Ok, so, in this thread it's just sarcasm and dismissals of established
points without good reason. But I was refering to your general behavior
towards me.

where was I name calling?

and where was I calling you wrong?


please tell us.

Well, the "we can see that in your posts" comment was obvious sarcasm.

And the "if the government says it's true" line.

And the "bow to who you bow to" was condescension at it's finest. And
most blatant.



Sarcasm is mockery, and you don't mock things you think are right.

where was I name calling?

and where was I calling you wrong?


please tell us.

Wow. You're really good at this "ignoring the obvious truth" stuff,
aren't you?

where was I name calling?


and To AB


where was I calling you wrong?


please tell us.



You both said that now I ask you both where I was name calling and
calling AB wrong?

Please just answer the question.

Why?

You have not answered any of the questions I asked you.

I will continue to post in this thread. I will however not post to you
as I have no wish to get into an individual pissin contest.

Thank you for your time.

thats exactly what I knew you would say. A kind of nannner nanner
nanner.

I thought more of you, sir.

And yet, you're the one who started all this crap. Seriously. Grow up.
Act your age. Act HALF your age. Act MY age, if you like.

but you said I named called and you wont answer the question.

where was I name calling?

and where was I calling you wrong?


please tell us.

I already did. Go back up about half a page.

I never called anyone a name and I never said they were wrong, you go
back and re-read.


I got to go now, Im sorry you cant admit that your wrong (that would be
the mature thing to do) but everyone can see it for themselves now.


I dont like excuse makers and most people dont either.

I know it's not quite on the subject. But will the other people who
post in this thread kindly back me (or him, if you wish) on this one?
Whichever of us is wrong, it'd be nice for him to know that he might fix
said personality disorder.

Read rule 1.

Your both wrong.

Saddam did not have a bone in his body..

When America armed him up with whatever weapons were on his shopping
list

I meant did not have a bad bone in his body when he was chums
with the ****e house

That much is certainly true enough. But we'd have to go back to....
huh.... who WAS in office back then....

Meddling where I shouldn't but here it goes:

First of all, there was no name calling, nor insults. Mr. Beard here
only lacks the right tools and have to repeat himself over and over, and
become sarcastic and patronizing. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

I see here that he is full ideas but lacks the proper arguments, and
that renders his statements useless.

Going back to the original post, yes, Saddam was really bad. He played
whore to the US and then tried to backstab the countries that made him,
not Iraq, powerful. If Iraq, by itself would have been powerful, that
would have meant that the Iraqi people was strong and capable. But Iraq
had no power, Saddam did. And that power went away the day he went into
hiding and died the day he was hanged.

Internal struggle amongst the different religious factions is tearing
that country to bits. And American, UK and UN soldiers are meddling in a
conflict that will only be settled when a real, compassionate leader
rise from within. And while that happens, a lot of boys are going to
die.

Maybe I went off subject here?

No you were right on subject:

Very insightful look at it from a diferent perspective.

And well put.

to alada

the right tools?


well, we have a very smart guy here, who has more tools to argue with
than chins in a chinezee phone book.

but he said I called him names and AB said I said he was wrong.


so..... I re-read the stuff and I dindt see any of that, but what do I
know, I lack the tools.

but thanks for the input

and please dont give excuses for them, I just want to see where I called
anyone names or said they were wrong, its that simple.