Take George out of the equation.

by Thunder Rider 127 Replies latest social current

• 

  berten

  >This whole blame the president thing is getting old...

  What *is* really getting old is that people like you keep having a blind spot

  to who really *is* a danger to this world.I don't care if you really want a terrorist

  leading the "Country Of The Free" (What a sick joke),what really pisses me off with

  you people is that you support this same terrorist in his actions *outside* this country of yours.

  If you promise to keep your *bully* on your *own* grounds,then we promise not to bash your police-state "Amerika"...
• 

  imallgrowedup

  Berten -

  Thank you for proving my point!

  growedup who has just turned ears back on
• 

  Thunder Rider

  I still haven't seen one suggestion. Lots of emotional remarks and name calling, but no workable ideas.
  
  What gives, I thought you libs had all the answers.
  
  Thunder ==}>>>>>>>>>>>>
• 

  Satans little helper

  I am anti Bush and I was and am anti the war. My reasons are not just down to my belief that the war was hypocritical and immoral but because there was little thought put into the post war nation building that has been borne out by the present problems and the repeated reports of Iraqi civilians being offended by the way American troops have treated the Iraqi people leading to higher support of militants. I also think it was unwise to march into Iraq before dealing properly with Afghanistan.

  What I would have liked to see happen was the stabilisation of Afghanistan before this went further, this could have then proved to be an example of how things would be done properly, what has instead happened is that the world has been shown that Bush is not prepared to finish the job properly.

  I think that the truth behind the Iraq attack should have been presented - that Iraq was going to be an object lesson to the middle east that support of terrorism was not going to be accepted any more and that we were prepared to remodel unnacceptable regimes to a situation where they would not present us with a threat of any kind.

  The war was started on a falsehood which has rightly led to the left condemning Bush's actions but I do think that now we have to all work together to produce a democraticly led Iraq where the people have political power rather than trying to impose a puppet regime. If we successfully do ths then we will be going down the road to producing a safer world. At the moment we are fanning the flames of hatred and stirring up the hornets nest even further.

  To remedy this the US needs to be stronger on the hearts and minds war and needs to be seen to be providing the Iraqi people with democracy and a standard of living at least equal to that before the war.
• 

  blacksheep

  The war was started on a falsehood which has rightly led to the left condemning Bush's actions

  So, how do you figure that virtually other other nations believed, as did the US, that Saddam had WMD, was a clear threat, was (and that's proven) flagrantly violating the UN requirements? Only France and Russia didn't really want a war, and we now know why. They were cutting deals with Saddam, who was keeping the kickbacks from them to furnish his lavish lifestyle at the expense of feeding his people.

  but I do think that now we have to all work together to produce a democraticly led Iraq where the people have political power rather than trying to impose a puppet regime. If we successfully do ths then we will be going down the road to producing a safer world

  And how your noble proposition different from the current goals for Iraq. No one wants a puppet regime. That's certainly not the intent. The intent is to help stabilze Iraq, help them build a democracy, and turn their govenrment as quickly as is reasonably possible over to THEM.

  . At the moment we are fanning the flames of hatred and stirring up the hornets nest even further.

  To remedy this the US needs to be stronger on the hearts and minds war and needs to be seen to be providing the Iraqi people with democracy and a standard of living at least equal to that before the war.

  That's your ALTERNATIVE? We need to be "stronger on the hearts and minds war"? Exactly how do you propose to do that? Sounds good; it's always best to reach the hearts and minds of people as opposed to having to use force. But exactly HOW do propose the US do this?

  I think we ALL agreed upon the Iraqi's having a functional government that doesn't brutalize and oppress people, and we are all agreed that they should have a standard of living, I think BETTER than that before the war. It is happening. In fact, now that Saddam isn't skimming off the money from the Oil for Food program, which money was intended to FEED the children of Iraq, it should be entirely possible.

  What you are suggesting is very much aligned with what everyone wants for Iraq. You are, however, not providing clear strategic and tactical recommendations for making it happen.
• 

  Realist

  thunder,

  i listed several.
• 

  ThiChi

  Bush?s preemption Policy is right on. Go to the source. You harbor terrorists, you are next.

  Bush pointed out to CNN reporterette Suzanne Malveaux, by "internationalization" she clearly meant France and Germany - yet we have 60 nations in our coalition! What is this elitist obsession with the Paris-Berlin-Moscow Axis of Appeasement? They wanted no part of the liberation. They didn't mind the status quo of mass graves and rape rooms. So Bush isn't going to give them U.S. taxpayer dollars to rebuild the nation they willingly let Saddam Hussein rip apart. They can cooperate in other ways, but not those.

  I've got my problems with Bush on the domestic side, but when you talk about national security in view of who his opponents are and what they want to do, it's no contest. You don't need reactionaries in the White House when the national security is at stake and you've declared war on terrorism after the terrorists declared war on us. You need somebody with a proper temperament who is not engaging in politics, somebody who stays the course and does not react to every little bit of criticism - be it from his own team or not. I think this is a great illustration that we have a man with the exact, correct, right temperament to be occupying the office at this time, given the challenges that we face.
• 

  blacksheep

  Let's see, Realist, here is your list:

  how about he invaded a country that had nothing to do with terrorism? removing a guy who had the religious nuts pretty well under control.

  Ah, I see. We shoulda kept Sadam in power. At least he kept control. Yeah, that's a big plus with totalitarian, murderous dictatorships. They maintain control, because people fear for their lives. They know if they step out of line they and their families will get tortured or murdered. Yes, indeed, a constructive solution!

  how about putting pressure on the currupt regimes in the arab world to oust terrorists? saudi arabia, kuwait, egypt,...

  "Putting pressure," how? And, that's been precisely what's been done. It's hasn't worked. They haven't taken the US seriously since we've shown time and again with wimpy presidents that we cave. The whole Iran hostage situation that Carter utterly bungled was the beginning of their seeing we barked but won't bite.

  how about putting pressure on israel to give the land back to the palestinians? war was declared on iraq 10 years ago for occupying kuwait...israel has occupied the palestinian terrotories 30 years ago...and the US has blocked all UN resolutions that condemed israel for it.

  Again, the "putting pressure" word. What are you talking about? If you want to get THAT far BACK, the Israelis occupied Palestine thousands of years ago. So what? Maybe if Jews didn't encounter such abject prejudice and persecution in Europe, there wouldn't be a need for them to find a place to call home. I guess they shouldn't take Hitler murdering millions of them so personally. The vast majority of Jews today live in the US. Wonder why.

  how about helping these countries to develop instead of letting them slip deeper in poverty?

  Well, good idea...we're all in favor of that. But you just said your good buddy Sadam kept control. And on the flip side, he was getting kickbacks from other countries in the oil for food program; money that was intended to purchase food for his people. Even when we've HAD those great programs, totalitarian leaders and corrupt governments (i.e. France, Russia) have taken food away from people.

  That's the best you can come up with??
• 

  blacksheep

  They didn't mind the status quo of mass graves and rape rooms. So Bush isn't going to give them U.S. taxpayer dollars to rebuild the nation they willingly let Saddam Hussein rip apart.

  Of course not! They were getting too many financial incentives in the corrupt, UN sponsored Oil for Food Program. Okay, so he's a brutal, murderous dictator. Nobody's perfect.
• 

  ThiChi

  One of the big falsehoods arround here is that "Terrorists had nothing to do with Iraq." Simply not true.

  Frankly, I don't give a damn if we have the evidence or not, but here's more evidence if you want it - and from a noteworthy source. The Observer is part of the Guardian newspaper chain in the UK - no conservative bunch. With that said, it's even more unbelievable that this story somehow remains sequestered. It's amazing that this story didn't get picked up by the U.S. press. It would silence liberals who are demanding the president show a "link" between 9/11 and Saddam. The paper reports that the CIA and FBI know all about this, which is interesting since both agencies claim they don't. Rose reports on the meeting between that leading Iraqi colonel who Mohammed Atta flew halfway across the world to meet in Prague in April 2001, and writes, "Evidence is mounting that this meeting was not an isolated event." Evidence was mounting last November, so imagine how much we have now. The Observer reports that Atta's meetings were "only one of several apparent links between Iraq, the September 11th hijackers and Al-Qaeda." Rose further reports about training camps in Iraq and eastern Turkey ?? specifically the 707 fuselage where Saddam trains Al-Qaeda hijackers. Rose has three independent sources for these reports. An UNSCOM member is quoted as saying that Iraq "presents a long time strategic threat," but that the U.S. is bad at recognizing those. This information is all out there. You appeasers can either have the guts to admit what you're seeing, or you can turn away as you did in the 1930s ?? and wait for the bodies to pile up.

  If you do a search, I have posted other links to credible eyewitness accounts of the training camps in Iraq that trained non-Iraq Terrorists in Iraq.....