicated on a theory of self defense becomes murder...a war of aggression.
Why not just include "Iraqis are brown skinned, or they smell, or they are poor business men, as other reasons for the invasion? They are just as valid as the comedy list you posted.
Good nite BB. Until tomorrow.
-
You humans. Attacking the author of the article when he cannot hear you. - Decker
Decker,
I attack you for copying and promoting that piece of garbage onto GetBig.
You can make fun of republicans all day on here, all is fair, I will even join you, as lately they deserve it.
But not our troops, as they don't make the rules, they only take orders, just like they did in Kosovo., when they were sent their by then President Bill Clinton. which most of you libs sat in silence.
You are a piece of shit, yes a piece of shit, for promoting that "Worst List that says hateful things about our troops, the same troops that went into Kosovo, sent their by Bill Clinton, and I bet you had not one negative word to say back then.
Lets not forget that Hillary Clinton, and your man John Edwards both voted for going into Iraq,
so lets see, John Edwards voted to send our troops into Iraq, and they went, and now you are okay with calling (promoting) these same troops the worst people ? You are a hypocrite
Plain and simple, Decker is a piece of shit
-
Yes I do feel the same way about cops and firemen. What's wrong with that? Everyone acts out of self-interest...even priests.
a few years ago i had a call that someone broke into an apartment. i get in and this dude has a girl tied to her bed, about to rape her. he shot me with a 12 guage slug. beautifull college student, about to get her life ruined, possibly killed. was i acting out of self interest? was i being selfish lying in a hospital bed thinking i was dead, all to protect a stranger?
you can imagine why i get pissed when i hear this type of bullshit.
there's a million things i could be doing. i "choose" to be a cop. i would explain why, but you wouldnt have a clue what i would be talking about.. a world full of deckers, we would be doomed.
-
Hussein gassed the Kurds 20 years ago and Bush I's reaction was to ignore it and continue his golf game.
As expected your reaction would've been do nothing. And by this statement apparently you think the atrocities stopped with that.
That's what you and people like you all say and it's obvious no matter what happens anywhere you are not a man of action, just words.
You continue to assume we have to suffer first before anything can be done just like your attempt to reclassify killing the enemy trying to kill us as some sort of genocide of innocent people on our part. The people we are killing are NOT innocent, they are NOT non combatants.
-
For god's sake one of the justifications for attacking the country was "Revenge".
If an attack is not legal, which this one wasn't, then using force predicated on a theory of self defense becomes murder...a war of aggression.
Why not just include "Iraqis are brown skinned, or they smell, or they are poor business men, as other reasons for the invasion? They are just as valid as the comedy list you posted.
Good nite BB. Until tomorrow.
I don't hear you complaining about any of the illegalities of what Saddam was doing before we went there. Nor would I expect you to have a plan for dealing with it. And the sanctions we encouraged showed nothing more than Saddams awful treatment of his own, yet you blame the USA just as you would for anything else. The bottom line is you don't believe in responsibility and holding leaders accountable (unless you have personal hatred towards them such as Bush).
-
a few years ago i had a call that someone broke into an apartment. i get in and this dude has a girl tied to her bed, about to rape her. he shot me with a 12 guage slug. beautifull college student, about to get her life ruined, possibly killed. was i acting out of self interest? was i being selfish lying in a hospital bed thinking i was dead, all to protect a stranger?
you can imagine why i get pissed when i hear this type of bullshit.
there's a million things i could be doing. i "choose" to be a cop. i would explain why, but you wouldnt have a clue what i would be talking about.. a world full of deckers, we would be doomed.
excellent post... thanks for hangin around
-
a few years ago i had a call that someone broke into an apartment. i get in and this dude has a girl tied to her bed, about to rape her. he shot me with a 12 guage slug. beautifull college student, about to get her life ruined, possibly killed. was i acting out of self interest? was i being selfish lying in a hospital bed thinking i was dead, all to protect a stranger?
you can imagine why i get pissed when i hear this type of bullshit.
there's a million things i could be doing. i "choose" to be a cop. i would explain why, but you wouldnt have a clue what i would be talking about.. a world full of deckers, we would be doomed.
You are the man. Thanks for sharing this.
-
You want to make jokes about a politician, one who sits as his or her desk , safe from harm, then go for it .
but anyone that finds humor in the above statement, is a piece of shit, and nothing more.
The quote about the troops clearly shows that whoever wrote the list isn't against the average joe soldier trying to stay alive in Iraq. I'd say quite the opposite.
-
Decker,
I attack you for copying and promoting that piece of garbage onto GetBig.
You can make fun of republicans all day on here, all is fair, I will even join you, as lately they deserve it.
But not our troops, as they don't make the rules, they only take orders, just like they did in Kosovo., when they were sent their by then President Bill Clinton. which most of you libs sat in silence.
You are a piece of shit, yes a piece of shit, for promoting that "Worst List that says hateful things about our troops, the same troops that went into Kosovo, sent their by Bill Clinton, and I bet you had not one negative word to say back then.
Lets not forget that Hillary Clinton, and your man John Edwards both voted for going into Iraq,
so lets see, John Edwards voted to send our troops into Iraq, and they went, and now you are okay with calling (promoting) these same troops the worst people ? You are a hypocrite
Plain and simple, Decker is a piece of shit
I think you need a glass of water or something.
Or perhaps better, read up on your democracy skills.
Trying to censor the discussion, what's up with that?
-
a few years ago i had a call that someone broke into an apartment. i get in and this dude has a girl tied to her bed, about to rape her. he shot me with a 12 guage slug. beautifull college student, about to get her life ruined, possibly killed. was i acting out of self interest? was i being selfish lying in a hospital bed thinking i was dead, all to protect a stranger?
you can imagine why i get pissed when i hear this type of bullshit.
there's a million things i could be doing. i "choose" to be a cop. i would explain why, but you wouldnt have a clue what i would be talking about.. a world full of deckers, we would be doomed.
Whatever happened to doing one's job with quiet dignity?
Where have I denigrated cops, firemen or the troops for choosing those respective careers? Pointing out that they do these things out of self-interest is a fact. There may be different honorable motivating factors for taking the job and I'm certain there are.
Choosing a dangerous profession carries its own rewards and risks. There are bad cops/firemen/soldiers and good ones. The measure of a man in this instance is in his performance of his duties. That's where he earns his respect.
In other words, don't expect me to kiss your ass just b/c you decided to be a cop. That's for cheerleaders. However, if you're a good cop then I salute you b/c you deserve it.
-
The quote about the troops clearly shows that whoever wrote the list isn't against the average joe soldier trying to stay alive in Iraq. I'd say quite the opposite.
Hedge,
please tell us all what part of the following quote you are getting this viewpoint from ?
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
Hedge,
This is a flat out smear of our troops, read the words after the number 28, it says " The Troops ", not some of the troops, not a part of the troops.
Hedge, your defense of the smear is as weak as it comes, and if you agree that our troops should be part of a "Wosrt List ", then you are a piece of shit as well.
-
I don't hear you complaining about any of the illegalities of what Saddam was doing before we went there. Nor would I expect you to have a plan for dealing with it. And the sanctions we encouraged showed nothing more than Saddams awful treatment of his own, yet you blame the USA just as you would for anything else. The bottom line is you don't believe in responsibility and holding leaders accountable (unless you have personal hatred towards them such as Bush).
Hussein was a shitty dictator. That is true. But what business is that of the US or to you?
Holding leaders accountable? So we are the world's police? Where do we get the authority for that?
Like it or not, there are many laws in place for international relations.
Do we still retain the right to bomb Germany or Japan or Viet Nam or Korea b/c we were enemies with them at one time?
The entire point of this invasion was that Bush ran to the UN to enforce an inspection/disarmament resolution against Iraq and Iraq was in compliance with that resolution yet Bush ordered the attack anyways.
That is how it happened. Can you deny that?
-
Hedge,
please tell us all what part of the following quote you are getting this viewpoint from ?
"28. The Troops
Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly. They keep telling John McCain they want to win. They need so much support, it's clingy and sad. Matching outfits? Kind of gay.
Exhibit A: Too cheap to buy their own body armor.
Sentence: Walter Reed."
Hedge,
This is a flat out smear of our troops, read the words after the number 28, it says " The Troops ", not some of the troops, not a part of the troops.
Hedge, your defense of the smear is as weak as it comes, and if you agree that our troops should be part of a "Wosrt List ", then you are a piece of shit as well.
That "smear" is sarcastic commentary on the IRaq mess--the politics that put the soldiers in a winless situation.
Or do you really think that author believes that army is 'clingy' and 'kind of gay' or 'too cheap to buy their own body armor' too?
Why is the sentence for them Walter Reed? Maybe b/c the political buffoons that got us into this war also let the Nation's best Vet hospital go to shit. The Bush people are playing the soldiers for rubes and using them in the most vile way without any real care for their concern yet you are incensed by this little bit of humor.
The leaders that sent the soldiers to Iraq to handle an invisible threat from Iraq are screwing over those soldiers by not providing adequate medical/psychological services.
The whole thing's a clusterfuck.
I suppose you can sit back and stew about how the article slights the soldiers when in concrete terms, it is Bush and the war supporters that are really screwing them.
-
Hussein was a shitty dictator. That is true. But what business is that of the US or to you?
Holding leaders accountable? So we are the world's police? Where do we get the authority for that?
Like it or not, there are many laws in place for international relations.
Do we still retain the right to bomb Germany or Japan or Viet Nam or Korea b/c we were enemies with them at one time?
The entire point of this invasion was that Bush ran to the UN to enforce an inspection/disarmament resolution against Iraq and Iraq was in compliance with that resolution yet Bush ordered the attack anyways.
That is how it happened. Can you deny that?
To an extent we do play the role of world police when things get bad enough AND are salvageable (WW2 on the Euro front is a perfect example of this.)
Iraq violated countless resolutions and continually attempted to undermine the efforts of the UN. Riddle me this Batman.. what do you think Iraq would be up to 10 years from now if we hadn't marched on em?
I get the impression you are the kind of guy who thinks a rapist may deserve to go free because a rookie cop fucked up the miranda rights, or the kind of guy who sees a woman getting beat in the street by an attacker and does nothing (but hey, he didn't do anything to YOU, right?).
I don't believe anything about our war with Iraq was illegal but even in that case any person who thinks it is better to stand by and do nothing while someone like Saddam is supporting terrorism, murdering and torturing innocent people, and is a constant threat (and problem) instead of not being afraid of doing something "illegal" needs to grow a spine and locate his testicles. It's the difference between people who put forth effort to change this world and those who are merely a bug on the face of progress.
-
Again Decker,
I attack you for copying and promoting that piece of garbage onto GetBig.
You can make fun of republicans all day on here, all is fair, I will even join you, as lately they deserve it.
But not our troops, as they don't make the rules, they only take orders, just like they did in Kosovo., when they were sent their by then President Bill Clinton. which most of you libs sat in silence.
You are a piece of shit, yes a piece of shit, for promoting that "Worst List that says hateful things about our troops, the same troops that went into Kosovo, sent their by Bill Clinton, and I bet you had not one negative word to say back then.
Lets not forget that Hillary Clinton, and your man John Edwards both voted for going into Iraq,
so lets see, John Edwards voted to send our troops into Iraq, and they went, and now you are okay with calling (promoting) these same troops the worst people ? You are a hypocrite
Plain and simple, Decker is a piece of shit
-
To an extent we do play the role of world police when things get bad enough AND are salvageable (WW2 on the Euro front is a perfect example of this.)
Iraq violated countless resolutions and continually attempted to undermine the efforts of the UN. Riddle me this Batman.. what do you think Iraq would be up to 10 years from now if we hadn't marched on em?
I get the impression you are the kind of guy who thinks a rapist may deserve to go free because a rookie cop fucked up the miranda rights, or the kind of guy who sees a woman getting beat in the street by an attacker and does nothing (but hey, he didn't do anything to YOU, right?).
I don't believe anything about our war with Iraq was illegal but even in that case any person who thinks it is better to stand by and do nothing while someone like Saddam is supporting terrorism, murdering and torturing innocent people, and is a constant threat (and problem) instead of not being afraid of doing something "illegal" needs to grow a spine and locate his testicles. It's the difference between people who put forth effort to change this world and those who are merely a bug on the face of progress.
agree 100 %
-
To an extent we do play the role of world police when things get bad enough AND are salvageable (WW2 on the Euro front is a perfect example of this.)
Iraq violated countless resolutions and continually attempted to undermine the efforts of the UN. Riddle me this Batman.. what do you think Iraq would be up to 10 years from now if we hadn't marched on em?
I get the impression you are the kind of guy who thinks a rapist may deserve to go free because a rookie cop fucked up the miranda rights, or the kind of guy who sees a woman getting beat in the street by an attacker and does nothing (but hey, he didn't do anything to YOU, right?).
I don't believe anything about our war with Iraq was illegal but even in that case any person who thinks it is better to stand by and do nothing while someone like Saddam is supporting terrorism, murdering and torturing innocent people, and is a constant threat (and problem) instead of not being afraid of doing something "illegal" needs to grow a spine and locate his testicles. It's the difference between people who put forth effort to change this world and those who are merely a bug on the face of progress.
The answer to your riddle is easy.
In ten years, Iraq would still be a toothless tiger.
Why? B/c a combination of UN inspections and sanctions crippled the country and any designs it had on WMDs.
How do we know?
The WMD inspectors were let into Iraq. Probably b/c Bush rattled the sabres.
The Inspectors were finding nothing.
Regardless of the Inspectors findings, Bush ordered the attack of a country prostrate and subject to US inspection demands.
That's what a coward does.
The Bully has the weakling's lunch money and his face in the ground and beats the shit out of him anyways.
So Saddam is killing and torturing innocent people. Check the headlines, so are we.
So 'growing a pair' involves becoming a criminal?
That's news to me. I guess all those rules are for sissies.
Gosh darn it, sometimes the law is just an inconvenience.
I always thought that beating down and killing in an inferior country is not a courageous act but the epitome of cowardice.
-
Again Decker,
I attack you for copying and promoting that piece of garbage onto GetBig.
You can make fun of republicans all day on here, all is fair, I will even join you, as lately they deserve it.
But not our troops, as they don't make the rules, they only take orders, just like they did in Kosovo., when they were sent their by then President Bill Clinton. which most of you libs sat in silence.
You are a piece of shit, yes a piece of shit, for promoting that "Worst List that says hateful things about our troops, the same troops that went into Kosovo, sent their by Bill Clinton, and I bet you had not one negative word to say back then.
Lets not forget that Hillary Clinton, and your man John Edwards both voted for going into Iraq,
so lets see, John Edwards voted to send our troops into Iraq, and they went, and now you are okay with calling (promoting) these same troops the worst people ? You are a hypocrite
Plain and simple, Decker is a piece of shit
You got me shakin' in my boots little lady.
-
The answer to your riddle is easy.
In ten years, Iraq would still be a toothless tiger.
Why? B/c a combination of UN inspections and sanctions crippled the country and any designs it had on WMDs.
How do we know?
The WMD inspectors were let into Iraq. Probably b/c Bush rattled the sabres.
The Inspectors were finding nothing.
Regardless of the Inspectors findings, Bush ordered the attack of a country prostrate and subject to US inspection demands.
That's what a coward does.
The Bully has the weakling's lunch money and his face in the ground and beats the shit out of him anyways.
Scott Ritter (a UN weapons inspector in Iraq) talks about Iraq's lack of WMD's all the time. You would have to be living under a rock not to hear about what he has said. All people have to do is type in his name on Google and bingo. Unfortunaltly getting people to do anything that requires their brain is tough.
-
The answer to your riddle is easy.
In ten years, Iraq would still be a toothless tiger.
Why? B/c a combination of UN inspections and sanctions crippled the country and any designs it had on WMDs.
How do we know?
The WMD inspectors were let into Iraq. Probably b/c Bush rattled the sabres.
The Inspectors were finding nothing.
Regardless of the Inspectors findings, Bush ordered the attack of a country prostrate and subject to US inspection demands.
That's what a coward does.
The Bully has the weakling's lunch money and his face in the ground and beats the shit out of him anyways.
Crippled the country? Hard to say that when what we DID find were very close to being capable of production. Many were even mobile. I should say that I speak from an unfair advantage having had a clearance at the time and seeing what happened to what Saddam DID have. Believe me, he was no where near toothless.
So inspectors were let into Iraq.. AND YET THEY WERE DENIED ACCESS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND COMPLAINED ALMOST DAILY OF NONCOMPLIANCE.
Funny you mention the bully/weakling scenario.. sounds an awful lot like Iraq vs. Kuwait '91. And I imagine you wouldn't have done squat about that either if it was your decision.
-
putting our troops on this list makes the whole thing null and void
the author is a world class asshole
btw - how can one compile a list like this and not include Pat Robertson, Ted Haggard, etc...
-
Crippled the country? Hard to say that when what we DID find were very close to being capable of production. Many were even mobile. I should say that I speak from an unfair advantage having had a clearance at the time and seeing what happened to what Saddam DID have. Believe me, he was no where near toothless.
So inspectors were let into Iraq.. AND YET THEY WERE DENIED ACCESS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND COMPLAINED ALMOST DAILY OF NONCOMPLIANCE.
Funny you mention the bully/weakling scenario.. sounds an awful lot like Iraq vs. Kuwait '91. And I imagine you wouldn't have done squat about that either if it was your decision.
I don't believe you. I believe the WMD inspectors or as I refer to them, worldclass scientists.
AND YET THEY WERE DENIED ACCESS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND COMPLAINED ALMOST DAILY OF NONCOMPLIANCE.
That's just not true.
"Inspections in Iraq resumed on the 27th of November 2002. In matters relating to process, notably prompt access to sites, we have faced relatively few difficulties, and certainly much less than those that were faced by UNSCOM [U.N. Special Commission] in the period 1991 to 1998. This may well be due to the strong outside pressure." http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/07/sprj.irq.un.transcript.blix/
See how Blix credited Bush's Sabre rattling with prompt acces to sites?
For some reason, Bush did not want the inspections to continue. Blix wanted the inspections to continue but not the president.
Could you please tell me what the hurry was for the president to stop inspections and attack Iraq?
-
Crippled the country? Hard to say that when what we DID find were very close to being capable of production. Many were even mobile. I should say that I speak from an unfair advantage having had a clearance at the time and seeing what happened to what Saddam DID have. Believe me, he was no where near toothless.
So inspectors were let into Iraq.. AND YET THEY WERE DENIED ACCESS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND COMPLAINED ALMOST DAILY OF NONCOMPLIANCE.
Funny you mention the bully/weakling scenario.. sounds an awful lot like Iraq vs. Kuwait '91. And I imagine you wouldn't have done squat about that either if it was your decision.
You are full of shit.
-
putting our troops on this list makes the whole thing null and void
the author is a world class asshole
btw - how can one compile a list like this and not include Pat Robertson, Ted Haggard, etc...
As equal opportunity offenders, you'd have to check the 2004-6 issues. I think Robertson ranks #1. I have to admit, the list isn't as funny as it was in past years.
-
Blix welcomes accelerated cooperation by Iraq, but says unresolved issues remain
7 March 2003 – Top United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix told the Security Council today that over the past month Iraq has displayed "active" or even "proactive" cooperation, which has allowed the inspection process to make significant progress, although a number of key disarmament tasks remained to be resolved.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=6383&Cr=iraq&Cr1=inspect
-
As equal opportunity offenders, you'd have to check the 2004-6 issues. I think Robertson ranks #1. I have to admit, the list isn't as funny as it was in past years.
I'd say throw out all entertainers (who cares) and include those people who are truly a blight on the human race.
I haven't read this entire thread but there is no justificaction for including "the troops" on this list and I'm definitely not seeing the satire.
No doubt Iraq is a mess but that's the sole fault of the idiots who planned this (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfewitz, etc..), starting with the fact that they've been planning this for years before Bush was even Prez. For fucks sake you think they could have done just a little bit better job
They should also include the financial engineers who created the Structured Invesment Vehicles/Collateralized Debt Obligations that are responsible for the sub-prime mess
-
Blix welcomes accelerated cooperation by Iraq, but says unresolved issues remain
7 March 2003 – Top United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix told the Security Council today that over the past month Iraq has displayed "active" or even "proactive" cooperation, which has allowed the inspection process to make significant progress, although a number of key disarmament tasks remained to be resolved.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=6383&Cr=iraq&Cr1=inspect
But Brixtonbullshitter was in Iraq and he headed the inspection team so I believe him over those stupid scientists.
-
I'd say throw out all entertainers (who cares) and include those people who are truly a blight on the human race.
I haven't read this entire thread but there is no justificaction for including "the troops" on this list and I'm definitely not seeing the satire.
No doubt Iraq is a mess but that's the sole fault of the idiots who planned this (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfewitz, etc..), starting with the fact that they've been planning this for years before Bush was even Prez. For fucks sake you think they could have done just a little bit better job
They should also include the financial engineerts who created the Structured Invesment Vehicles/Collateralized Debt Obligations that are responsible for the sub-prime mess
I don't see satire either. I see quasi-effeminate sarcasm...like the sort you may find in a fashion magazine or such. I don't think the author really believes that all the soldiers are rubes. Why rubes? B/c that's how the Bush administration plays them. It sent the troops over to Iraq undermanned, poorly equipped and with faltering medical services yet many of the troops still willingly want 'to do their job'. I don't think the author believes that the troops are kind of gay or what not. Sarcasm on inviolable subjects like the troops or the flag or mother or apple pie has been around for some time. Frankly, I don't think that entry is very funny. But I do like the 3 choices I made.
This is what I wrote in a prior post and I think it's applicable:
That "smear" is sarcastic commentary on the IRaq mess--the politics that put the soldiers in a winless situation.
Or do you really think that author believes that army is 'clingy' and 'kind of gay' or 'too cheap to buy their own body armor' too?
Why is the sentence for them Walter Reed? Maybe b/c the political buffoons that got us into this war also let the Nation's best Vet hospital go to shit. The Bush people are playing the soldiers for rubes and using them in the most vile way without any real care for their concern yet you are incensed by this little bit of humor.
The leaders that sent the soldiers to Iraq to handle an invisible threat from Iraq are screwing over those soldiers by not providing adequate medical/psychological services.
The whole thing's a clusterfuck.
I suppose you can sit back and stew about how the article slights the soldiers when in concrete terms, it is Bush and the war supporters that are really screwing them.
-
I don't see satire either. I see quasi-effeminate sarcasm...like the sort you may find in a fashion magazine or such. I don't think the author really believes that all the soldiers are rubes. Why rubes? B/c that's how the Bush administration plays them. It sent the troops over to Iraq undermanned, poorly equipped and with faltering medical services yet many of the troops still willingly want 'to do their job'. I don't think the author believes that the troops are kind of gay or what not. Sarcasm on inviolable subjects like the troops or the flag or mother or apple pie has been around for some time. Frankly, I don't think that entry is very funny. But I do like the 3 choices I made.
This is what I wrote in a prior post and I think it's applicable:
"Charges: Rubes, the lot of 'em. Come back all fugly"
This is just in horribly poor taste and I'm pretty tolerant of most stuff
-
I'd say throw out all entertainers (who cares) and include those people who are truly a blight on the human race.
I haven't read this entire thread but there is no justificaction for including "the troops" on this list and I'm definitely not seeing the satire.
No doubt Iraq is a mess but that's the sole fault of the idiots who planned this (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfewitz, etc..), starting with the fact that they've been planning this for years before Bush was even Prez. For fucks sake you think they could have done just a little bit better job
They should also include the financial engineers who created the Structured Invesment Vehicles/Collateralized Debt Obligations that are responsible for the sub-prime mess
Those "idiots" are getting their way whether you like it or not. Maybe they're not idiots afterwall? : P
Don't forget all your liberal icons slamming the war now voted for it.
Oh but I forgot.. it must have been some great conspiracy right? ah hahahhaahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!... lamest BS bush-hating theory ever. The war was more than justified. This is all about WHO justified it to you impotent jerks, lol.
-
Those "idiots" are getting their way whether you like it or not. Maybe they're not idiots afterwall? : P
Don't forget all your liberal icons slamming the war now voted for it.
Oh but I forgot.. it must have been some great conspiracy right? ah hahahhaahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!... lamest BS bush-hating theory ever. The war was more than justified. This is all about WHO justified it to you impotent jerks, lol.
has anyone ever told you you're a numbskull?
Did I say anything about the war being justified or not???
No I didn't
I said there was no justification for including the troops in that lame list
I also said the war was poorly planned and even more poorly executed and I blame the leaders and planners and not the troops
-
has anyone ever told you you're a numbskull?
Did I say anything about the war being justified or not???
No I didn't
I said there was no justification for including the troops in that lame list
I also said the war was poorly planned and even more poorly executed and I blame the leaders and planners and not the troops
For fucksakes BritishNumbNuts STILL thinks the UN inspectors werent allowed to do their jobs when there have been many inspectors that have said there were no weapons of mass destraction. Anyone that would ignore the facts stated by those inspectors and form their own theories based on what they heard from Bush and Co. has shit for brains.
-
For fucksakes BritishNumbNuts STILL thinks the UN inspectors werent allowed to do their jobs when there have been many inspectors that have said there were no weapons of mass destraction. Anyone that would ignore the facts stated by those inspectors and form their own theories based on what they heard from Bush and Co. has shit for brains.
I'm not British.
Classic bush hating nonsense. Your personal vendetta overpowers any reasonable attempt to understand the various reasons to destroy Iraq under Saddam.
Some links to help you...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theissues/article/0,,794275,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2167933.stm
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1123
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997-2000
Back and forth, back and forth. Funny you douches tell me how "Iraq was complying!!! He was!! Really!!" hahahahahaa!!!! And how long was THAT gonna last. I can't get past it.. you guys actually sit and type with a straight face that we had nothing to worry about blah blah, Iraq isn't doing anything wrong blah blah. The fact that you morons actually believe this is downright astonishing.
-
I'm not British.
Classic bush hating nonsense. Your personal vendetta overpowers any reasonable attempt to understand the various reasons to destroy Iraq under Saddam.
Some links to help you...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theissues/article/0,,794275,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2167933.stm
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1123
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_1997-2000
Back and forth, back and forth. Funny you douches tell me how "Iraq was complying!!! He was!! Really!!" hahahahahaa!!!! And how long was THAT gonna last. I can't get past it.. you guys actually sit and type with a straight face that we had nothing to worry about blah blah, Iraq isn't doing anything wrong blah blah. The fact that you morons actually believe this is downright astonishing.
An oversight on my part about your handle but hardly relevant on this topic.
Look, I suggest you listen to this guy, not just this one video but a few of them to get the whole picture. He was in Iraq and headed the UN inspection teams.