Details, details. You are SO picky!

I read it all. It was in error and I corrected it...You seem to have blinders on and are unwilling to change your preconceived settings.

Fill in the blank, Todd....war on ________....That is why we entered Iraq, and for reasons more compelling than we will ever know, or should know for that matter.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Impeachment talk from Ron Paul (R)
 

Fake-looking after-the-fact memo regarding out-of-date mustard and sarin gas trumps real news report that states search has ended; including viable quotes (see below):

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/12/wmd.search/

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said though the search for WMD yielded no results, the United States, based on "extensive intelligence," believed before it invaded Iraq that Saddam was intent on acquiring them.

I have to call "bull" on that one. Why?

1) Old gas - who cares?
2) Never heard of this happening anyway.
3) Why classified when this was a rallying point for Bush to go to war with Iraq?
4) Around June of last year was when the crap started to truly hit the fan about how poorly this effort was going - so political expediency at best.
5) Negroponte? Please...

FROM SOURCEWATCH: Shortly after taking up the position as U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Negroponte was asked about eyewitness statements that in late June Iraq's interim (U.S. installed) prime minister, Ayad Allawi had personally executed up to six suspected 'insurgents' in front of his U.S. military bodyguards. (Allawi denies the accusation). In an email to the Sydney Morning Herald, Negroponte did not attempt to deny the story. "If we attempted to refute each [rumour], we would have no time for other business. As far as this embassy's press office is concerned, this case is closed," he wrote. [5

Nice try. Next example.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Impeachment talk from Ron Paul (R)
 

Nope. Never commented on that thread. But a little scrolling through the pages would have revealed that.

I did see, however, your one comment:

I believe the theory is if you spew enough BS, some will stick. That jerkoff cartoonist in Atlanta, Lucko***** or whatever his name is, would be a nice example.

Yes, insightful enlightenment from yet another "vitriolic mouth". :rolleyes:

Oh what a load of crap! So the American public is too stupid to realize why we're in this war? "For reasons more compelling than we ever know" translates into "We have no idea why we're there."

The administration will soon find out that:

1) The American public isn't as stupid as the administration would like it to be.

2) Voting power settles all incongruencies. In November I expect a right-sided collapse in the House and Senate.

You have more faith in the general American public than I do. Throw up "how they voted" flag burning amendment, claim that those who voted against the bill are anti-american, and that's all it takes for many of these voter idiots.

Interesting that you bring this up: I believe we are seeing the second act of extreme polarization within the Neocon forces: that, of course, there will be those who believe in the traditional staples of conservatism - flag burning, right to life, illegal border crossing...

...but increasingly more Neocons are becoming faint-hearted about this war.

There are still a few hangers-on to the thought this war is just, but after November, having a lack of political power will silence and fade them off quite nicely.

The other issues are more core to the party, which truly, in an ironic way, shows how untrue to the party core Iraq is. After all, if so many conservatives are calling for the war to end and Bush to even be impeached...:eek:

Yeah, but people have short memories.

All it takes is 2 months of campaigning on thier emotions, that's all it comes down to.....that's all so many vote based on......

I think you're wrong. The American public is more stupid than the administration would like it to be.

It wouldn't take much to make a right-sided collapse. 1 or 2% swing to the Dems would put the Repubs on the floor gasping for breath. Then, I'm sure the Dems will do just as poorly, and the pendulum would swing once again. Best case scenario is gridlock.

Yes, you're correct. But that's why BOTH parties have to do some deep soul-searching to steer away from this.

The Dems can beat Bush's eight stolen years to a pulp ONLY IF the Reps put up a similar candidate; and if the Reps do this, the Dems will win handily.

However - if the Reps get a good candidate (McCain, possibly - there are others), who steer so far away from anything these false conservatives have done to this country since Clinton - i.e. focusing on Bush as only "the lost years," the Dems will have to drastically rethink their strategy.

1) It doesn't behoove a despotic administration to have a well-informed populace. By nature of the populace alone as those on the front lines of the country, and politicians being conveniently sequestered, despotic administrations eventually fail from being uninformed and out of touch with the population for whom it is supposed to work. Expansionism such as America to Iraq only serves to intensify this failure. America, at this moment, has the ability to be the most intelligent it has ever been. Conversely, we are lazy and care to push off our problems as those for someone else to solve.

2) Dems as bad as Reps - pendulum swings - yes, unfortunately, I agree with you. This is why we need true third, forth and fifth parties, etc.

I have a theory.

I've noticed most who are easily fooled have a perverse, twisted sense of "good" versus "evil" and they see "good" or "evil" in everything....down to their freaking dinner and their dumps........

I think this has become as a result of movies, fantasy, superman, spiderman, videogames. Fantasy has become reality to them.....

These who cannot decipher reality from the fantasy world are the target for these emotionally-driven campaigns....

we are missing something called common human decency... when you send my son or daughter 5,000 miles away to die for your own political and personal agenda, then that makes you no different than the animals who flew the planes into the Twin Towers.

Mul wants to give them the "milk of Christian kindness" too, in the form of either nuclear weapons dropped on them, or an Arab specific fatal virus.

True.

I'd like to see Dubya and his gang do a couple years in Gitmo.

I know Rummy won't mind the stress positions because he 'works standing up.'

We could re-open Alcatraz specifically for them. There's plenty of reclamation work to do there, the only problem would be the tourist issue. We couldn't let the public be exposed to these mass murderers.

The biggest problem with the middle east isn't instability - just the opposite. Bush wasn't trying to stabilize the region, he was trying to DESTABILIZE it!!

Saddam had been in power for what 30 years? Knocking him off was an attempt to create a new opportunity in the most important country in the region. Letting these dictators rule year after year with no agenda other than solidifying their power isn't in the US' best interest.

Does anyone think the islamic fascism isn't a problem? Does anyone have a solution to that problem? Does anyone on this board think the the UN could find their fat asses with either hand?

We could keep letting ourselves get bombed and humiliated in third rate back waters like Somalia and Yemen or we could take a stand in a country that is ripe for a new government.

Clinton did nothing, NOTHING! for eight years. You want to talk about lost years? Having Madeline Albright chase that murdering, disguting pile of ***** Arafat down the hall, begging him to come back to the table was a tremendous display of weakness. Draining the swamp is the answer. Starting with Afghanistan, continuing on in Iraq, and then Iran and Syria (not so much Jordan).

North Korea is a completely separate problem with a completely separate solution (get China to deal with it). Don't lump all foreign policy problems together.

Of course, in support of the Likudists in Israel. That' common enough knowledge.

Quote:

Saddam had been in power for what 30 years? Knocking him off was an attempt to create a new opportunity in the most important country in the region. Letting these dictators rule year after year with no agenda other than solidifying their power isn't in the US' best interest.

What's an "interest"?

Quote:

Does anyone think the islamic fascism isn't a problem? Does anyone have a solution to that problem?

I find the US government fascism to be a far more serious and dangerous problem for Americans, we don't need to leave America to find fascists, they're running the US government now.

Quote:

Does anyone on this board think the the UN could find their fat asses with either hand?

While I have no love for the UN, considering it a horrendous waste; since Bush and the Bush'ists love it, why are you having a problem with the UN?

Quote:

We could keep letting ourselves get bombed and humiliated in third rate back waters like Somalia and Yemen or we could take a stand in a country that is ripe for a new government.

Here's a hint on how to avoid US government troop deaths in a foreign land: DON"T SEND THEM THERE!. The US government has no business sending troops overseas at all, in any country, much less the 130+ countries where US troops are today.

Quote:

Clinton did nothing, NOTHING! for eight years. You want to talk about lost years? Having Madeline Albright chase that murdering, disguting pile of ***** Arafat down the hall, begging him to come back to the table was a tremendous display of weakness. Draining the swamp is the answer. Starting with Afghanistan, continuing on in Iraq, and then Iran and Syria (not so much Jordan).

Your switch has obviously drifted over to the "stupid" setting.

Quote:

North Korea is a completely separate problem with a completely separate solution (get China to deal with it). Don't lump all foreign policy problems together.

North Korea isn't a problem at all, neither was Iraq nor Afghanistan.

Leave these countries the hell alone.

Pat, these countries are a problem. Ignoring them is not an option.

Also, I like the Likudists in Israel more than I like the Wahabi's. Don't you?

The UN is a waste of time and W knows it. Why do you think he sent Bolton over there?

Calling this administration fascist is insulting. I believe people would rather live in the US under this adminstration than under real fascists like Saddam, Kim Jong Il, Assad and Castro. Why do you think we have an immigration problem?