Printable View
:down:
No, the bottom line is that you don't have the facts straight and have zero understanding of internation politics. You should restrict yourself to other forums instead of repeating leftist drivel.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaceFanStan
:down:
:down:
The bottom line is that you do not have the facts, and you do not understand international politics. All you are doing is repeating leftist drivel.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaceFanStan
:down:
I understand that there was just enough morons to elect the sorry SOB.
It is obvious where you fit. http://www.motorsportforum.com/forum...ongue-anim.gif :laugh:
You on the other hand doesn't seem to need others help on that...you manage it just find on your own :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by agwiii
RaceFanStan
From what you write, it is clear that you do not understand anything about the Middle East, Iraq, War, American Politics, or many things.
:down:
Okay don hippo, admit it. You cheated when you took composition and reading appreciation. It shows.
:down:
That is a lame rebuttal. :rolleyes:
It is sad when blind followers cannot see the truth.
Your hero is a liar & he has done great damage to USA's credibility to the world.
Your hero defied the UN & then went crying to them for help AFTER he waged war on Iraq.
Public opinion is busting through the lies & seeing Bush for what he really is.
We can only hope that someday Bush will be held accountable.
I wonder if his moronic followers will stand behind him then.
Likewise yours...but then again I'm sure you knew it already :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by agwiii
Stan,
You said it was a lame rebuttal that Agwiii made, but the same can be said of yours also. I don't know if you've been reading this thread, but there have been some really interesting arguments on both sides of the issue. You may have some valid opinions too, but silly rhymes like "Bush lied and soldiers died" don't really add anything here and are degenerating the thread to name-calling. I don't mean to offend, but I just wanted to point this out.
Wow, you guys really have been busy on this thread. Shame that I missed so much of this debate. I have to give you credit Mark that you really know how to back your words. It's great to read this kind of discussion, even that I don't necessary agree with everything said here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa
You've said many times that it's naiive to think that diplomacy will work in all occasitions. Well, maybe that is true. I have to admit that at some point you have to throw diplomacy to bin if all the options have been used. Same time I think that in Iraq this wasn't the case. Bush needed to show the nation that he was doing something to fight the terrorists. As you said yourself, Americans need action at some point, not just endless wordflows.
But I think that it is naiivve also to think that US entered Iraq only to give freedom to Iraqi people. US needed to get rid of Saddam, they needed oil, they needed to get some space near Iran. They needed to show that Bush Jr. is a man who can fight against an "powerfull" enemy and win wars. That is a nice way to get some votes, you know. Again, war is more profitable than peace in many instances.
At some of your post you also said (if I remember correctly, if not please correct me) that UN is slow in their actions and they just discuss matters when they should be doing something instead of talking. This is correct, and I agree 100 %. At it's currect form UN is pretty much like crippled duck. It would really need somekind of organizational reshaping. The thing that I cannot understand is when something tragic happens, it takes 2 weeks for UN to condemn this. To condemn?! It should take 2 hours to condenm the issue and two weeks to solve. No matter who has the right to us "veto" -rights.
Carry on gentlemen. :)