Nobody can tell me...

[Nash]

Before ya fall into the Toad-like tendancy to make something up on my behalf then argue against it....

slow down....

I'm not particularly fond of rape rooms, prisons and mass burial sites.

I'm not fond of a lot of things.

But there are some things worth fighting for.

And there are some things worth fighting for.... yourself.


Nothing you mention hampers your ability to BBQ up a nice steak in your back yard under a summery sky.

Don't die so that others can do the same.

You and your lot have died enough for others. It's their turn to pay up if they want it.

[Toad]

LOL, shows how little you really know about me, doesn't it?

This election is one instance where I'm departing from my SC dictum. I still think the SC is the most important of the three branches of government.

Still, I won't be voting for Bush and I know he's far more likely to nominate judges to my liking than Kerry. Sort of blows your entire thesis, professor.

Sorry but I see no hypocrisy in my positions, then or now. I'm not pretending  to have qualities or beliefs that I do not really have.

I believed in the justification given for the war in the pre-war period. However, a year + later and SH in hand for 6 months it seems that the information was incorrect. One quality that I do have, or trait if you prefer, is that I routinely review my positions. Call it "post mission debriefing" if you like. I've reviewed my postion on this war and I admit it certainly did not turn out the way I thought it would.

Note again that I have not accused anyone of lying or misleading. It just turned out to be a bad decision based on faulty intelligence. This ties in with another long held belief of mine. As I have said many times, there has to be responsibility and accountability.

Bush is the guy that sent us to war; it was his decision as President. It turned out to be a bad one. Now, I feel he has to be held accountable for that decision. What's done is done but you know, if you keep holding Presidents responsible for what they do and say, maybe it'll make a difference eventually.

Far better to do that than just ignoring it when they look into the camera and lie directly to  the citizenry, don't you think?

Looks like you found something to interest you here after all. Please post more!

[Toad]

Originally posted by NUKE
My answer is: No life is "worth" losing for any reason. .

That's an answer but not to the question I asked.

I asked how you'd feel about your son dying for what we've accomplished in Iraq.

For example, I have two draft age sons. It would destroy me to lose either of them in war or in an everyday car accident.

However, I like to think I'd be somewhat comforted if I lost a son chasing Osama in Afghanistan rather than WMD that have never been found in Iraq. There's a huge difference there, isn't there?

[NUKE]

Although I said I was out, I can't help myself....

Please start a new thread, this one if off topic and dead.....


Thanks.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Nash
Before ya fall into the Toad-like tendancy to make something up on my behalf then argue against it....

This is a strawman right here, unless you can back it up.

What did I make up and pretend you said?

Jeez, Nash, you're going childish here.

[NUKE]

Originally posted by Toad
That's an answer but not to the question I asked.

I asked how you'd feel about your son dying for what we've accomplished in Iraq.

For example, I have two draft age sons. It would destroy me to lose either of them in war or in an everyday car accident.

However, I like to think I'd be somewhat comforted if I lost a son chasing Osama in Afghanistan rather than WMD that have never been found in Iraq. There's a huge difference there, isn't there?

There would be no difference to the pain you felt for the loss.

Toad, please join me and stop this stupid thread.... it has become off topic and the points we are making are redundant now.

[NUKE]

Nash, Steve, Toad

Please start a new thread....... this one is over-cooked.

[Nash]

Originally posted by Toad
LOL, shows how little you really know about me, doesn't it?

This election is one instance where I'm departing from my SC dictum. I still think the SC is the most important of the three branches of government.

Still, I won't be voting for Bush and I know he's far more likely to nominate judges to my liking than Kerry. Sort of blows your entire thesis, professor.

Sorry but I see no hypocrisy in my positions, then or now. I'm not pretending  to have qualities or beliefs that I do not really have to have. I believed in the justification given for the war in the pre-war period. However, a year + later and SH in hand for 6 months it seems that the information was incorrect. One quality that I do have, or trait if you prefer, is that I routinely review my positions. Call it "post mission debriefing" if you like. I've reviewed my postion on this war and I admit it certainly did not turn out the way I thought it would.

Note again that I have not accused anyone of lying or misleading. It just turned out to be a bad decision based on faulty intelligence. This ties in with another long held belief of mine. As I have said many times, there has to be responsibility and accountability.

Bush is the guy that sent us to war; it was his decision as President. It turned out to be a bad one. Now, I feel he has to be held accountable for that decision. What's done is done but you know, if you keep holding Presidents responsible for what they do and say, maybe it'll make a difference eventually.

Far better to do that than just ignoring it when they look into the camera and lie directly to  the citizenry, don't you think?

Looks like you found something to interest you here after all. Please post more!

Woot! yer making those little hand slapping smileys now?

Heh cool.

I like how you say "shows how little you know about me" then say things about yourself now that fly in the face of your oft professed stances here....

What am I... a mind reader?

I'm glad to hear you re-evaluate your positions. More than I can say for some.

But you got taken to the bank over this war. Totally rooked. And despite how much I like hearing how eloquently your arguments against the war now sound, you tried yer best to make arses of me and others like me for the very stances you now take.

Pretend like yer pwning Nuke. It aint nothing. It was people like you with your mindset that brought about the war.... the very same people yer now arguing against and acting all proud about.

Who cares if you can re-evaluate? Try to do something like that beforehand and we'd all be in better shape.

[Toad]

Originally posted by NUKE
There would be no difference to the pain you felt for the loss.

For me personally. In one instance I could see the purpose. In the other I couldn't.

Stop the thread?

And have Nash accuse me yet again of trying to "shut him up"?

Not bloody likely!  

Besides, it's not really that far to 500!

Go team go!

[NUKE]

Originally posted by Toad
For me personally. In one instance I could see the purpose. In the other I couldn't.

Stop the thread?

And have Nash accuse me yet again of trying to "shut him up"?

Not bloody likely!  

Besides, it's not really that far to 500!

Go team go!

well, in that case.. count me back in!

[Toad]

Perhaps most people here a just a bit more complicated than posts on a BBS can describe? You don't have to be a mind reader, just a realist. You've never met me yet you act as if you know everything about me from BBS posts. Is that a problem with me or you?

Like most folks, I make decisions on a cost/benefit basis. I pointed out I still believe the SC is the most important aspect when picking a President. However, in this election, the cost/benefit is moving that consideration lower down the list for me. I also believe Presidents have to be held accountable.

So, right now, in the short term, it's more important to me to hold the President accountable and risk putting some judges on the SC that I won't like. That now becomes a problem for a later time.

Pretending that this sort of evaluation of cost/benefit is somehow unusual or unique may make you feel all proud and oh so smart but in reality you know it isn't.

Note well you haven't seen me say there were no weapons. I've repeatedly said there's three possibilities that I can see, none of which justify the loss of 800 soldiers. Therefore I think that I have not the very stances you took. Not hardly.

With the information I had and the research I did prior to the war, I felt the Administration had made the case. Now, after it's essentially done, I have not seen the evidence that I said I would require. There's no inconsistency there.

BTW, did YOU have absolute proof of your position prior to the war? What would you have done if the troops had found the WMD?

Oh, btw, I fail to see where I'm acting "all proud" about any of this.

[Nash]

Originally posted by Toad
Perhaps most people here a just a bit more complicated than posts on a BBS can describe? You don't have to be a mind reader, just a realist. You've never met me yet you act as if you know everything about me from BBS posts. Is that a problem with me or you?

Like most folks, I make decisions on a cost/benefit basis. I pointed out I still believe the SC is the most important aspect when picking a President. However, in this election, the cost/benefit is moving that consideration lower down the list for me. I also believe Presidents have to be held accountable.

So, right now, in the short term, it's more important to me to hold the President accountable and risk putting some judges on the SC that I won't like. That now becomes a problem for a later time.

Pretending that this sort of evaluation of cost/benefit is somehow unusual or unique may make you feel all proud and oh so smart but in reality you know it isn't.

Note well you haven't seen me say there were no weapons. I've repeatedly said there's three possibilities that I can see, none of which justify the loss of 800 soldiers. Therefore I think that I have not the very stances you took. Not hardly.

With the information I had and the research I did prior to the war, I felt the Administration had made the case. Now, after it's essentially done, I have not seen the evidence that I said I would require. There's no inconsistency there.

BTW, did YOU have absolute proof of your position prior to the war? What would you have done if the troops had found the WMD?

Oh, btw, I fail to see where I'm acting "all proud" about any of this.

You consistently hold tight to a certain position, then in one new sentence you blame me for believing it while you go on to say something completely different.

whatever.... that's nothing.

"With the information I had and the research I did prior to the war, I felt the Administration had made the case. Now, after it's essentially done, I have not seen the evidence that I said I would require. There's no inconsistency there."

What is that? First you argue with Nuke for taking that same stance, and then you take it yourself?

Let me paraphrase you here:

"The invasion was just because there might have been WMD but now that we can't find them the war is unjust."

Do I need to parse that for you or do you get it?

[Nash]

Originally posted by Toad
BTW, did YOU have absolute proof of your position prior to the war?

I had my instincts, but no... I didn't have proof one way or the other.

That's why I was against the war.

If there were proof..... then....

But there wasn't.... so....

What's yer excuse?

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Steve
what's dubious about paying off the families of suicide bombers?

Nice try,  liberal spin attempt   DENIED

It's dubious because of the reason SH started handeding out cash to the families of the suicide bombers.

Isreal started plowing down homes of the families in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.  SH started handing out the cash so the families could rebuild thier homes.


"How many Iraqis' would have died to Hussein and his thugs in the last year if he was in power?"

That does justify coalition members killing Iraqis.  Simplistic analogy but, if a psycho was planning on killing someone in your town, does that justify you killing someone else in your town?

[AKIron]

There was plenty of proof that Saddam was continually violating UN resolutions. He made WMDs, wouldn't prove he destroyed them, and balked at cooperating with the UN. Additionally, he paid people to blow themselves up killing Israeli civilians and  attempted to assasinate George Bush. Why is it so hard to believe he was a very real threat to world security?