SkyDekker

except nobody is following LOL....well Burma and Liberia are, but that's about it.....

same reason you still use the Imperial system....resistance t change. As far as I can find, only two other countries still officially use the Imperical system: Liberia and Burma (or if you want Myanmar) Most of you will now point to the UK, however, they are, from what I can find, officially on the Metric system, with the exception of the use of miles, yards, feet and inches for road traffic purposes.

It all depends on how he got to that belief. There are certainly some indicators out there that Bush and his direct reports specifically pushed or at least made it very clear that information that did not follow their "belief" was not to be released or followed up on. In then end, to me at least, it is very plausible that his underlings told him and subsequently congress only what he wanted to hear and what supported his goal. Hence, he may well believe that they had WMD, but then he told them to make him believe. It is relatively common in relationships with a powerful person that the underlings will do what it takes to please that person, specially when that person has a very strong, stated objective. Could your intelligence community really be THAT wrong, or were they lead down the wrong path?

you are a decent dancer, but discussing or debating seems utterly hopeless with you. I'll leave you to continue to play the energizer bunny...

You seem to forget that the question you demanded me to answer was in relation to whether I thought Iran should acquire nukes. hence, in this thing you call "silly games" you wanted your questions answered, but in relation to the same "silly game" you won't answer my questions. Don't think we should ban red lights, don't think the US should ban guns either. Don't understand the double standard though when it comes to objects don't kill people, people kill people, yet you are in favour of banning certain objects under the same reasoning. That is what I was trying to argue, discuss with you. So far you have been utterly unable to do so. Hope you had a decent weekend.

you are absolutely right, perjury over a blowjob is much more serious than incompetence resulting in the death of tens of thousands. I mean, one is about sex, which we all know is bad. The other is about killing people, which we all know is good.

Then why did you give it one?

Funny how you believe your intelligence agencies when it supports Bush, but you don't believe those same agencies when it doesn't support him. Your adoration for this man is almost scary.

You "demanded" answers to your question, yet you refuse to answer any questions yourself. Obviously you have no interest in an actual debate, discussion or maybe even general conversation. You're like the energizer bunny, but in stead of beating a drum, you just shout GUN, GUN, GUN, GUN ... .

Actually going into Iraq has changed that.....it created more of them and made their drive stronger. attaboy indeed

No, it was a serious question. Now, if you would answer it, maybe we can get to the serious debate after

Sure there is, I have wasted many a minute standing still for a red light in the middle of nowhere.

I don't understand this reasoning. We have banned driving through a red light, yet people still do it. Do you advocate not having laws against driving through a red light? Or stopping for a stop sign?

Excuse my ignorance, but was he squirrel hunting with a gun or with a knife? How does one normally squirrel hunt? I woudl assume with a gun of some sort, so why would he (after getting shot twice) decide to engage the man with a knife iso his gun? Something isn't making sense here.

John, I asked you some pretty simple and straight forward questions which you have failed to answer. very funny considering earlier in this thread you wrote this to me: So, eitehr the questions were too difficult for you, or you are uninterested in honest debate. Which one is it?

I think it can actually be summed up pretty easily: You really shouldn't invade sovereign nations with bogus reasons. but, if you do decide to dot hat, you may want to actually have a plan and do a half decent job.

The US has a history of violence and therefor should also not be allowed to own nuclear weapons under that argument.

I wonder where this evidence is coming from? Is it coming from the "white dude"? If so, wouldn't it be in his best interest to explain it that way?

No, I don't. But then, I wasn't the one who first stated the logic proclaimed above and telling anybody who doesn't agree that they are delusional. To follow the logic posted above: It wouldn't matter if Iran has a nuclear weapon, cause it is only an object. Nuclear bombs don't kill people, people kill people. Yes, Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. If that makes him a bad person in your eyes, then we have to extend that logic to other things. There are multiple people on here who have threatened and offered to kill people without any form of justice associated with it. In your mind, should those people be considered bad and therefor banned from owning guns? Is posturing and being a loud mouth enough to be labeled bad? you funny. When are you going to answer my question about how much the US would help Mexico acquire a nuclear weapon and several others I have posted above? Or, have you proven yourself uninterested in honest debate, and your comments unworthy of any more serious consideration?

Of course the US government gets to decide who is good and whois bad... Your historical track record on that decision making process has been pretty bad.... Didn't the US sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Doesn't that mean they really also don't want the good people to get or expand them either? How much would the US help Mexico acquire nuclear weapons?

Your own government headed by Bush wants to ban bad people leading countries from having nuclear weapons so that they cannot do bad things with them. Is Bush delusional in your opinion?

No, nowadays that would be called live-live...read here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2598077#2598077

pretty decent way to test a delivery device. Just read the media reports to find out if it worked...

I agree. Just trying to point out that in both sexes there are those with the ability and those who don't have the ability. The difficulty is establishing what those abilities are and at what level. In the future, we might get to a point where the ability to keep your sexual cravings in check is included as well.

As I am sure there were guys who did not have the right mind set to be on the front lines.