Posted on 04/26/2013 9:07:44 AM PDT by JohnPDuncan
I have no idea who that poster is.
Look, i’m sure this could go on forever. If I challenge the alleged facts im just going to get accused of moving goalposts or labelled a troll or worse.
I’m not going to get involved in this game.
I’d much prefer you to stop attacking a fellow conservative and just respect a disagreement.
I do not believe in pre-emptive war in any way shape or form. Unless there is an attack to respond to I dont care what evidence you have as to whether one out of 250 other counters has Sarin gas or not. Not really interested.
Obama wants the currrent Syrian regime to be gone so The Muslim Brotherhood can take over.
Just like he helped them to do in Libya and Egypt and a bunch of other places during “The Arab Spring”
For that reason alone I support the current leader
Most Republicans are reluctant to go to war, in fact most sane people are reluctant to go to war. Those who actually are expected to fight wars are reluctant to go to war as well. That doesn’t mean we can’t discuss the issues involved and it really doesn’t mean we make idiotic claims to support our decision and attempt to convince others we alone are right.
Sweeping issues under the rug or denying they are issues does not support your cause, and it sure doesn’t gain you any respect here.
Learn to discuss the issues, if you post it you own it so don’t backtrack by claiming it was a quote or changing the topic or whatever. I am about 90% convinced you are a troll, if you are not you need to spend some time studying history before you make false statements to so many of us that actually lived through the things you are trying to use to muddy the water.
This! I’m trying to expose the truth but I get bogged down in debates that are 10 years old.
My head hurts.
Docrock is one of the good guys.
Now, again, I have presented you with verifable things.
The Sarin IED did indeed happen on 14 May 2004.
Some soldiers were exposed to the gas.
Do you deny that chemical weapons existed in Iraq?
Chemical shells don’t rely on the press to exist.
They existed despite the press saying they did not.
Just because the “debate” is ten years old doesn’t mean teh facts aren’t valid.
You said there were no WMD in Iraq.
You have been presented with information proving that statement false.
Instead of going, “Oh, okay” you continued on insisting that it was merely a philosophical position regardless of the facts.
Now, if you want to talk about the real chemical attack in Syria, it was chlorine, and that was done by the so called “rebels”.
Tammy, I’m not a troll and I dont know how to convince you otherwise. I have studied history and it has revealed to me there has been a lot of conservatives such as Taft who oppose War (even entry into WW2).
This is the kind of conservative tradition i’m adhering to.
The reason so many think you are a lefty is the way you post is very liberalish- ignore the facts, try to change history to fit your agenda- then when called out on it you deny what you did or change the subject. If you quit acting like a liberal troll people will quit calling you one.
Here’s what im trying to say:
I’ve not looked into it (ive not had time because i’ve been fending off attacks calling me left-wing which is false)
I’m sure I can find articles claiming no WMD in iraq and contesting any alleged facts your throwing at me.
I dont think it’s wise to engage in this debate as you’ll just contest whatever I come up and label me a troll and we’ll go round in circles.
I prefer to just re-state my position which is not to go to war unless attacked.
I’m pleased you agree with me on Syria and if you have any information send it to me as I’m trying to expose the truth there.
What does it matter if chemical shells were found? The Syrian government isn't a friend of the United States, and the "rebels" fighting them aren't a friend of the United States either.
Further, there is NO NATIONAL INTEREST in intervening in any way in the Syrian conflict. When I say "in any way" we should not be sending arms, food, medical supplies or any sort of material support to the Syrian rebels whatsoever.
Both sides in the conflict are not friendly to the United States so why should we be intervening at all?
Throw in the fact that Iran has members of their Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Syria, Hamas is in Syria, and so is the Taliban - exactly what would the United States of America gain by sending troops into Syria or providing any sort of material support?
When two of my enemies are going about the business of killing each other, why should I care? (Spare me the "civilian casualties" argument - Syrian civilians to a large degree are muslims who also hate us.)
So, "WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?!"
Far as I'm concerned, they can all kill each other off. The world would be a better place should that happen.
I think he agree’s on Syria but is talking about Iraq.
You might want to begin your education with studying a little more about President Taft. Much of what you claimed about him is false; which is very telling about your lack of knowledge of history. Do some reading, compare what you find to what you posted about him.
Same difference in my book. Another muslim shithole.
the poster has no clue what he;s saying LOL. or even what facts are.
That conversation was about Iraq, which the poster in question said did not have chemical weapons.
Pretty much.
My bad, came in mid-thread and thought this was about Syria.
Of course Iraq had chemical weapons, Saddam used them on the Kurds in the Northern part of Iraq. Entire Kurdish villages were wiped out by them. That's been well documented.
There is much speculation (which I happen to believe is legitimate) that many of those Chemical Weapons were hurried out of the country to Syria in advance of the US Invasion in 2003.
Thanks for the ping. I knew this info would disappear so I keep it on my private server. Feel free to use any of it anytime. What I haven’t had time to document was Osama bin Laden trying to blow up the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor to kill spectators at the 2000 Olympics. There have been other attempt on Lucas Heights, but the issue has to do with blaming American politics for terrorist attacks. The spectators at the Olympics were a mix of nationalities and in 2000, there was no Aussie involvement in the mid east to piss off OBL. Do a simple search on these key words; “2000 Olympics nuclear” and you will even find Chechenias in the Auckland terror base.
He’SAID what was enough to defend the left by a CONCERNED CONSERVATIVE, aka, an 0b0z0id troll.
He just took the trolley bus at the corner of FR building.
HE GOOOOOONE!
That’s okay.
It happens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.