Do you approve of Curious George?

Let's see how it'll turn out here on Freakz. The nationwide average is in mid-to-high 30s now.
D

Looks pretty correct so far.

Looks pretty correct so far.
Not quite. We are in high 60s now, which means that 2/3 of the Freakz approve of him while the nation in general does not. Interesting.
D

Approval... hes not the best president but hes better than the other alternative we had at the time.

K&P

You are all on crack.

i think the "approval ratings" for bush are not accurate. he had low approval rating when he was re-elected yet he got over 50% of the vote. i think his opposition just screams the loudest and his base goes quietly about their business and expresses their voice come election time. just a thought...

post

You are all on crack.
Damn...looks like I am on crack. Obviously I can't read good. And do other things good too. Lol.... It's been a long day though.
D

Approval... hes not the best president but hes better than the other alternative we had at the time.


Just because the alternatives sucked doesn't mean you have to approve.

M $

Just because the alternatives sucked doesn't mean you have to approve.

M $

when I said I approved it meant that i liked what he's doing, approve what hes doing, and fully support what he does. he may not be the best at his job but hes doing the right thing which is why I clicked approve.

K&P

You are all on crack.

Is that a problem?

You are all on crack.

You dont even live here

You dont even live here

Yah...and?

M $

You dont even live here

What's your point? We get affected by your dumb ass president each and every day.

What's your point? We get affected by your dumb ass president each and every day.
You know that the more you bitch the longer God makes you live. Lol...And Canadian beer sucks too! Lol
D

And Canadian beer sucks too! Lol
D

as much as I want to agree with yah i just cant, molson and labatts is damn good stuff

K&P

as much as I want to agree with yah i just cant, molson and labatts is damn good stuff

K&P

And you would know this, how?

And you would know this, how?

Hey, he watches commercials. Besides, if you only went by experience he'd have no reason to be making all those comments in the XXX section.

i think the "approval ratings" for bush are not accurate. he had low approval rating when he was re-elected yet he got over 50% of the vote. i think his opposition just screams the loudest and his base goes quietly about their business and expresses their voice come election time. just a thought...

post or as in the case of Ohio, you have the head of the elections board who is a former bush campaign director and his amazing diabold electronic voting who publicly stated he was going to deliver the Ohio vote to bush ...... add that with the rampant reports of vote fraud across the state and not enough voting boxes in democratic districts where people had to wait over 3 hours to vote , add that to the fact that Kerry was winning in the exit polling .......... and you might just start to under stand how bush won the swing state that decided the election when less then forty percent of people approve of him ....... but it was all for nill because Kerry was just taking a dive and was never meant to win any way
but then again i love to ask people with bush stickers on their car why they support him, most of them say because he is a good conservative faith based man ....... witch is such a laugh it not even funny ..... he spends more then a drunken democrat, he boldly and shamelessly lies to the people and the congress , he is responsible for the murder of over 2000 Americans and countless Iraqis, he supports our troops by cutting vets funding and sending them to war without armor, made it so little old ladies can't get cheep drugs from Canada any more, increased our possibilities of being attacked by terrorists and succeeded in completely destroying our civil liberties wile wiping his ass with our Constitution ......... but hey at least he has helped Haliburton make billions .......... and i forgot to mention committed treason

YOU LOST! Move on.

The democrat party has to be the biggest conspiracy theory group in the world!!!

YOU LOST! Move on.

The democrat party has to be the biggest conspiracy theory group in the world!!! America lost ...... no i will never give up the fight for liberty, so i can't just move on, and i am not a democrat, their just as guilty

I've got new for you. America lost a hell of a long time ago and it had nothing to do with Bush. It all started when we had to make everyone the same. It started when we allowed women and those who weren't land owners to vote. When we started allowing those who contribute absolutely nothing to our country to have a say in how things get run.

It all started with lawyers.

What's your point? We get affected by your dumb ass president each and every day.

How are you affected? Isnt your Socialist Gov taking care of you?
I think its funny how the liberals are so butthurt about Pres Bush. What has he done to hurt you?

I've got new for you. America lost a hell of a long time ago and it had nothing to do with Bush. It all started when we had to make everyone the same. It started when we allowed women and those who weren't land owners to vote. When we started allowing those who contribute absolutely nothing to our country to have a say in how things get run.

It all started with lawyers.well said nice point, yes lawyers, which most politicians are are destroying things with their political correct sue every body nobody should be responsible for their own actions style of government..... but my beef with bush is that he is the president right now, not Clinton not Reagan ..... it is bush who need to be held accountable for his mis-leadership this enormous debt of a war that he caused us .... none of those other presidents are in office right now ....... and we need to hold the next president up to higher standards no mater what party he claims, we have to stop the bullshit corruption, and not allow it period end of story..... no one is going to do it for us it has to be us the American people

well said nice point, yes lawyers, which most politicians are are destroying things with their political correct sue every body nobody should be responsible for their own actions style of government..... but my beef with bush is that he is the president right now, not Clinton not Reagan ..... it is bush who need to be held accountable for his mis-leadership this enormous debt of a war that he caused us .... none of those other presidents are in office right now ....... and we need to hold the next president up to higher standards no mater what party he claims, we have to stop the bullshit corruption, and not allow it period end of story..... no one is going to do it for us it has to be us the American people

There is no way you can say what Bush is doing is wrong. You don't have the facts. You can't. The inside scoop just isn't available to the general public. That's why I think it's so foolish for all these arm chair quarterbacks to be kicking and screaming that they know how to win the game.

I would love to think we will be able to read the truth sometime in the next 10 years. But we won't. Those days are gone. If it turns out the President screwed up then the republican party will make sure to cover it up so it won't hurt them in an upcoming election. If it turns out the president was dead on with his actions you'll never know because the democrats will be so busy lying and trying to cover it up so they can use it to get elected.

I personally think this country is fucked until we get rid of this two party system. Actually I think we should keep it. What we need to do is make massive penalties if someone is caught lying. No more of this accusation shit where you get to just walk away if it isn't true.

I'm so sick of coverups and lies from all sides. Which is exactly why I say you stand behind someone that gets elected until the job is finished. Let them do what they were elected to do and shut the fuck up. If they don't do a good job then elect someone else next time.

And you would know this, how?

werent you ever 16? lol Ill admit i did drink once upon a time but not anymore. this whole body building thing has set me straight.

K&P

I'm so sick of coverups and lies from all sides. Which is exactly why I say you stand behind someone that gets elected until the job is finished. Let them do what they were elected to do and shut the fuck up. If they don't do a good job then elect someone else next time.

I never really thought about it that way but it does make sense. And im sure that if you look hard enough you can find dirt on anyone Salvation, I just say that he won by a majority of votes which means the majority of the people wanted him in office and since hes goign to be there another couple years lets support him and let him do his job. like T said if he fucks up than wait till the next go round and vote for a better candidate. Its not like all the accusations and stuff are going to really make a difference anyways, this is his last term.

K&P

bush stuck to his guns most leaders would have crumbled to the bleeding hearts and the comments of thoses who have nothing to do with it,he said at the start this would take years and cost american lives that it would be fought in many theaters,his rating were through the roof and american who turned there back on him are just fucking sheep following a heard that cant think for there selfs,im not real concerned about other unaffected countries opinions good or bad

I never really thought about it that way but it does make sense. And im sure that if you look hard enough you can find dirt on anyone Salvation, I just say that he won by a majority of votes which means the majority of the people wanted him in office and since hes goign to be there another couple years lets support him and let him do his job. like T said if he fucks up than wait till the next go round and vote for a better candidate. Its not like all the accusations and stuff are going to really make a difference anyways, this is his last term.

K&P
This time the words of wisdom are coming from our young Jedi. Bush is not going anywhere and he's not staying for the next term. So quit bitching and let's pray that the next president will do a better job.
D

This is almost flame material! I'm looking at Bush's score on this thread and just about to say things that I know would get me flamed by the Pro-Bush's. So I'm going to refrain. Sometimes it's better to just keep your mouth shut when you know your not going to change anyone feelings anyways.

What's your point? We get affected by your dumb ass president each and every day.


why yes we do, and the sooner that "man" (and i use this term loosely) is out of office, the better.

we ARE effected all the time by his stupid decisions and to be honest with you, he is nothing more than a "puppet" on strings.

if he continues doing what he is doing, he is going to start a major problem, a world wide problem...

Ok, you guys like to put down Our President? Well, What's the name of the leader of Canada again? (rhetorical question. Few know and even less care... THis merely shows how insignificant Canada is.)

Our President says what he will do and does what he says. He is not wishy-washy on issues. He defends the constitution of the country. He manages the government response to crisis where it happens. His leadership team is the most culturally diverse in US history. Condolizza Rice (Black) Alberto Gonzales (hispanic) and the list goes on and on.

First of all, Canada should be grateful that we keep their economy running. Besides some logging and energy exports, what do they have anyway? What if Ford or GM (US companies) shut down their factories there? What would happen to their economy overnight? Blub blub blub... If Canada were so great, they would not care about what ANYONE else does. Oops, Canada is little more that US North and without our economic activity as a trading partner, they would be a third world country, fractured by multiple languages and breakaway republics. I think you guys should be more appreciative of your countries arrangement with the US and not behave like France does now.

Hell, the state of minnesota could invade and take over Canada if they wanted :biggun :flag

Ok, you guys like to put down Our President? Well, What's the name of the leader of Canada again? (rhetorical question. Few know and even less care... THis merely shows how insignificant Canada is.)

Our President says what he will do and does what he says. He is not wishy-washy on issues. He defends the constitution of the country. He manages the government response to crisis where it happens. His leadership team is the most culturally diverse in US history. Condolizza Rice (Black) Alberto Gonzales (hispanic) and the list goes on and on.

First of all, Canada should be grateful that we keep their economy running. Besides some logging and energy exports, what do they have anyway? What if Ford or GM (US companies) shut down their factories there? What would happen to their economy overnight? Blub blub blub... If Canada were so great, they would not care about what ANYONE else does. Oops, Canada is little more that US North and without our economic activity as a trading partner, they would be a third world country, fractured by multiple languages and breakaway republics. I think you guys should be more appreciative of your countries arrangement with the US and not behave like France does now.

Hell, the state of minnesota could invade and take over Canada if they wanted :biggun :flag

why would you though? we are a NEUTRAL country. we DO go into war with the United States, but mostly just clean up the mess....

Canada is not an aggressive country, shit, we have what.............10 guns, 50 bullets and a couple of leaky subs??

we sell you our natural resources (wood, hydro, oil) and we buy them back from you (this has never made sense to me, but i don't know much about governing a country)

all around, Canada is a very laid back country. and i agree, minnesota could probably take over Canada, but why? we give no reason for you to be aggressive to us.

your President IS very aggressive, and he DOES piss alot of people off, you have to agree with me on that. it just seems that when Clinton was in office (and didn't he sit in office for as long as allowed?) things went alot smoother.

this war that is going on is terrible. i feel for you guys and your friends and family that are over there fighting, and i bet my last dollar they don't want to be there either....didn't this all start over Bin Laden? you never here his name mentioned anymore............

one more quick question you can (hopefully) answer for me, im not being a smart ass, i would seriously like to know the answer....

where is Sudam being held? is he in his own country or does the United States government have him? never here about him anymore either....

or as in the case of Ohio, you have the head of the elections board who is a former bush campaign director and his amazing diabold electronic voting who publicly stated he was going to deliver the Ohio vote to bush ...... add that with the rampant reports of vote fraud across the state and not enough voting boxes in democratic districts where people had to wait over 3 hours to vote , add that to the fact that Kerry was winning in the exit polling .......... and you might just start to under stand how bush won the swing state that decided the election when less then forty percent of people approve of him ....... but it was all for nill because Kerry was just taking a dive and was never meant to win any way
but then again i love to ask people with bush stickers on their car why they support him, most of them say because he is a good conservative faith based man ....... witch is such a laugh it not even funny ..... he spends more then a drunken democrat, he boldly and shamelessly lies to the people and the congress , he is responsible for the murder of over 2000 Americans and countless Iraqis, he supports our troops by cutting vets funding and sending them to war without armor, made it so little old ladies can't get cheep drugs from Canada any more, increased our possibilities of being attacked by terrorists and succeeded in completely destroying our civil liberties wile wiping his ass with our Constitution ......... but hey at least he has helped Haliburton make billions .......... and i forgot to mention committed treason
Dude, you sound like CNN. All I have to say is I'd rather have the man in office that has bigger balls then the rest of the world. I would also say that the polls being taken are the same ones that showed Bush losing the election in 2004. I also think that most people are glad that Bush was in office instead of Gore. What would of he done? Sat down with Bin Ladin and the ACLU and had tea. Go hug a fucking tree bro. War rocks and makes money and yes I am in the milatary and love every minute of it.

M_C

why would you though? we are a NEUTRAL country. we DO go into war with the United States, but mostly just clean up the mess....

Canada is not an aggressive country, shit, we have what.............10 guns, 50 bullets and a couple of leaky subs??

we sell you our natural resources (wood, hydro, oil) and we buy them back from you (this has never made sense to me, but i don't know much about governing a country)

all around, Canada is a very laid back country. and i agree, minnesota could probably take over Canada, but why? we give no reason for you to be aggressive to us.

your President IS very aggressive, and he DOES piss alot of people off, you have to agree with me on that. it just seems that when Clinton was in office (and didn't he sit in office for as long as allowed?) things went alot smoother.

this war that is going on is terrible. i feel for you guys and your friends and family that are over there fighting, and i bet my last dollar they don't want to be there either....didn't this all start over Bin Laden? you never here his name mentioned anymore............

one more quick question you can (hopefully) answer for me, im not being a smart ass, i would seriously like to know the answer....

where is Sudam being held? is he in his own country or does the United States government have him? never here about him anymore either....
Bro, don't feel sorry for us. The majority of this country isn't what you see on CNN. If you want the truth watch FOX. Wait, I don't think your goverment allows them in most of Canada. This world owes the past 100 years to the united states and its fighters. All wars have a hidden money side, all of them. What we are doing is right. Go ask the people over there fighting and the people that they are helping. Stop thinking that the news is trying to tell the truth. Ted Turner (CNN) is what we call politically driven. So don't feel sorry for me bro. I am proud of my kick ass nation.

M_C

One more thing bro, this is a war against muslims. We don't want to admit it for political reasons but just like the Germans or Itlians it is a war against a group of people. Are media tries to make it seem that we don't like them, we hate them and they hate us. It has and will always be that way. I just don't get people in my country anymore. Guys wearing pink shirts, retro-sex, all this P.E.T.A crap. That is why they hate us. They fear our will, hate are soft ass ways. So I say bring it on cowards, I have my glock ready.

M_C

Bro, don't feel sorry for us. The majority of this country isn't what you see on CNN. If you want the truth watch FOX. Wait, I don't think your goverment allows them in most of Canada. This world owes the past 100 years to the united states and its fighters. All wars have a hidden money side, all of them. What we are doing is right. Go ask the people over there fighting and the people that they are helping. Stop thinking that the news is trying to tell the truth. Ted Turner (CNN) is what we call politically driven. So don't feel sorry for me bro. I am proud of my kick ass nation.

M_Cif you want truth watch fox ..... sorry bro but that is the most absurd statement i have ever heard .... but on the real side you are right that all war is for monetary gain in the end,.... but that makes it right you honestly believe that killing for money is all right, if so you need help because you have a mental illness .......

you also said
One more thing bro, this is a war against Muslims. We don't want to admit it for political reasons but just like the Germans or Itlians it is a war against a group of people. Are media tries to make it seem that we don't like them, we hate them and they hate us. It has and will always be that way. I just don't get people in my country anymore. Guys wearing pink shirts, retro-sex, all this P.E.T.A crap. That is why they hate us. They fear our will, hate are soft ass ways. So I say bring it on cowards, I have my glock ready. .... so i take it that you believe in Hitlers final solution , after we kill all the Muslims who should we start on next ....? should we kill all the gooks or should we go for the kikes .... how do we deal with Americans of ethnic descent ....? line it out for me bro how about the injuns what we gonna do with them .... should we gas em .... crack out the zylomclom b .... fire up the ovens

One more thing bro, this is a war against muslims. We don't want to admit it for political reasons but just like the Germans or Itlians it is a war against a group of people. Are media tries to make it seem that we don't like them, we hate them and they hate us. It has and will always be that way. I just don't get people in my country anymore. Guys wearing pink shirts, retro-sex, all this P.E.T.A crap. That is why they hate us. They fear our will, hate are soft ass ways. So I say bring it on cowards, I have my glock ready.

M_C
Brotha, be carefull with statements like that. It's not a war against muslims, it's a war against terrorist scumbags. I'm not a muslim but I have a couple of muslim friends and, brotha, you can't be more off. They don't hate us as we don't hate them. No offence but you sound like an average ignorant bigot.
D

one more quick question you can (hopefully) answer for me, im not being a smart ass, i would seriously like to know the answer....

where is Sudam being held? is he in his own country or does the United States government have him? never here about him anymore either....
He's still in Iraq awaiting the trial. His trial is being postponed for various reasons and that has been dragging on for the past few months.
D

Yes Bush pisses other nations off due to having a backbone and standing against what he sees as wrong. I see the Muslim terrorists and thier ways to be VERY WRONG! When they hit us four years ago they started this war. WE ARE GOING TO FINISH IT - AND WE WILL FINISH THEM. NOBODY CAN FUCKING STOP US BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE THE POWER. Powerless countrys are naturally pissed off due to this fact.

If Toronto was minus 5 buildings and 3300 lives I believe we'd be on the same page!

I dont think any Canadians have the right to be pissed off. They enjoy a thriving economy due to America.

where is Sudam being held? is he in his own country or does the United States government have him? never here about him anymore either....

I dont know where he's being held. They have him on trial for genocide against 100's of thousand's of his own people. This man and his Gov killed thier own for whatever they wished. They take women, rape them and kill them too. I surely hope that you don't disagree with what is being done with him. He is an evil motherfucker

Brotha, be carefull with statements like that. It's not a war against muslims, it's a war against terrorist scumbags. I'm not a muslim but I have a couple of muslim friends and, brotha, you can't be more off. They don't hate us as we don't hate them. No offence but you sound like an average ignorant bigot.
D
I understand that. We didn't go after all the germans in the us during WW2. I just know that the majority of these people hate us. Bro I am a marine and know this first had so all ya punks that don't have ball to support this country you better get ready becasue when we go to syria next your ass will be thier to. I am based out of san diego, ca.

.... so i take it that you believe in Hitlers final solution , after we kill all the Muslims who should we start on next ....? should we kill all the gooks or should we go for the kikes .... how do we deal with Americans of ethnic descent ....? line it out for me bro how about the injuns what we gonna do with them .... should we gas em .... crack out the zylomclom b .... fire up the ovens


LMFAO, I nearly fell out of my chair

none of this would have happened if sadam would have complied to the UN like he agreed,all of this islam or terrorist stuff is bullshit thats how the bleeding hearts and radicals get people to sway toward there cause,this is a simple case of NONCOMPLIANCE people need to stop throwing anything else into the equation,if the un says comply you better fucking do it or your gonna lose,sadam was laughing at the un and the world,for all you people out there against the war,how much longer than 10 years should we have waited for him to comply?this isnt about islam,osama,poor people in the middle east,blown up civilans,racism, thats all thrown in there to confuse people,the seed here in NONCOMLPIANCE

sorry tuf, but if it was a matter of UN non compliance then we would be after Israel, you want a list of the almost 70 UN resolutions that a are not complying with ....? and they also have wmds ,and they a currently committing genocide against their own people ..... but we supply them with billions of dollars to do it with ..... THE ONLY REASON THAT WE ARE iN IRAQ..... is money, war contracts and making a safer world for Israel ............ when Saddam decided he was gonna start selling his oil for euros instead of dollars that was the final straw his fate was sealed

Yes Bush pisses other nations off due to having a backbone and standing against what he sees as wrong. I see the Muslim terrorists and thier ways to be VERY WRONG! When they hit us four years ago they started this war. WE ARE GOING TO FINISH IT - AND WE WILL FINISH THEM. NOBODY CAN FUCKING STOP US BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE THE POWER. Powerless countrys are naturally pissed off due to this fact.

If Toronto was minus 5 buildings and 3300 lives I believe we'd be on the same page!

I dont think any Canadians have the right to be pissed off. They enjoy a thriving economy due to America.ok madmat, please answer me this, i am not being smart ass, this is for real.... who was flying those planes , be cause in john asscrofts own words their is not one shred of evidence to prove that it was the supposed hijackers and 7 of the were found alive, all we really know if who we were suppose to think it was ...? all of the al quada cells that have ever been caught have turned out ,to not be who they were suppose to be .....

and next please tell me what bush has done to catch the 9/11 perpatrators, how many of these have been convicted of any crime ...?

Yes Bush pisses other nations off due to having a backbone and standing against what he sees as wrong. I see the Muslim terrorists and thier ways to be VERY WRONG! When they hit us four years ago they started this war. WE ARE GOING TO FINISH IT - AND WE WILL FINISH THEM. NOBODY CAN FUCKING STOP US BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE THE POWER. Powerless countrys are naturally pissed off due to this fact.

If Toronto was minus 5 buildings and 3300 lives I believe we'd be on the same page!

I dont think any Canadians have the right to be pissed off. They enjoy a thriving economy due to America.

have you hit China yet? the army (let alone the fact that if they cut off all of their resources to you) alone is bigger than the population of the United States.

and we enjoy a thriving aconomy from you? um.....no.

where do you think your country gets most of it's natural resources from? that's right my friend, Canada.

it wasn't just Americans that died on that terrible day you know, there were many races of people that died, INCLUDING Canadians. it just happened on your home ground.

bump about the question concerning the Bin Ladens...has your government caught them yet? Bush let a few of the family leave the country without questioning them hours after the twin towers were bombed.....

you can bet all there research and any wmds are safe and sound stashed away while stalling the UN,there we go again money ,gas,islam quick look the other way,see sal,the point is NONCOMLIANCE,how long were you gonna let them get away with it?its a simple question until people throw propaganda in it,cant chase un inspectors away with guns for 10 years ,how is that ok with you,its probly ok that iraq took over kuwait right,i give up,mabey next time we will let a madman with unlimited funds to build whatever the fuck he wants,make war with ALL his neighbors kill a million fucking people,then threaten the US,while attempting to make long range missles 1990,lets just let him get almighty and powerful,see how that goes over,everything the US does is in the best interest of the US,somtimes to make everyone happy you cant make everyone happy

bump about the question concerning the Bin Ladens...has your government caught them yet? Bush let a few of the family leave the country without questioning them hours after the twin towers were bombed.....

i am so tired of hearing this that it isn't funny. how can you people live in such a world founded on such wild accusations and conspiracy theories? TO DISPELL THIS BIN LADEN FAMILY MYTH ONCE AND FOR ALL, EVERYONE PLEASE READ THIS http://www.factcheck.org/article294.html

post

p.s. that is a good site to get the truth about stuff.

p.s.s. queen, can you please tell me where you heard the story of the bin laden family.

I don't know if it's worth the read. All I see all over the home page is "I heart Bush".

i am so tired of hearing this that it isn't funny. how can you people live in such a world founded on such wild accusations and conspiracy theories? TO DISPELL THIS BIN LADEN FAMILY MYTH ONCE AND FOR ALL, EVERYONE PLEASE READ THIS http://www.factcheck.org/article294.html

post

p.s. that is a good site to get the truth about stuff.

p.s.s. queen, can you please tell me where you heard the story of the bin laden family.

I don't know if it's worth the read. All I see all over the home page is "I heart Bush".

i guess that's all that's left to say when faced with the truth? just to boilster my claim that they are honest and nonpartisan... http://www.factcheck.org/miscreports70.html

post

I don't know if it's worth the read. All I see all over the home page is "I heart Bush".

and the devil make them believe.....

you can bet all there research and any wmds are safe and sound stashed away while stalling the UN,there we go again money ,gas,islam quick look the other way,see sal,the point is NONCOMLIANCE,how long were you gonna let them get away with it?its a simple question until people throw propaganda in it,cant chase un inspectors away with guns for 10 years ,how is that ok with you,its probly ok that iraq took over kuwait right,i give up,mabey next time we will let a madman with unlimited funds to build whatever the fuck he wants,make war with ALL his neighbors kill a million fucking people,then threaten the US,while attempting to make long range missles 1990,lets just let him get almighty and powerful,see how that goes over,everything the US does is in the best interest of the US,somtimes to make everyone happy you cant make everyone happy


i can't even understand most of this post :confused:

but i WILL quote another very infamous leader that stated;

"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think"

i guess that's all that's left to say when faced with the truth? just to boilster my claim that they are honest and nonpartisan... http://www.factcheck.org/miscreports70.html

post

Post,

I didn't even read one word of what was in the link. I went to their homepage, scanned their 'I love Bush' headlines and closed it.

like i said its simple to understand read it slow,ps i still like you guys hope you dont hate me cause i support bush ,hey jb why did you just close the page do you not want to hear both sides,and in both my posts i asked a simple question that no answers, how much longer do you think we should have let them laugh at the UN and chase inspectors away with guns

How did this turn into a u.s. - canada bashing thread? This is a thread about bush's approval rating so keep it on target.

And why is it everything someone saiz something bad about george w. bush, that people like Madmatman turn that around to bashing a country (canada). I've never understood that. Nobody here is bashing the u.s. dumbass, just your president. You want to bash our prime minister, go right ahead we dont like him either, but don't you fucking drag our country into it. Some of your comments were completely inappropriate.

i can't even understand most of this post :confused:

but i WILL quote another very infamous leader that stated;

"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think"


You're quoting Hitler now???

You're quoting Hitler now???

Yeah? Whether you like it or not, he was one of the greatest leaders. Don't misinterprete me though, he was a bad man -- But undeniably a genius.

Yeah? Whether you like it or not, he was one of the greatest leaders. Don't misinterprete me though, he was a bad man -- But undeniably a genius.

agreed. most geniuses (unfortunately) are insane. im glad you got my point;)

I don't think he was a genius at all. He was simply someone who played on fears. He stepped in at the right time and used hatred, greed, bigotry, and prejudice to gain power. Most of his choices in battle were awful.

There is a difference between genius and being the leader of stupid people.

I don't think he was a genius at all. He was simply someone who played on fears. He stepped in at the right time and used hatred, greed, bigotry, and prejudice to gain power. Most of his choices in battle were awful.

There is a difference between genius and being the leader of stupid people.

youre wrong there. Hitler had a rank in WW1 as well. he didn't just step in at the right time.

im not trying to start a huge battle here, my point is that people can be easily manipulated if the "manipulator" is smart enough to do it right.

Hitler was not a dumb man, in fact, he gave his soldiers testosterone to make them more aggressive on the battle field. his scientists were responsible for most of the research we have today on hormones and cell research. and before everyone jumps all over me, i think it's terrible that so many people suffered from the "experiments" that were done. i am just making a point.

now.....near the end of his reign, yes, he did screw up on the battlefield BIGTIME....as did Alexander the Great and Napoleon (also know as brilliant, ruthless leaders)

I don't think he was a genius at all. He was simply someone who played on fears. He stepped in at the right time and used hatred, greed, bigotry, and prejudice to gain power. Most of his choices in battle were awful.

There is a difference between genius and being the leader of stupid people.no i would not call him a genius, he had some support from some very rich industrialist that helped him get in power, he used their money and then kinda turned on them, to become a very staunch nationalist which wan not in the best interest of the industrialist..... nationalism is what made him strong after he got in the spot, people want to support a leader that is going to make their country great, Hitler wanted to make Germany the greatest nation in the world, so people supported him, but he did not have the smarts to keep it all going, and making the military mistakes done him in ..... but in the end the industrialist got what they wanted, the most powerful tool they ever had in their quest for globalization, so they got their use out of Hitler after all

youre wrong there. Hitler had a rank in WW1 as well. he didn't just step in at the right time.

im not trying to start a huge battle here, my point is that people can be easily manipulated if the "manipulator" is smart enough to do it right.

Hitler was not a dumb man, in fact, he gave his soldiers testosterone to make them more aggressive on the battle field. his scientists were responsible for most of the research we have today on hormones and cell research. and before everyone jumps all over me, i think it's terrible that so many people suffered from the "experiments" that were done. i am just making a point.

now.....near the end of his reign, yes, he did screw up on the battlefield BIGTIME....as did Alexander the Great and Napoleon (also know as brilliant, ruthless leaders)oh hitler was not dumb by any means, i just would not call him a genius .... the was though very determined .... which some times is more important ....

and it does not take a smart person to manipulate people ... it takes fear you have to always keep them dumb and afraid so they will look to you for help .... its a very old and simple tactic that has been working sense before Rome ..... you see it today here in America .... its called the war on terror and it let our government do things that it never could have done before, because the people are scared of a boogie man

i thought bush was an idiot?

post

i thought bush was an idiot?

post

Uh, yeah?

sorry tuf, but if it was a matter of UN non compliance then we would be after Israel, you want a list of the almost 70 UN resolutions that a are not complying with ....? and they also have wmds ,and they a currently committing genocide against their own people ..... but we supply them with billions of dollars to do it with ..... THE ONLY REASON THAT WE ARE iN IRAQ..... is money, war contracts and making a safer world for Israel ............ when Saddam decided he was gonna start selling his oil for euros instead of dollars that was the final straw his fate was sealed

That is not true. Name ONE binding UN resolution in which Israel is in violation of. The US would have veto'd any such resolution if there was one. Accusing Israel of genocide is a flat out lie or the most ignorant statement I have heard in years. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east in a region owned by a bunch of Arab nations who's combined GDP is less than that of spain. Israel was in national mourning with their flags at half staff on 9/11 while the arabs were dancing in the streets in celebration. Israel has been under attack since it's rebirth by a bunch of blood thirsty biggots who are called to attack and murder non believers by their insidious religion. In a region of the planet where arabs are in domination of almost all of the land you'd think they'd be happy. But the Jews have a miniscule country about 10 miles wide in some areas and to the arabs that's too much. We will stand with Israel and rightfully so.

Uzi

That is not true. Name ONE binding UN resolution in which Israel is in violation of. The US would have veto'd any such resolution if there was one. Accusing Israel of genocide is a flat out lie or the most ignorant statement I have heard in years. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east in a region owned by a bunch of Arab nations who's combined GDP is less than that of spain. Israel was in national mourning with their flags at half staff on 9/11 while the arabs were dancing in the streets in celebration. Israel has been under attack since it's rebirth by a bunch of blood thirsty biggots who are called to attack and murder non believers by their insidious religion. In a region of the planet where arabs are in domination of almost all of the land you'd think they'd be happy. But the Jews have a miniscule country about 10 miles wide in some areas and to the arabs that's too much. We will stand with Israel and rightfully so.

Uziuzi .... i will respond to your post in a new thread so we don't distract from this one, it will be in the flame forum so we can be safe to debate, and i will title it u.n. resolutions

That's too funny! What did Israel expect when they built a settlement on someone elses land?

That is not true. Name ONE binding UN resolution in which Israel is in violation of. The US would have veto'd any such resolution if there was one. Accusing Israel of genocide is a flat out lie or the most ignorant statement I have heard in years. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east in a region owned by a bunch of Arab nations who's combined GDP is less than that of spain. Israel was in national mourning with their flags at half staff on 9/11 while the arabs were dancing in the streets in celebration. Israel has been under attack since it's rebirth by a bunch of blood thirsty biggots who are called to attack and murder non believers by their insidious religion. In a region of the planet where arabs are in domination of almost all of the land you'd think they'd be happy. But the Jews have a miniscule country about 10 miles wide in some areas and to the arabs that's too much. We will stand with Israel and rightfully so.

Uzi

That's too funny! What did Israel expect when they built a settlement on someone elses land?

To get away with it and have the USA back them maybe?

To get away with it and have the USA back them maybe?

Exactly! You reap what you sow.

like i said its simple to understand read it slow,ps i still like you guys hope you dont hate me cause i support bush ,hey jb why did you just close the page do you not want to hear both sides,and in both my posts i asked a simple question that no answers, how much longer do you think we should have let them laugh at the UN and chase inspectors away with guns

Anybody? There's a lot of people that are real quick to say that every single thing Bush does is wrong but when asked a simple question: How would you do it? Everyone shuts up or changes the subject. Bush made it clear how he was going to handle someone that has made it clear he wanted nothing more than to hurt America, and fooled EVERYONE(even people that worked for him)into thinking he had the weapons to do so..And that was to get rid of him. That's why I voted for Bush...well, that and because he's from Texas. :)

could you imagine if we did nothing and a bunch of other countries saw it as a green light to start making nukes and wmds cause the UN wouldnt do shit to stop them,that would be real globel problem,then our children would have to deal with it 10 fold in 20 years,go bush

Since when did Iraq have anything close to a WMD? The way I would have done it is by getting proof, war isn't something you can gamble on!

It's funny how when Korea told the U.S. to fuck off, and they were going to keep going with their nuclear development, no one said shit. To add insult to injury, they even told the U.S. that if they tired anything, they'd turn the United States into a field of fire.

Hopefully, when China turns into the real super-power they handle their responsiblity properly.

Since when did Iraq have anything close to a WMD? The way I would have done it is by getting proof, war isn't something you can gamble on!


Um, since March of '88. Or do you not consider killing 5000 people at one time mass destruction? He tried to assassinate our President, that alone is enough for me. What do you have against taking a murdering rapist out of power? And I'm sure there are more leaders out there that are pure evil, but do we have to go after all of them at once to make this the right thing to do? Do you really wish that he was still in power? And yes in war people die, but how many tortures, rapes, murders have we prevented by taking this monster out?

Um, since March of '88. Or do you not consider killing 5000 people at one time mass destruction? He tried to assassinate our President, that alone is enough for me. What do you have against taking a murdering rapist out of power? And I'm sure there are more leaders out there that are pure evil, but do we have to go after all of them at once to make this the right thing to do? Do you really wish that he was still in power? And yes in war people die, but how many tortures, rapes, murders have we prevented by taking this monster out?

Call me history inclined, but this isn't the first war in Iraq. And as for the WMD, there were none. End of subject! If you know anything that the rest of the world doesn't know, let us know please!

Ok, well atleast you answered one question. You would have done nothing at all. Well, that was an option and America decided we wanted someone that would.

He tried to assassinate our President, that alone is enough for me.

And how many foreign leaders has our government assassinated, or attempted to assassinate?

M $

Call me history inclined, but this isn't the first war in Iraq. And as for the WMD, there were none. End of subject! If you know anything that the rest of the world doesn't know, let us know please!

Apparently you knew something that the rest of the world didn't. Everyone thought he had WMD's, France, Germany, even Clinton. But since you said end of subject I guess that ends all debate.

And how many foreign leaders has our government assassinated, or attempted to assassinate?

M $

Show me Bush's rape rooms.

Apparently you knew something that the rest of the world didn't. Everyone thought he had WMD's, France, Germany, even Clinton. But since you said end of subject I guess that ends all debate.

Clinton is not president, and France and Germany are against the war. Again, show me proof of WMD's. Apparently, they still have yet to be found. It's not what you think, it's what you know -- Where is the evidence?

This is the modern days, since when do we go to war over rape?

Ok man, I give up. You wish he was still in power, and I thank God he's not. We'll just agree to disagree.

Don't get me wrong, I don't care if Saddam was dead or alive. But, if this was truly about Saddam, than the war would have ended a long time ago.

Again, show me proof of WMD's. Apparently, they still have yet to be found. It's not what you think, it's what you know -- Where is the evidence?

Will somebody please show me a picture of God. I haven't seen him so he must not exist. What about air. I can't see it. It must not exist.

Evidence! I need something I can touch!!!

we might as well give up crash cause they refuse to even read or listen to pro bush/US articals yet somehow think there dealing with all the facts,thank god there not in our army cause they would probly drop there guns surrender and change there name to abbulah and bad mouth the usa like jane fonda,im friends with an ambulance driver from iran and a cab driver from iraq and a navy photo journalist,iv seen thousands of pic and heard ton of first hand stories and they all say the US is right,cab driver said as broke as he was he would not even driver american human sheilds to there destination he told them go home,i think my sources are much better that the news or a high school teachers opinion or even info you got around the drinking fountain,i dont have the nerve to tell someone there wrong about there own country..ie cab driver and ambulance driver,but i bet someone does

i thought bush was an idiot?

post
do you really think he got as rich as he did and also elected leader of the greatest nation in the WORLD by being an idiot, come on

What's your point? We get affected by your dumb ass president each and every day.
if you don't live here then nobody gives 2 shits about your opinion, and how exactly are u affected everyday that makes your life so bad?

i think my sources are much better that the news or a high school teachers opinion or even info you got around the drinking fountain...

Well said. Funny that all the soldiers have such a different view on what's happening over there. Gosh maybe it's because they are in the middle of it and actually know what's going on while the media and bush haters stand safely thousands of miles away and try to tell us "the facts" about what is happening. By the way, guess why you are safe to shoot your stupid fuck mouth off Mr. News Anchor!

do you really think he got as rich as he did and also elected leader of the greatest nation in the WORLD by being an idiot, come on

i was saying that tounge in cheek. there were alot of articles how these madman leaders were actually geniuses. and then they were saying how bush is basically a madman. yet they scream of how mush of an idiot he is. i just didn't know how he could be an idiot and a madman genius at the same time. i thought it was one or the other. but i guess they have the luxury of accusing him of being both...

post

And as for the WMD, there were none. End of subject! If you know anything that the rest of the world doesn't know, let us know please!

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." S
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

the rest of the world knew what everyone else knew. he had these weapons and he just pawned them off because we didn't move in right away.

and if you really hate the war, and not just bush, then you should have issues with our congress and not bush. did you know that in america the president can't go to war. congress is the body that authorizes war. so shouldn't you be more upset w/congress than the president? just a question...

post

Canadians and all those butthurt by this:
I was using ‘hyperbole” to point out the silly nature of the claims being made against the USA and its leadership. It’s always fashionable to pick on the big guy. This makes all of the little guys feel tough. Canada is our friend and neighbor and we stand by her. We appreciate your great country and do not take it for granted. Now you see how ridiculous some of the USA-hating comments have been when the tables are turned, huh? Im fucking sick of it. You guys need to appreciate the USA as well. There's no need for childish name calling

ok madmat, please answer me this, i am not being smart ass, this is for real.... who was flying those planes , be cause in john asscrofts own words their is not one shred of evidence to prove that it was the supposed hijackers and 7 of the were found alive, all we really know if who we were suppose to think it was ...? all of the al quada cells that have ever been caught have turned out ,to not be who they were suppose to be .....

and next please tell me what bush has done to catch the 9/11 perpatrators, how many of these have been convicted of any crime ...?


You must be the reincarnation of the disciple Thomas (doubting Thomas, as he became known) for you are not willing to admit to the overwhelming facts unless they are delivered to your doorstep, in a fashion you would choose, to touch them with your own hands. Well, too bad.

Let the debunking of your silliness begin…
First, the Al Queda terrorists DID hijack the planes and they DID fly them into the buildings. You wish to engage in a contest to show just who can proffer the most outrageous conspiracy theory? Ok, I concede…you win!

Second, your comment seems to try to establish that you, personally, KNOW the disposition of all Al Queda cells, the results of investigations into those who have been captured and all non-public information about them? James Bond has nothing on you then. Holy crapfest, Batman! What ARE you smoking? One of our close family friends works for the FBI. The stories that he HAS told us would make you bite your tongue in an instant. Don’t be deluded, man. You’ve got no proof and you wish for me to disprove a negative. Nice debate tactic…not.

Third, it is not only the Gov’t of the USA who is searching for the terrorists. If you have not heard, this is a GLOBAL war on terror. In addition to the USA, they strike in Africa, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Yemen, etc… These radicals hate non-Muslim countries and are out to destroy them. Do you feel safe? We are in a world-wide man-hunt. These are not an enemy with a border or a nationality or a flag. They are driven by an ideological bent to destroy. You should be thankful that the USA is pursuing them as hard as they are. IF you think YOU can do better, I’m sure our Gov’t will pay HANDSOMELY for your fine and rapid capture of these bad guys. You have my FULL support. Until YOU capture them, zip it Skippy! uh uh I dont want to hear it!

By the way, while I will poke fun at YOU I will not insult your leaders. Our officials’ names are President Bush and former Attorney General John Ashcroft. Third grade is calling and they don’t want name calling during recess… You don’t see me referring to your Prime Minister simply as Martin. We can disagree AND be dignified about it. Let’s try to represent your country by showing some respect, why don’t we?!

have you hit China yet? the army (let alone the fact that if they cut off all of their resources to you) alone is bigger than the population of the United States.

and we enjoy a thriving aconomy from you? um.....no.

where do you think your country gets most of it's natural resources from? that's right my friend, Canada.

it wasn't just Americans that died on that terrible day you know, there were many races of people that died, INCLUDING Canadians. it just happened on your home ground.

bump about the question concerning the Bin Ladens...has your government caught them yet? Bush let a few of the family leave the country without questioning them hours after the twin towers were bombed.....

China? LMAO The size of their population “fit for military service”, ages 18 – 49, is actually slightly larger than the population of the USA. Score one for your technical facts. However, defining the armed forces as such is a stretch. Besides shear numbers, they have no command in control capabilities, their navies are woefully stuck in 1950’s technology, on the whole, their weapon systems are slightly above 3rd world status. I don’t know what point you were TRYING to make, but they do NOT pose a viable threat to world peace…yet. [http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/ch.html]

As for getting MOST of our natural resources from Canada, I call your bluff. Nice try. With just a little investigation, you would have seen the USA produces MOST of the natural resources we consume, right here. We import many resources to meet the demands of the world’s #1 economy and the burgeoning demand for our products and services. While it IS true that we import a great many resources FROM Canada, this is but a FRACTION of what we produce on our shores. Still, we are grateful for your exports. These exports DO contribute greatly to YOUR economy. Again, were it not for the USA, Canada’s economy would be hurting badly.

I said NOTHING about the nationalities of people who perished in the terrorist strike of September 11th, 2001. This was a strike against the USA, not against any specific people. I’m honored to have the USA be the number 1 destination in the world for people who look for opportunity outside their home lands. It is sad than any had to die this way. Terrorism is not just against the USA.

Again, we resort to the tired, old line of attack that the USA has not yet captured Bin Laden. Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My! Hmmm, is it solely OUR responsibility to be looking for him? Has he not threatened Canada also? Hmmmm? The effort to find 1 man, in a land so foreboding and treacherous, bordered by nations filled with sympathizers who gladly provide safe harbor is no easy mission. Again, the places he can go continue to decrease and the “noose” is tightening. This is NOT a sprint, but a marathon. We’ll prevail. Your conspiracy about Bin Laden family members and such is the fodder of Michael Moore and company. Come ON! You MUST be able to do better than that! Get rid of that claptrap. View Celsius 41.11 -- The Temperature at Which the Brain Begins to Die. This ACTUAL documentary refutes the lies in Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11. This gripping documentary reveals the truth about 9/11, explores how George W. Bush has skillfully led the USA during the War on Terror. Then there is Farenhype 9-11. Each DESTROYS these insane Michael Moore manic machinations.
To help you understand the terror threat from Bin Laden, here’s some educational reading. Reading this might help you from posting inane comments that bore the readers.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/terror-qaeda.html

So, what have we learned?
* I actually DO like and appreciate Canada. I used exaggeration to get your attention and to slap some whiney types. Just stop it.
* We know that the war on terror is not just the pursuit of the USA, but of nearly all civilized nations.
* We know that capturing 1 man who lives with goats in the mountains of Afghanistan is not a simple task.
* We know that the USA produces most of the natural resources it consumes – including OIL, thankyouverymuch.
* We know that Michael Moore is a fathead who make grandiose claims without being able to support them. They fall apart under any scrutiny…

here ends class.

id like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony,id like to buy the world a coke la la la,there i fixed it,now can we just get along

if you don't live here then nobody gives 2 shits about your opinion, and how exactly are u affected everyday that makes your life so bad?

You're a moron.

Will somebody please show me a picture of God. I haven't seen him so he must not exist. What about air. I can't see it. It must not exist.

Evidence! I need something I can touch!!!

How typical.

That's too funny! What did Israel expect when they built a settlement on someone elses land?

Bro, respectfully, I can only assume you are speaking of the West Bank, Gaza strip and Golan Heights. How do you think Israel aquired those territories??? Israel aquired the West bank from Jordan, the Gaza Strip from Egypt, and the Golan Heights from Syria. Those nations blockaded Israel, mobilized forces against Israel, and declared a total war of destruction against Israel in 1967. Heck, Israel even captured the entire Sinai Penninsula but gave it back to Egypt after the two nations signed a peace treaty. There has been no problems between the two nations ever since then, same with Jordan as both of those countries now acknowledge Israels right to exist That's all Israel asks for to this day. Bottom line, the war was called upon Israel. They kicked ass and gained territory as a result so that's just TFB for their attackers. Why don't you ask for Texas and southern California to be given back to Mexico while you're at it?

Uzi

Anybody? There's a lot of people that are real quick to say that every single thing Bush does is wrong but when asked a simple question: How would you do it? Everyone shuts up or changes the subject. Bush made it clear how he was going to handle someone that has made it clear he wanted nothing more than to hurt America, and fooled EVERYONE(even people that worked for him)into thinking he had the weapons to do so..And that was to get rid of him. That's why I voted for Bush...well, that and because he's from Texas. :)

You have helped us swerve into a huge point with your post. I've seen the bumper stickers saying "War is not the answer". Well then what is??? The second you ask these malcontents what the answer is they 'clam up'. They have no idea of how to deal with our enemies other than appeasment and to blame ourselves. We're not the ones teaching hatred for other religions in our schools and forcing our women to wear burka's. Western culture, government, and economics is superior to theirs even though they've been around for eons. You'd think they'd learn from it like many others have.

Uzi

Man, this topic is almost causing as much debate as scrapple did.

Tell these Kurdish people that Saddam had no WMD's. The UN documented what Saddam had and there was no evidence furnished by Hussein's regime that suggests that they were destroyed.

Also.... name one country that was saying that Saddam Hussein didn't have WMD's

Uzi

Hopefully, when China turns into the real super-power they handle their responsiblity properly.


i made a comment on china and no one responded. what they don't understand is exactly how many people there are in the army....this army is NON-STOPPABLE!!!!!!!

i won't even get into their weapons supplies. and (if im wrong i apologize) Vladamier Puton is sided with most of all of the aisian population.

for those who don't know, Puton's country is ran by KGB. in fact, Puton is ex-KGB. these people dont fuck around, you have seen what they do under hostage situation.

i won't even get into Syria. for a small country, they have an abundance of nuclear weapons and chemical warfare. i believe they are also "protected" by Russia.

hmmm..it's funny. Nostradamus predicted in one of his writings, the their would be a war to end all wars, and the "yellow" man shall previal.

:flag i made a comment on china and no one responded. what they don't understand is exactly how many people there are in the army....this army is NON-STOPPABLE!!!!!!!

i won't even get into their weapons supplies. and (if im wrong i apologize) Vladamier Puton is sided with most of all of the aisian population.

for those who don't know, Puton's country is ran by KGB. in fact, Puton is ex-KGB. these people dont fuck around, you have seen what they do under hostage situation.

i won't even get into Syria. for a small country, they have an abundance of nuclear weapons and chemical warfare. i believe they are also "protected" by Russia.

hmmm..it's funny. Nostradamus predicted in one of his writings, the their would be a war to end all wars, and the "yellow" man shall previal.

Ahaaahhaa, More hocus pucus! I responded to your China question and your Bin laden BS :flag

How typical.

What's typical is how you ignore the above two posters who totally distroyed everything you've ever bashed the president over. Instead you jump on the one light hearted thing and ignore the facts. That's both typical and sad.

What's typical is how you ignore the above two posters who totally distroyed everything you've ever bashed the president over. Instead you jump on the one light hearted thing and ignore the facts. That's both typical and sad.

Ooooo, bitch slap!

SR

Using quotes about the first Iraqi war doesn't mean shit to me, political powers that use opinions as facts to sway public opinion.

Okay Uzisuicide, since that was 14-15 years ago, I guess we should figure nothing has changed since the first war on Iraq either. I guess America didn't accomplish anything the first time around. I think we should bomb Germany now! Those fucking Nazis!

A country, how about Canada? We refused to take part in the war, but did offer our support in the rebuilding process.

So, you kick ass (with the aid of American finances) -- And what? That makes it your land?

we already beat the nazis and now there no longer a threat,you just proved our point thank you jb

Yawn ZzzzzzZZz

Yawn ZzzzzzZZz

Shouldn't you be eatting?

Powell regrets UN speech on Iraq WMDs

Former US secretary of state Colin Powell says his United Nations speech making the case for the US-led war on Iraq was "a blot" on his record.

Mr Powell has also said that he had "never seen evidence to suggest" a connection between the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the United States and the Saddam regime.

In the February 2003 presentation to the UN Security Council, Mr Powell forcefully made the case for war on the regime of Saddam Hussein, offering "proof" that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

The presentation included satellite photos of trucks that Mr Powell identified as mobile bioweapons laboratories.

After the invasion, US weapons inspectors reported finding no Iraqi nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

In an interview with American ABC TV news to be broadcast on Friday (US time), Mr Powell said "it's a blot" on his record.

"I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now," he said.

Mr Powell spent five days at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters ahead of the speech studying intelligence reports, many of which turned out to be false.

He said he felt "terrible" at being misinformed.

However, he did not blame CIA director George Tenet.

Mr Tenet "did not sit there for five days with me misleading me," he said.

"He believed what he was giving to me was accurate."

Some members of the US intelligence community "knew at that time that some of these sources were not good, and shouldn't be relied upon, and they didn't speak up," Mr Powell said.

"These are not senior people, but these are people who were aware that some of these resources should not be considered reliable," he said.

"I was enormously disappointed."
Civil war concern

As for post-Saddam Iraq, Mr Powell said there was little choice but to keep investing in the Iraqi armed forces.

"What we didn't do in the immediate aftermath of the war was to impose our will on the whole country, with enough troops of our own, with enough troops from coalition forces, or, by (quickly) recreating the Iraqi (armed) forces," he said.

"It may not have turned out to be such a mess if we had done some things differently."

Mr Powell also voiced concern over a possible civil war in Iraq.

"A way has to be found for the Sunnis to be brought into the political process. You cannot let ... Iraq devolve into a mini-state in the north, a larger mini-state in the south, and sort of nothing in the middle," he said.

"The mission we set for ourselves at the beginning, and which we told the Iraqis that we were going to do, is to keep this as a single state. And that's the challenge that we have now."

Mr Powell downplayed his reported differences with Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, and said he was on good terms with President George W Bush.

"There are some who say, 'well, you shouldn't have supported (the war), you should have resigned', but I'm glad that Saddam Hussein is gone," Mr Powell said.

On Washington's differences with Tehran, Mr Powell also said he does not see "a clear military option with respect to Iran".

- AFP

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1456650.htm

Mr Powell spent five days at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters ahead of the speech studying intelligence reports, many of which turned out to be false.

He said he felt "terrible" at being misinformed.

However, he did not blame CIA director George Tenet.

Mr Tenet "did not sit there for five days with me misleading me," he said.

"He believed what he was giving to me was accurate."


the article you just cited makes my point for me. so, would you please tell me again how exactly bush lied when he was given info that sadaam had wmds? he relied on the info from the director of his intelligence agency, that may i add, was corraborated by several other top intel agencies all across the world (british, russian, israeli, etc). please just answer one question for me............. do you believe saddam had wmds? and if no, what did he use to kill hundreds of thousands of his own people? i'm curious as to your answer.

post

At one point, in the early 90's -- Yes, of course. I'm pissed at the fact that they juggle their excuse by saying "He had WMD" or "He had a direct link to 9/11". Bullshit lies, it's all about the money. I'm not for Saddam, I'm just against the concept of the war. Assassinate him if he's the problem. The war doesn't make sense, and I believe it involves a bit of corporate greed (building contracts, oil, etc.), and America's best friend, the Israelis. Almost like killing two birds with one stone.

Politics is bullshit, and whatever you hear out of a politicians mouth is usually the opposite of the truth. So, what makes Bush so special?

So he had WMD's but he decided to get rid of them all. Yeah, that happens all the time. Power hungry people always get rid of their main weapons. And why would anyone believe he had done this when he had lied soooooooooooooooooooo many times to us in the past and when he was refusing to cooperate with anyone who wanted to come check?

We had been attacked by terrorists in such a major way it was obvious to everyone that it was just the beginning. The simple fact is that it wouldn't matter who we went after. We just needed to set an example for the evil of the world that we would go after them and kill them. We had the power and we had the ability.

Unfortunitly thanks to the pussies here in our own country, the media included, what the world has learned is that many people will stab their own president in the back just to further their party. They learned that the United States is no longer united. We have no loyalty or unity. We can be beaten from within.

So he had WMD's but he decided to get rid of them all. Yeah, that happens all the time. Power hungry people always get rid of their main weapons.

of course he got rid of em t, that's why he kicked out the un weapons inspectors. duh........ :rolleyes:

post

Shouldn't you be eatting?

Shouldnt you be spewing more anti Bush bs? Oh wait......

Shouldnt you be spewing more anti Bush bs? Oh wait......

Oh wait, what? You just find your red, custom made George Bush dildo?

the article you just cited makes my point for me. so, would you please tell me again how exactly bush lied when he was given info that sadaam had wmds? he relied on the info from the director of his intelligence agency, that may i add, was corraborated by several other top intel agencies all across the world (british, russian, israeli, etc). please just answer one question for me............. do you believe saddam had wmds? and if no, what did he use to kill hundreds of thousands of his own people? i'm curious as to your answer.

post
For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.

Paul Wolfowitz May 28, 2003

So, where did all this bad information come from? While the culprits would like to pin the blame on the Central Intelligence Agency, the facts point in a different direction. To cite just one example, the now-discredited claim that Saddam was trying to buy "Yellow Cake" Uranium from Niger came from the Pentagon, specifically from Paul Wolfowitz, using information the CIA stated was unreliable. Wolfowitz, and his assistant Douglas Feith, set up a special office called the "Office of Special Plans" in 2001, that fed information to the White House to urge the attack on Iraq. Shortly after the invasion, the OSP was disbanded So, the trail of the lies that started a war goes from the White House, to the Pentagon, to the Office of Special Plans. But where was the OSP getting their information? Clearly, they were not using information provided by the CIA, or the CIA would not have denounced their sources as "unreliable". According to some reports, the OSP was using "consultants" who came from outside the Pentagon and operated with no oversight or accountability! The Office of Special Plans operated on its own, off the official payroll and away from Congressional oversight. According to several sources, it was the information given out by the Office of Special Plans that Dick Cheney "encouraged" the CIA to adopt! So where does the trail lead from the OSP?

As it turns out, the OSP was getting their information from primarily two sources. The first was Ahmed Chalabi, the bank embezzler who would be king and didn't care how it came about. The second, and more damning source, is the office of the Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon! As the Office of Special Plans poured out the lies that led to war, Israeli officers, up to the rank of General, were repeatedly escorted inside the Pentagon to the Office of Special Plans. At no time were they required to sign in!

Douglas Feith would then take this information, despite CIA doubts about the credibility of the claims, into private briefings at the White House that bypassed CIA. In some cases, the CIA was unaware of Feith's private briefings until the OSP information became part of White House public policy.

So, this is the trail of the lies that started a war, beginning at the White House, and via Dick Cheney moving upstream to the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, under Wolfowitz and Feith, then from OSP to an parallel group operating out of Ariel Sharon's office in Israel.

if you want to know why we are in iraq ...... all you have to do is listen to the guys who wrote the plan ......

so now let's discuss... who the players are in the push for this war... the PNAC
here are some excerts written by Bernard Weiner, Ph.D.

Some of the ideological roots of today's Bush Administration power-wielders could be traced back to political philosophers Leo Strauss and Albert Wohlstetter or to GOP rightist Barry Goldwater and his rabid anti-communist followers in the early-1960s. But, for simplicity's sake let's stick closer to our own time.

In the early-1990s, there was a group of ideologues and power-politicians on the fringe of the Republican Party's far-right. The members of this group in 1997 would found The Project for the New American Century (PNAC); their aim was to prepare for the day when the Republicans regained control of the White House -- and, it was hoped, the other two branches of government as well -- so that their vision of how the U.S. should move in the world would be in place and ready to go, straight off-the-shelf into official policy.

This PNAC group was led by such heavy hitters as Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, James Woolsey, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol, James Bolton, Zalmay M. Khalilzad, William Bennett, Dan Quayle, Jeb Bush, most of whom were movers-and-shakers in previous Administrations, then in power-exile, as it were, while Clinton was in the White House. But even given their reputations and clout, the views of this group were regarded as too extreme to be taken seriously by the mainstream conservatives that controlled the Republican Party.

SETTING UP PNAC

To prepare the ground for the PNAC-like ideas that were circulating in the HardRight, various wealthy individuals and corporations helped set up far-right think-tanks, and bought up various media outlets -- newspapers, magazines, TV networks, radio talk shows, cable channels, etc. -- in support of that day when all the political tumblers would click into place and the PNAC cabal and their supporters could assume control.

This happened with the Supreme Court's selection of George W. Bush in 2000. The "outsiders" from PNAC were now powerful "insiders," placed in important positions from which they could exert maximum pressure on U.S. policy: Cheney is Vice President, Rumsfeld is Defense Secretary, Wolfowitz is Deputy Defense Secretary, I. Lewis Libby is Cheney's Chief of Staff, Elliot Abrams is in charge of Middle East policy at the National Security Council, Dov Zakheim is comptroller for the Defense Department, John Bolton is Undersecretary of State, Richard Perle is chair of the Defense Policy advisory board at the Pentagon, former CIA director James Woolsey is on that panel as well, etc. etc. (PNAC's chairman, Bill Kristol, is the editor of Rupert Murdoch's The Weekly Standard.) In short, PNAC had a lock on military policy-creation in the Bush Administration.

But, in order to unleash their foreign/military campaigns without taking all sorts of flak from the traditional wing of the conservative GOP -- which was more isolationist, more opposed to expanding the role of the federal government, more opposed to military adventurism abroad -- they needed a context that would permit them free rein. The events of 9/11 rode to their rescue. (In one of their major reports, written in 2000, they noted that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing even--like a new Pearl Harbor.")

After those terrorist attacks, the Bush Administration used the fear generated in the general populace as their cover for enacting all sorts of draconian measures domestically (the Patriot Act, drafted earlier, was rushed through Congress in the days following 9/11; few members even read it), and as their rationalization for launching military campaigns abroad. (Don't get me wrong. The Islamic fanatics that use terror as their political weapon are real and deadly and need to be stopped. The question is: How to do that in ways that enhance rather than detract from America's long-term national interests?)

One doesn't have to speculate what the PNAC guys might think, since they're quite open and proud of their theories and strategies. Indeed, they've left a long, public record that lays out quite openly what they're up to. As I say, it was all laid out years ago, but nobody took such extreme talk seriously; now that they're in power, actually making the policy they only dreamed about a decade or so ago -- with all sorts of scarifying consequences for America and the rest of the world -- we need to educate ourselves quickly as to how the PNACers work and what their future plans might be.

THE PNAC PAPER TRAIL

Here is a shorthand summary of PNAC strategies that have become U.S. policy. Some of these you may have heard about before, but I've expanded and updated as much as possible.

1. In 1992, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney had a strategy report drafted for the Department of Defense, written by Paul Wolfowitz, then Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy. In it, the U.S. government was urged, as the world's sole remaining Superpower, to move aggressively and militarily around the globe. The report called for pre-emptive attacks and ad hoc coalitions, but said that the U.S. should be ready to act alone when "collective action cannot be orchestrated." The central strategy was to "establish and protect a new order" that accounts "sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership," while at the same time maintaining a military dominance capable of "deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role." Wolfowitz outlined plans for military intervention in Iraq as an action necessary to assure "access to vital raw material, primarily Persian Gulf oil" and to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and threats from terrorism.

Somehow, this report leaked to the press; the negative response was immediate. Senator Robert Byrd led the Democratic charge, calling the recommended Pentagon strategy "myopic, shallow and disappointing....The basic thrust of the document seems to be this: We love being the sole remaining superpower in the world and we want so much to remain that way that we are willing to put at risk the basic health of our economy and well-being of our people to do so." Clearly, the objective political forces hadn't yet coalesced in the U.S. that could support this policy free of major resistance, and so President Bush the Elder publicly repudiated the paper and sent it back to the drawing boards. (For the essence of the draft text, see Barton Gellman's "Keeping the U.S. First; Pentagon Would Preclude a Rival Superpower" in the Washington Post.)

2. Various HardRight intellectuals outside the government were spelling out the new PNAC policy in books and influential journals. Zalmay M. Khalilzad (formerly associated with big oil companies, currently U.S. Special Envoy to Afghanistan & Iraq ) wrote an important volume in 1995, "From Containment to Global Leadership: America & the World After the Cold War," the import of which was identifying a way for the U.S. to move aggressively in the world and thus to exercise effective control over the planet's natural resources. A year later, in 1996, neo-conservative leaders Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan, in their Foreign Affairs article "Towards a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy," came right out and said the goal for the U.S. had to be nothing less than "benevolent global hegemony," a euphemism for total U.S. domination, but "benevolently" exercised, of course.

3. In 1998, PNAC unsuccessfully lobbied President Clinton to attack Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein from power. The January letter from PNAC urged America to initiate that war even if the U.S. could not muster full support from the Security Council at the United Nations. Sound familiar? (President Clinton replied that he was focusing on dealing with al-Qaida terrorist cells.)

4. In September of 2000, PNAC, sensing a GOP victory in the upcoming presidential election, issued its white paper on "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for the New Century." The PNAC report was quite frank about why the U.S. would want to move toward imperialist militarism, a Pax Americana, because with the Soviet Union out of the picture, now is the time most "conducive to American interests and ideals...The challenge of this coming century is to preserve and enhance this 'American peace'." And how to preserve and enhance the Pax Americana? The answer is to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major-theater wars."

In serving as world "constable," the PNAC report went on, no other countervailing forces will be permitted to get in the way. Such actions "demand American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations," for example. No country will be permitted to get close to parity with the U.S. when it comes to weaponry or influence; therefore, more U.S. military bases will be established in the various regions of the globe. (A post-Saddam Iraq may well serve as one of those advance military bases.) Currently, it is estimated that the U.S. now has nearly 150 military bases and deployments in different countries around the world, with the most recent major increase being in the Caspian Sea/Afghanistan/Middle East areas.

5. George W. Bush moved into the White House in January of 2001. Shortly thereafter, a report by the Administration-friendly Council on Foreign Relations was prepared, "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century,"that advocated a more aggressive U.S. posture in the world and called for a "reassessment of the role of energy in American foreign policy," with access to oil repeatedly cited as a "security imperative." (It's possible that inside Cheney's energy-policy papers -- which he refuses to release to Congress or the American people -- are references to foreign-policy plans for how to gain military control of oilfields abroad.)

6. Mere hours after the 9/11 terrorist mass-murders, PNACer Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld ordered his aides to begin planning for an attack on Iraq, even though his intelligence officials told him it was an al-Qaida operation and there was no connection between Iraq and the attacks. "Go massive," the aides' notes quote him as saying. ( "Sweep it all up. Things related and not." Rumsfeld leaned heavily on the FBI and CIA to find any shred of evidence linking the Iraq government to 9/11, but they weren't able to. So he set up his own fact-finding group in the Pentagon that would provide him with whatever shaky connections it could find or surmise.

7. Feeling confident that all plans were on track for moving aggressively in the world, the Bush Administration in September of 2002 published its "National Security Strategy of the United States of America." The official policy of the U.S. government, as proudly proclaimed in this major document, is virtually identical to the policy proposals in the various white papers of the Project for the New American Century and others like it over the past decade.

Chief among them are: 1) the policy of "pre-emptive" war -- i.e., whenever the U.S. thinks a country may be amassing too much power and/or could provide some sort of competition in the "benevolent hegemony" region, it can be attacked, without provocation. (A later corollary would rethink the country's atomic policy: nuclear weapons would no longer be considered defensive, but could be used offensively in support of political/economic ends; so-called "mini-nukes" could be employed in these regional wars.) 2) international treaties and opinion will be ignored whenever they are not seen to serve U.S. imperial goals. 3) The new policies "will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia."



Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative. To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can [among other steps] work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies a clean break from the slogan, ‘comprehensive peace’ to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power. Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right, as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria’s regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq..Since Iraq’s future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq. Israel’s new agenda can signal a clean break by abandoning a policy which allowed strategic retreat, by reestablishing the principle of preemption, rather than retaliation alone and by ceasing to absorb blows to the nation without response. Israel’s new strategic agenda can shape the regional environment in ways that grant Israel the room to refocus its energies back to where they are most needed: to rejuvenate its national idea. Ultimately, Israel can do more than simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict though war. No amount of weapons or victories will grant Israel the peace it seeks. When Israel is on a sound economic footing, and is free, powerful, and healthy internally, it will no longer simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict; it will transcend it. As a senior Iraqi opposition leader said recently: ‘Israel must rejuvenate and revitalize its moral and intellectual leadership. It is an important, if not the most important, element in the history of the Middle East.’ Israel-proud, wealthy, solid, and strong-would be the basis of a truly new and peaceful Middle East.”

– “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” policy paper written for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, mid-1996, under the auspices of an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Authors included Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser, now all policymakers in or policy advisers to the Bush administration.

“Iraq’s future will profoundly affect the strategic balance in the Middle East. The battle to dominate and define Iraq is, by extension, the battle to dominate the balance of power in the Levant over the long run. Iraq tried to take over its neighbor, Kuwait, a catastrophic mistake that has accelerated Iraq’s descent into internal chaos. This chaos has created a vacuum in an area geostrategically central, and rich with human and natural resources. The vacuum tempts Iraq’s neighbors to intervene, especially Syria, which is also driven to control the region. Iraq’s chaos and Syria’s efforts simultaneously provide opportunities for the Jordanian monarchy. Jordan is best suited to manage the tribal politics that will define the Levant in the wake of failed secular-Arab nationalism. If Jordan wins, then Syria would be isolated and surrounded by a new pro-western Jordanian-Israeli-Iraqi-Turkish bloc. It would be prudent for the United States and Israel to abandon the quest for ‘comprehensive peace,’ including its ‘land for peace’ provision with Syria, since it locks the United States into futile attempts to prop-up local tyrants and the unnatural states underneath them. Instead, the United States and Israel can use this competition over Iraq to improve the regional balance of power in favor of regional friends like Jordan.”
– “Coping with Crumbling States: A Western and Israeli Balance of Power Strategy for the Levant,” policy paper written for an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, December 1996, by David Wurmser, now a State Department official in the Bush administration.

it was all a conspiracy!?!? :eek: you're starting to sound like my old senile grandfather. haha

post

it was all a conspiracy!?!? :eek: you're starting to sound like my old senile grandfather. haha

posthow can you even construe the written polices of the administration of our foreign policy writers as conspiracy .... they formulated what they were going to do, and now they are doing it .... conspiracy is unproven ... this is verified by the fact that they said what they were going to do ... and now they are doing it .... but in order to get Americans to go along with the plan and not Lynch them for killing their kids and spending their tax dollars on a war to secure the middle east ... they had to come up with a plan to sell the people on .... which was protecting them from Saddam's wmd and his terrorist ... they had to whip up a frenzy of fear ... to sell their war ...
if you truly want to under stand all you have to do is read their own words ... what is so crazy about researching what the guys behind the war were saying and applying that behind what they are doing ... its all history man, but you go on and preach that worn out and disproved old tag line of " Saddam has weapons of mass destructions we know it and he is going to attack us , boogie boogie be afraid be very afraid " same old song when you can't argue a legitimate point scream conspiracy

how can you even construe the written polices of the administration of our foreign policy writers as conspiracy .... they formulated what they were going to do, and now they are doing it .... conspiracy is unproven ... this is verified by the fact that they said what they were going to do ... and now they are doing it .... but in order to get Americans to go along with the plan and not Lynch them for killing their kids and spending their tax dollars on a war to secure the middle east ... they had to come up with a plan to sell the people on .... which was protecting them from Saddam's wmd and his terrorist ... they had to whip up a frenzy of fear ... to sell their war ...
if you truly want to under stand all you have to do is read their own words ... what is so crazy about researching what the guys behind the war were saying and applying that behind what they are doing ... its all history man, but you go on and preach that worn out and disproved old tag line of " Saddam has weapons of mass destructions we know it and he is going to attack us , boogie boogie be afraid be very afraid " same old song when you can't argue a legitimate point scream conspiracy

if that's what this war is all about, then why the first gulf war?

post

two reasons , one to protect business interest in Kuwait and also a testing ground , to see how our military would work in that environment , they wanted bush sr to go all they way be he did not have u.n. support to go all the way to Baghdad so he opted not to do so at the time , because gulf 1 was to liberate Kuwait not to take Iraq

up until the invasion of Kuwait you must remember that Saddam was our boy, our thorn in the side of Iran , it is said that we had under the table told Saddam that we would turn a blind eye to the invasion, and this makes sense if you need a righteous reason to move a bunch of troops and test a bunch of weapons, and plus war is good business if your in the weapons business and we look like the good guys for saving poor little Kuwait ....

And yet it's been over a thousand days since we've had another terrorist attack on USA soil. If Gore were in charge we'd have been blasted a dozen times before he actually made some kind of a decision. And talking about it more or assigning focus groups to look into coming up with a way to come up with an idea doesn't count as taking action.

I can't wait to see what you guys have to say after Hillary gets into office and totally ruins this country. I have the feeling you'll be wishing ol' GW was back in charge.

And yet it's been over a thousand days since we've had another terrorist attack on USA soil. If Gore were in charge we'd have been blasted a dozen times before he actually made some kind of a decision. And talking about it more or assigning focus groups to look into coming up with a way to come up with an idea doesn't count as taking action.

I can't wait to see what you guys have to say after Hillary gets into office and totally ruins this country. I have the feeling you'll be wishing ol' GW was back in charge.and why do we have terrorist attacks ....? because they cause terror .... which terrorizes people and makes them look to the government for protection , the government says sure we can protect you but you got to give us more power which means you will have to give up some civil rights, .... its an old tactic used by governments for centuries because a scared populace is a controllable populace

and why do we have terrorist attacks ....? because they cause terror .... which terrorizes people and makes them look to the government for protection , the government says sure we can protect you but you got to give us more power which means you will have to give up some civil rights, .... its an old tactic used by governments for centuries because a scared populace is a controllable populace

please state specifically shortly and concisely what "civil right" we have given up.

post

please state specifically shortly and concisely what "civil right" we have given up.

postAmendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue,