Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

"FamilySailor" wrote in message
...
Huh? Bush said that there were WMDs. There are none. He
said Iraq was an iminent threat. It wasn't. Those were lies. What
"IS" are you talking about?

OK, what is a weapon of mass destruction. Is saran (sp?) gas a weapon of
mass destruction?

No it isn't. Weapons of Mass Destruction are defined as weapons that are
capable of *mass* destruction.

These are nuclear and biological weapons.

Chemical weapons don't count.


Is putting out a hit on the George Bush a threat to America?

Quite the opposite. America would be much safer without him.



Is firing
missiles at American fighter pilots a threat? All you need is one and it
was
not a lie.

Invading Iraq threatened more US lives than firing missiles at US fighter
pilots. How many US servicemen died as a result of Saddam's missiles?
How many died as a result of the invasion?



There are many more, but no liberal will ever be satisfied,




because it does not suit their political Bush hating agenda. What if the
weapons were shipped out of the country, say in just a hand full of
trucks,
would that mean he still lied.

Were they? What if you were so brainwashed that you would cling to the
flimsiest of straws?


What if that is the facts!

You don't need to resort to "what if" for the facts. We know the facts!

Maybe you don't
really know enough to be qualified to accuse the man of being a liar.

Did Saddam have WMD? ... OR did Bush lie?



Regards


Donal
--

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

"SAIL LOCO" wrote in message
...
The main reason we went to Iraq is Iraq refused for 12 years to meet UN
resolutions.

Wrong.

Regards


Donal
--

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

Iraq *had* WMD. That is an undisputable fact. When & where did they all
go? Either they're well hidden, which I strongly doubt after all this
time & embarrassment, they were shipped over a border (possible) or
they were all used up.

I don't know, the intelligence agencies didn't know and the people
relying on information from intelligence agencies didn't know either.
Hussein was very uncooperative with the UN weapons inspectors leading
them and pretty much everybody else to wonder what he was hiding. It's
apparent *now* that nobody can find WMD and therefore Hussein was not
an imminent threat. Unless you can prove Bush et al knew in advance
that there were no WMD left, you can't fairly call them liars.

It's nice to see how omniscient you are, Jonathan. Can you apply this
to tell me what stocks are going to radically change price by this time
next year?

PDW

In article , Jonathan Ganz
wrote:

Huh? Bush said that there were WMDs. There are none. He
said Iraq was an iminent threat. It wasn't. Those were lies. What
"IS" are you talking about?

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 16:45:04 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Bush lied about Iraq. He had it on his agenda from the very
beginning.

For God's sake, we have plans on the table to attack, or defend every
country on the planet. If we were going to attack Mexico, there would
already be plans somewhere.


He lied about his reasons for going to war and
didn't bother to follow up with the intelligence services.


That's bull****. He put everything on the table. And nobody really
knows where the intelligence problems were.


For
all of Clinton's faults, he did do that. A couple of shells don't
match the tons of wmds that Powel and others claimed were
there.

And the British said they were there. And the Kurds said they were
there. And the UN said they were there. And so on.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 01:28:24 +0100, "Donal"
wrote this crap:


No it isn't. Weapons of Mass Destruction are defined as weapons that are
capable of *mass* destruction.

These are nuclear and biological weapons.

Chemical weapons don't count.


WMDs are called "NBC" weapons by the military. This stands for
"Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical" weapons.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RESPONSE

The United States leads international efforts to develop and sustain
global norms against the proliferation of nuclear, biological, or
chemical (NBC) weapons and their delivery means (NBC/M), often
referred to as weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It actively engages
in dialogues with states around the world to persuade them not to
acquire these NBC weapons capabilities or to eliminate capabilities
already developed. The United States also works with states to combat
proliferation by assisting them in gaining and assuring greater
control over sensitive dual-use equipment and technology
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/prolif97/secii.html

You forget, dumbass, that I was an NBC officer.




Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

Please don't wink at me. I'm only interested in women.

I'm not defending anything, except that you're a fishboy.

You're lying about the KF, just like Bu**** lied to the
American people.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"gonefishiing" wrote in message
...
hey ganz-------i didn't attack liberals, in fact i didn't attack, i
merely
poked fun at infantile narcisists..and your offended!....(wink)

and actually you were right when you stated saddam was the antithesis of
terrorism
an interesting addition, but it never answered the question i asked
nor did felton.
instead you just simply blindly defend your position and attack, deflect
questions and assume everyone else is doing the same.

but you'll never understand that so forget i was here, if you can.

if it makes you feel important---yeah your still kf'd--just not on my
laptop.........

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

Do your own research. All of this has been posted here even
many times.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"SAIL LOCO" wrote in message
...
Come on... get real. Bu**** made all sorts of claims as to why
we should attack Iraq. So far, none of them have any credibility.

Except for the WMD bit name a couple more.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"Trains are a winter sport"

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

Iraq was in iminent threat because of the WMDs. That was the
central issue. It was a fabrication.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"SAIL LOCO" wrote in message
...
The main reason we went to Iraq is Iraq refused for 12 years to meet UN
resolutions. WMDs were another issue.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"Trains are a winter sport"

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

I didn't realize that NBC officer is another acronym for STOOPID!
Thanks!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 01:28:24 +0100, "Donal"
wrote this crap:


No it isn't. Weapons of Mass Destruction are defined as weapons that
are
capable of *mass* destruction.

These are nuclear and biological weapons.

Chemical weapons don't count.


WMDs are called "NBC" weapons by the military. This stands for
"Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical" weapons.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RESPONSE

The United States leads international efforts to develop and sustain
global norms against the proliferation of nuclear, biological, or
chemical (NBC) weapons and their delivery means (NBC/M), often
referred to as weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It actively engages
in dialogues with states around the world to persuade them not to
acquire these NBC weapons capabilities or to eliminate capabilities
already developed. The United States also works with states to combat
proliferation by assisting them in gaining and assuring greater
control over sensitive dual-use equipment and technology
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------


http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/prolif97/secii.html

You forget, dumbass, that I was an NBC officer.




Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Put your money were your mouth is! OT
 

Sure thing.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..

Iraq *had* WMD. That is an undisputable fact. When & where did they all
go? Either they're well hidden, which I strongly doubt after all this
time & embarrassment, they were shipped over a border (possible) or
they were all used up.

I don't know, the intelligence agencies didn't know and the people
relying on information from intelligence agencies didn't know either.
Hussein was very uncooperative with the UN weapons inspectors leading
them and pretty much everybody else to wonder what he was hiding. It's
apparent *now* that nobody can find WMD and therefore Hussein was not
an imminent threat. Unless you can prove Bush et al knew in advance
that there were no WMD left, you can't fairly call them liars.

It's nice to see how omniscient you are, Jonathan. Can you apply this
to tell me what stocks are going to radically change price by this time
next year?

PDW

In article , Jonathan Ganz
wrote:

Huh? Bush said that there were WMDs. There are none. He
said Iraq was an iminent threat. It wasn't. Those were lies. What
"IS" are you talking about?