RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Saddam doesn't destroy missiles-liberals blame Bush?(14 posts)

Saddam doesn't destroy missiles-liberals blame Bush?Continental
Feb 25, 2003 9:00 AM
I can imagine the logic. Saddam is not destroying his illegal missiles because of the imminent threat posed by the cowboy occupying the White House.
Wait! WHAT "liberals" are blaming Bush? Give us a name.cory
Feb 25, 2003 10:09 AM
If you're going to make a statement like that, it's only fair to support it. How about ONE NAME of a "liberal" who's blaming Bush because Saddam didn't destroy the missiles?
Not one who doesn't support the war--that's easy, because there are millions of them. But tell us who you're talking about.
why wouldn't everyone blame Saddam? nmDougSloan
Feb 25, 2003 11:00 AM
Which Bush?czardonic
Feb 25, 2003 11:23 AM
You seem confused about why liberals don't trust Bush to take care of Saddam Hussein. Perhaps because he represents (and employs) the same GOP nuts who created and armed Saddam in the first place?
It's a predictionContinental
Feb 25, 2003 11:31 AM
Written too quickly and vaguely, perhaps. I'm imagining the logic of the people who oppose military action and want inspections, when the only reason there are inspections is because there is military action looming. Now that Hans has demanded that Saddam destroy the missiles, how will peaceniks respond when Saddam refuses? In any case, the peacenik response is irrelevant. Amusing but irrelevant.
Thousands of lives at risk. At least <i>you're</i> amused. (nm)czardonic
Feb 25, 2003 11:50 AM
tens of thousands already dead from doing nothingContinental
Feb 25, 2003 1:50 PM
I'm not amused by war. I am not amused by a mass murder in Iraq, who has already killed many tens of thousands of people and who has sworn to deliver death and destruction to millions, including me and my family. I'm amused by the illogic of peaceniks. If peaceniks weren't irrelevant, then I would not be amused.
Where you amused 20 years ago. . .czardonic
Feb 25, 2003 2:34 PM
. . .when Saddam was commiting these attrocities? Or 10 years ago when the U.S. encouraged the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam and then betrayed them, leaving them to be slaughtered?

Or were you out on the streets protesting?

Or maybe you don't give a crap who Saddam kills, as long as it isn't you and your family.
20 yrs ago Reagan was winning cold warContinental
Feb 25, 2003 7:45 PM
And 20 years ago I was amused by the liberal peaceniks making fun of Ronald Ray Gun. They didn't matter then and they don't matter now. But Liberal peaceniks are always amusing.
Along with his sidekicks, Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein(nm)czardonic
Feb 25, 2003 8:56 PM
Like using Stalin to defeat Hitler ugly, risky but you do it nmContinental
Feb 26, 2003 8:01 AM
And end up with the Cold War, the Gulf War, 9/11. . .(nm)czardonic
Feb 26, 2003 11:01 AM
slow painful global growth of freedom, liberty, democracy nmContinental
Feb 26, 2003 12:50 PM
Yep. In <i>spite</i> of the conservative agenda. (nm)czardonic
Feb 26, 2003 1:29 PM