IRAN:Ahmadinejad

[Vitas]

"Ahmadinejad has drawn strong condemnations around the globe for calling the Nazis' slaughter of Jews a myth and saying Israel should be wiped off the map or moved to Germany or the United States."

It is absolutely inane, and insane, that Ahmadinejad would at the same time and in the same breadth proclaim that he that he wants to wipe a sovereign nation off the map, and at the same time demand nuclear abilities. The world knows his intentions, because he has clearly stated them.

Russia and China cannot in the slightest allow themselves to be complicit in Ahmadinejad’s actions. This will make clear whether, post 9/11, or post 11/9/89, the UN is merely a Chamber of Commerce, or an effective, collective, world wide mechanism to fight terrorism. At this point, Iran gets no consideration for the previously proposed "economic and diplomatic incentives" to limit its nuclear program. Ahmadinejad has overstayed his welcome.

 

[fossten]

Uhm - still waiting to be flattened, Vitas.

I guess you meant THIS midweek, eh?

(Cues Jeopardy music, goes to bed)

 

[Calabrio]

Iran is very dangerous. The sooner people recognize this, the better we'll all be.

 

[Vitas]

Uhm - still waiting to be flattened, Vitas.

I guess you meant THIS midweek, eh?

(Cues Jeopardy music, goes to bed)

It appears that Fossten is so confused and disoriented that he posted in the wrong thread. I would post a link to the right thread, but it will be much more fun to see how long it will take him to find it.

 

[fossten]

It appears that Fossten is so confused and disoriented that he posted in the wrong thread. I would post a link to the right thread, but it will be much more fun to see how long it will take him to find it.

blah blah blah...more stall tactics, eh, Vitas? Never mind the fact that you never posted the "flattening" in the correct thread, right?

 

[Vitas]

Uhm - still waiting to be flattened, Vitas.

I guess you meant THIS midweek, eh?

(Cues Jeopardy music, goes to bed)

It appears that Fossten is so confused and disoriented that he posted in the wrong thread. I would post a link to the right thread, but it will be much more fun to see how long it will take him to find it.

blah blah blah...more stall tactics, eh, Vitas? Never mind the fact that you never posted the "flattening" in the correct thread, right?

OK, "Fossten" so you are already DAZED as well.

MODERATOR: Please direct "Fossten" to the correct thread:

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=25028.

 

[MonsterMark]

MODERATOR: Please direct "Fossten" to the correct thread:

Not my job. Sorry. We do have a PM feature you know if you would like to personally redirect him and save us all the b.s. Thank you.

 

[fossten]

OK, "Fossten" so you are already DAZED as well.

MODERATOR: Please direct "Fossten" to the correct thread:

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=25028.

Waaaaah! Waaaaaah!

"B-O-O H-O-O."

-- John Bender, The Breakfast Club

 

[rmac694203]

Waaaaah! Waaaaaah!

"B-O-O H-O-O."

-- John Bender, The Breakfast Club

You must really like that weak ass movie. You quote it enough.

 

[Calabrio]

"Weak ass movie?" It's considered a classic.

Do you have anything thoughtful to add or are you just trying to get your post count up?

 

[rmac694203]

As opposed to Fossten's well thought out post, trying to antagonize Vitas. I was just giving him some crap. And I don't care if that movie is considered a classic, I think it sucks. Post number 713, getting 'em up there.

 

[formerknown]

Does Ayatollah Khomeni know you raid his wardrobe?

 

[fossten]

Does Ayatollah Khomeni know you raid his wardrobe?

LOL

Okay, rmac, we got it, you think BC sucks. So what. What kind of movie do you consider 'good'?

 

[rmac694203]

I like a lot of different movies. My queue on Netflix is a smorgasbord of different varieties of movies. But if I had to name a few: Godfather 1 and 2, Scarface, Heat, Pulp Fiction, Saving Private Ryan, etc. I'm sure there are a lot of movies that I like that you probably think are crap, but that's cool. I just never got into BC because it's really not that funny, it's quite cheesy, and it just never did anything for me.

 

[Frogman]

What I don't understand is why we attacked Iraq on the whim that Sadam had Biological warfare missiles, yet we leave Korea who clearly has Nukes and is part of the "axis of evil", as well as now Iran, alone? Sure there is talk of "sanctions", but I don't see a bunch of coalition troops going in to take Old Kimmy or Ahmadinejad down like the US (and company) did with Saddam. Clearly, both of these men are certifiable lunatics, no?

 

[rmac694203]

This is something I have wondered as well. It seems out of the axis of evil, we attacked the tamest one.

 

[MonsterMark]

What I don't understand is why we attacked Iraq on the whim

I could spend a whole bunch of time explainging why we enforced the UN resolutions but I feel it would be a waste of time.

Unfortunately far too many Americans get their news from TV and shows like CNN and the Daily Show to ever get a true understanding of what is out there and what we are facing.

Bush didn't divide this country, hypocritical liberals did.

There is now a huge chasm. One side (approximately 45%) will always take the lib view no matter the facts and the other side (45%) will always be fighting for what is right. The pendulum swings in the center with the 10%.

We have our own civil war going on in this country, only nobody knows it yet. Give it a couple more years and the violence will start.

 

[Frogman]

We have our own civil war going on in this country, only nobody knows it yet. Give it a couple more years and the violence will start.

Unfortunately, I believe I said something to this effect sometime last year...

 

[fossten]

What I don't understand is why we attacked Iraq on the whim that Sadam had Biological warfare missiles, yet we leave Korea who clearly has Nukes and is part of the "axis of evil", as well as now Iran, alone? Sure there is talk of "sanctions", but I don't see a bunch of coalition troops going in to take Old Kimmy or Ahmadinejad down like the US (and company) did with Saddam. Clearly, both of these men are certifiable lunatics, no?

Your entire premise that we attacked Iraq on a whim is simply wrong, wrong, wrong. And it's been thoroughly debunked on this forum repeatedly. I'm sorry for you that you continue to be fooled by liberal rhetoric. If I thought you had an open mind, I'd encourage you to go read the more than one dozen UN resolutions and all the Democrat senators and reps that urged Bush to go into Iraq over a period of years. But I don't see you as an open minded person.

And now that people have used rhetoric like yours on Bush for years, criticizing him for going cowboy on Saddam's ass, threatening to have him impeached for it, you're surprised that he's a little gunshy of doing it again with Iran and Syria? You need to wake up and smell what the liberals are shoveling.

 

[Frogman]

Fossten,

I do have an open mind. But I clearly remember when The President came on naional TV and said Saddamn has Biological Weapons, and must be stopped before he would use them. That is not something somepne's put into my head.

I also remember him coming on TV again, after no weapons were found, and saying that this was actually not a war to stop Saddam from using his (apparently non existent) bio weapons, but rather it was a "liberation war" to liberate the Iraqi people.

No one has "fed" me anything.I'm merely asking about what I have personally heard the president say.

 

[TheDude]

There is now a huge chasm. One side (approximately 45%) will always take the lib view no matter the facts and the other side (45%) will always be fighting for what is right. The pendulum swings in the center with the 10%..

This is subjective "fighting for what is right"... Many liberals are against Bush simply becuase they feel he is destroying what this country stands for, Freedom, doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

We have our own civil war going on in this country, only nobody knows it yet. Give it a couple more years and the violence will start.

How do you know if nobody knows? I'm also curious to know what the sides are/would be?

 

[fossten]

Fossten,

I do have an open mind. But I clearly remember when The President came on naional TV and said Saddamn has Biological Weapons, and must be stopped before he would use them. That is not something somepne's put into my head.

I also remember him coming on TV again, after no weapons were found, and saying that this was actually not a war to stop Saddam from using his (apparently non existent) bio weapons, but rather it was a "liberation war" to liberate the Iraqi people.

No one has "fed" me anything.I'm merely asking about what I have personally heard the president say.

1. Your statement still does not establish your claim of the "whim."
2. Many, many other political leaders (including Bill Clinton in 1998, Kerry, and Hillary) agreed with or predated Bush's assessment and urged Bush and the country regarding the Iraq chem weapons issue.
3. Chem weapons HAVE been found in Iraq, which exculpates Bush of any accusation of lying
4. I'd like to see you link the quote where he said that Iraq was a "liberation war." I don't think he said that.

 

[Frogman]

The decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power was controversial. We did not find the weapons of mass destruction that we all believed were there -- and that's raised questions about whether the sacrifice in Iraq has been worth it. Despite setbacks and missteps, I strongly believe we did and are doing the right thing. Saddam Hussein was a menace to his people; he was a state sponsor of terror; he invaded his neighbors. Investigations proved he was systematically gaming the oil-for-food program in an effort to undermine sanctions, with the intent of restarting his weapons programs once the sanctions collapsed and the world looked away.

But not everything since liberation has turned out as the way we had expected or hoped. We've learned from our mistakes, adjusted our methods, and have built on our successes. From changing the way we train the Iraqi security forces to rethinking the way we do reconstruction, our commanders and our diplomats in Iraq are constantly adapting to the realities on the ground. We've adapted our tactics, yet the heart of our strategy remains the same: to support the emergence of a free Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself.


Blah Blah Blah... you get the point.





http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060525-12.html

I have commonly available ingredients for "chemical Weapons" under my kitchen Sink. You know what Clorox and a second commonly available household cleaner can do when mixed together? It can be used as a Chemical weapon. Would I ever? No, I would not.


I have nothing to prove to you, but I DO know what I remember having heard Bush say on national TV. About the same as him saying on CNN, that if this were a Dictatorship, we'd all be better off just so long as he was the dictator. But I'm sure he was just kidding. Right?