|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 17, 2006 13:07:56 GMT -8
lol honestly I couldn't care less what your email address is toe
|
|
|
|
Post by MARIO on Jan 17, 2006 17:19:17 GMT -8
Yeah, if tankey/leppy knew that, she'd run your ass into the ground.  Hey kevin, what's your email address? I send all of these guys our age here these idiotic forwards, so why not you. Later. Mario, take me off of your distribution list. I don't want that asswipe getting my email address. Don't worry, Mike, he won't be getting it. I send guys like you, Rex, and Bob the more serious and political emails. Strat won't be getting any of those. Take care. |
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 0:21:30 GMT -8
LOL yeah, I was wondering if it was awkward getting BAPs when you're as old as toejam...
|
|
|
|
Post by Far Rider on Jan 18, 2006 3:41:10 GMT -8
LOL yeah, I was wondering if it was awkward getting BAPs when you're as old as toejam... You ain't gonna live to be as old as I am, asshole. How do you keep from getting your ass kicked every day? Or do they kick sand in your face so you come here to make yourself feel like a man because you can run your mouth and nobody can physically kick your ass? Then you go over to THC and claim victory. What a dickhead. |
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 13:33:17 GMT -8
name me ONE time I ever "ran my mouth" that WASN'T a direct response from one of you little crybabies? You're great at dishin it out, but you just can't take it can you? LOL go take a nap |
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Jan 18, 2006 13:36:06 GMT -8
name me ONE time I ever "ran my mouth" that WASN'T a direct response from one of you little crybabies? You're great at dishin it out, but you just can't take it can you? LOL go take a nap How is your research going Strat? |
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 13:37:29 GMT -8
Research... you mean the dates? If that's what you mean I think the speach was Jan. 28 of 2003, which sorta splits the counterarguments in half, some were post that speech and some were before, I haven't drawn a clear conclusion yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Jan 18, 2006 13:42:45 GMT -8
Keep going then, I would suggest you look at those that were opposed to the doctrine of peemption and what they were saying before the war.
|
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 13:44:58 GMT -8
I know what they said, they said that preemptive war shouldn't occur unless its imminent.
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Jan 18, 2006 14:05:17 GMT -8
I know what they said, they said that preemptive war shouldn't occur unless its imminent. That's not all they said Strat they also said that since that is not what the administration is arguing... |
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 14:10:49 GMT -8
...cameron I fail to realize the importance. You see, I'm looking at what the ADMINISTRATION said themselves, isn't that a little more important then some liberal website somewhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Jan 18, 2006 14:22:50 GMT -8
Strat the administration argued that we could not wait for a threat to become imminent. You seem to think that because they argued that it was urgent that we do something that is making an imminent threat argument, it is not. Imminent threat has a specific meaning. Now you are either to dim witted to understand the difference or you are blinded by your idealogical beliefs.
|
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 14:28:33 GMT -8
So... you'll say they argued: an Urgent imperative vital crucial critical burning threat...but nothing imminent? Bush may not have used the word imminent but you can't deny his administration did, so when people say "bush lied about an imminent threat" that is incorrect, but if they say "the adminsitration lied about an imminent threat" that is proved by quotes.
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Jan 18, 2006 14:32:47 GMT -8
So... you'll say they argued: an Urgent imperative vital crucial critical burning threat...but nothing imminent? Bush may not have used the word imminent but you can't deny his administration did, so when people say "bush lied about an imminent threat" that is incorrect, but if they say "the adminsitration lied about an imminent threat" that is proved by quotes. No no no like I said you seem constitutionally incapable of being honest. The administration did not make an imminent threat argument. Imminent threat has a specific meaning that you do not seem to get that. We were not under threat of imminent danger no one was saying we were no one. That was what the anti-war crowd at the time was saying was nessisary to justify a war. The admisistration rejected that argument and said we could not wait for a threat to become imminent. |
|
|
|
Post by stratagosv on Jan 18, 2006 14:34:20 GMT -8
We'll do this by the numbers, they said "Imminent threat" do you disagree that they ever said Iraq was an imminent threat?
|
|
