Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

I'd like to introduce my new close personal freind Momar.Follow

#1 Apr 23 2004 at 11:42 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Come on up here, Mo. Can I get you a hamburger or a hot dog, brother? Or maybe some razor studded ****** to more effecitvely rape your populace, you old dictator you.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040423/ts_nm/libya_usa_dc_5

The White House is expected to announce on Friday that U.S. companies may resume most trade with Libya and buy its oil to reward Tripoli for giving up weapons of mass destruction, U.S. officials said.

Now, Mo. We'll buy the oil, see, we love the oil, but you're still "evil". K? Eeeeveeeel! Yes siree!


Libya will also remain on the U.S. list of "state sponsors of terrorism," which bars it from receiving U.S. arms exports, controls sales of "dual-use" items with military and civilian applications, limits U.S. aid and requires Washington to vote against loans from international financial institutions.


Now sell me some oil you eeeveel little ******* you!
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#2 Apr 23 2004 at 12:02 PM Rating: Decent
****
8,619 posts
I would also put the political slant of

Hey Mr Islamic Fundamentalist see what we do when your a good little terrorist group and bomb people not Allied with the USA?

We give you billions in Oil revenue and a McDonalds on every corner.... Nice people

You can buy more guns but you'll die fat.
#3 Apr 23 2004 at 2:12 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Quote:
Libya will also remain on the U.S. list of "state sponsors of terrorism," which bars it from receiving U.S. arms exports, controls sales of "dual-use" items with military and civilian applications


Ha! No PS2s for you suckers!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#4 Apr 23 2004 at 3:53 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Wow! Only Smash could put a spin that 180 degreeish on that story...


Oh no! Can't have a story that clearly shows GWBs policy *working* now can we?... Must spin it somehow.


It'd be funny if it just wasn't so predictable coming from Smash.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#5 Apr 23 2004 at 4:27 PM Rating: Decent
****
5,311 posts
Gbaji, I must be reading this wrong
Quote:
Libya will also remain on the U.S. list of "state sponsors of terrorism,"
Because I would swear that our current president, you know, the one who's fighting this long "war on terror" had some pretty strong words of warning for any governments who provide aid, sanctuary or financing to terrorists.

I'm confused. Is it only countries without huge oil reserves for sale to the U.S. who will still be under sanction?
#6 Apr 23 2004 at 5:43 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Huh!? Did you read the whole article? Libya has been on the US ********** list" for like 20 years now. Do you remember the "line of death"? Or the two different occasions when we shot down Libyan aircraft over that "line". Or the multiple occasions in which we've bombed or Cruise Missiled his bunkers and weapons making facilities?

The fact that we're dropping 90% of the sanctions we've held on Libya is *huge*. It's entirely the result of Gadaffi's recent concessions towards us. That is entirely the result of GWBs "war on terror". Basically, Libya matches all of the conditions that Iraq does. Gadaffi's not an idiot. The reason we're in Iraq today instead of Libya is because Gadaffi practically scraped his forehead on the floor going out of his way to toe the line after 9/11 and GWBs stated policy changes leading to Afghanistan.


If you want to know what we've gained in the post 9/11 world, this is it. Similar concessions and policy changes going on in Syria and Jordan are also bearing fruit. That's why I'm dumbfounded at the way Smash presented this. This article is about how much things are moving away from state sponsored terror in a country that has been one of the worst offenders. This is a huge victory...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#7 Apr 23 2004 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
****
5,311 posts
Yes, I read the entire article.

So the fact that our administration still considers their government "state sponsors of terrorism" is a non-issue.

I just wanted to clarify that point.
#8 Apr 23 2004 at 6:00 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
I suspect that will change in the near future if Libya shows itself to be as sincere about reform as it has recently appeared to be. In the immortal words of Ronnie, "Trust, but verify."

Totem
#9 Apr 23 2004 at 6:06 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,246 posts
We might look at this move with cynicism, as we rightly should. But still, it's better than the way things were. It's better to be engaged, trading or negotiating with someone than have them completely isolated. Now there's more opportunity for influence from many different quarters.
#10 Apr 23 2004 at 6:08 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Quote:

Oh no! Can't have a story that clearly shows GWBs policy *working* now can we?... Must spin it somehow.

I hadn't realized that buying oil from states that sponsor terrorism and have massive human rights abuses was policy.

Allthough, in retrospect I guess Saudi Arabia should have tipped me off. I'd hardly qualify Libya surrendering a nearly non-existant WMD program as a sucess.

I guess the next step will be campaign contributions to the Bush family form Lybia along with MFN trade status in a year or two. We should be selling them f-35's by 2012.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#11 Apr 23 2004 at 6:15 PM Rating: Good
****
6,730 posts
gbaji wrote:
The reason we're in Iraq today instead of Libya is because Gadaffi practically scraped his forehead on the floor going out of his way to toe the line after 9/11 and GWBs stated policy changes leading to Afghanistan.


You can't honestly believe that. The reason we are in Iraq is because Bush had a hard-on for Sadamn. Gadaffi didn't invade Kuwait and live to tell about it making George W's father look less than ineffectual to the middle east, Sadamn did. Gadaffi didn't thumb his nose at U.N. inspections and sanctions while the world looked on for ten years, Sadamn did.

As far as the average American remembers Gadaffi sponsored terrorists who shot down a few planes in the 80's and got bombed by Reagan for it. Gadaffi is old and didn't want to end up like Sadamn but that in no way means he was on top of Bush's hit list until he groveled.
#12 Apr 23 2004 at 7:16 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Do I have to draw a straight line for you guys?

What we're seeing is the political equivalent of the "carrot and the stick". You make a list of things/people/nations/whatever that you don't like. You hold a carrot in one hand and a stick in the other. Those that make an effort to fix the things you don't like about them get the carrot. Those that don't get the stick.


What is confusing about this? It's not an instantaneous process. As a result of the policy change after 9/11 and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, we've seen huge movements by nations like Libya towards policing the terrorist groups within their borders. The whole process doesn't work if you don't apply the carrort. In this case, we've removed a number of trade sanctions on their nation.

They're not off "the list", but they're not at the top of the list, and they've gotten a reward for showing up to the table. In the case of Libya, this is something we've never been able to get them to do before.


I know that it may fly in the face of those who vehemently oppose the "war on terror", but this is a pretty strong bit of evidence that it is working. Not perfectly, and not immediately, but it is certainly bearing fruit. In other words, those 700ish US soldiers did *not* die for nothing...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#13 Apr 23 2004 at 7:23 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I hadn't realized that buying oil from states that sponsor terrorism and have massive human rights abuses was policy.



So you are in favor of opening up the Alaskan oil reserves? And offshore drilling? Please find me a way for us to fullfill our oil needs that does not require buying oil from a nation that sponsors terrorism and has massive human rights abuses...


What a stupid piece of rhetoric Smash. Even for you.




____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#14 Apr 23 2004 at 7:26 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
/gets a nostalgic look in his eye

Ahhhh, the ol' Line of DEATH. <sniff sniff> I miss them good old days with Russian Bears, random cruise missle-ings, a shirtless Maverick playing Slo-Mo volleyball in the sun-- ahem! Sorry. Got a little carried away there.

Yeah, The Line o' Death. Whatever happened to those wonderful, wacky, and over-the-top Arabic sayings those super bad guys used to say? The Iraqi Minister of Information was the last of a dying breed. Can we have a moment of silence for these eloquent spokesmen of evil?

/pause

Thank you. We now resume our regularly scheduled programming.

Totem
#15 Apr 23 2004 at 7:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Step one: clone dinosaurs
Step two: Place dinosaurs in strategically located piles near major cities.
Step three, squish and then puree said dinosaurs. bury, wait 3 million years. Problem solved!
#16 Apr 23 2004 at 7:33 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Quote:

So you are in favor of opening up the Alaskan oil reserves? And offshore drilling? Please find me a way for us to fullfill our oil needs that does not require buying oil from a nation that sponsors terrorism and has massive human rights abuses...

Wow, you know nothing about this, do you? Only about 15 percent of our Oil comes from Saudi Arabia. The vast majority that we import actually comes from Canada and Mexico. We could easily meet our oil needs without ever importing any from any countries that sponsor terrorism. There's not, I repeat, not currently an oil shortage. Particularly not that we're now building a pipeline in Afganistan and have the reserves of Iraq.

There's really no reason to buy oil from Lybia.

Quote:

What a stupid piece of rhetoric Smash. Even for you.

Haha. I like it when you run into a brick wall arguing and resort to "that's stupid" It shows the extent of your cleverness, Cliff. It's up there with your classic "Come on now, folks, we all know..." I like it when you use "folks" it's a good barometer for when the really heavy ******** is coming down.

Look, I don't have a problem with us tading with states that sponsor terrorits. I'm not the one who thinks they're "evil". I have a problem with rampant hypocracy on a such a grand scale.

You seem frustrated lately. Could it be because your arguments are so convincing that Allakhazam, Gitslayer, and Flishtaco are all voting for the Dems for the first time this election?

Hahaha

Predisent Kerry, I CAN HARDLY WAIT!
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#17 Apr 23 2004 at 7:37 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Quote:

I know that it may fly in the face of those who vehemently oppose the "war on terror", but this is a pretty strong bit of evidence that it is working. Not perfectly, and not immediately, but it is certainly bearing fruit. In other words, those 700ish US soldiers did *not* die for nothing...

Just so I understand your iron trap logic here, Cliff, are you trying to say that the incasion of Iraq directly led to Lybia's actions? Because for anyone who doesn't have Wolfowitz **** in their mouths that's a pretty tough sell I'd say.

Wait, what the hell am I doing talking to you about Iraq. You almost fooled me for a second there, Cliff. Lybia is as related to Iraq as 9-11 is.

Let me again say, grow up and post your very own topics on the war if you want. Stop your hero worhip chasing of me when I post then. What are youacomplishing except being beaten down by me and every other random poster who happens by?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#18 Apr 23 2004 at 7:50 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Just so I understand your iron trap logic here, Cliff, are you trying to say that the incasion of Iraq directly led to Lybia's actions? Because for anyone who doesn't have Wolfowitz **** in their mouths that's a pretty tough sell I'd say.



Um... Yeah Smash. Why is that confusing for you?


Are you really the kind of person who can't find his own head without a map and both hands?

9/11 happens.

Bush declares "war on terror", stipulating that nations that harbor terrorist will become targets.

US invades Afghanistan

Some lip service given towards Bush's new policy in Middle East, but not much. Saddam continues to thumb his nose at us.

US invaded Iraq.


Half the damn Middle East craps their pants and comes to the table. Libya practically falls over itself to be our friend and make past wrongs right.


US rewards Libya with a reduction of santions and resumption of non-weapon trade.


Are you seriously suggesting those events were not related? How? Please explain to me why Gadaffi's being such a nice guy all the sudden? Are you saying it's a total coincidence that this happened right after we invaded Iraq? Are you really that dense?


Sheesh. Only you could take a story about a major political win for the administration and try to twist it around. This is huge Smash. It is the justification for what we've been doing in Afghanistan and Iraq. You just don't like that fact because it demolishes your whole argument against the actions we've been taking.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#19 Apr 23 2004 at 8:11 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Quote:

Are you seriously suggesting those events were not related?

Yes, because oddly, I don't see everything that happens in the "war on terror" as being directly related to Iraq.

Quote:

How?

How is it? Because a nation that the Department of State and the UN has been working on for almost ten years over this issue decided they needed the money more than they needed the weapons?

PLEASE EXPLAIN to me how the war in Iraq would have influenced Lybia in any way to take action.

Quote:

Please explain to me why Gadaffi's being such a nice guy all the sudden? Are you saying it's a total coincidence that this happened right after we invaded Iraq?

Yes, I'm saying it's a total coincidence. Because it is.


Quote:

Are you really that dense?

Yes, I am, cleary. I don't swallow everything that comes out of the white house without a second thought. I don't connect Iraq with 9-11, I don't think saddam and osamma were having tea in August 20001. I don't think we needed to invade Iraq to protect the US from an imminent threat and no I don't think Lybia giving up on WMD had much to do with Iraq.

Where's the logic?

What's your theory here, that Lybia thought that while we're mired in Iraq that we're going to launch a full scale invasion of Lybia? Don't know much about the history there, do we? They needed the money, that's about it. Sorry that doesn't fit into your fantasy.

/shrug Not my problem.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#20 Apr 23 2004 at 9:27 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
It's up there with your classic "Come on now, folks, we all know..." I like it when you use "folks" it's a good barometer for when the really heavy bullsh*t is coming down
I like it when he uses the word "but" as a sentance.

"But. What you folks don't understand is..."

Makes me want to buy him a comma, at least.

At least you're using less bold text, so that's a good thing. My monitor was running low on ink displying it all.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#21 Apr 23 2004 at 9:30 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Quote:

At least you're using less bold text, so that's a good thing. My monitor was running low on ink displying it all.

It's not easy.

You have to understand that when I speak I emphasise words pretty much as I would bold them.

If you've heard Richard Clarke speak I pretty much have that same New England Prep accent and a habbit of emphasising individual words when I'm arguing.

I'm sometimes acused of sounding Shatneresque, much to my great chagrin.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#22 Apr 23 2004 at 10:01 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
Lol, I have to meet you in May down in LA.

"Look, the Democratic Party is... mired in the legacy of its'... past. We have to... break... that paradigm. Kerry is... our hope for the future! Dammit, Spock! We have to get our warp drive back on line!"

Heheh.

Totem
#23 Apr 23 2004 at 10:05 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
We should really get together and have a beer. I'll be there for the whole month, I can trudge up to 'frisco if need be.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#24 Apr 26 2004 at 7:23 PM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo wrote:

... I'd hardly qualify Libya surrendering a nearly non-existant WMD program as a sucess...


Ya Iraq tried that too, but we invaded their ***** anyhow. Just another example of the stunning consistency we have come to expect from our White House.

Seriously, does anyone think Bush realized we should invade Iraq after 9-11? Of course he realized it was suddenly politically viable but...


Edit: I will use the preview button...I will use the preview button...

Edited, Mon Apr 26 20:23:56 2004 by yossarian
#25 Apr 26 2004 at 7:34 PM Rating: Good
You know, if a guy wanted to... he could waste his whole life in this forum.
#26 Apr 26 2004 at 7:52 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I'd hardly qualify Libya surrendering a nearly non-existant WMD program as a sucess...


Eh. I would. What exactly is "nearly non-existant"? You either have one, or you don't. Considering the only two issues we've really had with Libya is their WMD programs and terrorist support, getting Gadaffi to back off on both would seem to be a huge win. What more do you want? Promises of free oil? Turning Libya into "Disney Middle-East"? I don't see how you can view this as anything other then a huge success.


yossarian wrote:

Ya Iraq tried that too, but we invaded their ***** anyhow. Just another example of the stunning consistency we have come to expect from our White House.


No. They didn't. Which is why they were invaded. Iraq played the "we don't have to tell you or show you anything, even after a half dozen UN resolutions to the contrary" game, and lost.

If you honestly don't believe that Libya's near 180 degree turn around on both the WMD and terrorism issues is related to our invasion of Iraq, then I think you're just sticking your head in the sand. There simply could not be a clearer cause and effect relationship then the invasion of Iraq and the concessions now being offered by nations like Libya. It really is that cut and dried. If Libya didn't feel that it might be next on "the list", it wouldn't be giving up a damn thing. How much clearer does this have to be?


yossarian wrote:
]Seriously, does anyone think Bush realized we should invade Iraq after 9-11? Of course he realized it was suddenly politically viable but...



Of course he did. The only people who imply that there was no desire to invade Iraq and finish what Bush Sr. started are those who hope to gain political coin by pointing out that "Gasp! Look! They had plans to invade Iraq before 9/11". But just because an administration would *like* to do something doesn't mean it gets done. You take the opportunities when you can get them.

Clinton pushed for years for socialized medicine in the US. He failed. However, I'm quite certain that if an epidemic like SARS had broken out in the US during his presidency that he would have used that to push his agenda. He probably would have succeeded as well. It would not change the fact that he desired to do such a thing before the incident that made it politically possible occured.

Heh. But to be fair, I'm sure that had something like that happened, there would be Republicans that would have jumped up and down and pointed out the desire to create a national health plan before the epidemic, and there would have been inclusions of innuendo that the administration somehow allowed it to happen to push their political plans ahead. And you know what? I would have been calling BS on that bit of conspiracy theory as well.


Heck. People still argue that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen so that FDR could get us into the war with Germany. At what point will people accept that administrations always have plans for things that end up backburnered until the right conditions come along to persue them? I'm sure that somewhere in some government documents, there are plans drawn up for a number of actions both military and political, just sitting there waiting for the right conditions to use them. That really doesn't mean anything sinister unless you really read into them.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 198 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (198)