|
Jihadist terrorists
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 10 2005, 07:50 AM (2,293 Views)
|
|
somerled
|
Jan 17 2005, 09:19 PM
Post #76
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- Dwayne
- Jan 16 2005, 02:17 PM
- somerled
- Jan 16 2005, 09:32 AM
And that somehow justifies invading a country, destroying their infrastructure and killing a great many Iraqis ?
Saddam killed more Iraqi's per month than the total that have died as a result of invading Iraq, so your comments, like Jeff's are a mere diversion from the truth. And the truth is, yes the invasion was justified.
Another unsubstantiated claim - prove it. Where are your figures ?
|
|
|
| |
|
doctortobe
|
Jan 17 2005, 09:20 PM
Post #77
|
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
- Posts:
- 5,682
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #32
- Joined:
- August 30, 2003
|
I hope you didn't lose your hat when the point of that post went right over your head at Mach 2.
|
|
|
| |
|
somerled
|
Jan 17 2005, 09:21 PM
Post #78
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Jan 16 2005, 01:26 PM
- somerled
- Jan 15 2005, 09:06 PM
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Jan 15 2005, 12:06 PM
Probably because I know your kind too well... Besides, you just answered my question. If you had read it, you would have commented on it.
Did not comment or respond to it because I didn't consider it worthy of doing so. Simply not worthy the investment of effort to do so. Like I said - typical Dwayne garbage. I think I indicated that would be my approach as soon as saw it. You can like that or you can lump it.
Nothing like a closed mind, is there? You might learn something, even if it might upset your applecart.
Yes Bill. And you are a prime example.
|
|
|
| |
|
somerled
|
Jan 17 2005, 09:24 PM
Post #79
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Jan 16 2005, 01:26 PM
- somerled
- Jan 16 2005, 08:32 AM
- Dwayne
- Jan 16 2005, 02:31 AM
- cptjeff
- Jan 16 2005, 12:13 AM
and I gave my reasons- it was a cut and paste twisting of sentences and meanings, changing the entire makeup. you quote a sentence of the dulfer report- to claim that saddam had weapons. may I refer you here? well, I guess that answers that question. and that was the primary logic in the entire thing. with that blown to smithereens, I suggest that you work on something productive. like preparing a defence for an Impeachment trial for Bush. Edited
You didn't give reasons; all you gave were lies and diversions. You lie by stating I used the Duelfer Report to "claim that saddam had weapons", when in fact I cited the Duelfer Report under a section titled Undermining the Legitimacy of the UN Sanctions. This is the second time you've tried this and this is the second time I'm point it out. As well, you lie by trying to argue ... ineffectually I might add ... that my writings are twisted cut-n-pastes. And you do all this without providing a shread of supporting evidence. Much like somerlead, you simply make statements and then you think everyone else is supposed to accept it out of hand because you arrogantly think you're smarter than everyone else. On top of the lies are a host of diversions. You tried to divert this why arguments whether or not Iraq had nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, when in fact the essay I wrote isn't about that at all. The essay is about Iraqs place in the War on Terrorism. In addition to that, you also tried to divert this to an argument of an impeachment of Pres. Bush.
And that somehow justifies invading a country, destroying their infrastructure and killing a great many Iraqis ?
So you'd prefer if Saddam Hussein was still in power?
Don't ask me. Ask the average Iraqi living in Iraq.
|
|
|
| |
|
doctortobe
|
Jan 17 2005, 09:25 PM
Post #80
|
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
- Posts:
- 5,682
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #32
- Joined:
- August 30, 2003
|
- somerled
- Jan 17 2005, 08:24 PM
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Jan 16 2005, 01:26 PM
- somerled
- Jan 16 2005, 08:32 AM
- Dwayne
- Jan 16 2005, 02:31 AM
- cptjeff
- Jan 16 2005, 12:13 AM
and I gave my reasons- it was a cut and paste twisting of sentences and meanings, changing the entire makeup. you quote a sentence of the dulfer report- to claim that saddam had weapons. may I refer you here? well, I guess that answers that question. and that was the primary logic in the entire thing. with that blown to smithereens, I suggest that you work on something productive. like preparing a defence for an Impeachment trial for Bush. Edited
You didn't give reasons; all you gave were lies and diversions. You lie by stating I used the Duelfer Report to "claim that saddam had weapons", when in fact I cited the Duelfer Report under a section titled Undermining the Legitimacy of the UN Sanctions. This is the second time you've tried this and this is the second time I'm point it out. As well, you lie by trying to argue ... ineffectually I might add ... that my writings are twisted cut-n-pastes. And you do all this without providing a shread of supporting evidence. Much like somerlead, you simply make statements and then you think everyone else is supposed to accept it out of hand because you arrogantly think you're smarter than everyone else. On top of the lies are a host of diversions. You tried to divert this why arguments whether or not Iraq had nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, when in fact the essay I wrote isn't about that at all. The essay is about Iraqs place in the War on Terrorism. In addition to that, you also tried to divert this to an argument of an impeachment of Pres. Bush.
And that somehow justifies invading a country, destroying their infrastructure and killing a great many Iraqis ?
So you'd prefer if Saddam Hussein was still in power?
Don't ask me. Ask the average Iraqi living in Iraq.
I think it is safe to say that the answer would be no.
|
|
|
| |
|
Admiralbill_gomec
|
Jan 17 2005, 10:37 PM
Post #81
|
UberAdmiral
- Posts:
- 26,022
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- somerled
- Jan 17 2005, 08:24 PM
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Jan 16 2005, 01:26 PM
- somerled
- Jan 16 2005, 08:32 AM
- Dwayne
- Jan 16 2005, 02:31 AM
- cptjeff
- Jan 16 2005, 12:13 AM
and I gave my reasons- it was a cut and paste twisting of sentences and meanings, changing the entire makeup. you quote a sentence of the dulfer report- to claim that saddam had weapons. may I refer you here? well, I guess that answers that question. and that was the primary logic in the entire thing. with that blown to smithereens, I suggest that you work on something productive. like preparing a defence for an Impeachment trial for Bush. Edited
You didn't give reasons; all you gave were lies and diversions. You lie by stating I used the Duelfer Report to "claim that saddam had weapons", when in fact I cited the Duelfer Report under a section titled Undermining the Legitimacy of the UN Sanctions. This is the second time you've tried this and this is the second time I'm point it out. As well, you lie by trying to argue ... ineffectually I might add ... that my writings are twisted cut-n-pastes. And you do all this without providing a shread of supporting evidence. Much like somerlead, you simply make statements and then you think everyone else is supposed to accept it out of hand because you arrogantly think you're smarter than everyone else. On top of the lies are a host of diversions. You tried to divert this why arguments whether or not Iraq had nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, when in fact the essay I wrote isn't about that at all. The essay is about Iraqs place in the War on Terrorism. In addition to that, you also tried to divert this to an argument of an impeachment of Pres. Bush.
And that somehow justifies invading a country, destroying their infrastructure and killing a great many Iraqis ?
So you'd prefer if Saddam Hussein was still in power?
Don't ask me. Ask the average Iraqi living in Iraq.
Nice tapdance, Sparky.
Why don't you just say what you truly think... that Saddam should have been left alone, and any US intervention anywhere is wrong, and you love Socialism, and think you know more than anyone else anywhere
|
|
|
| |
|
Admiralbill_gomec
|
Jan 17 2005, 10:40 PM
Post #82
|
UberAdmiral
- Posts:
- 26,022
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- somerled
- Jan 17 2005, 08:19 PM
- Dwayne
- Jan 16 2005, 02:17 PM
- somerled
- Jan 16 2005, 09:32 AM
And that somehow justifies invading a country, destroying their infrastructure and killing a great many Iraqis ?
Saddam killed more Iraqi's per month than the total that have died as a result of invading Iraq, so your comments, like Jeff's are a mere diversion from the truth. And the truth is, yes the invasion was justified.
Another unsubstantiated claim - prove it. Where are your figures ?
Let's see... 300,000 in mass graves since the end of the first gulf war... which ended in 1991. So, 300,000 in 14 years, which is 1785 a month. Looks like Saddam did kill more people a month than it took to liberate Iraq.
I also hate to rain on your parade, but the Iraqis are still going to hold elections on the 30th. I know, you miss your buddy Saddam, but too bad. Freedom shall return to Iraq.
|
|
|
| |
|
Admiralbill_gomec
|
Jan 17 2005, 10:41 PM
Post #83
|
UberAdmiral
- Posts:
- 26,022
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- somerled
- Jan 17 2005, 08:17 PM
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Jan 17 2005, 09:30 AM
- doctortobe
- Jan 16 2005, 07:53 PM
Based on his track record for attempting to be knowledgeable on things (nuclear weapons, evolution) I would say that this is par for course for jeffy boy.
You know, Stalin wasn't that bad either, neither was Hitler. They were just misunderstood.
Yes, we have to understand the root causes of their penchant for evil. After all, Hitler's daddy spanked him, so that probably made him want to exterminate an entire race of people. Stalin had a last name no one could pronounce (Djugashvili). I'm sure that drove him to purge millions he saw as a threat... because people could pronounce their last names. Saddam had prematurely gray hair and talked like Sylvester the Cat. This probably made him want to kill 300,000 people and dump their bodies in mass graves... thufferin' thuccotash!
 You are kidding , aren't you ? Those can't possibility be your serious and concidered opinions on why Hitler and Stalin became mass murders , and by the way nothing has been proven yet about Saddam .
Do I need to define sarcasm for you, or are you (as I suspected) as dense as neutronium?
|
|
|
| |
|
Dwayne
|
Jan 17 2005, 10:47 PM
Post #84
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
- Posts:
- 5,951
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #153
- Joined:
- March 24, 2004
|
- somerled
- Jan 17 2005, 09:19 PM
- Dwayne
- Jan 16 2005, 02:17 PM
- somerled
- Jan 16 2005, 09:32 AM
And that somehow justifies invading a country, destroying their infrastructure and killing a great many Iraqis ?
Saddam killed more Iraqi's per month than the total that have died as a result of invading Iraq, so your comments, like Jeff's are a mere diversion from the truth. And the truth is, yes the invasion was justified.
Another unsubstantiated claim - prove it. Where are your figures ?
I know the truth matters little to you, but for most everyone else this article is probably quite relevent to my point...
- Quote:
-
Sanctions have caused 1.6 million deaths, Iraq claims
Last Updated Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:43:01
BAGHDAD - The economic sanctions the UN placed on Iraq over a decade ago have caused more than 1.6 million deaths in that country, the Iraqi state news agency (INA) said Friday.
The agency, quoting a letter from Iraq's UN mission to Secretary-General Kofi Annan, said 1,614,203 people have died since sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990. Of that number, 667,773 of the dead are children under the age of five, INA said.
The letter also claims that in 1989, the year before the sanctions were imposed, only 258 children under five died in Iraq.
The sanctions were the UN Security Council's punishment for Iraq's 1989 invasion of Kuwait. Under the council's blueprint, even purchases of medicine and medical equipment must be approved. Delays in those approvals, particularly from the United States and Britain, have led to many of the deaths, INA quotes the letter as saying.
The letter also maintains that sanctions have crippled Iraq's infrastructure, and caused a dramatic drop in the country's standard of living.
The U.S. and Britain have been pushing the council to rewrite the sanctions plan since June, but Russia has opposed the idea. The London-Washington plan would retain the ban on Iraqi purchases of military hardware, but ease the restrictions on civilian goods.
Baghdad wants the sanctions lifted all together.
These sanctions were placed on Iraq, because of Saddam Hussein actions, so he's primarily reasonsible for the sanctions and therefore for the effect of these sanctions. Couple that with the fact that Saddam Hussein skimmed billions of dollars meant to feed the Iraqi people, and one would have to be blinded by partisanship to believe that Saddam wasn't responsible for the deaths. And to add to that, if Saddam never had the weapons he was accused of having, that makes Saddam even more culpable for the deaths of Iraqi's that resulted from sanctions, because he could have allowed transparency at any point in time.
Now for the math... 1,614,203 dead over 11 years ... that's about 146,746 per year or 12,229 per month.
I could easily start tallying the deaths of Iraqi's Saddam caused through out right murder, but I won't.
According to The IRAQ BODY COUNT Database only 7,350 deaths "resulted from coalition military action" during the "major-combat" phase prior to May 1st 2003.
Technically, I could stop right there and say that I had given you all the proof you need, because I stated that Saddam killed more Iraqi's than had died "as a result of invading Iraq" and not as a result of invading and then occupying Iraq. But I won't stop there; I'll go ahead and lump in all those killed by murderous Islamist thugs and in battles against those thugs as part of that seven thousand plus killed as a direct result of US & coalition military action to bring the number dead to 15,365 to 17,582 over nearly 2 years.
You can now act smug and sanctimonious in the belief you've won an argument by about 3,100 to 5,300 dead Iraqi's.
|
|
|
| |
|
Admiralbill_gomec
|
Jan 18 2005, 09:49 AM
Post #85
|
UberAdmiral
- Posts:
- 26,022
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
No matter what figures you give Somerled, he'll immediately discount them because of his hatred of the United States.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fesarius
|
Jan 18 2005, 03:37 PM
Post #86
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 11,617
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #38
- Joined:
- September 2, 2003
|
Somerled,
Have you ever visited the U.S. before?
|
|
|
| |
|
somerled
|
Jan 18 2005, 03:46 PM
Post #87
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- Fesarius
- Jan 18 2005, 03:37 PM
Somerled,
Have you ever visited the U.S. before?
Nope.
I would rather see all of my own country , and see asia and europe and africa , and perhaps see where my ancestors originated. There is nothing in the USA that takes my fancy to see.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fesarius
|
Jan 18 2005, 03:48 PM
Post #88
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 11,617
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #38
- Joined:
- September 2, 2003
|
Not even me?
|
|
|
| |
|
Hoss
|
Jan 18 2005, 04:17 PM
Post #89
|
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
- Posts:
- 19,893
- Group:
- Validating
- Member
- #29
- Joined:
- August 28, 2003
|
- somerled
- Jan 18 2005, 03:46 PM
- Fesarius
- Jan 18 2005, 03:37 PM
Somerled,
Have you ever visited the U.S. before?
Nope. I would rather see all of my own country , and see asia and europe and africa , and perhaps see where my ancestors originated. There is nothing in the USA that takes my fancy to see.
Our plan is working.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fesarius
|
Jan 18 2005, 04:19 PM
Post #90
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 11,617
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #38
- Joined:
- September 2, 2003
|
^^^ LOL. Just remember, though, that Canada is not in the U.S.
|
|
|
| |