Bush ready to start WWIII

reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Oh no, that comment wasn't directed at you, Sorry if you took it that way.
Not sure why that whole story didn't paste into the thread. It was even cut off in mid sentence and I didn't catch it. Should have been a link at the end too and another to the cherry creek news that is another local rag that just printed the press release like it was a news story. Mainly trying to show that the unin endorsement came later than the event that was reported on.
and I count pretty good. I did miss the current Denver City attorney so instead of a few it was 4 current attorneys
In either case referring to "law enforcement officials" I would expect to see Police Chiefs, Sheriffs, Deputy police Chiefs, etc., Not DA's.
As for the original story it isnn't in the archives to there is no way to link to it.
Originally Posted by Dogstar
I never said you did......and I hope that above quote is not directed towards me. Your earlier post was not clear about any particular story to me so I just looked at the part I quoted, knowing that on its own, that statement was not correct because the DPPA did indorse him.
Now about this story. I will take your word about the headline in the paper though you have not provided and I have not found any proof and only add this...
You will have to say if perhaps you can't count though
.....more of the release that you did 'not post' seems to indicate a few more than 3 people. And now you and I both have used the term " few ", I quess that number can be interprated anyway one wishes.

...........
A complete list of speakers, attendees and other law enforcement officials endorsing Ritter:
ORDER OF SPEAKERS
TOM RAYNES – Republican District Attorney, 7th Judicial District (Delta, Gunnison, Montrose, Ouray and San Miguel counties)
BONNIE ROESINK – Republican District Attorney, 14th Judicial District (Grand, Moffat and Routt counties)
DAVID MICHAUD – Former Denver Police Chief, 1992-98
NORM EARLY – Former Denver District Attorney, 1983-93
BILL RITTER – Former Denver District Attorney, June 1993 to January 2005, Democratic candidate for governor.
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE
Don Quick – District Attorney, 17th Judicial District (Adams, Broomfield counties)
Mitch Morrissey – Denver District Attorney
Michael Goodbee – Former District Attorney, 5th Judicial District (Clear Creek, Eagle, Lake and Summit counties)
Greg Long – Former Republican District Attorney, 14th Judicial District (Grand, Moffat and Routt counties)
Dave Thomas – Former District Attorney, 1st Judicial District (Gilpin and Jefferson counties); current acting District Attorney, 3rd Judicial District (Huerfano and Las Animas counties)
Manuel Martinez – Former Denver Manager of Safety
Fidel “Butch” Montoya – Former Denver Manager of Safety
John Simonet – Former Denver Manager of Safety
Gerry Whitman – Denver Police Chief
Tom Coogan – Former Denver Police Chief (1983-87); Colorado Parole Board
Lorri Brovsky – Past President, Colorado Women in Criminal Justice
.......
I will also let this go now because I entered with the link about the injured soilders only becuse of the conversation relateing to the recruitment and that article was IMO, the lastest I know of that is relevant rather others agree or not.
I will let everyone decide on their own if they choose to beleive it or not.
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by rudedog40
Here's some proof Bush fabricated his 'war'
http://www.ksat.com/news/15116543/detail.html
Sorry Darth. I've had better things to do with my time than waste it arguing with clueless individuals that follow Bush like lemmings over a cliff...
That study would actually have some vailidity if Clinton and the leading Democrats hadn't said Saddam had WMD's and attacked Iraq first in 1998...
Was everyone wrong about WMD's? For the most part ya (remember small amounts were found). Remember that leaders from both parties were saying the same thing though.... so they all unknowlingly were lying to us.
Now, i'd love to see the same independent journalists chronicle all of the lies deliberately told to us while Clinton was in office. Rest assured, those weren't mistakes nor were they unintentional.
Rudedog, you started this thread under false pretenses and have continued to post incorrect information. Calling other people "clueless" is just silly.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by rudedog40
Here's some proof Bush fabricated his 'war'
http://www.ksat.com/news/15116543/detail.html
Sorry Darth. I've had better things to do with my time than waste it arguing with clueless individuals that follow Bush like lemmings over a cliff...

You call me clueless? That is hilarious. Dude you have yet to prove anything. All you have proven is we didn't find WMDs of significant amounts in Iraq. This is no news to us.
You keep trying the standard Air America Mantra of "bush lied". Yet ignore the fact that It would take far more than just President Bush to Fabricate this, it would require the WORLD intelligence organization as well as they all confirmed the same thing. But you in your arrogance and foolhardiness, fail to see this or even comprehend the scale such a "lie" would have to take on. Bush would have had to convince, France, England, Russia, and Germany to go along with the evidence and provide evidence of their own matching our analysis, which they did. And you call me clueless. I think you got hit with one to many golf balls to the head.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
I would encourage people to read Rude's link. When doing so ask yourself why this "study" is being promoted as being done by "two nonprofit journalism organizations" when the same people are behind both groups? It's also interesting to note they claim ANY mentions of Iraq's WMD's as false statements. Only the most braindead morons have conceeded that Iraq had WMD's at the time the weapons inspectors were pulled from Iraq in 98. Nearly every intellegence organization in the world believed Iraq still had WMD's (which in fact they did still have with over 500 mustard and Sarin gas shells being found there since 2003) So while the term false is technically correct I see the words misled or lie nowhere in their "study".
But as for lies here's one from those behind the "study"
"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members.
Here are links to stories about WMD's found in Iraq, WMD's if you consider Sarin and Mustard gas WMD's.
(And not a single link from the free republic or worldnet daily)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...001528_pf.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004May17.html
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...fer/index.html
"Meaningful ties to Al Qaida" Hows that for weasle words?
Yeah, it wasn't until we were in "control" of the country that we learned that there were indeed contacts between Iraq and Al Qaida but in the words of the 9-11 report "It doesn't appear it resulted in any collaborative relationship". Even after the fact they can't say with 100% accuracy. Go back and review the reason Clinton ordered the strike on the pharacutical plant in Sudan.
Yeah, I think its crazy that some people blindly follow Bush. I think it's halarious that people will believe any story that makes Bush look bad. Even when said story has about as much credibility as those about people being abducted by space aliens

Bush aint no saint but he isn't the devil either. Was the intellegence wrong about WMD's, Yes. If you bother to gather information from places other than the I hate Bush blog you would learn that many analysts have concluded that whatever happened the the WMD equipment Iraq did have it was obvious that Saddam intended to give the impression that he did still have a weapons program going.
 
mfp1016

mfp1016

Member
Go to the two organization's websites, they're hilarious. They can be taken as seriously as any other conspiracy theory website.
No offense Rudedog, I sometimes doubt your age.
 
mfp1016

mfp1016

Member
Originally Posted by crimzy
Iraq was our ally... Then a few years later they were using our own weapons against us. Saudi produces more terrorists than any other nation. You think these weapons will not be used against Americans someday.
Bush favors Saudi, not because they are a wonderful ally, but because the Saudi royal family was huge investors in the Bush family's (then) failing oil fields. Imagine that... Saudi money in Texas oil. What do you think they were really buying?
Bush favors the Saudis kings because they are the only ones who seem to be able to appease the Wahhabi for any length of time.
 
rudedog40

rudedog40

Member
You guys need to go sit around a campfire in Bagdhad and sing 'Who Luvs Dubya' camp songs. I simply post a link to an article listed on a local news station, and the bashing continues. No matter what information I could provide that would dispute any of your arguments, you'd just say, "Those guys are idiots and an unreliable news source. That news article has no facts to back up their claims." But if the same news source were to validate your beliefs, you say their the most reliable source out there. You only requote my comments that suit your side of the argument, but ignore the ones that do refute your claims.
Darth you claim the BRAC closings have nothing to do with the reduction of the military. You aren't serious are you? They reduced the number of bases because they were no longer required due to the lack of personnel to support them. Clinton had nothing to do with the closures, but you still blame him.
I'll ask AGAIN. If Clinton screwed up the military so bad, why hasn't Bush fixed it? He's had 8 years to do it, with a Congress to back him.
I'll ask AGAIN. How long do you want this 'battle' to continue? How long is long enough? You refer to Korea. Now that's a funny one. They maintain an area in the DMZ. Can't remember the last time I've heard of any military personnel getting shot at on a daily basis, or blown up in a Hummer, on the South Korean border.
I'll ask AGAIN. No matter how long we stay there, do you honestly think you will rid that region of any and all religious conflicts to where they will never fight with one another ever again? If not, then what's the point in continuing to 'repair' Iraq?
I honestly don't know why I'm posting this. You people have made up your mind about my viewpoints, and even if I could get Bush himself to validate my arguments, you'd still say I was wrong. I honestly don't care if you believe me, and I defintely don't care if you don't like my views of this useless war. I served in a war against my will. I had no choice to not go, unless I wanted to live in Canada for the rest of my life. I saw things over there that I still have nightmares about. I know several people who went to Iraq, and had similar experiences to mine. I also know several individuals who did a tour in Iraq, and had pleasant experiences. However, they were deployed into areas that weren't in the middle of the fire fights. So I guess it's who you talk to.
Unless you've been in a situation where you honestly don't know whether you'll be alive the next day, or next hour, I don't think you have any right to make any opinions on the matter. Go have hundreds of bullets zinging by your head, or mortar fire hitting within yards of your foxhole, then we'll talk.
Like I said. I want finality. I'm not willing to send my kids or grandkids into a war I don't believe in, and is continuing because a minority of Americans think we should stay and help some region of the world I care nothing about, heal itself. You want to go. GO. You want your kids and grandkids to fight the war for you because you can't. SEND THEM. I guarantee you there will never be another relative of mine involved in your war if I have any say in it.
Bottom line, I'm done with this thread, and the arrogant attitudes that go with it. You guys want to continue to bash my opinions and praise how great yours are, you'll do it without me. Believe me, I'm not alone in my beliefs. Guess I need to go find a bunch of saltwater fish geeks and have them join this pathetic site so we can gang up on you. I joined this site to gain information in a new hobby. All I've gotten from the majority of you are crass comments and poor advise. I've found more reliable resources for my needs. Ones that don't criticize you when you don't agree with their opinions. So go relish your victory in chasing away someone else. If I wanted this kind of abuse, I'd go back to Nam and volunteer for a POW camp. It would be less painful.
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
*BRAC- As I understand it, the DoD suggested bases, Clinton signed his approval, and Congress signed it. This is in addition to Clinton drastically cutting the military. Feel free to correct me on this. As I said, this is how I understand it.
*President Bush has been addressing the issues of the military.
*Yes. I do believe we can stay there long enough to stabilize the country. The majority of Iraqi's are well educated. The majority of Iraqis are embracing Democracy (as seen in the high numbers that vote)
*You will never have to send anyone to war. Every soldier currently deployed is a volunteer.
*You have not been bashed Rudedog. You started an inflammatory thread and lost control of the fire.
*"The Aquarium" is for off topic posts. Feel free to never post here again. Many members of the SWF community never visit the "Aquarium". Your posts elsewhere on this forum have nothing to do with your posts here. Your questions elsewhere on the forums will be answered. Your opinions will be discussed (SW) related, and you won't be "bashed".
 
ophiura

ophiura

Active Member
Originally Posted by rudedog40
. If I wanted this kind of abuse, I'd go back to Nam and volunteer for a POW camp. It would be less painful.

Another completely shameful thing to say. I truly have to question whether you are a Vietnam vet to ever EVER complain that so called "bashing" on a frickin message board is worse than being in a POW camp.
SHAME SHAME SHAME
 
mfp1016

mfp1016

Member
Also, I'd like to add (although I'm sure this will be an exercise in futility) that Journeyman is absolutely right. Rudedog, you started this thread in the Aquarium section, pretty much anything goes. This would obviously be a controversial debate, and if you wished it not to be, you probably should have declared that in your initial post. Furthermore, honestly, what do you expect? Would you like everyone to start delivering reefing advice with a pro-left spin? As far as I have seen, no one on this site offers any kind of SW advice with a political spin, I mean come on thats just preposterous. But for fun lets try an example, "Thread: Hey Check out this sweet new Purple Tang I got! Only $40! Good thing we invaded Iraq, I knew Bush would come through for his SW-loving Republican cronies. A Vote for Republicans is a vote for Tangs!" Thats silly.
Lastly I'd like to add, that most people whose political opinions I respect are all advocates of conversation and debate of politics. I work for a California University, I dare you to find a more pro-liberal arena. That being said, whats the point of only talking to people that you agree with? Personally, I listen to NPR and Air America in the car, not to gain fodder, but to question my own beliefs and values and to make sure I'm shaping my politics in my own right-mind (sorry for the pun).
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
I also read pretty much everything I can get my hands on right or left wing, I don't watch so much tv time is pretty tight but I got to watch alot of coverage of this "economic recession."
It has left me with this conclusion, even my lowly BBA in economics from a small texas school is better than most of these guys PHD's in Journalism. Most of these guys from either side can't put together a decent well thought out position paper if their life depended on them. From Hannity to Dobbs they have no clue what they are talking about half the time. And Dobbs is just clueless.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by mfp1016
Go to the two organization's websites, they're hilarious. They can be taken as seriously as any other conspiracy theory website.
No offense Rudedog, I sometimes doubt your age.
That was putting it kindly
 
bbq bill

bbq bill

New Member
3 yrs? ROTFL 30 years maybe. there is no nation on this planet not even russia (which are trying to fire their's back up) that comes close to the U.S. Navy.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by rudedog40
Here's some proof Bush fabricated his 'war'
http://www.ksat.com/news/15116543/detail.html
Sorry Darth. I've had better things to do with my time than waste it arguing with clueless individuals that follow Bush like lemmings over a cliff...
I've posted specific facts regarding your initial post crying about the proposed sale of arms to Saudi. I gave you information regrding the clinton garage sale to Saudi as well as other nations...which you failed to comment your support or lack thereof . Instead, you continued to bait and ignored my questions.
Once I saw this...I new most likely you were a fake and a fraud...just posting to bash a president and our troops.
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt regarding your current and past service to the military...a current 'contractor" would not publicly bash the institution that provides him/her with a paycheck.
If you truly beleive your morals and opinions are the correct ones...why do you accept a paycheck for your contract services? Why do you even work in support of this war and the military which you obviously have issues with? How do you reconcile your opinion of this war with the paychecks you claim to receive as a military contractor?
I can only arrive at one conclusion...fake and fraud.
Since you have such lack of respect for the military and our brave service people..I mam or sir...give you the same in return.
It seems like if we all would have joined in on YOUR bashing it would be okay...but once you showed your lack of respect for our miltary men an women and were "bashed"...you did not like it.
So if you are a man or woman of conviction that cries about bashing...why did YOU do it?
You don't know why you posted your last comment? TO conitnue your BASHING that is why. After all, in your mind..that bashing is okay.
We can have a civil debate regarding issues....but disrepect is usually not tolerated regarding our military.
This is probably why you did not receive much support...most folks that oppose the war do not trash the troops.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by mfp1016
Like I told Rudedog earlier, he's not the only Nam vet here.

Thanks for your honorable service! Missed it earlier.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by rudedog40
If I wanted this kind of abuse, I'd go back to Nam and volunteer for a POW camp. It would be less painful.
And once again sir or madam...you disrespect the brave men and women that served our country during the Viet Nam war, by comparing posts contrary to your views with the "discomfort" they cause to you personally , to Nam POW camps. I can't even begin to understand how one can think on this level...but it does provide an explanation for much of what I have read on this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top