Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak? [W:92]

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

You didn't answer my question. This is not about me, but you. I'm for staying entirely out of this mess. And I read that Assad has the approval of 70 percent of the population. Whether this is true or not, I neither know nor care. This is not our fight!

This is the isolationist/know nothing position. How do you reach a position without knowing the arguments? And why talk about Russia's positions.....when yours is isolation. Russia is not for isolation....they are actively supporting Assad with major weapon systems.

 

[P. Kersey]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Um, the "Lean" is politics, not philosophy.

Oh..thanks for explaining things to me. :roll:

This site is not "Debate Philosophy". I'm sorry if you didn't get that. You can put you lean towards Elmer Fudd, it won't change the fact that you do have a political viewpoint

My viewpoint is that neither party looks out for the best interest of the country and hyper partisans who think otherwise are part of the problem.

and your hypocritical "you believe one party has a better idea" is a hogwash argument

I'm not really concerned with your convoluted assessment of my philosophy.

......unless you have NEVER voted or participated in US politics. Even if you change your statement to "I was stating my philosophy", it remains a POLITICAL philosophy with the implication that YOU feel it is a superior POLITICAL philosophy.

Again..I'm not really concerned with your convoluted assessment of my philosophy.

I see you are very emotional about this, though, so just for you I'm going to change my "leaning" to something else so some other highly emotional partisan isn't fooled. :roll:

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Oh..thanks for explaining things to me. :roll:



My viewpoint is that neither party looks out for the best interest of the country and hyper partisans who think otherwise are part of the problem.



I'm not really concerned with your convoluted assessment of my philosophy.



Again..I'm not really concerned with your convoluted assessment of my philosophy.

I see you are very emotional about this, though, so just for you I'm going to change my "leaning" to something else so some other highly emotional partisan isn't fooled. :roll:

FFS, dude, differentiate between ad hominems and criticism of position, and after that understand that......... when a person votes, they have taken a position of choosing what person/party would be best. If you have voted, then you have taken such a position....and therefore you cannot say "A person cannot believe that one party/political ideology is better".

It is hypocrisy.

 

[zimmer]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

You think you are going to win the argument about whether Blix thought that Iraq was not in possession of WMD's prior to 03.....is dis-proven by quotes about "games"?

Sorry, you lose.....and the resultant inability of the US to find significant WMD evidence AFTER the invasion seals the argument.

CLASS IS IN, PLEASE BE SEATED AND PAY GOOD ATTENTION FOR 60 SECONDS​

1. Saddam started and lost Gulf War 1.
2. Saddam as the loser agreed to disarm.
3. What should have taken a couple years resulted in Saddam playing games with weapons inspectors.
4. 16 UN Resolutions are passed in the UN regarding Iraq over 12-years.
4. Saddam kicks out weapons inspectors.
5. Felonious Bill exits the Oral Office.
6. 9-months int the Bush administration 911 occurs.
7. Bush gives Saddam one last chance to come clean.
8. Saddam caves as troops are put on the border with Iraq.
9. Blix believes Saddam is hiding weapons and is not satisfied with documentation provided by Saddam.
10. Blix reports Saddam is playing games in January 2003.
11. Inspectors leave.
12. Saddam is taken out.

You cannot look into a regime that is secretive and dishonest and count their weapons or lack thereof. Inspections needed to be open... as Blix stated... not a game.

Blix was not satisfied there were no WMD and stated so in January 2003, and before.

This is coming from the guy who still cannot produce the quotes from the President.

ROTFLOL... what are the consequences if not serious... ahhh I see... he reserves "serious consequences" for things like a transportation bill.

Still cannot produce the quote and continuing to ask me to speculate in YOUR speculation thread!
Wow, you have no idea how much the left media was screaming about the made up documentation produced in the lead up to Iraq?

There was no made up documentation... and if there was it had to be the same stuff that had Demokrats on the record about Saddam's WMD and its threat to the western world when CLINTON was president.

Has it not been shown enough times that Powell was duped in his UN speech info? What, the left press was ignoring Wilson, Downing Street docs?

Powell wasn't duped, they went with the best info they had. Powell isn't some rookie, he's the former head of the Joint Chiefs, and had been in the plitical arena since Reagan in the 80's.

You bring up Blix.....and yet he was correct on Saddam's LACK of WMD's....and you think you are winning this argument?

You must be a retard. Blix claimed Saddam didn't provide believable documentation, and then went on the record to say Saddam was playing games with the inspections. I linked his statement.

You don't inspect if you know there is nothing there now... do you?

And you still haven't even stated a position on what you think is the correct action in Syria.

Don't need to. This is about Obama who drew a Red Line, said there would be consequences for transporting or using WMD.

Will the Red Line be replaced by a Thick Brown Streak?

Will he cower?

You should change your handle, to icantacceptthetruth.

 

[P. Kersey]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

FFS, dude, differentiate between ad hominems and criticism of position, and after that understand that......... when a person votes, they have taken a position of choosing what person/party would be best. If you have voted, then you have taken such a position....and therefore you cannot say "A person cannot believe that one party/political ideology is better".

It is hypocrisy.

I vote already KNOWING the candidate won't do what's best. Like may others, I usually vote either for the lesser of two evils or I throw my vote away on a candidate who can't win but is less of a liar.
I'm not naive enough to believe any of them. I've been around since LBJ and eventually you learn about politicians.

Going to go change my "lean" right now, though.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Blix was not satisfied there were no WMD and stated so in January 2003, and before.

There was no evidence found by the UNMOVIC team, Blix warned Blair directly that they had not found ANY WMD's......and again, history proves this to be the case.

I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.

You cannot look into a regime that is secretive and dishonest and count their weapons or lack thereof. Inspections needed to be open... as Blix stated... not a game.

After a Decade of inspections......nothing.....and still nothing.
I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.

Blix was not satisfied there were no WMD and stated so in January 2003, and before.

Wow...did we not already address this?

I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.

ROTFLOL... what are the consequences if not serious... ahhh I see... he reserves "serious consequences" for things like a transportation bill.

And you still have not gotten the quote from the clip YOU POSTED correct!

There was no made up documentation... and if there was it had to be the same stuff that had Demokrats on the record about Saddam's WMD and its threat to the western world when CLINTON was president.

LOL...so which is it...was there or was there not, you cannot decide!

The UN presentation was nearly totally false, that is a fact.

I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.

Powell wasn't duped, they went with the best info they had. Powell isn't some rookie, he's the former head of the Joint Chiefs, and had been in the plitical arena since Reagan in the 80's.

This is sad, you are ignoring that his presentation was debunked......BY POWELL!

You must be a retard.

Ad hominem, reported.

Blix claimed Saddam didn't provide believable documentation, and then went on the record to say Saddam was playing games with the inspections. I linked his statement.

You don't inspect if you know there is nothing there now... do you?

Again, he felt strongly enough about it to personally warn the British Prime Minister.

Don't need to. This is about Obama who drew a Red Line, said there would be consequences for transporting or using WMD.

Will the Red Line be replaced by a Thick Brown Streak?

Will he cower?

You should change your handle, to icantacceptthetruth.

LOL...."I am going to whine and accuse the President of being a coward......but I have no opinion on what action the President should take"

So....you have really thought this through?

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

I vote already KNOWING the candidate won't do what's best. Like may others, I usually vote either for the lesser of two evils or I throw my vote away on a candidate who can't win but is less of a liar.
I'm not naive enough to believe any of them. I've been around since LBJ and eventually you learn about politicians.

Going to go change my "lean" right now, though.

Wonderful, previous hypocritical positions topped off with apathy towards one's own vote to cover for choosing what one believes is best.

You keep reducing your argument to absurdity.

 

[polgara]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

This is the isolationist/know nothing position. How do you reach a position without knowing the arguments? And why talk about Russia's positions.....when yours is isolation. Russia is not for isolation....they are actively supporting Assad with major weapon systems.

Gimme, it is reported that Assad is fighting rebels, some of whom are AlQuida.(sp) If this administration isn't certain what is going on, they are taking the right road by waiting to see, IMO. I agree with that. In any event, unless we are threatened, this is not our fight, because it is a religious one between warring factions in the ME. That is my position, and it is one that I have publically stated numerous times. If that makes me an isolationist, then I guess I am, because we have sufficient problems in this country to keep us occupied.

 

[ocean515]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

There was no evidence found by the UNMOVIC team, Blix warned Blair directly that they had not found ANY WMD's......and again, history proves this to be the case.

I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.





After a Decade of inspections......nothing.....and still nothing.
I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.



Wow...did we not already address this?

I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.


And you still have not gotten the quote from the clip YOU POSTED correct!


LOL...so which is it...was there or was there not, you cannot decide!

The UN presentation was nearly totally false, that is a fact.

I am still trying to understand how this defense of the Iraq invasion fits into your argument of mocking the President for his warnings to Assad.


This is sad, you are ignoring that his presentation was debunked......BY POWELL!


Ad hominem, reported.

Again, he felt strongly enough about it to personally warn the British Prime Minister.


LOL...."I am going to whine and accuse the President of being a coward......but I have no opinion on what action the President should take"

So....you have really thought this through?

:boom

UNSCOM Reports to the Security Council

 

[P. Kersey]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Wonderful, previous hypocritical positions topped off with apathy towards one's own vote to cover for choosing what one believes is best.

You keep reducing your argument to absurdity.

Ok..polite doesn't work with you. ad hom is all you've got. Dismissed.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Gimme, it is reported that Assad is fighting rebels, some of whom are AlQuida.(sp) If this administration isn't certain what is going on, they are taking the right road by waiting to see, IMO. I agree with that. In any event, unless we are threatened, this is not our fight, because it is a religious one between warring factions in the ME. That is my position, and it is one that I have publically stated numerous times. If that makes me an isolationist, then I guess I am, because we have sufficient problems in this country to keep us occupied.

That is fine...for you. I just hope this was the same feeling you had when Saddam was gassing the Kurds.
I have no idea if you are being consistently isolationist, but you really should not be repeating the Russian position while clinging to an isolationist position.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Ok..polite doesn't work with you. ad hom is all you've got. Dismissed.

And again, pure hypocritical writing, you previously attacked my person and you are failing to recognize that I am being critical of your statements/positions....not your person.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

:boom

UNSCOM Reports to the Security Council

Thursday, October 7, 2004; Page A01


Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program."

U.S. 'Almost All Wrong' on Weapons (washingtonpost.com)

 

[ocean515]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Thursday, October 7, 2004; Page A01


Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program."

U.S. 'Almost All Wrong' on Weapons (washingtonpost.com)

:sinking:

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

 

[humbolt]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Gimme, it is reported that Assad is fighting rebels, some of whom are AlQuida.(sp) If this administration isn't certain what is going on, they are taking the right road by waiting to see, IMO. I agree with that. In any event, unless we are threatened, this is not our fight, because it is a religious one between warring factions in the ME. That is my position, and it is one that I have publically stated numerous times. If that makes me an isolationist, then I guess I am, because we have sufficient problems in this country to keep us occupied.

Good points. You're not an isolationist any more than Clinton was an isolationist when he did not get us involved in Rwanda.

 

[P. Kersey]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

And again, pure hypocritical writing, you previously attacked my person and you are failing to recognize that I am being critical of your statements/positions....not your person.

Right..well you've proved you're way too smart for me. :roll:

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

:sinking:

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

Good lord, can you possibly not go further into the weeds with whatever point you are trying to make?

I was not arguing whether or not Saddam "obstructed".

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Right..well you've proved you're way too smart for me. :roll:

If you say so.

 

[P. Kersey]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

This message is hidden because Gimmesometruth is on your ignore list.

 

[ocean515]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Good lord, can you possibly not go further into the weeds with whatever point you are trying to make?

I was not arguing whether or not Saddam "obstructed".

:yawn:

ANNEX C - STATUS OF VERIFICATION OF IRAQ'S BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAMME

Excerpt:

1. Iraq did not acknowledge its proscribed Biological Warfare (BW) weapons programme until July 1995. From the first UNSCOM inspections in 1991 until 1995 Iraq denied it had a BW programme and has taken active steps to conceal it from the Special Commission. These steps included fraudulent statements, forged documents, misrepresentation of the roles of people and facilities, and other specific acts of deception.

3. In September 1997, Iraq submitted its third "final" FFCD since the July 1995 disclosures. This FFCD contained essentially no new significant information from the previous one that the Commission had rejected as incomplete. A panel of international experts reviewed it in September 1997 and considered it as deficient in all areas. Iraq however argued that it had not been given an adequate opportunity to present its case to the UNSCOM assembled experts and at Iraq's request, a Technical Evaluation Meeting (TEM) between Iraq and a Commission assembled panel of international experts convened in Vienna in March 1998. Iraq did not present any new information at that meeting and the experts therefore reviewed the same material for a third time.


4. The TEM team reviewed the entire FFCD, and concluded it was deficient in all areas.

 

[Perotista]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

There was an interesting article about Russia this morning on Yahoo. They are advising the US not to take unilateral action on Syria, but to wait until the UN weighs in on this. They expect total chaos in the region otherwise. Since Russia is aligned with Iran, who is backing Assad against the rebels, who knows what may happen? I think we should sit back and wait this out. It's not our fight! eace:

I agree, sometimes doing nothing is harder than doing something even if that something is wrong. Does that make sense?

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

:yawn:

ANNEX C - STATUS OF VERIFICATION OF IRAQ'S BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAMME

Excerpt:

1. Iraq did not acknowledge its proscribed Biological Warfare (BW) weapons programme until July 1995. From the first UNSCOM inspections in 1991 until 1995 Iraq denied it had a BW programme and has taken active steps to conceal it from the Special Commission. These steps included fraudulent statements, forged documents, misrepresentation of the roles of people and facilities, and other specific acts of deception.

3. In September 1997, Iraq submitted its third "final" FFCD since the July 1995 disclosures. This FFCD contained essentially no new significant information from the previous one that the Commission had rejected as incomplete. A panel of international experts reviewed it in September 1997 and considered it as deficient in all areas. Iraq however argued that it had not been given an adequate opportunity to present its case to the UNSCOM assembled experts and at Iraq's request, a Technical Evaluation Meeting (TEM) between Iraq and a Commission assembled panel of international experts convened in Vienna in March 1998. Iraq did not present any new information at that meeting and the experts therefore reviewed the same material for a third time.


4. The TEM team reviewed the entire FFCD, and concluded it was deficient in all areas.

Again, I stated that prior to 03, Blix and Ritter were satisfied that Iraq had no WMD programs or stocks.

History shows they were correct.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

This message is hidden because Gimmesometruth is on your ignore list.

sad......:2bigcry:

 

[ocean515]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Again, I stated that prior to 03, Blix and Ritter were satisfied that Iraq had no WMD programs or stocks.

History shows they were correct.

:liar

ANNEX C - STATUS OF VERIFICATION OF IRAQ'S BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAMME

5. At Iraq's request another review of the FFCD by a team of international experts was conducted in Baghdad in July 1998. By agreement with Iraq and the Special Commission this team focused on those elements directly related to the material balance: weapons, bulk agents and materials such as bacterial growth media. This team concluded:

Weapons On weapons the team concluded that the material balances and their sub-components (production, filling and destruction) declared in the FFCD for biological bombs (R-400) and Al-Hussein warheads, could not be verified. Furthermore the account in the FFCD on biological spray devices, modified drop tanks and the aerosol generator (Zubaidy device), could not be verified.

BW agents The material balances for bulk BW agents and their sub-components (production, filling, losses and destruction) for all declared agents (Clostridium botulinum toxin, Bacillus anthracis spores, aflatoxin Clostridium perfringens spores and wheat smut) could not be verified.

Media The media material balance and its sub-components (acquisition, consumption, losses and destruction) could not be verified.

FFCD Iraq's FFCD in its totality cannot be verified. The team also expressed the view that verification cannot be achieved in the present circumstances whilst the Commission has an incomplete understanding of the philosophy of the programme including the military and other (such as security service) requirements for biological weapons. Without such an understanding, the Commission has an inadequate basis on which to assess whether the Iraqi account is complete. Accordingly, the FFCD in its present form, is an inadequate document for verification purposes.

12. The Commission has little or no confidence in Iraq's accounting for proscribed items for which physical evidence is lacking or inconclusive, documentation is sparse or nonexistent, and coherence and consistency is lacking.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Will Obama's thin "Red Line" become a Thick Brown Streak?

Again, I stated that prior to 03, Blix and Ritter were satisfied that Iraq had no WMD programs or stocks.

History shows they were correct.

:liar

ANNEX C - STATUS OF VERIFICATION OF IRAQ'S BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAMME

5. At Iraq's request another review of the FFCD by a team of international experts was conducted in Baghdad in July 1998.

Oh...98.