I'll blame Bush 41 then, I don't care, no big fan of him either. Did we win the battle in Somalia? You missed my whole point anyway. The point was we had no American Interest in Bosnia or Somalia and the Democrats had no problems with it including humanitarian missions. They won't accept that in Iraq even though that isn't the only reason we went there. What I'm trying to say is that Democrats don't mind using the military for humanitarian reasons in various countries but when it comes to Iraq they are totally against it! Crap, What do you mean about this? I'm not talking about the media here I'm talking about Democrats vs Republicans. What do you know about Carter? Your to young to remember. Hostages in Iran? Hell, You could ruin George Washington with that same situation. Are you telling me that there is no double standard when it comes to Democrats vs Republicans? Republicans resign when a situation comes up Democrats don't. William Jefferson vs Tom Delay, Mike Foley vs Michael Studds. I'll give you another example of this: WWII and all other wars we occupied and kept bases in various countries for years and a lot of those until this day building democracies. The Democrats have usually been for nation building and humanitarian support by the military. Democrats have said we need more troops to secure Iraq and now that we are going to do it they oppose it matter of fact they oppose everything now. Their throwing the country right down the crapper and I don't know why? Its more of voting for the war and then voting against it! I thought the Democrats were also for upholding and enforcing UN Resolutions? One more example: How long did it take to build Armies in Germany and various countries? The Democrats want a complete Army built in 4 years. I've heard various Generals say that it takes 12 years to make a Battalian commander! Maybe you should review the news of the Gulf War forward if you don't know about the missing Amerian POW and the fact that Iraq shot at our planes thus violating the cease fire agreement. Maybe you should read Martin's post above? You don't see anything wrong with her comments correct? Please explain?
It's official...we should have elected John Kerry as President. Like most Democrats he had all the answers. "I have a plan to plan a plan that I plan to plan as part of my plan that I plan to plan." I like the fact that we don't all agree. It makes us stronger and usually helps our accountability. The problem I have with Democrats (since the Clinton era) is that they ALWAYS complain, they ALWAYS blame the Republicans, and they NEVER have any ideas of their own. Now I'm sure there has to be some quality Democrats out there but they're surely not the ones running the show. The elections were a result of people wanting change. The Democratic leadership is trying hard to convince themselves that the people actually voted for them more than against the Republicans. That's not the case and the balance of power can be lost as easy as it was gained. The average citizen has no clue about what's really happening in the world. Most have already forgotten 9/11 and don't believe it could happen again. The biggest ally that terrorists have is our liberal tendency to be weak. Sitting around smoking a joint and singing "We Are The World" is NOT going to make everyone love us. Terrorists hating us is NOT because we have failed to extend an olive branch and accept their culture. Wake up liberals! STOP getting knocked up and demanding we pay for it; STOP commiting crimes and blaming "THE MAN"; STOP raising taxes so those who don't want to work/contribute can have the same luxuries as those who do; STOP sticking cigars where they don't belong; STOP telling us how to think; STOP telling us that a marriage is a man & woman, man & man, woman & woman, sheep & man, etc.; STOP telling us that we're to blame for the Mid-east crisis; STOP lying to minorities about how you'll fix their problems; STOP blaming your failures on Global Warming, etc.......................................................................................................................... Now, closer to home...aren't you glad we elected Blanco, Landrieu, Nagin, and Jefferson? I guess none of our problems are related to their performance. Of course not! It's all the President's fault. Afterall, W blew up the levees, W framed Bill by putting the 100K in his freezer, W gave all the Road Home money away, W started the New Orleans crime wave, W ordered Katrina and Rita to strike us, etc.......................................................................................................................... Does anyone ever accept responsibility for anything these days? Let me be the first to admit a sin. I (sorry to say) actually voted for Clinton the first time around. Within two months of his inauguration, I was sick to my stomach. :dis:
What "mass destruction" could Iraq do with these Weapons of Mass Destruction. 500 munitions would not do much damage. Even if UN inspectors had found these, not much would have been done besides confiscating them....If they found nuclear warheads.....thats a different story.... Sure, they couldn't legally have them (according to the UN), neither could we legally invade them. (according to the UN). It's the equivalent of saying we have the right to search your house because you have a parking ticket. Sure parking illegally is CRIME...as is murder.... but they are on two ends of the spectrum. Bush went to war with Iraq because he MISTAKINGLY (so they say) thought they had TONS of WMDs....WMDs CAPABLE of doing MASS DESTRUCTION.
If it was so blatantly obvious, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I'm just saying this whole deal stinks. It's a POSSIBILITY. I'm not the only one who thinks so.
Bush and Kerry both suck. I agree, if we all didn't disagree, this country wouldn't be around in its current form. The almost equal amount of right/left winged people keep the country where it needs to be...the middle. Democrats always blame the Republicans because for the past few years, REPUBLICANS were in POWER. Never any ideas of their own? You must not have been reading the news about 100 hours of floor time turning into 6 potential laws being set into motion. Sure some might get vetoed, but it's showing the country that work can get done to better society when you don't have a one-sided tyrant running the show. A vote against Republicans is a vote for Democrats. Fact of the matter is there are more Democrats in the House/Senate than Republicans. Don't pull a Matt Leinart. Nobody forced people to vote for Democrats. If you don't like either candidate, DON'T VOTE AT ALL! (which many did in the 04 elections) The U.S. is just as much as vulnerable to be attacked no matter who is in control. The size of our country, people of all cultures, vast ocean land make it inevitable. Wake up Republicans! STOP spending all my tax money on a war that we can't win! STOP caring more about big business than the average Joe citizen. STOP ignoring the general public. STOP making the social security taxes taken out of my paycheck useless. STOP FORCING democracy throughout the Middle East. STOP illegally authorizing the torture and indefinite jailing of inmates not proved guilty in a COURT OF LAW. STOP blaming your failures on 9/11 and terrorism. I generally vote Republican in Metairie. RESPONSIBILITY?!?!?!?!?! YOU SPEAK OF RESPONSIBILITY AND YOU SUPPORT BUSH??? HA!
It really is a mute point since this wasn't the only reason we went there. If we find out that the WMD's were transported to Syria like his air force a lot of people have crow to eat. I didn't want to get into a big discussion on WMD's because I'm more interested where we go from here for one thing. The democrats wish this was the only reason and then they act like they didn't vote for us to enter Iraq. You are against us being in Iraq, correct? :grin: So no other reason for this war matters to you other than WMD and Bush lied, correct? Never mind the rest?
Agreed! Raise taxes and amnesty for Illegals, just what we need! Bush will help them with amnesty, what a combination. Thats not very smart advise. Party trumps person, Example of this is that if you vote for one side because you are mad at another the side you usually vote against will carry out there agenda. No such thing as a moderate Republican or Democrat as far as the party is concerned. Examples: The moderate Republicans that voted with Democrats and disrupted certain agendas of the Republican Congress. Another example is like here in Colorado, you have a Democratic Senate and a Democratic governor meaning he will go along with his party more than he will be a moderate Democrat. Politicians usually tell you what you want to hear to get elected then vote with their party. Interesting, do the Democrats get any blame for the war we can't win? Personally I think we can win it but no one seems to want to including Bush! Interesting you take up for the inmates. You want them tried in a court of law? Thats just Rediculous, we'll have a bunch of OJ's running around and pedophiles. Maybe you should pay more attention to the news? Judicial sytem is a joke now days! Democrats should stop blaming Republicans for their failures and try and solve issues instead of oppose and create new problems.
Nothing personal, mon ami. Just trying to prod you into discussing the war. There are a lot of issues to knock around and because you are quick and articulate, I'd like to hear more of what could make you feel that way besides just swooping in, calling your opponents a "pantywaist" and making a witty quip. That's better. I disagree, of course. Americans backed Aghanistan because is was effective and it was against the enemies who attacked us on 9/11. It's a better way to fight a gueriilla war. Use a lot of light special forces and heavy airpower to back up local factions who are on our side. Leave the local politics to the locals while we attend to matters of our own national interest. This is the problem. We've already won all of the military victories! We sacked the bloody country in 21 days. Iraq is militarily defeated, Saddam is dead and the WMD's were mythical. We won, brother. What is left is a local political and criminal problem that only the Iraqis themselves can solve. Only the Kurds have cooperated with us and we owe them our continuing support. The Sunnis and the Shiites are trying to kill us, hate us, and deserve not one more American life or American dollar. What course? Seriously, the course we have followed has put the greatest power the world has ever known right upon the rocks. It's a stupid course. And what constitutes victory? No one will answer this simple question for me. Military might has done its job already, all the generals and experts have said so. The remaining problem is political, cannot be won by might, and our military is being squandered in a futile effort. How long will this bullchit go on before you see this? Right now we are backing the Shiite government of Iraq against the Sunnis. How distasteful is that? The silent power behind al-Maliki is Muqtada al Sadr, the violent anti-American mullah who is backed by Iran and Ahmedidejad. Guess who will be the next strongman of Iraq when we are gone? Sadr will. And we will have traded a secular dictator who was acting as a balance against Iranian ambitions in the Gulf for a radical islamic dictator who will be allied with Iran. It's political madness. Cry me a river. You have never hesitated to attack someone in a post, so when did you get so thin-skinned. And the politicians of both parties attack each other personally all the time. And I'm not a Democrat, I'm a registered independent and fairly likely to vote republican in 2008 if they run a moderate.
We did not go to war in Iraq for humanitarian reasons! What the hell are you talking about? Sure there is. And republicans also have a double standard. Everybody realizes this. What is your point? The people of those WWII countries cooperated with us for our protection and money. Iraquis hate us and are trying to kill our troops? Why do you love these islamic ragheads so much? But only if the military was used effectively and successfully, as in Bosnia and Kosovo. In Somalia, where we went in for humanitatian reasons during a famine and the Somalis chit all over us, democrats did NOT support any effort to offer further support or "nation-building". We tried to help, they didn't want it, so we left them to rot in their own cesspool. Good riddance. Too little, too late, and as you will see, it will not work as advertised and we'll be right back here for the 2008 campaign. The republicans are split over this troop issue because of it. Look, the long-standing plan to invade Iraq required 500,000 troops. Rumsfeld squashed that and sent 150,000 troops whom by now everybody realized was a major blunder. 20,000 more troop sis a drop in the bucket and will not approach the 500,000 that was needed to secure the borders and establish order. Now, even a half-million solidiers might not be enough to deal with all of the armed militias that have developed since Bush delared "Mission Accomlished" four friggin' years ago. Bush is more concerened with demonstrating his personal resolve than in doing what is in the best interests of the country he is supposed to be leading.
i have answered it many times. victory is stability and progress towards freedom and democracy in the middle east. not an easy goal, but a worthy one.
