OnlyAmbrose wrote:"But is that because he's stupid or just inart - inarticulate."
Moderator: Community Team
At which point did the Iraqis try and stab us with a knife, however metaphorical? They didn't try and kill us. They couldn't have anyway! There WAS no knife!Carebian Knight wrote:I'm gonna retell that story a bit.
In the 1990's a friend of your hired a babysitter. That babysitter molested his child. It wasn't proven but it is widely believed to be true. About 10 years later you hire the babysitter. Your daughter then tells you that he molested her. Now maybe your daughter only said it because she knows it's widely believed that he is a molester, but maybe she is telling the truth. So you send some cops over to ask him some questions, he refuses then after a couple of tries just long enough to hide any evidence that he has in the house, he finally complies. The cops find nothing. However you hear from a neighbor that she saw him moving a bunch of stuff before the cops came back, again maybe she is lying maybe not. So you go to his house and confront him about it. He starts to get hostile and grabs a knife and tries to kill you. What do you do? You don't sit down and say I'm sorry I won't believe my daughter or my friend, I'll believe you since you just tried to stab me with a knife. NO you kill him before he can kill you.
Saddam Hussein was put on trial, he was killed for crimes against humanity. We didn't march into his country run into his house and shoot him in the head.
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
The simplest things make your head explode.Stopper wrote:I'm still trying to work out who or what the molested daughter represents. And what is the "bunch of stuff" he tried to move before the cops came back, and what does this have to do with the daughter....?
*Head explodes*
Hey, Blair is just as left as Hillary... he just knew it was the right thing to do. Besides... if i remember correctly, all the Democrats supported the war in the beginning.joecoolfrog wrote:Yes but it now appears that the inteligence reports were manipulated to suit Bush and Blairs agenda,there was never firm evidence and thats a FACT. Are you seriously suggesting that nations should go to war on the merest suspicion that there might be a threat to their security,you do realise that thousands of innocent people have died for no good reason.jay_a2j wrote:.... THIS IS AN OPINION....NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH FACTS... I am aware that there are many people, much like those in Europe just before Hitler invaded Poland that are of the belief: "Well, lets just wait to see what happens before we take action." Unfortunately ALL WE HAVE is our intelligence sources. If they say there is a threat..... I for one would rather be safe than sorry. There are way too many whinny babies around to win this or any war.Stopper wrote:
yada, yada, yada....
or are likely to be found.
Because he kept screaming that the court is an American puppet (paranoidStopper wrote:Because his legal defence team weren't up to scratch?Carebian Knight wrote:Hint: It's why Saddam lost his trial.

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
You can't be, because it was the "bunch of stuff", or possibly the daughter, that got moved.mandalorian2298 wrote:Because he kept screaming that the court is an American puppet (paranoidStopper wrote:Because his legal defence team weren't up to scratch?Carebian Knight wrote:Hint: It's why Saddam lost his trial.![]()
) and the judge kept taking away his word?
He moved either his court or his word! Am I close?
Woah there, hold on a sec, are you saying that Saddam wasn't a genocidal maniac? That's further than anyone I know will take it...Stopper wrote:Because his legal defence team weren't up to scratch?Carebian Knight wrote:Hint: It's why Saddam lost his trial.
No, he appears to be hinting at a possible reason why he lost his trial.OnlyAmbrose wrote:Woah there, hold on a sec, are you saying that Saddam wasn't a genocidal maniac? That's further than anyone I know will take it...Stopper wrote:Because his legal defence team weren't up to scratch?Carebian Knight wrote:Hint: It's why Saddam lost his trial.
Many supported the war until they realised they had been misled, people dont like to be told lies! I think you are correct about Blair in that he believed it was the right thing to do,problem was it was simply blind faith and he was very wrong.umanouski wrote:Hey, Blair is just as left as Hillary... he just knew it was the right thing to do. Besides... if i remember correctly, all the Democrats supported the war in the beginning.joecoolfrog wrote:Yes but it now appears that the inteligence reports were manipulated to suit Bush and Blairs agenda,there was never firm evidence and thats a FACT. Are you seriously suggesting that nations should go to war on the merest suspicion that there might be a threat to their security,you do realise that thousands of innocent people have died for no good reason.jay_a2j wrote:.... THIS IS AN OPINION....NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH FACTS... I am aware that there are many people, much like those in Europe just before Hitler invaded Poland that are of the belief: "Well, lets just wait to see what happens before we take action." Unfortunately ALL WE HAVE is our intelligence sources. If they say there is a threat..... I for one would rather be safe than sorry. There are way too many whinny babies around to win this or any war.Stopper wrote:
yada, yada, yada....
or are likely to be found.
His court + his word = "bunch of stuff".Stopper wrote:You can't be, because it was the "bunch of stuff", or possibly the daughter, that got moved.mandalorian2298 wrote:Because he kept screaming that the court is an American puppet (paranoidStopper wrote:Because his legal defence team weren't up to scratch?Carebian Knight wrote:Hint: It's why Saddam lost his trial.![]()
) and the judge kept taking away his word?
He moved either his court or his word! Am I close?

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
Eh? I thought Saddam was the babysitter...?mandalorian2298 wrote:His court + his word = "bunch of stuff".Stopper wrote:You can't be, because it was the "bunch of stuff", or possibly the daughter, that got moved.mandalorian2298 wrote:Because he kept screaming that the court is an American puppet (paranoidStopper wrote:Because his legal defence team weren't up to scratch?Carebian Knight wrote:Hint: It's why Saddam lost his trial.![]()
) and the judge kept taking away his word?
He moved either his court or his word! Am I close?
You are not taking Carebians argument seriusly, Stopper. The daughter wasn't Saddam's but babysitter's.
"Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" - George W. BushThe1exile wrote:"I believe human beings and fish can peacefully coexist."Backglass wrote:Bush is a complete moron and an embarrassment to our great nation...and the majority of Patriotic Americans now see this. Too bad it took so long.

are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.