Vice Presidential Debate Poll. Who Won?

Chev said...Seems to me that you've realized your argument holds no weight. Why else would you attack my philosophy instead of the issue? Hmm?


Noooo...it just means that now I know why we'll never reach agreement on the issue.

BTW: It wouldn't matter if it was me or my daughter, to the world at large, my life or hers is not as valuable as two lives.

 

Seems to me that you've realized your argument holds no weight. Why else would you attack my philosophy instead of the issue? Hmm

Uh Chev? I really wasn't in on the whole "Body Count" argument. I just gave a Spock quote for no reason whatsoever.

 

The US propped Saddam up with WMD support against Iran, then he used them on the Kurds. I don't think the U.S. has any moral footing in this war. The right thing to do is diplomacize the hell out of the Middle East, broadly, and without relent.

The sanctions were overdone. No need to stop the flow of humanitarian aid. The long, historical list of US aid for Iraq weaponry and WMDs is all that was needed for sanctions.

As for lifting sanctions and letting Saddam "seek" WMDs, go ahead. Who isn't seeking WMDs? You can't invade just because of that. Weapons trade sanctions were effective. Humanitarian aid sanctions were not.

 

There was no santions on humanitarian aid. Where'd you hear that?

Also...

As for lifting sanctions and letting Saddam "seek" WMDs, go ahead. Who isn't seeking WMDs?

Where the heck you been for the last three years and 27 days?

 

There was no santions on humanitarian aid. Where'd you hear that?


Then why did people have bad water? Why did people die as a result of the sanctions? I didn't bring it up, people started arguing that the sanctions caused deaths.

 

Yes, because instead of using the money for his people , he used it to rearm himself while his people were dying. He is a monster.

 

Then the UN and US should have lifted a food, water and medicine embargo. But we should have enforced weapons embargo, instead of providing weapons like we were before.

 

Hops said.... But we should have enforced weapons embargo, instead of providing weapons.

Umm...huh? It was the French, Russians, Chinese, and Germans selling them the weapons.

Where you been?

 

"We liked Saddam because he was willing to fight the Ayatollah. So we made sure that he got billions of dollars to purchase weapons. Weapons of mass destruction. That's right, he had them. We should know v we gave them to him!

We allowed and encouraged American corporations to do business with Saddam in the 1980s. That's how he got chemical and biological agents so he could use them in chemical and biological weapons. Here's the list of some of the stuff we sent him (according to a 1994 U.S. Senate report):

Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart.
Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.
And here are some of the American corporations who helped to prop Saddam up by doing business with him: AT&T, Bechtel, Caterpillar, Dow Chemical, Dupont, Kodak, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM (Read a full list of companies and descriptions of how they helped Saddam).

We were so cozy with dear old Saddam that we decided to feed him satellite images so he could locate where the Iranian troops were. We pretty much knew how he would use the information, and sure enough, as soon as we sent him the spy photos, he gassed those troops. And we kept quiet. Because he was our friend, and the Iranians were the "enemy." A year after he first gassed the Iranians, we reestablished full diplomatic relations with him! "
-Michael Moore

 

Hops quoted..."We allowed and encouraged American corporations to do business with Saddam in the 1980s. That's how he got chemical and biological agents so he could use them in chemical and biological weapons. Here's the list of some of the stuff we sent him (according to a 1994 U.S. Senate report):

That is why we shouldn't use other people to fight our wars. That is why we went in ourselves in '91 and again now. When we arm someone else to fight our battles they turn on us.

Also all of this happened before the sanctions.

 

That is why we shouldn't use other people to fight our wars. That is why we went in ourselves in '91 and again now. When we arm someone else to fight our battles they turn on us.

Also all of this happened before the sanctions.


Exactly. I never said it was during sanctions. I said that embargos against weapons were sufficient. There was no need to embargo food, water, and medical.

But I am saying that we didn't need to go in this time.

 

Hops said...There was no need to embargo food, water, and medical.

AAAHHHHHH!!!!!! Listen to me...we NEVER embargoed food, water, or medical!!!!

Again...The suffering in Iraq was because the money Saddam got for food, water, and medicine, was illeagally used for weapons.

 

Again...The suffering in Iraq was because the money Saddam got for food, water, and medicine, was illeagally used for weapons.

Then how exactly are people arguing that the sanctions caused deaths?

"Economic sanctions imposed after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 have shattered the economy and left most of Iraq's 23 million people dependent on a UN program that permits the government to sell its oil to buy humanitarian goods. "
-Herald Sun News

So basically, they could only get humanitarian aid for oil, and the money was abused. A weapons only embargo would have been sufficient, opening up free trade of humanitarian goods, food, water, etc.

 

Shouldn't all this be going in the Iraq thread?

 

Never mind Hops. maybe if you reread the thread you'll get it. The weapons were imbargoed yet our "allies" sold them anyway.

 

Shouldn't all this be going in the Iraq thread?



Sure, Jediflyer, but first, what do you think of my idea?

 

Never mind Hops. maybe if you reread the thread you'll get it.

Come on, gimme some sugar.

 

I don't have the time to get into a long discussion on sanctions vs war and the meaning of life. I'll just say that I think this isn't an either or situation. Either have sanctions that commit genocide on Iraqis or launch a war and occupation on Iraqis is a false dichtomy. However, to find that third solution would require much more research into the events of the past twelve years. I am content just to know that there is a third way that most people seem to be ignoring.

 

Hello? Edwards can't win North Carolina....What does this state know that the rest of the nation should know?

 

I won the debate.

Know why?

Because I was smart enough to change the channel.

 

this picture just in of Cheney before the debate without makeup

[image=http://swanb.net/cheney_edwards_simpsons.jpg]

just a little humor folks.

 

cmdwillard,

Edwards might not win the popular vote in NC, but GW didn't win the popular vote in the US, so what's your point??

 

That's funny, I was sure cheney had more cancer spots.

 

He had the cancer spots removed. Sadly, the cancer spots contained the memories of his multiple meetings with John Edwards prior to the debate....