LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 184
1 members and 183 guests
Hank Chinaski
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-18-2004, 12:45 AM   #3901
ltl/fb
Registered User
 
ltl/fb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Flyover land
Posts: 19,042
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Rumsfeld says essentially the same thing in the interview - he is careful with the words he uses.
Which would explain the near-unintelligible stuttering. God help anyone who wants to use quotes from him from that show. He backs up and restarts so many times it's nearly impossibly to determine definitively what he is saying.

I will be losing all respect, or whatever you said. I have hopes that you have enough inherent sense to wake up someday and realize you are defending bullshit statements. And don't misinterpret me as by this meaning that Iraq was a happy benign place with lots of peaceful people who all were kind and loving to each other and respected the rights of women etc. Or maybe that wouldn't be a stretch. I'm starting to get all you people mooshed into one again.
ltl/fb is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:46 AM   #3902
sgtclub
Serenity Now
 
sgtclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Survivor Island
Posts: 7,007
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by notcasesensitive
here is what I mean:

1. You said Rumsfeld's line re: most immediate threat of any terrorist state could be read as merely being comparitive among all terrorist states.

2. In order for Iraq to be the most immediate threat but not to be an immediate (or imminent, whatever) threat, it would have to be the case that none of the threats against the US from terrorist states are immediate/imminent. Otherwise "most immediate" would also mean "immediate", thus negating Rumsfeld's ability to argue otherwise.

It seems to me that post-9/11 most of the US (including the Bush admin) has believed that there are terrorist states that pose an immediate/imminent threat. But if you have some knowledge that the Bush admin doesn't think this is the case, please elaborate.
Your logic is correct, but I'm not aware that the Bush administration has declared any terrorist state an immediate threat. If they have, I lose.
sgtclub is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:48 AM   #3903
sgtclub
Serenity Now
 
sgtclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Survivor Island
Posts: 7,007
Quote:
Originally posted by ltl/fb
Which would explain the near-unintelligible stuttering. God help anyone who wants to use quotes from him from that show. He backs up and restarts so many times it's nearly impossibly to determine definitively what he is saying.

I will be losing all respect, or whatever you said. I have hopes that you have enough inherent sense to wake up someday and realize you are defending bullshit statements. And don't misinterpret me as by this meaning that Iraq was a happy benign place with lots of peaceful people who all were kind and loving to each other and respected the rights of women etc. Or maybe that wouldn't be a stretch. I'm starting to get all you people mooshed into one again.
Good to see you are drinking too tonight.
sgtclub is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:49 AM   #3904
bilmore
Too Good For Post Numbers
 
bilmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 65,535
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
So, what IS your definition of IS?
Statement 1 refers to the imminency of a nuclear threat from SH. R says, some say 5-7 years, but he's not sure S won't have nuclear weapons sooner.

Statement 2 says that SH's Iraq poses the most immediate threat to the world of all states or countries. Nothing about nukes. Nothing about loosely organized groups. Likely based on S's support of terrorism, instability added to ME through SH's actions, ongoing killings, seeming desire for expansion/conquest, known propensity to use large-scale non-nuke weapons.

If you all truly failed to understand those distinctions, there's not much to be said. If you understood them and piled on with this kiddie BS anyway, well, there's less.
bilmore is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:51 AM   #3905
sgtclub
Serenity Now
 
sgtclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Survivor Island
Posts: 7,007
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

I assume no one is arguing that my reading of statement 1 is not reasonable?
sgtclub is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:52 AM   #3906
ltl/fb
Registered User
 
ltl/fb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Flyover land
Posts: 19,042
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Good to see you are drinking too tonight.
For stuttering read stammering. And if you are drinking, you are given a pass until noon (your time) tomorrow to admit you are being a parsing little cretin about this issue.

And, in case anyone thinks he picked up on the drinking from the post, I had told him in a PM I was drinking. He's no psychic. Not even very insightful.
ltl/fb is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:54 AM   #3907
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 33,049
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I'm not aware that the Bush administration has declared any terrorist state an immediate threat. If they have, I lose.
"There's no question that Iraq was a threat to the people of the United States."
• White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan, 8/26/03

"We ended the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
• President Bush, 7/17/03

Iraq was "the most dangerous threat of our time."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 7/17/03

"Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to the United States because we removed him, but he was a threat...He was a threat. He's not a threat now."
• President Bush, 7/2/03

"Absolutely."
• White House spokesman Ari Fleischer answering whether Iraq was an "imminent threat," 5/7/03

"We gave our word that the threat from Iraq would be ended."
• President Bush 4/24/03

"The threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be removed."
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 3/25/03

"It is only a matter of time before the Iraqi regime is destroyed and its threat to the region and the world is ended."
• Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke, 3/22/03

"The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder."
• President Bush, 3/19/03

"The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations."
• President Bush, 3/16/03

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/31/03

Iraq poses "terrible threats to the civilized world."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/30/03

Iraq "threatens the United States of America."
• Vice President Cheney, 1/30/03

"Iraq poses a serious and mounting threat to our country. His regime has the design for a nuclear weapon, was working on several different methods of enriching uranium, and recently was discovered seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/29/03

"Well, of course he is.”
• White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03

"Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. It's a danger to its neighbors, to the United States, to the Middle East and to the international peace and stability. It's a danger we cannot ignore. Iraq and North Korea are both repressive dictatorships to be sure and both pose threats. But Iraq is unique. In both word and deed, Iraq has demonstrated that it is seeking the means to strike the United States and our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction."
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03

"The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. ... Iraq is a threat, a real threat."
• President Bush, 1/3/03

"The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq whose dictator has already used weapons of mass destruction to kill thousands."
• President Bush, 11/23/02

"I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month...So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?"
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02

"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
• President Bush, 11/3/02

"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
• President Bush, 11/1/02

"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

"The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace."
• President Bush, 10/16/02

"There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."
• President Bush, 10/7/02

"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency."
• President Bush, 10/2/02

"There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is."
• President Bush, 10/2/02

"This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined."
• President Bush, 9/26/02

"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq."
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02

"Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons."
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02

"Iraq is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons program. These are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein can hold the threat over the head of any one he chooses. What we must not do in the face of this mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or to willful blindness."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 8/29/02


You lose.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:54 AM   #3908
sgtclub
Serenity Now
 
sgtclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Survivor Island
Posts: 7,007
Quote:
Originally posted by ltl/fb
For stuttering read stammering. And if you are drinking, you are given a pass until noon (your time) tomorrow to admit you are being a parsing little cretin about this issue.

And, in case anyone thinks he picked up on the drinking from the post, I had told him in a PM I was drinking. He's no psychic. Not even very insightful.
Do us a favor and switch to something stronger.
sgtclub is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:57 AM   #3909
sgtclub
Serenity Now
 
sgtclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Survivor Island
Posts: 7,007
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Lots of words, no substance
These quotes are irrelevant to the argument at hand. You must be drinking tonight too. Good for you.
sgtclub is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:58 AM   #3910
ltl/fb
Registered User
 
ltl/fb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Flyover land
Posts: 19,042
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I assume no one is arguing that my reading of statement 1 is not reasonable?
yeah, but it seems kind of disingenuous if no state at all is an immediate threat. That's like me being at a meeting of of only lawyers and saying "no one here is less of a lawyer than XYZ." Since everyone is a lawyer, that's a totally meaningless statement.

So he picked his words carefully so that they would SEEM to have a meaning, but really didn't.

Either that, or he meant that Iraq is an immediate threat.
ltl/fb is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:59 AM   #3911
bilmore
Too Good For Post Numbers
 
bilmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 65,535
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
You lose.
No, you just proved his point, and he's likely grateful for your blog-copying capabilities.
bilmore is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 12:59 AM   #3912
notcasesensitive
Flaired.
 
notcasesensitive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Out with Lumbergh.
Posts: 9,954
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Your logic is correct, but I'm not aware that the Bush administration has declared any terrorist state an immediate threat. If they have, I lose.
okay, here's my last question(s) for the night then -

assuming that the Bush administration didn't think that any terrorist state posed any sort of immediate threat to US/world safety (I find this frankly difficult to imagine, but anyway), why does Rumsfeld make statement number 2? what exactly does it gain him to mention that Iraq is the most immediate danger of any terrorist state if none of them pose any immediate danger?
notcasesensitive is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 01:02 AM   #3913
ltl/fb
Registered User
 
ltl/fb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Flyover land
Posts: 19,042
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Do us a favor and switch to something stronger.
Do yourself a favor and either drink a liter of vodka immediately or just whack yourself over the head with a bat really really hard. Not sure which will produce a bigger headache tomorrow, but at least both will ensure unconsciousness now.

I don't really mean that toward you, but it occurred to me as a logically appropriate retort and amuses me so I went with it.
ltl/fb is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 01:02 AM   #3914
Shape Shifter
World Ruler
 
Shape Shifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 12,057
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
These quotes are irrelevant to the argument at hand. You must be drinking tonight too. Good for you.
Could someone please restate the argument? Those seem pretty relevant to me, but I came late to the game.

eta: Nothing but Nyquil for me. Can I still play?
__________________
"More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming out any other way."
Shape Shifter is offline  
Old 03-18-2004, 01:03 AM   #3915
Not Me
Too Lazy to Google
 
Not Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 4,460
This just in -- the Earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
You must be drinking tonight too. Good for you.
That is good to know. I hate to drink alone.
__________________
IRL I'm Charming.
Not Me is offline  
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:52 PM.