liberals....

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Dissention and Strand, enough! Time to and make up.

Amen - detante already!!!!!!

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I do like you too, but you calling me liar is utter and complete BS and I will not stand for it - you know me better than that. You have not and cannot supported you accusation despite my begging you to do so.

So walk away if you want. But, you walk away wrong. I have cleared my name from your lies about it.

Again, please show me where I said I was talking about Blix when I made the cat and mouse with the palaces statement and I will gladly call myself a liar. until then, do not call me a liar of this because that is hurtful, wrong, and untrue of you to do so and you know it.

Again, please show me facts that back up what you said about Saddam picking and choosing. You cannot because the chief weapons inspector disagrees and says that is not the case.

I don't walk away wrong, I walk away the same as I was when this thread was started. I pointed out what you said to be untrue and it is. It's nothing personal, but if you want to take it personally, do what you wish.

[Bella Figura]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Well...hope you make it to heaven.

sorry I edited while you commented here's my amended version

no happiness for me, don't keep me doped with religion, sex (well maybe a little of that) and tv...John Lennon again. I want to be fully aware when they chop my head off with a sword ... you gotta love what the Italian said...

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Amen - detante already!!!!!!

Yeah, sure, reply before me so that I look like the asshole.

[CarneVaca]

Come on, guys! Don't make me get medieval on your asses.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

Well there's no swaying here either way. People believe what they want to, blindly or not. I'm going to bow out of this discussion considering I'm starting to insult fellow Ledgies, and that's not the idea, nor my original intention.

What I'm proud of the most is, at least we are all taking a stand on something. And that's better than not voting at all. Those are the worst kind.

As for my comments about Clinton being a sexual deviant. Yes...oral sex with another woman counts. Especially when you are MARRIED. Hello?!

Michael Moore is a business man in the end. He's trying to make a living. Maybe it's not "all" about the money, but in the END he's a guy trying to make a dollar like the rest of us.

And opposing Bush means you are a proponent of Kerry? I don't believe that view is "shockingly narrow." It's logical and realistic! We all know that 3rd party candidates NEVER win. They merely take votes away one from the other. It's always Rep vs. Democrat, and one of them WILL win. So you take the lesser of the two evils and pick one. It's your right and privilege as an American to do so.

PS. Lindsey Buckingham for president!

Ah. Go Cheney yourself.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Ah. Go Cheney yourself.

Second time on this thread that I laughed out loud.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Ah. Go Cheney yourself.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Again, please show me facts that back up what you said about Saddam picking and choosing. You cannot because the chief weapons inspector disagrees and says that is not the case.

I don't walk away wrong, I walk away the same as I was when this thread was started. I pointed out what you said to be untrue and it is. It's nothing personal, but if you want to take it personally, do what you wish.

Here are some articles that go on about how the palaces were initially off limits, but through negotiation and I assert the gathering of troops on the borders, SH allowed them to be inspected. These articles show I was correct in my assertion that in the initial negitiations for inspection, SH did not want to include the palaces as places to be inspected. To me, that means SH was playing cat and mouse with the UN and the inspection process because these palaces were not just homes - they contained other governing aspects. SH knew that and tried to exclude them even though the inspectors wanted to look at them. It means SH was trying to get out of burden of proof set forth by the UN. Yes, he caved, but the initial monkeying around was bad faith by SH. That is all I was trying to say.

http://aljazeerah.info/News%20archiv...002%20News.htm (search for the headline "Inspectors can visit palaces: Iraq" - then read on from there)

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/Southwest...q.un.language/

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/...538848024.html

http://www.detnews.com/2002/nation/0...tion-26380.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/10/12/iraq.palaces/

http://www.intelmessages.org/Message...s_02/2727.html

http://www.why-war.com/news/2002/10/01/iraqandu.html

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...l/iraq/1737283

http://www.drumbeat.mlaterz.net/Sept...%20091702a.htm

There are more - these are just samples.

[Sugar]

Without doing any research whatsoever and relying on my spotty post-pregnancy memory, in a nutshell, it seems to me that after a somewhat long hiatus the UN decided to get inspectors back in to Iraq and that Saddam wasn't allowing the palaces to be searched, yada yada, yada, but that he eventually gave the inspectors carte blanche. Afterwards, the inspectors were taken out of Iraq prematurely because of the impending invasion.

Is that about right? Mind you I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, but now I'm curious if what I remember what everyone else remembers.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Sugar

Without doing any research whatsoever and relying on my spotty post-pregnancy memory, in a nutshell, it seems to me that after a somewhat long hiatus the UN decided to get inspectors back in to Iraq and that Saddam wasn't allowing the palaces to be searched, yada yada, yada, but that he eventually gave the inspectors carte blanche. Afterwards, the inspectors were taken out of Iraq prematurely because of the impending invasion.

Is that about right? Mind you I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, but now I'm curious if what I remember what everyone else remembers.

Pretty much.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Here are some articles that go on about how the palaces were initially off limits, but through negotiation and I assert the gathering of troops on the borders, SH allowed them to be inspected. These articles show I was correct in my assertion that in the initial negitiations for inspection, SH did not want to include the palaces as places to be inspected. To me, that means SH was playing cat and mouse with the UN and the inspection process because these palaces were not just homes - they contained other governing aspects. SH knew that and tried to exclude them even though the inspectors wanted to look at them. It means SH was trying to get out of burden of proof set forth by the UN. Yes, he caved, but the initial monkeying around was bad faith by SH. That is all I was trying to say.

http://aljazeerah.info/News%20archiv...002%20News.htm (search for the headline "Inspectors can visit palaces: Iraq" - then read on from there)

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/Southwest...q.un.language/

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/...538848024.html

http://www.detnews.com/2002/nation/0...tion-26380.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/10/12/iraq.palaces/

http://www.intelmessages.org/Message...s_02/2727.html

http://www.why-war.com/news/2002/10/01/iraqandu.html

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...l/iraq/1737283

http://www.drumbeat.mlaterz.net/Sept...%20091702a.htm

There are more - these are just samples.

If that's all you were trying to say, you should've said it that way, not shrouded your statement to make it sound like Saddam was actually playing cat and mouse about the inspections. That being said, I fail to see how his saying the palaces were off limits constituted any sort of game he was playing with the inspectors. I think this whole argument boils down to perception and we don't perceive this situation the same way. Saddam allowed inspections wherever and whenever, so the point is rather moot. He had no knowledge of when they were going to inspect, no knowledge of hwere they were going to inspect, and he allowed them to inspect every time they asked to do so.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

If that's all you were trying to say, you should've said it that way, not shrouded your statement to make it sound like Saddam was actually playing cat and mouse about the inspections. That being said, I fail to see how his saying the palaces were off limits constituted any sort of game he was playing with the inspectors. I think this whole argument boils down to perception and we don't perceive this situation the same way. Saddam allowed inspections wherever and whenever, so the point is rather moot. He had no knowledge of when they were going to inspect, no knowledge of hwere they were going to inspect, and he allowed them to inspect every time they asked to do so.

I always said that the cat and mouse game was part of the initial negotiations. I explicitly said several times I was not talking about any other time. I even cited to Blix saying Iraq gave them unfettered access.

I think initially not wanting to allow the inpectors into the palaces is significant because the inspectors said such access was necessary. Yet, SH tried to disallow it. Yes, he caved in later, but his initial refusal was "cat and mouse" in that he would allow the inspectors here but not there, even though the inspectors said they needed to go to both. So, that he eventually caved in does not in any way negate my statement that in the initial negotiations, SH was playing cat and mouse with the inspectors, the inspection process, whatever you want to call it. The end result is the same because if SH had won this point, the inspectors would not be allowed in where they said they needed to go. That was bad faith on the part of SH that the end result (the eventual allwance of unfettered inspections) does not cure. He was in no position to negotiate anything under the newest UN Resolution.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by Sugar

Without doing any research whatsoever and relying on my spotty post-pregnancy memory, in a nutshell, it seems to me that after a somewhat long hiatus the UN decided to get inspectors back in to Iraq and that Saddam wasn't allowing the palaces to be searched, yada yada, yada, but that he eventually gave the inspectors carte blanche. Afterwards, the inspectors were taken out of Iraq prematurely because of the impending invasion.

Is that about right? Mind you I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, but now I'm curious if what I remember what everyone else remembers.

Spot on.

[Sugar]

Thanks guys! Glad to see I've still got a couple brain cells left to rub together!

But again, I'm not sure what the point is. This was Saddam's MO. When we didn't enforce things years before, why did we think he was going to comply now? Is this a reason to invade in 2004? Frankly, I don't think so, especially since he ultimately gave the inspectors carte blanche and ESPECIALLY since we had OTHER THINGS we should have been concentrating on.