Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 12:49:52 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
Independent non-partisan… my panty hosed butt. No reputable organization would use the rhetoric used in this report.

I do not believe the administrations explanations or actions are complete and honest but I certainly do not put my trust in the truth and motivations of this group either.

WMD  is a silly argument…. The reason I am against this war is not because of the reasons given but because we invaded a country without being attacked directly. This is the only fact that cannot be argued… In hindsight or foresight it was wrong.

This left wing babble is assuming lies while using hindsight. They present no more proof of lies than Bush does of his reasoning behind the invasion.

Please use your brains and stop being influenced by every oddball conspiracy theory that comes along. Your reactions here to unsubstantiated rumors shows you are easily influenced.  

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 1/24/2008 12:54:22 PM >

(in reply to Muttling)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 2:23:26 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Muttling

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Why do people always forget and ignore the fact that 7500 military personnel died under Clinton's presidency?

You accuse Bush of lying, distorting the facts, crimes...etc etc etc. But turn that blind partisan eye toward the previous administration, the deaths it caused, the lies they told, the crimes they committed...

Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal Democrat.

Did you happen to checkthe source of this little claim? Here it is:
http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/Death_Rates.pdf

Now what jumps out from this? For me two little details.

1) From 1993 to 2000 (The Clinton administration) how many deaths does the Pentagon attribute to enemy action? 1.


While the 7500 claim is certainly not accurate, neither is the claim of 1 death.   We lost 45 soldiers in the mission to Somalia alone.  17 sailors died in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.  I know there were several casualties in Bosnia as well, but the number is Googling up very easily.

According to my source 19 died in the battle of Mogadishu, Black Hawk Down, with 22 additional fatalities amongst US troops during the the period between Dec 1992 and March 1994. Strangely the Pentagon report I linked to above doesn't list any hostile action fatalities in 1992, 1993 or 1994. It does include 30 deaths due to terrorism so the Somalia deaths may have somehow all been classed as terrorism related instead of as combat deaths as they rightfully should have been. It does appear that the 17 deaths on the Cole were attributed to terrorism as well, 17 terrorism deaths are reported for 2000, which IMO is the correct attribution for those deaths.

It was early when I looked this up and my brain must have simply not engaged when I saw the numbers.

But this is the document various rightwingers grabbed the "7500 military deaths under Clinton so 8900 under Bush isn't so bad" talking point from and it is the official Pentagon tally.

Even correctly attributing all the Somalia casualties that occured on Clinton's watch as hostile action would still only bring Clinton to less than 50 compared to the 2500+ 6 year total for Bush.

(in reply to Muttling)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 3:56:16 PM   
Feric


Posts: 227
Joined: 1/9/2008
From: San Francisco
Status: offline
Thank you, Subtee! Thanks for posting this article. After reading it, I have a couple of questions: Why are Bush and Cheney still in office, and not being arrested and thrown in jail? If these do not constitute Impeachable Offenses, what does?

_____________________________

A figure of startling and unexpected nobility...

(in reply to subtee)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 4:22:34 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:


In this thread, you have totally missed subrob, and then my intent. You see the word "Clinton' in a discuss like this, and make all kinds of unwarranted assumptions.


Subrob said, AND I QUOTE: "You accuse Bush of lying, distorting the facts, crimes...etc etc etc. But turn that blind partisan eye toward the previous administration, the deaths it caused, the lies they told, the crimes they committed..."

Which I demonstrated false, by showing the Daily Show ripped on Clinton as much as Bush. There is no blind-partisan eye.

The intent is to distract from prosecuting Bush for his alleged crimes by pointing to Clinton and invoking some variant of "Two Wrongs *DO* Make A Right".

Bush is not Clinton.

Bush's Alleged Crimes are Not Clinton's.

If you think Clinton should be adjudicated, then knock yourself out, but stop invoking Clinton to excuse Bush's wrongdoing or justify inaction.

< Message edited by farglebargle -- 1/24/2008 4:25:38 PM >


_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 5:32:00 PM   
Crush


Posts: 1031
Status: offline
Now, now....we really need to remember that the groups that made these reports are heavily funded by Good Old George Soros:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/016723.php

However, the real problem is that all these politicians just need to be jailed.

Next constitution, let's remember to add the following:  "For each term served in Office, an equal term will be served in Federal Prison.  In the Pink Ward."




(in reply to Muttling)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 5:34:51 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crush

Now, now....we really need to remember that the groups that made these reports are heavily funded by Good Old George Soros:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/016723.php



Who cares? An alleged Criminal is an alleged Criminal.


Overt Acts of the Bush Administration supporting indictment.

A. On December 9, 2001, CHENEY announced on NBC's Meet the Press that "it was pretty well confirmed" that lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta had met the head of Iraqi intelligence in Prague in April 2001, which statement was, as CHENEY well knew, made without reasonable basis and with reckless disregard for the truth, because it was based on a single witness's uncorroborated allegation that had not been fully investigated by U.S. intelligence agencies.

B. On July 15, 2002, POWELL stated on Ted Koppel's Nightline: "What we have consistently said is that the President has no plan on his desk to invade Iraq at the moment, nor has one been presented to him, nor have his advisors come together to put a plan to him," which statement was deliberately false and misleading in that it deceitfully implied the President was not planning an invasion of Iraq when, as POWELL well knew, the President was close to finalizing detailed military plans for such an invasion that he had ordered months previously.

C. On August 26, 2002, CHENEY made numerous false and fraudulent statements including: "Simply stated there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us," when, as CHENEY well knew, this statement was made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that the IC's then prevailing assessment was that Iraq had neither nuclear weapons nor a reconstituted nuclear weapons program.

D. On September 7, 2002, appearing publicly with Blair, BUSH claimed a recent IAEA report stated that Iraq was "six months away from developing a [nuclear] weapon" and "I don't know what more evidence we need," which statements were made without basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that: (1) the IAEA had not even been present in Iraq since 1998; and (2) the report the IAEA did write in 1998 had concluded there was no indication that Iraq had the physical capacity to produce weapons-usable nuclear material or that it had attempted to obtain such material.

E. On September 8, 2002, on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, RICE asserted that Saddam Hussein was acquiring aluminum tubes that were "only suited" for nuclear centrifuge use, which statement was deliberately false and fraudulent, and made with reckless indifference to the truth in that it omitted to state the following material facts: (1) the U.S. intelligence community was deeply divided about the likely use of the tubes; (2) there were at least fifteen intelligence reports written since April 2001 that cast doubt on the tubes' possible nuclear-related use; and (3) the U.S. Department of Energy nuclear weapons experts had concluded, after analyzing the tubes's specifications and the circumstances of the Iraqis' attempts to procure them, that the aluminum tubes were not well suited for nuclear centrifuge use and were more likely intended for artillery rocket production.

F. On September 8, 2002, RUMSFELD stated on Face the Nation: "Imagine a September 11th, with weapons of mass destruction. It's not three thousand, it's tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children," which statement was deliberately fraudulent and misleading in that it implied without reasonable basis and in direct contradiction to then prevailing intelligence that Saddam Hussein had no operational relationship with al Qaeda and was unlikely to provide weapons to terrorists.

G. On September 19, 2002, RUMSFELD told the Senate Armed Services Committee that "no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people than the regime of Saddam Hussein," which statement was, as Rumsfeld well knew, made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that: (1) Hussein had not acted aggressively toward the United States since his alleged attempt to assassinate President George H. W. Bush in 1993; (2) Iraq's military forces and equipment were severely debilitated because of UN sanctions imposed after the 1991 Gulf War; (3) the IC's opinion was that Iraq's sponsorship of terrorists was limited to ones whose hostility was directed toward Israel; and (4) Iran, not Iraq, was the most active state sponsor of terrorism.

H. On October 1, 2002, the defendants caused the IC's updated classified National Intelligence Estimate to be delivered to Congress just hours before the beginning of debate on the Authorization to Use Military Force. At the same time, the defendants caused an unclassified "White Paper" to be published which was false and misleading in many respects in that it failed to include qualifying language and dissents that substantially weakened their argument that Iraq posed a serious threat to the United States.

I. On October 7, 2002, in Cincinnati, Ohio, BUSH made numerous deliberately misleading statements to the nation, including stating that in comparison to Iran and North Korea, Iraq posed a uniquely serious threat, which statement BUSH well knew was false and fraudulent in that it omitted to state the material fact that a State Department representative had been informed just three days previously that North Korea had actually already produced nuclear weapons. The defendants continued to conceal this information until after Congress passed the Authorization to Use Military Force against Iraq.

J. Between September 1, 2002, and November 2, 2002, BUSH traveled the country making in excess of thirty congressional-campaign speeches in which he falsely and fraudulently asserted that Iraq was a "serious threat" which required immediate action, when as he well knew, this assertion was made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth.

K. In his January 28, 2003 State of the Union address, BUSH announced that the "British have recently learned that Iraq was seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa" which statement was fraudulent and misleading and made with reckless disregard for the truth, in that it falsely implied that the information was true, when the CIA had advised the administration more than once that the allegation was unsupported by available intelligence.

L. In a February 5, 2003, speech to the UN, POWELL falsely implied, without reasonable basis and with reckless disregard for the truth, that, among other things: (1) those who maintained that Iraq was purchasing aluminum tubes for rockets were allied with Saddam Hussein, even though POWELL well knew that both Department of Energy nuclear weapons experts and State Department intelligence analysts had concluded that the tubes were not suited for nuclear centrifuge use; and (2) Iraq had an ongoing cooperative relationship with al Qaeda, when he well knew that no intelligence agency had reached that conclusion.

M. On March 18, 2003, BUSH sent a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate which asserted that further reliance on diplomatic and peaceful means alone would not either: (1) adequately protect United States national security against the "continuing threat posed by Iraq" or (2) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant UN Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, which statement was made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that, as BUSH well knew, the U.S. intelligence community had never reported that Iraq posed an urgent threat to the United States and there was no evidence whatsoever to prove that Iraq had either the means or intent to attack the U.S. directly or indirectly. The statement was also false because, as BUSH well knew, the UN weapons inspectors had not found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and wanted to continue the inspection process because it was working well.

N. In the same March 18, 2003 letter, BUSH also represented that taking action pursuant to the Resolution was "consistent with continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001," which statement was entirely false and without reasonable basis in that, as BUSH well knew, Iraq had no involvement with al Qaeda or the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Crush)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 5:50:15 PM   
Crush


Posts: 1031
Status: offline
The source always matters, whichever side it is from.  It means it needs scrutiny and check for bias.  As this thread clearly shows, there is always bias.  To find the "truth" of an issue, ALL the  facts need to come out, including any problems that MAY or MAY NOT be associated with a report.

That's why scientific journals are juried.



(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 6:00:49 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crush

Now, now....we really need to remember that the groups that made these reports are heavily funded by Good Old George Soros:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/016723.php



Who cares? An alleged Criminal is an alleged Criminal.


alleged:

  • declared but not proved; "alleged abuses of housing benefits"- Wall Street Journal
  • alleged(a): doubtful or suspect; "these so-called experts are no help"
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

  • Stated; recited; claimed; asserted; charged.
    www.consultwebs.com/legal_glossaries/car_accidents/glossary.html

  • is a general descriptor for crimes not yet proven, such as when a person has been accused of or is under suspicion for a crime but who has been neither convicted nor exonerated by a trial.
    www.asisonline.org/library/glossary/a.xml

  • Questionably true or asserted to be true.
    www.aapa.org/manual/judicial/glossary.html


    For someone who is big on slinging legal terms around, perhaps you should actually understand how the "innocent until proven guilty" concept works under the American legal system.

    Firm

    _____________________________

    Some people are just idiots.

    (in reply to farglebargle)
  • Profile   Post #: 88
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 6:47:47 PM   
    farglebargle


    Posts: 10715
    Joined: 6/15/2005
    From: Albany, NY
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Crush

    The source always matters, whichever side it is from.  It means it needs scrutiny and check for bias.  As this thread clearly shows, there is always bias.  To find the "truth" of an issue, ALL the  facts need to come out, including any problems that MAY or MAY NOT be associated with a report.

    That's why scientific journals are juried.





    And what I'm saying is that there's enough here to let a Jury decide if Bush is guilty of the alleged crimes.

    _____________________________

    It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

    ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

    (in reply to Crush)
    Profile   Post #: 89
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 6:51:33 PM   
    farglebargle


    Posts: 10715
    Joined: 6/15/2005
    From: Albany, NY
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

    For someone who is big on slinging legal terms around, perhaps you should actually understand how the "innocent until proven guilty" concept works under the American legal system.

    Firm


    EXACTLY what part of my calling for a US Attorney to request a Grand Jury indictment, and subsequently a Trial Jury's decision on the alleged offenses is in conflict with the concepts you are invoking of Due Process and Equal Protection?

    _____________________________

    It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

    ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

    (in reply to FirmhandKY)
    Profile   Post #: 90
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 6:53:01 PM   
    subtee


    Posts: 5133
    Joined: 7/26/2007
    Status: offline
    FR to everyone....

    oh let's fuck

    _____________________________

    Don't believe everything you think...

    (in reply to farglebargle)
    Profile   Post #: 91
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:02:09 PM   
    luckydog1


    Posts: 2736
    Joined: 1/16/2006
    Status: offline
    The relevance of citing the previous adminstration (lets not even use the name, it brings up such passion and desire to change the subject) actions regarding Iraq and WMD, is not to say na na na.  But to show that Bush did not make this stuff up.  It was what was handed to him by the previous administration.  A legitmate argument can be had over what he chose to do with the information.  But to pretend it was made up is just not true.

    Bush did not make up that Saddam was refusing to comply with the UN sanctions, that was the previous adminstrations assertion.  Over which it killed people.  The UN also agreed that Saddam was in violation, though there was disagreement over what to do about it.

    Bush did not make up that Saddam had WMDs and had not accounted for them per the Cease fire agreement.  That was the policy of the previous Administration.

    Bush did not make up that Saddam was aiding terrorists (which includes more than just Alqueda and the 911 event)  that was also the assertion of the Previous Administration.  For example Saddam was paying per explosion to derail the Previous administrations Oslo and dayton Peace Accords.

    (in reply to subtee)
    Profile   Post #: 92
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:04:52 PM   
    kdsub


    Posts: 12180
    Joined: 8/16/2007
    Status: offline
    Luckydog1... don't let facts sway you... it is a lot more fun to find boogiemen

    (in reply to luckydog1)
    Profile   Post #: 93
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:26:55 PM   
    Feric


    Posts: 227
    Joined: 1/9/2008
    From: San Francisco
    Status: offline
    subtee wrote:
    >FR to everyone....
    >oh let's fuck

    Ah yes, nothing like a little sex to take our minds off politics!
    Drop me a line when you're ready. I'll bring the wine...


    _____________________________

    A figure of startling and unexpected nobility...

    (in reply to subtee)
    Profile   Post #: 94
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:35:23 PM   
    Muttling


    Posts: 1612
    Joined: 9/30/2007
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: farglebargle



    All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.




    First, conspiracy to commit a crime requires that said crime be carried out and none has.   Conspiracy to defraud the United States.  Conspiracy to defraud the United States would be applied to fraudulent claims or other schemes for money.

    Second, charges of conspiracy are insanely difficult to prove as you have to prove a meeting took place where the intent to committ a crime or defraud the government was discussed.

    As we have discussed before, very unethical and very wrong but it does not rise to the level of criminal.

    (in reply to farglebargle)
    Profile   Post #: 95
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:39:09 PM   
    subtee


    Posts: 5133
    Joined: 7/26/2007
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Feric

    subtee wrote:
    >FR to everyone....
    >oh let's fuck

    Ah yes, nothing like a little sex to take our minds off politics!
    Drop me a line when you're ready. I'll bring the wine...



    Consider the line dropped; bring red...this is a clusterfuck; we can cluster or, well...it's been proposed...

    _____________________________

    Don't believe everything you think...

    (in reply to Feric)
    Profile   Post #: 96
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:46:38 PM   
    Level


    Posts: 25145
    Joined: 3/3/2006
    Status: offline
    I always like to post these whenever the topic of  WMDs comes up.  

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc1h1wg7LeQ

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i87cZ3Og6ts&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE&feature=related


    _____________________________

    Fake the heat and scratch the itch
    Skinned up knees and salty lips
    Let go it's harder holding on
    One more trip and I'll be gone

    ~~ Stone Temple Pilots

    (in reply to Muttling)
    Profile   Post #: 97
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:47:01 PM   
    Muttling


    Posts: 1612
    Joined: 9/30/2007
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: luckydog1

    The relevance of citing the previous adminstration (lets not even use the name, it brings up such passion and desire to change the subject) actions regarding Iraq and WMD, is not to say na na na.  But to show that Bush did not make this stuff up.  It was what was handed to him by the previous administration.  A legitmate argument can be had over what he chose to do with the information.  But to pretend it was made up is just not true.


    You need to check your time lines as the previous administrations claims that you refer to were not current ones.

    quote:

    Bush did not make up that Saddam was refusing to comply with the UN sanctions, that was the previous adminstrations assertion.  Over which it killed people.  The UN also agreed that Saddam was in violation, though there was disagreement over what to do about it.


    This was true up through the mid-1990's, but not true during the run up to the war.   The UN inspectors agreed that Saddam was complying with UN requirements and requested more time to be allowed to finish it's work.

    quote:

    Bush did not make up that Saddam had WMDs and had not accounted for them per the Cease fire agreement.  That was the policy of the previous Administration.


    Iraq did a pretty good job of accounting for it's WMD materials.  A FAR better job than the US has done in our compliance with treaties that we have signed.   One of the big problems was not their compliance with UN requirements but their method of verifying compliance.  We told them to deactivate all their anthrax and they did that then dumped it, they just didn't do it in front of weapons inspectors.

    When they told us the story, the UN weapons inspector sampled the dump site and interviewed Iraqi's involved in the operation.   Since it was impossible to independently verify the exact quantity of anthrax that was deactivated, the Bush administration claimed it didn't get rid of it all despite the UN inspectors verification that they did.

    How does one view claims such as these as a reasonable justification for overthrowing a foreign government?  How can the Bush administration honestly say that Saddam could have avoided war if he simply cooperated when we were making claims such as these?

    quote:

    Bush did not make up that Saddam was aiding terrorists (which includes more than just Alqueda and the 911 event)  that was also the assertion of the Previous Administration. 


    When exactly did the previous administration make ANY claims concerning the attack on 9/11.   That occurred after the previous administration had left office.






    (in reply to luckydog1)
    Profile   Post #: 98
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 7:52:42 PM   
    subrob1967


    Posts: 4591
    Joined: 9/13/2004
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: DomKen

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: subrob1967

    Why do people always forget and ignore the fact that 7500 military personnel died under Clinton's presidency?

    You accuse Bush of lying, distorting the facts, crimes...etc etc etc. But turn that blind partisan eye toward the previous administration, the deaths it caused, the lies they told, the crimes they committed...

    Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal Democrat.

    Did you happen to checkthe source of this little claim? Here it is:
    http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/Death_Rates.pdf

    Now what jumps out from this? For me two little details.

    1) From 1993 to 2000 (The Clinton administration) how many deaths does the Pentagon attribute to enemy action? 1.

    2) From 2001 to 2006 (the first 6 years of the Bush administration) how many deaths does the Pentagon attribute to enemy action? 2603.

    I will also note that looking over the chart another detail is striking, all the other death causes except terrorism are up significantly during the Bush administration even though troop levels have only gone up a small amount. The suicide rate is a particular concern from this chart.

    Oh and BTW the total for your beloved Bush administration is 8989 deaths in only 6 years. That extrapolates out to 11,985 deaths over 8 years. So that is likely 4500 more service men deaths over 8 years than occured during the 8 year Clinton administration.

    So who exactly is the hypocrite?

    BTW this sort of attempt to twist facts to make Bush look good is sure not helping the case that Bush and his supporters did not lie.


    Do you really think the dead military members, or their families care if they died during battle, or training? I don't.

    Nor am I a Bush supporter. I never voted for him, think he went in the wrong direction to prosecute the war on terror, and doesn't give a shit about whats good for the U.S.

    (in reply to DomKen)
    Profile   Post #: 99
    RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths - 1/24/2008 8:12:36 PM   
    luckydog1


    Posts: 2736
    Joined: 1/16/2006
    Status: offline
    Muttling I am going out so have time to only adress your last point tonihgt, I will get back tomorow for the rest.

    Me "Bush did not make up that Saddam was aiding terrorists (which includes more than just Alqueda and the 911 event)  that was also the assertion of the Previous Administration." 

    Muttling  "When exactly did the previous administration make ANY claims concerning the attack on 9/11.   That occurred after the previous administration had left office."

    Now I know you are way smarter than that.  That is not what I am saying at all, you must intentionally be trying to misread it to avoid the point or something.  Saddam was aiding terrorists, I named one example, I can give you more if you like.  Terrorists are more than just Al Queda.  You know that, your a smart guy.  Clinton killed people and commited acts of war over Saddams gov's ties to Al Queda and Chemical weopons.  Your a stand up guy, why don't you tell me about Al Shifa. 


    (in reply to subrob1967)
    Profile   Post #: 100
    Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
    All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: 935 lies: 3929 American deaths Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
    Jump to:





    New Messages No New Messages
    Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
    Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
     Post New Thread
     Reply to Message
     Post New Poll
     Submit Vote
     Delete My Own Post
     Delete My Own Thread
     Rate Posts




    Collarchat.com © 2025
    Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

    0.094