Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Impeachment?


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Impeachment? Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:07:28 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

That's exactly the point. Thank you for making my argument for me. Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq. Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


Are you saying he lied? Or he didnt lie?

Im confused again.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 161
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:07:41 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
This is an interesting post, and dead on topic as well, so thank you iso for posting it.

It raises a few more questions in my mind.

During the Bush years, remember the 'we broke it we bought it' mantra? And the tar baby analogy we were treated to every time we sat down to discuss politics on discussion boards such as this one?

Well, who is going to rebuild Libya. France?  Nobody?

Or why are we breaking it, destroying the government there. Do we have even the first clue who is going to fill the power vacuum there? Is this something like Carters Afghanistan, are we inviting Al-Qaeda into a new playground with all of this?

Im not pretending I have any of the answer here, these are just some questions that this post raised in my mind.

quote:

ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner

Why are the people in other African states less worthy of protection. We're going into the Sudan next right?

Even the "Decider" got Congressional approval for his idiocy.

The rebels sure look inherently trustworthy. If they turn out to be the mean kind of AK 47 toting Muslim rebels then propping up a stable puppet government will require the USA to put boots on the ground.

I'm sure the French will stick around to help, except they won't.

Every $400,000 + cruise missile we drop would pay to employ a soccer mom possibly two but they might struggle on such a meager salary.

Obama isn't apt to get Congressional approval as only neo con sociopaths, Obama Kool-Aide idealogues, Muslim rebels with AK 47s in Libya, and those with oil interests in said country seem to support funding another boneheaded military misadventure in the Middle East.

The US Constitution trumps the UN Charter but to true hypocrites (Obama idealogues fit the bill perfectly), warmongering is ok as long as Obama does it.

Team America F**k Yeah.




_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to isoLadyOwner)
Profile   Post #: 162
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:09:53 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

There was much more to this than many here would like to remember.  While concern over WMDs played a key role in being the "straw that broke the camel's back", there was much more to this invasion...


That's exactly the point. Thank you for making my argument for me. Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq. Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


Sorry, but that type of logic is flawed.  Besides, the world is not quite so black and white.  If you'd read what I linked to, that would have been apparent to you.

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 163
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:10:39 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

That's exactly the point. Thank you for making my argument for me. Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq. Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


Are you saying he lied? Or he didnt lie?

Im confused again.


He did lie about WMD, but for the purposes of Treasure's argument, we don't even need to prove that. She admits that he lied about his reasons for launching a war.


_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 164
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:14:20 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

There was much more to this than many here would like to remember.  While concern over WMDs played a key role in being the "straw that broke the camel's back", there was much more to this invasion...


That's exactly the point. Thank you for making my argument for me. Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq. Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


Sorry, but that type of logic is flawed.  Besides, the world is not quite so black and white.  If you'd read what I linked to, that would have been apparent to you.



If it's flawed, please point out how. I don't need to read the link, because it's completely irrelevant. Bush's sole legal justification for invading Iraq was that they possessed WMD and were a grave and imminent threat to us and to their neighbors. If we invaded for any reason other than that - any reason at all - then we lied about our reasons for invading Iraq. Period. It's very simple, and the  history of Saddam's regime has absolutely no bearing on the matter.


_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 165
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:16:44 PM   
FirmhandKY


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

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda
Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq.

You will have to source this claim for me, panda, as I seem to remember other valid reasons.

And, if that assertion fails, this one ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


... is invalid and your entire argument fails on the logic.

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 166
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:17:02 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

That's exactly the point. Thank you for making my argument for me. Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq. Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


Are you saying he lied? Or he didnt lie?

Im confused again.


He did lie about WMD, but for the purposes of Treasure's argument, we don't even need to prove that. She admits that he lied about his reasons for launching a war.



Kindly do not put words into my mouth.  I've presented no argument, merely a concise historical overview.  How you try to spin that into support for your argument is not my responsibility, but it is yours.  People here are not stupid... they can read just as easily as you can.  Do them the honor of not trying to insult their intelligence, as well as attempt to ensnare me into your corner.

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 167
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:20:37 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		Sure he is, and to be honest? I knew you couldnt wait to post..I for one am sick of his lies and bullshit, you ignore it until he gets called on it, then out you come out trying to be condescending, to those who are sick of being lied to.
oh nit picking is so immmature, but more than me mike and panda are capable of that eh  dear chap??

Just to finish my derail, he gave me permission to post it...
Panda asked
quote:ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda
And exactly how many times did Clinton invade Iraq? Got even a rough estimate, for that matter?
End Quote...its still posted on his post 131 at the end of the article
Here was his initial post after Pandas
Which to normal people would mean..... that he was responding with an article clinton explaining a strike...not an invasion
Then mike posted post 132 and sanity went back and added this
quote:

No one has tried to claim anything like Clinton invaded Iraq, panda, I have no idea where you pulled that out of. However Clinton was very clear that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the United States and the entire world

One minute after mikes post,


Right now, yes if I get moderated so be it, but I am more than sick of him changing and doing everything he can to make out other people are lying or stoopid.
He changed his reply and then denied it, I just happen to be downloading porn and playing with the screen snip

Persnikety? yes, pissed off, yes, laughing at the twattery and the hippocrisy, even my own YES
Utter bitch, sometimes
level of caring at the moment?
zero
Goodnight




_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 168
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:27:43 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
Lucy, the facts are as yet unchanged. As Ive stated numerous times now there is no claim on my part that Bill Clinton invaded Iraq in any of that.

May we resume discussing the topic now?


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 169
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:28:53 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

If it's flawed, please point out how. I don't need to read the link, because it's completely irrelevant. Bush's sole legal justification for invading Iraq was that they possessed WMD and were a grave and imminent threat to us and to their neighbors. If we invaded for any reason other than that - any reason at all - then we lied about our reasons for invading Iraq. Period. It's very simple, and the  history of Saddam's regime has absolutely no bearing on the matter.


For one thing, I believe it is what is called "Ad Hominem Tu Quoque"... a logical fallacy.

As for not bothering to read the link... I'm afraid it just demonstrates arrogance on your part. 

Pity.

< Message edited by TreasureKY -- 3/21/2011 7:31:17 PM >

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 170
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:29:35 PM   
cuckoldmepls


Posts: 855
Joined: 11/29/2007
Status: offline 		Even the national news asked today 'why aren't we defending the protestors of Bahrain and Yemen if the basis of our attack in Libya is to defend citizens?'

I't's impeachment time folks. Obama didn't even check with Congress first and last time I checked, bombing another country unprovoked was an act of war which requires Congress to support.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 171
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:30:45 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda
Under international law, Iraq's fictitious WMD program was the sole justification for invading Iraq.

You will have to source this claim for me, panda, as I seem to remember other valid reasons.

And, if that assertion fails, this one ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

Arguing that Bush invaded Iraq for reasons other than their non-existent WMDs is admitting that he lied, and launched illegal and unprovoked war of aggression.


... is invalid and your entire argument fails on the logic.

Firm



You guys must be out of practice. You.re usually not this easy. Under international law, the sole legal justification for invading Iraq was UN Resolution 1441, which basically  authorized use of military force of Iraq failed to demonstrate that they did not possess WMD. If you're aware of some other legal justification for the invasion, please post it. I'm sure we'd all find it quite fascinating.


_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 172
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:32:46 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

If you're aware of some other legal justification for the invasion, please post it. I'm sure we'd all find it quite fascinating.


You refused to read the link I posted.  Sorry... can't help you any more than that.

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 173
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:32:56 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Don't forget the lovely Lucy....and perhaps the "silent majority" of sensible ,intelligent thread readers that are at this moment laughing their damm asses off at your frantic backpedaling.Who knows how many that group might include.


Mike, I hate to say it, but reading the thread it is apparent that you, Lucy and some others are intentional mis-stating his positions and then attacking those mis-statements as if they are his.

You are all straw-manning him, in other words.

He isn't the one who looks "strange" to the "silent majority of sensible intelligent thread readers".

Firm

"straw manning" sanity....I guess we will have to disagree on that.Sanity hangs himself with his own keyboard.
As to me looking "strange"...I'm cool with that,hell I've been called worse.....and from folks that weren't twisting logic to defend an idiot.
As I said I'm alright with my reading of sanity's posts


_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 174
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:33:24 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		Your post WAS your claim that he invaded ..however many times you deny it, until you changed it, that was your response to the question...that is your claim, which you are denying, the facts you didnt type the actual word invade  is beside the point
straw man my arse
go ahead, Ive said my piece.
spin spin




_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to cuckoldmepls)
Profile   Post #: 175
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:33:49 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Whats the supposed delusion mike (other than pandas asserting that I claimed that Clinton invaded Iraq)


I never said that. You're lying again.


_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 176
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:37:16 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
In the initial post the article stood alone lucy, there was no claim anywhere that Clinton invaded Iraq. Under an article that someone has edited it states that its been edited for the world to see, your pointing out that there has been an edit isnt really necessary as everyone already has the means to see that for themselves.

So are you quite finished with your derail yet?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Your post WAS your claim that he invaded ..however many times you deny it, until you changed it, that was your response to the question...that is your claim, which you are denying, the facts you didnt type the actual word invade  is beside the point
straw man my arse
go ahead, Ive said my piece.
spin spin





_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 177
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:39:12 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline 		No Panda......I said he said it...or at the least implied it...as Lucy so nicely demonstrated above(thanks Lucy)....."straw-manning" my ass.


_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 178
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:40:18 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

Kindly do not put words into my mouth.  I've presented no argument, merely a concise historical overview.  How you try to spin that into support for your argument is not my responsibility, but it is yours.  People here are not stupid... they can read just as easily as you can.  Do them the honor of not trying to insult their intelligence, as well as attempt to ensnare me into your corner.



Really!

quote:


*sighs*  Here's a very good primer on Iraq for anyone who thinks they have all the answers.

Marine Corp Institute - Iraq: An Introduction to the Country and People

An overview of the rise to power and reign of Saddam Hussein starts on page 19.

A breakdown of the International response to Saddam's oppression begins on page 31.

Coverage of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM starts on page 53.

There was much more to this than many here would like to remember.  While concern over WMDs played a key role in being the "straw that broke the camel's back", there was much more to this invasion... and some serious history leading up to it.  There was a reason this operation was named as it was.

I won't say I like everything about the war on Iraq nor do I agree with how everything happened.  I'm not fond of politicians of any flavor, and I have no special affinity for George Bush or distaste for President Obama.  I will say that I'm open-minded enough to realize there's a lot more going on than some would like people to believe.


Sounds like an argument to me. You stated a position and supported that position with a link. I don't know about you, but where I grew up, that was called making an argument. Why are you weaseling away from it now and pretending that you weren't? Maybe you should think these things through a little more thoroughly before making such brash statements and backing yourself into these sticky corners.


_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 179
RE: Impeachment? - 3/21/2011 7:43:18 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

If you're aware of some other legal justification for the invasion, please post it. I'm sure we'd all find it quite fascinating.


You refused to read the link I posted.  Sorry... can't help you any more than that.



So you've got nothing, then?

Pity. As i said, you guys didn't used to be so easy. You were more fun when you were good at this.


_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Impeachment? Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   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

0.125