The world has many wrongs, and many wars, but there's only one wrong Iraq war.
At this time, allow me to take this opportunity to reiterate, with reinvigorated emphasis, the fact that the Iraq war was wrong.
posted by iraqwarwrong @ 4:52 PM
Intro/Declaration
About I (The Proprietor).
[II]
11.09.2001
My blogparents
My Metrics
On Manichaeanism.
Parity?
Instaputzilanche
Terminology: Iraq War,
Runup-to,
terror,
patriotism/dissent,
swiftvet,
Reputzi dhingers,
theodacy,
Lohanim,
mendacy/mendaciology,
September 12th Reputzis
Metaphors: Hologram,
Burrito,
Laundromat,
hackysack,
zoo,
Walkman,
deterent
SODA (Squishing Of Dissent Again): Yglesiases's site,
Linda Ronstat,
Google blackball,
syrup,
Broken i.e. Glassy Night,
Blogger,
bookstore,
election call,
Sorry Everybody people,
Joneoconh,
Koufax awards
Letters: Powerline dhingers,
LIttle Green Football dhinger,
Den Beste(worst if you ask me),
Minerva L. Gunderson,
Alex D.,
Druge,
Joneoconh,
NRO assistant editor,
The Nation web editor,
College Newspaper,
Rush Limaugh,
Professor Juan Cole,
Donald Luskin,
Krugman,
Dowd,
Professor Cole on Algeria/filibusters,
Allan Colmes,
Stine
Fallout (a Series):
Part I,
Part II,
Part III,
Part IV,
Part V,
Part VI.
Book Report: My War: Killing Time In Iraq: Part 1,
2
Movie Reviews: The Wicker Man,
Some Kind Of Wonderful,
That Touch Of Mink,
Rosemary's Baby,
Straw Dogs,
River's Edge,
Igby Goes Down,
Dirty Harry,
Lawrence of Arabia,
The Apartment,
Ferris Bueller's Day Off,
Star Wars 3,
The Message
Brain Twisters: 1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9
Misc.: Uranium heist,
Brock O'Bannon,
Arab State,
premption,
Arab War Powers,
Sorry Photo,
2,
Leiter found,
Leiter 2 (Joey Lawrence),
Vader = Smits?,
Leiter 3: Original Leiter Reports 1,
Leiter 4: Leiter 1, Instaputzi 0,
Leiter 5: No lifes,
Leiter 6: Leg work,
Iraq Peace,
Leiter 7: What Bush fells,
Leiter 8: Brian's Pick's,
Murtaugh,
Serbia Compromise,
Story of the calculus girl,
Venn's diagram,
Indians,
make it stop
Argument Strategies: cost,
lies,
distracted,
counting,
feel safer,
other bad men,
sans France,
Just War,
wrong war AND time
[& place!],
contained,
progressive principles over party,
Of Choice,
need allies,
before 9/11,
plan,
sunk costs,
not Best Possible Foreign Policy Path,
didn't think,
illlegal,
not constitutionally required,
rushed,
quagmire,
NGOs,
dropped the ball,
rushed the vote,
if someone tries to kill someone in Iraq later that makes The Iraq War was wrong,
brink,
cherrypicking.
My Tips for doing your part to name the wrong.
The Elements of MY Style
A post I thought I never have to write
My Blogroll Policy
[pt. 2]
My Comments Policy
The old blog
My other (santyre) blog
WONDER QUIZ
Fees for reading
Last TIDANF
Last Post.
Jeff Alworth
Bad People Wrong About Iraq War Being Right
Ace (of, Spades)
17 Comments:
Hiya moron! How's it going over here in the land of the left? Having fun using those little catch phrases and buzzwords you're so fond of? You haven't commented lately on IMAO. I'm sorry if I scared you off, but I simply have no tolerance for stupid people and what they say. You should really go back and see how fond of you we are there.
I forgot to mention; we are still waitning for an answer in defense of your wonderfully intellectually created opinions. You said this post that you would like to reiterate, the fact that the war in Iraq is wrong. This entails that you intend to rephrase your arguments. As usual, you do not appear to have any. Just wondering...
Hi King Steve, thanks for your comments. The problem is that you're still stuck thinking it was right, this is really the source of our discrepancy when you get right down to it. It's a difficult matter to resolve unless/until you see come around to the right side (right as in correct) but I'm can be patient. It's a journey, keep searching. Good luck,
My Gawd you are an idiot. I do think that the war in Iraq was completely right and millions of Iraquis would agree with me. Is there somehting wrong with your brain? Or is this all just some big joke and you're just trying to get my goat? As this is your blog it should be up to you to persuade me to change my ways of thinking. I ask you, no I DARE you, to give me an argument in favor of the following statement; "The war in Iraq is wrong." Can't think of any? Yea that's what I thought; you were no doubt brainwashed early by both your parents and the public school you went to. Please, I beg of you; tell me something that might possibly, just maybe influence me to agree with your position on the war in Iraq.
Ah King Steven I see the problem (my fault really). I was commenting on two (2) Frank J.'s website's Comment's thread's, not 1 (one). There was thread #1 (with you) and thread #2 (not seen, by you). The conversation carried to thread #2 nad (somewhat lazy, forgot) I discontinued, precipitating in thread #1. But, I forgot about you and unfinished answers to your (astute) questions! Really, not fair. My blame.
So In summery, to point you to further redressment of your request, please go here to this (OTHER) thread, wherein I answered your questions (and all) others, to better ability, Just, you did not see. it. (For exapmle post at 3:19 p.m. of this day, please read for your enjoyment enlightment..) Many (again) apologies,
I went there already and I found no real reasons fro me to change my mind as to the subject in question.
"no WMD found which means (proves) WMD were never there at any time. (WMD heavy to move)" Wrong dumbass; a huge amount of anthrax was found as well as a good deal of Sarin gas. And it's not as though they had no way of delivering it; the Sarin was found in un-fired artillery shells.
"We should never havea gone in in first place." Once again why?
"Saddam very bad man but no Operational involvement in 9/11 (flimsy loose ties at best.) If we had to fight everyone who knew about and funded those involved in 9/11 and larger A'l Qa'i'da network, we may have to kill dozens if not hundreds of Muslims (ARabs) peoples" I have no problem with killing that many. In fact it would probably be necesary to kill a good deal more. Do you believe that killing people who would thouroughly enjoy killing you a BAD thing?
"unilateral is bad (worse) then Multilateral (better.). "coalition" is deeply deceptive unilateral concept." WHY, IDIOT?!?!?!?
'no French (Francais in French) Army (Armee) involvement. (How can U.S. fight war against someone without (sans) France, makes no sense hestorically)!" PLease learn how to spell my friend. Why does it not make any sense? The French are perhaps the whiniest weakest and most useles people on Earth. Besides; how in hell would it make sense "Hestorically"? The French got their asses kicked in TWO wars and had to be rescued like the bunch of damsels in ditress that they are. Both times the bulk of the effort was contributed by the U.S. And yet the French, to this date, are bitter about the fact that they were bailed out by a bunch of tough-ass "colonials". They often say such things as they appreciated the British and the Canadians more. Bunch of fucking dickheads! I am from Canada and I can tell you we didn't do shit. Oh we did what we could but we didn't do shit.
"no UN endorsement. (Kofi Anna,n man of peace, criticized us publically in front of the whole world! I don't feel good about this)" I'm sorry to tell you this but the U.N. has long outlived it's usefulness to the nation that pioneered it. Why should the States pay any attention to an entity that seems to be wholly against them?
I could deal with the rest of your, uh... arguments, but I have grown impatient. I think I'll go shoot at my Micheal Moore targets. Oh yea that's right; youlike his fat fucktard ass to don't you?
My comments forthwrith below (briefly),
anthrax: show me anthrax found. All anthrax (insidentally) was from right-Wing lunatic against Daschle (a Democrat). I can give articles if you want.
sarin: those shells are OLD (can you say "left over")? where are the Stockpiles
killing Arab/Muslims being o.k.: I am opposed to genocide
French whiny/weak: Yes but French Army has GUNS (that should please you right wing Second amendment person) for compensation. We still need French'es help (this is what Multilaterallism all about - sorry concept so difficult)
UN: Because it's about PEACE (in our time)
Michael Moore: thanks for reminding me, I'm want to go catch his movie (no spare cash at the moment).
I'm glad I was able to address your quesitons, Come babck enytime,
Hi. Rightwingduck here.
Nice site. good job. Bad logic though.
But, since in the liberal world, effort and not results are what counts. congrats!
Hey. Why is the UN blessing so vital.
Were they hoping to turn it into a brothel like they did in Bosnia? Can't get enough of those child prostitutes?
Maybe they can reinstitute the bribes they were getting for the oil-for-food program.
Also, let us not forget the brave way they got the hell out of dodge when their hotel was bombed in Baghdad.
Oh, and the way they have turned their head and pretended to not hear or see anything during this whole Sudan Genocide (don't worry, they're dark skinned and Christian. You won't miss them much) with tens of thousands driven from their home and thousands murdered.
Not that it's new territory for the UN. Afterall, with the mass graves unearthed, the people tortured under Saddam (not just standing naked), and the gassing of his own people, turning away is second nature.
Yes, I agree. The United Nations should be brought in.
They can implement their oil-for-food/brothel/turn the other way policies. So don't stress out. Trust the UN. Find a hobby and grab a latte.
Rightwingduck, briefly (time short- commute!):
UN blessing is for Multilateralism (can give links if you want). It also adds something called Legitamacy so taht the Iraqi people can be assured we not there only to take their oil and skedaddle, the Iraqi people see "UN" and think "Legitamate". Also it assures France we not there for Mendacious and Greedy reasons, (France human right nation, nation of tolerance/diplomacy etc with hundreds years long histroy).
Some of what you say may be true about UN, I would be open to links (though i discount news if from right wing sources like Moonie Times, WAll street journal etc) but two wrong's don't make a right.
That's not democracy!
Cordially,
Just read that they found sarin loaded into two rockets. As for the 'stockpiles' I'd like to let you into two little military facts.
First, it's called "Weapons of MASSIVE Destruction" for a reason. You don't need a stockpile, unless you're looking at destroying half the world like the USA & USSR were during the MAD period.
Two, Saddam had plenty of time to know that we were coming. So he moved, hid, and buried the hot stuff. Maybe he destroyed some of it, but whatever.
Bush only played the WMD card because analysis told him that the Europeans don't care about genocide and human rights, they only care when they're threatened.
Dispensing with tiresome points quickly:
-sarin was OLD (left-over). Give me a break! You saying we invaded Iraq to confiscate LEFT-OVER sarin?? make no snese
-sorry it's "MASS" not "MASSIVE", which totally demolishes your point from the get-go
-Show me your proof that Saddam hid stuff. how COULD he if we had every inch of Iraq covered with satellites. Besides, obviously Dick Cheney would be shouting it from the rooftops. Rummy said "we knew exactly where they were" well????
-Europeans not threatend. They threatened MORE not less with SAddam (stability) out of power.
Sorry but. You don't have any (neither) of your legs to stand on!
iraqwarwrongwrong
How? You can't just say I'm "wrong" with no argument. there's no substance in that! LOL
Freedom is a good thing. Being free is right. Care to argue that point?
The Iragi people are now free. The Iraqi people enjoy a good thing now. They are now in a free society which is more right than the fascist state they lived in.
They reason they are free is the Irag War which deposed Saddam, a bad man. Removing bad is good, removing wrong is right.
Ergo (latin for therefore)
The Iraqi war is/was right. Not wrong.
"Freedom"? "Freedom" to have their (THEIR OWN) dictator ousted by us in a Wrong war is what you call freedom?
No dictator sounds pretty good to me.
Their 'elections' consisted of a yes or no vote for Saddam. Not with someone actively campaigning against him. Who could speak against him and live? Not his son-in-law that's for sure. But I guess you'll say he was just misunderstood or they WANTED to be gassed and tortured by him since they 'elected' him and all. Right?
Well they sure didn't elect allawi!
Post a Comment
<< Home