AOPA credit card --- WARNING.

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

Many reasons were given for invading Iraq. Which were wrong?


All of them.


You say that because you don't know the reasons given for invading Iraq.


I know the reasons that were given to the public and the UN beforehand.


That is unlikely.



Every single one of them was either wrong or an outright lie.


Explain why.



As for the real reasons, I suspect that if we knew those Bush would have
lost the election by 60 million votes.


The real reasons were those given, but you're not familiar with them.

"Chuck" wrote in message
. com...

I said "very many luxuries". Never said that I didn't have *any*

My PC is a luxury as well as my DSL, although it's only $5 more a month
than
dial up, and so is my Dish Network, but I only have the basic package.
Those
are my luxuries... What are yours?


Mine are not an issue. I'm not complaining about credit card policies
while
purchasing luxuries. You are.


Oh... OK.... well, are my luxuries excessive?


In your position, yes.



Apparently, you already had your opinion of me and my luxuries...


No, it was formed when you admitted you spent money on luxuries while
bitching about your financial situation.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

Apparently, you already had your opinion of me and my luxuries...


No, it was formed when you admitted you spent money on luxuries while
bitching about your financial situation.

Were you born a prick or did you learn to become one?

"Mike V." wrote in message
news:7BQpd.102152$5K2.72055@attbi_s03...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

Apparently, you already had your opinion of me and my luxuries...


No, it was formed when you admitted you spent money on luxuries while
bitching about your financial situation.


Were you born a prick or did you learn to become one?

Neither. Were you born a poor judge of character or did you learn to become
one?

In a previous article, "Steven P. McNicoll" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
I know the reasons that were given to the public and the UN beforehand.
That is unlikely.
Every single one of them was either wrong or an outright lie.
Explain why.

1. Saddam has weapons of mass destruction - LIE
2. Saddam has ties to Al Queda - LIE
3. Saddam is a threat to America - LIE
4. Saddam was attempting to buy Uranium from Niger - LIE
5. Deposing Saddam will make America safer - LIE
6. The Iraqi people will greet American troops as liberators and there
will be no need for massive numbers of troops to secure the country
afterwards - WRONG

Ok, which reasons do you think I missed?

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
My group's mission statement - 'You want *what* ? By *WHEN* ?'
-- Simon Burr

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

1. Saddam has weapons of mass destruction - LIE


Not a lie. It may have been wrong but it was definitely not a lie. The one
point before the war on which there was agreement was that Saddam had WMD.



2. Saddam has ties to Al Queda - LIE


Not a lie, Saddams ties to Al Qaeda were demonstrated.



3. Saddam is a threat to America - LIE


How so? Saddam with WMD is certainly a threat to America and it was agreed
that he had WMD.



4. Saddam was attempting to buy Uranium from Niger - LIE


Not a lie, Saddam did attempt that.



5. Deposing Saddam will make America safer - LIE


Not a lie, the whole world is safer without Saddam.



6. The Iraqi people will greet American troops as liberators and there
will be no need for massive numbers of troops to secure the country
afterwards - WRONG


Many Iraqis did greet American troops as liberators.



Ok, which reasons do you think I missed?


I don't know, but it doesn't matter. You were wrong on all counts.

In a previous article, "Steven P. McNicoll" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

1. Saddam has weapons of mass destruction - LIE


Not a lie. It may have been wrong but it was definitely not a lie. The one
point before the war on which there was agreement was that Saddam had WMD.

Most of the intelligence source said he didn't. Bush's people decided to
believe the ONE source (who was a defector and then very suspect) who told
them what they wanted to beleive.


2. Saddam has ties to Al Queda - LIE


Not a lie, Saddams ties to Al Qaeda were demonstrated.

Thoroughly disproved by the 9/11 Commission.

3. Saddam is a threat to America - LIE


How so? Saddam with WMD is certainly a threat to America and it was agreed
that he had WMD.

He didn't have them, and if Bush's people hadn't cooked the books, we all
would have known that.

4. Saddam was attempting to buy Uranium from Niger - LIE


Not a lie, Saddam did attempt that.

Thoroughly disproved. The document cited in his State of the Union
address was known to be a lie before he cited it. It was even supposedly
signed by somebody who was no longer in the government position that he
supposedly was in.


5. Deposing Saddam will make America safer - LIE

Not a lie, the whole world is safer without Saddam.

Bull****. The US presence in Iraq is making thousands of new fanatical
terrorists every week, both in Iraq and outside. People whose anger was
directed towards their oppressor Saddam is now directed towards their
invaders, us. And Bush's calling it a "crusade" was sure to fanaticize a
lot of formerly moderate muslims.

6. The Iraqi people will greet American troops as liberators and there
will be no need for massive numbers of troops to secure the country
afterwards - WRONG


Many Iraqis did greet American troops as liberators.

Army war planners demanded 200,000 - 300,000 troops to make sure there
wasn't any looting and destruction of infastructure after the "end of
major combat operations". Rumsfeld overruled them and went in without
enough people, and the resulting chaos fueled the insurgency.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"using Outlook to read e-mail is like licking public toilets; using Outlook
with a virus checker is like taking antibiotics and then licking public
toilets (it might work, but it's hardly optimal" -- David Megginson

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:52:32 -0500, Matt Whiting
wrote:

How is Canada these days? I haven't visited since before 9/11 due to
the hassles at the border. It was bad enough before.

Hassles? Where?

We live on the border and have not been subject to any hassles.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "Steven P. McNicoll"
said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

1. Saddam has weapons of mass destruction - LIE


Not a lie. It may have been wrong but it was definitely not a lie. The
one
point before the war on which there was agreement was that Saddam had WMD.

Most of the intelligence source said he didn't. Bush's people decided to
believe the ONE source (who was a defector and then very suspect) who told
them what they wanted to beleive.


Wrong. Every nation with an intelligence gathering capability said he had
WMD. The only nation that disputed it was Iraq.



2. Saddam has ties to Al Queda - LIE


Not a lie, Saddams ties to Al Qaeda were demonstrated.

Thoroughly disproved by the 9/11 Commission.


Confirmed by inspectors in Iraq.



3. Saddam is a threat to America - LIE


How so? Saddam with WMD is certainly a threat to America and it was
agreed
that he had WMD.

He didn't have them, and if Bush's people hadn't cooked the books, we all
would have known that.


He was believed to have had them and it has not been proven that he didn't
have them. There's no evidence that any books were cooked and no reason to
believe any were.




4. Saddam was attempting to buy Uranium from Niger - LIE


Not a lie, Saddam did attempt that.

Thoroughly disproved.


No, it was proven.



The document cited in his State of the Union
address was known to be a lie before he cited it. It was even supposedly
signed by somebody who was no longer in the government position that he
supposedly was in.


5. Deposing Saddam will make America safer - LIE

Not a lie, the whole world is safer without Saddam.

Bull****. The US presence in Iraq is making thousands of new fanatical
terrorists every week, both in Iraq and outside. People whose anger was
directed towards their oppressor Saddam is now directed towards their
invaders, us. And Bush's calling it a "crusade" was sure to fanaticize a
lot of formerly moderate muslims.


Nonsense. You're entitled to your own opinions but you're not entitled to
your own facts. The fact is you've bought the propaganda.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
k.net...

"Mike V." wrote in message
news:7BQpd.102152$5K2.72055@attbi_s03...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

Apparently, you already had your opinion of me and my luxuries...


No, it was formed when you admitted you spent money on luxuries while
bitching about your financial situation.


Were you born a prick or did you learn to become one?

Neither. Were you born a poor judge of character or did you learn to
become one?

Sorry. My mistake. I thought you were a prick but evidently you are a douche
bag.