IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Norman Schwarzkopf did execute the GW-I...
as well as he was let...

Just because Bush did not WANT TO WAIT that long does not mean that we didn't have the time. Bush pushed this war because of the ELECTION SCHEDULE.
I'll bite at that... I think it *MAY* have gotten pushed up due to it...

We didn't have the 6 months time before it commenced... anyway you slice... that much is true.

And the ONLY real reason we are getting resistance in Iraq this time is.... because we are INVADING IRAQ TO OVERTHROW IT.
Ummm.... correct me if I am wrong here... but didn't we liberate Kuwait and then plunge into Iraq, invading it in the GW-I? Hmmm, guess that fact escaped your rotted-wood-trap mind there. When didn't we get resistence then back in 1991?

So, you are saying the only difference between then and now on the resistance... is that we invaded Iraq NOW... but you forget we invaded Iraq then too... Can/Will you explain this marvelous fact we have ALL missed oh mighty "If I only had a brain" Brandioch?

Or are you saying that *IF* we would have invaded Iraq in 1991 with the want to GET Saddamn then, we would have gotten resistence then? WOW... I _AM_ so baffled with your Bullshit...

You know the saying: Blind them with Brilliance, but if you can't, Baffle them with BullShit.

I seem to see alot of Bovinious-Scatologious-Brandiochious, with a very rauch-odiferousness!

b4k4^2
[link|mailto:curley95@attbi.com|greg] - Grand-Master Artist in IT
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry/|REMEMBER ED CURRY!]   [link|http://pascal.rockford.com:8888/SSK@kQMsmc74S0Tw3KHQiRQmDem0gAIPAgM/edcurry/1//|ED'S GHOST SPEAKS!]
[link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,857673,00.asp|Writing on wall, Microsoft to develop apps for Linux by 2004]
Heimatland Geheime Staatspolizei reminds:
These [link|http://www.whitehouse.gov/pcipb/cyberspace_strategy.pdf|Civilian General Orders], please memorize them.
"Questions" will be asked at safety checkpoints.
New Translation, please!
So, after much mindless rambling you FINALLY get somewhere near my original point.

Or are you saying that *IF* we would have invaded Iraq in 1991 with the want to GET Saddamn then, we would have gotten resistence then? WOW... I _AM_ so baffled with your Bullshit...
That's close. If we had invaded Iraq in 1991 with the stated intention of killing Saddam and overthrowing the Iraqi government, then we would have seen the same level of resistance that we are seeing now.

We did not do that.

We did not attempt to take Iraqi cities in 1991.

We bombed their military (correctly) and tried to bomb Saddam.

But we never tried to take Baghdad.

You know the saying: Blind them with Brilliance, but if you can't, Baffle them with BullShit.
I think that you're annoyed that your pre-conceptions are being ripped apart and I'm doing the ripping.

Hey, if you can't deal with the facts, that's your problem.

My predictions are 100% accurate.
New Obviously...
Your predictions are at 0%.

My pre-conceptions aren't being ripped apart...

Your MIS-conceptions... have already been ripped apart by yourself. Thanks for playing.

You literal "loser" ewe.

Have your words and move along now.
b4k4^2
[link|mailto:curley95@attbi.com|greg] - Grand-Master Artist in IT
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry/|REMEMBER ED CURRY!]   [link|http://pascal.rockford.com:8888/SSK@kQMsmc74S0Tw3KHQiRQmDem0gAIPAgM/edcurry/1//|ED'S GHOST SPEAKS!]
[link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,857673,00.asp|Writing on wall, Microsoft to develop apps for Linux by 2004]
Heimatland Geheime Staatspolizei reminds:
These [link|http://www.whitehouse.gov/pcipb/cyberspace_strategy.pdf|Civilian General Orders], please memorize them.
"Questions" will be asked at safety checkpoints.
New So, you claim Iraq HAS used nuke/chem/bio now?
Your predictions are at 0%.
Well, if that were true, then Iraq would have used nuke/chem/bio.

My pre-conceptions aren't being ripped apart...
You can't tell 0% from 100%. I'm sure that's not all you don't know.

Your MIS-conceptions... have already been ripped apart by yourself. Thanks for playing.
Hmmm, but I said Iraq would NOT use nuke/chem/bio.

If MY "MIS-conceptions" were the issue, then Iraq WOULD have used them.

But Iraq has NOT used them.

I'm sure you'll continue to claim you were correct.

Even when this "war" is "over" and Iraq has STILL not used nuke/chem/bio weapons.

:D
New I always let losers have thier words.
b4k4^2
[link|mailto:curley95@attbi.com|greg] - Grand-Master Artist in IT
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry/|REMEMBER ED CURRY!]   [link|http://pascal.rockford.com:8888/SSK@kQMsmc74S0Tw3KHQiRQmDem0gAIPAgM/edcurry/1//|ED'S GHOST SPEAKS!]
[link|http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,857673,00.asp|Writing on wall, Microsoft to develop apps for Linux by 2004]
Heimatland Geheime Staatspolizei reminds:
These [link|http://www.whitehouse.gov/pcipb/cyberspace_strategy.pdf|Civilian General Orders], please memorize them.
"Questions" will be asked at safety checkpoints.
New Say it again.
     Bush getting a bit upset. - (Brandioch) - (8)
         Exactly what may I ask is your experience with... - (folkert) - (7)
             Believe whatever you want to. - (Brandioch) - (6)
                 Norman Schwarzkopf did execute the GW-I... - (folkert) - (5)
                     Translation, please! - (Brandioch) - (4)
                         Obviously... - (folkert) - (3)
                             So, you claim Iraq HAS used nuke/chem/bio now? - (Brandioch) - (2)
                                 I always let losers have thier words. -NT - (folkert) - (1)
                                     Say it again. -NT - (Brandioch)

Surreptitious semblances scamper surrealistically, strewing scabrous solecisms, simpering sophistry - striving sententiously - still, scintillating serendipity seems South. Zymotic, yellowish xeroxed vellums unsatisfactorily trumpet simple rationales: querulous ponderings of nebulous musings. Let knaves justly invoke hoary genuflection, for early doth craven biliousness atrophy.
68 ms