^^thats proof? hahaha

9/22/2006 11:56:33 AM

ha this thread is awesome

9/22/2006 11:56:43 AM

Quote :

"At this point, I'm done again. I'm really hoping theDuke will read this and see how hard you are trolling and be done with you."

so because I recognize other countries as threats instead of you who has the mentality of "Al Queda attacked US...attack Al Queda in Afghanistan...war over until other attack on US Soil" I am trolling hard? Go join the peace corps

9/22/2006 11:58:07 AM

all I have to say is that im sick of the government spending my money on a stupid war and not protecting me from real threats.

9/22/2006 12:00:22 PM

^

9/22/2006 12:03:04 PM

YOU

CAN'T

BE

THIS

STUPID

CAN

YOU

?

9/22/2006 12:03:56 PM

^please stop posting that foolish post that has no relevance to anything

Quote :

"not protecting me from real threats."

such as? cancer and diseases, etc?

9/22/2006 12:06:30 PM

yeah that would be nice.

also countries with nuclear bombs

9/22/2006 12:08:00 PM

you think the govt is just ignoring nuclear threats? just because govt strategizing isnt all over the news?

9/22/2006 12:10:16 PM

I am sure the citizens in the Soviet Union felt very safe.

9/22/2006 12:17:16 PM

YOU

CAN'T

BE

THIS

STUPID

CAN

YOU

?

9/22/2006 12:28:46 PM

^what do you expect your trolling to accomplish?

9/22/2006 12:39:59 PM

The same thing your trolling is trying to accomplish.

9/22/2006 12:40:29 PM

if you're not going to post anything relevant to the topic, don't post

if you're just going to talk shit to me, make another thread for that

oh wait you did, but it was in the wrong section and everybody called you out on it

9/22/2006 12:43:53 PM

You haven't posted much relevant in here or the other thread either. I just assumed you were trolling so I figured I would join the party.

9/22/2006 12:51:36 PM

doesnt deserve a response

[Edited on September 22, 2006 at 12:52 PM. Reason : .]

9/22/2006 12:52:39 PM

Quote :

"When performed without informed, rational justification at minimum, uses of freedom can be thus labeled irresponsible, and many times are costly."

There is the problem... It seems simple enough but large groups of people are irrational in their justification to other large groups of people in our society. For example, conservative Christians find it perfectly rational to limit drug/alcohol consumption while a large number of people also find it perfectly rational to legalize and tax it. Someone will always think we are going too far one way or the other in various avenues. Another is free speech and freedom of the press where some think its fine that a reporter can leak Grand Jury testimony because the people have a right to know and some think its criminal and should not be allowed because it can undermine the justice system and potentially someone's well-being. Gun ownership: some think its bad overall, some think limited is fine, some think they need high-powered assault rifles for protection. Heck, even animal rights... I mean you can go on and on about well-represented camps that will never agree on what is the proper amount of freedom limitation or allowance.

9/22/2006 12:56:28 PM

Quote :

"When performed without informed, rational justification at minimum, uses of freedom can be thus labeled irresponsible, and many times are costly."

*ahem*

9/22/2006 1:05:42 PM

Freedom

9/22/2006 1:10:06 PM

Quote :

"its a damn good thing we'll never know what a "shitty country in the middle east" couldve done if Saddam had continued to get his way as a cold hearted dictator"

um he hasn't done shit since the gulf war. what's that, 13, 14 years? he was not a threat. he knew what was up if he pulled shit so he didn't

and you forget about the other countries that had just as legitimate a reason to go into

9/22/2006 2:35:30 PM

i'm not saying we shouldnt also go into the other countries that pose a threat

but you say he hasnt done shit in 13 or 14 years...what do you call firing at coalition aircraft nearly every day until the current war started?

9/22/2006 3:02:47 PM

I'D CALL IT NOT DOING SHIT!!!

9/22/2006 3:03:37 PM

you'd call firing on US and British aircraft nearly every single day not doing shit....

9/22/2006 3:08:58 PM

and those coalition airplanes destroyed the missle silos, and don't confuse yourself, they weren't being fired on everyday. Never the less, what Iraq did, did not call for the escalation of force used by the United States and Great Britain. Also, quit adding different caveats to the decision to go to Iraq. Originally it was the al-Qaeda-Saddam link (disproven), WMDs (disproven), Tried to kill my daddy (clinton had already dealt with this). Now it has turned into fired on coalition aircrafts, the Kurds, etc. What the fuck. When does the justification end and people realize this administration has just fucked up.

9/22/2006 3:12:34 PM

Quote :

"Tried to kill my daddy (clinton had already dealt with this). "

what do you mean clinton had already dealt with this?

Quote :

"Originally it was the al-Qaeda-Saddam link (disproven), WMDs (disproven), Tried to kill my daddy (clinton had already dealt with this). Now it has turned into fired on coalition aircrafts, the Kurds, etc."

no

it was always all of those things plus more...it was always all of those things, dont kid yourself

9/22/2006 3:14:21 PM

Quote :

"Quote : "When performed without informed, rational justification at minimum, uses of freedom can be thus labeled irresponsible, and many times are costly." *ahem*"

Game, my point was that rationality is subjective. Even "informed" is subjective when you get into what respective camps consider reliable sources to supply the information that you use for criteria.

9/22/2006 3:16:14 PM

Quote :

"State409c Please tell me how Nazi Germany was more of a direct threat to the United States than Iraq was with Saddam?"

Uh well, Nazi Germany declared war on us after we got into it with Japan. I guess that's how.

9/22/2006 3:26:58 PM

Btw, why did we decided to "free" the Iraqi people now, but not in the 80s?

9/22/2006 3:27:07 PM

Quote :

"On June 26, 1993, the United States launched a cruise missile attack against a building housing the IIS in Baghdad in retaliation for the assassination attempt on former President Bush. According to news reports, the attack killed between six and eight persons and injured approximately 12 others. On June 27, 1993, Madeleine Albright, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, addressed an emergency session of the Security Council and provided evidence to support the attack on the IIS facility. "

http://hnn.us/articles/1000.html

Quote :

"no it was always all of those things plus more...it was always all of those things, dont kid yourself"

You are right, the attempted assasination of Bush Sr., WMDs, and the Iraq-al-Qaeda link were always the reasons behind the war. The fact of the matter remains, that with all the evidence we have now, we know there were no WMDs, there was no Saddam-al-Qaeda link, and the attempted assasination had been taken care of. Now the reasons for war have shifted to completely irrelevant items and serve to only confuse the debate.

[Edited on September 22, 2006 at 3:30 PM. Reason : .]

9/22/2006 3:27:17 PM

^interesting

9/22/2006 3:29:44 PM

Twista still 0-infinity in TSB.

9/22/2006 3:33:38 PM

you're still batting 1.000 on riding my dick from thread to thread

9/22/2006 3:34:42 PM

I can't help you're the most retarded motherfucker to ever grace this section with a post. At least dnl admits he isn't bright.

9/22/2006 3:37:50 PM

you cant help but ride my dick?

whatever you say fag

9/22/2006 3:39:42 PM

For the reading impaired

Quote :

"I can't help you're the most retarded motherfucker to ever grace this section with a post."

9/22/2006 3:40:09 PM

whatever you say fag

9/22/2006 3:40:37 PM

So basically nutsmackr owned you and you have nothing credible to reply with?

9/22/2006 4:15:09 PM

does nutsmackr hold your dick when you pee?

9/22/2006 4:20:28 PM

So basically nutsmackr owned you and you have nothing credible to reply with?

9/22/2006 4:23:39 PM

so basically you havent said anything credible in the Soap Box ever?

and quit sending me PMs...for someone so adamant about his self confidence, you seem pretty unsecure about yourself

i make a serious thread and all you're doing now is trolling

9/22/2006 4:43:15 PM

YOU

CAN'T

BE

THIS

STUPID

CAN

YOU

?

9/22/2006 4:53:11 PM

i value any president more than the current one

9/22/2006 4:53:42 PM

^What was the purpose of posting that?

9/22/2006 4:58:57 PM

I look at it like this...I expect the govt to protect the country and our fellow Americans from war/terror etc...I dont expect them to provide free health care and other welfare programs...and even if they make some laws that "hinder my freedoms" I'm free to break those laws, in a sense, if they are relatively minor laws IMO, like not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign when there are no cars in sight...I will live my life how I live it regardless of who is the President...but my own freedoms and rights to bear arms, etc, are not sufficient enough to stop large scale terror attacks...so I value the safety that the govt can try to provide, while I am aware of the freedoms I have

I am not one that thinks because it gets out in the press that there are phone records being kept (which have been kept for decades, just not put out in the media) that we are catastrophically landsliding towards a police state with martial law

^it has to do with SOMETHING, unlike the post above it

9/22/2006 4:59:49 PM

i just happened to stumble upon this quote:


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"

- Benjamin Franklin

9/22/2006 11:09:07 PM

What like that's a new one?

9/22/2006 11:33:37 PM