• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Time for a regime change

Gee, I haven't heard this tired refrain before. You're quite original and provocative by suggesting that it's our regime that needs changing and not good old Saddamy-poo's.
rolleye.gif


ZV
 
America needs the war. For both the economy and to re-establish our place as a powerful country. Maybe once we start feeling the pain of "real" war we will once again hold the traditional American values in more respect.
 
Originally posted by: Konigin
America needs the war. For both the economy and to re-establish our place as a powerful country. Maybe once we start feeling the pain of "real" war we will once again hold the traditional American values in more respect.
Click to expand...

One can hope 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Konigin
America needs the war. For both the economy and to re-establish our place as a powerful country. Maybe once we start feeling the pain of "real" war we will once again hold the traditional American values in more respect.
Click to expand...


This whole post reeks.
 
Biased crap based on the idea that if a lot of people are against something, it must be stupid. What makes the European leaders any better judges of the situation than Bush? Oh, right, they support your opinion. So they must be wiser.
 
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Biased crap based on the idea that if a lot of people are against something, it must be stupid. What makes the European leaders any better judges of the situation than Bush? Oh, right, they support your opinion. So they must be wiser.
Click to expand...

You guys and your "bias". What cracks me up is what you see as "objective".

 
I was kind of surprised to see you don't live in a certain California town Hagbard. Lame article anyway.

 
Originally posted by: hagbard
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Biased crap based on the idea that if a lot of people are against something, it must be stupid. What makes the European leaders any better judges of the situation than Bush? Oh, right, they support your opinion. So they must be wiser.
Click to expand...

You guys and your "bias". What cracks me up is what you see as "objective".
Click to expand...

And you are objective?
 
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: hagbard
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Biased crap based on the idea that if a lot of people are against something, it must be stupid. What makes the European leaders any better judges of the situation than Bush? Oh, right, they support your opinion. So they must be wiser.
Click to expand...

You guys and your "bias". What cracks me up is what you see as "objective".
Click to expand...

And you are objective?
Click to expand...

We've been down this road. No, I'm not. Neither are you.

 
I'll jump right in and volunteer the answer that he's not. And guess what, you aren't either. And guess what, no one is. And guess what, that's why we're trying to point out how stupid it is to even bring the word "bias" into this thread. Because guess what -- it is.

edit: well it looks like i jumped in.... right behind hagbard 😀
 
Right sorry, editiorials.

ed·i·to·ri·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-tôr-l, -tr-)
n.
An article in a publication expressing the opinion of its editors or publishers.
A commentary on television or radio expressing the opinion of the station or network.
 
Originally posted by: Grey
Right sorry, editiorials.

ed·i·to·ri·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-tôr-l, -tr-)
n.
An article in a publication expressing the opinion of its editors or publishers.
A commentary on television or radio expressing the opinion of the station or network.
Click to expand...

Your point?
 
Originally posted by: hagbard
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: hagbard
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Biased crap based on the idea that if a lot of people are against something, it must be stupid. What makes the European leaders any better judges of the situation than Bush? Oh, right, they support your opinion. So they must be wiser.
Click to expand...

You guys and your "bias". What cracks me up is what you see as "objective".
Click to expand...

And you are objective?
Click to expand...

We've been down this road. No, I'm not. Neither are you.
Click to expand...

I have yet see proof that Iraq has disarmed.
I have yet to see that Iraq is cooperating.
I have yet to see that Iraq is no longer a threat to its neighbors(yes we have oil interest).
We have proof that Iraq supports terrorists.
We know Senior al queda have been in Baghdad.
We know getting rid of Saddam with free a country.
We know Saddam has killed thousands(some reports put it close to a million)
We know the world is better place without Saddam.
....

I find my self quite objective, but I admit i would prefer to see Saddam out of power for a multitude of reasons.


 
I have yet see proof that Iraq has disarmed.
I have yet to see that Iraq is cooperating.
I have yet to see that Iraq is no longer a threat to its neighbors(yes we have oil interest).
We have proof that Iraq supports terrorists.
We know Senior al queda have been in Baghdad.
We know getting rid of Saddam with free a country.
We know Saddam has killed thousands(some reports put it close to a million)
We know the world is better place without Saddam.
Click to expand...

Conclusion: KILL KILL KILL
 
Originally posted by: markuskidd
I have yet see proof that Iraq has disarmed.
I have yet to see that Iraq is cooperating.
I have yet to see that Iraq is no longer a threat to its neighbors(yes we have oil interest).
We have proof that Iraq supports terrorists.
We know Senior al queda have been in Baghdad.
We know getting rid of Saddam with free a country.
We know Saddam has killed thousands(some reports put it close to a million)
We know the world is better place without Saddam.
Click to expand...

Conclusion: KILL KILL KILL
Click to expand...

Or do nothing and continue to let Saddam KILL KILL KILL.

 
Originally posted by: markuskidd
Originally posted by: Grey
Right sorry, editiorials.

ed·i·to·ri·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-tôr-l, -tr-)
n.
An article in a publication expressing the opinion of its editors or publishers.
A commentary on television or radio expressing the opinion of the station or network.
Click to expand...

Your point?
Click to expand...

Did you read the thread? I would hope I don't have to draw conclusions for you. The links are all opinions against war, I can find an equal number of pro-war ones if you want.
 
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: markuskidd
I have yet see proof that Iraq has disarmed.
I have yet to see that Iraq is cooperating.
I have yet to see that Iraq is no longer a threat to its neighbors(yes we have oil interest).
We have proof that Iraq supports terrorists.
We know Senior al queda have been in Baghdad.
We know getting rid of Saddam with free a country.
We know Saddam has killed thousands(some reports put it close to a million)
We know the world is better place without Saddam.
Click to expand...

Conclusion: KILL KILL KILL
Click to expand...

Or do nothing and continue to let Saddam KILL KILL KILL.
Click to expand...

Ironic, as your list does not list evidence of Saddam's excessive KILL-KILL-KILLing as something we have. The US has killed approximately 4,000 civilians this year in its military campaigns. Where does Saddam stand in relation to that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top