 |
|
d=me
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dojoboy
Exactly. |
are you people any better than them? you don't seem any good just by insulting the army.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
ML, don't you see that you are exactly the same as the posters you're insulting?
Or perhaps I'm giving you way too much credit for personal insight...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
 |
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MalevolentLight
Ann Coulter is my hero. Nobody said Giulliani was right. That story originated from the U.N. and from the IAEA headed by Mohammed Al Baradei, both enemies of Bush and the US. Next they leaked it to the NY times and to CBS and now 60 minutes is going to do a special on it...gee how convenient. Next, we are talking about 380 TONS of explosives, it would take 12 dump trucks to move it. That kind of stuff doesn't just get picked up by looters and leave. And now satellite photos are showing that the explosives were gone BEFORE the US troops took over. And on top of it all those explosives can be used to create WMD, you know the stuff Saddam isn't supposed to have. But hey, keep jumping on it like you did Rathergate because you are doing exactly as we want. I really don't think you guys could have made me happier this election with all the scandals. Keep up the good work.  |
ML,
Don't get me wrong I hate Kerry more than the next man (and damn proud of it)but, this is wrong on a number of points.
Sat photos - show activity nothing more nothing less and if at an ammo dump one would certainly expect activity prior to or during the war phase, non? Which is why it was such a ridiculous request from the leftist corwd here saying why didn't we see sat photos of activity. B/c undoubtedly there would be some and that would mean a big so what? No proof they weren't moving any of a number of things.
Explosive used to create WMD - Hugely overblown. If you speak towards use in helping create nukes, then it takes a lot more than $100.00 worth of chemicals to pull that off. Namely know-how. The precise means to create the necessary compression to compress the U235 or Plutonium into critical mass/density. This means exacting placement and machining capability not tooo mention the all too precious U235 or Plutonium fuel. By far and away the quantity and/or availaility of conventional explosives are fairly run of the mill and the least of the concerns to make a Nuke.
The first part, I may happen to agree with regarding collusion of CBS/NYT and Kerry campaign which sickens me to no end.
Finally, there is some pretty hard data (video) that now pretty much shows the stuff was there when 3rd ID showed up. (Credit where credit due to Ramo)
But at the end of the day we have 239 tons of explosives on the loose and jcha........ you know what..... do you really think even with those accounted for/destroyed it measurably changes the threat our troops face? Not much were I too hazard a guess.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:20
|
|
quote:
Ann Coulter is my hero. Nobody said Giulliani was right. |
But over the past few days the Bushies and Ann have been accusing Kerry of disgracefully criticising the soldiers who went thru the site on the way to Baghdad. What Kerry said was the planners messed up, the guys giving the orders, not the troops on the ground who followed the orders they were given. For the Bushites to accuse Kerry is deceitful... But it gets better, Guiliani said it was the soldier's responsibility to investigate and secure the site. Rudy would be right if the troops were ordered to do just that...but they weren't. So why aren't all these frothing GOP paid liars accusing Guiliani? Because they are lying scum...
quote:
That story originated from the U.N. and from the IAEA headed by Mohammed Al Baradei, both enemies of Bush and the US. |
It originated from the Iraqi scientists in charge of the place and these Iraqis feared what might happen if the site wasn't secured during the invasion. Hell, we were in contact with these guys before the war and they were already telling us how important it was that we secure the site asap if we invaded. But I'm sure opponents of Bush helped the story along, that doesn't negate the story.
quote:
Next they leaked it to the NY times and to CBS and now 60 minutes is going to do a special on it...gee how convenient. |
It's breaking news for many people, are the media supposed to shut down whenever mistakes are exposed? The messenger may deserve being shot for other reasons, but not for reporting relevant information.
quote:
Next, we are talking about 380 TONS of explosives, it would take 12 dump trucks to move it. That kind of stuff doesn't just get picked up by looters and leave. And now satellite photos are showing that the explosives were gone BEFORE the US troops took over. And on top of it all those explosives can be used to create WMD, you know the stuff Saddam isn't supposed to have. But hey, keep jumping on it like you did Rathergate because you are doing exactly as we want. I really don't think you guys could have made me happier this election with all the scandals. Keep up the good work. |
Looters had time and the means, there are Iraqi eyewitnesses who said they knew people who were renting their trucks to looters. But that isn't the point, it doesn't matter if the HE was moved before troops arrived. The point is no one was ordered to secure and investigate the site and as a result looters grabbed God only knows what...guns, ammo, explosives, RPG's, mortars, and maybe the high explosives. Why? Well, some would say, and I'd agree, that we invaded with too few troops to secure what we needed to secure. Now we are paying a big price for that mistake... Oh yeah, satellites can now see into bunkers and compile inventories? And HE are not WMD but now I see a number of Bush supporters trying to make that link.....again.  I still think Saddam has WMD somewhere, just nowhere near what he had during the first gulf war when this "imminent threat" forgot to use WMD on our troops. But I didn't care when he had them then... The two Bush's are incompetent, they got us into two wars and a third war on terrorism in less than 8 years.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pax
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MalevolentLight
Then maybe you should take it up with the African Kings who sold them to us in the first place. Slavery is Africa's number 1 money maker even today. But all that aside, you aren't doing blacks a favor by saying they should be held to a lower standard. All that does is perpetuate the education gap. Affirmative action by definition is racism. Racism never helps anyone, even when it's done to try and help a particular race (it was actually created just to get votes for the Democratic party). There are plenty of educated blacks out there who made it without affirmative action, Rice being one of them. |
Racism helped the the U.S.A. become as powerful as it is today.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MalevolentLight
|
|
High Above
Jul 1999
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
BTW, ML, how do you know Jaguar's an american-asian? |
Maybe you'd like to point out where I call him asian. That would definitely help your cause.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pax
|
|
Let me say this as the black liberal child of a wellfare mother college graduate military member that I am. I voted for Kerry on my birthday Oct. 28.
Affirmative action is not the reason for the problems in the black community. I'll give you two good reasons for the state of the black community.
1. The best leaders we had are dead.
2. The mindset of the black community has to be changed. The values that are needed to succeed have to be either introduced or reinforced.
Taking away the Affirmative Action safety is in the words of Mike Tyson "ludicrous"
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-10-2004 07:00
STFU.
@ML
|