Iraq & Benghazi

Everyone knows it's you yurt. I got a PM from someone today about a completely totally different topic and they tacked on something about there being a lot of weirdos here and used yurt trying to pretend he's not yurt as an example. It was funny because it wasn't even about yurt. Everyone knows. People think it's really, really strange. I know I do. Like, just come back. Why insist you're not a previous poster when every single person here knows it's you. You are humiliating yourself. But I like it so please proceed squeak toy.
 
Thing1 said:
Well, any way you slice it, it's pretty much exhausting. I really don't know 100% if you're Yurt, but trying to talk to you exhausts me as much as talking to Yurt did. No one else has really had that quality - where there were constant interruptions to "call out my side" and condemn Democrats equally regardless of the circumstances.

It's just tiring. I come here to have some spirite d discussion, but the minutiae w/ you is pointless.
Click to expand...

I don't do that often. I see you do it quite often though. I find it odd you would complain about it. You did it everyday this week and even made a thread about it. But yeah, I'm the one doing it all the time.

I really don't get you. We were having a good conversation, you refuse to accept anything except what you already believe. You kept harping on Christie's link, I finally address it and you haven't once commented on it. It has nothing to do with you being tired. You simply don't like it when people disagree with you. We had not discussed her link, so you can't possibly be tired of talking about it.

Minutiae? That is really is calling the kettle/black. We were equally discussing the matter in some detail. You seem to get very upset when a discussion doesn't go the way you want. I've seen you do it repeatedly. You usually end up insulting the person and declaring that you were right all along.
 
Darla said:
Everyone knows it's you yurt. I got a PM from someone today about a completely totally different topic and they tacked on something about there being a lot of weirdos here and used yurt trying to pretend he's not yurt as an example. It was funny because it wasn't even about yurt. Everyone knows. People think it's really, really strange. I know I do. Like, just come back. Why insist you're not a previous poster when every single person here knows it's you. You are humiliating yourself. But I like it so please proceed squeak toy.
Click to expand...

You nailed it years ago w/ that character from the Star Trek where they were battling that spirit who had been Jack the Ripper & a bunch of other killers through the centuries. That guy's voice is usually what I hear now when I read his posts.
 
Seahawk said:
I suppose if one were to to that, I would not say that is very smart. But I don't see anyone doing that.

I've read that stuff years ago, why would I reread it? Context cannot take away the fact that Dems said he had WMDs and was a threat. To claim context is wholly dishonest because the whole issue about the context was about whether we should invade, not whether they actually said he had WMD's or was a threat.

Did you read it?
Click to expand...

This was you addressing the link?

Really?

You're not serious about discussing it. The end.
 
Thing1 said:
You nailed it years ago w/ that character from the Star Trek where they were battling that spirit who had been Jack the Ripper & a bunch of other killers through the centuries. That guy's voice is usually what I hear now when I read his posts.
Click to expand...

Wolf in the Fold!

I totally forgot about that Onceler, LOL. Yeah that is fitting.
 
Thing1 said:
This was you addressing the link?

Really?

You're not serious about discussing it. The end.
Click to expand...

However, as is typical of such lists, some of the quotes are truncated — and all of them are provided without context — so as to reinforce the author's point of view even when the proffered material does not fit it. Namely, several of these quotes were
offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S.
Click to expand...

Guess you didn't read it.
 
Seahawk said:
Guess you didn't read it.
Click to expand...

Cherrypicking, just like your hero Bush.

There are all kinds of reasons why the context was important. I'd add that the context of being AGAINST unilateral military involvement is hugely important, because it's impossible to even calculate how different that is from Bush's position. Right there, the equivalency argument begins & ends.

But what you Bushies are ignoring more than anything is that many of the quotes in that boring & repetitive list are from the '90's. We had sanctions against Iraq then, and no-fly zones. The purpose of these was to get Iraq to abandon their WMD programs and destroy those weapons. Guess what we found out AFTER we invaded?

Give it some thought. I want you to do well.
 
You once again really don't get it. We are talking about what was said, not the positions taken. Do you really not see the difference?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top