BUSH LIED! THOUSANDS DIED!

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

No kidding.

While you pro-war folks actually make it happen on a bloody grand scale and stick us with the bill. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

Corn -- You make it too easy. All I had to do was cut and paste the same reply I posted when PJ first posted such an obvious setup line. :laugh:

Don't blame me for cutting and pasting the same obvious reply to the same dumb statement. :p
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: loki8481
Bush lied to get us into the war.

ok. so what?

Obviously dahunan thinks that everyone that voted for Bush is an accomplice to murder and therefore should be murdered themselves. This is the face of the typical anti-war liberal.

exaggerating doesn't make you look smart.
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

No kidding.

While you pro-war folks actually make it happen on a bloody grand scale and stick us with the bill. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

Corn -- You make it too easy. All I had to do was cut and paste the same reply I posted when PJ first posted such an obvious setup line. :laugh:

Don't blame me for cutting and pasting the same obvious reply to the same dumb statement. :p

You wouldn't know pro-war if it hit you in the ass.
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Originally posted by: OrByte
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: loki8481
Bush lied to get us into the war.

ok. so what?

Obviously dahunan thinks that everyone that voted for Bush is an accomplice to murder and therefore should be murdered themselves. This is the face of the typical anti-war liberal.

exaggerating doesn't make you look smart.

I"m sorry, exaggerating?

Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: loki8481
I for one won't be reelecting him in November.
rose.gif

you really are a sick man

too bad you weren't an Iraqi who was labeled as "Collateral Damage"
You call him a sick man, but then you say it's too bad that he wasn't killed in Iraq?? :confused:

If you are willing to support war built on lies then you should truly be collateral damage too

It should be obvious..

Yeah right.....

Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

If I was an accomplice in a murder what punishment would I deserve? *oh.. need to specify some criteria

I am NOT a Republican Politician
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

No kidding.

While you pro-war folks actually make it happen on a bloody grand scale and stick us with the bill. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

Corn -- You make it too easy. All I had to do was cut and paste the same reply I posted when PJ first posted such an obvious setup line. :laugh:

Don't blame me for cutting and pasting the same obvious reply to the same dumb statement. :p

You wouldn't know pro-war if it hit you in the ass.

Oh, wow! Irrelevant insult time. Do I get to play? :D

You wouldn't know anything if it hit you in the ass because, with your head so far up it, you'd be viewing whatever it was in the dark. :laugh:

I win. :cool:
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.

I'd bet you're willing to send others to possibly die to prove that point...

more meat for the grinder.....
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

No kidding.

While you pro-war folks actually make it happen on a bloody grand scale and stick us with the bill. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

Corn -- You make it too easy. All I had to do was cut and paste the same reply I posted when PJ first posted such an obvious setup line. :laugh:

Don't blame me for cutting and pasting the same obvious reply to the same dumb statement. :p

You wouldn't know pro-war if it hit you in the ass.

Oh, wow! Irrelevant insult time. Do I get to play? :D

You wouldn't know anything if it hit you in the ass because, with your head so far up it, you'd be viewing whatever it was in the dark. :laugh:

I win. :cool:

I most certainly did not insult you, I merely stated a fact.

You're a moron. <----Now that was an insult.

Mocking the antics of the anti-war crowd does not make one pro-war. Sorry, you lose.
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.

I'd bet you're willing to send others to possibly die to prove that point...

more meat for the grinder.....

It almost seemed like you actually countered his point there for a split second.
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.

I'd bet you're willing to send others to possibly die to prove that point...

more meat for the grinder.....

It almost seemed like you actually countered his point there for a split second.

Thanks! Coming from you that means... nothing at all....
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.

I'd bet you're willing to send others to possibly die to prove that point...

more meat for the grinder.....

It almost seemed like you actually countered his point there for a split second.

Thanks! Coming from you that means... nothing at all....

Just as long as you realize i'm right and your vomit like words don't go unchecked, I don't really care :)
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.

I'd bet you're willing to send others to possibly die to prove that point...

more meat for the grinder.....

It almost seemed like you actually countered his point there for a split second.

Thanks! Coming from you that means... nothing at all....

Just as long as you realize i'm right and your vomit like words don't go unchecked, I don't really care :)

So be it.... :)
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ultra laser
I wonder who has killed more Iraqis - Saddam or American troops.

I would bet that Saddam and the current participants in the insurgency (the majority of which are Iraqi's) have killed exponentially more Iraqi's than the US Armed Services.

I'd bet you're willing to send others to possibly die to prove that point...

more meat for the grinder.....

So basically, you're no smarter than Harvey. Birds of a feather I guess.............:roll:
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,478
6,903
136
I've watched Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc. from the first day they started campaigning to get control of the government.

I watched, read and heard all the filthy lies, innuendo, misinformation, propaganda and hubris that came out of their mouths while campaigning....

Then, after I saw them get into the white house through the use all of that despicable behavior, I watched them stay true to form and rigidly consistent in the devious methodology they employed to ramrod their agenda down the people's throats with the unfailing cooperation of a heavily republican controlled congress and judiciary.

A lot of us on this forum was calling them out on it from the get-go and onward to this very day.

Then, we watched as the Bush admin's credibility and reputation progressively eroded the more their chicanery was exposed until 70% of the people consistently gave them a thumbs down on their deceptive, secretive and micromanaging style of governance. Seventy fricking percent; more than two-thirds of the population presently disapproves of their shenannigans. The majority have spoken. They also spoke, no, they screamed loudly and clearly in 2006 - "We don't like what you neocons are doing to our country". Yet, these elected corrupted crooks still don't seem to get the message, and now Mccain doesn't seem to get the message.

The economy is tanking. Nope, not our fault says the folks who had complete control over the government for over six years....The war went well but the occupation is a disaster. Nope, Bush was right then, just as he is now. Never mind that it's taken all these years and lies to get only this far - and all because those presently in control of it are either stubborn beyond reason, egotisitical beyond reason, delusional beyond reason and/or have as their highest priorities reasons for which have been hidden from us through deceit and collusion among the administration and the ultra-rich; and on and on and on.

Shame on you. Shame on us for allowing this travesty to exist.

Change is on the horizon. Change is lighting the end of the tunnel. It's inevitable. It's irreversable. It's about time I say.

I can only hope the effort to hold Bush, Cheney and the rest of that....that.... gang of corrupted profiteers be diligently pursued, and have these people held accountable for their actions.

They deserve no less.

edit- syntax


 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

No kidding.
Yeah they are almost are nutty as the Pro War folks. In fact doesn't being Pro War mean wishing death on scores of people? On one side you have a few kooks wishing death on a few and on the other side you have those like ProJo wishing death on many.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Fern
We are rushing into war without fully discussing why, without thoroughly considering the consequences, or without making any attempt to explore what steps we might take to avert conflict.

It would give the President blanket authority to launch a unilateral preemptive attack on a sovereign nation that is perceived to be a threat to the United States.

Think for a moment of the precedent that this resolution will set, not just for this President but for future Presidents. From this day forward, American Presidents will be able to invoke Senate Joint Resolution 46 as justification for launching preemptive military strikes against any sovereign nations that they perceive to be a threat.

Congress has a responsibility to exercise with extreme care the power to declare war. There is no weightier matter to be considered. A war against Iraq will affect thousands if not tens of thousands of lives, and perhaps alter the course of history. It will surely affect the balance of power in the Middle East. It is not a decision to be taken in haste, under the glare of election year politics and the pressure of artificial deadlines. And yet any observer can see that that is exactly what the Senate is proposing to do.

The Senate is rushing to vote on whether to declare war on Iraq without pausing to ask why.

To follow through on the proposal outlined by the President would require the commitment of a large number of U.S. forces

In a September 30 report, CBO estimates that the incremental costs ? the costs that would be incurred above those budgeted for routine operations ? would be between $9 billion to $13 billion a month, depending on the actual force size deployed. Prosecuting a war would cost between $6 billion and $9 billion a month. Since the length of the war cannot be predicted, CBO could give no total battle estimate.

This is no way to embark on war..

Before we rush into war....

Reading his speech I say now with more conviction (and proof) that any member of Congress voting for the resolution cannot now say "it wasn't a vote to go to war" (as the revisionist dogma now goes) unless lying.

Byrd laid it all out before the vote and described it as a preemptive war. He made it exceedingly clear.

A damn good speech IMO.

He's certainly in a strong "I told you so" position. He nailed it, his prediciton/warning was about 100% accurate.

Fern

Very good point.

I'd still like to see a rebuttal to this post.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
<<And yet Congress is being exhorted to give the President open-ended authority now, to exercise whenever he pleases, in the event that he decides to invade Iraq. Why is Congress elbowing past the President to authorize a military campaign that the President may or may not even decide to pursue? Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves? >>
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
<< But officials often did not mention the level of dissension or uncertainty in the intelligence agencies about the information they were presenting. >>

"There is no doubt." = Damn liars.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Corn
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting how the anti-war folks go around wishing death on people.

No kidding.
Yeah they are almost are nutty as the Pro War folks. In fact doesn't being Pro War mean wishing death on scores of people? On one side you have a few kooks wishing death on a few and on the other side you have those like ProJo wishing death on many.

Yep, you nailed, that is why people are pro war, because they just want people to die. That's why our founding fathers were pro war, it had nothing to do with wanting independence from Great Britain. That's why the North was pro war during the civil war, it had nothing to do with ending the evil that was slavery. That's why the US was pro war during WWII, it had nothing to do with stopping Hitler and Tojo. Etc......


:roll:
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
Originally posted by: JD50
Yep, you nailed, that is why people are pro war, because they just want people to die. That's why our founding fathers were pro war, it had nothing to do with wanting independence from Great Britain. That's why the North was pro war during the civil war, it had nothing to do with ending the evil that was slavery. That's why the US was pro war during WWII, it had nothing to do with stopping Hitler and Tojo. Etc......


:roll:

and you are pro war now for what reason again?
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: JD50
Yep, you nailed, that is why people are pro war, because they just want people to die. That's why our founding fathers were pro war, it had nothing to do with wanting independence from Great Britain. That's why the North was pro war during the civil war, it had nothing to do with ending the evil that was slavery. That's why the US was pro war during WWII, it had nothing to do with stopping Hitler and Tojo. Etc......


:roll:

and you are pro war now for what reason again?

I'm not pro war. I want us out of Iraq as soon as possible, meaning, once we fix what we broke.

You obviously missed my point.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: JD50

That's why the US was pro war during WWII, it had nothing to do with stopping Hitler and Tojo. Etc......


:roll:

And if we're going to be pro-war, now, we should be rallying the armed forces of the United States of America to storm the Whitehouse and, on behalf of our citizens, take it and our Constitution back from the traitors and murderers who stole them from us.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
i honestly wanted to know. I've heard so many reasons to be there its impossible to know what reasons drives any one person. i thought your post was interesting because for each of those wars you cited the most common ideas as to why we went to war but with this one can we even nail that down? I don't think we can. If the reasons for staying change constantly then that is reason enough to leave.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
JD50 - Did my 06/08/2008 06:58 AM post give you something to think about?