[MauserboyM48]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9YuD9kYK9I

Wow. He basically argued the same arguments of the anti-war voice today.

What do you turkeyhawks have to say about this? Here is the most passionate advocate of the war today, saying the reasons why invading Iraq would be a disaster. They knew it then, but they chose to forget it when they invaded. Good going Dick.

 

[falm16]

quite a few light years from 1994 to 2001.

 

[ret_marine2003]

I like pancakes.

And Bunnies.

With butter and syrup.

 

[mkgr22]

I like pancakes.

And Bunnies.

With butter and syrup.

I hate Bunnies. They eat my garden.

And George Bush put them there to do it.


And when I shoot them, the blood is on W's hands.

 

[MauserboyM48]

Just as I figured. So all of you see how wrong you are for supporting this war? Even good old Dick doesn't think it would be a good idea.

 

[EricOKC]

Just as I figured. So all of you see how wrong you are for supporting this war? Even good old Dick doesn't think it would be a good idea.

That interview took place about ten years before we invaded, didn't it?

We'd probably have a harder time justifying invading Nazi Germany in 1934 than in 1944, wouldn't you?


When Iraq surrendered in the 1991 Gulf war, a number of terms were set down that Iraq had to abide by, with surrendering Weapons of Mass Destruction just one of many.

As you may or may not remember, Slick Willy went public countless times threatening Iraq with invasion if he did not comply with the terms of their surrender, but to Slick Willy's relief, Saddam would back down a bit each time.

Perhaps you have forgotten how Saddam used to crack jokes about Willy bombing Iraq to draw attention away from Monica?

Anyway, by the end of Willy's term, the UN was unable to monitor WMD's, as well as a number of other possible violations, and Willy didn't want to have to use force to get the UN back in.

I do feel that this admin did need to put more emphasis on the other violations as well when they invaded though.

Anyway, all that aside.
Iran is going to build nuclear weapons, we all know that.
Iraq would have built or bought some also, as they were pretty much an enemy of Iran.
We'd now have a nuclear arms race between Iraq and Iran, with the arsenal going over to Saddam's sons when he left power.

So, Mauser, how would you want to handle sending troops into Iraq in the future, knowing Iraq may have nuclear weapons?

 

[jjk308 In Memoriam RIP]

Eric, the Mauserchild has conveniently disremembered everything that conflicts with his preconceived notions. IMHO he and the other Liberaltarians have these notions as a sort of personal ego booster, just to be different, a rebel, an actor, larger than life, on their own little stage. There's sure no deep thought behind them or any recognition of the historical context behind any of the quotations he dredges up.

I'll close with MY favorite quote:

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. THOSE WHO DO NOT REMEMBER THE PAST ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT."

George Santayana 1863 –1952 , philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist.

 

[MauserboyM48]

Wow! What a surprise! A total evasion of the topic!

It doesn't matter if its 10 years or 200 years later. The political and religious conflicts in that area are OVER A THOUSAND years old. What we are seeing unfold is exactly what Dick warned us about.

 

[ret_marine2003]

Eric, the Mauserchild has conveniently disremembered everything that conflicts with his preconceived notions. IMHO he and the other Liberaltarians have these notions as a sort of personal ego booster, just to be different, a rebel, an actor, larger than life, on their own little stage. There's sure no deep thought behind them or any recognition of the historical context behind any of the quotations he dredges up.

I'll close with MY favorite quote:

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. THOSE WHO DO NOT REMEMBER THE PAST ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT."

George Santayana 1863 –1952 , philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist.

...but he wont have the capacity to read and understand any of this unless a team leader at "move.on.org" tells him how to think...



Now where is my syrup at...

 

[MauserboyM48]

.
Now where is my syrup at...

Right next to the kool-aid and Bush propaganda...

 

[ret_marine2003]

I know you are but what am I...to infinity...plus one.

now back to those pancakes....

 

[EricOKC]

Wow! What a surprise! A total evasion of the topic!

It doesn't matter if its 10 years or 200 years later. The political and religious conflicts in that area are OVER A THOUSAND years old. What we are seeing unfold is exactly what Dick warned us about.

Mauser,
I'm sorry, but I seem to have addressed the topic, and you even referenced it in your above quote.

Any war we fight anywhere has political and religious conflicts going back a thousand years...that cliche is really getting worn out.
Does the word "Europe" ring a bell, Mauserboy?
England, Italy, Germany, France, etc., have been fighting each other for well over a thousand years over politics and religion, but we went there at least twice in the first 50 years of the 20th century.
By and large, I'd say Europe has known the longest length of time in peace since WW2, even with Ivan breathing down its back.

Same may be said for greater Asia.

 

[ret_marine2003]

Mauser,
I'm sorry, but I seem to have addressed the topic, and you even referenced it in your above quote.

Any war we fight anywhere has political and religious conflicts going back a thousand years...that cliche is really getting worn out.
Does the word "Europe" ring a bell, Mauserboy?
England, Italy, Germany, France, etc., have been fighting each other for well over a thousand years over politics and religion, but we went there at least twice in the first 50 years of the 20th century.
By and large, I'd say Europe has known the longest length of time in peace since WW2, even with Ivan breathing down its back.

Same may be said for greater Asia.

You just cant get through to the lad with facts Eric, he isn't going to have any of it unless it is "Coast to Coast AM or Art Bell certified" to be true.

His other sources include U.S. News, The Globe, and The National Enquirer...followed distantly by the New York Times... which may not count because the times leans too far right for him.

"Pinwheel pinwheel spinning around, come on over and see what I found...."

 

[MauserboyM48]

Mauser,
I'm sorry, but I seem to have addressed the topic, and you even referenced it in your above quote.

Any war we fight anywhere has political and religious conflicts going back a thousand years...that cliche is really getting worn out.
Does the word "Europe" ring a bell, Mauserboy?
England, Italy, Germany, France, etc., have been fighting each other for well over a thousand years over politics and religion, but we went there at least twice in the first 50 years of the 20th century.
By and large, I'd say Europe has known the longest length of time in peace since WW2, even with Ivan breathing down its back.

Same may be said for greater Asia.

But we understood the region and we had a strategy in place in which to deal with these issues. Quarrels amongst nations don't last thousands of years, maybe decades, possibly a century but never a thousand. A thousand years ago there was no germany. The alliances and quarrels changed all the time. England vs France and Spain, Spain Vs England and France, etc. The struggle we are seeing unfold today in Iraq is something we don't understand. We try to put a western style solution onto this region time and time again and we continually screw it up. France in Syria and Lebanon, England in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, it doesn't work. We don't understand the irrationality of the politics of the region. It is a totally different culture and way of life over there. We could never relate to them the way we think we do. As George Bush said in the year 2000, "we shouldn't bully other countries around...tell them what to think and how to act."
The Republican party has stepped away from that and so has America. We need to go back to our traditions and not think we can go around the world and bully and boss others around and then think we won't incite hatred towards us. Ignorance got us into Iraq and ignorance won't get us out.
The points cheney made in 1994 are 100% correct. It is exactly what we are seeing today in Iraq. The kurds are disturbing the border with Turkey. The Shia are closely linked with Iraq and are fighting Sunnis. Everything he said in 1994 has come true today. You have to wake up to this fact and stop clinging to a failed policy.

 

[unbekannt]

This ISN'T a war among nations, it is a war of IDEOLOGY, --radical islam against ANYONE who doesn't BELIEVE what the jihadists believe.--
Islam and other religions (protestants vs catholics, hindus vs islam for example) have been in conflicts for thousands of years reguardless of what politcal lines are drawn on a map.
THIS IS A GLOBAL WAR!!!!
How does one negotiate with someone who is willing to die for thier beliefs, kill anyone who doesn't share thier beliefs, and would like to see the world under Islamic law. How does one expect to live in peace with these fanatics?
Has anyone noticed the spread of islam on a global scale? Has anyone listened to what the religious leaders of have planned and are preaching?

To think that to have American forces simply leave Iraq and sit here while they plot to kill us is simply, silly.

The only solution is to kill as many of them OVER THERE than to allow them to come over here and kill us in our homeland.

Radical islam has been at war with us in one form or another for centuries.
Barbary pirates, USMC hymm lyric "...to the shores of Tripoli" come to mind.

Is it not better to deal with the people who would do us harm on the otherside of the world than to live as the Israelies do and wonder when the next attack will be, living a way of life none of us ever thought possible?

It has been six years since 9/11 and there hasn't been a successfull attack. Who knows how many attempts have been foiled due to national policy that takes the fight to the enemy in a miltary action and NOT fight terrorism as a law enforcement operation as in the last presidential admin.

The world is a vastly different place since 1994.

If one wants to live in a world of illusion, and ignore the reality we as nation find ourselves in, is... well, I don't know what to say...

The failed international policies (do nothing and live on poll numbers) of the clinton administration led us to the current situation we find ourselves in.

Vote for whom ever one wants, I'm not trying to convince anyone to see my point of view, nor am I troll trying to get reactions by posting silly topics just to get a reaction.


But I will say this; I DO NOT want to live under Islamic rule as I would have to give up bacon with my pancakes.

 

[MauserboyM48]

Saddam was a secularist. Most sunnis are. Thats one reason why he attacked fundamentalist Iran in the 80s. He was a dictator, a brutal asshole, but not a terrorist.

 

[unbekannt]

I'm not just refering to iraq in my last post.
Isreal thought saddam a threat in as they did an air strike on his FRENCH BUILT reactor in '81.
Iraq was the lesser of two evils in the Iran/Iraq war.

 

[MauserboyM48]

I'm not just refering to iraq in my last post.
Isreal thought saddam a threat in as they did an air strike on his FRENCH BUILT reactor in '81.
Iraq was the lesser of two evils in the Iran/Iraq war.

Yes and Israel has every right to defend themselves from REAL threats. This proves Israel can defend itself, whether against Iraq or Iran.

 

[John Sukey In Memoriam]

Wow! What a surprise! A total evasion of the topic!

It doesn't matter if its 10 years or 200 years later. The political and religious conflicts in that area are OVER A THOUSAND years old. What we are seeing unfold is exactly what Dick warned us about.

Oh but it DOES matter! Slick Willie and the rest of the usual suspects in the DNC were the biggest supporters of taking out sadarse. The difference is that Bush did something about it, while the DNC simply blurted out EMPTY THREATS. Oh yeah, willie blew up a couple of mud huts in Agrhanistan an a supposed germ war factory in Pakistan. Never found any evidence of a WMD there either.

a small point, there WAS NO Iraq until the British created it. and it sure as heck was NOT a thousand years ago.

If you want to quote what somebody did years before, I would remind you that we were all loyal subjects of King George until times changed.

 

[falm16]

i really don'tsee why ya'll waste your time.... all good points except MBoys ramblin, but you'll never get through to him. he's hollywood. i can't even believe he let you have the last word for this long, he reminds me of rosie o'donnel.