Debates
02 Feb 05
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAt last you seem to get it.
I've already posted.
Here's some more info for you though. You seem to claim that if someone thinks the world is better off without Saddam, then they must support the means that were used to remove him. This is not true. Why? See my earlier post.
You're an insanely biased moron, SVW, though many of us already knew that.
Yes.
The means to remove him were what did remove him.
Hence the question... "good that he is gone" or "wish he were still there".
See the subject of the thread. It's a miracle if two "realities" can both exist at "now".
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYour ability to communicate in the English language is really weak, SVW. You might want to work on that.
Apologia
I did assume a minimal abilty.
"That which is = That which did become real"
"That whis is not = that which did not become real"
Reality is a bitch.
Right now, Saddam is not. The elections DID happen. And if I am an insanely biased moron, it is the fault of reality. Not your dreams of hatred and want for US failure.
Live wi ...[text shortened]... him back? Did you see the people willing to dip their fingers in Ink? Why do you want him back?
Yes, the USA under GWB invaded Iraq, and Hussein is no longer in power. Your judgements of whether this should have taken place or not are not controlled by the fact that it did happen.
You are accusing me of wanting the US to fail with no evidence. I do not want the US to fail as a general rule. Is there something specific you are accusing me of wanting the US to fail at? If so, please say it clearly.
I am living with the reality. That doesn't mean I necessarily approve of the decisions that were made in order to bring reality to it's present state.
No, I don't want Saddam to be restored to power, because the state of the world after that happened would not be the same as it was before we invaded.
...my point of view? That the world is better off WITH him.
Your point of view is that the world is better of with Saddam Hussein?
02 Feb 05
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYes or no idiot?
I've already posted.
Here's some more info for you though. You seem to claim that if someone thinks the world is better off without Saddam, then they must support the means that were used to remove him. This is not true. Why ...[text shortened]... n insanely biased moron, SVW, though many of us already knew that.
Let's try with idiot number two, aka, that which "was a thousand tampons" ...
Yes or no.
cirle one. if you are able. Which I doubt. Too much "learning" in you way. For the first time in your miserable existence you are now asked to think. Good luck. Remember... easy. yes or no. Circle one. Think you can handle it? I don't think so. Prove me wrong. With a single word response. Yes. No. Single word. Genius.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWy1 - Yes, the world is probably better off without Saddam.
Yes or no idiot?
Let's try with idiot number two, aka, that which "was a thousand tampons" ...
Yes or no.
cirle one. if you are able. Which I doubt. Too much "learning" in you way. For the first time in your miserable existence you are now asked to think. Good luck. Remember... easy. yes or no. Circle one. Think you can handle it? I don't think so. Prove me wrong. With a single word response. Yes. No. Single word. Genius.
That's from my post on page 2. It's the tenth one down. You seem to have missed it while posting your massive deluge of idiotic posts. Please try to stop being full of yourself long enough to check to see if people actually answered your questions.
Please address my points. In addition, please answer these questions, using the criteria you're asking us to use:
Should we invade North Korea, China, and Cuba? Should we have invaded Cuba when we first decided they were our enemy? Should the U.S. have invaded Soviet Russia? Please note that most Republicans praise Reagan for NOT fighting with the USSR.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyThe subject of the thread is "The Left Wing Miracle". There is no miracle.
At last you seem to get it.
Yes.
The means to remove him were what did remove him.
Hence the question... "good that he is gone" or "wish he were still there".
See the subject of the thread. It's a miracle if two "realities" can both exist at "now".
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI am not subject to the blinders that you choose to
Would you know reality if it bit you in the butt?
Did you not watch the elections of last Sunday in Iraq? What did that "reality" tell you about your support for Saddam?
put on yourself. Reality would never 'bite me in the
butt' because I keep it before me at all times.
You want to demonify Saddam when we all could name
5 dictators with far worse crimes against their own people.
Bush went in there, not to free a people, but to solidify
American interests: oil.
You fail to see that specific American corporations benefit
astronomically from this war, while the American people
carry the bill. You fail to see that every argument used
for going to war was a lie, and that, if this were a true
humanitarian mission, we would have done so in other
countries and in a humane way. You want to justify the
killing of innocent civilians when other plausible solutions
were presented and rejected.
Indeed, these solutions required time, discipline, patience
and compassion. Sure, war is immediately gratifying and
has dramatic and 'exiting' results. Sure, the Iraqi people
are 'free' now, but with the loss of a great many 'collateral'
lives the utter destruction of the vast majority of their
infrastructural facilities in key areas in their country (except
the oil fields...we managed not to bomb too many of those...
I wonder why?).
Of course, in your clever, chimp-like way, you want to paint
me out to be a 'Saddam Supporter.' I'm not, never was and
never will be.
But there were other viable ways of getting him out of power --
ways that were 1) Safer to Iraqi and American people; 2) Resulted
in less infrastructural damage; 3) Empowered the Iraqi people
from within, rather than from without; 4) Made America look like
hereos rather than devils to the rest of the world; and 5) Cost less
money in the long run.
You may not like these 'ordinary, non-sexy' solutions, you may
prefer the glory of war, but I don't.
I will not continue to engage in discussion about this if you insist
on irrational opinions and false accusations at those who disagree
with them.
This war was a lie, and I feel sorry for all the American families
who lost loved ones, those Americans who were ordered to fight
there with insufficient equipment and intelligence all for selfish American
interests, and the Iraqi people who could have reaped all of the
benefits of Freedom without the horrible costs of this deceitful war.
Nemesio
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYou said "probably" which invokes the "miracle".
[b]1 - Yes, the world is probably better off without Saddam.
That's from my post on page 2. It's the tenth one down. You seem to have missed it while posting your massive deluge of idiotic posts. Please try to stop being full of yourself long enough to check to see if people actually answered your questions.
Please address my points. I ...[text shortened]... Soviet Russia? Please note that most Republicans praise Reagan for NOT fighting with the USSR.[/b]
What is to tough with dealing with reality?
Yes or no. Don't want no "probably". yes or no. Just like the universe made us do. Decide. Recognize that term? From my theme for the last year? Decide. Yes or No. It ain't that tough. No "Probably" because the universe is binary. Jeez! It's like trying to potty train imbiciles! Yes. No. Binary. No "Probablies".
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou're asking an impossible question then. I am not omniscient; therefore I don't know with certainty whether the world is better off with Hussein. Your question is unreasonable. I don't care what you want, because you want something which is a falsehood.
You said "probably" which invokes the "miracle".
What is to tough with dealing with reality?
Yes or no. Don't want no "probably". yes or no. Just like the universe made us do. Decide. Recognize that term? From my theme for the last year? Decide. Yes or No. It ain't that tough. No "Probably" because the universe is binary. Jeez! It's like trying to potty train imbiciles! Yes. No. Binary. No "Probablies".
Why do you think I think dealing with reality is tough?
The universe is binary? What are you talking about?
I may very well leave while calling you names. Why? Because you don't think. You spew your flawed arguments and insults totally uncritically and there is no point in talking to you.
02 Feb 05
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI give up.
You're asking an impossible question then. I am not omniscient; therefore I don't know with certainty whether the world is better off with Hussein. Your question is unreasonable. I don't care what you want, because you want som ...[text shortened]... ults totally uncritically and there is no point in talking to you.
Impossible for an idiot.
The rest of us see what happened as compared to what didn't happen.
What a bunch of air headed tom-foolery.
Sorry. Go watch a cartoon. You will feel better. And understand it much better than what reality offers you.
Saddam. Not Saddam. It happened.
Choose.
1 = Not Saddam
2 = Saddam
Crap. Why am I wasting my time. There is no way to explain binary logic to fools.
If that is too much of a challenge, just type a "1" or a "2" ...
Forget your qualification. It didn't happen. Saddam is "not" did happen. Saddam "is" didn't happen. Choose one or two.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou're drunk. You're not debating, you're being an idiot.
Which part of Reality "probably" happened? It is real or it isn't. Binary. Think. Saddam. Not Saddam. Jeez! Kids! No. Idiot Kids!!!
You aren't considering other people's claims with any sort
of critical aparatus. If you want to masturbate and pretend
to be some sort of 'political intellectual,' feel free to fling
your ejaculant all over this forum, but don't expect us to
hand you a towel.
I'm tired of your ravings. I think you are a sad and lonely
person, I think you are no different than a two-year old
throwing a tantrum for attention, only a different source of
expression. I forgive the two-year old; in an adult, it's
inexcusible.
Keep fondling yourself, for all I care. When you say something
that actually demonstrates that you are considering the arguments
of others and reflecting upon them, I'll chime back in. Until then,
I'm outa here.
See ya, Alpha Chimp,
Nemesio
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by NemesioWow. You are not drunk. You are just a fool.
You're drunk. You're not debating, you're being an idiot.
You aren't considering other people's claims with any sort
of critical aparatus. If you want to masturbate and pretend
to be some sort of 'political intellectual,' feel free to fling
your ejaculant all over this forum, but don't expect us to
hand you a towel.
I'm tired of your ravin ...[text shortened]... g upon them, I'll chime back in. Until then,
I'm outa here.
See ya, Alpha Chimp,
Nemesio
Oh well.
Yes or no. mr. not drunk.
Let me guess. You think the world is better off without Saddam but it was wrong to remove him with war?
A miracle.
Stupid bastard. Forgive the direct observation.
So you support him. Why? Why are you against the elections of Sunday last?
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI reject your characterization of my position as a miracle
Yes or no. mr. not drunk.
Let me guess. You think the world is better off without Saddam but it was wrong to remove him with war?
A miracle.
for reasons I've expressed before but you reject.
Until you demonstrate why it is 'miraculous' to believe
that this war was unnecessary to remove Saddam and,
furthermore, why Saddam should have been the primary
target when other dictators are far more evil, then
I will entertain resuming a 'conversation.'
Not before.
Goodnight.
Nemesio