GostHacked Posted July 22, 2008 Report Share Posted July 22, 2008 Initially I wrote Another thing to note here is that Saddam was a person of convenience as well. The US gave weapons to Iraq in order to fight of Iran. The chemicals came from several countries, but just like the war on drugs, you punish the buyer and not the dealer. Which solves nothing. You said Really? You mean Saddam is not dead...like Elvis? The US "gives" weapons to Canada too....so what? Saddam was in material breach of GW 1 surrender instruments and he was a very bad poker player. Better go easy on the reading comprehension insults after you wrote "The US gave weapons to Iraq in order to fight of Iran." See, I am paying attention. Get your story straight. OH I see, at first you were asking me if Saddam was still alive. Then you went on about US giving weapons to Canada. Sorry for the confusion.. Correct..no such thing as playing fair in such matters. To expect otherwise is quite foolish. So Iran with the bomb is alright by me then. Cute, but the longstanding American objective in Iraq was regime change. Any questions? Pfffff. That's not what Bush tells me !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 22, 2008 Report Share Posted July 22, 2008 OH I see, at first you were asking me if Saddam was still alive. Then you went on about US giving weapons to Canada. Sorry for the confusion.. Weapons here...weapons there...weapons, weapons everywhere. Your confusion is forgiven. So Iran with the bomb is alright by me then. They can have all the bombs they want so long as the world gets the oil. We can do it the easy way...or the had way. Pfffff. That's not what Bush tells me !!! Not only Bush, but Clinton too. Ding, dong, Saddam is dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted July 22, 2008 Report Share Posted July 22, 2008 BC They can have all the bombs they want so long as the world gets the oil. We can do it the easy way...or the had way. The easiest way would be to buy the oil from Iran. The Chinese and Russians are doing it. The hard way is taking control of the oil. I guess the US likes to do things the hard way. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are proofs of that. With the money spent on the US Military since 2001, could have easily bought all of Iran's oil. Well maybe not that much, but a good chunck of it. Buuut, since Iran wants to sell their oil in their dollars with the Iran Oil Bourse, the US sees this as a threat and decides to take over the country. This is how it will play out. We both know that. Not only Bush, but Clinton too. Ding, dong, Saddam is dead. Really? You mean Saddam is not dead...like Elvis? Yes folks BC is the master of clarity. Wait... this could be taken as an insult ... I better watch myself ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 22, 2008 Report Share Posted July 22, 2008 The easiest way would be to buy the oil from Iran. The Chinese and Russians are doing it. The hard way is taking control of the oil. I guess the US likes to do things the hard way. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are proofs of that. With the money spent on the US Military since 2001, could have easily bought all of Iran's oil. Well maybe not that much, but a good chunck of it. US doesn't buy much Iranian oil last time I checked...at any price. We like it the "hard way". Buuut, since Iran wants to sell their oil in their dollars with the Iran Oil Bourse, the US sees this as a threat and decides to take over the country. This is how it will play out. We both know that. Take over the country? No silly, just the oil! Yes folks BC is the master of clarity. Wait... this could be taken as an insult ... I better watch myself ... I just call 'em like it is. Sue me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yes, even more good news out of Iraq. Moqtada Packs It In Good news out of Iraq is becoming almost a daily event: In just the past week, we learned that U.S. combat fatalities (five) dropped in July to a low for the war, that key leaders of al Qaeda in Iraq have fled to the Pakistani hinterland, that troop deployments will soon be cut to 12 months from 15, and that Washington and Baghdad are close to concluding a status-of-forces agreement. Now this: Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr plans to announce Friday that he will disarm his Mahdi Army, which was raining mortars on Baghdad's Green Zone as recently as April. Coupled with the near-total defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq, this means the U.S. no longer faces any significant organized military foe in the country. It also marks a major setback for Iran, which had used the Mahdi Army as one of its primary vehicles for extending its influence in Iraq. WSJ Quick, somebody tell Harry "The War Is Lost" Reid. What a leader that guy is, the way he and his party persevered, through even the most dark and difficult times was unbelievable. The Winston Chruchill of our time. How about the war is won, you a-hole. This guy should be ashamed to even show his face in public, unless it's to be spit on. Of course, that's only my opinion, I could be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yes, even more good news out of Iraq....Quick, somebody tell Harry "The War Is Lost" Reid. What a leader that guy is, the way he and his party persevered, through even the most dark and difficult times was unbelievable.... Good observation...maybe the senior senator will recognize good news in Iraq after Obama is in office. I don't know who squabbles more about it....Iraq or the US Congress! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.