Conquer Club

Stopper wrote:

Guiscard wrote:I genuinely think Blair did think they had the WMDs and that the whole 45 minute claim was true. It was the intelligence service that was to blame in the UK in my opinion.

Eh? I have absolutely no doubt of the ability of Blair to convince himself of the truth of something he knows to be a lie - double-think is an essential requisite for a successful politician. I don't think I'm being cynical here - it's just human nature, and we get the politicians we deserve.

Still, I can't see how you can shift the blame onto the intelligence services - if you ask me, it was quite the other way around - the government pressured the intelligence services to give the conclusions (and dossier!) they wanted to hear.

Yeh I suppose the pressure put on the intelligence services to find some sort of evidence was immense, and I know it is pretty much a pre-requisite to be shady as a PM, but the information used in the UK was SO sketchy that I really think it would take a stupid politician to go to war on such a flimsy excuse. The first rule of politis is that anything that can be discovered will be - whereas the security services were under pressure to perform and just please their superiors...

Its all just conjecture, though...

Listen to what stopper is saying you guys. I mean seriously, you guys seem to have above average intelligence well to the level of critical thinking ability - you can't be that naive. Blair and Bush are career politicians - lying is expected of them, it's part of who they are.

got to agree with that, politics=lies, there's no way around it. It should be lies for the greater good, which intentions may bee, but more often than not its lying for personal gain. I still have faith in our system and trust in our president, but some changes concerning money and personal grudges would be nice

so why do people get so worked up about lies is we can accept that they are going to happen?

b.k. barunt wrote:Listen to what stopper is saying you guys. I mean seriously, you guys seem to have above average intelligence well to the level of critical thinking ability

I only scored 179 on that IQ test in the other thread...lol

Guiscard, I re-read all of your previous posts. I get the impression that you are not pro-US or pro-Bush, but I don't see you as a Bush basher. I also saw that you took back your name-calling against Beezer, which I find commendable.

In my line of work, I am an ESL teacher, and I also teach English literacy to many people, mostly immigrants. Many of those immigrants are muslims from Jordan and Syria. We get along great and have learned much from each other as they learn English. I expressed an opinion about England in another thread that was linked to Islamic protests and also what my students are telling me. For that I was called a "racist" which I felt was an unjust characterization considering the fact that those people who made the charge know nothing about me. I guess I carried my frustration from that thread to this topic.

I linked you in with all those other people...my apologies. I still disagree with you, but you are not the same as the people who made baseless charges. How about a Stella Artois!

only a 179? that's pretty good, but I still don't set much store by measures of intelligence

So what do you measure?

luns101 wrote:How about a Stella Artois!

Hell yes, I'll take 2 of those puppies thanks!

luns101 wrote:How about a Stella Artois!

I don't drink watery camel piss...

Bitter in the week and Guinness on the weekends...

I´d had to vote other.
Balkenende from the Netherlands has to be the worst leader.
Sure Kim from korea is bad to his subjects, but at least he makes them make him look good on tv doing it. Sure Bush isn´t the brightest of all leaders, but he manages not to nuke the US.

Balkenende looks like harry potter, how low can you go. His politics are aimed to accomplish.. well you got me there, nobody really knows. There is no backbone no driving force what so ever. I nominate balkenende for being unremarkable in every single respect as the worst leader.

luns101 wrote:The leftists here will never be convinced that anyone could be as evil as George W. Bush or another US republican president.

You are probably correct...just as the republican religious fanatics will hate any Democrat. Glad I'm neither left, right or religious. All this party BS on both sides is pathetic in my opinion.

luns101 wrote:By the way, Bill Clinton also said that Iraq had WMD's

Oh! That makes it all OK! As my mother used to say..."two wrongs don't make a right". Clinton wasn't immune to stupidity either, thats for sure.

Wow, so much for the olive branch. When we can't even agree on a good drink, now that's partisan...lol

luns101 wrote:Wow, so much for the olive branch. When we can't even agree on a good drink, now that's partisan...lol

Lol No offence, I just don't drink lager... Rather have something with some kinda taste which doesn't knock you out with bubbles.

Or spirits.

Or Cider...

I see a theme developing here...

obama

ws1 wrote:obama

Care to provide reasoning?

Obama because there is no worse leadership than that which betrays the trust of its constituency. In addition, he has totaly failed to get the point that "it is the economy stupid."

mpjh wrote:Obama because there is no worse leadership than that which betrays the trust of its constituency. In addition, he has totaly failed to get the point that "it is the economy stupid."

but he inherited the worst situation ever because of the ex-idiot

Not gonna matter to the 17 million unemployed and their friends and families when the election comes around.

mpjh wrote:Not gonna matter to the 17 million unemployed and their friends and families when the election comes around.

obviously, it is not my election.. I just shared a fact that the dude inherited a couple of wars, a financial crisis and a lot of america haters all over the world.


*chewing gum loudly*

Pirlo wrote:

mpjh wrote:Not gonna matter to the 17 million unemployed and their friends and families when the election comes around.

obviously, it is not my election.. I just shared a fact that the dude inherited a couple of wars, a financial crisis and a lot of america haters all over the world.


*chewing gum loudly*

+1

Pretty bad leader in my opinion...didn't even have control of a country or its military yet.

It sucks I can't vote....

Mugabe 12 votes!?? GW 50?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I move for a more educated voting block

Necro bump of the half-decade.

I got a written warning for a 4 month bump.

Obama isn`t on the list, plus he inherited a meltdown that was already underway along with 2 wars. I think there may be lots of people in 2011 that deserve to have their name on this list, but the list was made in early 2007 and you need to stick with the original poster`s choices.

I must say, I like the OP`s style and wish he were still here.

Pirlo wrote:

mpjh wrote:Obama because there is no worse leadership than that which betrays the trust of its constituency. In addition, he has totaly failed to get the point that "it is the economy stupid."

but he inherited the worst situation ever because of the ex-idiot

But is that what Obama said he would do? I'm pretty sure Obama is on the record saying he would fix the problems and bring hope and change and his trillion dollar spending programs would work. I dont remember him promising "I'll make sure it doesn't get worse." The reality is his programs did make it worse, and now we have to pay the interest on those mistake.

B.O.H.I.C.A.

1 term all the way