Author Topic: .....yet strangely accurate.... (Read 2851 times)

Grey Wolf · **Reply #20 on:** March 27, 2004, 12:54:06 am

You forgot the "Iraq funds Al Quaeda", "Give me a connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda", and the massive Haliburton contracts.

Bobboau · **Reply #21 on:** March 27, 2004, 12:55:40 am

I think you forget the first words out of Europe after 9-11 were "he'd better not use this to invade Iraq"

Setekh · **Reply #22 on:** March 27, 2004, 01:02:02 am

Saw this in the local news. I don't even bother trying to think the world's leadership is reasonable any more.

an0n · **Reply #23 on:** March 27, 2004, 01:04:39 am

Personally, I thought he'd go for the Saudi's and/or Iran first. I mean, sure they're harder targets but they'd be the leaders of any organised mass-defence.

And it'd've broken OPEC's back, reducing the economic attacks they could launch through the oil.

Bobboau · **Reply #24 on:** March 27, 2004, 01:04:57 am

as I was saying...

my sister just started takeing that BTW

Grey Wolf · **Reply #25 on:** March 27, 2004, 01:07:01 am

Quote

Originally posted by an0n
Personally, I thought he'd go for the Saudi's and/or Iran first. I mean, sure they're harder targets but they'd be the leaders of any organised mass-defence.

And it'd've broken OPEC's back, reducing the economic attacks they could launch through the oil.

The Saudi ruling family likes the US government, and vise versa. Iran, I could believe, but they may have gone after Saddam because he would have no allies whatsoever, whereas Iran could quite possibly have a few other powers step in to assist.

Bobboau · **Reply #26 on:** March 27, 2004, 01:12:36 am

they went after Iraq becase they figured the WMD would be an easy sell

aldo_14 · **Reply #27 on:** March 27, 2004, 07:39:18 am

One of the first things i heard in the media (i.e. the analysis) after bush was elected - and this was before 9/11 - was the expectation that bush would want to finish his daddys job by going after Iraq.

Gank · **Reply #28 on:** March 27, 2004, 08:02:17 am

http://www.newamericancentury.org/
These guys have been advocating it for years, think tank set up by various neo-cons.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
Pnac basically does the thinking for the Bush cartel.

Rictor · **Reply #29 on:** March 27, 2004, 09:46:11 am

Quote

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Memories of Iraq doing fishy things resurface. They give UN a hassle proving their usefullness NULL.

That sentence makes little sense. Who gives the UN a hassle? The US or Iraq? And why would that prove their uselessness?

aldo_14 · **Reply #30 on:** March 27, 2004, 10:09:46 am

Quote

Originally posted by Rictor

That sentence makes little sense. Who gives the UN a hassle? The US or Iraq? And why would that prove their uselessness?

Well, the UN is useless because it set out a mandate for finding and destroying WMD in Iraq. Obviously, this was completely unacceptable because, um...........

help?

Flipside · **Reply #31 on:** March 27, 2004, 11:52:52 am

Iraq and Kuwait together means that the US could theoretically be the last country in the world to have oil to fuel their tanks, planes and artillery. Why invade now when it'll be so much easier in 30 years?

an0n · **Reply #32 on:** March 27, 2004, 06:08:26 pm

Because in 10 years everyone is going to get mighty pissed at the US destroying the environment and cut off America's oil supply by whatever means neccessary.

Tiara · **Reply #33 on:** March 28, 2004, 03:43:15 am

Quote

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
"Give me a connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda"

an0n · **Reply #34 on:** March 28, 2004, 04:01:23 am

That's assuming he can spell.

Grey Wolf · **Reply #35 on:** March 28, 2004, 04:15:37 pm

Tiara, you forgot about the A's. So now we have two clear connections.

Rictor · **Reply #36 on:** March 28, 2004, 04:24:10 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Bobboau

Thats awesome

:D

Especially if you imagine their voices are the voices of the two little rabbit things from Duckman, which I do.

Bobboau · **Reply #37 on:** March 28, 2004, 04:30:27 pm

News:

Author Topic: .....yet strangely accurate.... (Read 2851 times)

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....

.....yet strangely accurate....