Originally posted by sigma:

Tell me where I said Saddam didn't have these weapons?

Come on. You've exhibited poor reading comprehension in the past, but damn man, I only wrote 3 sentences. Certainly that's not hard to follow.


Hey sigma, follow this logic... You are an A$shole. There, was that even simple enough for you?

Originally posted by sigma:

Hatred of Bush?
Get off your high horse. I voted for him as Governor, as President, and right now am 50/50 on November.


Get off yours! I included not only you but "there will be some people in this country..." Now even you can see that I was NOT only referring to you when I said that...

Originally posted by sigma:
I was simply presenting what some people thought. It's called learning. I can sit here and effectively argue circles around you all day from any side of any point of any topic. Did I ever say that was my opinion?


Now where in the definition of learning does spitting out other peoples opinions come into play???

Gee, sigma, how can you possibly fit that large head of yours through a normal doorway???

You mearly think that you can argue circles around me, because you think that you know everything about everything! You are a pompous son of a b|tch if I have ever seen one...


Originally posted by simga:
Proof?

Show me where Sarin is considered a WMD?

A chemical weapon, yes. But is it a Weapon of Mass Destruction? I was under the belief that it was not considered to be a WMD because of the concentrations needed to kill.

Now that you've proved it to be a WMD, now you need to prove it was Saddam's WMD...

Show me how old this bomb was. Was it a new bomb? Or was it a remnant from the Iraq/Iran Wars?

If it was a new bomb, was it at least 2 years old, placing it made under Saddam's rule?

If it was at least 2 years old, who made it? Was it made under a government-sanctioned program, or just some guy in the back of his tent working for Al Qaeda or any other group?



LOLOL. Your word twisting never ceases to amaze me sigma! I guess you do have one up on me, word twisting. Okay, here we go...
1)JATO has provided that proof for me...

2)Prove it was Saddam's. Well, I can't do that until we dust for fingerprints and find that Saddam's prints are on every shell casing, test tube, involved...

As for the rest of the things you want me to prove, I can't do that for you. And also as far as your other questions it shows very clearly how you are stretching to find a way to disprove the WMD thing. Your pulling a Clinton, what is the meaning of 'is' with your 'logic'

My logic works like this:
-We know that Saddam was using chemical or biological agents to kill 300,000+ people
-CIA and Brittish agencies have confirmed this
-Saddam has repeatedly disobeyed UN orders to allow inspectors unrestricted access to sites suspected of holding or creating WMD's
-We now have found 2 shells with toxic agents in them


Originally posted by sigma:
It's calling thinking. Using your head and logic rather than 100% reactionary thinking. I tend to think things through before making blind reactions based on what I want to be true.



Again, your head is too large for your body, I think you might tip over if your not careful... As much as you like to think I am stupid, I do think about things before I come to a decision. When I state my opinions they are just that, opinions, which you are more than welcome to disagree with. But when eveidence such as what has been found today, and what has been shown since we first went into Iraq, is provided, you still want to try to make me look stupid by asking assinine questions like how do I know that it was Saddams? All that does is show that you (and I am assuming that you didn't believe the weapons wer real) don't have a leg to stand on anymore. -Nick

"Moore has also accused the American people of being the stupidest, most naive people on the face of the Earth. And after last weekend, he's got the box office numbers to prove it!"