Re: "Well, that was clear as mud. I guess you must want us to kind of wing it until we find the gov't that meets your requirements."
If was clear as a bell that my reply offered you a well-defined broad range of less government such as I would like to see(which ought have satisfied you if you wish to correctly catagorize me as one who believes in less government). Your prior implication that I believe in no government remains false, as is your later implication that I am outside of the norm among Libertarians and/or Republicans for denying so. If you want specifics, show me the replies you can give to the issues and answers you'll find here in this, I think, wonderful book:
ruwart.com
Hey, you can download it for free.
Re: "Come again? Are you asking for clarity from yourself? I am not surprised"
I take it you are unfamiliar with the common usage of this phrase, particularly when following a precise denunciation of anothers words.
Re: "Relax? You're funny!"
Yes, I suppose I am, and I suppose you indeed can't relax (no matter how many times you fail to "come again").
Re: "Not only was Saddam not a threat to us, he was no longer a threat to his neighbors. Conservatives, and apparently, libertarians have an overactive imagination that exceeds even Disney's."
Well now, it is difficult to believe you after reading no more than this:
odci.gov
I supppose you'd like the rest of us to accept that the realities noted in David Kay's report are naught but his imagination, too. No thanks. Well agree then, to disagree. America and the world is safer for having taken action in Iraq, IMO.
Re: "And you WERE pre emptive and a bit rude"
Me? Rude? As you like it, but no, you left out what I'd written in order to bolster your claim that I was pre-emptive(a half truth, particularly in a case like this, is a whole lie). I gave you a swell explanation of my opinion for you to respond to, and all I got in return was ad hominem crap.
Re: "Who cares? My conversation is not dictated by phraseology"
Again, you probably would love the reader to believe I said nothing more on the point involved than you've quoted(you certainly don't seem to want to attempt to respond).
Re: "There you go again trying to dictate the results"
Hey, you quoted more! I can no longer count the times you've employed this non-argument. I state what I believe, you state what you do. They are opposites on this issue. I no more dictate results by stating my opinion than you do by stating yours. What is your real beef? Do you have real replies? Can your refute information in David Kay's report, or are you just stubborn in the face of facts?
Re: "And again, your point was?"
My point was that Freedom works for questions of trash and treasure, and dictates that we prevent ourselves from being murdered by taking actions such as Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Re: "Its probably just you(who thinks most all Iraqis approve of American led reconstruction projects)."
This truly deserves no more than a hearty LOL, Democrats will again agree.
Re: "The act of war is a tyrannical state. Its often justified by noble causes but the reality is that the perpetrator rarely accomplishes the noble goals that it claims will be accomplished; to whit, Hitler in Europe, the US in Vietnam, Saddam in Kuwait, and the US again but this time in Iraq....I think its now inevitable that we will be hit again. Its only a matter of time. And more effort will be expended by our enemies to make it happen.
Most of us thought another attack was inevitable since the morning of 9/11/01. Our enemies simply don't retain the same capacity to attack as they had prior to the liberation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Don't forget to add the American Revolution to your list of wars above(among many other interesting examples, no doubt).
Re: "There you go again trying to dictate the results"
No, just stating my opinion, LOL, as I am free to do.
Freedom Works,
Dan B. |
