Kalshion

Jamotto, what I'm saying is that no one will be able to get any further information from the communist party

Found something interesting in the Congressional Records AUTHORIZING THE USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES AGAINST IRAQ -- HON. TIM ROEMER (Extensions of Remarks - October 17, 2002 Here's a little insert quote: Whether Saddam Hussein represents an imminent threat to the United States is the most important question we have answered. After examining the evidence and meeting with key members of the Pentagon and the intelligence community, I have concluded that there is ample evidence indicating that Saddam Hussein represents a clear, grave, and growing threat to the United States. While I do not agree with Administration statements about Iraqi connections, at this point, on the September 11 terrorist attacks or the accusations of firm and provable al Qaeda links, the lynch pin for me is weapons of mass destruction. He is seeking to build a nuclear device launched by ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles, far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and other nations in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work. I think it's best you guy's read this.. cause this'll answer you're question about rather Saddam was a threat or not

Nomad Did you forget already that the UN was RESPONDSIBLE for Saddam's funding of terror cells? The oil for food... something you apperently convently forgot It was good to take Saddam out cause he funded terror cell's in his country, he harbored terrorist's and he also avoided all inspections which in my opinion was a clear sign of suspiusion Country's like France, Spain, China, Germany, and in some case's a few US districts thought it was a bad idea to take out Saddam... why? Cause they would no longer benefit from the Oil to Food campaign, which was a major FAILOUR cause saddam did not use any of the money to help his citizens, he used it to fund the terror cell's in his country Nomad, where do you get the BS from about the UN and about how I expect them to serv us? I'm beginning to wonder if you're listening to the liberal media here No, I expect the UN to follow there own policies

You won't get any information from the communist party in case you havn't noticed, and if you do, it'll be very little

Nomad You seem to have forgotten something The US DID have a UN Mandate for over two years there What did that accomplish? NOTHING That's why Bush went in without there help, ecause he knew that the UN Mandate did nothing but help Saddam get richer And Nomad, the reason the Europain's are made is because we took out Saddam.. that's why a lot of people opposed us going into Iraq, but even Kerry said that Saddam was a threat (before he flip flopped AFTER we took him out)

Gas explosion doesn't create a mush room cloud of that size UNLESS a load of fuel is involved.. and I mean a load Only a Nuclear, Hydrogen, and Atomic create a Mush Room cloud of THAT size If raditation IS discovered then there will be no way for them to hide it My belief is that it is a sub-surface nuclear explosion, my reasoning is because according to what I've read on Fox the explosion was big enough to be seen by a satallite

I know the Prime Fleet forum and website are down right now But they where up earlier today and throughout the week (I should know, I've posted several time's) But, as for the other sites, I can't answer that as I havn't been on ISS or Galcom.net Might be internet interference.. happen's all the time, the internet isn't exactly perfect

If this is true (I'm scepticle because this is from the AP) then not only will the UN get on there ass but so will this administration I damn sure hope this isn't true... I certainly hope it's not

uhhh guys I think we should look at both this thread, and one other... Cause where discussing this same exact Bill in BOTH threads...

if, by unnevessary, you mean the death's in Iraq. Those death's are unavoidable, our soldiers made the choice to go to war and fight for there country. Death is a side effect unfortantly Is our Government responsible for those deaths? Yes and No is the answer Yes, cause we are at war No, cause they put themselves in harm's way. They KNEW the risk's and choose to face it You are right, there is plenty of blame But, ask yourself this, would the death's have lower IF the Bill had been passed? What would have happened if our soldiers had been more better equiped because of this Bill? That Bill would've given our soldiers BETTER weapons, MORE Armor, and a higher chance of suvival, but thank's to Kerry and several other's that Bill DID NOT Pass So ultimately, the blame for the soldier's death fall's into Kerry's hand's along with those who voted against this Bill If the Bill had passed, then our losses might've been minimal..

quote:Originally posted by street: quote: preatty much sentence'd most of the POW's there to Death BY lieing to the commitee Good lord!! Search the Congressional Records Street... it's listed right there that several people died when Kerry testified against our own troops When the Vietnamess saw that they showed it to our boy's over there, and several of died because of Kerry

The problem with Kerry's honorable discharge was that he lied to the commitee in order to get it, by falsifing his action's in Vietnam, and lieing However According to the Congressional records, Bush DOES have an honorable record. YET The CR claim's that Kerry lied to the commitee, which there ARE document's which prove that. Along with the fact that Kerry preatty much sentence'd most of the POW's there to Death BY lieing to the commitee

Gah, sorry about posting right after I did post To answer you're statements Street Me, personally.. I don't vote for anything unless I have ALL the information THAT is what help's me decide, I research stuff before I vote on the subject at hand Now, on the subject of flip flopping, the reason many people won't vote for Kerry is because he HAS and STILL IS flipflopping on ALL the decision's he made He say's one thing about something, then changes his mind a minute later He vote's on something, but decide's NOT to vote on another thing that'll help what he voted on previously quote: does that make it "OK" to believe the Lies N o it doesn't make it ok to believe a Lie, but if I knew someone was lieing then I'd be werry about them being re-elected Now you're probably going to ask me this "Why do I want to re-elect Bush since he lied" Here's my question, you have no proof he lied about anything. Yet, there is proof all around that Kerry lied about a whole slue of things. It's like I said in another thread, Lieing and Assuming are two completely different things Now say Intelligence told him about something and he trusted the intelligence, having said that... it was later found out that the intelligence was FALSE.. that DOES NOT mean Bush lied, it mean's the people who compiled the intelligence reports misinformed Bush about the current situation Having said that, it mean's that Bush didn't lie at all. It mean's he was misinformed about the situation, the intel he was given trusted because of the source

It is simple You claim they took his statements out of Context Yet, the media has done the same to Bush. Same boat street, same things..

Kerry supported the war but voted AGAINST the bill that would equip our troops Oh, but you convently forgot that didn't you street? Need proof of that? Check the congressional records and look under the year 2000-2001 and 2003-2004.. all right there

Anywho people, back on topic The reason we all believe the document's are false is because Bush was HONORABLY discharged You DO know what Honorably discharged means right? It mean's, someone who has served there duty WITH honor. That being said someone who has skipped out on there duty, disobeyed orders, and such are not eligible for an HONORABLE disharge

I leave tip's only if the person has done a good job As long as the Lawyers and the Supreme Court are allowed to let this through this type of stuff will happen. It's up the people to vote those in the Supreme Court out in order to provent stuff like this from reaccuring(sp) As for the lawyers, well that's a bit of a problem. You can't exactly vote a lawyer out of office since they don't exactly own a key position

Yes, Nomad. You heard me Cowards My firm belief is that it was a mistake to form the UN, there cowards... It was the UN that GOT Saddam to where he was The UN was responsible for allowing Saddam to get so much money, they didn't have the courage to stop it

Grizzle, like Street, you're missing the point Kerry is another Clinton, Clinton allowed the UN to get involved in ANY thing's The UN are cowards, once a man get's killed they FLEE Kerry already said he was going to get the UN involved If Kerry is elected, we lose this war, because he'll get the UN involved THAT'S why the Terrorist's want Kerry in office

Even a child know's that there will always be bad people within his or her living enviroment Having said that, it shouldn't be to surprising that we have terrorist's in the US they just aren't making a move. Why? Well let's see, for starter's why make a move against a president who has shown the full power of our military? It'd be stupid to do anything to the US right now in that regard Osama is probably dead, but he's also probably alive. We don't know Grizzle, it's very VERY hard to kill a man who's on the move 24/7 As for attack before the Elections... it's possible, no one said it can't happen. But like I said above, if they do attack they'll go through proper mean's to hide the evidence that it'll come In other words. An attack is diffinantly possible and I wouldn't doubt it if they did attack The terrorist's WANT Kerry in office, so the best place to do harm to bush IS at the Elections By the way Street, a little something that came across my mind. If Bush wanted ot hide the true number of death's he wouldn't have said 1000+ death's in Iraq, that there would've been stupid. He would've made it a much lesser number

Bush's stupidity? Bush wasn't the one who started up a campaign for Saddam back in the 1990 Clinton along with the UN where the one's who made Iraq a bigger threat, NOT Bush

Street, you've been watching to much of the Communist New's Network For starters, Bush has YET to LIE about ANYTHING READ THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS, It's stated right in there, back in the year 2000 that Iraq WAS and STILL is a THREAT Street, I certainly hope you're not voting. Cause if you are then you're illinformed vote will canceal my informed vote

Same thing here with a few of my friends Had a friend shoot one of his friend's while they where hunting.. wasn't plesant but he survived Another friend of mine decided to shoot his hand off because he wanted to feel pain (he's not in seceity anymore though from what his father said) So yes, I also know of these idiots By the way Jaguar, clean out you're PM box. It's very hard for people to send you PM's when you're box is full

Aye Personally, I'm both for and against this Ban For it cause it keep's idiot's from getting ahold of guns But against it because criminal's STILL have access to guns and can harm the common citizen weather this ban goes through or not

Tiger Claw I'm trying NOT to join in I'm in about roughly 50+ Different Roleplaying Genra's now.. I'm REALLY trying to cut back here But, if you don't mind another crazy imagination freak to join yer story then I guess I can give it a wireal*sp* just send me a PM with stuff that you do not want me to do (kill off you're crew in one hit type of stuff , even though I would never do that) Anywho, Jag, you mean to tell me you can't tell who Tigerclaw is? My own obversations.. Tigerclaw is an imagenitive person, his creativeness is one of the highest I've seen in the roleplaying world. Not many people possess that ability to roleplay AND use there imagenation at the same time