And while I'm at it...

Tootsie!!! Dats funny rabban!

Did you ever see this site? bush or chimp

Its a riot

Last edited: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 at 6:54:41 PM

Curious George is soooooo sweet!

That "Bush or Chimp" thing is just wierd... Maybe it's because I actually support him! X/

Funny, yet strange, I support him too!

@rabban: WTF? 8( the eyes )8

Kerry is a joke

*** BUSH CHENY 2004 ***

"Let's Finish The Job!"

/adapt

Critical Impulse

More war in 2004!!!!

Yeah, lets elect the chimp this time! Save the supreme court the hassle. Yeah, lets kill us some arabs!!!!

Yeehaw!!!

Lets keep the money in the hands of the rich! Yeah, kerry is a joke!!!!

But a bumbling, lieing retard is no joke at all!!!

Yeahaw!!!!

I guess some people are just upset that they didn't have a chance to vote for nixon. So they are attempting to make it up by voting for the chimp.

IMHO, who will help Iraq is my number 1 criteria on who to vote for. I do not like career politicians in general, but I will not go into that here. Regardless of whether you agree with the invasion of Iraq or not, the simple fact of the matter is that we are there and we have toppled Saddam. Do we help them rebuild their country into something to be proud of, or do we have a snit and run for home, leaving nothing but destruction behind us, and giving them a REAL reason to hate us?

No, I'm not Republican. Nor am I a Democrat. However I did use to live in Saudi a long time ago, and I am very much a non-isolationist. The other countries are out there - pretending they aren't won't do any good whatsoever. As for the other items on the various parties' agendas, I personally think that neither party has the best interests of the US at heart - they just like to get re-elected (aka getting their salary paid). Pretty much I figure anything they say before Election Day is worth the gold it's inscribed on. What is the value of vapor these days? 8o

In the interests of full disclosure, my father-in-law is in Baghdad, working to rebuild their civilian prison system. He is a civilian contractor, working for the US Dept of Justice. (And before you ask, what happened in Abu Ghraib was in the military prison, not civilian. There have been no similar occurences in the civvie side, because they've been hiring professional staffers, not to mention working side-by-side with Iraqis.)

_{Update: Whoops! Just realized that after saying I wasn't going to get into my dislike of pols that I did so anyways! :[ Sorry!}

Last edited: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 6:19:20 PM

@Master TMO-

I hope your father-in-law stays safe over there. It's pretty horrifying what the Al Qaeda bastards are doing to people they capture. I would be pretty nervous being any kind of contractor out there right now, since it seems that's who they're targeting.

OM

Well, he's retired military. His career has been pretty much prisons and running prisons (which is why the DoJ contacted him about going over there in the first place), so he's got a good grasp of security. He keeps his whole team as secure as possible. No one on his team has been hurt in any of the events so far. They've been close to a couple, but no harm yet (yes, he and his wife are religious - if anyone wants to add him to any prayer lists, I'm sure they'd be most appreciative XD ). One SUV got hit by a mortar while sitting in a parking lot - that's been the most direct they've been hit so far.

Oh, and just an FYI, according to him, the majority of the people arrested for shooting at the troops and making trouble have been non-Iraqis... Make of that what you will...

Non-iraqis? Meaning what? Other middle eastern nationalities? Or other Westerners? I'm betting the former, but I would only be mildly surprised if it actually were the latter.

Glad to hear he's keeping safe.

Other Middle Easterners are what he mentioned to me. Granted, he didn't give me a comprehensive prisoner list or anything. ;) This was just in casual conversation. I would imagine though that any westerners captured would make world news - although that's not necessarily a given. From what he's said, they held TWO press conferences about the events at Abu Ghraib that were completely ignored by the press... Until pictures showed up. *rolls eyes* Then, suddenly, they were ALL concerned about how the military was covering it up.... And people wonder why I'm cynical. ;)

_{again, for fairness of reporting, I should mention that everything I post about events in Iraq is second-hand knowledge gained from conversations with my father-in-law. It is possible I misunderstood or mis-remembered something, but to the best of my ability everything I'm saying is as I was told. Of course, my father-in-law (or I) could be part of the global conspiracy to Make Things Up... XD... But you'd never believe me if I said we weren't.}

Stinkfingers quit while you're ahead....behind I mean.

/adapt

Critical Impulse

Ahead or behind what, moron?

Go chimp go! More war in '04.

Waving this flag sure beats thinking

:o..man you really are a moron...lol

/adapt

Critical Impulse

Stink - So, anyone who doesn't agree with you doesn't think? That's an awful narrow minded attitude there. I think I'm done with this conversation.

Any ignorant liberal with Kerry's hand up their ass has selfish attitudes. It's all about gay marriages, blood for oil, inproportionate rights to minorities, etc.

All bs

/adapt

Critical Impulse

I'll be the first to admit that there is a big mess in Iraq. Yet at the same time, it's too easy to put blinders on and only focus on the bad news. Of course on the other side of the coin, some spend their time only focusing on the good news. But the reality is as usual, a mix of good and bad. Fear and optimism all rolled into one. (For a glimpse at the emotional rollercoaster that many in Iraq are experiencing, other commentaries on the above site are interesting. It's from an Assyrian Christian's POV, which is not one you hear very often.)

Iraq is at a tipping point. There is the possibility of a free society on one side, and the possibilty of sliding back into an Orwellian state on the other side. It's at that tipping pont that we find something that hasn't been seen in Iraq for 30 years; hope. Hope for something besides the soulless oppression that has held them for so long. Yeah, the odds may seem unfavorable, but at least there is a chance.

Which candidate will give Iraq the best shot at a real future? To me that's the question. (TMO's first post, first paragraph says it well.)

Or you can call Bush a chimp. It's easier than thinking.... ;) ;) _{<-- Double wink.}

Oh, and back to the original topic, I like Heinz ketchup. :P

Last edited: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 at 6:15:00 AM

I'm glad someone else is here to hammer on stink. ;)

@Master TMO & 56K - I'm glad to hear some good news coming out of Iraq. It's so hard to come by. Also, I don't think there's much comparison between Abu Ghraib's treatment of prisoners and the beheading of the terrorist's prisoners, but which is getting more publicity? _{Besides, after looking at some of the prison photos again, I had to admit I chuckled at the idea of stacking up a pile of naked men and mugging for the camera. I don't think it was right, but funny in a twisted way.} I'm sure there's a lot more good going on over there than what's being reported and that most of the attacks are being carried out by foreigners, but again the liberals would have us believe that the Iraqis hate us and want us dead.

So in other words...Go, monkey, go! XD

As Geraldo said _{(gad - I'm quoting Geraldo! Someone hit me)} "The media doesn't report on the buildings that aren't on fire." Or something like that. Find the most dramatic event of the day and blow it out of proportion to try and get viewers. It's easier to blow bad news out of proportion than good news.

Last edited: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 at 2:10:07 PM

Fact remains...bush = moron

O goody! Things are going better for iraq! Now I can sleep nights. To think it only took 10,000 iraqi lives and the lives of arovnd 900 VS soldiers (can yov tell the " " doesnt work on this compvter?) and over 100 billion dollars to get it! What a bargain.

Yov gvys are right! Of covrse. Easily worth the cost. What was I thinking abovt? Go chimp, go!!!

Morons

Why wovld who can help iraq be yovr nvmber one criteria? Very cvriovs.

Some folks like to leave a campsite cleaner than it was when they got there.

Stink - One last time: please drop the insulting tone. If your only response to my comments is to tell me how stupid I am, then you can go ____ off.

Why is Iraq my #1 concern? Tough to explain. Trying to put this simply (otherwise I'll ramble for a couple of paragraphs); if we don't help, it will practically guarantee civil war, famine, and even more hatred for us overseas. It may happen anyways, but at least we will have tried . To me, it's the decent thing to do.

@Bolo - that's hardly a fact - it's an opinion. I have no clue if he's smart or not, and I don't care. I rank him right up... Err.. down there with other politicians. Calling somebody stupid is the last resort of someone too lazy to think up a real reason to dislike them. I dislike him because he's a pol, but I'm honest about that. For me, voting is always a 'lesser of two evils' kinda thing.

Last edited: Thursday, June 24, 2004 at 1:25:15 AM

Stink the more I read your replies the more I am beginning to think you're the chimp. Stop being a sarcastic little liberal and start debating like a man...wait..let me guess - you're 12 like the other 100 TTers.

/adapt

Critical Impulse

Ok I will...(again sorry bvt my friends compvter doesn't have the letter which comes between the 't' and the 'v'...well, it does, bvt every since he dvmped oatmeal on it, it doesn't work).

Master...sorry, I didn't mean to imply yov were the moron...i meant that for adapt/critical impvlse who initiated this interchange when he svggested that I qvit while I was behind. I had no idea what he was talking abovt.

Critical impvlse...yov new arovnd here? I've already beaten this svbject into the grovnd in other threads. Debate like a man? I've done that elsewhere, I was being glib here. Ok, yov want a piece of me? Yov got it.

Iraq was never abovt freeing iraq from a brvtal dictator. The revisionists in the whitehovse frabricated this as a jvstification after their prior rationale was shown to be spvriovs...yov may remember the myth of WMDs and the alleged link to al qaeda? Well, as yov may recall, that has been thovroghly debvnked. The admistration now shops ovt the excvse for the iraq invasion as a hvmanitarian response to a brvtal dictator. This administration has no credibility.

I have jvmped to the conclvsion that people who believe this last jvstification are either naive, or deeply partisan. This administration has been cavght in lies....and what does it do when confronted with trvth? It fabricates a new rationale...now we've gone to war to free the iraqi people. Why wovld yov believe this? Don't forget that the vs had svpported saddam all throvghovt the iran-iraq war...we svpplied iraq with weapons and biotechnology (this is a matter of pvblic record) and when saddam vsed gas on iranian civilians and iraqi kvrds, the VS said nothing. Atrocities against civilians were apparently acceptable when saddam was chiefly engaged in a war with a enemy of the vs.

Add to this the vs rather spotty record in vsing force to address brvtal dictatorships, ethnic cleansing, and other atrocities world wide, and it even fvrther weakens the possiblity that we interceded in iraq for hvmanitarian reasons. We did nothing to help the east timorese when they were being slavghtered by the hvndreds of thovsands by the indonesians, we did nothing to stop the bloody komer rovge from killing millions in sovthest asia, we did nothing to stop the tribal killings of millions in rwanda, and we are doing nothing now to stop the killing in somalia.

Yov will believe what yov want to believe. And I think there are a lot of people ovt there who really, really want to believe that the vs is acting for the right reasons in iraq. Vnfortvnately, ovr history rvns covnter to acting ovt of international altrvism. If yov have been reading the mainstream press, yov may have noticed the increasing scrvtiny that a grovp called The American Enterprise Institvte is getting. Google these gvys if yov really want to know why we are in iraq.

Stinky the V

Master: also in regards to iraq: the decent thing to do wovld have been to leave them alone in the first place....or apply a consistent policy of intervention world wide. Bvt I agree with yov: leaving them now is not an option.

As to bolo's charge of bvsh being a moron: apply the old adage -- looks like a dvck, walks like a dvck, talks like a dvck...its a dvck.

Adapt/inept: I'm a little liberal with my hand vp kerry's ass? Little? Hmmmm not very little...check ovt my pic. I covld crvsh yovre pin head like a grape. Liberal? Look vp liberalism before yov throw that term arovnd anymore. Vnfortvnately, rvsh limbavgh, being a complete bvfoon, has no idea what the term means, so all of yov ditto heads are going arovnd missvsing it. I'm a leftie, and provd.

Last edited: Thursday, June 24, 2004 at 4:49:56 AM

In case yov missed it inept/ci here's something I wrote over a month ago that answers yovr criticisms...

"...the us doesn't usually intercede in the goings on in another country unless it is the us strategic interests to do so...so I was saying that our failure to act in cambodia, rwanda, east timor weakens our stake to the moral high ground and the argument that we try to free people from tyranny around the globe. (u can find plenty of evidence to suggest that the us has interceded in support of brutal dictators who brutalized their own people when it served our interests to do so...like iraq in the 80s and 90s....which further weakens our claim of freeing people/spreading democracy.)

Freeing the iraqis was never the point of this war. The point of the war is explained best by the architects of it: the american enterprise institute. You can google that if you care to. Richard perle has written that the enterprise thought it would best serve american interests if saddam was gone. I don't care to go into the reasons why it would serve us interests...i read part of his report a while back....something about following the reagan doctrine of flexing muscle to establish a powerful, stablizing force in the region. Anyway, that is all conjecture, and as a private think-tank, they are free and welcome to advance their theories.

Part of the problem here though, is that bush was so easily persuaded by their theories and theorists (perle, wolfiwitz, rove et al.) that he brought their agenda to the white house and into fruition. He advanced his ideas prior to 9/11 (see Paul O'neil, richard clarke, bob woodward and others on this). He did not subject this theory to rigorous analysis. He did not seek dissenting opinion. 9/11 was a god-send to the administration and to the american enterprise institute because it allowed bush to conflate al qaeda with saddam, thereby providing a rationale to pursue his program of ridding sadam and establishing us power in the mid. East. But whatever happened to the democratic process? Or in seeking consensus with our allies?

What was the question again?

Oh yeah, and Chief, I actually read through your arguments....very good stuff there. And well presented. But like 44, I draw a different conclusion. I don't believe that the ends justify the means...that might makes right till right is ready...or any other suitable cliche....because I didn't believe bush's first premise: that iraq had wmd and the means to use them...or his supposition that he would put them in the hands of al qaeda....the cia had long ago established the deep animosity between al qaeda and saddam. I agree with 44 that the world has become a more dangerous place for americans. I regret the weakening of our alliances world wide. I hope we can do something to fix that.

By the way...did it ever occur to anyone that maybe the iraqis don't want our version of democracy? I recently read that 90% of iraqis polled want us the hell out of there....maybe one or two of the over 10,000 dead iraqi civilians were related to them in some way?

But I will concede that the world is a better place for having deposed saddam....lets make it even better by deposing bush in 2004."

Now inept/ci...what intelligent morsel can yov add to this conversation?

Peace....or as the presidential monkey wovld say "peance freeance" whatever that means.

Run and hide! The neo-con ThinkTanks are after you!

http://www.aei.org/

http://www.aei.org/perle/

More Iraq reading than you can handle.

If you were paying attention before the war, you knew all this going in. It was no secret. There was the Richard Perle produced episode of FrontLine, The Gulf Crisis: The Road to War explaining much of the justification, which PBS ran a dozen times. Thomas Friedman was writing in the NY-Times and appearing all over TV telling us about the neo-con rational and plan. Charlie Rose practically had Friedman as a semi permanent guest. (Heck, he was on Letterman and Oprah, IIRC). The whole concept was out in the open before the war. But now it's a conspiracy. I know if I was planning a high level conspiracy I would get someone to go on Oprah and talk about it....

Oh, and as long as I'm babbling about pre-war, this made me think twice . Was it a good idea to go to war? I'm not sure. I don't think the majority of Iraqi's know either. At this point, the results are still "too close to call...."

Good enough for me. Like you alluded to, a dead horse topic that has made it's rounds here, hence my double wink on my earlier cheap shot. :)

At least this post is on topic for a ThinkTanks forum. Heh.

Last edited: Thursday, June 24, 2004 at 6:49:54 AM

Stink - Thank you. I appreciate your change of tone - and the clarification that you weren't talking to me. ;)

I'm not debating WHY we went into Iraq, as far I'm concerned it's immaterial - we ARE in Iraq, and now that we are we should help them, and hopefully give them a free society (please note a free society does NOT mean that their country is exactly like the US. Free societies can exist under other government types as well).

WMDs - It is unfortunately impossible to prove a negative, so we'll never PROVE that there weren't any. The fact that we haven't found any is damning evidence, naturally; but it's still theoretically possible that there were some. IIRC, they found an entire fighter squadron that had been buried underneath the sand completely by accident - the wind uncovered part of one of the tails. There are plenty of hiding places out there. But, it's likely that if there were a lot of them, we would have found some by now, or at least found out what happened to them.

Bush-Moron/Kerry-Ahole: I dislike calling people idiots (have ya noticed? XD ), and the IQ 93 story from the election year was a hoax. But really, I don't know anything about his personality - Kerry has some stories running around about him that show him as a thorough-going bastard - don't know if they're true or not though, so I'm reserving judgment and trying not to be biased by them. He's a career-politician though. ;)

I wasn't involved in the other threads on this topic - not sure how I let myself get sucked into this one. *puzzled* Normally I avoid these discussions. At any rate, unless someone posts a question directly to me about what I've written I'll consider this a dead topic as well.

Back to your regularly scheduled game of ThinkTanks...

Denks master...jvst so yov know, the sarcastic tone was never intended for yov...mainly focvssed on the semi-literate inept/ci and some remarks lagman made...also motivated by the fact that I didn't want to go here again, as this svbject is so beaten to death.

Laggy: as yov said, the american enterprise institvte is no secret...who said anything abovt a conspiracy? I didn't. They are ovt there in the open. I was jvst pointing them ovt for those who hadn't heard of them, or who didn't know they set ovr foreign policy. Yov appear to be trying to weaken any possible critqve by claiming the left is somehow fixating on conspiracy...cheap.

Ps...whats with the "more iraq reading" link which is clearly biased crapola/propaganda manvfactvred by aei? Reading? Yeah, yov can read it....yov jvst can't believe a single word of it.

The aei is so widely discredited now that they are approaching irrelevancy...they bvngled iraq, they fed classified info to chalabi and he gave it to iran. And yov go on some convolvted diatribe abovt doing right by iraq. Iraq is a dismal failvre based on lies. It is a distraction from the war on terror (or at least thats what general zinni and other acting members of the pentagon have said both on and off the record). It is tremendovsly expensive, and it has resvlted in the death of american service men and thovsands of iraqis. Yet yov defend the policy and by extension, this president. And yov call me a chimp?

Whats vp with that?

Last edited: Thursday, June 24, 2004 at 2:11:18 PM

BTW, Stink - I like the "v" subbing. Gives the posts a more 'Roman' feel. XD

Wow what a bunch of useless shit people devote so much time into puttin gon these threads. Stink I bet you a million dollars you've never tried that thing they call "real sex" before have you?

/adapt

Critical Impulse

@ inept/mr: tee hee! And he said I wasn't man enovgh to enter into debate! Look what happens when I do! He falls back on adolescent poop smearing becavse he lacks the ability to respond intelligently!

@master: denks, by the way, I forgot to mention that I hope yovr relative in iraq stays safe. I mean that. Also regret that I was too lazy in previovs posts to clarify that I was referring to inept/mr as the moron. There was nothing moronic in yovr posts...and my qvestion abovt iraq was genvine and entirely absent of malice...sorry abovt the confvsion.

Stinky the v

Enovgh?becavse?yovr?

We're not in fucking ancient Rome, dumbass.

Heheheh. Adapt, you obviously didn't bother to really read Stinky's posts, did you? If you had, you'd know why he was using 'v' in place of 'u'. Then again, maybe you did read it, but chose to ignore it because you have no defense or retort for his argument, except for your predictably juvenile name calling. What a piece of shit you are.

Re: original post - that's an uncanny resemblance! Poor woman! (The Lurch one's a little stretch, but close enough for a hoot!)

Otherwise, there's some good debate in here (the poop-flinging and name calling I can do without). No matter whether I agree or not with the major/original reason (WMDs) for going into Iraq, I do think that we're there now and should try and salvage what we can (trying to seed a democracy). And with my blinders on, Saddam's departure is a good thing in itself (bad part coming soon --->). Unfortunately, I doubt that a democracy in Iraq will stick without a longer occupation by a policing force: US, because even though there are Iraqi police and a growing new Iraqi military (both good things, I'll agree, 56k) they alone can't keep the "insurgents" at bay. Hell, even our troops are having a tough time at that. That's where the bad part sneaks in around the blinders: the invasion/occupation of Iraq might truly be called a distraction to the war on terrorism if it hadn't created a larger terrorist problem. I think we've created a literal field-day for terrorists and their recruitment efforts.

And as for that US up there: setting up a democracy would have a greater chance of success with wider global involvement and support, instead of a push (shove down the throat?) from a seemingly unilateral action. I think Kerry would do a better (and more credible) job bringing in helpful support from other nations. And to set the record straight, the only presidential "candidate" that is proposing to immediately pull out of Iraq is Mr. Nader (God, please, not him again...).

Here's to hoping to avoid a new Rome...

Last edited: Thursday, June 24, 2004 at 6:14:11 PM

You know what this forum needs? An Ignore function! Hey -z-! Think that's feasible? :P

Good post george...right on om