Opinons on Bush & Iraq?

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by Imported, Jan 14, 2004.

  1. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    Vincentr1: Am I the only one that believes dragging our country into a war costing billions of dollars and overthrowing a government, albeit a bad one, for trumped up bullshit charges, just to get rid of a tyrant dictator, is grounds for impeachment. Isn't lying to Congress about weapons of mass destruction worse than fucking Monica Lewinski?
     
  2. B_JohnTheHorse

    B_JohnTheHorse New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    510
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Vincent,

    Yes I have to agree with you. We are dealing with an administration that:

    1) Used illegal means to suppress valid ballots in Florida [many from minority communities] in the 2000 election to steal the election from Al Gore.

    2) Actively encouraged, participated and profited from the energy crisis in the western US, especially California, then lied and covered up the facts in Dick Cheney's energy 'task force' [really a meeting of corporate thieves].

    3) Like retards ignored urgent warning from the outgoing Clinton Administration that Al Queda was a huge immediate threat to the US for the childish impetuous reason that if Clinton was recommending it, they wouldn't have anything to do with it. Reason? They hate Clinton. Result? 911. There is tons of evidence to suggest that they knew of the threat and willfully ignored it. 3000 people died.

    4) Has completely and unnecessarily alienated, ruined, and destroyed relations with countries around the world. Friend and Foe alike. Even to the detriment of their own policies. Think everything from denying reconstruction contracts in Iraq to war opponents, to calling France & Germany old europe, to countless insults and inappropriate demands made on countries across the globe.

    5) Blatenly lied about reasons for going to Irag, caused 500 US deaths, tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths, whilst simultaneosly failing to catch Bin Ladin and his Al Queda freaks who are busily perfecting a method to drop and dirty bomb or chemicle weapon in a major western country, most likely the USA.

    6) Begun the long project of eroding civil liberties in the usa. Remember these people are not democrats. Democracy means accepting loss at and election (2000) or being held accountable for wrong doing (illegal wars, corporate profiteering, halliburton, enron etc).
     
  3. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    norseman: Interesting points gentlemen.
    I agree with some, if not most of what you said.

    Two thoughts:

    1. What do you wanna bet he'll get re-elected ? (and what does that say about the American voters ?)

    2. Do you think part of the unspoken agenda for our actions in the Middle East (present and recent past) was to gain a strategic presence in that part of the world ?

    Always looking for the story behind the story....

    Norse
     
  4. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    Vincentr1: 1.) Of Course he'll get re-elected. The morons in this country have raised his approval rating since they drug the ferret ( Saddam) out of his hole and the democrats running are hardly impressive. The Democrats don't speak well and they bicker like little bitches. Not one solid leader among them.

    2.) GWB invaded Iraq for one reason. He hates Saddam and wanted him gone. Call it a personal vendetta. It had nothing to do with national security. It was a matter of personal pride. Our soldiers died to satisfy GWB's ego. Period!


    [quote author=norseman link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#2 date=01/14/04 at 13:25:59]Interesting points gentlemen.
    I agree with some, if not most of what you said.

    Two thoughts:

    1. What do you wanna bet he'll get re-elected ? (and what does that say about the American voters ?)

    2.  Do you think part of the unspoken agenda for our actions in the Middle East (present and recent past) was to gain a strategic presence in that part of the world ?

    Always looking for the story behind the story....

    Norse[/quote]
     
  5. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    gigantikok: You guys act as if it was SOLELY Bush who decided that going to war would be best for this country. He had to be supported and advised by a cabinet and by Congress, so that is the first reason why it is absolutely fucking ridiculous to even suggest that Bush should be impeached for a political move that was supported by others. And no, "lying" about weapons of mass destruction isn't worse then fucking Monica Lewinski. Clinton was sworn UNDER OATH in a court of law and lied to all our faces about his infidelity. The issue wasn't him fucking around, the issue was how willing he was to lie to everyone about Monica and many other things. Clinton lovers still don't seem to understand that. But getting back on topic, Bush went in assuming there were weapons of mass destruction, that is a mistake on his part, I will agree. There were, however, many reasons to believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It still hasn't been proven that they don't. It also hasn't been proven that they do, but you can't use that as a reason to jump on Bush and call him a liar. That's ridiculous. If we find weapons of mass destruction... well, great, Bush was right. If we don't... well, Bush was wrong, but we still eliminated a tyrannical dictator. No, I don't agree with all the money that has been spent on the war, but I do agree we are there for good reasons. I can believe what I want to believe, and you can choose to believe what you want to believe, neither side really has any facts, but I choose to believe that it seems to be common sense that Saddam had connections to Osama and was funding him. Whether you agree with the war or not, you might want to get used to Bush because he's coming back, Jack.
     
  6. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    Vincentr1: [quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#4 date=01/14/04 at 14:34:57]You guys act as if it was SOLELY Bush who decided that going to war would be best for this country.  .............Whether you agree with the war or not, you might want to get used to Bush because he's coming back, Jack.[/quote]


    Ok, I'll admit it wasn't solely little George, the big George had his input too!

    And yes we all need to prepare for georgy porgy's return. Prozac and vicadin should be subsidized by the government. Free therapists and :Dalcohol for who didn't got to Yale! :D
     
  7. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    gigantikok: JohntheHorse, most of what you say is bullshit. It is a twisted combination of skewed facts. You've overlooked many things to support your argument and you are "spinning", as Bill O Reilly calls it. I will address a few things:

    1) STEAL the election from Al Gore??? DO you want me to fall over laughing? This is a loser who was so inept that if he had just won his OWN state and Bill Clinton's state, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN PRESIDENT. "Illegal means to suppress valid votes"? Sure, it's all one big conspiracy theory against the left with the Bushes in charge. Do you know how ridiculous you sound? I know you are making things up because you can't exactly describe or prove any kind of "illegal means" the Bushes would have gone through to get the votes. If you remember, but you don't because you block out any facts that don't support your arguments... Gore's administration was in FL for WEEKS ON END trying their damnedest to recount and scrounge together as many votes as they could, and they STILL couldn't come up with anything. IN fact, it was Gore that was engaging in illegal means by counting unreadable votes for himself. He was counting chad votes that had been punch way off center and no where near either Bush or Gore's name. He was counting everything and anything he possibly could, and in the end Bush still won, because the people really VOTED FOR HIM. Not because his bro had some huge conspiracy theory in the works.

    3) It was actually the Clinton Administration that were the retards. Clinton had repeated signs on danger in his face during his presidency and he did absolutely nothing. Am I the only one who knows about the mid 90's truck bombing in the Twin Towers themselves by none other then... you guessed it, OSAMA! And who was the one that sat on his ass and did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!? Oh, that retard Clinton. There we go. More skewed facts from your part, John.

    5) Go back and do some research on some of the ridiculous blatant lies your beloved Clinton administration spewed out. Bush hasn't lied, Bush has been mistaken. He thought there was a connection between Saddam and Osama, he thought there were weapons of mass destruction. His mistake. Still hasn't been proven, maybe it will, but even if it WAS proven you would STILL find reasons to bitch and moan about Bush. Saddam was found, and if Osama had been found, 10 to 1 YOU'D STILL BE BITCHING ANYWAY. Jesus.

    I'd cover your other topics, but I either:
    a) Don't know enough about them
    or
    b) Don't care enough to respond.
     
  8. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    jerkin4-10: john the horse...good grief...youve made the best argument yet...the OUTGOING clinton regime telling the INCOMING bush regime...jeez...what the hell?...what DID slick willy do about terrorism???...you know the trade center WAS bombed in HIS term...the cole was attacked in HIS term...since afghanistan and iraq...what was the latest terror attack?...*tapping foot, waiting patiently*...the war on terror IS being won...but unfortunately THIS enemy shoots at us behind innocent children and civilians...talks to us when they dont have the element of surprise...waves to us as we drive by...homeland security is working...its not perfect...but damn sure better than what we had...and when was ANY war with out cost...cost of our precious sons and daughters lives and money from our pockets...but the cost of freedom is high...and everyone in this country should be willing to pay it...or you live in the wrong country...
     
  9. B_JohnTheHorse

    B_JohnTheHorse New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    510
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Gigantikok,

    I have always had an extremely low opinion of you, what you post here and why, but I in the interest of fairness I would like to comment on your claim that congress & the cabinet voted for W's wars.

    Congress did go along with alot of W's agenda, which is why I believe that they in many ways are unfit to govern. They are coke-lite to Bush's coke. It is also true that Gore was an inept campaigner that didn't win his own state. But that has nothing to do with the situation in Florida. Remember the decision to stop counting ballots was a legal decision based on a ruling by the supreme court, NOT based on the fact that they're weren't ballots to be counted. The Supreme Court simply ordered the state to stop counting ballots.

    Re: the democrats in congress. They have shown a great deal of hypocrisy and weakness in dealing with an inherently weak president. In many ways they don't deserve to be elected until they actually believe in something, not just in 'me too!'
     
  10. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    mindseye: [quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#4 date=01/14/04 at 14:34:57]You guys act as if it was SOLELY Bush who decided that going to war would be best for this country.  He had to be supported and advised by a cabinet and by Congress, so that is the first reason why it is absolutely fucking ridiculous to even suggest that Bush should be impeached for a political move that was supported by others.[/quote]

    In fact, Condoleeza Rice told a State Department official as far back as July, 2002, "Save your breath -- the president has already decided what he's going to do on this." [Source: New York Times, January 7, 2004]

    Sounds like it was his decision, eight months before the start of hostilities, and still several months before the UN had met to discuss the issue.
     
  11. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    Inwood: Well...yes, as you can see there are some people on this site who have opinions about Bush and Iraq.

    Now I think any one who has read my posts would say I'm not exactly a fan of Bush. But it would be helpful to post some back up information (links, etc.) that help bolster your points against Bush or for Bush. I like to read them and it helps me try to see the other person's view of the situation. Doesn't mean I'll become a Republican or fringe but the more knowledgeable I can be about a subject the better.

    That said you can still spin your jokes, jabs, etc. Being President doesn't automatically exclude you from being the butt of jokes or deprecating comments.

    And I'm not sure a President can be impeached for fighting a war. There is an ongoing political battle on the issue of the constitution and war declarations. Do a Google search and you can read some very interesting things about it.

    And on that bit about illegal means to suppress valid ballots in Florida there seems to be some memory of one or two other states that had the same problem except a different party was being blamed for it. Doesn't make it right. Just means we need to get more politically involved to get people elected who serve the country first. Again Google to find out more.

    Oh there's so much more but to be true to my post I need to look up links so I don't come across as a hypocrite since I've already copped out by suggesting Google searches two times already.
     
  12. Pecker

    Pecker Retired Moderator
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    83,922
    Likes Received:
    34
    [quote author=Vincentr1 link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#5 date=01/14/04 at 14:47:44]Free therapists and  :Dalcohol for who didn't got to Yale! :D[/quote]

    Who didn't go to Yale?

    Lieberman did.

    Kerry did.

    So did Howard Dean.

    They don't deserve your pity, too? :-/

    As for the unfortunate voting thing in Florida, how many newspapers and other groups counted and counted and counted for months but could never conclude that Gore had received more popular votes than Bush had? We all know that if such a finding had been finally made it would be plastered all over every newspaper, wall, billboard and TV news show on the planet.
     
  13. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    jerkin4-10: as ive stated in the past about resources...there are websites, stories, threads etc to back up 14 theories of martians killing kennedy...im not that big of a net geek to run all of those down...nor do i want to take the time out of my day to 'reference' my beliefs...i think that the dye is set and most republicans will stay republicans...and democrats will stay democrats...and no amount of beating me over the head with tidal waves of information thats easily biased by either side, whatever side that is...is going to change my 'core' beliefs... like the other day...saw on the national news...some sect or whatever...called 'americans for peace' [something like that] had polled people and found this interesting result...most people were against the war in iraq...WHAT A SHOCK!...do you think if a peace organization would have come up with different results they would have made any kind of deal about it?...who did they poll?...members of their society?...or just open up a phone book?...i love the don henley song...'garden of allah'...where the devil is talking...saying...'there is no wrong...there is no right...just data to be manipulated...i can get you any result you want...WHATS IT WORTH TO YOU?'...i think mr henley has come up with a very true statement there...so beating each other in the head with biased information is a waste of time...i think...
     
  14. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    voltern: We need another man like Nixon. he kept all those other countries in their place.He had their respect and they hated him and feared him. because they knew if worst came to worst he had no problem pushing that lillte red button that would wipe them off the face of the earth. But then again no one would want me as pres. either, i wouldnt have a problem pushing that button to.
     
  15. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    Inwood: Here's some links on what was reported about the count in Florida. Some of it is very interesting. So the newspapers did report on it. Most people may just have not read it.

    The main one I remember from the time and it's mentioned in some of these reports is that if the vote count had been allowed to continue and Gore's preferred method of counting followed Bush most likely would have been declared the winner. The kicker is that if the vote counting had been allowed to continue and Bush's preferred method followed then most likely Gore would have won.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1440130.stm

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/feb2001/flor-f05.shtml

    http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/04/florida.recount.01/

    http://us.cnn.com/2001/LAW/04/columns/fl.hamilton.voterecount.04.13/

    http://www.gore2004us.com/consortiumnews.html

    I know. I'm bad. I just couldn't resist the last one. ;D
     
  16. jay_too

    jay_too New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    821
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CA
    [quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#4 date=01/14/04 at 14:34:57]And no, "lying" about weapons of mass destruction isn't worse then fucking Monica Lewinski.  [/quote]

    hey man,

    I am glad you brought this topic up again. You never did explain the ethical or moral construct and the theoretical/theological basis for saying that a lie about consentual sex between two adults is worse that a lie that results in the death of tens of thousands. [I have asked this maybe 5 or 6 times.] Maybe in this explanation of relative morality you could discuss non-consentual sex with a 16-year-old servant; it this an impropriety or a no-nevermind for those of your ethical background.

    You do bring up the good point that the Congress shares a part of the blame for the fiasco; we should follow the American tradition of kicking the bums out.

    I'm waiting!

    jay
     
  17. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    [quote author=Inwood link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#14 date=01/14/04 at 20:50:18]The main one I remember from the time and it's mentioned in some of these reports is that if the vote count had been allowed to continue and Gore's preferred method of counting followed Bush most likely would have been declared the winner.[/quote]
    I wonder who the 55,100 illegally disenfranchised voters would've voted for, though. If they could redo the election with their voting results restored today, I'm pretty sure who they'd vote for.
     
  18. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Okay, for anyone interested in what I meant by the 55,100 voters, Florida had passed an election reform bill where they'd have a corporation deal with convicted felons. Who was in charge of it? Katherine Harris. (She wears a lot of hats, doesn't she? Secretary of State, Secretary of Elections, and Bush campaign adviser.) ChoicePoint/DBT was selected for finding convicted felons to be stricken from voting. (This is the first time in history that a private corporation has done this.) DBT admits a 15% error rate. They came back with 8000 names. (For the Republicans, since you're all so inept at math anyway [Cutting taxes to pay off the national debt? LOL], that's 1200 votes - already more than twice the margin between Bush and Gore in Florida, a mere 537 votes.) But Harris wanted more, so she asked for people sharing the same surname with a convicted felon. But Harris wanted more, so she asked for people sharing the same birthday with a convicted felon. She ended up with 58,000 names, and independent investigators have found that the list is 95% inaccurate. (Once again talking to Republicans, that's 55,100 - or over a hundred times the margin.)

    Harris also allowed 680 illegal overseas ballots, including ones clearly cast after Election Day, to be counted. (Not much, but it means Gore probably won by 143 even after ChoicePoint got through with them.)

    What happened to the people involved? Harris is now a Congressman - elected with her own rules. ChoicePoint has gotten out of the Scrubs R Us business and is now into molecular biology; they now have one of those lucrative no-bid, no-limit war contracts under the Patriot Act, specifically dealing with DNA. It's good to see that Bush remembers his friends.
     
  19. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    gigantikok: [quote author=JohnTheHorse link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#8 date=01/14/04 at 16:17:45]Gigantikok,

    I have always had an extremely low opinion of you, what you post here and why, but I in the interest of fairness I would like to comment on your claim that congress & the cabinet voted for W's wars.

    Congress did go along with alot of W's agenda, which is why I believe that they in many ways are unfit to govern. They are coke-lite to Bush's coke. It is also true that Gore was an inept campaigner that didn't win his own state. But that has nothing to do with the situation in Florida. Remember the decision to stop counting ballots was a legal decision based on a ruling by the supreme court, NOT based on the fact that they're weren't ballots to be counted. The Supreme Court simply ordered the state to stop counting ballots.

    Re: the democrats in congress. They have shown a great deal of hypocrisy and weakness in dealing with an inherently weak president. In many ways they don't deserve to be elected until they actually believe in something, not just in 'me too!

    [/quote]
    That's wonderful that you have a low opinion of me, shows how childish you really are. I disagree with your extremely biased, idiotic political opinions but I have nothing against you since I DON'T KNOW YOU. But, I guess you are one of those that take every political argument to heart. Sorry to hear that.

    Back to the election of 2000, the Supreme court put an end to the counting because they had been doing it for MONTHS ON END. The country needed a president, and not someone bitching and moaning about having lost. Gore had a ridiculous amount of time to scrounge together votes of any kind and he still couldn't. Sorry, but I don't believe in convenient, vast conspiracy theories. I guess that is something Liberals like you like to latch onto because they have no real facts to support their arguments.
     
  20. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    gigantikok: [quote author=Inwood link=board=99;num=1074109950;start=0#14 date=01/14/04 at 20:50:18]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1440130.stm

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/feb2001/flor-f05.shtml

    http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/04/florida.recount.01/

    http://us.cnn.com/2001/LAW/04/columns/fl.hamilton.voterecount.04.13/

    http://www.gore2004us.com/consortiumnews.html

    I know. I'm bad. I just couldn't resist the last one.  ;D[/quote]
    Hmmmm. Let's analyze these links, shall we?

    BBC? Liberally biased? Check. (Has even gotten in trouble latley for skewing facts to support a Liberal viewpoint)

    CNN? Liberally biased? Certainly.

    Gore's website? Need I say more?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted