So that's a no, in that book there is no solid research about the subject you pretended was in there.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

the answer is no, im not going to do your thinking or research for you. just dont be so dim as to suggest everything i say is unfounded.

Have you even read that book, Nate?

Yes, why else would I have posted the cover?

I'm not asking you to do research, I'm asking you to share the knowledge you claim to have gained from the book.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

No. simply put, I made a statement, you said i was "talking out of my ass", i let you know it was based on a book to refute that, and now you want to know "What chapter and verse". I'm not playing your games - you're playing mine now.

You don't think a book available from a site "designed to bring you the best conservative books available" might be a tad biased in its viewpoint? Let's face it, the site describes Rumsfeld as "a modern-day American Hero".

i didn't know it was sold exclusively from such websites.

And despite the books aleged bias, my real point was that most of the people bickering in this forum seem to have not really ...

ah forget it, not worth the effort.

What do you mean playing games? Just give me one source they cite that backs up what you were saying.

Also, THIS book proves everything I have said.

You obviously know NOTHING about ANYTHING because you have never read it.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

It's called history.

Where in that book does it say we invaded Iraq this year to take back weapons we gave them? And if it says that, what official source is it based on? (Note: a college web page is not an official source)

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

you know what mAAk?

fehhhh

It's not in there is it? Just admit it. You opened up your ass and started talking out of it.

Of all the reasons I've heard for going to war, I never remember anyone saying we had to "go get the weapons we gave him". If we gave him WMDs, then we would DEFINTELY know Saddam had them, and going to war wouldn't have been such a stickey wicket. If you're talking about traditional weapons, again, if you think Saddam's traditional military capabilities were a threat to us, you obviously missed us cutting through Iraq's military like a hot knife through butter earlier this year.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

0-I-L

Focus people! FOCUS!

0-I-L

That is why we are there and not Cuba. These altruistic blatherings fall apart when we consider that we didn't go somewhere else first.

Say it with me now...

0-I-L

---
"Jelly-belly gigglin, dancin and a-wigglin, honey that's the way I am!" Janice the Muppet

quote:

---

It's not in there is it? Just admit it. You opened up your ass and started talking out of it.

Of all the reasons I've heard for going to war, I never remember anyone saying we had to "go get the weapons we gave him". If we gave him WMDs, then we would DEFINTELY know Saddam had them, and going to war wouldn't have been such a stickey wicket. If you're talking about traditional weapons, again, if you think Saddam's traditional military capabilities were a threat to us, you obviously missed us cutting through Iraq's military like a hot knife through butter earlier this year.

---

We invaded Iraq to (in order of importance to the Bush Administration):

1. Steer the dialogue for the 2002 congressional elections away from the lousy economy onto an issue where one could attacked as unpatriotic if they didn't support an attack. The whole news cycle changed. Funny that.

2. Have a big military victory in their pocket for the 2004 presidential election. I think they believed their own lies here -- that we would be greeted as liberators and the oh-so educated Iraqi's would want to set up a democratic government quickly.

3. Gain a long-term political foothold and influence in a strategic oil-producing region. The aforementioned Iraqi's would, of course, feel forever in our debt.

4. Reward corporate contributors (Halliburton, et al) with reconstruction contracts.

Plan #1 worked like a charm. As for the rest, it has yet to be seen, but it's not exactly working out as planned.

And anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their ass.

---
...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.

my reason wasn't the only reason; don't forget about revitalizing our econemy(which im very happy with).

So what if it was a photo-op/large scale propaganda. Good things happend. Some soldiers(who elect themselves to that position) and some iraqis(who were the enemy) and some civilians(regretebly) died. I think we're better off than we were before.

The economy isn't as recovering as much as you think.

Here's some snippets from this article :

Notice the words in bold.

Merry Christmas!

Ouch. I won't bring up the 2 million jobs lost since Bush got in office. That should be common knowledge by now, right?

My sentiments exactly. There's issues here in this country that need to be fixed now. Like the fact that we are facing a record national debt in the trillions within the next 10 years. That programs are being cut left and right. Education. Environment. Health Care. Things that affect YOU. Plus, as Spankling alluded to earlier, even the soldiers in Iraq aren't exempt to this wishy-washy bullshit either, as their pay and benefits are getting cut too. Quite a reward for soldiers who get shot at on a daily basis while serving their country.

Instead, we spend billions upon billions to go invade and occupy Iraq...THEN, after his cute little "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists" speech (and alienating virtually the entire world), Bush has the audacity to go around from country to country asking for help in the reconstruction.

I shudder when I think of what kind of shape this country will be in when my kids are in their 20's and 30's.

P.S. This country isn't any safer than it was before 9/11. Just ask that college student who brought all those knives on planes unnoticed and then e-mailed the TSA, only to have them ignore it completely. Gee, maybe they thought it was spam.

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

Going to have to nail you again nate, war doesn't necessairly improve the economy.

Also:

I missed the "solid facts" where the United States said our reason for going into Iraq was to "get back our weapons". Also it wasn't to "take care of a problem we started", it was to finish a war that never ended.

Also what abourt the book you claimed contained all the answers about what weapons we "went in to take back"? Or maybe you are hoping we'll forget about that.

Are you saying we made Saddam invade Kuwait? If we had not acted then, yes, I might concede our inaction helped created a stronger, more dangerous Iraq. Just because someone betrays someone doesn't mean the burden of guilt goes on the one who was betrayed.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

quote:

---

Are you saying we made Saddam invade Kuwait? If we had not acted then, yes, I might concede our inaction helped created a stronger, more dangerous Iraq.

---

Hey, MaaK, don't look now, your rhetoric is burning! You can swing around all the insults you want, but the truth is that at least Nate has done enough research (albeit in the wrong places) and provided examples, while YOU, on the other hand, have just vomited out garbage. Where are your examples?

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

What are you talking about? Nate said in that book explained why we went into Iraq to "get back the weapons we gave them". He never showed where in the book it explained this, much less what sources it used to back them up.

What do you want examples of?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

*sigh* Ok, Nate HAS posted links to articles. YOU, MaaK, have done nothing other than vomit your uninformed opinions. You base your entire philosophy on things you can't even show people. Where is the truth that you use to formulate your opinions?

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

Maybe if you could narrow down your quesiton to specific points you wouldn't seem purely argumentative. Also his articles didn't exactly prove that we went into Iraq to get back weapons we left there. I'm sorry if you believe everything you read on the Internet.

And I was calling him out for making it sound like that book had proof about this. The fact that he had to go to an iran-culture web site and someone's cheap and obviously radical left propaganda site to avoid answering the question makes my point, not his.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Once again, you miss the point. Don't believe everything you see on T.V., either, buddy boy. Nate doesn't even factor into this discussion, but I am amused by your focus on him. He seems to be a fence-sitter, which means he is no use to either of us in this discussion. The focus was on you. Provide some proof of your beliefs and reasons. Forget Nate, because you obviously missed the point that although his 'proof' was garbage, he at least went looking for it. You, on the other hand, haven't allowed anyone to think that you're basing your opinions on anything other than possibly hateful, biased anger.

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