In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Well then, Hairy...

nordnord Member Posts: 6,106
edited February 2004 in General Discussion
You never answered the questions I posed. You DID give your opinion, but I didn't ask for that.

I never raised the question about any "legality" in the Iraq conquest. I didn't rely on anything Mr. Clinton had said. I merely asked some questions that could easily be addressed with a simple yes or no.

I don't care whether you're democrat, republican, libertarian, communist, or anarchist. I don't care whether you believe we've "opened Pandora's box".

For once put politics aside. Put your suspicions aside. Put your libertarian views aside (I tend to agree with the libertarian views much of the time).

Now answer the questions I posed. Then tell me we wouldn't have had to deal with Saddam at some point. Tell me that the 500 men and women we've lost wouldn't pale in comparison to what Saddam would have liked to do to us.

And after you've answered my questions honestly, then go back and spout off about many of the issues I agree with you on. Just don't lay too much blame on 'ol George for doing what should have been done 20 years ago.

Nord

Comments

  • ElMuertoMonkeyElMuertoMonkey Member Posts: 12,898
    edited November -1
    Um... point of order... 20 years ago Reagan and Bush's dad were propping Saddam up.

    They made the mess and now we're wiping their @$$es for them.

    That doesn't answer your question, but I ain't Hairy.
  • nordnord Member Posts: 6,106
    edited November -1
    Ummm, Mr. Monkey -

    I think that's exactly what I said. Bad policy that goes back to the early 70's needed to be dealt with. I didn't blame anyone in particular.

    Nord
  • HAIRYHAIRY Member Posts: 23,606
    edited November -1
    Nord: Per your request. Here are the comments you made on the other thread and my response to them.

    1. Did Saddam ever display or use WMD's? (Reply: Yes, so what? The US does as well; should we be unilaterally invaded because of it?)

    2. Did Saddam ever take offensive actions against a neighboring state? (Reply: Yes; and so do other states in that region. BTW, the US gave Saddam the "green light" to invade Kuwait--read Ambassador Glaspies response to Saddam.)

    3. Did Saddam ever use terror as an instrument to maintain power? (Reply:??? If you are defining his brutality to his own people--yes; if you are using the word "terror" in today's context--no.)

    4. Did Saddam ever threaten the use of force against the US or its
    allies? (Reply: Against the US alone--No; against Israel and the coalition in 1990-Yes.)

    5. Did Saddam allow free inspections to verify that there were no
    WMD's remaining in his inventory? (Reply: "Free"? or unhindered? No; allow inspections: Yes. Didn't President Bush tell the world he would take the question to the UN for a final vote and then refused to do so when the Administration realized the vote would be against US military action?)

    6. Did Saddam ever lie to the world? (Reply: About WMD: No--he kept saying he didn't have any. Now, if Saddam told the truth and Bush said the opposite, who, in your opinion, is the liar?)

    After you answer the above questions, please favor me with an answer to these questions...

    1. Would you have chosen to make your home in Iraq with Saddam at the
    helm? (Reply: No, I am an American and choose to live in America; had I been a Ba'athist, perhaps.)

    2. Perhaps you might have enjoyed the weather in northern Iraq with
    Kurds. Would you have felt confident that Saddam would never have
    gassed you? Bombed you? Starved you? Tortured you? (Reply: Since he moved the Kurds out of the area into Bagdad, Yes. Today, however, am not as confident that Turkey wouldn't.)

    3. Would you have felt completely safe in any country surrounding Iraq
    that was within SCUD range of Saddam's forces? (Reply: Yes--they are notoriously inaccurate--witness the 1990 attack on Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and Israel.)

    4. Could you be certain that Saddam wasn't developing more potent
    weapons? (Reply: H'll--I'm not even certain you exist!)

    5. Could you be certain that Saddam didn't have WMD's? (Reply: As certain as the Bush Administration is that Iraq does--and I don't have the resources the USG has either. BTW, hasn't Bush recently said he still needs more time to find them?)

    6. Do you have any basis in history or fact as to why Saddam wouldn't
    bring anything he could against us? (Reply: Given that even our alleged Allies do things against us (e.g., Israel's attack on the USS Liberty and the employment of American citizen Johnathan Pollard as an Israeli spy in the NSC--one may make the case that EVERY nation is a potential enemy. That said, however, it does not behoove us to go invade them as a preemptive course of action--as we just did in Iraq.)






    Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
  • nordnord Member Posts: 6,106
    edited November -1
    Hairy -

    Now I understand. You've clarified just about everything.

    One more question... Just where did you go to law school? Not many have the talent for turning simple answers into difficult one's. I escpecially enjoyed your reply about the SCUDS. You'd feel safe because they are inaccurate... That's deep!

    Your logic has won me over.

    Nord
  • HAIRYHAIRY Member Posts: 23,606
    edited November -1
    Nord: Your questions reminded me of the one asked a candidate for political office by his opponent: "When did you stop beating your wife?"

    Needless to say, the question is not intended to nor designed to obtain information but to try to "catch" the person. I viewed your questions in the same light and responded as well as one can during that process.

    I'm pleased my logic was so persuasive. [:D]





    Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
  • nordnord Member Posts: 6,106
    edited November -1
    Ah, Hairy...

    There was no intention of entrapment. Just simple questions that wouldn't tax anyone to a great extent. You wiggled and squirmed. You made simple complicated. You couldn't help but interject your opinion.
    In the end, though, you never answered.

    You lost this round. Try again.[:)]

    Nord
  • dcon12dcon12 Member Posts: 32,003 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by nord
    Ah, Hairy...

    There was no intention of entrapment. Just simple questions that wouldn't tax anyone to a great extent. You wiggled and squirmed. You made simple complicated. You couldn't help but interject your opinion.
    In the end, though, you never answered.

    You lost this round. Try again.[:)]

    Nord
    I will have to beg to differ, He did answer, maybe not to yours or mine sattifaction but the answer were there. Just my opinion. Don


    "Right is Right, even is everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it"
  • rcdisrcdis Member Posts: 994 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    nord

    HAIRY answered the loaded questions quite well. I fail to see how HAIRY has lost or you have won a round or a square.

    rcdis
Sign In or Register to comment.