What the......!!

[Guest bengalrick]

man that is right on....



and that was BILL CLINTON... i really didn't know that until after i finished...

nice one bb... i fall for that everytime...

[Guest BengalBacker]

I like to post that every so often when the Bush hating rhetoric gets out of hand. It never gets much response from the Bush haters for some reason though.....

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='BengalBacker' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:48 PM']I like to post that every so often when the Bush hating rhetoric gets out of hand. It never gets much response from the Bush haters for some reason though.....
[right][post="106837"][/post][/right][/quote]

[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]

b/c it disproves the "bush lied", "he wanted to go to war", "we knew he had no weapons" theories...

can you say "thread stopper"

[BengalSIS]

I can still think Bush is an ID10T.

Btw...I wasn't all that fond of Clinton either.

[Ben]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:50 PM'] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]

b/c it disproves the "bush lied", "he wanted to go to war", "we knew he had no weapons" theories...

can you say "thread stopper"
[right][post="106840"][/post][/right][/quote]

No... i still think he is an asshat. He didnt technically lie, bad info presented in a way to make his case. He wanted to go to war.....welll...... No way to prove one way or another w/ out some kind of personal memo..... "we knew he had no weapons".....another subjective claim....

[Guest BengalBacker]

[quote name='BengalSIS' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:51 PM']I can still think Bush is an ID10T. 

Btw...I wasn't all that fond of Clinton either.
[right][post="106842"][/post][/right][/quote]


Some think he's an id1ot, some think he's an evil mastermind. My guess is he's neither.

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='BengalSIS' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:51 PM']I can still think Bush is an ID10T. 

Btw...I wasn't all that fond of Clinton either.
[right][post="106842"][/post][/right][/quote]

absolutely... and if that is what you think of him, more power to you... i can't think of anyone that tries to imply he's a genius...

but at least, this can prove that it wasn't only bush that thought he had the weapons... if you can think back to before 9/11 or soon after, i bet you actually thought he had them too... i sure as hell did... we were in a weird period of time after 9/11, and any threat was intensified a thousand times... of course, this was the reason it was sold to the people... there were many more reasons to go to war, but that was the main reason... i don't think he lied, i think it was either 1) bad intellegence 2) the weapons were moved... i will not believe he lied until that is proven, b/c no president wants to go to war... who wants the burden of death on your shoulders, if the only thing you get out of it, is a good name (by half of the population), a horrible name (the other half ), free people that don't/didn't vote for you, and make the security better, even though they are thousands of miles away... he didn't want to make that decision imo, but after 9/11, we had to take care of business...

[Ben]

[quote name='BengalBacker' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:55 PM']Some think he's an id1ot, some think he's an evil mastermind. My guess is he's neither.
[right][post="106845"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Evil supporting cast maybe?

[Guest BengalBacker]

[quote name='Ben' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:57 PM']Evil supporting cast maybe?
[right][post="106848"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Maybe.

Then again, they could be setting in motion peace in the Middle East that's never been seen before. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Ben]

[quote name='BengalBacker' date='Jun 24 2005, 03:06 PM']Maybe.

Then again, they could be setting in motion peace in the Middle East that's never been seen before. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
[right][post="106851"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Yeah.. i guess we will kno win about 20-30 years if it worked.

[Guest BlackJesus]

[color="red"][u][b]Oldschoolers classic Excerpt he always quotes.... + Reality [/color][/b][/u]


[img]http://moveoncalifornia.org/bush_dumb.jpg[/img]
[u][b]The Dumbass addresses the nation.[/b][/u]
Some excerpts:
to protect the national interest of the wealthy Oil executives in the United States, and indeed the interests of wealthy oligarchs and comapnies throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein our former allie must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, we prefer that only white nations own them if at all possible.
Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of our agreement to let them continually kill Kurds in the North.
Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles like us the U.S., in fact we are the only ones to ever use a Nuke (chuckles). With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them on Iranians when we wanted him to. Not once, but repeatedly to our approval. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war in which we funded both sides for a win win situation. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran right after Rumsfeld met and laughed with him. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq which we didn't act on over 15 years , better late than never (gives texas grin).
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will wait for us to give him these terrible weapons again.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments that he would only bomb and kill with our approval. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain my lapdog, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully and give me the WMD's he didn't actually have, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning and piss off the rest of the world.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors, like for instance when they say "give us the WMD's and Saddam says he doesn't have them". Here are some of the particulars.

Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment, reminiscent of how we watched as the Museums were looted after the invasion (laughs).

Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents which would have indicted the US government in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.

So Iraq has abused its final chance to bow to the will of GW.
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham, because there are no WMDs there to find.
if Saddam can cripple the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community -- led by the United States -- has simply lost its will to take away what isn't there. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday -- make no mistake -- he will use it again as he has in the past, hopefully against a countrie we don't like like Syria.
If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam and other dictators we arm will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain independence in the region, only Americans get to bomb brown people dammit.
The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War where we go in and piss off the whole middle east again.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people which we have known for decades, the peace of his region, the security of the world, oh shit even I don't believe that, nevertheless (texas chuckle).
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new American puppet government -- a government ready to live in peace with Starbucks and Baghdad Kmart supercenters with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people, as much as we do in the US, ie. mainly lock up black people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort and ultimatley the US leaving after we are done blowing up shit.
The decision to use force is never cost-free, unless you are a rich ass like me who guarded Texas from the Viet Cong. Whenever American forces are placed in harm's way, the poor and middle class mainly risk the loss of life.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of of black gold for my firiends. If Saddam defies the world like we are and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future from people who don;t jump when we say too. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people, so we must make war on his own people first God dammit.

And mark my words, he would use weapons of mass destruction and deploy them, if we ever gave them to him again.

[Guest BengalBacker]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 03:10 PM'][color="red"][u][b]Oldschoolers classic Excerpt he always quotes.... + Reality [/color][/b][/u]
[img]http://moveoncalifornia.org/bush_dumb.jpg[/img]
[u][b]The Dumbass addresses the nation.[/b][/u]
Some excerpts:
to protect the national interest of the wealthy Oil executives in the United States, and indeed the interests of wealthy oligarchs and comapnies throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein our former allie must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, we prefer that only white nations own them if at all possible. 
Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of our agreement to let them continually kill Kurds in the North.
Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles like us the U.S., in fact we are the only ones to ever use a Nuke (chuckles). With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them on Iranians when we wanted him to. Not once, but repeatedly to our approval. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war in which we funded both sides for a win win situation. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran right after Rumsfeld met and laughed with him. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq which we didn't act on over 15 years , better late than never (gives texas grin).
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will wait for us to give him these terrible weapons again.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments that he would only bomb and kill with our approval. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain my lapdog, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully and give me the WMD's he didn't actually have, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning and piss off the rest of the world.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors, like for instance when they say "give us the WMD's and Saddam says he doesn't have them".  Here are some of the particulars.

Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment, reminiscent of how we watched as the Museums were looted after the invasion (laughs).

Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents which would have indicted the US government in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.

So Iraq has abused its final chance to bow to the will of GW.
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham, because there are no WMDs there to find.
if Saddam can cripple the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community -- led by the United States -- has simply lost its will to take away what isn't there. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday -- make no mistake -- he will use it again as he has in the past, hopefully against a countrie we don't like like Syria.
If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam and other dictators we arm will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain independence in the region, only Americans get to bomb brown people dammit.
The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War where we go in and piss off the whole middle east again.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people which we have known for decades, the peace of his region, the security of the world, oh shit even I don't believe that, nevertheless (texas chuckle).
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new American puppet government -- a government ready to live in peace with Starbucks and Baghdad Kmart supercenters with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people, as much as we do in the US, ie. mainly lock up black people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort and ultimatley the US leaving after we are done blowing up shit.
The decision to use force is never cost-free, unless you are a rich ass like me who guarded Texas from the Viet Cong. Whenever American forces are placed in harm's way, the poor and middle class mainly risk the loss of life.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of of black gold for my firiends. If Saddam defies the world like we are and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future from people who don;t jump when we say too. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people, so we must make war on his own people first God dammit.

And mark my words, he would use weapons of mass destruction and deploy them, if we ever gave them to him again.
[right][post="106853"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Strange how you did that as if it was Bush speaking, when it was all taken from a Clinton speech made in 1998, long before Bush or Rumsfeld were even known to most people.

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote]Strange how you did that as if it was Bush speaking, when it was all taken from a Clinton speech.[/quote]


[color="blue"][i][b]I am not a fan of Clinton either... although I would take him compared to Bush right now, ....

SO now your defense is that the guy Republicans hate being blown under the desk thought the same thing as Bush....


It doesn't matter who said it initially, that is what would be said now if Bush was honest with it .....

Hell Dems also have been part of the US Problem...... I am not registered in any political party, DEM prez's also armed dictators, etc [/b][/i][/color]

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:10 PM'][color="red"][u][b]Oldschoolers classic Excerpt he always quotes.... + Reality [/color][/b][/u]
[right][post="106853"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Why point me out ?
Just because I am for America and see us doing more GOOD than BAD ? :roll:



Oh and way to take an address that was given by Clinton and put a
Michael Moore-esqe slant on it...your little fat buddy that
is rich, white, male and American would be proud of
you for "hating" what you are [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img]

[Guest BengalBacker]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 03:18 PM'][color="blue"][i][b]I am not a fan of Clinton either... although I would take him compared to Bush right now, ....

SO now your defense is that the guy Republicans hate being blown under the desk thought the same thing as Bush....
It doesn't matter who said it initially, that is what would be said now if Bush was honest with it .....

Hell Dems also have been part of the US Problem...... I am not registered in any political party, DEM prez's also armed dictators, etc [/b][/i][/color]
[right][post="106856"][/post][/right][/quote]


Too bad Che isn't alive so he could run for President, right?

My only purpose in posting this is so that all of the people who supported Clinton, yet think Bush is an evil bastard will see the irony.

I know though. You hate all of us Americans equally.

WORKERS UNITE !!!!!!

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote]Oh and way to take an address that was given by Clinton and put a
Michael Moore-esqe slant on it...your little fat buddy that
is rich, white, male and American would be proud of
you for "hating" what you are [/quote]


[i][b]You keep writing "Hating what you are".....

My nation does awful shit all the time, everyday in fact, but that doesn't mean I am that .... I disagree with many of the things they do and attempt my best to change others opinions , however short of "Revolution" many of these things can not be changed until the masses of people see the truth (being that 70 % of the nation still believes in a carpenter Man God, I am not confident in the intellect of the audience)[/b][/i]

[whodey319]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 04:18 PM'][color="blue"][i][b]I am not a fan of Clinton either... although I would take him compared to Bush right now, ....

SO now your defense is that the guy Republicans hate being blown under the desk thought the same thing as Bush....
It doesn't matter who said it initially, that is what would be said now if Bush was honest with it .....

Hell Dems also have been part of the US Problem...... I am not registered in any political party, DEM prez's also armed dictators, etc [/b][/i][/color]
[right][post="106856"][/post][/right][/quote]
you say your not registered or affiliated with any party yet the worst thing you say about the democrats is "i am not a fan of clinton". You are so far left its unbelievable, is you real name Howard Dean Jr?

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 03:18 PM'][color="blue"][i][b]I am not a fan of Clinton either... although I would take him compared to Bush right now, ....

SO now your defense is that the guy Republicans hate being blown under the desk thought the same thing as Bush....
It doesn't matter who said it initially, that is what would be said now if Bush was honest with it .....

Hell Dems also have been part of the US Problem...... I am not registered in any political party, DEM prez's also armed dictators, etc [/b][/i][/color]
[right][post="106856"][/post][/right][/quote]

this almost identical to what bush did say 48 hours before we went in... and you say "what does this matter..." well after hearing that our president is a bold faced liar for a couple years now, it would make sense to show a democratic president saying the same thing...

yeah, dem's armed dictator what 30 or 40 years ago... my god... we should all commit suicide b/c my great-great-great-great- grandpa was a slave owner and his great-great-great-great grandfather took his land from the indians... lets live int eh future and only know our past, not live in it...

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote]you say your not registered or affiliated with any party yet the worst thing you say about the democrats is "i am not a fan of clinton". You are so far left its unbelievable, is you real name Howard Dean Jr?[/quote]


[i][b]Clinton made a lot of mistakes and I was critical of him during all of it also.... (I don't subscribe to the "must obey" my party line like most) .... Hell Clinton fucked up in Rwanda and took a Blowjob over stepping in to stop Genoicide. Similar to how now W could care less about the Darfur in Sudan. I advocate issues not red or blue colors. [/b][/i]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote]yeah, dem's armed dictator what 30 or 40 years ago... my god... we should all commit suicide b/c my great-great-great-great- grandpa was a slave owner and his great-great-great-great grandfather took his land from the indians... lets live int eh future and only know our past, not live in it...[/quote]

[i][b]Behaviors of the past affect the future.... Saddam came into power over 30 years ago, so did Castro, (30 years in the timeline of the world is not much, and nothing happens in a bubble)

As for the live in the now, that is also what murderers say ..... Hell lets let Saddam live in the now and eat doritos and not focus on all the bad shit he's done over the past 30 years right oh in this case we want to pay attention [/b][/i]

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 02:23 PM'][i][b]You keep writing "Hating what you are".....

My nation does awful shit all the time, everyday in fact, but that doesn't mean I am that .... I disagree with many of the things they do and attempt my best to change others opinions , however short of "Revolution" many of these things can not be changed until the masses of people see the truth (being that 70 % of the nation still believes in a carpenter Man God, I am not confident in the intellect of the audience)[/b][/i][right][post="106859"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Your Nation does GREAT things everyday in fact.
But you CHOOSE to overlook THAT and let ANY AND ALL
BAD overshadow it.


And you act like you hate "rich, "white", "straight" male Americans.
All of the above is what YOU ARE.

You also act like you hate Christians...My whole family are
Christians. I was brought up in church. I do not attend church
and probably never will. But it did teach me so family and moral
values that I probably wouldn`t have recieved otherwise...
MOST Christians are good-hearted people that live good lives.
So what if they were TAUGHT to believe in God ?
You keep generalizing them all to be like the Head of the Catholic Church
or a bunch of pedophiles.

Relgion is based on faith.
You can`t see air but you know it`s there...


Anyway Who-Dey ! [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img]

[whodey319]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 04:23 PM'][i][b]You keep writing "Hating what you are".....

My nation does awful shit all the time, everyday in fact, but that doesn't mean I am that .... I disagree with many of the things they do and attempt my best to change others opinions , however short of "Revolution" many of these things can not be changed until the masses of people see the truth (being that 70 % of the nation still believes in a carpenter Man God, I am not confident in the intellect of the audience)[/b][/i]
[right][post="106859"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Im sick of your fucking anti religion bullshit and im not a religious person at all. You are a pathetic human being that believes no one can have their own beliefs, religious or political it doesnt matter with you, youll fight to the end to try to demean anyone. If they dont agree with you they are morons. I wouldnt be sad if you disappeared forever, maybe you should start being a cleveland fan and hang out with all the douchebags in clevland. here's a big FUCK YOU from me.

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote]I wouldnt be sad if you disappeared forever, maybe you should start being a cleveland fan and hang out with all the douchebags in clevland. here's a big FUCK YOU from me.[/quote]

[i]That's cute.... Whodey319 reached his breaking point [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img]

[img]http://www.watan.com/img/1/girl-crying.jpg[/img]

Well don't worry cause I still love you like Christ would [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/30.gif[/img] [/i]

[BengalsCat]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 24 2005, 04:10 PM'][color="red"][u][b]Oldschoolers classic Excerpt he always quotes.... + Reality [/color][/b][/u]
[img]http://moveoncalifornia.org/bush_dumb.jpg[/img]
[u][b]The Dumbass addresses the nation.[/b][/u]
Some excerpts:
to protect the national interest of the wealthy Oil executives in the United States, and indeed the interests of wealthy oligarchs and comapnies throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein our former allie must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, we prefer that only white nations own them if at all possible. 
Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of our agreement to let them continually kill Kurds in the North.
Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles like us the U.S., in fact we are the only ones to ever use a Nuke (chuckles). With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them on Iranians when we wanted him to. Not once, but repeatedly to our approval. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war in which we funded both sides for a win win situation. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran right after Rumsfeld met and laughed with him. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq which we didn't act on over 15 years , better late than never (gives texas grin).
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will wait for us to give him these terrible weapons again.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments that he would only bomb and kill with our approval. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain my lapdog, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully and give me the WMD's he didn't actually have, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning and piss off the rest of the world.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors, like for instance when they say "give us the WMD's and Saddam says he doesn't have them".  Here are some of the particulars.

Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment, reminiscent of how we watched as the Museums were looted after the invasion (laughs).

Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents which would have indicted the US government in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.

So Iraq has abused its final chance to bow to the will of GW.
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham, because there are no WMDs there to find.
if Saddam can cripple the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community -- led by the United States -- has simply lost its will to take away what isn't there. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday -- make no mistake -- he will use it again as he has in the past, hopefully against a countrie we don't like like Syria.
If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam and other dictators we arm will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain independence in the region, only Americans get to bomb brown people dammit.
The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War where we go in and piss off the whole middle east again.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people which we have known for decades, the peace of his region, the security of the world, oh shit even I don't believe that, nevertheless (texas chuckle).
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new American puppet government -- a government ready to live in peace with Starbucks and Baghdad Kmart supercenters with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people, as much as we do in the US, ie. mainly lock up black people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort and ultimatley the US leaving after we are done blowing up shit.
The decision to use force is never cost-free, unless you are a rich ass like me who guarded Texas from the Viet Cong. Whenever American forces are placed in harm's way, the poor and middle class mainly risk the loss of life.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of of black gold for my firiends. If Saddam defies the world like we are and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future from people who don;t jump when we say too. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people, so we must make war on his own people first God dammit.

And mark my words, he would use weapons of mass destruction and deploy them, if we ever gave them to him again.
[right][post="106853"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



I still dont get how u can post all this there were no wmd when they attacked bush for saying there 368 tons of explosives missing?? how do you explain that or do you just ignore that fact and that this piticular story came out a month priorty to elections?????????????

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote]I still dont get how u can post all this there were no wmd when they attacked bush for saying there 368 tons of explosives missing?? how do you explain that or do you just ignore that fact and that this piticular story came out a month priorty to elections?????????????[/quote]


[i][b]Dynamite is not a WMD

Fuck every nation in the world has dynamite, it is needed for construction for fucks sake. Every nation in the world has shit loads of dynamite. the state of Ohio I am sure possesses far more than 368 tons worth.... Bush was criticized because now the insurgents have that dynamite and will continue to kill Americans who he put there in harms way.........

Oh I forgot "fight and piss them off over there, so we don't have to fight them here" [/b][/i]