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

To: loboinok

OK, I'll answer the question.

I feel President Bush lied to me. He said the weapons were there, and they weren't.

Look, I think we should kill the people who knocked down the towers, and their buddies. As I understand, Saddam killed the religious fanatics. An evil man, but not one of the guys that knocked down our towers, that's all.


8 posted on 11/08/2004 1:44:23 AM PST by nosurrender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: nosurrender

"I feel President Bush lied to me. He said the weapons were there, and they weren't."

If one believes something to be true, tells you, later it turns out to be false, is this "lying" to you?

It was believed and stated by many others they, too, believed there were WMD. Included Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and so forth.

Were Clinton and Gore equally "lying" to you?

It still is unknown what happened to the WMD that so many believe were there. It may well be proved the WMD were moved to, say, Syria.

If Saddam harbored terrorists, he was warned 9/20/2001 that we'd be going after those situations.

Notice Libya changed their tune. They decided it wasn't worth the risk, to get caught.

Do you understand the scope of islamic terrorism around the world? Philippines, Indonesia, India, Sudan, Israel to name a few places.

Aren't these forces dangerous enough to use pre-emption?

Do you really trust the UN to do the right thing? They didn't in the Balkans, and haven't in Sudan.


10 posted on 11/08/2004 1:58:38 AM PST by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: nosurrender

Go back to DU!


11 posted on 11/08/2004 1:59:30 AM PST by Tripoli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: nosurrender

There is no historcal precedent for leaders or groups needing to like each other before they conspire with each other for a common goal. Liking or hating each other - or any emotion in between has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Hitler and Stalin paired up nicely to slice up Poland and let Hitler consolidate Europe. Check out the writings pre WWII to see how they saw eye to eye. NOT!

How about Stalin and Roosevelt. Or better yet Stalin and Churhill. Did they cooperate cause they were buddies? You wouldn't want to concede that Roosevelt was pro soviet?

How about Pol Pot and the anti Communists teaming up to fight the Vietnamese with majority funding from Red China? Don't think that team wasn't made up of folks who "hated" each other.

How about the Saudis, Pakistan and the arab (foriegn) mujahaddeen and the USA teaming up to fight the USSR in Afganistan. No love lost there between those folks. Those mujahadeen evolved into Al Qaeda.

You can go back as far as u want in history and to any part of the globe and find that alliances are formed by necessity.

Did the French Ally with the Rebel colonists in the American war because the Tallyrand or King Louis thought so highly of the Continental congress or it's Generals. No way. There target was Britain. They saw America as a weapon to bleed the British. And they tried to tie up the Americans so that an American US peace would not be effected.

Am i mistaken or were the Red Chinese not allied with the Vietnamese. Only to invade them and fight them to stop anymore dominoes from falling in SE Asia.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

This is poster seems to share the Jimmy Carter like vision that got the world in a mess 35 years ago. Carter did not think the shah was a nice enough man to be an ally and let the world know it. You can draw a line from that event to the invasinon of afganistan and the forming of the arab mujahadeen (brezinskis idea) to were we are today.


18 posted on 11/08/2004 2:21:22 AM PST by NextDoor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: nosurrender

Please define for me what a 'weapon of mass destruction is'? I've been asking this question for 3 years to whomever uses the term and have yet to get an answer.
How many people need to be killed in order for it to be a weapon of mass destruction? Is it a car bomb with a relative of yours being one of the victims? How about any bomb which can take out 1 city block ... or, just how many city blocks? Maybe it's a 2 ounce vile of poison thrown into the water supply and kills 10,000 people. My guess is, you and others have narrowed the definition strictly to some sort of nuclear device capable of turning 100 square miles into waste land.


31 posted on 11/08/2004 3:04:04 AM PST by moonman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: nosurrender

obviously you are not very well read and get your info from the MSM..No connection between all you mention ?..I suggest Victor Davis Hanson for starts ..Iraq was for starters the $$ behind terrorist training , a breeding ground , weapons store etc ..Oh yes you must have forgotten about WTC I as well ..READ MORON


32 posted on 11/08/2004 3:18:46 AM PST by hineybona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

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