Northern Iraq falls to Al Qaeda, $400 million looted from central bank.

Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
"We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al-Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America, period."

-former Director of the CIA, George Tenet



So no Iraqi terrorist was responsible for 9/11, and no links between Iraq and 9/11 have been found, yet you think the invasion was justified because Saddam was such a big bad bully. But 15 of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, Osama Bin Ladin was Saudi, and the entire operation was funded by Saudi and Pakistani intelligence, yet you think it was all just individuals committing terrorism...

A facepalm simply doesn't do it justice...
Click to expand...
This all the fucked straw dog.

Saddam was icing. Saddam was not blocking the gap. Sadam was a Thorn in the side of the World and the World took care of it.

The world did not take care of the Taliban and neither did we. We aged them.

But we did erect chaos in the gap of Iraq and blocked it with a clusterfuck.

Thank you George Bush.

So, here is your silly face palm.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
and you repeat your previous IGNORANT statement as if it was the fresh new hotness.

saddam had been tuggin on our beards for OVER A DECADE, flouting the cease fire agreement he signed to keep his ass off the gallows.
he was BEGGING for a fight, because he was certain he wouldnt have to actually fight.
TWELVE YEARS of empty threats had convinced him that america wouldnt actually respond.

then , 0n 9/12/2001, he stolled into the bar with a chip on his shoulder, shouted, "Fuck you pussies! Imma piss on the floor" and was shocked that he got his ass beat.

he didnt HAVE to be involved in 9/11. any asshole who wanted a fight after that, was gonna git one.
Click to expand...
Last I checked, none of that is legal justification for invading or occupying a country with a military force

Dr Kynes said:
they wertent involved in that one, but they WERE involved in others, and they associated with the guys who DID do it.
Click to expand...


So how far do you want to take this little guilty by association train?

Dr Kynes said:
and then you race off to the saudi canard, as if i hadnt JUST explained to you that people FROM a country are not necessarily acting on behalf of their government when they do shit.
Click to expand...
Saudi intelligence and the ISI funded the attacks, those would be elements of the government..
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Last I checked, none of that is legal justification for invading or occupying a country with a military force
.
Click to expand...
are you clinically retarded?

Saddam signed a Cease Fire (NOT an Armistice) which was contingent upon his acceptance of a laundry list of concessions

HE BROKE EVERY ONE

thus the cease Fire should have been torn up and thrown in his face, and the ass kicking should have re-commenced immediately after the deal was broken.

but no, for 12 years he strutted around, acting like a badass, refusing to abide by the deal he made, so when ass kickin time came round, his ass was just first in line.

Violating the cease fire agreement IS grounds for the recommencement of hostilities, occupation of iraq, and the dissolution of his regime.

you are a moron.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ayr0n said:
Oooh truth hurt ya a little bit? So have you ever actually tried to do anything to help your "cause" or do you just bitch on forums, parrot talking points n try to talk down to people who have a different opinion than you?

Click to expand...
keep dreaming your mad delusions.




you aint rustled shit.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
DonAlejandroVega said:
he broke the rules of the first illegal invasion..........I see
Click to expand...
uhh, the first invasion was LEGAL, he invaded an ally, so he gets his ass beat.

thats the rules.


or do you imagine kuwait had that one comin?

or should our allies simply understand that we wont honour our treaties.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ayr0n said:
I ain't rustled shit? Why'd you get all hostile then my man? "smug, smarmy AND ignorant?" doesn't sound real friendly. I even 'liked' your post :(
Click to expand...
because your response was in fact, smug, smarmy and ignorant.
it was non substantive, and childish as well, but i didnt wanna pile on.

youre clearly having enough trouble following the subject as it is.
 
DonAlejandroVega

DonAlejandroVega

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
uhh, the first invasion was LEGAL, he invaded an ally, so he gets his ass beat.

thats the rules.


or do you imagine kuwait had that one comin?

or should our allies simply understand that we wont honour our treaties.
Click to expand...

our allies.....the Slave Kings. exactly. we are doin'.........what the original Patrons.......said........eh...what we shouldn't do. its like that, kid.

MILLERScROSSING-pOLITO.jpg
 
Last edited:
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
DonAlejandroVega said:
this.........doesn't work..............

View attachment 3181710
Click to expand...
that makes no sense.

try to be clear.

ill try again:

Kuwait signed a treaty, becoming our ally, we promise to defend them if they get attacked, and they promise to sell us oil at a reduced price.

Iraq invades Kuwait.

do we A: honor the deal we made, or B: tell them to pound sand, we got what we wanted so they can go fuck themselves.

If A: other nations know, if we make a deal, we keep it

If B: nobody will sign a deal with us ever again.

further, there is no "legal" or "Illegal" war.
no outside power can tell the us, or iraq or russia that they cant go to war today, cuz that would be illegal.

wars can be just, or unjust, legality doesnt enter into it.

russia's annexation of the ukraine is LEGAL in russia, but ILLEGAL in ukraine. who's right?
whoever wins the war.
 
DonAlejandroVega

DonAlejandroVega

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
uhh, the first invasion was LEGAL, he invaded an ally, so he gets his ass beat.

thats the rules.


or do you imagine kuwait had that one comin?

or should our allies simply understand that we wont honour our treaties.
Click to expand...

"or do you imagine kuwait had that one comin?"

yer askin' the wrong guy what rich, slave-owning bigots have comin.'
motherfuck Kuwait :)
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
DonAlejandroVega said:
our allies.....the Slave Kings. exactly. we are doin'.........we the original Patrons.......said........eh...what we shouldn't do. its like that, kid.
Click to expand...
war cults, self rule, tomatoe posicles, and unicorn hair weaves! Mailbox Transmissions, and lesbian dancing girls!

you been smoking Doer's dope?
maybe you should check your carbon monoxide filter.
or are you having a stroke?
 
DonAlejandroVega

DonAlejandroVega

Well-Known Member
neoconism doesn't work. that's what's being attempted. make the world into one big America. the neo's comprise BOTH parties. Victoria's Britain on bath salts.
 
ayr0n

ayr0n

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
because your response was in fact, smug, smarmy and ignorant.
it was non substantive, and childish as well, but i didnt wanna pile on.

youre clearly having enough trouble following the subject as it is.
Click to expand...
Bro every other post you put "derp derp derp" and I'm the one being childish? The only time I hear someone saying "Boooooooosh" is on the Rush Limbaugh show, which I'm unfortunately subjected to on occasions in my workplace - and that's why I asked if you were impersonating him. Not smug or smurmy or ignorant. It was a valid question. I know it's hard to wrap your head around the concept that just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them 'wrong', but it would help you to figure it out at some point. I probably am a "child" compared to you, but that doesn't make my beliefs any less valid than yours - just a less experienced perspective I suppose. Enjoy your horse while it's high. Has 2 come down eventually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top