So I was debating with couple of republicans. And they told me that Saddam is linked to 9/11. I asked them how, they said "after years of research, it was said that the fuel used in the planes that the terrorist flew, were Iraqi oil." LMAO! my god i can't still stop laughing still. How much of a MORON you have to be to believe this?
then maybe we should go after china for providing us with the materials and Japan for providing the plane with electronic equipment?
2007-03-20 09:35:53 · 12 answers · asked by PROUD TO BE A LIBERAL TEEN! 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Your posts are contradictory. In one post you say you are about to become an officer. Yet, your name on this site says you will join the military in two years. So, what's going on. A bit of gamesmanship? I hope you are up for it in the military.
And, in answer to your question, I never heard that "theory".
2007-03-20 09:47:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, it very well could have been jet fuel made from oil from Iraq in the planes. I doubt that the terrorists had any choice where the oil that was refined into jet fuel and put into the planes they would eventually hijack came from. You are right that this assertion is pretty much idiotic. Do you think the terrorists actually asked if the plane was filled with jet fuel made from Iraqi oil? Even if they did ask, would anyone know?
2007-03-20 09:41:01 · answer #2 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
uhh, he did have chemical weapons, he merely posed no possibility to us with them (as they have been short selection and he merely used them on his very own human beings). We have been additionally advised that he had the flexibility to create extra (if I undergo in strategies we did locate some autos that could have been used to cause them to very early interior the conflict, yet they did not have any chemical components in them on the time we got here upon them). He additionally kicked out the UN inspectors in case you do not undergo in strategies that. i'm not asserting that the justifications we've been given (not the watered down version every physique likes to undergo in strategies now) are maximum magnificent, yet you simplify the information too plenty in order that for you to use it to push your element. besides the fact that if or not we had the main magnificent motives for going into Iraq, we would desire to stay there now to stabilize the country (it is placing out to artwork).
2016-11-27 01:17:02 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bet it took every last ounce of your brain to think this question up here. Quit drinking Robitussin and your brain may repair that damage.
2007-03-20 09:45:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a new theory? Wow you need some new troll material? How about Al Gore inventing the internet...no...wait already done.
2007-03-20 09:40:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Wow, that's a stretch......we owned the airplanes. Does that mean United and American Airlines are to blame too?
2007-03-20 09:40:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why do you even bother having a debate with morons like that...?
2007-03-20 09:45:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
thats the "solid intelligence" they gave us and most of the public bought it as they do now
2007-03-20 09:39:46 · answer #8 · answered by Departed 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's almost amusing how pathetic liberals have become. This is really the best story you could come up with?
2007-03-20 09:39:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
You've got to be kidding me...lol.
Why am I not suprised?
2007-03-20 09:39:51 · answer #10 · answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋