Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:06:11 AM
"Saddam was a potential threat in 2003.. "
AHHHHH ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Hang on... hang on... hahahahahahahahahaha! No no, wait, I'm going to make a point here... hahahahahahahahahahahhahaha! Sorry... too funny... can`t stop laugh---hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Potential threat... hee hee... too funny, too funny...
Monday, August 13, 2007 10:41:05 PM
They don't like it that people are committing crimes everywhere, and likely always will be, so they pressure the police forces to crack down on even the tiniest offenses, and we end up with police committing illegal acts or punishing those who don`t really deserve it (think going 31 in a 30 zone) in order to "meet quota".
Well, they don`t like the idea of somebody using terror to force us to do what they want (never mind that the Bush administration has done nothing but use fear/scare tactics to keep the American people properly sheep-like), so they attack the country that they tell us is where all the terrorist countries come from.
Yes, these radicals are a threat, because they may attack us again, but that does not mean that it was SADDAM that was a threat, or that he ever was going to be. Neither were/are the radicals an IMMINENT threat, because after 9/11, how are they going to do something so massive again???
Monday, August 13, 2007 10:36:14 PM
The radicals use OUR tactics and OUR "barbarism" as recruiting devices! The numbers of radical believers (the type who like to suicide bomb and such) have SKYROCKETED since we invaded Iraq. I don't have sources to cite right now, but the studies are out there.
And why is a war on a concept never a good idea??? Because, as Davy pointed out, A CONCEPT NEVER DIES. It is impossible to force a concept to surrender. It is impossible to force a concept to go to prison. It is impossible to invade a concept and take it over. So what does our government do instead? They attack the EMBODIMENT of the concept.
They don`t like the idea of people tearing up their own bodies, because it depleted society of those bodies (whether or not people stupid enough to do drugs should be part of our society is another issue entirely), and so they have the WAR ON DRUGS, and they attack any and all persons who think differently about even the tiniest drug.
Monday, August 13, 2007 10:31:53 PM
Oh, and I bet they DON'T speak freely in public anyway, because if they do, then maybe the next suicide bomber will run up next to them on the street before he blows himself up!
Saddam was not a threat. He didn`ts have any WMDs. He didn`t have squat, actually. All he had claim to was George W. Bush`s hatred (passed down to him by his father), and a severely crippled country.
And don`t you think that people, when they are oppressed, will eventually rise up against those who oppress them? We Americans did it. The Canadians did it. Heck, even the minorities in our own country stood up for themselves after hundreds of years of oppression. Why doesn`t anybody ever bring up the idea that the Iraqis would have risen up in their own time as well? Every person killed in the cause of liberating their own people from oppression is a martyr, and nothing recruits better than martyrs.
Instead, we invaded and are making the guys that we want to go away into martyrs.
Monday, August 13, 2007 10:26:37 PM
Rich, I would love to hear an actual FACT from you, instead of just smart-aleck remarks. Davy actually brought up a lot of facts that have been verified in several sources, liberal, conservative, and neither, and all you can reply is that he's exaggerating? How? Where`s your proof? Do you have multiple credible sources from all points of view?
And you didn`t read carefully enough, either. We`re not using the suicide bombers, THEY are. And by the way, according to the psychological "puramid of needs", ideological and philosophical fulfillment (I.E. publishing political viewpoints, etc) comes about three steps AFTER you have fulfilled physical needs (I.E. eating), therefore, for the Iraqi people, it as better to be able to buy tomatoes while holding their tongues, than it is now to be able to say what they want while being too afraid of death to buy food to eat.