MI5 says kids groomed for terror attacks

Indeed. That was my original clear and concise point that grim tried to twist. No idea why grim believes it's a big smoking gun about where in Iraq zarqawi was. It doesn't matter.

Arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

It seems Bush is good at invading countries but never wins the war. I can't think of any war he has been successful in.

 

For those who are so confident in what they type about Iraq is true. What is your job role? Are you an Iraq researcher who travels to Iraq and researches about what is going on? You seem to be very confident that you are correct about everything you post about Iraq.

I have seen people from Iraq post here, people that have seen what is going on with their own eyes and then there is people from the other side of the world who say they are wrong.

No one knows what is going on out there apart from the soldiers who are fighting the war and the people of Iraq.

 

You're exactly right... And if you actually talk to them, they paint a much different picture than you. Show some respect.

 

Is it respectful to lie about what the soldiers say about the war?

they don't agree with the war and they want to come home. That is why they donate to Ron Paul more that any other candidate. it's only the armchair Rambo's on here who agree with the war, but i guess it's easy to agree to a war when you aren't the one fighting it.

 

Of course not, that is the point I just made...

"They".... ? That's a pretty broad word to use. Do you actually know anyone personally serving in Iraq? Do you have any relatives there? Friends?

Oh God, here we go... Your post was nothing other than a ploy to segway into another Ron Paul pimpathon..

Go away.

Before you do.. Tell me exactly who "they" are? I know quite a few of those "they", and "they" paint a different picture.

 

I would like to see an opinion poll among vets, as I would expect they are divided in their opinions on the merits of this war, as we are here. Personally, I have seen and talked with vets who say to hell with it, pull out, and I have talked with vets 6who believe it's the right thing, and say we should stick it out. It doesn't surprise me that there is a mixed pool of opinions, as, well, vets come from the same species as we wizened posters here.

Edited to add:

Actually, while it is clear the civilian population has pretty affirmatively said this war was not "worth it," I did come across the following Military Times poll; unfortunately as it is a year-end survey, only 2006 is available. Still, it seems to suggest about what I would have thought - mixed opinion, with slightly more in favor than against the effort, and, somewhat surprising for me to find, actually, that more military believes it will work than fail in the end.

I am not surprised the military isn't happy with the President's handling of the war - casualties mount, with less demonstrative progress, it hits them first; and equally not surprised that a majority of the military approves of the President, as President.

Military Times Poll

If anyone has more current military opinion, I'd really appreciate the link.

 

Wow so you have unsubstantiated claims of anecdotal evidence... You must be right then

if "they" is a broad word why did you use it when talking about the people who disagree with gkd_uk? works both ways.

 

With the little bit of info you and Gtech do not like, he was not in an area of Iraq controlled by Saddam



And Gtech being proven wrong yet again on multiple other fronts.

Talk about

I suggest you reread the thread, if anyone is 'agruing for the sake of arguing' that would be you.
You corrected a posted, I added info you left out, you decided to argue from there. Instead of liking facts, 'ohyeah facts did not fit your agenda' you decided to argue.

You sure appear it's a huge smoking gun where he was at, you've used it previously in your arguments, hell you had to correct the original poster on him not being there. If it's not a smoking gun then why did you jump to correct him with 1/2 truths, I gave the full truth, of which you decided to argue. Those pesky facts, I know you don't like them.



BTW if anyone is trying to twist that would be you, just look at your posts. You can not grasp the concept that Saddam had nothing to do with him being there, that he was not in an area controlled by Saddam. I simply gave an addon to your 1/2 truths, for the full fact. Fact is not 'twists' you however did nothing but twist after the full fact was laid out there.

--edit
Yet again, can you not comprehend this. I had no intent on arguing in this thread, simply having the full facts out there that yes he was in Iraq, in an area of Iraq Saddam DID NOT control. If you were not intending to be misleading, why on earth would you try to twist away from this simple fact? Why would you argue? I would have been done right there and then, but nope you had to make an extremely lame attempt to draw a Saddam connection to Zarqawi, sounds alot like Cheney I might add. You used misleading lies and 1/2 truths, you were proven wrong per usual and now you've gone to I 'twisted' oh give me a break.

 

Are you smoking crack this morning? Read what you wrote.. You are talking about yourself...

Who again is "they"...

"they say a lot" - " that they do "....

Uma Thurman and John Travolta, "Pulp Fiction" - at Jack Rabbit Slims

So who are "they"?

 

Yes and you said "You're exactly right... And if you actually talk to them, they paint a much different picture than you"

So i put it to you, who are "they"?

 

Maybe it would be best if you just left this thread and let the adults talk...

You're going in circles. No one is listening.. I know I am not anymore.. CYA...

 

So you have realized your hypocrisy for pulling someone up for saying "they" a few posts after you yourself said the exact same thing while talking about the exact same group of people?

 

You brought it up, I fed it right back to you... From where I come from, you got owned... Now I did give you the opportunity to tell me who "they" is, but you refuse to do so.

You are digging a hole that you are never going to be able to climb out of..

So who is "they?"

 

How could i have said it first when the first time i said it was while quoting you saying "And if you actually talk to them, they paint a much different picture than you".

So, What do you mean by "they"?

Is your hypocrisy not apparent? You demand the definition of a word that you yourself used in the exact same context.

 

Here's a little info you might not like he was in Iraq a country controlled by Saddam

I don't really see what bothers you, it's like your defending Saddam or something.
It's on par with:

Toopac: There's milk in my fridge.

Grim: Zanussi doesn't make milk (just in case anyone is confused)
----------------------------------------
Toopac: There's a virus on my PC.

Grim: Microsoft doesn't supply them.
----------------------------------------
Toopac: There's a thread about Google on DP.

Grim: DP is not associated with Google..
----------------------------------------

 

Because you did say "they" first... here: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=5135705&postcount=45

In post #44 I referred directly to solders in Iraq as they, in direct response to the poster I quoted..

You used "they" ambiguously...

So again, who is "they".

 

Nope I like facts, unlike you
The fact was he was in an area that Saddam did NOT control.

I know that doesn't go with your agenda or Gtechs as then it takes away from the terrorist angle and reason to invade Iraq. This same lame excuse was used during the war build up, after the war started, etc, etc. It has been proven to be wrong over and over, yet here you guys are still holding onto it.

I do not defend Saddam, I however do not use fiction to my advantage. You two have proven over and over fiction is about all you have

In the same respect it's like.

Toopac: Timothy Mcveigh was in the US, therefore the US must have supported him.
Grim: Incorrect, he was in the US, the US however did not support him.

Why so afraid of facts? I would think anyone would like facts, but yet you continue to prove otherwise.

 

I read nothing like that from Gtech or toopac, I think you are just reading too much into a simple statement.

 

Guys, just let grim have the last word. If you give a narcissist the last word, they believe (in their own delusional mind) that they are correct because they have the last word, and will shut up. He's proven that fact time and again.

He's already convinced me, that whatever it is that's bugging him about whether saddam had control of the North or not (like...whoopty doo, scooby doo...as if it makes some sort of difference) that is because he's afraid it somehow might give Bush some credit over something.

I love to taunt nuts as much as the next guy, but I've already had my fun with him...again

He's too easy!