Amazing similarities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

The vast majority of countries in the world were against you. Coalition numbers were 50 countries... the number of countries in the world is 192. Seems like a pretty clear majority to me. (These numbers are from Google).

In terms of populations, it is also clear that the support for the war was largely only there in terms of the US people. The numbers for population in Britain, and the other "large" coalition allies, were and are much against the war.

Also, in terms of WORLD population, the most populous countries were AGAINST the war. China and Russia alone are pretty huge in people, don't you think?

---

So that's your proof? Come on man, you're as hollow if not more so than my last post (I love a good paradox). Fact is, 50 countries had armies that they could send in support of this venture, the others may not have supported the war with troops, but their absence doesn't automatically imply they were against our policy at all, in fact it doesn’t imply anything at all...so do better next time if you have a fact to add.

The Russian President has been in support of Bush for some time now, and their original policy against the war in Iraq doesn't depict the populations vote any more than our going to war depicts our populations vote. So again your facts base is whack. At least when I came in here with conjecture and speculation, I didn't try to back any of it up with hollow research.

Go back to watching your robot wars... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

See Clam, in an effort to "rattle my cage" you've effectively undermined your core agenda. Even your own camp is refuting your statement...thank you very much for your time, see you next month when you decide to drop back in. :wave: It was fun while it lasted... :p

---

Yeah, what's up with that? Hey Clam, is it us: WD you miss so much, or just teh Ya_k?https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gifhttps://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

Yeah, what's up with that? Hey Clam, is it us: WD you miss so much, or just teh Ya_k?https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gifhttps://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gif

---

Or maybe it's just that when he's in here with us it's only because his gay clam forums are down (not “going down”, but unavailable, I must choose my words wisely)...so he has to "slum" with us until things get back to sliming in his neck of the woods... :eek2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

So that's your proof? Come on man, you're as hollow if not more so than my last post (I love a good paradox). Fact is, 50 countries had armies that they could send in support of this venture, the others may not have supported the war with troops, but their absence doesn't automatically imply they were against our policy at all, in fact it doesn’t imply anything at all...so do better next time if you have a fact to add.

The Russian President has been in support of Bush for some time now, and their original policy against the war in Iraq doesn't depict the populations vote any more than our going to war depicts our populations vote. So again your facts base is whack. At least when I came in here with conjecture and speculation, I didn't try to back any of it up with hollow research.

Go back to watching your robot wars... ;)

---

Ok this post makes no sense whatsoever.

You say that the fact that the countries that didn't join you doesn't necessarily mean they were against you. I remember a LOT of political rhetoric from Dubya and Co. saying quite specifically, either you're with us or against us.

You say that the fact that a country went to war doesn't reflect its population's vote. You are SUPPORTING my point when you say that!

You say that you came here with conjecture and speculation and didn't bother trying to back it up with research. Are you actually trying to convince people you are right? Or are you secretly a democratic provocateur?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

Yeah, what's up with that? Hey Clam, is it us: WD you miss so much, or just teh Ya_k?https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gifhttps://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gif

---

The facts of the matters are this: number one, I have a life. Number two, while Windrivers is cool in many ways, it's definitely NOT the most interesting place on the internet. And Ya_K doesn't bother me as much as he used to... I have gotten over my "techs-itis". :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

Or maybe it's just that when he's in here with us it's only because his gay clam forums are down (not “going down”, but unavailable, I must choose my words wisely)...so he has to "slum" with us until things get back to sliming in his neck of the woods... :eek2:

---

I just adore how this comes from the guy who thinks that his opponents are trying to conduct a smear campaign... :D :D :D

Play nice Ya_Know. Every single poll except possibly from Britain has shown not just a majority against the war but a large majority.
Ya_Really don't think our war in Iraq is supported by a majority of the worlds citizens, now do you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

The facts of the matters are this: number one, I have a life. Number two, while Windrivers is cool in many ways, it's definitely NOT the most interesting place on the internet. And Ya_K doesn't bother me as much as he used to... I have gotten over my "techs-itis". :D

D

---

I'm reporting you to NooNoo. How dare you come in here then profess you have a life!?! One negates the other...

(Face it..I am so much more brilliant than you are…)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

Play nice Ya_Know. Every single poll except possibly from Britain has shown not just a majority against the war but a large majority.
Ya_Really don't think our war in Iraq is supported by a majority of the worlds citizens, now do you?

---

Those taking the polls were probably ill-informed by sh!theads like Moore bilging their bile all over the world that America didn’t support it’s own war, or it’s own president.

Not to mention, what polls, and who actually administered them…what are their accuracy? Crap, it’s all crap.

I am basing this on fact that the world wants us as the global police force, it’s the way it has been for too many years. And the world at large is against tyranny. Do they support the war with Iraq? Well not directly, but in their hearts they support our cause 100%…well except for the other evil dictators of the world…Do you see my points?

Even you all here against me right now, support the need to get rid of Saddam 100%, but because it was Bush at the helm, you’ve hidden behind these farces, and fake ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

I am basing this on fact that the world wants us as the global police force, it’s the way it has been for too many years.

---

And what are you basing this "fact" on?

Did you ASK the world if they wanted you as coppers? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

Those taking the polls were probably ill-informed by sh!theads like Moore bilging their bile all over the world that America didn’t support it’s own war, or it’s own president.

Not to mention, what polls, and who actually administered them…what are their accuracy? Crap, it’s all crap.

I am basing this on fact that the world wants us as the global police force, it’s the way it has been for too many years. And the world at large is against tyranny. Do they support the war with Iraq? Well not directly, but in their hearts they support our cause 100%…well except for the other evil dictators of the world…Do you see my points?

Even you all here against me right now, support the need to get rid of Saddam 100%, but because it was Bush at the helm, you’ve hidden behind these farces, and fake ideas.

---

You are totally wrong in thinking that the worlds citizens secretly wanted us to invade Iraq.
As to "Even you all here against me right now, support the need to get rid of Saddam 100%, but because it was Bush at the helm, you’ve hidden behind these farces, and fake ideas"
I agree somewhat. Speaking for myself it is good Saddam is gone (for the Iraqis and the world). I think it could have been done in a similiar manner to what we did in Afghanistan. The Kurds were already beyond his control and we could have helped the Iraqi people overthrow Saddam. But the way it was done was just about the worst way possible. And since Bush was in charge of that he has to take the blame.
btw I would also be happy if the N. Korean wacko were gone. Plus the mad mullahs of Iran.

I sort of see a "You want me on that wall, you need me on that wall" idea coming from you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

As to "Even you all here against me right now, support the need to get rid of Saddam 100%, but because it was Bush at the helm, you’ve hidden behind these farces, and fake ideas"
I agree somewhat. ...

I sort of see a "You want me on that wall, you need me on that wall" idea coming from you.

---

That was all you had to say...I rest my case. https://forums.windrivers.com/

I'm willing to concede that Saddam had to go.

BUT, what about China, Korea, most of Africa, many other 3rd world countries and banana republics?

When are they going to be liberated?

Answer: Never.

No Saudis or oil involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

I'm willing to concede that Saddam had to go.

BUT, what about China, Korea, most of Africa, many other 3rd world countries and banana republics?

When are they going to be liberated?

Answer: Never.

No Saudis or oil involved.

---

The real reason:
They are not at war with us!!! If they were, the story would be different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

That was all you had to say...I rest my case. https://forums.windrivers.com/

---

That should go in the Misquotes thread. Please fix.

EDIT- Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

The real reason:
They are not at war with us!!! If they were, the story would be different.

---

Saddam was never at war with the States, except as the US started it.

Admitted: he hates the US. I am quite certain he would obliterate the US if he had the capability. But so would a lot of other places, and a lot of them have a lot MORE capability than he ever had!

If you are referring to Al Qaeda and the terrorist attacks, then I will ALSO admit that Saddam has ties to terrorism and would and probably has encouraged and supported terrorist attacks against the US. But AGAIN, there are a lot of other countries that are just as bad or worse than Iraq ever was.

AGAIN, tis true, Saddam had to go for all these reasons. But OTHER people need to go MORE!

Come on, Bush. In the words of Bill Goldberg... WHOSE NEXT?

Please someone name me a country anywhere in the world that has the balls to formally declare war on the United States?

Iraq would never, ever have formally declared war. So they did minor things in the background. "Unofficial" sort of speak.