what is it that you're against? war? us in iraq? or just bush in general?

Are you referring to when the military knew where bin Laden was and we had a bomb ready to drop on him and Clinton called off the attack because he was afraid of the political ramifications?

was it that nobody cared? or did news media make clinton's sex scandal the main story? and how about it wasn't the fact that he got a blowjob it was the fact that he lied under oath and on the tv to the american people.

or are you referring to black hawk down?

again, by the standards clinton set... at least bush shot at him and tried to kill him (bin Laden) and is still trying to kill him.

aren't we still actively searching for him? and i don't think it's all bush's fault that bin Laden got away at tora bora. i'd say it was a mistake by the military in general. a bad plan. if this is what you're referring to???




***edited by police, deleted double topic post.

__________________

daddio's gonna sit outta this thread

__________________
We stay fresh to death, We the best, Nothin less!!! .~' City Stars '~.

Seriously.

But I can't help at nibble on the bait...

Before I retire from this thread, let me clarify something for everyone who believes we are still going after AQ.

Although it's true forces are still in Afghanistan tracking him down, it has become obvious that our main focus has become Iraq. Imagine if all of that fire power was specifically for tracking down OBL - I bet we would have him DOA by now, eh?

It's ALWAYS a mistake to start a war with absolutely no clear plans or objectives. And if you're starting a war for personal reasons, you're definitely asking for trouble.

You're absolutely right, our main focus is iraq, it should be.

We have approx 26,000 troops in afganistan right now. they're hunting OBL and fighting the taliban. it does seem a little silly to me to put the same number of troops and fire power on the ground in afganistan for the task of hunting OBL. imagine how much crying the liberals would do then!

as far as Al Qaeda... we are fighting them... in iraq. it never was AQ we were fighting in afganistan (atleast directly). i still say its better to fight them in iraq then in the US.

and as far as the comment about starting a war blah blah blah...

I always go crazy when i hear people say things like that. i guess its short term memory loss. here's a refresher...

Saddam Hussein = murderer, dictator, convicted of genocide. killed 100's of thousands of iraqi's by using chemical weapons. compared to Adolf Hitler.

United Nations = numerous resolutions basically stating "hey crazy murderer saddam, disclose what you've done with your WMD's and prove that they have been destroyed or else... you are a threat to the worlds security."more

before we removed him from power how many times did we / Pres. Bush tell him to comply with UN resolutions? How many times did we tell him to let weapons inspectors in? so far it seems that we may have been mistaken about him having WMD's but how were we to know? he had them at one time. where did they go? he was supposed to have disclosed how he disposed of them. he probably moved them to Syria or they are still hid somewhere. But again, that wasn't the issue. he had to prove they were destroyed and he was disarmed. this all stemmed from when he invaded kuwait. oh and how many times did he shoot at our air craft patrolling the no fly zones? here's a conspiracy theory for all you conspiracy theory people... what if saddam knew his days were numbered and he knew he could do his most damage to us by dividing us by destroying his WMD's or moving them so Bush would never find them to make it look as if we invaded for no reason? remember before we invaded congress voted for us to invade. even most of the liberals. we were united. which is how we still should be by the way. we got in this mess together now its time to get out of it together. but we have to stick to the plan. how long should it take to basically rebuild an entire country while still fighting opposition? 1 year, 5 years 10 years? what would satisfy the bleeding heart liberals?

read up on the plan and research the plans we had.... how can you say no clear plan or objectives. that's just plain silly. and as for personal reasons... i believe i disproved that above.

i still say if you (people in general) really feel our country is so terrible that we would invade a country and start a war for no reason but oil or w/e then how can you live here? i would hate my country and feel embarrassed to be there and would leave. and how bad is it that we are trying to spread freedom to people? that's really what we do. that's what our country is based on. women are now getting an education in iraq, people are voting and moving freely without boundaries. they have a democratic govt in place. i am kinda proud of my country standing up to evil and fighting it; spreading freedom. no one else will do it so how cool are we! remember if we didn't step up in WW2 the french would be speaking german.

hope this sparks good debate! it's kinda nice to be able to have the freedom to think and say what you want huh.

__________________

Bush and the nonsense war in Iraq. Note that I'm not arbitrarily against Bush just 'cause it's Bush. I have a serious problem with him for many reasons.



I'm referring to the executive order that authorized bin Laden's capture or death and the sanctions against Afghanistan. I'm certainly not defending Clinton, I'm just remarking that he also made an attempt, even if it was a frail one.


It was just the media doing what they do best, and that's keeping people interested in petty bull****.

It was about getting people into a frenzy over something totally unimportant. The whole thing was a laughable mess.

I wasn't.

It took us... how long to get into Afghanistan after he supposedly claimed responsibility for the attack?

Bush has stated that Osama is no longer of any concern to us:

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

But he sure wasted no time in running off after Saddam, who had nothing to do with 9/11. Priorities? Moreso than you'd think.

More than a bad plan, it was an absolutely embarrassing failure. And since Bush is the commander-in-chief and it was his appointed administration that let him get away, yes, Bush is certainly culpable here.

__________________
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." -Sinclair Lewis

I think everybody saw it.

AMERICA’s elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil.

In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W Bush’s economic policies.

However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East.

Britain and America have always insisted the war had nothing to do with oil. Bush said the aim was to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and end Saddam’s support for terrorism

__________________
The beast in me Is caged by frail and fragile bars”

Would you say you're Rep or Dem or something else?




I see, ok then, he made an attempt



Totally agree with you here. The media as a whole no longer reports unbiased information. They all seem to have a larger agenda and it doesn't help that huge corporations own most of the media.


About a year wasn't it? also if memory serves me right we didn't know exactly where he was until he fled to Afghanistan.



Where did you find this i would like to look at the whole speech.

Wasn't it a good thing to remove saddam? he was one of the worlds worst dictators and a murderer. we wasted alot of time before going in to iraq, so much time he could move or hide the weapons that he had. remember the planes and tanks buried in the sand and the cash of weaponry we found later? remember all the UN resolutions? it took a long time for us to finally enter iraq.


we definitely weren't prepared and we learned a lot from that. yes i know he is culpable but not the only one to blame was my point.

thanks for the response korax we do agree on some stuff i can see

__________________

please share where you got this information at. and what does the head of the US Federal Reserve know about Saddam Hussein anyways... other than his interest rates were too high! lol

i like the last paragraph the most... if it was all about the oil wouldn't we be taking it now? i don't think we are an evil country motivated by oil. we allowed saddam to trade oil for food so his people wouldn't starve and he robbed that system to build palaces. why don't people talk about all the bad he did anymore? just the bad we are doing by trying to help a country.

why is it such a hard concept to understand... iraq is the center of the middle east. once they are self sufficient and a free democratic society freedom will begin spread throughout the entire middle east. freedom will defeat the terrorists. having freedom gives value to life... when you value life you don't blow yourself up!

__________________

I could pledge myself to neither. Republican and Democrat are two sides of the same coin.



Indeed. Pretty much anything with a corporate tag on it is bull****. Mainstream media outlets are nothing but sewage pumps. Whatever happened to the Woodwards and the Bernsteins?

I believe ground troops were deployed in 2002, though, I'm not sure when. Still, I'm no military strategist or anything, but it seems like they should have had some kind of plan to mobilize infantry a bit quicker than that. We couldn't've actually thought he was just going to hunker down and wait for us to make our way to his location.

Congressman Jim McDermott - Speeches - Cheney was Right on Iraq, The First Time

Didn't read much but the parts around the actual quote itself. It's just some congressman citing Bush's quote. I couldn't find an actual transcript of the speech, but just google that quote and you'll find volumes of references to it. It's not the only time he's said something like that, either: YouTube - Bush-Truly not concerned about bin Laden (even his excuses for not being that concerned with bin Laden are pathetic... there is no clear strategy, and our soldiers keep getting half-assed vehicles that aren't even properly armored).

I distinctly remember Bush standing on top of the smoldering rubble of the World Trade Centers and declaring with a bullhorn that those who perpetrated this act would pay. It's horrible to see him declare that he isn't concerned with bringing justice to this guy.

Sure, Saddam was a bad guy, but the United States has never really been interested in helping the Iraqi people. Hell, we used to love the guy. He killed so many people with arms that we had been selling to him since '86. The whole thing's dripping with deceit.

And while it's certainly possible that he does have WMDs and just hid them, I don't buy it, because I've yet to be presented with any real evidence. Plus, the Downing Street memo actually states that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

To my knowledge, nothing has been proven, and the burden of proof lies on the ones who make the claim.


True. But he's the one who's totally abandoned the hunt.

It's been a busy day and I haven't had much time to read, research, or reply.

__________________
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." -Sinclair Lewis