Anti Bush read this ...

[prodigal]

We need to start being a smaller player and let other countres take the lead becuase then the heat gets off of us


Like who? Who even has the willingness, let alone the capability to do so? Germany? France, perhaps? The UN?
What you suggest would be nice for us but unfortunately we must take care of it ourselves because no one else will, at least until the hard lifting is done and things are stabilized. Hard but true.

 

[KickSave]

"You were conditioned by Bill Clinton for 8 years, consciously or subconsciously, to believe that almost everything that came out of the President's mouth was a lie, just like Pavlov's dogs. It's no wonder that you are so cynical when your own guy let you down so much."

Ummm....


Watergate - 1972
Iran Contra - 1986
Monica - 1996


Actually I think we've been conditioned to NOT believe the rhetoric
since WAY before Bill wanted to keep his personal indiscretions a secret. If you ask me, when comparing a president lying about having sex, vs lying about orchestrating a cover up of what they are illegally doing with my tax dollars or an illegal breakin to fix an election, it's hard for me to listen to conservitive high and mighty's talk so indignantly about this subject. Half the republican senators and congressmen who were chasing Clinton with a pitchfork, were guilty of virtually the same thing at one point in time.

 

[prodigal]

Watergate - 1972
Iran Contra - 1986
Monica - 1996


Actually I think we've been conditioned to NOT believe the rhetoric
since WAY before Bill wanted to keep his personal indiscretions a secret. If you ask me, when comparing a president lying about having sex, vs lying about orchestrating a cover up of what they are illegally doing with my tax dollars or an illegal breakin to fix an election, it's hard for me to listen to conservitive high and mighty's talk so indignantly about this subject. Half the republican senators and congressmen who were chasing Clinton with a pitchfork, were guilty of virtually the same thing at one point in time. [/B][/QUOTE]


Nor will you find me defending those particular acts of Republican presidents either. A spade is a spade. You can't justify Clinton by what others may have done. It reminds me of the child who gets caught smoking (or whatever) and excuses it by saying all the other kids do it.
When Nixon was finally outed, he knew he had done wrong, his party knew it, the press knew it and the nation knew it. There was no massive effort to justify it by equivocating about what the meaning of "is" is. How Orwellian is that?
At least Nixon finally did put the best interests of the nation above his own personal ambitions by resigning, showing at least some grace and decorum. But Clinton's own ambitions and self-interests were always more important than the nations.

 

[CLCAP]

Let's keep this real...those "components" were buried 12 years ago and even the current administration is not calling them the "smoking gun". The guy with the mustache was no saint by any means and the whole world is much better of without him but that doesn't mean that we weren't "lied" to when Powell told the UN that the Iraqi army could use those weapons against us on 45 minutes notice. We were all told by our president that we went to war (and about one American soldier gets killed every day right now) because of the threat of WMD's that those inept UN observers couldnt find for two full months - well we don't seem to be doing THAT much better than them having the whole country at our disposal. Just my 3 cents.....

 

[prodigal]

Why do you suppose the Iraqis themsleves stocked NBC suits? We found plenty of them, as well as copious stocks of atropine.
Come on folks, where there's smoke there's fire. Use your brains.
The stuff is out there somewhere. Maybe we don't have the right country at our disposal now. He could have easily moved it to Syria or Iran. It's indisputible that Iraq produced WMD as it's well documented that they used it on their own people. Conversely there is absolutely NO documentation, proof or any kind of evidence that it was ever destroyed.
Don't let your political views cloud your ability to reason.

 

[CLCAP]

I guess there's just no way that they could have been afraid that someone else will use WMD's on them....(read Iran), they sure used them on their own people....but back then they were our "friends". I don't dispute that there was less than perfect evidence of their destruction (they actually accounted for quite a bit according to the UN but not all) but on another note.....the stuff they found in Maryland a couple of weeks ago missed some essential documentation as well. Everything is not always black or white.....it's usually a shade of gray...

And let's for a minute assume that you are absolutely right and that Iraq had vast stockpiles of WMD's right until the war broke out. Let's also assume that they were (under our noses) moved to totalitarian countries in the region and to terrorist organizations. Well in that case - congratulation fellows, now the weapons that were under the control of one madman are under the control of several and stand a MUCH bigger chance to be used against us since we apparently have NO idea where they are. And on top of that once again - one American kid is dying every day - for what?

 

[prodigal]

clcap

As you stipulate to the existence of WMDs in Iran in your first paragraph above it follows that our invasion of Iraq therefore did not put Saddam's WMDs into Iran's hands. It also logically follows that Saddam would hardly disarm himself of his WMDs if he knew that Iran also possesed them.

As for "vast" stockpiles, well some of that stuff is so potent that really not much is needed to cause catastrophic deaths if used properly (or improperly as the case may be). Small to moderate amounts could be hidden anywhere, yes even under the noses of the US military and even the brilliant UN inspectors.

As for the loss of our guys over there, yes, it is tragic and I mourn their loss and pray every night that that day's loss will be the last. But we are now reminded that freedom and our way of life is not free and some unfortunately must pay for it. Although I had an awful dread about it, I do trust the President in taking us to war. I believe he is doing what he honestly feels is necessary to protect our country from the enemy. If it turns out that he really knowingly lied and did this for other than noble purposes, I'll be the first in line with a torch to burn him down (figuratively, of course). But I just do not believe this man is capable of such a thing.

 

[ShawnC]

A flask of certain nerve agents can kill an entire city if used right.

 

[Dragonbravo]

Typhoon,

You talk about Bush and corporate greed. Remeber the books were being burned by these unethical companies under Clinton's watch. Where was the FEC? Could it be that since the economy was good (becuase of inflated figures) that nobody cared that these guys were doing illegal stuff? It took Bush to bring the legal hammer down on these jerks.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Isn't the American way still "Innocent until proven guilty"?[/qoute]

Yes, but Saddam was proven guilty years ago. He was then given appeal after appeal after appeal, you aren't innocent in an appeal, you are guilty until proven innocent.

Or they were planted there.

Well, technically, it was in the scientists garden so ya, it was planted there.

And I suppose you have facts to back up your theory of how many Iraqis were killed?

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?

Pinko, commie, liberal whats? And you think I'm filled with hatred?
Whoa!

I was just trying to accomadate your intellect.

Why do you think that might be? Maybe because we unilaterally impose our will upon the region at whim? Osama himself said he hates us for "trespassing on the holy land". Oh, great solution, let's send more troops there and bomb the hell out of the place. That'll make them stop hating us.

So the 8 years of understanding that President Clinton projected towards the region had nothing to do with 9/11? Maybe they attacked because we never retaliated when they bombed our ships and embassies. Do you realize that terrorism world wide is down 40%? I'm sorry but force is the only thing that will work against these people. We can't hug them and make them think we like them. They just see that as a sign of weakness.

I never said Saddam was innocent. I only said bush lied about the WMD to justify this war.

So why lie about WMD's when it was so obvious that Saddam was guilty

Judging by your reading comprehension skills and your extensive vocabulary, you only attended the finest schools yourself.

My, my, you do have some issues. Where did this little anti-clinton diatribe come from? I never said Clinton was a saint, he's not. I'm questioning the double standard that is protecting Bush.

There is no double standard. Every time Bush speaks he is eventually proven right! He said that Iraq had the capability to produce WMD as well as possessing some WMD. We have found the capability part, we will soon find the actual weapons.

 

[KickSave]

Watergate - 1972
Iran Contra - 1986
Monica - 1996


Actually I think we've been conditioned to NOT believe the rhetoric
since WAY before Bill wanted to keep his personal indiscretions a secret. If you ask me, when comparing a president lying about having sex, vs lying about orchestrating a cover up of what they are illegally doing with my tax dollars or an illegal breakin to fix an election, it's hard for me to listen to conservitive high and mighty's talk so indignantly about this subject. Half the republican senators and congressmen who were chasing Clinton with a pitchfork, were guilty of virtually the same thing at one point in time.

Nor will you find me defending those particular acts of Republican presidents either. A spade is a spade. You can't justify Clinton by what others may have done. It reminds me of the child who gets caught smoking (or whatever) and excuses it by saying all the other kids do it.
When Nixon was finally outed, he knew he had done wrong, his party knew it, the press knew it and the nation knew it. There was no massive effort to justify it by equivocating about what the meaning of "is" is. How Orwellian is that?
At least Nixon finally did put the best interests of the nation above his own personal ambitions by resigning, showing at least some grace and decorum. But Clinton's own ambitions and self-interests were always more important than the nations. [/B][/QUOTE]

Oh yeah, Nixon had the country's best interest at heart the whole time when he was busy trying to fix the election, a real champion of democracy and public service there. Laughable!

Look I'm NOT defending Clintons character, far from it. But for you to sit around and attmept to imply that we don't trust Bush because of Bill, it's retarded! We don't trust Bush because all presidents (no, make that all politicians) lie, period, since day one, and it's HARDLY Clinton who started the mistrust. We don't trust Bush because the evidence is hardly there to support his claims of us being in imminent danger from Iraq. If more evidence comes out, the war will become more justified. It has nothing to do with Bill Clintons sex life.

 

[prodigal]

"Oh yeah, Nixon had the country's best interest at heart the whole time when he was busy trying to fix the election, a real champion of democracy and public service there. Laughable!"[QUOTE}

Now did I defend Nixon? I didn't even bring him up, you did. I merely pointed out that at least when he was caught he did the honorable thing and resigned, something Clinton would never do.
Are you trying to justify Clinton because of what Nixon did?



"If more evidence comes out, the war will become more justified. It has nothing to do with Bill Clintons sex life." [/B][/QUOTE]

So let's give them a chance to find it, why don't we, before we start impeaching Bush for lying. It could take a while. It takes as long as it takes.

 

[CLCAP]

Absoulutely agree!! But if no weapons are found - let's say in two years from now would you agree to start an investigation into the motives of this administration? Or are we just going to give them more time and never question them??

 

[enigma]

A moron.

I luv how some of you can only resort to name calling. Define moron, and then prove that GW Bush is a moron.

A womanizing, ambitious redneck.

I guess that you must be refering to Bill Clinton, but redneck refers to a working man. I don't think that Bill ever worked a day in his life.

A rich-boy empty suit artificial Texan.

Bush one, hardly an empty suit. You may not agree with him, but he wasn't an empty suit. Artificial Texan, yes.

A senile former cowboy actor.

Now, your starting to tick me off. Reagan was extremely well written. He gave radio commentarys in CA for years and he wrote every one. If you would actually research the issue instead of listening to Dan Rather et al, you would find a different level of respect for Ronald Reagan. I can't prove that he was or wasn't senile during his administrations, but I doubt that he would have continued if he knew he was impaired.

An honest pacifist.

Jimmy Carter, he had everyones respect until he pronounced Castro a good guy. Why didn't he stop when he was ahead?

Another empty suit.

No argument

A crook.

At least Nixon had the decency to step down when finally caught.

These are, in reverse order, the Presidents who've served in my lifetime. Not pretty, is it? (Note: an honest pacifist doesn't necessarily make a bad President...he just gets eaten alive because nobody else in politics is honest.) [/B]

 

[enigma]

Re: Re: All liberal BS!

And finally, those who blame Clinton for 9/11, can write Osama a letter and ask him what made him hate the USA so darn much... he'll tell you, it was when the infidels parked their army in the holy land, in 1990. That's when Al quaida was born.

Right now I simply can't imagine the hatred and destruction that we are due for in 10 more years as a result of our marginally justified invasion of Iraq. We've just given birth to the seed of 100 more Osama's who we don't even have on our radar screens yet. Our intelligence, and the supposed war on Terror, will absolutely NEVER stay ahead of people who want to kill themselves to make a point to us. ugh!

I'm afraid you're right in your last statement, but their hatred has little to do with 1990, or with our invasion of Iraq. They hate us because of religious reasons. We are a known as a Christian country, and they hate Christians and Jews. To make it worse, they see us as hypocrits because we are known as a Christian country, yet we produce billions of dollars of filth that is morally objectionable to them. They will try and destroy us because of our "Christianity", and if we all became atheists tommorrow, they would hate us for that. If we all became Muslim tommorrow, they would still hate us because of the amount of trash our country produces. They will hate us as long as we do/produce/be anything that is objectionable to them. The difference between them and us is quite simple, they kill those who they object to. We give our enemies foreign aid.

regards,
enigma

 

[KickSave]

"Oh yeah, Nixon had the country's best interest at heart the whole time when he was busy trying to fix the election, a real champion of democracy and public service there. Laughable!"[QUOTE}

Now did I defend Nixon? I didn't even bring him up, you did. I merely pointed out that at least when he was caught he did the honorable thing and resigned, something Clinton would never do.
Are you trying to justify Clinton because of what Nixon did?



"If more evidence comes out, the war will become more justified. It has nothing to do with Bill Clintons sex life."

So let's give them a chance to find it, why don't we, before we start impeaching Bush for lying. It could take a while. It takes as long as it takes. [/B][/QUOTE]

What a spin doctor you are. First off, I'm not justifying ANYTHING, although you are clearly defending Nixon as an honorable man, phooey! You accused those who doubt the WMD rationale for the war in Iraq as being tainted and influenced by Clintons lies. I merely pointed out that Presidents have been lying for ages. So it's not Bill Clinton that is the reason Bush is lacking credibility on this issue, it's the issues directly at hand here, nice try though. You then attempted to diminish the impact of Nixon's improprieties as if he was thinking of us - Bzzzt, wrong! When he was outed, he still didn't admit to anything, He quit and his buddy Gerald pardoned him before he would have been sent to prison. Quite an honorable man, uh huh.

And for the record, I'm NOT on any impeach Bush crusade. I'm no witchhunter, unlike the entire republican senate. Bush can't put together a string of gramtically correct sentances, and the supposed threat from the WMD hasn't materialized in nearly the way it was promised. that's why he lacks credibility with me, not becuase of Bill getting a BJ. But I'm willing to give them time to find the WMD, and I'll wait until then to make my final judgement on the merits of going to war, losing over 100 US lives, 1000's of innocent Iraqi civilians, and giving birth to a whole new breed of Amerca hating Osama types that we'll never see coming...

So far though, finding one centrifuge doesn't make me feel any safer over the next 10 years.