KrustyKidd

Well Morgan, you disappoint me. Garbage? This guy is a walking Leftist Sandwichboard complete with grade 9 rhetoric. No, it was inevitable. We all knew it was going to happen sooner or later and were getting on with the stuff that had to be done. Satisfying for sure but nothing changed as it is still rolling along and progressing as before. The Left seems to think this is a game that has a definitive score to tell when you have won. It does not, it will take decades, Saddam and Al Queda are only blips on the screen. That is why re-enrollment in the military is at a high. That is why Bush's approval rating is at an all time high. No, the US has handled Iraq with Kid Gloves as it plans on returning Iraq to Iraqis. If it wanted to prove overwhelming military might I doubt there would be a building with more than two bricks stuck together. Saddam was an example for Dictators to get their shit together. Iraq is an example for all Arabs what can be if they pick Democracy. Iran and NK can be dealt with in different ways. BTW, does this guy have any qualifications to write idiocy like this? No, I think they mean a freely elected government of Iraqis like they are determined to have the 25 Memeber Council set up. Has this Guy been in a cave for the last year I wonder? What are you, a moron? I write better researched tripe than this and I drive a freakin' truck all day! A war won in less time than it took Reno to kill everybody at Waco, two of the Aces killed in less time than it took Hillary to find her freakin' financial records for an inquiry for crying out loud!!! Republican Guard falls in less time than it took Teddy to call the police after drowning his date at Chapaquidick and yu talk about limits? Talk about the responsible holding back the Dogs of War you idiot! Once again this clown shows his one dimensional thinking. America has guns, money, political alliances and all sorts of means to project them. They use what is the best and they chose diplomacy. Is he saying that he would chose death for all Iranians? What a warmonger. What a fool. Summary of Hans Blix's 27 Jan 2003 Report to the UN Hmmm, that would mean WMD right? Hmmm, that would mean WMD right? Somewhere in the amount of 2 million pounds of it, enough to fill three or four semi trailers. Would that be seen as 'Non Coopeeration and grounds for declaration of non complience with the two resolutions of 687 and 1441? Hmmmm Hmmm, that would mean WMD if dropped in one of the 6500 warheads mentioned above that they had right? What an idiot. So typical of the Left. What did he say about truth being the first casualty?

Anybody that compares another in West to Hitler has shot themselves in the foot. If the main point they have is BS then what else is not? If I were the Left I would have shown a Swastika or something and made comparissons like that. There is comparissons, no denying it but to compare a democraticlly elected President shooting for a second four year term to a Dictator for life is childish. BTW, the election was so close that to say Bush stole it is a joke. I can't believe that when there was such a close margin anybody could say that it was stolen. As far as Ioncerered, it came down to who ever had the better lawyers. It could have gone the other way and we would all be calling Gore an election thief. Clinton himself said that it was close so what does the left want and how can we take them seriously when they purport that somehow there was a Gore landslide?

I'm fairly openminded and I've listened to Left Radio, once in awhile they actually have some good points but those are far and few between. it has substance. Left Radio is the same old crap - "No blood for oil" "Wheres the WMD?" "Bush is a moron" etc. Like a rally for college students.

Thank you Cameron. America is not all bad. Sometimes they actually do things for the reasons they say. I wonder what other things do for mainly non selfish motives?

What is going on with Liberals in North America? In the effort to educate and bring truth to the forefront I Krusty Kid will give away a bonus argument to the Liberals amongst us. It is reference Gadaffi's surrendering of WMD: 'How easy it is to surrender something that exists.' Any of you want to use it feel free.

Pictures already. MARS SITE Hate to throw a political spin on this but note the absence of one. Almost think that America is doing this just to do it and see what is there. Of course the spin offs are their own but the real wonder is mankind's.

Uh Oh. Seems OBL is able to get a tape to us faster than the normal six month trip. Does this mean that he is a threat to western society again or that he has faster camels? CLICK FOR CAMEL MAIL

Bush was criticized for adressing troops on a carrier, so what do the Liberals think of her adressing troops in Afganistan? Note bullet proof vest/note flight suit note use of military ac/note use of military a/c note morale boost/note morale boost was purpose holiday with hubby?/pure business ADRIANNE!!!!!

That's funny! I wouldn't be too sure about the Islamic Radical though. History would dictate that but remember, in the ME the Church is government. Hence it is organised and would be the largest collective organisation that is mobilised. Also, remember that nobody ever votes and if they do it is fixed. Here, we won't have a vote until all candidates have campaigned, polls and ballots have ben set up. Something that is not too important in most ME elections. A strong religious leader in Basra will not sway the voters on the other side of town with threats this time. People can chant all they want in public and yet vote their true will inprivate. Most of the time its an enthusiasm that carries the vote. Here it iwill be an educated and counted vote.

I think it's a great idea! America is free and Bush is right and has nothing to fear. He is a leader, an elected one. Every lawyer the Democrats could hire or find looked at the results and not a damm thing they could do. If they lost fair and square then they lost, if they are so dumb as to let a close election slip away then they were unfit to lead anyhow. Imagine the Dems not knowing if it was legal to invade Iraq or not LOL. Anyhow, the more childish crap they spew out the more they paint themselves into a corner with their own fecces. Bush doesn't flinch, doesn't dignify them with a response. I love it! So the American public will have to ask themselves a question when election time rolls around; do you beleive a man who never ranted or raved and things worked out pretty much the way he said or do you believe a bunch of screaming and emotional actors who probably know as little about poitics as they do about nuclear fission?

I could include an Iraqi with a penchant for Pie Charts or a tree hugger but that would be distracting. This is as basic as I could think of.

Well said. I have heard it before but am unsure if it is an actual quote or a common idea. It has however, in our society, become a little unbalanced. In the charter for example it gives the weak, power to antagonise the strong and thereby make them weak but not the 'new weak' the power to fight back. That is not what was intended. It needs to be written so that all are equal, not the ones that have traditionally been persecuted scince social ideas, feelings, animosity are a moving fluid rather than a stationary solid.

I wouldn't be too quick to claim terrorism. I scanned an aviation forum last night. Seems Flash Air is not a tightly run ship. I would wait a bit before throwing anything out.

Francisco Pizarro couldn't read or write. With a hundred and sixty men he conquered a five million person empire. Not a very nice guy by any means but if not him then it would have been another. I wonder, could a University Grad with a PHD in human studies have done the same thing? Doubt it, probably would have fallen victim to the sacrificial knife.

That's right John. You are not. As well, you claim that Bush has lied, yet have no proof. Allegations are not proof. The links I provided were threads in which you should have posted this subject. I don't care if you read them or not but they do provide evidence and opinions that we are rehashing ad nauseum here. Oh, I also came across this little article from today. The Bush hating Rockerfeller agrees with the "Boooo meter" being activated. You are going to tell me that the man who wants to put Bush away more than any other Dem is lying now? ROCKERFELLER THE RAT II Here's a few quotes from your buddies. I see you didn't like Kay's report. It's funny how the left thought that all sorts of evidence would be 'planted' but when he turned up nothing spectacular they didn't argue with it. Matter of fact they used this report as evidence that they were right all along. Only when it was pointed out that he had indeed turned up enough evidence to prove Saddam was in violation of both 687 and 1441 and thus exonerated Bush did they say (like you) that he is CIA and biased etc. Here is Blix's of 27 Jan 2003. Remember, Kay had unfettered access, whereas Blix had, in comparison, next to none. If you don't like this either then there is not much else I can present to you and in turn, ask for you to give me proof of your allegations that there is no WMD or material in Iraq. As before, I wait for your factual report. To summarize the summary: Hmmm, that would mean WMD right? Hmmm, that would mean WMD right? Somewhere in the amount of 2 million pounds of it, enough to fill three or four semi trailers. Hmmm that would mean deception and not cooperating with inspectors right? Hmmm, that would mean WMD if dropped in one of the warheads they had right? Hmmm, scince then Blix has discovered these have a range of more than 600 miles. This would mean prohibitted weapons right? Hmmm, scince then they have discovered scientists with crates of 'take home work' documents in their homes. One even had parts for a freakin particle separator in his garden as 'take nhome work' for crying out loud! Where is this stuff? Well, they bury fighter jets and move labs around. Why is it beyond the scope of your immagination to think that three trailers containg drums of whatever are not somewhere under the ground in the uninspected two thirds of Iraq? Or in one of these unaccounted for warheads in one of the 120 uninspected weapons depots? Of course you can prove that they are not right?

No, if you thought like me you would have a point you could back up with facts or links. Also, you wouldn't be placing your d**k in a door waiting for somebody to slam it shut. WMD material has been found in Iraq. Res 687 stated that Iraq had to rid itself of all WMD equipment and material and even specified some types of 'dual use' equipment. Even Blix kept on tripping over the stuff so it is an irrefuatable fact that WMD equipment and material was in Iraq. As for WMD themselves that can be as simple as a scud with a four pound cylander filled with mustard agent. Saddam had both of those. Did he have hordes of ready to go Scuds filled with this? Jaques Chirac thought so, Hillary Clinton as well. Matter of fact from Ted Kennedy to Michael Moore many Liberals did. The proof is in past threads that I have alrready linked. Now prove to me that scince only 10 of 130 weapons sites have been inspected in Iraq and less than half of the country has been gone over that Bush was wrong about WMD. Now you are going to tell me and prove to me that in a country the size of California that there is not a propane size cylinder with some type of deadly chemical anywhere that can be placed into the nose cone of a Scud missile? That should be enough to get you started. Report back when you have irrefutable proof. A tip: thousands of Democrats have tried this, from Rockerfeller to Clinton and all have failed with better info and resources than you could hope for so I doubt you have proof that they don't. As a matter of fact, Rockerfeller is Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Sub Committee and in a leaked memo was admitted to using his position to gather intelligence to overthrow Bush so you can be sure if he could prove that there were no WMD then you would know it.ROCKERFELLER THE RAT

Crystal clear, so why mistitle the thread instead of using already existing ones? IRAQ AND WMD or US MILITARY INTERVENTION or BUSH MUST GO

Won by War and the trend can be terminated if the beligerent parties wish to make peace. This is a new one in the history of the World. No wonder the Arabs don't get it. As well, the more time they take trying traditional ways of trying to win back what they lost by using the same loser means the more the Right Wing in Israel feel that they should keep it. Surely this is another reason to make a definite peace effort.

All, the purpose of threads is to avoid getting into a general, topical free for all. The thread was about code orange, not justification for war with Iraq, legitimacy of the Florida recounts or any of the favorite musings from Mr "dude. wheres my country." Usually, those with a weak point will sometimes attempt to enlarge a discussion hoping to find a point so that the opposition will be overcome with a cascade of irrelevent facts, arguments and general inarguable counterelogeic as it has nothing or little to do with the direct conversation. Bush lied about reasons for the Iraq invasion? What the heck does that have to do with As I said before, there is thread upon thread about WMD and Terrorism allegations. Surely you wanted to discuss Code Orange here as you made a new thread with that as it's title. As it looks however, you use code orange as a lead in for a topic which has nothing to do with the actual security level. Why? To confuse, rant and just gererally be a nuisance I think. Make a point, not a rant and we will discuss it.

History is plaqued by violence because the powerful try to enslave the weak, not free them to persue their own destiny. Big difference. Unless of course you view an unemployed starving person being given a job and a chance to raise a family free from fear as the same thing as rape, torture, dictatorship and death.

Still is the Tiny Guy Lonius. Let's say that I own a missile armed with a Nuclear Warhead. I walk into a bar and sit down and soon am set on by two real big smelly Red Necks that don't like the color of my bow tie. They push me around a whole bunch then start eating my beer nuts. What am I to do? Go home and fire my Nuke at them? Hardly. I go home and have the neighbor's pit bull pooping on my lawn, the teenagers of the other neighbors are ripping up my shrubs and rolling the leaves up to smoke. Do I Nuke them too? Or maybe simply try to deal with it in a lesser way such as calling the Sherrif (who also hates me)? It's obvious that Nuclear weapons in the hands of a responsible person will only be used as a last resort. Therefore they don't make much of a difference when Israel is protecting borders and such unless about to suffer extreme casualties or lose a country.

A precedent? Hardly. Israel has every right to that land. More so because of lack of peace agreement so that it acts as buffer. That is the traditional and military right to it. More than enough for pretty much every nation on earth. However, Israel is torn between the need for this land to be used to placate the traditionalists such as those that achere to the afore mentioned though and the more realistic and modern need to give it back as a token for peace. What is holding them? Easy, peace assurances, the stuff that dictators can't give for fear of losing control in front of their own subjegated people. . NOT SURE WHAT THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE PRESENT THREAD BUT HERE IS THE LOWDOWN

Speaking of sons, did you know that it took Bush less time to find them than it took Hillary to come up with her records? It took less time to take Iraq than Reno took to take Waco. Less time to take Iraq's republican Guard than it took to count the Florida Votes.

Hello! Anybody in there? $500 Billion dollars to build a country out of run down equipment and a 19th century infastructure left by decades of corrupt dictators and aristocrats is conventional? GW Bush is the first ruler scince Alexander to wage war with hope and freedom instead of rape and fire. As for "retarded pygmies" it seems that you are one as you don't see what they are doing. 'Conventional Means' is shooting everybody in sight. That would present a casualty rate of about a thousand Iraqis a day. Seeing that? I am not belittling you Lonius, just seems that your Leftist Drive has gone back to 'automatic rhetoric mode' from the reality postition. Lonius, tell me that 'Global Dumming' hasn't affected you. You know damm well that the intent of "fail" is that if the Iraqis lose the civilised country that will become theirs once the US relinquishes control is what "fail " means. You could take it that : if the terrorists take over. if France rules them, if Iran invades and imposes a religious theocracy or if they simply fade away into a Somalian feudalist society that would be the product of "fail." Now here is Morgan defining what he, himself meant: If it isn't within yourself to agree with the reality of what is going on then at least come up with reasons why you don't. This tripe shit you threw out here can't be Lonius. It has to be somebody playing with your comp while you are getting ready to go out for the New Years.

How about the US creating a thriving democratic Arab society in the heart of the ME? One that shows how things could be if they did normal things like put their back to the job of living, raising a family and persuing their own religion instead of trying to convert the planet? It may not influence the terrorists that exist at this moment but they will kill themselves either by bomb or bullet anyhow but the population that does have something to live for will have their say. The say of turning them in when it becomes apparent that they are holding them back, endangering their lives by hiding amongst them and using their children as cannon fodder in some messed up jihad against all that they do not share with the terrorists. That's the weapon the West is using. It's called a 'Democracy Bomb.'