Jump to content

If George Bush was an idiot...


Hondo#17

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jeremiah Wright wants retribution for what the whites did to the slaves. Just how many "Masters" are still alive and what do they have to do with me? I didn't own any slaves. Wright hates whites because of how he may have been treated, but he wants to take it out on all whites, so that makes him a racist. People that have racist family members...... if they don't tell their family members not to act racist in front of them, then yes, they are racists as well. If you can tolerate somebody spewing Honky this or N***** that, then yes, you are a racist. You can keep that junk away from me. I tell people around me, " Don't use the N word around me". I had a guy roofing my house and he used the "N" word and I made him pack his stuff and leave. Either you are a racist or you aren't, there is no in between, and in my opinion, if you can tolerate being around a racist, that makes you a racist.

 

So, in your opinion, does the same go for alcoholics and wifebeaters? If you can tolerate being around one - you are one... unless they don't act like one in front of you? In my opinion everyone is racist to a degree if calling someone an undesirable name or term defines racism. Racism is not exclusively reserved for the black and white races. The thing that is confusing in your statement is that one is exempt from being a racist if they tell family members not to be racist in front of them. One thing I have always believed is that if you can't be anything else, be genuine and don't act like you are something you are not. You may not be a racist - but you seem to condone being a hypocrit. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to understand something. Obama is a very good politician. He is doing the things that he thinks will benefit him and his people. You can call it this or that, but he is a politician. If you are demo, repub, or whatever, if you are a politician you are that. If anyone thinks different, well, I have this ocean front property in Arizona. The thing today is that politics has become to big, to business, people do it for the purpose of obtaining wealth and power. People no longer do it because of some calling or desire to help and make things better for a nation, they do it to make things better for them and theirs. About all you can hope for is to get one who is a decent person. History has a way of showing the value of our presidents. Look at Carter, he was pitiful then, is still looked at as one of the worst in history, that is until now. History will show Obama as the Chicago thug and nothing more. Is he racist? Again, you have to understand, he/politicans are completely self serving. He is and does what is beneficial to him. He has no conviction other than greed and self importance.

 

In the coming years, history will record Mr. Bush in the manner befitting a president. History will show he did a pretty good job in the time and place. His actions, although not popular to many, probably protected this nation more than we know. I personally think Mr. Bush was a good man in a bad political situation. He might do things he did not completely agree with, he knew the system, I do not think he would have gone against what he truly believed. Obama sold his birthright to be president.

 

As for racism in America, I don't think most people truly even understand what racism is. It has been used and abused so much, we now use it for our cause any time some thinks different than we do. Can't come up with facts, or debate, no viable arguments, well then chunk in the race card and scream the loudest, everyone else will give up rather than be called a racist. Sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, in your opinion, does the same go for alcoholics and wifebeaters? If you can tolerate being around one - you are one... unless they don't act like one in front of you?

 

 

I don't know about alcoholics...but I dang sure feel that way about wife beaters! If you associate with one...then you are no better that they are & they are SCUM OF THE EARTH!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about alcoholics...but I dang sure feel that way about wife beaters! If you associate with one...then you are no better that they are & they are SCUM OF THE EARTH!

 

 

:notworthy: :happy65: I have no use for someone who beats a woman... :banghead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, in your opinion, does the same go for alcoholics and wifebeaters? If you can tolerate being around one - you are one... unless they don't act like one in front of you? In my opinion everyone is racist to a degree if calling someone an undesirable name or term defines racism. Racism is not exclusively reserved for the black and white races. The thing that is confusing in your statement is that one is exempt from being a racist if they tell family members not to be racist in front of them. One thing I have always believed is that if you can't be anything else, be genuine and don't act like you are something you are not. You may not be a racist - but you seem to condone being a hypocrit. Just my opinion.

 

 

you know, Jesus hung around a few guys, that many considered dirt bags.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know, Jesus hung around a few guys, that many considered dirt bags.......

 

I agree that Jesus walked with some "undesirables" however those that walked with him had asked for forgivness and changed their ways. Remaining friends with some S.O.B. that drinks his paycheck away and beats his wife or kids to death is just as bad as being that guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Jesus walked with some "undesirables" however those that walked with him had asked for forgivness and changed their ways. Remaining friends with some S.O.B. that drinks his paycheck away and beats his wife or kids to death is just as bad as being that guy.

 

 

Any man that beats his wife is a kitty-kat (nicer way to say what I REALLY want to call them!).

 

Instead of hitting on a poor defenseless woman - try that #### with me - I grew up in a home with domestic violence & do not tolerate anyone who hits their wife OR anyone who tolerates anyone who does - I'm 6'02" and weigh 275# and wouldn't ###### on a wife beater if they were on fire! So come get ya' some!

 

 

 

Anywho - back on topic...Obama has surrounded himself with some tremendous undesirables, crooks, & Chicago-thugs....but there is one thing for certain....Barrack Hussein Obama is NOT Jesus Christ!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! Boy, this one went way off topic... but just to add my 2 cents in on the "non-topic conversation" on wife beaters... my grandmother always taught us girls if something like that EVER happened to us... that at some point in time, the sucker would fall asleep, and the iron skillet was just in the other room....to use it!

 

Knowing her - I GUARANTEE she would've used it.

 

Course, my preference is a butcher knife.

 

Course, I always liked what one of Willie Nelson's ex-wives' used... though I don't think it was for beating her... sew 'em up in a sheet, have the kids and everything loaded in the car, and then beat the #### out of him and LEAVE! LOL!

 

Okay... back on topic....

 

So today, the news is, a Supreme Court ruled against ACLU in prisoners who were "tortured" in overseas locations...they don't have their day in court.

 

And another that in 19 months, Obama's spent more money than Washington through Reagan spent...all presidents combined... aren't we proud!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any man that beats his wife is a kitty-kat (nicer way to say what I REALLY want to call them!).

 

Instead of hitting on a poor defenseless woman - try that #### with me - I grew up in a home with domestic violence & do not tolerate anyone who hits their wife OR anyone who tolerates anyone who does - I'm 6'02" and weigh 275# and wouldn't ###### on a wife beater if they were on fire! So come get ya' some!

 

 

 

Anywho - back on topic...Obama has surrounded himself with some tremendous undesirables, crooks, & Chicago-thugs....but there is one thing for certain....Barrack Hussein Obama is NOT Jesus Christ!

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Bush entered office in Jan.2001 debt was:5,728,739,508,558.96

when he left office in Jan.2009,debt was:10,627,961,295,930.67<---after 8 years

Any smart person could see that is doubling the debt. And lets not forget, he had a budget surplus

 

Obama debt Jan 2009:10,627,961,295,930.67

As of 8/30/10:13,369,841,967,694.39<---in under 2 years

Don't think that is doubling the debt in one yr. And lets not forget, these two wars Bush started account for most of our spending budget. End the wars, and our spending would drop off. Wars have cost us over 1,000,000,000,000.<---Bush didn't start the two wars, terrorists did.

 

2.How about the US patriot act. Forget a state law, how about our nation laws.<---and yet, who has the patriot act affected? please do remember that three of the 9/11 terrorists were stopped on a traffic stop on the night before 9/11. Had the patriot act been inacted, 9/11 probably could have been avoided.

 

3.Bush might as well join Mexico, cause he did nothing about illegal immigrants coming over. In fact, he is a pro-business republican. The type of republican that is for illegal immigrants,because they provide cheap labor.<---then what does that make Bill Clinton and Obama?

 

4.I guess you forgot, GW Bush policies put us in the recession we are in now. Recession started in 2007-2008 under GW Bush, so you can blame him for high unemployment across the nation.<---negative, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the Dems caused the recession that we're in now. I can replay the video of Bawney Frank and other dems if you'd like. Matter of fact, I can also post a video of Bill Clinton in his own words placing the blame squarely on the dems.

 

5.We had a situation worse than Exxon Valdez. Can you blame him for stopping drilling until we find out what went wrong and how to fix things for future problems. Blame BP,its their fault.

 

6.Do we really want a conversation about GW Bush and Oil. I guess you forgot how high gas was under him,(the former oil guy)<---please. All politicians are in bed with big oil companies. Also, don't forget that OPEC controls the price of oil and not the president of the United States.

 

7.I wish GW Bush would have used a teleprompter. He was the worst speaker out of any president we have ever had. <---LOL, have you heard Obama when his teleprompter goes out?

 

8.Its Obama money, if he wants to take his wife out and spend millions on her, its his business. Nobody tells you how to spend your money on your spouse. <---as was mentioned earlier, Obama wasn't spending his money. The money being spent belonged to the tax payers.

 

9. How about the GM jobs, Obama saved. GM had lost 10,000 or so in 09', but have since brought back about 8000 of those jobs. Not to mention Chrysler opening a new plant and the other 45,000 or so new jobs in auto manufacturing (like toyota,hundai,ford,etc)<---hmm, and who is running GM right now? correct, the government so of course Obama is going to take care of them. But let's talk about the lack of jobs outside of GM.

 

10. DVD and Ipod's- Are you serious? That aint even worth discussing. Lets talk about jobs, and wars, something more urgent.

 

11. BUSH HELD HANDS AND KISS THE SAUDI'S

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/im...dullahhands.htm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/911review/293457625/

http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/89ja...ant_be_serious/

 

12.Bush appointed Mike Brown head of Fema, and tried to make Harriet Myers a supreme court Judge. And lets not forget about Cheney and Rumsfield.

 

13.Im sure was being sarcastic about the 57 state thing. <---no, he was serious. You know it, I know it, and everyone on this forum knows it.

 

14. Do we really want to talk about GW Bush on the english Language. Really!!!!!!!

 

15.Bush flew right over gulf coast while people were dying, and didn't stop to save one life. Far worse than obama flight on earth day.<---and how many lives did Obama save during the midwest flooding?

 

16.Bush started 2 unjust wars after 911. Far worst than flying that plane near WTC.<---no he didn't. Terrorists started those two wars.

 

17. More people died in Gulf coast then Midwest. No comparison. Not even close<---You mean the people who failed to heed the warning died in the Gulf coast. But let's get a tad more technical shall we. Of all the people who died during Katrina, how many were from "outside" of New Orleans?

 

18.those czars you speak of, were created under GW Bush. Get your facts straight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._...t;---you're kidding...right? The Asian Carp czar was created by GW Bush? Please think before you type.[/color]

 

I think you must have hid under a rock from 2001-2009 because if you did, you would see that everything you try to pin on Obama, Bush did something similiar or worse.<---Oh really? please by all means, point them out because I would love to see what you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as a christian, I hate nothing or no one. But Bush told us Sadaam already had weapons, and that he was a threat to our safety. Neither was true. Nor did Iraq even have the infrastructure in place to build a weapon. Sadaam would have never attack america. He didn't have the ability too. We see that is true, because his army and gov, went down in less than a month when we attacked. Sadaam wasn't crazy enough to attack us, because he knew it would destroy him. But again, Sadaam had nothing to do with 911, and that was the point of the wars, was to get back the ones who attack us. But we would never attack Saudi Arabia!!!!!!

 

I guess you are one of the ones who think Sadaam flew the planes in the buildings.

 

Ahh, but here is something that you didn't know. Even according to democratic leaders in the 1990's, Al Queda and other terrorist groups were in Iraq. They were in Iraq because Saudi Arabia turned to the United States for assistance when after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Saddam massed his army on the border with Saudi Arabia.

 

Iraq didn't have the infrastructure in place to build a weapon? are you sure about that?

 

Saddam wouldn't have to attack the United States. Al Queda would be more than happy to do so. As it stands, they've attacked us on american soil in 1993 and 2001.

 

We didn't attack Saudi Arabia after 9/11 because Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with 9/11. Al Queda was in Afghanistan, so we sought them out. Al Queda was also talking to Iraq and Saddam continued to defy UN Sanctions. Had Saddam complied, he might still be alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so since you were there Colmes, who bought the tickets? Did it come out of Obama bank account? Did he use debit or credit?

 

 

Wait, you weren't there, you are just assuming. Typical conservative Rush talking points.

 

You know I heard Obama flushed the toilet twice yesterday. Should we get him for using taxpayers money for Whitehouse water. Please,

 

There are plenty of things Obama has done wrong, but taking his wife out on a date aint one of them. Its actually one of the smartest things a husband could do. This is why your side lost to him in the first place because yall focus on small,insignificant things like flag pins, or did he put his right hand on his chest during national anthem and dates with his wife. Focus on these two stupid wars,that our soldiers die from everyday.

 

Actually, the wars aren't stupid. Al Queda has tried to attack us again on American soil, but have been unsuccessful. Because they are having to use resources in fighting us on two separate fronts, the Time Square "attempted" bombing was a failure. Had the two wars not been happening right now, it would have ended quite differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I was heading somewhere with that post before everyone's ADD kicked in and we got distracted by wife beaters (BTW – if you wear one – does that mean you are one? lol). JT sort of headed the direction I was going. I found it interesting that while discussing the ineptness of Bush and Obama the discussion came full circle to racism. Then someone stated that they prefer for their racist friends and family to stay in the closet, so to speak. ie:"Hey, Bubba, don't use racist terms around me – save that for those late night meetings under the white hood and cloak of darkness." Reminds me of the riddle: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it – does it make a noise? But instead it's: If a racist doesn't act like a racist in front of others, is he still a racist? One thing I can say about Bush - he had a sense of humor and could laugh at himself. Obama stays on the defensive and gets offended by every little thing. The only funny thing I have ever heard Obama say was "You can put lipstick on a pig – but it's still a pig." [And I mean funny-coincidence not funny – ha-ha] He was referring to Palin of course - but the irony was that he could just as well have been warning the people he would use a better disguise than lipstick to cover up his swine-like qualities. So, I could conclude that IF George Bush was an idiot…he didn't try to pretend to be something that he is not. Which brings me back to the point I was trying to make. When my parents first got married, my mom's mom would drop by unannounced, usually after my dad had popped the top on a cold one. My mom would tell him to hide his beer so her mom didn't see it. He always had the same answer – "Why should I hide it from her – when God can still see it?" Point being, it does not matter one bit if you reveal the true you to others - God always knows the real you. We will all answer to Him - even if we never uttered a racist word but thought it just the same.

 

The original meaning of racism has been relegated to a neologism that has evolved into the "Great American Excuse" like Locutus said. Racism is a belief that race is a determining factor of human traits and capabilities and that racial differences produce an inferiority or superiority in a particular race. Nothing is mentioned about terms, labels or name calling. So by that pre PC definition – the NAACP, The congressional black caucus, The United Negro College Fund, The Black Panthers [new and old], Miss Black America Pageant - to name a few are all just as racist as the KKK. The KKK, now there is your quintessential example of racist hiding who they really are. Then there is our government that is the most racist of all. How else do you describe what our government did to the Native Americans and the American citizens of Japanese decent in 1942? You get sent to reservations or internment camps – no due process, no rights what so ever – when the government exercises its racist authority. [but I guess the Native Americans and Japanese have the last laugh - all the way to the bank - because our citizens do love those casinos and Toyotas.] In comparison, sitting at the back of a bus doesn't even measure up to racism. And no, discrimination and racism are not synonymous. In today's PC climate they may seem the same but they are not the same however, they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. I like to discriminate on the basis of the content of ones character not the color of ones skin. Every state and school that groups student test results according to race is racist – what other reason do they do it but to show superiority and inferiority between the races? Pointing out racial diversity or using ones racial diversity to gain an advantage could be considered racism because in order to gain the advantage they must show their inferiority to another race. Using terms like reverse discrimination or reverse racism when non-minorities are involved is racist because it infers that unless it happens to a certain race it is less important because somewhere subconsciously the one using the term feels that non-minorities are superior. Racism will always exist as long as there are forms that ask that question – optional or not – it's still racist.

 

 

 

 

As for the blame game – I learned at a very young age that any time you point a finger at someone else, you always have 3 more pointing back at you – from your own hand - literally!!!!!! I may not know a lot of things but I know one thing, I only have me to blame for wasting my time replying to these message boards.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it a compliment to be "Black"? Whats wrong with being white or anything else? Is being black better somehow? HMMM? A compliment.

 

We have been there 8 yrs, flip the country upside down. Found Sadaam in a man whole in the middle of nowhere, but we haven't found one WMD. Wonder why. Thats because they don't exist, but even if he did have WMD's, why did we need to attack him. N.Korea has WMD,<---no ties to terrorists. we haven't attack. Russia has them, We haven't attack,<---no ties to terrorists. Matter of fact, they're having their own problems with terrorists. Please see news reports of the latest bombing there. Pakistan has them, No attack.<---no ties to terrorists and is helping. Sadaam was no threat to the US at all.<---not according to Bill Clinton and the rest of the dems. Removing him made Iran stronger, and a bigger threat to Middle East.<---Iran was a threat to the Middle East even with Saddam in power. Please see the Iran hostage situation during the Jimmy Carter presidency.

 

 

Clinton and Bush were both Wrong. Difference is, Only Bush went to war.<---Had Clinton gone to war, 9/11 wouldn't have happened. Had Clinton gone to war, we wouldn't have been looked at as being weak.

 

By the way, the only place I am a janitor at,is on this Board cleaning up the mess you type.

 

p.s. Since its a compliment to be "Black", thanks Black Man. Hope you have a very Black Man day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it. Maybe to the Shites of Iran and Iraq, and the Kurds, but to the World, I would have to respectfully disagree. All I know, is that 4000 US Soldiers were alive when he was there. And Iran was not a threat to Israel or the Middle east,because they had Iraq to worry about. Which is the reason the US put Saddam there in the first place. Its funny we were after two guys (Bin Laden and Saddam) we help prop up. How ironic.

 

The United States didn't put Saddam anywhere, Saddam through assasinations put himself into power in Iraq. We also didn't help prop up Bin Laden either. We helped to arm the mujahideen with stinger missiles, but Bin Laden propped himself up with the massive Bin Laden payroll of his father's construction business.

 

So please, point out the irony again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's are tax payer's too, and he was rich before he was president. Yes, the secret service provided to him is paid by taxpayers (including him since he is a tax payer too), but how do you know who bought the ticket. Again, he had money before he became president. Everywhere he goes we pay for secret service, but that comes with the territory. Should he stay home and not take his wife anywhere?

 

So what is the justification for the wars, since you see them as necessary? There were no WMD's.<---Saddam is to blame for that. Had there not been any WMD's, then he should have just cooperated with the UN inspectors. Saddam was a secular leader, and was not a state sponsor of terrorist. Al Qaeda-Mesopotamia didn't exist in Iraq before we got there. As a matter of fact there was hardly if any sectarian violence in Iraq before we got there.<---oh really? I'm sure that there's over a hundred thousand people who would have disagreed with you, that is IF they were still alive. 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take the Ron Paul approach (he is against preemptive wars). I think Iran wouldn't be foolish enough to attack us, because they know that would be the death of Persia. A man with a pistol wouldn't be foolish enough to start a gun battle with machine guns. Not even Russia was brave enough to attack us, and vice versa, because we both knew what each other had. So as long as they don't bother us, we shouldn't bother them.

 

Iran doesn't have to attack us. But nothing would stop them from giving Al Queda a dirty bomb just to blow it up in Times Square. Or have you forgotten that Al Queda has sworn to kill as many americans as they can.

 

Nothing like doing it up right in our nation's largest city...right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I thought we should have took out the training camps of the group who said they attacked us. Afghanistan did not attack us, but a group of people there did, so it made no sense to invade the whole entire country. This should have been a CIA job. Kind of like the movie Munich (although it was a fictional film)<---Actually, the Taliban was hiding Bin Laden who in turn was leading Al Queda...who did attack us. Actually, Afghanistan is against the Taliban so basically we didn't invade Afghanistan, we simply took up what Al Queda started.

2. I don't think we should have attack Saudi Arabia, but if we were going to invade a country for 911, it should have been that country because 15 of the hijackers are from there. Would have made more sense than Iraq<---No, because the Saudi government is not aiding Al Queda. When Al Queda was in Saudi Arabia, Saudi fought them. What did Iraq do when Al Queda was there? exactly, nothing.

3.Never said, the genocides in Iraq were not as important,but I said, if we are going to invade one country for Genocide, we should invade all of them,especially ones that Genocide is occuring at a far worse rate. If you are going to police the World, police the entire world, not just the middle east<---Umm, Clinton sent us to Kosovo. We were also in Somolia. Neither are in the middle east. But, there were at the bequest of the UN.

4.Jordan and Kuwait are our allies. Jordan is in between Iraq and Israel. But again,Israel,has an army and a great air force. If they are attacked by Iran its their problem,not ours. They moved in the neighborhood, and its their job to protect themselves. We aren't going around protecting other countries like that in the world,except Israel. Why, because of so called religous reasons. Doesn't add up to me, because the Bible says, that those who do not except Jesus Christ will go to Hell. That includes, Jews,Muslims,Buddhist,etc. If Canada invaded us tomorrow, would Israel help us. Probably Not, they would say,thats your problem, we got enought problems at home. Israel reclaimed Palestine as their home,so its their job to deal with the consequences that come with that move. Just like the US did, when they came to America, and had to fight with the Indians,Mexico,British,and French. We did it on our own, so they need to do the same.<---Umm, had it not been for the French, there wouldn't have been a United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a form of entertainment you know so I hope you don't get totally disgusted and quit!

 

Personally I like to hear input from those that do not appear to be of neocon nature like the ones that hammered me for supporting Chuck Baldwin. To heck with them, who did they support, John McCain, Obama etc. etc. No criticism intended for you.

 

It is a waste of time like so many other things. But then I guess it is not as much of a waste to some degree as watching Judge Judy or my favorite, Dancing With Stars. Does that even come on any more?

 

camuchs , actually I have taken Bible reading and church going a lot more serious these days. I work Sundays but finally found a congregation that holds a Sunday evening service that allows me time to get off work and make the sevice. It has worked out well and helped me accept the fact that government as we know it today is rather hopeless. But we know God uses politics to fulfil the ultimate plan.

 

I have not been a big "movie buff" for many years. Since you mentioned G.W.s humour, did you happen to see the movie "W". Hey, I was once a fan of G.W. I thought that flick was hilarious though I'm sure among the thin skinned some find it "offensive" in that it was a "liberal" attempt to discredit G.W. Fact of the matter is I don't think any of us really know the full story when it comes to those that participate in the political games and events

 

 

Ah yes, cheap food and entertainment! Our addiction to it helps make the panem et circenses so effective!

 

Yes, I thought "W" was hilarious as well. I agree with you about the "games and events" like you often say; panem et circenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iran doesn't have to attack us. But nothing would stop them from giving Al Queda a dirty bomb just to blow it up in Times Square. Or have you forgotten that Al Queda has sworn to kill as many americans as they can.

 

Nothing like doing it up right in our nation's largest city...right?

 

This is the bottom line. In vietnam, we went there to fight communism. What happen,we stayed there forever,then we left. Communist took over the country anyway. So it was a waste of time. Fast forward to today. We went to Iraq to fight terrorist. That was the point. But there were no terrorist in Iraq,and even if there was,they had nothing to do with 911. Then they said Iraq had WMD. Still have not found those. So thats not true. Then they said it was Operation Iraqi freedom. Iraq is free from Saddam,but suicide bombings and violence are far worse in Iraq then they were when Saddaam was there, and there is still no stable gov in place. Then removing Iraq made Iran a stronger threat. After Iran took the hostages, we help elevate Saddam in power because Iraq and Iran were enemies. And it worked. Iran was no longer a big threat to the Middle east, because Iraq was there. Just like we help elevate Bin Laden to fight the Soviets. And it worked because Afghan war help contribute to the fall of the Soviet Union. There is no end to this mess. We made a mistake. Its ok,America aint perfect. But Colin Powell even said we shouldn't have went, and even Bush had hinted that Iraq may have not been a wise choice. Sorry,but our whole point of fighting was to get the terrorist who threaten the US. Well those people didn't exist in Iraq. Saddam was a bad guy,but he was not involved in a Jihad. So again Iraq war was a mistake. Sorry. You can try to rationalize it all you want, but you are wrong. There might be a case to be made for the Afghan war, but no reason for Iraq. NONE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bottom line. In vietnam, we went there to fight communism. What happen,we stayed there forever,then we left. Communist took over the country anyway. So it was a waste of time. Fast forward to today. We went to Iraq to fight terrorist. That was the point. But there were no terrorist in Iraq,and even if there was,they had nothing to do with 911.<---Al Queda was in Iraq, as quoted by Bill and Hillary Clinton in the early 90's. Then they said Iraq had WMD. Still have not found those. So thats not true.<---All Saddam had to do was simply cooperate with UN inspectors. Then they said it was Operation Iraqi freedom. Iraq is free from Saddam,but suicide bombings and violence are far worse in Iraq then they were when Saddaam was there,<---because the terrorists don't want US forces to leave Iraq. They want to start a holy war in which the muslim world fights against the west. and there is still no stable gov in place.<---LOL, the terrorists don't want a stable government. They want a holy war. Then removing Iraq made Iran a stronger threat.<---hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Iran was already a threat, even before Saddam came to power in Iraq. After Iran took the hostages, we help elevate Saddam in power because Iraq and Iran were enemies.<---negative, Saddam elevated himself to power through assasinations. The US had to deal with him because Iraq was in a war with Iran. And it worked. Iran was no longer a big threat to the Middle east, because Iraq was there.<---again, incorrect. In case you didn't know, neither side won that war and for those who were keeping score, Iraq went billions into debt, which was the reason Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990. Just like we help elevate Bin Laden to fight the Soviets.<---negative, Bin Laden elevated himself because he practically bank rolled the war effort against the Russians in Afghanistan. How do you think Al Queda got started? And it worked because Afghan war help contribute to the fall of the Soviet Union.<---actually, Russia was ill-prepared to fight a war in Afghanistan. They had to fight with choppers and was doing well until the US started supplying stingers to the Mujahideen. Once they could no longer fight with their attack choppers, it was the beginning of the end for Russia. But for those keeping score, Desert Storm I brought about the end of the Soviet Union. There is no end to this mess. We made a mistake.<---actually, Saddam made the mistake. Again, had he cooperated with the inspectors, he would probably still be alive. Its ok,America aint perfect.<---as proven in 2008. But Colin Powell even said we shouldn't have went, and even Bush had hinted that Iraq may have not been a wise choice. Sorry,but our whole point of fighting was to get the terrorist who threaten the US. Well those people didn't exist in Iraq. Saddam was a bad guy,but he was not involved in a Jihad. So again Iraq war was a mistake. Sorry. You can try to rationalize it all you want, but you are wrong. There might be a case to be made for the Afghan war, but no reason for Iraq. NONE<---and that is where we disagree. But please, show me where the terrorists aren't comfortable right now in Iraq by bombing and killing innocent people. Show me where the Iraqi people were taking up arms and are literally driving Al Queda completely out of Iraq. Show me where the Iraqi Republican Guard took up arms against Al Queda in Iraq. Show me where the Iraqi police stepped up to stop Al Queda. Matter of fact, show me where Al Queda is slacking off in the slightest so that the United States can pull its military out of Iraq? Again, the sooner you look at the bigger picture, the sooner you'll no longer be in the dark.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. First off, Im not a Democrat, so telling Me Bill or Hilary Clinton said something,doesn't convince me of anything. I don't care if Bill Clinton says this war was needed. He would still be just as wrong as GW Bush.

 

2. So what if Al Qeada was in Iraq in early 90's, what does that have to do with Sept.11,2001. They were not there when that happen. Again, Saddam had nothing to do with 911, and he was not a threat to our security. The point of us going to Iraq,wasn't because Saddam didn't cooperate, It was because he was a terrorist,and a threat to our security. N.Korea doesn't coooperate with UN either, but we aren't going there.

 

3.Actually Saddam did cooperate with UN. Have we found any WMD's. NO!!!!!!!!!!!! Saddam was just a bluffer to make us think was bad. Thats all. Just all bark with no Bite.

 

4.you are correct Terrorist forces want us to stay there, but you keep forgeting that there were no terrorist forces there until we got there. Remember there is a cause before an effect.

 

5.I already acknowledge Iran was a threat BEFORE Saddam got in power. Im saying,that their threat was minimized when we aided Saddam in the early 80's.

 

6. We didn't have to deal with Saddam we CHOSE to. Life is about choices, we wanted to deal with him because we wanted to help him out in Iran war. Its called Retribution

 

7.Never said anybody won the war between Iraq/Iran. My point is that due to the war, Iran abilities were limited. Just like due to our two wars, we are limited across the world and even at home. That was the point of helping Saddam. As long as Iraq was a threat to Iran, and at war with them, their focus would be on Iraq instead of places like Israel. Well as soon as we eliminated Iraq from the equation, we crossed out one enemy from the check list. In fact,due to the fact that Iraq has a large Shia population, we have actually help Iran get stonger. Just imagine if Iraq becomes a Shia country. They would be a huge friend and supporter of Iran. But again, Iran wouldn't threaten Israel because if they shot any missles over Iraq to get to Israel,Saddam would have seen that as a threat to him, and would have acted.

 

8.Again, I never said we created Bin Laden, I said we help support him. and you seem to be admitting the same thing when you say help supply stingers to fight the Soviets. Thats Exactly what Ive been saying.

 

9.We were not perfect in 2000 and 2004 either. Although 2000 didn't go the way the American people voted. But again we had the choice of ,Not ready to lead (Obama), Too Old and No Clue (McCain)/ Dan Quayle with a lower IQ (Palin). Don't like either choice, but glad it wasn't the other team.

 

10. You seem to be lost in the big picture. You keep pointing out what the terrorist are doing in Iraq today. But you keep forgetting that the terrorist were not in IRAQ before the war. They are there now,because of the war. But ask yourself why are they there. They are there because they feel we invaded there lands for no reason (which is true). And they hate us. Thats never going to change. We are not going to win their hearts. So why even stay, if you are not going to change anyone minds and feelings toward the US. They hated us before, and they will hate us after. If you are not going to change the results, then why even engage. Im not going to convince you that Liberals are better than conservatives (although neither is good). So Im not even going to try to engage in that battle. You are not going to convince me that Palin would make a good president. So you would be wasting your time trying. You can't force revolution. The people have to want it. The people didn't put Saddam out. So I guess they didn't want change. They don't want us there,as a matter of fact, alot of Iraqi's said it was better when Saddam was in power. Its a waste of time with no end solution. So that means it was a stupid war. Lets get all of our troops out and back at home with their families.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...