Oil for Food scam

[calculoso]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+Oct 11 2004, 11:52 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ Oct 11 2004, 11:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> All I quoted is what he said, that the Oil for Food Program was a 'major' cause of the war. If you've got a problem with that, talk to him, not me. [/b]

Care to look at that quote again?

<!--QuoteBegin-"DFF"
Might not be a legitimate rationale for the war, but it is certainly a major reason why the war happened in the first place.[/quote]

A major reason... not a major cause.

It's no different than what I said above. If the other countries don't try to lessen the consequenses and minimize the standing up to Saddam, the war doesn't happen.

Of course, this in no way justifies the war.

[kermitology]

Source of so much confusion..

Entry: reason
Function: noun
Definition: intention
Synonyms: aim, antecedent, argument, basis, cause, consideration, design, determinant, end, goal, grounds, idea, impetus, incentive, inducement, motivation, motive, object, occasion, proof, purpose, rationale, root, spring, target, ulterior motive, warrant, wherefore, why, whyfor

[calculoso]

Yes... but

Reason why there was a possibility for the war

is not the same as

Reason why they went to war.

[CaramonLS]

Dis I love you. Your wording is so amazingly cautious in your statements now.

"if" "if" "if".

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by calculoso@Oct 11 2004, 09:16 PM
It's no different than what I said above. If the other countries don't try to lessen the consequenses and minimize the standing up to Saddam, the war doesn't happen.

I'm sorry, I don't understand this paragraph.

Are you saying that the OFF was a 'major' cause of the war? Unless we're broadly expanding the use of the word 'major', then you're wrong. I understand that you're both saying that the OFF corruption was not a rationale to go to war. That's precisely why the Administration didn't use it, because believing that it was a 'major' factor in causing the war is BS.

Pure and simple.

As for quoting Dis, the main word I'm into is 'major'. I don't care if you guys think it was rationale, an indirect cause, etc. A 'major' cause/factor/reason etc. is all the same thing. It wasn't a major reason, and that's the bottom line.

Maybe explain your paragraph and we'll talk about it more.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by calculoso@Oct 11 2004, 09:16 PM
A major reason... not a major cause.

Lol, this is probably one of the biggest pieces of semantics I've seen on this board. I suppose I understand what you're getting at, but it's a pretty fine line. Too fine.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by kermitology@Oct 11 2004, 09:21 PM
Source of so much confusion..

Entry: reason
Function: noun
Definition: intention
Synonyms: aim, antecedent, argument, basis, cause, consideration, design, determinant, end, goal, grounds, idea, impetus, incentive, inducement, motivation, motive, object, occasion, proof, purpose, rationale, root, spring, target, ulterior motive, warrant, wherefore, why, whyfor

Ah yes, and synonyms always have the EXACT same meaning don't they Kermitology?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by CaramonLS@Oct 11 2004, 09:45 PM
Dis I love you. Your wording is so amazingly cautious in your statements now.

"if" "if" "if".

Not sure what you mean Cam...can you elaborate?

[Displaced Flames fan]

The bottom line guys is this...

I've made it very clear what I meant...and I was never suggesting that abuses of the OFF program were a legitimate rationale or justification for the war. You can talk about semantics all you like, but the intent hasn't changed and my intent has been illustrated over and over and over again.

So what are you saying by continuing to ignore what I've said and act as if my first post is open to interpretation?

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Oct 11 2004, 10:28 PM
The bottom line guys is this...

I've made it very clear what I meant...and I was never suggesting that abuses of the OFF program were a legitimate rationale of justification for the war. You can talk about semantics all you like, but the intent hasn't changed and my intent has been illustrated over and over and over again.

So what are you saying by continuing to ignore what I've said and act as if my first post is open to interpretation?

Agreed. I hear exactly what you're saying. I'd prefer to argue on about the actual validity of the OFF being a 'major' cause/reason/factor (as opposed to it not being a factor at all, not in its legitimacy as a beef) in the war.

Dis, I'll say it so you can hear it. You do not believe that the OFF was a 'major' rationale for going to war. It was a 'major' reason the war occurred.

If I don't have it right this time, I'm afraid I'll never get it right.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by Agamemnon@Oct 11 2004, 10:31 PM

Agreed. I hear exactly what you're saying. I'd prefer to argue on about the actual validity of the OFF being a 'major' cause/reason/factor (as opposed to it not being a factor at all, not in its legitimacy as a beef) in the war.

Dis, I'll say it so you can hear it. You do not believe that the OFF was a 'major' rationale for going to war. It was a 'major' reason the war occurred.

If I don't have it right this time, I'm afraid I'll never get it right.

Yes, of course the theory is debateable, as is any theory. I think things could've been different without France and Russia's financial interests (within their governments Lanny) in Iraq. Key word in that sentence is COULD'VE....notice I didn't say WOULD'VE.

Now if we can get Cam and Lanny on board....and oh...the potty mouthed Kermitology as well then we can all move past this collossal waste of time!

[kermitology]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan+Oct 11 2004, 04:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Displaced Flames fan @ Oct 11 2004, 04:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-kermitology@Oct 11 2004, 09:21 PM
Source of so much confusion..

Entry: reason
Function: noun
Definition: intention
Synonyms: aim, antecedent, argument, basis, cause, consideration, design, determinant, end, goal, grounds, idea, impetus, incentive, inducement, motivation, motive, object, occasion, proof, purpose, rationale, root, spring, target, ulterior motive, warrant, wherefore, why, whyfor

Ah yes, and synonyms always have the EXACT same meaning don't they Kermitology? [/b][/quote]
Yes, I proposed that those are the EXACT meanings you had.. Jebus man.. I'm just saying why it's so confusing. Holy sh*t..

By the way, a synonym is by definition a word with the same or very similar meaning to another word..

Notice why it's a source for confusion, why some people might take your comments to mean it is a CAUSE for the war? You're jumping at people based on that comment, this is why people are jumping to conclusions, that statement comes off as meaning a CAUSE for the war, which you've since refuted.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Fair enought on the first part.

I'm well aware of what a synonym is....have been for about 25 years thanks.

As for do I understand why people are still confused? Absolutely not. Initially, maybe....but if you thought what I meant was a justification my sentence would've been one big contradiction....because I started by saying it wasn't a legitimate rationale for invasion.

Selective reading and preconceptions are the reason.

That's not to say I'm not guilty of the same things at times so I don't get another expletive laden PM again.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan+Oct 11 2004, 10:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Displaced Flames fan @ Oct 11 2004, 10:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Agamemnon@Oct 11 2004, 10:31 PM

Agreed. I hear exactly what you're saying. I'd prefer to argue on about the actual validity of the OFF being a 'major' cause/reason/factor (as opposed to it not being a factor at all, not in its legitimacy as a beef) in the war.

Dis, I'll say it so you can hear it. You do not believe that the OFF was a 'major' rationale for going to war. It was a 'major' reason the war occurred.

If I don't have it right this time, I'm afraid I'll never get it right.

Yes, of course the theory is debateable, as is any theory. I think things could've been different without France and Russia's financial interests (within their governments Lanny) in Iraq. Key word in that sentence is COULD'VE....notice I didn't say WOULD'VE.

Now if we can get Cam and Lanny on board....and oh...the potty mouthed Kermitology as well then we can all move past this collossal waste of time![/b][/quote]
Hooray, progress! Now if we can just work on that attitude...

[Agamemnon]

Ouch, I just used my 300th post agreeing with Dis. I feel dirty. Sorry guys.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Whose attitude are we working on Ag? :P

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by Agamemnon@Oct 11 2004, 10:44 PM
Ouch, I just used my 300th post agreeing with Dis. I feel dirty. Sorry guys.

Only 300? Hell, I thought we'd put that many in on this ridiculous topic alone!

Everyone agrees at one time or another...and I'm probably not nearly the right-wing nutbar you think I am...so I'm sure it will happen again.

Ask 'Roos!

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Oct 11 2004, 10:46 PM
Whose attitude are we working on Ag? :P

Zing, you got me!