|
|
Post by harleyman on Feb 11, 2010 8:49:46 GMT -5
Makes about as much sense as you saying your ex leader never sold arms to Angola, granted phony contracts to spend government money, and never got accused of corruption? So what's your point now? Nice try, but missed.... I've got nothing to do with Chirac as it's about him you're talking about So is it now time for you to ignore my questions and counter-points to your arguments? You wander so far off topic there is little hope of you coming back on topic. In case you forgot your original topics "allow" me to help you. The USA invades and you state how bad it is to invade over WMD's. We then find some and your argument turns into how few we find since invading. Are you simply disliking USA for invading at all? What if your country had a similar circumstance how would that make you respond to YOUR country's leadership? Please, refrain from misdirection on this one... |
|
|
|
Post by wolfknight on Feb 11, 2010 14:14:57 GMT -5
Ok, nothing's changed, YOU've got the truth, all the others are or, terrorists, or commies and therefore absolutly stupid... I never called you any of those things you seem to have read into my words. All I did was suggest that you take a moment and educate yourself on the profiles and silhouettes of missiles, so you do not make such an error while trying to argue about the age or efficacy of a weapon that was found in Iraq. Not to smart to call a 3 foot sword a pocketknife. When trying to argue a point about weapons, it would be the intelligent thing to make sure you have at least a small amount of understanding about which you speak. If you don't want to take the time to do that (I was able to spot the differences in SECONDS of bringing up pictures on the 'net), it is up to you if you want to have the "stupid" title fit you or not. And, anticipating that you might try to find ANYthing to make me look foolish, I am well aware that the Soviet p-700 Gannit was launched from a sea-borne platform. The missile in the picture just bears a similar shape. Certainly closer than the German V1. Mmmh, got some hard drive problem mate ? Bush's administration, a few time after the 9/11 said to everyone who was willing to listen that Al Quaeda had conections with Iraq and therefore, the US needed to go to iraq.... That didn't last long, but that's how it was presented at tyhe beginning... Really? I recall that he said that al Queada was operating in Iraq (a fact that was accepted by the international intelligence community on the whole), and that rooting out terrorists and treating those who would harbor them as terrorists was going to be the norm (the so-called "Bush Doctrine"), but I don't remember a single time that he, nor anyone in his administration said that Iraq had a thing to do with 9/11. Since you seem to have total recall of such information, and a problem-free hard drive, perhaps you can cite any instance where he was quoted as saying so, in which case I will concede that I am mistaken. You can take the tone and the condescension you want, that won't change my mind.... I don't expect my tone to do that. All I expect is that you will take a moment and actually inform yourself before getting in over your head, as you very clearly are in this discussion. I doubt it will happen, because confirmed trolls rarely bother with facts, but I can hope that there may have been SOME growth since the last time you showed your ignorance in all its glory. |
|
|
|
Post by fgoodwin on Feb 11, 2010 15:07:30 GMT -5
lepatte, would you agree that cruise missiles aren't normally buried? Why do you suppose this one was?
|
|
|
|
Post by oldguard on Jun 24, 2010 12:13:38 GMT -5
or what about the 40 mig jets buried outside of basra that the Iraqi's weren't suppose to have? Or the french made gps jammers, or the new russian made armor piercing grenades?
|
|
