Only to someone who fears their own words. As no accusations were made, and just a hint given for your future reference,. In other words there is ZERO basis for such a claim in this thread or any other and you're just trolling. <TABLE cellpadding=8 width="95%" align=center bgColor=#FFF39
So if a policeman accidentily shoots an innocent man, all policemen are bad? No Dr Guy, again you demonstrate your rather weak handle on logic. Saying that "we are the good guys" only works if everyone we killed was a terrorist is not the same as saying that 'we are all bad guys" because "they were no
If we always describe our enemies that way, what does that say about us? It says that despite all our differences we are actually a fairly easy going and peace loving lot who require the active and accentuated stimulus of the oversimplified good vs evil boogey man argument to agitate us into supportin
Thats hilarious. Yet strange as it is that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. Maybe you could customize your truck by knitting yourself some apricot colored mud flaps?
Julian Beever Link Notice how everythings fake? Even the hose and water. God only knows what he could do with you and your abilities.
You should team up with that guy who does those street art chalk drawings. Im sure he could make you fly... or fall.... or something.
So much for this not being about the %$$#^ asphalt. !
I merely proved you wrong using your own words. Simply repeating that you did something doesn't make it so Dr Guy. I realize repeatition is about all you have but its still not enough. You've taken a statement I made about people without cars and tried to invalidate that with another statement I made about those (in this case me) with cars. If that works for you then great however some of us require a little more rigor in our connexxions. <
Well maybe not good vrs bad, but rather legitimate vrs illegitimate
The vast majority of people fighting us in Iraq are part of groups that are conducting their aggression through a means of terror tactics (IED's, Assassination, Kidnapping, Murder, etc...) and violence. They belong to groups that use "terror" as the primary means to make the populace follow the
I am curious, if there are 5 guys plotting to blow up a bridge in NY, and only 4 of them take part in it, and it kills 100 Americans, and they are all from Yemen, and did this to cause fear, but the 5th guy did help plan it and was a source of information but did not actually take part. Is the 5th guy a terror
ok so some 75,000 civilians have died since we have invaded this is indeed bad.but up to 125000 civilians were dieing in iraq under saddam during the 10 years of sanctions. So you think 75,000 in 4 years is better than 125,000 in 10? Also bearing in mind that we invaded on a pretext of fictious WMD? No
There is no point in debating someone who does not remember the last item they wrote, and then changes their mind and denies it (hint - you can edit your responses - but not after someone has quoted them). What are you referring to here Dr Guy?
You still are not reading. SHow me where I said "ON this thread". lmao, omg and wtf?? Call me old fashioned Dr Guy but i do tend to make different arguments from thread to thread. Thats typically because the subject is different. Does anyone else here do that or is it just me?? <
To anyone else..... is this Guy for real?? And if so, why?
So You are contending that America has killed those Iraqis Moreover apart from killing tens of thousands of people what has the US "achieved" in Iraq? and of course you have a reputable source. Like your own blog? Sure. The source I choose to use Dr Guy, is the source I was ref
Do you have an english block? Conservative means low end, yet you say 75,000 is conservative, and then provide a link that says 54,000. You are not playing dumb are you?So You are contending that America has killed those Iraqis No Dr Guy I dont have an english block. And Yes conservative does mean l
this is a stupid comment. there were 19 terrorists on 9/11. however there were only 4 acts of terrorism. I agree it wasn't well worded in order to make my point. How many terrorists acts do we consider the 19,000 plus people killed committed? Was it 19,000+ or just 1 (opposing our invasion)?? <BR
You really should read what you write. You are now changing your arguement once again. Once again? O.k. So in order for me to be changing it "once again" Dr Guy, I must have changed it "once before". So for any of that to be true I must have made at least 3 different arguments on this thread Dr Guy.
And yes I am playing out a greater good argument so lets not get too hung up on #$%^& asphalt.
and unfortunately if you are buying gas. your no longer paying for roads except in emergencies. such as when a bridge collapses. <T
What I meant was the responsible person does not take blame for their responsibilities, they always look for someone else to blame. Wouldn't that make them irresponsible? <TD class="mb-Body-Quote-Text"
So your position is that Americans would be happier to know more people have been killed in Iraq than they actually think. Nice. You clearly dont have a degree in marketing do you. You refer to all the dead as terrorists. That would require at least 19,429 terrorist acts to have been committed.i.e one for each of the dead in order for them to be considered a terrorist. What sc
Seems someone does not know, and is just envious. Possibly but then that's their problem.
So the count stands at zero.
JoeUser Forums