Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

colin-powell-presentation: What a CRAP...


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 chisinau

chisinau

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1129 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 04:26 PM

..."we know" that's all he could say, "we know".
The photos must be 1st generation-polaroid, So where are the high-definition military-satelite photos that could show a dollar coin on the ground ?
What a crap...
  • 0

#2 kelly

kelly

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2559 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 04:34 PM

Mr. chisinau....you are not happy?...I don't blame you...there is nothing like irrefutable evidence......but,go easy....do not burst a blood vessel...
  • 0

#3 Soddem

Soddem

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2118 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 04:46 PM

its "what a load of crap", not "what a crap" ;)

and i agree with you 100 percent. they scratching at straws now, to try and find some excuse to justify their evil intentions
  • 0

#4 Guest_Viking396_*

Guest_Viking396_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:12 PM

How shocked I am that Soddem and the rest of the Iraqi backers didn't believe the speech. So shocking, NOT.
  • 0

#5 chisinau

chisinau

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1129 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:18 PM

Come-on Powell, you must be kidding. Is that the best you were able to bring to the UN ?

He who lies for you will lie about you.
He who lies for you will lie about you.
  • 0

#6 uglybastard

uglybastard

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 605 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:22 PM

So let's see:

the people who were for the war are still for the war.

The people who were against the war, Saddam's felatio crew, are still against it.

Why am I not surprised?
  • 0

#7 Guest_Viking396_*

Guest_Viking396_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:24 PM

Exactly, Powell could have posted Saddam handing over chemical weapons to a terrorist and Soddem and the rest of the lackys would tow the line with their usual rhetoric.
  • 0

#8 chisinau

chisinau

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1129 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:26 PM

Too many of you are so confused that you're unable to comprehend that too many of us are against Saddam AND against the war.

I know this is beyond your understanding, because for those who think "square", reasoning is a lost challenge.
  • 0

#9 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:29 PM

"Powell could have posted Saddam handing over chemical weapons to a terrorist and Soddem and the rest of the lackys would tow the line with their usual rhetoric"

But, as Hussein doesn't support any terrorists with WMD, that is an impossible scenario.

Although I do understand, and agree with your point, I believe it would be the same if the roles were reversed. As for anti-war rhetoric, consider the pro-war rhetoric as well.
  • 0

#10 gonzo

gonzo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14844 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:35 PM

You heard it here first!
Powell will resign his post or have his portfolio changed when the attack happens. This goes against his priciples as a team player in the world community. I dont think he respects his chicken hawk bosses and peers.
Deep down Powell is an honorable man, He was just the messenger boy today and i felt he didnt speak with conviction.
  • 0

#11 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:39 PM

I don't question the fact tha Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, I question the motives and the authority of the US for making this war. When truth is already a casualty, what are we supposed to believe?
  • 0

#12 Mae

Mae

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:39 PM

Originally posted by uglybastard
So let's see:

the people who were for the war are still for the war.

The people who were against the war, Saddam's felatio crew, are still against it.

Why am I not surprised?



Well, its more about giving inspectors more time so this can be resolved diplomaticallyajnd trough UN.?
Whats so bad in for example put in 10 times more inspectors and give them more time? Everyone wants that except for USA and UK.
  • 0

#13 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:41 PM

The Bush felatio crew do not want this resloved diplomatically. War is all they seem to want.
  • 0

#14 gonzo

gonzo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14844 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 05:42 PM

Maybe he has "weapons of mass destruction" to protect his country against your buddies in Israel. eh beast..


protect
  • 0

#15 vigorous

vigorous

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53988 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 06:20 PM

Well - as to more inspections - there is the summer
looming up and more, not fewer, soldiers are going
there.

I think we'd just best get used to the idea there will be
a war and pray for the least number of civillians possible
to be hurt or killed and the least possible environmental
damage to be done to already crippled water and
sewage systems.
  • 0

#16 IceHawk

IceHawk

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 06:39 PM

Sad but true Vig,

All Saddam had to do was give up the chems and bios. All he had to do was to comply with resolution 687 and 1441.

The responsibility for the anguish that the Iraqi people are about to experience falls squarely on the shoulders of Saddam Hussein.

A sad day indeed.

Good Day.
  • 0

#17 Guest_CaptainAmerica_*

Guest_CaptainAmerica_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 February 2003 - 06:56 PM

everyone who is pro this will change their tune after a few body bags start making their way back



I disagree. They have no stake in this. It will make for good evening news on CNN. They will drink their beer just like it was yesterday. As long as it is not their sons or daughters in those body bags, I say they will still support the war and remain removed and indifferent.

That's how it's gonna be. We have become desensitized. We have the same emotions watching a bomb going off in an Isreali market as we do watching a bomb go off on a television drama.

In America, war is something that happens to the "other" guys. We just watch and follow along. (Which in itself is not such a bad predictament(sp?) all things considered.)
  • 0

#18 SmallMind

SmallMind

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 07:00 PM

Originally posted by chisinau
Too many of you are so confused that you're unable to comprehend that too many of us are against Saddam AND against the war.

I know this is beyond your understanding, because for those who think "square", reasoning is a lost challenge.



I think you lost them.
DOH, what under achievers.
  • 0

#19 SmallMind

SmallMind

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 07:01 PM

Originally posted by IceHawk
Sad but true Vig,

The responsibility for the anguish that the Iraqi people are about to experience falls squarely on the shoulders of Saddam Hussein.

A sad day indeed.

Good Day.



Bullshit, killer boy.

have nice day.
  • 0

#20 IceHawk

IceHawk

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts

Posted 05 February 2003 - 07:17 PM

Well Smallmind,

It would have helped if you had pasted my entire post. However, to your benefit, at least you lived up to your moniker.

Good Day

:D
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru