The emperor wears no clothes. Dubya...is the perfect example of this fairy tale

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by earlpearl, Apr 8, 2006.

  1. yo-yo

    yo-yo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    206
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    185
    #61
    Gtech,

    The entire point was that IF (and that's a doubtful if) there were actually and WMD that they were going to stop from being used to hurt our people and in terror attacks, the FAILED MISERABLY because the WMD is still non existant or in another extremist country that most likely supports killing americans. So the Iraq war has solved nothing, stopped no WMD from being used, and caused thousands of deaths.
     
    yo-yo, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  2. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #62
    Ah, *that's* what the point is. Yeah, that's the ticket :)

    No one says freedom doesn't come without a price. In war, people die. Innocent people and people that are not innocent. It's not pretty and it's not nice. The alternative, as we saw, was almost a million people killed by saddam and dumped in mass graves, tortured, (tongues cut out, wrists, fingers, legs, feet and heads chopped off), thrown off the roof of third story buildings, shredders, acid baths, torture, imprisoned, raped, killed and things some of us cannot even imagine.

    So here you are, moaning about thousands, while hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions suffered under this man without so much as a word. I remember an argument we had last year, where you were doing no less than what you are doing now. You said it would be different if Bush had said it was about that, but that it was just about wmds. And I showed you clearly where Bush mentioned this as one of the conditions saddam could avoid war with. Apparently it never mattered in the first place.

    Don't pretend you care about the soldiers lives. You've made it perfectly clear, time and again you do not. If you are concerned about people being killed, you'd be the first to start a post when zarqawi's buds blow up and kill 79 people including children. And almost daily, there is something you could report. But you don't. Because you don't care. It's nothing more to you, than an opportunity to attack your country, which is something you thrive on.

    The coalition is in Iraq to make things better. They are there to take out "bad guys" and help bring freedom (something you have, but take for granted because someone else died to give it to you). They build schools, hospitals, build relationships with communities, give supplies and do their best to take care of locals. And yes, from time to time, INDIVIDUALS act on their own stupidity and do things wrong. While it's true that innocent people DO die as a result of those actions indirectly, the difference between them and those you seem to have no issue with (terrorists who have infiltrated from other countries) is that terrorists intentionally target the population so that news media can deliver the message of death back home. They do not build hospitals, they do not build schools, they do not offer help and support to the locals. They offer death. If you are so concerned about death, you ought to be concerned about what would happen to the people of Iraq if we pulled out before the Iraqis are prepared to deal with their own threats.

    And then there is always the excuse about how they weren't there before the war. They existed, but with saddam, he'd cut their heads off without a second thought. Our soldiers can't do that. They are constantly under criticism and spotlights. They are constantly under your attack. Remember the post "oops, they did it again?" You couldn't wipe the drool from your chin fast enough to get digital point and attack them. Later on, it was discovered they didn't do it. Did you correct the post? No. Why? Because the truth isn't important.

    It's clear who you hate for the 30,000. Who do you hate for the million?
     
    GTech, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  3. ferret77

    ferret77 Heretic

    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    230
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #63
    I don't blame just GW, Iblame his administration and everyone who voted to give him the authority to go to war.

    what time zone are you gusy in, I'm only awake because I am sick
     
    ferret77, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  4. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #64
    I'm in central time zone. 3:35am here. I prefer nights myself, though I'm seriously behind in work.

    In the blame game, there's lots to go around, especially since most of the intelligence came from the previous administration who also knew he had wmd.

    I guess it all depends on whether leaving a people without freedom and another million being killed saddam was worth "inaction is the best course of action."

    Of course, there's always the link in my signature as well. Don't be shy, click it and discover something new ;)
     
    GTech, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  5. ferret77

    ferret77 Heretic

    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    230
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #65
    If you care so much about the poor people, why don't have links about what is going in darfar, you only seem to care about the "people" that the president tells you to care about.

    And are the iraqis living in freedom?, they have bombings, no electricty, giant gangs of thugs terrorizing who ever does follow their party. Sounds like paradise.
     
    ferret77, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  6. yo-yo

    yo-yo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    206
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    185
    #66
    I care about innocent people's lives. If soldiers are guilty of anything less than humane conduct towards civilians they are worthless as far as I'm concerned.

    It's clear you don't care about the innocent people Saddam killed, just like you don't care about the innocent people American and British troops have killed.

    If evil dictators killing their citizens was a legit reason for war (as i've stated 1,000 times now) there are at the very LEAST 10 other countries who have killed far more than Saddam, and tortured far more than Saddam, and STILL DO. And Bush never mentions them, you never mention them.... they mean nothing to you. You just use the "saddam hurt people" line as just another excuse to justify a shameful and unjust war led by a Cowboy and his posse of rich businessmen.
     
    yo-yo, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  7. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #67
    Are you talking about zarqawi's soldiers?

    Kind of hard to be clear about it, when there's no substance to the claim. Nice try though, good deflection! The best way to take the heat off yourself when you know something is true, is to throw it back in the accuser's face. You fell right into that one :D

    Like the slaughter of Nigerians I just posted about? Perhaps you missed my discussions on Rwanda? Or Beslan? Perhaps you missed posts about the slaughter of Israelis? Perhaps you missed my recent discussion with mcfox Kuwait, Kosovo and Bosnia. You may also have missed my posts about Darfur.

    Ten countries please? I'd love to see your list of countries you *would* approve of going into, that you wouldn't cry about.
     
    GTech, Apr 12, 2006 IP
  8. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,584
    Likes Received:
    150
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #68
    In the latest episode of the emperor wears no clothes, we now have recently seen 6 retired military officers question the leadership of Donald Rumsfield.

    It appears that not only does the emporor wear no clothes but his top staff also walk around naked...expecting everyone else to believe that they are elegantly dressed.

    This isn't exactly ideal when military leaders question military leadership...but if people are troubled enough by the direction of leadership it is important.

    Now it is important to go back in time to look at this issue.

    Back in 2003 then active General Shinseki disagreed with the pentagon estimates for necessary American forces in Iraq. Rumsfield and others were unhappy with his comments. Shortly after that he was pushed into a non-active corner and resigned afterwards. Probably an action that contributed to other generals not speaking up.

    Now the emperor and his well clothed staff have been telling the public that they are taking the advice of generals with regard to this issue and that the military brass is free to discuss this point. It evidently hasn't been the case according to the recent comments from the retired military brass.

    It is helpful to look back at this issue when General Shinseki first spoke up:

    I bolded the one paragraph describing the administrations perspective on why there wouldn't be a need for more troops.

    BTW: Would you hire Wolfowitz as a fortune teller. His crystal ball must have clouded over that day

    I wonder if these guys would think better if they were wearing clothes. Maybe thinking caps :D
     
    earlpearl, Apr 14, 2006 IP