Read This: GW Bush By November 2008?

So, which ranking do i hold?
Just because "guy" says it over and over doesnt make it true, well atleast in reality.

Everytime he "guy" labels someone warmonger, he's asked what info-quote he based it on, he has none.

If your not part of the "Blame America First Club" your labeled a warmonger, that simple.

First, I've LIVED in some of these states, have you?
Second, when were any of these "terrorist states"
on anybodys list of places to visit ? they're shit holes, thats why nobody goes.

Been there done that, 6 years, your welcome.
Have you?
Ever put YOUR life on the line for your beliefs?



btw, this "challenge" has been presented many times , same results.

 

lol

 

HTH, I do not remember the exact context of those posts you quoted, but if I am corrrect the discussion was about the validity of the intelligence used to decide the threat of the Hussein regime. Maybe this is a mistake discussing posts that I have not refreshed on, but I believe the point I was trying to make was that leading up to the war, most of the world and the major intelligence agencies had the same conclusion of the capabilities of Hussein. Even countries that were against the invasion concurred on the same intelligence. I am in no way negating Bush responsiblity for the Iraq war. He is the President, he is the Commander in Chief. The blood is on his hands. However, you cannot NOT put blame in Congress who made their decision on the same intelligence. The politicians that were calling for action against Iraq were privy to the same intel reports that the President was. All I am saying is that Democrats, as well as Republicans, need to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions.

 

lol

 

fact is i don't get sucked into the intellectual garbage of the war monger any more

yes.... no doubt old posts of people have been doctored or they just don't exist anymore rather like every other lie that has been told to the public.

i don't bother wasting my time ploughing through the posts of the warmongers (but kudos to you "higher than hell" for taking interest!) because anyone who cares to read even one post of the warmongers sees them for what they are - warmongers.
they are the people that tell you day is night, war is peace and there is no other information available to contradict their world view.

i couldn't think of anyone of sound mind that would willingly entertain the reality of these people.

as i've said before

the post of the warmonger are the unreadable in pursuit of the unspeakable

if you start listening the garbage of these characters you might as well pack your brain into a specimen jar.

 

lol

 

Yeah, its a diversion tactic, except when "troofers" use it its called making people think.


HTH, funny how you cry about editing post, that used to be a daily thing with you, you would say some stupid shit, then replace it the next day with a :lol:.

 

lol

 

Well you showed who the real "genious" is, :dupe: .

 

So, refresh me on US history "GUY" when has America used mercenaries to quell the local populace?

 

lol

 

Ok, my bad, i forgot thats how things work around here.


"prove it" bullshit, you've gone and out done yourself.
Now, asking for someone to back up a statement is bs?

 

lol

 

the spin is the 30 post since i've asked this simple question,

I'll put it in my notes ,that asking a simple question makes you dizzy.

 

lol

 

When have i ever done that ?
I believe i have provided a source or a link to everyone of my "statements".

Demanding ? go back to the 1st time i asked him, post 29?

If by demanding, you mean asking repeatily?

And i never asked him to "PROVE" shit, surely when he made that statement he had a particular incident and or date in mind.

 

Guy made an unfounded claim. Asking for proof is not unreasonable. It would be no different than if I said "in order to get nominated in the Democratic Party, you have to drink a gallon of monkey cum". Now prove that isn't true. Do you see how this works? If you are claiming something happened, surely it isn't to much trouble to produce an article or a link supporting the claim.

 

ditto

 

That is right, I went through the past 500 posts and removed all of my posts hailing Bush and showing my support for the Iraq war.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but my position has not changed.

See there are many things that I don't agree with the anti-war and Bush crowd about. If you pay attention you will actually notice that most of my positions are neutral if anything. There are many posts that I am simply trying to show that there is more than just a narrow view of a topic, that certain claims are exaggerated, or there is more to a story than just the extreme left-biased view.

A good example is the Lancet Survey. You believed the Lancet Survey that estimated Iraqi deaths at 500,000 (and you later believed 1,500,000). After providing several links showing that this number is likely not accurate, you still chose to believe this number. Why do you suppose that is? Is it because you took an honest look at it, or because it suits you better to blame 500,000 deaths on Bush, rather than just 80,000? But somehow I am a money grabbing silverspoon war monger because I choose to believe the lower number. I chose the lower number because I trust that the Iraqi people respect their dead enough to keep quite accurate records, and that the number the Iraq Ministry of Health states is more accurate than a cross section cluster sample survey that has been proven to be statistically impossible to perform accurately and unbiased in the time claimed by Lancet.

 

lol