🚀 go-pugleaf

"toad-o-line" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:avf9uc$ltl$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
>
> " Joshua" <Joshua@Jericho.com> wrote in message
> news:qhDS9.954$aD3.35@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "toad-o-line" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
> > news:avecrf$jtb$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
> > >
> > > " Joshua" <Joshua@Jericho.com> wrote in message
> > > news:GluS9.933$aD3.841@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > >
> > > > <gryb> wrote in message
> > news:gpvj1v4q0otqg819sjbc1sq3d2vr3t7fge@4ax.com...
> > > > > the planned invasion of Iraq will go ahead even if no weapons of
> mass
> > > > destruction are found
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> > > > _
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Bush will launch an invasion even if nothing is found by the UN
> > weapons
> > > > inspectors.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Good!
> > >
> > > Yeah, let's waste the lives of  young American boys who are fighting
for
> > > nothing.  Oops!  I forgot;  they're fighting to divert American
> attention
> > > from the fact that Bush, just like his father, has no plan for our
> economy
> > > that's deep in the tax-cut crapper.  Divert attention from the fact
that
> > > protection of individual liberties are gone.
> > > >
> >
> > I suppose you'd prefer that we sit on our collective hands and employ
the
> > Chamberlain maneuver until Iraq brings their next generation of
terrorism
> to
> > our shores?   No thank you!
> >
> No, I'd prefer we confront the threat that is, not the easy one that might
> be.  North Korea has nukes,  Iraq may have something.  Bush is just too
much
> of a pussy to confront the real threat.>
> > >


Recall again that you're speaking from a position of knowing nothing more
than what the talking heads tell you on the evening news.
Further, you exhibit a poor understanding of global politcal and military
dynamics - not that I'm surprised by that.



> > > > > <snip pointless polemic>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > And the media is attempting to uphold the fiction that the
> resumption
> > of
> > > > weapons inspections
> > > > > is an honest and serious attempt to avoid war.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't think you can use "media" and "honest" in the same sentence
> with
> > a
> > > > straight face.
> > > >
> > > > That includes Fox "News" big boy.  No spin my foot.
> > >
> >
> > Fox is certainly more balanced than CNN, but then I don't really expect
> you
> > to ever admit nor even recognize that fact.
> >
> > I don't watch CNN.  Fox is a laugh: one step above The National
Enquirer.


You just don't like them because they don't kowtow to the liberal
establishment.


> And their idea of 'balance" is giving airtime to that fruitcake Alan
Colmes.
> But then I don't really expect a bootlicking conservative toady like


ROFL!!!


> yourself to ever admit or recognize that fact.  People like you are
content
> to treat the bleatings of former AM deejays like Rush Limbaugh as fact.
Go
> on deluding yourself that Fox is balanced.... it's good for a laugh.


Personally I don't care for Limbaugh, but I knew you'd tote that out
eventually - you children always do.

>
> > > > > The Bush Administration attitude is,  that if no weapons of mass
> > > > destruction are found in Iraq,
> > > > > that does not prove that weapons of mass destruction do not exist
in
> > > Iraq.
> > > > > Their view is,  that it is not necessary to produce evidence to
> > justify
> > > an
> > > > invasion.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Just because YOU haven't seen the evidence, does not mean it does
not
> > > exist,
> > > > cupcake!
> > >
> > > And YOU have?  Or you're just taking Bush's word for it?  "Trust me,
my
> > > daughters Barb and Jenna don't drink...!">
> > > >
> >
> >
> > As a matter of fact I have, junior!   Going into the detail here would
> > entail violating the terms of my security clearances on the matter
though
> > and it's SO much more fun to watch you and other idiots like you twist
in
> > the wind spouting on about things you know not.
> >
> Bullshit. No more needs be said.  You have no security clearance, except
> maybe one you got from the back pages of Marvel Comics.
> >


You believe what you choose, I'll believe what I know.



> > > > > If the inspectors' findings do not provide the necessary pretext,
> > Bush
> > > > will ignore the
> > > > > inspectors in favour of some other excuse.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > *YAWN* !
> > > >
> > > Yeah, because it's a lot easier to attack Iraq than it is to attack
the
> > REAL
> > > threat:  North Korea.  Bush is not only a liar but a pussy as well.
> > >
> >
> >
> > you mean the "real threat" that, like so many other threats in the world
> > today, that is the product of the Clinton administration?
> >
> > Try again.  The nuke threat from North Korea well predates Bill Clinton.
> Guess your 'security clearance' doesn't provide you with actual facts.
>


You really should read a bit more.   But then I can see how that would be
difficult with your head so far up your ass.