Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Solid proof that Sen. Boxer is a liar or ignorant
Topic Started: Jan 19 2005, 01:21 AM (837 Views)
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
benetil
Jan 19 2005, 12:56 PM
warmongering liars

Yes, warmongering liars. I guess you wont have any problem when they call you a traitor then? those are the words we are using aren’t they?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 01:00 PM
Dan: You obviously haven't been paying attention. I stated to AB that we should do something about Iraq, but be more cooperative. My statement about hypocrisy is in regards to the Reagan administration both aiding and fighting terrorists.

oh my mistake, it was Reagan’s administration that is hypocritical then not the current one. The current one is doing the right thing in cleaning up Reagan’s mess?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
benetil
Jan 19 2005, 12:56 PM
somerled
Jan 19 2005, 03:57 AM
So Boxer is asking probing questions of Rice. Good.

She's a slippery , devious and cold and calculating customer and is a poor choice.

I hope I'm reading your post right. It is a given that Senator Boxer is a slippery, devious liar - those qualities are prerequisites for being a powerful politician in the USA.

Condoleezza Rice is more intelligent, more slippery and more devious than any sitting US Senator I can think of. I still hold it against her (Rice) for shamefully lying for the boys when she pretended that she forgot about the "FACTS" in the President's State of the Union address

Lying for a group of warmongering liars - she'll (Rice) make a fine Secretary of State.

It's fun and easy to say stuff like this because that way you don't have to have intelligent discussion.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
For the third time in this thread Dan, yes we should do something about rouge powers, but we should be more cooperative with the rest of the world in doing so. Waiting 30 days for the invasion would'nt have changed anything except we would be working with the UN rather than against them.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Dandandat
Jan 19 2005, 01:00 PM
benetil
Jan 19 2005, 12:56 PM
warmongering liars

Yes, warmongering liars. I guess you wont have any problem when they call you a traitor then? those are the words we are using aren’t they?

Coldoleezza Rice would describe herself as a silly, forgetful girl who occasionally 'chokes' at the most critical juncture (I heard her do so on Tim Russert's program). She doesn't consider herself a malicious liar - I do. And I doubt that she cares. Plus, the Bush administration doesn't pay too much attention to things like this . . .

I wouldn't describe myself as a traitor of the USA, either. But I actively oppose nearly everything that the Bush administration stands for.
| Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 01:11 PM
For the third time in this thread Dan, yes we should do something about rouge powers, but we should be more cooperative with the rest of the world in doing so. Waiting 30 days for the invasion would'nt have changed anything except we would be working with the UN rather than against them.

The UN would have changed its mind in 30 days? You would have changed your prospective on this war in 30 days?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 01:11 PM
For the third time in this thread Dan, yes we should do something about rouge powers, but we should be more cooperative with the rest of the world in doing so. Waiting 30 days for the invasion would'nt have changed anything except we would be working with the UN rather than against them.

Rouge powers? Like Mary Kay and Avon?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 06:11 PM
For the third time in this thread Dan, yes we should do something about rouge powers, but we should be more cooperative with the rest of the world in doing so. Waiting 30 days for the invasion would'nt have changed anything except we would be working with the UN rather than against them.

Personal Response

Again, there were solid military reasons for not waiting the 30 days - ones the Iraqis were well aware of as well, but lets now worry about facts when the opportunity to criticize is available.

End of Personal Response
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
benetil
Jan 19 2005, 01:11 PM
I wouldn't describe myself as a traitor of the USA, either. But I actively oppose nearly everything that the Bush administration stands for.

Its not for you to describe, it is for them to describe. Just as you described them as warmongers.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
I'm pretty sure Blix asked for another 30 days for inspections before the war. And yes, I am aware of troop movements, but we are supposed to work within international law. That is, if you believe in international law.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
benetil
Jan 19 2005, 06:11 PM
Coldoleezza Rice would describe herself as a silly, forgetful girl who occasionally 'chokes' at the most critical juncture (I heard her do so on Tim Russert's program).

Personal Response

That sound you heard was the illusion of a belief in women's equality crashing into a brick wall. :rolleyes: Yeah, former Stanford provosts are know for describing themselves as "silly, forgetful boys" .... Why would describing a woman that way be something different? :rolleyes:

End of Personal Response
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 06:18 PM
I'm pretty sure Blix asked for another 30 days for inspections before the war. And yes, I am aware of troop movements, but we are supposed to work within international law. That is, if you believe in international law.

Personal Response

So you would have preferred that more American and Coalition troops died than have gone against international opinion?

Truthfully, Sisko, I disagree with your intrepretation of international law as well, but I'm not starting a discussion that I know you won't finish.

End of Personal Response
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 12:00 PM
Dan: You obviously haven't been paying attention. I stated to AB that we should do something about Iraq, but be more cooperative. My statement about hypocrisy is in regards to the Reagan administration both aiding and fighting terrorists.

1) I responded that the UN should have cooperated more with us. Not vice versa. Reasons given for their reluctance were the Oil-For-Food program that you ignored.

2) I still haven't seen proof that the REAGAN ADMINISTRATION supplied WMDs to Iraq. Your claim of hypocrisy would lie on that proof. Other than that it is simply conjecture.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
I stated that I don't think much else would've changed including the number dead. It is apparent that Hussein did not have these WMDs because he didn't use them as his country was being overrun. You are free to disagree with my "interpretation" if you like.

Am I wrong that Blix asked for extra time for the invasion? Is he not the UN's inspector? Would complying with his suggestion not been cooperating?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
The Sisko
Jan 19 2005, 06:25 PM
I stated that I don't think much else would've changed including the number dead. It is apparent that Hussein did not have these WMDs because he didn't use them as his country was being overrun. You are free to disagree with my "interpretation" if you like.

Am I wrong that Blix asked for extra time for the invasion? Is he not the UN's inspector? Would complying with his suggestion not been cooperating?

Personal Response

If you are responding to me, you are indicating that you don't understand the issue of troop movements. (And completely missed my point about international law....)

If you are responding to AB, nevermind.

End of Personal Response
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus