# No WMD in IRAQ -- CIA REPORT



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/...port/index.html

No WMD at time of invasion. Possiblity to acquire some if UN sanctions ended.

****Saddam still needed to be taken down, but we were lied to*****


----------



## MR HARLEY (Aug 12, 2003)

Great ....................How about that pic ?








click here

http://www.piranha-fury.com/forum/pfury/in...30&#entry691215


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

yeah... his sons are dead too...

what a shame...


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)




----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

And for icing on the cake he only wanted to build WMDs in the first place to deter the US from attacking him.

Mark one down for the good guys, y'all did a real fine job bringing stability and security to the world


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

some of us DID NOT agree with how things were done... so its not fair for you to say "ya'll"


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> Mark one down for the good guys, y'all did a real fine job bringing stability and security to the world


 Rome wasnt built in a day.


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> elTwitcho said:
> 
> 
> > Mark one down for the good guys, y'all did a real fine job bringing stability and security to the world
> ...


 And that applies how??????


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

seharebo said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > elTwitcho said:
> ...


 Think about it


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> seharebo said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 I did....still nothing....


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

yes but it wasn't built by digging a big huge hole that would have to be filled before even considering starting to work on it and then calling it "progress".


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

seharebo said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > seharebo said:
> ...


 I think she is trying to say... "a little at a time" or "we cant see the whole picture yet"

something like that...


----------



## MR.FREEZ (Jan 26, 2004)

i still think the war in iraq was the right thing

mainly cause that dirt bag hates us and i think eventuly he would have defientyly supported

osama and helped train some camel dung smokein pricks and coudl have done even more.

i know they had connections some how or another


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> yes but it wasn't built by digging a big huge hole that would have to be filled before even considering starting to work on it and then calling it "progress".


If you dont consider the following progress, then what is?

*1. Restoring Essential Infrastructure*

_Generated 4,518 MW on October 6, surpassing the pre-war level of 4,400 MW.

USAID is working to add 827 MW of capacity through new generation and rehabilitation projects.

Conducting water and sanitation projects worth $183 million that will benefit 14.5 million people.

Rehabilitating three key bridges (Khazir, Tikrit, and Al Mat) critical to the flow of passengers and goods throughout Iraq. Al Mat Bridge was the first to be completed and reopened March 3.

Reopened Umm Qasr seaport on June 17. Approximately 40 ships offload cargo per month.

Completed emergency work to prepare Baghdad and Basrah airports for operations. More than 5,000 flights have arrived and departed Baghdad International Airport since July, which now averages more than 20 non-military movements per day.

Restored international calling service and activated more than 140,000 subscriber lines in Baghdad. _

*2. Supporting Essential Health and Education Services*
_
Vaccinated 3 million children through monthly national immunization days.

Equipping 600 facilities in seven target governorates to provide essential primary healthcare services.

Trained 750 people who are training more than 2,000 primary healthcare providers in maternal and child health services.

Distributed high-protein biscuits to more than 240,000 children and pregnant and nursing mothers.

Renovated 2,356 schools nationwide.

Distributed 1.5 million secondary school student kits, 808,000 primary school student kits, and 81,735 primary school teacher kits.

Printed and distributed 8.7 million revised math and science textbooks to governorates throughout Iraq.

Trained 860 secondary school master trainers, who trained 31,772 secondary school educators nationwide.

Awarded five grants worth $20.7 million to establish partnerships between American and Iraqi universities.

Giving more than 600 out-of-school students a second chance through the Accelerated Learning Program. 
_
*3. Expanding Economic Opportunity*
_
Implementing 17 high-priority activities with the CPA to reform Iraq's currency, state-owned enterprises, small businesses, banking system, taxation system, budgeting, and utility administration.

Began facilitating the Central Bank program to exchange new dinars for old on October 15, 2003, and completed the program January 15, 2004. There are currently 4.62 trillion new Iraqi dinars in circulation.

Created more than 77,000 public works jobs through the National Employment Program.

Developed a bank-to-bank payment system that allowed 80 banks to resume business by late October.

Supporting the Iraqi initiative to revitalize agricultural production, stimulate income, and employment generation through the Agriculture Reconstruction and Development Program for Iraq.

Coordinating the Marshlands Initiative to rejuvenate the marshlands ecologically, socially, and economically. 
_
*4. Improving Government Efficiency and Accountability*
_
Local governance teams are working in all 18 governorates as part of CPA Governance Teams.

Facilitated an interim structure of government, the Governorate Council, to represent the population of 18 governorates, including Baghdad.

Established 16 governorate councils, 78 district councils, 192 city or sub-district councils, and 392 neighborhood councils, allowing more than 19 million people to engage in local policy discourse.

Committed $2.4 million for the implementation of the CPA's nationwide Civic Education Program to introduce Iraqis to democratic principles and ideas in preparation for the upcoming transition to sovereignty.

Awarded rapid-response grants worth $13.4 million to allow local governments to deliver essential services.

Rehabilitated nine key central government ministries, Baghdad mayoral buildings, headquarters of nine Baghdad municipalities, and urban water and electric authorities, while providing 40 directorates and agencies with enough furniture, equipment, and basic office supplies to enable them to return to service.

Assisting local governments in budget formulation.

Established more than 660 community associations in 16 governorates as part of a campaign targeting grassroots democracy. 
_
*5. Humanitarian Assistance *
_
Immediately after the conflict, provided 516,800 metric tons of food worth over $389 million through the World Food Program.

Deployed one of the largest ever Disaster Assistance Response Teams, including doctors, public health professionals, water and sanitation experts, food distribution and agricultural specialists, and other experts.

Pre-positioned substantial amounts of food and supplies before the war: water, hygiene and health kits, blankets, and plastic sheeting.

Awarded grants to staff and prepare U.N. agencies and NGOs for response.

Repaired water and sanitation facilities quickly and furnished emergency healthcare assistance.

Distributed medical kits containing enough medicine and supplies for 10,000 people for three months. 
_

Source: USAID.GOV
_Last Updated: June 28, 2004 _

So, we've made no progress, huh?


----------



## aaron07_20 (Apr 23, 2004)

mr.freez said:


> i still think the war in iraq was the right thing
> 
> mainly cause that dirt bag hates us and i think eventuly he would have defientyly supported
> 
> ...


 Ok what you said doesnt make any sense, you said the war was neccassary because eventually he would support Osama? Why wouldnt you just go after Osama, the more powerful terrorist? Why would you shift to Suddam when you have Osama cornered? And why do people keep saying that the war was necc. because we had to get Suddam? We have suddam..so why are we still there? Why arent there a larger number of highly trained military soldiers trying to find Osama?


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

how about destroying their way of life as they know it... and forcing them to live like we do... sounds like cowboys and indians...

but that is what we did... we went over there and overthrew their government, which has worked for a LOOOONG time.... and changed it to what we want...

even if you leave out corruption... the whole outcome (changing their gov.) is just not right...


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Did I say anything about rebuilding Iraq? What part of "stability" and "world security" are you not getting exactly? That's all very fine and nice to say you've made progress rebuilding the Iraqi country after you destroyed it but that isn't related to the topic at hand.

Or do you honestly think that Iraqis are going to start saying "Bless America for bringing back all that we used to have before they blew it up in the first gulf war and then keeping us in third world conditions for over a decade. They are heros" ?


----------



## MR.FREEZ (Jan 26, 2004)

aaron07_20 said:


> mr.freez said:
> 
> 
> > i still think the war in iraq was the right thing
> ...


 saddam had the money and i think he WAS supportin osama

if you want to get rid of an enemy you cut of the head that made the hand slap you

no the hand that slapped you cause theres sitll one more

theres no puns intended here


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> Did I say anything about rebuilding Iraq? What part of "stability" and "world security" are you not getting exactly? That's all very fine and nice to say you've made progress rebuilding the Iraqi country after you destroyed it but that isn't related to the topic at hand.


 Point is you have to start from somewhere. You cant just blow up a place and expect the world to be safer. Theres a handful of reasons we got rid of Saddam. By a long shot we have made the world of Iraqi civilians safer. Considering the hundreds of thousands of people he killed. You can only do so much in a given lot of time. Hence the statement "Rome wasnt built in a day." You cant expect the US to bring stability and security to the world. That would have to be more than an effort on our part.


----------



## Enriqo_Suavez (Mar 31, 2004)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> how about destroying their way of life as they know it... and forcing them to live like we do... sounds like cowboys and indians...
> 
> but that is what we did... we went over there and overthrew their government, which has worked for a LOOOONG time.... and changed it to what we want...
> 
> even if you leave out corruption... the whole outcome (changing their gov.) is just not right...


 Yeah, his government was working fine, wish we left him alone...


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> Did I say anything about rebuilding Iraq? What part of "stability" and "world security" are you not getting exactly? That's all very fine and nice to say you've made progress rebuilding the Iraqi country after you destroyed it but that isn't related to the topic at hand.


Point is you have to start from somewhere. You cant just blow up a place and expect the world to be safer. Theres a handful of reasons we got rid of Saddam. By a long shot we have made the world of Iraqi civilians safer. Considering the hundreds of thousands of people he killed. You can only do so much in a given lot of time. Hence the statement "Rome wasnt built in a day." You cant expect the US to bring stability and security to the world. That would have to be more than an effort on our part.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

Enriqo_Suavez said:


> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:
> 
> 
> > how about destroying their way of life as they know it... and forcing them to live like we do... sounds like cowboys and indians...
> ...


 just like we kill our own... with Death penalty and such... do you know the reason people were killed in iraq?

why do we get involved... reason: there is a benifit...!


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> Enriqo_Suavez said:
> 
> 
> > Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:
> ...


 LOL









You're obviously brilliant

Tell me the truth - you're obviously a Bush supporter trying to make other liberals look bad, aren't you ?


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> reason: there is a benifit...!


 Thats wonderful. Please do tell me these benefits we are getting


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:
> 
> 
> > reason: there is a benifit...!
> ...


 not we...


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Point is you have to start from somewhere. You cant just blow up a place and expect the world to be safer.


 And yet that seems to be Bush's foreign policy doesn't it? While I fully agree it is necessary and of utmost importance to get rid of the people we as a western society are at war with "ie terrorists" I don't see a benefit in making even more radical fanatics willing to join the cause of terrorism by blowing the sh*t out of someone's country and then saying "hey guy, we're helping you. duh".


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:
> ...


 Then who?


----------



## Atlanta Braves Baby! (Mar 12, 2003)

What ever happened to cheaper oil?!?!?


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Atlanta Braves Baby! said:


> What ever happened to cheaper oil?!?!?


 Thats precisely the point, this war wasnt about oil.


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


Try Bush Sr./JR/Cheney and all the others who own millions in stocks from Lockheed Martin and The Carlyle Group. By the way, why are we in Iraq again?? We were never attacked by them...so we bomb their civilian homes to "kill Saddam".

Mission Accomplished it a joke. Had we never got Saddam we would have been better off. At least Saddam has his people under control, now there is anarchy and we have to clean it up.<--dont worry we will get into plenty of debt with those good 'ol Republican Tax Cuts (those REALLY help fund wars)







! The real countries harboring "terror" are Iran and Saudi Arabia. We don't dare attack them tho cus they are good friends of daddy and Jr Bush.

Hey but where are those WMDs???? Bush said Iraq had Nukes and LOADS of Sarin...yet all I have seen are simple warheads from the 70s and cartoon pictures that Bush drew up. Why not any REAL spyplane pics like JFK had of Cuba??


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Atlanta Braves Baby! said:
> 
> 
> > What ever happened to cheaper oil?!?!?
> ...


Really? How bout this, Saudis get some form of control of that oil- And sell Iraqi oil to us via OPEC! Ooooo AHHHHHH. Thats a HUGE conspiracy theory though, it would NEVER happen right?


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Filo said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Atlanta Braves Baby! said:
> ...


 filos right...this war is about oil...just like why we went into germany, vietnam, korea, numerous countries in S.america, africa....america goes to war b/c of oil


----------



## MR.FREEZ (Jan 26, 2004)

diddye said:


> Filo said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 sorry but were are we drillin for oil in



> germany, vietnam, korea, numerous countries in S.america, africa....


----------



## Guru (Apr 20, 2004)

> QUOTE (elTwitcho @ Oct 6 2004, 11:55 AM)
> Mark one down for the good guys, y'all did a real fine job bringing stability and security to the world
> 
> Rome wasnt built in a day.


And where is Rome now.


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

diddye said:


> Filo said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 Obviously you don't know the difference of our oil supply/suppliers since WW2. Most of those countries you mentioned were because of the Cold War, and situations don't relate. Though it is really bothering me why we are guarding the oil supply so heavily in Iraq, yet did nothing against looting+vandalism. It still amazes me that some people think this war has no political meaning regarding who gets the benefits. You actually think this helped the people of Iraq? Or do you think its really helping those who have millions invested in Lockheed Martin? Just because someone says oil played a big role in the war, doesn't mean thats all this war is about--and doesn't mean the United States will be getting more oil cheaper or free anytime soon. Think of the Saudis







+ Saudis = $$ for certain politicians


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

oh yea 9.11 was all about oil....rolls eyes


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Obviously someone needs to check their facts again and learn where the US gets their oil. Youll see Iraq is far down on that list.


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

I think we should reverse things. The US is being invaded, because we have something that we don't have (like WMD in Iraq). Would you not fight all of the troops coming in? I personally believe that the entire country would take up arms to fight off the invasion. Now we are insurgents, we try to form alliances with Mexico and Canada to fight off the invasion. One of the goals of the group coming in is to destroy this polluted thing called economy and the evil lying leader of the country.

Flip it around again. We are upset that the Iraqi's are not friendlies. We call them insurgents for banding forces with other Arab nations to throw us out of the country. We are seen as hostile for not wanting the US's help.

Does this seem fair? We have destroyed these peoples' lives over nothing. There were no weapons and more so no plans unless the US broke the UN sanctions.

Who is the terrorist? It is looking more and more like we are.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

To reverse roles, thinking for even for a splitsecond another country dares to take on the allmighty United States of America, making it the victim, and trying to see the other side of the story, it all is deeply and utterly unpatriottic - don't expect any intelligent answers on a question like that (or even answers at all, maybe except some snickering remarks) from our rightwing friends...


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

seharebo said:


> I think we should reverse things. The US is being invaded, because we have something that we don't have (like WMD in Iraq). Would you not fight all of the troops coming in? I personally believe that the entire country would take up arms to fight off the invasion. Now we are insurgents, we try to form alliances with Mexico and Canada to fight off the invasion. One of the goals of the group coming in is to destroy this polluted thing called economy and the evil lying leader of the country.
> 
> Flip it around again. We are upset that the Iraqi's are not friendlies. We call them insurgents for banding forces with other Arab nations to throw us out of the country. We are seen as hostile for not wanting the US's help.
> 
> ...


 Comparing Iraq to the US to do a reverse role is like comparing a goldfish to a great white. Just aint going to happen. Theres so many differences its crazy you would even try to attempt such thinking. Just picturing Iraq trying to invade the US is hilarious on its own.







I mean war isnt a funny thing, but the way your reversing it, its like a chihuahua trying to fight a great dane. Im sorry but thats just funny


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> To reverse roles, thinking for even for a splitsecond another country dares to take on the allmighty United States of America, making it the victim, and trying to see the other side of the story, it all is deeply and utterly unpatriottic - don't expect any intelligent answers on a question like that (or even answers at all, maybe except some snickering remarks) from our rightwing friends...


 Sometimes you dont make sense to me Jonas. You say you were for Saddam being taken out of power, yet against the war altogether. Make up your mind will ya







You cant have both. Im still waiting on your plan of what you would have done that would have been better.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

when has america murdered its own people? Broke over 12 years of UN resolutions? Please dont reverse....aint even close


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

I'll reverse things - but I will apply it to something that's a lot more applicable - the country where I was born.

If someone invaded Russia during Stalin's regime and removed Stalin from power, a lot of things would be different - for the better, in the long run. I am sure there would be a lot of lives lost at first, and a lot of growing pains with a period of adjustment, but in the long run it would save millions of lives of innocent people, prevent the Cold war and help establish a great friendly democracy. My family and I would not have had to move and seek better life overseas.


----------



## Guru (Apr 20, 2004)

No WMD in Iraq except for the ones dropped on Iraq. Whos terroroizing who?


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

BraveHeart007 said:


> oh yea 9.11 was all about oil....rolls eyes


 Are we talking about 9-11 or Iraq, because as Dick Cheney said the other night, they are not related...


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

diddye said:


> when has america murdered its own people? Broke over 12 years of UN resolutions? Please dont reverse....aint even close


 Well America doesn't seem to care what the UN says anymore...and we do kill our own people, death penalty-oh yeah Bush has the record for that one! By the way, when was the last time America has let UN inspectors into Area 51?







Double standard aye?


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Filo said:


> diddye said:
> 
> 
> > when has america murdered its own people? Broke over 12 years of UN resolutions? Please dont reverse....aint even close
> ...


 well looking at how stupid that comment jsut was, i'll steal our VP's quote "his record speaks for itself"....or in this case "your comment speaks for itself". Area 51? Death penalty for murders? Ok.


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

So you are telling me USA gets privacy but everyone else doesn't...I can't recall the last UN inspections in Area 51. Why does Bush get to use the death penalty, but Saddam can't?


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

HEY WE CAN DO IT!!!!!! BUT IRAQ CAN'T!! I LIKE IT!!






























USA is a sovereign nation, but so was Iraq--ahh that doesn't matter DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR USA!!


----------



## MR HARLEY (Aug 12, 2003)

Filo said:


> So you are telling me USA gets privacy but everyone else doesn't...I can't recall the last UN inspections in Area 51. Why does Bush get to use the death penalty, but Saddam can't?


 With Comments Liek the previous one and now this one ...
Sorry But didyee and the others are gonna eat you up , I would pack a big lunch if your gonna debate these dudes and girls about politics...
Just a ittle Advice


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Filo said:


> So you are telling me USA gets privacy but everyone else doesn't...I can't recall the last UN inspections in Area 51. Why does Bush get to use the death penalty, but Saddam can't?


saddam did have the death penalty. When the US came in, bremer stopped it. Now the iraqi prime minister put it back in.

HAHAHA...everybody, I encourage you to read the article about area 51. yes, its true, everybody will go to war w/ the US very soon.


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

diddye said:


> Filo said:
> 
> 
> > So you are telling me USA gets privacy but everyone else doesn't...I can't recall the last UN inspections in Area 51. Why does Bush get to use the death penalty, but Saddam can't?
> ...


 I meant it sarcastically, why does Bush get to use the death penalty with no country up his ass to stop him--but its such a crime when anyone else does it (saddam)


----------



## MR HARLEY (Aug 12, 2003)

Ummm, this is Sarcastic' ..........Were a Super Power ,We have the power. We dont give a Fock what others think ....Obviously :laugh:



> yes, its true, everybody will go to war w/ the US very soon.


They Cant , they dont have the power , we would crush them


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

MR HARLEY said:


> Ummm, this is Sarcastic' ..........Were a Super Power ,We have the power. We dont give a Fock what others think ....Obviously :laugh:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Obviously you don't realize the power of nuclear bombs, yeah other countries have them


----------



## MR HARLEY (Aug 12, 2003)

Filo said:


> MR HARLEY said:
> 
> 
> > Ummm, this is Sarcastic' ..........Were a Super Power ,We have the power. We dont give a Fock what others think ....Obviously :laugh:
> ...


 Oh But I do My Young 007 ....
And I think we should do the same thing to them that we did to Iraq , if they dont let us have access to their facilities ....(North Korea and Iran ) and whoever else deceides to step up their Nuclear Efforts ...Bash me if you like but its my Right


----------



## Enriqo_Suavez (Mar 31, 2004)

Did anyone else realize that the Area 51 article was a joke? It wasn't a real news story...


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

ya it was pretty obvious when the article seems to have a pic where will smith might jump out any minute.


----------



## MR HARLEY (Aug 12, 2003)

Enriqo_Suavez said:


> Did anyone else realize that the Area 51 article was a joke? It wasn't a real news story...










Looked like Men In Black


> ya it was pretty obvious when the article seems to have a pic where will smith might jump out any minute.


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> seharebo said:
> 
> 
> > I think we should reverse things. The US is being invaded, because we have something that we don't have (like WMD in Iraq). Would you not fight all of the troops coming in? I personally believe that the entire country would take up arms to fight off the invasion. Now we are insurgents, we try to form alliances with Mexico and Canada to fight off the invasion. One of the goals of the group coming in is to destroy this polluted thing called economy and the evil lying leader of the country.
> ...


 It is called *CONCEPTUALIZATION*, of course their is no comparison between the two countries. The idea was intellectual thinking. If we had experienced what we did to Iraq. Reversal of roles to see what our reaction would have been to country doing what we did to Iraq to us. The probability or likelihood of it happening was not the point. Think then post.


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Actually the US and by extension everyone else in North America WILL be toppled by the rest of the world and it isn't going to be a millitary invasion, it will be an economic one and it's already well begun. No, no country is going to invade and bring you down anytime soon but it's shortsighted to think that means we as north americans aren't headed for shitsville in the near future.


----------



## Enriqo_Suavez (Mar 31, 2004)

> shortsighted to think that means we as north americans aren't headed for shitsville in the near future


No, its 'doomsday' thinkers like you that try to scare people into thinking the end of the world is coming. Just like Y2K and all those other bullshit scares. The US and its place at the top of the world isn't going anywhere.


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

Enriqo_Suavez said:


> The US and its place at the top of the world isn't going anywhere.


 It is that kind of fallible thinking that makes the US vulnerable.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

> The US and its place at the top of the world isn't going anywhere.


have you heard of China's economy skyrocketing? What do you think happens when a nation that large gains financial stability?


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

China economy isnt actually sky rocketing.. i could break down how it appears that way for you though in a brief form.

China controls their own currency. Therefore they are determing the trade rates for it and the cost of their product. They are aritificially devaluing their dollar, which has cost us to attempt to devalue our dollar. The specifics of it are kind of complicated and i would have to think about the whole breakdown.. but China is not gaining on us. The value of the US currency has little to do with anything right now as its exactly where it should be. meanwhile in europe they are having massive inflationary problems. Just look at the value of their products over there.. would you guys actually pay twice the amount for something thats being produced in europe? This is why we should not put a socilaist like john kerry into office... and this is one of the biggest concepts of this election. Under Kerry, we would see the value of the US dollar rise, which means the cost to produce our domestic products would rise. This would make our products less attractive to foreign markest, while currently and cheaper dollar and cheaper labor will produce more attractive products especially in markets such as europe where their currency is out of control.


----------



## MR HARLEY (Aug 12, 2003)

Wow thanks Px


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

seharebo said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > seharebo said:
> ...


Oh your one to talk with your "Think Then Post" comment. You didnt even know what the saying "Rome wasnt built in a day" meant.







I just took your words for what they meant. "I think we should reverse things" To the last of my knowledge that would mean Iraq vs. the US. So why dont _YOU_ try thinking before posting!


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> seharebo said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 I guess I should have dumbed-it-down for you. I think we should reverse things - meaning the situation (not US Vs Iraq). My first sentence should have relayed that to you "The US is being invaded because we have something we don't have (ex. situation with Iraq not having WMDs). Similar situation not role reversal of current crisis.

I know what the saying means, as far as the correlation of that phrase to the current events. I don't believe it applies, because we would need to be making progress. I don't see that what is currently going on as *progress*.

Veni, Vini, Vici


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

I dont know why everyone is still caught up in the war thing.. Bush had to do what was done, and we should also consider all those polls taken before iraq was invaded. I dont really think the whole 90% or so that supported us blowing the sh*t out of the middle east really cared if there were WMD or not. Face it.. everyone wanted revenge agains these rogue states. Now its easy and convenient to critcizm to put john kerry into office who will undoubtley raise the cost to do business in the US. When you do this you will cause more companies to leave and increase the price of our product. This is a capitalist market, unlike europe. Thats why over here.. those that apply themselves are able to do great things and we also have more innovation in the usa. If you strip away the reward for being great, why should anyone make an effort? Personal satisfaction? f*ck personal satisfaction.. i work hard to get money so i can do whatever i want when i retire. We will become level with other countries in the world as the result of his election.. which is pricesly what the european union wants so they can instill their ridiculous beliefs on us. Its a trap which we are unfortunately falling into.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Poseidon X said:


> I dont know why everyone is still caught up in the war thing.. Bush had to do what was done, and we should also consider all those polls taken before iraq was invaded. I dont really think the whole 90% or so that supported us blowing the sh*t out of the middle east really cared if there were WMD or not. Face it.. everyone wanted revenge agains these rogue states. Now its easy and convenient to critcizm to put john kerry into office who will undoubtley raise the cost to do business in the US. When you do this you will cause more companies to leave and increase the price of our product. This is a capitalist market, unlike europe. Thats why over here.. those that apply themselves are able to do great things and we also have more innovation in the usa. If you strip away the reward for being great, why should anyone make an effort? Personal satisfaction? f*ck personal satisfaction.. i work hard to get money so i can do whatever i want when i retire. We will become level with other countries in the world as the result of his election.. which is pricesly what the european union wants so they can instill their ridiculous beliefs on us. Its a trap which we are unfortunately falling into.


 exactly, which is also why the health care in canada isnt all its cracked up to be.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

f*ck the health car in canada.. this is the big picture.. simple minds are wowed by simple things. Promise people free healthcare and they love you, to bad at the same time your taking away their chance to ever gain wealth from which they can buy all the health care they want.. plus lots of better things!

Lets recap and spell this out so everyone can understand economics 101.

by adding social programs and goverment spending, we increase taxes, which raises the cost to do business, which in turn raises the price of US products, which causes US companies to leave the country, which causes unemployment while at the same time the added price of US products becomes less attractive to foreign markets, so less money is now going into the country, so less money is being payed in wages, and people are still being taxed, so all of our tax dollars now go toward the f*cking health care plan, so we dont have money for an efficient army, and we are overtaken by "europe".. you see where this is going people? Im sorry.. all your little social program a dream of the weak, its called get out there and do it. This is what makes this country the land of the free.. we are not owned by out goverment, we determind our own future.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> > The US and its place at the top of the world isn't going anywhere.
> 
> 
> have you heard of China's economy skyrocketing? What do you think happens when a nation that large gains financial stability?


 oh yeah.. on how this is done, China does not allow purchase of their currency out of the country, therefore they can undistribute money against the gold standard at the leisure. this increases the value of their currency.. or they can simply distribute tons of their currency and their value suddenly plummits, this currentl how they are munipulating the world economy and we are letting them do it for the time being

On the other hand, with other countries the currency can be bought and sold by other foreign markets at any time.. therefore if the USs outstanding dollars can be purchased by european countries which prevents are dollar from falling below a certain point by the us undistributing that money.


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Poseidon X said:


> I dont know why everyone is still caught up in the war thing.. Bush had to do what was done...Face it.. everyone wanted revenge agains these rogue states.


Had to do what was done? How do you figure considering the report specifically stated that sanctions had worked in preventing Iraq from getting WMDs 100%? Revenge against Iraq for what? If all you've got is unsubstantiated rhetoric straight from the mouth of Dubya that you've just gobbled right up without asking what the hell it means there's not much sense in commenting since we've already seen Bush give the same "nothing whatsoever to do with reality" version of events.

As for China's economy not really growing, all that "hey they're controlling their dollar" stuff sounds really nice but that's not an economic indicator of any kind.

For instance, last year China bumped the US off for the position of country that received the highest amount of Foreign Direct Investment. The fact that people are investing more heavily in China than any other country is an actual economic indicator. The fact that less money is coming into the US as Foreign Direct investment is also something you should be troubled about. In fact, while China attracted 54 billion of FDI and are expected to reach 60 billion by the end of the year, the US fell to HALF their previous total to 29 billion dollars, that's the same amount as going into BELGIUM.

Source

How about Growth Domestic Product? If you want to use a REAL economic indicator, or infact THE economic indicator most commonly accepted as the single measure of how well an economy is doing, China's GDP rose 173 percent from 1990 to 2000. The United States' GDP rose only 42 percent during that same period. Not catching up you say?

Source

But by all means, I suppose if you look at figures that have nothing to do with how strong a countries economy is (I'm sorry, they control their dollar so their economy isn't as good as the US economy was your argument?) then yes China is nothing to worry about, but if you look at their economic growth from the perspective of someone who actually understands economics then yes, they are far outstripping anyone else in growth and will very soon be the world's most dominant market.

Anything else?










EDIT: Sorry that's supposed to be "GROSS" domestic product, not growth. And get off the "China controls their dollar" business, it's not relevant to measuring the size or rate of increase of their economy.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

ok.. so your saying buy them not being able to control their dollar and then hence lowering their manufacturing costs is not the result of why there has been so much foreign investment?

The foreign investment is there because they are controlling their dollar.. it is a major issue that will be addressed in time. WHY WOULD ANYONE NOT INVEST THERE IF THEY HAVE THE CHEAPEST COST TO PRODUCE PRODUCTS! This is how you allow countries to develope, but sooner or later they will not have this advantage. Their production costs will rise and make the market less attractive for foreign investment. I dont know why were on china in the first place.. but all these seperate facts tie in together. everything you said is true.. but why is it true? Are you indicating we should be switching back to communism because perhaps our economy would grow on pace with chinas?


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> Had to do what was done? How do you figure considering the report specifically stated that sanctions had worked in preventing Iraq from getting WMDs 100%? Revenge against Iraq for what? If all you've got is unsubstantiated rhetoric straight from the mouth of Dubya that you've just gobbled right up without asking what the hell it means there's not much sense in commenting since we've already seen Bush give the same "nothing whatsoever to do with reality" version of events.


 huh? I said.. what was the publics opinion. I think just about everyone wanted to attack Iraq not to long ago.. and now everyone is in denial about the whole thing. You flip flow just like kerry. Cleary.. at the time we attacked Iraq, going to war was the popular decision of the public. The fact is Iraq did not obey the UN. This is all the right we needed. If you want to disobey the international governing body.. then your going to be punished.


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Don't make those insinuations because then the conversation delves deep into the realm of stupidity and honestly I still think you're a fairly intelligent peson and wouldn't want to see it go that route. Besides that either you're being difficult for the sake of being difficult or you don't understand the global economic picture at all since it's clearly very obvious to everyone that China's econony has grown because of their move towards a market driven system as opposed to state control.

All you've said is that China's growth has been caused by the devaluing of their dollar (though I believe there is much more to it). Stating what has caused their growth does not do anything to change the fact that their growth has greatly outstripped that of the United States in every relevant economic indicator. Further to that, don't pretend like the United States does not influence the cost of it's dollar based on economic forecasts, your dollar (at least relative to the canadian dollar) has gone down substantially in the last two years. It's called an economic control, and much like interest rates ALL countries use them.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

seharebo said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > seharebo said:
> ...


 "Dumbed it down"







And you went to college right?! Nice choice of wording you learned there.









Believe what you want about the saying fitting or not fitting in with our current situation. I didnt and dont expect you to believe or see anything I say with the way youve been purposely attacking my posts in the last couple of months. So suit yourself.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Judazzz said:
> 
> 
> > To reverse roles, thinking for even for a splitsecond another country dares to take on the allmighty United States of America, making it the victim, and trying to see the other side of the story, it all is deeply and utterly unpatriottic - don't expect any intelligent answers on a question like that (or even answers at all, maybe except some snickering remarks) from our rightwing friends...
> ...


Where did I say that?
You're speaking non-sense Karen, and you know that: of all PFury members, you probably know the best how I think about the whole situation, so don't give me this...









I've never said I've been against the war on terror, or the ousting of Saddam (if anyone, after the my posts I made, still thinks that, than I give up: fighting terror is possible: fighting stupidity/blinds isn't...)
I'm just against the destructive way in which the US thinks it's solving any problems - instead, it only makes matters worse, and the worst of all is that it wasn't even necessary to be in the sh*t-faced situation we are in now: if a government with an actual brain lead the operation from the first moment on (or even better, a coalition which conducted its actions on legal grounds), things could have been much less grim than they are now...

btw: I've made plenty of posts in which I said how I - being a civilian, not a politician or someone from the military - think things should have been done, and what were imo. the biggest/most fatal mistakes made so far.
If you want to know where, use the board's search function


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> "Dumbed it down"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 (jargon) dumbed down - Simplified, with a strong connotation of *over*simplified.

I added the "it" to show the subject. You go to college, right?


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

Poseidon X said:


> China economy isnt actually sky rocketing.. i could break down how it appears that way for you though in a brief form.
> 
> China controls their own currency. Therefore they are determing the trade rates for it and the cost of their product. They are aritificially devaluing their dollar, which has cost us to attempt to devalue our dollar. The specifics of it are kind of complicated and i would have to think about the whole breakdown.. but China is not gaining on us. The value of the US currency has little to do with anything right now as its exactly where it should be. meanwhile in europe they are having massive inflationary problems. Just look at the value of their products over there.. would you guys actually pay twice the amount for something thats being produced in europe? This is why we should not put a socilaist like john kerry into office... and this is one of the biggest concepts of this election. Under Kerry, we would see the value of the US dollar rise, which means the cost to produce our domestic products would rise. This would make our products less attractive to foreign markest, while currently and cheaper dollar and cheaper labor will produce more attractive products especially in markets such as europe where their currency is out of control.


 wow... i didnt know that...


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

seharebo said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > "Dumbed it down"
> ...


 She is a kid... not worth the argument...


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> seharebo said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 She knows way more than you do.. I guarantee that


----------



## Gordeez (Sep 21, 2003)

[quote name='Filo' date='Oct 7 2004, 05:04 PM ...and we do kill our own people, death penalty-oh yeah Bush has the record for that one! [/QUOTE']
f*cking A he does...








Instead of letting all those jackass murderers sit in
jail getting free food doing nothing, we get rid of em here in Texas!


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Gordeez said:


> Filo said:
> 
> 
> > diddye said:
> ...


----------



## Gordeez (Sep 21, 2003)

I wasnt comparing it to the Iraq thing...I was just stating my answer to that little piece


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Gordeez said:


> I wasnt comparing it to the Iraq thing...I was just stating my answer to that little piece


 No I know you weren't.. but other people were on this thread


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

Gordeez said:


> > =Filo,Oct 7 2004, 05:04 PM ...and we do kill our own people, death penalty-oh yeah Bush has the record for that one!
> 
> 
> f*cking A he does...
> ...


 So why is it so bad that Saddam was doing the same? I agree with the death penalty as well.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Filo said:


> Gordeez said:
> 
> 
> > > =Filo,Oct 7 2004, 05:04 PM ...and we do kill our own people, death penalty-oh yeah Bush has the record for that one!
> ...


 Are you actually telling me that all the people that Saddam killed were scumbag criminals who deserved to die ?


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

Jewelz said:


> Filo said:
> 
> 
> > Gordeez said:
> ...


Its been found that we don't have 100% accuracy with our criminals either. And we have people on life in jail (and death row) for stealing candy.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Filo said:


> Its been found that we don't have 100% accuracy with our criminals either. And we have people on life in jail for stealing candy.


 It's probably exremely difficult to have 100 % accuracy anywhere. But how can you compare a tyrant and a dictator like Hussein with our government ? Do we torture and kill our Olympic athletes if they don't perform well in competition as well ?


----------



## Fido (May 21, 2003)

No we don't do that, but we love to torture POWs







. We also don't care if people go to death row for stealing candy and gum.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Filo said:


> We also don't care if people go to death row for stealing candy and gum.


 Where are you getting this info ? National Enquirer ?


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Dont ya know all our prisioners in death row are 9 and 10 year olds for stealing candy? Right after they came from area 51.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

diddye said:


> Dont ya know all our prisioners in death row are 9 and 10 year olds for stealing candy? Right after they came from area 51.


 Halloween often has deadly consequences for many junior delinquents in this country


----------



## haitwun (Dec 30, 2003)

But it is true that the United States is one of the only countries in the world that believes in putting minors on death row. Even Saddam wasn't that cruel.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/silenced/women.htm


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> Don't make those insinuations because then the conversation delves deep into the realm of stupidity and honestly I still think you're a fairly intelligent peson and wouldn't want to see it go that route. Besides that either you're being difficult for the sake of being difficult or you don't understand the global economic picture at all since it's clearly very obvious to everyone that China's econony has grown because of their move towards a market driven system as opposed to state control.
> 
> All you've said is that China's growth has been caused by the devaluing of their dollar (though I believe there is much more to it). Stating what has caused their growth does not do anything to change the fact that their growth has greatly outstripped that of the United States in every relevant economic indicator. Further to that, don't pretend like the United States does not influence the cost of it's dollar based on economic forecasts, your dollar (at least relative to the canadian dollar) has gone down substantially in the last two years. It's called an economic control, and much like interest rates ALL countries use them.


 I definately agree with you on most all of your points here, but i still not sure why the china thing is anything to base a vote for.. I dont really think americans want to live like they do in china in order to replicate the kind of recent sucess. On the other hand.. the one thing that can beat a system like that is a strong captialist system. Were not going to beat them by increasing the cost to do business in the united states by increasing taxes etc... do you agree on that?


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Oh I wasn't even talking about a Bush vs Kerry thing, I was just saying it's an undeniable fact that China is emerging as one of the biggest economies in the world and it's my opinion that they will overtake the US within 15 years.

As for the whole increasing cost to do business thing, I honestly think it's a difficult compromise. A full out state driven economy ensures a proper distribution of wealth but often (almost always actually) fails when it has to compete against a capitalist system. A fully capitalist system intrinsically involves cutting as much cost as possible and increasing profits which results in a disproportionate distribution of wealth. Unfortunately the middle class is what drives the economy and if the middle class is eliminated because wages were cut, jobs were shipped overseas and downsized so that the company can make more profit eventually the people that drive the economy by actually purchasing the goods the company makes will no longer exist. Capitalism really isn't that great of a system in this day and age IMO because of the trend to eliminate the actual wage earners it's just unfortunate that out of all the choices capitalism is the best available. It's a lesser of the evils kind of thing.


----------



## mori0174 (Mar 31, 2004)

haitwun said:


> But it is true that the United States is one of the only countries in the world that believes in putting minors on death row. Even Saddam wasn't that cruel.


 You are going to tell me that Saddam didnt kill any minors? I find that laughable at best.


----------



## KumbiaQueens (Feb 5, 2003)

Jewelz said:


> Filo said:
> 
> 
> > We also don't care if people go to death row for stealing candy and gum.
> ...


 It was a generalized statement Jewelz. You remember the 3 Strikes Law? There were 3 main offenses for the "strike". One that would pertain to this particular area would be robbery with a deadly weapon. There's no saying what they stole, however, for all any of us know, it could have been a candy bar, and some cash.

3 Strikes Law Intro


----------



## KumbiaQueens (Feb 5, 2003)

mori0174 said:


> haitwun said:
> 
> 
> > But it is true that the United States is one of the only countries in the world that believes in putting minors on death row. Even Saddam wasn't that cruel.
> ...


 As for the jailing minors, they go to a juvenile detention center unless they were convicted of something serious. It's amazing to see what kind of actions 6-16 year olds are capable of. Killing a family pet is one thing, but when you have a little 2nd and 3rd grade child murdering their classmate, a line needs to be drawn, and a slap on the hand just wont cut it.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

KumbiaQueens said:


> Jewelz said:
> 
> 
> > Filo said:
> ...


 I thought 3 strikes law resulted in a life sentence, not death row

anyway, how can this be even compared to Saddam's regime where people were killed without a judge or a jury ?


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Yeah, god forbid people get tried without a judge or jury, not like the states would ever do that. Or worse still not charge people at all and just lock them up indefinitely on land that isn't technically US soil and say "no laws apply to these people therefore we can do whatever we want"...


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Being born in a communist country myself, I am constantly shocked at how spoiled a lot of people over here are. Almost everyone who was born here takes the liberties and freedom provided by the US for granted; they'd rather sit and bitch and whine and come up with conspiracy theories at how government is doing this wrong or that wrong ..

No country or goverment in the world is perfect but to even try to compare the two regimes is so ridiculous it's out of this world. The very fact that anyone can sit here and badmouth George Bush all they want without any fear of repercussions should give you a clue. What do you think would happen if someone like Michael Moore tried to release a movie criticizing Saddam's regime in Iraq ? Did you see a lot of people from all parts of the world wanting to emigrate to Iraq or seek refuge under Hussein's regime ? - except terrorists, of course.


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> Did you see a lot of people from all parts of the world wanting to emigrate to Iraq or seek refuge under Hussein's regime ? - except terrorists, of course.


 Actually the terrorists mostly emigrated over there after you guys took over. Nice try though


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Jewelz said:


> KumbiaQueens said:
> 
> 
> > Jewelz said:
> ...


 You are correct. 3 felonies in California and your given life in prison.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> seharebo said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 Oh and your maturity level just shines right on through your posts









Seharebo- I know what it meant, thanks







I just would have thought a person of your stature would have chose better wording.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> Yeah, god forbid people get tried without a judge or jury, not like the states would ever do that. Or worse still not charge people at all and just lock them up indefinitely on land that isn't technically US soil and say "no laws apply to these people therefore we can do whatever we want"...


 #1:They are not criminals...they are terrorists or people fighting while not adhering to the geneva convention
#2:They are getting tried. Also, a lot were freed recently when they were not deemed to be a danger anymore.
#3:Why aren't you fighting americans? All your beliefs i've read so far make me think you can possibly be the 2nd shoe bomber....and just as smart as him too


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

diddye said:


> elTwitcho said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, god forbid people get tried without a judge or jury, not like the states would ever do that. Or worse still not charge people at all and just lock them up indefinitely on land that isn't technically US soil and say "no laws apply to these people therefore we can do whatever we want"...
> ...


 I was this close to giving you a reply and then I saw point three. You're a stupid f*ck


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

haha it was a joke...not like you've never had harsh comments about me. Lighten up.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> Jewelz said:
> 
> 
> > Did you see a lot of people from all parts of the world wanting to emigrate to Iraq or seek refuge under Hussein's regime ? - except terrorists, of course.
> ...


 Well, my point was - how many people sought shelter or refuge there while Saddam was in charge ? I am aware about what hapenned afterwards. Do you just like arguing for the sake of arguing or do you honestly think that living in the US would be identical to living in Iraq under Saddam ?


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

I never said that Jewelz, nor do I even disagree with your point, but if you're going to toss stupid sh*t in there I'll call you on it.


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> I never said that Jewelz, nor do I even disagree with your point, but if you're going to toss stupid sh*t in there I'll call you on it.


I dont agree with you and Ill call you on for you being a stupid sh*t in here


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

I can't believe you're still under the impression I actually care what a rabid moron such as yourself thinks


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

The feeling is mutual


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Then why did you seek me out and make a comment about me in a discussion you had nothing to do with? You can't go grab someone's attention and say "Hey dude, HEY! HEY DUDE! Oh, I don't even care about talking to you you know" when it's obvious you're just begging for my attention. Go chase a rubber ball around the hallway or something, it might be a bit complicated for ya but if you watch a cat do it you should be able to get the gist of it pretty quickly


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> Then why did you seek me out and make a comment about me in a discussion you had nothing to do with? You can't go grab someone's attention and say "Hey dude, HEY! HEY DUDE! Oh, I don't even care about talking to you you know" when it's obvious you're just begging for my attention. Go chase a rubber ball around the hallway or something, it might be a bit complicated for ya but if you watch a cat do it you should be able to get the gist of it pretty quickly


 Your a sypathizer to terroists and you sell youself as being complicated a intelligent LMAO

Keep on smoking that canadian crack there buddy


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Dude, seriously. First shut up already because I've got no interest in talking with you no matter how many times you go "look at me look at me I'm still trying to insult you, LOOK!". Second, go learn some f*cking punctuation so we don't get any more posts like the last one.


----------



## aaron07_20 (Apr 23, 2004)

BraveHeart007 said:


> Keep on smoking that canadian crack there buddy


 That is why so many countries hate us..


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> I never said that Jewelz, nor do I even disagree with your point, but if you're going to toss stupid sh*t in there I'll call you on it.


 If you look closely on what I wrote, it was never my intent to compare Iraq under Saddam vs. post-war Iraq; that's not what the discussion was about - it was about US vs. Saddam's rgime. And it's no secret that Saddam's regime did, in fact, provide refuge to a number of terrorists - a couple of names that come to mind are Abu Nidal, who is responsible for terrorist acts in Vienna and Rome airports as well Abdul Rahman Yasin, a suspect in the first WTC bombing of 1993.


----------

