AND FOR THE LAST FVCKING TIME, NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY ISN'T 'PROOF' THAT HE HAS THEM. ARE YOU REALLY THAT DUMB THAT YOU THINK OTHERWISE? FVCK YOU ALREADY.
AND FOR THE LAST FVCKING TIME, NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY ISN'T 'PROOF' THAT HE HAS THEM. ARE YOU REALLY THAT DUMB THAT YOU THINK OTHERWISE? FVCK YOU ALREADY.
AND ONCE AGAIN THAT BURDEN OF PROOF WAS GIVEN TO AND ACCEPTED BY SADDAM, NO PROOF THEY WERE DESTROYED, WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM THEN SMARTA*S?
Michael
Elite member
- Nov 19, 1999
- 5,435
- 234
- 106
Alistar7 - You said that the French media was state controled. Not one of your links even came close to showing otherwise.
To remind you:
"probably because we don't have a govt controlled media like France."
You're being a dolt.
I'm not saying that the focus of reporting is different in France than in the US.
Since you obviously cannot admit that you made a mistake, I see no further need to discuss this with you.
Michael
To remind you:
"probably because we don't have a govt controlled media like France."
You're being a dolt.
I'm not saying that the focus of reporting is different in France than in the US.
Since you obviously cannot admit that you made a mistake, I see no further need to discuss this with you.
Michael
Since you can't read and come up with an answer to the links I provided, you attack my intellect and cower away, lol, whatever troll.
This was the statement of mine YOU MISSED BEFORE YOU MADE YOUR ASSumption..
"Do the govt. of France control the media, no, does the French media act more so as a cheerleader for the state? yes."
Next time at least find someone to read the posts to you.....
My point was the press in France does not provide balanced full reporting, they are more cheerleaders for the govt than independent press, my links CLEARLY show this to be true.
Now answer my questions...
Understand the burden of proof is on Saddam, not the US? I hope you are not suggesting we just take his word...
Yes, the burden of proof was on Saddam. He failed to provide proof that his WMD were destroyed. Does that 'prove' that he has WMD? Now think carefully before you answer. Try to think like someone who understands the definition of 'proof'.
No, it proves he had them and cannot account for them. Think like a rational person for a seond.
Saddam destroys his WMD, as he claims he has, yet somehow loses the evidence? What would have happened had he provided the evidence?
Inspections would have stopped sacntions would have ended, he would have remained in power with no international oversight or restrictions. We are lucky he does not think rationally, he could have had this over with 10 years ago and already built a far better modern conventional army. Now why wouldn't he take this route if he already destroyed them as he claims? Why would he take every step needed except saving the only proof that would have saved his butt?
IMHO I think he has probably already given a bunch of it away, possibly destroyed the rest but cannot account for what was given away, that's why there was no evidence provided.
Saddam destroys his WMD, as he claims he has, yet somehow loses the evidence? What would have happened had he provided the evidence?
Inspections would have stopped sacntions would have ended, he would have remained in power with no international oversight or restrictions. We are lucky he does not think rationally, he could have had this over with 10 years ago and already built a far better modern conventional army. Now why wouldn't he take this route if he already destroyed them as he claims? Why would he take every step needed except saving the only proof that would have saved his butt?
IMHO I think he has probably already given a bunch of it away, possibly destroyed the rest but cannot account for what was given away, that's why there was no evidence provided.
you read my links that clearly show how the French media won't even accurately report on the health of politcal leaders, you read how the French press BLINDLY accepted what their govt told them without even taking the time to verify a word (all false) yet you still deny these facts, sorry about your denial. Being on your list is a blessing, I wish the rest of the ignorants and those who can look at facts and dismiss it because it does not meet their bias would do the same...
I will retract the troll statement as I have read some of your other posts in various threads.
and if they dont find them they will import them
it is so easy to do it
i remember the story during the first war
iraqi were supposed to have destroyed 300 incubator killing more than 200 babies. a nurse testified.
first ppl were wondering jesus 300 incubators is a lot when you consider that in the largest western hospital there are only a few dozen of them
then it appeared that the nurse was the niece of the ambassador of the koweit in us. She told later it was a fake. but for a long time bush reminded this so cruel action in his speech
it is so easy to do it
i remember the story during the first war
iraqi were supposed to have destroyed 300 incubator killing more than 200 babies. a nurse testified.
first ppl were wondering jesus 300 incubators is a lot when you consider that in the largest western hospital there are only a few dozen of them
then it appeared that the nurse was the niece of the ambassador of the koweit in us. She told later it was a fake. but for a long time bush reminded this so cruel action in his speech
apoppin
Lifer
How do I get on your "ignore list" . . . or am I already?
Is there a certain "criteria" one has to meet to be so honoured?
what u mean that us do provide a full reporting?
please dont tell me you actually belive that
it can be true
and when you want to prove that it is the case link to french paper it is so easy to link to anti french paper
yeah, and then moved to Saudi Arabia, etc., etc.. First Iraq, now Syria, where will it end? I first supported the war against Saddam. Now it just seems like they wanna fvck with the whole Middle East
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: seawolf21
Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Originally posted by: NFS4
OK, so we go into this way claiming that Iraq has not declared all its weapons of mass destruction and that we KNOW that they have them. Now we can't find any?? What's up with that?
I remember Colin Powell shoing the UN pictures of all of this stuff last month. Now it just disappeared?
It would be a serious blunder if we didn't find jack sh!t over there after all the "sand" clears
You are EXACTLY right, man; it's been a month now, and still we haven't got anything to show for it. And special forces were in Iraq before that; they could have scoped SOMETHING out, and pointed the world's attention to it just before, or after the war started.
The Bush regime just raped a country based upon the ever-elusive WMD mantra, yet now saying that well the Iraqi's needed to be free so WMDs don't really matter as much. That's circumvention of the issue, and pure baloney.
We have every right to have expected that SOMETHING, ANYTHING, be found by now; yet the well has come up dry.
I had a dream last night that because Iraq was clean, the UN condemned George Bush to allow Saddam to come back into his country and power, and GWB was forced to foot the entire bill for reconstruction of Iraq.
Heh heh...wouldn't THAT be Justice served!
You're jumping the gun. How did the Bush regime rape Iraq??? Minimally, we stopped the execution of many Iraqi citizens. How do you explain the multiple palaces that the Hussein family lived in, while many of their citizens were very poor. Iraq will get out of being a dictatorship, the oil will be sold and the Iraqi citizens will have a *much* better life than they had under the Sadaam Hussein regime. I think this alone is a very impressive undertaking. Also, when the WMD are located (which they will be) it'll just be the icing on the cake.
Sounds like bait and switch to me. WMDs were the pirmary reason for war. Liberating the Iraqis was the icing on the cake not the other way around.
Who is safeguarding WMDs at this very moment? The Iraqi military? We defeated them. So again, who is guarding WMDs? We can't wait several months to find them when Al-Qaeda might be getting their hands on them right now.
That was my whole point. We went in with the reasoning that Iraq had these BLATANT WOMD and that we would prove to the world that he had them. We went in saying that we have OVERWHELMING evidence to this fact. Well then if that were the case, they should have found something by now.
If the US had overwhelming evidence to the fact that there were WOMD in Iraq, I'm sure that someone would have snitched or they would have "tripped over" something by now. Like I said, this whole WOMD thing sounds like more of a coverup to take out Saddam...the "REAL" prize in Iraq.
I don't believe Iraq is the real prize. I still believe WMDs is the primary reason but I am concern that we are taking a while to find WMDs.
phillyTIM
Golden Member
- Jan 12, 2001
- 1,942
- 10
- 81
it seems you guys are hitting the nail right on the head, why haven't iraqi people turned over those WMDs if they've been hidden in their homes and schools and such?
why is it a month later, and still nothing has been found?
I'm sure the Bush Regime is already thinking of what to plant and where.
Bush and Blair's political hides are on the line here; if the Iraqis turn out to be snide against the US, and so far no WMD's are found, they've got to figure someway to save their political a##es!
why is it a month later, and still nothing has been found?
I'm sure the Bush Regime is already thinking of what to plant and where.
Bush and Blair's political hides are on the line here; if the Iraqis turn out to be snide against the US, and so far no WMD's are found, they've got to figure someway to save their political a##es!
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
sillyTIM - how many times do you have to be reminded that the WAR is only a month old and not the FULL ON SEARCH FOR WMD?
jeez
CkG
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
sillyTIM - how many times do you have to be reminded that the WAR is only a month old and not the FULL ON SEARCH FOR WMD?
jeez
CkG
While you are reminding sillyTIM that the war is only a month old, those allegedly Al-Qaeda terrorists are moving them out of the country.
sillyTIM, the Administration is not going to plant anything. It needs an excuse for Syria.
What's a month later? We've been searching for a month? I think these folks have had other things to worry about up until now.
I believe our own pre-emptive strikes against his key locations before moving our troops in had a lot to do with it, but that's just me. It's a guess - I don't claim to be a military strategist of the highest caliber, unlike many other fine commanders in this forum.
See, I think this is one of the biggest problems with the arguments that go on here. As soon as someone insults the president for something, someone else will argue against it. Then that second person will be called a blind follower. However...
I know the idea of a moderate is a crazy one to many people, but have you ever considered that someone who defends something the president did isn't saying that there must be NO criticism of the president? Just arguing against that ONE point? Agreeing with absolutely anything and everything the president says is, yes, foolish. But no one I've seen is saying that! Blatantly labelling someone as such just leads to more insults. Would you like it if someone made a similar statement to the converse?
"To announce that there must always be criticism of the president, or that we are never to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and immature, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
I suppose a call for more cool heads in this forum is a futile one? *sigh* But I guess we get more riled up otherwise.
It's sort of ironic that Alistar7 dismisses Saddam's word saying he had no WMD's, but uses Saddam's word as sole proof that he infact had them. The fact is Saddam lies, Saddam said both, and we can't trust his word on either.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter