fleblebleb

Heeheehee, it's a multipurpose gremlin to you Johnny, stay out of the soup

Did they sometimes put their foot in their mouth?

Fict, fictous, fictious, fictitious, fictititious. Discuss, ad nauseam.

I love threads that have no comprehensible posts

Actually, instead of training for cold you can just jack up your calorie consumption, especially solid fats, for that American climber find cookie most useful to eat in many quantities and good to wash down with hot coffee flavor milk drinks.

Are you drinking again Johnny? :

Schweet!

Nice try, Tomweasel! Damn, at least admit when you're blatantly busted, 'cause you are. Busted, that is. By the sumbitchin' Lexicon Police. Forget it, he not only won't admit it, he won't even get it. But boy did she get him good

Your own opinion of yourself isn't worth much Tom, and it seems quite a few of the rest of the crowd here find you about as articulate as a horse

Avy danger going to high on the east side

My daddy can beat up your daddy!

Please please point out my "playground logic". I challenge you to bring that to the table .. where is my playground logic at fleblebleb? I understand you are frustrated with your lack of understanding concerning the current Iraq invasion, but don't take it out on those of us who are attempting to uncloud your brain. I haven't said a single word about my personal opinion of the Iraq war Tom. I'm just here for watching you. Don't fall off the horse!

Relax Trask, this stopped being a discussion about war or not a long time ago, now it's just making fun of Tom's rhetoric, or horsemanship, or whatever. Funniest part: Everything on this thread was already hashed over many many times by you, DFA and Greg W

Bullshit Tom. You're applying playground logic to international politics. Oops, should have said horseshit

Ya Tom's horse definitely also had a bigger pecker than Einstein

Yes, with a taint of horse manure

Either the enemy, or we don't know what you're useful for

Bah, Tom's cavalry horse was smarter than either of them and more brutal too!

Hah-haha, I found the article so stupid and baseless that I thought you'd written it! Go work on some horsemanship skills Tom! Yee-haw!

Cite WHICH sources AlpineK? You name them, I'll cite them. It's hard to believe that the only thing preventing you from presenting logical rebuttals is the notion that I didn't cite my sources. In my opinion, there are no sources to cite in the above posts. If you feel differently, point me to the fact in question and, like I said, I would be more than happy to cite a legitimate source. But please don't let this affect your ability to argue logically. A good debator will have no problem picking apart a counter argument regardless of whether or not sources have been cited for the point they're arguing against. Edit : And while we're on the subject of citing sources, I want to see sources cited for the war for oil argument. Heh, I tried to talk to you without calling you names, and I did pick apart one of your arguments which was, to put it mildly, not exactly carefully constructed, and boy did you bounce back from that one Not even a word to dispute what I said Tom? Hmm, could it be that you're beaten, and that it's just easier to yell back at the other people? Too bad you're showing off as a complete idiot in the last exchange as well, eh? You agree to cite your sources if we point them out to you, that's damn nice of you isn't it? Saddle up Tom, it's back to the cavalry with you

:coffee-splurting-gremlin: You should hook up with skisports, the two of you would make an awesome couple. Jon & Timmy, mastahs of deception! How are you going to top this guys?

So, sounds like they're going in to stay and rebuild and stuff. Should be a great opportunity to reunite the international community and possibly even stabilize the region. Why would you contact small contractors for a giant job?

Sorry, got distracted. Let's simply assume, and not argue, that the US is not after oil in Iraq. True or not, it is beside the point for now. That doesn't preclude oil from being a reason behind the war. Oil is the only notable natural resource in the middle east. It's therefore a main reason for western involvement in the politics of the region, especially since the Cold War concluded. Without oil money some of the more or less feudal governments in Arabic nations could not hold onto power, possibly including Hussein's. Oil money also supports the fundis and by that token, oil in some ways could be construed to be a reason behind 9-11. Beyond that, without the oil interest the fundis objection to western presence in Islamic countries would be pointed at Israel only. What led Hussein to invade Kuwait? It was likely oil, and even more so improved access to the Gulf - for shipping oil. Without the Kuwait invasion, would there be an Iraq war? Western civilization is heavily dependent on oil for transportation and other things. Would pulling out of the middle east be an option? What if there were no oil there? Would there be any reason to be there in the first place? How is oil NOT a reason behind the war? Actually, there are more things that are easy to pick apart than just the connection between your first and second sentence. "Taking" an oil field in 1991 is somewhat of a perplexing notion, you can't just load these things onto a tanker and ship out. Instead you have to take political control of the region containing the oil fields, which Bush senior apparently deemed too costly considering the possible military opposition, international fallout etc. Of course, retaining control of oil fields while returning the profits of oil sales to the population is not that complicated, since whoever is in control gets to decide how much is profit and how much is cost.

Actually, being a college student does make you educated. That's the whole point. However, you can dispute the quality of the education, and students may not all be well informed, but hey - that's splitting hairs isn't it? Nope, that was not the understanding that reading your prior posts led me to. Tom, I have made no arguments concerning the war. I just found fault with your one-sided dismissal of other people's arguments. Fine, I'll play rhetoric with you. Which of your arguments do you want me to rebut?