October 18, 200422 yr Chewbacca didn't ask why, he asked if you believed those things or not. Your questions were quite different F_M.
October 18, 200422 yr His questions were meant to mock the dems and the left. Gotta put em in context. In numerous posts he has implied that we follow the lead of Jesse Jacskon and Michael Moore only.
October 18, 200422 yr His questions were meant to mock the dems and the left. Gotta put em in context. In numerous posts he has implied that we follow the lead of Jesse Jacskon and Michael Moore only. 595242[/snapback] Well, no But the majority just follow... whoever. Same goes for Republicans. So many uneducated and uninformed voters. :confused
October 18, 200422 yr Author Wow, the lies continue from the left. Now, the NY Times says Bush will privatize social security. Amazing. Meanwhile, there is still no connection between terrorists in Iraq and Al Queda. Maybe, there wasn't before, but the lead terrorist in Iraq, (Zarqawi or something) said : "By the grace of God we are now in contact with Osama Bin Laden."
October 18, 200422 yr Wow, the lies continue from the left. Now, the NY Times says Bush will privatize social security. Amazing. Meanwhile, there is still no connection between terrorists in Iraq and Al Queda. Maybe, there wasn't before, but the lead terrorist in Iraq, (Zarqawi or something) said : "By the grace of God we are now in contact with Osama Bin Laden." 595288[/snapback] So we invaded because we knew a terrorist who had no allegience to AQ would come into Iraq or be there already, though not doing anything, cause trouble because of our invasion, then join up with AQ after we invaded, hence creating the link for invasion. What is this, the Terminator movies? Are we sending someone back to sleep with Sarah Connor to make John Connor?
October 18, 200422 yr Author Wow, the lies continue from the left.? Now, the NY Times says Bush will privatize social security.? Amazing. Meanwhile, there is still no connection between terrorists in Iraq and Al Queda.? Maybe, there wasn't before, but the lead terrorist in Iraq, (Zarqawi or something) said :? "By the grace of God we are now in contact with Osama Bin Laden." 595288[/snapback] So we invaded because we knew a terrorist who had no allegience to AQ would come into Iraq or be there already, though not doing anything, cause trouble because of our invasion, then join up with AQ after we invaded, hence creating the link for invasion. What is this, the Terminator movies? Are we sending someone back to sleep with Sarah Connor to make John Connor? 595315[/snapback] I'm not saying this is full justification for the war, I'm just saying the war on terrorims isn't just on Al Qeada, since other organizations have the same beliefs and intentions, and are joining forces with Al Qeada. Kerry fails to realize this is a war on terrorism and not only on Al Qeada.
October 18, 200422 yr I found todays herald article about al zarqawi to be rather strange. Even before his face came out in iraq he has been on the list of the worlds most wanted terrorists and the FBI has had him listed as an al qaeda operative for over 3 years
October 18, 200422 yr Wow, the lies continue from the left. Now, the NY Times says Bush will privatize social security. Amazing. Meanwhile, there is still no connection between terrorists in Iraq and Al Queda. Maybe, there wasn't before, but the lead terrorist in Iraq, (Zarqawi or something) said : "By the grace of God we are now in contact with Osama Bin Laden." 595288[/snapback] So we invaded because we knew a terrorist who had no allegience to AQ would come into Iraq or be there already, though not doing anything, cause trouble because of our invasion, then join up with AQ after we invaded, hence creating the link for invasion. What is this, the Terminator movies? Are we sending someone back to sleep with Sarah Connor to make John Connor? 595315[/snapback] I'm not saying this is full justification for the war, I'm just saying the war on terrorims isn't just on Al Qeada, since other organizations have the same beliefs and intentions, and are joining forces with Al Qeada. Kerry fails to realize this is a war on terrorism and not only on Al Qeada. 595454[/snapback] And George fails to see UBL as a threat, he said "I am not that concerned about him." What a smart thing to say on his part. Whats he concerned about then? Those killer pretzels? The top video
October 18, 200422 yr Author And George fails to see UBL as a threat, he said "I am not that concerned about him." What a smart thing to say on his part. Whats he concerned about then? Those killer pretzels? What George is saying is that getting Osama shouldn't take precedent over everything else in the war on terror. Kerry makes it sound like getting Bin Laden will make us automatically win the war on terror.
October 18, 200422 yr And George fails to see UBL as a threat, he said "I am not that concerned about him." What a smart thing to say on his part. Whats he concerned about then? Those killer pretzels? What George is saying is that getting Osama shouldn't take precedent over everything else in the war on terror. Kerry makes it sound like getting Bin Laden will make us automatically win the war on terror. 595477[/snapback] No what Kerry is saying is that why did we take our focus off of the enemy. Did Iraq attack us? Did I miss that? What was the link by those who attacked us, UBL and co. and Iraq again? Oh nothing? Well geez... now it makes perfect sense.
October 18, 200422 yr Author And George fails to see UBL as a threat, he said "I am not that concerned about him." What a smart thing to say on his part. Whats he concerned about then? Those killer pretzels? What George is saying is that getting Osama shouldn't take precedent over everything else in the war on terror. Kerry makes it sound like getting Bin Laden will make us automatically win the war on terror. 595477[/snapback] No what Kerry is saying is that why did we take our focus off of the enemy. Did Iraq attack us? Did I miss that? What was the link by those who attacked us, UBL and co. and Iraq again? Oh nothing? Well geez... now it makes perfect sense. 595481[/snapback] I agree completely. No one who isn't connected to Bin Laden or 9/11 should ever be considered a threat.
October 18, 200422 yr And George fails to see UBL as a threat, he said "I am not that concerned about him." What a smart thing to say on his part. Whats he concerned about then? Those killer pretzels? What George is saying is that getting Osama shouldn't take precedent over everything else in the war on terror. Kerry makes it sound like getting Bin Laden will make us automatically win the war on terror. 595477[/snapback] No what Kerry is saying is that why did we take our focus off of the enemy. Did Iraq attack us? Did I miss that? What was the link by those who attacked us, UBL and co. and Iraq again? Oh nothing? Well geez... now it makes perfect sense. 595481[/snapback] I agree completely. No one who isn't connected to Bin Laden or 9/11 should ever be considered a threat. 595492[/snapback] Iraq turned out to be a big of a threat as Cuba. Now North Korea, there is a real threat and what has Bush done? Anything?
October 18, 200422 yr Author And George fails to see UBL as a threat, he said "I am not that concerned about him." What a smart thing to say on his part. Whats he concerned about then? Those killer pretzels? What George is saying is that getting Osama shouldn't take precedent over everything else in the war on terror. Kerry makes it sound like getting Bin Laden will make us automatically win the war on terror. 595477[/snapback] No what Kerry is saying is that why did we take our focus off of the enemy. Did Iraq attack us? Did I miss that? What was the link by those who attacked us, UBL and co. and Iraq again? Oh nothing? Well geez... now it makes perfect sense. 595481[/snapback] I agree completely. No one who isn't connected to Bin Laden or 9/11 should ever be considered a threat. 595492[/snapback] Iraq turned out to be a big of a threat as Cuba. Now North Korea, there is a real threat and what has Bush done? Anything? 595496[/snapback] I'm not using this as a reason for going to war. but Iraq has shown other countries the U.S. is serious about cracking down on nations such as Iran and North Korea. After Saddam was capture, Libya decided to give up its weapons. Saddam never took the U.S. seriously, until Bush decided to invade. North Korea and Iran know we're serious, and diplomacy should work. If it doesn't work, war with North Korea won't be the U.S. going alone, and people in North Korea want to be united with their democratic neighbors in the south.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.