The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Yup, after reading through a few posts on here and seeing how many people take my stance of staying away from the life forums, I wanted to do this topic.
Yesterday I watched Kofi Annan, on Sky, answer questions about the whole Iraq situation. One thing that stood out more than ever, to me, was that this was a guy who actually did want so see a true United Nations. To quote; "The council acts best when it is united."
It's right, but not the case we are seeing right now. It is, as you all know, divided into pro, anti, and "what do we get if we support you" groups of nations. America is essentially threatening the withdrawal and denial of aid to several nations if they do not get in line with the US stance. To me that is plain wrong because aid is aid, it is something you give to those who need it, and yes, you expect friendship in return maybe, but not an automatic over-ride on a nation's stance on an issue. What happened to political sovereignty ?
To add to this, General Meyes, speaking from the Pentagon, in response to a question about Turkey's refusal to let the US use military bases, said this; "We will open a second front in Northern Iraq with or without Turkey's help."
Excuse me ? What on earth is the point in saying that ? It is simply fuelling the belief that the USA will do whatever it wants and steam roller over everything in its way to do so.
Think back to New Years Eve 1999, the Millennium, the year 2000, a new century, was near. Conflict, on the level we are seeing now, and may well see, was not happening. Iraq was contained, terrorism was a rare occurence outside of the Middle East, Israel and the Palestinians were at a somewhat uneasy halt, there was much talk of alleviating third world debt, in other words the outlook was positive. I, and no doubt many others, thought this was the start of some of the better chapters in history. It wasn't a perfect world by far, but many were giving it a damn good go.
A year and half later it fell apart, around 20 men, and a bunch of guys in a cave, ended the illusion. At the time the response, Operation Enduring Freedom, seemed the right thing to do, in my opinion. Now ? well many Afghani's have a better life for sure, but the root of the problem, the hardcore terrorists and leaders, were long gone. We killed many many fighters who in all realism would never have left Afghanistan. The objective was to get those behind 9/11, and disassemble the infrastructure of Al Queda, and their Taliban supporters, in Afghanistan. To a degree it worked, but many spread around the world.
The USA, UK, and the West in general, have hardened security to counter terrorists, so the terrorists are hitting people outside of those areas. Kenya, Bali, Phillipines, Indonesia - easy targets. We're not really winning, we're displacing.
Originally I believed that George Bush was a good man in the wrong place at the wrong time. But his policies are destroying most hope for any kind of better future for us, the people of Iraq, and anyone else his policies effect. That US ambassador's letter was right, in a way. Everything that America and successive administrations have worked for, the alliances and trusts, is being destroyed overnight.
For what ? The world, and international politics, is ripping itself apart because of a small oil rich nation which has largely been ignored for over ten years. Iraq is, in the face of overwhelming odds, making some slow concessions.
I beleived at one point that concessions like these were always stalling tactics, ploys to spin out time. But, what if this is a case of two different kinds of culture, politics, governments, clashing and not understanding each other ? Do we really want to do this because of misunderstanding ?
The announced strategy today, is another reason for my change of heart. More ordinance than was used in the entire Gulf War, will hit Baghdad in one night on the first day of war. That is, to anyone who knows what kind of weapons will be used, insane. I don't know about shock and awe but it's going to do little to win over Iraqi civilians, even I will admit that that amount of weaponry will kill more innocents than it will targets.
Bush is, I fear, losing sight of the objective - the weapons of mass destruction and Saddam. We know full well that anyone in the Iraqi military who opposes Saddam is dead, along with his family, and anyone else who supports him. We know that the scientists we question cannot give us what we want, and that they endanger themselves and their families if they do. A full on invasion is overkill, because whilst Iraqi soliders are dying, Saddam will be safe, and more than likely flee or hide.
What needs to happen, is for people to back down and admit they are wrong, like I'm doing now. You can carry on saying something for so long that to go back on it seems impossible, a loss of face, but when the stakes are potentially thousands of lives, it has to be done.
Bush needs to back down, and the other countries need to give him the space and support so he can do so and retain some credibility. You may think Bush does not deserve such support, but is is the only way America could back down now. Saddam also needs to back down, give the UN more time and access, and in a perfect world, Saddam would step back, allow free elections - like Iran is suggesting - and let a semblance of democracy begin. Again, America needs to give Iraq space. 250 000 troops is overkill, they'll wipe out the entire Iraqi army but not Saddam. The threat of force has obtained co operation, but it is a a somewhat hard handed way of doing it.
Maybe we don't need war, but neither is containment an option again. It's killing the Iraqi's and doing nothing for the UN's image in the Iraq.
You may have noticed a deviation from my normal tone here, slightly.
Let me make this clear; I believe in America, and the idea of the American dream, and that given the right person America can be an agent of true democracy, freedom and all that entails. In fact given the right people in charge of many countries, and I can offer no idea of who these people would be, except to say they would be "Good" people - however you define them - , this could be a different world.
George Bush is not one of these good men, neither is Saddam, neither is Yassir Arafat, neither is Ariel Sharon. Between them, these four men are destroying any hope of a finer world for all of us, and not just for us - as in the West - but for everyone. War isn't going to make that world because the peace it creates is just an absence of war, not true peace.
Apologies to all who I have belittled, and argued with, but it was what I believed then. I still believe in America - whatever you think that is - but not Bush. In many ways he is changing what America is and stands for, and I am thinking that the UN is now the only organisation, along with people in the US administration, who can stop this before it is too late.
More and more I think that if we attack Iraq, in this way, at this time, we wave goodbye to peace for our, and our childrens, lifetimes, and maybe beyond.
If you read this far, thanks for reading.
Yesterday I watched Kofi Annan, on Sky, answer questions about the whole Iraq situation. One thing that stood out more than ever, to me, was that this was a guy who actually did want so see a true United Nations. To quote; "The council acts best when it is united."
It's right, but not the case we are seeing right now. It is, as you all know, divided into pro, anti, and "what do we get if we support you" groups of nations. America is essentially threatening the withdrawal and denial of aid to several nations if they do not get in line with the US stance. To me that is plain wrong because aid is aid, it is something you give to those who need it, and yes, you expect friendship in return maybe, but not an automatic over-ride on a nation's stance on an issue. What happened to political sovereignty ?
To add to this, General Meyes, speaking from the Pentagon, in response to a question about Turkey's refusal to let the US use military bases, said this; "We will open a second front in Northern Iraq with or without Turkey's help."
Excuse me ? What on earth is the point in saying that ? It is simply fuelling the belief that the USA will do whatever it wants and steam roller over everything in its way to do so.
Think back to New Years Eve 1999, the Millennium, the year 2000, a new century, was near. Conflict, on the level we are seeing now, and may well see, was not happening. Iraq was contained, terrorism was a rare occurence outside of the Middle East, Israel and the Palestinians were at a somewhat uneasy halt, there was much talk of alleviating third world debt, in other words the outlook was positive. I, and no doubt many others, thought this was the start of some of the better chapters in history. It wasn't a perfect world by far, but many were giving it a damn good go.
A year and half later it fell apart, around 20 men, and a bunch of guys in a cave, ended the illusion. At the time the response, Operation Enduring Freedom, seemed the right thing to do, in my opinion. Now ? well many Afghani's have a better life for sure, but the root of the problem, the hardcore terrorists and leaders, were long gone. We killed many many fighters who in all realism would never have left Afghanistan. The objective was to get those behind 9/11, and disassemble the infrastructure of Al Queda, and their Taliban supporters, in Afghanistan. To a degree it worked, but many spread around the world.
The USA, UK, and the West in general, have hardened security to counter terrorists, so the terrorists are hitting people outside of those areas. Kenya, Bali, Phillipines, Indonesia - easy targets. We're not really winning, we're displacing.
Originally I believed that George Bush was a good man in the wrong place at the wrong time. But his policies are destroying most hope for any kind of better future for us, the people of Iraq, and anyone else his policies effect. That US ambassador's letter was right, in a way. Everything that America and successive administrations have worked for, the alliances and trusts, is being destroyed overnight.
For what ? The world, and international politics, is ripping itself apart because of a small oil rich nation which has largely been ignored for over ten years. Iraq is, in the face of overwhelming odds, making some slow concessions.
I beleived at one point that concessions like these were always stalling tactics, ploys to spin out time. But, what if this is a case of two different kinds of culture, politics, governments, clashing and not understanding each other ? Do we really want to do this because of misunderstanding ?
The announced strategy today, is another reason for my change of heart. More ordinance than was used in the entire Gulf War, will hit Baghdad in one night on the first day of war. That is, to anyone who knows what kind of weapons will be used, insane. I don't know about shock and awe but it's going to do little to win over Iraqi civilians, even I will admit that that amount of weaponry will kill more innocents than it will targets.
Bush is, I fear, losing sight of the objective - the weapons of mass destruction and Saddam. We know full well that anyone in the Iraqi military who opposes Saddam is dead, along with his family, and anyone else who supports him. We know that the scientists we question cannot give us what we want, and that they endanger themselves and their families if they do. A full on invasion is overkill, because whilst Iraqi soliders are dying, Saddam will be safe, and more than likely flee or hide.
What needs to happen, is for people to back down and admit they are wrong, like I'm doing now. You can carry on saying something for so long that to go back on it seems impossible, a loss of face, but when the stakes are potentially thousands of lives, it has to be done.
Bush needs to back down, and the other countries need to give him the space and support so he can do so and retain some credibility. You may think Bush does not deserve such support, but is is the only way America could back down now. Saddam also needs to back down, give the UN more time and access, and in a perfect world, Saddam would step back, allow free elections - like Iran is suggesting - and let a semblance of democracy begin. Again, America needs to give Iraq space. 250 000 troops is overkill, they'll wipe out the entire Iraqi army but not Saddam. The threat of force has obtained co operation, but it is a a somewhat hard handed way of doing it.
Maybe we don't need war, but neither is containment an option again. It's killing the Iraqi's and doing nothing for the UN's image in the Iraq.
You may have noticed a deviation from my normal tone here, slightly.
Let me make this clear; I believe in America, and the idea of the American dream, and that given the right person America can be an agent of true democracy, freedom and all that entails. In fact given the right people in charge of many countries, and I can offer no idea of who these people would be, except to say they would be "Good" people - however you define them - , this could be a different world.
George Bush is not one of these good men, neither is Saddam, neither is Yassir Arafat, neither is Ariel Sharon. Between them, these four men are destroying any hope of a finer world for all of us, and not just for us - as in the West - but for everyone. War isn't going to make that world because the peace it creates is just an absence of war, not true peace.
Apologies to all who I have belittled, and argued with, but it was what I believed then. I still believe in America - whatever you think that is - but not Bush. In many ways he is changing what America is and stands for, and I am thinking that the UN is now the only organisation, along with people in the US administration, who can stop this before it is too late.
More and more I think that if we attack Iraq, in this way, at this time, we wave goodbye to peace for our, and our childrens, lifetimes, and maybe beyond.
If you read this far, thanks for reading.
Page:
Goatboy wrote:
> You mongoloid waste of living space.
> End it.
> Go on.
Ha ha look who is talking.....
You really think I care what you say ?
> You mongoloid waste of living space.
> End it.
> Go on.
Ha ha look who is talking.....
You really think I care what you say ?
hahaha, he came back....wait...my god...that means Snuggly was right, WE'RE NEVER GONNA LEAVE THIS PLACE......WE'RE TRAPPED FOREVER...........RUN CHILDREN.........RUUUUUUUUUUUUN!!!!
*sucked into oblivion/'Long, Interesting or Amusing Stories' forum*
*sucked into oblivion/'Long, Interesting or Amusing Stories' forum*
Star Fury wrote:
> I posted the original to see what kind of response it would draw from
> 'certain' people, and I wasn't exactly surprised by the responses.
>
> Fact is I now support Bush, Blair, the whole war on terror and the
> campaign in Iraq far more than ever before.
---
You utter, utter lying two-faced cretin.
You can't admit that you changed your mind and instead choose to pretend that the original post was "a test"?????
Kill yourself.
Do it.
Go on, you offer nothing to this world except yet another coward too scared to stick to his own beliefs and instead changes them and then puts his fingers in his ears and shouts "LALALALA Can't hear you!!!"
I can't believe you're trying to worm out of your post after so long. If you had the balls to just say "That's what I thought then" but you actually think anyone believes that you just wrote it AND POSTED FOLLOW UPS as a laugh??
Pathetic.
Kill yourself, go on.
"responses from certain people"? Open-mouthed disbelief and an admiration for your honesty? That's the ONLY response you got kid.
Kill yourself, do it.
Do it on live television so I can witness the spectacle of a truly worthless human being ending yet another waste of organs and neurons.
Do it.
Realise that you have no dignity and end it all.
How can you live with yourself knowing that you avoided this thread for weeks because you had no answer, and then come up with an excuse so shallow as "it was a test"
Pathetic.
And you're fooling nobody with your dullard opinions on a subject your tiny little mind doesn't understand.
Kill yourself, go on.
I'd respect that at least.
You base-thinking, idiotic, weak-minded cow person. Whatever you write here from now on is as worthless as whatever station you'll achieve in life.
End it.
Go on, prove you have a shred of honesty and integrity left in your dodging, pathetic excuse shell of a head.
You mongoloid waste of living space.
End it.
Go on.
> I posted the original to see what kind of response it would draw from
> 'certain' people, and I wasn't exactly surprised by the responses.
>
> Fact is I now support Bush, Blair, the whole war on terror and the
> campaign in Iraq far more than ever before.
---
You utter, utter lying two-faced cretin.
You can't admit that you changed your mind and instead choose to pretend that the original post was "a test"?????
Kill yourself.
Do it.
Go on, you offer nothing to this world except yet another coward too scared to stick to his own beliefs and instead changes them and then puts his fingers in his ears and shouts "LALALALA Can't hear you!!!"
I can't believe you're trying to worm out of your post after so long. If you had the balls to just say "That's what I thought then" but you actually think anyone believes that you just wrote it AND POSTED FOLLOW UPS as a laugh??
Pathetic.
Kill yourself, go on.
"responses from certain people"? Open-mouthed disbelief and an admiration for your honesty? That's the ONLY response you got kid.
Kill yourself, do it.
Do it on live television so I can witness the spectacle of a truly worthless human being ending yet another waste of organs and neurons.
Do it.
Realise that you have no dignity and end it all.
How can you live with yourself knowing that you avoided this thread for weeks because you had no answer, and then come up with an excuse so shallow as "it was a test"
Pathetic.
And you're fooling nobody with your dullard opinions on a subject your tiny little mind doesn't understand.
Kill yourself, go on.
I'd respect that at least.
You base-thinking, idiotic, weak-minded cow person. Whatever you write here from now on is as worthless as whatever station you'll achieve in life.
End it.
Go on, prove you have a shred of honesty and integrity left in your dodging, pathetic excuse shell of a head.
You mongoloid waste of living space.
End it.
Go on.
Pah.. *Bullies* .. La la la la..
See you've still got this "pumpkin" fixation, to my mind you're either a country yokel or have a serious childhood trauma, or just bored.
Anyway.....
I posted the original to see what kind of response it would draw from 'certain' people, and I wasn't exactly surprised by the responses.
Fact is I now support Bush, Blair, the whole war on terror and the campaign in Iraq far more than ever before.
You say that anti-war is not pro-Saddam, I beg to disagree with that.
Objectives of the war;
1) Removal of all WMD.
2) Regime Change.
3) Elimination of terrorists inside Iraq.
Right, let's skip to 2) first of all. Regime change. Iraq WAS a dictatorship. Now, lets not get bogged down in the whole "there's tons more dictatorships in the world, why's Iraq so bad" debate, and consider what that means. Saddam is in charge, anyone who disagrees takes a one way trip to prison, and worse. Any attempts made by his own people to kill Saddam have been met by total failure, and not forgetting that anyone caught betraying him can wave goodbye to their life, and their whole extended families lives also. The regime is not just one man but the whole inner circle around him, even if the Iraqi resistance had killed Saddam one of those would have stepped in. How do you remove a whole regime and it's entire support apparatus ? War. Now if a war objective is the removal of the regime, and you oppose the war, then that can well be interpreted as vague support for him and his regime. Yes, war isn't nice, but it was the only way THIS time.
Right, the big one, 1) Removal of all WMD. After over three weeks we've found very little, apart from the entire Iraqi army being kitted out with WMD protection gear recently bought from our "allies" in Europe and Asia. Considering the NATO and the USA only use WMD in response to it's use then that speaks volumes, but I digress. No WMD found ! Shock horror scandal. Hold your horses, the UN inspectors have had about 8 years to find the stuff and have turned up nothing, yet we know it is there. Iraq's a big country, no ? Obviously the first priority is to finish off the regime and restore law and order for the Iraqi people everywhere as best we can whilst new authorities are put in place. Then we can get down to the specialist business of finding the weapons, even today a 1000 strong US team including many former inspectors is enroute, US officials have identified over 3000 sites to investigate, and that's just the start. Don't forget this is, oops, was, a regime that stored weapons in hospitals and schools, so nowhere can be ruled out. Give it time, after all you, and others, were very happy to give the UN about 12 years to mess around with no results. The US and it's allies have done more in three weeks than the UN in 12 years.
And 3) Terrorists. Camps destroyed in the north, the palestinian guy - who seeing as we have a perfect ID to match to him there is no doubt of his guilt - not to mention plenty more people apprehended and killed.
My glee ? We've destroyed a terrorist regime in three weeks, we've given freedom to a country and paid a high price for doing that, and it's a long road ahead. In order to achiece our aims many many have died, on both sides, and civilians. No one ever said nobody would be killed, and I find it interesting that the anti-war lobby continually trumpets civilian kills and casualties of proof of the wrongness of this war, where the hell was your concern for the hundreds of thousands of civilians Saddam's regime has killed over the years for such crimes as disagreeing with his rule, protesting e.t.c. ? I'll tell you where, nowhere. The US alliance kills people and you protest, Saddam killed thousands every year and you never protested for action but watched the UN around and criticised every attempt America and its allies made to bring Saddam to an end. Not forgetting that dictators around the world have seen the footage from Iraq, they know it could be them next.
Gunship diplomacy ? Maybe, but it's all leading to a safer, more fair world. Do not forget this conflict was not a straight decision to attack, we tried diplomacy for 12 years, 12 long years whilst the Iraqi people suffered. Yes, in the dim past we helped Saddam, but every country on this planet has done similar, somewhere. What is important is that we have now moved to correct that mistake, to in some small measure atone for it.
And what did it take to give us the political will to finally confront all this ? Over 3000 people murdered one morning in September. That is what it took to stop our nations turning a blind eye to the mess they partially created in the past. Afghanistan was the first test, Iraq the final proof. If a nation threatens us, or supports those who do, or aids those who do, and refuses to resolve matters diplomatically then it shall do so at its peril.
Will this create more terrorists ? Maybe, but there was plenty of them before 9/11 so that rings hollow as a counter argument. Following 9/11, at a time when terrorist after terrorists has been captured or killed, as two regimes have fallen, there have been no major attacks on the West bar Bali and small isolated incidents. They're on the run, because we're fighting back and hurting them.
Incidentally, what happened in Iraq at exactly midnight on the 10th September 2001 ? Saddam and his inner circle went to their command bunkers. The Republican Guard mobilised from it's bases. Iraqi army units advanced to positions similar to those prior to the 1990 invasion. Proof Saddam knew what would happen that day and hoped to capitalise ? He was the only world leader to congratulate the terrorists, and this whole tale is in Saddam by Con Coughlin, and is backed up by numerous sources, more of which are on the internet as well.
Anyway.....
I posted the original to see what kind of response it would draw from 'certain' people, and I wasn't exactly surprised by the responses.
Fact is I now support Bush, Blair, the whole war on terror and the campaign in Iraq far more than ever before.
You say that anti-war is not pro-Saddam, I beg to disagree with that.
Objectives of the war;
1) Removal of all WMD.
2) Regime Change.
3) Elimination of terrorists inside Iraq.
Right, let's skip to 2) first of all. Regime change. Iraq WAS a dictatorship. Now, lets not get bogged down in the whole "there's tons more dictatorships in the world, why's Iraq so bad" debate, and consider what that means. Saddam is in charge, anyone who disagrees takes a one way trip to prison, and worse. Any attempts made by his own people to kill Saddam have been met by total failure, and not forgetting that anyone caught betraying him can wave goodbye to their life, and their whole extended families lives also. The regime is not just one man but the whole inner circle around him, even if the Iraqi resistance had killed Saddam one of those would have stepped in. How do you remove a whole regime and it's entire support apparatus ? War. Now if a war objective is the removal of the regime, and you oppose the war, then that can well be interpreted as vague support for him and his regime. Yes, war isn't nice, but it was the only way THIS time.
Right, the big one, 1) Removal of all WMD. After over three weeks we've found very little, apart from the entire Iraqi army being kitted out with WMD protection gear recently bought from our "allies" in Europe and Asia. Considering the NATO and the USA only use WMD in response to it's use then that speaks volumes, but I digress. No WMD found ! Shock horror scandal. Hold your horses, the UN inspectors have had about 8 years to find the stuff and have turned up nothing, yet we know it is there. Iraq's a big country, no ? Obviously the first priority is to finish off the regime and restore law and order for the Iraqi people everywhere as best we can whilst new authorities are put in place. Then we can get down to the specialist business of finding the weapons, even today a 1000 strong US team including many former inspectors is enroute, US officials have identified over 3000 sites to investigate, and that's just the start. Don't forget this is, oops, was, a regime that stored weapons in hospitals and schools, so nowhere can be ruled out. Give it time, after all you, and others, were very happy to give the UN about 12 years to mess around with no results. The US and it's allies have done more in three weeks than the UN in 12 years.
And 3) Terrorists. Camps destroyed in the north, the palestinian guy - who seeing as we have a perfect ID to match to him there is no doubt of his guilt - not to mention plenty more people apprehended and killed.
My glee ? We've destroyed a terrorist regime in three weeks, we've given freedom to a country and paid a high price for doing that, and it's a long road ahead. In order to achiece our aims many many have died, on both sides, and civilians. No one ever said nobody would be killed, and I find it interesting that the anti-war lobby continually trumpets civilian kills and casualties of proof of the wrongness of this war, where the hell was your concern for the hundreds of thousands of civilians Saddam's regime has killed over the years for such crimes as disagreeing with his rule, protesting e.t.c. ? I'll tell you where, nowhere. The US alliance kills people and you protest, Saddam killed thousands every year and you never protested for action but watched the UN around and criticised every attempt America and its allies made to bring Saddam to an end. Not forgetting that dictators around the world have seen the footage from Iraq, they know it could be them next.
Gunship diplomacy ? Maybe, but it's all leading to a safer, more fair world. Do not forget this conflict was not a straight decision to attack, we tried diplomacy for 12 years, 12 long years whilst the Iraqi people suffered. Yes, in the dim past we helped Saddam, but every country on this planet has done similar, somewhere. What is important is that we have now moved to correct that mistake, to in some small measure atone for it.
And what did it take to give us the political will to finally confront all this ? Over 3000 people murdered one morning in September. That is what it took to stop our nations turning a blind eye to the mess they partially created in the past. Afghanistan was the first test, Iraq the final proof. If a nation threatens us, or supports those who do, or aids those who do, and refuses to resolve matters diplomatically then it shall do so at its peril.
Will this create more terrorists ? Maybe, but there was plenty of them before 9/11 so that rings hollow as a counter argument. Following 9/11, at a time when terrorist after terrorists has been captured or killed, as two regimes have fallen, there have been no major attacks on the West bar Bali and small isolated incidents. They're on the run, because we're fighting back and hurting them.
Incidentally, what happened in Iraq at exactly midnight on the 10th September 2001 ? Saddam and his inner circle went to their command bunkers. The Republican Guard mobilised from it's bases. Iraqi army units advanced to positions similar to those prior to the 1990 invasion. Proof Saddam knew what would happen that day and hoped to capitalise ? He was the only world leader to congratulate the terrorists, and this whole tale is in Saddam by Con Coughlin, and is backed up by numerous sources, more of which are on the internet as well.
No? Nothing at all? Not even a development on your standard "I'm not listening so write what you want" piece of petulance?
~sigh~ Ah well, at least now we know that you're everything you're accused of being. Your foaming glee at the result of this war is as bad as your lust for starting it in the first place.
~sigh~ Ah well, at least now we know that you're everything you're accused of being. Your foaming glee at the result of this war is as bad as your lust for starting it in the first place.
So boring that I keep winning Game of the day...
Okay, here's a thing Bell; you've avoided once again answering why you changed your mind. You've merely posted and completely failed to even acknowledge the request for clarification of his attitude-switch - instead belittling everything said whilst at the same time crowing about "being proved right".
Really, I dare you; come up with a response or just shut up little boy.
Oh, and you're still resorting to the "You don't really care about Iraq" petulance. Which isn't an argument, and isn't true. Come on pumpkin; surely all of your frenzied masturbation to footage of US troops in action can't have addled your mind THAT much, can it?
Okay, here's a thing Bell; you've avoided once again answering why you changed your mind. You've merely posted and completely failed to even acknowledge the request for clarification of his attitude-switch - instead belittling everything said whilst at the same time crowing about "being proved right".
Really, I dare you; come up with a response or just shut up little boy.
Oh, and you're still resorting to the "You don't really care about Iraq" petulance. Which isn't an argument, and isn't true. Come on pumpkin; surely all of your frenzied masturbation to footage of US troops in action can't have addled your mind THAT much, can it?
Don't need to my friend. I think the pictures coming out of Iraq, of the Iraqi people, justify far more than I ever could. They hated Saddam all along, they're glad of what we did, and of what we had the balls to do.
More importantly it finally marked a watershed. No longer will we - the USA and UK, and anyone else who fancies standing up for freedom, sit around and wait to be attacked. If your nation or regime threatens us and you don't fancy diplomacy then we will hurt you, destroy you, and your people will be glad we did so.
The Taliban and Al Qaeda know that, what survives of the Iraqi regime knows that, so does Syria, Iran, and North Korea who, oh look, suddenly agree to multi party talks after months of refusal.
I really cannot be bothered to go back and see what crap people have written because it's just that; crap.
Fact is Light you don't give a $h1t about Iraq, the fact you dredged this up from ages ago shows that. Instead it's all about you and having to prove something to us all, possibly that your posts are the most boring ones ever.
And why was I not here ? Because I ran from your somewhat self serving and liberal idiot arguments ? Well...surprisingly no. Been away on Tenerife for two weeks, and before that, well as Goatboy pointed out to me many a time, the arguments on here are somewhat pointless, they change nothing at all apart from our wordcounts of course.
So have fun concocting a witty reply to this Light, 'cause I won't be reading it ! :)
More importantly it finally marked a watershed. No longer will we - the USA and UK, and anyone else who fancies standing up for freedom, sit around and wait to be attacked. If your nation or regime threatens us and you don't fancy diplomacy then we will hurt you, destroy you, and your people will be glad we did so.
The Taliban and Al Qaeda know that, what survives of the Iraqi regime knows that, so does Syria, Iran, and North Korea who, oh look, suddenly agree to multi party talks after months of refusal.
I really cannot be bothered to go back and see what crap people have written because it's just that; crap.
Fact is Light you don't give a $h1t about Iraq, the fact you dredged this up from ages ago shows that. Instead it's all about you and having to prove something to us all, possibly that your posts are the most boring ones ever.
And why was I not here ? Because I ran from your somewhat self serving and liberal idiot arguments ? Well...surprisingly no. Been away on Tenerife for two weeks, and before that, well as Goatboy pointed out to me many a time, the arguments on here are somewhat pointless, they change nothing at all apart from our wordcounts of course.
So have fun concocting a witty reply to this Light, 'cause I won't be reading it ! :)
Hello Bell, welcome back.
Care to answer any of the points made in this thread, or are you just going to prove myself and Goatboy 100% correct?
Care to answer any of the points made in this thread, or are you just going to prove myself and Goatboy 100% correct?
*POP*
Because I know Belldandy/Star Fury is lurking here.
Woolies Man, you avoided this post and just carried on your smug posturing.
Answer my questions in the posts a page back.
No digs, no refusal to answer.
Justify this post and your week-after change of mind.
But you didn't did you?
All your views, all your red-faced martyredom to the cause of Bush and you bloody ran away and hid from this.
Answer, or realise you are a coward and realise that we know it too.
Hang your head kid and go back to your groundless arguments with your Uni mates who don't know better.
Because I know Belldandy/Star Fury is lurking here.
Woolies Man, you avoided this post and just carried on your smug posturing.
Answer my questions in the posts a page back.
No digs, no refusal to answer.
Justify this post and your week-after change of mind.
But you didn't did you?
All your views, all your red-faced martyredom to the cause of Bush and you bloody ran away and hid from this.
Answer, or realise you are a coward and realise that we know it too.
Hang your head kid and go back to your groundless arguments with your Uni mates who don't know better.
Page: