Logical Proof of Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

quote:

---

So stopping mad men like the Butcher of Baghdad (ofcourse thats all an illusion and misrepresentation as well correct)should be left undone as it might result in the deaths of Americans verses the torture, rape, mutilation, dismemberment and other crimes against others.

---

Uh..yes? We are not the world's police man. Furthermore, if we applied your logic, we'd have to invade Russia, China and most of Africa not to mention most Middle Eastern countries. Furthermore, Saddam wasn't a threat to us. And removing him has allowed Iran to become the regional powerhouse. How is that beneficial for us?I like how you called him a liberal yet you favor an interventionist foreign policy, which is inherently liberal.

quote:

---

It is truely amazing how blind liberals like yourself are to the real world.

---

Interesting how you say that since Bush and Co effectively went in blind to how the Middle East works and ignored all advice to the contrary. Real world you say?

quote:

---

Bush is probably the last hope that we had against aggression.

---

Iraq was going to attack us?With what? Edited by obvious Child, : No reason given.

Just because terrorists are out to get us doesn't mean we should have invaded Iraq. Especially since Iraq was an obstacle to Iran who openly funds, trains and otherwise supports terrorists.

quote:

---

Ill let you explain that statement, I have no idea what you mean. Even a person such as yourself can understand prtection and defense of others in hostile situations, correct?

---

Iraq, which posed no threat to the US and had terror operations only to extent of making payments to palestianian suicide bombers who were going to blow themselves up anyways was hardly a candidate for a necessary invasion. Iraq was however, a severely liberal foreign intervention.

quote:

---

Again, you can pretend that you have more information that the President, but you do not. I am certainly not saying that every decision is based on all knowledge and always the best, however, if one cannot see that the terrorost groups are not a serious threat after all they have accomplished nad would have accomplished otherwise, you really do have your head in the sand. When Korea extends its threat beyond its borders we all pay attention and respond.

​

One does not go in blind to destroy a mad dog if you know it is a mad dog, regardless of the surrounding situation or political climate. Sometimes you have to take care of problems, regarless of the Frech leaders advise, ha ha.

---

Now that is amusing. Bush and Co got all kinds of warnings from experts regarding cultural norms, societal norms and things they SHOULD have done in planning. They ignored it all. Furthermore, Iraq was never a big terror supporter unlike its neighbors Iran and Saudi Arabia where 15 of the 19 hijackers were from and where huge amounts of money still flow to terrorists. Furthermore, Saddam was a secular ruler.Iraq was not a threat.I find it incredibly amusing that you think that Iraq was behind 9/11 despite Congressional investigations and even DUBYA admitting it was not related.But belief what you wish to suit your massive delusions.

quote:

---

Lets take a guess at who the likely suspects are in this situation.

---

Explain to me why Saddam would help Bin Laden, the person who called for Saddam head, and twice tried to have him assassinated. Why would he RISK his own safety in working with people who he KNOWS want him dead? For someone who rabidly paranoid as Saddam, your argument is delusional.Please report the information you have saying that Iraq was involved in 9/11

quote:

---

"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th"

---

- President BushBush: No Iraq link to 9/11 found

quote:

---

While so many countries pose no direct threat to the US, unfortunately its leader was a known supporter of terroism and a harbinger of those same terrorists.

---

That would be Iran and Saudi Arabia. Not Iraq which was a two bit player and not worth our time.

quote:

---

Only a fool would not recognize the reduction in these incidents by terrorists, since Bushes actions and sustained activity. Trying to make a distinction in these countries as to who is or is not involved is simply ludicrous. All of the countries which you and other mention are extremist, in some form or fashion.

---

Incorrect as usual. Terrorist attacks have actually risen since the 90s. And why is it a foolish distinction? Or are you making the asinine argument that everyone in a certain country is a terrorist?Fail:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../04/26/AR2005042601623.html

quote:

---

If Mr Bush was so misinformed, how did we kill, catch and detain so many of the architechs of these terrorist groups. The point is that no matter how much is done to stem the tide, you will still just keep crying Foul. Thank God leaders like Mr Bush ignore your razor sharp politcal insights, that would keep the terrorists in business.

---

We didn't catch them in Iraq. Most were caught in Pakistan which we did not invade and Afghanistan. You ignore facts.Do you ever address actual facts or are you content with your delusions?Btw: Dubya says you are wrong.