Saddam Challenged President Bush To A Gunfight....

[Jedi Knight]

....and Bush dropped the hammer on Saddam in the first 30 seconds of the war!

Saddam was taken out of his compound on a stretcher with an oxygen mask on and it is rumored his knucklehead son Uday ate 3,000 degrees worth of high explosives! (cya Uday!!!!)

President Bush is the next Abraham Lincoln and General Patton mixed into one!

Bush!!! Bush!!!! 8 More Years!!!!!!

JK

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Bush!!! Bush!!!! 8 More Years!!!!!!

JK

...4 more years...

[Barkhorn1x]

...cite please.

I want this to be true - but I will need some solid proof.

Barkhorn.

[headscratcher4]

2 :p (I say this because winning the war, and fixing the economy are two very different things...ask GWHB).

[Barkhorn1x]

Originally posted by Barkhorn1x
...cite please.

I want this to be true - but I will need some solid proof.

Barkhorn.

Err...about the war I mean - not GHWB election prospects. ;)

Barkhorn.

[Crossbow]

First, it has not been established just what, if anything, happend to Saddam H. the other day. I would like to see such data before proclaiming victory.

Second, winning a war and winning and election are two very different things; just ask his dad.

Third, you are too much a genius to understand that the same person can only serve two terms as President. Two terms means eight years, and he has already served over two of those eight years.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Crossbow
First, it has not been established just what, if anything, happend to Saddam H. the other day. I would like to see such data before proclaiming victory.

Second, winning a war and winning and election are two very different things; just ask his dad.

Third, you are too much a genius to understand that the same person can only serve two terms as President. Two terms means eight years, and he has already served over two of those eight years.

I would like to see him serve 10 more years as President!!!!!

Bush!!! Bush!!! 10 more years!!!!!!

JK

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


I would like to see him serve 10 more years as President!!!!!

Bush!!! Bush!!! 10 more years!!!!!!

JK

Since you are such a total genius you can read the US Constitution for yourself.

And since you are such a brave, non-communist, god-loving, military combat veteran, then I am sure you can make whatever changes you like to it.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Crossbow


Since you are such a total genius you can read the US Constitution for yourself.

And since you are such a brave, non-communist, god-loving, military combat veteran, then I am sure you can make whatever changes you like to it.

You mean I can make a new law banning Saddamocrats from seeking public office?

JK

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


You mean I can make a new law banning Saddamocrats from seeking public office?

JK

That is absolutely right! You can call it the JK Admendment.

You just write it up, send it to your local congressman; once the word gets around that it is your idea (and with your sterling reputation that should not take more than a few hours), all 50 states will have it ratified by lunchtime.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Barkhorn1x
...cite please.

I want this to be true - but I will need some solid proof.

Barkhorn.

Hmmm...you want some proof, eh? How is this--Saddam is hiding in the hospital in Baghdad. That is where he had his tape made. He was wounded and that is why he looks so afraid and white during the taped speech. In the background, you can see a tapestry on the wall--a curtain. That was hung inside a hospital room.

The notepad he read from was a speech written in route to the hospital by one of his advisors.

JK

[MRC_Hans]

Whoever asked for proof: JK is all-knowing. His words are proof in themselves.

--- which is good, since thats all he will provide.

Hans

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Whoever asked for proof: JK is all-knowing. His words are proof in themselves.

--- which is good, since thats all he will provide.

Hans

My word is good. It always was.

JK

[Barkhorn1x]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Hmmm...you want some proof, eh? How is this--Saddam is hiding in the hospital in Baghdad. That is where he had his tape made. He was wounded and that is why he looks so afraid and white during the taped speech. In the background, you can see a tapestry on the wall--a curtain. That was hung inside a hospital room.

The notepad he read from was a speech written in route to the hospital by one of his advisors.

JK

I'm sorry JK but you will have to do better than that since I VERY much doubt that you were an eye witness.

Regards,
Barkhorn.

[Richard G]

Don't bring a pistol to a Tomahawk fight.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Barkhorn1x


I'm sorry JK but you will have to do better than that since I VERY much doubt that you were an eye witness.

Regards,
Barkhorn.

lol

JK

[Goshawk]

Barkhorn:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/21/sprj.irq.saddam/index.html
Officials said they did not know whether the Iraqi leader was injured or killed in the massive attack, and sources acknowledge information so far is mixed.

"I've seen intelligence suggesting he is dead, intelligence suggesting he is injured, and intelligence suggesting he is just fine," said one U.S. official. "Welcome to the fog of war." And may I say, welcome to the fog of a JK thread. :D

[subgenius]

JK:
"President Bush is the next Abraham Lincoln and General Patton mixed into one!"

Obviously they're both spinning in their graves over this master historian's comparison. A new twist on damning with faint praise.

What an insult.

Not even his closest friends and advisors would have the temerity to compare Bush to these giants.

What does that makes someone who does?

Smarmy.

Wish G.S. was here to give him a lesson.

"The morning I arrived I wore my uniform and went alone to his grave.

The whole lot was covered with flowers, all of which were wilted save the sheath of red roses over the spot where he lay. These to me seemed fresh, vivified by the great soul of him who lay beneath them.

For an hour I stood there, and the knowledge came to me that the grave no more held Papa than does one of his discarded suits hanging in a closet.

Suddenly I seemed to see him in the road wearing his checked overcoat and with his stick, which he waved at me as he had been used to do when he was impatient and wanted to go somewhere.

I knelt and kissed the ground and saluted, not Papa, but the last resting place of that beautiful body I had loved. His soul was with me and, except for the density of my fleshly eyes, I could have seen and talked with him.

As I waited in his office where we smoked and talked so often he is here. I like to remember not the symbol of his gallant spirit which I saluted in the churchyard, but rather Papa, the last time I saw him alive wheeled out (in the hospital) to die perhaps, and to think of his words so true of our present temporary seperation when he smiled at me and said, Au revoir, son.

Oh darling Papa. I never called you that in life as both of us were too self-contained, but you were and are my darling. I have often thought that life for me was too easy, but the loss of you has gone far to even my count with those whom before I have pitied.

God grant that you see and appreciate my piteous attempt to show here your lovely life. I never did much for you and you did all for me. Accept this as a slight offering of what I would have done.

Your devoted son,

G.S. Patton, Jr.
July 9, 1927"

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Goshawk
Barkhorn:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/21/sprj.irq.saddam/index.html
And may I say, welcome to the fog of a JK thread. :D

Maybe, but it is a clear fog when you think about it. :D

JK

[The Fool]

A US Engineer is being held in connection to the "fragging" of the command tent... Sounds like a loonie may have got through the system.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool
A US Engineer is being held in connection to the "fragging" of the command tent... Sounds like a loonie may have got through the system.

I am interested to see what the report is on the guy after the investigation is completed. He attacked the CTF itself in that camp. That is some serious sh#t.

JK

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by The Fool
A US Engineer is being held in connection to the "fragging" of the command tent... Sounds like a loonie may have got through the system.

I heard, on FoxNews, he was a "Muslim American".


Lacey said the suspect had an "Arabic sounding name" but was not able to confirm a Fox News television report that the man was a Muslim American.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030323/ts_nm/iraq_kuwait_attack_dc_7

If true, it fits a pattern with the D.C. Sniper, the nuts in the Ricin case in Paris and London, the 9-11 attacks, and the attack on an El Al Airline in Los Angeles.

Some people theorize that it is some lunatic like Bin Laden trying to make it appear that all Muslims are attacking the US (and the West), and that the US is fighting all Muslims.

It's a mad mad mad mad world.

How to make sense of it all?

This list is especially relevant to the trends of Militant Islam in America:

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/431

And here is a scorecard from Pakistan

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/477

-Ben

[DrBenway]

Interesting links, Ben.

What I see: the Islamic world is on the brink of civil war, only they don't know it yet.

This impending war provokes enormous confusion among Muslims (note the squabbling at the recent conferences of Arab leaders). Uncertain of their common ground, the Muslim world falls back onto the safest position: all agree non-Muslims ought to keep their noses out of Muslim business.

On one side of this civil war stand the fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, who make up maybe 60% of the Muslims out there. On the other side are more moderate Muslims. Unfortunately, the moderates don't have a well articulated position to embrace. The fundies have the benefit of a system of Islamic schools putting out clerics sharing their views.

Among the fundamentalists are a significant number of pseudo-fundies: folks who believe Islamic Law is truly of God, but who don't really want to deal with Islamic Law in their daily lives. These folks are like Catholics who use birth control, believing it's not right, but hoping God won't punish them too severely for their error.

The moderates want Islamic Law re-interpreted, so that it is consistent with modern views of human rights. However, their position is viewed as apostasy, per Islamic Law as it's now explicitly defined. Thus, if they're vocal about their position, they risk death threats from the fundies.

I recommend we not wait for Muslims to sort themselves out. We ought to put forth our own descriptions of Islam, then ask Muslims which description fits them best. Here's my go at it:

"Moderate Islam is that form of Islam which respects basic human rights, including political equality of all persons, regardless of race, sex, or religion."

"Fundamentalist Islam insists on establishing a state able to impose Islamic Law or 'Shari'ah' upon the people."

Once defined, the West can take a stand clearly in favor of the moderates and opposed to the fundamentalists.

I'm tired of hearing politicians weasle around with hypocritical nonsense and half-truths like "war on terrorism," or "Islam is a nation of peace." Let's tell the truth, stand for something real, and help those moderate Muslims out there in their efforts to move their countries into the modern world. I bet the pseudo-fundies would be happy to move toward a more liberal form of Islam, if that form were more broadly supported.

So we ask those Muslims we deal with: "Are you the sort of Muslim who embraces the notion of basic human rights, or are you the sort that believes in the old laws which politically subordinate women and non-believers?" Then we put those in the latter camp on notice: We tell them we're utterly opposed to their objectives. We will fight them to stop them, if we must.

The fundamentalists have already brought the war to us. We can't avoid this battle. If we have any hope of prevailing, we ought to honestly articulate what we value and what we hate, as it concerns them.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by DrBenway
Interesting links, Ben.

What I see: the Islamic world is on the brink of civil war, only they don't know it yet.

This impending war provokes enormous confusion among Muslims (note the squabbling at the recent conferences of Arab leaders). Uncertain of their common ground, the Muslim world falls back onto the safest position: all agree non-Muslims ought to keep their noses out of Muslim business.

On one side of this civil war stand the fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, who make up maybe 60% of the Muslims out there. On the other side are more moderate Muslims. Unfortunately, the moderates don't have a well articulated position to embrace. The fundies have the benefit of a system of Islamic schools putting out clerics sharing their views.

Among the fundamentalists are a significant number of pseudo-fundies: folks who believe Islamic Law is truly of God, but who don't really want to deal with Islamic Law in their daily lives. These folks are like Catholics who use birth control, believing it's not right, but hoping God won't punish them too severely for their error.

The moderates want Islamic Law re-interpreted, so that it is consistent with modern views of human rights. However, their position is viewed as apostasy, per Islamic Law as it's now explicitly defined. Thus, if they're vocal about their position, they risk death threats from the fundies.

I recommend we not wait for Muslims to sort themselves out. We ought to put forth our own descriptions of Islam, then ask Muslims which description fits them best. Here's my go at it:

"Moderate Islam is that form of Islam which respects basic human rights, including political equality of all persons, regardless of race, sex, or religion."

"Fundamentalist Islam insists on establishing a state able to impose Islamic Law or 'Shari'ah' upon the people."

Once defined, the West can take a stand clearly in favor of the moderates and opposed to the fundamentalists.

I'm tired of hearing politicians weasle around with hypocritical nonsense and half-truths like "war on terrorism," or "Islam is a nation of peace." Let's tell the truth, stand for something real, and help those moderate Muslims out there in their efforts to move their countries into the modern world. I bet the pseudo-fundies would be happy to move toward a more liberal form of Islam, if that form were more broadly supported.

So we ask those Muslims we deal with: "Are you the sort of Muslim who embraces the notion of basic human rights, or are you the sort that believes in the old laws which politically subordinate women and non-believers?" Then we put those in the latter camp on notice: We tell them we're utterly opposed to their objectives. We will fight them to stop them, if we must.

The fundamentalists have already brought the war to us. We can't avoid this battle. If we have any hope of prevailing, we ought to honestly articulate what we value and what we hate, as it concerns them.
Thats nice Doc, to keep things fair should we non muslims also divide ourselves into the goodies and the badies? Are your categories definitions based on what we say or what we do?

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by The Fool

Thats nice Doc, to keep things fair should we non muslims also divide ourselves into the goodies and the badies? Are your categories definitions based on what we say or what we do?

Are you cool with human rights, or no?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by DrBenway


Are you cool with human rights, or no?

what has that got to do with it? You are making one of the most hilarious suggestions I have ever seen grace this board. You are going to ask muslims if they are goodies or baddies? Lol..... Answer the questions yourself first. Which of your categories do non muslim countries fall into? Is America respecting the human rights of the Australian citizens the Us Army abducted and is holding without trial in Cuba? Is the USA a place where women, Blacks, Hispanics, asians, or muslims enjoy political equality?

Look, I'll save you the wait, They are all going to say they are goodies, Just like all non muslim countries would....your next idea?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by DrBenway
Interesting links, Ben.

What I see: the Islamic world is on the brink of civil war, only they don't know it yet.

This impending war provokes enormous confusion among Muslims (note the squabbling at the recent conferences of Arab leaders).

the arabs have been squabbling amongst each other for hundreds of years. come to think of it, the europeans have been at it for a while, too.

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by The Fool

Thats nice Doc, to keep things fair should we non muslims also divide ourselves into the goodies and the badies? Are your categories definitions based on what we say or what we do?

You truly are a moron. Don't you know that there are "Zionist Jews" and there are "Jews who don't agree with the racist and evil occupation of Palestine, which should be liberated from river to sea"?

Similar categories for ordinary Christians and "Crusaders".

Yes, we should tell our Muslim friends what behaviors we disagree with (blowing us up), and what behaviors we consider appropriate (practicing religion in a way that doesn't kill ourselves or others.) That is the way we treat sikh and hindus and buddhists and even scientologists. It is the way we must treat Muslims as well!

-Ben

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by The Fool
Look, I'll save you the wait, They are all going to say they are goodies, Just like all non muslim countries would....your next idea?

No, that's not true. Read Muslim web sites. Many reject the notion of political equality of the sexes, for one. They're not shy about their position.

I never said "goodie" or "baddie"; those are your words. I said human rights. I'm refering to the doctrine of human rights outlined by the United Nations. This doctrine is not subscribed to universally.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
the arabs have been squabbling amongst each other for hundreds of years. come to think of it, the europeans have been at it for a while, too.
The conflict I'm describing hasn't been going on for hundreds of years. There are other conflicts, such as the Sunnis vs. the Shi'ites or other heresies. But the problem of liberalism strikes much deeper at the basis of Muslim belief.