Battlezone Forums

And the best damn fighters in the world? There's a reason why the Pope's guards are called Swiss.

Another Iraq. Do something for the UN or some other Coalition and then get blasted for it...

Nielk1 wrote:Another Iraq. Do something for the UN or some other Coalition and then get blasted for it...

Funniest statement I've read this year
What did the US do for Iraq, take its oil?

Oust a ruthless dicatator and establish a rare democracy in the Middle east that hopefully will last into the foreseeable future.

Red Spot wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:Another Iraq. Do something for the UN or some other Coalition and then get blasted for it...

Funniest statement I've read this year
What did the US do for Iraq, take its oil?

u madd??

Can you comment in full sentences with something that can actually be replied to?

No I am not mad, I follow both international as well as national news. I only had to follow our national news to figure out Bush was handling according his own agenda. Part of that is our own president apologizing to our country for taking sides with Bush and lying to an entire country. He admitted siding with Bush eventhough none of the allegations where true, effectivly invading Iraq for its oil/control in the middle-east.
If that still isnt clear by now I dont know what will make it clear to you.

hey, just as long as the price of gas stays low, that's all i care about...

Red Spot wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:Another Iraq. Do something for the UN or some other Coalition and then get blasted for it...

Funniest statement I've read this year
What did the US do for Iraq, take its oil?

I WISH WE HAD THAT DAMN OIL. But noooooooooooooooooo...

We did NOT go to Iraq for oil.
We did NOT get oil FROM Iraq.
We went to Iraq because the UN was having heart attacks over "Weapons of Mass Destruction".
And then, then, we don't find any and WE are the bad guys and the UN has people saying that Bush is the devil.
Oh, and we have NO DAMN OIL.

Load of ****.

Red Spot wrote:http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bush+admits+lying+about+iraq

Wow, are you a moron?
"Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11"
I NEVER SAID IT DID
Iraq had to do with the UN and claims of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Weapons that the UN said he must have. Weapons that the UN couldn't find but assured us were there. Weapons that all intelligence said was there.

Bush NEVER said it was about 9/11, thus, he could not lie! If there were no WMDs, then it still was not a lie from Bush, it was incorrect intelligence. To lie, you must actively know the truth.

You and people like you who who have such twisted and fictional ideas of recent past events sicken me. Read a damn recent history book, one that isn't written by an idiot. There was no lie, no matter what you claim there was.

Umm... Nielk is correct. It would be intelligence's fault.
And actually, there WERE WMD's.

Ehm, when I get the google results it shows 2 videos on the top.
-One about Iraq not being related to 9/11.
-One about the whole WMD-affair just a method to get support for his agenda.

You are free to form your own oppinion, you are not free to blatantly insult people cause they do not agree with you. Is it so difficult for you to see that not everyone will just aimlessly accept your opinion because it is you?
I hand you videos of Bush apologizing for what I say and you just pick the wrong example and get all worked about it ... grow up.

Red Spot wrote:Ehm, when I get the google results it shows 2 videos on the top.
-One about Iraq not being related to 9/11.
-One about the whole WMD-affair just a method to get support for his agenda.

You are free to form your own oppinion, you are not free to blatantly insult people cause they do not agree with you. Is it so difficult for you to see that not everyone will just aimlessly accept your opinion because it is you?
I hand you videos of Bush apologizing for what I say and you just pick the wrong example and get all worked about it ... grow up.

I blatantly insult people who refuse to acknowledge FACTS and instead delve into opinionated conjecture, conspiracy, and fraudulent 'evidence'. Everything I have said has fact behind it. Irrefutable fact. I am not expressing an opinion, I am expressing a summation of FACTS. The numerous videos used to claim nearly all of the anti-Bush points are either wrong entirely or in the case of actual quote, taken entirely out of context or taking advantage of a man who is not a great orator. I looked at various of the results in the Google page, they were all of this garbage quality I explained.

Afghanistan <- 9/11
Iraq <- UN/WMDs
Libya <- Coalition/I really have no idea at this point, the administration doesn't even keep it straight why we are there.

I have explained with fact, and nothing but fact, everything that is needed. I have shown the falacies and I have said what the truth is. You refuse to see it and peddle more bull. When I show you again, you claim I am unable to see what your point was. Perhaps if you had actually linked me to something useful instead of to the condescending LMGTFY that is MEANT TO BE USED for people who cannot search for things themselves with search terms I had NO REASON to search for that are the equivalent of a loaded question you might get some more respect from me. But you seem to expect me to do your work for you, finding so called 'evidence' for your point of view.

Maybe if I Google for news articles on the start of the Iraq war, or perhaps I Googled for "Proof Bush was right"? What if I linked YOU to a LMGTFY that was just a search for "Redspot is a moron"? I am not saying you are one, I am asking, what if I did that? Would you be able to refute the so called evidence that would dot the search page?

How about you take some of your own advice.

Red Spot wrote:grow up.

Libya <- Coalition/I really have no idea at this point, the administration doesn't even keep it straight why we are there.

As far as I understand it, the US is there because Britain and France + a few others twisted your governments arm over the matter, by threatening to do it without them! Nato is a Very Important Alliance to most of its members, none of them want to see it broken.

I fear that once again we are getting it wrong though, and are just feeding a civil war. Assassination of Gadaffi should have been the first thing tried, he deserves it. He is a Colonel, a legitimate military target.

Red Devil wrote:hey, just as long as the price of gas stays low, that's all i care about...

We're going to have to do something about that increasing demand and decreasing supply thing, then. Since supply is finite, the only option is to decrease the number of gas burning monkeys.

Time to break out the high yield nukes.