Is the USA at war with pakistan?

[gambit]

I thought this was about Pakistan. How did it get on to Iraq?

Because people cannot resist the convenient rhetorical club called Iraq.

 

[gambit]

my dear sir, my point still remain valid. killing millions of inocent iraqi people on the basis of mere suspicion or rumors is not justifiable. moreover, after the invasion there were no proofs of WMD s presence in iraq.

Where is your source that we killed millions of Iraqis? I have a source run by critics of US that technically dispute you. He employed sound statistical analysis and logical thinking.

by the way the article that i posted earlier was from © Center for American Progress. if you try to go to the links given at the end of each date and event you will be able to find many refernces quoted from US newspapers and US news agencies. here is something about the center of american progress:

About the Center for American Progress

How certain are you that those links are ALL that is in print about Iraq? How certain are you that there are no commentaries that support the Iraq invasion?

i hope this information about the site from which i posted the article and its CEO (former chief of staff of bill clinton) will satisfy your question regarding my dishonest intellectuality to quote anything against US just to say US is bad.

i am sorry sir, but i think i was just sharing my opinion and trying to answer your questions but i never tried any personal remarks about you or question your compabilities/competency and i will like you to be a gentleman and do the same as well, please.

regards

sincerely

Relax...I did not called you intellectually dishonest. That jab was for your source. I called the CAP source intellectually dishonest.

 

[Silent observer]

Where is your source that we killed millions of Iraqis? I have a source run by critics of US that technically dispute you. He employed sound statistical analysis and logical thinking.

How certain are you that those links are ALL that is in print about Iraq? How certain are you that there are no commentaries that support the Iraq invasion?


Relax...I did not called you intellectually dishonest.That jab was for your source. I called the CAP source intellectually dishonest.

dont worry, i was and am fine. anyhow thank you for clearing.
if you do not agree to the writings of CAP run by your former chief of staff, then there is no point left for me giving more evidence from other sources.

as you can provide commetaries supporting iraq invasion, i can provide many to support my point of view and also of killing of inoccent iraqis but why not both of us leave this irrelevent talk (in relation to this thread) and go back to the thread.

regards

sincerely

 

[gambit]

dont worry, i was and am fine. anyhow thank you for clearing.
if you do not agree to the writings of CAP run by your former chief of staff, then there is no point left for me giving more evidence from other sources.

as you can provide commetaries supporting iraq invasion, i can provide many to support my point of view and also of killing of inoccent iraqis but why not both of us leave this irrelevent talk (in relation to this thread) and go back to the thread.

regards

sincerely

Let me put it this way. I have posed questions about this 'WMD' issue that people here avoided. Most here did not know that the UN inspections teams were structured to exclude Americans in the top position. Most here did not know that Saddam's chief nuclear scientist supported the American military overthrow of Saddam. Most here, including you, probably have never bothered to read in-depth what the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty's and the IAEA's missions really said, hence your refusal to explain for all to see what are your interpretation of 'WMD'. The US invasion of Iraq is nothing but a convenient rhetorical club that you can pull out at your leisure then retreat when the questioning become too uncomfortable on what you really know about the issues. Run along and be comfortable in your naivete.

 

[Silent observer]

Let me put it this way. I have posed questions about this 'WMD' issue that people here avoided. Most here did not know that the UN inspections teams were structured to exclude Americans in the top position. Most here did not know that Saddam's chief nuclear scientist supported the American military overthrow of Saddam. Most here, including you, probably have never bothered to read in-depth what the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty's and the IAEA's missions really said, hence your refusal to explain for all to see what are your interpretation of 'WMD'. The US invasion of Iraq is nothing but a convenient rhetorical club that you can pull out at your leisure then retreat when the questioning become too uncomfortable on what you really know about the issues. Run along and be comfortable in your naivete.

my dear friend i was the one who is trying to finish this topic but you on the other hand want to continue with this topic.

about your points:

okay, americans were excluded from the teams and the saddams chief nuclear scientist supported US invasion of iraq but i can not think it qualify US (or any other country of the world) to invade iraq or any other country. killing of innocent iraqi people, yes i was right and how can you say that US has taken over iraq after a war and not even a single civilian had been killed (no one will believe that my friend, by the way can you post something which support that no one civilian was killed during iraq s invasion).

about running away, my friend both of us we have different opinions and we were not able to convince each other so decency requires that both of us walk away and this is what i have tried to do so now can we be a gentle men and go back to the topic of this thread because we will find many opportunities on this forum to discuss this iraq, US invasion and WMD issue.

regards

sincerely

 

[gambit]

about running away, my friend both of us we have different opinions and we were not able to convince each other so decency requires that both of us walk away and this is what i have tried to do so now can we be a gentle men and go back to the topic of this thread because we will find many opportunities on this forum to discuss this iraq, US invasion and WMD issue.

regards

sincerely

Funny that you have the gall to lecture to me about staying on topic when it was YOU back on page 2 who introduce this WMD issue, remember?

can i ask one thing why US attacked iraq second time, i mean till todate they were not able to find any weapons of mass destruction, arnt they?

Now you put on airs while running away after being challenged. So keep this lesson in mind.

 

[Silent observer]

Funny that you have the gall to lecture to me about staying on topic when it was YOU back on page 2 who introduce this WMD issue, remember?Now you put on airs while running away after being challenged. So keep this lesson in mind.

my dear friend i am not running away and we will find enough threads on this forum to discuss about WMD and iraq invasion by US. both of us have hijacked this thread and started another discussion and i just do not want to continue doing it here.


about lesson in mind, i can not understand what lesson you are talking about??

regards

sincerely