View Full Version : Chirac is back
sytaylor
11-25-03, 08:11 AM
So Chirac is back in the UK after the ill feeling over the whole iraq dispute in the back of the UN. (Ok the last part of the sentance was just to rhyme).
Notice how there are no huge picket signs that say "Nuke is Puke", in fact no demonstrators whatsoever for the only leader to test weapons rescentley, and in paradise of all places. Thats all been allowed to drop because he disagreed with Bush. Too many people are caught up in what they want to believe and are not looking at the real issues. Its sickening.
its a fence mending issue... chirac and blair will hammer some things out... agree to disagree on other matters...
not so much related to conflicts though I am sure blair and chirac will talk about french troop involvement in iraq...
still the tone of the visit is not the same as with the US visit and therefore I can't see why there would be protests of the same magnitude...
besides... the protestors are probably all tired out already..
vampireuk
11-25-03, 08:32 AM
So when was the last time France went to war? You want anti war protestors to protest against a country not actively engaged in a war?:rolleyes:
Anyway I thought the best place to show your feelings is at the poll booth, why has that suddenly changed? Also if you are that upset that nobody is protesting why not lead by example?
1stFlight
11-25-03, 08:36 AM
Originally posted by sytaylor
So Chirac is back in the UK after the ill feeling over the whole iraq dispute in the back of the UN. (Ok the last part of the sentance was just to rhyme).
Notice how there are no huge picket signs that say "Nuke is Puke", in fact no demonstrators whatsoever for the only leader to test weapons rescentley, and in paradise of all places. Thats all been allowed to drop because he disagreed with Bush. Too many people are caught up in what they want to believe and are not looking at the real issues. Its sickening.
Real issues...
We ....started....a .....war. Against a nonagressive..... nation.....and ....have .... yet to find a single WMD warhead......
Maybe that doesn't mean a lot to you.... should I say it a bit slower so it sinks in?
vampireuk
11-25-03, 08:38 AM
Yeah I also enjoyed reading the real issues bit? I mean what on earth does that even mean? France tested a nuclear weapon, so what? Many countries have, those trees in "paradise" must be so upset:D
I am curious to what the "real issue" is, because if going to war on a flat out lie is not a issue I wonder what in the hell is a issue:eek:
Originally posted by 1stFlight
Real issues...
We ....started....a .....war. Against a nonagressive..... nation.....and ....have .... yet to find a single WMD warhead......
Maybe that doesn't mean a lot to you.... should I say it a bit slower so it sinks in?
Iraq is non-agresive? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH *cought*Iran*cough*Kuwaitt*cough*gassing Kurds*cough* BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
Originally posted by vampireuk
So when was the last time France went to war? You want anti war protestors to protest against a country not actively engaged in a war?:rolleyes:
Anyway I thought the best place to show your feelings is at the poll booth, why has that suddenly changed? Also if you are that upset that nobody is protesting why not lead by example? Hey they beat up Greenpeace-thats got to count for something.
Sure why not anti war protestors protest France. After all for many of these protestors its not being peaceful...its about being seen and whatnot.
1stFlight
11-25-03, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by UDawg
Iraq is non-agresive? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH *cought*Iran*cough*Kuwaitt*cough*gassing Kurds*cough* BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
Recall the gas they used was stamped, "Made in the USA" .... *cough* *cough* Iraq was one an Ally of ours....
Ouuuuuuu owned:
vampireuk
11-25-03, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by sbp
Hey they beat up Greenpeace-thats got to count for something.
Now lets be fair, everybody would beat up Greenpeace if given the chance:p
Originally posted by 1stFlight
Recall the gas they used was stamped, "Made in the USA" .... *cough* *cough* Iraq was one an Ally of ours....
Ouuuuuuu owned:
Iraq was never an ally of ours. What proof do you have that the gas was from the US. I am not talking about some leftist news site that claims this but what actual proof from government sources that we supplied them with that gas?
Originally posted by UDawg
Iraq was never an ally of ours.
Nice try at rewriting history there.
As for the protesters. If they don't show up for Chirac, fine, but why didn't they show up for Putin this summer? The war in Chechnya has been far more devastating than the war in Iraq. And for no reason for that matter, other than good ol' greed and political power issues.
Originally posted by 1stFlight
Recall the gas they used was stamped, "Made in the USA" .... *cough* *cough* Iraq was one an Ally of ours....
Ouuuuuuu owned:
This is an outright lie! WE never gave mustard gas to the Iraqis. Once again you lie and will be unable to provide any proof of your misleading statements.
ih8mblogins
11-25-03, 12:58 PM
"Iraq was never an ally of ours."
http://www.tehelka.com/channels/commentary/2002/sept/20/com092002target.htm
http://www.topos.org/rumsfeld.html
In case you need the definition of 'ally':
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/ally
ih8mblogins
11-25-03, 01:23 PM
As for mustard gas, American companies didn't sell mustard gas to Iraq, but mustard gas ingredients and helped build a chemical weapons factory to produce it. Iraq produced the final result themselves.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/saddam/2003/0202atimeto.htm
So because you take leftist sites with an agenda who say we were allies then it is true. We did favor Iraq in the Iran Iraq war and were trying to sway them from the Soviets in order to defeat global communism but they were not a ally of ours. They were CLOSELY allied with USSR and Saddam routinely made anti-US speeches all throught out his reign. He was a communist and his party was communist.
Nixon whent to China and tried to open normal relations with them, did that make them an ally? No. So don't post propaganda agenda sites as proof. If you want to post them as another point of view that is fine but I will throw it back in your face if you use them as proof.
vampireuk
11-25-03, 01:33 PM
MJ12 is watching you :eek2:
Once again, I get a response from somebody on this issue that cannot differentiate between biological agents and CHEMICAL precursors or agents. Dude, do not waste my time with links that simply reinforce what I have said in the past.
ih8mblogins
11-25-03, 01:51 PM
Try looking at the footnote references of articles.
Here's the commie leftist sources the article from the Indian news site used for its facts:
(1) BBC, London, 15 August 2002.
(2) The New York Times, 18 August 2002.
(3) US Senate report quoted by William Blum, "What The New York Times Left Out", Counterpunch, 20 August 2002.
(4) Financial Times, London, 30 July 2002.
(5) The Wall Street Journal Europe, 15 August 2002.
As for the Rumsfeld picture, do a search of 'rumsfeld handshake' until you find a source that you find agreeable.
ih8mblogins
11-25-03, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by bknblk
Once again, I get a response from somebody on this issue that cannot differentiate between biological agents and CHEMICAL precursors or agents. Dude, do not waste my time with links that simply reinforce what I have said in the past.
And once again, I get a repsonse from someone that didn't read what I posted.
Here, I'll quote myself: "American companies didn't sell mustard gas to Iraq"
Originally posted by bknblk
Once again, I get a response from somebody on this issue that cannot differentiate between biological agents and CHEMICAL precursors or agents. Dude, do not waste my time with links that simply reinforce what I have said in the past.
Sigh....
I llike you bknblk am tired of people posting political agenda sites as PROOF for their arguments.
If you want to post these sites as a opinion of your side then that is fine.
DO NOT post these sites as proof of your argument because I will post 100 sites that believe that goatse could formation that kruno posted is real.
YA GOT IT!!!
You will note I rarely post anything as proof that is not covered by main stream news agencies. If I post something from a right wing political site, I post it as a point of veiw I want you to read and form your own opinions about it. This is why I ATTACK likes to left wing sites. If I posted Rushlimbaugh.com you guys will laugh at me until your prostate falls out.
Originally posted by ih8mblogins
As for the Rumsfeld picture, do a search of 'rumsfeld handshake' until you find a source that you find agreeable.
Who cares if Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam. Reagan shook hands with Gorbachev does that make the USSR a ally? Maybe it was just a hand shake between two country that are trying to get what they want from a bad situation.
If you want to say because that Rumsfeld is responsible for the gassing of the Kurds then that is obsurd. If you want to say the US is responsible for Saddam being a dictator, that is also obsurd.
These are the same lies the left says about the CIA trainging Osama. Its wasn't true with Osam and it isn't true with Iraq. We did back them in the Iran/Iraq war because of our situation with the Shaw. We also were fighting the Soviet Union. We had to pick the lesser of the TWO evils.
ih8mblogins
11-25-03, 02:10 PM
Post from all the right wing sources you want. If what they say is true it doesn't matter that they said it. If what they doesn't hold up, it'll be discredited. Don't kill the messenger, let the information fend for itself.
Originally posted by ih8mblogins
As for mustard gas, American companies didn't sell mustard gas to Iraq, but mustard gas ingredients and helped build a chemical weapons factory to produce it. Iraq produced the final result themselves.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/saddam/2003/0202atimeto.htm
OK, you did not say we sold finished product, you flatly stated that we sold the ingredients. Now it is time to prove your statement. I know that some American companies sold biological agents, but never chemical precursors. Check with ze Frogs, Germans, or Russians on the gas issue. Indeed, there was an article posted here not long ago that pretty clearly provided evidence that the Germans were the providers of Chemical agents to Iraq.
If you are going to quote yourself, don't edit what you originally said; it is only 2 posts up.
The point they are trying to make as the point in one of his links said was that the US was complicant with Iraq. In other words we are at fault and Saddam is not. This is a lie. Their evidence is that we had certain agreements with Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. They say we gave ingreediants and weapons so we are hypcrits. This is a misrepresentation of what happened. The US gave a total of 3% of weapons gave to Iraq during that time. USSR, Germany, France and China were the biggest contributors. I might have the exact order wrong but the US was at the BOTTOM of the list. USSR was at the top. Iraq was a little Soviet wann-a-be country. Saddam was CLOSELY allied with Soviet Russia.
vampireuk
11-25-03, 02:26 PM
Is it just me or is the internet on its last legs tonight?:eek:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.