The Cellar - View Single Post

jane_says · 07-08-2004, 11:44 AM

UT, I certainly do not believe that the US is acting in the best interest if Iraq.

Lumber, I will concede to "highly, highly in-friggin-probable" instead of "impossible". My feeling is that the connotation is the same, but whatever floats your boat, right? And sorry for the UT / Smooth typo. Trying to defend my position in the midst of bedlam here at my desk - apologies to anyone offended by the name switch. I'd still like a cite or putting words in anyone's mouth, though.

Jaguar, you're preaching to the choir about the stolen election - I even referenced it somewhere in the middle of this trainwreck - the fact is that we are still comparing apples to oranges with this "US is analogous to Iraq because of A and B." I will call your scenario just as highly in-friggin-probable as the aforementioned one.

You know, my husband, a decorated Army Ranger, disagrees with your assertion of what "anyone who was on the ground in the interening 10 years or so" might opine. He was there, but doesn't presuppose to know what the entire if the Iraqi nation might or might not have felt. I don't consider your opinion that is was impossible for the Iraqis to oust Saddam any more reasonable than my opinion that it's impossible that the Chinese, or the Brits, or the Martians, might have to liberate us from Bushco. As I mentioned before, I think the Iraqis could have killed Saddam if they had chosen to, but did not do so due to well-founded fear.

Lumber, be honest, now: you watched that Twilight Zone marathon on SciFi last weekend, didn't you?

I am truly not trying to be shitty here on purpose. I feel very strongly that the war in Iraq is wrongheaded, unwarranted, and self-serving. I also like to debate intelligent people with different points of view. I'll stop now, as I don't want any hard feelings.

07-08-2004, 11:44 AM	#41
jane_says Colonist Extraordinaire Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: SW VA Posts: 200	UT, I certainly do not believe that the US is acting in the best interest if Iraq. Lumber, I will concede to "highly, highly in-friggin-probable" instead of "impossible". My feeling is that the connotation is the same, but whatever floats your boat, right? And sorry for the UT / Smooth typo. Trying to defend my position in the midst of bedlam here at my desk - apologies to anyone offended by the name switch. I'd still like a cite or putting words in anyone's mouth, though. Jaguar, you're preaching to the choir about the stolen election - I even referenced it somewhere in the middle of this trainwreck - the fact is that we are still comparing apples to oranges with this "US is analogous to Iraq because of A and B." I will call your scenario just as highly in-friggin-probable as the aforementioned one. You know, my husband, a decorated Army Ranger, disagrees with your assertion of what "anyone who was on the ground in the interening 10 years or so" might opine. He was there, but doesn't presuppose to know what the entire if the Iraqi nation might or might not have felt. I don't consider your opinion that is was impossible for the Iraqis to oust Saddam any more reasonable than my opinion that it's impossible that the Chinese, or the Brits, or the Martians, might have to liberate us from Bushco. As I mentioned before, I think the Iraqis could have killed Saddam if they had chosen to, but did not do so due to well-founded fear. Lumber, be honest, now: you watched that Twilight Zone marathon on SciFi last weekend, didn't you? I am truly not trying to be shitty here on purpose. I feel very strongly that the war in Iraq is wrongheaded, unwarranted, and self-serving. I also like to debate intelligent people with different points of view. I'll stop now, as I don't want any hard feelings.