Search results

I was perfectly consistent. Am I not allowed to express my opinion, and then ask the question rhetorically so that others may express theirs? Jesus. :retard4:

Yeah, that sounds nice and all, but you can point to hundreds of people on both sides of the coin and apply that statement. So what's your point? I suppose at some level this comes down to a basic question that is often skirted - is there an absolute wright and wrong? Can it only be...

I'm guessing that criminals don't welcome the application of force either. There's a point burried in there somewhere. :)

I thought you guys were comparing men, not the military strengths of two countries? :nono: Off you go to play with Mr. Squiggles...

I'm sorry, that one takes the cake, and earns you your first trip to the ignore list. :rofl4:

A dictator spends decades tearing a country apart socially and economically, and if we can't fix it in a couple of months then we're the bad guys?

:rofl4:

Umm...

Umm...

It is a thought process that many leaders share, good and bad, right and wrong. Your point, if there was one? Besides, you get bent out of shape when someone suggests that the events of WWII have some relevance, since they are obviously not identical, yet you offer the above suggestion...

Do I really have to dignify that with an answer?

Iraq is key to the ultimate solution.

I'm not really sure where people get this touchy feely attitude that disputes are a matter of perspective, and no single party is "wrong."

I can play with myself... most people can't.

California.

I think the best interests of the entire planet were served by us making the tough decisions that no one else had the balls to make, even if we get pinned as the bad guys for doing so. That's reality, welcome to it... :nono:

I think it's pretty much a given that Saddam was evil, caused more than his fair share of deaths, suffering, etc., and that if left in power would be a continuing threat of some magnitude. I think it's also clear that if he didn't have a significant stockpile of WMD's when we invaded, he would...

^^^^^ :rofl4: ^^^^^

Yeah, you're right. Saddam wasn't that bad.

Bush may have been acting on a personal agenda. I happen to agree with it, since I share it, and since I believe that agenda has at its root the long term security of this nation and the prospect of peace in general.