Comments Posted By Mark
Displaying 61 To 70 Of 94 Comments
Rick,
I agree that whether the turmoil in Iraq is a "civil war" or not is immaterial. However, the use of the term is not. Although we have been militarily involved is civil wars ourselves (had 2 on our own territory as I recall) the media meaning of the term appears to have changed. In today's newspeak, "civil war" = "unwinnable quagmire", and the term is used as justification for the "cut and run" policy. That is why I get annoyed at all of the attempts to label the Iraq "conflict" as a "civil war".
Comment Posted By Mark On 28.11.2006 @ 11:01
KENNEDY AND OTHER LIBERALS ANSWER TO A DIFFERENT MORALITY
Barron's, via Drudge, reporting that their studies show Republican's holding both Houses of Congress.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash7.htm
Is conventional wisdom wrong, again?
Comment Posted By Mark On 21.10.2006 @ 17:34
IRAQ: THE WITHDRAWAL CLOCK IS OFFICIALLY TICKING
I have to wonder if this latest pre-election "leak" includes all of the options being evaluated or just the ones that admit defeat.
Comment Posted By mark On 13.10.2006 @ 15:18
Bin Laden's comments from Nov 2002 until the start of the war in Iraq told his followers it was "ok to work with socialists in these times" , socialists referring to Baathists.
He actually made numerous threats against the U.S. to NOT invade Iraq, which is the exact opposite of what Tubina has said.
Comment Posted By Mark On 24.08.2006 @ 13:15
LOL, the Iraq war was a trap for the U.S., set by bin Laden?
That's a good one. First time I've heard that one. Good one.
Comment Posted By Mark On 23.08.2006 @ 16:36
tubino
you cherry picked his comments. he hasn't "distanced himself from the links"It's, as I said earlier, intellectually dishonest and/or incredibly stupid to take the statement "Saddam didn't run 9-11" and turn that into "Saddam had no links to al Qaeda"
What Bush says, or doesnt say, about an issue really has no bearing on whether or not its true, though it's curious that you view everything through a political prism like that.
You are all over the place with your other comments.
I'll ask a THIRD time. Where did Ansar al Islam and al Qaeda in Afghanistan get their CBW manuals?
Comment Posted By Mark On 23.08.2006 @ 16:34
Tubino,
First al Qaeda had NO LINKS to Iraq then those links were irrelevant.Which country had stronger links and what course of action do you recommend for those countries?
You never answered my question , a very important one, "Who gave Ansar al Islam and al Qaeda in Afghanistan the CBW manuals know-how for cyanide, ricin, sarin and vx?"
Please answer the question.
Comment Posted By Mark On 23.08.2006 @ 14:21
Tubino,
You were right about Brookings being biased. They are a liberal think tank, aka not pro Bush, that's why I cited them.Tubino,
all my sources are discredited? Nice try but your argument is just so shallow.
I've spoken with Clintonistas, and cited them at my site, foreign intelligence agencies, Kurds, and cited for you quite a bit of intelligence that's made it's way through bipartisan investigations.You just want to not see the links and you've reached your position not through logic, but emotion, and thus using logic to get you out of it obviously won't work. Good luck in your willfully ignorant endevours.
Comment Posted By Mark On 23.08.2006 @ 12:27
What is my point in the AQ stuff?
Correcting an error that is made by you and others on a daily basis.I have said I am far more sure about Saddam's support for them than I am about the invasion. People can make up their own minds about whether or not we should have invaded but should make that decision based upon honest alternatives.
What would Iraq be doing now if we hadn't invaded?
Where would Zarqawi be? Would Zarqawi and Ansar al Islam still be smuggling poisons and cw into Europe and elsewhere?
Would they be attempted to, and having the capability to, kill 80,000 people like they tried in Jordan in 2004?Would Saddam be free of sanctions now?
The options weren't "Go to war" or "Remain at peace" as so many have tried to simplify this down to. The options were take out Saddam and the rest of the scumbags holed up in his country or just play defense with the NON - CONVENTIONAL attacks being launched from inside Iraq.
Comment Posted By Mark On 23.08.2006 @ 12:04
UBL knew Iraq was going to be invaded just like the rest of the world saw it coming since 98.
Wow, you are really on to something now......
Comment Posted By Mark On 23.08.2006 @ 11:27
