You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
I'm not attacking you, I think buzz ignoring you when you are trying to join the discussion is wrong but that's on him.
I've no issue with you whatsoever.
Nope. I'm ignoring him when he's changing the whole discussion to something that fit's his narrative by saying (and I quote):
Ok...uh...we weren’t deceived into Iraq? Ok buddy
Well, I never said whether we were or weren't. Mitch wants to have this discussion because it makes him feel good. I'm not interested.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:buzzsaw wrote:Have a good day mitch.
Wow with you. There is no winning with you. This is a discussion it doesn’t need to have a winner and a loser. And the topics can be fluid. I don’t know what the fuck your problem is all the time.
You do what you do every time and this is how I will handle you every time you do it to keep the peace. I was not in any conversation about why we were in Iraq, I didn't say anything about why we were in Iraq, and I will not be saying anything about why we were in Iraq because that is fairly well documented. If you want to have that discussion with others, go for it. I will not be participating; nor will you force me into participating by saying I said something that I didn't.
So as I said, have a nice day.
You are in a thread in which all of these topics are relevant today. Me responding to you specifically does not mean that I am assuming you said anything. If that’s how you’ve been interpreting this for the past few years then I get why you are so offended all the time.
Re: US Politics Thread
buzzsaw wrote:mitchejw wrote:Wow with you. There is no winning with you. This is a discussion it doesn’t need to have a winner and a loser. And the topics can be fluid. I don’t know what the fuck your problem is all the time.
You do what you do every time and this is how I will handle you every time you do it to keep the peace. I was not in any conversation about why we were in Iraq, I didn't say anything about why we were in Iraq, and I will not be saying anything about why we were in Iraq because that is fairly well documented. If you want to have that discussion with others, go for it. I will not be participating; nor will you force me into participating by saying I said something that I didn't.
So as I said, have a nice day.
You are in a thread in which all of these topics are relevant today. Me responding to you specifically does not mean that I am assuming you said anything. If that’s how you’ve been interpreting this for the past few years then I get why you are so offended all the time.
No bro, you made up something to get me into a conversation I have zero interest in. Show me one post - any post - I made in this thread where I said anything about why we got into Iraq besides the ones telling you I'm not interested in that discussion. You replied to my post, so tell me what I said that gave you ANY indication I was interested in discussing why we were in Iraq.
Re: US Politics Thread
buzzsaw wrote:Listen, I'd be thrilled to stay out of most of the international conflicts that we get into, so I'm certainly not an advocate of any of this. But the reality is we are the free world's police force whether we like it or not. That's why many of those countries don't spend like we do. If we didn't, they'd have no choice but to spend more.
People globally may view us negatively, but we get the first call from anyone facing issues they don't know how to solve regardless of what that issue is. You cannot expect us to bail countries out when they are in trouble then expect us to walk away allowing whatever it was to happen again. We're going to protect our interests. You can't have one without the other. Not the way things are now or have been since WWI. Regardless of why we were in the Middle East, just leaving wasn't an option. Obama wanted to do it and knew he couldn't. If we're going to be everybody's big brother, there's a cost that goes along with it.
Please explain how this applies to Iraq. Those aren’t the reasons we originally went there.
This is you wanting to make it about why we got into Iraq.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:buzzsaw wrote:Listen, I'd be thrilled to stay out of most of the international conflicts that we get into, so I'm certainly not an advocate of any of this. But the reality is we are the free world's police force whether we like it or not. That's why many of those countries don't spend like we do. If we didn't, they'd have no choice but to spend more.
People globally may view us negatively, but we get the first call from anyone facing issues they don't know how to solve regardless of what that issue is. You cannot expect us to bail countries out when they are in trouble then expect us to walk away allowing whatever it was to happen again. We're going to protect our interests. You can't have one without the other. Not the way things are now or have been since WWI. Regardless of why we were in the Middle East, just leaving wasn't an option. Obama wanted to do it and knew he couldn't. If we're going to be everybody's big brother, there's a cost that goes along with it.
Please explain how this applies to Iraq. Those aren’t the reasons we originally went there.
It doesn't matter any more why we went there. Get into reality mitch. We're there. We can't just leave and even your god Obama didn't just leave for a reason. Stop and absorb that. Life isn't fantasy land. There are consequences for everything. NOTHING comes without a cost and not all cost is financial cost.
This is me nicely telling you to piss off.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:buzzsaw wrote:Listen, I'd be thrilled to stay out of most of the international conflicts that we get into, so I'm certainly not an advocate of any of this. But the reality is we are the free world's police force whether we like it or not. That's why many of those countries don't spend like we do. If we didn't, they'd have no choice but to spend more.
People globally may view us negatively, but we get the first call from anyone facing issues they don't know how to solve regardless of what that issue is. You cannot expect us to bail countries out when they are in trouble then expect us to walk away allowing whatever it was to happen again. We're going to protect our interests. You can't have one without the other. Not the way things are now or have been since WWI. Regardless of why we were in the Middle East, just leaving wasn't an option. Obama wanted to do it and knew he couldn't. If we're going to be everybody's big brother, there's a cost that goes along with it.
Please explain how this applies to Iraq. Those aren’t the reasons we originally went there.
This is you wanting to make it about why we got into Iraq.
Go back and look...Irish asked specifically about Iraq and trusting the government. It has nothing to do with you.
- IRISH OS1R1S
- Rep: 59
Re: US Politics Thread
I think I brought up Iraq as a possible answer to your question of what changed in America.
Regardless I'm out for a bit. 
Re: US Politics Thread
buzzsaw wrote:mitchejw wrote:Please explain how this applies to Iraq. Those aren’t the reasons we originally went there.
This is you wanting to make it about why we got into Iraq.
Go back and look...Irish asked specifically about Iraq and trusting the government. It has nothing to do with you.
Go back and look at the conversation I was having with Irish. Tell me where I said anything to him about why we got into Iraq. I'll be waiting...
Re: US Politics Thread
You don't seem to understand that I don't have to have the conversation that you want me to and you don't get to make things up to drag me into the conversation that you want to have. I've played that game with you too many times and I'm done. So...
Have a nice day mitch.
