The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #97835   Message #1985779
Posted By: Ron Davies
04-Mar-07 - 10:31 AM
Thread Name: BS: Maliki doesn't want more U.S. troops
Subject: RE: BS: Maliki doesn't want more U.S. troops
Teribus-

So sorry you seem to disagree with the anti-war posters being labelled "peace mongers" (sic). However, as a typical Bushite, it seems your reading skills also need a bit of work---guess whose comment the "peace mongers" was? None other than your (current) faithful companion and lap-dog, Dickey. Perhaps you'd like to take it up with him.

As far as the Iraq situation is concerned, sure is fascinating that somehow the earlier-cited issues---- of Sunnis being able to trust the police, and being guaranteed more oil than would accrue to them from just the "Sunni parts" of Iraq--- are now considered crucial issues. Now who has been talking about them on Mudcat for over a year--and who has been denying that the Sunnis deserved any consideration? Clue: for the latter, please look in the mirror.




Dickey--

You should be aware that when you bring up a historical issue, as you did in the case of the Cuba missile crisis, you should be prepared to discuss it. Your statement that you "don't care" about how JFK had the missiles removed is very revealing--but does not help a discussion. And in fact it shows no willingness on your part for anything but kneejerk jingoistic (look it up) response. Not name-calling, just fact. If you disagree you are welcome to provide evidence that yours is not a knee-jerk jingoistic response. I will be glad to listen.

Not angry, just disappointed in you. I have no objection to a lively historical debate--but you have 1) no knowledge and 2) no interest even in learning. Again, not personal attack--just an observation--as proven by your record here so far. You are welcome to prove me wrong.

There are many enthusiastic, if amateur, historians on Mudcat, who are more than willing to research historical issues. If you are not, you'd best not bring them up.




And, by the way, nobody is requiring you to prove positively that there was no propaganda campaign between summer 2002 and March 2003. However, it's you and your mighty leader, Teribus, who allege there was never a propaganda campaign to get the US public to back Bush's planned Iraq war. But as usual, your argument about "proving the absence" is a red herring (look it up).

My point is that neither you nor Teribus can provide even one clear quote from a member of the Bush regime refuting a link between Saddam and 9-11. While we have provided many by figures of the Bush regime linking the two--especially implying or predicting that the next 9-11 style attack on the US would be supplied by Saddam--with his WMD's.