Put- logic apparently is as foreign to you as being a producer.

1.I am confused are you talking about Bush nr 2 doing what Bush nr 1 couldn't?

2.If I give reason for an invasion as WMD, by God there ought to be some found somewhere.....

3.The fact that the hijackers are from Saudi Arabia is nullified by the fact that they met in another country??? You can't be serious....

4.You are saying a sniveling guy found living in a hole is a weapon of mass destruction????  i guess your wife wears the pants after all.

5.Now you want us to invade countries because they form a land bridge?  The world is just a big risk game , i guess. let's take out Canada and then blow thru Mexico and south america, then we'll have all of north and South america to ourselves.

And so on and so on....

[quote=noggin]

Put- logic apparently is as foreign to you as being a producer.

1.I am confused are you talking about Bush nr 2 doing what Bush nr 1 couldn't?

[/quote]
Nope.  Bush Sr. had no authority granted by Congress to remove Saddam from power.  Bush Jr. did.

All Bush Sr. could do was drive Saddam out of Kuwait and contain him.

[quote=noggin]

2.If I give reason for an invasion as WMD, by God there ought to be some found somewhere.....
[/quote]
WMDs were a reason.  So was the fact that Saddam FAILED to comply with UN resolutions time and time again that he give weapons inspectors full access. 

Read UN Resolution 1441.  It references several similar resolutions passed earlier and promises "serious consequences" if Saddam failed to comply.  He failed to comply.

[quote=noggin]

3.The fact that the hijackers are from Saudi Arabia is nullified by the fact that they met in another country??? You can't be serious....
[/quote]
The fact that the hijackers were born in one land provides no proof that it was an official act of that nation.

If a person is born in China, travels to Japan, then conducts terrorist attacks against Malaysia, does that mean it's an official act of China?

Newsflash:  Bin Laden and Al Qaeda want to overthrow the Saudi royal family and kill them.
[quote=noggin]

4.You are saying a sniveling guy found living in a hole is a weapon of mass destruction????  i guess your wife wears the pants after all.
[/quote]
What could have happened during the time that the Democrats were stonewalling Bush?  Could they have been hidden?  Removed?  Destroyed?

You see, Saddam was supposed to provide PROOF to the UN inspectors that he destroyed his WMDs.  He never provided that proof.

[quote=noggin]

5.Now you want us to invade countries because they form a land bridge?  The world is just a big risk game , i guess. let's take out Canada and then blow thru Mexico and south america, then we'll have all of north and South america to ourselves.

And so on and so on....

Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo, and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn’t you be putting on fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals…oops…I forgot that Republicans are all rhetoric.  Please forgive the previous rhetorical statement.

[quote=menotellname]Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo, and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn't you be putting on fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals...oops...I forgot that Republicans are all rhetoric.  Please forgive the previous rhetorical statement.[/quote]

That's funny, since most...the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY...of our soldiers are REPUBLICANS.

[quote=menotellname]Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo,
and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn’t you be putting on
fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals…oops…I
forgot that Republicans are all rhetoric.  Please forgive the
previous rhetorical statement.[/quote]



I wont speak for the other usual suspects…I can only answer for myself.



Sr. Hombre-sin-nombre, I can’t explain in short bumpersticker
simplicity why I chose to voluntarily join the military. I’ll happily
admit that I was young, dumb and full of c.um…but that’s only a facet
of the truth. What I can say is that my experience exposed me to all
the risks associated with maintaining freedom. Looking back on time,
I’d like to believe that a shared sense of duty and a belief in a cause
higher then self is what most combat soldiers hold close to their
hearts.



Because of the time, when I happened to serve, I was dealt a set of
lousy cards in quick succession. I played my hands honorably and acted
parts upon two different stages, in theatres with names like The Balboa
and The Babel. The first was as romantic and exciting as Butch Cassidy
and the Sundance Kid…the second was quietly unforgettable as Heaven’s
Gate.



Trying to ridicule someone takes style you seem to hunger for Sr.
Sin-nombre. I think at heart I am a disenfranchised democrat. My main
problem is that I can’t seem to find candidates that can explain 70
years of welfare wihich give the poor only enough to keep them poor,
planned parenthoods that systematically target poor people of color
(ethnic women make lousy feminist is my only guess) and anything to do
with unions (here you could keep me up all night - educator,
correctional worker or tradesmen - dealers choice).



Boy, it’s late…I came in from a night game where my team lost and know
I find myself addressing a loser whose team can’t seem to decide if a
uniform, let alone which color, is appropriate.



Menotelllname, you get excited about ridiculing people for their
convictions, yet you lack the confidence to use your own voice in any
competent way to draw up an arguement or point of view that is owned
and can be originally your’s. Please make an honest effort to insult me
the next time you decide to collectively add my name to a tired and
immature attempt at being clever.



Good night.

Boy, it’s late…I came in from a night game where my team lost and know
I find myself addressing a loser whose team can’t seem to decide if a
uniform, let alone which color, is appropriate.<<<Mojo



Should I hold my breath waiting for a mental midget to comment on how
pathetic Mojo’s life must be since he was reading this forum in the
middle of the night?

Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo, and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn't you be putting on fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals

Well, since I am a woman, and as Put has pointed out old   (no point in denying the obvious) your suggestion is, as is the rest of your thinking in this topic, ludicrous.   This doesn't mean that I don't fight for my ideals.  My venue is political not physical.  My enemies are those who would distort and prevert the Constitutional processes that have maintained our freedoms by covertly introducing Socialism and even Communism into our political mainstream by overturning the laws that have been voted on by the populace and passed by our elected officials through the use of the Courts.  My enemies are those who would subvert and destroy our country in a desperate attempt to regain the power and past glory that they see slipping away from them  Pitting class against class and race against race in a self serving power grab. My enemies are those who would relish a defeat for this current administration, that they hate to a rabid and unhinged level, even if it means a defeat for the country as a whole and a further erosion of our ability to protect our way of life.  My enemies are those who would abrogate to themselves our abilities to determine our own fates, choose our own way of raising our families, indoctrinate our children, tell us how we can or cannot not express our views on religion and so on, They will try to controll all aspects of our daily lives, even to the extent of what we should eat. (Read this as Nanny State).  My enemies are also those morons who smoke and throw their cigarette butts on the ground.  Do they think they just disappear? ......oh....wait.... that is a bit off topic

All my enemies are not necessarily Democrat or Liberal, some are Republican as well.   The difference is that I can discriminate on what and where I put my political efforts and don't tar everyone with one label. Since I recall our discussions on discrimination in the industry, tarring everyone as the same and labeling people should be something that I should think you would be sensitive to.

Babbling looney- Put Stan and the like all talk about their political ideals but i would even doubt that they have voted in all elections since they have been eligible. They are like all too many in this country who rail constantly about the shortcomings yet provide nothing as far as progress. If you can't make your neighborhood a better place for yourself, your family and your neighbors then don't complain about the greatest nation on the face of the earth.

[quote=noggin]

Babbling looney- Put Stan and the like all talk
about their political ideals but i would even doubt that they have
voted in all elections since they have been eligible. They are like all
too many in this country who rail constantly about the shortcomings yet
provide nothing as far as progress. If you can’t make your neighborhood
a better place for yourself, your family and your neighbors then don’t
complain about the greatest nation on the face of the earth.

[quote=babbling looney]

Well, since I am a woman, and as Put has pointed out old   (no point in denying the obvious) your suggestion is, as is the rest of your thinking in this topic, ludicrous.   This doesn't mean that I don't fight for my ideals.  My venue is political not physical.  My enemies are those who would distort and prevert the Constitutional processes that have maintained our freedoms by covertly introducing Socialism and even Communism into our political mainstream by overturning the laws that have been voted on by the populace and passed by our elected officials through the use of the Courts.  My enemies are those who would subvert and destroy our country in a desperate attempt to regain the power and past glory that they see slipping away from them  Pitting class against class and race against race in a self serving power grab. My enemies are those who would relish a defeat for this current administration, that they hate to a rabid and unhinged level, even if it means a defeat for the country as a whole and a further erosion of our ability to protect our way of life.  My enemies are those who would abrogate to themselves our abilities to determine our own fates, choose our own way of raising our families, indoctrinate our children, tell us how we can or cannot not express our views on religion and so on, They will try to controll all aspects of our daily lives, even to the extent of what we should eat. (Read this as Nanny State).  My enemies are also those morons who smoke and throw their cigarette butts on the ground.  Do they think they just disappear? ......oh....wait.... that is a bit off topic

All my enemies are not necessarily Democrat or Liberal, some are Republican as well.   The difference is that I can discriminate on what and where I put my political efforts and don't tar everyone with one label. Since I recall our discussions on discrimination in the industry, tarring everyone as the same and labeling people should be something that I should think you would be sensitive to.

[/quote]

I'm getting turned on.

I just love intelligent women.

[quote=Put Trader]
What do you see as being great about the United States?
[/quote]

I'd say just about everything, except taxes, of course.

And pink-pantied, yellow-bellied, lilly-livered egalitarian wack job commie fascists *cough*, I mean, liberal democrats.

"What do you see as being great about the United States?"

                                              ---Put Trader
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

From your perspective, if nothing else, there are laws here in the United States which prevent decent people like us from beating scum like you and your ilk to death with our shoes.

[quote=Roger Thornhill]

[quote=menotellname]Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo, and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn't you be putting on fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals...oops...I forgot that Republicans are all rhetoric.  Please forgive the previous rhetorical statement.[/quote]

That's funny, since most...the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY...of our soldiers are REPUBLICANS.

[/quote]

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

[quote=menotellname]You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.[/quote]

Sure I could. I could just agree with you. Then I'd be more wrong, and that would take effort. QED

Being right is easy.

[quote=Starka]

"What do you see as being great about the United States?"

                                              ---Put Trader
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

From your perspective, if nothing else, there are laws here in the United States which prevent decent people like us from beating scum like you and your ilk to death with our shoes.

[/quote]

This reminds me of a quote I saw yesterday:

Some men are alive only because it is against the law to kill them. - Ed Howe

[quote=Mojo] [quote=menotellname]Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo, and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn't you be putting on fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals...oops...I forgot that Republicans are all rhetoric.  Please forgive the previous rhetorical statement.[/quote]

I wont speak for the other usual suspects...I can only answer for myself.

Sr. Hombre-sin-nombre, I can't explain in short bumpersticker simplicity why I chose to voluntarily join the military. I'll happily admit that I was young, dumb and full of c.um...but that's only a facet of the truth. What I can say is that my experience exposed me to all the risks associated with maintaining freedom. Looking back on time, I'd like to believe that a shared sense of duty and a belief in a cause higher then self is what most combat soldiers hold close to their hearts.

Because of the time, when I happened to serve, I was dealt a set of lousy cards in quick succession. I played my hands honorably and acted parts upon two different stages, in theatres with names like The Balboa and The Babel. The first was as romantic and exciting as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid...the second was quietly unforgettable as Heaven's Gate.

Trying to ridicule someone takes style you seem to hunger for Sr. Sin-nombre. I think at heart I am a disenfranchised democrat. My main problem is that I can't seem to find candidates that can explain 70 years of welfare wihich give the poor only enough to keep them poor, planned parenthoods that systematically target poor people of color (ethnic women make lousy feminist is my only guess) and anything to do with unions (here you could keep me up all night - educator, correctional worker or tradesmen - dealers choice).

Boy, it's late..I came in from a night game where my team lost and know I find myself addressing a loser whose team can't seem to decide if a uniform, let alone which color, is appropriate.

Menotelllname, you get excited about ridiculing people for their convictions, yet you lack the confidence to use your own voice in any competent way to draw up an arguement or point of view that is owned and can be originally your's. Please make an honest effort to insult me the next time you decide to collectively add my name to a tired and immature attempt at being clever.

Good night.
[/quote]

Just so you know...genius...I was in the military too.

Please search for all of my previous postings to gain more insight.

"..tired and immature attempt at being clever."

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Hi pot, it's me kettle."

A la your posts directed at Put, right?  Or you do you mean your current lame attempt directed at me, right?

(Mojo, please insert your next long winded pointless diatribe here.)

[quote=menotellname]

(Mojo, please insert your next long winded pointless diatribe here.)

[/quote]

I enjoy reading Mojo's diatribes. He exhibits a mastery of English composition with soulful wit and repartee that you simply cannot hope to match.

His posts are a mode of expression intended to arouse amusement. They possess the power to evoke laughter through his remarks showing felicity or ingenuity and swift perception especially of the incongruous.

Mojo has an ability to perceive the ludicrous, the comical, and the absurd in human life and to express these usually without bitterness - something you singularly fail at.

[quote=menotellname][

Seems to me that Mr. Bush assumes involvement in 9-11 because of Iraq's praise of the events.  Further, he assumes that there are WMDs even though none were ever found.  Then in the last highlighted paragraph he mentions "oil".  Now, isn't that really what this is all about for that little man from Texas?

[/quote]

Clueless is too kind a word for you. Bush NEVER said Iraq was involved in 9/11. In act he's said many, many time there's no evidence to suggest that Iraq was involved with 9/11. That claim of yours is just foolish.

He "assumes" there were WMD because every intelligence agency on the planet thought Saddam had them because we KNEW he had them at one point, had failed to comply with the UN inspections he had agreed to AND he hadn't accounted for those WMDs. It was the CIA director, appointed by Clinton who said it was a "lay up" to prove Saddam had them. Bush didn't say anything different in 2002 and 2003 about Saddam and WMD than Clinton and most every Democrat said in 1998 when they made "regime change in Iraq" US policy.

Finally, you wack-jobs said the FIRST Gulf War was "all about oil" and you've yet to apologize for being wrong about that. You ARE aware we didn't holdKuwait's oil fields after that war, aren't you? If we wanted Iraq's oil we could have simply continued to buy it as we were under the UN food for oil program OR we could have been like France and Germany and have made under thetable deals to help get sanctions dropped.

[quote=inquisitive] [quote=noggin]

Put- logic apparently is as foreign to you as being a producer.

1.I am confused are you talking about Bush nr 2 doing what Bush nr 1 couldn't?

[/quote]
Nope.  Bush Sr. had no authority granted by Congress to remove Saddam from power.  Bush Jr. did.

All Bush Sr. could do was drive Saddam out of Kuwait and contain him.
[quote=noggin]

2.If I give reason for an invasion as WMD, by God there ought to be some found somewhere.....
[/quote]
WMDs were a reason.  So was the fact that Saddam FAILED to comply with UN resolutions time and time again that he give weapons inspectors full access. 

Read UN Resolution 1441.  It references several similar resolutions passed earlier and promises "serious consequences" if Saddam failed to comply.  He failed to comply.
[quote=noggin]

3.The fact that the hijackers are from Saudi Arabia is nullified by the fact that they met in another country??? You can't be serious....
[/quote]
The fact that the hijackers were born in one land provides no proof that it was an official act of that nation.

If a person is born in China, travels to Japan, then conducts terrorist attacks against Malaysia, does that mean it's an official act of China?

Newsflash:  Bin Laden and Al Qaeda want to overthrow the Saudi royal family and kill them.
[quote=noggin]

4.You are saying a sniveling guy found living in a hole is a weapon of mass destruction????  i guess your wife wears the pants after all.
[/quote]
What could have happened during the time that the Democrats were stonewalling Bush?  Could they have been hidden?  Removed?  Destroyed?

You see, Saddam was supposed to provide PROOF to the UN inspectors that he destroyed his WMDs.  He never provided that proof.
[quote=noggin]

5.Now you want us to invade countries because they form a land bridge?  The world is just a big risk game , i guess. let's take out Canada and then blow thru Mexico and south america, then we'll have all of north and South america to ourselves.

And so on and so on....

[/quote]
 Is there oil there?  You see, we only invade countries with oil.  So Bush can make all his oil buddies rich, you see.
[/quote]

Well said.

[quote=menotellname]Still trying to figure out why Put, Stan, Mojo, and Looney are still stateside.  Shouldn't you be putting on fatigues and going overseas to fight for your ideals...oops...I forgot that Republicans are all rhetoric.  Please forgive the previous rhetorical statement.[/quote]

Let me see if I understand this...we can't support the war unless we volunteer to fight it (let's put aside that fact that I, and I'm sure many others here, other than metellnotruth have ALREADY served in uniform)? Then can you be for law and order w/o joining the police? Can you be in favor of fire prevention w/o joining the fire department?

The foolishness of liberals never ceases to amaze....