Ion

ICC aside, whatever that is, have you -as in you debater10- considered putting the "...human,..." Bush in jail?

Start considering it.

You will see:

the world improves after Bush goes to jail.
"Adn by the way,...", what's that?

I can make out "And by the way,...", but "Adn by the way,..." what's that?

Do you think I should invest "...in a dictionary." to find out "Adn by the way,..."?

debater10

It is getting to be a bit late in Lynchburg, so I am afraid that I must sign off for the night.

Because I dislike leaving on a sour note, I would like to say that I have enjoyed the discussion. Thank you all.

Lol. By the way, the picture was a nice touch.

Ion

Nah:

ask Bush for coaching you on how to make false claims.

Not that he is good at masking them with me, but it seems to fool people over there in Lynchburg, Virginia, so you might benefit from Bush while you are in Lynchburg, Virginia.

debater10

... That you do not see your comment as in any way innappropriate speaks volumes about your willingness to maintain an open mind and a level of tolerence for that which you do not agree with. Perhaps that is what I have learned most in our discussion tonight.

Gawdawful

You don't get rid of 500,000 tons of chemical weapons and unknown quanitities of biological weapons (representing a supposed immediate threat to the US and it's allies because it supposedly can be used within 45 minutes and delivered by non-existent SCUD missiles) overnight. The US has been incinerating just such weapons for nearly 20 years now in a number of locations including Johnston Atoll and Dugway Utah, and the job isn't done yet, not by a long shot. Of course, the quantity of the US chemical weapons stockpile still probably exceeds that of any other nation on earth, maybe even all of them combined, but a half million tons is a lot of hazardous material, if it even existed... ever existed.

Bush&Co. not only lied to get the US into Iraq, but they are relatively incompetent at it. Note they've been trying to switch reasoning for the "war" to "the War on Terrorism" and "Saddam had chemical and biological programs" from "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction poised for attack"; big difference, big lie. But, if they keep repeating a lie doesn't it become the "truth" after while?

The US has chemical and biological weapons programs, the weapons themselves, and nuclear weapons too and represents a clear threat to world stability; maybe the US should invade itself, change regimes and disarm. Nevermind, we'll be doing regime change next year anyway. And, I don't even think the vote will be close enough for recounts, not even in Florida.

Warren in Oklahoma

Ion

You see, "...open mind and a level of tolerance..." for Bush's fans considering that Bush lied and killed Iraqis for oil, well, that is:

not negotiable.

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

None of these is ad-hominem, when taken in context. Your comments are inded idiotic, and rather hypocritical. Further, if you believe that ridding yourself of the only weapon that can harm an enemy while said enemy is attacking you is a GOOD idea, then you ARE an idiot. Your other comments were indeed moronic, being similar in nature to ridding yourself of the only means of defeating an enemy just before he attacks you.

Ad homimens are used INSTEAD of addressing the comment, and outright dismiss it. Your comments, rather, were used to support the assertion that you are indeed an idiot. Since you lack the reading comprehension skills to discern this, you are indeed an idiot.
Lie. Your original statement was designed to cast Bush in a great light, and to push the other parites into an akward posistion. You can't wiggle out of this one.
Then why bother having them in the first place? ICBM capability is NOT the only use--they could, for instance, be used against soldiers attacking their country, or against transports bringing them in to destroy our military beofre it got there. The fundamentally lfawed assumption YOU made is that you need ICBMs for WMDs to be effective. That makes you an idiot.

Ion

So, Bush the crook is qualified about "...the human rights abuses..."?

I say U.N. is qualified about "...the human rights abuses...", but not Bush.

Not at all.
So France attacked Iraq for its oil, and killed thousands of Iraqis?

I thought Bush did it, not France.
You know?

War in Iraq is Bush's fabrication.

Only Bush's.

He wants Iraq's oil, and kills thousands of Iraqis.

I don't see "...MULTIPLE countries." in Iraq's war, but I see Bush and what he did choose as his advisors.

The SwampThing

And there he goes again, saying fallacy this, fallacy that...
But hey, the "phallus" inuendo is yours, not mine. I never mentioned such genitalia on my post! But then again, you seem to be "hung up" on it...


The only way you are going to make Bush look human, is if you dress him in a E.T costume! And then again, who knows?!?
But you still get two points for the effort, though!


PS:You must be confusing a "Dictionary", with a "Pictionary"...
An honest mistake.

Ion

I think debater10 meant to say 'Fictionary', speaking from debater10 experince with own shortcomings.

Like "...human..." Bush.

That's one heck of a debater10' shortcoming of fiction, right here...

If 'Fictionary' doesn't work, then try 'Victionary'.

'Pictionary' might work too.

Who knows...