Eternal Allegiance - Celebrity Gossip

Go Back   Eternal Allegiance - Celebrity Gossip > Eternal-Allegiance Forums > Scoop!


Register and remove some of the ads
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-21-2005, 08:34 PM   #41
World Champion
 
ManSlippers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,147
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Errick


Aren't the weapons of mass destruction in Syria anyhow?
I dunno, do they have oil in that country? If so, they're next
ManSlippers is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 07:06 AM   #42
weeeee
 
MoonBerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,614
Default

^ LMAO.
MoonBerry is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 09:02 AM   #43
Somebodys Watching...
 
GrgotSlave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Chi-Town
Posts: 7,803
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by strongerbritters
just like the Bush supporters are BRAINWASHED into supporting this war by thinking he's honest about his intentions of the war...Bush is a piece of shit, bottom line, who sacrificed thousands of lives for his greedy intentions that benefit him and him only.
Haha, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Quote:
Originally posted by Lemons
Sheehan should go protest infront of 98 or 97 senators who voted for the war. Complain to your Senator about why they didn't thoroughly read the information presented by the CIA and FBI. They could have stopped it, and chose not to. Its not 100% the president's fault.
Dude, do you seriously think the CIA and FBI are going to go against Bush? They're in it for the same reason Bush is in it: for the oil. The war in Iraq has NOTHING to do with Iraqi's and their freedom. It's all about the oil and the money. Btw, I couldn't give two shits of what Michael Moore has to say. I've never seen any of his documentaries or anything, I said that incase you were going to use that against me. Anyways, Iraq would've been better off without Bush having to butt in. I'm not even joking when I say this. I was talking to one of my freinds who's other freind happened to visit Iraq. He said that the women were crying out for the Taliban to come back because when they were under the Taliban rule, women and children could actually go out at any given time knowing they were safe and wouldn't get harmed.

Btw, isn't it known that Korea has weapons of mass destruction? Oh yeah, I forgot, they're not a prime source of oil.
GrgotSlave is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 11:43 AM   #44
World Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Britneyslave

Dude, do you seriously think the CIA and FBI are going to go against Bush?
I never said go against it. Theres a difference between an intelligence failure, and actually lying. The CIA would never, lie to the President. They're also not biased in any way shape or form. Some of you still dont understand, that if the CIA gives the president wrong information, the president has to make a decision based on the information he got. If the info is wrong, the decision will be wrong. Its as simple as that.

Also, the person who gave the memo to President Bush, never checked the sources. 4 Other countries agreed that Saddam had the weapons, and they got that from their intelligence too. The CIA became so confident that Saddam had them (automatically assuming that, because we gave it to him in the 80s, and he didn't let the U.N search all of the bomb sites/factories) they made a decision to tell President Bush that he had the weapons because to them, knowning what went on durring the 80s, they'd have a reason to be suspicious.

Also, lets not give the politicians and the President so much cold blood. No one is that cold to destroy a country for oil. Also, the Senators from all 50s states, know just as much as the president does.. Why is it that They didn't base their Yay vote for Oil, but the President did? Even the liberal senators from States like California, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania - why did they vote yes on the War in Iraq? Why didn't they stop Bush from his "Opperation Blood For Oil".. Because they, like the President, had reason to believe that when Saddam had or has the weapons, he'd use it on us, or our troops in Saudi Arabia. Saying Saddam never had weapons is like saying Osama, doesn't have the terrorists... theres no difference. come on, lets think it through.

Last edited by Lemons : 08-22-2005 at 11:46 AM.
Lemons is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 12:28 PM   #45
World Champion
 
ManSlippers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,147
Default

Blame it all on the CIA. Anything to take the heat off of Bush Intelligence failure is just a fuckin excuse.
ManSlippers is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 01:06 PM   #46
World Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by strongerbritters
Blame it all on the CIA. Anything to take the heat off of Bush Intelligence failure is just a fuckin excuse.
If thats what really happend, what do you want me to blame it on? Oil? Nope. Not gonna happen. Nobody destroys a country just for oil. If Bush Senior didn't want to do it, neither would Bush Jr.. there is an excuse and the excuse is the CIA isn't perfect, and you shouldn't expect everything to be done perfectly.
Lemons is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 01:51 PM   #47
Life Me
 
Birgerhar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sam Houston Tollway
Posts: 6,218
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Britneyslave
Btw, isn't it known that Korea has weapons of mass destruction? Oh yeah, I forgot, they're not a prime source of oil.
We were just in talks with Korea a couple weeks back about their nuclear weapons. I think it didnt end so well though. Anyways, Korea is a total different playing field than Iraq for many more ways. I don't remember why as of now, but just know you can't compare Korea to iraq.

And I don't blame Bush solely for the war. I blame his entire administration. Right intentions or not, the war was a mess. Look how many innocent civilians were caught in the crossfire. I hear it's over 20,000. The USA was supposed to help this country, so their military tactics should of been more reserved. Yes, alot of the civilians have been caught from the numerous bombs but many too have been caught in a battle. They should use or try to use now, better tactics, to kill the least lives as possible.
Birgerhar is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 02:25 PM   #48
World Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Harbinger

And I don't blame Bush solely for the war. I blame his entire administration. .
What about the 97 Senators who voted Yay for going into Iraq? What about the CIA and how they messed up? Theres more to running a country than the President and the Administration.
Lemons is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 02:40 PM   #49
World Champion
 
PapRoach123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: nWo City
Posts: 10,827
Default

I remember long ago on this very forum there was a debate on whether there should be a war or not. Many of us were opposed to it and others were for it. Each had their own set of reasons. We debated thread in thread out until the day the war was started. We kept debating during that war, and we are still debating now. Some of us had the same arguments the entire damn time and still have those same arguments to this day.

You'd think that if we could think up several different hypothesi that would be so right on target even before the damn war began, surely you'd think the President of the United freakin States would think of those same arguments before making any decisions.
PapRoach123 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 02:59 PM   #50
World Champion
 
ManSlippers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,147
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Lemons
If thats what really happend, what do you want me to blame it on? Oil? Nope. Not gonna happen. Nobody destroys a country just for oil. If Bush Senior didn't want to do it, neither would Bush Jr.. there is an excuse and the excuse is the CIA isn't perfect, and you shouldn't expect everything to be done perfectly.
I blame IRAQ on Bush's quest for oil. You cannot say for fact that nobody would destroy a country for oil, because Bush just did. I don't think CIA intelligence had anything to do with the invasion of Iraq. It was a sidetracker because Bush couldn't find Bin Laden, and what a GREAT sidetracker than removing Saddam, who nobody was really that fond of, and using him as an excuse because people WOULD believe Saddam is the reason we invaded and these MADE-UP weapons of mass destruction (there was no proof BEFORE going into Iraq that he had them), which for some reason WE are only allowed to own. Therefore there is no doubt in my mind that Iraq was a distraction because they couldn't get Bin Laden and they made up a distraction and used a country that would benefit them in the end, which is because of oil, which in turn FUCKED US, the public that doesn't matter to the Bush Administration over, with outrageous gas prices.

Quote:
Originally posted by Stinger
I remember long ago on this very forum there was a debate on whether there should be a war or not. Many of us were opposed to it and others were for it. Each had their own set of reasons. We debated thread in thread out until the day the war was started. We kept debating during that war, and we are still debating now. Some of us had the same arguments the entire damn time and still have those same arguments to this day.
I remember tall of that, and I was somewhat FOR and against the war. Afghanistan was fine, but Iraq to me, was not.

Quote:
Originally posted by Stinger
I remember long ago on this very forum there was a debate on whether there should be a war or not. Many of us were opposed to it and others were for it. Each had their own set of reasons. We debated thread in thread out until the day the war was started. We kept debating during that war, and we are still debating now. Some of us had the same arguments the entire damn time and still have those same arguments to this day.

You'd think that if we could think up several different hypothesi that would be so right on target even before the damn war began, surely you'd think the President of the United freakin States would think of those same arguments before making any decisions.
And remember, our genius President isn't exactly the brightest color in the Crayon box and can often be compared to the intelligence of drying cement on a private off-limits road.
ManSlippers is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:03 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19