Does George Bush own all of us,

[LoungeMachine]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cadaverdog

I'm sorry I support my family by driving a truck not being a secretary and wearing skirts like yourself.

That's a profession to be proud of, and worthy of no scorn.

But Jesus Christ dude, stop listening to Rush Limpdick and Sean Hannity on those overnighters.

They've rotted your mind.

Wake up and look around you.

Does this country.....does this WORLD look a little different since BushCO, Halliburton, Blackwater, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Jack Abramoff, Scooter Libby, et al started running things??????

Can you HONESTLY say you're proud of your Republican Party?????

We're FUCKED.

We've spent HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS to get stuck in a civil war we cannot win, and an occupation that is kiiling our own, as well as innocent children in the name of GREED, PRIDE, OIL, AND The Bush "Legacy"

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Baby's On Fire


How do you know Lounge is a secretary and wears a skirt?

I have great legs.

[cadaverdog]

L.m
Istill await your answer to post#37

[cadaverdog]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
That's a profession to be proud of, and worthy of no scorn.

But Jesus Christ dude, stop listening to Rush Limpdick and Sean Hannity on those overnighters.

They've rotted your mind.

Wake up and look around you.

Does this country.....does this WORLD look a little different since BushCO, Halliburton, Blackwater, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Jack Abramoff, Scooter Libby, et al started running things??????

Can you HONESTLY say you're proud of your Republican Party?????

We're FUCKED.

We've spent HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS to get stuck in a civil war we cannot win, and an occupation that is kiiling our own, as well as innocent children in the name of GREED, PRIDE, OIL, AND The Bush "Legacy"

If you check my posts I do not support the current adminastration or their policies . I want the troops to come home,now .
I just disagree with some of yor allegations as to how we got there.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by cadaverdog
What part are you debating that Sadaam did comply or congrees would have said ok if Bush would have come right out and said he tried to kill my dad so he deserverse to die?

Have you bothered to read the transcripts from Hans Blix?

Have you read Woodward's "Bush at War"

Have you read what Colin Powell has said about his speech to the UN ?

Have you come to grips yet with the fact that Bush, Cheney, Rummy, et al cherry-picked intel against the strong reservations of his own intel community in the lead up to the war?

I'l wait......

[Baby's On Fire]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
That's a profession to be proud of, and worthy of no scorn.

But Jesus Christ dude, stop listening to Rush Limpdick and Sean Hannity on those overnighters.

They've rotted your mind.

Wake up and look around you.

Does this country.....does this WORLD look a little different since BushCO, Halliburton, Blackwater, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Jack Abramoff, Scooter Libby, et al started running things??????

Can you HONESTLY say you're proud of your Republican Party?????

We're FUCKED.

We've spent HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS to get stuck in a civil war we cannot win, and an occupation that is kiiling our own, as well as innocent children in the name of GREED, PRIDE, OIL, AND The Bush "Legacy"

Talk to him about his stint in Deliverance. That's something he'll understand.

[cadaverdog]

And yes I voted for Bush twice .
You never made a mistake?
I think the search for WMDs was justified, hell you admitted they had them and you are right we supplied them .
But if I gave you a shotgun to kill my enemy and you said you would ,and you shot my friend instead does that mean I wanted my friend killed .
Was I stupid to trust you? yes
Were we stupid to trust Sadaam to use the weapons we gave him to fight Iran instead of invading kuwait and killing his own people?Yes.
But saying we wanted kuwait invaded is bullshit.
Backing the president to search for WMDs does not mean I said OK go ahead and take over their country while your at it.

[cadaverdog]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Have you bothered to read the transcripts from Hans Blix?

Have you read Woodward's "Bush at War"

Have you read what Colin Powell has said about his speech to the UN ?

Have you come to grips yet with the fact that Bush, Cheney, Rummy, et al cherry-picked intel against the strong reservations of his own intel community in the lead up to the war?

I'l wait......

That doesn't answer my question or questions.
Did Sadaam comply with the UN.
Would congress have ok ed the invasion if he had complied and Bush came right out and said he tried to kill my daddy we should kill him.

[cadaverdog]

Originally posted by Baby's On Fire
Talk to him about his stint in Deliverance. That's something he'll understand.

You are obviously incapable of carrying out a civilized debate.
You are a broken record ,saying the same shit over and over.
Bush sucks .
Clinton got his dick sucked .
You are a racist..
Anyone who is not an atheist is an idiot .
Anyone who disagrees with you is a moron.
Did I leave anything out?

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by cadaverdog
On this point the UN refused to act and I beleive that would justify forcing compliance .
I am not trying to justify anything but that .

i understand.

i'm just saying that i don't think the U.S. normally decides to enforce UN resolutions. (in fact, this is probably the only time that we have decided to enforce another entity's resolution, after the entity, itself declined to do so.)

i believe that we used the UN resolutions as justification because it sounded better than saying that we were preemptively attacking a country based on a somewhat vague notion of national security.

i have no problem with protecting our national security.

i'm just not sure that the evidence at the time showed that we were in imminent danger to justify a preemptive strike. even if saddam had WMD (which was not a certainty given the evidence), was he an imminent threat to attack the U.S.? i don't believe so.

i won't argue whether or not saddam was an oppressive tyrant. he was; i just don't think it was enough of a threat to justify an attack.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Baby's On Fire
Talk to him about his stint in Deliverance. That's something he'll understand.

Was he the kid with the banjo, or the guy who squealed like a pig?

[Nitro Express]

At least Larry Craig plays footsie with you and invites you to come over. Bush just grabs you and ass fucks you with no invite.

[cadaverdog]

Originally posted by FORD
Was he the kid with the banjo, or the guy who squealed like a pig?

I am not sure why you chimed in on this conversation.
I am familiar with your posts and know your political leanings.
You have your opinion I have mine .
We can debate politics in a civilized manner without resorting to childish name calling.
I should not play that game myself , but when provoked I sometimes act without thinking.
Babys on fire has shown he has no respect for any opinion other than his own.
He thinks the remedy for anything is to kill the offender.
He called Vick a ****** and refers to middle easterners as sand ******s.
He obviosly hates the USA as he says the US of fucking A.
If you have any religous beleifs ,he calls you a moron.
When confronted with his own statements he denies he made them.
I was stupid for even trying to debate him on his level and will not
further debate anyone who will not or can not respect the fact that not everyone agrees.
One of my best friends is a liberal democrat that beleive Bush blew up the WTC himself , but we agree to disagree and we get along just fine.

[cadaverdog]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
i understand.

i'm just saying that i don't think the U.S. normally decides to enforce UN resolutions. (in fact, this is probably the only time that we have decided to enforce another entity's resolution, after the entity, itself declined to do so.)

i believe that we used the UN resolutions as justification because it sounded better than saying that we were preemptively attacking a country based on a somewhat vague notion of national security.

i have no problem with protecting our national security.

i'm just not sure that the evidence at the time showed that we were in imminent danger to justify a preemptive strike. even if saddam had WMD (which was not a certainty given the evidence), was he an imminent threat to attack the U.S.? i don't believe so.

i won't argue whether or not saddam was an oppressive tyrant. he was; i just don't think it was enough of a threat to justify an attack.

I believe the WMDs were buried or moved before we got there.
If we had found them and arrested Sadaam we still might be in the same boat we are in.
Bush would have still insisted on installing his puppet government
and still used the fighting terrorists excuse to stay .
It is obvious to me Bush had his own agenda from the start and
stupid ass Sadaam supplied the fucker with an excuse.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by cadaverdog
I am not sure why you [FORD] chimed in on this conversation.

Because it's a forum on a public message board, that's why he "chimed" in

If you want to keep your "conversations" personal, I suggest you find a nice chat room on Yahoo.