i know

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#21
you show me a MAJOR anti war protest NOT organized by a socialist or communist organization. SHOW ME.

now what has their main "concern" been?

innocent iraqis.

now. the fact that there have been MINIMAL casualties (especially when dealing with a military barrage so large) has to be taking a lot of umph out of one of their only legitimate concerns about the war (which happened to be one of mine as well) . not to mention praise by iraqi citizens given to american soldiers. how dare you people defend someone like that all for an antibush agenda. thats what led me to initializing the thread. thanks. those are MY facts. yours will be different.

agreeing to disagree is how this will end.
nice shittalking with you loki.
 
Apr 25, 2002
1,905
0
36
#22
phil said:


ok. do me a favor. i am going to make a statement. then i ask you to call me a liar.



the dude with the dad from baghdad wouldnt be going thru this had saddam exercised many opportunities to avoid this conflict.
And this is what I said to you in another thread...

"We all know Saddam is a problem, however he was not being hurt by the sanction his people were. Hurting his people was not hurting him, the sanction was cruel buddy......

You can look at it in many ways, Saddam was starving his people, and so were we....."
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#24
YOUNGNUTT said:
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT BUSH BUT I'M ALL FOR THE WAR.
NEWS FLASH PEOPLE THERES DEATH EVERYDAY I'D RATHER HAVE IT HAPPEN IN WAR THAN SOME INNOCENT LADY ON THE STREET CUZ THE SHOOTER MISSED HIS TARGET:confused:
YES BUT YOU STILL FAIL TO ADMIT THAT THIS SITUATION COULD BE OVER BY SADDAM RIDING OUT!! HE HAD CHANCES TO END THIS AND MAINTAIN HIS POWER. HE CHOSE NOT TO. AND FOR YOUR ANTI BUSH FEELINGS, YOULL MAKE EXCUSES FOR HIM.
 
Apr 25, 2002
1,905
0
36
#26
phil said:


YES BUT YOU STILL FAIL TO ADMIT THAT THIS SITUATION COULD BE OVER BY SADDAM RIDING OUT!! HE HAD CHANCES TO END THIS AND MAINTAIN HIS POWER. HE CHOSE NOT TO. AND FOR YOUR ANTI BUSH FEELINGS, YOULL MAKE EXCUSES FOR HIM.
You said yes, so that means that you agree that we are apart of the problem....

And I did admit that Saddam was evil and his thugs need to be gone. An evil person does not care about his people, and it's clear that Saddam has been a problem in Iraq...

My problem is this....

We put him in power, now we want to take him out by blowing up Baghdad....We are trying to kill one man and his stooges but we blow up an entire city, hurting hundreds of civilians.....

I don't agree with that...
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#27
no i said yes because the u.s. implemented the sanctions, not saying its their fault iraqs people have been punished.

you still cannot say that saddam is THE problem. A problem but not THE problem. IN YOUR EYES WE ARE THE PROBLEM.

like i said. call me a liar.

all this could have been avoided by saddam doing what he was supposed to do. its really simple but when dealing with liberals i sometimes forget to take logic out of the equation to dumb it down for them.
 
Apr 25, 2002
1,905
0
36
#28
phil said:
no i said yes because the u.s. implemented the sanctions, not saying its their fault iraqs people have been punished.

you still cannot say that saddam is THE problem. A problem but not THE problem. IN YOUR EYES WE ARE THE PROBLEM.

like i said. call me a liar.

all this could have been avoided by saddam doing what he was supposed to do. its really simple but when dealing with liberals i sometimes forget to take logic out of the equation to dumb it down for them.
Don't tell me what I see in my eyes....

I didn't say that we are the only problems, did you read my post? I said Saddam is the problem and he needs to be removed from power. I said this to you in another thread...

I do agree that we are also the problem, the sanction was cruel, you weren't hurting Saddam you were hurting his people. Did they really think Saddam was going to say "OK OK OK, remove the sanction and I will stop" B.S.

I don't agree....
 
May 8, 2002
549
0
0
40
#29
YOUNGNUTT said:
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT BUSH BUT I'M ALL FOR THE WAR.
NEWS FLASH PEOPLE THERES DEATH EVERYDAY I'D RATHER HAVE IT HAPPEN IN WAR THAN SOME INNOCENT LADY ON THE STREET CUZ THE SHOOTER MISSED HIS TARGET:confused:
Your an idiot. It's not like if we go to war then old ladys wont die. Your point doesnt mean shit.
 
Apr 25, 2002
1,905
0
36
#34
phil said:


just not successfully by a republican president, especially a bush, right??????

you think france was going to remove him? russia? sheeit
Are you an idiot? Do you honestly think I only hate some Republicans? I hate a lot of Democrats also....

Do you have me mixed up with somebody? Because you swear you know my view points...Here's what I said in another thread about both political parties in another thread...

"I don't support neither of these political parties, because one party does not help out black people and the other party claims to help black people out but in actuality they really don't. But still 90% of our votes go to that party anyways..my my my how ignorant are we...Fuck'em both....The political system is a joke and has been for many many years now... Choosing between one party or the other is like choosing the lesser of the evil..Definitly not my type of politics..."

I don't care for Bush, I don't hate him I just don't care for him....

Do I agree that Iraq needs to be liberated? YES!! Saddams regime is one of the most oppressive ever. But don't make it seem like this isn't about controlling the oil, because part of it is.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#36
Do I agree that Iraq needs to be liberated? YES!! Saddams regime is one of the most oppressive ever. But don't make it seem like this isn't about controlling the oil, because part of it is.
so iraqis should continue to live in oppression so america doesnt have a hand in their oil? thats worth it to you? hmmmm... come on now
 
Nov 8, 2002
1,693
31
48
47
#37
I think folks will focus more on the negative, Even though saddam needs to leave (And they agree), They will keep the Focus on the Oil. Atleast Shed some light on the fact that Iraq wants him gone. That Iraq would LOVE nothing else than to have a Contract with the USA (Whish We all agree uses the MOst Petroleum). And in that aspect Can really Help Both Parties. Us Oil wise and Them Economically. Is that So bad?

Bush is Going to get the Oil Contracts. He does not put a Emphasis on it because he dont need to. Everyone already is only Focusing on that. If he said He will seek Oil Contracts after the war, What do you think the Public Reaction would be?

Is it that bad? Is it that he has just not stated it?
Whats wrong with the Oil Bonus?
 
Apr 25, 2002
1,905
0
36
#38
Mcleanhatch said:


some of these hyper liberals would love it, if say nader was doing this. they would be all for it.
Who are the hyper liberals on this board that you claim would love it?

Myself I don't oppose removing Saddam but I do oppose the amount of force thats being used in the war. To be honest I don't care who's doing it. Whether, it was my dad who was the president, my mom, grandmother, brother, hispanic, asian, Democratic, Republican, Independent etc.
 
Apr 25, 2002
1,905
0
36
#39
phil said:


so iraqis should continue to live in oppression so america doesnt have a hand in their oil? thats worth it to you? hmmmm... come on now
Where did I say that?

Heres what I said in another thread.....

"Of course, I don't agree with the number of bombs that we are dropping in Baghdad. We are liberate people by killing them, I don't see whats wrong with dropping special arm forces instead of dropping thousands of bombs on the Iraqi people. Al Jeereza is saying Saddam is still in control, can you believe that? It may not be true, but imagine if that is true? All those bombs and you still haven't killed the man"

TELL ME WHERE I SAID THE IRAQ'S SHOULD CONTINUE TO LIVE UNDER A OPPRESSIVE REGIME? TELL ME WHERE I IMPLY THAT?