Hold on there a second.  Yes, the United States does torture people you buffoon.  You’re caught up in an “us” versus “them” mentality.  The pictures of the US and British soldiers and the videos that have been seen around the world, including the one you show above IS torture.

Nobody in their right mind would pretend that Iraq was a kite-flying paradise.  It’s certainly not anymore if it ever was!  It’s worse now than it ever was.  You’re referring to Michael Moore showing footage of a young boy flying a kite in Fahrenheit 9/11.  He was showing this footage to stress the point that they were an oppressed people that were constantly under the thumb.  Are you going to say this footage was staged by Moore or something?  You SEE a boy flying a kite - he’s not being tortured, doesn’t need anyone’s help.  Moore’s not saying the country was a happy dappy place.  You’re taking what he said completely out of context.

Iraq was no paradise before the invasion and Moore nor I ever said it was.  It’s an even less safe place now than it was before we went over there and completely destroyed the place, took their oil and murdered, yes murdered unecessarily 100,000 innocent Iraqi people who had nothing to do with anything.

To say that two wrong make a right and that terrorism helps to stop terrorism means you are a fool.

Did you ever hear that both sides of the coin can be wrong?  No, to you it’s “We’re right because we’re told we’re right by freedom fighting leaders who becoming very rich in the process.” I smell oil to tell you the truth.

And I’m sure you’re going to say that America isn’t performing terrorism in Iraq?  Here’s the US Defense Department’s own definition of terrorism.

“the unlawful use of—or threatened use of—force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives.”

“Americans, and especially a certain political group of Americans, completely ignored that film.  What a shame...and how shameful.  Shameful to disrespect those who suffered by dismissing them as political fodder.  Shameful to line the pockets of a man like Michael Moore while ignoring the voices of those who were there and suffered losses unimaginable to the average American.”

No, nobody ignored this.  To line the pockets of Michael Moore.  OH MY GOD.  Was Michael Moore ignoring the voices of the innocent Iraqi people who had lost loved ones because of US bombings in Iraq when he showed them in tears in Fahrenheit 9/11 wondering where God was?

Edit: “He was showing this footage to stress the point that they were an oppressed people that were constantly under the thumb.”

Apologies for the edit.  He was showing this footage to stress the point that this particular Iraqi boy (and countless other like him) were not constantly under the thumb of oppression and that he was just living his life like you or I.  The fact that many children just like him died in the US’s relentless bombing campaign is very said, and the footage highlights this fact.

Ddi you even bother to read the linked page, “Michael Douglas?” Somehow I doubt it.  I bet you spell America with a k when you post to DU don’t you?

I agree with JimK. If I was unclear on the reasons before we went in, the torture rooms removed any apprehension I had.
Gawd, I only thought Michael was posting in the forums. He is also posting on the front page. He does have a hot wife though, and the dimple in his chin like his dad.  Michael Douglas claims to understand what Moore means with a clarity of vision only brought on by hallucinogens.

That’s awful.  Torturing statues is the lowest of the low.

Riiiiiiiight Michael Douglas, because torture is only torture, murder is only murder, and terrorism is only terrorism when the U.S does it?  What the fuck? I, along with many other people that are posters at the forums at Moorewatch are through being civil with you.  JimK, please check out the forums here to see what we have had to put up with the past few days.

Not torture:

And the Holocaust isn’t real, either, right Jim?

I viewed several hours of video and testimony detailing the horrors of Saddam’s torture. One woman recalled tearfully how her newborn baby was fed to dogs infront of her eyes. Another video shows floors stained with blood and fat that liquified off torture victoms and poured onto the tiles below them.

Yes, and Saddam tortured with our money. What’s your point?

Are you going to say this footage was staged by Moore or something?

Mikey Moore staging footage to make money!!??
How absurd!!!

Are you honestly trying to say that you believe that American soldiers are not committing torture in Iraq?

Can you honestly be in that much denial? I mean how much photographic and video evidence do you need?

It’s funny how you frame your point as being either Saddam tortured, or we tortured. As if, for some reason known only to you, it cannot be both. Of course it can and most certainly is.

And who thought Iraq was a paradise? Of course Saddam was a brutal dictator. He tortured and killed thousands; no doubt about it. But he was not a threat to Israel, America or anyone else. He had virtually no military, no WMD and no connection to Al-Qaeda or 9/11. Or are you in denial about those facts as well?

War should always be an absolute last resort. Because of the brutality and innocent death and suffering that defines war, it should only be launched if there is a direct threat, especially pre-emptively. The simple fact is that this war is a war of choice, against a non-existent threat.

Saddam was a tyrant, but have you seen North Korea? Have you seen Darfur? Have you seen a dozen other countries where conditions are as bad or worse than they were in Iraq before the invasion?

And what have all of these “liberated” Iraqis gotten? A civil war? Yeah, that’s much better. Do you think the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis that somehow managed to survive under Saddam’s rule but were then killed by invading American forces are better off? Do you think it was worth the lives of over 2200 American soldiers, as well as the suffering of some 20,000 who are permanently injured?

We are 3 years and $400 billion in, and the country is more violent and unstable than at any time before. What possible outcome do you envision? You think there’s a chance that American military might is going to permanently end the insurgency and impose democracy, and all the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds will live happily ever after? By it’s nature the insurgency cannot be defeated, as it feeds on the very force that the U.S. is using to try to destroy it.

Every day in Iraq costs the U.S. 3 soldiers’ lives and $1.5 billion, not to mention untold number of Innocent Iraqi lives. That’s about it. Just do the math and figure out what the magic number is in lives and cost to be able to say, “Ok, we’re out.”

That is the only possible outcome.

Mike D + canadian: Don’t bother reasoning with Republicans, because they just hate America. That’s why they’re letting India have nukes and the UAE have our ports.

Mike D, canadian liberal, and McCloud, do you actualy have anything to add to this discussion besides flamebait and oft-debunked bullshit liberal talking points?

Notice to members “Please dont feed the trolls”

Takes ages to sweep up the droppings.

Bugger it Ill feed them a bit.
So a bunch of idiots in uniform abused and assaulted detainees in Iraq. They were charged and sentenced promptly by a military trial. Their commander was incompitent and will undoubtedly be blacklisted as far as any career goes. the images and story are still widely shown today.
To you this is the same as..
A whole regime from the top down, engaging in collective punishment, murder, arbitary arrest and detention, physical mutilation, rape, and the list goes on.
This was done by many who are almost certainly among your “minutemen” in Iraq today. They will not face charges. their leader who on occasions PERSONALY ordered this to happen is in a court being defended by “usefull idiots”. The media have no interest in a “Saddam regime” story, despite huge amounts of footage and documents.Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why?

And you say its the same, how silly you are.

I saw a few of the posts, and just HAD to comment.

That’s why they’re letting India have nukes

No one’s letting India do anything.  They already have nukes just like their mortal enemy, Pakistan, has nukes.  All we’re doing is recognizing they have the nukes.  There’s really no choice in the matter.  Pretending India isn’t a nuclear power doesn’t mean they’re weapons suddenly don’t exist.  However, giving them this recognition makes them responsible for these weapons.  Do you really think denying reality is for the best, or is it just because a Republican did it?  By the way,

Don’t bother reasoning with Republicans, because they just hate America

That’s the problem, isn’t it?  Additudes like yours destroys debate and compromise needed for Democracy to work.  If you honestly think you can’t reason with half the country, then politics isn’t for you.

It’s an even less safe place now than it was before we went over there and completely destroyed the place, took their oil and murdered, yes murdered unecessarily 100,000 innocent Iraqi people who had nothing to do with anything.

MD,

I can’t believe that after all this time, there are still a few people out there that so willingly fall back on the “we took thier oil” chestnut. Tell me, fella, where is this oil? Is it the same oil that is being refined into gasoline, which by the way, I am paying $2.50 per gallon to fill up my truck? And where are these 100,000 innocent people we murdered? Are you including the folks killed by the car bombs and roadside IED’s? Are you including the people killed in the Mosques by the terrorists bombings?

Certainly the war has led to the death of non-participants. That of course is unfortunate and sad. Keep in mind though, that if we merely wanted to wipe that country off the map, we could have. Instead, we have invested billions of dollars and the blood of our own sons to do it in a way where non-participant casualties were kept to a minimum. Also keep in mind that after we caught Saddam, we didn’t leave, we stayed and built bridges, schools and water treatment factilities.

wow, it’s been a while since I posted,( I do check in every day though) I guess I forgot how to use the format buttons.I totally ganked the quotes.

The first part of my post was a quote from Michael Douglas.

I think both of these pics are torture,however there is a diffrence,saddams torture chambers remind me of medival times :S

Michael Douglas (and a few otheres) are amazing because they type such coherent response whilst plugging both ears and going “Lalalalalalalala, I’m not listening!”

But he was not a threat to Israel, America or anyone else.

My bad, I thought when he was offering $20,000 to the families of suicide palistinian bombers that was a threat to Isreal but guess I was wrong.  You obviously know better.  I mean just because he was starving his own people, committing horrible crimes against humanity, taking blood money from the U.N., had previously invaded a neighboring coutnry, and was vocal about his hatred for west doesn’t mean he was a threat.  It could have all been an act, right?  Becareful when using the phrase “anyone else” because you sound like an uneducated child, but then again, the rest of your post wasn’t much better.

Saddam was a tyrant, but have you seen North Korea? Have you seen Darfur? Have you seen a dozen other countries where conditions are as bad or worse than they were in Iraq before the invasion?

Is this a call for more military action in North Korea and Darfur?  Sure sounds like it.  I understand you are upset about military decisions and their lack of personel so if you could give us your rank and explain why others should join the military like you have then maybe more people will join so our military can stop the attrocities in NK and Darfur.

Check my math for me I am confused.

We are 3 years and $400 billion in,...or....Every day in Iraq costs the U.S. 3 soldiers’ lives and $1.5 billion

Why doesn’t that add up?  $1.5 bil X 1095 days = $400 bil

Do you think it was worth the lives of over 2200 American soldiers, as well as the suffering of some 20,000 who are permanently injured?

To put it quite simply, Yes.  If our national foreign policy’s basic goal is security then I thank those men and women for their wonderful, amazing, heroic, sacrifices and pray that many others have the guts to follow in their steps.  If Uncle Sam comes calling I will be there too.

Yes, and Saddam tortured with our money. What’s your point?

Our point is that it wasn’t our money, it was the U.N’s.  All the more reason for them to be disbanded or ignored.  Stop them from giving money to all the other pathetic governments out there abusing their people.

Oh, and it is the U.N. that allows the attrocities in Darfur and North Korea to continue, so what’s your point?

Suggestion for new photo captions on this post.

“Torture:”
The pic of the statue being tortured.

“Not torture: But very closet Gay!”
The pic of Abu Grab-ass

What’s that guy listening to, in the first photo?  I see he’s got headphones on.

I think those are electrodes and they’re electricuting him.  Either that or, by the look on his face, they’re making him listen to either country or Greenday.  Now THATS torture.

Michael Douglas wrote:

“He was showing this footage to stress the point that they were an oppressed people that were constantly under the thumb.  Are you going to say this footage was staged by Moore or something?”

No, Moore’s depiction was pretty clear- Iraq (HIS view of Iraq) was a peaceful place prior to the American invasion. I don’t think, especially with the evidence we have seen with regards to footage and the trial of Hussein, we can deny that Iraq was, in fact, a dictatorship. For Moore to even think of such a fraudulent depiction is akin to Walter Duranty’s white-washing of the Stalin-engineered famine in Ukraine.

Good comments, Fairplay.

Canadian Liberal, let’s assume for a moment that torture by the Americans is as widespread as I believe you are suggesting. It’s bad. Fine. We’ve established that. Now- does that detract from the fact that Saddam Hussein was a butcher? 50,000 in one pit alone. That’s the size of a small Canadian town. Don’t lose sight of who is on trial.
Jim said he didn’t care why America went to Iraq, not that people aren’t tortured or that it was good people were tortured.

canadian liberal:

Are you honestly trying to say that you believe that American soldiers are not committing torture in Iraq?

I believe both the US and Saddam have committed acts of torture in Iraq, which is worthy of criticism and outrage.  But if you were to weigh the two, Saddam would beat the US with both arms tied behind his back. 

Or would you, canadian liberal, like to argue that Iraq torture was less frequent and qrotesque under Saddam than it is under the US?

I believe that the acts committed by US soldiers in Abu Ghraib was appalling, and I wish I could say that they were the only ones.  But let’s not say they were anywhere near what Saddam did.

But he was not a threat to Israel, America or anyone else. He had virtually no military, no WMD and no connection to Al-Qaeda or 9/11. Or are you in denial about those facts as well?

Well, he was a threat to his own people.  And according to the Duelfer report, he was quite intent on acquiring WMD, not exactly a trait one finds in an individual who is supposed to be harmless.  In fact, he was planning to go full speed ahead in that regard as soon as the sanctions toppled.

Saddam was a tyrant, but have you seen North Korea?

As you noted, Saddam had virtually no military, while NK may have nukes and has, by many accounts, a very large military located near the South Korean border ready to invade that country at the first sign of trouble. Invading NK would likely be exponentially more difficult (and costly) to invade that Iraq has been. Thus, dealing with NK is whole other ballgame than dealing with Iraq.

Have you seen Darfur?

Actually, Darfur is in bad shape exactly becausenobody has stepped in militarily.  The only defense the non-arab people have there against the janjaweed is the African Union, who are underequipped and undermanned to handle the situation.  Tens of thousands of Africans living in that country are believed dead because no nation has been willing to seriously do anything about it.

That is the only possible outcome.

What is the “outcome” for the Iraqis if we pull out now or soon?

Granted, US troop deaths and the cost of managing Iraq will go significatly down, if that is your main concern. So will Iraqi deaths, although the aftermath of a US pullout in Iraq will be undoubtably bloody, for the Iraqis that is.

But what about the freedom of the Iraqis after the US leaves?  Will it be better or worse than those they possess under the US occupation?  What about their civil liberties? What about being able to elect their own leaders?  DO they have any potential for a better future if the US pullouts now or in the near future?

Iraq is in bad shape now.  But it was in pretty bad shape before the invasion, and it will probably be in even worse shape than it is now if we pull out. 

Right now, a stable, democratic Iraq seems like a longshot, but that’s more than they ever had under Saddam, and it certainly won’t exist if the US pulls out now.

McCloud:

Yes, and Saddam tortured with our money. What’s your point? {/quote]

That torture is bad, or something like that. Or does the fact the US turned something of a blind eye to Saddam’s activities during the 80’s somehow nullify the insidiousness of that dictator?

canadian liberal:

Are you honestly trying to say that you believe that American soldiers are not committing torture in Iraq?

I believe both the US and Saddam have committed acts of torture in Iraq, which is worthy of criticism and outrage.  But if you were to weigh the two, Saddam would beat the US with both arms tied behind his back. 

Or would you, canadian liberal, like to argue that Iraq torture was less frequent and qrotesque under Saddam than it is under the US?

I believe that the acts committed by US soldiers in Abu Ghraib was appalling, and I wish I could say that they were the only ones.  But let’s not say they were anywhere near what Saddam did.

But he was not a threat to Israel, America or anyone else. He had virtually no military, no WMD and no connection to Al-Qaeda or 9/11. Or are you in denial about those facts as well?

Well, he was a threat to his own people.  And according to the Duelfer report, he was quite intent on acquiring WMD, not exactly a trait one finds in an individual who is supposed to be harmless.  In fact, he was planning to go full speed ahead in that regard as soon as the sanctions toppled.

Saddam was a tyrant, but have you seen North Korea?

As you noted, Saddam had virtually no military, while NK may have nukes and has, by many accounts, a very large military located near the South Korean border ready to invade that country at the first sign of trouble. Invading NK would likely be exponentially more difficult (and costly) to invade that Iraq has been. Thus, dealing with NK is whole other ballgame than dealing with Iraq.

Have you seen Darfur?

Actually, Darfur is in bad shape exactly becausenobody has stepped in militarily.  The only defense the non-arab people have there against the janjaweed is the African Union, who are underequipped and undermanned to handle the situation.  Tens of thousands of Africans living in that country are believed dead because no nation has been willing to seriously do anything about it.

That is the only possible outcome.

What is the “outcome” for the Iraqis if we pull out now or soon?

Granted, US troop deaths and the cost of managing Iraq will go significatly down, if that is your main concern. So will Iraqi deaths, although the aftermath of a US pullout in Iraq will be undoubtably bloody, for the Iraqis that is.

But what about the freedom of the Iraqis after the US leaves?  Will it be better or worse than those they possess under the US occupation?  What about their civil liberties? What about being able to elect their own leaders?  DO they have any potential for a better future if the US pullouts now or in the near future?

Iraq is in bad shape now.  But it was in pretty bad shape before the invasion, and it will probably be in even worse shape than it is now if we pull out. 

Right now, a stable, democratic Iraq seems like a longshot, but that’s more than they ever had under Saddam, and it certainly won’t exist if the US pulls out now.

McCloud:

Yes, and Saddam tortured with our money. What’s your point? {/quote]

That torture is bad, or something like that. Or does the fact the US turned something of a blind eye to Saddam’s activities during the 80’s somehow nullify the insidiousness of that dictator?

Oh, nuts,
somehow I posted twice.  Sorry for clogging up the thread.

And my response to McCloud was:
That torture is bad, or something like that. Or does the fact the US turned something of a blind eye to Saddam’s activities during the 80’s somehow nullify the insidiousness of that dictator?

Like Paratrooper, I haven’t posted in a while, and I’m a bit rusty.

I’m really sorry about that.

Iraq was no paradise before the invasion and Moore nor I ever said it was.  It’s an even less safe place now than it was before we went over there and completely destroyed the place, took their oil and murdered, yes murdered unecessarily 100,000 innocent Iraqi people who had nothing to do with anything.

Oh really? Maybe that the violence is on the news is what makes it more unsafe. That’s the problem with you dolts. If it’s not on TV, it must not exist. Yeah, you are right. The fear today for the Iraqi citizen is a roadside bomb (and the US isn’t planting those bombs). The years of being pulled off the street or gassed or whatever by Saddams thugs are over. But since those years weren’t televised, they don’t count, so hence things must be worse. The 100,000 number is questionable, and that’s been pointed out a million times, but why left facts get in the way of a rant.

To say that two wrong make a right and that terrorism helps to stop terrorism means you are a fool.

The wrongs of what a few soldiers did were put on the news by a free press, and those people were punished. Hell, a lot of them were punished for things that weren’t even torture, but our standards are quite high, hence the punishment.  You’re talking about a few examples, and basically making our whole system guilty. Saddam’s torture was policy, and it was condoned, and certainly wasn’t made known through a free Iraqi press, and CNN even admits they were too chickenshit to report it. You can’t tell the fucking difference though can you?

Did you ever hear that both sides of the coin can be wrong?  No, to you it’s “We’re right because we’re told we’re right by freedom fighting leaders who becoming very rich in the process.” I smell oil to tell you the truth.

Show some evidence, or shut the fuck up already. Where’s this oil you’re talking about? Maybe you like the good ole days where Kofi, and his looters were raking in the cash.

I was never for this war, but some of you numbnuts with the same, it must have been for oil, the US military condones torture, it’s a racist war, and on and on. Not to mention the fact that when we talk about deaths in Iraq, NONE OF YOU ASSHOLES ever points to the insurgents and say how horrible it is that they would DELIBERATELY try to kill as many civilians as possible. This alone, makes me seriously question if you give a shit about life when it doesn’t give you ammunition for your talking points. Bush isn’t the reason insurgents are DELIBERATELY targeting civilians, insurgents are the reason. Find me some evidence where the US deliberately tried to bomb any civilians. Billions have been poured in to try to prevent that as much as possible. I hear this indiscriminate bombing bullshit argument from some of you leftist out there. SHOW SOME FUCKING EVEDINCE.

And who thought Iraq was a paradise? Of course Saddam was a brutal dictator. He tortured and killed thousands; no doubt about it. But he was not a threat to Israel, America or anyone else. He had virtually no military, no WMD and no connection to Al-Qaeda or 9/11. Or are you in denial about those facts as well?

Michael Moore, if you believe his movie.  Saddam tortured and killed hundreds of thousands, not just thousands.  In case you forgot, he was shooting at American planes all of the time and paying the families of suicide bombers who killed Israelis.  Not finding WMDs doesn’t make “no WMD” a fact in the real world.  And a number of meetings with Al Qaeda doesn’t make “no connection” a fact in the real world either.

War should always be an absolute last resort.

Of course that is the expected attitude from a citizen of a country that cannot even defend itself.  In the real world, things are not so black and white that such an absolutist statement is valid.

In case you forgot, he was shooting at American planes all of the time and paying the families of suicide bombers who killed Israelis

And so does the Saudi Royal Family and Qadaffi. What’s your point?

Not finding WMDs doesn’t make “no WMD” a fact in the real world. 

“The absence of evidence doesn’t indicate the evidence of absence”, huh?

And a number of meetings with Al Qaeda doesn’t make “no connection” a fact in the real world either.

You mean like when Bush was paying Al Qaeda to burn opium crops? Or how about when Reagan was paying them to fight the Soviets with the same tactics used against us?

Of course that is the expected attitude from a citizen of a country that cannot even defend itself.  In the real world, things are not so black and white that such an absolutist statement is valid.

That’s just rich. A hawk using the liberal “everything is relative” argument to justify this war. What other commie values won’t you hypocrites co-op besides our massive “taxing and spending” for this illegal war, subsidies for corporations, taking away Arab and Muslim children from their families, and making the government function so inefficiently that there’s no need to take personal responsibility when things go wrong? Will you start banning all religion and make only the writings of your Neo-con apologists the official state literature? Force all the “liberal intellectuals” at universities to work in the fields? Run over protestors with tanks? C’mon man, the suspense is killing me.

And so does the Saudi Royal Family and Qadaffi.

Link please.

“The absence of evidence doesn’t indicate the evidence of absence”

Not an exact quote, more like a misinterpretation of what was said.  Try this:  Just cause you can’t see it doesn’t prove it didn’t happen or exist.  That’s a little closer to what was said and you should know that.  I know you like to twist people’s words and make crap up but try for once to stay on point and prove something.  However, I get the feeling all we will see is you making bold statements with no real proof and then twisting people’s words to try to make them look silly.

http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area;=sr&ID;=SR1703
http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-8251.html

I must say, McCloud, that I was more intreged in hearing that the Saudi’s had fired at U.S. planes.  So when that wasn’t proven be your links I was disappointed.  Then I was even more amuzed by your second link talking about an incident that is currently over 20 years old.  I guess I didn’t remember Qadaffi firing at U.S. planes cause I was 3 months old at the time.  But then again it was 25 years ago and we are on our 4th president since that happened.  Maybe someother people forgot about it too.

See when you bring up topics they should be recent and relevent.  You know, within the last 10 years or so, and pertaining to the topic in at hand...torture.  But neither of them really talked about that did they.  That’s o.k. I know you are knew at this.  Here is a topic you can discuss… Why did Michael Moore call the people who support Saddam Hussein freedom fighters when under Saddam the people had no freedoms?  Interesting isn’t it.  Maybe you can explain this.

That’s why they’re letting India have nukes and the UAE have our ports.

No India doesn’t have nukes because of Republicans hate America… but maybe you can explain why Democrats keep supporting the people that blow up our soldiers.  (Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, etc.) Or maybe you can explain why Democrats haven’t come out in unilateral disgust of the U.N. for allowing the crap Iran is pulling to continue.  See Democrats hate America which is why our enemies (Iran...Iraq...North Korea) keep getting WMD.

I must say, McCloud, that I was more intreged in hearing that the Saudi’s had fired at U.S. planes.

I was making a point that they also pay the families of suicide bombers, dumbass.

See when you bring up topics they should be recent and relevent. You know, within the last 10 years or so, and pertaining to the topic in at hand...torture.

Remember what Santayana said about forgetting history: like Vietnam. Or the fact that Saddam was propped up by us and tortured with our consent and cash.

Here is a topic you can discuss… Why did Michael Moore call the people who support Saddam Hussein freedom fighters

The people who supported Saddam Hussein are out of power. The insurgency consists of the rest of Iraq. And Reagan was calling suicide bombers freedom fighters long before Moore.

No India doesn’t have nukes because of Republicans hate America…

So why are they negotiating to give them nuclear power after they violated the nuclear proliferation agreement?

but maybe you can explain why Democrats keep supporting the people that blow up our soldiers.

Last time I checked, Hillary and Lieberman supported the troops. But Bush keeps cutting their healthcare and forcing them on extended tours of duty. What’s up with that?

Or maybe you can explain why Democrats haven’t come out in unilateral disgust of the U.N. for allowing the crap Iran is pulling to continue.

Actually, they’ve been criticizing Bush’s mishandling of Iran for a while now. But Shrub is bogged down in Iraq and can’t really do anything at the moment. Look how useless he was in saving New Orleans.

See Democrats hate America which is why our enemies (Iran...Iraq...North Korea) keep getting WMD.

There were no WMDs in Iraq, and there are none in Iran. And N. Korea is just bluffing. The ones who hate America are those who want to murder innocent babies while taking away a woman’s reproductive rights, even in the case of rape or incest.

There were no WMDs in Iraq

Take Santayana and shove it up your ass.  Then pull out some history lessons and look at Saddam gasing his own people.  Look at his treatment of his own Kurdish people.  I am sure there were no WMD’s used there.  Wait there were and you are wrong again.

Saddam was propped up by us and tortured with our consent and cash.

Yeah, only with our consent and cash… that is how he got so rich.  It couldn’t have been from Kofi Annan and the U.N. oil for food program.  And if you can read try looking into the ratio of U.S. support of Iraq versus other countries during his rise to power.  Then attempt to look at history in the correct way: within perspective.

The insurgency consists of the rest of Iraq.

Way to support our troops who repeatedly say differently.  I am sure you want peace in the Middle East and realize that immediate withdrawal is not a feasable answer.  So with that knowledge in hand why would you not call for more international involvement and support for our military from democrats.

Reagan was calling suicide bombers freedom fighters long before Moore

Maybe you can clarify this… Reagan was calling the people that killed our troops freedom fighters?  I can’t find any references to that or historical accuracy.  That’s cause there isn’t any.  Again you are wrong.  I like it when you make crap up and take it out of context… it is easier for me.

Look how useless he was in saving New Orleans.

Keep it on the right thread.  You have been repeatedly disproven on this topic in other threads.  Why is it that you never learn?  Could it be that you don’t know how to understand basic logic and gov’t functions?  Probably.

Wow, McCloud, that was quite a fisking!  Too bad it was based on B.S.

“The absence of evidence doesn’t indicate the evidence of absence”, huh?

To put it simply, it’s called “trying to prove a negative.”

You mean like when Bush was paying Al Qaeda to burn opium crops? Or how about when Reagan was paying them to fight the Soviets with the same tactics used against us?

You’ve been reading too many far-left websites and conspiracy theorists.  The U.S. government didn’t pay bin Laden (Al Qaeda in your words) anything.  That’s a myth according to the CIA officers who were actually involved in supporting the mujahadeen against the Soviets.

What other commie values won’t you hypocrites co-op besides our massive “taxing and spending” for this illegal war, subsidies for corporations, taking away Arab and Muslim children from their families, and making the government function so inefficiently that there’s no need to take personal responsibility when things go wrong?

Now exactly how is the war illegal?  And you might as well toss in why it is “immoral” while you’re at it.  I like that line about “taking” children—want to explain it?  And a leftist talking about personal responsibility is a hoot, but not as much as thinking that government inefficiency has anything to do with the political party in power.

Force all the “liberal intellectuals” at universities to work in the fields? Run over protestors with tanks?

That’s a leftist tactic.  You can look at the history of every communist government for a plethora of examples.

I’m pretty amazed at how stupid some people can be.

You negotiate with a nuclear power who has violated a treaty BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE NUKES YOU MORON.

I’ll leave fisking the rest of his bullshit to y’all, you guys do such a good job of it.  :)

Thanks JimK, I suppose we could do it easy enough by saying “Read all the previous stuff and then come up with something that hasn’t already been debunked” But I doubt any of these trolls will take the time to read previous threads.

What’s that guy listening to, in the first photo?  I see he’s got headphones on.

Judging by the look on his face, probably the same liberal crap that keeps getting brought up on this site by McCloud, canadian liberal, and Michael Douglas.

You negotiate with a nuclear power who has violated a treaty BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE NUKES YOU MORON.

Unless they’re Iran, Pakistan, or N. Korea.

Wow Iran already has nuclear capabilities… where do you get your information and how much Kool-Aid do you have to drink to believe it?

Ahh the beloved Moonbat you know they haven’t been posting here that often recently.  However, once you bring up that U.S doesn’t torture, and Suddam did they just come out of the woodwork.  Just amazing!

Unless they’re Iran, Pakistan, or N. Korea.

What the fuck does that even mean?  Re: N. Korea: We’re trying to force them back to the six-way talks.  Pakistan is currently an ally (albeit a tenuous one that could turn with the death of their current leadership) and Iran is being penned in on all sides regarding nukes.  Even Europe...The frigging EU, are talking tough to Iran.

So what the fuck are you talking about?

You seem fairly ignorant of actual world events.  Not surprising for a lefty troll.

Threatening Iran, showing preference to India when it’s still at conflict with Pakistan, and ignoring N. Korea’s demands isn’t exactly “negotiating”.

You’ve been reading too many far-left websites and conspiracy theorists.  The U.S. government didn’t pay bin Laden (Al Qaeda in your words) anything.  That’s a myth according to the CIA officers who were actually involved in supporting the mujahadeen against the Soviets.

Even if it weren’t a myth, and I’ll admit I don’t know whether we gave Bin Laden, or those associated with him money or not back then, but what morons like McCloud don’t understand is that Reagan was an ordinary human like the rest of us when he was President.  He’s wasn’t a fucking clairvoyant, which neither is McCloud or any other leftist who pride themselves by predicting yesterday’s news.  No one can determine who is going to be naughty or nice 20 or 30 years out. At the time, the Soviets were a huge threat, and violated all kinds of human rights, far worse than any of the charges made against the US, and invaded Afghanistan for no reason.  There were no 12 years of UN bullshit, and broken resolutions. Afghanistan hadn’t already invaded another country, etc. etc. None of this matters though, because the brutality of the Soviet Union is forgiven by folks like McCloud, so is Saddam’s brutality, along with the current insurgent brutality out there. I’ll tend to forgive the US more because that’s the side I’m on, McCloud will forgive regimes like the Soviet Union more because that’s the type of crap he sympathizes with.

I’m not saying I condone when there is actual torture in the name of the US. A cold room or loss of sleep is not torture. Beating the shit out of someone is, and should be delt with, but to say our most violent day is even close to the least violent day of the likes of Saddam, or the Soviet Union, or Iran, or North Korea is absolute bullshit.

… ignoring N. Korea’s demands ...

I hate to break it to you, but making demands is not negotiating.

Section8:

I don’t know for a fact either, but I have read interviews with retired case officers and the ex-Pakistan station chief who all said they never gave any money to or even dealt with bin Laden or his organization (that’s not to say that money could not have eventually gotten to some of his pals).  Also, during the time of CIA involvement with the mujahideen, there were a number of different Arab and Afghan groups involved in the fight against the Soviets.  There should be no need to point out that bin Laden had (and still does have) a s**tload of money and access to even more through sympathizers in his home country, so he didn’t even need any infidel help.

What makes it even more unlikely is that he hates infidel Americans with such a passion that in one case quite a few years ago (during his first “deployment” to Afghanistan in the pre-Taliban days), he was in the presence of an American journalist invited by and under the protection of an Afghan warlord in which he got so freaked out that there was an American close to him that he started a stink about having the Afghans kill him on the spot.  They basically blew him off and got the American out of there.

First, three quotes by Golda Meir which I believe relate to us right now:

Forget peace for now. We have to show them we’re strong. Golda Meir

We don’t thrive on military acts. We do them because we have to, and thank God we are efficient. Golda Meir

We have always said that in our war with the Arabs we had a secret weapon - no alternative. Golda Meir

Second, several quotes by the Democratic Party and leftist messiah, JFK:

A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality. JFK

Kinda like how our President does what he must despite the obstacles and pressures put forth by the ignorant lefties!

Israel was not created in order to disappear - Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and the home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom. JFK

Did you hear that all you antisemite lefties (I’m looking at you Cindy and Mikey!)

It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war. JFK

But according to Cindy Sheehan and Mikey Moore, the only way we can assure peace is to disband the military!

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.  JFK

And that means kickins some ass in the middle east even if the Frogs and Krauts don’t want to support us!

Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past. Let us accept our own responsibility for the future. JFK

Wow!  Imagine that!  people in power and position actually making nonpartisan decisions and votes and taking responsibility for them.  Makes you wonder why old Jack didn’t have more heart to hearts with his little bro Teddy!

The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission. JFK

But wait a second!  Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry and most of the rest of the Dems want to surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan and pull out!  Don’t these people even understand what their own golden boy was talking about?

The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were. JFK

Like the libbies and lefties who are so skeptical and cynical of our efforts in Iraq.  The same ones who can’t think outside their own little pot-toking clouds and dream of a free Iraq.

There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction. JFK

Kinda like sitting on your ass and asking for “sanctions” against Saddam (Clinton) instead of actually getting off your ass and kicking Saddam in his? (George W.)

There is always inequity in life. Some men are killed in war and some men are wounded, and some men are stationed in the Antarctic and some are stationed in San Francisco. It’s very hard in military or personal life to assure complete equality. Life is unfair. JFK

So you mean that even the “children” of Republicans can be sent to war and kill and die?  Gee, that’s not what Mikey would have us believe!

We are not against any man-or any nation-or any system-except as it is hostile to freedom. JFK

But Mikey, John Kerry, Cindy and all the rest think that we should be hugging and kissing and making friends with people like that!

When written in Chinese, the word “crisis” is composed of two characters. One represents danger and the other represents opportunity. JFK

Just like the crisis we face in the middle east.  there are the dangers our troops fae every day.  and the opportunity to help the oppressed Iraqi people to establish their own government and finally live in freedom.

And finally a few quotes from two of our greatest military leaders who ever lived!

We are going to have peace even if we have to fight for it.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

No data for format specified.

‘Nuff Said