Food for thought (about whole 'iraqi freedom' bullshit)
 

A very well written article: The Bush Administration's Top 40 Lies About War and Terrorism

http://babelogue.citypages.com:8080/sperry...storyReader$526

eh.. id still drop the bomb

well... Bush lied. Period.

Once upon a time, when you lied in America and cheated people, it used to turn into a big scandal, and the liar disappeared from the public´s eye... good times!

(and back them, people didn´t use to hate USA)

yeah, sad but true. You can bash me all you want if you disagree...

Took the words right outta my mouth :D

why?
Gimme a good reason to

my 2 cents:

-Saddam Hussein was not a threat to USA. Period.

-The Iraqi people needed freedom. Period. The longer US troops stay in Iraq, the worse it is, coz someday they'll rebel against USA. Since Bush was fast to start the mess, she should hurry and clean it soon. (notice I'm NOT saying it's easy!!!).

i grew up in a military family, my family's history extends deep into politics. we grew up and lived on the "dont ask, dont tell/need to know basis" crap. i grew up with that and still to this day i live by that.

i dont care about weapons of mass destruction, hell if you were really smart youd know that the ingredients to alot of these weapons are in your high school science book. why has no one cared to mention? cause aperently our kids are too stupid (or maybe they dont care) to pick it up and read. i love biology, its my favorite science i have all my text books cause i stole them at the end of the year and all that crap is in there... all you need to do is add 2+2.

WMD or not, saddam had to leave, any which way. he slaughtered his own people. he invaded his neighboring countries. you know this, this is a fact that all you anti-war pussies love to ignore. fact is, he might not have been a threat to us right now, but he was a threat, period. these people were regular humans like you and i and they need to be freed.

i never went to Iraq because i was never called... i would of given my left fucking nut to be there (<~~ trigger happy Texan). i supported this war and no matter what happens i stand by it and dubbya.

so he lied; shit happens, you deal with it and get over it.

I don't understand how people in this country can just accept the adminstration's lie after lie after lie about Iraq and shrug it off to some consequence of doing business. Yet when Clinton lied in a matter that did not threaten anyone's life, unlike a war, our country spent months trying to get rid of him. I'm not a Clinton lover by any means, but it seems our priorities are a little messed up. We don't mind accepting lies that cost a lot of lives, but we will go to the wall on some high moral horse to take down a man who lied about having sex with an intern.

This war is and always has been about oil and economic control. Freeing the Iraqi people was just a PR ploy to gather support for the war, along with the dubious claims that Saddam had WMD. In any event, it's a major shift in policy, going for a preemptive strike rather than responding to a real situation. Even if he had them, unless we had clear intelligence that he was going to attack the U.S., there is no justification for invading Iraq and losing countless American and Iraqi lives. From what I have been reading in the last several weeks, it doesn't appear this information was at hand.

Since when lechium did you become an expert on whats right for our country??? Or your country for that fact??? And whats your thoughts on ww2 when the allies went after hitler???? And do you think that after the dust settles on this one, that after so many americans and british troops have been killed that we will just "lay down" to the fact that we were "lied" to??? This whole conspiracy crap is just that "crap"...Most americans understand that we have to protect our interests in the gulf region...i.e. oil...Its what drives our country to protect the rest of the world, including your country....I for one stand by bush and our troops...

2whocares: You cant compare ww2 with iraq bullshit, for a simple reason -- in ww2 usa and other were defending againts a common threat. In case of Saddam usa is agressors, cuz this time around he didnt attack Kuveit, he didnt do shit, his country was attacked and bombed for laughable reasons.

2Mulletman: just dont forget that it was US whi put Saddam in power in Iraq in the first place. Also about being threat in general... well a lot of things are, according to that logic gotta bomb France -- they got nukes for sure.

2Dogstar: right on

P.S. About Saddadm being a bad guy who killed his own people and therefore should be stopped: few decates ago Cambodian govornment has executed half (or maybe even 2/3's but I'm not 100% sure) country's population. Let this sink in -- HALF of entire country's population was executed. Now that's MUCH fucking worse than Saddam, right?
Did Cambodia have oil? Nope. Did US do much to help these people? Noooo.

So please dont fucking tell me that US tries to save people around the world. It's only interested in it's own own commerical interests.

and why Bush didn´t strike the Liberian goverment sooner? Why did they need UN for this and for Iraq not? And why Bush gave preference to his buddy´s oil company (which he has stock options) to "help" Iraq to produce oil?

Sorry, but Bush isn´t skilled enough to run your country. You deserve better.

Right on, dogstar!!! Not only about war, but it´s lie after lie on the Economical situation as well.

Mullet! my brother got out of the army a few months before the whole war thing started, but his friends got to go. Since the whole 3rd ID was there he would've gone too. We even saw his friends chillin in one of saddam's palaces on the cover of the chicago sun-times.

:banghead: All I know is that my sis is still there and she is proud of what she's doing. I got a note from her the other day and she said that the Iraqi people have been inviting her troop into their homes and the kids are all smiles about being liberated. She did give her left nut to go, BTW and she left 2 children home to do it. She's driving munitions to the front line in a hummer and gets shot at all the time. She's a seargent and a target too! So when y'all talk about what's right or wrong about this goddamn freaking war, keep in mind that there are people reading who have loved ones there. To me, your opinions mean nothing compared to her life.

2Aimee: All I'm saying is that war and it's cause is bullshit. I have nothing against people who are directly involved in it because of orderes they recieved.
I do question people who had volunteered thou, but guess they were just brainwashed by Bush & Co.

P.S. about 'liberation' -- Saddam was put into power by US... what makes you think that the new guy they're gonna put in charge or Iraq is going to be any better?

I have no quarrel with anyone who is there; it's the policies of our government I question. I lost a very dear cousin in the Army who died in a helicopter crash, so I know from loved ones being in the military. My uncle also was a 30-year Navy veteran. It doesn't mean I have any less respect for them for doing what they were ordered to do. There is no question we need brave people willing to defend our country. The key word is defend.

If we are there we are defending our interests. You can't say it's ok to defend America, and then outline what is defendable. - Is that even a word???

You defend a country when countrie's independance, and lives of it's citizens are in danger. Iraq campaign has nothing to do with defending US.
Saddam is a threat for oil industry mostly. Question is -- are you willing to die yourself or see your relatives/friends die for 20 cents off galon of gas few more billions in bank account of a big oil company?

See but what you dont understand is that we all signed up on our own will, there was no draft. This administration's reasons were theres and not mine. those of us who signed up signed up for reasons of our own, not anyone elses. My father was in kosavo and somolia, he had no interest in that administration, nor were they of any threat to us. he accepted those missions for reasons of his own.

you have your reasons for being a coward, i have mine for being a murderer...

The key phrase again is *defending our interests*. Those interests (oil) are not the same as defending our country from attack. That's what I was talking about. And I do believe you can outline what can be defended. The U.S. was the aggressor here. We weren't defending ourselves from physical attack, but from economic threats. Big difference.

People sing up to military to defend their country, not oil companies. Big difference.

Also once you're calling me a coward -- how come you're here in US, not in Iraq?

Where do you get off making that kind of a statement?? Who do you think you are, you of the high and mighty opinions??? The men and women who serve in the military do so of their own accord, no one 'brainwashes' them into doing it. My husband has been in the Navy for 6 years active and 18 as a Reservist with 2 years to go before retirement at age 40. He has been in the Navy through MANY presidential administrations both Democratic and Republican, and if called, he will go. Not because he's been 'brainwashed' by any one, but because it's his duty to his country, which he loves, and which he will do of his own free will. You need to get some more life experience under your belt before you go insulting people with the crap that flows out of your mouth on a daily basis.

I was talking about people who volunteered (and are happy to) to go to Iraq, not to military in general.

okay, all you people talking (speculating) about the freakin oil...where the hell is it?

that's right, still in the ground in iraq.

dumbasses.

so teri, if you country tells you you have to slit an innocent 4 year old girls neak, would you do it?

just as an example here

American-Bad a$, knock off the name-calling. You're entitled to your opinion, but there is no need to be rude. I have no problem with people disagreeing, but I take offense to name-calling. Consider this a warning. Do it again, and you will be reported to Steve, who then will have the option of banning you. Thank you, and have a nice day.

First of all, our service men and women would never be told to kill any 4 year old girl.

Secondly, what's a neak?

And thirdly, why am I even dignifying this with a response?? God only knows.

yhea your right theyd never be told to kill a 4 year old girl.

but hey, good thing we can always bomb a orphanage Full of 4 year old girls that will all be mercelessly slaughtered like lamb, because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Its happened before, its happening now, and it will happen again

why do i get threatened with a ban, when there is "fuck this, bullshit this" and tons of other crap all around me that i don't say?

sorry, but i think you are being partial to all the others in this thread.

x - where do you come up with all this crap?

Wrong, American bad_a$, stop whining. You're talking about bad language, for which others have been warned as well. I'm talking about name-calling. As I said, keep it up and you'll be reported. This is normally a cool, pleasant place to hang out, and Steve likes to keep it that way. And we all disagree from time to time, but name-calling is rude and uncalled for.

the news, religion class when we read real life storys of stuff, in school, on tv, on the radio, and the newspaper and literally everywhere you can hear this stuff

i am not whining. i don't see a differnce in me calling a bunch of people "dumbasses" and some one else so say out of the blue, "what the FUCK??"

is there a difference? help me here.

The difference is you are using words to harm others... namecalling.

i suggest you make me admin

:roll: :laugh: :roll:

Sorry, but that was the best one I've seen all night!

yeah, yeah, yeah...okay

While I'll admit Bush is not perhaps the most intelligent man on the face of the earth, we do have multiple branches of government in these here United States. So while the president may be the foremost figure/symbol of our nation, he, by no means, runs this place. The legislative branch was created, in our constitution, to be the strongest branch and while power has, over time, shifted toward the executive branch, the legislature is by no means lesser than the President. At this point in time, the two branches are roughly equal in power. However, when both houses of the legislature, both which consist of members of both parties (obvious statement here, but necessary for emphasis) vote to give the power to the executive to declare war, than room for bitching among anti-war sentiments is decreased. And as I conveniently learned in my philosophy class today, elected Democrats in the legislature have no room to complain that it's unjust b/c they're in the minority because, as members of an elected legislature in which majority rules, they already understand the "risks", etc. associated w/ being in the minority.

beautiful :clap: :clap: :clap:

I'll give you that Saddam's regime was a threat to American oil dependence. While I, personally, would not like to risk lives of friends/relatives to pay less for gas, the fact is that Americans don't like expensive gas (I'm not saying that anyone else would give lives of loved ones to pay less for gas)... I'm guess that you're not fond of the American Revolution, either? I mean, the revolutionary colonists didn't threaten the freedom of the British Empire. All Britain used the 13 colonies for was for its own economic advantage... cheaper cotton, cheaper lumber, etc. And how about the Falklands? There's not even economics at stake, just British pride. Won't let Argentina take over control of the islands despite the fact that the islands really have no economic benefits.