Ken'sPen Wrote:you mean the fact that we were giving aid to the Taliban prior to 9-11 and Bush's condemnation of them as evil....
and I was under the impression that it was money and food? and you pointed out that it was just food,
and I google searched it, and found out that you were right, and acknowledged my error? THAT is the feather in your cap?
When I was wrong I hope you noticed how promptly I admitted it.......
do you care to admit any of your errors along the way?
I've been erroneous?
Mad Wrote:Hoon Wrote:Mad Wrote:I'm more of a Lone Gunman, then a follower.
.... and tookie williams was redeemed.
Big difference, I'm white and have never MURDERED anyone and have nothing to do with criminal activity, fuckass.
I apologize.
Please don't send me pictures of my house in the mail, Snake Eyes.
Hoon Wrote:Ken'sPen Wrote:When I was wrong I hope you noticed how promptly I admitted it.......
do you care to admit any of your errors along the way?
I've been erroneous?
which encapsulates the folly of our debates....
actually you were a good foil for me...
it was never about changing your mind, or the other toadies like you,
but you did a good job of illustrating the depths of ignorance required to defend Bush and his actions....
for that I was always grateful.
I am not infallible.
I just can't remember. I welcome examples.
ahhhhhh
WMDs in Iraq?
Sufficient groundforces to secure the peace?
Sufficient armed forces to maintain a protracted presence in Iraq and not impact us negatively elsewhere?
Iraqi oil paying for the war?
The spreading of Democracy after the war in Iraq?
Valerie Plame was not a covert agent?
Valerie Plame was not outted?
Bush's tax cuts don't favor the rich?
I dunno......
we had a lot of debates... and you were right in one small element of a rather insignificant discussion we had, and apparently you are holding that up as THE shining example of the time you were right.
Clinton thought Iraq had WMD, just about everyone did.
why is it, that everytime a retard wingnut faces a difficult question,
the name Clinton gets mentioned.....
Why is it when faced with an indisputable fact, a fool tries to change the debate?
I respond to your talking points with a solid fact and you spout political bullshit. What a surprise.
you did NOT....
you simply said someone else was wrong as well....
But Clinton didn't opt to go to war... Bush did....
so focusing on Clinton is a fool changing the debate.
Have you heard about yet another Downing St. memo being leaked... indicating that perhaps Bush knew NOTHING would be found and was still determined to go to war?
i dont go on rumors and innuendo, present the evidence and i will consider it.
you keep drawing conclusions and putting words into my mouth. i dont support the war in iraq. i feel we were better off finishing what we started in afghanistan rather than getting involved in a protracted war with no clear exit strategy in iraq.
most people in this administration at the time and in the clinton administration and throughout the world thought Iraq had WMD. don't draw a conclusion that my reaction is to automatically go to war from that.
To put it in context AFTER Powell gave his presentation to the UN I was perplexed. He said that what he was presenting was FACT and not assertions, he stated emphatically what Saddam had, and where he had it....
I asked the question that was never answered...
If we knew EXACTLY what he had... why not drag the inspectors to the site, and show the world what he had.....
additionally the question "how do you prove something doesn't exist" was never really answered by Hoon, instead he insisted I was a fool if I didn't think he was sitting on huge stockpiles of weapons.
i agree with you. and powell leaving the administration is a red herring.
tangental to this we discussed how lumping all the weapons under the heading "WMD" was done to create a more ominous impression of Saddam's military might/ability to strike the US...
Mustard Gas is a crappy weapon, and there was ZERO threat to the US from his stockpiles...
ditto most of the weapons in his "WMD" inventory.
many had shelf lives that expired....
Yet hoon continued to insist he was a credible threat to attack us within our borders.
This argument continued on to the garbage assertions of Saddam's nuclear program.
i think north korea and iran pose a more immediate threat to our borders, and certainly the taliban poses the most immediate threat. what happened to that?
which was the next step in our argument....
I said it would be folly to over throw Saddam because it would obligate us to a long standing peace keeping mission, which would weaken our ability to deal with Iran and N. Korea as we would be otherwise occupied......
this created many discussions as to how large our army was,
and how large a force was needed to occupy Iraq.
on ALL these topics Hoon's positions turned out to be wrong.
As Keyser said, every nation on earth thought he still had WMD's. Let's not act like it was just Bush.
The previous administration thought so as well.
The difference between Bush and Clinton was 9/11.
Percieved threats were much more of a concern after it, than before it.
To me, this is the thing.
How can every nation on earth think / know he had WMD's and we cannot find any?
Considering situations our 'allies' have put us in (the oil for food scandal being the most recent), I wouldn't be so foolish as to think they disappeared.
There is every possibility they're out there - somewhere.
We'll never agree on the fundamentals, certainaly not the war. I think it was the right move, given what we knew. You don't. Neither of us will ever be proven right or wrong in the others mind.
But you carry that need to be right to an extreme on all other issues - where all rationality is lost.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I forgot your love of the Oil for Food scandal,
it was your ONLY rebuttle to my wondering WHY Bush did NOTHING to investigate the Billions that went missing during the Iraqi Provisional Authority.....
the ONLY way you could explain why our traditional allies did not agree with our justification for war.
for as much as your side derides conspiracy theorists, you need to BE one, in order to ignore Bush's many errors.
that scandal is not fictional.
it's the biggest misappropriation scandal in history.
but I have a feeling you'd rather fry smaller fish, like Ken Lay, because you can tie him to Bush indirectly.
See what I mean?
You don't mind that our allies stabbed us in the back. You're more concerned with Ken Lay even though that scandal pales in comparison.
Of course, I could be all wrong.
Hoon Wrote:that scandal is not fictional.
it's the biggest misappropriation scandal in history.
.
no it's not....
the official report came out...
but you don't know about it, because it doesn't match the agenda of the spin machines you listen to.
Bottom line....
as I have often said, I care more about what WE do, than what any other nation does.....
I would post about the missing money... the US tax payer money....
and your only rebuttle is changing the topic to the Oil for Food Scandal.....
so again... I attack Bush for credible reasons,
and you obfuscate.