Current Administration (be prepared-not holding anything back)

K

Kal-el

0
Throughout the summer of 2001, even as U.S. embassies buzzed with word of an impending attack, Bush remained focused on such ancient obsessions as ousting Hussein and building a missile defense sheild against long-range missiles that no terrorists or rogue states possesed. (fast forward 2 years)
France had taken a courageous position against the war in Iraq. President Chirac reacted with good common sense, as a world in peace is always preferable and more constructive.This did not stop George W. Bush, from sending his troops and, from ravaging the country. All this under the pretense of eradicating the totaltarian regime of Saddam Hussein and all forms of terrorism. Not to mention Iraq NEVER possesed wmds, and that was Bush's main sales pitch for this bloodbath. The result is 1,600 dead US soldiers for nothing, and several thousand wounded. The Iraqi population weeps for 40-50,000 victims from American bombings. Iraq, a ruined and devestated country, has become the "sanctuary" for all of Islam's armed groups, a place where they can perpetrate attacks, kidnappings, fierce struggles against the illegal occupant, who is a symbol of the "infidel" and delinquent west, which imposes its democracy with missiles and its christian values through torture, and all this for a few more barrels of oil...
The one responsible is George W. Bush. I hold him personally liable and responsible for the deaths of over 1600 American soldiers, and almost 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths. And the numbers keep swelling. I don't blame the soldiers, they have to feed their families and they are just doing what they think is right, I blame the brains behind the braun.
And whats worse is George Bush is now trying to justify the whole operation by posing as the champion of democracy and promising that it will definetly bring peace to the middle east. He even wants to go one step further by using the sucess of the Iraqi and Palestinian elections, hoping that Egypt and others will follow. He now hopes to turn his illegal mistake into a historical sucess and become known as someone who changed history by bringing peace into this devestated region. This is a new manipulation of the truth in order to give the illusion to the world that this Illegal invasion of a soverign country, carried out under false pretenses, was in fact extremely beneficial.
And I like how he claims the US is doing "the will of God"- I think George is a bit confused, he seems to not be able to differentiate between Satan and God.

I know this will piss some people off, but please don't judge me as one should'nt be judged based on their beleifs.
 
Judge you? I agree with you. Part of the reason I quit watching television was because I was tired of the government controlled "news" and media brainwashing. Anyone with a half-way functioning brain can see what is going on here. Let's see... son of well-to-do oil company family becomes president, shortly invades and takes control of oil-rich underdeveloped country. Haha. It's almost laughable if this travesty wasn't so bloody and tragic. George Bush will go down as one of the biggest crook presidents of all time ...just wait and see... if we survive the next three-some-odd-years...
 
I really shoudn't say it, but if the founding fathers knew what W was up to, they'ed be rolling around in their graves! This is kinda off topic, but I think stem cells, once perfected, can prolong the lives of millions of people with diabetes, cancer, alzheimer's to name a few, and W used his presidential veto, and shot down further funding on stem cell research. He claimed," Being a well-devoted Christian(as if thats not contradicting enough), I'm against killing". I find that once again contradicting, when he said hes against killing, it seems like he has no problem killing 100s of thousands of Iraqi civilians with his illegal occupation.
 
i agree with you on most parts, how i differ is that i don't consider bush the only person to blame, there are many many people behind him.

and i do think the soldiers are partly to blame, they are willingly participating and furthering this wrong cause.

and the whole religion thing, politicians will just throw in the religious twist and it'll instantly convince 90% of the christians out there that they're doing the right thing. happens everywhere, not just politics.
 
Shithead, I blame the WHOLE administration for this war, or bloodshed. Starting with W- right down to the head of Fox news for being the "mouth" of the Bush administration. The soldiers are being used based on lies, and soon they will realize this. I personally think Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Ashcroft, and Powell should be in front of an international court being tried for "crimes against humanity".
 
I think George Washington and the rest of the founding fathers are probably spinning like tops down there. One problem with turning a country like the US into an empire is that empires fall, and when they do, they usually fall hard. We need only look to the past to learn this lesson. Rome, Spain, England... History repeats itself. Once we were an undeveloped region fighting off the yokes of an overseas oppressor... now, almost 300 years later, we have cast ourselves in the role of Imperial Occupier. Doesn't W have any advisors who studied history and can tell him what happened in those historical situations? There is no profit in the occupation of a resistant foreign nation. Military enforcement and losses will offset any profit eventually.
 
I think George Washington and the rest of the founding fathers are probably spinning like tops down there. One problem with turning a country like the US into an empire is that empires fall, and when they do, they usually fall hard.--kong 1971

That's democracy at work; the creation of a democratically supported imperialist power. It feels good to vote for the emperor when you are a citizen of the empire, benefiting from the fruits of the looting that were taken by brute force.
 
Kal,

And now, for a different perspective...

>France had taken a courageous position against the war in Iraq. President Chirac reacted with good common sense, as a world in peace is always preferable and more constructive.<

What a load of shit. France and Chirac had been bought off with oil-for-food money. He is a crook, and after the defeat of the EU constitution, is totally ineffective, and will probably be defeated. While Bush, Blair, etc, have been re-elected. Standing up for what is right generally pays off.

>This did not stop George W. Bush, from sending his troops and, from ravaging the country. All this under the pretense of eradicating the totaltarian regime of Saddam Hussein and all forms of terrorism.<

So you believe it would be better to re-install Saddam as the leader of Iraq, correct? Either he was one of the worst leaders of a country in history, or he is innocent. Either he should be tried as a criminal, or put back in power. Perhaps those hundreds of thousands of bodies dug up in the desert were manufactured.

>Not to mention Iraq NEVER possesed wmds, and that was Bush's main sales pitch for this bloodbath.<

So the Iranians and Kurds killed by Saddam's WMDs were faked also? He never had WMDs? What a load of shit. I believe he still had them at the beginning of the war. It just does not make sense that he did not. But whether he did or did not, he still had the capability, the knowledge, the means, and the will, to make more WMD once the heat was off. That is what was important. Not the evidence of barrels of weapons.

The threat was the man himself, and his obvious willingness to use these weapons, and not only possibly, but probably give them to terrorist organizations for use in other countries. That is and was a risk too great. Bush, Blair, Howard, et al made the correct decision.

>The result is 1,600 dead US soldiers for nothing, and several thousand wounded.<

Thankfully, myself and millions of other citizens do not feel this way. These men and women did not die for nothing. They died in the most honorable way possible, in service to others. They not only died protecting the US, and the rest of the world, but especially to free 50 million people. Look back in ten years time to see their true contribution.

Interesting in your diatribe, you never even mention Afghanistan. Was that was also wrong? All of the same things could be said about that situation, or many other situaitons throughout history. Why did the US become involved in WWII in Europe? Germany had done nothing to the US. Were we wrong to help defeat Hitler?

An obvious comparison would be to look at the millions of East Asians killed after the US pulled out of Vietnam. Everyone celebrates the end of the Vietnam war, but how many realize the death and destruction that occured after the US protection was pulled out? Who is responsible for THOSE deaths? How about the "peace" activists?

>The Iraqi population weeps for 40-50,000 victims from American bombings. Iraq, a ruined and devestated country, has become the "sanctuary" for all of Islam's armed groups, a place where they can perpetrate attacks, kidnappings, fierce struggles against the illegal occupant, who is a symbol of the "infidel" and delinquent west, which imposes its democracy with missiles and its christian values through torture, and all this for a few more barrels of oil...<

Oh bullshit. Where is this new oil coming from? Why not mention the oil for food program, with all of it's foibles? Where is the fucking torture? Nude pics? Compared to Saddam's regime? You must be joking. News flash: The Iraqis see the tide of the US actions, and are well on their way to building a free, fair, and democratic country. They are fighting AGAINST the insurgents, the former Sunni torturers and Al Queda, who care NOTHING for their fellow Muslims.

>The one responsible is George W. Bush. I hold him personally liable and responsible for the deaths of over 1600 American soldiers, and almost 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths. And the numbers keep swelling. I don't blame the soldiers, they have to feed their families and they are just doing what they think is right, I blame the brains behind the braun.<

Thankfully, there are millions who do not hold your view, not just in the US, but around the world. Bush re-elected, Blair re-elected, etc, etc. What is great is, Bush and Blair, et al, do take the responsibility. They should also accept the accolades for a job well done.

>And whats worse is George Bush is now trying to justify the whole operation by posing as the champion of democracy and promising that it will definetly bring peace to the middle east. He even wants to go one step further by using the sucess of the Iraqi and Palestinian elections, hoping that Egypt and others will follow.<

Well duh. Do you deny that democratic countries are historically more peaceful? What a wonderful idea. If the entire middle east becomes democratic, the common man of each country having the ability of self determination, then it is almost guaranteed that the region will finally be free and peaceful. There are only about 50,000 violent Wahabists, that have an irrational voice because of violence. If their voice is drowned out by the millions of peace loving Muslims, there will be peace in the region.

And W said all of this from the beginning, not just during or after the war.

>He now hopes to turn his illegal mistake into a historical sucess and become known as someone who changed history by bringing peace into this devestated region. This is a new manipulation of the truth in order to give the illusion to the world that this Illegal invasion of a soverign country, carried out under false pretenses, was in fact extremely beneficial.<

Illegal? He had the consent of a huge majority in Congress (who were privy to the same information W had), as well as a UN resolution. Same in about thirty other countries. You may try to rewrite history, but it does not wash. Every true, fair examination of the actual facts reveals the opposite conclusion to your findings. Be honest.

And in the end, in the decades to come, when all can be seen in the light of hindsight, you will find that his decisions were true and correct.

>And I like how he claims the US is doing "the will of God"- I think George is a bit confused, he seems to not be able to differentiate between Satan and God.<

Please find ONE occurance of W claiming he is doing "the will of God". You are not honest.

Bigger
 
Bib, I have to respectfully disagree with you:

[/QUOTE]Interesting in your diatribe, you never even mention Afghanistan. Was that was also wrong? All of the same things could be said about that situation, or many other situaitons throughout history. Why did the US become involved in WWII in Europe? Germany had done nothing to the US. Were we wrong to help defeat Hitler?
[/QUOTE]So you believe it would be better to re-install Saddam as the leader of Iraq, correct? Either he was one of the worst leaders of a country in history, or he is innocent. Either he should be tried as a criminal, or put back in power. Perhaps those hundreds of thousands of bodies dug up in the desert were manufactured.[/QUOTE]

I agree that Saddam has alot of blood on his hands, heck, he put his own people in shredders, but he'll NEVER have the amount of blood on his hands as the coalition, err should I say, American army. What Saddam did I consider "population control" I know that sounds harsh, but its true. George Bush should have just put our soldiers in shredders, or pulled the trigger himself, because the end result is the same.
The USA is only 5% of the world population and they dominate the whole world and have militaries in 120 countries. It is not possible for 5% of the world population to bring democracy to 95%!

A job of a military soldier is to protect the US from all enemies, both foreign and domestic, not to overthrow dictatorships. WW2 was alot different. It wasn't a quagmire. Germany wasn't being illegally occupied for years with no end in sight, and the majority of the population not to mention the world supported us. In hindsight Saddam NEVER attacked us, while Hitler declared war on the U.S.
The American invaders announced that they were going to be welcomed as liberators and covered in flowers by the people. In fact, the truth is that they were seen for what they really were, an occupying force and over 1600 american soldiers were killed by the Iraqi resistance and over 10,000 severly wounded and probably handicapped for life. And this massacre continues today.
This occupying force then claimed to have "won the hearts and minds" of the people, but instead, the humiliations, the arbitrary imprisonment, the torture carried out in the prisons, the blatant crimes and massive destruction such as in the city of Fallujah, has made the people hate the occupying force as never before. Consequently the occupyiers prefer to avoid contact all all costs with the Iraqi people,who keep on asking them the akward question of "when will you go home?", and instead pass the buck to the Iraqi police of maintaining order.
Anyone who resists the American occupation is branded as terrorists, just as the Nazi soldiers called the French resistance terrorists too. Bush is also smoke-screening with his attempt to make beleive that the resistance is either composed of foreigners or old followers of Saddam. The truth is that the vast majority of it is composed of Iraqis happy to have been rid of Saddam, but who also want the occupying forces to leave their country. I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way if lets say China illegally attacked and occupied the US, killing and torturing the populus.
Finally, the recent elections are wheeled out as an American victory, as if it is the miracle cure which will bring peace by magic. They claim that democracy will be a sort of final solution bringing peace and somehow not specified, magically disolve all anti-zionist and anti-american sentiments.
The truth is that if the Arab people were to vote right now to see if they were pro or anti Israeli or American policy,the vast majority would be anti. And that is Bush's biggest defeat. As long as he can pass the blame of the middle east problems and terrorism onto a few dictators,all was well. All one had to do was overthrow the dictators, and all would be fine.
The USA is only 5% of the world population and they dominate the whole world and have militaries in well over 50 countries. It is not possible for 5% of the world population to bring democracy to 95%!
And while I really think this is the best country on the planet, this is exactly why I think Bush needs to be replaced immediately. His comments 2 years ago that "God told me to strike at Saddam" serves only as further proof that he is a fanatic. The old testament's "Eye for an eye" was taught to be wrong by Jesus and was replaced by "Love your enemy". George Bush, who claims to read from the bible every morning, somehow missed this most famous message of Jesus and if he really followed Jesus, would lead the world to peace instead of war.
Click to expand...
 
Please find ONE occurance of W claiming he is doing "the will of God". You are not honest.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ Bib, Bush told Israel's Haaretz news this , and it was made a book by Justin A. Frank, MD called "Bush on the Couch"
 
Religion MUST be kept seperate from the state. The founding fathers knew this and so created our democratic government in such a way. The problem with government and religion intertwining is that it tends to draw religious extremists to positions of power. As such, although I am a Christian, it makes me feel somewhat uncomfortable when my leaders claim to be doing the Will Of God. When government and religion become one we do not have democracy, we have a theocracy, which shortly becomes a totalitarian state. Men in power tend to want to keep that power, and if "God says for them to stay in power" who is to stop them? Very frightening to think about.
 
Colin Powell, February 24, 2001:" [Saddam] has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So, in effect, our policies have strenghtened the security of the neighbors of Iraq."

Condoleeza Rice, July 2001: "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."
Click to expand...

The Downing Street Memo. July 23, 2002: There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the facts were being fixed around the policy.
Click to expand...

That says it all. Everyone in this administration has lied to us about this bloodbath, or war if you wanna call it. Here's more proof of Bush and his cronies lying -www.whatreallyhappened.com/WMDlies.html
 
The only advice I have is for you guys to start listening to Limbaugh. He backs up what he says with references so you can check up on his claims.
 
The only advice I have is for you guys to start listening to Limbaugh. He backs up what he says with references so you can check up on his claims.
Click to expand...

You got to be joking? Rush Limbaugh is so far on the right, he makes Joe scarbourogh seem like a moderate. He peddeles his right-wing political mumbo jumbo so often it makes me sick, not to mention he made a racial comment (on the air no less) towards Eagles quarterback Donovan Mcnabb.
 
Is it just me?
every time he goes off on a rampage, spouting off about the "Evil Doers" I expect him to don a cape and fly off the stage!
it's like watching a cartoon!
Now if someone would jsut drop an anvil on him we'd be all set!
 
His comment about Donovan Mcnabb was taken out of context and blown up for media frenzy. His point was that people like to see people from disadvantaged backgorund do well, not that black people aren't good quarterbacks.

If you actually listen to what Limbaugh talks about and follow up on what he says, you will be hard pressed to discredit his claims. I challenge anyone to listen to him for two weeks and follow up on what he says.
 
Is it just me?
every time he goes off on a rampage, spouting off about the "Evil Doers" I expect him to don a cape and fly off the stage!
it's like watching a cartoon!
Now if someone would jsut drop an anvil on him we'd be all set!
Click to expand...

Now that is some funny stuff, man!
 
If you actually listen to what Limbaugh talks about and follow up on what he says, you will be hard pressed to discredit his claims. I challenge anyone to listen to him for two weeks and follow up on what he says.
I don't think I could listen to him for two weeks, my head would explode. Everytime he pushes his right-wing agenda, I wince with horrific pain.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I bet a lot of people are going to start chiming in with negative comments about Limbaugh. That's just fine, but try to be more specific than:

guy: 'Limbaugh sucks...'
guy2: 'Why does he suck?'
guy: 'I don't know, he just sucks...because I heard he sucks'

Everyone, besides BIB, seems to be forgetting that congress voted to go to war based on the same info Bush had, and nobody is offering any real insight on what should be done to improve our situation. We should do more than just list things that suck and point at people.
 
Kal-el said:
If you actually listen to what Limbaugh talks about and follow up on what he says, you will be hard pressed to discredit his claims. I challenge anyone to listen to him for two weeks and follow up on what he says.
I don't think I could listen to him for two weeks, my head would explode. Everytime he pushes his right-wing agenda, I wince with horrific pain.
Click to expand...


What is his right-wing agenda?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Both sides are doing a great job of terribly oversimplifying each other's position. Nobody is totally correct, though Bush is a sack of shit to be sure (but hardly original in this role). Conservatives get off on feeling rightous and smug in their belief system (and it has everything to do with belief, not sensible policy or politics). Most leftists just get their jollies whining about how evil and bad conservatives are without examining the issue from anything but an oppositional viewpoint, and so little is reconciled.

Rush Limbaugh is a moron though. For years he raged against drug defendents, adovating strict punisHydromaxents for even offenses such as minor possesion of substances like pot. Then, king-sized asshole that he is, attempts to buy tens of thousands of dollars of narcotics from his housekeeper. Why? Oh yeah, he's a drug addict. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer, and damn good at what he does. He just regurgitates all the opinions of his rabid conservative audience right back at them, so they can feel vindicated and justified in their opinions because a guy on the radio agrees with them. Yep, that's some deep scholarship and political discourse right there - an uneducated opinionist on the radio spits out half-baked soundbites he already knows all his listeners agree with, and you all just lap it up with a smile. That's not discussion or even interesting, it's just mental masturbation. He has little if any respect for his adoring audience; you all are just a meal ticket for a bloated pill-popping media enterpriser.
 
What is his right-wing agenda?
I think Swank effectively and sufficiently answered that question. Haha

But anyway, more and more Americans do not agree with what George Bush tells us-that "war is unfortunate but necessary to rid the world of evil", implying that God approves of America's policies in which thousands of innocent children are killed in Iraq, US and British soldiers torturing Iraqis or the hundreds of US coffins coming home-all this while the populations of Muslim countries are indoctrinating little children that Islam is the only true religion in order to retaliate.
I just love how right-wingers call liberals "unpatriotic" or other such nonsense. I fully support our troops, just NOT the Commander-In-Chief. No matter what is proven or said, impeacHydromaxent will never happen, mostly because of a GOP controlled congress.
He is pledging a pure campaign of disinformation in order to support the "war on terror". And by invading other countries in the name of this so called "war on terror", killing thousands of innocent civilians, imprisoning and torturing thousands of others, America is only generating a thousand times more terrorists ready to die to avenge the death and tortures endured by their friends and families. How can citizens of the "country of freedom" and the most advanced country in the world, USA, suddenly become war criminals, torturers, and abusers? Only because they are indoctrinated by this big lie of a "war on terror" which makes them see all Arabs or Muslims as potential terrorists guilty of the 9/11 attacks, and needing punisHydromaxent. It is exactly like the Germans in 1938 who were indoctrinated to hate the Jews so much that the majority of them were ready to help Hitler put them in concentration camps. Guantanamo looks more and more like Auschwitz and it is indeed a concentration camp where so called "detainees" have absolutely no rights. The imaginary "war on terror" is creating more terrorists and the future will sadly prove it. Before this quagmire began there were a few hundred religious fanatics ready to blow themselves up in the name of their god, now there are hundred of thousands all over the Muslim world who hate America as never before. Hatred creates hatred. War brings war, and violence brings more violence. "Those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword". That's why its more important than ever to remember what Jesus said: "Love your enemies". If these words of Christian wisdom were applied by George Bush, who falsely claims to be a Christian, after September 11 Bush would not have started a war, but by loving his enemies, would have given more support to Palestinians, received more Palestinian refugees,withdrew the military from Saudi Arabia, canceled the economic sanctions against Iraq killing so many children, ask Israel to desroy their wmds, and give as much money as it gives to Israel to Arab countries in a more balanced way. This would have brought peace and love which would have dramatically brought down the number of potential terrorists.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Are any of you "dissenting" September 24th in D.C. L.A. or San Francisco? I've never driven down to D.C. before from here (OHIO), (been to D.C. of course), but I'm hoping to have a friend come with me just in case I get lost.
 
Kal-el said:
What is his right-wing agenda?
I think Swank effectively and sufficiently answered that question. Haha

But anyway, more and more Americans do not agree with what George Bush tells us-that "war is unfortunate but necessary to rid the world of evil", implying that God approves of America's policies in which thousands of innocent children are killed in Iraq, US and British soldiers torturing Iraqis or the hundreds of US coffins coming home-all this while the populations of Muslim countries are indoctrinating little children that Islam is the only true religion in order to retaliate.
I just love how right-wingers call liberals "unpatriotic" or other such nonsense. I fully support our troops, just NOT the Commander-In-Chief. No matter what is proven or said, impeacHydromaxent will never happen, mostly because of a GOP controlled congress.
He is pledging a pure campaign of disinformation in order to support the "war on terror". And by invading other countries in the name of this so called "war on terror", killing thousands of innocent civilians, imprisoning and torturing thousands of others, America is only generating a thousand times more terrorists ready to die to avenge the death and tortures endured by their friends and families. How can citizens of the "country of freedom" and the most advanced country in the world, USA, suddenly become war criminals, torturers, and abusers? Only because they are indoctrinated by this big lie of a "war on terror" which makes them see all Arabs or Muslims as potential terrorists guilty of the 9/11 attacks, and needing punisHydromaxent. It is exactly like the Germans in 1938 who were indoctrinated to hate the Jews so much that the majority of them were ready to help Hitler put them in concentration camps. Guantanamo looks more and more like Auschwitz and it is indeed a concentration camp where so called "detainees" have absolutely no rights. The imaginary "war on terror" is creating more terrorists and the future will sadly prove it. Before this quagmire began there were a few hundred religious fanatics ready to blow themselves up in the name of their god, now there are hundred of thousands all over the Muslim world who hate America as never before. Hatred creates hatred. War brings war, and violence brings more violence. "Those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword". That's why its more important than ever to remember what Jesus said: "Love your enemies". If these words of Christian wisdom were applied by George Bush, who falsely claims to be a Christian, after September 11 Bush would not have started a war, but by loving his enemies, would have given more support to Palestinians, received more Palestinian refugees,withdrew the military from Saudi Arabia, canceled the economic sanctions against Iraq killing so many children, ask Israel to desroy their wmds, and give as much money as it gives to Israel to Arab countries in a more balanced way. This would have brought peace and love which would have dramatically brought down the number of potential terrorists.
Click to expand...

I don't want to get too much into this because right now I just don't have the energy, but I find it funny how ALL the countries during WWII had GOD on their side. Every leader said something similar to the effects of God is on our side. It's been that way quite a bit. It's one of the key elements in manipulating and brainwashing a nation into believing their government/leaders are righteous in their quests. It's that extreme patriotism backed by the majority of a people unwilling to question the government outright. Facism is quite beautiful to our current administration...rigged elections, scaring the people into thinking the enemy is anywhere, everywhere, and could be anyone, justifying war on false premises, and limiting the press substantially. It's pretty easy to do here it seems. Our leaders are now more than ever switching from corporate man X to government leader X and back again when their terms are done. And we blindly go about our business thinking it's not so bad...it could be worse. Good thing is we still have the power to stop the insanity that's taken place recently. We still at least can show our government that WE are still here. If the guys under Nixon that are very much involved in today's administration want to see their unsettled business and ideologies come to fruition we'll have to put a stop to it. Who does the U.S. government officials work for exactly? Let's remind them of what happens when the people are ignored. If all of our names ended with an Inc. maybe then they'd change their ways.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Why do you think the majority of our nation has been brainwashed and bamboozled by the current administartion? This is a very unhealthy, and common belief amongst the liberals in our country. It's like saying everyone is too stupid to realize the truth. The left 'believe' they hold the truth, and those that do not follow are just too stupid and brainwashed to realize it. The left is shooting themselves in the foot with this attitude, and are too dense to realize it is hampering their agenda.

Again, remember that congress overwhelmingly voted to go to war based on the exact same information presented to W and his administartion.

As for Limbaugh, the challenge still stands to listen to what he says and discredit his opinions on the issues at hand.

Who has done more damage, Limbaugh with his dive into pain killers, or Rather/Newsweek/CNN presenting completely false information.
 
Again, remember that congress overwhelmingly voted to go to war based on the exact same information presented to W and his administartion.
Click to expand...

Congress was definetly told a string of lies about Iraq to push this cause for war. Bush definetly wanted to activate war prior to being president, he was just waiting for a grave tragedy (9/11) to happen to cover it up.

Below is the Congressional authorization for force that Bush used to launch the invasion of Iraq. However, if you read Section 3, paragraph B, Bush was required to prove to congress that Iraq was in violation of UN Resolutions by still being in possession of WMDs, and secondly, that Iraq was behind 9/11. Both claims have since been dissaproved and discredited, and appear to be created by the Pentagon office at the heart of the latest Israeli spy scandal.
Therefore, under United States law, the war in Iraq is illegal. And We The People are not under any legal or moral obligation to pay for it, let alone our kids be killed in it.
If anything, Bush and his pro-war Neocon buddies should be required to reimburse the treasury for their private use of government property. I leave the question of civil lawsuits for wrongful deaths to the families of the dead American service people, and the live service people still suffering from depleted uranium.
Click to expand...

Read the whole report at www.whatreallyhappened.com/iraqwar.html
 
Al Franken discredits Rush Limbaugh on a routine basis. Al plays a quote or claim that Rush has said. And then he tells how it's a lie and then tells the truth. The only one I can think of was where Rush said something like "over 70 percent of the people on welfare are teenagers on their first jobs". Al then goes and gets the real statistics from the US Department of Labor and it's realy like 15 or 20%.

Don't quote me on the actual numbers, but the point remains the same. Al also does it with Sean Hannity and O'Reilly. He catches them in outright lies.
 
LambdaCalc said:
Why do you think the majority of our nation has been brainwashed and bamboozled by the current administartion? This is a very unhealthy, and common belief amongst the liberals in our country. It's like saying everyone is too stupid to realize the truth. The left 'believe' they hold the truth, and those that do not follow are just too stupid and brainwashed to realize it. The left is shooting themselves in the foot with this attitude, and are too dense to realize it is hampering their agenda.

Again, remember that congress overwhelmingly voted to go to war based on the exact same information presented to W and his administartion.

As for Limbaugh, the challenge still stands to listen to what he says and discredit his opinions on the issues at hand.

Who has done more damage, Limbaugh with his dive into pain killers, or Rather/Newsweek/CNN presenting completely false information.
Click to expand...

No you see the thing about hampering their agenda is that the way things stand currently the agenda is more important than anything else. It's even more important than what the people want and the right (if you want to play this card) cares only what is in the sight's of the President and his administration. And the very few actual Conservatives have any say as to what is pushed in the agenda or more importantly in legislation. Don't even start with the judiciary. The President has made it clear that he'll go along with anything that involves benefitting the elite, cutting out any form of socialist programs which are vital to the country with our health care system, helping friends profit from war and reconstruction, completely dismantle all that this country supposedly stands for, and makes sure that he has as much power as possible. If anyone thinks the President is looking out for anyone other than himself, his elitist friends and international criminals alike then he or she cannot put two and two together or hasn't bothered doing any research. Also, anytime someone mentions the left or liberals somehow fails to see that those terms are not bad words. If there wasn't another side or a group that criticized the government and President do you know what we'd have here? But I suppose all of us liberals should be quiet and behave ourselves. After all our frame of mind hasn't produced a single solution to social security yet right? Oh wait, that's right our way of thinking brought us Social Security. I understand it's a bit difficult to comprehend pragmatism in this country, but if you try hard enough you'll begin to see why Social Security was a pretty good idea and still is to many Americans today.

Newsweek did not report false information. The Koran has been "mishandled" quite a bit since 9/11 and it has been reported many times over the last few years. You know maybe if the U.S. was keeping to any of the things they insisted they wouldn't do in Afghanistan, as in building miltary bases in Afghanistan, maybe the people wouldn't be protesting. Afghanistan has become the pet of the U.S. and like many other countries which we've helped or liberated we've allowed former war criminals run the country. Just one more reason the Afghans were protesting is probably because things haven't changed there for the majority of the population. But I guarantee you the Afghan "President" is glad that the U.S. is still there considering the Pipe Line sitting in their country. The people of that country truly needed help, but the help wasn't delivered because things are not the same, but they are the same.

Innocent people are being held without any formal charge in Guantanamo Bay. How many recieved their right to be heard by a court of justice? Tens of thousands were sold to the military back when there were massive rewards for that sort of thing and how many of those "terrorists" do you suppose were just your every day person? How many of them were dissidents? And you bring up left wing/right wing arguments and a three paragraph report in Newsweek that was doing nothing more than reporting the truth? The amount of misinformation and suppressing of the real news is sickening in this country. Don't ever believe that where we stand today as a country that we are as free as people will tell you. Don't think this country isn't slipping. After all that has happened, with every change that is being attempted like with the fillabuster and the nuclear option...if you can't see that our Senate is full of plenty of crazy power hungry bastards that will toy with something like the fillabuster...and if you can't see it (talking to anyone out there) or take it seriously then we're all in for a long bumpy ride.
 
Yeah, that shit about Limbaugh being "factually correct" all the time is just stupid. The reason people think that is because nobody bothers to check. If you get online though, there are watchdog sites that keep track of the BS, and of course the Franken show, which is infotainment as well but infinately less stupid and at least honest about its political slant. All the conservative mouthpieces present themselves as non-biased or centrist. Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Savage, all of them, but gee whiz, what do you know, their entire fan base is conservative and so is nearly every comment out of their mouths. Yep, they definately don't have a conservative agenda . . . Anybody that buys that will buy anything these guys say. Why? Like I said before, it makes them feel good that some guy on the radio agrees with them. Nothing more, nothing less.

The point of mentioning Rush's drug addiction is that he's a huge hypocrite who just says things to gratify his audience. When Rush got busted did he stand up in court and say "Judge, I've been saying for a decade that all drug offenders ought to be locked up like wild animals, so please do the right thing and throw the book at me. Give me the maximum sentence plus ten." Nope, he plea bargained like a madman and hired some of the most expensive defense lawyers in the country to keep himself out of jail.

It's not about journalism, politics, or really anything topical, it's about selling radio [words=http://www.phallosan.com/shop/catalog/default.php?z=eNortjIxtVKyL0pNszWxMFcrSSxKTy2JL0hMT7U1UisoykyxtbBQSy4tLsnPjS8uKcrMS7dVsgZcMMpbEbo%2C]ads[/words]. It sickens me that people turn to that mindless drivel for their news and interaction. You all are just lining up to let somebody else tell you what your opinions and ideals should be. If you seriously tune into Limbaugh or Hannity of any of those morons for your news and consider it to be a real discussion of issues, then you're just as dumb as they think you are.

Here's a thought - turn on the BBC world news instead, where it's just coverage of facts and events with no opinions and loud, quarrelsome sound bites. Try making up your own minds about events and politics. It's a lot more useful exercise without some swollen loudmouthed bullshit artist holding your hand for you. Then again I'm inclined to believe that people who listen to that nonsense like having someobdy else tell them what to think, so you may just find it disturbing . . .
 
Last edited:
Well it's easier that way Swank. In the United States the people aren't taught that politics matter. We like sport's statistics. Anyone who knows a little bit more than where they stand on abortion is in the minority. We like to think we're everything we've been pumped up to be, but in truth from the educational system to the way we vote to how little attention the majority pays to their government (federal or state or even local for some) we're set up to be ignorant and non-participitory. Pushing an agenda to those who are ill-informed and too lazy or too narrowminded to see what's what ties in with that and taking comfort in other people thinking similarly. Then again I live in Ohio. Hello Intelligent Design! Goodbye thousands of jobs! well, the jobs have been long gone...so I guess I'm late on that.
 
Newsweek admitted the report was false.

I don't totally agree with the patriot act either, but for the most part it's not like they are going to the grocery store and nabbing random guys named Bill...unless Bill's real name is of Arabic origin, and Bill tends to buy weird supplies in bulk.

Why do you say the press in this country are suppressed and fed misinformation? It's the duty of the press to gather and validate their own information...that's why they exist. Perhaps you would prefer the press to be controlled by the government as it is in most of the Arab world.

The Koran will probably be mishandled, and the prisoners may be a bit uncomfortable...but isn't prison suppose to be somewhat uncomfortable? Perhaps you would prefer we handle our prisoners in the same manner as our enemy. Perhaps you would prefer our millitary and government to handle the war in the same manner as our enemy. As far as I can tell, the 'torture' the prisoners have been through doesn't amount to anything less that you experience being a fresHydromaxan football/baseball...player or joining a fraternity.

Liberals always seem to be announcing our doom, and genrally being negative about absolutely everything...why?
 
You are right Swank...Conservatives just line up and listen to a fat man tell them what they want to hear, becasue we are just fat, lazy Americans headed for doom. We can't even check up on the facts ourselves, and proclaim every word out of fat man's mouth to be truth. It's good to have people like you around to remind the rest of us dumb americans just how fat and dumb we are.
 
LambdaCalc said:
Newsweek admitted the report was false.

I don't totally agree with the patriot act either, but for the most part it's not like they are going to the grocery store and nabbing random guys named Bill...unless Bill's real name is of Arabic origin, and Bill tends to buy weird supplies in bulk.

Why do you say the press in this country are suppressed and fed misinformation? It's the duty of the press to gather and validate their own information...that's why they exist. Perhaps you would prefer the press to be controlled by the government as it is in most of the Arab world.

The Koran will probably be mishandled, and the prisoners may be a bit uncomfortable...but isn't prison suppose to be somewhat uncomfortable? Perhaps you would prefer we handle our prisoners in the same manner as our enemy. Perhaps you would prefer our millitary and government to handle the war in the same manner as our enemy. As far as I can tell, the 'torture' the prisoners have been through doesn't amount to anything less that you experience being a fresHydromaxan football/baseball...player or joining a fraternity.

Liberals always seem to be announcing our doom, and genrally being negative about absolutely everything...why?
Click to expand...

I trust that you don't realize that people were taken in and not released from custody after 9/11 in this country. There are lots of people that were taken out of their homes in the middle of the night at gun point, but I guess if you were paying attention to the news you'd have known. And it was all based on hear say and racial profiling.

You do realize there are innocent people in prison today in OUR country right? So when our government leaders like Donald Rumsfeld make it clear that indeed there has been reported and confirmed torture going on in Cuba among many other foreign nations it's okay because everyone of the detainees are guilty in some way? That's crazy! Torture is wrong. It doesn't exactly send the message to the people our troops have to fight that torture is not allowed. People's lives have been endangered and have lost lives because of a war, a preemptive war at that, which was based on false/manipulated information, yet the White House of course has enough balls to send Scott McLellan (how he hasn't hanged himself by now I don't know....I don't think the man has ever told the truth in his life, but then again that is his job...he's the least significant man and yet there he is forever lying and spinning) saying that Newsweek's report cost people their lives. Incredulous. And the fraternity analogy? Are you serious? How about looking into Uzbekastan and how they boil people's body parts. Fraternity stuff. Man, I hope you don't believe people in the Middle East hate us for our freedom too.

Yeah liberals, we are here to let everyone know of our pending doom. We're here to offer another side, another viewpoint. It just happens in most cases especially when there is war going on involving the U.S. we are right. It's just nobody seems to really catch on until the end or much later.
 
Lamdacalc, man alive, you just proved my point buddy. That shit about detention centers in Iraq being nothing no worse than "fraternity hijinks" is almost a direct quote from Limbaugh. He famously said the prison guards were making "tough" and "smart" decisions that were possibly saving lives. Thanks for demonstrating that you will actually repeat shit you hear on the radio like a parrot.

The problem with our conduct over there is that A) we're supposedly the shining light of the world and an example, yet we were clearly violating the Geneva Convention and international rules of conduct, which we helped create and enforce, so we looked like total jackasses, and B) In a societal conflict in which they already hate us, internationally publicized photos of our people humiliating and torturing prisoners for sport is like a fucking gift to terrorist recruiters. Our behavior over there recruited a legion of new terrorists and dissolved any credibility we might have been clinging to. We fucked up and caught doing it - what's unpatriotic about acknowledging that?

And, to be clear, there was a lot more shit going on than making the prisoners strip down and pose (which any Muslim man would tell you is more humiliating and horrible for somebody from that culture than almost anything else that could be done to them). The investigations by the Red Cross have revealed that prisoners that died of neglect and abuse were actively hidden from human rights investigators and this is currently under federal investigation. Our own military leaders have condemned the prison and detainment activites over there, and those directly responsible have been tried and convicted of war crimes by a military court (too bad they won't go up the ladder a little farther, they really pinned it down on a few scapegoats). Prisoners were beaten, starved, threatened and attacked by guard dogs, the list goes on. On top of that, a vast number of the detainees in Iraq were just suspects and we had absolutely no right to detain and abuse them. They were denied access to their families, international agencies, or basically the outside world - they just disappeared. One Iraqi journalist that was imprisoned simply because he looked like a suspected insurgent organizer for six months and nearly died is writing a book about his experiences as well as the whole situation. Yep, no worse than a little hazing.

Also, I didn't say you were fat. But Americans are fat - we're the fattest fucking country on Earth, and if the entire world consumed at the rate that we do the planet would be a desert inside of a year. And I know we're dumb, because Rush Limbaugh and BIll O'Reilly are two if the most popular broadcast personalities out there.
 
Just for the record....Good answer Bib. To those of you who really are upset with the present administration: Interesting that you live and like it in America but don't like what it takes to get and keep what we have. If we would follow your advice and position, we would soon lose our freedom, and be in the mess some of these other countries. I am proud of our leaders. GS
 
Wow, I had no idea there were this many cool-aid drinkers on this board. Abe Lincoln had it right about fooling people.

Just no way to respond to all the tripe and misinformation reported in this thread by the left leaning members. Nobody would read the lengthy post it would take to respond anyway.

But just a few common sense things to think about.

How come the US did not remove Saddam in the first Gulf War, 1991?

Why is it when the US is asked to leave a country, we always do?

Where is the US stationed in the world, at present, that we are not welcomed by the government.

Why is it that so many people forget that the US has stated emphatically we will leave Iraq if the recently, freely elected government ask us to?

Why were the US and UK the only countries attempting to enforce the Iraqi oil embargo?

Why were Saddams troops almost daily firing at the US and UK planes patrolling the no fly zone?

If Saddam had gotten rid of his WMDs, why did he not allow free and unfettered inspections as he swore he would under the first Gulf was surrender documents.

Why is it nobody on the left ever remembers the numerous UN resolutions that Saddam was in violation of?

What about the oil for food program thefts, and the bribes paid to the Security Council members?

Any deaths or injuries in war are terrible, but how does the left bitch about a war that freed 50 million people, with the fewest casualties in history, on both sides, and the least amount of collateral damage in history?

Why does the left center on bitching about Iraq, but says nothing about Afghanistan? Both were preemptive strikes, against known threats. Afghanistan had never declared war on the US, but Saddam had in the earlier war. A war in which he was in violation of the surrender documents.

How does the left forget so easily that it was the Bill Clinton appointed CIA director, George Tenet that proclaimed the evidence for WMDs in Iraq a "slam dunk", both privately to the President and members of Congress, and publically.

We know that Saddam had WMDs. He admitted it after his son-in-law spilled the beans on his various programs, and when he used them on his own people, the Kurds, and on the Iranians. He did not disclose what happened to these known WMDs as he was supposed to under the surrender documents of the first war, and UN resolutions. So, what happened to them?

IF this was an illegal war, why does the left NOT call for the reinstallation of Saddam, and for paying war costs to Iraq?

As far as all the false quotes attributed to Bush et al, following is a great resource:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/query.htm...q=0&oq=&text=0&qm=0&ql=&st=91&nh=10&lk=1&rf=1

You can search and check on anything the Administration has said about anything. Always good to have accurate information, and to be able to read quotes in context.

Once again, the US has had an election since the was in Iraq began. All the evidence, the true evidence is on the table. Probably every single person in the US understood the position of Bush. And he received the most votes in history.

Be interesting to see how Chirac does.

Bigger
 
It is NOT unpatriotic to criticize our leaders or national policies. It is our DUTY to do so! We are a DEMOCRACY that is founded on FREEDOM and the RULE OF THE MAJORITY. Anyone who claims otherwise is not talking about a democratic political structure DEPenis EnlargementNDENT on the opinions and needs of the citizens, but a TOTALITARIAN STATE ruled by a privileged few.

The next time you say we should just shut up and support our president and our country's policies, you should just throw up your arm and scream "Heil, Hitler!" Then we can start burning books, imprison dissenters, organize an SS and just hope that our personal religious, racial or political group does not go on the list for extermination in the name of the common good.

In a democracy, it is the job of all citizens to police and contribute to the steering of this vast, powerful and free nation.

Fascists, go get your own country.
 
kong,

Who the hell said you can't criticize? I do all the time. Just not generally about Iraq.

In fact, that is one of the things our guys are fighting for. Do you think the Taliban or Saddam allowed for dissent?

A person may be wrong, and sound stupid as hell. But in the US, he has the right to do so.

Bigger
 
Bush and Limbaugh are both lying hypocrites and about the poorest excuses for Christians anywhere. All they really care about is getting richer and finding ways for their pals to get richer. The right wing agenda is to perpetuate class division through economics.
 
Its all a massive right-wing conspiracy right? I mean... when isnt it? The major countries that didnt want to go to war, France, Germany, Russia? did so because they were abusing the oil for food program and didnt want the documents recovered. Same with UN and kofi annan's people.

Pretty much, Bush did the right thing by liberating millions of people from a dictator even if only 1600 US troops died and thousands more innocent people were killed in the bombings (one major reason is due to the fact where Hussein built his military facilities). In the end the weakminded and morally weak countries (France, Germany) and the UN will become feeble and weak spouting petty meaningless words trying to get things done. Similar to the league of nations way back when.

History is repeating itself. World in trouble. USA saves it. We still take shit. We move on as the wealthiest most free country in the world. What is new?
 
[/QUOTE] originally posted by Bib:
How come the US did not remove Saddam in the first Gulf War, 1991?
Click to expand...

Good question, does it ever make you think that maybe we would'nt have to go through half of this shit now.

Why is it when the US is asked to leave a country, we always do?
Click to expand...

Maybe after we slaughter thousands of people.

Where is the US stationed in the world, at present, that we are not welcomed by the government.
Click to expand...

Of course we are, cause we put "puppet" governments in place.

Why is it that so many people forget that the US has stated emphatically we will leave Iraq if the recently, freely elected government ask us to?
Click to expand...

Yea its easy to say it.

Why were the US and UK the only countries attempting to enforce the Iraqi oil embargo?
Click to expand...

If tomorrow the Arabic nations were to decide to create a new oil embargo, America would invade them to get the oil and a vast majority of Americans would support it.

Why were Saddams troops almost daily firing at the US and UK planes patrolling the no fly zone?
Click to expand...

It was proven that in early summer of 2002, Blair's and Bush's forces bombed Iraq hoping to get Saddam to retaliate, so a war would be justified.

If Saddam had gotten rid of his WMDs, why did he not allow free and unfettered inspections as he swore he would under the first Gulf was surrender documents.
For 6 months Saddam had well over 400 UN weapons inspectors in Iraq, they were searching everything from his palaces, to the cargo in and out of the country.
Click to expand...
Why is it nobody on the left ever remembers the numerous UN resolutions that Saddam was in violation of?
Indeed, all of W's arguements for war with Iraq applied as well to other countries with which the US was quite cozy with. Nuclear weapons and support for terrorists? Try Pakistan- the most likely current home of Bin Laden and world headquarters of Al-Quaeda. Brutally repressive regimes that export Islamic extremism? Try our friends the Saudi's. Violations of UN resolutions? Other countries were in violation of 91 of those. In Feb 2003, Iran- on top of the US's list of rouge states- announced it had begun mining uranium and was preparing a nuclear power plant, which Iran, sitting on an ocean of oil, had no peaceful use for.
Click to expand...
What about the oil for food program thefts, and the bribes paid to the Security Council members?
What about the harsh sanctions the US put on Iraq killing hundreds, if not thousands of innocent children?
Click to expand...
Any deaths or injuries in war are terrible, but how does the left bitch about a war that freed 50 million people, with the fewest casualties in history, on both sides, and the least amount of collateral damage in history?
We are currently helping rebuild a ruined and devestated Iraq. Fewest casualties? Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians were murdered by American bombings alone. Out of that 10,000 of those were children. How do you justify that?
Click to expand...
Why does the left center on bitching about Iraq, but says nothing about Afghanistan? Both were preemptive strikes, against known threats. Afghanistan had never declared war on the US, but Saddam had in the earlier war. A war in which he was in violation of the surrender documents.
America thought Bin Laden was in Afghanistan-and he ordered the 9/11 attacks- Saddam DIDN'T. The first gulf war was justified in that he invaded Kuwait. Bush hinted Iraq was behind 9/11, as then National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice said, "This is a story that is unfolding and is getting clearer, and we're learning more." We, the public, never did.
Click to expand...
How does the left forget so easily that it was the Bill Clinton appointed CIA director, George Tenet that proclaimed the evidence for WMDs in Iraq a "slam dunk", both privately to the President and members of Congress, and publically.
That was Donald Rumsfeld that uttered those words. George abandoned the Clinton plan to attack Al-Qaeda, which was presented to the incoming Bush administration in Jan 2001, in favor of developing his own. Not to mention that he also ignored warnings in Jan 2001 from the outgoing Clinton National Security team that Al-qaeda and its sleeper cells in the US were the major security threat facing the US.
Click to expand...
We know that Saddam had WMDs. He admitted it after his son-in-law spilled the beans on his various programs, and when he used them on his own people, the Kurds, and on the Iranians. He did not disclose what happened to these known WMDs as he was supposed to under the surrender documents of the first war, and UN resolutions. So, what happened to them?
Bush said alot, but he never mentioned that immediately after learning that Iraq had used chemical weapons against the Kurds in 87-88, the Reagan Administration blocked a senate resolution imposing sanctions on Iraq, and the succeeding Bush 1 administration gave Saddam's government $1.2 billion in financial credits. Or that the US helped cover up Saddam's poison gas attacks on the Kurds by claiming Iran was responsible. Or that while knowing Iraq was using chemical weapons against Iran, the US gave Iraq satelite intelligence to help it target Iranians. Or that the US supplied Iraq with anthrax. Or that Donald Rumsfeld was Reagan's envoy to cozy up with Saddam in 1983.
Click to expand...
IF this was an illegal war, why does the left NOT call for the reinstallation of Saddam, and for paying war costs to Iraq?
Soon after Bush's economic adviser Larry Lindsey committed the sin of publicaly estimating the cost of the war at $100-200 billion, he lost his job. The white house said $50-60 billion. A month later, only days into this quagmire, Bush asked congress for a $75 billion downpayment to cover war costs for 6 months. In September, he requested another $87 billion- more than the combined 2004 federal budgets for education, job training, and employment and social services. Yet the budget Bush sent to congress in Feb 2003 included no war costs, on the preposterous notion the white house still hoped to avoid war.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
sephin said:
Its all a massive right-wing conspiracy right? I mean... when isnt it? The major countries that didnt want to go to war, France, Germany, Russia? did so because they were abusing the oil for food program and didnt want the documents recovered. Same with UN and kofi annan's people.

Pretty much, Bush did the right thing by liberating millions of people from a dictator even if only 1600 US troops died and thousands more innocent people were killed in the bombings (one major reason is due to the fact where Hussein built his military facilities). In the end the weakminded and morally weak countries (France, Germany) and the UN will become feeble and weak spouting petty meaningless words trying to get things done. Similar to the league of nations way back when.

History is repeating itself. World in trouble. USA saves it. We still take shit. We move on as the wealthiest most free country in the world. What is new?
Click to expand...

jesus christ! im just gonna call you ignorant beyond all recognition, and hopfully someone has the effort to write a big post and give you the facts that can prove you wrong a thousand times over.
 
It seems like I can argue my point till I get blue in the face, and nothing changes. I can't fit 10lbs of shit in a 5lb bag- its useless. Anyway, there was no UN security Coucil resolution authorizing use of force to invade Iraq. Three of the five permanent members- France, Russia, and China- remained opposed, and despite intense lobbying of the ten rotating members, the US failed to get the nine votes to pass such a resolution. Only three countries- the US, UK, and Australia- sent combat forces to Iraq. Around 30 countries openly voiced support (according to the White House, another 15 did so anonymously) a small minority of the 184 member UN nations. The 30 supporters did not include a single Arab country. Alot of Bush's "coalition of the willing" was more a coalition of the bribed and coerced. And most of these countries' population's remained vastly opposed.
 
Bib said:
Wow, I had no idea there were this many cool-aid drinkers on this board. Abe Lincoln had it right about fooling people.

Just no way to respond to all the tripe and misinformation reported in this thread by the left leaning members. Nobody would read the lengthy post it would take to respond anyway.

But just a few common sense things to think about.

How come the US did not remove Saddam in the first Gulf War, 1991?

Why is it when the US is asked to leave a country, we always do?

Where is the US stationed in the world, at present, that we are not welcomed by the government.

Why is it that so many people forget that the US has stated emphatically we will leave Iraq if the recently, freely elected government ask us to?

Why were the US and UK the only countries attempting to enforce the Iraqi oil embargo?

Why were Saddams troops almost daily firing at the US and UK planes patrolling the no fly zone?

If Saddam had gotten rid of his WMDs, why did he not allow free and unfettered inspections as he swore he would under the first Gulf was surrender documents.

Why is it nobody on the left ever remembers the numerous UN resolutions that Saddam was in violation of?

What about the oil for food program thefts, and the bribes paid to the Security Council members?

Any deaths or injuries in war are terrible, but how does the left bitch about a war that freed 50 million people, with the fewest casualties in history, on both sides, and the least amount of collateral damage in history?

Why does the left center on bitching about Iraq, but says nothing about Afghanistan? Both were preemptive strikes, against known threats. Afghanistan had never declared war on the US, but Saddam had in the earlier war. A war in which he was in violation of the surrender documents.

How does the left forget so easily that it was the Bill Clinton appointed CIA director, George Tenet that proclaimed the evidence for WMDs in Iraq a "slam dunk", both privately to the President and members of Congress, and publically.

We know that Saddam had WMDs. He admitted it after his son-in-law spilled the beans on his various programs, and when he used them on his own people, the Kurds, and on the Iranians. He did not disclose what happened to these known WMDs as he was supposed to under the surrender documents of the first war, and UN resolutions. So, what happened to them?

IF this was an illegal war, why does the left NOT call for the reinstallation of Saddam, and for paying war costs to Iraq?

As far as all the false quotes attributed to Bush et al, following is a great resource:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/query.htm...q=0&oq=&text=0&qm=0&ql=&st=91&nh=10&lk=1&rf=1

You can search and check on anything the Administration has said about anything. Always good to have accurate information, and to be able to read quotes in context.

Once again, the US has had an election since the was in Iraq began. All the evidence, the true evidence is on the table. Probably every single person in the US understood the position of Bush. And he received the most votes in history.

Be interesting to see how Chirac does.

Bigger
Click to expand...

To answer just one of your questions Bib before I hit the hay. Saddam wasn't removed for the reason why Geroge H.W. Bush admitted to in that by removing Saddam from power in Iraq would mean utter chaos in that country. Kind of like what we're seeing today. Just how did the Ba'th party even come to be? In the 70s they got their act together regrouped and ousted their current leaders. Saddam helped in that coup just as he helped the U.S. and Saddam helped each other out by the U.S. giving weapons to Iraq to fight the Iranians. Saddam was supposed to be the bulldog for the U.S. in the Middle East. He was anti fundamentalist. The Iraqi military/arsenal consisted of old weapons the Soviet Union, and European nations sold them in addition to the weapons and chemicals we gave them.

Why can't you understand that the U.S. sets up countries that have something we desire such as oil and a key position in the world, which to build a military base? Usually it's a militant or tyrannical leader set on imposing its will on the people particularly the people against the government who is helped to power. Look at Afghanistan Bib. Who is the President there? And another thing why can't all of you get it through your heads that I stand left or right of no party. I am loyal to my country and the well being of my family, friends, everyday Americans, and the men and women of the military in which case several are and have been all of the aforementioned.
 
Last edited:
Boy I see we got a pile of shit growing here. Let me step on in....

First, I don't think that there is anyone that could say that some things couldn't have been done better in Iraq. However, the actions in general have been correct.
Do I think we in the US (as a country) sometimes do things that we shouldn't do? Yes. For example, half of the corrupt dictators/governments in South America are probably in power due to US influence. Then we bitch about them. Example, Noriega put in power by US, then we kidnap him from his own country. I don't think it was legally right but probably was morally. There's a quote somewhere by someone long ago about the law vs. what is morally right. However, Latin America is intrinsically corrupt. It is the nature there. Don't bash me for saying that, I've got some experience in this (and almost anyone from Latin America will tell you the same).
Back to Iraq. Did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction. Yes. I'm pretty sure the ten's of thousands of bodies that have been found (many in mass graves) were not of people who just decided to commit suicide. Besides, if you think that Bush lied about them, ask the Clinton administration. Quotes from them say that there were WMDs. Were they lying too. Or does it only count for Bush. One thing I can say for Bush (and no I don't agree with him on everthing) is that he doesn't change on you. You may not agree with him, but you know what he thinks is the right thing to do.
Let me go over a few points:
"If tomorrow the Arabic nations were to decide to create a new oil embargo, America would invade them to get the oil and a vast majority of Americans would support it."
Yes, this has been the long standing policy of ALL US administrations, both republican and democrat, for many years. And since we now have taken over Iraq, I think we should syphon off some of the oil for our own. However this is not happening, so there goes the war for oil theory (partly - not to say that ousting Saddam help). Also, take a look at the percentage of oil that came from Iraq. Not exactly on the top of the list.
You say that Saddam was doing population control. Damn, couldn't brother have just passed out some Trojans? So, it is ok for Saddam to kill innocent people, but by your definition Bush is bad if innocent people were killed as a result of his decisions (though I'm certain that he still has a ways to go to catch Saddam). Also, did Clinton ever send any troops anywhere to stop "genocide"? Now was that right or wrong? Shouldn't folks in other countries just be allowed to kill anyone who is of an inferior race/religion/etc? Don't ask me, cause you would be surprised to know that I think yes they should. When the people want it to stop, there will be revolution. If assistance of other countries is asked by these people, then send some help.
Speaking of sending help. Why is it that the US sends more aid to more places in the world than anyone else and catches more shit for trying to help. Tell you what, next time some backwoods, mule humping, no hygiene having, can't support your own country has some rain/wind/moving earth/etc. (and yeah I've been there), let France take care of them. I don't want the money that I pay in taxes going to some bastards that are going to A: steal it B:use it against us C:not give it to those who need it the most or D:use it and call us a bunch of mother-fuckers.
While we are on the subject of these world problems, how about the UN. Move the headquarters to Paris and pull the US out. I'm tired of more of my tax money going to a corrupt organization that get real estate in NY, gets the US to pay for the majority of its operations, and goes against the US in most issues. But hey, let's give Syria a seat - they seem like nice guys.
On the Limbaugh issue. I don't know a lot about the drug case part, but his case is different than most drug addicts. He became addicted to something that he was instructed to take by a doctor. He did not actively seek out the drug in the beginning. I do feel though that most drugs should be legalized. If a person wants to screw themself up, go ahead. Sir Darwin would be proud that you're helping prove his theory. Also about Limbaugh - I occassionally listen to him and agree with most of what he says, but sometimes I just have to say, "that's dumb." Anyone that doesn't think that every personality on the radio with a political talk show has an agenda, needs to be examined. They all have their opinions and agenda. Otherwise they wouldn't have a show/job. I now live in the Atlanta area. There is a radio host here that tells you to not believe anything he says without verifying it for yourself. As far as the "data" that is given by talk show/political people, there are always various data that say opposing points for the same thing, or the data are "interpreted" to say what one wants. A person will believe the data/person they want to believe.
You mentioned stem cell research. Is there legislation that prohibits stem cell research? If there is, then this a legislative issue (i.e. Congress/Senate), not an executive issue (president). I believe that there is not. If I remember correctly (and I could be wrong), Bush is against government funding. This would mean that a private company (Pfizer, Bayer, Merck, etc - funny aren't these based outside the US) would be free to pay for it if they were willing. Also, if it were to not be legal here, go to Mexico, France, Canada, China, or Antarctica for all I care to do the research.
I don't have the time nor desire to go through all of your points, but I'll try to get back to some of them specifically. Cuidado, I might even agree with something you said somewhere along the way...
 
Besides, if you think that Bush lied about them, ask the Clinton administration. Quotes from them say that there were WMDs. Were they lying too. Or does it only count for Bush.
Click to expand...

No, but did Clinton send his military horde into Iraq? In 98 he did bomb Iraq in operation Desert Fox, because they kicked out UN weapons inspectors.

O well, I' sure there's more quotes to pick-apart here, but I'm going to end it here. Thanks guys for the healthy debate.

Speaking of sending help. Why is it that the US sends more aid to more places in the world than anyone else and catches more shit for trying to help.
Because they are trying to look descent and cover up their collective guilt for their crimes in Iraq.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Just to make 1 thing clear- Bib, I want 8 inches, sephin, Lambadacalc, German Stallion, and Priapologist- I deeply respect your views; even though I don't agree with them, and I thank you for voicing your opinion. Shithead, Swank, Kong 1971, anti-pop, Rod buster, Gimme9- for the most part I agree with you guys, and also thank you for exersizing your first amendment right.
 
Kal-el said:
Just to make 1 thing clear- Bib, I want 8 inches, sephin, Lambadacalc, German Stallion, and Priapologist- I deeply respect your views; even though I don't agree with them, and I thank you for voicing your opinion. Shithead, Swank, Kong 1971, anti-pop, Rod buster, Gimme9- for the most part I agree with you guys, and also thank you for exersizing your first amendment right.
Click to expand...

Kal-el,

What views of mine, in particular, do you not agree with? :)

Cheers!
Pri
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top