Republicans and Iraq - role playing

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Aug 11 2006, 02:53 PM) [snapback]301669[/snapback]</div>

I make a call to Al Gore, ask him to get his best people together and figure it out !!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(B Rad @ Aug 11 2006, 02:40 PM) [snapback]301743[/snapback]</div>

If I were Al Gore I'd laugh at you and tell you you broke it you fix it. OR, I'd fix it if those who broke it stepped down since you are so incompetent and can't tend to your own errors.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(B Rad @ Aug 11 2006, 04:40 PM) [snapback]301743[/snapback]</div>

Wasn't his best person Joe Leiberman?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(prez1 @ Aug 11 2006, 06:49 PM) [snapback]301866[/snapback]</div>

I'd call Joe or John McCain. Or surrender, which is the Democrat response, near as I can tell.

 

Send all the *extreme* left wing liberals over to Iraq to run as blockers for our troops.. :lol: B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Aug 11 2006, 03:53 PM) [snapback]301669[/snapback]</div>

this is not the end but the beginning of a long drawn out war - to be fought on multiple fronts, Iraq just being one of them.

you end this by ending Islamonazism/Islamofascism - simple.

you make it longer and costlier by allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons - and that is one topic that I will hold peoples feet to the fire on. those that would allow that should be held responsible for any sequelae from that disaster. we should have learned by the north korea fiasco clinton lead us through - we should not repeat tragic mistakes.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Aug 12 2006, 12:21 AM) [snapback]301961[/snapback]</div>

You mean like FDR in WWII? And it was Nixon who cut & run in Vietnam. And Reagan in Lebanon.

Spineless chicken hawks.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 31 2006, 11:37 AM) [snapback]312176[/snapback]</div>

I love this - Clinton actually managed to contain both Iraq & N Korean - and now you bunch of cry-babies want to blame this current fiasco on Clinton.

Man up, you nancies and take some responsibility.

With the GOP its always: "But Clinton". What a bunch of corrupt, money grabbing losers.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Aug 31 2006, 12:00 PM) [snapback]312184[/snapback]</div>

He contained North Korea - damn, that is the best piece of PR I have seen on this BB ever. Jeez - he ARMED them... He gave them the nukes - then he left town as they built more of them. I guess he contained India and Pakistan too by your logic --- he let the nuclear genie out of the bottle THREE times - a RECORD - for any sitting President. Yes he contained them - by leaving the mess he made to others. I guess he contained Somalia too by running - and now they are ruled by sharia law. What else did he contain on his watch?? the middle east?

"our" responsibility will be NOT to make the MISTAKE clinton made and let another ding dong nut who likes to kill othersget his hands on nukes.

btw- how do you define clinton containing a the nuclear north korea - the same country he allowed to obtain nukes? cant wait for this one...

and how did he contain iraq - perhaps by keeping our airforce up and enforcing the no-fly zone and other UN mandates?? with force?? jeez - give a guy a gun and as long as he does not use it - you have contained him. what do you define it as when he uses that gun or nuke?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 31 2006, 12:13 PM) [snapback]312190[/snapback]</div>

Let me introduce you the FACTS of the situation.

Concern focuses around two reactors at Yongbyon, both of them small power stations using Magnox techniques. The smaller (5MWe) was completed in 1986 and has since produced possibly 8,000 spent fuel elements. Construction of the larger plant (50MWe) commenced in 1984 but in 2003 was still incomplete.

On March 12, 1993, North Korea said that it planned to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refused to allow inspectors access to its nuclear sites. By 1994, the United States believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about 10 bombs with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military air strikes against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the Agreed Framework in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with light water reactors and fuel oil until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require enriched uranium to be imported from outside North Korea, the amount of reactor fuel and waste could be more easily tracked, making it more difficult to divert nuclear waste to be reprocessed into plutonium. However, the United States never built the promised light water reactors and in late 2002, North Korea was forced to go back to using their old reactors.

Both from this article

Please post your links which indicate that Clinton gave Nukes to NK.

What part about the word Contain do you not understand? We found at when we invaded Iraq that, yes, the containment strategy worked. Saddam did not have WMD. That is, he did not have a gun. What was your point again - oh, yes, you don't have a point.

Get out of your parent's basement, wipe the cheese-curls dust off your hands and start reading more widely - it will do wonders for your education.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Aug 31 2006, 12:35 PM) [snapback]312206[/snapback]</div>

Under his presidency he let them develop nukes, did not enforce UN mandates, did nothing when they turned off the cameras, supplied them with material and knowledge - did nothing to retard their development.

Iraq did have WMD's - sarin gas. and they could have reconstituted their nuclear program within two years. you would rather wait for them to get nukes too?? How did he kill over a million of his own people? How did he murder over 100,000 kurds? What did he use there?

And you would allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons too? With you at the helm of this ship my basement will be the only safe place.

And no need to question my education or my ability to synthesize information - give it a try sometime - try to stop hating people who are trying to protect you.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Aug 30 2006, 07:59 PM) [snapback]311857[/snapback]</div>

I'd send over all the chickenhawks who talk tough but have never put on a uniform. As far as I can tell, that would be mostly republican talk radio hosts.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 31 2006, 12:50 PM) [snapback]312216[/snapback]</div>

I could see Pelosi, Reed, Kenedy in uniform too - even kerry or gore -- they would be vomiting if they ever put it on - be shameful. Heck, just imagining them in it makes me nauseous. At least the "chickenhawks" would fight for this country and not hand it over like the democrats/frenchies.

 

Still no links that indicate that Clinton gave nukes to NK. You are a sorry little man.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 31 2006, 12:48 PM) [snapback]312215[/snapback]</div>

Oh, now its "he let them build nukes" - flip-flopper. Actually the first reactor was built during the senile old coots presidency. Notice that?

He destroyed that gas during the containment. The gas attacks took place during Rethuglican administrations. You really have got nothing.

Quit changing the subject - you really need to focus on the discussion at hand.

Synthesize Information = Make the Sh*t up as you go along. Yeah, your education sucks but your creativity is working 100%

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 31 2006, 12:54 PM) [snapback]312221[/snapback]</div>

Gore & Kerry served in Vietnam.
Pelosi was not elgible at the time
Reid did not serve in the military but was in the DC Police.
Kennedy did not serve.

1/5 - thats about average for you. LOL

The thing about the Chickhawks is that they *DID NOT* fight when they had the opportunity - they left that up to others.



Official motto of the GOP: Cluck, Cluck, Cluck

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 31 2006, 12:54 PM) [snapback]312221[/snapback]</div>

One of the things that really sickened me about the last election was the portrayal of Kerrys naval service. And that portrayal came from people who have never put on a uniform. I guess when you are a republican, you can pick and choose who to thank for their service.

Absolutely disgusting.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 31 2006, 03:49 PM) [snapback]312335[/snapback]</div>

Ah, Jerome Corsi, PhD - an especially vile example of the bucket of slime that extremists on the right tend to be. Notice the Freeper posts this toilet-splasher has made - talk about a knuckle-dragger of the first water.



Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Aug 31 2006, 10:17 AM) [snapback]312243[/snapback]</div>

Actually Kennedy's biography says he served in the ARMY 1951 - 1953. BTW dbermanmd what was your branch. I was ARMY. You don't have to respond. Just curious.

 

Liberal rules for any other parties argument: :lol: :lol: :lol: Sad but true, just read it and you too will see the light!

#1: Attack Your Opponent
If you feel that your opponent is trying to use facts to your disadvantage, attack him or her personally. Call your opponent names, insult his ancestry, imply that he performs improbable sex acts with animals or his own mother -- or both. If you can arouse his anger, you will have him on familiar ground where he can be beat. Your aim is to make your opponent stop using those pesky facts and figures to win the argument -- everyone knows arguments are supposed to be emotional, not cold and rational, so he's doing it wrong to start with. Names guaranteed to upset an opponent with a conservative bent are Nazi, Dittohead (meaning he's a fan of Rush Limbaugh), and Sheep. Spell "Republican" and "America" with a K in them, to suggest that your opponent is a member of the KKK -- but if they mention that Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was a Klansman, accuse your opponent of making an ad hominem attack! Make sure to claim that your opponent is either a dupe, is brainwashed, or is perhaps working for the government or ask them what branch of the military they have served in. If at all possible, make personal attacks on President Bush at the same time; that usually forces people to try and defend him.

#2: Switch Your Arguments
If you feel that your are beginning to lose an argument, change it. Switch sides altogether if you have to. For instance, if you are arguing that there are no biological or chemical weapons in Iraq, and your opponent quotes one of the many UN reports that state there definitely were banned weapons there, suddenly change your argument to "of course, there were, the US gave them to Saddam". Never mind the fact that you were just saying they didn't exist -- the purpose is to confuse your opponent and keep him from winning the argument.

#3: Raise The Bar
When your opponent presents you with proof of anything -- UN records of WMD stockpiles, Amnesty International records of humanitarian crimes, eyewitness accounts of rape, torture, murder, etc -- state that it's not enough to convince you. Tell your opponent that his so- called "proof" doesn't mean anything at all. Insist that anything from only one source doesn't count. Force him or her to go back and search for more proof... and more, and still more. Eventually, your opponent will grow tired of trying to convince you with mere facts and figures, and either give up or get angry -- and then you know you've got him! You can tell everyone that your opponent lost because his or her proof was "laughable".

#4: Attack The Source
When your opponent presents you with those pesky facts, there's only one way to beat him -- attack the source. Refuse to give credence to anything reported by the Weekly Standard, or NewsMax, even if your opponent's facts come from another source as well. Any news outlet even slightly to the right of the New York Times, the LA Times, CBS, ABC, NPR and Time is immediately suspect. Put down FOX news channel and anyone that refers to it -- ignore the fact that they have reported the same stories as every other network. The fact that your opponent uses any of those obviously biased sources automatically proves him wrong, a brainwashed tool, a sheep, etc (see rule #1). If he gives you information from a web site, attack that site as being biased, or right-wing. If he attacks your sources as being left-wing, scoff at that argument -- you know that "left wing" and "correct" are the same thing. Quotes from any liberal source (even a non-journalist's web page or blog) are automatically correct, while any conservative source is OBVIOUSLY distorting the facts to make an ideological point.

#5: Blame America First/Moral Equivalency
It's very important, at all times, to remember that America is the REAL bad guy here, everywhere, and for all time. If your opponent shows facts about Saddam's humanitarian offenses, match them with claims of America's own "atrocities". Although your opponent will claim there is no comparison between the two, continue to claim, for instance, that Saddam's 30- year record of using rape, murder, torture and mutilation on prisoners merely accused of crimes is the EXACT SAME THING as Texas administering the death penalty after due process of law. Argue that because America has not always been absolutely perfect, Americans have no right to judge any other country, no matter what it does, even though the Geneva Convention did not exist until after WWII. Stay focussed on your vision of an evil America ruled by corporate greed, evil America slobbering to kill the innocents in other countries, evil America ruthlessly building an empire, and evil America only pretending to be benevolent and generous to other countries.

Never give credence to your opponent's arguments that America rebuilt countries like France, Germany, Japan, Nicaragua, Grenada, etc... it was obviously a ruse of some kind! Always seek to put the worst possible interpretation on everything America does or ever has done, or any statement by any member of the Administration. Remember that America exists only to dominate the entire world, like a James Bond supervillain. For reference, watch as many Oliver Stone movies as possible. Remember that American soldiers always act exactly like the soldiers in Platoon.

 

Republicans and Demecrats! Unless we learn to find a solution to why others dont like us!all are military might that can be applied wont win the war.I also feel that America should not try to shove its ideas and values down the thoats of other countries.Dont get me wrong!! I love this country,but being no.1 shouldnt mean that our way is the only way.