I became a bit tired of the agreeing here, and so, I went on a brief search for a conservative forum to debate with. I found one. Here (http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/index.php?Cat=). And since I'm engaged in several fronts as of now, I am calling for my fellow liberals to stick it to them. I AM NOT asking for you to destroy their forum and I WILL NOT condone trollish behavior there. So, if you're ready for some debating, help me out. I'll see you there.

P.S: to prevent confusion, possibly registering with an identical alias to your sciforums one would help.

aaah a good old fashion forum war! How many people to we have raiding this unsuspecting hell hole of a forum anyways? I personally would like to get some recruits to come over to This (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=12) theology forums and help me violate several anti-evolutionist.

*cough* refer to Berserker (they would not let me call my self WellCookedFetus dam them!)

Pollux V,

I logged on and read some of those peoples replies to you... come on these people are total idiots!, don't waste your breath they don't even know about argument fallacies! I won’t fight there, as it is the anti-evolutionist on the theology forum is enough purified evil and stupidity for me.

Edit: So I can't type os sue me!

you guys, etc, go ahead.
I will take care of things here.
;)

That's the problem with hanging out only with people with whom you agree: when you step into a group of the seasoned opposition your butt gets handed to you, and then you have to call for back up.

:D

hehe, that site reminds me of the folks back home in the south. I even saw a confederate flag. ::sniff:: just like home.

*edit

OMG! they have a gun forum. this is just too much!:D

that site will provide me with much comedy reading.

use diff handles. forum wars can be disruptive

*sighs and wipes sweat off of brow* oh my god, croicky, great leaping lizards, I just wrote possibly the longest reply ever, must have taken over and hour and a half to get through their nonsense. I hope that one of the bigger guns here, like Tyler, goofyfish or Tiassa have noticed my call, perhaps they could help out...

Seriously, just LOOK (http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=128311&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=3#Post128311) at this!!

MEDIC!!! SuperFudd give Pollux 50cc of morphine stat! Tyler, goofyfish, ConsolerCoffee were the hell is that suppression fire we need!?! Don't worry Pollux your going to make it… gump here is going to carry you burnt ass back to a chopper like the wind!

i think i'll have to read that site on ocansion in order to have a balanced diet.

now, you have to admit there are some nuts in all areas of the political spectrum. I'm sure i could find some liberal poeple that are pretty crazy.

WellCooked, Im already there. I started a thread using something that Prisme once said. Its suppose to destract them.

BTW, the setup is awful. Sciforums is much better. I cant navigate worth a darn in there.

Well, I just looked at the thread that I started, 51 replys...

wow they ban me... hum guess they don't like constructive criticism? Oh well Its good I did not mention to the them about me being high at this time.

I like the emoticons though... except this on http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/fouet.gif if you notice on their version they screwed it up! Who the hell would want to be whiped in the face during kink sex???

Where's Nancy, dammit?

If you understand that joke, you're doing okay.

Mr. G

Of course one will get their ass handed to them when arguing with people who have no sense of reality. If you went, for instance, and tried to argue with Osama bin Laden, you'd get your ass handed to you. Now these people aren't quite as morally depraved as bin Laden, but they are pretty rabid bandwagoners.

In General

I've seen similar forums for Christianity.

They are best avoided by miles. Attempting to argue reasonably in those places is a little like walking into a local Foursquare Church and advocating Satan. Sure, you can probably argue better, but you're not going to have any effect.

Baron Szurke may choose to not make an appearance there. They do reasonably good research but tend to treat these little details as if they are the only truth. This evening I advised someone in a post here that, Just because options remain untried does not mean war is our only option. It is, of course, intended to be an anemically ironic play on words, but something tells me it would become my motto at that site.

As a general note to those who occasionally involve themselves in my posts in the religion forum: If you've ever wondered what I mean when I say religions don't require gods ... put this one on the list.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

baned aready? that's quick. ya gotta get under the radar.

i don't like set up either. every post has like 8 emoticons at the end and big pictures and a lost signature. too busy for my eyes.

ya think they notticed the sudden influx?

"Spiff, Counselor, Pollux, and Berserker....:rolleyes: "

dont waste ur time there pollux.. just read the thread u gave the link for.. those ppl are hopeless... :eek:

I decided to be nice (http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB36&Number=128381&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=&PHPSESSID=).

Now ... just for kicks--I posted a couple of essays by Elsa Tamez, which seem quite popular among the religious part of the peace movement. Here at Sciforums I've been accused of being many things; Christian, atheist, a woman .... While the name issue is settled for those fights, I may have invited a Christian misidentification. It will be fun :p

At any rate, I figure I owe them a chance to respond to a civilized post before I go so far as to write that board off as useless. Who knows? I very well might be surprised.

(Baron Szurke has arrived ....)

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Wow, we got the Baron on our side. I just like to screw with people....

Hey wait, they banned you?! For what! Maybe I should just go into troll mode, nah, Im above that... Okay Im not.

I think they ban me because my name "Berserker" was very similar to "Berserk" who seems to have been someone else that was banned. Anyways I have now logged on as my true form... let them bitch about it :p though they probably have my IP on record I think I will last the night.

I hope Pollux wakes up... the IQ testing Admin: Oracle just rammed Pollux like that black guy in Pulp Fiction. He says a lot of Ad Homs. but there is as legit argument there.
I don’t care much for politics so I don’t know much about it… I’m very limited to my field and defending evolution on theology forums. At best all I can do here is call out fallacies in a persons argument. I can also order around: Everyone go here http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=127752&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=4 and defend pollux against the admins attack on pollux’s intelligences as well as s/he political view points! Now say "YES CAPTIAN SIR"!

Yes! Good! We can begin the invasion.

Fetus, get your trolls ready to attack from the west. Have them use only their clubs. They must provide a distraction, and draw the hordes of infidels away. I shall attack with my elves-of-da-night in the east to make sure that the rest of the army is pulled from the city, and then spacemanspiff and tiassa can pillage and burn whomever they wish inside. Ahh, the glory of capitalism!

That fellow, oracle, is a moron. I'm about to turn him into catfood, like I just did last night. Any support debate-wise would be cool...

Remember, we mustn't mention our home base, our jewel, our oasis in the internet, of sciforums. If they were to learn our location then it would be like giving the location of earth to a bunch of really, really bad aliens:bugeye:

YES GENERAL SIR! http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/arnie.gif
Oop they ban me again, well I lasted the night. I'm sorry sir I'm died http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile_dead.gif
they did not even give me a reason this time! they just said: "Your banned, fuck off" :D
Oh well that was fun... best to do while stoned :m:

Remember, we mustn't mention our home base, our jewel, our oasis in the internet, of sciforums. If they were to learn our location then it would be like giving the location of earth to a bunch of really, really bad aliens

Ya we better hope there not smart enough to look up are names a google!:
Google search results (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Pollux+V+CounslerCoffee+spacemanspiff)
maybe we should have used defrent names! http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/images/smilies/doh.gif

CRAP! They already think Im a canadian cause I just copied and pasted something that Prisme once said....

They didnt even address any of my questions! And the level of intolerence here is unbelivable... They dont have good blocking abilitys either. And did I mention that I cant navigate that forum very well, it sucks.

I think that the user known as ThomasisUnderated has found us out. He said:

I'm sure that Pollux and his gang musn't mention their home base, their jewel, their oasis in the internet

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=127972&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=5

And if it being nice doesn't work, seek another, more merciful option. I presume that the boy I'm arguing with over there is about eleven. It just wouldn't be right to light him up right now. Much like my war strategy in real life. Sure, I would love to bury this guy with invective, but merely prodding him to grow up should, hopefully, be effective. There is always time to resort to soul-crushing. :cool:

It's still the same link I gave above.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Yes, we are more than "smart enough" to find you. Hopefully you're smart enough to figure out how simple that is.

Fetus, you were banned because the name appears deliberately offensive. Simple as that. Nobody told you to fuck off, either. For one thing, had we, we would have spelled "you're" correctly.

Pollux, trash oracle? Hysterical. You looked like road kill after the thrashing was finished. You should be ashamed.

Smacemanspiff, I find your comment about our having a firearms forum rather interesting, since a prolific poster from The FiringLine.com and its successor, The High Road.com,(two of the largest forums on the net) is none other than...spacemanspiff. Leading a dual virtual life here, bud?

Whatever, knock yourselves out. It's occasionally nice to have something to kick around over there and leftists all make good footballs. :D

welcome to sciforums!

Fetus, you were banned because the name appears deliberately offensive.Well, why don't you just go back to where you came from, then? Free speech doesn't exist at this board, either, but our kind host and moderators aren't blithering tyrants.

"Free Conservatives?" Jesus H. Baldheaded F:eek:cking Christ on a Pony! "Hi, welcome to Free Conservatives where you'll be banned if we feel the slightest bit offended."

Then go home, little boy. Pack it up, 2ndA and go back to your secure place where you can expect to be respected because it's the only option. Go back to your little paradise where honesty, intelligence, and personal integrity have even less meaning than it does here.

I mean, that was really, really stupid. Come here and admit that your board censors people for really stupid reasons.

Go home. That's free advice, 2ndA, not an order. Around here we don't play the childish pep-rally that you're most comfortable with at your board. But believe me, you'll be grossly offended around here, and after that petulant declaration of childish authoritarianism on behalf of your board, I think people would very much enjoy watching you squirm with self-inflicted, narrow-minded discomfort.

Seriously, little boy: The water's too hot for you to play in around here. If someone's User ID is enough to scare you into banning them, it would be best if you packed your bags, went back to your bigoted utopia, and only bothered to come round here when you're ready to examine life, the Universe, and everything honestly.

The amount of disgust the hypocrisy of your "Free Conservatives" site inspires moves straight past upsetting me and leaves me with nothing to do but laugh at a bunch of frightened children who are simply afraid to do anything other than repeat themselves over and over again to a rousing hallelujah chorus.

Why do people like you, 2ndA, seem so dedicated to proving faith in human potential wrong?

And you better stretch before you try kicking anything. I saw Buckeye do a Charlie Brown over there, but nobody had to pull the ball. It's just plain flabby arguments. So warm up properly before trying to think, 2ndA. Quite obviously, you run a danger of hurting yourself.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

2ndA,

Oh ya can you explain why you banned berserker?

Oh by the way Admin. Pollux will be must greatful you came http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/evild.gif Unfortunate scientist are not as cruel and conditional as evil parties members like your self so you might be staying here for a long time, dam

It times like these I wish my IP address changed daily not monthly!

Xev said that she would help out. And there banning abilities really suck to. WellCooked, you've been banned twice? And you can still go back? Im guessing that conservatives dont have a firm grasp of IP's.

And as for his banning, really? Just the name! WTF! Your kidding right?

Well, why don't you just go back to where you came from, then?

Why? It might be interesting here. It certainly appears it will be rather easy, based on your myopic fixation on one small portion of my post.

Free speech doesn't exist at this board, either, but our kind host and moderators aren't blithering tyrants.

So you say. The reality has yet to be explored.

"Free Conservatives?" Jesus H. Baldheaded Fcking Christ on a Pony! "Hi, welcome to Free Conservatives where you'll be banned if we feel the slightest bit offended."

You seem to have a certain inability to express yourself. Sad, for a denizen of forums, at least.

Then go home, little boy.

Let's examine the phrase "little boy". While you did guess the sex correctly one must wonder how many ways you could be incorrect about the size. Physically? Ha, that's funny. Mentally? We can compare brain scans, SAT's or IQ's, anyway you care to go. But perhaps you mean merely on a debate footing? In that case I'd have you know I do this in the real world as well as the net. I've done it online since day one and before. I'd suggest you never underestimate your opponent, or think your fellow posters are so silly as to automatically believe your rather lame attempt at marginalization. You can do better.

I hope.

Pack it up, 2ndA and go back to your secure place where you can expect to be respected because it's the only option.

That eager to rid yourself of me? How sad that fear could so permeate your first reply. As for respect, I get the respect I deserve, though I doubt you personally are smart enough to actually 'respect" anyone. Those who fall outside your leftist and atheist thought processes are always going to be beneath your respect in the confines of your narrow little mind.

Go back to your little paradise where honesty, intelligence, and personal integrity have even less meaning than it does here.

Funny how those who publicly encourage their other forum mates to invade another site for the express purpose of stirring it up can then whine they are either disagreed with or simply not put up with. Your hypocricy is showing.

I mean, that was really, really stupid. Come here and admit that your board censors people for really stupid reasons.

I would hope the Powers-That-Be on this site would have the common sense to ban me if I were to register as "Libsarealldeadfags" or something similar. Not one rational discussion will ever come from such a poster. Such a poster has come to incite riot and nothing more. Strolling in to a place where abortion is loathed as "WellCookedFetus" or whatever is equally ignorant. Whether you have sufficient experience on large forum admin or not to understand that I have no idea.

Go home. That's free advice, 2ndA, not an order.

Get whatcha pay for, eh?

Around here we don't play the childish pep-rally that you're most comfortable with at your board.

I cut my teeth on one of the nastiest leftist boards around in its heyday. I'm quite comfortable with ugly fights. Perhaps moreso than any other member there and likely most here, though experience has shown there's little a leftist won't stoop to when backed into a corner.

But believe me, you'll be grossly offended around here,

Nothing offends me...kiddo. Except maybe gross stupidity.

and after that petulant declaration of childish authoritarianism on behalf of your board,

I'm not certain, what is that? What do you call such an absurd argumentative device? I told him why he was banned and that he was full of shit otherwise. The fact you don't like that hardly makes ME petulant.

I think people would very much enjoy watching you squirm with self-inflicted, narrow-minded discomfort.

I never squirm, I am never uncomfortable and I am quite accustomed to being called narrow-minded by people whose mental faculties could travel freely in a bicycle rut. Quit kidding yourself, you're only setting yourself up for a fall.

Seriously, little boy:

There it is AGAIN! WooHoo!!!

The water's too hot for you to play in around here.

Sorry to disappoint but the water is hardly hot here. This is a long, long way from being an agressive forum, either of the Left or Right variety. If you think it is then you really need to get out more.

If someone's User ID is enough to scare you into banning them, it would be best if you packed your bags, went back to your bigoted utopia, and only bothered to come round here when you're ready to examine life, the Universe, and everything honestly.

Since you obviously know nothing of what is involved in maintaining a forum i won't bore you anymore. As for my being scared? Please. My opinions, unlike the majority of college indoctrinated leftists, has come about over thirty odd years of close examination. Little or nothing, especially nothing pumped out by the average leftist, scares me. As for examination itself, you claim to be a leftist, correct? Then by definition you know nothing about examination, either of self or of the world. perhaps you are about to learn that.

The amount of disgust the hypocrisy of your "Free Conservatives" site inspires moves straight past upsetting me and leaves me with nothing to do but laugh at a bunch of frightened children who are simply afraid to do anything other than repeat themselves over and over again to a rousing hallelujah chorus.

Handy excuse to scurry back to your nice little cave. I'll bet you even think such is original to yourself. Like I said, get out a bit more.

Why do people like you, 2ndA, seem so dedicated to proving faith in human potential wrong?

If you're so niave as to have faith in human potential then you need to be shook up a bit. OTOH, what you likely see as potential is what I see as failure and thus would explain why I specifically have shook you up. Good.

And you better stretch before you try kicking anything.

I do when going out against the first string. When it's time to deal with JV it's usually just wasted effort.

I saw Buckeye do a Charlie Brown over there, but nobody had to pull the ball.

I'm certain you think you did. Recognizing reality as opposed to the fantasy-land leftist version of it likely isn't one of your strong suits, though.

It's just plain flabby arguments.

OK, maybe I was wrong. That's one of the fastest summations of leftist debate I have ever seen. Thx.


So warm up properly before trying to think, 2ndA.

Heaven forbid. I'd hate to take such an early lead over you.

Quite obviously, you run a danger of hurting yourself.

Always amazing how the non-existent or absurd can be so obvious to leftists but reality is so transparent to them. perhaps when you can grasp that you can explain the ailement to those of us who don't suffer from it? Or perhaps the revelation will leave you too speechless...one can only dream.

********************************************

BTW, thx for the welcome, Spookz

Also, we have a very good grasp of IP's. I run one, the admins of the site host are regs on FC and you could get back in because you were temporarily unbanned. I assure you, if we want you banned you'll stay that way. OTOH the reverse may not be true here. Have a wonderful afternoon. :D

What a parlor trick, your little matrix screen sucks.

Hey, I got that too, Counsler. :bugeye:

As far as your forum war, Pollux, it honestly didn't look to be going that well. Those guys know their facts pretty well.

We're still training them. We're still helping them out. Is there a difference between giving them weapons or giving them training? Quote from Pollux referring to Iraqis. Its unsubstanciated statements like these that open you up for ad hominem attacks and flaming, and make you sound stupid. The people already showed that most of your sources were highly biased opinions, and not even true objective facts.

We cannot proceed.

You have been banned from making any new posts or sending private messages. The reason for this ban is:

Please use your back button to return to the previous page. Wow, what a site. They won't even give a reason for their bannings.

I mean, I hadn't even replied yet to the admin's slanders. So here's my post to a person called "Warlady" and another, more reasonable, called "Westbrook":Baron stuff a sock in it troll. I've read your silly rantings at the scifi site. You're just a bunch of kids hell bent on disrupting this site. Well sorry but we are adults here. Go back to your romper room. What a crock. One of your pals just popped over to talk about how your site bans people because their User ID's conflict with your political presumptions.

I mean, come on: "Free Conservatives"? Free what? Free to make you happy or get lost? Free to suck up to your bandwagon or just shut the heck up?

Desert Fox's entrance to this topic wasn't graceful. Heck, I'd be interested to see a thinking conservative demonstrate the propriety of the Iraqi Bush War, but none of them seem to want to.

So, Warlady, a message specifically for you:

- If you would like to justify the childish responses of your members, that's fine with me. But if you expect me to respect your intellgence, show it first. I have yet to know what I'm supposed to respect.

My first post here was met by such disrespect that it almost surprised me. But after reading through the topics and seeing the moderation, it would seem to me that it shouldn't have.

So if you don't like my tone, Warlady, please excuse the hell out of me. I'm merely trying to communicate to your faithful legions in the language they seem to know best.

In the meantime, if I'm a troll, then perhaps you should consider whether or not your hypocritical posterior should be piling up so much crap under the guise of "Free" conservatives. There's nothing "Free" about this site or its moderators. And its faithful conservative posters: Wow, they've made the free choice to be bandwagon zombies; I can't really argue with that.

But it's a little hard to respect.

So I would ask you for your opinion, as a conservative, on respect.

- Many conservatives see respect as something that is given as a reward.
- I generally see respect as a standard.
- However, I must admit that the petulant bandwagon makes it very difficult to respect conservatism.
- If I seem to disrespect conservatism, it is because conservatives have asked me to do so.

So what would you have me do? Bend over backwards to find some way to disrespect you by respecting you without cause? Sure I can try, but I'll end up respecting your comedy value, whatever that's worth.

However, since this is a conservative site and dedicated to conservative principles, I must insist that your moderators give better respect than openly refusing to consider issues and using their authority to be prigs.

I mean, come on: Buckeye Mike even admitted that there are dumbasses at this site. Is defending dumbasses because they're on your side an easier thing to do than give honest consideration to issues? Seriously, Warlady, I thought you had a point about which president and so forth. But looking at the top of page 1 of this topic, I see an interesting proposition: Nobody has explained how an Iraqi Bush War is right. I've heard pretty much all prior attempts, but the war-wagon seems to be almost a church in the sense that it refuses all objective examinations of history and demands a subjective and partisan exploitation of history in order to justify itself. So it would be more accurate to say that nobody has made a coherent, mature, rational, or otherwise useful justification for war. This is, of course, an opinion, but it derives from the observable fact that the whole history of warfare has not brought peace.

As I look around, I see that it is the moderators disrupting any discussion of the topic issue, so I'll accept your apology whenever you feel like giving it.

In the meantime, grow up. You can fool similarly simple people by pretending to be intelligent and rational, but I would hope you understand that not everybody's that stupid.

But I really shouldn't be surprised. "Free Conservatives" is sort of an oxymoron.

Westbrook

I shall take it to heart. I do admit that I'm being irrational in concluding that my initial experience with this board is representative of the whole experience, but I find it quite sad that this board bans people on the basis of their names; I find Desert Fox's lack of contribution to this topic disturbing, and I find Warlady's hostility unbecoming someone who runs a forum at a place called "Free" anything. In the meantime, I shall take your advice to heart; please understand, though, that I have a long habit of "speaking the language" according to the "When in Rome" principle.

On the one hand, I'm sorry if I've upset a few people, but insofar as I can tell, that is the preferred mode of "communication" around here.

The poor conduct I've noted is unbecoming anyone, but it really does seem to be the preferred costume of conservatism.

A note on your signature, specifically the Penn quote: several years ago, a church in Seattle's Belltown district offered on its marquee the message: Freedom is not the liberty to do what you want, but the liberty to do what God tells you is right.

(Something about tyrants?)That didn't even get a chance to be posted yet, so I'm wondering what these conservatives are afraid of. I mean, they'll ban without reason.

Of course, at a conservative website, we expect nothing lest.

2ndA, I think my point has been proven. You're not prepared for a website like this, so it would probably be to your benefit to pack your bags and go home where you can be sheltered.

Oh well. Scaring conservatives into censorship and blacklisting is something I'm quite proud to do. It's so easy. You don't have to threaten. You don't really have to do anything but address the truth, which scares them like sunlight to a vampire.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

2ndA, I think my point has been proven. You're not prepared for a website like this, so it would probably be to your benefit to pack your bags and go home where you can be sheltered.

I expected surrender. I hardly expected it to be so abject or sudden. Thank you, you service my ego well. Are you certain you aren't French?

I to have been banned for no reason. I said I was canadian, and then BAMB! They banned me. Probably because I lied. (Im from kentucky)

Its just so easy to sign back up though!

I expected surrender. I hardly expected it to be so abject or sudden. Thank you, you service my ego well. Are you certain you aren't French?I would ask you to explain that; I hadn't figured that Warlady's retreat from the field of battle would serve your ego so well. I'm officially curious.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Originally posted by CounslerCoffee
I believe that war with Iraq is wrong, please convince me otherwise.

You're not the brightest bulb in the marquee are you?...oh well have fun reading, maybe you will actually learn something. :cool:

As President Reagan used to say, "It isn't that Liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

<font color="red">edit: removed embedded movie - next time just post a link - Porfiry (admin)</font>

(BBCNews: Iraq's tortured children) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/from_our_own_correspondent/2058253.stm)

(PBS.org: Highly secret terrorist training camp at Salman Pak) (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html)

(NY Times: Defectors Cite Iraqi Training For Terrorism - 11.12.01) (http://query.nytimes.com/search/article-page.html?res=9B01EED81E39F93BA35752C1A9679C8B63)

(UK Guardian: The Iraqi connection - 11.11.01) (http://www.observer.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,591439,00.html)

(The New York Sun: September 11 and Iraq) (http://www.nysun.com/sunarticle.asp?artID=608)

?In 1991 Saddam killed 500,000 people when they rose against him. Nobody demonstrated against him then. But now the United States wants to get rid of the dictator, people are demonstrating against it.?
-one of the Iraqi liberation soldiers the U.S. is training at "Camp Freedom" in Hungary

(UK Telegraph: Saddam 'killed missile chief' to thwart UN team) (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/02/wirq102.xml)

(The Los Angeles Times: Protesters With Bloody Hands -Max Boot) (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot27feb27,1,57777.story?coll=la%2Dnews%2Dcomment %2Dopinions)

(Reuters: Blix - Iraq Banned Weapons Unaccounted For) (http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2231238)

(Human Rights Watch: Iraq's Crime of Genocide: the Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds) (http://hrw.org/reports/world/iraq-pubs.php)

(Amnesty International: Iraq: Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners) (http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/print/MDE140082001?OpenDocument)

(New York Times: How Many People Has Hussein Killed?) (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/26/weekinreview/26JOHN.html?ex=1044248400&en=1aec64f892889c31&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE)

(NY Times: War for Peace? It Worked in My Country -Nobel Laureate José Ramos-Horta) (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/25/opinion/25HORT.html?ex=1046754000&en=37a13efbf7f6a865&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE)

(Colin Powell's Special Section - "Iraq: Failing To Disarm" -audio, video, text) (http://www.state.gov/p/nea/disarm/)

"The Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction represent a clear threat to world security. This danger has been explicitly recognized by the U.N."
-Letter by Eight European leaders in support of the United States

(New Zealand Herald: "Evidence of an Iraqi Official Acting as a 'Professional Rapist'") (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3007499&thesection=news&thesubsection=world)

(CAABU: Pro-war letter to Tony Blair from Iraqi Exiles in UK) (http://www.caabu.org/campaigns/iraqi-exiles-letter.html)

(ABCNews: Is Odai Hussein More Brutal Than His Father?) (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/World/saddam_son_030214.html)

(WSJ: Eight European Leaders Stand With Bush) (http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110002994)

(Washington Post: Now, It's Business That Booms in Afghanistan) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2374-2003Feb25.html)

(UK Guardian: Ten More European Nations Back US on Iraq) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-2380889,00.html)

"If we do not act, if we do not stand up to Saddam, that will encourage him to commit other atrocities."
- Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada (February 19,1998)

"stressed the extremely grave risks that will result from a refusal by Iraq to accept the inspection of the presidential sites. Now, time is running out.
- French president Jacques Chirac (1998)/I]

"Iraq should stop refusing to cooperate, and if all the political efforts that are being made do not result in success, a military operation cannot and should not be ruled out in this case."
[I]Rudolph Sharping, chairman of the Bundestag group (1998)

(Center for Non-Proliferation Studies: WMDs in Iraq) (http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/scud_info/scud_info_refs/n41en172/iraq.htm)

(Washington Post: UNSCOM Tracks Terror Weapons) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/maps/satindex.htm)

(Washington Post: The Unconventional Arsenal) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/stories/graphic022298.htm)

(Palestine Chronicle: U.S. to Have Access to 21 Countries in Iraq War) (http://palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20030131211732662)

(Washington Times: Iraqi Scientist Says Materials for Nuclear Bombs in Hand) (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20020916-28573872.htm)

(UK Times: 14 Years of Torture and Humiliation in Saddam's Jail) (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-590350,00.html)

"At the end of all of the academic arguments is whether we are willing to pay the price to bring freedom to the people of Iraq. If we are, we will not regret it."
- Vietnam veteran and former Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey

(MSNBC: Banging the War Drums Slowly -Christopher Hitchens) (http://www.msnbc.com/news/876640.asp)

(CNN: Experts: Iraq has Tons of Chemical Weapons) (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/09/02/iraq.weapons/index.html)

(Finish the War. Liberate Iraq -former Democrat Senator Bob Kerrey) (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002252)

(UK Telegraph: UN Inspectors Uncover Proof of Saddam's Nuclear Bomb Plans) (http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/19/wirq19.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/01/19/ixnewstop.html/news/2003/01/19/wirq19.xml)

(Reuters: Iraq Scientist Says Saddam Hiding Arms Underground) (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/MAN230030)

(UK Times: Exiles Prepare for a Happy Return at Camp Freedom) (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-589171,00.html)

"The last thing we want to see is a smoking gun. A gun smokes after it's been fired?. If someone waits for a smoking gun, it's certain we will have waited too long."
- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

(ThisIsLondon: New Saddam Torture Dossier Unveiled) (http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/2283602?source=Evening%20Standard)

(GlobalSecurity.org: Tuwaitha Nuclear Center) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/tuwaitha-imagery.htm)

(New York Post: Iraq Nuke Sites Up & Atom Again) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/020907-iraq1.htm)

(Scripps Howard News Service: Protestors Deny Peace a Chance) (http://www.modbee.com/24hour/opinions/story/773259p-5558650c.html)

(GlobalSecurity.org: H-3 Airfield) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/h-3.htm)

"We are praying you will stick to your resolve to liberate our country from a dictatorial tyranny over 30 years which has caused the deaths of nearly 2 million men and women, sons and daughters."
- Letter to UK Prime Minister Tony Blair from Iraqi Exiles

(U.S. State Dept: Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs) (http://www.state.gov/www/regions/nea/iraq_white_paper.html)

www.senate.gov/~armed_services/statemnt/2002/Duelfer.pdf+iraq+weapons+of+mass+destruction&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 (http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:LYr8LaLUFAMC:(U.S. Senate: Testimony on emerging Threats & Capabilities)

(U.K. Ministry of Defence: Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction) (http://special.fco.gov.uk/background/iraqcbw.shtml)

(Foreign Affairs: The Greatest Threat -Richard Butler) (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20000901fabook871/richard-butler/the-greatest-threat-iraq-weapons-of-mass-destruction-and-the-growing-crisis-of-global-security.html)

(Washington Times: Iraq Seeks Steel for Nukes) (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020726-23093280.htm)

(Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights & Labor: Iraq: A Population Silenced) (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/15996.htm)
(UK Times: Liberal MP Backs War After Meeting Saddam Torture Victims) (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,635-592766,00.html)

"Of course they have no credibility. If they had any, they certainly lost it in 1991. I don't see that they have acquired any credibility."
-Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector Hans Blix, on the Saddam regime

(UK Telegraph: Saddam Killed Abu Nidal Over Al-Qaeda Row) (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2002%2F08%2F25%2Fwnidal25 .xml)

(UK Guardian: The Iraqi Connection to Al-Qaeda) (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/archive/article/0,,4296646,00.html)

(Jane's: Abu Nidal Murder Trail Leads Directly to Iraqi Regime) (http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jwit/jwit020823_1_n.shtml)

(Brain-Terminal.com: MOS at the New York City Peace Protests) (http://www.brain-terminal.com/articles/video/peace-protest.html)

(MidEast Review of Int'l Affairs: Iraq's WMDs & the '97 Gulf Crisis) (http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1997/issue4/jv1n4a1.html)

"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of sanctions and ignore the commitments he's made? Well, he will conclude that the international community's lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. The stakes could not be higher. Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."
- Bill Clinton in 1998

(Amir Taheri: Anti-War or Anti-US?) (http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/69969.htm)

(Reuters: Report: Saddam Authorized Use of Bio-Chemical Weapons if Attacked) (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=214458&contrassID=1&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=0)

(The Scotsman: France & Russia Make Money Out of Immoral Peace) (http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=200892003)

(StratFor.com: The Chirac-Hussein Connection) (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/weekend_sites/week_in_review_021703___022103/content/the_chirac_hussein_connection___courtesy_of_stratf or_com.member.html)

(Associated Press: Non-Aligned Summit Backs Iraq Disarmament) (http://www.news-journal.com/news/content/news/ap_story.html/Intl/AP.V2215.AP-Non-Aligned-Sum.html)

(New Republic: Dispatch - Food Fight) (http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/rubin/MR-NR7-01.htm)

?I am surprised to hear of all the anti-war demonstrations in the West. I wish that the demonstrators could spend just 24 hours in the place I have come from and see the reality of Iraq. Fourteen lost years of my life. Nothing but bread for food ? darkness, filth, beatings, torture, killings, bitterness and humiliation.?
-Rafat Abdulmajeed Muhammad, jailed for selling a roll of film to an British journalist

(Daily Telegraph: The Iraqi People Want to Know When Bush Will Get Tough) (http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/rubin/rubingettough.htm)

(New Republic: Will Saddam's Troops Fight?) (http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/rubin/rubin090902.htm)

www.csis.org/stratassessment/reports/WMDIraq.pdf+iraq+weapons+of+mass+destruction&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 (http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:HUnpebHwmNoC:(Center for Strategic and International Studies: WMDs in Iraq)

(Washington Post: Germany's Mr. Tough Guy -Michael Kelly) (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michaelkelly/mk20030212.shtml)

(Washington Post: French Oil Firm Sees Future in Iraq) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37621-2003Feb20.html)

"Iraq under Saddam?s regime has become a land of hopelessness, sadness, and fear. A country where people are ethnically cleansed; prisoners are tortured in more than 300 prisons in Iraq. Rape is systematic . . . congenital malformation, birth defects, infertility, cancer, and various disorders are the results of Saddam?s gassing of his own people. . . the killing and torturing of husbands in front of their wives and children . . . Iraq under Saddam has become a hell and a museum of crimes."
?Iraqi Safia Al Souhail, Advocacy Director of the International Alliance for Justice

(White House.gov: A Decade of Deception and Defiance) (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912.html)

(Osama bin Laden's Letter to America -11.24.02) (http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html)

(Detroit News: Anti-war Protests Anger U.S. Troops Inside Kuwait) (http://www.detnews.com/2003/nation/0302/18/a04-88305.htm)

(BBC News: Exiles' "Liberate Iraq" Plea) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2786475.stm)


(BBC News: Iraq Exiles Back Blair's Stance) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2775981.stm)

(NRO: Why Won?t Anti-war Types Listen to Iraqis? - Amir Taheri) (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-taheri022603.asp)

Originally posted by tiassa
I would ask you to explain that; I hadn't figured that Warlady's retreat from the field of battle would serve your ego so well. I'm officially curious.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

To a long detailed point by point reply you made no direct comment. The best you could come up with was another almost dizyingly childish and thoughtless claim that I can't survive here. And yet it was you who was elft utterly rebuffed.

You surrendered. Rolled over, stuck your legs in the air and said Fuck me! I'm yours! Pathetic. Lame. Thoughtless. Damn near puerile. And yet you whine about the giving and getting of respect. How can you whine about that which you don't understand.

Radical Richie, Im the leading conservative on sciforums.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18663&perpage=5&pagenumber=7

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18485

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=282866#post282866

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18477

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=281372#post281372

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18232&perpage=5&pagenumber=3

There ya go. Check out what I have to say.

So why did you ban berserker again? :rolleyes: or in fact the rest of us? And you dare to call us close minded... well if we were then you won't be here for much long, and we do keep track of IP addresses.

The side effects of a Iraqi war and the power vacuum produce afterwards will be only more death, destruction and terrorism then we have had before... not the mention the price tag is now more money then is need to land people on mars... 3 times! Considering our deficit and the continued loss in government revenue, this country will be really in the hole after this war!

The reason I hate politics is because, I hate parties, Its either the evil party to the right or the idiot party to the left. Parties polarize people and you can not explore more options because your mind becomes focused on pleasing the party. Personally I think we should do way with are present party system and voting technique. We need multiple party candidates and opinion based voting.

Most of all with the way America is going we will have gone the way of Rome within the century, oh well there better biotech careers in Malaysia.

Well they banned me too. They are apparently unable to ban IP addresses, because I registered again:) However I would again ask that you guys don't harass the conservatives. They view us the same way that we view them, merely a bunch of retards agreeing with each other. I just wish some of them were more competent debaters. I've waited the whole day and oracle has not replied to my second-most-recent post. As of now, that spells defeat.

Yes, I also admit to making some unsubstantiated remarks. I can offer no excuse. So, for that I am sorry--even though they already hate liberals (where I merely disagree with conservatives and pity them) their opinion has likely degenerated at least a little.

I was in a good mood when I arrived home from a friend's house. My cold seems to be going away and after a few hours we got through two hours of the dune miniseries. I decided to make a different approach. I don't think it'll work but I don't care, I'm glad I tried. I decided to be nice and peaceful--and to ask them outright to hear me out, to relinquish their way of thinking and merely consider. I've found that for both parties being aggressive assholes is unsuccesful in doing so. I have yet to see a reply (I only posted a few minutes ago), but, you never know--I just might reap some converts. Warlady seems to be the most impressionable of them all, I don't doubt that she will read this at some point, but I plan on making her my viceroy to that website's jurisdiction. We need to take some territory here.

Radical Rick, and that other fellow with the numbers, don't remember your name--you may disagree on opinions, but you have to admit--sciforums has a much better layout. I'm glad porfiry has our avatars and signatures so small, the other website looks like anytown USA.

My Post (http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=127752&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=5)

Well, that little debacle made an entertaining read. Didn't have a look until today, and it kinda looks like Vietnam in there... you went into enemy territory and got yer asses handed to you on a plate by an enemy who knew their ground well.

Thanks for the chuckle :cool:

oh, and Pollux.. might be a bit late. First impressions last.

I can only agree on that last point:)

“In 1991 Saddam killed 500,000 people when they rose against him. Nobody demonstrated against him then. But now the United States wants to get rid of the dictator, people are demonstrating against it.”
-one of the Iraqi liberation soldiers the U.S. is training at "Camp Freedom" in Hungary

do you know why they rose up against him?

"The Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction represent a clear threat to world security. This danger has been explicitly recognized by the U.N."
-Letter by Eight European leaders in support of the United States

make the case. so far your leaders have provided us with bogus and plagiarized shit masquerading as evidence. no doubt you can do better. convince me. do a good job and i might even sign up

If we do not act, if we do not stand up to Saddam, that will encourage him to commit other atrocities."
- Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada (February 19,1998)

chirac is an opportunistic ass. however this time he is gonna have to stay up that flagpole. his people will not let him climb down and do another about turn (vive la french)

"Iraq should stop refusing to cooperate, and if all the political efforts that are being made do not result in success, a military operation cannot and should not be ruled out in this case."
Rudolph Sharping, chairman of the Bundestag group (1998)

bullshit. there are alternatives.

"At the end of all of the academic arguments is whether we are willing to pay the price to bring freedom to the people of Iraq. If we are, we will not regret it."
- Vietnam veteran and former Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey

fuck you kerrey. bring it to us first! your citizens. you skanky ass grunt! i spit on you!

"The last thing we want to see is a smoking gun. A gun smokes after it's been fired…. If someone waits for a smoking gun, it's certain we will have waited too long."
- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

alright satan.

"We are praying you will stick to your resolve to liberate our country from a dictatorial tyranny over 30 years which has caused the deaths of nearly 2 million men and women, sons and daughters."
- Letter to UK Prime Minister Tony Blair from Iraqi Exiles

crap! a dead kurd is a good kurd. ask around. no one cares about em. least of all the exiles

"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of sanctions and ignore the commitments he's made? Well, he will conclude that the international community's lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. The stakes could not be higher. Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."
- Bill Clinton in 1998

...over the rainbow...........! smoke a cigar and shut up fool!

“I am surprised to hear of all the anti-war demonstrations in the West. I wish that the demonstrators could spend just 24 hours in the place I have come from and see the reality of Iraq. Fourteen lost years of my life. Nothing but bread for food — darkness, filth, beatings, torture, killings, bitterness and humiliation.”
-Rafat Abdulmajeed Muhammad, jailed for selling a roll of film to an British journalist

you dumb shit. work with what you have!

Iraq under Saddam’s regime has become a land of hopelessness, sadness, and fear. A country where people are ethnically cleansed; prisoners are tortured in more than 300 prisons in Iraq. Rape is systematic . . . congenital malformation, birth defects, infertility, cancer, and various disorders are the results of Saddam’s gassing of his own people. . . the killing and torturing of husbands in front of their wives and children . . . Iraq under Saddam has become a hell and a museum of crimes."
–Iraqi Safia Al Souhail, Advocacy Director of the International Alliance for Jus

all true but yet is propaganda meant to bolster the push for war. the average iraqi lives like anyone else. the sanctions have a greater impact on them than what saddam does.

2ndA and Radical Rick,

The reason we may not post back to you in extremely long detailed post is that some of use have a life, and have limited time and have to prioritize... yes I know this concept may seem strange to you…

Pollux V,
If and when the admin console votes on banning* these people please tell us so we don’t waste the time trying to continue arguing with them… also so we can bury them like we did Green_World :D

*We must appreciate are democratic process, “some” forums don’t have that.

Oh spookz,
I love how your wrote back to them in the same style they right on their forum.

When they commit an act worthy of banning, I'll talk it over with porfiry. So far they've only differed in opinion. Besides, the guy had a point, fetus. Going in with a name like that could have only upset them. Try another username, like "softskinnedfetus" or something:D

I would like to go back to berserker* but then again they still have not explain why they ban that one!

*Thats my name on Theology forums the other name bothered people but they never ban me for it… I change it when they asked nicely!

Also as you can see to the left I am not actually cooked: I'm still baking.

Pollux, they have already violated the TOS. They threw a pop up on me everytime that I visited sciforums. I found the problem, and corrected it (They aint that good, obviously using subseven.)

Wow their low all we did was come over for a discussion defending the liberal side they don't have... and they come at us hacking?!?

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=UBB24

It is just all to shocking, there like two inches off of being the KKK!
:mad: :mad: :mad:

Banned again. My email is currently being verified. Dunno if I can get back.

Hehe they should argue against me about homosexuals... I remember how I got Lady to leave in shame before here banning after proving to her homosexuality was not a choose.

:rolleyes:

How embarassing.

You know who you are: roadkill, and with no skid marks to lend plausible deniability.

You guys got hosed, and you set yourselves up for it, too.

It'll be interesting to read your failure analysis.

:rolleyes:

:D :D

Who say I don't like that? http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/fouet.gif

Personally I knew this was going to happen… I just could not wait to see the carnage unfold, I’m sorry.

*Fetus awaits fire squad for high treason. Then suddenly sprouts wings and flies away to join the evil ones in a night time feeding* http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/grhargh.gif

Radical Rick

I'm seriously hoping that I'm correct in my presumption that you have not really read any of my posts outside of this topic. Otherwise, I would have to be insulted.

Is that the same President Reagan that took part in the McCarthy witch hunt? Who believed that extinguishing Communism was more important than personal integrity? Who considers Grenada among the finest accomplishments of his public service? Who may well have acted in a treasonous manner in his dealings with Iran? Who played with chimpanzees for money? (Mind you--that particular job, I envy.)

You know, here's a question about the propaganda images you're pushing: The US helped make it possible. If we choose to hold those who finance terrorism responsible for the results of their actions, why should Donald Rumsfeld not be among the prosecuted (http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0802-01.htm)?

Of course it's nasty. Of course it's wrong. But an invasion will only stop Saddam. It will not stop the human suffering in Iraq. We must find a better way.

What about those Americans who assisted Osama bin Laden (http://cbn.org/SpiritualLife/understandingislam/Islam_and_the_Bible_Introduction_to_a_Series.asp)? The Taliban are our former "friends" as well (http://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/Op-Eds/Beeman3.html). (See also: 1 (http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/099.html), 2 (http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/112.html), 3 (http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/targetterrorism/afghanistan/players/keyfigures.html))?In 1991 Saddam killed 500,000 people when they rose against him. Nobody demonstrated against him then. But now the United States wants to get rid of the dictator, people are demonstrating against it.?
-one of the Iraqi liberation soldiers the U.S. is training at "Camp Freedom" in Hungary A couple of points that should be considered here:

(1) The alternatives are not merely "Invasion vs. Support Saddam".
(2) Not all peaceful resolutions have been tried. Few, if any, have ever been given serious political consideration.
(3) Do you know why Poppy Bush didn't go all the way to Baghdad? (Hint: There is a fundamental reason.)"The Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction represent a clear threat to world security. This danger has been explicitly recognized by the U.N."
-Letter by Eight European leaders in support of the United States See points 1 and 2 above, and please refer to the link about Donald Rumsfeld, which I reiterate here (http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0802-01.htm). Forgive me, please, if I'm not more specific, but I seem to be repeating myself over and over as one after another conservative steps up and presents the same issues in the same context without having paid attention to the fact that I've addressed them numerous times and they're merely restating the question instead of tackling the issues I present. Now, you're new here, so I am not particularly annoyed with that, but I do beg your pardon if I refer you here and there. In the long run, I'm still providing more commentary than you bothered to, and you could have saved yourself some time in that case by not bothering; because I have seen all of these issues before and they're still not enough to impress me into supporting this particular war."If we do not act, if we do not stand up to Saddam, that will encourage him to commit other atrocities."
- Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada (February 19,1998)

"stressed the extremely grave risks that will result from a refusal by Iraq to accept the inspection of the presidential sites. Now, time is running out.
- French president Jacques Chirac (1998)/I]

"Iraq should stop refusing to cooperate, and if all the political efforts that are being made do not result in success, a military operation cannot and should not be ruled out in this case."
[I]Rudolph Sharping, chairman of the Bundestag group (1998) Clinton, I'm sure, could have spun the failures of yesterday into the glories of today if he really tried, but I'm surprised that it's taken as long as it has for the US to finally lose its temper about a cease-fire condition that was designed to fail."At the end of all of the academic arguments is whether we are willing to pay the price to bring freedom to the people of Iraq. If we are, we will not regret it."
- Vietnam veteran and former Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey Yeah, which makes me wonder two things about liberating Iraq: Why did Congress only apportion $97 million, and why have we only spent $3 million to sponsor an internal toppling of Saddam?

I mean, we're willing to spend how many billions on an invasion and waste how many human lives?

And it's not even worth $97 million to seek a better option?

(As a silly aside, Hitchens cracks me up. I don't think I've ever seen him on TV when he wasn't coked to the gills or drunk to beat the Buckley. I admit that I have a hard time distinguishing his more appropriate rhetoric from the selfishness of an addict, but that can be said about a good many journalists of varying caliber.)"The last thing we want to see is a smoking gun. A gun smokes after it's been fired?. If someone waits for a smoking gun, it's certain we will have waited too long."
- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld Yeah, that's kind of the irony. I would direct your attention back to point 3 above."We are praying you will stick to your resolve to liberate our country from a dictatorial tyranny over 30 years which has caused the deaths of nearly 2 million men and women, sons and daughters."
- Letter to UK Prime Minister Tony Blair from Iraqi Exiles The relief of the Iraqi people will be a relative idea. Things will get better, but it's going to be a long time before things get to the point of acceptability."Of course they have no credibility. If they had any, they certainly lost it in 1991. I don't see that they have acquired any credibility."
-Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector Hans Blix, on the Saddam regime Did I mention that bit about the cease-fire being designed to fail? It relied upon factors which were known to be absent from the situation.Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal Well, duh.

I do find it ironic that conservative positions will arbitrarily turn to Bill Clinton for credibility, but I also admit that such a consideration is beside the point.

But here again I point you to the Rumsfeld article I've already linked twice for you above.

But one thing, for comparison, that I can say about the US' former enemy, the old Soviet Union: The commies never nuked anyone in combat. So I say, "Well, duh. From one President of a WMD country to another ...."?I am surprised to hear of all the anti-war demonstrations in the West. I wish that the demonstrators could spend just 24 hours in the place I have come from and see the reality of Iraq. Fourteen lost years of my life. Nothing but bread for food ? darkness, filth, beatings, torture, killings, bitterness and humiliation.?
-Rafat Abdulmajeed Muhammad, jailed for selling a roll of film to an British journalist What bugs me about the situation the most is that we sat back for twelve years insisting on a course of action that would lead us to war sooner or later. In the meantime, other options (supporting an internal liberation, for instance) remained virtually untried."Iraq under Saddam?s regime has become a land of hopelessness, sadness, and fear. A country where people are ethnically cleansed; prisoners are tortured in more than 300 prisons in Iraq. Rape is systematic . . . congenital malformation, birth defects, infertility, cancer, and various disorders are the results of Saddam?s gassing of his own people. . . the killing and torturing of husbands in front of their wives and children . . . Iraq under Saddam has become a hell and a museum of crimes."
?Iraqi Safia Al Souhail, Advocacy Director of the International Alliance for Justice (A) The US helped make Iraq a land of hopelessness ad nauseam.
(B) The US chose a course, following Desert Storm, that would lead us back to war.
(C) For twelve years, under the UN resolutions, the US pursued this result as if it were the only possible result.
(D) Before that, hey, Hussein was our guy for eight years.

I object to the whole cycle of violence. The people who screwed up before (Rumsfeld, Cheney, &c.) are using their errors of the past to justify the errors of the immediate future. This method will not work, and that's why there's a peace movement. The method is unsound, people have come to distrust the US, and Bush is trying to put out the fire with gasoline.

I will continue to read through your list of links, though I will not be nearly as amused if they fail to impress me with anything new. I know it's easier to think that pacifists don't read the news, don't keep up on current events, and have no clue what's happening in the world, but one of these days you're going to have to put enough effort and respect into your approach to tell me what it is you see in that mess of words you've offered up.

I remind Christians, occasionally, that it is useless to simply quote a Bible at me because I can read the same words and take them to mean something differently in sum than the evangelist. I now remind the war party of the same. What is it you're trying to show me with all of this that is going to change my mind? So far, I'm not seeing it.

If you can't even bother to write a coherent explanation of your position, why should I bother to do it for you? If I simply assumed you were right simply because you can pop off two one-liners (one borrowed), I'd be on the bandwagon already.

Next time, please don't be such a presumptuous and thereby useless bystander.

Thanks for trying, though. Who knows, there might still be something in at least one of those articles that will change my mind, but so far the basis of what you're presenting doesn't seem any different from the same myopic bandwagon I've already been through more times than I can count without finding justification for the Iraqi Bush War.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

To a long detailed point by point reply you made no direct comment. Fill in the detail here? What the hell are you talking about?The best you could come up with was another almost dizyingly childish and thoughtless claim that I can't survive here. Well, if WellCookedFetus is such a horrible User ID that you had to ban him, you won't. I find it hilarious that the site admins had a problem in the first place.And yet it was you who was elft utterly rebuffed.Elft where?You surrendered. Rolled over, stuck your legs in the air and said Fuck me! I'm yours! Pathetic. Lame. Thoughtless. Damn near puerile. And yet you whine about the giving and getting of respect. How can you whine about that which you don't understand. You'll have to point that out, as I'm wondering if you're not thinking of someone else.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

I think he's talking about how you didn't refute his arguments, just made a bunch of comments.

Generally, while debating, if you don't refute or contest a person's claim, then you yield to them and they win on that point.

However, I don't know what point he is talking about.

(They aint that good, obviously using subseven.)

Subseven? *snork* OK, yeah...ummm, sure.

*snork*

Wow never thought I would hear a pig snork here!

did anyone see what I said above :o

heh.. I read the thread title, wandered over there to take a look, and the first though that entered my head was Monty Python...

"Run away! Run away!"

Ah ... I see what 2ndA was referring to. A bunch of bluster and bravado that got lost a couple pages back.

Very well. If you insist:Why? It might be interesting here. It certainly appears it will be rather easy, based on your myopic fixation on one small portion of my post.Not entirely myopic. That portion of your post tells us much. You're welcome to stay, but if WellCooked's User ID is such to offend the administrators of Free Conservatives, they'd probably best stay away from here, as WellCooked is well below the usual par of the odd and possibly offensive. You set the standard, I was just observing the comparison.

But if you think you can survive without being too offended, I think it would be interesting to find out if you actually have anything to say.So you say. The reality has yet to be explored.For your objectivity, yes. For ours, we already know. Comparatively, I'm amazed at how willingly the moderators at Free Conservatives will suspend open debate and start banning people for disagreeing with them. It's an observational reality on this side.Let's examine the phrase "little boy". While you did guess the sex correctly one must wonder how many ways you could be incorrect about the size. I figured you were a child, what with the bluster and authoritarian routine. I mean, it really is childish: Your name makes me uncomfortable so we'll ban you.

Think about it.In that case I'd have you know I do this in the real world as well as the net. I've done it online since day one and before. Have you always hidden from what offends you? Keep flexing your muscles. We know. The world is round. And the bathroom is that way.I'd suggest you never underestimate your opponent, or think your fellow posters are so silly as to automatically believe your rather lame attempt at marginalization. You can do better. Oh, of course I can. But every once in a while it is a great release to stoop to the tactical standard of the conservative mind.

But as to marginalization: Hey, I'm not the asshole who advocates banning people for their names. I'm not the cheap admin who would rather ban someone who disagrees with her than allow a debate to continue. Marginalize yourself all you want. I'm just going to have some fun pointing it out:

- Fetus, you were banned because the name appears deliberately offensive. Simple as that.

I mean, that's pretty freaking ridiculous, but it's about what we expect from conservatism: I believe in Free Speech. Absolutely. Within limits. You shouldn't be allowed to offend me.

Why is it that I keep running into this sentiment every time I deal with the conservative assertion of a mind?That eager to rid yourself of me? No, it's compassion. I don't like it when people get hurt because they're too stupid to realize they're in over their head. I'm serious here: If you think Well Cooked Fetus is offensive, this is not the place for you to be.As for respect, I get the respect I deserve, though I doubt you personally are smart enough to actually 'respect" anyone. See, if you were actually any good at debating, at least at the sleazy part of it that you so seem to love, you would be able to realize how to jab someone like that. Subtlety. It helps you not sound like a petulant child.Those who fall outside your leftist and atheist thought processes are always going to be beneath your respect in the confines of your narrow little mind.The atheists at this board can be pretty tough some days. But we're not all leftists.Funny how those who publicly encourage their other forum mates to invade another site for the express purpose of stirring it up can then whine they are either disagreed with or simply not put up with. Your hypocricy is showing.You should go back and check my posting record. I didn't get bothersome to Warlady until after Buckeye failed to engage in a reasonable conversation. Think what you want, but all I found at Free Conservatives were a bunch of half-witted wanna-be comedians with no real respect for life, death, or the coming war. I get the feeling they think the Iraqi Bush War is a video game.
I would hope the Powers-That-Be on this site would have the common sense to ban me if I were to register as "Libsarealldeadfags" or something similar Why don't we compare your assertion with reality:

- Banned: "WellCookedFetus", essentially a thing.
- Comparative example: "LiberalsAreAllDeadFags", an assertion.

Apples? Oranges?Not one rational discussion will ever come from such a poster. So did they teach you that kind of prejudice in debate school?

You're quite presumptuous, aren't you?

Or, rather I should take a note from the expert and point out: The reality has yet to be explored.Strolling in to a place where abortion is loathed as "WellCookedFetus" or whatever is equally ignorant. Homogenize the board, eh?Whether you have sufficient experience on large forum admin or not to understand that I have no idea.Admin experience and narrowmindedness, while not necessarily mutually exclusive, have no real relation here. Only years of your own seething conservative bigotry.Get whatcha pay for, eh? Consider it a donation. I didn't actually think you'd be smart enough to take the advice.
I cut my teeth on one of the nastiest leftist boards around in its heyday. I'm quite comfortable with ugly fights. Obviously, that's a pure lie, if you can't handle a WellCookedFetus.

And besides, didn't you just note, Funny how those who publicly encourage their other forum mates to invade another site for the express purpose of stirring it up can then whine they are either disagreed with or simply not put up with.

I would say that the operating example suggests very strongly that you are not comfortable with ugly fights, and your idea of a nasty leftist must be somewhat cosmic.Nothing offends me...kiddo. Except maybe gross stupidity. What I actually find offensive is the massive degree of bigoted presumption upon which you rely to justify your position. I think of the Bush Administration as "gross stupidity", I'm imagining that you don't. Point being, your point is about as funny as a Christian telling me on the one hand that God is omnipotent, on the other that God cannot do this or that, and to yet a third that simply because God cannot do this or that does not mean God is not omnipotent. In other words, it's a matter of definitions. And if you choose to rush to spite and judgment, well, on the one hand it's your own choice, and at the same time I wouldn't be surprised, as such presumptuousness is, experientially speaking, a prerequisite of conservative thought.I told him why he was banned and that he was full of shit otherwise. The fact you don't like that hardly makes ME petulant. Banning him for his name was petulant.I never squirm, I am never uncomfortable and I am quite accustomed to being called narrow-minded by people whose mental faculties could travel freely in a bicycle rut. Quit kidding yourself, you're only setting yourself up for a fall. Of course, when you find yourself cornered, you can always just ban them, right?There it is AGAIN! WooHoo!!!Stop acting like a child and I'll stop calling you a little boy.Sorry to disappoint but the water is hardly hot here. This is a long, long way from being an agressive forum, either of the Left or Right variety. If you think it is then you really need to get out more. It's not about aggression.

It's about substantial debate.

Something about a bicycle rut there, beanpole?

Oh well, at least we learn more about your priorities.Since you obviously know nothing of what is involved in maintaining a forum i won't bore you anymore. Actually, I appreciate it, especially since maintaining a forum has nothing to do with your cowardice and bigotry.My opinions, unlike the majority of college indoctrinated leftists, has come about over thirty odd years of close examinationWhat's really funny about that is that I can say the same, of a sort. My opinions, unlike the majority of party-indoctrinated rightists, comes from about thirty years of close examination.Little or nothing, especially nothing pumped out by the average leftist, scares me. Generally speaking, it's because it's only the fringe left that gets violent. Violence runs thick through the right wing. Duh. Leftism doesn't operate through mechanisms of fear the way rightist paranoia does. Of course you're not going to be scared of the average leftist.

However, I can see you being scared of the results of what that leftist pumps out. While the average leftist won't threaten to kill you, the average leftist does dream of a free and equal human society, and I know for a fact that this scares the bejeezus out of the right.As for examination itself, you claim to be a leftist, correct? Quite the leftist these days, it turns out.Then by definition you know nothing about examination, either of self or of the world. perhaps you are about to learn that.You see, if you really were a competent debater, you would provide some basis for that other than what we're already used to in your presumption and bigotry.Handy excuse to scurry back to your nice little cave. I'll bet you even think such is original to yourself. Like I said, get out a bit more. Handy excuse? What the hell are you talking about?

Get out a bit more? Hey, I'm not the one who claims to have spent the whole time of debate boards in front of a computer cutting my teeth. Perhaps if you didn't reach so wildly I might find you amusing.
If you're so niave as to have faith in human potential then you need to be shook up a bit. OTOH, what you likely see as potential is what I see as failure and thus would explain why I specifically have shook you up. Good That makes about as little sense as the bit about the handy excuse and the cave.

Look, some people simply haven't given up, rolled over, and chosen to join the evil they perceive around them. I can see however why you would see human potential as a failure; after all, you seem to spend much time working against it.I do when going out against the first string. When it's time to deal with JV it's usually just wasted effort.Witty rejoinder. It almost has substance.

Oh, that's right. I forgot. It's true because you say it's true.

:rolleyes:

This from someone who runs away from people's user ID's?
I'm certain you think you did. Recognizing reality as opposed to the fantasy-land leftist version of it likely isn't one of your strong suits, though. Oh, please. Hmm ... let me think for, oh, I don't even need to in order to match that.

Recognizing reality is something the left aims to do. Telling reality what it is and should be is what the right aims to do.

Wow. For a seasoned debater, you're second rate.

Maybe you'd better stretch some, so we can see your "A-Game".OK, maybe I was wrong. That's one of the fastest summations of leftist debate I have ever seen. Thx. So that's the problem!

Okay. Look--there are organizations out there that will help you with your reading skills. I'll look around on the web and send you a few links.

Sorry. I'll lay off. I didn't realize I was debating with someone under the influence of learning disabilities. I owe you sincere apologies for my tone.

Now, just to make sure we're up to speed on the point:

- If the leftist argument was flabby, Buckeye should have been able to hit his mark. In more familiar terms: Buckeye couldn't hit the broad side of a barn at point blank if the leftist argument is flabby.

Now, just to clear it up even further:

- "Flabby" is a colloquial word that refers to extraneous body fat, and typically refers to an unhealthy amount of extraneous body fat. Flabby people are generally not in good physical shape, and are more prone to muscle and other injuries if they don't take time to warm up before exercise.

So as the metaphor goes: Buckeye's "logic" was more flab than anything else. His lack of conditioning explains why he missed the ball.

Again, I'm so sorry. I didn't mean to confuse you.Heaven forbid. I'd hate to take such an early lead over you.Well, you're welcome to hang around and show us what you've got. Right now it's all talk, no shock. And here we might get to have a good debate, since you will be unable to ban the posters you're afraid of.Always amazing how the non-existent or absurd can be so obvious to leftists but reality is so transparent to them. perhaps when you can grasp that you can explain the ailement to those of us who don't suffer from it? Or perhaps the revelation will leave you too speechless...one can only dream.Ah, yes, the old conservative's dream that everyone who disagrees will just shut up.

You really are incapable of breaking that pattern, aren't you?

So bring it on, "flabby boy".

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

PS to Balder1: I had missed the fact that 2ndA's post existed. Whoops. Silly me. However, I'm just curious if you had missed it as well. Because now that I've gone through it, I still agree with you as to the question of what point.

hey tiassa,

I logged on first as "Berserker" and then they ban me... then I logged on as wellcookedfetus and claim they ban me because of my name... then they ban everyone else.

they won't answer this:

Why did they ban Berserker???

Why did they ban everyone else from this forum???

This is the most communist and untolerating behavior I have ever seen! "We ban you because we wanted to" is the only possible true answer here, there is no legitimate reason!

Like I said these people are unreasonable and as soon as they see a force of conflicting view points they ban them so they can stay nice a cuddly in there hell hole.

Also how is my name offensive? Are you making fun of my lifestyle in this jar?

By the way tiassa at first I thought you were bull shitting about this being a tough and mean forum… what with all the calm and technical discussions we have… but dam! You alone make this forum look armed to the teeth! http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/images/smilies/bowdown.gif

I'm going to point out the irony of decrying conservative behavior as "Communist". The irony works both ways (it's flexible). But thank you for that moment.

As to other things: Seriously, I think they banned you because they're afraid of what they don't understand. Namely, why anyone would doubt every golden word coming off their fingertips.

It's been a hell of a week. I've played Gilooly twice and apparently have established an arsenal. Could be worse ;)

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

It smells like ass in here...wait a second...someone has ass in their name.....:D :D :D :D :D

I'm pretty sure that's the third time I've heard that one in over three and a half years. Not bad. You do me a kind honor.

I'll raise this bong to you, Weisse Bora.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

I treat pot smokers that have lost their brains...its sad. You see their ability to communicate is the first to be destroyed and it all goes down hill from there.

Stone cold is the way to go. Reality is a bitch but it beats the alternative.

Its like losing your ability to feel pain. think about it. Danger lurks everywhere. Burns, cuts, bruises, circulation blockage...there is a reason quadraplegics require constant turning and that doesn't include DVT problems either.

Lay off the plant toxins. You brain might recover or at least learn how to function with the permanent impairment.

Let's examine the phrase "little boy". While you did guess the sex correctly one must wonder how many ways you could be incorrect about the size. It might seem strange, but isn't it really easy to guess if someone is male or female just based on their style of writing? I puzzled over your name, Tiassa, because I thought you wrote like a man. Just reinforces my sexism, in the end.


I figured you were a child, what with the bluster and authoritarian routine. It's ironic that you say this, when half of this forum is children, and we have quite a few people(child or not) who don't understand how to use capitalization or grammar. Like it or not, you're insulting sciforums more than Warlady's. We've got two teenage moderators, don't we? Tristan, and Pollux V?

I mean, it really is childish: Your name makes me uncomfortable so we'll ban you. I agree, that was childish, but they probably just didn't want to deal with him anymore and that was an excuse. If I found out some forum wanted to battle it out in a childish "forum war" and really just wanted to bash and flame my forum and forum members, I'd probably ban them too. Conservatives are just more pragmatic than liberals. In some way, its a good thing.

- Comparative example: "LiberalsAreAllDeadFags", an assertion. How about this: "AnotherStupidLiberalPothead", a thing.

the average leftist does dream of a free and equal human society And there are two avenues to achieve an equal society: bring everyone down to the lowest person, or bring everyone up to the highest person. Guess which avenue communism and socialism, as well as the average leftist, pursues?

PS to Balder1: I had missed the fact that 2ndA's post existed. Whoops. Silly me. However, I'm just curious if you had missed it as well. Because now that I've gone through it, I still agree with you as to the question of what point. The main reason I can't find the point is because I'm still not exactly sure what the two of you are debating. It seems to be a mix of who is the better debater and, from that, conservatism vrs liberalism. I consider myself liberal minus the leftist, socialist philosophy, which makes me quite a bit different from your average liberal.

Overall, it's really just a stupid flame war.
_________________
A man who is not a Liberal at sixteen has no heart; a man who
is not a Conservative at sixty has no head.
--Benjamin Disraeli

who say we were going to "bash and flame"? this was a call for liberals to defend there beliefs with variable arguments not to flame... at least I saw it that way. And all I did over there was state philosophical fallacies in there arguments... I did not go on ranting sprees or ad hom. People, because I can't rant about politics and Ad hom. are not my style.

As for childish hehe well were not as childish as them I can say that for sure. I don't see people being ban here for stating there views or for have a bad name.

And there are two avenues to achieve an equal society: bring everyone down to the lowest person, or bring everyone up to the highest person. Guess which avenue communism and socialism, as well as the average leftist, pursues?

I don't think any of those groups think in such terms if they did then conservatives would bring a few up to the highest person... ***. If we should view it as you say then "socialist" and "lefist" would want to make everyone equal and so forth bring everyone to a middle ground, not the bottom or top... communist though pretend to be socialist but they have a elite group thats more equal then others. The communist way of propaganda and totalitarian rule is also a common trait of conservative…


Moderator edit - profanity

pitty i cant post for some silly reason

i LOVE the stupidity on the gay section

im surprised you havent gone there yet tiassa

will be more fun than lady was cause lady was PARTIALLY intelegent, just twisted.

Overall, it's really just a stupid flame war. Of course it is.How about this: "AnotherStupidLiberalPothead", a thing.There is a bit of a difference between asserting that something is well-cooked and asserting that something is stupid.

But other than that, why should a name like that be banned? If someone wishes to self-identify with stupidity, they're perfectly welcome to.If I found out some forum wanted to battle it out in a childish "forum war" and really just wanted to bash and flame my forum and forum members, I'd probably ban them too.Well what's really too bad is that none of them really seemed to want to have any sort of discussion other than a flame war. I didn't start to get disgusted with their ilk until I got there and looked around a little and interacted with them. I mean, those are some intolerant bastards. F:eek:cking intolerant bastards. And what's sad is that like all bigots, their intolerance seems to come from their fear of what they do not understand, namely ways of thinking that deviate from their own. It's part of the nature of conservatism.Like it or not, you're insulting sciforums more than Warlady's. We've got two teenage moderators, don't we? Tristan, and Pollux V? Wow. Impressive. I suppose that even I would have used that logic if I felt the need to. But there is a difference between youthful exuberance and the "I'm not listening! I'm not listening! La-la-la-la-la-la-" that earns my grade of childish.

And, well, I hate to point it out because I was trying to be subtly humorous about it, and while it's not that big a deal to me ... (Pollux, I'm sorry, but I gotta do it.)

Something about insulting Pollux, you say? Well, see ... Pollux has kinda sorta called me out twice in a week or so to involve myself in a couple of arguments. One of them happens to be what is shaping up to be a fine little forum war. Sure, it was WCF who called it a forum war, but, well, I tried being nice. They were rude. And then they banned me before I could even begin to respond. So this is Pollux's little forum war, despite his disclaimer. And what was it you wrote? If I found out some forum wanted to battle it out in a childish "forum war" and really just wanted to bash and flame my forum and forum members, I'd probably ban them too.

(Pollux ... um ... next time, maybe it shouldn't be a public rally call. Or maybe I'll take it up with our Fetal friend. I don't know. Sorry ... you were just too convenient a twist to leave out of it.) ;)

Okay ...Guess which avenue communism and socialism, as well as the average leftist, pursues?From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. Communism and socialism raise them all. Remember that it is Capitalism which depends on a massive working-poor class to support itself.I consider myself liberal minus the leftist, socialist philosophy, which makes me quite a bit different from your average liberal. I'm actually an Anarcho-pacifist and a Sisyphan Camusite. It's only a stone's throw away from Nihilism and that on a delicate subjective construction. My landing on the left is a natural consequence of my initial deliberate education encouraging kindness. I had to learn how to flame; it's not a natural instinct, but people tend to think I have a natural talent for it. (Salieri's envy, of a sort?) I'm actually rude to people as a courtesy. For some, it seems the only language they understand. Which, of course, precludes some communication, an unfortunate situation which I am powerless to change without a wholesale violation of principle starting with mass executions of the stupid, er ... just for instance. ;)Conservatives are just more pragmatic than liberals.You're kidding me, right?

Well, okay, I can see that. Once you've painted yourself into a corner, a conservative is more willing to get his shoes dirty and do the whole damn thing over again. And you know what? Typically the conservative will just paint himself into the corner again. But yes, I well understand. About the time the conservative is starting the floor for the fourth time, the paint is finally dry in the liberal's room, so it's just a matter of finishing up. Now, is the liberal smart enough to not paint into the corner on the next job? Depends on the liberal. But at least, unlike the conservative, it is not an inherent part of the mindset.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

PS to Asguard: They banned me before I got to the gay-bashing. I have to reconsider the bounds of courtesy. I don't know whether to offer free blowjobs or just tell them they're right and their asses look great in those jeans . . .

i used what everyone keeps naming me here:p

assguard:p

i dont know wether to interlectully show how stupid they are or try and pick up:p

Maybe I should re-register as "Codpiece". Although yours is protection against dicks while mine ... oh, never mind ...

(I can't wink or give a tongue-smiley when talking about dicks and asses, you understand ....)

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Just to note:

-I do not do drugs.
-I am not a commie.
-I do not vote for democrat's. I vote for the constitution party.

Christ, I wish I could respond so much. But it doesn't appear to matter in the least. They will not listen to us, and it's impossible for me to register there. There were claims somewhere back in this thread that I had my ass handed to me, and I have to say that I disagree. So far my friend, oracle, has chosen to continue not providing any of the evidence he says is all over the place. Am I right by saying that if you don't support your argument that it really isn't an argument anyway? Am I right by saying it is not my job to support the alternative, when I believe that the alternative is misinformed and incorrect? Please, I need some support here.

If anyone has a working profile there, if you were to post what follows on the "Why Warlady has been right all along" thread then I would be very grateful.

Your analogy is completely wrong. We did not give Iraq the pieces to of a weapon, what he was given was in a form that was unusable in a weapon. I love the way that the pro-Saddam crowd keeps changing their stories, hoping that people won't notice. Several weeks ago when the inspectors found that cache of empty warheads that are designed to hold chemical weapons, the Saddam lovers cried "This is not a smoking gun. The warheads are empty, they don't count as chemical weapons!" And now you want to call the raw materials that Saddam had to process (after he figured out how to do it) weapons.

In my metaphor, the pieces of the weapons were not harmful. When put together, they could kill. But anyway--this is not my point. The weapons that we keep finding in Iraq are ours. If you have evidence to contradict this, please present it. I shall give you mine--

The meeting
between Rumsfeld and Saddam was consequential: for the next
five years, until Iran finally capitulated, the United States
backed Saddam's armies with military intelligence, economic
aid and covert supplies of munitions.

As President
George W. Bush and his war cabinet ponder Saddam's
successor's regime, they would do well to contemplate how and
why the last three presidents allowed the Butcher of Baghdad
to stay in power so long.

Through
years of both tacit and overt support, the West helped create
the Saddam of today, giving him time to build deadly arsenals
and dominate his people. Successive administrations always
worried that if Saddam fell, chaos would follow, rippling
through the region and possibly igniting another Middle East
war. At times it seemed that Washington was transfixed by
Saddam.

I'm not sure who was speaking at the time, but this came right out of the senate or the house, I'm not sure.

My Gold Mine (http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s092002.html)

Oracle, please make an attempt to counter this argument with evidence of your own. Just to help you out, my argument is that we helped Saddam out when it was profitable for us, and decided to destroy him also when it was profitable. Not because we're concerned for the Iraqis safety. If we cared about them then we wouldn't be planning to level Baghdad in the first week of the conflict.

"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," said one Pentagon official who has been briefed on the plan.

Here (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/24/eveningnews/main537928.shtml)

Please, if you think my sources are liars or are misinformed, tell me where, specifically, and then correct them with your own evidence.

I think this concludes my message. I'll keep trying to register. There's a goldmine of IP's at my school, there must be well over a hundred computers, hopefully everything will work out.

Maybe I should re-register as "Codpiece".

Hahahaha. I guess these guys don't laugh. Perhaps "bananaflavoredcondom" would be better?

Fcking intolerant bastards. And what's sad is that like all bigots, their intolerance seems to come from their fear of what they do not understand, namely ways of thinking that deviate from their own. It's part of the nature of conservatism.

It's really true. They don't listen. They've already made up their minds, it seems, to go down with the ship. What I found funny is that they blame all the problems that I blame on both the republicans and the democrats on just the democrats. They even said, at one point, that our president was catering to the democrats. Unbelievable bullshit.

So this is Pollux's little forum war, despite his disclaimer.

Well until I could keep re-registering I didn't want to call it that. But now that they've totally locked me out, yes, "begun this forum war has." We may need to have a vote on whether or not the vaporization through hacking of their forum is the right thing to do.

Pollux ... um ... next time, maybe it shouldn't be a public rally call

I agree. I'll ask specific people through p/m if we have ever have a PFW2. Plus, if we wipe them out this forum's safety will be threatened when they regroup.

Sorry ... you were just too convenient a twist to leave out of it.)

Well I do hope this was a compliment!

So, this is what a UN Security Council session is like?

No wonder it's not taken seriously.

Over-invested lunacy.

I think I'll go outside and commune with the real world for a while.

:rolleyes:

Hey you know what? I think those conservatives left! hey look at that we made them leave without even banning them... pussies!

Please come back and prove me wrong.

Do you suppose being engaging requires being engaging?

A bunch of you folks went trolling, brought back some company, and after seeing what you've got they decided to return home instead of volunteer to be bait for generally illogical lefty passions.

They've got their little universe, y'all've got yours and neither is seeing a dispassionate reason to seriously engage the other.

Yep. Y'all da Man.

While it's true that "forum wars" are bad ideas, some of us tried being nice and respectful when we posted there, to no avail. Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the facts of the case before opening your mouth and making an ass of yourself, G.

Really--I understand generalizations are easier for you. But every once in a while it wouldn't hurt to think a little bit, would it?

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

You see their ability to communicate is the first to be destroyed and it all goes down hill from there.The irony of that, of course, is the number of people who get mad at literate people for writing long and detailed posts that don't rely on connect-the-dots generalizations. The complainers are generally sober. But what's funny is that if you write the connect-the-dots generalizations, people will question the generalizations until you've written twice as much and they still are incapable of understanding what issues are even at stake.

Your prejudice is not founded in reality, is not well-demonstrated, and I hope you neither drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, or consume caffeine. You really should think your words through before stomping around like a bitter kid with a grudge against someone.

But you are entitled to be as stupid as you choose to be. That's a human right.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Originally posted by CounslerCoffee
Radical Richie, Im the leading conservative on sciforums.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18663&perpage=5&pagenumber=7

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18485

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=282866#post282866

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18477

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=281372#post281372

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18232&perpage=5&pagenumber=3

There ya go. Check out what I have to say.

this was however the most entertaining post!:D

Neoconservatives = liberals in conservative clothing.

To the ovens, I say.

tiassa:

Dictionary.com/oed lists you as the 3rd definition of dense.

Whenever your little pointy-head feels up to the challenge for a real debate please let me know.

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?

Think of how different your world would be if only your mothers felt the way you do about abortion. :eek:

Blessings,

Dutch

Originally posted by Dutch
Whenever your little pointy-head feels up to the challenge for a real debate please let me know.

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?

Think of how different your world would be if only your mothers felt the way you do about abortion. :eek:

Blessings,

Dutch

Yes, Dutch, most of the little trolls inhabiting this site should have been aborted. You know in Judaism the latest term a fetus can be aborted is? Until the fetus graduates from law school!!!

Hey now I was aborted... its not that bad. ;)

If your liberal and your against abortion, does that mean your not liberal? Are all Liberals pro-choose? Perhaps you guys would like to have a discussion on the nature of consciousness and realize that if you did not exist you would not care. :eek:

I go to theology forums to fight it out all the time, I consider my self a open person ready to defend my beliefs… so I’m not a shut-in like most of the people on that forum. When is comes to politics though I don’t have any optimistic beliefs I would want to defend there. I'm a Reluctant Anarchist, which means I don’t like it but the fact is greed and selfishness rules human society, and no matter what no society will be perfect and there will always be people getting shafted. The truth is our government though far better them most is crap in compression to some pipe dream utopia… but I’m realistic and know that a utopia is an impossibility with the human animal. Maybe when we evolve to supercomputer form…

I'm pro-mandatory abortion for some people.

Mr. G

Your contributions are almost as insightful as a dead rat. Your reliance on short quips, the equivalent of sound-bites, merely highlights your lack of any substantial argument about whatever subject you choose to grace with your anemic wit.

Come now: Is that the best response you can manage?

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

tiassa,

Remember how I go around pointing philosophical fallacies in peoples post: What you just said is a total Ad Hominum! Now it is true that what he has that vague personal attacks he has said is not a valid argument… but above you just made personal attacks of your own and claim him wrong because of it.

fetus get a life
if insults have to have a logical structure, what good is it?

No a argument or discussion has to have a logical structure... oh that’s right I was under the false impression that this thread was one of those two things... Never mind my bad :o flame away people.

What you just said is a total Ad Hominum! Now it is true that what he has that vague personal attacks he has said is not a valid argument? but above you just made personal attacks of your own and claim him wrong because of it.It's a good point, but I must respectfully disagree.1. That's the problem with hanging out only with people with whom you agree: when you step into a group of the seasoned opposition your butt gets handed to you, and then you have to call for back up.

2. How embarassing. You know who you are: roadkill, and with no skid marks to lend plausible deniability. You guys got hosed, and you set yourselves up for it, too. It'll be interesting to read your failure analysis.

3. So, this is what a UN Security Council session is like? No wonder it's not taken seriously. Over-invested lunacy. I think I'll go outside and commune with the real world for a while.

4. Do you suppose being engaging requires being engaging? A bunch of you folks went trolling, brought back some company, and after seeing what you've got they decided to return home instead of volunteer to be bait for generally illogical lefty passions. They've got their little universe, y'all've got yours and neither is seeing a dispassionate reason to seriously engage the other. Yep. Y'all da Man.

5. Dictionary.com/oed lists you as the 3rd definition of dense .These are not excerpts of his five posts in this topic. They are the entire posts.

- Your contributions are almost as insightful as a dead rat.

I agree that this is an incorrect statement--I can learn more from a dead rat than I can from G's posts.

- Your reliance on short quips, the equivalent of sound-bites

I think this is observational.

- merely highlights your lack of any substantial argument about whatever subject you choose to grace with your anemic wit.

A conclusion drawn from the observation.

- Come now: Is that the best response you can manage?

I don't know ... I kind of think I have the right to ask this question. I mean, if G's going to bother addressing me at all, I think I have the right to ask.

Doesn't mean he's going to answer. It's his right to dodge the question.

However, there is always the chance that I'm wrong, so I'll keep your note under consideration. But there's also this:No a argument or discussion has to have a logical structure... oh that?s right I was under the false impression that this thread was one of those two things... Never mind my bad flame away people. This particular topic has generally been a flame-out. More substantial posts, as you can see, are more by accident. If Radical Rick wants to take another swing at it, this time with a little bit of commentary to actually advise us of what his point is, that'd be great. But this topic in general seems to be about a flame war that happens to be having the effect Pollux seems to have been after. Things certainly have been more interesting around here the last couple days, though I defer to the Chinese proverbial context of interesting.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

Hey I totally agree that all he has said is just him http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/throwup.gif on us... but you have been doing this http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/repuke.gif in return and thats not helpful. Oh well this is a flaming war not a forum war.

in return and thats not helpfulI must admit that the cold reception I found at FC was enough to convince me that there's no need to be helpful in this little flame war.

So far the interforum exchange seems limited on our board to a couple of topics--mostly this one.

However, one of our own posters today basically admitted that his pro-war arguments aren't expected to change anything and he's posting for the humor.

I'm having a hard time remaining helpful in th