Saddam a proven liar - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Saddam a proven liar
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 04:18:

quote:
Originally posted by LiquidX
Tiesto, your blaming everything on 9.11. If its so then tell the thousands of families on the Hiroshima, Japan that lost their entire families on the BOMB that WE dropped. So its just pointless what your trying to say. Also, STOP LINKING 9-11 to SADDAM!! Saddam its not Bin Ladin, and Bush is not CASTRO!!! get it!!!!????????

Renegade.. I so agree with you on many parts, good job.

i am NOT linking 9.11 to Hussein...please show where i linked them....

i am stating that IF bombing Iraq prevents terrorist attacks then i am all for it....LISTEN

Posted by Nalin on Mar-21-2003 04:54:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
i am NOT linking 9.11 to Hussein...please show where i linked them....

Okay, so you're not linking 9/11 to Saddam hence your not linking terrorism to Iraq? Lets look at your next sentence right below this one.

quote:
i am stating that IF bombing Iraq prevents terrorist attacks then i am all for it....LISTEN

What is this ^ if its not a link?

So not only are you stupid, ignorant and immature, but you're also illeterate. Good work.

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 05:02:

Posted by Cyrus King on Mar-21-2003 05:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Nalin
Okay, so you're not linking 9/11 to Saddam hence your not linking terrorism to Iraq? Lets look at your next sentence right below this one.

What is this ^ if its not a link?

So not only are you stupid, ignorant and immature, but you're also illeterate. Good work.

LOOOOOOOOOOL

Tiesto14.. give it up man.... you are making yourself look undeniably stupid.. everyone here thinks this...

Everytime i see your posts... i shake my head in disbeleif at how ignorant and immature someone can be.

Posted by Cyrus King on Mar-21-2003 05:03:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
i said 9.11 not terrorism...

9/11 WAS TERRORISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 05:10:

quote:
Originally posted by Cyrus King
9/11 WAS TERRORISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

um you THINK?...

i meant that i was not linking to Hussein to the 9.11 attacks..but i do feel he has ties to terrorism...same way Libya has ties to terrorism but not to 9.11...understand?

Posted by LiquidX on Mar-21-2003 05:43:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
Tell this little boy that he is safe from terror...then i will be against ANY war on terrorism or countries with WMD....He lost his dad in 9.11

Ok.. what countries are YOU claiming are against waron terrorism?!?! and tell me WHO IN HERE is against war in terrorism?!?!.. did you forgett that after 9.11 every single country helped out with all their efforts to fight against the Al Quaeda?!?! .. War is different then terrorism, and WAR on Iraq is what?!?! .. what are you trying to say here?!?! .. so just because im against a military action against Iraq.. I should remember of the dad of that little boy and say YES attack Saddam?!?! if so.. WHY?! .. duffes!

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 05:58:

quote:
Originally posted by LiquidX
Ok.. what countries are YOU claiming are against waron terrorism?!?! and tell me WHO IN HERE is against war in terrorism?!?!.. did you forgett that after 9.11 every single country helped out with all their efforts to fight against the Al Quaeda?!?! .. War is different then terrorism, and WAR on Iraq is what?!?! .. what are you trying to say here?!?! .. so just because im against a military action against Iraq.. I should remember of the dad of that little boy and say YES attack Saddam?!?! if so.. WHY?! .. duffes!

becuase i said so...sorry i refuse to argue with someone who still uses the word "duffes" in the year 2003...retract that word and we shall continue the debate,.,...thank you...

Posted by fastmp3 on Mar-21-2003 06:26:

tiesto14 don't go crying around if something worse than 9/11 happens , because attacking iraq doesn't prevent from terrorism , you must be stupid to believe that

Posted by ZinG on Mar-21-2003 06:30:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
2 billion out of 6?..whats that mean

hmm see you got issues

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 06:33:

quote:
Originally posted by ZinG
hmm see you got issues

no i really dont know what that means...explain...

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 06:34:

quote:
Originally posted by fastmp3
tiesto14 don't go crying around if something worse than 9/11 happens , because attacking iraq doesn't prevent from terrorism , you must be stupid to believe that

it remains to be seen....

Posted by fastmp3 on Mar-21-2003 16:22:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
it remains to be seen....

haha worth the risk ? you got it buddy but don't come crying around if the next plane hits you

Posted by King_Mack on Mar-21-2003 17:10:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
2 billion out of 6?..whats that mean

world population dumbass. That question coming from you doesn't suprise me tho

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 17:15:

quote:
Originally posted by King_Mack
world population dumbass. That question coming from you doesn't suprise me tho

not sure why noone has answered me....i asked a perfectly straight forward question and not one person will answer....and you call me immature and stupid...LOL...piss off

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 17:26:

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 17:44:

Posted by DrUg_Tit0 on Mar-21-2003 18:53:

Well, what did you think "2 billion out of 6 are protesting against the war" was being reffered to? I somehow have a feeling it was reffering to 33% of the world population. But I might be wrong since it is a statement with so many possible alternative meanings.

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 19:06:

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Well, what did you think "2 billion out of 6 are protesting against the war" was being reffered to? I somehow have a feeling it was reffering to 33% of the world population. But I might be wrong since it is a statement with so many possible alternative meanings.

oohhh ok...

well that can be argued both ways...cant it...u say how about the 2 billion against it...well i will trun around and say what abotu the 6 billion not protesting it and for it?.....

that case was weak...try again

Posted by tiesto14 on Mar-21-2003 19:19:

i LOVE how Renegade hasnt posted since Fuzzy proved him wrong that Hussein has Scud missiles....hahhahahhaha Renegade got owned...

Renegade keep watching SkY News

Posted by Cyrus King on Mar-21-2003 20:30:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
i LOVE how Renegade hasnt posted since Fuzzy proved him wrong that Hussein has Scud missiles....hahhahahhaha Renegade got owned...

Renegade keep watching SkY News

You cant even compare renegade to fuzzy green..
Every intelligent person here knows that Renegade has shut your fucking mouth up numerous times... making you look like the idiot you inherently are!

Posted by fastmp3 on Mar-22-2003 00:59:

hahaha i love how tiesto keeps on trying ROLLLLLLLL the eyes again

Posted by Crazy Serb on Mar-22-2003 01:18:

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
well Hussein lit more oil fields on fire...lol

They are his oil fields, he has every damn right to do whatever he feels with them...

quote:
Originally posted by fastmp3
tiesto14 don't go crying around if something worse than 9/11 happens , because attacking iraq doesn't prevent from terrorism , you must be stupid to believe that

Hahaha, even the Montreal crew is joining in on this gang bang with tiesto14... damn!

Posted by Mental Exodus on Mar-22-2003 02:51:

EVERY government lies in one way or another on a very frequent basis.

Posted by Renegade on Mar-26-2003 08:36:

quote:
i LOVE how Renegade hasnt posted since Fuzzy proved him wrong that Hussein has Scud missiles....hahhahahhaha Renegade got owned...

Okay, I obviously missed this bit. I know that Tiesto14 is banned now (such a shame) but just to set the record straight I'll reply to what FuzzyGreen said:

quote:
I have done my research.
Al Samoud missiles are not Scud missles.

1) The Al-Samoud missiles are classified as "Scud B" missiles: essentially scaled down, liquid propelled scuds that may use parts from SA-2 missiles. If you don't believe me, you can read:

Here:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/samoud.htm

Here:

http://www.rense.com/general35/claimed.htm

Here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...3¬Found=true

Or here:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/n...21223-pac01.htm

quote:
The missiles that were launched at Kuwait had traveled more then 400 km.

Do they know that for sure though? In most of the sources I found in Google (using the seach query "scud missile attack kuwait") it seems like no one was sure what missiles were shot down, only that they "may" have been scud missiles (which are still permitted - along with any other missile - so long as they don't travel over 150km!). This website, pretty much the only one which claims to have a good idea about what type of missiles were shot down, blames the "Al-Samoud" and the "Ababil-100" for the attacks:

http://www.dtic.mil/armylink/news/M...sileattack.html

The Pentagon apparently said a similar thing:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/...iraq-scud_x.htm

And here's some info on each of these missiles:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/missile/index.html
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/missile/ababil.htm

Hardly the weapons of mass destruction the US Government have been looking for, eh?

quote:
Care to admit mistake and quit insulting me?

I will quit insulting you when I am ready, idiot.

Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »