Posted on 02/04/2003 4:41:12 PM PST by Barandth
Edited on 04/14/2004 10:05:49 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
My colorful rhetoric is nothing compared to the rude and crude behavior who've displayed on FR in the past. I don't know what you expect to accomplish by pinging the AM. Such an act is childish nonsense, at best and a waste of time.
I suggest you stuff it.
Calling the President Bush scum, proves my point. You belong over at DU!
This particular gun just happens to have a long trigger pull. (The "trigger pull" is the time required for Saddam to perfect his development and delivery of WMDs to his target.)
This is a threat scenario which libertarian theory can't address. It's because libertarian theory is archaic in this ugly new world of the 21st century. And that's obvious.
***
Libertarians and Buchananites and liberals would "argue" that IF we hadn't fought the first Gulf War, THEN we wouldn't be in this mess. Well, I don't necessarily agree. But for the sake of the argument, I am prepared to pretend that the libertarians and Buchananites are correct about that.
Ah, but the libertarians and Buchananites and liberals are making a dubious claim which is not an argument against war at this time even if their dubious claim is correct. The appeasers can't understand the problem which we now face, much less address it correctly. Gosh, we have to address the mess which we are in NOW.
Buchanan has STUPIDLY maintained in a recent column that Saddam has been CONTAINED. He needs to pull his head out of...the sand.
That is a lie. Keep telling your lies, Dane---it demonstrates the baselessness of the Drug Warrior position.
I dunno. What is it about people who don't even know what a liberal is? They obviously can't even see the obvious.
I pinged the monitor to try to get a answer to why the originator of this thread was banned. That part had nothing to do with you.
If you had a point,you would put your eye out playing with it.
Arab proverb: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Hussein and bin Laden (and whoever succeeded him) have every reason to have cooperated. And there is compelling independent evidence to this effect.
"Saddam Hussein is responsible for the deaths of more radical fundie Muslims that every other country combined."
Name one.
"and part of the reason we are attacking him is to protect Ali Bubba-2 Bush's Saudi business partners."
Set aside your anti-Bush bias for a moment. Think clearly.
Name one.</>
Name "one" what? Are you asking me to contradict my own statement and name a country that is responsible for more radical fundie Muslim deaths than Iraq?
Actually I am right and I AM a "liberal". Your problem is you don't know what a liberal is. Then again,you most likely think Ali Bubba-2 is a conservative.
And the answer is: A lot. Bush said as much in his speech to Congress after 9/11. We probably won't be done during the Bush presidency. We probably won't be done fifteen years from now. The simple reality is that we have reached the point in history where horrid subhumans - who want to either kill us all or enslave us under their stifling theocracy - can potentially get access to technology that can do us great harm. We thus have no choice but to adopt a doctrine that says "If you desire to harm us, we WILL destroy you, and we will do it BEFORE you are able to accomplish your obvious goals."
Is a name enough,or do you want his phone number,too? Did you ever hear about the Iran/Iraq war? It was in all the papers. Iran was/is ran by radical fundie Muslims who are of a different Muslim sect than Saddam Hussein,and Iran had hundreds of thousands of casualities in that war. The Muslim sect Saddam Hussein follows is not (or wasn't,anyhow) anti-American,and in fact allowed Christians and Jews to live there peacefully. BTW,Saddam Hussein and Iraq were considered to be our allies back then,and we supplied him with aid.
Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. You just made me rethink my position for a second -- which means you most certainly have a chance of converting people to your cause. Good points, although I'm not in agreement with the premise that what we're doing is "imposing our values" on people (which is I think probably our main ideological split).
You don't know of a single radical Islamist that Saddam Hussein has liquidated, do you?
Iranian cannon fodder and Shiite marsh Arabs don't qualify. The fact is: there is absolutely no basis to believe that Iraq and al-Qaeda are NOT natural allies!. Given Hitler's racist beliefs, you probably believed it impossible for Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan to be WW II allies, as well.
Well there is a problem right there...
Isreal is a democratic nation and quite stable in spite of the genocidal arabs and the villainous United (League of) Nations.
Egypt and Turkey I believe are republican forms of government. The Iranian Student movements are gaining strength against the Fascism instituted by the Carter Administration.
I see no reason to abandon the Middle East to Totalitarianism when better options are available. Even if you have to use force to liberate an oppressed people.
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.