Michael Moore Strikes Again!

[John D Harris]

[quote]Originally posted by Timber Loftis:

2. The bring the bill to a vote, knowing I won't support it in its current form. I vote against it, as do a majority of my colleagues. The bill fails. But, this was an important bill. So, the next day at 7 a.m., I have calls from 10 senators from the other side of the aisle. They tell me they have AMENDED the bill to include some of my concerns. (In this specific example, let's say that for instance, the included a rollback of taxcuts for the wealthy to help pay for the weapons.) They want to know if I will support it now. I say sure. The bill comes up for a vote again. That's the legislative process. Had Kerry won on voting "no," the guns would have still made it to the troops. EVERYONE was trying to get the needed supplies to the troops. It wasn't a vote for getting them the supplies, it was a fight over HOW to best do it. Come hell or high water, the troops were going to get funded. That's why it makes it "spin" and "misrepresentation" to say that Kerry voted against body armor. The body armor was going to get funded, it was only a question as to how.

Had Kerry won on voting "no" you would be right ,but he didn't it passed without his "yes" vote. since we are being honest about how the voting works let's also be honest about some other things.

1) Senators vote for or agianst bills they know will pass or not pass even if they vote agianst the majority. In other words they know what the numbers are BEFORE the vote comes to the floor there are NO suprises! Kerry voted against it, now either he can't count, or he has hired staffers that can't count, because the bill was going to pass with or without Kerry's vote.

2)Sometimes Senators vote to make a statement, Kerry made his statement! he seperated the warriors from the war. Voted "yes" for the war, "no" for the warriors. We have an exmaple of how Kerry will seperate the two, I will say on the matter of how Kerry deals with the troops his history is amazing consistent. He was so for the war in Vietnam he volunteered and went, and at the first chance he got he did what he could to stab the troops in the back. Lo and behold 30+ years later he does it again. Now T.L. I'm old school "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me."

Damn near a year after the vote Kerry finaly "comes" up with it was for as a tax protest, after he had or at least his campaign had complained about the troops not have the right equitpment at first. When the ONLY bill that dealt with equiptment for the troops came up for a vote, Kerry voted agianst it.
If there was another bill please show me, if not then your arguement is invalid, depending on "if's" and "coulda's"

* T.L. gets side tracked on his walk to first base, by visions of legal actions.*

[Stratos]

I remember the sarin gas round, a certain someone posted a post demanding an apology from the anti-war crowd, if I remember correctly. It did make the news. I don't remember hearing anything more about any more rounds of this kind, though.

[John D Harris]

Ignoring Kerry's words his actions are remarkabliy consistant, Screw National security where ever posible, so he may not deserve the fip flop lable.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Stratos: I remember the sarin gas round, a certain someone posted a post demanding an apology from the anti-war crowd, if I remember correctly. It did make the news. I don't remember hearing anything more about any more rounds of this kind, though.

That demand was made by ME, AFTER the anti-war crowd said that an apology should be made BECAUSE not a single WoMD had been found. Now that latest intel report says 30-50 WoMD rounds(some Sarin some mustard gas) have been found. 30-50 doesn't equal 0, unless your are using fuzzy math. Don't come complaining to me if some people make a zero WoMD stand as in there are Zero WoMDs, then a WoMD shows up, It's not My fault they made the Zero claim, I just hold their feet to the fire.

[Oblivion437]

Besides, why don't you and I pick up a good HMMWV, and drive into Syria...

Reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons:

*Turkey, in a spoof of that scene from Midnight Express*

"Uh...I'd like to buy some...drugs..."

"DRUGS?!? Everything made of drugs! Tent, tent poles, even Camel made of drugs!"

"How much?"

"Pay in American money, Turkish money Made of drugs!"

I can imagine it in Syria:

"I'd like to buy some uh, some Aspirin, two liters of Coca Cola, and sixteen tons of VX Nerve Gas, please?"

"That'll be six dollars and thirty-two cents, with tax."

Come down to Korn-er Mart, we have all your medication, grocery and WMD needs!

Now, the thing to consider is this: Saddam obviously did at some point after Round 1 possess these weapons, what the hell else would he hide from the inspectors besides weapons that he couldn't have, that they'd actually care about?

Certainly no one's going to suggest that the missiles that struck Bahrain didn't exist...

[Timber Loftis]

Hold their feet to the fire? A couple lousy crappy ancient cold war style artillery pieces with small amounts of rotted chemicals inside? That's enough to justify 1000 deaths and $200 billion? I think you should hold all feet to the fire, not just the blue ones. It's laughable you can even make that argument.

So, yes, you are technically right, 1 is greater than zero. Point conceded. Now, if you'll be so kind to concede that it is still a pointless amount to make a lot of hullabaloo over -- and 1 is not zero, but NEXT TO it.

But, that's okay. Grasp your artillery shell, hang onto it, love it, treasure it. Let it console you as you tuck yourself in at night that all is good, the President is right, and the world is a happy place full of fluffy bunnies.

[ 10-12-2004, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Oblivion437]

You can stop with the condescension, that's downright low...

You know how little effort, money and time it takes to build up an arsenal of biological weapons? You know, or have any idea how compact they are? I could keep enough VX nerve gas to kill half of Chicago (if the wind is favorable) in a container no larger than an ordinary brief case. That's a LOT of firepower, in a VERY small package. And that much agent can be prepared in a laboratory smaller than a two-car garage, in under six months. You're telling me you couldn't manage to make *that much* evidence disappear? Or are you unaware of a relatively ignored news item about Russian intelligence agents who were arrested soon after the invasion trying to smuggle documents out of Iraq? Those are the people we caught, after we arrived. Saddam could have clearly anticipated this, and many others, and began moving his equipment into someplace, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, perhaps? Let's not forget you don't need even a tiny amount of manpower (relative to other means of acquiring military and geopolitical strength) to build and move this program around, at your behest. When you're getting funding pumped into your pockets through a food-for-oil scam, you have plenty of everything you need.

I hope you're not going to ignore that it may very well have been sheer dumb luck that saved those soldiers from the effects of the gas in the old shell, whose age is yet to be determined, one spin commentator's choice of words is not Canon-law...

Besides, the possibility of Communist takeovers in SE Asia was enough to get three VERY Liberal (some might say Patriarchal) Presidents rolling the ball on Vietnam to cost us over 50,000...

Furthermore, you seem to miss the implications of the fact that it IS there...If Chemical weapons were animals, they'd be herd animals, where you find one, you're going to find a hell of a lot more...

In closing, as addendum, I don't think ANYONE should have such weapons. I'm not talking about *just the government* or something ridiculous. I think governments are LESS trustworthy with such things...I wish we could find a way, lasting and permanent, to destroy all such weapons, forever. There's no right hands for something that dangerous. However, this is pure idealism on my part. I wouldn't hope some legislation or pact is going to do anything towards accomplishing this goal. Just ask the NPT signers how they feel about it now.

[ 10-12-2004, 11:42 PM: Message edited by: Oblivion437 ]

[Gab]

Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Gab: As for what John Kerry, what the hell?! Bush said many times that Ameriica faced an eminent threat fom Saddam. Kerry was fooled by Bush and the flawed intelligence. What you fail to understand is that a vote for the authority to go to war, does not mean a vote for war. Kerry has explained that Bush should've given the weapon inspectors more time to do the job and have the UN pass another resolution, not just start a preemptive strike on Iraq.

Gentlemen Place your bets [img]smile.gif[/img]

For nearly 2 years I've asked for anyone to come up with a quote from President Bush stating Iraq was an eminent threat. So far not one single quote has been given, NOT ONE SINGLE QUOTE, nowhere has anybody been able to come up and say President Bush said Iraq was and EMINENT THREAT. So now I ask you, Gab directly, produce a quote where President Bush said before the war thet Iraq was an Eminent threat?

Show me I have no fear of being wrong, if I am, I am I'll drop the defense of President Bush not saying there was an Eminent Threat from Iraq so fast the resulting vaccum from My movement will SUCK the Greymatter our of anybodies head standing nearby. [/QUOTE]Your in luck Harris, it turns out I was slightly mistaken. Bush said (regarding Saddam and Iraq) in his 2003 State of Union speech: "Some say we must not act until the threat is immenent. Since when have terrorists and tryants have anounced their intenions, polietly putting us on notice before they strike?"

So Bush didn't exactly say that Iraq was an imminent threat, but gave the impression that it would be if the United States didn't quickly take action. Either way, Bush still mislead us into this war. The artillery shells you described are not WMDs and not good enough proof that Saddam posed a threat to America.

[ 10-13-2004, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: Gab ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Hold their feet to the fire? A couple lousy crappy ancient cold war style artillery pieces with small amounts of rotted chemicals inside? That's enough to justify 1000 deaths and $200 billion? I think you should hold all feet to the fire, not just the blue ones. It's laughable you can even make that argument. So, yes, you are technically right, 1 is greater than zero. Point conceded. Now, if you'll be so kind to concede that it is still a pointless amount to make a lot of hullabaloo over -- and 1 is not zero, but NEXT TO it. But, that's okay. Grasp your artillery shell, hang onto it, love it, treasure it. Let it console you as you tuck yourself in at night that all is good, the President is right, and the world is a happy place full of fluffy bunnies.

Well T.L. I have said all along personally that SoDamn Insane needed his rear-end kicked and I don't care what the reason/excuse was for doing it! I don't need the few shells, "Hale" I don't need a any WoMD's that's right ZERO WoMD's. He needed his rear-end kicked and I'm glad we did IT!

Next TO, is NOT IT! Close is not IT! Don't come complaining to me when the mark is missed and claim it is hit. Zero is Zero, One is One, I have no problem with anyone that said not many or very few WoMD's will be found. "Hale" I thought lots would be found, as did most of the Intel agencies of the worlds Countries. It doesn't bother me one way or the other that only a few were found, no matter how old or new they were. Now talk about a silly arguement the age of the WoMD's is prehaps the most silly thing I have ever heard. Please present any evidence that after a certain age WoMD's cease being WoMD's. If any evidence to that fact can't be presented, don't come to me complaining about the failure of your case.

T.L. you can tuck yourself in at night with visions of fuzzie bunnies dancing in your head for all I care. As for me, for years before you were even thought of being concieved, I understood the world is mean cruel and harsh. Lordy, Lordy, I grew-up on USAF bases, all were on the first stike list of the USSR nukes.

[John D Harris]

Now here's one for you boys, You folks remember that fell'r Hans Blitz(or what ever) from the UN, yeah the one all anti-war crowd touted as saying there was no evidence that Iraq had anymore WoMD's, while IGNORRING the rest of his sentence that there was no evidence Iraq didn't had WoMD's. Well in the last couple of days it has been reported that Hans Baby looked over the British Dossier and said it was perhaps the best assesment of Iraq he had seen. Guess what they were both wrong!