Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 03-12-2008, 06:51 AM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichC View Post
.

Yes some Democrats did vote for the war.

But, there decisions had to be partly based on the information that was
given to them that has turned out to be lies.

Like...
Weapons of mass destruction
Iraq being a eminent threat to the US
Fearmongering of the terrorists are gonna get you !

And where did these lies and fearmongering come from.
Republicans.


RichC
, read the 9/11 Commission Report and then tell me about falsified intelligence.

B

Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 03-12-2008, 07:36 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
, read the 9/11 Commission Report and then tell me about falsified intelligence.

B
This is not a point you can argue aginst.
The fact is that the president and the vice president both lied about
Weapons of mass destruction.
They did not exist.
They were told that they did not exist by the CIA and others.
People specifically sent to find out if anyting did exist came back and
said no, nothing exists.


RichC

.
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 03-12-2008, 07:41 AM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichC View Post
1. This is not a point you can argue aginst.
2. The fact is that the president and the vice president both lied about Weapons of mass destruction.
3. They did not exist.
4. They were told that they did not exist by the CIA and others....



.
,
1. Why do you avoid knowledge of that which you allege?
2. Prove it.
3. They did.
4. False.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 03-12-2008, 08:22 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Fowler View Post
Thanks for the personal attack and analysis.
There was absolutely no personal attack in what I said.
I did attack your points of view and what you said.

Quote:
I would bet my carbon footprint is smaller than yours.
I think it would be extremely hard for your carbon footprint to be smaller.

We run our vehicles on waste vegetable oil.
One of which was rescued from the junk yard.

Our home is all electric, and we buy electricity from Green Mountain energy, and is generated solely by wind and water power.
Where they do use any fossil fuels they make up the carbon points
by planting trees.

We recycle, reduce, and reuse, what we can.
Which is allot.

I wear lots of second hand clothes.

Most of our food comes from local grown, organic sources.

And I have produced a fertilizer called Tera Preta that
actually traps carbon for use in growing plants.

We are getting close to being carbon negative.

Quote:
Lets take your pie-in-the-sky idealism one point at a time:
Public transportation---Will work for some, but not all. Unless you are going to mandate that people live only in cities and get permission to live in rural areas. In my job, I carry a radioactive device for work--I am not permitted to use public transportation.
It is not pie-in-the-sky idealism.
I put effort into what I think is right.
Public transportation cuts down on energy use.
Get you and your radioactive device a bicycle.

Quote:
Alternative fuels--OK, but there is a price to pay--Have you seen the rise in corn products since so much is used for ethanol production? Is this cost accounted for?
I agree, ethanol is a joke, money making scam.

Quote:

Wind and solar---OK, but realistically speaking, what % of the solution do they represent? If you cannot see how nuclear power can save oil, than how will wind and solar contribute?
Enough solar energy falls on the planet in one day to power
the world for a year.

Quote:
Also the Elitist will not allow wind farms to be built if it spoils theie view--think Kennedy and Streisand.
There are some idiots in this world.

Quote:
I am all for reducing the amount of power I consume. I drive fuel efficient cars- ( No Hummer--hate them!), but it would be arrogant of me to determine how much fuel and energy you require. Just as it is arrogant of Al Gore to use waste energy while telling me to conserve. My house is about 1200 SF so my impact is not large.
The problem is government types--people who think government should contrrol all resources and parcel them out as they deem appropriate that is the problem.
I am not for big government.
I do not need the government to play mommy and daddy for me.
The government is what has gotten us into this war and this energy mess.

Quote:
You say we conquer the middle easr for its oil---so how much oil have we taken in our time in Iraq?
That is what was in the story by the general you quoted.

Quote:
For the foreseable future OIL is the energy source. We need to be loking at alternatives, but solar and wind are not nearly sufficient. We keep hearing that practical electric cars are almost here. But I've been hearing that for 40 years, and still electric cars are impractical for most people. Proponents of electric cars still have not solved the dispoasl issue--so it is simply ignored when they talk so glowingly about them.
Go rent and watch a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car.
Then get back with me on that one.

Quote:
Do you really think the Chinese, with their awakening industry will go solar and wind powered?
Yes, especially after we use up all the oil.

Quote:
Do you see yourself as a left-wing nut??
No, it is people like you that have to put me in some sort of category.
Personally I am a realist.
I try my best to see the world for what it is,
and to make the best decisions I can for all involved.

I am honest, wise, and content.
How well do you sleep at night ?

Quote:
Your impratical utopianism makes me laugh!
Wow, that is not arrogant at all !
Your fear based, self centered, ego driven, hedonism is disgusting to me.

My way, or what you call utopianism,
is not impractical,
I live it.
And many others do too.


RichC

.
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 03-12-2008, 08:32 AM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,598
Burning veggie instead of diesel does not reduce your carbon emissions. Think about it.

B
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 03-12-2008, 08:37 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
,
1. Why do you avoid knowledge of that which you allege?
2. Prove it.
3. They did.
4. False.
I do not wish to go find the links yet a third time.
Go look them up in the last thread where you started this.

If you cannot see that there were massive amounts of bull**** and
manipulation behind getting this war started you need to do some
more reading.

No wait, I will provide some links.
Here is some reading for you.

Now this is the end of this argument !
  • Lie #1 - Uranium from Niger - Bush said "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." in his State of the Union Address. The documents supporting that statement were forged.
  • Lie #2 - Iraq and 9/11 - Bush led people to believe that Iraq was involved with 9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speeches. This was so effective that at one point 70% of Americans actually believed Saddam was behind 9/11. Bush has since admitted that this was not true.
  • Lie #3 - Congress Knew - Bush has stated that Congress had access to all the same information that the White House had. Thus he should not be blamed for making the mistake of going to war. But Bush was briefed many times about the falsehood of various stories and this information never reached Congress. [ZNet]
  • Lie #4 - Aluminum Tubes - Bush, Cheney, Rice and Powell said that some aluminum tubes Iraq attempted to buy were intended for use in a uranium centrifuge to create nuclear weapons. These were the only physical evidence he had against Iraq. But it turns out this evidence had been rejected by the Department of Energy and other intelligence agencies long before Bush used them in his speeches. [NYTimes] [MotherJones] [CNN]
  • Lie #5 - Iraq and Al Qaeda - Bush still insists that there was a "relationship" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. But the 9/11 Commission released a report saying, among other things, that there was no "collaborative relationship" between Al Qaeda and Iraq. The nature of the relationship seems to be that Al Qaeda asked for help and Iraq refused. Al Qaeda was opposed to Saddam Hussein because Saddam led a secular government instead of an Islamic government. [ZNet] [CNN] On 9/8/06 a Senate panel reported there was no relationship. [ABC]
  • Lie #6 - Weapons of Mass Destruction - Bush insisted that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction but his "evidence" consisted mostly of forged documents, plagiarized student papers, and vague satellite photos. The United Nations was on the ground in Iraq and could find nothing. After extensive searches Bush was finally forced to admit that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.
  • Lie #7 - Mobile Weapons Labs - Bush and his team repeatedly claimed that Iraq possessed mobile weapons labs capable of producing anthrax. Colin Powell showed diagrams of them at his speech before the UN to justify invading Iraq. These claims originated from Curveball, a discredited Iraqi informer who fed Bush many of the stories related to WMD. On May 29, 2003, two small trailers matching the description were found in Iraq. A team of bio-weapons experts examined the trailers and concluded they were simply designed to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. But, for over a year, Bush claimed these were part of Iraq's bio-weapons program. The expert's report was suppressed and only recently made public. [WashPost] [ABC]
Here is a link that all of the hyperlinks work on.
http://www.impeachbush.tv/args/iraqlies.html


RichC

.
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 03-12-2008, 08:59 AM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,598
1. The link to Niger was proven by Joe Wilson, who later changed his story (to put it diplomatically) for his NY Times article. Look it up.

2. The link is in your mind, not mine. I heard the same speeches.

3. Congress had access to the same information. Whether they chose to review it is their decision.

4. There were mixed interpretations from intel about the tubes. If you view the evidence in a time sequence then you'll understand that initial reports and later reports differ. You know, as people learned more.

5. Read the 9/11 Commission Report. There were periodic talks that started early and were not friendly but became friendlier with time. Read the report yourself, don't take my word for it. Do your own research. Learn on your own, not what some knucklehead tells you.

6. Wrong. Ask the Kurds & Iranians about their dead from poison gas attacks.

7. The weapons lab thing was based on aerial reconnaissance. It wasn't proven otherwise until ground inspections. Ground inspections weren't possible until after Saddam was deposed. Can you guess why?

You cite a source that is plainly biased. Good job!

B
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 03-12-2008, 09:11 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
.

Ok Bot.

I see that nothing will convince you but words straight from the
horses mouth so here you go.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/21/bush-on-911/


RichC

.
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 03-12-2008, 09:18 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
.

And here, the white house concedes that the president lied.

http://www.laborlawtalk.com/archive/index.php/t-95822.html


RichC
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 03-12-2008, 09:20 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
.

Is there a source that I can have that you will not consider biased.

I mean the sources were from everone from Mother Earth News, to ABC

what more do you want ?
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 03-12-2008, 09:24 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichC View Post
.

Yes some Democrats did vote for the war.

But, there decisions had to be partly based on the information that was
given to them that has turned out to be lies....
I don't buy that, although I have no way of knowing what was in the minds of the Democrats who voted in 2002 to authorize the use of military force in Iraq. There is no doubt in my mind that the Administration lied, repeatedly, about the supposed threat posed by Saddam, but I doubt that people like Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were fooled by those lies. The lies, combined with many honest errors, mislead the public and therefore provided political cover for Clinton and Edwards to vote in favor of the 2002 resolution, but I doubt that those votes were cast in good faith. Of course, I don't know everything they knew, so I could be wrong. I just think that if there was a good reason for authorizing force, we would have heard it by now.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 03-12-2008, 09:26 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
...6. Wrong. Ask the Kurds & Iranians about their dead from poison gas attacks...
Please explain how Saddam's past attacks against the Kurds and Iranians have any relevance to the supposed threat that Saddam posed to us in 2002.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 03-12-2008, 10:10 AM
RichC's Avatar
Internal Error 404
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by dculkin View Post
I don't buy that, although I have no way of knowing what was in the minds of the Democrats who voted in 2002 to authorize the use of military force in Iraq. There is no doubt in my mind that the Administration lied, repeatedly, about the supposed threat posed by Saddam, but I doubt that people like Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were fooled by those lies. The lies, combined with many honest errors, mislead the public and therefore provided political cover for Clinton and Edwards to vote in favor of the 2002 resolution, but I doubt that those votes were cast in good faith. Of course, I don't know everything they knew, so I could be wrong. I just think that if there was a good reason for authorizing force, we would have heard it by now.
Yes, that is an assumption that I made.
That some of the participants may have been swayed by the bull.
I cannot truly know why they voted the way they did.
But the broad statement by Bot that the Democrats voted for the war
before they voted against it needed some prefacing.

Even I was swayed further to the side of war than what I thought I
would be. But I never crossed the line.
And in light of these later events, I am glad that I was not put into a
position of having to vote one way or the other.

My main argument was that the democrats may have been swayed by the
bull, and that they are not wishy washy as was suggested by Bot.

I get tired of Right wing Republicans blaming everyone else for the
problems in the world.

And I have a big mouth, and balls enough to say what I think.

Thanks

RichC

.
__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 03-12-2008, 11:08 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,263
W had a good reason to think that Hussein had weapons. Ronald and Poppy sold them to him. Then turned their back on him. Just like they did to the Iranians. No wonder nobody over there likes us.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 03-12-2008, 12:58 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
I find it funny that Bot claims he isn't a republican. His was probably the most desperate defense of the Bush administration that I've ever seen.

Let's not forget the famous quote of Chenney in the run-up to the war : "There's no doubt that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction." I remember when I first heard him say that that was the time I completely turned against the prospect of invading. I knew that statement was complete BS given what we actually knew and what we were seeing on the ground. Needless to say I was not surprised when no such weapons were found.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page