"I Was Wrong!"

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Reverend Ken Joseph, Jr. was initially against the war, but changed his mind after seeing pre-war conditions in Iraq.

Story
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Same problems people have faced in Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Tibet and a number of other places.


Guess we should grow the military by ten-fold and do some more invadin'!!
 

arsbanned

Banned
Dec 12, 2003
4,853
0
0
Nahh, let's just keep it the same size and invade all of those countries! Hey! We're AMERICA! We can KICK anyone's A*S! :laugh:
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Reverend Ken Joseph, Jr. was initially against the war, but changed his mind after seeing pre-war conditions in Iraq.

Story

And?

PS You should really try to make your thread titles and descriptions more explanatory. For example, you could have had the sub-title be "Reverand changes mind about Iraq war."
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Reverend Ken Joseph, Jr. was initially against the war, but changed his mind after seeing pre-war conditions in Iraq.

Story

And?

PS You should really try to make your thread titles and descriptions more explanatory. For example, you could have had the sub-title be "Reverand changes mind about Iraq war."

Good suggestion. Done.
 

leeboy

Banned
Dec 8, 2003
451
0
0
RIP, I don't think you get it. No matter what you post, is does not and will not ever justify attacking a sovereign nation. Never. We are all left with the feeling of "Who is next" with this administration. Get over it, you live by a different set of rules.
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Same problems people have faced in Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Tibet and a number of other places.


Guess we should grow the military by ten-fold and do some more invadin'!!

You are correct.
Iraq was the first step in bringing freedom and democracy to the world. This should have been done a long time ago when Clinton ignored the call to Jihad against the West.

Erasing the harsh, desolate conditions that the people of the middle east live under will eradicate the desperate fanaticism we are up against and that have attacked us on 9/11.

Desperate conditions equate to desperate measures.

Even as the hawk that President Bush is, he does not do enough. We are not doing enough for the people in the world living under brutal dictators. Though I understand Bush's POV, he MUST remain in office next term because EVERYTHING is on the line this election.. the honor of our nation, the future of freedom in Iraq.

Free societys are a GOOD thing. Bringing that freedom to people, contary to radical leftist belief (who prefer "equal" socialist societys) is not a crime.

I for one believe that instituting a democracy in Iraq will start a domino effect across the middle east in time. No one is going to stick with their old ways once they taste freedom and a taste of the "evil" capitalist dollar.

This war has been a STUNNING blow to leftists across the world.

William Clinton should have taken the 1996 declaration of Jihad to kill all Jews and Westerners seriously.

Alas, it was not and now we are taking care of his mistakes.
To me, that was the reason for his stained legacy, not the Monica scandal and not even the economic boom he had sucessfully destroyed by the end of his 2nd term.

It truly was a shame.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Edge3D
Originally posted by: conjur
Same problems people have faced in Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Tibet and a number of other places.


Guess we should grow the military by ten-fold and do some more invadin'!!

You are correct.
Iraq was the first step in bringing freedom and democracy to the world. This should have been done a long time ago when Clinton ignored the call to Jihad against the West.

Erasing the harsh, desolate conditions that the people of the middle east live under will eradicate the desperate fanaticism we are up against and that have attacked us on 9/11.

Desperate conditions equate to desperate measures.

Even as the hawk that President Bush is, he does not do enough. We are not doing enough for the people in the world living under brutal dictators. Though I understand Bush's POV, he MUST remain in office next term because EVERYTHING is on the line this election.. the honor of our nation, the future of freedom in Iraq,

Free societys are a GOOD thing. Bringing that freedom to people, contary to radical leftist belief (who prefer "equal" socialist societys) is not a crime.

I for one believe that instituting a democracy in Iraq will start a domino effect across the middle east in time. No one is going to stick with their old ways once they taste freedom and a taste of the "evil" capitalist dollar.

This war has been a STUNNING blow to leftists across the world.

William Clinton should have taken the 1996 declaration of Jihad to kill all Jews and Westerners seriously.

Alas, it was not and now we are taking care of his mistakes.
To me, that was the reason for his stained legacy, not the Monica scandal and not even the economic boom he had sucessfully destroyed by the end of his 2nd term.

It truly was a shame.




<--- fires up HowardDeanYeahYell.WAV



:roll:


Settle down, Beavis. The world does not revolve around the end of a U.S. gun barrel.
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
Originally posted by: leeboy
RIP, I don't think you get it. No matter what you post, is does not and will not ever justify attacking a sovereign nation. Never. Get over it, you live by a different set of rules.

Good idea.

I'm sure Adolf Hitler would have loved it if the USA had followed such a wise doctrine.
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Conjur, if "parroting" bothers you, you must really be annoyed with Kerry.

Kerry's just parroting his speechwriters

"John Kerry said something amazing the other day. He was talking to the Wall Street Journal and was asked about his many attacks on ''Benedict Arnold CEOs'' -- for example: ''We will repeal every single benefit, every single loophole, every single reward for any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that take American jobs overseas and stick you with the bill.'' (Kerry in Virginia, Feb. 10)

Senator Flippy has now decided this line is nonoperative. As he told the chaps at the Journal, ''You know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said 'Look, that's not what I'm saying.' Benedict Arnold does not refer to somebody who in the normal course of business is going to go overseas and take jobs overseas. That happens. I support that. I understand that. I was referring to the people who take advantage of noneconomic transactions purely for tax purposes -- sham transactions -- and give up American citizenship. That's a Benedict Arnold. You give up your American citizenship but you want to continue to do business.''

Got that? When Kerry talks about ''any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that takes American jobs overseas,'' he's not referring to someone who ''takes jobs overseas.'' Perish the thought! He's all in favor of taking jobs overseas. It wasn't him who attacked all those ''Benedict Arnold CEOs,'' just his ''overzealous speechwriters.'' And the minute he discovered it was going on, he called them to say, ''Look, that's not what I'm saying.''"

Hahaha. Vinatge Kerry.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Who the F is Reverend Ken Joseph, Jr. and why the F do I care what he thinks? Don't answer that. I don't care.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Conjur, if "parroting" bothers you, you must really be annoyed with Kerry.

Kerry's just parroting his speechwriters

"John Kerry said something amazing the other day. He was talking to the Wall Street Journal and was asked about his many attacks on ''Benedict Arnold CEOs'' -- for example: ''We will repeal every single benefit, every single loophole, every single reward for any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that take American jobs overseas and stick you with the bill.'' (Kerry in Virginia, Feb. 10)

Senator Flippy has now decided this line is nonoperative. As he told the chaps at the Journal, ''You know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said 'Look, that's not what I'm saying.' Benedict Arnold does not refer to somebody who in the normal course of business is going to go overseas and take jobs overseas. That happens. I support that. I understand that. I was referring to the people who take advantage of noneconomic transactions purely for tax purposes -- sham transactions -- and give up American citizenship. That's a Benedict Arnold. You give up your American citizenship but you want to continue to do business.''

Got that? When Kerry talks about ''any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that takes American jobs overseas,'' he's not referring to someone who ''takes jobs overseas.'' Perish the thought! He's all in favor of taking jobs overseas. It wasn't him who attacked all those ''Benedict Arnold CEOs,'' just his ''overzealous speechwriters.'' And the minute he discovered it was going on, he called them to say, ''Look, that's not what I'm saying.''"

Hahaha. Vinatge Kerry.

Hijacking your own thread already?

And, again, how is that parroting? He's corrected his speechwriters to change the wording to more accurately reflect his opinion on outsourcing of jobs. I suppose you want to Kerry to oppose ALL outsourcing, unlike Bush?
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Conjur, if "parroting" bothers you, you must really be annoyed with Kerry.

Kerry's just parroting his speechwriters

"John Kerry said something amazing the other day. He was talking to the Wall Street Journal and was asked about his many attacks on ''Benedict Arnold CEOs'' -- for example: ''We will repeal every single benefit, every single loophole, every single reward for any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that take American jobs overseas and stick you with the bill.'' (Kerry in Virginia, Feb. 10)

Senator Flippy has now decided this line is nonoperative. As he told the chaps at the Journal, ''You know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said 'Look, that's not what I'm saying.' Benedict Arnold does not refer to somebody who in the normal course of business is going to go overseas and take jobs overseas. That happens. I support that. I understand that. I was referring to the people who take advantage of noneconomic transactions purely for tax purposes -- sham transactions -- and give up American citizenship. That's a Benedict Arnold. You give up your American citizenship but you want to continue to do business.''

Got that? When Kerry talks about ''any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that takes American jobs overseas,'' he's not referring to someone who ''takes jobs overseas.'' Perish the thought! He's all in favor of taking jobs overseas. It wasn't him who attacked all those ''Benedict Arnold CEOs,'' just his ''overzealous speechwriters.'' And the minute he discovered it was going on, he called them to say, ''Look, that's not what I'm saying.''"

Hahaha. Vinatge Kerry.

Hijacking your own thread already?

And, again, how is that parroting? He's corrected his speechwriters to change the wording to more accurately reflect his opinion on outsourcing of jobs. I suppose you want to Kerry to oppose ALL outsourcing, unlike Bush?

His comment suggests that he doesn't read his speeches before he delivers them. If that's not parroting, what is?

Either that, or he's falsely blaming his speech writers for his own stupid remarks.

So is he parroting or lying?

Which is it?
 

Klixxer

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2004
6,149
0
0
Originally posted by: Edge3D
Originally posted by: leeboy
RIP, I don't think you get it. No matter what you post, is does not and will not ever justify attacking a sovereign nation. Never. Get over it, you live by a different set of rules.

Good idea.

I'm sure Adolf Hitler would have loved it if the USA had followed such a wise doctrine.

Instead you suggest that the US should follow Adolfs doctrine?

Anywayz, godwins law, you lost.
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
How did anyone "lose"?
Why are liberals so condescending?

Anyway, for educational purposes- Adolf was conquering nations and making them a part of their empire.

That isnt the same doctrine thats being followed here, we are LIBERATING. As in, removing a brutal dictator that systematically murders his own people. You know, Genocide?

I thought leftists were against genocide? Republicans like myself sure are.

Basically we are only maintaining the same role we played in WW2. Removing a threat to our safety and a threat to the people of Iraq, the middle east and Israel.

I dont have any objections to that.

Can you twist that around enough to make the mission to somehow appear evil or wrong?

I know that this is all terrible for your boy Kerry, but it was the DEMOCRATS own fault they turned their back on America.. and its going to cost them the election.
It was a decision made at one point by the party, and it will cost them in spades.
 

Klixxer

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2004
6,149
0
0
Originally posted by: Edge3D
How did anyone "lose"?
Why are liberals so condescending?

Anyway, for educational purposes- Adolf was conquering nations and making them a part of their empire.

That isnt the same doctrine thats being followed here, we are LIBERATING. As in, removing a brutal dictator that systematically murders his own people. You know, Genocide?

I thought leftists were against genocide? Republicans like myself sure are.

Basically we are only maintaining the same role we played in WW2. Removing a threat to our safety and a threat to the people of Iraq, the middle east and Israel.

I dont have any objections to that.

Can you twist that around enough to make the mission to somehow appear evil or wrong?

I know that this is all terrible for your boy Kerry, but it was the DEMOCRATS own fault they turned their back on America.. and its going to cost them the election.
It was a decision made at one point by the party, and it will cost them in spades.

Blah, blah, blah, you already lost the argument.

Liberation, are you sure? I read somewhere by one of your fellow republicans that it was about the war on terror this week. I think it is about WMD's next week, please try to keep up, man, you are embarrasing Bush.
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
"Blah blah blah" is your response???????

It is a waste trying to get even slightly intellectual with you liberals.

edit- you guys crack me up.. you say "blah blah blah" to something like this.
Anyway, for educational purposes- Adolf was conquering nations and making them a part of their empire.

That isnt the same doctrine thats being followed here, we are LIBERATING. As in, removing a brutal dictator that systematically murders his own people. You know, Genocide?

Regarding GENOCIDE... wow. Blah blah blah was a pretty elaborate, and intellectual response.
Keepem coming.

See the reason you are wrong is in the pudding.. when someone says "blah blah blah", when someone points out the difference between empire building and liberation as it relates to current events is very, very sad.

This is actually very sad to see the state of our nations mindset sink to this kind of level.

edit #2- Actually now I see you are in Germany. You are NOT one of us.. you are actually AGAINST us.
I suppose the truley sad part to that equation is that our Democratic party (many Americans), actually AGREE with you.
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
Originally posted by: Edge3D
How did anyone "lose"?
Why are liberals so condescending?

Anyway, for educational purposes- Adolf was conquering nations and making them a part of their empire.

That isnt the same doctrine thats being followed here, we are LIBERATING. As in, removing a brutal dictator that systematically murders his own people. You know, Genocide?

I thought leftists were against genocide? Republicans like myself sure are.

Basically we are only maintaining the same role we played in WW2. Removing a threat to our safety and a threat to the people of Iraq, the middle east and Israel.

I dont have any objections to that.

Can you twist that around enough to make the mission to somehow appear evil or wrong?

I know that this is all terrible for your boy Kerry, but it was the DEMOCRATS own fault they turned their back on America.. and its going to cost them the election.
It was a decision made at one point by the party, and it will cost them in spades.

What threat did Iraq pose to the US?

Zephyr
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
The threat was the same reason that Senator Kerry voted for the war.
Maybe, you should ask him. :laugh:

I'll give you the actual reasons WHY Senator Kerry and President Bush enacted the war.. but you'll have to ask nicely.