Let this thread be a lesson to anyone wondering why the D&D forum breakup was a good thing. I knew this would happen to this thread, but hey... celebrate and ignore the D&D clowns; I'm sure this thread will eventually be moved back to the D&D forum or just shut down. So Damn Insane is under lock and key... now for Osama Been Hidin'. WOO!
Yes, and? I already told you. I don't really consider you or bigtexxx, or any other hardcore conservative giving him credit to count towards his overall credibility on this board. I thought for a moment that I should put a disclaimer about this before I typed that, figuring that some conservative would just keep saying "but you said everybody" instead of realizing that it wasn't meant to be taken in the literal sense. Perhaps I should have, since you seem so caught up on it. Oh really? I hear liberals compared to Bin Laden all of the time here. I hear liberals being questioned on their patriotic and moral character all of the time here. I see conservatives finding the worst possible things to crow about in every situation that benefits them. It doesn't happen just here either, and I think that's where a lot of the animosity that gets brought onto this board by some people comes from. You're absolutely blind if you don't see that this is a two way street. But then again, I am talking to someone who takes TJ seriously.. so I wouldn't put it past you. If TJ were a liberal I would be embarassed that anyone would ever associate myself with him. You should feel the same way. Should being the key word there.
I was wondering why it was moved from the D&D in the first place.. this had argument written all over it because of the nature of posters that would enter this thread (myself included, I guess) Sorry for being all argumentative up in here.
Um... let me make sure I understand you, DR: You're saying that the current administration lied to the people of America and the rest of the world about their real reasons for going to war. I'm with you on that one. Whether the war was justified for other reasons is a different question. But then you say that if the "opposing party" points out that fact, we're disgusting. So if the president (whether it be GWB or Clinton) lies with a straight face, we should do what? Applaud? Sit on our hands? Sorry, but I hate lying presidents, regardless of their party affiliation.
No disrespect or anything. I was just saying that it kind of is pointless to tell us you mean this word, or spelling etc. when the reader can tell. Wow...3 posts in a row huh? I'll break your streak, here's to one of mine.
Yeah, I figured most people could fill in that blank.. I just miss the edit function that much Break my streak eh? Nevar!!!!
In retrospect, I should have used a lot of the Bush conspiracy theories about him allowing 9/11 to happen for political and underhanded economic dealings. That's just about as radical as TJ going on about how Dems want to see America burst into flames (*disclaimer: 'burst into flames' is not meant to be a literal quote)
Uh huh. You just knew it would after being here for a whole week, right? If I didn't know any better, I'd guess that flamingmoe isn't your only screen name here... Couldn't agree more.
One, if not 'the' most provocative statement in the whole thread, and you were totally ignored. I thought that you had worked your way off of most folks' ignore lists ZRB, but guess not, and rightly so.
This is truly a great day for the world. Now can we come up with some kind of rule to keep T_J and all the other D&D clowns out of the rest of the bbs?
I don't think it's a matter of keeping individual members out (or at least I hope not).. but more so keeping threads properly seperated into their respective forums.
Wow, on a day when most people from both sides of the political spectrum should be, and are, celebrating the capture of one of the world's worst people, and my ignore list has grown exponentially. Welcome, giddyup, bigtexxx, and Murdock. Feel free to mingle with Trader_Jorge. I celebrate with the rest of my family today, only to read utter bull**** in this thread.
Yes, I think he can get a deal to save his life. The question for you: Is he the type of person that would take a deal to save himself? Right now he still seems to have some bluster, but I am unsure how long that will last. After a bit of time, he might be interested in saving himself. My opinion, he will take a deal.
First let me say it's a damn shame that these kinds of threads can't exist in the Hangout which wound up necessitating the creation of the D&D. Second let me say that Trader Jorge and his fangirls are a huge part of why the D&D became necessary. The proof is in this thread if you never knew it before. Third, whose bright idea was it to MOVE this thread from the D&D to the Hangout? Did none of you who obviously hate this board's version of "debate and discussion" see this coming? Did you not know we had rabid, radical, partisan shills like our very own poor, poor, poor man's Ann Coulter and his various poor, poor fangirls just waiting for something like this to happen so they could turn it into the usual partisan bull****? Fourth, come on, who thought Saddam would never get captured? I mean, come on. I'm watching CNN and people are acting like Dean et al got totally caught off guard. Reminds me of those heady days of April when treeman and his various pals were acting like the taking of Baghdad was supposed to surprise the glynchs and BJ's among us and make us Republicans. Duh. We took Baghdad. Duh. We caught Saddam. Not that it's not a big deal. It is. But is that supposed to shut the rest of us up? Was that even really the guy we were looking for? I mean, I know that more than half of America thinks he had something to do with 9/11, but even Bush -- even after doing everything he could to make us think he did -- had to admit he didn't. But all this really belongs in the D&D. Alright. All that off my chest, here's why I'm posting in here... Mango: One of the major arguments that my side cited against Saddam being a real threat to the US was that he was more concerned with self preservation than wiping out any enemy. I (and many, many intelligence officials) have said for years that he is a realist and a survivalist. The CIA said that if he had WMD's he would never use them unless his back was against a wall -- because he was a secular survivalist and knew that any unprovoked attack would result in his death. His surrender today, without shooting his pistol, only backs that up. It was no surprise at all to me. He may be (and is) homicidal, but he was never a maniac. He cares about his own survival more than anything else. So... He probably will get offered a deal. Whatever it might be, it will be worth it to the administration to offer him some kind of deal in return for WMD intelligence (regardless of today's celebrations, they NEED it). If there are WMD's, knowing what we know of his character (and what anyone who's paid any attention at all has known for some time), he will take a deal and say where they are. He is NOT a zealot. He never was. Having caught him alive, if they don't get that intel out of him, I will conclude it is because there are no WMD's. Anybody have an argument otherwise? (Disclaimer: I already know yours, Jorge. I'm hateful, blah, blah, blah.) Finally, sixth (or whatever), whoever moved this to the Hangout... Please... Be better than Bush... Show you can admit your mistakes and move it back to that awful, terrible, hateful and hated forum where it belongs. I really didn't want to post in this thread at all, but I finally felt compelled. There's a theory in the Batman comics that the Joker wouldn't exist if it weren't for Batman. In this thread at least the theory works in reverse.
