Skull and Bones -- Kerry v Bush?-- Press Clips

[quade 4]

Quote

It's just a silly little bad-boys club. You have to be invited by the in-crowd . . .

Exactly! It's an elitist club for the sons of the wealthy power brokers.

To me, that instantly spells trouble.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Deuce 1]

Ah, Q.

It's the pentaverate! Well, it was until the colonel died. Ah, I hated the colonel. With his wee beady eyes!

He put a secret chemical in his chicken that made you crave it fortnightly!

[billvon 3,120]

>but the Iraqis realize they got a bargain.

I think that will be true in a few years, but even that's not certain. As an example - do you think the people in the outlying areas of Afghanistan "think they got a bargain?" We've forgotten about them, and warlords have taken over all the areas outside Kabul again. Hunger is widespread and Al Quaeda/Taliban attacks are increasing near the Pakistani border region. Women are no longer allowed in schools outside Kabul. Civil wars are breaking out as warlords compete for land. The heroin trade is nearing record highs; without irrigation, aid or even fuel for tractors, poppies are one of the only things farmers can grow. And aid? The administration forgot to add the aid they promised them into the budget this year; Congress snuck it back in at the last minute.

Just as a recap, here's what Bush said at the UN shortly after the Afghanistan war:

"I make this promise to all the victims of that regime: The Taliban's days of harboring terrorists and dealing in heroin and brutalizing women are drawing to a close. And when that regime is gone, the people of Afghanistan will say with the rest of the world: good riddance.

I can promise, too, that America will join the world in helping the people of Afghanistan rebuild their country. . . . More help eventually will be needed. The United States will work closely with the United Nations and development banks to reconstruct Afghanistan after hostilities there have ceased and the Taliban are no longer in control. And the United States will work with the U.N. to support a post-Taliban government that represents all of the Afghan people."

Is this what we have planned for Iraq? When we go to war with North Korea, will we forget about the Iraqis, and let them return to the endless civil wars that predominated there before Hussein took power? Or will they end up under a draconian Islamic theocracy, with the Shi'a (the majority) taking their revenge on the Sunnis that for so long oppressed them?

I hope not, but our track record isn't that good. We are very easily distracted.

>Don't forget that all the gloom and doom about postwar Iraq is
> whipped up by people who have a vested interest in making even
> the best of situations look bad, and making unfortunate situations
>look like absolute catastrophes.

Yep, just as we have people whose political reputations depend on making this war look as good as possible.

[ERICCONNELLY 0]

Quote

I hereby promise that when I am elected President of the United States of America, I will parachute onto the deck of an aircraft carrier

You got my vote, just for that! Now how about free beer and some European style TV commercials (You know - like the one's with naked women skydiving to sell shampoo)

So, Are you running?

[TheAnvil 0]

My dearest SkyDekker - I do apply the same standards to all. You seem to blur the lines between mistake and lie and are allowing your innate prejudices to get the better of you.

President Bush made a judgement based on all of the information given to him and IF no WMD are ever found in Iraq, he made a mistake. If he were LYING, he would have had to know that there were no WMD in Iraq and deliberately stated the contrary.

It amazes me how folks wanted to give these inspectors time and more time and more time to find these weapons then expect the US to find them instantly.

As to the lie/mistake thing, here. I'll give you some examples.

Mistake: Bush has intel stating WMD exist in Iraq, and uses that as a pretext to demand regime change in return for not providing an assbeating to the Iraqi military. If no WMD are found, he was MISTAKEN.

Lie: John Ashcroft is weak on civil rights because he voted against Judge White.

Mistake: Bombing the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia (I forget which republic)

Lie: Zoe Baird's employment of an illegal immigrant years ago made her completely unqualified to be Attorney General.

Mistake: Not taking the Sudanese up on their offer to deliver bin Laden's head on a silver platter.

Lie: "I haven't changed my positions on one single issue..." Joe LIEbermann

Mistake: Getting a blow from one of your interns.

Lie: I never had sexual relations with that Lewinsky woman!

I even threw in the Baird lie for the lefties out there. She really was a talented choice and would have performed well as AG. Much better than the second stringer who got the job and should be indicted.

As to the reason to go into Iraq, read some more of the UN resolutions and Bush's speeches again.

Beers,

Vinny the Anvil

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[TheAnvil 0]

No way dude, I'm not buying it.

Those 'children' to whom you refer were teenagers old enough to fire AK-47's at Americans and assist the Taliban in beating women and hiding terrorists. Those 'children' pledged to kill again. You want 'em loose? I don't. Call them what you want, but children is a misnomer and you know it. Teenagers with a bent towards murder and violence is a far more accurate description.

Secret military prison? You'd be hard pressed to find many people who DON'T know we're keeping prisoners at Guantanamo. Or do you know something we don't? Jose Padilla is NOT a minor.

The # of civilian casualties inflicted by US forces over in Iraq and Afghanistan is by far the lowest in any major military action of such magnitude in history. War=death. Machiavelli had it right sometimes.

Terrorists we've supported? Hmmmm.....the US did support some royal SOBs during the cold war. No doubt about it. It was a bad thing and I think in many parts of the world a lot of anti-US sentiment stems from that. There, my friend, we agree, though I don't know how that's pertinent to the current Iraqi situation.

beer.....nectar of the gods.....

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[TheAnvil 0]

Deuce/ChopChop '04........

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

You seem to blur the lines between mistake and lie and are allowing your innate prejudices to get the better of you.

Even if this was true, it would only be a matter of the pot calling the kettle black.

Quote

President Bush made a judgement based on all of the information given to him and IF no WMD are ever found in Iraq, he made a mistake.

Unless he knew that the information was wrong all along. I guess you assume that the President can do no wrong. I assume that the President misleading the US citizens is a possibility. Heck, it's been done many times before.

Quote

It amazes me how folks wanted to give these inspectors time and more time and more time to find these weapons then expect the US to find them instantly.

It amazes me how folks who did NOT want to give the UN inspection teams more time, because there was an imminent danger, are not outraged that they are so far unable to find anything. If they are so well hidden, how can it be such an imminent danger?

Quote

Mistake: Bush has intel stating WMD exist in Iraq, and uses that as a pretext to demand regime change in return for not providing an assbeating to the Iraqi military. If no WMD are found, he was MISTAKEN.

Bush had alterior motive to invade Iraq, be it oil or be it finishing what his daddy could not, and used WMD as an excuse. WMD are never found, to me that would be a LIE.

Quote

As to the reason to go into Iraq, read some more of the UN resolutions and Bush's speeches again.

Now would those UN resolutions be from the same United Nations as the one that the US broke from when it went to war against Iraq? So, do you agree with the UN, or do you not agree with the UN? Or option three: you only agree with the UN when it fits in your plan?

[TheAnvil 0]

No SkyDekker, you're getting it wrong again dude. Your last point first: READ UN RES 1441. I have. Use of force - AUTHORIZED. Non-negotiable fact of life.

The WMD are not well hidden from those who hid them ( I'm assuming they exist, and I believe they do). Give me a few months and I can hide anything in a land area the size of California that would take you YEARS to find.

Your assertion that Bush had ulterior motives is completely untenable. 1990 was an entirely different foreign policy paradigm and strategic/tactical paradigm as well. The Bush/daddy connection touted by the left is childish. They're related, they're both conservative, and they are similar in many other ways. Nobody takes a nation to war for such a puerile reason. That argument works on uneducated sheeple.

If he had ulterior motives - name them. I always love a good conspiracy theory. You claim he misled the American people? Fine - let's hear it! Prove to me he KNEW there were no WMD and KNEW that the intelligence community was ALL wrong and just wanted to expend billions to invade a nation just for oil, fun, and a political grand-slam. That's a bed-time fantasy Terry McAuliffe et al tell their kids and sheeple.

The UN has made itself irrelevant in the opinion of many - myself included. It has shown itself incapable of enforcing its own resolutions and might follow the League of Nations into history's dust bin. If you want to give credibility to a human rights commission with Sudan and Libya as members - go right ahead! I don't.

Because of the UN's inept handling of virtually every facet of its intended function, I believe the future of international relations will once again lie in alliances, pacts and etc, which could be a dangerous thing in some ways and a good thing in others. The UN is a discussion forum and that's about it - not to be taken seriously any longer.

Cheezeburgers,

Vinny the Anvil

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[billvon 3,120]

>but children is a misnomer and you know it.

OK, so we're claiming that 13 year olds aren't children. I'll remember that one.

>Secret military prison?

Yep. Try to get a list of who's being held there. See if the prisoners can communicate with _anyone_, even a laywer. Everyone knows it's there; what's going on there, and who's being held, and what will happen to them is a secret.

>Jose Padilla is NOT a minor.

Nope, just a US citizen who once had constitutional rights. He is no doubt a criminal; so why not charge him with the crime, try him for it, and put him in jail (legally) for the rest of his life, as our constitution provides for? Why do we have to violate our own constitution to deal with this guy?

>Terrorists we've supported? Hmmmm.....the US did support some
>royal SOBs during the cold war. No doubt about it. It was a bad thing
> and I think in many parts of the world a lot of anti-US sentiment
> stems from that.

Yep. And there's nothing we can do about history other than learn from it.

>There, my friend, we agree, though I don't know how that's pertinent
> to the current Iraqi situation.

We came very close to supporting the Mujahideen Khalq last week (an Iraqi terrorist organization) because they would kill Iranians for us. We let them keep their weapons, heavy artillery etc. It was only a few days ago that the administration decided to disarm them; there was a lot of debate about it. That was a good decision, an example of learning from history. I hope we continue to do that.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

No SkyDekker, you're getting it wrong again dude. Your last point first: READ UN RES 1441. I have. Use of force - AUTHORIZED. Non-negotiable fact of life.

and....

Quote

The UN has made itself irrelevant in the opinion of many - myself included.

So which one is it Anvil???? Or are we back to option 3: We only like to UN when it fits into our argument?

To the rest of your email: It started with me asking you a question, I did not claim anything different. All I claimed was keeping an open mind, keeping an open mind to different possibilities.

Quote

Prove to me he KNEW there were no WMD

Maybe when you invade a country the burden of proof is a little different. I like the idea of having proof before you invade another country. You know, the old innocent until proven guilty. But I guess you adhere to shoot, kill first and then ask questions.

[TheAnvil 0]

You still don't get it dude. Let go of your Bush-hate and love of US-bashing and READ what I write for a change.

You moaned about the US 'breaking with the UN' and invading Iraq. Because I have read 1441 and other UN resolutions pertaining to the pre-invasion situation, I know this to be an incorrect statement on your part. Non-negotiable fact of life, as I stated before. It in no part means that I like the UN or believe it shoud in any way be a constraint on the conduct of US foreign policy when it comes down to it. Truth be told I despise the organization. But don't think for a second that I'm going to let you bash the US for breaking with the UN mandates when it DID NO SUCH THING. Your assertion is incorrect.

You then went on about President Bush misleading the American people, i.e. lying. If you wish to prove that, you have to establish that President Bush KNEW FOR A FACT THAT NO WMD EXISTED in Iraq. In other words, you have to show that he knew he was being deceived by all of the intelligence agencies. Until you have done so, you have absolutely no basis whatsoever in proving that he was lying on the issue. None. Nada. Zilch.

Your shoot first and ask questions later analogy also has no factual basis. Radio transmision intercepts, human intelligence, and Lord only knows what else all indicated that Saddam Hussein's regime was not being truthful and had not disposed of the WMD the UN/US/Russkies/Frenchies all knew he had back in the early 90's. He admitted he was in material breach of 1441 with his Al-Samoud missiles (though that wasn't the mother of all breaches, to be sure).

Chill dude. Let go of your hate. I like the US, but can freely admit we screw up sometimes. I despise the majority of the democrats on the national stage, but freely admit they have done some good things and a few of them actually have decent ideas. I even like some of them (especially Zell Miller of GA).

Think peachy thoughts. Watch the Sound of Music and sing along to THESE ARE A FEW OF MY FAVORITE THINGS. Listen to an Enya CD and drink a few bottles of Chilean wine - or some Andes music better still!

Peace and long life, and plenty o' beer - which I'm off to get,

Vinny the Anvil

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[quade 4]

Has anyone ever noticed "our" side is pretty reasonable and that only the "other guy" is a raving lunatic?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Has anyone ever noticed "our" side is pretty reasonable and that only the "other guy" is a raving lunatic?

Spoken like a true republican!

. . =(_8^(1)

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

Quote

Has anyone ever noticed "our" side is pretty reasonable and that only the "other guy" is a raving lunatic?

Spoken like a true republican!

Danger Will Robinson!

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

You still don't get it dude.

Why is that? Because I am not smart enough, or because I do not agree with you?

Mr. Anvil, I am not quite sure where you are getting the idea that I hate Mr. Bush or America. Personally I really do not hate many things, I find it to be an exceptionally strong feeling, one restricted to only a very few people or things.

Quote

READ what I write for a change

I do read it, I keep quoting it, then I ask you a question. You have yet to answer that question. Makes me wonder who needs to READ.

Quote

You moaned about the US 'breaking with the UN' and invading Iraq. Because I have read 1441 and other UN resolutions pertaining to the pre-invasion situation, I know this to be an incorrect statement on your part.

Really, well I am happy you read a couple of resolutions and now think you can make that statement. Have you read that part about member nations going to war and the procedures in place for that? Before you start telling people to do research, maybe you should try and do some of it, or at least that pertaining to the erroneous statements you are making. Furthermore, it is ceertainly no fact in International Law that the resolutions alone would have been enough to go to war. The US basically said piss on you UN, we don't like what you are doing, we don't care what you think, you are useless, but we'll use your resolution to try and justify a war. I can't really agree with that sentiment.

Non-negotiable fact of life, as I stated before.

Quote

This one really made me laugh. Is it non-negotiable because you said so? Proof to me that the majority of International Law experts agree with you, maybe then it can be a non-negotiable fact of life.

But don't think for a second that I'm going to let you bash the US for breaking with the UN mandates when it DID NO SUCH THING.

Quote

Right and I was on the freefly world record jump

You then went on about President Bush misleading the American people, i.e. lying. If you wish to prove that, you have to establish that President Bush KNEW FOR A FACT THAT NO WMD EXISTED in Iraq. In other words, you have to show that he knew he was being deceived by all of the intelligence agencies. Until you have done so, you have absolutely no basis whatsoever in proving that he was lying on the issue. None. Nada. Zilch.

Quote

Well, I am sure you are intelligent enough to figure out that it would be next to impossible for me to prove that to you. What I have stated before is that I am not willing to believe a politician just based on his word, something I would now have to assume you are doing. Too many US presidents before him have lied.

However, the US stated they had strong intelligence on these WMD, pretty pictures about where they were, all those suspicious sites. Clear and present danger, all that good stuff. I would have to believe that the US has one of the best, if not the best intelligence agencies. I would hope that if their work is used to invade another country it is severely scrutinized and is held to a fairly high level of certainty. Now that they are having trouble finding the WMDs and are starting to make excuses for their inability to find them, it is getting harder for me to believe that such had been done. IN the end it was Bush's decision to go to war as CIC, so if it was the wrong decision, I would hold him responsible.

Chill dude. Let go of your hate.

Quote

I would prefer if you do not tell me ot Chill dude and as I have stated before there is no hate here. I thought we were having a decent discussion, but I do have to say that I am a little offended by the patronizing tone you have in your writing. From the "feel" of your writing I have to say that it sounds like you hold your political beliefs and views superior to others. Maybe you should Chill dude and think that there may be other options.

***Chilean wine

I prefer home grown Niagara Peninsula wines.