March 23rd, 2008, 08:52 PM
Quoting McCaulley
No he didn't think Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. He said that publicly because that would stir the fear factor and get public support, but he dilberately mislead the public with that one.
Bush isn't really as bad a guy as you guys are making him out to be. Sure he attacked Iraq but he did it because he had reason to believe that Saddam possesed weapons of mass destruction. It's like the cops entering someones propert because the have probable cause to believe the person could be doing something illegal. Bush did this for the safety of Western peoples everywhere and deserves to be thanked, in my opinion
House Member
Posts: 3,656 
Videos: 2
Location: 50° 30' N, 104° 38' W
Videos: 2
Location: 50° 30' N, 104° 38' W
March 23rd, 2008, 08:52 PM
*these selections are not random...
Quoting McCaulley
For future reference McCaulley, when you eventually do get to vote, supporting a candidate on the basis of his stand on a single issue is not really practical, or a good idea. Voting's a serious business, you have to weigh a whole lot of things about candidates before deciding who to vote for, and you're very unlikely to have the option of picking one who agrees with you on everything. An issue like abortion might tip the balance for you in favour of one candidate over another, other things being more or less equal, but suppose, to go to an unlikely extreme, you had a pro-life candidate who also wanted* to nuke Tehran and Baghdad, reverse all the civil rights and status of women legislation of the last 40 years, cancel all social security, and make fundamentalist Methodism the official state religion with penalties for non-conformity. Would you vote for that candidate solely on the basis of his pro-life position if the other candidate was pro-choice but had a much more sensible view of the world otherwise?
Thank you for hoping for an easier choice for me but i must tell you the major reason i like George Bush is his position on abortion. He si pro-life and this is why i am now trying to defend him. I believe in life for unborn babies because they are humans and that is why i still like George Bush
*these selections are not random...
March 23rd, 2008, 08:57 PM
Quoting McCaulley
Watch this. http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/lies/video.html
Bush isn't really as bad a guy as you guys are making him out to be. Sure he attacked Iraq but he did it because he had reason to believe that Saddam possesed weapons of mass destruction. It's like the cops entering someones propert because the have probable cause to believe the person could be doing something illegal. Bush did this for the safety of Western peoples everywhere and deserves to be thanked, in my opinion
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,639
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
March 23rd, 2008, 08:58 PM
about. They also dismissed infomation from their sources in the government who told them there wasn't enough information to 'know' for certain that there was wmd's. That
report came out later. They cherry picked information, and went with whatever they
felt supported their claim, and dismissed all other. They had no right to attack another
country for probable cause, that's not good enough, many people have lost their lives since that blunder.
About 4000 americans and 100s of thousands of iraqis, bush should see the same fate
as saddam did, seems fair to me, it's totally his responsibility, and the buck stops with him.
Quoting McCaulley
bush, cheney and friends planned to attack iraq long before any so-called wmd' info came
Bush isn't really as bad a guy as you guys are making him out to be. Sure he attacked Iraq but he did it because he had reason to believe that Saddam possesed weapons of mass destruction. It's like the cops entering someones propert because the have probable cause to believe the person could be doing something illegal. Bush did this for the safety of Western peoples everywhere and deserves to be thanked, in my opinion
about. They also dismissed infomation from their sources in the government who told them there wasn't enough information to 'know' for certain that there was wmd's. That
report came out later. They cherry picked information, and went with whatever they
felt supported their claim, and dismissed all other. They had no right to attack another
country for probable cause, that's not good enough, many people have lost their lives since that blunder.
About 4000 americans and 100s of thousands of iraqis, bush should see the same fate
as saddam did, seems fair to me, it's totally his responsibility, and the buck stops with him.
Member
Posts: 102
Location: Pennsylvania
Location: Pennsylvania
March 23rd, 2008, 09:07 PM
Dexter Sinsiter, thank you for pointing that out to me, i will base any election i vote in on whether the candidate agrees with me on a mjority of opinions. As to you other two, What if Iraq had had weapons of mass destruction and George Bush didnt attack Iraq and SAddam nuked New York? that was what he had to onsider while deciding to attack Iraq, i think he picked the safest choice and he is still being criticized for it. But he would be criticized even more if he let a few million people die of a chemical bomb in New York city right?
Dexter Sinsiter, thank you for pointing that out to me, i will base any election i vote in on whether the candidate agrees with me on a mjority of opinions. As to you other two, What if Iraq had had weapons of mass destruction and George Bush didnt attack Iraq and SAddam nuked New York? that was what he had to onsider while deciding to attack Iraq, i think he picked the safest choice and he is still being criticized for it. But he would be criticized even more if he let a few million people die of a chemical bomb in New York city right?
House Member
Posts: 3,656
Videos: 2
Location: 50° 30' N, 104° 38' W
Videos: 2
Location: 50° 30' N, 104° 38' W
March 23rd, 2008, 09:22 PM
You're pretty young so not seeing the bigger picture is understandable, I wouldn't have got it at 15 either, I didn't know enough history and neither do you yet, but if you're interested enough to come in here and talk about it, you probably will eventually. Read this for instance, and see if you can spot parallels in the behaviour of your country in the 19th and 21st centuries.
Quoting McCaulley
I think Bush is far worse than we're making him out to be, not because he's a bad man himself, but because he's a dupe of people smarter and more ruthless than he is, he's just taking the fall for it. Look up the history of people like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeldt and Paul Wolfowitz. They're the real drivers, and it's nothing like the cops entering someone's property because they have probable cause to believe illegal activities are going on. To do that legally, they first have to convince a judge and get a search warrant, which will restrict what they can do. Saddam Hussein was no threat to anybody but his own citizens, and I'd immediately agree he deserved to be taken down, but a unilateral invasion not supported by most of your allies or international organizations is not the way to do it.
Bush isn't really as bad a guy as you guys are making him out to be. Sure he attacked Iraq but he did it because he had reason to believe that Saddam possesed weapons of mass destruction. It's like the cops entering someones propert because the have probable cause to believe the person could be doing something illegal. Bush did this for the safety of Western peoples everywhere and deserves to be thanked, in my opinion
You're pretty young so not seeing the bigger picture is understandable, I wouldn't have got it at 15 either, I didn't know enough history and neither do you yet, but if you're interested enough to come in here and talk about it, you probably will eventually. Read this for instance, and see if you can spot parallels in the behaviour of your country in the 19th and 21st centuries.
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,639
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
March 23rd, 2008, 09:22 PM
plans of their own. That will continue if the u.s. is there or not, doesn't matter.
They have to figure that out on their own, and hopefully that will happen soon.
McCain said he will be in favour of the u.s. staying there for another hundred years if they have to, tell that to the american mothers and fathers who will lose their sons and
daughters for a war that was started on false information.
Quoting McCaulley
that's right, and they have ways of infiltrating the area where the uniforms are, which says that many of them are signing up for security, then betraying that promise, with
many have sacrificed their lives for their country already some before even pulling on the uniform by being caught in a sucide blast outside police recruitment centers, terrorists or "insugents" frequently attck police and Iraqi army forces, classifying them as prime targets
plans of their own. That will continue if the u.s. is there or not, doesn't matter.
They have to figure that out on their own, and hopefully that will happen soon.
McCain said he will be in favour of the u.s. staying there for another hundred years if they have to, tell that to the american mothers and fathers who will lose their sons and
daughters for a war that was started on false information.
Member
Posts: 102
Location: Pennsylvania
Location: Pennsylvania
March 23rd, 2008, 09:29 PM
I must first state that i plan on joining the military upon graduation from high school and so thats one less person for you too worry about. Also i would love to read your article and i will tomorrow after school, but ive no more time for i must be off to bed. I ehnjoyed talking with you guys and look forward to continuing the discussion tomorrow, but for now ive got to start thinking about my 10th grade honors english test tomorrow on Animal Farm,well, until tomorrow
I must first state that i plan on joining the military upon graduation from high school and so thats one less person for you too worry about. Also i would love to read your article and i will tomorrow after school, but ive no more time for i must be off to bed. I ehnjoyed talking with you guys and look forward to continuing the discussion tomorrow, but for now ive got to start thinking about my 10th grade honors english test tomorrow on Animal Farm,well, until tomorrow
Member
Posts: 102
Location: Pennsylvania
Location: Pennsylvania
March 23rd, 2008, 09:43 PM
I couldnt help but read the article on amnifest destiny and i must say that that has to do with America expanding westward, Iraq has nothing to do with incresing the power or prestige of America but has to do with the duty that we feel as americans to help and protect other people in the world that need protecting, such as the people in Iraq, one of the reasons i joined this site was to get the point of view from other peoples throughout the world since up to now i have only been exposed to American beliefs. I am attempting to see the argument from your point of view as well as from the perspective of other people throughout the world and i must say that you are doing an admirable job of expressing your opinions
I couldnt help but read the article on amnifest destiny and i must say that that has to do with America expanding westward, Iraq has nothing to do with incresing the power or prestige of America but has to do with the duty that we feel as americans to help and protect other people in the world that need protecting, such as the people in Iraq, one of the reasons i joined this site was to get the point of view from other peoples throughout the world since up to now i have only been exposed to American beliefs. I am attempting to see the argument from your point of view as well as from the perspective of other people throughout the world and i must say that you are doing an admirable job of expressing your opinions
House Member
Posts: 3,656
Videos: 2
Location: 50° 30' N, 104° 38' W
Videos: 2
Location: 50° 30' N, 104° 38' W
March 23rd, 2008, 09:54 PM
The U.S. came out of the Cold War as the only superpower, and the goal of taking over the world must have seemed within reach, but U.S. administrations didn't attempt it, until a random--in the sense that it could easily NOT have happened, for a variety of reasons--event on 11 Sept. 2001 let loose the forces, represented by people like Cheney, Rumsfeldt, and Wolfowitz, that were itching to try it. They did, and now we're all living in the middle of an airplane crash. The UN's hundred-year project to end war has been seriously compromised by U.S. unilateralism. I think the U.S. needs to lose in Iraq as soon as possible, and it'd be nice if Iraq doesn't lose too. The civil war the invasion's let loose makes that unlikely, but that's a lesser consideration. Iraq's less important than the planet.
Quoting McCaulley
That would have been a very bad thing, but there was never any danger of that happening. Iraq was a target from the beginning, long before 9/11 and any worries about WMDs arose, and Cheney, Rumsfeldt, Wolfowitz, Bush, et al., believed what they wanted to believe, not what the evidence showed. But it's not really about Iraq anyway, and never was. It's not about terrorism or oil either, except peripherally. It's about the way the world runs and who's going to be in charge. In September of 2002 a 34 page document was submitted to Congress called The National Security Strategy of the United States. It contains this sentence: "The United States will not hesitate to strike preemptively against its enemies, and will never again allow its military supremacy to be challenged." The document clearly implies the U.S. should be the only global superpower, not merely the world's police force but its judge, jury, and executioner, forever. Talk about Manifest Destiny...
What if Iraq had had weapons of mass destruction and George Bush didnt attack Iraq and SAddam nuked New York?
The U.S. came out of the Cold War as the only superpower, and the goal of taking over the world must have seemed within reach, but U.S. administrations didn't attempt it, until a random--in the sense that it could easily NOT have happened, for a variety of reasons--event on 11 Sept. 2001 let loose the forces, represented by people like Cheney, Rumsfeldt, and Wolfowitz, that were itching to try it. They did, and now we're all living in the middle of an airplane crash. The UN's hundred-year project to end war has been seriously compromised by U.S. unilateralism. I think the U.S. needs to lose in Iraq as soon as possible, and it'd be nice if Iraq doesn't lose too. The civil war the invasion's let loose makes that unlikely, but that's a lesser consideration. Iraq's less important than the planet.
Member
Posts: 102
Location: Pennsylvania
Location: Pennsylvania
March 23rd, 2008, 10:05 PM
I, as an American, believe that all first worl countries in the world at the moment are important playing pieces on the earth and i believe that we should use this God-given power to help those less fortunate such as the people in Iraq who were oppressed by Saddam Hussein and needed the help of the poeple such as you and i to get rid of him. Goodnight, more tomorrow
I, as an American, believe that all first worl countries in the world at the moment are important playing pieces on the earth and i believe that we should use this God-given power to help those less fortunate such as the people in Iraq who were oppressed by Saddam Hussein and needed the help of the poeple such as you and i to get rid of him. Goodnight, more tomorrow
House Member
Posts: 4,564
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
March 23rd, 2008, 10:35 PM
Neither Lincoln nor Roosevelt started those wars. By contrast, Bush started his.
Quoting Walter
Lincoln was in power when about 1,000,000 soldiers and civilians died as a result of the Civil War. FDR sent between 300,000 and 500,00 (depends on the source) American soldiers to die on the battlefields of WWII. W has a long way to go to match these numbers.
Neither Lincoln nor Roosevelt started those wars. By contrast, Bush started his.
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,639
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
March 24th, 2008, 02:13 AM
The worst thing that Saddam Hussein did to the u.s., was to 'snub his nose' at their threats. He also refused to cave in to the accusations that he had wmds, but he did
allow the inspectors in, and they did not find anything they were looking for.
While all of that was happening, bush was sending troops, warships, planes, and more
threats to the persian gulf, in preparation for an attack.
STILL, NOTHING WAS FOUND.
THE ATTACK TOOK PLACE ANYWAY, even though the inspectors found nothing, and said
they didn't think they would, but could not understand why they couldn't finish the job.
If they had of continued looking and inspecting till the end, they would have been killed in
the invasion I suspect.
Bush didn't want to wait any longer,be cause the 'time of year' and 'weather' was just right,
and if they waited any longer it would have been too hot. Hows that for taking 'lightly',
the lives of thousands of people.
Perhaps if the u.s. bomb makers, war machine makers, jet fuel suppliers, etc., would give back their profits,
the war could be paid for, they are the winners here, the biggest loser GEORGE W. BUSH,
as, what goes round comes round, and now he has to live the rest of his life, with this on his mind, note, that I did not say conscience, as there is none. He wanted to go down in
history as one of the greatest presidents ever, now, it is the OPPOSITE forever, and that
will be read in the history books for many generations.
The worst thing that Saddam Hussein did to the u.s., was to 'snub his nose' at their threats. He also refused to cave in to the accusations that he had wmds, but he did
allow the inspectors in, and they did not find anything they were looking for.
While all of that was happening, bush was sending troops, warships, planes, and more
threats to the persian gulf, in preparation for an attack.
STILL, NOTHING WAS FOUND.
THE ATTACK TOOK PLACE ANYWAY, even though the inspectors found nothing, and said
they didn't think they would, but could not understand why they couldn't finish the job.
If they had of continued looking and inspecting till the end, they would have been killed in
the invasion I suspect.
Bush didn't want to wait any longer,be cause the 'time of year' and 'weather' was just right,
and if they waited any longer it would have been too hot. Hows that for taking 'lightly',
the lives of thousands of people.
Perhaps if the u.s. bomb makers, war machine makers, jet fuel suppliers, etc., would give back their profits,
the war could be paid for, they are the winners here, the biggest loser GEORGE W. BUSH,
as, what goes round comes round, and now he has to live the rest of his life, with this on his mind, note, that I did not say conscience, as there is none. He wanted to go down in
history as one of the greatest presidents ever, now, it is the OPPOSITE forever, and that
will be read in the history books for many generations.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,612
March 24th, 2008, 10:28 AM
Well gee Walter neither are the nabobs in Israel but who do you think is encouraging their American business partners to continue in the effort to exterminate Arabs?
No one it seems likes to address the actions of the United Staes within the context of a conflict born out of the mistake made back in 1947.
Americans will continue to spill the blood of their children for the myth of a "Democratic Israel"....
Stop funding Israel and let the cards fall where they may.
Well gee Walter neither are the nabobs in Israel but who do you think is encouraging their American business partners to continue in the effort to exterminate Arabs?
No one it seems likes to address the actions of the United Staes within the context of a conflict born out of the mistake made back in 1947.
Americans will continue to spill the blood of their children for the myth of a "Democratic Israel"....
Stop funding Israel and let the cards fall where they may.
Grossly Underrated
Posts: 6,278
Location: In the bush somewhere near Sudbury
Location: In the bush somewhere near Sudbury
March 24th, 2008, 10:35 AM
Woof!
Quoting McCaulley
Keep in mind, the people you help are people who do not talk like you, think like you, live like you, worship like you. These people know a world whose only similarities to your own come in that it orbits the sun and the moon orbits it. Nothing you know of life applies to them. To inflict your way of life on them is as arrogant to them as forcing their way of life on you is objectionable. Remember this and you will conquer mountains, Grasshopper....
I, as an American, believe that all first worl countries in the world at the moment are important playing pieces on the earth and i believe that we should use this God-given power to help those less fortunate such as the people in Iraq who were oppressed by Saddam Hussein and needed the help of the poeple such as you and i to get rid of him. Goodnight, more tomorrow
Woof!
World Police
Posts: 4,789
Videos: 1
Videos: 1
March 24th, 2008, 10:45 AM
Bush's legacy will be a crumbling economy and the mess in Iraq, not much to be proud of there.
Quoting McCaulley
I think you are a minority in the US with your views about Iraq. The US didn't go there to help or protect anyone, look at the country now? It's worse off then it was under Saddam.
I couldnt help but read the article on amnifest destiny and i must say that that has to do with America expanding westward, Iraq has nothing to do with incresing the power or prestige of America but has to do with the duty that we feel as americans to help and protect other people in the world that need protecting, such as the people in Iraq, one of the reasons i joined this site was to get the point of view from other peoples throughout the world since up to now i have only been exposed to American beliefs. I am attempting to see the argument from your point of view as well as from the perspective of other people throughout the world and i must say that you are doing an admirable job of expressing your opinions
Bush's legacy will be a crumbling economy and the mess in Iraq, not much to be proud of there.
