i am a liberal. my friend is a conservative. we argue about politics all the time via email. i call him a chicken hawk and an office hawk. he calls me a chickentaxhawk and commie and stuff. this argument here started after i saw that 8 soldiers were killed in iraq a couple days ago, and i decided to remind him about it via text message ("wmd"). the next morning this exchange began with this link about quotes from the clinton administration regarding the threat posed by sadaam hussein's iraq.

read it through if you have the patience. if you are having similar arguments with people you respect, i empathize.

£ - Liberal Dousche
© - Conservative Dousche

©
http://polipundit.com/index.php?p=18421

£
what does that mean to you? only one group of people sold and started this war.
and only idiots believed and supported them.
wmd.

©
it means you are a blathering brainwashed idiot if you think only one group of ppl started and sold this war, especially in the face of the email i sent you. and i can't wait for there to be a democracy there which you will surely rue.
i'm sorry you need a refresher on all this like it's the 2004 election again which shows you quotes from your favorite dems, at least 9 other reasons bush gave for going in, the senates vote, the media's capitulation, and obvious points like that the whole world thought they had wmds because they either did (there's dozens of declassified iraqi docs showing movements and burying), or it was as simple as hussein (saddam) having convinced his entire staff for the sake of his own security which in turn fooled the free world.

4302. 1993-1996.*
like you really give a shit.

£
are you claiming that bill or hillary clinton would have launched "shock and awe"? no. end of discussion.

name the military campaigns from 1993-96. pretty sure there weren't many good ones. so i don't know what your point is, but i was upset about those lives lost as well. its just that we are sending these emails now. so. you really have no point, but i love that you sent me a link to one of the many conservative trash sites trying to make that a valid point. arguments against sighting the cost of this war are inherently self serving and gross.

you are needy and this war is idiotic.

©
it's impossible to say what hill would do.
the point is that we are losing roughly the same servicemen we do IN PEACE TIME you maroon. and you don't give a fuck or get all antsy when that happens.
and nate, i know you're smart enough to sift thru the conservative jargon and use a fucking hyperlink to a newspaper article which makes dems sound just like bush.
and you're needy, that's why you suck bo's dillz** and continue to be a liberal.
child.

£
no. it isn't impossible. the only idiots that would have started this are the ones that did. and you supported and continue to support them. idiot.

as far as casualties are concerned, your argument is purely irrational. according to your logic, it is safer to be at war. got it. doesn't sound like a manufactured chickenstat that begins with ignoring the deaths of innocent civilians at all. you still can't talk me out of thinking that every single death that is a result of this idiot non-strategy of a war, is senseless.

and you're the one sucking or hating peoples "dillz" and sending the hyperlinks. i don't ever bother you with shit. except texts that obviously hurt your feelings.

©
there will be a democracy there in spite of your wishes. and, you certainly know all about feeeeelings. you still don't understand; or you contort the frame of the discussion...and i'm not surprised. and obviously you don't read my links because they undermine your psychological well being.
i'm not suggesting we should be at war to save troops. and don't insult yourself by pretending to interpret my words that way. i'm saying you have a deathticker in your head that's an animus of your derangement on this topic. that you're inconsistent with your heartbreak over troop deaths this time around because it's, get this, self serving. when in fact they all know damned well what they're doing there and many have joined since wmds were not found. if iraq wasn't happening, they'd be dying in training accidents, small time missions at nearly the same rate! and you wouldn't(haven't) ever say a damned thing about it as evidenced by your complete ignorance in the amount of annual deaths that occur simply maintaining a military. (which are similar to what's going on now despite the war and whatever your pointless opinion is on it) maybe you just need to come out and say you don't support the mission, or the troops since they are giving you such a bad bad name and they willingly buy into this empire building, war mongering shit.
what if they gave a war and no one came nate.
you're the one with hurt feelings.that's why you started in yesterday. about wmds!!! lol

£
so since you haven't joined since the war started, does that mean you still don't believe in it? or are you just here to make sure that liberals know that some of the people that agree with you are willing to fight for it?

you're so brave. your opinions aren't self serving at all. they're so measured. they're so objective. seriously i'm so glad you've grown, because if neither of us trusted our governments every move, we'd probably be muslim already. both of us i mean. i'm a muslim.

you didn't name the military action that occured between 92 and 96. i'd be willing to bet many of those deaths occured in operations resulting from the first gulf war. i know you idiots could care less about the context that your numbers come from, but it might make for a reasonable discussion. one were you don't have to show me how objective you are.

i know. wmd's... totes LOL. i'm loling. totes omg. lol. that old dumb stupid thing that people sold a war with. omg. i can't believe people are even remembering that. as if we have anything to learn from that. lolol. omg totes.


to be continued...



* he's referring to the number of service men/women that died from 1993-1996, in order to provide a different perspective regarding the number of servicemen/women who have died in military operations since the beginning of the war in iraq.


** code for dick. i believe "bo" is his nickname for obama, (?) and that my friend is infering that my partisan tendancies are so strong, that my excitement over barrack obama's candidacy has risen to the point that i will blindly listen to anything he says.