So, you didn't think Pelosi would try for a pull-out of Iraq?

[rclouse 0]

Most likely the WMDs were moved to Syria long before we got there. Saddam had plenty of time to do that.

Late to the party, as usual. Fortunately or unfortunately we've got server issues at work, so I've gotta kill time somehow.

Anyway, if Saddam had moved large amounts of anything into Syria in the months before the war we would have detected that from spy satellites. The fact that we haven't invaded Syria is proof that never happened.

It's telling that the UN inspectors were doing their job, searching and not finding WMDs, and then Bush ordered them out to start the war. They would have found nothing and his excuse to go to war would have been lost.

Face it, Dittoheads: the war was a huge mistake and it's Bush's and the Republicans' fault. And that's why they got their asses handed to them last week.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

you're cornered, et

Not really. I am not the US.

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

No. Again, I did not make any such statement. You're clearly confused.

[GaryC 7]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

you're cornered, et

Not really. I am not the US.

Talk about the two-step back peddle.

[Ban Hammer 13,619]

Anyway, if Saddam had moved large amounts of anything into Syria in the months before the war we would have detected that from spy satellites. The fact that we haven't invaded Syria is proof that never happened.

and just how are you so certain of that?

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

No. Again, I did not make any such statement. You're clearly confused.

as bush is the president of the usa, it's clear you were indicating such was your choice

[Carol&Marc 0]

Anyway, if Saddam had moved large amounts of anything into Syria in the months before the war we would have detected that from spy satellites. The fact that we haven't invaded Syria is proof that never happened.

and just how are you so certain of that?

He is a cnn military analyst! geeez, Charles get it together dude!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

you're cornered, et

Not really. I am not the US.

Talk about the two-step back peddle.

I am not backpeddling. I am just helping you to read what I wrote since you apparently read something I did not write.

[GaryC 7]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

you're cornered, et

Not really. I am not the US.

Talk about the two-step back peddle.

I am not backpeddling. I am just helping you to read what I wrote since you apparently read something I did not write.

Yeah right!!!!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

No. Again, I did not make any such statement. You're clearly confused.

as bush is the president of the usa, it's clear you were indicating such was your choice

No, all I am saying is that I rather have the UN call the shots globally than the crooked bunch on 1600 Penn Ave. The Middle East which Bush and his crooks have fcuked up nicely really ain't the US, is it?

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The UN may be less than perfect but it ain't nearly as crooked or dangerous as Bush and the bunch he assembled at 1600 Penn Ave.

How else am I to interpret this statement? So please spell it out for this dumb republican, would you really rather see the UN calling the shots for the US?

you're cornered, et

Not really. I am not the US.

Talk about the two-step back peddle.

I am not backpeddling. I am just helping you to read what I wrote since you apparently read something I did not write.

Yeah right!!!!

Again, I never said what you claim I said. You cannot quote me saying that I rather have the UN govern the US yet you claim that I made that statement. I did not. Period.

You're just like Bush. Problems with the reality. No wonder you adore the man.

[GaryC 7]

[rclouse 0]

[Carol&Marc 0]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday!

YOU said it ET, I'd put my trust in that body (the U.N.).......over Bush! (PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.)

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday!

YOU said it ET, I'd put my trust in that body (the U.N.).......over Bush! (PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.)

And? Again, Bush fcuked up matters outside of the US, no? Which is what we were really talking about - the fcuked up war in Iraq that Bush has lied this country into and the destabilization of an entire region (again, outside of the US) that his misguided adventure has caused. It is in that regard (matters of international peace and stability, matters of international law and order) that I put my trust into the UN over Bush any day of the week. Just because you can't grasp the proper context doesn't mean it isn't there.

Edited November 14, 2006 by ET-US2004

[Ban Hammer 13,619]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday!

YOU said it ET, I'd put my trust in that body (the U.N.).......over Bush! (PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.)

And? Again, Bush fcuked up matters outside of the US, no? Which is what we were really talking about - the fcuked up war in Iraq that Bush has lied this country into and the destabilization of an entire region (again, outside of the US). It is in that regard (matters of international peace and stability, matters of international law and order) that I put my trust into the UN over Bush any day of the week. Just because you can't grasp the proper context doesn't mean it isn't there.

and the un obviously has a better track record when dealing with rogue nations. 12 years of resolutions must be hard to bear

[Carol&Marc 0]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday!

YOU said it ET, I'd put my trust in that body (the U.N.).......over Bush! (PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.)

And? Again, Bush fcuked up matters outside of the US, no? Which is what we were really talking about - the fcuked up war in Iraq that Bush has lied this country into and the destabilization of an entire region (again, outside of the US). It is in that regard (matters of international peace and stability, matters of international law and order) that I put my trust into the UN over Bush any day of the week. Just because you can't grasp the proper context doesn't mean it isn't there.

Liberal *SPIN*? did you mean it before you did'nt? or did you say before you you did'nt mean it?...I need to sit down

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd put my trust in that body over Bush any day of the week and twice on Sunday!

YOU said it ET, I'd put my trust in that body (the U.N.).......over Bush! (PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.)

And? Again, Bush fcuked up matters outside of the US, no? Which is what we were really talking about - the fcuked up war in Iraq that Bush has lied this country into and the destabilization of an entire region (again, outside of the US). It is in that regard (matters of international peace and stability, matters of international law and order) that I put my trust into the UN over Bush any day of the week. Just because you can't grasp the proper context doesn't mean it isn't there.

and the un obviously has a better track record when dealing with rogue nations. 12 years of resolutions must be hard to bear

Well, before Bush decided to play President of the World, Saddam was contained and the region was stable. Iraq was not a threat to anyone. Can't say that now, can you? So much for Bush's accomplishment in comparison to that of the UN.