bigtexxx is still touting weapons that can cause skin irritations as WMD. bigtexxx is using intel reports issued by a biased cable news channel as proof of something. this thread was over before it even began.
Ha ha ha ha. I haven't seen you post on this subject since you were last seen holding Rick Santorum's hand as he went down gloriously in flames, having been pwned by the Adminstration itself, via the FAUX NEWS syncophants, on the planet, and courtesy of FAUX NEWS' own paid pretend liberal Gimp Alan Colmes -- which resulted in your magical and mystifying disappearance from the subject entirely. Glad you've re-entered the fray. And here I was thinking that WMD's weren't the real reason for the war as you've explained to us a thousand times, except for when they are.
When facts are presented there will be no denial. But Santorum has already been shown up on this. The administration and their supporters were shown up when they tried to pretend like the SWIFT program that the NY Times wrote about was a leak, etc. There was the reported mobile labs find, the previous supposed WMD's that were found, and all the Iraqi troops that were supposedly ready, but then it turned out that they weren't. We have seen this crap so much, and it has yet to ever pan out. When our administration and their cheerleaders starts giving us the real deal, then maybe everyone will get excited when something REALLY does happen. Until then all these little pre-mature ejaculations of joy are humerous.
Another liberal dodges the 9/11 report findings that I brought up in the first post in this thread. So predictable.
Incorrect. The 9/11 commission did not found a connection as in communication between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but no proof of any type of working relationship. That myth was debunked long ago.
But see, if you keep repeating the same lie long enough then eventually it must become true. It is right out of the Karl Rove handbook.
Righty's who follow Awol Deserters into war, and tout FOXs (of all places LOL) exclusivity of Proof to help a loser like Bush. Priceless.
Link? Just because you say something was debunked long ago doesn't mean it is so. Your sentence doesn't even make sense.
BigT, can you tell us when the evidence is completely mounted so we can finally make a decision on going to war? Thanks.
14 UN Resolutions, a history of Saddam using WMD on his own people, and my first post in this thread.
We don't go to war for UN Resolutions or to replace tyrranical governments. We go to war to protect and defend the national security of the United States. I thought you were a real world conservative, not some whimsical ideologue.
So if I had the police raid my neighbor for having a stockpile of guns in their garage even though they were super soakers, I wouldn't be lying because they are guns, and if you get shot with one of those big ones in the eye, it could, like, really hurt and stuff? I mean my cousin was once shot in the eye with a super soaker and he like couldn't see for five minutes or something and then it was really scary, but then his vision came back and it was like phew, okay, but we were careful not to like shoot someone in the eyes with a fully pumped super soaker, so like we realized that those things are really really dangerous, so saying that they are guns, while people may expect the worst, it's still technically true based on an obscure, non-publicly accepted definition. Funny that we need to go and use old, obscure codes to define what a WMD is, whereas when the world says its an illegal invasion we simply say that its only their opinion.
