Well of course its my opinion. Isn't that the point of this? But maybe you ought to at least give your opinion more than just a coating of self confidence. Maybe express it instead of just identifying its existance in abstract space.

And the statistics aren't about whether people only watch one channel. They infer that people who get most of their information from Fox News are more likely to be misinformed than those who watch other channels. Good for you for watching all of the channels but not everyone is like that. In fact most people are the opposite. I don't see what you said as being much of an argument about the statistics.
Money buys weapons. Political interference buys time and opportunity. And besides we all know that the US supported them. Are you REALLY trying to re-write history? Cuase whenever someone insists that the US had nothing to do with the Contras or that Noriega wasn't an American lap dog it is rather sad and funny. After the Iranian revolution of 79 the pro-American Shah was gone and that wasn't what the US liked. Iraq had a history of border issues with Iran and of course the US gave huge amounts of money to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. The AK-47s came from the deal with the Soviet Union in the 70s but that fell through around 79.

Forget the black and white world. Saddam flip flopped as much as the US.

Yes, thats EXACTLY the same. Why don't we just say that Syria and its leaders are EXACTLY the same as Saddam and his regime. I mean they're all just a bunch of arabs in the desert. They're all the same thing right? I mean the prior and very paradoxical relationship between the US and Saddam before the war(s) are the same as Syria which the US isn't apparently even supposed to talk to. The irony of Rumsfeld shaking old Saddam's hand is lost on you I suppose.:hmm:

Learn some nuance.

And to the Avon Lady. What in gods name does France have to do with this? Are you just using the google image search to cloud the argument? If we want to talk about where Saddam's Nuclear program came from then that would be a propos. Otherwise you're being a smart ass.

If the shoe fits.

While not the same, they shared a number of similarities.
Remember you said it.

This would be applicable to any country that behaves like Syria, Greenland not excluded.
Precisely. Our enemy's enemy is our friend.
Not on me, at least. But the irony doesn't make it any more relevant than all the other pics just posted here.
Speaking of irony! :rotfl:
Everybody was in bed with whichever side advanced their causes. But some causes are different than others.
I thought it would be easier for you if it were illustrated. :roll:
:D

secret mystery prize to the first person to find a photo of bush embracing hillary in a similar fashion!

Bonus prize if you can produce one with tony blair filming in the background...

:huh:

:down:

I thoroughly detest media as a whole these days, with 'good' journalism no longer considered that which produces the facts unbiased, but instead that which puts as many facts in to make the story beneficial for one side.

Thats why i make a habit to get news from as many sources as possible, and where possible about the same topic.:yep:

crafty AL, i give you that!:up:

http://www.jibjab.com/what_we_call_the_news

Seems good for this thread eh?

Right on target!

As does the US with many despotic regimes. Between the secret prisons and the jingoistic foreign policy. However, similarities aren't justification to generalize anyone that the current american regime says is bad stuff.
And it is a sarcastic nod towards the tendency to generalize all arab regimes that aren't kissing up to the US.

And I was making light of the fact that whenever someone justifies the Iraq invasion they make the intentions sound so righteous and honourable. The fact is that if Saddam was so darned evil then the US, even the current administration's forbearer, is directly complicit in whatever evil he committed.
Another irrelavent cryptic remark. You're reaching.

Honestly Avon Lady, micro-analysing my post and taking sentenses out of context isn't much of a way to argue. You ignore the overall point and instead deride me and mock me without actually being a person and just discussing. Contempt is such a boring way to go about a conversation. I could be as needlessly smug as you but I choose not to. You insult your own intelligence.

I never understand why these handshake pictures are posted as some sort of gotcha.

USA and GB were allies with one of the biggest mass murderers ever, Mr. Stalin. Plenty of picturs of FDR and Truman shaking hands and making nice with Stalin. What does this prove (leaving aside FDR's rosy view of Stalin)? Somehow the cold war was invalidated because there were pictures of earlier leaders with Stalin when they had a common enemy?

It proves that politicians are liars and that the double standards in world politics are astounding. :cool:

Bingo.

It was Churchill who coined the term "iron curtain" in 1946. During WWII, Churchill said of Stalin "A hard-boiled egg of a man - at once a callous, a crafty and an ill-formed man."
It proves nothing of a sort in cases where the alternative is likely worse, as above.

You missed my guy. :cool:

Maybe, but then again i'd miss such interesting repartee about abstract space.

No it doesn't. The percentages you mention are, for the most part, well below 50%. The questions are loaded too. Take the WMD one for example. There HAVE been chemical weapons found in Iraq, not the mother load I grant you, but the poll does not distinguish between that and the chemical warfare artillery rounds that have indeed been found. Nor does it mention the chemical agents recovered in Jordan from a failed terrorist attack either.

In short your poll is nothing more than bovine feces. Cherry picked statistics designed to push an agenda.


No you said "given most of the weapons used in the Gulf Wars against the US by the US for war against Iran", not money or political interference or neato Skillcraft US government pens, and yeah we also know Saddam DID use chemical weapons, and had not accounted for the ones we knew he had. We also knew that he on many occasions threatened to use them and we know he at least possessed the means to restart chemwep programs.

Not as sad and funny as the fact that none of that has anything to do with Saddam.

Yeah right. The man was in control of huge amounts of oil revenue, he hardly needed money from us to fund his war machine against Iran.

And his flip flopping is what eventually did him in.

I responded with that Pelosi picture to point out that a stupid handshake picture does not mean some kind of dark evil deal has been made. I'd say that if anyone needs to "learn some nuance" it is you wiseguy.

Pot, kettle, black.

An accurate description of Fox News. Aaaaand we come full circle. :lol:

No, it proves that the polite thing to do is shake a persons hand when you meet them. Nothing more or less.

LOL.

I always see hysterical liberals incorrectly stating that most of Iraq's weapons came from the US. :roll:

I've seen the numbers. A handful of unarmed observation helicopters. The rest was mostly Russian and French sold with a smattering of smaller nation's home-built vehicles.

When I see the "US gave them all their weapons" I generally stop reading the poster's comments since they will repeat any line they hear as truth when it is quite fictitious.

This post wins the thread (imo).

Yeah. I have the same reaction to all those right wingers who like to link Iraq to 9/11.

You guys really have to start paying attention to emoticon usage.

Oh, its a battle of wits? a competition of sorts?I had no idea. Hmm.

Oh, and how that "wins" a thread about Fox being bias, well, I gues I dont know.

Pay more attention then. I suggest you go back and reread the entire thread.