2
   

What ABout Saddam

 
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 08:03 am
dlowan wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
You want to debate your views, start a thread. I will debate mine, thanks.
For someone that thinks this is a silly question/thread, you sure posted a tome, dlowan.
I see nobody will admit to wanting Saddam back in power but offer instead, it's Bush's fault, it's Americas fault.
I say this, coulda, shoulda, woulda doesn't hack it, we're there, whether you think it's legal or not doesn't matter. You want to run the country, run for office, you want to blame America &/or Bush, go for it, it doesn't change a dammed thing. This thread is not about the war, nor Bush, nor anybody but saddam.
BTW-dlowan, When i read in the first few words of a post to me, a personal attack, I don't bother reading much of the rest of the post. You want to try again without a confrontational manner, I might answer.



Try addressing the issue of your false argument.

Why should people admit to an obvious lie for the sake of your strawman?

If you want less confrontation, then be more reasoned and rational.

And stop with the pathetic


Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes



Good lord, YOU to wail re confrontation.


BTW, it was your silly argument that was attacked, not you.


I will address the topic of this post, understand that? You're still being confrontational & trying to make the thread about me, won't work.
Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 08:35 am
LSM wrote:

I say this, coulda, shoulda, woulda doesn't hack it, we're there, whether you think it's legal or not doesn't matter.



'nuff said.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 08:47 am
candidone1 wrote:
LSM wrote:

I say this, coulda, shoulda, woulda doesn't hack it, we're there, whether you think it's legal or not doesn't matter.



'nuff said.

Thank gawd, at least somebody understands.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:05 am
We are there. One thing about being there.

You don't solve a problem using the same thinking that created the problem in the first place. (Einstien)

Continuing to promote that same boneheaded thinking that got us there is a recipe for continuing the disaster. Until you recognize the thinking that caused the problem we won't solve the problem of our being in Iraq
0 Replies
 
pararover
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:06 am
What's this big fuss about now?
Saddam will finally get what he deserves, so will George W Bush some other day (hope that day comes soon).
In the clash of inflated egos, it is always the innocent that get hurt the worse. Saddam had massacred the sunnis then, and Bush is doing the same with Iraqis and American soldiers.
There's always payback time, as Newton's 3rd law says 'for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:08 am
pararover wrote:
What's this big fuss about now?
Saddam will finally get what he deserves, so will George W Bush some other day (hope that day comes soon).
In the clash of inflated egos, it is always the innocent that get hurt the worse. Saddam had massacred the sunnis then, and Bush is doing the same with Iraqis and American soldiers.
There's always payback time, as Newton's 3rd law says 'for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'.


Please try again when you get your facts straight.
0 Replies
 
pararover
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:14 am
OK i'm sorry it was the shias.
But that still doesn't change my views.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:18 am
parados wrote:
We are there. One thing about being there.

You don't solve a problem using the same thinking that created the problem in the first place. (Einstien)

Continuing to promote that same boneheaded thinking that got us there is a recipe for continuing the disaster. Until you recognize the thinking that caused the problem we won't solve the problem of our being in Iraq

Well, that's simple, lets just leave then, 'k?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:25 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
parados wrote:
We are there. One thing about being there.

You don't solve a problem using the same thinking that created the problem in the first place. (Einstien)

Continuing to promote that same boneheaded thinking that got us there is a recipe for continuing the disaster. Until you recognize the thinking that caused the problem we won't solve the problem of our being in Iraq

Well, that's simple, lets just leave then, 'k?


k!

We should leave - immediately.

But we won't, due to pride. We will stay until we are kicked out.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:27 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
parados wrote:
We are there. One thing about being there.

You don't solve a problem using the same thinking that created the problem in the first place. (Einstien)

Continuing to promote that same boneheaded thinking that got us there is a recipe for continuing the disaster. Until you recognize the thinking that caused the problem we won't solve the problem of our being in Iraq

Well, that's simple, lets just leave then, 'k?



That's a splendid example of simplistic thinking that creates problems instead of solving them. It's the black-and-white view of the world:

- You're either with us, or with the terrorists.
- We either stay the course, or cut and run.
- You're either for the invasion, or you're a Saddam supporter.

Very nice, very simple, and completely wrong.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:33 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
parados wrote:
We are there. One thing about being there.

You don't solve a problem using the same thinking that created the problem in the first place. (Einstien)

Continuing to promote that same boneheaded thinking that got us there is a recipe for continuing the disaster. Until you recognize the thinking that caused the problem we won't solve the problem of our being in Iraq

Well, that's simple, lets just leave then, 'k?


k!

We should leave - immediately.

But we won't, due to pride. We will stay until we are kicked out.

Cycloptichorn

What happens if we leave immediately? You believe that the Osamas of the world won't follow our troops home? Are we prepared for that? If we're kicked out, hey, that's it, nothing we can do about it then except hunker down & wait.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:35 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
You believe that the Osamas of the world won't follow our troops home?


Yes, that's something I forgot to mention in my previous post:

- Fight them there, or you will have to fight them here.

Bullocks.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:39 am
Was that a reference to old Osama Been Forgotten ? ! ? ! ?

Ah, the comic relief . . .

Osama bin Laden is a Sunni, who subscribes to the Wahhabi fundamentalist belief set. The Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party which previously ruled Iraq are a secular group, and at one time, Osama even offered to take Hussein out for us (back when he was till one of our buddies). The majority of the citizens of Iraq are Shi'ites, and there is no love lost between Sunnis and Shi'ites, and especially between Wahhabis and Shi'ites.

You'll find, OE, that the Madame of the Lone Star Whorehouse brings nothing in the way of substantive knowledge to any such discussion. She has a political agenda, and doesn't intend to let facts get in the way.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:48 am
old europe wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
You believe that the Osamas of the world won't follow our troops home?


Yes, that's something I forgot to mention in my previous post:

- Fight them there, or you will have to fight them here.

Bullocks.

Ah, so you believe that all will be well if we leave? I see. Hmmm, are you saying that we weren't the great satan before? I could've sworn that the osamas of the world attacked us on 911, & you know why they attacked us? Because they are sworn to kill us, plus the fact that we sat on our asses & endured 7 of their attacks & did nothing!.
BTW-Do you live in the US?
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:53 am
Setanta wrote:
Was that a reference to old Osama Been Forgotten ? ! ? ! ?

Ah, the comic relief . . .

Osama bin Laden is a Sunni, who subscribes to the Wahhabi fundamentalist belief set. The Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party which previously ruled Iraq are a secular group, and at one time, Osama even offered to take Hussein out for us (back when he was till one of our buddies). The majority of the citizens of Iraq are Shi'ites, and there is no love lost between Sunnis and Shi'ites, and especially between Wahhabis and Shi'ites.

You'll find, OE, that the Madame of the Lone Star Whorehouse brings nothing in the way of substantive knowledge to any such discussion. She has a political agenda, and doesn't intend to let facts get in the way.

The difference in you & me is that, YOU read & copy any thought that you post, YOU haven't shown any capability of an original thought.
Your snide & childish whorehouse mutterings shows your originality. Talk about s***, you wallow in it.
0 Replies
 
pararover
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 09:55 am
WHOA!!!
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 10:02 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Ah, so you believe that all will be well if we leave?


You'll have significant difficulty finding the post where I said something faintly resembling your strawman up there. You're falling back to your previous talking point, by the way:

- We either stay the course, or cut and run.

I don't know whether or not you realize that it's very likely that there are more than two options available. None of these options is an easy course of action, and no matter which course of actions will be taken, the US is deep in the middle of this mess. And that's nobody's fault but America's, I might add.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 10:07 am
old europe wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Ah, so you believe that all will be well if we leave?


You'll have significant difficulty finding the post where I said something faintly resembling your strawman up there. You're falling back to your previous talking point, by the way:

- We either stay the course, or cut and run.

I don't know whether or not you realize that it's very likely that there are more than two options available. None of these options is an easy course of action, and no matter which course of actions will be taken, the US is deep in the middle of this mess. And that's nobody's fault but America's, I might add.

I'm not surprised that you blame America, it's par for the course for some, including you, apparently.
Of course I know there's more than one action thatt could be taken in Iraq, however, no matter what's done, short of cutting & running, you & others with your views will still grouse. Then if we should leave & are attacked again, who will you blame? America, of course! We're dammed if we do & dammed if we don't, so I say, get our troops out & then carpet bomb them. What do you, as an armchair general, believe should be done?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 10:14 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
I'm not surprised that you blame America, it's par for the course for some, including you, apparently.


I blame America for being in the middle of a mess, as result of a war that America started?

<shrugs>

Yes, I guess I do. I would have blamed the USSR for ending up in the mess that Afghanistan was as a result for going into Afghanistan, too. Do you think that is illogical?


LoneStarMadam wrote:
Of course I know there's more than one action thatt could be taken in Iraq, however, no matter what's done, short of cutting & running, you & others with your views will still grouse.


No. In fact, I have often argued against leaving. My take on the issue is: you break it, you own it.


LoneStarMadam wrote:
Then if we should leave & are attacked again, who will you blame?


Most likely the terrorists.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Nov, 2006 10:17 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
parados wrote:
We are there. One thing about being there.

You don't solve a problem using the same thinking that created the problem in the first place. (Einstien)

Continuing to promote that same boneheaded thinking that got us there is a recipe for continuing the disaster. Until you recognize the thinking that caused the problem we won't solve the problem of our being in Iraq

Well, that's simple, lets just leave then, 'k?


k!

We should leave - immediately.

But we won't, due to pride. We will stay until we are kicked out.

Cycloptichorn

What happens if we leave immediately? You believe that the Osamas of the world won't follow our troops home? Are we prepared for that? If we're kicked out, hey, that's it, nothing we can do about it then except hunker down & wait.


A 'phased withdrawl' is just an immediate withdrawl which has been put off for political reasons.

If we say 'we'll leave in 18 months,' at some point we will be leaving immediately. So why not leave immediately now? There is no evidence that the Iraqi army or Government are progressing one whit towards securing the country. Sticking around until this happens could leave us there in perpetuity.

Osama isn't in Iraq, btw. If you are concerned about finding and stopping guys like him, perhaps you would advocate us finding and stopping guys like him instead of mucking around in Iraq creating more.

As for our defenses at home, you can blame your Republican leaders for failing to provide for that. They claim we can't afford it, but for just the amount spent in 3 months in Iraq, we could bio, chemical, and radiation screen all our ports, better secure our facilities such as nuclear and chemical plants, and take great steps towards closing the border. Yet none of this has been done. Why?

Cycloptichorn
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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » What ABout Saddam
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/01/2023 at 04:32:55