Then summarize it please.

 

You mean the talks with Yassir Arafat that failed miserably, and never even got close to completion? Yeah, I want more!



Wait, why can't the leader of a nation be radical and employ cells of secret police to terrorize all the opposition groups and kill the ethnic groups he doens't like? Explain to me how Saddam wasn't a guy who used small cells of police to terrorize people into submission.


See above. We've had this discussion before. When you are having people snatched and murdered, and setting off bombs and gas attacks in your own country, you are a terrorist.

Again, you're presuming that the terrorists care about Europe. You didn't directly answer the point because you know that it's ridiculous. Terrorists will be terrorists and new recruits will join because they are unhappy, hateful, uneducated people. They do not give a **** about the UN or the cooperation of all nations.

So let me get this straight: You think a country where the President's two sons are nearly killed, and no one is punished, is more stable than current day Iraq...AND
I'm off point calling Saddam a terrorist, but you're on target saying that people who blow themselves up at the entrances to night clubs are NOT terrorists? What kind f'd up world do you live in where people who go around trying to blow themselves up at public bus stops are NOT terrorists?


Apparently you were not speaking spanish back in Spain, either. I came to that conclusion based on a myriad of factors. Europeans have been ripping on the US since the 80's at least. And educated Europeans HATED the Clinton policy of "do nothing until all the killing is done, then interfere in a way that mucks up the peace process" in Kosovo.


hahaha, so did the Army put Grand Ayatollah Ali Al Sistani into power? How about Muqtada Al Sadr, he was on the ballot too? Answer that please.

Now you're claiming to see the future with the oil issue. "The US will go ask for Iraq's oil"...you know this...how? Because you are, like I said, narrow minded. You get one idea in your head, and then you twist all the facts to fit it: If Bush isn't taking oil now, he's going to do it tomorrow. Iraq isn't stable now because there's killing, but Saddam's killing was so different that Iraq was stable then. Saddam was not a terrorist, and neither were the Palestinian suicide bombers who killed a bunch of old ladies at bus stops. They are "freedom fighters", just like the guys who are doing the bombing in Iraq today, right?

You're relying on the "I hear this from people around my workplace sometimes" method of studying the world. And you're apparently also a graduate of the Yassir Arafat school of ethics in warfare. That's the only possible explaination for this.

 

Do you actually read over the things you post?

According to your logic Iraq will succeed when we pull-out because the terrorists will have nothing to fight. Am I right?

Listen. I truly think that you are against anything Bush. Face it. Clinton was responsible for a lot of bad and you'd defend him to the grave. I'm not asking for complete agreement on this issue. But if you're not willing to come forward like Chrisnonstop, Imprezastifan88 or even SilverScoober02 then I honestly think having a intelligent conversation is next t impossible with you. It's easier for me to accept a partial agreement on this matter rather than hear you defend hotair.


Here's another one! I only had to read certain parts of your post to catch this.

I'm not going to even explain this. Just add the bolded & color portions in order to reveal your stupidity. *HINT* One of those colors does not belong *hehehe*

But what does it matter? You're just going to repeat yourself like an umpire that's made a bad call.

 

WOW this blew up after I left.

 

Of course I read over everything I post.

You are just taking what Im saying out of context. Not that hard to do really anyone can do what you just did.

First paragraph you quoted I was talking about pulling out right now. What would happen if we pulled out right now? Iraq would be ****ed, thats pretty simple.

Second paragraph you quoted, I was talking about something differently. As in if we pulled out after everything was set and Iraq succeeded in staying together it would be seen as a sucess. The terroirst are there because we are there, how could you deny that I don't know.

Please if you are going to quote me take the effort to read the rest of what I wrote instead of taking little bits of it. I expected better from you salty.

NO President has never done everything right. I think its pathetic that he was trying to say Clinton didn't do anything in the Middle East. And yet Bush's NUMBER ONE target is out and about. And I also think its pathetic that your trying to say I'll defend Clinton no matter what he does. No what I am doing is not letting guru take the blame of Bush were he is at fualt.




Wow, your kidding me and you're saying Im stupid? Read that over again. Seriously, if you believe that Saddam was a terrorist then your a moron beyond description. He led a Army/Police and did not need to meet his ends by being a terrorist. Come on, if you are going to call him a terrorist then might as well call every damn world leader that has ever attacked anyone with his army/police a terrorist.

Maybe I wouldn't have to repeat myself if you understood simple concepts about what a terrorist is vs a tyrant. But maybe im wishing to much. Funny though maybe your just using the personal attacks to take away that 11 people agree with me that this was NOT comparable to the downing of the Berlin Wall. To just you 4 who are delusional from smoking Bushes **** to much.

 

I've come to the conclusion that subaruguru and ESPECIALLY unregistered need a job...one in which they actually have to work.


MY EYES! I feel like I'm ready to write a thesis based on your tomes that you've written.

 

haha

 

Job? What's that?

 

I'm just playing, but man! You you're about as verbose as unregistered.

 

it comes naturally to subaruguru seeing how his work is similar.

 

Goddamn: every thread seems to turn into Unregistered vs. Subaruguru or Unregistered vs. all conservatives

 

my money is on unregistered

:banana:

 

Are you serious? You and Imprezastifan88 seem to be the most consistent speakers in center/left and left field.

I can't really refute your opinion in a thread that involves opinion like this one. But to compare subaruguru's inability to present a good argument over unregistered is laughable and offensive. I'm not saying this because we happen to be best friends either. There's been plenty of times I’ve told him he's wrong and visa versa.

I think the main difference comes in good facts and the ability to be thorough in most every argument. Not to mention he’s one of the most knowledgeable people I’ve ever known, does this for a living and been doing it on a national level since elementary school.

Someone should start a poll between everyone in teh politics.

 

What you talking about Willis!

Meh I noticed im typing WAY to much, ie spending to much time so I just wait for a bit then type again.

 

Thats your oppinion. And I strongly disagree with it, and could even point out where his arguments are not based on facts yet he claims they are. But whats the point you already stated you two are friends hence, you are baised in your oppinion of me and how I discuss issues.

I win!