Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by her209, Jan 8, 2005.
Key word in bold. Unlike the terrorist POS we are fighting we do not target innocents on purpose.
Just my .02
This is newsworthy how? Must be a slow news cycle. It was my understanding that civilians getting killed was a matter of course over there.
we have to do this periodically to keep up the enrollment in the insurgency, so we have an excuse to stay there.
What were those civilians doing there anyway? Don't they know there's a war on? They should have the common sense to leave Iraq until we are finished liberating them.
You must have a reading disability.
I would think soldiers dying would be a matter of course as well, but they still get linage in the paper when one of them gets sacked.
What was I supposed to say? That they should have the common sense to leave Iraq until we find that WMD?
Read the article, testiclelips.
I have recently come to the realization that I must be very careful how I respond to personal attacks here at P&N. It seems no matter what people say to me I am always wrong if I reply in kind. I'm quite sure if I had posted either of those replies one or more of the people who generally agree with your worldview would have reported me by now. I wish it was not so. Please don't misinterpret my refusal to respond in kind. You really left yourself open with that last one but I am, unfortunately, unable to respond for fear of repercussions. You and a few other members apparently don't have the threat of those consequences to stop you.
BBond, don't worry too much. Hell, next time you disagree with something Dari says, just reply with "You must have a reading disability", and then follow with "Read the article again". It works for them, right?
Here, let me do it for you...
Go play in traffic, Penisface.
Your pathetic attempts at sarcasm and jokes were exposed. Again, read the article and pay careful attention to the fourth word in the body of the article.
I read the article in the OP and two other sources as well.
Try to wrap your mind around this; It's be really tough to mistakenly drop five hundred pound bombs on Iraqi civilians' homes if you didn't go through all the trouble of making up reasons to attack them, unprovoked, in the first place...
Must we go through the reasons and the history behind the reasons again? In the end, the Administration was wrong because of the flawed intelligence, which existed for 3 Administrations, 2 Clinton and 1 Bush. There, you happy? Now that the meat and potatoes of your sarcastic joke as been done away with, what else do you have to say?
Thats what happens when you are at the mercy of something with a ironic name such as "military intelligence".
If the reason for attacking Iraq was, as you say, flawed intelligence, and several administrations shared that same flawed intelligence, what was the overriding reason that forced George W. Bush to invade Iraq, unprovoked, on March 19, 2002?
And if the current Bush administration was using the same intelligence his father's administration used ten years ago I would suggest they may have been, as some CIA analysts have said, using outdated information revisited to justify their unprovoked invasion.
Don't you "conservatives" believe in accountability? Or is accpuntability only for we subjects and not the royalty?
More of a taking intelligence from selective sources that fit their agenda.
Reason they don't listen is becasue they are polarized to listen to only their own failing leaders and yesmen, common sense takes a backdoor to the long term goal they are hell-bent on carrying out.
Bush invaded because he feared the marriage of outlawed nations and terror cells after September 11. A prime example of that was Afghanistan. He also invaded because Hussein's Iraq had 17 outstanding UN resolutions against it.
BTW, I never said anything about his father's administration. Every Administration is 4 years. Hence I said three because Clinton had two and the current Bush has one so far.
Exactly my point in this thread.
They hear only what they want to hear, make decisions based on the erroneous information, then deny responsibility because they are the victims of bad information.
Is it to much to ask that You stay on topic, Bob?
How quaint. The word "mistakenly" allows the act to be excused. Whoops, we went to war on "mistaken" intelligence. Excuse us.
How about a new, refreshing approach for the apologists? This one is getting tired.
Very subtle message from Namir Noureldine, but very clever.
["] Several Killed as U.S. Bombs Wrong Target in Iraq
SUICIDE BLAST ["]
Oops, we mistakenly killed 100,000 Iraqis while liberating them...
What happened to the much touted "conservative" dictum of accountability?
I want all you working people to go into work on Monday, make a huge error that threatens to bankrupt the company you work for, then tell the boss it was just a mistake. Let me know the results while you're on your way to the unemployment office...