Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/15/2004 3:25:45 PM PDT by flightleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
To: flightleader

Good stuff. However, most liberals have a "fingers in their ears and humming loudly" attitude when presented with the facts.


2 posted on 07/15/2004 3:36:49 PM PDT by RockinRight (Liberalism IS the status quo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Good work. People 35 and older that have blood flowing to their brains should know all these things already, however.


5 posted on 07/15/2004 3:50:14 PM PDT by somemoreequalthanothers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Nice, thanks! I'm bookmarking for later reading.


6 posted on 07/15/2004 3:53:10 PM PDT by Big Giant Head ( < What stupid thing are we going to do today, Brain?>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Nice job, I will save this for later arguing with lefty fools.


7 posted on 07/15/2004 3:55:17 PM PDT by Agent47
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

People who wilfully ignore the plain meaning of words will not be persuaded by more words.


8 posted on 07/15/2004 3:56:53 PM PDT by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Excellent.

I'll add that someone who DID say that Saddam/Iraq was an imminent threat was none other than prospective Dem VP nominee Edwards.

Of course his response now is that Bush didn't do anything "like he should have" (whatever that means).


9 posted on 07/15/2004 3:57:10 PM PDT by visualops (Let's win another one for the Gipper, and donate to FR too!!.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

good synopsis. Will keep this if you do not mind.


11 posted on 07/15/2004 4:07:23 PM PDT by buzzyboop (no tags, no fuss)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Very well done summary of the facts, some of which I didn't know.

Thanks for posting it!

D


12 posted on 07/15/2004 4:11:03 PM PDT by daviddennis (;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

<<"It was Iraq’s responsibility to declare all WMD and assure the UN of their location and/or total destruction. The burden of proof was on Iraq, not the US or the UN".>>

We know the "oil for food" fraud reaches the highest levels of the UN, So how do we know the're telling the truth about the WMD?


14 posted on 07/15/2004 4:31:58 PM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (BUSH 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader
You missed one. I had a discussing with a couple of 20 somethings at lunch about this, and then by chance Hannity had a 19yr old ditz spout it off:

It's not right for the US to murder all those innocent Iraqis

The innocent Iraqis that were killed while liberating Iraq were not murdered. Murder is defined as "The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice". The two qualifiers are unlawfulness and premedited malice.

The US Congress, including John Kerry and John Edwards, gave the president legal authorization to conduct the forceful removal of the Hussein regime. Additionally, several UN resolutions gave prerequisites for the use of force, which were sufficiently fulfilled, even though it was never voted on by the General Assembly. It equates to if I murder you, and the law does not charge me, I have still commited murder. The legal justifications have been made at both the national level and the international level.

The innocent civilians were accidentally killed by US munitions. Killed being defined as "To put to death or to deprive of life". The United States military went to extraordinary lengths to cut to a minimum accidental deaths. Even so far as to put US service members at greater risk. This is of no consolation to those that have lost loved ones, due to US action. It should be consolation to those that otherwise would have been killed had the US indiscriminately used it's power. In short the US did not go into action pruposely targeting civilians.

15 posted on 07/15/2004 4:38:23 PM PDT by Turbo Pig (...to close with and destroy the enemy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Good stuff!!! Well done!!! Very useful -- I plan to print this out as a resource, and will share it with others.


16 posted on 07/15/2004 4:44:52 PM PDT by Finny (God continue to Bless President G.W. Bush with wisdom, popularity, and victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Bump for later read; I just got screamed at (all caps) for sending a pro-Bush article to a family member who is a shrieking leftie goon. I have a feeling I'll need this info for the next family reunion.

Man, that is going to be a scream.


23 posted on 07/15/2004 5:44:21 PM PDT by Marauder (Show me a liberal and I'll show you a sick individual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader
Here are two other arguments you can use, flightleader.

Regrading our strategic alliance with dictators...none of them was worse than Josef Stalin, who made Saddam look like a choir boy. When Hitler started WWII by marching into Poland from the West, Stalin was marching in from the East - the two had formed a strategic alliance. The Polish people would not enjoy liberation for another 45 years. But here's the truly embarrassing part for America. In 1933, Franklin Roosevelt recognized the Soviet Union - at a time when Stalin was force-starving 10 million Ukranian farmers! I would argue that the Soviet Union was more than just a strategic partner with the US. FDR enjoyed a warm relationship with this murderer, affectionately calling Stalin "Uncle Joe."

The second example I actually got from Hannity's book "Fear No Evil" Why did we supported Saddam in the 80's? It was more than just hostility toward Iran for taking our diplomats hostages. Iran, with the Shah was once a major US ally. The Shah wasn't a nice guy, but he kept a lid on the religious terrorists - until Jimmy Carter, as part of his human rights campaign, demanded that the Shah loosen up his treatement of these thugs. Carter asked the Shah to permit open trials, allow mass (and often violent) demonstrations by these zealots. And when the students went out of control, Carter demanded that the Shah take no action against them. Hannity lists a passage from Reagan's autobiography to show how Reagan felt about it.

"Our government's decision to stand piously by while he (the Shah) was forced from office led to the establishment of a despotic regime that was far more evil and far more tyrannical than the one it replaced. And as I was to learn through personal experience, it left a legacy of problems that would haunt our country for years to come."

Hope that helps.
24 posted on 07/15/2004 5:45:12 PM PDT by mwfsu84 (v)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Good responses. Especially to the imminent threat statement. The President seemed clear enough at the time.


25 posted on 07/15/2004 5:52:31 PM PDT by RightWhale (Withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty and establish property rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Wow!! Good job.


26 posted on 07/15/2004 6:23:31 PM PDT by waRNmother.armyboots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader
Here's an exchange between me and a liberal on the Air America microphone:

Liberal: Bush is a liar.

Me: Britain still stands by their uranium report.

Liberal: Do you know how many women the British have raped?

[This answer manages to be outrageously untrue and preposterously beside the point as well. It's almost as if they purposely enrage you with their stupidity.]

Me: Why are you changing the subject? Liberals always change the subject.

But by this time the microphone was in front of her motor yap as she continued to tell the Air America audience of two how horrible the British are.

27 posted on 07/15/2004 6:42:21 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

BUMPmark


28 posted on 07/15/2004 7:27:56 PM PDT by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader; MS.BEHAVIN; 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub; Ms.Poohbear; tomkow6; HiJinx; MoJo2001; ...
Bumped, bookmarked, and PINGED because it's just so damn SPOT-ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great work!

29 posted on 07/15/2004 7:41:08 PM PDT by Long Cut (The Constitution...the NATOPS of America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MeekOneGOP

Meek, this deserves a mega-ping if ever there was one!


30 posted on 07/15/2004 7:43:12 PM PDT by Long Cut (The Constitution...the NATOPS of America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: flightleader

Welcome to Free Republic! If your subsequent posts are this awesome, you'll have a LOT of fans pretty soon!


31 posted on 07/15/2004 7:44:16 PM PDT by Long Cut (The Constitution...the NATOPS of America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson