Sick of Liberals..

[Sniper]

Originally posted by WharfRat
Sniper!!!

Geez - oh - man ... you can't be serious!!!

Why do we have the suits? for protection against IRAQ'S chemical weapons...
You're now saying that the US is known to use chem weapon??? and that any country need to "defend" themselves against a possible US chem attack?

Please dude... there is NO reason for them to be concerned about chemical warfare, unless they intend to wage it themselves...they know it, I know it, and deep down, I think you know it too.....

That's the response I was hoping to get... We have these suits for protection and not to wage chemical warfare. I don't think it is unreasonable at all for Iraq to have these suits for protection from Israel.

[WharfRat]

Originally posted by Sniper
My point is these chem suits are not a huge smoking gun... Every country has them. If Iraq is allowed to have them under the U.N. sanctions then I don't see how this is proof.

No...they're not a huge smoking gun... but even you have to admit that it lends to suspicion... c'mon Snipe, let's get real here... do you honestly think Isreal is going to launch chemical weapons at Iraq?
They may or may not have them ... I don't know...they certainly have never used them... Iraq has a long history of putting them to use though....

[Sniper]

Originally posted by WharfRat
No...they're not a huge smoking gun... but even you have to admit that it lends to suspicion... c'mon Snipe, let's get real here... do you honestly think Isreal is going to launch chemical weapons at Iraq?
They may or may not have them ... I don't know...they certainly have never used them... Iraq has a long history of putting them to use though....

I don't disagree with what you are saying... Sure it lends suspicion, but there are other reasons for them to have these suits as well. I think it is equally as likely that these suits are for protection from Isreal, Iran, or even the Kurds.

[WharfRat]

Originally posted by Sniper
I don't disagree with what you are saying... Sure it lends suspicion, but there are other reasons for them to have these suits as well. I think it is equally as likely that these suits are for protection from Isreal, Iran, or even the Kurds.

I agree it's a possibility... but equally? I don't think so....

The Kurds??? Good Grief...they can't even afford bullets for their kalishnakovs...much less have the capability of developing or pruchasing chemical agents...Saddam has made sure of that with his oppression of anyone that is NOT Sunni Muslim....

[Barbarian]

Guys... just give it up, it's like talking to a brick wall... this is why I get disgusted with both extreems, because both sides take rediculous stands and refuse to budge or compromise.

[WharfRat]

Originally posted by Barbarian
Guys... just give it up, it's like talking to a brick wall... this is why I get disgusted with both extreems, because both sides take rediculous stands and refuse to budge or compromise.

No offense Barbarian... but if you're getting disgusted with it...walk away. Nobody is forcing you to read or participate in these discussions....
If we want to have an intelligent debate.... then we have every right to.... that's what this forum is for isn't it?

[PhinPhan1227]

Congrats...you've redefined the Straw Man fallacy...

Originally posted by Sniper
I agree that Iraq has... But, who supplied them with these weapons at that time and who trained them?


Ask the Palistineans if they are civilians... also ask them who routinely launches attacks against them?

What the HECK does that have to do with ANYTHING in this thread? You were talking about them having the suits as a precaution against Israel...where the HECK does the US giving them weapons come in?

And on the last point, I asked "of the two countries, who has launched attacks against the others civilian populations, Israel or Iraq? " Unless the Palestinians have taken up residence in IRAQ, your answer in no way, shape, or form answers my question. The ONLY substantive answer you gave was to the question of who has the burden of proof, and even that was inane since Saddam has had 12 years to comply....perhaps a couple more decades would have been enough?

[Barbarian]

Originally posted by WharfRat
No offense Barbarian... but if you're getting disgusted with it...walk away. Nobody is forcing you to read or participate in these discussions....
If we want to have an intelligent debate.... then we have every right to.... that's what this forum is for isn't it?

I'm not disgusted with intelligent debate.. actually what i was referring to is more a general disgust with both extreems, the far right and far left in general.

This debate has just broken down and is no longer intelligent debate, but don't worry though wharf, I'm actually on your guy's side on this one it has just reached the point where no matter wht you say, the opposition will come back with something even more rediculous to attempt to counter it...

[Sniper]

Originally posted by PhinPhan1227
Congrats...you've redefined the Straw Man fallacy...







What the HECK does that have to do with ANYTHING in this thread? You were talking about them having the suits as a precaution against Israel...where the HECK does the US giving them weapons come in?

And on the last point, I asked "of the two countries, who has launched attacks against the others civilian populations, Israel or Iraq? " Unless the Palestinians have taken up residence in IRAQ, your answer in no way, shape, or form answers my question. The ONLY substantive answer you gave was to the question of who has the burden of proof, and even that was inane since Saddam has had 12 years to comply....perhaps a couple more decades would have been enough?

Read your question again.

"of the two countries, who has launched attacks against the others civilian populations, Israel or Iraq? "

My answer of "Ask the Palistinians if they are civilians... also ask them who routinely launches attacks against them?" does in fact answer that your question. It implies that Israel has attacked civilian populations.

So how does this not answer the question you asked?

[PhinPhan1227]

Originally posted by Sniper
Read your question again.

"of the two countries, who has launched attacks against the others civilian populations, Israel or Iraq? "

My answer of "Ask the Palistinians if they are civilians... also ask them who routinely launches attacks against them?" does in fact answer that your question. It implies that Israel has attacked civilian populations.

So how does this not answer the question you asked?

What part of "against the OTHERS civilian populations" is too complicated to grasp? Is "the others" beyond your understanding? The Palestinians do not LIVE in Iraq, therefore they can NOT be counted as part of Iraq's population. In NO part of my question did it state "which of the two countries has attacked A civilian population". In fact, I don't see any way that I could have BEEN more specific. "The others"....it's an integral part of the question Snippy, try reading it again....slowly if needed....sheesh.