Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq? (page 3)

sonofapreacherman

<<< Simply put, Clinton sent troops into Somolia and because of poor planning, some of them were slaughtered.>>>

Bottom line is you gotta look after them somolians (not to mention the clams, greenbacks and all other types of mulah).

This is all so silly. You are taking sound bites and turning (churning) them into some lumpy concoction. Please read some intelligent analysis of the global situation. I recommend Ideas that Conquered the World. You'll find that liberal democracy will be the only global arena for peace and economic growth. You'll find that communism is not the same duck in Cuba as in China. AND BTW didn't America send a little boy home to Cuba because that's where his father was living? I prefer the atheism, but then I'm free to prefer it. In China as in Cuba plenty of people practice religion w/o adverse affects. Try practising Catholicism in an Islamic country. Shoot you won't even be allowed to have a Christmas tree.

"Daddy, why aren't you fighting for freedom and liberal democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan?"

"Well , honey you must realize by now that Daddy is a coward."

"What's a coward Daddy?"

"It's a good man who stands for nothing."

ThiChi

lol Panda...sooo true

This is worth re-posting:

I would remind all of you that the administration gave many reasons given for kicking out Saddam. It started out as WMD, then to the Al-Qaeda ties, regime change and democratizing the region. But we also know we had 17 UN resolutions, including 1441, that said Iraq had failed to disarm and would face "serious consequences" if it didn't come clean instantly.

Critics ignore uncomfortable facts such as this from President Bush's speech to the United Nations on September 12, 2002. Bush mentions weapons of mass destruction briefly, and then cites Iraq's support for terrorism, its persecution of civilians, its failure to obey Security Council resolutions, "release or account for all Gulf War personnel," return the remains and return stolen property, "accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues, as required by Security Council resolutions." Bush cited the Oil for Food program, which turned out to be Kofi Annan's private Enron.

heathen

Daddy, what does the US constitution say about sending troops into other countries as a liberating force?

Son, the US constitution says the military may not be used as a mercenary militia .

Daddy, But GWjr. says we went to Iraq to liberate the Iraqui people from an oppressive regime.

Son , I told you before that God talks to GWjr.

Daddy , WTF are you talking about?

Son , don't use that language with me or I'll beat the hell outta ya. Now shuddup and get some sleep.

talesin

TaiChi

Yes, you are correct. I guess that's why the UN doesn't support this invasion.

Cause there was NO IMMINENT DANGER, and WoMD were not an issue.

I note that you are not addressing the issue of 4,000 bodies as opposed to 300,000 estimated (?)

tal

blacksheep

Daddy, Why did planes crash into the WTC on 9/11?

blacksheep

Daddy: Why did planes crash into the WTC on 9/11?

ThiChi

""I note that you are not addressing the issue of 4,000 bodies as opposed to 300,000 estimated (?)""

The issue is, did Bush only speak of WMDs for the reason of war with Iraq, as some here paint it. Again, the Hate US first crowd, appeasers and the Red Diaper Doper Babies are wrong...

One thing is for certain, the numbers vary. I want to give this aspect more time. Whatever the numbers prove to be, it is atrocious. True?

The UN, i.e., Germany and France, had a good thing going.. $$$ business with the Dictator.....

Realist

panda,

i notice you are at your computer instead of fighting these evil evil arabs! you should be ashamed of yourself!

besides NOT fighting for a rediculous lie is more honorable than being so stupid as to not see what the US gov is really doing.

thichi,

does it really make things a lot better that bush had more than just one lie to present to the public?

NO wmds, NO terrorist links and 4000 is not 300.000!

the US killed more than 4000 people in iraq...so can we officially call bush a mass murder now?

also same as to panda....why are you not fighting in first line you hero?!

Crazy151drinker

Daddy, who was Pol Pot?

He was this commie in Cambodia

Daddy, did he do bad things?

Naahhh, he just systimaticly starved 1,000,000 people.

Daddy, why didnt we stop him?

We had a pansy president.

Daddy, whats Rwanda?

This dump in Africa

Daddy, is it a nice place?

Naahhh 800,000 peole died in a couple of months.

Daddy, were they sick?

No dear, they were hacked up with axes and knifes

Daddy, why didnt we stop them?

We had a pansy president.

Daddy, who is Bin Ladin?

This really bad man who wants to kill all of us

Daddy, are we going to stop him?

Were trying dear, we had a chance but we blew it.

Daddy, why did we blow it?

We had a pansy president.

Daddy, why do we have pansy presidents?

Because like Liberals, they dont have any balls.

Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?

Share this