Bush military records 'destroyed'

demon · 9th July 2004, 11:23 PM

And the dog ate my homework:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3880141.stm

Chaos · 10th July 2004, 12:38 AM

If you ask me, there are a few "accidents" too many in this administration.

Cain · 10th July 2004, 01:40 AM

F*cking foreigners.

You guys are too damn cynical. See, that's what this administration boldly stands up against -- cynicism. Bush is hopeful for a democratic Iraq, a safe Iraq, a free Iraq. Bush is optimistic for a thriving domestic economy, keeping the homeland safe and free. Bush is for America -- no apologies.

It's like they say: a conservative wakes up thinking of each day as the Fourth of July; Liberals wake up each day (in the late afternoon) thinking it's April 15th.

demon · 10th July 2004, 02:19 AM

Cain:
"...that's what this administration boldly stands up against -- cynicism. Bush is hopeful for a democratic Iraq, a safe Iraq, a free Iraq..."

Too right, that`s why he spent all those billions of dollars, just to give them democracy...he`s good like that. Thing is, it's just a bit too much like Saddam's democracy there at the moment.
But, here's a question: when is the US army going to invade again to bring "freedom" to the people of Iraq?

Seems the Philippines are pulling their 51 troops out of the "mother of all coalitions" as Rumsfeld would say...drip, drip, drip...

Chad Noles · 10th July 2004, 05:46 AM

originally posted by demon:

Quote:

But, here's a question: when is the US army going to invade again to bring "freedom" to the people of Iraq?

When is the US Army going to invade again to bring "freedom" to the people of America?

Ziggurat · 10th July 2004, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by demon
Too right, that`s why he spent all those billions of dollars, just to give them democracy...he`s good like that. Thing is, it's just a bit too much like Saddam's democracy there at the moment.

Yeah, what with all those people getting killed for expressing different political viewpoints. And the ethnic cleansing campaigns against Kurdish civilians. And the draining of the marshes in the south. And the fact that hospitals are all run as "self-funding" institutions, teachers were paid a few dollars a month. And the amputations and mutilations used as punishment...

Oh wait, Iraq DOES have a free press now, there aren't any ethnic cleansing campaigns, the marshes are being reflooded, hospitals are actually free to civilians for the first time in decades, teachers are paid living wages, and amputees are getting prosthetic limbs rather than people losing real ones.

I'm confused... how is it still like Saddam's "democracy"? Well, they're still muslims, does that count for you?

You're a worm, demon.

Mel · 10th July 2004, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by demon
And the dog ate my homework:

Obviously, the dog got hungry when he couldn't find a single person willing to come forward to back up Bush's story.

Bush's M.O. for dealing with his past:

1) Hide records in daddy's library

2) Seal records by legal manuever

3) When choice 1 or 2 fail, LOSE those suckers.

Let's all sing the 'O, O, O, Obstruction of Justice' song.

10th July 2004, 07:57 AM

Seems like some people like to read headlines and not the whole article:

Quote:

It added that in 1996 and 1997 the microfilm records of "numerous service members" from the first quarter of 1969 and the third quarter of 1972 were ruined - Mr Bush's among them.

So did Bush build a time machine to go and destroy those records 3 years before he became president?

wjousts · 10th July 2004, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ziggurat
hospitals are actually free to civilians for the first time in decades

Shame that isn't the case here.

Bjorn · 10th July 2004, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ssibal
So did Bush build a time machine to go and destroy those records 3 years before he became president?

I wonder what Bush was up to in 1996/1997?

Cleon · 10th July 2004, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ziggurat
Oh wait, Iraq DOES have a free press now,

The US has shut down a few newspapers since invading Iraq. That's not "free."

Quote:

hospitals are actually free to civilians for the first time in decades,

Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care.

Quote:

I'm confused... how is it still like Saddam's "democracy"? Well, they're still muslims, does that count for you?

Do you actually know of anyone that called Saddam's regime a democracy? I sure as hell don't, and I even know a few Baathists.

Mycroft · 10th July 2004, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cleon
Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care.

Yeah, I forgot about that. Those guys who had limbs chopped off by Saddam were not charged anything for this service.

Good call, Cleon. We always need to be reminded of the bright side of things.

demon · 10th July 2004, 02:38 PM

Mel:
"Obviously, the dog got hungry when he couldn't find a single person willing to come forward to back up Bush's story."

Yep, and he found a zippo lighter too. Bad dog

CapelDodger · 10th July 2004, 03:02 PM

from ssibal:

Quote:

So did Bush build a time machine to go and destroy those records 3 years before he became president?

from Bjorn:

Quote:

I wonder what Bush was up to in 1996/1997?

Planning a run for president, perhaps? Maybe getting a team together - or having one come to him - that would spot this slight problem from the Vietnam era? Who knows?

demon · 10th July 2004, 03:35 PM

Quote:
"'Inadvertent destruction'
The microfilm containing the records apparently disintegrated as staff were trying to preserve it from decay."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It`s the way they tell`m...wonder why I`m not laughing though.

10th July 2004, 04:22 PM

For those implying that Bush was somehow involved in the destruction of these records, how about providing some evidence.

Bjorn · 10th July 2004, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Planning a run for president, perhaps? Maybe getting a team together - or having one come to him - that would spot this slight problem from the Vietnam era? Who knows?

Oh my Ed - I would never have thought of that!

Grammatron · 10th July 2004, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CapelDodger
from ssibal:
from Bjorn:Planning a run for president, perhaps? Maybe getting a team together - or having one come to him - that would spot this slight problem from the Vietnam era? Who knows?

You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much?

corplinx · 10th July 2004, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft

Yeah, I forgot about that. Those guys who had limbs chopped off by Saddam were not charged anything for this service.

Good call, Cleon. We always need to be reminded of the bright side of things.

Obivously he meant Sunni muslims and by healthcare he didnt mean western quality. You assume way too much.

Regnad Kcin · 10th July 2004, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grammatron
You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much?

Did Mr. Clinton enjoy eating desserts? No doubt. Oh, wait, you mean a deserter from the military. Right. Except for one small problem...

Dorian Gray · 10th July 2004, 10:12 PM

YEAH, Grammatron, the small problem that Clinton was never IN the military. But guess who was, and who is a deserter?

And Cain, there's a difference between optimism and what you do, which is stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes tight and go 'loo loo loo loo loo loo' to keep out all the pesky reality.

Grammatron · 11th July 2004, 02:47 AM

When I wrote deserter I mean draft dodger. Which if you think about it not really that different.

As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that.

Kerberos · 11th July 2004, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grammatron
When I wrote deserter I mean draft dodger. Which if you think about it not really that different.

As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that.

You're only a deserter if you're charged with it? Following the same logic, does that mean that Saddam Hussein wasn't a mass murderer, untill this year?

Grammatron · 11th July 2004, 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kerberos

You're only a deserter if you're charged with it? Following the same logic, does that mean that Saddam Hussein wasn't a mass murderer, untill this year?

Nice logic leap, but not quite.

If no one in the armed forces has called him a deserter and charged him with that, how does that make him one?

Kerberos · 11th July 2004, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grammatron
When I wrote deserter I mean draft dodger. Which if you think about it not really that different.

As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that.

You're only a deserter if you're charged with it? Following the same logic, does that mean that Saddam Hussein wasn't a mass murderer, untill this year?

CapelDodger · 11th July 2004, 03:50 AM

from Grammatron:

Quote:

If no one in the armed forces has called him a deserter and charged him with that, how does that make him one?

His actions determine whether he was a deserter. The fact that no-one in the military has accused their commander-in-chief of desertion doesn't tell us much. Just what his actions were is going to be difficult to determine, what with the records getting trashed and all.

What is clear is that Clinton opposed the war, and didn't go, while Bush (and Cheney) didn't oppose the war ... and didn't go. Make of that what you will.

CapelDodger · 11th July 2004, 03:50 AM

edited to remove double post

Ziggurat · 11th July 2004, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cleon

The US has shut down a few newspapers since invading Iraq. That's not "free."

Yes, for inciting violence, not for printing opposing points of view. What's your point?

Quote:

Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care.

No they didn't. I'm not sure where you got your information, but I'm getting mine from Iraqi doctors. The health care system under Saddam basically collapsed (beginning actually BEFORE the first gulf war) because Saddam didn't spend money on it. That has finally changed.

Quote:

Do you actually know of anyone that called Saddam's regime a democracy? I sure as hell don't, and I even know a few Baathists.

Read demon's post again, the one I responded to. Note his use of the phrase "Saddam's democracy". I don't care what demon *actually* thinks regarding democracy, but I am going to reuse the term he used when describing Saddam's Iraq. If it's somehow too complicated to understand why I might reuse demon's term when responding to him, well, perhaps you need to start using a blunt keyboard so you don't hurt yourself.

demon · 11th July 2004, 05:37 AM

From Mytharat (weapons inspectors kicked out etc...he should work for Fox News or Anne hasn`t got a Clwyd "Human mincing machines" he LOVES when we kill people, just not when arabs retaliate. Silly, silly racist!")

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mytharat:quote:
No they didn't. I'm not sure where you got your information, but I'm getting mine from Iraqi doctors. The health care system under Saddam basically collapsed (beginning actually BEFORE the first gulf war) because Saddam didn't spend money on it. That has finally changed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mytharat:
Read demon's post again, the one I responded to. Note his use of the phrase "Saddam's democracy". I don't care what demon *actually* thinks regarding democracy, but I am going to reuse the term he used when describing Saddam's Iraq. If it's somehow too complicated to understand why I might reuse demon's term when responding to him, well, perhaps you need to start using a blunt keyboard so you don't hurt yourself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I`ll call you on this...how many Iraqi`s do you know? I know many...here me? MANY! shock horror too, I know Palestinians too...I actually talk to them, you warmongering jerk. Engage the people you are talking about before you speak about them you despicable armchair bomber. I dare you to come back here after talking to an Iraqi...hearing one of the Chalbi "yes men" doesn`t count, get that? Idiot.

t

Bjorn · 11th July 2004, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grammatron
You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much?

"Clinton did too" is soo old now ....

Ziggurat · 11th July 2004, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by demon

I`ll call you on this...how many Iraqi`s do you know? I know many...here me? MANY!

That's nice for you. Can I meet them?

Tell you what, I'll give you a source that you can check out yourself, so you don't even have to trust me.
http://iraqataglance.blogspot.com/
Look up the July 4th post. Example quotes:
"During the ex-regime, the hospitals in Iraq, according to a decision from the ‘wise’ government were self-funded, i.e the poor Iraqi who’s downtrodden and plunged into poverty had to pay very high expenses to get the medicine or to be treated in the hospitals..."

"After the liberation, the new Ministry of Health decided to cancel the self-funded system in the hospitals making all the treatments and medicine for free, thousands of families are now being treated at no cost, they are so glad to get the free treatment."

"I feel so pleased when sometimes I sit in the pharmacy room there in Basra with my colleague when someone comes and gets his medicine then says ‘how much?’.. And we reply ‘Ibbalash’! ( free)."

Now, do you have a source to back up your contention, or are you just talking out your backside again?

Quote:

shock horror too, I know Palestinians too...I actually talk to them, you warmongering jerk.

Shock and horror, I wasn't talking about Palestinians. Get bent.

Quote:

Engage the people you are talking about before you speak about them you despicable armchair bomber. I dare you to come back here after talking to an Iraqi...hearing one of the Chalbi "yes men" doesn`t count, get that? Idiot.

t

What, am I supposed to be scared by that? Am I supposed to feel cowed by some imagined moral superiority on your part? How about you wander through http://iraqataglance.blogspot.com/ or http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/ and tell me why you so disdain the opinions of those Iraqis. I guess maybe they don't count as "real" Iraqis if they are glad to have freedom. But then, you never really cared about their freedom at all.

Edit to correct "aren't" to "are"

demon · 11th July 2004, 07:59 AM

If you actually want to talk to an Iraqi...face to face...not through a link or by a cruise missile...ask them about sanctions. I dare you.

Why don`t you actually ask some real Iraqis for a change instead of mouthing off here? Do you even know what you are talking about?
Give you a hint...it`s people, human beings.

Ziggurat · 11th July 2004, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by demon
If you actually want to talk to an Iraqi...face to face...not through a link or by a cruise missile...ask them about sanctions. I dare you.

I'm not sure what you think your point is, but the sanctions support invading Iraq. The sanctions were devastating indeed to innocent Iraqis, but they could not be safely lifted while Saddam stayed in power (one of the primary arguments against the war was that it wasn't needed because sanctions kept Saddam in check). The best way to get rid of sanctions is to get rid of Saddam. Which is what we did.

Quote:

Why don`t you actually ask some real Iraqis for a change instead of mouthing off here? Do you even know what you are talking about?
Give you a hint...it`s people, human beings.

I note that you have no support for your earlier factual contentions, and you have no response to the sources I posted. And yes, it is indeed about human beings. But you haven't ever actually advocated a course of action that would produce real, lasting benefit for the people you seem to want me to think you support.

So again, get bent.

demon · 11th July 2004, 01:50 PM

"I note that you have no support for your earlier factual contentions, and you have no response to the sources I posted. And yes, it is indeed about human beings. But you haven't ever actually advocated a course of action that would produce real, lasting benefit for the people you seem to want me to think you support."
More than a decade of sanctions are the way to go eh?

To think there was no alternative to war is a fallacy and a misrepresentation of the anti-war position.

Takes one hell of a warmonger to persist that we were right to go to war in the light of new revelations every day now...oh yes, human rights violations. Have you ANY idea about Iraqi history? Do you know ANYTHING about it?

I mean that seriously, have you enaged any? Would you like too? Ask a resident of Fallugha about "Operation Iraqi Freedom"...telling them it`s for their own good just won`t cut it.

Grammatron · 11th July 2004, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bjorn
"Clinton did too" is soo old now ....

Yes and that's not the point. You are welcome to re-read the posts and my response to them to get the point.

Ziggurat · 11th July 2004, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by demon

To think there was no alternative to war is a fallacy and a misrepresentation of the anti-war position.

It's not about whether or not there were alternatives, it's about whether or not the alternatives were better. And nothing you have ever presented indicates that there was a better alternative. Keeping the sanctions was an alternative (were you for that alternative, in light of how, as you yourself point out, it's toll was terrible for Iraqis?). Lifting sanctions (which might allow Saddam's weapons programs to restart) was also an alternative. Got any more alternatives?

Oh, and you STILL haven't been able to address any of my factual contentions regarding the state of Iraqi health care, or in fact anything else I said in my earlier post regarding the difference between Saddam's Iraq and the current situation. All you can do is resort to "no true Scotsman" logic. But I'm not going to play that game. So, once again, bite me.

Ziggurat · 11th July 2004, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by demon

To think there was no alternative to war is a fallacy and a misrepresentation of the anti-war position.

It's not about whether or not there were alternatives, it's about whether or not the alternatives were better. And nothing you have ever presented indicates that there was a better alternative. Keeping the sanctions was an alternative (were you for that alternative, in light of how, as you yourself point out, it's toll was terrible for Iraqis?). Lifting sanctions (which might allow Saddam's weapons programs to restart) was also an alternative. Got any more alternatives?

Oh, and you STILL haven't been able to address any of my factual contentions regarding the state of Iraqi health care, or in fact anything else I said in my earlier post regarding the difference between Saddam's Iraq and the current situation. All you can do is resort to "no true Scotsman" logic. It's getting old.

Bjorn · 11th July 2004, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grammatron
Yes and that's not the point. You are welcome to re-read the posts and my response to them to get the point.

You posted this:

Quote:

You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much?

I can see no earlier mentioning of Clinton in this thread, which was about Dubya's military records. What was your point?

On another note, you have posted these, in the order I quote them:

- at that time a president (Clinton) was in office who was a deserter

- As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that

- If no one in the armed forces has called him (Bush) a deserter and charged him with that, how does that make him one?

Do we have different standards here - Clinton was a deserter, Bush was not, because he was never charged with that?

Mel · 11th July 2004, 05:45 PM

Clinton was a deserter???

The last I heard, he wasn't even IN the service..... like a couple of guys in the Bush admin.

demon · 11th July 2004, 06:06 PM

Mytharat:
"It's not about whether or not there were alternatives, it's about whether or not the alternatives were better. And nothing you have ever presented indicates that there was a better alternative. Keeping the sanctions was an alternative (were you for that alternative, in light of how, as you yourself point out, it's toll was terrible for Iraqis?). Lifting sanctions (which might allow Saddam's weapons programs to restart) was also an alternative. Got any more alternatives?

Oh, and you STILL haven't been able to address any of my factual contentions regarding the state of Iraqi health care, or in fact anything else I said in my earlier post regarding the difference between Saddam's Iraq and the current situation. All you can do is resort to "no true Scotsman" logic. It's getting old."

You haven`t seen my posts then.
You are obviously ignorant about Iraq befor Fox News told you about it...was doing rather well until FoxNews recruited scum like you around a neocon agenda planned years ago...I think that`s the reason you get so uppity these days...you like the aggression, you just got left out with the say so angle LOL

Thats always been the problem with self important warmongers...they think the war is being fought for their own good...can you say "dickhead" on here without getting banned? LOL

9th July 2004, 11:23 PM	#1
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	Bush military records 'destroyed' And the dog ate my homework: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3880141.stm
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

10th July 2004, 12:38 AM	#2
Chaos TAM Chocolate Dispenser Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Heart of Old Europe Posts: 9,778	If you ask me, there are a few "accidents" too many in this administration.
	__________________ Grand Master, Knights of the Question Mark Illusion: too good to be true - Reality: too true to be good Authors build castles in the sky, readers live in them and publishers collect the rent. - Maxim Gorki Folks enjoy a witch-hunt as long as they are on the blunt end of the pitchfork. - Suezoled You can't use logic to talk a man out of a position that he didn't use logic to get himself into - passed down by Nyarlathotep Kids these days are better than their parents since they constitute the newest edition, the beta version of our societies - Cleopatra YouÂ´ll have to accept the fact that some people are just plain nuts. - Paul C. Anagnostopolous

10th July 2004, 01:40 AM	#3
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,936	F*cking foreigners. You guys are too damn cynical. See, that's what this administration boldly stands up against -- cynicism. Bush is hopeful for a democratic Iraq, a safe Iraq, a free Iraq. Bush is optimistic for a thriving domestic economy, keeping the homeland safe and free. Bush is for America -- no apologies. It's like they say: a conservative wakes up thinking of each day as the Fourth of July; Liberals wake up each day (in the late afternoon) thinking it's April 15th.
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

10th July 2004, 02:19 AM	#4
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	Cain: "...that's what this administration boldly stands up against -- cynicism. Bush is hopeful for a democratic Iraq, a safe Iraq, a free Iraq..." Too right, that`s why he spent all those billions of dollars, just to give them democracy...he`s good like that. Thing is, it's just a bit too much like Saddam's democracy there at the moment. But, here's a question: when is the US army going to invade again to bring "freedom" to the people of Iraq? Seems the Philippines are pulling their 51 troops out of the "mother of all coalitions" as Rumsfeld would say...drip, drip, drip...
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

10th July 2004, 05:46 AM	#5
Chad Noles Muse Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 534	originally posted by demon: Quote: But, here's a question: when is the US army going to invade again to bring "freedom" to the people of Iraq? When is the US Army going to invade again to bring "freedom" to the people of America?
Chad Noles Muse Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 534	__________________ Breathe,breathe from the bag of visions-South Park

10th July 2004, 05:47 AM	#6
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,193	Quote: Originally posted by demon Too right, that`s why he spent all those billions of dollars, just to give them democracy...he`s good like that. Thing is, it's just a bit too much like Saddam's democracy there at the moment. Yeah, what with all those people getting killed for expressing different political viewpoints. And the ethnic cleansing campaigns against Kurdish civilians. And the draining of the marshes in the south. And the fact that hospitals are all run as "self-funding" institutions, teachers were paid a few dollars a month. And the amputations and mutilations used as punishment... Oh wait, Iraq DOES have a free press now, there aren't any ethnic cleansing campaigns, the marshes are being reflooded, hospitals are actually free to civilians for the first time in decades, teachers are paid living wages, and amputees are getting prosthetic limbs rather than people losing real ones. I'm confused... how is it still like Saddam's "democracy"? Well, they're still muslims, does that count for you? You're a worm, demon.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

10th July 2004, 06:58 AM	#7
Mel Muse Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 552	Re: Bush military records 'destroyed' Quote: Originally posted by demon And the dog ate my homework: Obviously, the dog got hungry when he couldn't find a single person willing to come forward to back up Bush's story. Bush's M.O. for dealing with his past: 1) Hide records in daddy's library 2) Seal records by legal manuever 3) When choice 1 or 2 fail, LOSE those suckers. Let's all sing the 'O, O, O, Obstruction of Justice' song.
Mel Muse Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 552	__________________ "It's a magical world, Hobbes, ol' buddy... Let's go exploring!" -- Calvin's final words

10th July 2004, 07:57 AM	#8
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a	Seems like some people like to read headlines and not the whole article: Quote: It added that in 1996 and 1997 the microfilm records of "numerous service members" from the first quarter of 1969 and the third quarter of 1972 were ruined - Mr Bush's among them. So did Bush build a time machine to go and destroy those records 3 years before he became president?
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a

10th July 2004, 09:22 AM	#9
wjousts Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 324	Quote: Originally posted by Ziggurat hospitals are actually free to civilians for the first time in decades Shame that isn't the case here.
wjousts Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 324	__________________ "Where do we go to get our good name back? .... We go where we always go when a dramatic change is needed. We go to the ballot box" - Al Gore 5/26/04

10th July 2004, 09:56 AM	#10
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Quote: Originally posted by ssibal So did Bush build a time machine to go and destroy those records 3 years before he became president? I wonder what Bush was up to in 1996/1997?
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

10th July 2004, 10:26 AM	#11
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,518	Quote: Originally posted by Ziggurat Oh wait, Iraq DOES have a free press now, The US has shut down a few newspapers since invading Iraq. That's not "free." Quote: hospitals are actually free to civilians for the first time in decades, Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care. Quote: I'm confused... how is it still like Saddam's "democracy"? Well, they're still muslims, does that count for you? Do you actually know of anyone that called Saddam's regime a democracy? I sure as hell don't, and I even know a few Baathists.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

10th July 2004, 11:34 AM	#12
Mycroft High Priest of Ed Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 16,105	Quote: Originally posted by Cleon Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care. Yeah, I forgot about that. Those guys who had limbs chopped off by Saddam were not charged anything for this service. Good call, Cleon. We always need to be reminded of the bright side of things.
	__________________ Surely Israel is the party to blame? -a_unique_person I do have Mycroft on ignore, he is pretty much the Matt Giwer of your side. -a_unique_person Palestinian Refugees

10th July 2004, 02:38 PM	#13
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	Mel: "Obviously, the dog got hungry when he couldn't find a single person willing to come forward to back up Bush's story." Yep, and he found a zippo lighter too. Bad dog
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

10th July 2004, 03:02 PM	#14
CapelDodger Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Cardiff, South Wales Posts: 16,742	from ssibal: Quote: So did Bush build a time machine to go and destroy those records 3 years before he became president? from Bjorn: Quote: I wonder what Bush was up to in 1996/1997? Planning a run for president, perhaps? Maybe getting a team together - or having one come to him - that would spot this slight problem from the Vietnam era? Who knows?
	__________________ It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898) God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150

10th July 2004, 03:35 PM	#15
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	Quote: "'Inadvertent destruction' The microfilm containing the records apparently disintegrated as staff were trying to preserve it from decay." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ It`s the way they tell`m...wonder why I`m not laughing though.
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

10th July 2004, 04:22 PM	#16
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a	For those implying that Bush was somehow involved in the destruction of these records, how about providing some evidence.
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a

10th July 2004, 06:06 PM	#17
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Quote: Originally posted by CapelDodger Planning a run for president, perhaps? Maybe getting a team together - or having one come to him - that would spot this slight problem from the Vietnam era? Who knows? Oh my Ed - I would never have thought of that!
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

10th July 2004, 08:11 PM	#18
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	Quote: Originally posted by CapelDodger from ssibal: from Bjorn:Planning a run for president, perhaps? Maybe getting a team together - or having one come to him - that would spot this slight problem from the Vietnam era? Who knows? You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much?
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	__________________ Private Information, Do not read this!

10th July 2004, 08:55 PM	#19
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	Quote: Originally posted by Mycroft Yeah, I forgot about that. Those guys who had limbs chopped off by Saddam were not charged anything for this service. Good call, Cleon. We always need to be reminded of the bright side of things. Obivously he meant Sunni muslims and by healthcare he didnt mean western quality. You assume way too much.
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	__________________ In the tradition of "Stop Silvia!" Stop Hal Bidlack: http://skepticalcommunity.com/forums...hp?f=1&t=28671

10th July 2004, 09:26 PM	#20
Regnad Kcin Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The ol' Same place Posts: 6,212	Quote: Originally posted by Grammatron You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much? Did Mr. Clinton enjoy eating desserts? No doubt. Oh, wait, you mean a deserter from the military. Right. Except for one small problem...
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

10th July 2004, 10:12 PM	#21
Dorian Gray Hypocrisy Detector Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Dayton, Ohio Posts: 20,195	YEAH, Grammatron, the small problem that Clinton was never IN the military. But guess who was, and who is a deserter? And Cain, there's a difference between optimism and what you do, which is stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes tight and go 'loo loo loo loo loo loo' to keep out all the pesky reality.
	__________________ "A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka "Rational arguments don't work on religious people. If they did, there wouldn't be any religious people." - House Additionally to Carlin being funnier than Izzard, I think Dorian is funnier than the Marquis. - Ron Tomkins

11th July 2004, 02:47 AM	#22
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	When I wrote deserter I mean draft dodger. Which if you think about it not really that different. As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that.
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	__________________ Private Information, Do not read this!

11th July 2004, 02:57 AM	#23
Kerberos Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 4,608	Quote: Originally posted by Grammatron When I wrote deserter I mean draft dodger. Which if you think about it not really that different. As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that. You're only a deserter if you're charged with it? Following the same logic, does that mean that Saddam Hussein wasn't a mass murderer, untill this year?
Kerberos Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 4,608	__________________ Bible code: A method for obtaining hidden messages from texts that contains none, for the purpose of predicting events after they happen. "When the facts are on you side, but the law is against you, stress the facts. When the law is on your side, but the facts are against you stress the law. When both the facts and the law is against you, pound the table and yell like hell". Laywer maxim

11th July 2004, 03:02 AM	#24
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	Quote: Originally posted by Kerberos You're only a deserter if you're charged with it? Following the same logic, does that mean that Saddam Hussein wasn't a mass murderer, untill this year? Nice logic leap, but not quite. If no one in the armed forces has called him a deserter and charged him with that, how does that make him one?
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	__________________ Private Information, Do not read this!

11th July 2004, 03:12 AM	#25
Kerberos Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 4,608	Quote: Originally posted by Grammatron When I wrote deserter I mean draft dodger. Which if you think about it not really that different. As a side-note, Bush is not a deserter because he was never charged with that. You're only a deserter if you're charged with it? Following the same logic, does that mean that Saddam Hussein wasn't a mass murderer, untill this year?
Kerberos Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 4,608	__________________ Bible code: A method for obtaining hidden messages from texts that contains none, for the purpose of predicting events after they happen. "When the facts are on you side, but the law is against you, stress the facts. When the law is on your side, but the facts are against you stress the law. When both the facts and the law is against you, pound the table and yell like hell". Laywer maxim

11th July 2004, 03:50 AM	#26
CapelDodger Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Cardiff, South Wales Posts: 16,742	from Grammatron: Quote: If no one in the armed forces has called him a deserter and charged him with that, how does that make him one? His actions determine whether he was a deserter. The fact that no-one in the military has accused their commander-in-chief of desertion doesn't tell us much. Just what his actions were is going to be difficult to determine, what with the records getting trashed and all. What is clear is that Clinton opposed the war, and didn't go, while Bush (and Cheney) didn't oppose the war ... and didn't go. Make of that what you will.
	__________________ It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898) God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150

11th July 2004, 04:17 AM	#28
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,193	Quote: Originally posted by Cleon The US has shut down a few newspapers since invading Iraq. That's not "free." Yes, for inciting violence, not for printing opposing points of view. What's your point? Quote: Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care. No they didn't. I'm not sure where you got your information, but I'm getting mine from Iraqi doctors. The health care system under Saddam basically collapsed (beginning actually BEFORE the first gulf war) because Saddam didn't spend money on it. That has finally changed. Quote: *Do you actually know of anyone* that called Saddam's regime a democracy? I sure as hell don't, and I even know a few Baathists.** Read demon's post again, the one I responded to. Note his use of the phrase "Saddam's democracy". I don't care what demon actually thinks regarding democracy, but I am going to reuse the term he used when describing Saddam's Iraq. If it's somehow too complicated to understand why I might reuse demon's term when responding to him, well, perhaps you need to start using a blunt keyboard so you don't hurt yourself.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

11th July 2004, 05:37 AM	#29
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	From Mytharat (weapons inspectors kicked out etc...he should work for Fox News or Anne hasn`t got a Clwyd "Human mincing machines" he LOVES when we kill people, just not when arabs retaliate. Silly, silly racist!") quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, under Saddam, Iraqis had free health care. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mytharat:quote: No they didn't. I'm not sure where you got your information, but I'm getting mine from Iraqi doctors. The health care system under Saddam basically collapsed (beginning actually BEFORE the first gulf war) because Saddam didn't spend money on it. That has finally changed. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mytharat: Read demon's post again, the one I responded to. Note his use of the phrase "Saddam's democracy". I don't care what demon actually thinks regarding democracy, but I am going to reuse the term he used when describing Saddam's Iraq. If it's somehow too complicated to understand why I might reuse demon's term when responding to him, well, perhaps you need to start using a blunt keyboard so you don't hurt yourself. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I`ll call you on this...how many Iraqi`s do you know? I know many...here me? MANY! shock horror too, I know Palestinians too...I actually talk to them, you warmongering jerk. Engage the people you are talking about before you speak about them you despicable armchair bomber. I dare you to come back here after talking to an Iraqi...hearing one of the Chalbi "yes men" doesn`t count, get that? Idiot. t
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

11th July 2004, 07:00 AM	#30
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Quote: Originally posted by Grammatron You might have a point there, but at that time a president was in office who was a deserter and people had no problem with that, so why go through so much? "Clinton did too" is soo old now ....
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

11th July 2004, 07:25 AM	#31
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,193	Quote: Originally posted by demon I`ll call you on this...how many Iraqi`s do you know? I know many...here me? MANY! That's nice for you. Can I meet them? Tell you what, I'll give you a source that you can check out yourself, so you don't even have to trust me. http://iraqataglance.blogspot.com/ Look up the July 4th post. Example quotes: "During the ex-regime, the hospitals in Iraq, according to a decision from the ‘wise’ government were self-funded, i.e the poor Iraqi who’s downtrodden and plunged into poverty had to pay very high expenses to get the medicine or to be treated in the hospitals..." "After the liberation, the new Ministry of Health decided to cancel the self-funded system in the hospitals making all the treatments and medicine for free, thousands of families are now being treated at no cost, they are so glad to get the free treatment." "I feel so pleased when sometimes I sit in the pharmacy room there in Basra with my colleague when someone comes and gets his medicine then says ‘how much?’.. And we reply ‘Ibbalash’! ( free)." Now, do you have a source to back up your contention, or are you just talking out your backside again? Quote: shock horror too, I know Palestinians too...I actually talk to them, you warmongering jerk. Shock and horror, I wasn't talking about Palestinians. Get bent. Quote: Engage the people you are talking about before you speak about them you despicable armchair bomber. I dare you to come back here after talking to an Iraqi...hearing one of the Chalbi "yes men" doesn`t count, get that? Idiot. t What, am I supposed to be scared by that? Am I supposed to feel cowed by some imagined moral superiority on your part? How about you wander through http://iraqataglance.blogspot.com/ or http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/ and tell me why you so disdain the opinions of those Iraqis. I guess maybe they don't count as "real" Iraqis if they are glad to have freedom. But then, you never really cared about their freedom at all. Edit to correct "aren't" to "are"
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

11th July 2004, 07:59 AM	#32
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	If you actually want to talk to an Iraqi...face to face...not through a link or by a cruise missile...ask them about sanctions. I dare you. Why don`t you actually ask some real Iraqis for a change instead of mouthing off here? Do you even know what you are talking about? Give you a hint...it`s people, human beings.
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

11th July 2004, 09:16 AM	#33
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,193	Quote: Originally posted by demon If you actually want to talk to an Iraqi...face to face...not through a link or by a cruise missile...ask them about sanctions. I dare you. I'm not sure what you think your point is, but the sanctions support invading Iraq. The sanctions were devastating indeed to innocent Iraqis, but they could not be safely lifted while Saddam stayed in power (one of the primary arguments against the war was that it wasn't needed because sanctions kept Saddam in check). The best way to get rid of sanctions is to get rid of Saddam. Which is what we did. Quote: Why don`t you actually ask some real Iraqis for a change instead of mouthing off here? Do you even know what you are talking about? Give you a hint...it`s people, human beings. I note that you have no support for your earlier factual contentions, and you have no response to the sources I posted. And yes, it is indeed about human beings. But you haven't ever actually advocated a course of action that would produce real, lasting benefit for the people you seem to want me to think you support. So again, get bent.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

11th July 2004, 01:50 PM	#34
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744	"I note that you have no support for your earlier factual contentions, and you have no response to the sources I posted. And yes, it is indeed about human beings. But you haven't ever actually advocated a course of action that would produce real, lasting benefit for the people you seem to want me to think you support." More than a decade of sanctions are the way to go eh? To think there was no alternative to war is a fallacy and a misrepresentation of the anti-war position. Takes one hell of a warmonger to persist that we were right to go to war in the light of new revelations every day now...oh yes, human rights violations. Have you ANY idea about Iraqi history? Do you know ANYTHING about it? I mean that seriously, have you enaged any? Would you like too? Ask a resident of Fallugha about "Operation Iraqi Freedom"...telling them it`s for their own good just won`t cut it.
demon Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,744

11th July 2004, 03:10 PM	#35
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	Quote: Originally posted by Bjorn "Clinton did too" is soo old now .... Yes and that's not the point. You are welcome to re-read the posts and my response to them to get the point.
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	__________________ Private Information, Do not read this!

11th July 2004, 05:04 PM	#36
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,193	Quote: Originally posted by demon To think there was no alternative to war is a fallacy and a misrepresentation of the anti-war position. It's not about whether or not there were alternatives, it's about whether or not the alternatives were better. And nothing you have ever presented indicates that there was a better alternative. Keeping the sanctions was an alternative (were you for that alternative, in light of how, as you yourself point out, it's toll was terrible for Iraqis?). Lifting sanctions (which might allow Saddam's weapons programs to restart) was also an alternative. Got any more alternatives? Oh, and you STILL haven't been able to address any of my factual contentions regarding the state of Iraqi health care, or in fact anything else I said in my earlier post regarding the difference between Saddam's Iraq and the current situation. All you can do is resort to "no true Scotsman" logic. But I'm not going to play that game. So, once again, bite me.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law