MaKK logic as we know it:

quote:

---

Well I found a figure from a poll done in Canada. Can you show me that poll from "the rest of the world"?

---

"The rest of the world," as opposed to "the Western world," as stated in the message you are quoting.

Canada is part of "the Western world."

It is pretty much as West as we are.

You cannot read. You cannot reason. You are a mook.

Whatever that is supposed to mean.

quote:

---

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.

---

He did go into Iraq, you idiot.

I can't go on like this. The rest would be the same. Forget it.

---
What others say about boorite!

quote:

---

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.

---

You've been saying all throughout this thread that we, The almighty USA, don't have to answer to anyone and that there were solid reasons (Iraq was linked to 9-11, Saddam was a threat to world peace, he had WMDs, he farts too much, etc etc) for going to war. Why bring the UN into the discussion as a rebuke to Mikey, especially since you have such a "distaste" for them? Afraid your "solid reasons" aren't good enough?

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

Gosh I've been prone to typos lately. It must be Bush's fault.

Big Baby Boorite:

quote:

---

"The rest of the world," as opposed to "the Western world," as stated in the message you are quoting.

Canada is part of "the Western world."

It is pretty much as West as we are.

You cannot read. You cannot reason. You are a mook.

---

Canada was the only nation I found with ready poll data on the subject. If you have other data to prove you didn't yank your statement from your ass I'd like to see it.

Whatever that is supposed to mean.

---

I'm sure the "rest of the world" is as concerned about America's security as America, and I'm sure American politicians are concerned with overseas opinion polls.

He did go into Iraq, you idiot.

I can't go on like this. The rest would be the same. Forget it.

---

You know what I meant, he didn't take out Saddam Hussein. That was his pledge to keep the Arab coalition together. This whole war was about taking out Saddam Hussein, I didn't imagine I had to be that specific.

I like how you trail off and get "exasperated" before addressing one of my very defensible points. Bravo.

niteowl:

Show me where I said that.

I certainly never said that.

That is true and I said something to that effect.

I never said that. I in fact have argued several times we should have gone in whether or not he had WMDs.

Also true.

I told you why, because Mikey argued that he was a war criminal. He's certainly not a criminal in the eyes of the U.S. law, so I was demonstrating to Mikey that he's not a criminal in the eyes of the U.N. either.

I did ask why we should listen to U.N. member nations on matters of how to protect our own country, and I have not yet gotten a good answer to that question. (Other than boorite's circular argument that boils down to "because the U.N. says we should")

Otherwise I don't know what your problem is with what I've said. Calm down and have a colonic.

dougan:

Now you're talking.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

No, MaKK, I don't know what you mean. I know what you write, and it is a load of gibberish.

---
What others say about boorite!

Well, the U.S. has been found guilty of terrorism in the World Court before and have we been punished for it? If the U.N. considered Bush a war criminal, would they prosecute him? Would they go as far as to even call him one with such a precedent having been set?

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

Ok. You compared Bush's less popular coalition to Bush Sr.'s coalition. Bush Sr.'s coalition was predicated on the basis that he would not march on to Baghdad and take out Hussein. The current Bush's war was predicated on the basis that he would. You can't make an equal comparisson based on that. Ousting Saddam from Iraq is a much bigger deal than ousting him from Kuwait.

So Bush is a criminal because the U.N. would never prosecute. Great, makes perfect sense.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

quote:

---

That is true and I said something to that effect.

---

If you honestly think that there will ever be "World Peace", then your the idiot.

I think that our ancestors would shit themselves at the site of this. The original policy for America was that we stay out of everyone's business. We isolated ourselves to stay away from the Europe that we broke off from. Now we are the global fucking police and we have our fingers in every countries ass while keeping our head in our own rectum as well. America has always gone into EVERY situation ass-backwards. We almost didn't participate in WW2, because the slaughter of the entire Jewish race wasn't our problem. Had the Japanese not attacked Pearl Harbor we would have never been involved in the war, and the Jewish community may not exist today. A war that could end the suffering of millions isn't important, but that oil...Now that's a cause worth fighting for! And that Vietnam, that sounds good!

And MaKK, you said that pulling troops out of Iraq now would be stupid. What purpose do you think they serve over there? What do you really believe that they are doing over there? The way I see it, they are just dying for no reason. They are just sitting ducks waiting to be shot.

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

quote:

---

And MaKK, you said that pulling troops out of Iraq now would be stupid. What purpose do you think they serve over there? What do you really believe that they are doing over there? The way I see it, they are just dying for no reason. They are just sitting ducks waiting to be shot.

---

Oh, and wasn't MaKK celebrating our "Mission Accomplished" recently? So would you like to keep them there even though we've accomplished our mission? Seems pretty inane to me.

Seriously, when is Bush just going to come out and admit that he's lying to us all the time? Didn't he say that we were done like six months ago? We're still there killing off insurgents... but NOW we're finished. I'm totally confused by the logic behind our positioning in Iraq.

And now that we've established a Democratic presence in Iraq... they've instituted martial law. Just fucking great.

Here's another fun quote from Bush: Someone was questioning Bush about Dick Cheney being able to stand up to John Edwards, who's more charismatic, younger, and appealing. Bush said, "Dick Cheney can be president."

Show me where I said that.

---

You've said countless times that we don't have to answer to anyone in the international community (especially the UN) when it comes to "protecting our country". If you're waiting for me to dredge up every example in this thread, you'll be waiting a long time. You know you've said it.

I'm fine...I think you're the one who needs to calm down.

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

You are correct, Ewwwww. If we actually cared about making the world a better place like we say, instead of just having an ulterior (and usually sinister) motive for every war, then our troops would be in Sudan right now stopping the genocide going on there instead of Iraq.

Hell, we gave the Taliban millions in aid just a few months before we suddenly woke up one September morning and realized they weren't such great friends afterall.

---
Destroying my reputation one post at a time.

He should have said, "Dick Cheney is the President." Let's face it, as much as I revile him and everything he stands for, GWB is a sock puppet. The real power and decision-making rests with Cheney and Rove.

---
...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.

That was aid to Afghanistan, though. Powell said at the time that it bypassed the Taliban.

Ewww:

If you believe less troops are better, Kerry has said he we actually increase the number of troops in Iraq.

But, to answer your question, they are the only thing that stands between the terrorists in completely taking over Iraq, or plunging it into civil war.

dolt:

Mission accomplished again.

He will be.

niteowl

You're right, I don't care about their opinions on how to deal with U.S. security, and I wouldn't trust them with the task.

We also legally engaged a war according to their standards.

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

fuzzyman:

Why? Because all the funny political cartoons say so?

Hey this is a funny cartoon:

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

quote:

---

quote:

---

He should have said, "Dick Cheney is the President." Let's face it, as much as I revile him and everything he stands for, GWB is a sock puppet. The real power and decision-making rests with Cheney and Rove.

---

Why? Because all the funny political cartoons say so?

---

Let's see. The man can't speak coherently without a script in front of him. He has done fewer press conferences than any president in my lifetime. He had to appear in front of the 9/11 comission with Cheney at his side.

It obvious that the man doesn't have the wits to intelligently answer questions about his positions and policies on his own.

---
...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.

Fuck you, MaKK, I'm not going around calling you a dolt. And you didn't respond to my question in any way. If it's "Mission Accomplished" then why keep our troops there?

Something that the administration doesn't realize is that every day we spend in Iraq just makes more terrorists. Go see Control Room, a movie about Al-Jazeera and the way the Arab world sees the war. There are little kids (seriously, 11-year olds) who see what's going on around them in their own town and get fed up... they become car-bombers.

C'mon... maybe that's who it was intended for, but you honestly think the Taliban, corrupt as they were, didn't make sure all the money was funneled to them and their buddies in Al Qaeda?

If I remember, Saddam pulled the same trick when countries sent aid to Iraq intended for civilians. He used it for his army and government.

---
Destroying my reputation one post at a time.

fuzzyman:

Actually if you were paying attention he speaks very well when he has no script. When he's reading from a script he gets tripped up. I know some good smart people that have trouble with public speaking. Are you calling them sock puppets? Well, one of them actually is, but, you know what I mean.

How does that make him a sock puppet? I thought a "sock puppet" would be a mouthpiece.

They did that so they wouldn't risk giving diverging testimonies that could be nit picked over to accuse them of hiding things, and used as fodder in an election year. It was the smartest and most correct thing to do.

It obvious?

Wow, you've fumbled up. You must be Dick Cheney's sock puppet.

smelltard:

Please don't.

Yes I did I called you a dolt.

We can have two missions. Jeez.

And police make more criminals!

No.

All car bombers should be at least old enough to drive. I've said it before and I stand by my policies.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

C'mon... maybe that's who it was intended for, but you honestly think the Taliban, corrupt as they were, didn't make sure all the money was funneled to them and their buddies in Al Qaeda?

If I remember, Saddam pulled the same trick when countries sent aid to Iraq intended for civilians. He used it for his army and government.

---

So aid should never be given to countries which are ruled by dictatorships?

Until we can come up with a viable solution to make sure the money goes where it's intended to go, instead of helping to arm the enemy... then no, I don't think we should give dictatorships money.

---
Destroying my reputation one post at a time.

I'm sure the Iranian earthquake victims would agree with you.

American whiners blame our country for not wanting to send enough money to the poor people of other countries, then turn around and blame the country for the money we do send to such countries when it hits the media one way or another that the government ruling the country is bad. And of course Americans have guns, our police have guns, our FBI has guns and our military has guns, even my dog has his own gun, but if guns are involved in any party of funds sent to another country we've obviously lost our minds.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

quote:

---

No.

All car bombers should be at least old enough to drive. I've said it before and I stand by my policies.

---

So... You don't give a shit what the people being bombed think?

And people can hook a fucking bomb up to a car without needing to know how to drive it...

you know, what, I'm just going to leave this thread alone, because it's clear that it's people just getting into fights with MaKK over politics. But in any case...

MaKK:

Please, don't turn this into a "fuck you, no fuck YOU" war, people. MaKK is a troll and when he calls you a dolt, you should realize he's just upset at himself because he cannot comprehend anything other than the rhetoric he's been force-fed ad nauseum until it became his.

My favorite MaKK quote of the day:

I love how you just throw shit in here like that completely out of context. Was the discussion about Kerry? Was anyone defending Kerry? You seem to have a less-than-healthy obsession with that craggy horse-faced bastard. Take some more Lithium and have a nap.

Most of the people here could give a fuck about Kerry either, and if they DO give a fuck, they haven't really made it obvious. I've watched you bring up Clinton completely out of context as well. Here's how the conversation usually goes, Makk.

___________________________________________________

Random User: Bush did such and such and it was wrong.

MaKK Clinton did that same thing in office, why don't you hate him?

ANSWER: Who says I don't? What the fuck is the point?
___________________________________________________

Random User: Bush ok'd this and that.

MaKK: With John Kerry's O.K. as well! What about him? He blah blah blah!

ANSWER: Yes.
______________________________________________________

The only thing I can think of to rationalize your responses is that you take attacks on Bush personally. That seems why you react so defensively and personally. Are you related to the guy? Or are you in virulent gay love with him?

P.S. - Virulent is quite the right word in this context.

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

quote:

---

So... You don't give a shit what the people being bombed think?

And people can hook a fucking bomb up to a car without needing to know how to drive it...

---

And a fourteen yeard old CAN drive. I just don't think they SHOULD. God you are so dense.

quote:

---

you know, what, I'm just going to leave this thread alone, because it's clear that it's people just getting into fights with MaKK over politics. But in any case...

MaKK:

You are a beautiful person.

---

Thank you!

Mikey:

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you believe less troops are better, Kerry has said he we actually increase the number of troops in Iraq.

---

I love how you just throw shit in here like that completely out of context. Was the discussion about Kerry? Was anyone defending Kerry?

---

You were talking about voting Bush out of office, and when someone brought up the question of troops "remaining as targets" it's appropriate to point out the person who would replace Bush would bring in more "targets", not less. It's 100% appropriate and instead of arguing against such a logical point to bring up, you just say the point makes you mad.

Does it make you mad because it points out you don't have a logical argument?

It has been implied that Bush made up threat intel. Pointing out that his predecessor, who had no intention of going into Baghdad, publicly had the same intel, is once again very appropriate. I wonder why it makes you so angry.

quote:

---

Random User: Bush did such and such and it was wrong.

MaKK Clinton did that same thing in office, why don't you hate him?

ANSWER: Who says I don't? What the fuck is the point?

---

The point of Clinton having the same information makes it hard to argue that Bush made up or altered the intel. It's pretty straight forward without going off into imagination land.

quote:

---

Random User: Bush ok'd this and that.

MaKK: With John Kerry's O.K. as well! What about him? He blah blah blah!

ANSWER: Yes.

---

I don't really know what you're referring to here. If I bring up a specific point you're always welcome to question it at the time, and I can clear it up, like this quesion of intel from the last administration. If you had a specific example, though, you could easily list it without saying "Bush said this and that."

Well I say: Bush DIDN'T say this and that!

Can't I be both of those things?

You're done talking now.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008