In short the UK based there evidence on a thesis written by a student years before. They found it on the internet and directly copied parts of it. Im not one of those people. If The Govt had said we need to take out saddam because he gassed 1 Kurd I would have said agreed with their stance. Personal opinion? why state the obvious repeatedly ? Its not like you or me will ever have the real facts but somethings are so obvious its painful. The bombings in London huh ? Yeah, a bunch of muslims decided to find the parts of london with the most muslims in them and tried to blow them up.. Come on, your a smart guy, before you post me any more news reports youve read, come to London and the vibe will hit you so hard, you wont be able to believe that so many people could be wrong. Funny, here profile here was low until she got arrested.
That's fine yo-yo, but that's your personal opinion on what you think classifies wmd. In terms of the war though, chemical weapons were part of the wmd.
Y'all are making this way too difficult. Saddam Hussein, an official head-of-state, tried to asassinate a U.S. President. Additional justification is unnecessary.
Thats what happens when you cant think for yourself. I dont think anyone has any proof that Iraq was not in support of terrorism.
War What is it good for Absolutely nothing War What is it good for Absolutely nothing War is something that I despise For it means destruction of innocent lives For it means tears in thousands of mothers' eyes When their sons go out to fight to give their lives War What is it good for Absolutely nothing Say it again War What is it good for Absolutely nothing War It's nothing but a heartbreaker War Friend only to the undertaker War is the enemy of all mankind The thought of war blows my mind Handed down from generation to generation Induction destruction Who wants to die War What is it good for Absolutely nothing Say it again War What is it good for Absolutely nothing War has shattered many young men's dreams Made them disabled bitter and meanLife is too precious to be fighting wars each day War can't give life it can only take it away War It's nothing but a heartbreaker War Friend only to the undertaker Peace love and understanding There must be some place for these things today They say we must fight to keep our freedom But Lord there's gotta be a better way That's better than War War What is it good for Absolutely nothing Say it again War What is it good for Absolutely nothing
Which is why considering the iraq dossier, for me, is not something I should consider first. There is no authenticity behind it, what-so-ever. It's a fabricated document and one must put their trust into the author to accept it. I'm comfortable with the facts I have presented. It is far more efficient to debate based on facts, as opposed to personal opinion. London bombers, yes, in a nutshell, that is what happened. Did you see the video al qaida released of one of the bombers last statement? I need more than a "vibe" Design Agent. Conspiracy theories and personal opinions have their places, but their place isn't to replace facts.
I haven't seen you post any facts yet, GT. If you have posted facts in this thread I have missed them. Not even so much as a newsmax link yet!
I think more antis show up because none of them have jobs or anything to do, and besides, who wants to be a pro-war protester, kinda lame if you ask me.
The UK and US government put their faith in it, why dont you play follow the leader this time and believe it What FACTS have you presented ? You cannot claim anything you say is a fact, it is all second hand reporting unless you were in Iraq looking too. Without being here you cannot say categorically that happened. If you think the boy with the bomb was anymore than a pawn you must be mistaken. You need more than a vibe for sure. Unless you saw GWB with a knife in his hand you wouldnt believe it. BTW its not a GWB thing for me. Blair, Howard (opposition), John Kerry would have all done the same probably. As mentioned everything you have said is a personal opinion based on someone else's opinion of someone elses report, so please dont try and portray it as fact either. I would call my opinion deliberatley informed opinion based on no love for any politician or political party of any kind. With a personal attempt to remove any bias inorder to try and filter out the fact from fiction. - can you put your hand on your heart and say that ?
Pick something you take exception with and lets go at it. Like the WMD issue where I posted a link to, that several have made an attempt at with personal opinion, but none have been able to counter. I'm always open for good debate
Put your claws away GGirl.. You do not have facts (see post above - no not Crazy robs, although it says the same thing!)
Totally. You arent supposed to protest something you support. The whole comparing the amount that showed up thing just deosnt hold any merit in my opinion.
DA: You have a very odd form of logic there. I determined that Saddam should be deposed back in '91. The U.S. Government took a decade to get it done. That's government for 'ya. The statements made during the last few months before the U.S. Military was given approval to start the real work... I really never cared about. I don't care why they did it; I only care why I believe it was the right thing to do. The motivations of the Bush Administration are not something I concern myself with; the actions of the Bush Administration are what I concern myself with. And, in this case, the Bush Administration wisely chose to agree with me.
Nor in mine on the whole, doesnt change the point that the war was started for reasons other than those stated. When you have the largest protest in UK history it does say something.
It appears that there is no one here to debate you. BTW, thank you for the facts you posted on this topic, especially in this thread: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=284550
I've seen nothing that indicates this at all. If I'm wrong, feel free to quote a source that says so. Sure I can. I did not go to New Orleans, but I know a hurricane hit there. I did not go to Iraq and watch people being decapitated, but I know it happened. I have not seen a million dollars, but I know it exists. Those that bombed London did what they did. However you wish to portray them is your own opinion, but they did what they did. A video was later released with his own words. Odd scenario. I suspect if someone posted a photo of Bush at a dinner holding a steak knife while cutting some beef, there are those that would accuse him of murder. So that hurricane in New Orleans didn't happen? The world trade center was never attacked? It doesn't work that way DA. While reporting can certainly be biased and often is, it doesn't discount that these events happened. That's what makes the NYT's article regarding WMD so powerful, for me. The NYT is about as anti-Bush as it gets. And the article itself, is slanted towards the scenario of "ok, there were wmds, but it's Bush's fault that he didn't go in there and secure them." Sort of a catch22. Yes, without question. But I disagree with your opinion of how your personal opinions are presented. People are entitled to their personal opinions, however they derive them. They are just not entitled to their own facts. That's where debate comes in.
What evidence? Have you seen these evidence? Who has judged the correctness of these evidence? How about for murder, if the police says that they have evidence, should we close the courts and send the person directly to jail for indefinite time because police said so? How do we know that the same agencies that have made so many mistakes, are not making mistakes now? Should the government and it's employee be above any legal system and control? The punishment for different terrorist acts are clearly defined in criminal code, if there is such strong evidence for their crime, why does government refuses to convict people in courts and send them to prison according to the current laws? What is a difference between USA's present government and soviet government under Stalin and following leaders when they jailed people without trials or by show trials simply by saying that they were enemy of state? This is not defending any specific action, crime or person but defending the rights of everyone to a fair trial according to the legal system. Is this your opinion that if Stalin did it in Soviet Union then it is BAD but if Bush does it in USA then it is GOOD?