How the hell did I get into this?

Of course, if you want me to, just let me know…

but of course, you are correct. If you can’t undo ALL injustice in the world, you better try to undo ANY.

Fabulous logic…..should be the new Democratic motto, you know, bumper stickers, t-shirts.

“100% Perfection or We Aren’t Interested”

There are no more prisons built specifically to torture children.

Well, at least not in Iraq:

15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two of his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a confession on the family’s links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.

Hooray for the coalition of the willing!

I disagree with you on the rollup. I also disagree with the methods - you do a lot more to prevent terrorism if you can do things that improve global quality of life - Truman doctrine rather than Japan doctrine, circa WWII.

Be that as it may, we can agree on the doubt that we will ever overcome the ethnic divisions. There will be civil war in Iraq when we leave, and there isn’t anything we can do about iit. Along with that civil war, there will be ample chaos for terrorists to thrive.

Again, I think that we cannot claim noble intentions, given our choices in who and how we let profit from this war, but I thank you for the rational debate.

Sorry for late response. You are right that I addressed what you said rather than what you meant. But I concede the point this far: there were probably other nations at least equally tied to Al Qaeda (I would guess Syria, maybe Iran). And I would also acknowledge that there were other countries with more advanced WMD threats (on paper per our intel). Unfortunately, that still does not make a strong case against the war - in isolation. Roll up the WMD intell, the terrorism connection, the Al Qaeda connection, Saddam’s history of using WMD type weapons, his willingness to murder thousands and thousands, his eagerness to take over his mideast neighbors, the UN resolutions, and the overall unstable nature of the mideast and you have more of the typical neocons (IMO) reason for the war. If you doubt me on this rationale, suggest a review of Democratic statements in the 1995-200 period.

I still doubt the war becasue I’m not sure we will ever overcome the ethnic divisions, and overall backwardness of that society. te minute we leave, hte Mullahs begin eroding the foundation of the democracy - however nobly intended it was.

Dugger

Neither has anyone claimed that Saddam was a decent human being.

You have serious reading comprehension problems, do you know that?

Once again, for every case presented for war, taken singly or as a group, other countries matched the criteria far better than iraq - they just weren’t easy targets for wingnuts and chickenhawks with a dream of cheap oil forever (which you probably believe in too, along with the tooth fair and the holy ghost).

You’re beyond ridiculous. You’re insane. Delusional. Braindead.

You guys are ridiculous& .
”

LMAO! You are ridiculous. No one said that Iraq would be peace loving member of the world if Suddam was left. Get a grip, you use straw man argument.
What is said, by me and other rational people, is that there would be 30 to 180 thousand less dead people if Suddam had been left in, especially since it was only asking for more time to confirm and not rush into a foolish war.
And there you go with your folks “tens of billions of dollars” stupid lack of an argument also.
The war has cost THREE HUNDRED BILLION dollars, with another ONE HUNDRED BILLION in the next budget.

You also say “they didn t ask them to prove a negative, they asked for positive affirmation that they destroyed known stockpiles of chemical weapons (yea, I know he never had them, tell that to about 5000 kurdish men, women and children)”
You know they never used them, sarcastically spoken, is to prove what, may I ask, you intellectual midget? We know he used them, he used them on Kurds et al when BUSH #1 betrayed the people who rose up against Saddam by leaving them without support. The US called for them to uprise, implying that they would back the people up. They knew Saddam would react, but Bush senior did nothing. He knew there were chemical weapons going to be used, but still used the people against Saddam with a lie.
Furthermore, you rationally retarded reject, that was in 1991, and any grade oner will tell you that 1991 is NOT equal to 2003, so just because they were used, proving he at one time had them, which no one disputes, that does not logically follow that he has them “now” (at the time of attack).

You are so sadly lacking any critical thinking skills, you just ad more evidence to the argument that people who still support the reasons for going to war are stupid.
There, I can call names with the best of them, and I can use logic at the same time.

People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, buddy, and you implying, with your sarcasm, that others are too stupid to grasp simp,e facts is just the same as honestly labeling someone by name calling.
Frank, you are next.

That argument “I would rather be spied on blah, blah, than vaporised’, is also a stupid argument, because you might as well say that you would also rather have a video transmitter recording everything you do 24/7 than be vaporised. I know I would.

SO WHAT? You can justify any extreme behavior or unethical conduct if you you “might” avert some “Hypothetical worst case ” scenario.

That is not logic, it does not make sense. I am 46, and I have been improperly jailed, and was followed just a month ago and harassed by a cop because someone reported a person hanging around their neighborhood acting suspiciously.
I was walking to the doctor, FFS, and I asked him what he wanted, he started saying never mind blah blah, so I demanded what the f he wanted and he followed me into the Dr office and told me, so I said that I will show him my phone bill and ID to prove I am not the homeless rogue that was reported, and he said it wasn’t necessary. So I said “you will leave me alone then?” and he said no, he is still suspicious, so I said “You are lying to me” and he went beat red, but we were in a doctors office and he had to listen to me explain that if he was still suspicious, I could clear that up right then and there, but he said it wasn’t necessary, so obviously he had no reason to be following me, yet saying he was still suspicious proved he was lieing.

That, coupled with loss of rights, it a living example of how innocent peoples lives and rights are trampled by allowing rights violations in the name of ‘I can do it if I want’ Bush bullshit.
If that cop had been able to say, and he already proved he was capable of lien, he could say I pulled a weapon, or threatened to blow him up, or even just said his reasons are secret, and I could’ve been “disappeared”.

That is your principle argument, that you want to risk that intrusion of your rights, and therefore safety to live normally without fear of peong persecuted, prosecuted, and found guilty and punished, with no legal recourse, in the name of ‘National security.

Well, YOU may want to give up your hard won freedoms, hard won - not by you I might add, and therefore not yours to give up, you may want to trash those freedoms to avoid the possibility that a terrorist will be averted because of those loss of liberties and constitutional protections, which is another “what if” part of your argument, after all that “might” I say, might prevent the very unlikely scenario of that being the only way of all the hundreds of other security measures that could prevent such an event, stop someone from acquiring fissionable material, refining it, machining or building a devise to within 100,000 thousandths of inch tolerance, in order to possibly pick a location within 1 or 2 miles of you to detonate it, thereby vaporising you, but that is a pretty stupid and far fetched scenario in the first place.

Maybe if you can prove three hundred million, if not billions of other people getting unrevised or regulated spying and info collecting done on them, will be instrumental in preventing such an event, then sure, but what is the problem with having over site anyways?

It is absolutely ludicrous and without common sense to give up very important rights like that when it isn’t even necessary, in spite of what the Lieing fascist Bush, and his sycophantic zombie followers say.

If it is so fucking important to spy on people for that minuscule remote possibility, and going into private property to check for radiation signatures on racially profiled (illegal) people, WHY THE FUCK HASN’T THE BUSH ADMIN INSTALLED RADIATION DETECTORS AT BORDER CROSSINGS CUSTOMS AND AIRPORTS??????
WHY HASN”T THE F******ADMINISTRATION DONE WHAT THE REPORT NOW GIVES THEM A FAILING GRADE ON DOING WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED TO MAKE AMERICA SAFE FROM THESE THREATS IN THE FIRST PLACE???????

You make me ill, you are so happy to have you precious freedom thrown away to violate common sensibilities and allow violating people more as a result, i n the name of security, yet you bitch nothing about concrete examples that are already supposed to be done to make your world safer, but haven’t

It is beyond insane, that what’s it is, you are so hypocritical that it is unbelievable, almost.

You would rather let people be tortured an spy-ed on by giving up rights, unnecessarily, than call Bush on his lies and mistakes that endanger your own life, and show the hypocrisy of his actiona and decisions.

We had been attempting to get all this confirmed through twelve years of UN “sanction” all the while being shot at while enforcing UN no fly zones (in violation of the cease fire from GW I).

Yea, you guys are right, if we had ONLY given Saddam another (fill in the blank with the random number of your choice) THEN Iraq would just be another quiet, peace loving member of the world community….

You guys are ridiculous….

I’m willing to fault the UN for this one, then, because they crafted something ridiculous in asking Iraq to prove a negative. The administration made a masterful use of that logical fallacy and helped prop up the case for war.

You were claiming that the inspections “scavenger hunt” was useless because it couldn’t verify that we were safe from a threat of Saddam’s WMD. Our subsitute for that scavenger hunt was an invasion which also has not turned up any WMD. (Oh, allright. I’ll grant JayTea’s antique artillary shells.)

All that other stuff you mention is good news, isn’t it? If you want to open up a new topic, do go ahead. However, let’s not pretend that these things are relevant to our earlier comments.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13495329.htm

Did I miss any of the biggies?

Other good things happening in Iraq:

10. Most schools rebuilt and repainted at least two times now.
9. Many Iraqis alive and uninjured
8. Power on in Baghdad up to 6 hours daily.
7. Many US soldiers still alive and unmaimed.
6. Insurgent supply of ammo being reduced daily.
5. No US soldiers injured by flying flowers and candy.
4. Lots of room for new exhibits in the Iraqi Museum of Antiquities
3. Market for scrap auto parts literally booming.
2. Funeral industry growing exponentially.
1. Pro-Iranian Mullahs can walk free from persecution

Brilliant! You are 100% correct. I’m just waiting for the next few years to unfold to figure out my position on Pedro’s jackassiness.

BTW, how did you know my life’s ambition was to work in the Bush Ministry of Information?

=P

The silly scavenger hunt we were on was completely useless.

The war that replaced the “scavenger hunt” has been so much more productive.