Election Decided by 'Skins Game

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-26-2004, 10:14 AM
Blurred

Quote:

Originally Posted by watersnowdirt

Don't ever, EVER say something like that to me again you ignorant piece of shit. You've said a lot of insulting things, to me, and others, but when you say something like that, you cross a dangerous line.

http://www.tetongravity.com/usergall...rama_queen.jpg
10-26-2004, 10:18 AM
watersnowdirt

edit: nevermind. it's not worth it.
10-26-2004, 10:23 AM
Lone Star

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

A pussy in the White House could possibly get you killed.

Dude, you're right!!

I think I represent the entire nation when I say this:

Blurred, please don't run for president. I don't wanna die.
10-26-2004, 10:27 AM
Gary Johnston

Comin' to Save....the Motherfuckin' Day YEAH!

We're dicks! We're reckless, arrogant,stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Il is an asshole. Pussies dont like dicks because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes. Assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck a asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate. And it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves. Because pussies are a inch and half away from assholes. I don't know much about this crazy crazy world, but I do know this. If you don't let us fuck this asshole we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit.
10-26-2004, 10:30 AM
Blurred

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lone Star

I don't wanna die.

Pussy. :D
..
10-26-2004, 10:37 AM
Gary Johnston

Sing it LOUD!

America, fuck yeah! Comin' again to save the motherfucking day, yeah! / America, fuck yeah! Freedom is the only way, yeah! / Terrorists, your game is through, 'cause now you have to answer to / America, fuck yeah! So lick my butt and suck on my balls! / America, fuck yeah! What you gonna do when we come for you now!
http://www.cinema.com/image_lib/8885_p003_thumb.jpg
10-26-2004, 10:49 AM
13

An observation from a JONG

For a fella who whines and bitches a lot about the (and I quote) "liberal media," he sure does rely on a lot of information that comes from the media.

Aaaaand, what he says is nothing most of us haven't heard before from the mouths of fearful Americans in places terrorists likely won't even think about striking. Since, ya know, historically, most attacks have been on areas of high human density (planes, buildings, buses, etc.).

I just have one thing to say to people voting for a candidate based on fear of another terrorist attack: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
10-26-2004, 11:00 AM
freshies

Quote:

Originally Posted by 13

I just have one thing to say to people voting for a candidate based on fear of another terrorist attack: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

werd (damn 10 characters rule...)
10-26-2004, 12:38 PM
mr_gyptian

Quote:

Originally Posted by 13

For a fella who whines and bitches a lot about the (and I quote) "liberal media," he sure does rely on a lot of information that comes from the media.

Aaaaand, what he says is nothing most of us haven't heard before from the mouths of fearful Americans in places terrorists likely won't even think about striking. Since, ya know, historically, most attacks have been on areas of high human density (planes, buildings, buses, etc.).

I just have one thing to say to people voting for a candidate based on fear of another terrorist attack: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

That asshole said a lot of things.

Campaigning for re-election in Boston on October 30, 1940, FDR had sworn: "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." Well, Peleliu ain’t Peoria. Roosevelt was lying when he made his declaration, just as he had lied repeatedly before and would lie repeatedly for the remainder of his life.

400,000 American boys died on foreign soil.
10-26-2004, 12:45 PM
Cornholio

Are you seriously equating World War 2 with Iraq?
10-26-2004, 12:56 PM
basom

no he's simply trying to say that the guy who coined the phrase about fearing fear told people he wasn't sending troops out. its a pretty lame point though. doesnt make the fact that 'fearing fear is bad' wrong.
10-26-2004, 01:03 PM
13

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr_gyptian

That asshole said a lot of things.

Campaigning for re-election in Boston on October 30, 1940, FDR had sworn: "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." Well, Peleliu ain’t Peoria. Roosevelt was lying when he made his declaration, just as he had lied repeatedly before and would lie repeatedly for the remainder of his life.

400,000 American boys died on foreign soil.

You're grasping at straws, kid. So weak.

Reminder: October 30, 1940 was before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
10-26-2004, 01:50 PM
Will

Quote:

Originally Posted by Summit

Look for an NYT correction tomorrow...

Hey Summit! I found your correction!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Miklaszewski, MSNBC

Following up on that story from last night, military officials tell NBC News that on April 10, 2003, when the Second Brigade of the 101st Airborne entered the Al QaQaa weapons facility south of Baghdad, that those troops were actually on their way to Baghdad, that they were not actively involved in the search for any weapons, including the high explosives, H.M.X. and R.D.X. The troops did observe stock piles of conventional weapons but no H.M.X. or R.D.X. and because the Al Qaqaa facility is so huge, it's not clear that those troops from the 101st were actually anywhere near the bunkers that reportedly contained the H.M.X. and R.D.X.
...
Pentagon officials say elements of the 101st airborne did conduct a thorough search of several facilities around the Al QaQaa compound for several weeks during the month of April in search of W.M.D. They found no W.M.D. And Pentagon officials say it's not clear at that time whether those other elements of the 101st actually searched the Al QaQaa compound.

Remember, the weapons inspectors had already been in Al QaQaa as recently as March 8th. The US knew there were no WMDs there, so they never bothered to look until....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Miklaszewski, MSNBC

Now, Pentagon officials say U.S. troops and members of the Iraq Survey Group did arrive at the Al QaQaa compound on May 27. And when they did, they found no H.M.X. or R.D.X. or any other weapons under seal at the time. Now, the Iraqi government has officially said that the high explosives were stolen by looters. Pentagon officials claim it's possible -- they're not sure, they say, but it's possible that Saddam Hussein himself ordered that these high explosives be removed and hidden before the war.

Hold on, is the pentagon arguing that between satellite imagery, predator drones, and overwhelming air superiority we failed to notice truck after truck (roughly 40 five-ton trucks) leaving one of the better known weapons depots in Iraq? A place which we suspected contributed to WMD production?

....but wait, there's more:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSNBC, 10/26/04 Transcript

Amy Robach: And it's still unclear exactly when those explosives disappeared. Here to help shed some light on that question is Lai Ling. She was part of an NBC news crew that traveled to that facility with the 101st Airborne Division back in April of 2003. Lai Ling, can you set the stage for us? What was the situation like when you went into the area?

Lai Ling Jew: ...blah blah blah ...They sent us over to this area in Iskanderia. We didn't know it as the Qaqaa facility at that point but when they did bring us over there we stayed there for quite a while. We stayed overnight, almost 24 hours. And we walked around, we saw the bunkers that had been bombed, and that exposed all of the ordinances that just lied dormant on the desert.

AR: Was there a search at all underway or did a search ensue for explosives once you got there during that 24-hour period?

LLJ: No. There wasn't a search. The mission that the brigade had was to get to Baghdad. That was more of a pit stop there for us. And, you know, the searching, I mean certainly some of the soldiers head off on their own, looked through the bunkers just to look at the vast amount of ordnance lying around. But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away. But there was – at that point the roads were shut off. So it would have been very difficult, I believe, for the looters to get there.

AR: And there was no talk of securing the area after you left. There was no discussion of that?

LLJ: Not for the 101st Airborne, Second Brigade. They were -- once they were in Baghdad, it was all about Baghdad, you know, and then they ended up moving north to Mosul. Once we left the area, that was the last that the brigade had anything to do with the area.

But wait, you ask (while scratching your head), what about that April 5th, 2003 AP report. The one in which the 3rd infantry passed through Al Qa Qaa?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AP

Col. John Peabody, engineer brigade commander of the 3rd Infantry Division said troops found thousands of five-centimeter by 12-centimetre boxes, each containing three vials of white powder, together with documents written in Arabic that dealt with how to engage in chemical warfare.

A senior U.S. official familiar with initial testing said the powder was believed to be explosives. The finding would be consistent with the plant's stated production capabilities in the field of basic raw materials for explosives and propellants.

Well, what comes in white powder form?

HMX does,

http://www.xsd.com.cn/src/20030628/1...yte71r9000.jpg

And so does RDX

http://www.xsd.com.cn/src/20030628/1...ytevndo000.jpg

This is incompetence.

We were warned about not securing this stuff. It was there in early March. It was there in early April. No one bothered to secure it. By the time we got a proper search there in late May the stuff was gone. Then we either covered it up until now, or our government was clueless until now. I don't know which option I like less.
10-26-2004, 02:14 PM
mr_gyptian

Quote:

Originally Posted by 13

You're grasping at straws, kid. So weak.

Reminder: October 30, 1940 was before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

Yeah, kinda like Bush saying he was against nation building during his presidential campaign. Oh yeah except Al Qaeda was not attempting to take over the world. Neither was Iraq. That is, until they were given the chance. As long as we're looking at reports you should take a look at Duelfer's report.

The only straw I'll be grasping at will be in my victory cocktail on Tuesday evening.
10-26-2004, 02:38 PM
mr_gyptian

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will

Hey Summit! I found your correction!

Remember, the weapons inspectors had already been in Al QaQaa as recently as March 8th. The US knew there were no WMDs there, so they never bothered to look until....

Hold on, is the pentagon arguing that between satellite imagery, predator drones, and overwhelming air superiority we failed to notice truck after truck (roughly 40 five-ton trucks) leaving one of the better known weapons depots in Iraq? A place which we suspected contributed to WMD production?

....but wait, there's more:

But wait, you ask (while scratching your head), what about that April 5th, 2003 AP report. The one in which the 3rd infantry passed through Al Qa Qaa?

Well, what comes in white powder form?

HMX does,

http://www.xsd.com.cn/src/20030628/1...yte71r9000.jpg

And so does RDX

http://www.xsd.com.cn/src/20030628/1...ytevndo000.jpg

This is incompetence.

We were warned about not securing this stuff. It was there in early March. It was there in early April. No one bothered to secure it. By the time we got a proper search there in late May the stuff was gone. Then we either covered it up until now, or our government was clueless until now. I don't know which option I like less.

This is astounding. I was under the impression that there were no WMDs. Or wait, that there weren't enough. Oh no, wait. They were too old.

Give me a break for fuck's sake. 380 tons of weapons in a country that had, depending on reports betweeen 250,000 and 600,000 tons of weapons of Destruction not to mention Mass Destruction.

Jesus, it's like complaining of a toothache after being diagnosed with both Ebola and AIDS.
10-26-2004, 02:38 PM
FNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

I didn't put quotes around what Kerry said dipshit, Still means the same thing though. He doesn't think terrorism should be the main focus right now. The turd in your room is waiting....

...or...it's that he wants to control terrorism to the point that we don't NEED to live every day of our lives in fear of another terrorist attack. It's a statement - be a poorly worded one - that Kerry's plan for winning the war on terrorism is going to work so well that the terrorists won't have the capability to be anything more than a nuisance.

of course that's not what you'll read in the republican handbook though.

-Edit-

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr_gyptian

Yeah, kinda like Bush saying he was against nation building during his presidential campaign. Oh yeah except Al Qaeda was not attempting to take over the world. Neither was Iraq. That is, until they were given the chance.

You can't be seriously implying that Al Qaeda & Iraq are trying to take over the world. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization. They're not trying to take over shit except for the hearts & minds of who they percieve are their enemies. What's the last country to be invaded by Al Qaeda? Yeah...

And what are you talking about "given the chance"? We went through Iraq like a hot knife through butter. We beat them down in record time during the first gulf war when they actually did invade Kuwait. That pretty much put their aspirations of any type of conquest in perspective - the perspective of 'not gonna happen'. Iraq trying to take over the world would be like the Michigan militia trying to take over America. There's no fucking way it would happen.
10-26-2004, 02:39 PM
13

mr_g,

You're still grasping. Keep trying, persistence is an admirable trait to possess.
10-26-2004, 03:20 PM
Will

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr_gyptian

Give me a break for fuck's sake. 380 tons of weapons in a country that had, depending on reports betweeen 250,000 and 600,000 tons of weapons of Destruction not to mention Mass Destruction.

So the place is already so fubared that proof of even more fubar is nothing to be concerned about?

[sarcasm]Yeah.... the next time I invade a country I'm going to steamroll right past the very stuff the IAEA had warned me about. Explosives whose location was very well known, and which are pretty much one of the more powerful military high-explosives available. Explosives that can be used to trigger a nuke. I'm going to make no effort to secure it, then I'm going to try and hide the fact, from the IAEA and my own country, that it was stolen out from under my nose. I'll even pressure the Iraqis to do the same. That's exactly what a competent invasion plan would include.[/sarcasm]

Considering that your 250,000-600,000 number is the mass of munitions, while I'm talking pure explosive material, I think we've got an apples and pears situation here.

This was a screw-up. One that should not have happened. One that was easily preventable. And we're paying for it now.

According to the Nelson Report, a private newsletter that circulates to embassies and Capitol Hill offices,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nelson report

...sources say it is unlikely that many roadside bombs are made from captured artillery shells, "taking a shell apart is incredibly dangerous and difficult, it has to be done by real experts, and we'd have seen more 'accidental explosions' if they were doing this on any scale. No... it's the RDX and HMX doing most of the damage, you can bet on it."

Experts guess that the amount of this material it takes to make a roadside bomb is a few pounds. How many bombs can they make with almost 377 tons?
10-26-2004, 03:27 PM
Blurred

The shit wasn't even under our watch when i t was moved. The whole thing is a joke. Kerry and his camp were going to release this story on Halloween, and it prolly would've been more effective then. They say it would take 40 trucks to move all that. Interestingly, Kerry is jumping all over this.....so why couldn't WMD's be moved at the same time? What a joke...
10-26-2004, 03:33 PM
FNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

so why couldn't WMD's be moved at the same time?

You seriously might be the only person left in America who still believes there were WMD's in Iraq.
10-26-2004, 03:38 PM
Blurred

Quote:

Originally Posted by FNG

You seriously might be the only person left in America who still believes there were WMD's in Iraq.

Once again, you missed my point again. If 380 tons of explosives are "missing", oh, nevermind......
10-26-2004, 03:44 PM
13

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

Once again, you missed my point again. If 380 tons of explosives are "missing", oh, nevermind......

Is him 'fwaid?
10-26-2004, 03:51 PM
iceman

Sorry, this thread is way too long and heated for me to read in its entirety, but if the original point has not been definitively addressed, the future of the world is safe, there's no way in hell the Skins will beat Green Bay this Sunday.
10-26-2004, 04:38 PM
FNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

Once again, you missed my point again. If 380 tons of explosives are "missing", oh, nevermind......

I don't think you've got a point, at least not one better than 'if 380 tons of high explosives can dissappear, then so COULD the WMD's.'
10-26-2004, 04:42 PM
sea2ski

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceman

Sorry, this thread is way too long and heated for me to read in its entirety, but if the original point has not been definitively addressed, the future of the world is safe, there's no way in hell the Skins will beat Green Bay this Sunday.

I guess the 40% of Americans who won't vote in November believe this. ;)

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page