curtins Posted January 30, 2005 Author Share Posted January 30, 2005 woah woah woah- dont go putting words into my mouth here I NEVER called the iraqi ppl terrorists- there is a difference. the iraqi ppl want elections and freedom etc- the iraqi terroists done big difference no proven connection between 9/11 and iraq???? ha!!!! it has been proven by the 911 commision that iraq had ties with al quieda and sadam offered bin laden to come hang in iraq instead of afganistan. not to mention that sadam had wmds- no propaganda here just cold hard facts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 [quote name='curtins' date='Jan 29 2005, 11:59 PM'] woah woah woah- dont go putting words into my mouth here I NEVER called the iraqi ppl terrorists- there is a difference. the iraqi ppl want elections and freedom etc- the iraqi terroists done big difference [/quote] Saying that, within the context of the elections, its either support the US or Terrorists... that would most certainly be implying that Iraqi people (or at least those that follow the Religious Leaders, which is almost everyone) are terrorists. You didn't think your post through, and it shows. [quote] no proven connection between 9/11 and iraq???? ha!!!! it has been proven by the 911 commision that iraq had ties with al quieda and sadam offered bin laden to come hang in iraq instead of afganistan. not to mention that sadam had wmds- no propaganda here just cold hard facts[/quote] Oh my. Thats the biggest pile I've ever heard. Why don't you quit listening to Bill O'Reilly and the other propaganda slingers. I still cannot believe that people listen to a guy that can't differentiate between a Falafel and a Loofah. Especially when all credible sources (including the White House) have said things to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtins Posted January 30, 2005 Author Share Posted January 30, 2005 actually i dont listen to bill orielly much- laura ingrahm, mark lavin, rush limbaugh, and sean hanity are much better. and ther IS a big difference between the US, the terrorists, and the inocent iraqi ppl. terrorists are anyone that is fighting our troops. dont tell me that the entire population of iraq is fighting our troops and weather you chose to beleive me about the 911 commission or not- its true- I had to research all that stuff for school back in october so I would know. but now im tired and going to bed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franciscanheart Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 [quote name='StColette' date='Jan 29 2005, 11:39 PM'] Anyway, all I can suggest is you pray for those people over there, for all troops, for Ted Kennedy, for all those in our government and the governments of the entire world, and pray especially for the terriorists. Mt 5: 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you: 45 That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust. [/quote] If I were to repeat anything either one of these two people has already said it would be this. You arent reading anything anyone is saying. You continue to argue the same point over and over paying no mind to what is really being said. You will get no where doing this. So, seeing as you wont be getting anywhere that way and you dont intend on listening, you might as well pray about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 [quote name='curtins' date='Jan 30 2005, 12:11 AM'] terrorists are anyone that is fighting our troops [/quote] Yeah, prayer seems like the only thing that will work with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spathariossa Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 [quote name='curtins' date='Jan 30 2005, 12:11 AM'] terrorists are anyone that is fighting our troops. [/quote] Are you out of your mind? So would you be a terrorist if you fought against an invading army? I mean, I won't deny that I think Saddam should have been removed. That's definitely my stance. But one could argue forcefully that those fighting American soldiers are Iraqi patriots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 right now the troops are a stabilizing force. They will need to stay for a while and remove themselves as the Iraqis achieve stability for themselves. However much the Iraqis dislike it, without the occupation forces there would be chaos of Iraqi vs. Iraqi on a scale much greater than at present. I'm quite willing for the troops to be a unitive force by being mutually disliked by most of those in Iraq. What I don't think is necessary is for us to debate what should be happening, and who is wrong. What is happening is happening, getting into an argument won't solve a thing, unless one of you is the President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 I love you Jenni and Rich and all the others who posted here. Speaking of which, I have two comments, 1: If you want news, real news, "laura [sic] ingrahm [sic], mark [sic] lavin [sic], rush [sic] limbaugh [sic], and sean [sic] hanity [sic]" (Sorry for all the sic notes) are probly not the places to get it. I could much more easily argue against Bush by listening to Air America or whatever that is or in enviromental threads by talking about Rifkin. However, AA or whatever, probly isn't the most basis-free soucre of news. Rifkin is considered a quack by the professional sci. community. You must break up your sources into what is reliable and what isn't. 2. If you want people to talk you seriously, take basic grammar. Plus, placing a sic after every word in your quote can drive a person nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtins Posted January 30, 2005 Author Share Posted January 30, 2005 i dont get the whole sic thing and actually all those peeps are great sources for news cause THEY ARE RIGHT AND THEY TELL THE TRUTH- maybe you should try listenin to them sometimes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jan 30 2005, 04:14 PM'] I love you Jenni and Rich and all the others who posted here. [/quote] Love ya too Jacob lol bring a little peace to this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 [quote name='curtins' date='Jan 30 2005, 04:30 PM'] i dont get the whole sic thing and actually all those peeps are great sources for news cause THEY ARE RIGHT AND THEY TELL THE TRUTH- maybe you should try listenin to them sometimes [/quote] Sic means that he copied your post and was pointing out that its you, not he, that made the error and he left it there to prove his point. Anyways, they aren't right and they don't always tell the truth. That group of people are notorious for being unreliable. Just because there is a left wing bias (possibly) in the media doesn't mean that the best way to balance it out is with a right wing bias. The best way to correct a bias is with the TRUTH. Propaganda and 'cooked books' aren't the best way to negate truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 The 911 Commission said that Iraq had no hand in planning the 911 Attacks. However, there is a ton of evidence that the Iraqui government and Alquaida were in communication under the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend idea. That cannot be denied, that there was communication. And that Saddam funded palistinean suicide bombers (which is why if Israel had gone to war with Iraq that would've been a just war no question in my book) Ted Kennedy is wrong here. Not because of all the republican spin blah blah blah you must hate the troups (I absolutely love Shawn Hannity, but he really gets too illogical about stuff like that.) The Iraqui elections were held today and people were celebrating in the streets, there was an over 60% turnout. The only people that are mad about it are the few that used to have power during Saddam's reign. But the terrorists do not have popular support or sympathy, they are not freedom fighters. They are fighting democracy, they do not want the Iraqui people to be represented in their government. They are fighting for fascism and even the Iraqui people know that. They are wary of a U.S. presence, they'd like us out of here. But they are definitely not supportive of the Insurgence. It is working out very well according to the President's plan and in the long run this is going to be good for the country. The U.S. plans to get out when it feels Iraq is ready to hold itself up on its own and protect its people. We can already see the U.S. not holding control, the people who won the election definitely have more pro-Iranian stances than we would like, these are not the people we would have chosen. We continue to give up control little by little and help Iraq develope its own security. There is no reason not to be optimistic about the future of Iraq. Kennedy is wrong because the troops being there is the only thing stopping fascist insurgents from taking over the country. We're on the side of the Iraqui people, they're greatful Saddam is gone and want us gone too but they don't want the insurgents in control. Keep the insurgents out of control and your doing the will of the Iraqui people. We are gradually turning into a force to enforce and defend the will of the Iraqui people and less of a force simply defending our presence there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Thanks Aloysius, that was actually an educated post. However, I'd point out that the USA was still part of the problem, as the Sunni population did not vote in almost all cases. This, to me, is definately a problem. Of course, with reportedly over 70% turnout (which honestly sounds like a fake number but whatever), nobody is really going to challenge it. In the end, I still think there are reasons to be pessimistic about the future of Iraq. This mainly comes from the convoluted process. They elected an Assembly, which will elect a President, who will elect two Deputy Presidents, who will elect a Prime Minister, who will appoint a cabinet. The Assembly has to create a Constitution, which will go to referendum in September, which could go either way. Its still progress, but not exactly assured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 nothing's a sure thing. the places with low turnout were places like Saddam's hometown. Yeah that needs to be worked on, but those people had the oppurtunity to vote. the other 60% (I heard predictions of 70% but the only actual number I heard they said [u]at least[/u] 60% meaning they're not sure it could be more) risked their lives and voted, so what the heck they chose who runs the country cause they were brave enough to do it. the only problem is that there'd be inadequate representation and the people would be discontent with the gov't' and I don't think they'd buy the "if you didn't vote you can't complain" line, lol. So yeah, that's a problem and there are some bad factors but I am still overall optimistic about Iraq's future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 So you admit there's a problem... meaning Ted Kennedy was partially right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now