re: So was Sadam's refusal to cooperate with Weapons inspectors

Current Events » in reply to One line says it all.

Scott Evil — 10/5/2004 5:47:55 PM (archived)

combined with his support of suicide bombers in Isreal, his prior use of WMD in Iraq and elsewhere, the systematic rape and murder of his enemies inside of Iraq, his direct attacks on Iraqi dissedents outside of Iraq, his corruption of the oil for food program, and his probable support for terrorist organization throughout the Middle East and the world constitute legitimate reasons?

Some would say yes and some would say no...

So how does John Kerry define "legitimate reasons"?

Hind sight is easy...Don't believe me? Watch Kerry fold as the evidence of Sadam's ties to Al Queda start to flow in fast an ferious in the remaining weeks of the campaign.

Scott Evil

The whole thread (27 posts)

Question on the "Global Test." - Tom Brosz - 10/5/2004 4:05:47 PM
- Now I get it. It's not the French who need to approve. It's the Martians. - Tom Brosz - 10/6/2004 12:07:59 AM
- re: Bush's sending mixed signals was hard work. - Chris Vancil - 10/5/2004 9:19:45 PM
- Sure: poor choice of words - alcaray - 10/5/2004 8:41:49 PM
  - re: Kerry is accusing the US of Commiting a war crime by invading Iraq??? - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 10:14:16 PM
    - No. The question was about future actions, wasn't it? (n/t) - alcaray - 10/5/2004 10:53:03 PM
- re: Question on the "Global Test." - Publius - 10/5/2004 7:48:56 PM
  - re: You want the Truth? I'll give you the Truth. - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 8:00:31 PM
- re: Invading Iraq had nothing to do with your security - Raoul - 10/5/2004 7:09:21 PM
  - re: By your definition, Bin Ladin isn't a threat to the US either. - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 7:54:29 PM
    - "We"? Speak for yourself. - alcaray - 10/5/2004 9:03:32 PM
      - re: Please define what is a threat if Sadam was not a threat... - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 10:12:39 PM
        
        Kim, if he really has nukes is a threat. Iran, if and when... - alcaray - 10/5/2004 10:55:52 PM
  - Yes, it did. (n/t) - ebnelson - 10/5/2004 7:39:45 PM
- One line says it all. - Tony - 10/5/2004 4:58:26 PM
  - Who decides if the "proof" is sufficient? - Tom Brosz - 10/5/2004 6:00:00 PM
    - Since you're fixated on two words let me give you another - Tony - 10/5/2004 6:10:32 PM
      - re: two words - Tom Brosz - 10/5/2004 6:23:30 PM
        
        re: "So, before you go in you have to prove why you did it first?" - alcaray - 10/5/2004 8:46:03 PM
        
        Yes, but Kerry wasn't talking about "Americans" was he? - Tom Brosz - 10/5/2004 11:33:22 PM
        
        you guys are gonna say what you guys are gonna say (n/t) - alcaray - 10/5/2004 11:39:07 PM
        
        No - Tony - 10/5/2004 7:00:32 PM
  - re: So was Sadam's refusal to cooperate with Weapons inspectors - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 5:47:55 PM
- re: This is the beauty of the Kerry doctrine. - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 4:17:13 PM
  - Typical Kerry: All sides of all issues. (n/t) - David F Mayer - 10/5/2004 4:38:36 PM
- Belmont Club - Tom Brosz - 10/5/2004 4:12:15 PM
  - re: Keep Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheny in charge... - Scott Evil - 10/5/2004 4:21:03 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (27 posts)