1
   

Hussein Admitted Creating Illusion WMD Program Still Existed

 
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 03:43 pm
old europe wrote:
Key words:

Brandon9000 wrote:
left unchecked


There were weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq in 2003.
I claimed only that Clinton believed that Iraq was a threat. I then proved it. Period. How like liberals, terrified to address the contents of a post, to focus only on the poster.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 03:44 pm
How pathetic you are, Brandon. Truly.

I bet when you read this article you couldn't wait to come here and trumpet it around, as if it validates your position in any fashion.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 03:45 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
old europe wrote:
Key words:

Brandon9000 wrote:
left unchecked


There were weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq in 2003.
I claimed only that Clinton believed that Iraq was a threat. I then proved it. Period.



You showed that Clinton said he believed that Iraq, if left unchecked, would become a threat.

However, Iraq wasn't left unchecked.


Brandon9000 wrote:
How like liberals, terrified to address the contents of a post, to focus only on the poster.


Cute.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 03:48 pm
The whole world is not with Bush nor the invisible successor.
Majority of the humanity pays much attention about the barbaric, banal, abysmal, uncompassionate, non-christian war without anyreasons.
Unless the approved, selected, elected president mention the faulty steps under BUSH were nonsense, USA has no chance to lead US.
I can cut and paste umpteen american intellectuals who vouchsafe my critical views.
V R watching you with rapt attention
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 03:49 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
How pathetic you are, Brandon. Truly.

I bet when you read this article you couldn't wait to come here and trumpet it around, as if it validates your position in any fashion.

Cycloptichorn

Name calling, the mark of maturity. I made no claims whatever about this article. I merely posted it.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 03:52 pm
old europe wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
old europe wrote:
Key words:

Brandon9000 wrote:
left unchecked


There were weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq in 2003.
I claimed only that Clinton believed that Iraq was a threat. I then proved it. Period.



You showed that Clinton said he believed that Iraq, if left unchecked, would become a threat.

However, Iraq wasn't left unchecked.


Brandon9000 wrote:
How like liberals, terrified to address the contents of a post, to focus only on the poster.


Cute.

That's not what he said at all. Read the quotation. He said that he believed that Saddam Hussein, if left unchecked, would USE the weapons. Please tell me why one would "check" someone who posed no threat?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:00 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
That's not what he said at all. Read the quotation. He said that he believed that Saddam Hussein, if left unchecked, would USE the weapons.


Yup. That was after Saddam had thrown the UNSCOM weapons inspectors out of the country. UNSCOM had been created by UN SC resolution 687 of 3 April 1991.


Brandon9000 wrote:
Please tell me why one would "check" someone who posed no threat?


UNSCOM was set up to implement the non-nuclear provisions of resolution 687 and to assist the IAEA in the nuclear areas. The precise terms are laid out in paragraphs 7 to 13 of the resolution.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:00 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
How pathetic you are, Brandon. Truly.

I bet when you read this article you couldn't wait to come here and trumpet it around, as if it validates your position in any fashion.

Cycloptichorn

Name calling, the mark of maturity. I made no claims whatever about this article. I merely posted it.


Reading skills need improvement; I wrote a description of you, not call you a name.

You don't post for how long, show up, post, and there is no implicit or implied claim in the article? Who do you think you are kidding?

:lol

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:08 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
How pathetic you are, Brandon. Truly.

I bet when you read this article you couldn't wait to come here and trumpet it around, as if it validates your position in any fashion.

Cycloptichorn

Name calling, the mark of maturity. I made no claims whatever about this article. I merely posted it.


Reading skills need improvement; I wrote a description of you, not call you a name.

You don't post for how long, show up, post, and there is no implicit or implied claim in the article? Who do you think you are kidding?

:lol

Cycloptichorn

I posted an article without comment. I'm not responsible for your speculations about what my motives might be. Incidentally, name calling does nothing to lend your opinions credibilty.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:09 pm
old europe wrote:
And with a bit of luck, you might get another happy day in five or nine years from now...


With many sad days in between.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:09 pm
old europe wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
That's not what he said at all. Read the quotation. He said that he believed that Saddam Hussein, if left unchecked, would USE the weapons.


Yup. That was after Saddam had thrown the UNSCOM weapons inspectors out of the country. UNSCOM had been created by UN SC resolution 687 of 3 April 1991.


Brandon9000 wrote:
Please tell me why one would "check" someone who posed no threat?


UNSCOM was set up to implement the non-nuclear provisions of resolution 687 and to assist the IAEA in the nuclear areas. The precise terms are laid out in paragraphs 7 to 13 of the resolution.

I said that Clinton believe that Saddam Hussein was a threat, and then I proved it. I don't quite see the relevance of your comments to my claim or my evidence.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:10 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
How pathetic you are, Brandon. Truly.

I bet when you read this article you couldn't wait to come here and trumpet it around, as if it validates your position in any fashion.

Cycloptichorn


Tsk, tsk. Your anger at the poster is showing, Cyclops.

Come now ... let's see some of that vaunted leftist tolerance I hear so much about.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:17 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
Any idiot could see Iraq was not a threat to the USA.

Apparently, millions and millions of idiots did not, including Bill Clinton. Interesting that Saddam Hussein was deliberately trying to create the impresssion that his former WMD programs were still extant. Also, how typical that you make this statement without the tiniest particle of supporting argument.


To quote you, nobody that disagrees with you has ever had a particle of evidence. Yet, it matters not whom you quote to buttress your dumb argument, most people knew better and many who went along with Bush were stampeded by the public hysteria, of which Bush contributed muchly to create.

Your claim, which was, incidentally, not in response to any previous comment of mine in this post was that any idiot could see that Iraq was no threat to the US. You don't have a particle of evidence to support that position for the simple reason that you didn't even attempt to offer any support for it. No big surprise there. I would, indeed, expect you to do just this - "prove" your opinions with evidence like "any idiot could see."


I have witnessed many posters present you with evidence in many threads. Your one response: That's not evidence. It's a merry-go-round I don't care to get on.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:18 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
I said that Clinton believe that Saddam Hussein was a threat,


You did.

Brandon9000 wrote:
and then I proved it.


You didn't. There's a difference between saying "He is a threat" and saying "If left unchecked, he will become a threat."


Brandon9000 wrote:
I don't quite see the relevance of your comments to my claim or my evidence.


That's the crux, isn't it?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:18 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
How pathetic you are, Brandon. Truly.

I bet when you read this article you couldn't wait to come here and trumpet it around, as if it validates your position in any fashion.

Cycloptichorn


Tsk, tsk. Your anger at the poster is showing, Cyclops.

Come now ... let's see some of that vaunted leftist tolerance I hear so much about.


One would think that an intelligent poster such as yourself could tell the difference between anger and disdain, but apparently not.

Double Laughing

Cycloptiochorn
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:20 pm
Iraq had nukes. Bill said so.

Edgarblythe thinks Bill is an idiot.

Carry on.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:29 pm
I had raised a point to ponder over
about the banal quick fix bigmag justice in Iraq.
I detest Saddam and his funny corporate criminals.
By corporate criminals, I mean those who had made business with that untouchable( but qualified) criminal.
Saddam Hussain is not Rama Fuchs .
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 06/19/2019 at 09:59:04