View Single Post
Old 09-03-2006, 03:53 PM   #7 (permalink)
foundit66
Senator
 
foundit66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,836
Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Level up: 9%, 456 Points needed
Level up: 9% Level up: 9% Level up: 9%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
foundit66 is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alias View Post
Osama said it, do some research.
Seriously. Asking others to prove your claim for you isn't sensible.
I'll take this as a sign you don't have what you claim.

I don't ask others to find my proof for them, and I see no reason why you do that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alias
As to the main point, my point was that this islamic fascist is saying the same thing the anti-war crowd says. "genocide of the indians, bombs on Hiroshima, the American government is a terrorist regime, etc". The anti-war crowd insults America and so does this nut job.
That is the point.
I see.
So if Christians say Jesus is Lord, and the KKK say Jesus is Lord, then obviously that must mean something, eh?

Just because two groups have similar arguments doesn't mean anything.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alias
It doesn't matter if Saddam attacked America or not. That is not the reason we took him out. We took him out because he supported terrorism and was an unstablizing factor in the ME. If you don't know that, then I can't help you. How can you fight a war on terrorism and not take out a terrorist regime. Iraq is right between Syria and Iran. Do you get it? What better way to drive a wedge than get right between these 2 and work from the inside out. Brilliant.
At what cost?
What price in soldier life and $$$?
And to why the heck should Americans spend all that just to "stabilize" the area?
The reason I ask if they have attacked America is to give a reason why we should be involved in the first place. The reason we WERE SOLD on invading Iraq in the first place was based on their portrayed active threat to the U.S. and others with WMDs.

And now, that legitimate threat is shown as faulty, the question of why we are involved comes up again.
If a customer pays another company to do his taxes, invest his money, and balance his check-book, and then all they do is report check-book balances at the end of the month, we would obviously see how the customer might want to quit doing business with the company.
Obviously, the military action in Iraq is different, but the ideal of questioning our involvement in the situation and whether or not the returns justify the investment.

And that's ignoring the fact that it ISN'T WORKING.
You want to work from the inside out, but we have done nothing more than DESTABILIZE THE INSIDE. Iraq is in virtual civil war at the moment. We haven't helped to stabilize anything in Syria and Iran. We have succeeded in destabilizing Iraq.
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart
"Please don't judge others by your own standards."
-- Garysher