Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Interactive
Wow, wow hold on a second as I mentioned earlier there's no definite proof that there isn't any and there's no definite proof that there is at this time.
Shot their load over Israel? No, Saddam had alot more than what he shot over at Israel.
Kerry is by no means any better than Bush, especially when it comes to the military, the guy's a raging idiot with no tact whatsoever.
|
Saddams got these weapons and he's sitting there and there is no doubt in his mind at all that the west is after him.He's sitting on a stockpile of weapons that are dangerous enough that 2 of the richest nations on the face of the planet consider it a threat.Does he use them? No he goes on the run and hides in a hole in the floor with a load of cash.Doesn't make sense!!
If he had a single weapon to hand he would of used them! No doubt! Bush and Blair couldn't wait to tell us that he used them on his own ppl,unyet he doesn't use them when his country is invaded! Come on!!! What was he saving them for?????
Kerry is the raging idiot with no tact.
If i went through all the newspapers printed,worldwide since Bush was 'elected' i wonder how many times i would see that sentance starting with Bush's name?
Hasn't this kerry got quite a good and accountable milatary carreer behind him,has even been honoured i believe,where as again there seems to be (oh no) yet another dark cloud of grey area hanging over Bush's military history.
I believe that Kery actually served in Vietnam,i would rather get sent to war by a man who has been there as he knows just what he's sending ppl in to.Plus he's not asking them to do something he wouldn't do himself.
As i said before.i am no fan of either man,but America simply must be able to offer a better choice than Bush.
Threaded Mode