Lynch condemns 'US propaganda'

[mxlm]

I said whom, not how many. Polls just can't be passed off as fact any more. Pen and Teller's bullsh*t gives an excellent example of why they can't. - But it doesn't matter what I think of polling, I'll just quote your pdf.

I think you need to do better than Penn and Teller if you're going make claims like that. Peer-reviewed journals would a nice place to start.

[Cassiel]

Uh, Helios? If you're going to attempt to wriggle out of Mulu's dismantling of your prior posts by simply changing what you're saying, it'd be a really good idea not to leave the previous post you're abandoning in the current one...

[HATEFACE]

Uh, Helios? If you're going to attempt to wriggle out of Mulu's dismantling of your prior posts by simply changing what you're saying, it'd be a really good idea not to leave the previous post you're abandoning in the current one...

I can correct errors, right? Oh, please say I can. I am just a human! Buu hooo! I'm no match for you mighty robots.

[HATEFACE]

Only someone living on an island could come up with that. Say hello to Gilligan and the Skipper next time you goto the other side of the island. Watch out for the gigantic ringwraiths too while your at it

So, uh, tell me, why was he so bad?

There are videos of his war crimes. I'm not sure if I should post them because they are violent and graphic. I'm unsure of the forum rules regarding showing videos exicutions, beheadings, torture, and rape.

But If I get the go ahead I'll do it.

OK. I watched the first video and it was painful to watch. I won't watch the other 3. However, I didn't see Saddam Hussein in the video I did watch.

So how is Saddam Hussien a bad person compared to your hero George Bush, under whose regime American soldiers have executed, tortured and raped Iraqis?

You're retarded. President Bush doesn't go cutting off the limbs of his opponents. You may notice some folks in congress still have their arms.

It's a little known secret in america that our general public off of buildings and break their limbs. I HAVE TO TELL YOU NOW OR IT MAY NEVER GET OUT. THEY COULD SEND ME TO A SCARY UNDOCUMENTED PRISON!!!! that you all are aware of.

Yeah, I was raped by army soldiers. It gave me such butthurt.

Please provide video proof of american soldiers raping Iraqis.
Please provide videos of american soldiers doing everything else in those other three videos you didn't have the balls to watch.

You're retarded. Just incase you passed over it.
. . .and finally,
I'm sorry that I insulted your hero Saddam Hussien who rapes, tortures, and exicutes Iraqis. He isn't your hero? Could of fooled me considering you're a staunch defender of him.

I would also like to add we can't go around "policing" the world attacking every single dictator around, because if we attack one, our president gets labeled as a warmonger by leftist nutjobs like yourself who attempt to be fair, but are in fact, just assholes - LIKE ME! It's a fun circle jerk isn't it?
http://storiesinamerica.blogspot.com/20 ... er_01.html
http://www.idealog.us/2004/02/consider_the_im.html

Oh hell, just google it. Bush is the devil etc.

You're all nuts. Claiming not to be insane isn't going to change that fact that you think an evil dirtbag is "Not so bad" compaired to "my hero" Bush. You're all stupid. You make stupid claims just like me. (however, only one of us is pretending just leading you on.) What's worse is that there are more of you who are completely stupid then those who are not.

[HATEFACE]

I said whom, not how many. Polls just can't be passed off as fact any more. Pen and Teller's bullsh*t gives an excellent example of why they can't. - But it doesn't matter what I think of polling, I'll just quote your pdf.

I think you need to do better than Penn and Teller if you're going make claims like that. Peer-reviewed journals would a nice place to start.

You're dumb. This claim is easily proven when you look at your previous posts. We want to be fair here, mxlm. If you can't see that you're dumb, I suggest looking at your previous threads for a nice place to start.

[Mulu]

You're retarded. President Bush doesn't go cutting off the limbs of his opponents.

But his military does blind, sodomize, beat, freeze, starve, and otherwise torture and kill detainees. I've seen pictures of detainees at AG with their eyes removed from their sockets, with limbs damaged beyond repair. We've imprisoned women and even children whose only crime was to be Sunni. According to one recently returned interrogator, 90 - 95% of the detainees at AG were totally innocent, they had no involvement with the insurgency or any terrorist activities. They were tortured anyway.

We've also used white phosphorous on insurgents, a substance as bad as napalm which ignites when it comes into contact with skin. White phosphorous kills stick out as the body will have burned black skin, but the clothing is intact. That's called chemical warfare.

I don't post pictures like that, but they are very simple to find with a modicum of google skills.

As for whether or not Saddam was evil, of course he was evil. His regime was also the best possible outcome for US interests (a flourishing democracy simply isn't possible). We support Khaddafi, Mubarak, Musharraf, King Abdullah, the Saudi royal family, and all of the other "secular moderates" in the Middle East who engage in the brutal suppression of dissent. Saddam wasn't significantly worse than any of them. The only action he ever took against US interests was trying to assassinate George Sr., and even after *that* he was still trying to suck up and be our friend so he could wage war on Iran again, a plan the current administration would readily agree to today had we not invaded.

On the issue of what happens if we leave, I think the easiest statement is "End Game." It's a situation all players in the region have been planning for, as they have known all along that the US couldn't maintain an indefinite presence in Iraq. General Gates has recently said he isn't satisfied with Maliki and his lack of progress, but guess what? Maliki doesn't care. Unless we're willing to completely end the charade of democracy in Iraq and attempt a coup of their democratically elected leader, he has nothing to fear from us. We need him a lot more than he needs us, and he knows it.

None of the regional players want us out of Iraq soon, especially Al Qaida, and everyone knows we aren't leaving Iraq as long as Bush is president. Everyone also knows the US citizenry won't tolerate staying much longer after he's out. So, that's the game plan: Surge or no surge, regional conferences or no regional conferences, negotiations with the insurgency or no negotiations with the insurgency, no matter who gets elected President (other than McCain who's a non-starter), in two years nothing will have significantly changed for the better in Iraq, and we will begin our withdrawal. I predict things will be very quiet as we leave, the calm before the storm. Well, Al Qaida will probably give us some parting shots and try to goad us into staying, as it is in their interests for us to be there and they can add insult to injury as we leave.

Then, it's one of two options: Partition, or more likely full scale civil war, with the Kurds hoping to sit out the worst of it. Republicans will blame the carnage on the Democrats, Democrats will blame the carnage on Bush's failed plan, pundits will scream "genocide" and "moral failure," and our soldiers will mostly just be glad to be home, claiming the Iraqis are getting what they deserve. The message coming out of Gates lately has been very clear. "It's up to the Iraqi's to build a country." That means if the whole misadventure ends in disaster, and it will, the military will claim the only ones to blame are the Iraqi's themselves, thus washing their hands of their own misdeeds.

And Bush and Cheney and the other architects of this miserable failure will sip cool drinks on their porches, basking in their sycophants and Halliburton pay-offs, and feel no guilt or remorse. Welcome to the real world.

[HATEFACE]

You're retarded. President Bush doesn't go cutting off the limbs of his opponents.

But his military does blind, sodomize, beat, freeze, starve, and otherwise torture and kill detainees. I've seen pictures of detainees at AG with their eyes removed from their sockets, with limbs damaged beyond repair. We've imprisoned women and even children whose only crime was to be Sunni. According to one recently returned interrogator, 90 - 95% of the detainees at AG were totally innocent, they had no involvement with the insurgency or any terrorist activities. They were tortured anyway.

We've also used white phosphorous on insurgents, a substance as bad as napalm which ignites when it comes into contact with skin. White phosphorous kills stick out as the body will have burned black skin, but the clothing is intact. That's called chemical warfare.

I don't post pictures like that, but they are very simple to find with a modicum of google skills.

As for whether or not Saddam was evil, of course he was evil. His regime was also the best possible outcome for US interests (a flourishing democracy simply isn't possible). We support Khaddafi, Mubarak, Musharraf, King Abdullah, the Saudi royal family, and all of the other "secular moderates" in the Middle East who engage in the brutal suppression of dissent. Saddam wasn't significantly worse than any of them. The only action he ever took against US interests was trying to assassinate George Sr., and even after *that* he was still trying to suck up and be our friend so he could wage war on Iran again, a plan the current administration would readily agree to today had we not invaded.

On the issue of what happens if we leave, I think the easiest statement is "End Game." It's a situation all players in the region have been planning for, as they have known all along that the US couldn't maintain an indefinite presence in Iraq. General Gates has recently said he isn't satisfied with Maliki and his lack of progress, but guess what? Maliki doesn't care. Unless we're willing to completely end the charade of democracy in Iraq and attempt a coup of their democratically elected leader, he has nothing to fear from us. We need him a lot more than he needs us, and he knows it.

None of the regional players want us out of Iraq soon, especially Al Qaida, and everyone knows we aren't leaving Iraq as long as Bush is president. Everyone also knows the US citizenry won't tolerate staying much longer after he's out. So, that's the game plan: Surge or no surge, regional conferences or no regional conferences, negotiations with the insurgency or no negotiations with the insurgency, no matter who gets elected President (other than McCain who's a non-starter), in two years nothing will have significantly changed for the better in Iraq, and we will begin our withdrawal. I predict things will be very quiet as we leave, the calm before the storm. Well, Al Qaida will probably give us some parting shots and try to goad us into staying, as it is in their interests for us to be there and they can add insult to injury as we leave.

Then, it's one of two options: Partition, or more likely full scale civil war, with the Kurds hoping to sit out the worst of it. Republicans will blame the carnage on the Democrats, Democrats will blame the carnage on Bush's failed plan, pundits will scream "genocide" and "moral failure," and our soldiers will mostly just be glad to be home, claiming the Iraqis are getting what they deserve. The message coming out of Gates lately has been very clear. "It's up to the Iraqi's to build a country." That means if the whole misadventure ends in disaster, and it will, the military will claim the only ones to blame are the Iraqi's themselves, thus washing their hands of their own misdeeds.

And Bush and Cheney and the other architects of this miserable failure will sip cool drinks on their porches, basking in their sycophants and Halliburton pay-offs, and feel no guilt or remorse. Welcome to the real world.

You can PM the pictures to me.

AG was a terrible mess, I agree. - Past mistakes can be correct so they never happen again.

Did you even read that article you posted?

Oh yeah, I'm going to vote McCain. Who are you going to vote for friend? The usual none-of-my-damn-buisness candidate?

[Mulu]

Oh, and on the surge.

IRAQ WAR
U.S. officials exclude car bombs in touting drop in Iraq violence
By Nancy A. Youssef
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials who say there has been a dramatic drop in sectarian violence in Iraq since President Bush began sending more American troops into Baghdad aren't counting one of the main killers of Iraqi civilians.

Car bombs and other explosive devices have killed thousands of Iraqis in the past three years, but the administration doesn't include them in the casualty counts it has been citing as evidence that the surge of additional U.S. forces is beginning to defuse tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

President Bush explained why in a television interview on Tuesday. "If the standard of success is no car bombings or suicide bombings, we have just handed those who commit suicide bombings a huge victory," he told TV interviewer Charlie Rose.

Others, however, say that not counting bombing victims skews the evidence of how well the Baghdad security plan is protecting the civilian population - one of the surge's main goals.

"Since the administration keeps saying that failure is not an option, they are redefining success in a way that suits them," said James Denselow, an Iraq specialist at London-based Chatham House, a foreign policy think tank.

Complete article

I'll vote for the Democratic candidate. I assume that's going to be Obama, but it's still too close to call. McCain won't win the Republican primary, so you'll have to vote for Fred or whoever does win it.

And of course I read both articles I posted. Did you?

BTW, we can all scroll up and read prior posts, there is no reason to block quote them, especially when they are long. (And I'm not going to PM you pictures you can find yourself in 30 seconds).

Another interesting article on the surge.

[Lusipher]

Hell, I might even vote democrat this time around. Not sure since its so early, but no republican candidate gets me even remotely excited. Mitt Romney is about the closest to anyone I'd vote for on the republican side this time around. As for the Dems I just hope someone besides that nutcase Hillary wins.

[Mulu]

I'm sure you'd like Fred Thompson (Link includes a brilliant analysis of why poor white folk vote for rich phony rednecks). He's about as classic of a conservative as they come.

[Lusipher]

Nope sorry. I dont have want to vote for the guy who was in Hunt for Red October. The guy doesnt have a clue how to govern anything.

[mxlm]

You're dumb. This claim is easily proven when you look at your previous posts. We want to be fair here, mxlm. If you can't see that you're dumb, I suggest looking at your previous threads for a nice place to start.

You're not even trying anymore. That's neither an entertaining example of trolling nor an attempt at intelligent discussion.

Do better.

[Cassiel]

I can correct errors, right? Oh, please say I can. I am just a human! Buu hooo! I'm no match for you mighty robots.

Sure, you can correct errors! I will even help you, because I'm nice like that:

Your error here is posting in the first place. Stop.

[NickD]

You're retarded. President Bush doesn't go cutting off the limbs of his opponents. You may notice some folks in congress still have their arms.

It's a little known secret in america that our general public off of buildings and break their limbs. I HAVE TO TELL YOU NOW OR IT MAY NEVER GET OUT. THEY COULD SEND ME TO A SCARY UNDOCUMENTED PRISON!!!! that you all are aware of.

Yeah, I was raped by army soldiers. It gave me such butthurt.

Please provide video proof of american soldiers raping Iraqis.
Please provide videos of american soldiers doing everything else in those other three videos you didn't have the balls to watch.

You're retarded. Just incase you passed over it.
. . .and finally,
I'm sorry that I insulted your hero Saddam Hussien who rapes, tortures, and exicutes Iraqis. He isn't your hero? Could of fooled me considering you're a staunch defender of him.

I would also like to add we can't go around "policing" the world attacking every single dictator around, because if we attack one, our president gets labeled as a warmonger by leftist nutjobs like yourself who attempt to be fair, but are in fact, just assholes - LIKE ME! It's a fun circle jerk isn't it?
http://storiesinamerica.blogspot.com/20 ... er_01.html
http://www.idealog.us/2004/02/consider_the_im.html

Oh hell, just google it. Bush is the devil etc.

You're all nuts. Claiming not to be insane isn't going to change that fact that you think an evil dirtbag is "Not so bad" compaired to "my hero" Bush. You're all stupid. You make stupid claims just like me. (however, only one of us is pretending just leading you on.) What's worse is that there are more of you who are completely stupid then those who are not.

I wrote some big post in reply, talking about extraordinary rendition (or whatever it's called when the American government kidnaps people they think are naughty and take them to another country and torture them because they don't want to have to deal with all that legal rubbish...) linked in a couple of articles about American soldiers raping innocent Iraqi girls. Pointed out that the military has admitted to all these things and it's readily available on the news. Then I talked about how it's more complicated than "Saddam was the baddy". Then I compared him a bit more to George Bush. And topped it off with saying that I'm just trying to get you to think about things from a different point of view.

But when I posted it, the entire forum went down and I can't be bothered typing it all up again. Especially considering I'm not entirely certain you're capable of thought anyway.

[Jeppan]

*peeks in and sees that is is not worth getting into*

You right-wing nuts should send up more talented people to do the talking.

Helios me da verguënza ajena.