|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Mar 23rd, 2003 10:24 AM | ||||
| Ronnie Raygun |
"The bombing in 1998 was not an invasion, it was a bombing like others that have gone on there for over a decade." The protests started was before the invasion. "This is a bunch of nations, really one really powerful nation," Great Britian is a really powerful nation.....not like us but still. "going in and playing God with another sovereign nation." I know you're only defending Saddam's sovereignty but as you well know is a murderous dictator and the people their have no say......so I say the hell with his sovereighty. "Whether you agree with that or not, it still raises the stakes from the past Gulf conflicts." Nope. Clinton bombed civialian targets in both Iraq and Kosovo. UNLIKE BUSH! The lights are still on in Baghdad. You can't say the same for Clinton's attacks. Where were the protests? |
|||
| Mar 23rd, 2003 02:41 AM | ||||
| GAsux |
Frozen Hades.... I must defer to my sense of integrity and support Ronnie on one point. It is probbaly the only thing I will ever defend him on. Anyhow, Ronnie's point with regards to Max's protesting Libya comment was not just to point out the spelling error. He was being a smart ass and pointing out that the cruise missile strikes in August of 1998 were against training camps in Afghanistan and a "suspected" chemical weapons plant in Sudan, not Libya. Ronnie's plan was to justify himself in disregarding every point Mr. burbank made because that one small part was an error. |
|||
| Mar 23rd, 2003 01:25 AM | ||||
| Jeanette X |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
| Mar 23rd, 2003 01:22 AM | ||||
| Jeanette X |
Re: Saddam sets oil wells on fire. Quote:
Sadly it is too late to turn back now. Its has begun, and hopefully it will end with minimal bloodshed and a new Iraqi government. |
|||
| Mar 23rd, 2003 01:05 AM | ||||
| theapportioner |
I'm not hating anything except their lack of respect for the facts. Haha! If we are talking about facts, or the lack thereof, you'd have far fewer people supporting this war. It's about ideology, bucko. |
|||
| Mar 23rd, 2003 12:54 AM | ||||
| Bennett |
Quote:
I'm sure that Hussein watches channel 10 action news, and would have been greatly moved by a "Stop Saddam" sign. People are protesting the war and our president, because supposedly, that is something that they (we) have control and influence over. |
|||
| Mar 22nd, 2003 11:32 AM | ||||
| Ronnie Raygun | I'm not hating anything except their lack of respect for the facts. | |||
| Mar 22nd, 2003 09:30 AM | ||||
| mburbank |
FS is right, Naldo. That misspelling pretty much shoots down your whole argument. Naldo, when you get so worked up over Anti-Bush protesters and anti Bush sentiment, aren't you hating their free speech? You should actively support and embrace it. Free speech is what America Stands for! |
|||
| Mar 22nd, 2003 09:00 AM | ||||
| FS |
Quote:
|
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 06:52 PM | ||||
| Vibecrewangel |
.... Quote:
I am one of these........ |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 04:01 PM | ||||
| mburbank |
Are you sure it was "Libyya"? That's a really sound point. Good work. And maybe it's me, but a few small town protests seems proportional. Here we have an all out invasion, shock and awe, the biggest non nuclear weapon ever and along with it, nationwide, sizeable protests. That makes sense to me. Do a small but nasty missile attack, get a small protest. Do a whole war, get a big protest. Did I vote for Clinton, even once? No sir, I did not. I do seem to recall a very large fracas generated by the president putting his willy in the wrong place and then lieing about it, though. That struck me as something of an over reaction, especially concidering president Bush the Firsts forays outside the marital bed and lies to congress (Out of the loop on Iran contra.) Is that foam I see coming out of your mouth? Don't come vibrating to me with your festering Clinton hatred. I'm not his standard bearer. I just think your jealous 'cause his surplus was so big. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 02:20 PM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
The bombing in 1998 was not an invasion, it was a bombing like others that have gone on there for over a decade. This is a bunch of nations, really one really powerful nation, going in and playing God with another sovereign nation. Whether you agree with that or not, it still raises the stakes from the past Gulf conflicts. The protests were much smaller in 91, too. Bush was in the White House. Not as many "hypocrites" then, either. Why not? |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 12:33 PM | ||||
| Ronnie Raygun |
"I was at one that protested the cruise missiles we fired into Libyya at the so called Chemical Weapons plant there." Are you sure Maxi, Check your history. Are you sure it was "Libyya"? I mean, if you were at the protest, you should know which country it was right? I don't care what you say. Their might have been a few home town protests but NOTHING near what's happened as of late which demonstrates the sherr hypocracy of the left. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 11:32 AM | ||||
| mburbank |
Your quite wrong on several counts. There were protests against Clinton's war gestures. I was at one that protested the cruise missiles we fired into Libyya at the so called Chemical Weapons plant there. Several studies have found no evidence at all that this was what it was. I was also at the protest in San Francisco. I saw lots of signs, and while some of them adressed Bush personally (and he is the commander in chief of the army, after all) I didn't see any comparing Bush to Hitler or Bush actively wanting Babies dead. I did see Grannies against Dead Babies" which I rather liked, but that was the whole text. I also saw "Republicans against the war". These are American citizens excersising American rights and protesting American actions. They are anti American partcipation in this war. I cannot see why you see this as so awful. Do you hate The Right To Assemble. Do you hate Freedom of Speech? You seem to hate something here. And even if this protest were speciffically and solely anti-bush (and there are plenty of people who DO support war with Iraq, but feel that Bush did a very bad job presenting his case) that would be problem why? Isn't it American to do that if that it is your sincere belief that what Bush is doing is bad for our country and the world? I think, deep at the heart of a lot of your anger, is hatred of people disagreeing with you, or as I'm sure you see it, not facing facts. But that's America, Ronnie. No matter how right a person is sure they are, a lot of other people are going to disagree. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 11:04 AM | ||||
| Ronnie Raygun |
Petro dollars of the Iraqi people. Setting oil wells on fire does nothing to hinder allied troops. They will only hurt the Iraqi people....but then again, he has a long history of that. "Nalds, they're protesting the war. That's why their signs say what they say." Their signs say Bush is like Hitler. Bush wants to dominate the world. Bush will cause WWIII. Bush want's Iraqi children dead. Bush is a terrorist. ......AND SAY NOTHING ABOUT SADDAM. There has not been an anti-war protest. Only anti-Bush protests. And the proof is that these people didn't protest Clinton when he did it. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 10:36 AM | ||||
| mburbank |
Nalds, they're protesting the war. That's why their signs say what they say. If you go to a rally to support our troops, will you carry a sign that says 'TRY REALLY, REALLY HARD NOT TO KILL ANY INNOCENT PEOPLE'. Of course you wouldn't. Does this mean you endorse the killing of innocent people? Of course not. Don't go environmental on me, either. Rumsfeld made several statements about how bad setting the wells on fire was. They ALL had to do with 'riches'. I suppose he might have meant air quality, but I think he was talking about petro dollars. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 10:36 AM | ||||
| FS |
Quote:
I was paying a lot less attention to international news at that time, so I can't give a clear answer as to why Clinton wasn't protested. I'd say that 9/11 woke people up to realize war could affect them too, and perhaps they should have protested just as strongly then as they do now. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 10:18 AM | ||||
| Anonymous |
That is a blatant misstatement FS. and.... England and Spain will win in the end. Germany and France are lying hypocrites, destroying Europe. _________________________________________ Before he was killed, Saddam Huseein was found in breach of UN Resolution 1441 |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 10:12 AM | ||||
| FS | Because Iraq was attacking Kuwait, Ronnie. | |||
| Mar 21st, 2003 09:23 AM | ||||
| Ronnie Raygun |
It didn't stop you people from calling Bush, "Hitler". You think you might have seen a sign that condemns the man responsible for not disarming and causing the war. Which leads the majority of Americans to believe that the anti-"war" protesters are really anti-"Bush". After all, there were no protests when Clinton was bombing Iraq. WHY IS THAT!? |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 08:12 AM | ||||
| Bennett | It's called common sense Ronnie... When has war ever been a "good" thing for the environment? I don't think you need to see a posterboard sign to figure that out. | |||
| Mar 21st, 2003 07:22 AM | ||||
| Protoclown |
Quote:
|
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 06:07 AM | ||||
| Ronnie Raygun |
"...because we all know he was planning on burning those oil wells today anyway. This is the a prime example of why environmental libs protested a war, because they knew things like this would happen." - Bennett That's funny. I don't remember seeing one sign protesting Saddam or telling him not to set them on fire. |
|||
| Mar 21st, 2003 05:35 AM | ||||
| FS |
Quote:
|
|||
| Mar 20th, 2003 10:17 PM | ||||
| El Blanco |
what does booby trapped have to do with it? Get our people in to disarm them. The faster they get to the wells, the faster they can deal with whatever Hussien has doent to them. I've always admitted oil has something to do with it, from every side. However, to say it is the driving force is naive. Part of it is pride that this asshole has been snubbing us all this time. The biggest part is that he does fund terrorists (he didn't help in 9/11 but he does have ties to groups), and he is preparing WMD. |
|||
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||||
