Bush booed at 2008 Nationals home opener!!

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

Purely the dictators decision and not the will of the people? Then perhaps you can explain the supermajority that passed the bill in both houses of Congress? Even if Bush had vetoed the bill for the use of force in Iraq it would have still passed based on vote tallies.

Are you serious???
DO you only see 2 days around the present???
Bush clearly used the events of 9/11 to influence/alter the decisions of many. Do you remember the words -- "you're either with me or the enemy"? Do you remember that everyone that disagreed with him was marked as unpatriotic? Do you remember all the (empty) abuse of the Level of Threat whenever Bush's proposal was in question? Those are all traits of a dictatorship, FYI, but you have some growing up to do before understanding...

The congress was rushed into making decision clearly.

The bottom line is -- we invaded a sovereign country without the UN approval, many are dead, the infrastructure is gone, for ABSOLUTELY no clear reason (proven). It was proven SH regime had nothing to do with AlQaeda, there were no WMD, absolutely nothing -- just Bush's personal wishes...a clear International Crime act and someone should be responsible.

In the past, WE organized to bring the leaders up and executed them (ex. SH, Milosevic...), therefore, the same should be applied now.

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Are you serious???
DO you only see 2 days around the present???
Bush clearly used the events of 9/11 to influence/alter the decisions of many. Do you remember the words -- "you're either with me or the enemy"? Do you remember that everyone that disagreed with him was marked as unpatriotic? Do you remember all the (empty) abuse of the Level of Threat whenever Bush's proposal was in question? Those are all traits of a dictatorship, FYI, but you have some growing up to do before understanding...

The congress was rushed into making decision clearly.

The bottom line is -- we invaded a sovereign country without the UN approval, many are dead, the infrastructure is gone, for ABSOLUTELY no clear reason (proven). It was proven SH regime had nothing to do with AlQaeda, there were no WMD, absolutely nothing -- just Bush's personal wishes...a clear International Crime act and someone should be responsible.

In the past, WE organized to bring the leaders up and executed them (ex. SH, Milosevic...), therefore, the same should be applied now.

dictatorship - noun
1. A government in which a single leader or party exercises absolute control over all citizens and every aspect of their lives

Right you are, total dictatorship. That would explain why there is no single leader with total control and the government is split between multiple parties

Originally Posted by dr325i

Do you remember the words -- "you're either with me or the enemy"? Do you remember that everyone that disagreed with him was marked as unpatriotic?

Yes I do. They were part of the state of the union address in 2001 - 9 days after September 11th and were in no way referring to Iraq. He doesn't even mention Iraq in that speech except for a single reference to the first Persian Gulf War. As for unpatriotic same argument. If you didn't think we should go after Al'Qaeda in their place of residence in Afghanistan after they attacked us then you sure as hell were unpatriotic.

Originally Posted by dr325i

In the past, WE organized to bring the leaders up and executed them (ex. SH, Milosevic...), therefore, the same should be applied now.

Saddam was executed based on charges of him ordering the executions of 148 people. Bush has done nothing criminally wrong internationally or otherwise, let alone ordering executions.

Originally Posted by dr325i

The congress was rushed into making decision clearly.

You'd be amazed how long Congress can hold up/delay a bill in both houses when it wants to. Hell a single person can do it even.

Originally Posted by dr325i

The bottom line is -- we invaded a sovereign country without the UN approval, many are dead, the infrastructure is gone, for ABSOLUTELY no clear reason (proven).

The reason was self-defense which is authorized under international law. And it wasn't only the United States self defense. The UK was pretty keen that Saddam wouldn't get/keep any WMD's either.

Originally Posted by dr325i

It was proven SH regime had nothing to do with AlQaeda, there were no WMD, absolutely nothing

Hindsight is always 20/20. Did we fuck up? Probably. Did we do follow what we thought was the best course of action at the time? Absolutely.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

dictatorship - noun
1. A government in which a single leader or party exercises absolute control over all citizens and every aspect of their lives

Right you are, total dictatorship. That would explain why there is no single leader with total control and the government is split between multiple parties

Yes I do. They were part of the state of the union address in 2001 - 9 days after September 11th and were in no way referring to Iraq. He doesn't even mention Iraq in that speech except for a single reference to the first Persian Gulf War. As for unpatriotic same argument. If you didn't think we should go after Al'Qaeda in their place of residence in Afghanistan after they attacked us then you sure as hell were unpatriotic.

Saddam was executed based on charges of him ordering the executions of 148 people. Bush has done nothing criminally wrong internationally or otherwise, let alone ordering executions.

You'd be amazed how long Congress can hold up/delay a bill in both houses when it wants to. Hell a single person can do it even.

The reason was self-defense which is authorized under international law. And it wasn't only the United States self defense. The UK was pretty keen that Saddam wouldn't get/keep any WMD's either.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Did we fuck up? Probably. Did we do follow what we thought was the best course of action at the time? Absolutely.

1) You and ganeil are great of litteral translation and finding useless links. However, both of you fail to use reasoning... You know very well what I meant by the dictatorship.

2) Axis of evil -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_Evil
Two of them now have the WMD (Nukes) and we cannot touch them. Is Iran less of a threat today than in 2000? I would not think so...

2a) Afghanistan is a COMPLETELY different thing from Iraq -- their Gov't clearly supported Al Qaeda, Iraqi clearly did not. However, what we did in Afghanistan was completely insane -- we got rid of (most) of Al Qaeda and Taliban, then we gave up before finishing -- all lives lost in there and money and efforts spent -- clearly wasted...

3) SH was executed for responsibility over 148 murders. Yet, Bush told us over the years the numbers of hundreds of thousands. We could not prove that? It is easily proven that Bush's responsibility in Iraq is for way more than 148 innocent.

4) Your last comment is immature and selfish. Did we fck up -- yes, so what? I cannot comprehend how is it possible to approach country's total distruction and hundreds of thousands dead just like that. Someone HAS to be responsible for that...and also for over a trillion $$$ wasted instead of investing in my child's education and healthcare, and much more...

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by Kiwirobbie

Ah so you belong to the other 50% who don't know where Mexico is!

I'm sure he knows where Tacos come from...

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by dr325i

You know very well what I meant by the dictatorship.

Not really, do tell. I'm waiting with baited breath. Bush didn't force anyone to vote for the war, they made the decision.

Originally Posted by dr325i

over a trillion $$$ wasted instead of investing in my child's education and healthcare, and much more...

The federal government shouldn't be spending a dime on anyone's education, that's a state issue. (FAFSA loans and college things aside since they're generally interstate institutions)

Originally Posted by dr325i

SH was executed for responsibility over 148 murders. Yet, Bush told us over the years the numbers of hundreds of thousands. We could not prove that?

They got Capone on tax evasion. Does that make him any less of a mobster and all around bad guy? Does it mean he did nothing else illegal?

As for the rest of that response, my only response is this: /facepalm Not even worth responding to.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

Not really, do tell. I'm waiting with baited breath. Bush didn't force anyone to vote for the war, they made the decision.

The federal government shouldn't be spending a dime on anyone's education, that's a state issue. (FAFSA loans and college things aside since they're generally interstate institutions)

They got Capone on tax evasion. Does that make him any less of a mobster and all around bad guy? Does it mean he did nothing else illegal?

As for the rest of that response, my only response is this: /facepalm Not even worth responding to.

Again, the GOv't is not responsible (according to your little brain) for education, but they bail the banks???
WHy do I get the Fed Ed tax break for my kids, but not the Steat tax break??? I suggest you re-read the rules before posting the BS...

Capone...wow, what an empty, robotic and dumb response.

As for Bush forcing someone...of course not directly -- he simply said Either with me or you're an enemy. We have seen what he tried to do to France and Germany after not kissing his ass, but the World was much smarter...

Of course, you could not answer the most obvious and important comments above...
Maybe you should wait a few years, grow up and let your brain form its own opinions...then come back to this discussion?

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Kiwirobbie

Ah so you belong to the other 50% who don't know where Mexico is!

I was really hoping you could do better than this.

You seem like a fairly intelligent, albeit misinformed guy. I would suggest you broaden your intellectual horizons beyond Rolling Stone magazine. Who knows, you actually learn something.

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Kiwirobbie

It depends on who is supplying the misinformation, could be you, could be me, that's what the idiot used for his invasion of Iraq a whole big mess of misinformation.

Was the US (and UK, Australia, Germany, France, Israel, Poland, etc...) deceived into believing Iraq retained stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons? Yes, it is pretty clear that we were and it is just as clear that the deception was intentional on the part of Iraq.

The question is, so what? Iraq was still in breach of their obligations under the cease fire agreements (the deception itself was a violation) and that breach justified the resumption of hostilities.

I am continually amazed how many only want to discuss the past as it relates to Iraq. What about the present and the future?

The case has been made repeatedly as to what our objective is in Iraq and how that will benefit us, Iraq, and the region. It is about time those who want us to surrender put up.

Would the US be better off if we pulled our troops out of Iraq immediately? If so, how?

Would Iraq be better of if the US pulled its forces out immediately? If so, how?

Would the region be better off if the US pulled its forces out immediately? If so, how?

[e90im]

Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are scum.

Bush is an incompetent moron and crying pussy. What a loser!!!

People that still support him are right winge cult members who will follow him into shithole without critically thinking. Now, how's that for ad hominem?

[e90im]

Bush supporters, read this book…

Obedience to Authority by Stanley Milgram

http://www.amazon.com/Obedience-Auth...7839330&sr=1-1

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Again, the GOv't is not responsible (according to your little brain) for education, but they bail the banks???
WHy do I get the Fed Ed tax break for my kids, but not the Steat tax break??? I suggest you re-read the rules before posting the BS...

I didn't say that's how it is, I said that's how it should be. The whole Department of Education should be eliminated or vastly scaled down. As for bailing the bank (singular, not plural) out it was necessary. I love how you criticize the administration for not doing anything to prevent recession on one hand but when they do something to stop recession you say they shouldn't have done it.

Originally Posted by dr325i

Capone...wow, what an empty, robotic and dumb response.

If by empty, robotic and dumb you mean perfectly appropriate and a fitting analogy then you're absolutely correct.

Originally Posted by dr325i

As for Bush forcing someone...of course not directly -- he simply said Either with me or you're an enemy. We have seen what he tried to do to France and Germany after not kissing his ass, but the World was much smarter...

As I said above, that line was in reference to terrorism, Al'Qaeda and right after 9/11. It had nothing to do with Iraq.

Originally Posted by dr325i

Maybe you should wait a few years, grow up and let your brain form its own opinions...then come back to this discussion?

My opinions are my own and nobody else's. What gave you that idea? I haven't ever engaged in any copy/paste. (That I can remember) Again with the personal attacks trying to bring down the man and not his ideas. I sure sign of one with poor logic and skills in debate.

[e90im]

^ I guess he forgot "freedom fries" controversy....

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Kiwirobbie

First up it should never have happened but that's in the past, now the US has to clean up the mess they created. I really don't care how many US servicemen have to die to do it, or how much it costs, you guys made the mess now fix it.


Germany and France were against the invasion, they didn't provide troops, they didn't believe Bush's fabricated evidence they saw it for what it was a pointless war based on nothing. Howard was so far up Bush's butt he would have done almost anything the US asked (just like Tony), Rudd is completely different and I believe there will be a complete Australian pullout in the very near future. As for Poland they wanted to join NATO and want US military hardware and financial investment, it looked good for them to get involved, as for Israel they have an anti muslim/arab adjenda so will support any action against muslims/arabs plus they also have there nice large multi-billion dollar handout each year courtsey of the US taxpayer so they mostly follow the US lead.

If you are saying that Saddam should never have been allowed to deceive us and everyone else then i agree with you.

No one fabricated any evidence. Data may have been analyzed incorrectly but that does not equate with fabrication. If you believe the evidence was fabricated, you must believe that it was President Clinton who fabricated it. The evidence used in 1998 for Desert Fox was essentially the same as that which was used in 2002.

Whether France or Germany sent troops is a separate issue than whether their intelligence services believed that Iraq retained chemical and biological stockpiles. In fact a large portion of the evidence that was used came from German intelligence. If you take a look at UN Security Council Resolution 1441, you will see that it held that Iraq was in material breach of its obligations and that it was passed unanimously. France, Russia, China, (and Norway) voted for this resolution.

The debate was not about whether or not Iraq was in breach but what should be done about it. If I wanted to question the motives of world leaders as you do, I could argue that Germany, France, Russia, et al did not want to enforce the resolutions against Iraq because they were getting rich through the corruption of the Oil for Food program but I believe they acted in a way that they believed was in the best interest of their nation.

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Kiwirobbie

We can argue about this all day long, I believe that Bush snuck into the presidency on the back of dodgy deals and that the invasion of Iraq was a shame based on misinformation that the US cooked up, most of the people I know believe this as do a huge portion of the media, I'm not in the minority or a lone wolf pissing in the wind, give it a few years after the twit has gone and we'll probably know who was right and who wrong.

Relying on the crutch of, "it's what all my friends believe" is a sign of intellectual laziness. The question is, "Why do they believe it?" Is there any credible evidence to support the belief? If there is, you have failed to produce it.

Unfortunately you (like most around here) do not appreciate the difference between an argument and simple contradiction. This may help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

Was the US (and UK, Australia, Germany, France, Israel, Poland, etc...) deceived into believing Iraq retained stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons? Yes, it is pretty clear that we were and it is just as clear that the deception was intentional on the part of Iraq.

The question is, so what? Iraq was still in breach of their obligations under the cease fire agreements (the deception itself was a violation) and that breach justified the resumption of hostilities.

I am continually amazed how many only want to discuss the past as it relates to Iraq. What about the present and the future?

The case has been made repeatedly as to what our objective is in Iraq and how that will benefit us, Iraq, and the region. It is about time those who want us to surrender put up.

Would the US be better off if we pulled our troops out of Iraq immediately? If so, how?

Would Iraq be better of if the US pulled its forces out immediately? If so, how?

Would the region be better off if the US pulled its forces out immediately? If so, how?

What a fucking MORON you are, shame for this country and any civilized society. So WHAT??? Destroying whole country and directly causing violence that cost 250k innocent lives -- SO WHAT.

Sometimes I wish something would hit your own backyard so you can see --SO WHAT! But then -- there are many innocent and sensible people living too close to you...

Lunatic...

[Kiemyster]

hey... if someone on this forum can get me proper supplies, consider the job done.