seattle.politics

"Paul Mitchum" wrote in message
news: %usenet@ ...
> Patriot Games wrote:
>> "Paul Mitchum" wrote in message
>> news: %usenet@ ...
>> > Patriot Games wrote:
>> >> "Paul Mitchum" wrote in message
>> >> news: %usenet@ ...
>> >> > Patriot Games wrote:
>> >> >> "Paul Mitchum" wrote in message
>> >> >> news: %usenet@ ...
>> >> > [..]
>> >> >> > History has already shown that the Bush administration clearly
>> >> >> > intended military action against Iraq from before it took office.
>> >> >> Nope.
>> >> > Yup. I've offered you evidence, and you've disregarded it.
>> >> The undocumented whining of a fired disgruntled former employee IS NOT
>> >> EVIDENCE.
>> >> > There's other evidence as well
>> >> Yet you FAILED to cite it....
>> > No, Mr. Gamey. I didn't fail to cite it, I offered a single cite which
>> > didn't give you any pause whatsoever. I don't think you'd care if I did
>> > offer other cites
>> Excuses don't equal performance.
> True. And? I'm not performing your dance.
>> You FAILED to CITE your claim. Period.
> Actually, that's not true. I *did* offer a cite for my claim. You did
> not reject the cite, you rejected the source, preferring the White House
> line that O'Neil is simply 'disgruntled.' As if simple sour grapes could
> explain such a story.

Hahahahahhaha!!!!

>> > You simply don't care about the facts.
>> You've provided NONE to date.
> Except the ABC News report on Paul O'Neil's statements in Suskind's book
> that I linked to. You're working REALLY HARD with some words in ALL CAPS
> in order to avoid this fact.

Hahahahahahhahaha!!!!

>> >> > There were no WMD in Iraq
>> >> 2004. LIVE Sarin gas rocket shell.
>> >
>> > And even if it's true, do you think that justifies the death of 3000+
>> > US
>> > soldiers and somewhere upwards of two thirds of a million Iraqis?
>> War doesn't justify death and deaths aren't justified by war. Its an
>> ignorant question on its face. People die in war - it just happens.
> War doesn't 'just happen,' dipshit. War isn't like the weather, where
> you can expect a rain of bombs early Monday morning, but by
> mid-afternoon lightly-scattered peace will break out. War is waged. It's
> an intentional act. People intentionally wage war knowing that people
> will die, because that's what makes it war.

Like I said: "People die in war - it just happens."

> So you've simply decided
> that it's OK to have killed close to a million people over a single
> 10-year-old unuseable shell that might once have contained Sarin.

You haven't been paying attention. The shell found was a LIVE shell, not
"unuseable." The shell found DID contain Sarin gas, not "might once have
contained" Sarin Gas.

Having hit rock bottom we find that your entire set of beliefs is not only
based on LIES, but that when actual facts are presented you REJECT them....

I don't know what the Pentagon or the Admiistration expected to find in Iraq
but I doubt they expected to find a LIVE Sarin gas rocket shell. Think
about it. If we found a trashcan with some discarded Sarin or Sarin
components that could be rationalized as a sloppy unfortunate mistake. If
we found a rocket shell under a desk prepped for a chemical weapon but not
finished that could be rationalized as a harmless oversight.

> Up here in the Pacific Northwest, we have a little island called San
> Juan Island. On this island are the two sites of the San Juan Island
> National Historical Park. The two sites are called American Camp and
> English Camp. There was almost a war between the US and Britain over
> this island, precipitated by the death of a pig. But some smart people
> realized that there had to be a better way, and war was averted. It
> might be a story you'd find interesting:
> < /archive/sajh/ >

That's almost hilarious. But its typical of Democrats and Socialists. The
British failed to act responsibly in managing their livestock and
immediately tried to blame someone else.

>> Invading Iraq with a ground force would not have been my first choice but
>> they didn't ask me and I wasn't King For A Day then. My first choice
>> would have been the aerial assassination of Saddam, his two asshole sons,
>> and as many of his top civilian and military leadership as possible in a
>> single evening. In fact, taking a ground force into Iraq would NEVER
>> have
>> been on my To-Do List.
>> I would have handled Iraq the same way we're going to handle Iran: Death
>> From Above - Have a Nice Day.
> Hmm. This is interesting. You think that bombing Iraq (and/or Iran) into
> an anarchic leadership-free state without stabilizing it with troops on
> the ground would have been in the US' interests.
> Boy are you ever stupid.

You're assuming it would then be a "anarchic leadership-free state" which is
not necessarily true. Citizens would still have jobs, businesses would
still have employees and customers, the national infrastructure would still
be intact and the national resources would be untouched.

I'm guessing that even though you think we shouldn't have invaded Iraq you
must be 100% supportive of staying there with troops so as to avoid an
"anarchic leadership-free state," right?

>> > All right! Woo! We destroyed our credibility, destroyed Iraq, and will
>> > have probably destroyed our economy in order to find a single shell
>> > that
>> > might have once held Sarin! NOT a weapon, NOT a rocket, but a SHELL.
>> I don't feel like fact-checking myself right now [..]
> Har!
> You're a joke, Games.

If I'm the "joke" then what does that say about your self-serving circular
logic???