For those of you against Bush and the war..... This is to you

[nino]

Originally posted by Denis:
1. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

We allowed ourselves to be misdirected by an administration with another agenda and 1000 lives were lost following that agenda.

WTF! sure, they where just sitting back, drinking hot tea, and HARBORING TERRORIST. i wonder how many more american lives would be lost if we sit back and let the terrorist reproduce themselves in a petri dish.

i guess you belive as they do -"victory or martyrdom!"

[Jerriko]

Originally posted by nino:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Denis:
1. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

We allowed ourselves to be misdirected by an administration with another agenda and 1000 lives were lost following that agenda.

WTF! sure, they where just sitting back, drinking hot tea, and HARBORING TERRORIST. i wonder how many more american lives would be lost if we sit back and let the terrorist reproduce themselves in a petri dish.

i guess you belive as they do -"victory or martyrdom!" </font>[/QUOTE]WTF? Just because they were in Iraq doesn't mean that Iraq was harboring terrorists. Terrorists are in hundreds of nations around the world, are they all harboring them? Terrorists like countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, etc because those governments don't have good control over their less populated regions. The United States could also be considered to 'harbor terrorists'. But of course you also miss the point at hand. I don't have a problem with the war, I have a problem being lied to by Bush as to why we going to war.

[epic]

Originally posted by Jerriko:
I have a problem about being lied to by our government.

Do you honestly think it'd be in our government's best interest to share with us the details of missions? [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img]

I understand where you're coming from completely, but you have to realize that telling us the real deal will only cause trouble. Seeing as how people with connections keep popping up out of the woodworks, I think that we're still revealing too much of our plan as to how to go about handling this "war". I rather have a president that is ready to get down and dirty rather then a guy who has an unclear stance on subjects that have the utmost importance to our nation. Kerry would just get walked over. With presidency being the highest position in our country, do you really want someone who can't get his story straight as to how he stands on issues be in the driver's seat? Could you imagine what he'd do if 9/11 occurred when he was in office? :eek:

Good debate...nonetheless.

[nino]

as for myself, i could care less if we went to war for the oil, if we went to bish slap saddam for back-talking to pappa bush, or if we just went to kill some terrorist. yes it is sad to see americans lose lives - i gives a damn about the iraq population, but do you know how many american soilders lost thier lives this year alone just in training. when it comes to war, people dye before, during and after.
i am just rambling.
let me just say......fock terrorist! Jihad my azz, i will see you in hell.

[Jerriko]

I am not talking about specific mission details. [img]graemlins/twak.gif[/img] I am talking about the reason to go to war. Bush lied to the american people and to congress. The flip-flop issue was something that was invented by Bush (and his camp) to make Kerry appear to be indecisive. Bush's camp did the same thing to McCain in the primary in South Carolina. They had made up their own poll asking, "If you knew that John McCain fathered a black child out of wedlock, would you be more or less likely to vote for him?" Guess what, McCain lost that primary.

[Mighty Thor]

Jerriko, try the BBC news dude. Don't listen to CNN, CSNBC, or FOX they are all biase.

Evidence is coming out of the woodwork. I bet you after this election there will be more. When I say serrogate territories of the former Soviet, I mean countries like Afghanistan.

Iran has employed a former nuclear scientist of Soviet. And they are now making nuclear and won't disarm when told by the UN to do so.

Forget about campaign. It's been all negative from the start. The Democrats looked at Bush's services 5 times already and tried to nail him on that. When in 1996 Clinton vs. Dole they said military records doesn't matter and Clinton can still be an effective Commander in Chief.

Four days ago, a gun company donated a rifle to Kerry and to speak against assault weapons. You know what he said, "I wish I could take this to the debate and blow someone away with it."
Does that sound STUPID or what.

If I were you, pay more attention as to where they stand and what's going on. Leave their baggages behind.

I'll definately shut up now because we are getting off topic. Plus, we can never reach an agreement on this.

There are three things we should never talk about on this site: Politics, Religion, and Ricers.

[BiH]

wow so only people died were at sep 11 :rolleyes: ohh come look around the world

[Jerriko]

Originally posted by Mighty Thor:
Jerriko, try the BBC news dude. Don't listen to CNN, CSNBC, or FOX they are all biase.

Evidence is coming out of the woodwork. I bet you after this election there will be more. When I say serrogate territories of the former Soviet, I mean countries like Afghanistan.

Iran has employed a former nuclear scientist of Soviet. And they are now making nuclear and won't disarm when told by the UN to do so.

Forget about campaign. It's been all negative from the start. The Democrats looked at Bush's services 5 times already and tried to nail him on that. When in 1996 Clinton vs. Dole they said military records doesn't matter and Clinton can still be an effective Commander in Chief.

Four days ago, a gun company donated a rifle to Kerry and to speak against assault weapons. You know what he said, "I wish I could take this to the debate and blow someone away with it."
Does that sound STUPID or what.

If I were you, pay more attention as to where they stand and what's going on. Leave their baggages behind.

I'll definately shut up now because we are getting off topic. Plus, we can never reach an agreement on this.

There are three things we should never talk about on this site: Politics, Religion, and Ricers.

How would this be getting off subject? I trust the BBC as much as CNN or such. Iran? So you're saying that they are next on the list for invasion. Even though the ONLY proof in existence would support the fact that they are constructing nuclear power for electricity, so they say. Why should they? North Korea has developed one hell of a nuclear program and Pres Bush has left it unchecked. Why is no one talking about that? They just tested one of those nukes so we know they work. Hydroplant demolition my a$$! [img]graemlins/bs.gif[/img]
Funny how you brought up the Clinton/Dole debates on military service. Since Clinton obviously won that debate only now that it favors you would you bring it up. And if military service didn't matter, why is Bush still going after Kerry's record? [img]graemlins/stickpoke.gif[/img]
And on a side note, I suggest you research your history. Afghanistan was NEVER a territory of the Soviet Union. [img]graemlins/twak.gif[/img]
But back to terrorists, I suppose everyone here has forgotten about Oklahoma City. It's a shame that Bush wasn't president then, he could have nuked Montana.

[imported_admin]

Originally posted by Jerriko:
And yes, Kerry voted to support action against Iraq but once he saw how Bush was f***ing it up, he changed his mind as did many other Democrats and Republicans. But of course no one wants to talk about that.

Same here.

I used to support the invasion because I believed Bush when he said it would be "shock and awe" and a quick victory. Now that I see its an occupation and not a liberation I am for getting out.

The longer this war drags on the more people join those militant groups. Bush has presented the impression before the rest of the world that America is a bully and "don't mess with the U.S.". Well, they are, and they're winning. As long as Americans have that cocky attitude there will be a never-ending supply of militants and terrorists. When you kill one, two take his place. Saying "you're either with us or against us" and fighting with a cocky attitude will win the battle but not the war.

And no, I'm not some Democrat pot-smoking peace-loving hippie. I'm a traditional American conservative who's for small government and against empire-building.

[memphis_raines]

Originally posted by Jerriko:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by nino:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Denis:
1. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

We allowed ourselves to be misdirected by an administration with another agenda and 1000 lives were lost following that agenda.

WTF! sure, they where just sitting back, drinking hot tea, and HARBORING TERRORIST. i wonder how many more american lives would be lost if we sit back and let the terrorist reproduce themselves in a petri dish.

i guess you belive as they do -"victory or martyrdom!" </font>[/QUOTE]WTF? Just because they were in Iraq doesn't mean that Iraq was harboring terrorists. Terrorists are in hundreds of nations around the world, are they all harboring them? Terrorists like countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, etc because those governments don't have good control over their less populated regions. The United States could also be considered to 'harbor terrorists'. But of course you also miss the point at hand. I don't have a problem with the war, I have a problem being lied to by Bush as to why we going to war. </font>[/QUOTE]Almost everyone has a problem with being lied to by Bush. He takes after his daddy. Remember the "read my lips....no new taxes" deal? There might not have been any NEW taxes, but hell, let's just raise the old ones!

And all this about harboring terrorists.....is everyone forgetting about the guys that hijacked those planes that WERE TRAINED BY THE U.S?? Which is worse, harboring them or teaching them?

[firebird49er]

my question is, where are bigtymer and kamarozrule to defend their '**** kerry' statements. yes saddam was evil, but he was no threat to us. what happened to all this evidence of wmd's? there are no weapons, and we went to war based on bad information, which is just a really stupid thing for a government to do. and bush supporters defend their mistake with 'well we freed the people'. that wasn't our mission! there are lots of people that need to be freed from dictators, but u don't see us freeing them. bush scared us into believing saddam was a threat and because alot of our population are idiots, we fell for it and bush got his way (and his oil). think about it, if he really cared to protect america from terrorist threats, he would've gone after north korea. we KNOW FOR A FACT that they do have nuclear weapons, and WE KNOW FOR A FACT they are willing to use them. n. korea is much more of a threat now than saddam would've ever posed. and i'm not defending saddam, but he kept his people under control, which is something we will NEVER be able to do. There will always be insurgents, and unfortunately their gov. doesn't have what it takes to defend themselves from their own people!! there were always terror threats, even when clinton was president. difference is, clinton didn't purposely use these threats to scare us to get his way. too many people think bush always was hard on terrorism. does anyone remember that he ignored his own terror reports and thats the reason 9/11 happened in the first place?? i'm not saying kerry is the greatest or am i endorsing kerry, i am just saying bush needs to be taken out of office.

[SirShaun]

Weird how everything ends up evolving around religion. If we took out the whole middle east we would have towel heads thinking like they are. The whole killing people along with themselves bringing them good in after life. Im not against there religion. Im an atheist at this point in my life and i look at religions fairly. Al Queda were extremists. They have support countries and ties with other countries. I would like for yaull to think about if yaull were in bush's shoes. Once the planes hit the towers and everything bush did immediate search and destroy to Afghanistan. All fine and well no one complained. Who has been poster boy bad boy ever since we were raised. Thats right SADAM! I dont know about yaull but the media and tv has made Sadam out to be one evil SOB. Now..... If a suspected conspiring country refused to let UN in to inspect freely which we gladly let the UN do would u not be worried?

[nino]

i dont see anything wrong with nuking montana.

[98Camaro3.8]

Originally posted by memphis_raines:
And all this about harboring terrorists.....is everyone forgetting about the guys that hijacked those planes that WERE TRAINED BY THE U.S?? Which is worse, harboring them or teaching them?

And I suppose this is somehow George W Bush's fault? Do you have any experience in aviation? Getting your pilot's license (or just taking a few lessons) has nothing to do with the government. Anyone can become a flight instructor and give lessons to anyone else.

They also used computers to practice. Is that Bush's fault too? I guess you're saying we need background checks before you purchase a computer? :rolleyes:

[skorpion317]

Regardless of whether or not Saddam/Iraq had ties to Sept. 11th or Al Qaeda, Saddam should have been removed from power. He was aruthless dictator, who gassed his own people, tortured people for sport, and let his people languish in poverty while he lived the life of luxury. His sons were just as bad, even worse on occaision.

ALL Islamic fundamentalists should be removed. Fundamentalism of ANY religion is a total load of crap, and using it as a political tool/weapon is irresponsible. The only reason some governments haven't been removed yet (Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.) is because they are players in the world economy, Saudi Arabia especially. Those bastards are snakes, they greet us as friends, and then they fund terrorist organizations. The Saudi royal family should be eliminated, but the collapse of the government would disrupt the world economy (oil is god).

We are not occupying Iraq. We have no need to claim that hellhole as a colony. Al we are trying to do is get it back on it's feet before we leave.

I also don't agree with protesters who are against some of the security measures that are taken to ensure our safety. Muslims protest profiling, even though the only terrorists that have any desire to attack America are Muslims. We don't have the Irish Republican Army coming to attack us, we have Arabs. so if we get suspicious about a Mr. Ak-Al Abdar, and take him in for questioning, there should be no problem. Besides, if you're not doing anything wrong, you should have nothing to worry about.

I fully support the war on terrorism, and I believe that day, Islamic extremism will be extinguished. until that day, we must keep fighting the good fight.