Activist Cindy Sheehan Arrested at Capitol

[Ted Striker]

I think that's the most I've ever seen you type Dinodoc.

You even expressed an opinion.

What is the world coming to it must be the End of Our Times as Thorn said.

[Berzerker]

I called it as I see it based on her statements. I actually cared very little if you agreed with my assessment

Did you mean it as a compliment? No, you meant it as a bad thing, so stop being a hypocritical chicken****.

The entire list. However, I would be interested in discussing why you feel that if Iraq had been in possession of WMD it would have somehow mad the war worthwhile in your opinion.

Where did I say WMD would have made it worthwhile? I just gave you a list without WMD on it. Are you going to identify this BS reason or keep dancing?

That seems like it might be a more productive avenue to explore than this boring (only slightly entertaining due to the threats to send angry PMs) back and forth over Sheehan. We can even discuss why you feel lied to if you wish.

Its more productive discussing a reason for invading Iraq I never offered? Whooa... And you think the Bushies were honest?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I wanted to make it harder for him to weasel out of it.

Did I ever try?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Cindy's son enlisted. That pretty much ends it. I imagine he's appalled.

The reasons soldiers were sent remains topical even so. Especially since that reason has been exposed as a lie.

[Berzerker]

Did I ever try?

He was projecting

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Where did I say WMD would have made it worthwhile?

I assumed that's what the bleating about being lied to was about.

I just gave you a list without WMD on it. Are you going to identify this BS reason or keep dancing?

I really do believe I specified that I was refering to the entire list you gave. However if you insist on a rundown of why:

1) We owed the Kurds and Shia for stabbing them in the backs after the first gulf war

This one is irrelevent. We owed them jack in absence of a compelling reason. The threat Iraq possed to us had been contained.

2) Toppling a brutal dictator is a good thing, especially one we supported.

Toppling a brutal dictator isn't a good thing when it compromises our ability to deal with other threats.

3) We needed a battlefield - a magnet - for the war on terror, Iraq was better than Afghanistan.
5) We need a possible staging ground for invading Iran and possibly Syria.

I really do wish you'd share whatever it is you were smoking when you came up with these two. Or at least share what color the sky was.

4) Democracy in Iraq would help democracy grow in Iran.

It seems to be doing a bang up job so far.

6) Oil and Israel.

I wasn't sure what you meant here.

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Did I ever try?

I never said you did. I thought you might when I to the quote to my sig however.

[Berzerker]

I assumed that's what the bleating about being lied to was about.

So a Prez lies us into a war and the people who lost children as a result are "bleating" if they complain too much?

I really do believe I specified that I was refering to the entire list you gave.

Thats quite a trick given my list of several reasons was posted after you said this:

I didn't care about the reason for the war, either the one Bush put foward or the BS reason you came up with to support it.

So this BS reason has become several BS reasons? For someone so attuned to BS you really should keep track of your own posts.

This one is irrelevent. We owed them jack in absence of a compelling reason. The threat Iraq possed to us had been contained.

It wasn't irrelevant to Paul Wolfowitz who was not happy how Bush I stabbed those people in the back nor is it irrelevant to people who think honor matters.

Toppling a brutal dictator isn't a good thing when it compromises our ability to deal with other threats.

We chose the threat least able to resist, do you think invading Iran or N Korea would have been easier?

I really do wish you'd share whatever it is you were smoking when you came up with these two. Or at least share what color the sky was.

Hasn't Iraq become a magnet for the war on terror? What do you think US leaders meant when they said we would take the war to them rather than fight it here? I see no rebuttal in that response, just another dodge.

It seems to be doing a bang up job so far.

You gotta be kidding, Iraq has had democratic elections already. You thought the process of democratising Iran would occur before it happened in Iraq?

I wasn't sure what you meant here.

And yet you called it a BS reason?

I wanted to make it harder for him to weasel out of it.

Yup, projecting...

[Berzerker]

Oh btw, a BS reason implies a deceitful reason. You're obviously going to disagree with the reasons I gave because you've already dug that hole, that doesn't mean those reasons are BS.

And you didn't answer my question about the Bushies, do you think they got us into this honestly?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
So a Prez lies us into a war and the people who lost children as a result are "bleating" if they complain too much?

What lie? The question if it really mattered if Iraq had WMD or not is a legitimate one. I actually don't think that the war would have been justified if the country had been awash in chemical weapons. I don't think the lieing charge holds water in my opinion though.

Thats quite a trick given my list of several reasons was posted after you said this:

The crap about the Kurds was the only one I specifically remembered you bringing up at the time. Happy?

It wasn't irrelevant to Paul Wolfowitz who was not happy how Bush I stabbed those people in the back nor is it irrelevant to people who think honor matters.

Perhaps you could tell me why I should care. Any threat posed by Iraq had been contained by US after the Gulf War. The Kurds or Shia were irrelevent to that.

We chose the threat least able to resist, do you think invading Iran or N Korea would have been easier?

I didn't say that. I specifically stated that it has tied us down to an extent that it is hampering our ability to deal with other threats.

You thought the process of democratising Iran would occur before it happened in Iraq?

I kind of thought that the process of democratising Afghanistan (Remember them?) would finish before it happened in Iraq.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
What lie?

Bush got up and said he had clear evidence that Iraq had WMD and that he possed a threat to the US. Neither was true and the Downing Street Memo's have shown that he knew they were untrue when he said them, that the UK knew they were untrue but felt preserving the alliance was more important then challenging it since Bush said he'd go to war no matter what, and that Iraq had absolutely no ties to Al Qaeda dispite the administration's constant claims in insinuations to the contrary.

It is very clear he deliberately lied and that he was looking for an excuse to invade Iraq from before the time he took office. What is the reason for that? No one can say with 100% certainity but it is well documented that Bush repeatedly said he wanted revenge upon Saddam for trying to kill his father. We also know Bush is a man who holds grudges.

[Arrian]

I actually don't think that the war would have been justified if the country had been awash in chemical weapons.

Interesting. An actual opinion from DD. And one I... agree with ?!

I kind of thought that the process of democratising Afghanistan (Remember them?) would finish before it happened in Iraq.

!!

Traitor liberal scum. Why do you hate America?

-Arrian, rather shocked

[DinoDoc]

Can I ask why, if as you believe that both Bush and Blair knew Iraq had no WMD, that the possible use of WMD by Iraq during the conflict was brought up? That would seem to argue against the smoking gun aspect you and others seem to place on the memo. If you already know that Iraq has no WMD and are planning to manipulate intel in a massive conspiracy (I presume that we brought the French and others in on that part as well) why bring up the possible use of said fake weapons as an issue?

[Arrian]

Can I ask why, if as you believe that both Bush and Blair knew Iraq had no WMD, that the possible use of WMD by Iraq during the conflict was brought up?

In a word? Bull****. They were continuing to bull**** us. After all, had they not brought it up or planned for it in any way, wouldn't that have been a tipoff that they knew damned well we would not encounter WMD in Iraq? Further, having worked hard to convince people that WMD was a real threat, how negligent would it look to ignore the issue of our soldiers encountering such dangers?

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Arrian
In a word? Bull****.

In the supposedly secret memo where they laid out the alliance for lieing? Why would they do that?

[Arrian]

I didn't realize what you were alluding to. This was discussed in the memo? I haven't read it yet.

-Arrian