Thread: US and Coalition strikes Syria

Originally Posted by Andre

Originally Posted by El Kabong

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

You call them Liberals ?

Our Liberal branch are the rich politicians here, right wing. Labour party are our left.
We also drive on the other side of the road and all hang upside down off the bottom of the Earth as well.

The left uses terms which suit their narrative, so they've hijacked the term "Liberal" just as they have used the term "Progressive".

Liberal means by definition "(in a political context) favoring maximum individual liberty" and that is what I am for, however, the people who are "Liberal Democrats" want the exact opposite. They want to draw and quarter free speech, the Second Amendment, freedom to practice religion, etc.

And again the MAIN point here is that the New York Times has now admitted that there WERE WMDs in Iraq and so Iraq War justification CHECK!

Anyone ready to admit that once again Lyle was right? When will you learn Kirkland? Mustard gas, nerve agents, and a leader who wanted to rekindle production of those weapons AND get nuclear weapons....a leader who used those weapons on the regular....but naaaah no need to remove Saddam. Sing yourself another lullaby Kirkland and chalk up another loss for yourself when it comes to debate.

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Hmmm, I see November 5, 1998: Condemns the decision by Iraq of 31 October 1998 to cease cooperation" with UN inspectors as "a flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687 and other resolutions.

Iraq must provide "immediate, complete and unconditional cooperation" with UN and IAEA inspectors.


Who was President in 1998 again?


That's what I thought, so shut your commie fucking face and go back in your hole you despicable waste of oxygen.

So after having reality prove you wrong for the millionth time you've gone back to dodging the question again. Would you really have invaded Syria and if so, how?

Are we in Bizarro world or something? How exactly has reality proved me wrong? If anything reality is something that is tied to MY argument not yours space cadet.

Saddam Hussein REFUSED ACCESS TO UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS and he also touted he had WMD's if you believe Senator John Kerry who ran against President George W. Bush in 2004.

"In UN Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm of face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing." - Sen. John Kerry January 23, 2003


Is any of this reaching you Kirkland? Are you being contrary just for fun or because you're just that fucking stupid? I mean I can hammer the shit out of you with the facts all day long because I have the facts, I've posted the facts, and you've posted fuck all but verbose rebuttals which amount to nothing more than a childish "Nuh uh!"

Obviously things you read each day knock the things you read the previous day off your little shelf and remembering a conversation you had a day before is impossible for you.

Here's what I originally said, followed by what you said, cut and pasted.

ME: George W Bush was proactive in invading Iraq to protect America from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction and that proactiveness has led to the current situation. Perhaps being proactive isn't such a good idea.

YOU:You keep spouting off about the WMD's (good little liberal you are) without realizing that that was one of a number of factors which lead to the invasion of Iraq. Certainly the invasion could have been avoided but for Saddam's refusal to allow UN weapons inspectors full access to his country.


ME: This posts starts silly and gets sillier. Whenever you say "you do realise" I know I'm then going to read a whole load of wrong and you don't disappoint.

Long story short.

Saddam let the inspectors in....................


You should be able to fit those limited quotes on your shelf all at the same time without risking shelf overload. Yes?

Originally Posted by El Kabong

And again the MAIN point here is that the New York Times has now admitted that there WERE WMDs in Iraq and so Iraq War justification CHECK!

Anyone ready to admit that once again Lyle was right? When will you learn Kirkland? Mustard gas, nerve agents, and a leader who wanted to rekindle production of those weapons AND get nuclear weapons....a leader who used those weapons on the regular....but naaaah no need to remove Saddam. Sing yourself another lullaby Kirkland and chalk up another loss for yourself when it comes to debate.

No, the NYT haven't admitted that there were WMDs. You need to risk shelf overload and read more than the first few lines of articles. You should be able to manage at least one full newspaper article a day without suffering a shelf collapse/screw loose catastrophe.

That Iraq had artillery shells full of various chemical was known by all sides in 1992 when the weapons inspectors first went into Iraq. But artillery shells are not weapons of mass destruction. In the case of the shells discussed in the article, some of which were sold to Iraq by America, the worst destruction caused was somebody getting a big blister.


From your own fucking link:

The discoveries of these chemical weapons did not support the government’s invasion rationale.

All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.
In case after case, participants said, analysis of these warheads and shells reaffirmed intelligence failures. First, the American government did not find what it had been looking for at the war’s outset, then it failed to prepare its troops and medical corps for the aged weapons it did find.




Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies.


In September 2004, months after Sergeant Burns and Private Yandell picked up the leaking sarin shell, the American government issued a detailed analysis of Iraq’s weapons programs. The widely heralded report, by the multinational Iraq Survey Group, concluded that Iraq had not had an active chemical warfare program for more than a decade.
The group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, a former United Nations official working for the Central Intelligence Agency, acknowledged that the American military had found old chemical ordnance: 12 artillery shells and 41 rocket warheads. It predicted that troops would find more.
The report also played down the dangers of the lingering weapons, stating that because their contents would have deteriorated, “any remaining chemical munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily significant threat."


And so on.

Tote that water son....those lefties are counting on you to be just that stupid and you certainly aren't disappointing them. Like the New York Times would EVER admit that THEY had it wrong all along especially when it comes to W and the Iraq War

Now try to follow this

Did Saddam had WMDs?

YES

Did we KNOW he had WMDs?

YES

Were WMDs the sole reason for invasion?

NO

So you can TRY to spin that story to help out your view but in the end it doesn't because the plain simple facts have knocked the legs out from under your argument.

So crawl back to your liberal puppet masters and get some more talking points boy, because the ones you are using have been debunked.

Originally Posted by walrus

Originally Posted by pacfan

This is the only place I've seen where rightist americans (I know of no american leftist by international standard)debate with European lefties and they end up never understanding each other. The american lefts are not the same as the left, lefties, or leftists of Europe or elsewhere. The leftie fellows outside america are by the american standard, the reds or the commies. I hope I made it a little clearer and you folks here now understand where they are coming from... But I hate these politics, they muddle issues rather than clarify them. I'd rather be guided by the principle or right and wrong, and the truth...

Pac, American left and rights don't understand each other so its no surprise there is more confusion with Europeans. That's why I live in an underground bunker and remain heavily armed and stoned twenty four seven.

So that means you were really serious about your doomsday thread? You're one of the doomey preppers? Wow, I always wanted to visit one of your camps... well, talkin' 'bout wars and pesitilence...armageddon may not be far away... leave me space there, buds, I'll join you there soon... don't forget - I eat a lot..

Originally Posted by Andre

Originally Posted by El Kabong

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

You call them Liberals ?

Our Liberal branch are the rich politicians here, right wing. Labour party are our left.
We also drive on the other side of the road and all hang upside down off the bottom of the Earth as well.

That's what I mean, the concept of political right and left for americans are much different from rest of the world. America was created with the ideals of freedom so they're naturally a rightist state by world standard. Even what they consider left is tame compared elsewhere, their liberals are just about the center by world standard while their progressives is at about the center-left compared to the progressives elsewhere, and for americans they will undoubtedly be classified as reds or communists.

So what the heck am I driving at? Well I've seen the same folks here debating essentially the same issues over and over ever since I came here nearly 10yrs back and still nothing is resolved. Why? the answer is simple, they are ideologically wide apart and they'll never understand each other. It's like trying to mix oil with water...

That's why I said I hate politics. Take the case of this thread's topic, to me it's just a simple case of group of headhunting beasts trying to conquer their part of the world, the heck with oil and what not, I say just nuke 'em... ...I'll take back the nuke part, conventional bomb will do. BTW, is there oil in Syria?

Originally Posted by pacfan

Originally Posted by walrus

Originally Posted by pacfan

This is the only place I've seen where rightist americans (I know of no american leftist by international standard)debate with European lefties and they end up never understanding each other. The american lefts are not the same as the left, lefties, or leftists of Europe or elsewhere. The leftie fellows outside america are by the american standard, the reds or the commies. I hope I made it a little clearer and you folks here now understand where they are coming from... But I hate these politics, they muddle issues rather than clarify them. I'd rather be guided by the principle or right and wrong, and the truth...

Pac, American left and rights don't understand each other so its no surprise there is more confusion with Europeans. That's why I live in an underground bunker and remain heavily armed and stoned twenty four seven.

So that means you were really serious about your doomsday thread? You're one of the doomey preppers? Wow, I always wanted to visit one of your camps... well, talkin' 'bout wars and pesitilence...armageddon may not be far away... leave me space there, buds, I'll join you there soon... don't forget - I eat a lot..

I would not want to come up to the world that was left or the type of people in it. I got enough to last the front panic then out to sea onto the remote sides of these southern islands out here I wouldnt be on the main land with the packs for nothing.

Originally Posted by Andre

Originally Posted by pacfan

Originally Posted by walrus

Originally Posted by pacfan

This is the only place I've seen where rightist americans (I know of no american leftist by international standard)debate with European lefties and they end up never understanding each other. The american lefts are not the same as the left, lefties, or leftists of Europe or elsewhere. The leftie fellows outside america are by the american standard, the reds or the commies. I hope I made it a little clearer and you folks here now understand where they are coming from... But I hate these politics, they muddle issues rather than clarify them. I'd rather be guided by the principle or right and wrong, and the truth...

Pac, American left and rights don't understand each other so its no surprise there is more confusion with Europeans. That's why I live in an underground bunker and remain heavily armed and stoned twenty four seven.

So that means you were really serious about your doomsday thread? You're one of the doomey preppers? Wow, I always wanted to visit one of your camps... well, talkin' 'bout wars and pesitilence...armageddon may not be far away... leave me space there, buds, I'll join you there soon... don't forget - I eat a lot..

I would not want to come up to the world that was left or the type of people in it. I got enough to last the front panic then out to sea onto the remote sides of these southern islands out here I wouldnt be on the main land with the packs for nothing.

I was thinking about nuclear fallout, mate, an arab shooting a nuke at Israel and Israel retaliating with 10 nukes, and you know what that means, right. You don't think about anything when that happens and you'll just have to find the safest place you can think of and I thought these preppers have underground bunkers with food supplies and medicines to last for years. Here in the jungles, there is nowwhere for me to hide, not even from a typhoon! But if you can find me a good place there in the rock of Uluru, I might go there instead, I've always wanted to meditate there at night...

Originally Posted by pacfan

Originally Posted by Andre

Originally Posted by El Kabong

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

You call them Liberals ?

Our Liberal branch are the rich politicians here, right wing. Labour party are our left.
We also drive on the other side of the road and all hang upside down off the bottom of the Earth as well.

That's what I mean, the concept of political right and left for americans are much different from rest of the world. America was created with the ideals of freedom so they're naturally a rightist state by world standard. Even what they consider left is tame compared elsewhere, their liberals are just about the center by world standard while their progressives is at about the center-left compared to the progressives elsewhere, and for americans they will undoubtedly be classified as reds or communists.

So what the heck am I driving at? Well I've seen the same folks here debating essentially the same issues over and over ever since I came here nearly 10yrs back and still nothing is resolved. Why? the answer is simple, they are ideologically wide apart and they'll never understand each other. It's like trying to mix oil with water...

That's why I said I hate politics. Take the case of this thread's topic, to me it's just a simple case of group of headhunting beasts trying to conquer their part of the world, the heck with oil and what not, I say just nuke 'em... ...I'll take back the nuke part, conventional bomb will do. BTW, is there oil in Syria?

I forgot to mention one important thing. These guys from the left are anti-americans, especially when it comes to their military activities. Most of those so-called conspiration theories come from this group. In the old days, they were just concocted to destroy the image of the US but over the years, they themselves (the international left) started to actually believe in them, something most americans still can't understand, I guess. These things all started during the Vietnam war, and I'd seen how they
slowly unfolded during my childhood days; I grew up during those times when the early babyboomers where fighting in the streets all over the world for various causes, mostly against US involvement in Vietnam. It became sort of fashionable too to be a leftist or leftie those days, obviously as their protest against US. I went to school inside US base those days and I saw protesters carrying red flags slowly gathering at the gates of the base, growing in numbers as times went on. I watched those huge black birds, the infamous B-52 bombers going to and coming from their bombing missions in Vietnam. Things were quite tense those days inside the base, americans themselves arguing about the war. It's a long story so I'll cut it short here. I made this post to let the americans understand a bit why there are so many people outside against them 'cause obviously, they don't. But don't get me wrong, I'm not taking sides, I just hate all politics, whatever the side...

During Vietnam? Nooo the left's subversive nature goes back waaaay longer. At the very least the muckrackers of the 1900's, the International Workers of the World, the Spanish Civil War International Brigades....those commies sewed the seeds of the draft dodger anarchists of the 60's.

Originally Posted by El Kabong

During Vietnam? Nooo the left's subversive nature goes back waaaay longer. At the very least the muckrackers of the 1900's, the International Workers of the World, the Spanish Civil War International Brigades....those commies sewed the seeds of the draft dodger anarchists of the 60's.

I was just talking about the world-wide anti-americanism, not the whole communist thing, of course. I hope it's clear, buddy...

Originally Posted by pacfan

Originally Posted by El Kabong

During Vietnam? Nooo the left's subversive nature goes back waaaay longer. At the very least the muckrackers of the 1900's, the International Workers of the World, the Spanish Civil War International Brigades....those commies sewed the seeds of the draft dodger anarchists of the 60's.

I was just talking about the world-wide anti-americanism, not the whole communist thing, of course. I hope it's clear, buddy...

Yeah ok I understand now

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by pacfan

Originally Posted by El Kabong

During Vietnam? Nooo the left's subversive nature goes back waaaay longer. At the very least the muckrackers of the 1900's, the International Workers of the World, the Spanish Civil War International Brigades....those commies sewed the seeds of the draft dodger anarchists of the 60's.

I was just talking about the world-wide anti-americanism, not the whole communist thing, of course. I hope it's clear, buddy...

Yeah ok I understand now

No problem, but I thinks you're too fired-up sometimes and needs to chill a bit, believe me buddy, stupid opinions of some of us posters won't kill ya...

*******

..where were we... the latest I've heard about these beasts is that they've lined up some of their prisoners and had their heads lopped off again... if someone can give me some nuclear grenades, I'll be happy to lob them myself...