Bin Laden is dead

[The Thriller]

This has been beaten to death, but what the hell.

You don't actually believe this do you? I would like you to provide the exact intelligence that Bush had proving he KNEW WITHOUT DOUBT they had no WMD's that would make it possible for him to LIE about it.

There is a difference between lying and being wrong. Dems seem to forget that conveniently when Obama promised he would negotiate before ever attacking another foreign power "I don't care who it is" I believe were his exact words, then he went after Ghadaffi without ever talking to him or the rebels, or without ever consulting congress, so he lied, but it's ok, because Obama is awesome. Bush was wrong about WMD's (as was all of congress, since they had the exact same intelligence to review that Bush did when they voted one vote short of unanimously to invade Iraq), but of course that was a lie since, well, since dems don't like him. I guess since Bush lied about the WMD's so did congress, since they were all working from the same intelligence, as was the EU, particularly Great Brittan whose own independent intelligence sources provided them with corroborating information.

Or you have to believe that the dumbest president ever was smart enough to trump up fake intelligence convincing enough to get all of congress to believe it was accurate in order to force us into a war. So in essence you have to admit that Bush was smarter than every democrat in congress at that time.

Good hell have you ever read the history of relations with Iraq, going back to the 70's and before? It was hardly some new thing Bush trumped up for fun.

Seriously, educate yourselves people before spouting off the latest crap the media and your political pundits push at you.

[/rant]

Ever read the book Fiasco?

Bush's administration lied. Sorry folks, they did. Who cooked up the intelligence? Couldn't intelligence contrary to what the WH wanted just be discounted? Ooooppsss! Then, you bring in the subject of Bush's intelligence. You act as if he would have to work alone. You act as if Paul Wolfowitz had nothing to do with this. Or that Ahmed Chalabi had nothing to gain by the invasion. Pathetic.

Iraq has been prime real estate for thousands of years. People have fought over it for a long time. Why would today be any different? You had an overzealous administration wanting to spread "Democracy" and "free market" with connections to big oil... You had an American people angry at radicalism and afraid of the "next attack." They could then be easily manipulated. You had Iraqi refugees who were acting as our allies who would have loved nothing more to knock out Saddam and become leaders of the new Iraq. And you had a Congress scared to speak up for fear of being labeled anti-American.

It became a perfect storm. But of course, you wouldn't want to read a book written by an insider since *gasp* Obama sucks and Bush ruled.

Take accountability for what your Repub administration did and stop making excuses for them. What's funny is the crowd that preaches loudest about accountability refuses to take upon any.

 

[The Thriller]

Dems seem to forget that conveniently when Obama promised he would negotiate before ever attacking another foreign power "I don't care who it is" I believe were his exact words, then he went after Ghadaffi without ever talking to him or the rebels, or without ever consulting congress, so he lied, but it's ok, because Obama is awesome.

What was the context? What does "attack" mean? It easily could mean invade. As I remember, the context was about invading a foreign power and destroying its government ex Iraq.

Weren't the NATO negotiations and the cries for Gadhafhi to stop killing his own people enough talk for you? I think preventing the mass destruction of rebels is fine. But I guess people like you hate that because black Obama Democrat sucks no matter what.

/rant

 

[TheDude]

This has been beaten to death, but what the hell.

You don't actually believe this do you? I would like you to provide the exact intelligence that Bush had proving he KNEW WITHOUT DOUBT they had no WMD's that would make it possible for him to LIE about it.

There is a difference between lying and being wrong. Dems seem to forget that conveniently when Obama promised he would negotiate before ever attacking another foreign power "I don't care who it is" I believe were his exact words, then he went after Ghadaffi without ever talking to him or the rebels, or without ever consulting congress, so he lied, but it's ok, because Obama is awesome. Bush was wrong about WMD's (as was all of congress, since they had the exact same intelligence to review that Bush did when they voted one vote short of unanimously to invade Iraq), but of course that was a lie since, well, since dems don't like him. I guess since Bush lied about the WMD's so did congress, since they were all working from the same intelligence, as was the EU, particularly Great Brittan whose own independent intelligence sources provided them with corroborating information.

Or you have to believe that the dumbest president ever was smart enough to trump up fake intelligence convincing enough to get all of congress to believe it was accurate in order to force us into a war. So in essence you have to admit that Bush was smarter than every democrat in congress at that time.

Good hell have you ever read the history of relations with Iraq, going back to the 70's and before? It was hardly some new thing Bush trumped up for fun.

Seriously, educate yourselves people before spouting off the latest crap the media and your political pundits push at you.

[/rant]

Old man approves!

 

[LogGrad98]

What was the context? What does "attack" mean? It easily could mean invade. As I remember, the context was about invading a foreign power and destroying its government ex Iraq.

Weren't the NATO negotiations and the cries for Gadhafhi to stop killing his own people enough talk for you? I think preventing the mass destruction of rebels is fine. But I guess people like you hate that because black Obama Democrat sucks no matter what.

/rant

You do realize that the very second you play the race card it shows you have no real argument right? What in any of what I said implied I have a problem with Obama being black.

Also, what in any of what I said implied that I agreed with the way the war was carried out? I pointed out that being wrong is different than lying. I gave you an example of Bush being wrong and you weave a vast right-wing conspiracy out of it using a book with some serious omissions and logic based in opinion and conjecture, which actually does not make a very convincing case in and of itself that Bush lied, but rather is a condemnation of the planning and carrying out of the war in general - much of which I agree with. Then I point out a blatant and easily researchable lie by Obama and you split hairs. Oh I am sure he meant to say he will sit down with anyone unless it didn't fit his agenda, in which case he would just move pre-emptively. We definitley don't want to take him at his word, it might make him look bad.

By the way, you stuck to the democratic indoctrination talking points regarding the war in iraq perfectly. Bravo.





And again kudos pulling out that race card to bolster your position. Stay classy.

 

[Gameface]

Let's make this really simple, so that I might be able to play along. Iraq has had WMDs. Iraq has used WMDs against Iran in a war Iraq started. Iraq has used WMDs against their own unarmed civillians. Iraq had WMDs during the first Persian Gulf war. Part of Iraq's surrender agreement was to allow inspections to prove that they no longer had WMDs. Iraq impeded the inspections to the point that Clinton withdrew inspectors and enacted civilian-punishing sanctions on Iraq, leaving the question as to Iraq's possession of WMDs open for debate. Bush used the possibility of WMDs to "sell" the war to the U.S. public. We all bought it...hard. It wasn't Bush pushing an unwilling America to war with Iraq, it was the American people fully on-board and ready to march into Baghdad.

If Bush lied he did it by telling us exactly what we wanted to hear. Had Clinton doubled-down on the inspections the door to an invasion by Bush never would have been open.

 

[One Brow]

If Bush lied he did it by telling us exactly what we wanted to hear. Had Clinton doubled-down on the inspections the door to an invasion by Bush never would have been open.

I agree. I only wish to add: in the days leading up to the invasion, Iraq acceded to most of the demands of the insectors for WMDs, from what I recall. Bush told them to leave because he was invading anyhow.

 

[TheDude]

I agree. I only wish to add: in the days leading up to the invasion, Iraq acceded to most of the demands of the insectors for WMDs, from what I recall. Bush told them to leave because he was invading anyhow.

I believe Saddam said something along the lines of "You can bring inspectors in, but they're not searching anywhere they want."

 

[TroutBum]

I watched, "Loose Change" and, "An Inconvenient Truth." I also read Al Franken's book. Everything I read and watch is truth. Period.


Media > Your opinion > Science

 

[One Brow]

I believe Saddam said something along the lines of "You can bring inspectors in, but they're not searching anywhere they want."

The inspectors were already in. In the last few days for the invasion, Saddam was desperately trying to avoid it by, finally, complying with all the requirements. Bush apparently decided it was too little, too late.

 

[Chad Feldheimer]

White House releases Bin Laden photo:

 

[DutchJazzer]

T Osama bin Laden was assassinated under the authority of the President of the United States of America.

yes thats what i think about this. just the united hypocrisy of america. why not arrest him have him at a trial. innocent unti;l proven guilty fundamentals the US of A values right. yet he gest murdered and thrown in sea. it doenst matter if he killed 3000 people or not. israel atleast had the decency to take the nazi's alive and put them on a trial(eg eichman) if nazis who comited more than 3000 murders get a trial why doens't bin laden get one.

instead a group of thugs jsut kill on foreign soul get rid of the evidence. i mean maybe bin laden was shot in his back. put on his knees shot in the head from behind. there is no evidence. its at the bottom of the sea if we can believe them.

i'm not condoning what osama did.

so bring on the neg rep

 

[Scat]

yes thats what i think about this. just the united hypocrisy of america. why not arrest him have him at a trial. innocent unti;l proven guilty fundamentals the US of A values right. yet he gest murdered and thrown in sea. it doenst matter if he killed 3000 people or not. israel atleast had the decency to take the nazi's alive and put them on a trial(eg eichman) if nazis who comited more than 3000 murders get a trial why doens't bin laden get one.

instead a group of thugs jsut kill on foreign soul get rid of the evidence. i mean maybe bin laden was shot in his back. put on his knees shot in the head from behind. there is no evidence. its at the bottom of the sea if we can believe them.

i'm not condoning what osama did.

so bring on the neg rep

Frickin' Euro trash.

 

[DutchJazzer]

Frickin' Euro trash.

lol maybe i'm trash but i'm not a euro

 

[Bronco70]

yes thats what i think about this. just the united hypocrisy of america. why not arrest him have him at a trial. innocent unti;l proven guilty fundamentals the US of A values right. yet he gest murdered and thrown in sea. it doenst matter if he killed 3000 people or not. israel atleast had the decency to take the nazi's alive and put them on a trial(eg eichman) if nazis who comited more than 3000 murders get a trial why doens't bin laden get one.

This is brilliant, dutch.

I'm sure keeping OBL in custody would have been a logistic cakewalk. Easy like Sunday morning.

Oh, and comparing the transient leader of all Al-Qaeda to German military officers - also spot on.

Bravo.

 

[DutchJazzer]

This is brilliant, dutch.

I'm sure keeping OBL in custody would have been a logistic cakewalk. Easy like Sunday morning.

Oh, and comparing the transient leader of all Al-Qaeda to German military officers - also spot on.

Bravo.

they could have kept in on a submarine orAircraft carrier. in an undisclosed location broadcast the trial from there if they are concerned about security. so yes a logistical nightmare. but imho the right thing to do.

i know if it was broadcast that osama is at building x doing the trial some drugged out redneck will try to assassinate him. or whatever. or some terrorist cell will try to free him. but still the right thing to do is hold a trial. didnt osama (supposedly) commit(Or is the mastermindbehind) a crime on us soil. what happened to innocent until proven guilty. doenst he deserve a (fair) trial. isnt that what america stands for?

or because he isn't a us citizen he does not deserve a fair and speedy trial. what kind of legal precedent does this set. what if a foreign guy kills 30 people instead of 3000 will he get shot and burried at sea too.

what they did is outright MURDER. they even disposed of the evidence.
was osama armed did osama fight back if so he deserves to get shot.
you always should try to catch a criminal alive and unharmed if it does not interfere with other peoples safety/live. did they try that or did they just catch him shot him in the back of the head and dumped him at sea?

the way it should have gone try to catch him alive. give him a faur and speedy trial(i know a logistic nightmare but not impossible) then if guilty shoot him hang him electrocute him whatever. cremate his behind and dump it at sea or send it to space or whatever.

isnt that what America stands for?

they spend miollions of dollars on the so called war on terror. yet they dont have the money to keep osama at sea for a trial laywer etc? is america really that bankcrupt?


hope you guys understand where i'm comming from.

 

[DutchJazzer]

I'm sure keeping OBL in custody would have been a logistic cakewalk. Easy like Sunday morning.

so because something isn't gonna be a cakewalk don't attempt it? its hard getting out of bed at 6 in the morning going to work getting a measly paycheck in the morning. isnt it easier if i just con old ladies out of their money cus thats gonna be a cakewalk.


doing the wrong thing because the right thing is hard to do, is really ethically and morally despicable.

 

[Scat]

Easy like Sunday morning.

The clothes she wears, the sexy ways,
make an old man wish for younger days
She knows she's built and knows how to please
Sure enough to knock a man to his knees

 

[Beantown]

Dutch I'm sure Allah appreciates you sticking up for bin laden. Just more virgins for you.

 

[DutchJazzer]

i wanted to comment on this thread earlier but i did not want to rain on your(usa) parade

also 1 point i forgot. something that really irked me.something that really ground my gears is obeezy(obamas ghetto street name) saying : "justice has been done!"
no ****. it would have been better if he said we tried to apprehend osama. he resisted unfortunatly he got shot and killed during the aprehension.

but by saying "justice has been done". dont know how to quite put it

 

[LogGrad98]

This is brilliant, dutch.

I'm sure keeping OBL in custody would have been a logistic cakewalk. Easy like Sunday morning.

Oh, and comparing the transient leader of all Al-Qaeda to German military officers - also spot on.

Bravo.

They got in and got out with his body. Would it have been that much harder to carry out an unconscious or restrained man as opposed to a dead one?