Oh, MaKK. Who would be our foil if it were not for you?

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Reynolds Wrap?

---
What others say about boorite!

I'd rather go generic.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

How could Bush make a decision on information given to Blair before the war?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

HE'S GOT YOU THERE, DOUGAN!

Oh wait, on rereading your message, he really doesn't.

I am John Kerry.

---
What others say about boorite!

I am Kohn Jerry.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

quote:

---

HE'S GOT YOU THERE, DOUGAN!

Oh wait, on rereading your message, he really doesn't.

---

I said that if you disagreed with Bush's war policy, look at X number of information sources available pre-war. I didn't say "gee I wonder if there's a specific statement that would make Tony Blair look like he was hiding information". Dougan's statement is not relevant to my question of Bush's war policy unless he can show that this British intelligence was going straight to Bush. He also conveniently leaves out other sources that back up the war policy, inside British intel and outside.

But yeah, you're right, I don't have a grasp of the English language. I forgot that Bush is synonymous with Blair. Silly me.

By the way memebers of Congress had access to the same intel Bush did, pre war. Clinton did also. He publicly confirmed it.

British intel saying their sources were spotty should't counter a pro-war argument. Of course it was spotty. If we knew what was in Iraq we wouldn't have been pushing to get inspectors in.

I can assume I'm actually making a successful argument since you are being so dismissive. You never engage me when the facts are on my side. It's always "not worth giving the troll sources" or "mAAk just doesn't understand English".

I don't care if you choose to side against the Iraq War effort with new information available to you about the decision making process, but where is equal blame for Congress, who is the actual governing body that authorized this, and who had the same information? Hey I wonder how Kerry voted.

Seriously, I wonder. Did he vote for it before or after he voted against it? Refresh my memory. I can't blame him, he has such a grasp of the English language, plain-spoken folks can only blame themselves for not understanding.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

MaKK, I think you're the only person in the Western world, and that includes Capitol Hill and the White House, that hasn't abandoned every one of the many pretenses offered for this stupid war. Not that 99.99% of the rest of the world ever believed them in the first place. Not only that-- you write multi-paragraph messages proving that you don't understand a damned thing anyone is saying. Vote for Kerry.

---
What others say about boorite!

MaKK, are we able to vote for Congress? Can we hold a big election every four years and just vote that the entire body of Congress leaves? No, we cannot.

Why even bother quoting sources? You're the only one that ever really needs proof of anything, and when proof IS posted, you either ignore it or dismiss it. You never address it directly, and avoid any questions about the parts that you DIDN'T deem illegitimate.

So are you saying that because we didn't know what was in Iraq we had to invade it to find out?

Respond however you wish. Call me an idiot, call boorite a whatever, it doesn't matter. You're not even that frustrating anymore because its obvious your mind will not deviate even an iota from the Rapture-desiring path you are on.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

I just said if you want to disagree with the war that's fine, but remember the context it started in. It's like the people who say on September 10th 2001 it should have been obviously al Qaeda was going to crash planes into the Trade Center.

But you're right, I do still agree with the war. I don't know why you disagree with it. Gee could it be the upcoming election?

That's what I'm talking about. You're absolutely wrong there. Dig up some poll numbers and look at pre-war support for going into Iraq. But oh, facts don't matter because I'm a troll.

Just make up whatever you want. 99.99% of people know you're right anyway.

Welcome to irony town. You still obviously don't understand what I was saying about the political environment before the Iraq War. The very same political environment Kerry, who somehow holds none of the blame in your eyes, was a part of. But oh yes, I'm the one who doesn't understand.

Mikey:

Yes, Congress is elected by the people. We live in something called a "representative democracy".

You're right, we vote as frequently as every two years on Congress persons.

Are you suggesting that one branch of government should be punished for another branch's perceived misuse of power because their election is "sooner"? Great argument. Scroll down to where I call you an idiot for reference.

Because you just made up something about Bush being a war criminal that should be pretty easy to prove if it were true.

You still haven't tried to offer proof that Bush is a war criminal. I'm not going to accept something that isn't an answer to my question, like Dougan talking about Blair's information sources while I am talking about Bush's. There's a difference between responding to my post and actually offering proof.

You've never posted anything for me to respond about regarding Bush being a war criminal. If there's any other point you want me to directly address, as always, I welcome it.

Saddam was obstructing weapon inspectors. He was already in breach of U.N. agreements that made it legal to wage war on him. He could have allowed us to search his nation peacefully.

I did, with complete and utter clarity.

If you can't understand the three short sentences I typed in response, then you are an idiot.

boorite is a whatever

I'm just curious as to how Bush is being blamed for a function his branch of government isn't in charge of, which is going to war.

I'm also curious as to why you are so evasive when I ask what you mean by saying Bush is a war criminal.

I'm extremely confused at the lengths the Bush opposition goes to to find an ally, such that they are firmly positioned arguing that Saddam Hussein was better off in power, and that he deserved the benefit of the doubt.

I'm even doubly confused that Kerry is touted as the answer to the Bush "problem", when he backed the war policy, and has never said how he would deviate from it. Not that it matters, since Iraq is already sovereign. So what exactly is Kerry going to do different?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

I just said if you want to disagree with the war that's fine, but remember the context it started in. It's like the people who say on September 10th 2001 it should have been obviously al Qaeda was going to crash planes into the Trade Center.

But you're right, I do still agree with the war. I don't know why you disagree with it. Gee could it be the upcoming election?

That's what I'm talking about. You're absolutely wrong there. Dig up some poll numbers and look at pre-war support for going into Iraq. But oh, facts don't matter because I'm a troll.

Just make up whatever you want. 99.99% of people know you're right anyway.

Welcome to irony town. You still obviously don't understand what I was saying about the political environment before the Iraq War. The very same political environment Kerry, who somehow holds none of the blame in your eyes, was a part of. But oh yes, I'm the one who doesn't understand.

Mikey:

Yes, Congress is elected by the people. We live in something called a "representative democracy".

You're right, we vote as frequently as every two years on Congress persons.

Are you suggesting that one branch of government should be punished for another branch's perceived misuse of power because their election is "sooner"? Great argument. Scroll down to where I call you an idiot for reference.

Because you just made up something about Bush being a war criminal that should be pretty easy to prove if it were true.

You still haven't tried to offer proof that Bush is a war criminal. I'm not going to accept something that isn't an answer to my question, like Dougan talking about Blair's information sources while I am talking about Bush's. There's a difference between responding to my post and actually offering proof.

You've never posted anything for me to respond about regarding Bush being a war criminal. If there's any other point you want me to directly address, as always, I welcome it.

Saddam was obstructing weapon inspectors. He was already in breach of U.N. agreements that made it legal to wage war on him. He could have allowed us to search his nation peacefully.

I did, with complete and utter clarity.

If you can't understand the three short sentences I typed in response, then you are an idiot.

boorite is a whatever

I'm just curious as to how Bush is being blamed for a function his branch of government isn't in charge of, which is going to war.

I'm also curious as to why you are so evasive when I ask what you mean by saying Bush is a war criminal.

I'm extremely confused at the lengths the Bush opposition goes to to find an ally, such that they are firmly positioned arguing that Saddam Hussein was better off in power, and that he deserved the benefit of the doubt.

I'm even doubly confused that Kerry is touted as the answer to the Bush "problem", when he backed the war policy, and has never said how he would deviate from it. Not that it matters, since Iraq is already sovereign. So what exactly is Kerry going to do different?

---

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

That's really more of a coherent response than I expected.

You do understand the duties of Congress, and the election process in general, right? I'm sorry I took a mocking tone when there's a good chance those things aren't made clear to most students going through the school system these days.

That's why I thought your protest idea was silly, because it's an event that would occur anyway. If the Republicans wanted someone else as a candidate, they can vote any way they want to, even if their incumbent party leader is seeking renomination.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

I've tried to avoid putting my political view's on Stripcreator for some time now because I feel it really has no place here. But im so worked up right now that im going to anyway. Im just going to keep this very simple and in single sentance form so its easy to understand, because there seems to be lots of confusion between the many strippers here (MAAK and Everyone else, mostly). :)

1) Fuck War, which should be avoided at all costs, no exceptions.

2) Fuck Bush, who thinks he is John Wayne.

3) Fuck Republicans.

4) Fuck Democrats.

5) Fuck Third Partys.

6) Fuck Democracy as a system.

7) Fuck Iraq, and Fuck Oil too.

8) Fuck Saudi Arabia, and their funding of Mr. Bush's oil companys.

9) Fuck Halliburton, and any other company that would have Dick as anything other than a janitor.

10) Fuck the bias right-wing media.

11) Fuck the bias left-wing media.

12) Fuck everyone else that refuses to tell it like it is(which is about everyone on earth).

13) Fuck the people who sit and criticize, but do nothing to help.

14) Fuck anyone who disagree's with this(Not really, I just felt this chat needed another "Fuck".).

And most importantly, a line from The Unseen song "Goodbye America"

15) Goodbye America, Fuck you America!

Im moving to Canada soon.

---
"No obscene images." I guess I'll just have to settle for saying cocksucker a lot.

Yeah whatever, you're an idiot.

Anyway:

Boorte said,

Here are some pre war poll numbers from Zogby.

This includes interesting figures such as 47% of likely voters suporting the war in Iraq if "It included sending in hundreds of thousands of US ground troops" in Feb 2003.

But more to your point, when asked "What is the greatest danger to the U.S." 30% said Iraq in early Feburary 2003.

No one believed but .01% believed it?

What other information are you using to support that?

How could, as you say, even capitol hill no longer support the war when it is basically over? Are you saying we should pull the plug on protecting the new Iraq government? Is that your interpretation of what the current "war" is? If not, what is it?

Hm. Maybe you meant Canadians no longer support the war.

Well, that's impressive. Well, they aren't really in the war. And they don't vote. At least I don't think they do.

Mikey:

Here are some sources. Where are yours?

Here's why we invaded. I put it in plain English to save the tedium, but since you're so eager for it:

Authority to use force against Iraq exists from the combined effect of resolutions 678, 687 and 1441. All of these resolutions were adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter which allows the use of force for the express purpose of restoring international peace and security:

1. In resolution 678 the Security Council authorised force against Iraq, to eject it from Kuwait and to restore peace and security in the area.

2. In resolution 687, which set out the ceasefire conditions after Operation Desert Storm, the Security Council imposed continuing obligations on Iraq to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction in order to restore international peace and security in the area. Resolution 687 suspended but did not terminate the authority to use force under resolution 678.

3. A material breach of resolution 687 revives the authority to use force under resolution 678.

4. In resolution 1441 the Security Council determined that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of resolution 687, because it has not fully complied with its obligations to disarm under that resolution.

5. The Security Council in resolution 1441 gave Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" and warned Iraq of the "serious consequences" if it did not.

6. The Security Council also decided in resolution 1441 that, if Iraq failed at any time to comply with and cooperate fully in the implementation of resolution 1441, that would constitute a further material breach.

7. It is plain that Iraq has failed so to comply and therefore Iraq was at the time of resolution 1441 and continues to be in material breach.

8. Thus, the authority to use force under resolution 678 has revived and so continues today.

9. Resolution 1441 would in terms have provided that a further decision of the Security Council to sanction force was required if that had been intended. Thus, all that resolution 1441 requires is reporting to and discussion by the Security Council of Iraq's failures, but not an express further decision to authorise force.

So I'll wait for any response. I guess I should hold my breath. Perhaps you'll lodge a good "Bush is a doody head" at me, leaving me powerless to respond.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

...and yet all that rambling about the UN came from someone who didn't give a crap whether or not we had authorization from the UN to invade Iraq.

---
Think classy, you'll be classy.

I think the question is in your point #7. The inspectors were never given time to complete their inspections, and no WMDs were never found.

---
...Trot and Cap'n Bill were free from anxiety and care. Button-Bright never worried about anything. The Scarecrow, not being able to sleep, looked out of the window and tried to count the stars.

MaKK, I specified "the rest of the world." Also there is a qualification in your cited support for going into Iraq, a qualification which is seldom mentioned. "With international support." Specifically, with UNSC support. That was in the polls. Daddy Bush managed to get it. Shrub did not. He did it anyway. Even his father was against it. He is lame, and you are lame. Give it up.

Oh, and please don't talk to me about Zogby. Are you familiar with Zogby? Christ, this is like talking to a chimp.

---
What others say about boorite!

Also, Colin Powell was against it, because it defied the Powell Doctrine (which you might want to look into). Powell went along with his President because of either loyalty or cowardice, depending on how you look at it. Either way, this war appears, well, stupid. Also rapacious, greedy, and utterly, utterly failed. Oh wait, Halliburton made money, so it was a success.

See you in hell.

---
What others say about boorite!

You said that French, Russian and British intelligence, as well as Clinton, supported the idea that Iraq was a threat. I thought you were attmepting to show there was a pre-war consensus on the threat from Iraq, but apparently not. Did you mean only that intelligence which these four parties were sharing with Bush?

You said there was British intelligence which said that Saddam was a threat. Since most intel seems to have been saying that nothing is really known about his capabilities, specifically what are you referring to?

quote:

---

Hey I wonder how Kerry voted.

Seriously, I wonder. Did he vote for it before or after he voted against it? Refresh my memory. I can't blame him, he has such a grasp of the English language, plain-spoken folks can only blame themselves for not understanding.

---

Yeah, well, anyone who thinks Kerry is going to stay out of pointless wars isn't really to be taken seriously.

Hey Makk, scroll back about 10 pages, maybe even like 20, and you'll see a "discussion" where I challenged you to provide sources for your claims, which you patently refused to do. I provided sources and articles and you did not. All of a sudden you want to "play the game"?

I, too, find it hilarious that you quote UN charter when the UN became irrelevant when it voted against Shrub's wishes.

You need an enema.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Mikey was the one complaining about the war being illegal, and he refused to offer evidence of what he meant, so I had to provide my own.

Their job was obstructed. You're right, Saddam didn't give them the time they needed.

Boorite:

Well I found a figure from a poll done in Canada. Can you show me that poll from "the rest of the world"? Last I checked the rest of the world didn't vote in American elections anyway.

Wow, great argument.

Bush Sr.'s international support would have fallen apart if he had gone into Iraq. The reason he kept it was that he kept his pledge not to. They aren't two valid comparissons.

You can offer any other evidence you want. You don't seem to be able to though. I'm pretty sure you can't since your points seem to be largely subjective.

The Powell Doctrine isn't law. Also you seem to forget Powell in front of the U.N., calling for the war. Oh wait, you say:

Because of reasons you made up. Well, good enough for me!

No sources on this I imagine.

Oh no, not stupid.

Oh whew, those are good things. I think.

quote:

---

Oh wait, Halliburton made money, so it was a success.

See you in hell.

---

Somehow I knew you'd work Halliburton back into a completely unrelated argument.

Dougan:

Yes, we were talking about Bush's run up to war. I'm sorry for biting your head off.

The intelligence that said he was actively seeking yellow cake uranium.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Hey I wonder how Kerry voted.

Seriously, I wonder. Did he vote for it before or after he voted against it? Refresh my memory. I can't blame him, he has such a grasp of the English language, plain-spoken folks can only blame themselves for not understanding.

---

Yeah, well, anyone who thinks Kerry is going to stay out of pointless wars isn't really to be taken seriously.

---

Unless a civil war breaks out, there isn't much he could do to step up the war, and it would be silly at this point to pull troops out.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Mikey was the one complaining about the war being illegal, and he refused to offer evidence of what he meant, so I had to provide my own.

---

Ahh, I see. So it's ok for MaKK to suddenly care about the UN.

MaKK is a liberal, and he approves of this message.

---
Think classy, you'll be classy.

Yes, we were talking about Bush's run up to war. I'm sorry for biting your head off.

---

So what intel did Clinton share with Bush? What did Russia?

The intelligence that said he was actively seeking yellow cake uranium.

---

Which, sadly, the CIA knew was false before the Statue of the Union.

niteowl:

quote:

---

Ahh, I see. So it's ok for MaKK to suddenly care about the UN.

MaKK is a liberal, and he approves of this message.

---

You've ignored my response and just made your same statement again.

Once again, I didn't say I cared. I was trying to conceive of any possible scenario that Mikey might be using to support his "Bush is criminal!" opinion. Also my expressed distaste was mainly for many U.N. member nations who are otherwise dispicable, but suddenly high and mighty with moral authority when their opinions are expressed in the U.N.

Clinton said, when Bush was under fire with false allegations that he twisted intelligence, that the intel Bush presented was the same intel he was getting. He debunked the claims of wrong-doing.

They have publicly stated since the war that the intel they had and shared with the U.S. before the war backed up their assessment of Saddam as a threat.

They were at least suspicious their sources were made up, I don't know if they knew it was not true. But my main point was the climate pre-war. The public gave their support for the war knowing the evidence was largely circumstantial. Even if the yellow cake intel was true, it wouldn't have meant that the U.S. would find yellow cake in Iraq. It just spoke to their intent to aquire materials for nuclear weapons. Boorite has said everyone was so skeptical pre-war of this information, which is a flat out lie. Much of the media, public, and Cognress was at least complicit in the run-up to war. But suddenly, in hindsight, (and during an election summer) he suggests it's all Bush's fault that mistakes were made anywhere in the process that led to war. Logically you have to disagree with this.

The biggest mistakes were made in the intel agencies. I know at least in the U.S. congress has intel oversight comittees. If the moral outrage for transparency is so great and heart-felt, where's the equal criticism in these other areas?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

For those of you who like pictures.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008