NationStates Jolt Archive

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

i know i do! because afetr a president is elected to a second term nothing short of assination will get em' out

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

It's the American waaaay.

just kidding ;-).

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

Until it gets close to Election '08 if Bush wins '04. However, if some sort of extreme law is trying to be passed, throw your arguments up against it, but if Bush is re-elected, he is going to assume he has the full support of the American people and ignore our voice when it comes to (drops the F-bomb)ing up our foreign relations so our complaints about war by then will only dishearten the troops.

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

Until it gets close to Election '08 if Bush wins '04. However, if some sort of extreme law is trying to be passed, throw your arguments up against it, but if Bush is re-elected, he is going to assume he has the full support of the American people and ignore our voice when it comes to (drops the F-bomb)ing up our foreign relations so our complaints about war by then will only dishearten the troops.

As long as we can retake Congress and/or the Senate, we might be able to survive Bush being re-elected.

There's always impeachment

Remeber that if he gets a second term, he wont be able to have another one , so at least that will be his last term

There's always impeachment

We mustn't sink to their level and do what the Republican Congress did to Clinton in his second term. We must get past bi-partisanship and continue to run the country. But when Bush wants to bring into law such things as the Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage, we must stand firm and defeat the Bill.

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

i know i do! because afetr a president is elected to a second term nothing short of assination will get em' out

I'd gladly assassinate him. Just give me a gun and a location and I'm there...

Oh wait. I believe in gun control. (damn).

I'd still stab his worthless heart out. I bet that would make him happy. Going to Jesus 3 decades early. Unless of course you weird religious people consider that "cheating" into the afterlife.

And the secret service is on the way....

Great, Presidnet Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

And the secret service is on the way....

My original response to this included a whole bunch more of delicious ideas I have to wreak upon [bad people]. Well, I promise I won't be anywhere near the Republican Convention this August.

But if anyone from Al Quada is reading this... Pretty pretty please?

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.


I think that seriously undermines our right to represent ourselves in government. If that sonofabitch wins again, we shouldn't just give him carte blanche do to whatever he wants! That's a pretty ridiculous suggestion in fact.

Especially for the troops' sake. I don't know why everyone is so concerned with them maybe hearing that we aren't happy with what the president is making them do. Is single-mindedness necessary for a military? Is democracy bad for war? Maybe we have to reprioritise then. Which is more important, our freedom or the war? Also, do you know what those soldiers do over there? They do awful things. Sure they do some good things too, but they are over there fighting a war, which means killing, which isn't something to take lightly or to write off simply because the president got elected again - I for one don't agree with this mindless, unconditional support for the military. Our side isn't always the "good guys."

it is sad to see a nation fall
sad to know the end is ni and not know what to do
the fearful will run and hide
the brave will put up a fight and die
of those that do what is needed great men have been forged

of those i know some say this is but a passing phase
but i see into the truth

this is the beginning of the end
there may come a calm before the storm
but when it hits it will unleash the deludge
and all will perish in its path

may you all make merry and find some peace, pray the be dead before the end

But when Bush wants to bring into law such things as the Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage, we must stand firm and defeat the Bill.

You do know that the president has nothing to do with Consitutional Ammendments, right? That's all the Congress and the States.

Great, Presidnet Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

Mmm....speaking of F-bombs...

Anyone good at drawing? I had an excellent idea for a political cartoon, but I can't draw worth doodley...
Anyway, it goes something like this...Bush, would be on one side, with a cowboy hat, his big ears, nose, etc, w/e all cartoonized, and he'd be holding a bible, but it'd wouldn't be majorily noticeable. On the other side, a guy that looks very intelligent, with a lab coat on and a disgruntled look on his face. Speech bubble over scientist (higher up as he speaks first), "But Mr. President, Stem Cell research could save lives!!" Speech bubble over Bush "F*** off." (Oh, and Bush's speech bubble would be shaped like a bomb...) (And yes, I know Bush didn't drop the F-bomb, but the point is, if you think about it, that seems like a good response for the Bush admin to use instead of trying to come up with lies (like that scene in F9/11 at his ranch...))

But when Bush wants to bring into law such things as the Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage, we must stand firm and defeat the Bill.

You do know that the president has nothing to do with Consitutional Ammendments, right? That's all the Congress and the States.

That makes it okay for the President of the United States to be uneducated in American Civics? (As opposed to Honda Civics, hehe) I don't think so. Besides, this is the George W. Bush that in 2000 said "There ought to be limits to freedom" in response to a website, www.gwbush.com (it's down for right now), that criticized him. :? :?

I think that seriously undermines our right to represent ourselves in government. If that sonofabitch wins again, we shouldn't just give him carte blanche do to whatever he wants! That's a pretty ridiculous suggestion in fact.

Especially for the troops' sake. I don't know why everyone is so concerned with them maybe hearing that we aren't happy with what the president is making them do. Is single-mindedness necessary for a military? Is democracy bad for war? Maybe we have to reprioritise then. Which is more important, our freedom or the war? Also, do you know what those soldiers do over there? They do awful things. Sure they do some good things too, but they are over there fighting a war, which means killing, which isn't something to take lightly or to write off simply because the president got elected again - I for one don't agree with this mindless, unconditional support for the military. Our side isn't always the "good guys."

Please don't post here again as you clearly did not fully understand my post.

Remeber that if he gets a second term, he wont be able to have another one , so at least that will be his last term

Well, YE-ES...and NO-O...maybe.
True, the man HIMSELF will be gone, however there's the question of "who will replace him?".
All those people who threaten that "It was Bush jr., then it'll be Jeb for 2008, then Jeb again 2012" are really something to worry about, in my opinion.

You say "assassination". Well, you'll need more than that.
As with any weed (Bush?) you'll need to do more than kill the flowers - you need to take out the roots, too.
There are some who refuse to see the light, as it were.
And that's their business. But there are some who can be shown, and do see for themselves. This is one place to start, and has been started on
(any number of anti Bush websites have sprung up, some of which
even make for good reading), but only YOU can vote him out or, if you don't live in America, only YOU can tell the government that you disagree with him).

But when Bush wants to bring into law such things as the Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage, we must stand firm and defeat the Bill.You do know that the president has nothing to do with Consitutional Ammendments, right? That's all the Congress and the States.That makes it okay for the President of the United States to be uneducated in American Civics?

No, of course not. However, all he said was that he was in favor of such an Ammendment, not that he would ram one through or anything like that.

Besides, this is the George W. Bush that in 2000 said "There ought to be limits to freedom" in response to a website, www.gwbush.com (it's down for right now), that criticized him. :? :?

And that is germain to a discussion on Constitutional Ammendments, how?

That and also Bush isn't THE ONLY one in the Republicans; the rest of them - and their influences - well and truly have to be gotten rid of, too.

And finally - and most importantly - we must learn from this.
When I say "we", I mean "the world". Learn that, just because a powerful figure says something enough times doesn't mean that it's true.
I know that this argument can be used both (many) ways, but still,
it certainly holds true here, in my opinion.

Great, Presidnet Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

Mmm....speaking of F-bombs...

Anyone good at drawing? I had an excellent idea for a political cartoon, but I can't draw worth doodley...
Anyway, it goes something like this...Bush, would be on one side, with a cowboy hat, his big ears, nose, etc, w/e all cartoonized, and he'd be holding a bible, but it'd wouldn't be majorily noticeable. On the other side, a guy that looks very intelligent, with a lab coat on and a disgruntled look on his face. Speech bubble over scientist (higher up as he speaks first), "But Mr. President, Stem Cell research could save lives!!" Speech bubble over Bush "F*** off." (Oh, and Bush's speech bubble would be shaped like a bomb...) (And yes, I know Bush didn't drop the F-bomb, but the point is, if you think about it, that seems like a good response for the Bush admin to use instead of trying to come up with lies (like that scene in F9/11 at his ranch...))

got a couple of good ones

hey when is a president not a president?
give up: when he is not elected nor educated nor the actual brains of the opperation

basicly when he lies, cheats, and steals.

got a million of em

Please don't post here again as you clearly did not fully understand my post.

Don't post here again?

I didn't think you'd be THAT eager to show your support for suppression of free expression.

You aint the boss! So sit yo punk ace down and shut up. Everyone has an opinion, even if it makes now sense at all. o.O

http://aimforsaken.250free.com/seph.gif

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope.

i'm not going to compromise myself just because bush dragged these people into a war. i want them back home. i'm not going to tell them to keep fighting for something that i don't believe in. damn right they need hope, but not hope that we get our hands on some oil. hope that we can end this bullshit. i guess what im trying to say, is that you shouldnt waive your free speech just because bush wins.. in fact, you should do the opposite.

i'm not going to compromise myself just because bush dragged these people into a war. i want them back home. i'm not going to tell them to keep fighting for something that i don't believe in. damn right they need hope, but not hope that we get our hands on some oil. hope that we can end this bullshit. i guess what im trying to say, is that you shouldnt waive your free speech just because bush wins.. in fact, you should do the opposite.

Ah ah, you didn't understand his post. He's the boss of this thread! No more posting for you!!

Besides, this is the George W. Bush that in 2000 said "There ought to be limits to freedom" in response to a website, www.gwbush.com (it's down for right now), that criticized him. :? :?

And that is germain to a discussion on Constitutional Ammendments, how?

Ammendment 1

Ah ah, you didn't understand his post. He's the boss of this thread! No more posting for you!!

Yea, actually, I like it when people understand previous posts before posting...there should be an IQ test given to people around the world annually. People dumber than me should be killed. There'd be less then 100,00 people in the world, if that...

i'm not going to compromise myself just because bush dragged these people into a war. i want them back home. i'm not going to tell them to keep fighting for something that i don't believe in. damn right they need hope, but not hope that we get our hands on some oil. hope that we can end this bullshit. i guess what im trying to say, is that you shouldnt waive your free speech just because bush wins.. in fact, you should do the opposite.

Suppose those soldiers believe in it? Are you going to tell them to stop fighting just because you don't like it?

so if we fail, you want us to give up?

If you fail, then you have to accept that he won the election and is our leader. That is how the peaceful exchange of power works. You can oppose his policies, but he is there fair and square.

There's always impeachment

Impeachment is not a recall. It also doesn't get a president out of office. It just brings up charges against him, and unless you can prove that he committed and actual crime then you are SOL.

We mustn't sink to their level and do what the Republican Congress did to Clinton in his second term. We must get past bi-partisanship and continue to run the country. But when Bush wants to bring into law such things as the Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage, we must stand firm and defeat the Bill.

So we shouldn't try a man for purjury? If Bush commits an actual crime, then he must be tried for it. Clinton was thought to have lied under oath, that is an actual crime. He was thusly impeached because of it. By the way, an amendment on gay marrige would not be done by the president, he would just help to start the process.

I'd gladly assassinate him. Just give me a gun and a location and I'm there...

Oh wait. I believe in gun control. (damn).

I'd still stab his worthless heart out. I bet that would make him happy. Going to Jesus 3 decades early. Unless of course you weird religious people consider that "cheating" into the afterlife.

Ok, that is just wrong, and a federal crime to boot. In fact, I can't think of anything else I can say that could possibly describe my feelings on that post.

Remeber that if he gets a second term, he wont be able to have another one , so at least that will be his last term

Well, YE-ES...and NO-O...maybe.
True, the man HIMSELF will be gone, however there's the question of "who will replace him?".
All those people who threaten that "It was Bush jr., then it'll be Jeb for 2008, then Jeb again 2012" are really something to worry about, in my opinion.

You say "assassination". Well, you'll need more than that.
As with any weed (Bush?) you'll need to do more than kill the flowers - you need to take out the roots, too.
There are some who refuse to see the light, as it were.
And that's their business. But there are some who can be shown, and do see for themselves. This is one place to start, and has been started on
(any number of anti Bush websites have sprung up, some of which
even make for good reading), but only YOU can vote him out or, if you don't live in America, only YOU can tell the government that you disagree with him).

Well, something tells me that you won't be getting a good chunk of the population. Granted you only need a slight majority, but the Dems can't win withou majority black and latino support. And, John Kerry is no Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton was at least likeable...Kerry is a tougher sell. You make fun of the Bush....Kerry is a political cartoonists dream candidate.

i'm not going to compromise myself just because bush dragged these people into a war. i want them back home. i'm not going to tell them to keep fighting for something that i don't believe in. damn right they need hope, but not hope that we get our hands on some oil. hope that we can end this bullshit. i guess what im trying to say, is that you shouldnt waive your free speech just because bush wins.. in fact, you should do the opposite.

What the guy means is that you shouldn't whine about it. Also, soldiers are not supposed to question their orders. The military is not just another job, it is a path of servitude to your country. You don't join and not accept the possibility that you might go to war. They are supposed to keep fighting reguardless of their beliefs, the military doesn't get the same priveleges that we do. If they disagree with a war, they shouldn't have joined the military in the first place. Their job is to fight, not question. The least you can do is say that they are doing a good job. It isn't like they have a choice. Not to mention that they shouldn't.

Not to mention...in F9/11, the Marine Corporal that said he'd go to jail before going back to Iraq, I have absolutely no respect for him. Like Omni is saying, the military is not just another job. The military is a way of life, and if that Marine doesn't go back, someone else will have to go. It's not like they'll just run the Op one man short. Someone else will have to go die for him because he is not man enough to stand up to his commitment. I'm not a Right-winger guised as a Left-winger. I'm a left-winger with rationality.

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.

There are times when insubordination is neccisary. Servitude to the country and servitude to the president are two entirely different things.

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.

There are times when insubordination is neccisary. Servitude to the country and servitude to the president are two entirely different things.

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.

There are times when insubordination is neccisary. Servitude to the country and servitude to the president are two entirely different things.

Not in the military. The President is also known as the Commander-in-Chief for a reason.

I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.

There are times when insubordination is neccisary. Servitude to the country and servitude to the president are two entirely different things.

Actually, soldiers swear an oath to serve both. They are the same thing. Your president is you commander-in-chief. You serve him because he is the leader of the country. Insubordination is contrapositive to a functioning military.

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)


Typical you call any opinion different then yours crap.
I happen to be an AntiBush person.
I voted for Bush the first time, and now I have reaped the fruit of that mistake.
Then I see people like you and remember why I voted for someone like Bush.

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.

There are times when insubordination is neccisary. Servitude to the country and servitude to the president are two entirely different things.

Not in the military. The President is also known as the Commander-in-Chief for a reason.

I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Interesting quote.

But the problem is, this.

"I will DEFEND the Contsitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

Where in that oath does it say "I will attack soveriegn nations without just cuase."?

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.

There are times when insubordination is neccisary. Servitude to the country and servitude to the president are two entirely different things.

Not in the military. The President is also known as the Commander-in-Chief for a reason.

I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.So what is a soldier to do if he's given an order by the President that is plainly unconstitutional? Hypothetically speaking of course--I'm not suggesting that has happened yet or is going to any time soon--just asking what if?

Say, for instance, that a power-mad president realized he was about to lose his bid for re-election and ordered the military to close down polling places in areas where he was going to do poorly. Could a soldier legitimately follow that order? Or would he be duty-bound to follow it?

got a couple of good ones

hey when is a president not a president?
give up: when he is not elected nor educated nor the actual brains of the opperation

basicly when he lies, cheats, and steals.

got a million of em


I'd vastly prefer Eddie Guerrero over Bush as President any day.

8)

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)


Typical you call any opinion different then yours crap.
I happen to be an AntiBush person.
I voted for Bush the first time, and now I have reaped the fruit of that mistake.
Then I see people like you and remember why I voted for someone like Bush.

Opinions different than mine are crap? Did I say that? Did I even imply that? What was meant to be implied, if you were intelligent enough to figure it out, is that off-topic posts are a bunch of crap in forums. So please, take your off-topic crap and find a new thread. I am tired off off-topic posts in threads. Too often threads get turned into rants and rants and rants and they end up discussing why gay people suck, or why Christianity is wrong, or why Bush is wrong, or whatever. Completely stray from topic. I've never seen a forum that had so many threads stray from topic as much as this forum. I'm trying to keep this discussion on topic, and I'm not sure how non-anti-Bushers could contribute to the topic...however, if they have a contributing opinion, they should feel free to post it.

So what is a soldier to do if he's given an order by the President that is plainly unconstitutional? Hypothetically speaking of course--I'm not suggesting that has happened yet or is going to any time soon--just asking what if?

Say, for instance, that a power-mad president realized he was about to lose his bid for re-election and ordered the military to close down polling places in areas where he was going to do poorly. Could a soldier legitimately follow that order? Or would he be duty-bound to follow it?

Well, normally soldiers don't receive orders directly from the president, but in a case such as that, you would not be obligated to follow that order.

So what is a soldier to do if he's given an order by the President that is plainly unconstitutional? Hypothetically speaking of course--I'm not suggesting that has happened yet or is going to any time soon--just asking what if?

Say, for instance, that a power-mad president realized he was about to lose his bid for re-election and ordered the military to close down polling places in areas where he was going to do poorly. Could a soldier legitimately follow that order? Or would he be duty-bound to follow it?

Well, normally soldiers don't receive orders directly from the president, but in a case such as that, you would not be obligated to follow that order.

He's obligated to follow lawful orders. Anything that isn't a lawful order, he as the moral authority to disobey it!

I think that seriously undermines our right to represent ourselves in government. If that sonofabitch wins again, we shouldn't just give him carte blanche do to whatever he wants! That's a pretty ridiculous suggestion in fact.

Especially for the troops' sake. I don't know why everyone is so concerned with them maybe hearing that we aren't happy with what the president is making them do. Is single-mindedness necessary for a military? Is democracy bad for war? Maybe we have to reprioritise then. Which is more important, our freedom or the war? Also, do you know what those soldiers do over there? They do awful things. Sure they do some good things too, but they are over there fighting a war, which means killing, which isn't something to take lightly or to write off simply because the president got elected again - I for one don't agree with this mindless, unconditional support for the military. Our side isn't always the "good guys."

Please don't post here again as you clearly did not fully understand my post.
Translation: Only post here if you Fully agree with me :roll:

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one.
You are not supossed to disagree in HIS thread...WTF were you thinking? :lol:

Great, President Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

only as many as gets him more oil... :roll:

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)


Typical you call any opinion different then yours crap.
I happen to be an AntiBush person.
I voted for Bush the first time, and now I have reaped the fruit of that mistake.
Then I see people like you and remember why I voted for someone like Bush.

Opinions different than mine are crap? Did I say that? Did I even imply that? What was meant to be implied, if you were intelligent enough to figure it out, is that off-topic posts are a bunch of crap in forums. So please, take your off-topic crap and find a new thread. I am tired off off-topic posts in threads. Too often threads get turned into rants and rants and rants and they end up discussing why gay people suck, or why Christianity is wrong, or why Bush is wrong, or whatever. Completely stray from topic. I've never seen a forum that had so many threads stray from topic as much as this forum. I'm trying to keep this discussion on topic, and I'm not sure how non-anti-Bushers could contribute to the topic...however, if they have a contributing opinion, they should feel free to post it.
I believe the name of this thread is A plead to Anti-Bushers of which I am one. Not liking Bush does not mean liking someone who plainly stated other opinions different then his are unwelcomed crap, then tries to back peddle with some ridiculous line about what you were infering at least have the balls to stand by what you said.

I think if Bush is reelected (God help us all), we should just learn to live with it. However, I do not support the war at all, and I will never accept it. I honor the soldiers in their bravery and support of their country, but the act of sending them into Iraq just ensures unnecessary death. Some of the Iraqi people will no doubt feel intimidated by our presence, and as a result will attack our troops. Wouldn't you feel intimidated if you were an Iraqi and there were American soldiers scrambling about looking for anti-Americans? I still don't understand why we're in there. There's no trace of WMDs, and the Iraqi people can't attack us. We've already got Saddam...so what are we doing? I remember in F9/11, a soldier wrote home saying "I don't even understand why we're here. I can't wait until I go home". If the very troops who follow your orders don't even understand why they're there, something's not right.

I think if Bush is reelected (God help us all), we should just learn to live with it. However, I do not support the war at all, and I will never accept it. I honor the soldiers in their bravery and support of their country, but the act of sending them into Iraq just ensures unnecessary death. Some of the Iraqi people will no doubt feel intimidated by our presence, and as a result will attack our troops. Wouldn't you feel intimidated if you were an Iraqi and there were American soldiers scrambling about looking for anti-Americans? I still don't understand why we're in there. There's no trace of WMDs, and the Iraqi people can't attack us. We've already got Saddam...so what are we doing? I remember in F9/11, a soldier wrote home saying "I don't even understand why we're here. I can't wait until I go home". If the very troops who follow your orders don't even understand why they're there, something's not right.no we should NOT just lern to live with it--we should REVOLT

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.

About time some one cared about more than a little money. I do agree with bush on alot of things but nothing bugs me more than to have to read a bunch or negative comment about our troops. I hate it when people cannot except my views and tryt and force their onto me with all this "bush sucks" crap give it a rest save your energy for the elctions. :?

I think if Bush is reelected (God help us all), we should just learn to live with it. However, I do not support the war at all, and I will never accept it. I honor the soldiers in their bravery and support of their country, but the act of sending them into Iraq just ensures unnecessary death. Some of the Iraqi people will no doubt feel intimidated by our presence, and as a result will attack our troops. Wouldn't you feel intimidated if you were an Iraqi and there were American soldiers scrambling about looking for anti-Americans? I still don't understand why we're in there. There's no trace of WMDs, and the Iraqi people can't attack us. We've already got Saddam...so what are we doing? I remember in F9/11, a soldier wrote home saying "I don't even understand why we're here. I can't wait until I go home". If the very troops who follow your orders don't even understand why they're there, something's not right.no we should NOT just lern to live with it--we should REVOLT

Why? Just becuase you dont agree with the majority? Then move someplace that isn't a democracy. Alot of people agree with president Bush and will vote. He is an Elected leader our people elected him if you disagree with him take it to the polls cuase alot of us dont wanna here you insults and bigoting. :?

Great, President Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

only as many as gets him more oil... :roll:

Why do so many people think its for DAMN oil. Oil is not worth the death of hundreds of troops and distruction of millions of dollers of equipment. Iraq is not about oil becuase even if we were to pump it all out it would not be able to pay for the war. Besides I believe the president gets payed a good sum of money already correct? So why would he try and get oil to sell? Greed is a powerful thing yes..but with all the president gets such as large pay check and a free stay at the white house for a couple years would be enough to quench just about any ones greed.

Great, President Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

only as many as gets him more oil... :roll:

Why do so many people think its for DAMN oil. Oil is not worth the death of hundreds of troops and distruction of millions of dollers of equipment. Iraq is not about oil becuase even if we were to pump it all out it would not be able to pay for the war. Besides I believe the president gets payed a good sum of money already correct? So why would he try and get oil to sell? Greed is a powerful thing yes..but with all the president gets such as large pay check and a free stay at the white house for a couple years would be enough to quench just about any ones greed.Greed isn't about what you have, its about what you can get. You don't get less greedy when you have more, it just doesn't work like that.

Great, President Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

only as many as gets him more oil... :roll:

Why do so many people think its for DAMN oil. Oil is not worth the death of hundreds of troops and distruction of millions of dollers of equipment. Iraq is not about oil becuase even if we were to pump it all out it would not be able to pay for the war. Besides I believe the president gets payed a good sum of money already correct? So why would he try and get oil to sell? Greed is a powerful thing yes..but with all the president gets such as large pay check and a free stay at the white house for a couple years would be enough to quench just about any ones greed.Greed isn't about what you have, its about what you can get. You don't get less greedy when you have more, it just doesn't work like that.

Works with me. :twisted:

Great, President Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

only as many as gets him more oil... :roll:

Why do so many people think its for DAMN oil. Oil is not worth the death of hundreds of troops and distruction of millions of dollers of equipment. Iraq is not about oil becuase even if we were to pump it all out it would not be able to pay for the war. Besides I believe the president gets payed a good sum of money already correct? So why would he try and get oil to sell? Greed is a powerful thing yes..but with all the president gets such as large pay check and a free stay at the white house for a couple years would be enough to quench just about any ones greed.

Why exactly ARE we in Iraq? I mean, we're not doing the Iraqi people any good, and like I already said, they're not gonna plot an attack against us. I recommend that everyone go to www.costofwar.com The methods of calculation used can be found on the site.

Great, President Dick Cheney. Wonder how many F-bombs he'll drop once he's in the highest office.....

only as many as gets him more oil... :roll:

Why do so many people think its for DAMN oil. Oil is not worth the death of hundreds of troops and distruction of millions of dollers of equipment. Iraq is not about oil becuase even if we were to pump it all out it would not be able to pay for the war. Besides I believe the president gets payed a good sum of money already correct? So why would he try and get oil to sell? Greed is a powerful thing yes..but with all the president gets such as large pay check and a free stay at the white house for a couple years would be enough to quench just about any ones greed.

Why exactly ARE we in Iraq? I mean, we're not doing the Iraqi people any good, and like I already said, they're not gonna plot an attack against us. I recommend that everyone go to www.costofwar.com The methods of calculation used can be found on the site.

To oust a tyrannical dictator that has abused his countrymen and to rid the world of a supporter of terror! That is the reason we are there and we are succeeding. Yes, we still have attacks going on, but they are from foreigners. Iraqis do want us there. They don't like us occupying no, but that will change drastically on June 30,2004 when soveriegnty is given to the interm Government! We won't have a say in how they run things. That is why we are over there! (hurry home daddy! Love and miss you)

ignore me

To oust a tyrannical dictator that has abused his countrymen and to rid the world of a supporter of terror! That is the reason we are there and we are succeeding. Yes, we still have attacks going on, but they are from foreigners. Iraqis do want us there. They don't like us occupying no, but that will change drastically on June 30,2004 when soveriegnty is given to the interm Government! We won't have a say in how they run things. That is why we are over there! (hurry home daddy! Love and miss you)

1) that was NOT the reason for going in: to oust saddam OR to get rid ofa supporter of terror
2) and hye captain inobvious, we have NO proof that saddam supported INTERNATIONAL terror, and if we were going to take out a supporter of terror, maybe we should have gone after sudan, you know the country that outrightsupports al-quieda, the country iraqi officials went ot to meet with al-quieda officials about things under pressure from the sudanese government

and pray tell what we are succeeding at? eliminating terrorism? international terrorism has increased since we started the "war on terror"


and iraqis dont want us there more and more, 80%+ of the coutnry think we are occupiers and want us out, and that we are causing more problems than occurred under saddam

we wont have a say in how they run things? we appointed the whole council of people and we will still control all troops and make decisions for them

2) and hye captain inobvious, we have NO proof that saddam supported INTERNATIONAL terror, and if we were going to take out a supporter of terror, maybe we should have gone after sudan, you know the country that outrightsupports al-quieda, the country iraqi officials went ot to meet with al-quieda officials about things under pressure from the sudanese government

and pray tell what we are succeeding at? eliminating terrorism? international terrorism has increased since we started the "war on terror"


Let's see: I believe since al-Qaeda are international terrorists, and iraqi officials met with them, they wouldn't be doing so just for a friendly visit.

It also seems to me that the "war on terror" was kicked off by them attacking the US, and I don't recall any terror incidents in the US since then.

To oust a tyrannical dictator that has abused his countrymen and to rid the world of a supporter of terror! That is the reason we are there and we are succeeding. Yes, we still have attacks going on, but they are from foreigners. Iraqis do want us there. They don't like us occupying no, but that will change drastically on June 30,2004 when soveriegnty is given to the interm Government! We won't have a say in how they run things. That is why we are over there! (hurry home daddy! Love and miss you)

1) that was NOT the reason for going in: to oust saddam OR to get rid ofa supporter of terror
2) and hye captain inobvious, we have NO proof that saddam supported INTERNATIONAL terror, and if we were going to take out a supporter of terror, maybe we should have gone after sudan, you know the country that outrightsupports al-quieda, the country iraqi officials went ot to meet with al-quieda officials about things under pressure from the sudanese government

and pray tell what we are succeeding at? eliminating terrorism? international terrorism has increased since we started the "war on terror"


and iraqis dont want us there more and more, 80%+ of the coutnry think we are occupiers and want us out, and that we are causing more problems than occurred under saddam

we wont have a say in how they run things? we appointed the whole council of people and we will still control all troops and make decisions for them

Lets see, Money to Suicide Bombers of Hamas. Yep no terror supporting there. I never said international Terrorism did I? No I said a Supporter of Terror which he has throughout the Middle East.

As for being inobvious, your the one that didn't know that. As for the polls yes they do think that. Didn't say we weren't! We were for a time but that is changing and will change on June 30, 2004! Then Iraq will be on their own!

As for increasing terror, remember that terrorists started this whole affair when they KILLED THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE ON AMERICAN SOIL!!! We struk back as we should have. Of course Terror Increased! We have them up against a damn wall. When you cornor an enemy they are going to fight viciously or havent you read what the Japanese did at the End of WWII with Kamakaze planes! They knew they were beat so the lashed out! Still lost but still lashed out! Samething here. They are trapped and they are lashing out! It was inevitable! They are trying to change government minds and they did in Spain and now Spain is regarded as a coward in the face of Terror because the fled Iraq when 3/11 happened which caused an upset in their elections! Terrorists started this fight and now they are paying a steep price for starting this fight.

We went in to remove a major threat to the Middle East who was blatantly supporting terror. If you think there is no evidence supporting the fact that Sadam was working with Al Queda, then you must live in a cave and never see the news. Him and his cronys were meeting with Al Queda and giving them money and equipment all the time. Check out the photos of it. His guys even admitted to doing it. Also, Sadam was giving I think around $25,000 to the family of every suicide bomber who killed at elast one Israeli, and he was the major funder of Hamas. And as for the WMDs, we went to take them out. Everyone said they were there, and its better to be safe then sorry. Besides, according the the laws the UN passed after Desert Storm, WE WERE REQUIRED BY UN LAW to go back and sue force to reopen the WMD search, since Sadam was not cooperating. Just cause the UN is too hypocritical and lazy to follow its own laws doesn't mean we should not follow the post-war accord. Also, as a sort of plus, Iraq is now a much better and much safer place than it was under Sadam, and we saved maybe tens of thousands of Iraqis, since he was killing about 20,000 or so a year. And yes, it is safe, according to everyone I know who was there or is there now, and that violence is the abnormality, not the norm. And although every American lost is a tragedy, and we must never forget their sacrifices, they did not die in vain.

2) and hye captain inobvious, we have NO proof that saddam supported INTERNATIONAL terror, and if we were going to take out a supporter of terror, maybe we should have gone after sudan, you know the country that outrightsupports al-quieda, the country iraqi officials went ot to meet with al-quieda officials about things under pressure from the sudanese government

and pray tell what we are succeeding at? eliminating terrorism? international terrorism has increased since we started the "war on terror"


Let's see: I believe since al-Qaeda are international terrorists, and iraqi officials met with them, they wouldn't be doing so just for a friendly visit.

It also seems to me that the "war on terror" was kicked off by them attacking the US, and I don't recall any terror incidents in the US since then.

iraq NEVER attacked us

they were encouraged to emet with al-quieda operatives by sudanese government

We went in to remove a major threat to the Middle East who was blatantly supporting terror. If you think there is no evidence supporting the fact that Sadam was working with Al Queda, then you must live in a cave and never see the news. Him and his cronys were meeting with Al Queda and giving them money and equipment all the time. Check out the photos of it. His guys even admitted to doing it. Also, Sadam was giving I think around $25,000 to the family of every suicide bomber who killed at elast one Israeli, and he was the major funder of Hamas. And as for the WMDs, we went to take them out. Everyone said they were there, and its better to be safe then sorry. Besides, according the the laws the UN passed after Desert Storm, WE WERE REQUIRED BY UN LAW to go back and sue force to reopen the WMD search, since Sadam was not cooperating. Just cause the UN is too hypocritical and lazy to follow its own laws doesn't mean we should not follow the post-war accord. Also, as a sort of plus, Iraq is now a much better and much safer place than it was under Sadam, and we saved maybe tens of thousands of Iraqis, since he was killing about 20,000 or so a year. And yes, it is safe, according to everyone I know who was there or is there now, and that violence is the abnormality, not the norm. And although every American lost is a tragedy, and we must never forget their sacrifices, they did not die in vain.

I couldn't have said it better myself! Thank you L337 Winners!

Lets see, Money to Suicide Bombers of Hamas. Yep no terror supporting there. I never said international Terrorism did I? No I said a Supporter of Terror which he has throughout the Middle East.

As for being inobvious, your the one that didn't know that. As for the polls yes they do think that. Didn't say we weren't! We were for a time but that is changing and will change on June 30, 2004! Then Iraq will be on their own!

As for increasing terror, remember that terrorists started this whole affair when they KILLED THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE ON AMERICAN SOIL!!! We struk back as we should have. Of course Terror Increased! We have them up against a damn wall. When you cornor an enemy they are going to fight viciously or havent you read what the Japanese did at the End of WWII with Kamakaze planes! They knew they were beat so the lashed out! Still lost but still lashed out! Samething here. They are trapped and they are lashing out! It was inevitable! They are trying to change government minds and they did in Spain and now Spain is regarded as a coward in the face of Terror because the fled Iraq when 3/11 happened which caused an upset in their elections! Terrorists started this fight and now they are paying a steep price for starting this fight.

hey guess what, LEARN TO READ. i said NO support of INTERNATIONAL terrorists

they wont be on their own, we will be controlling everything still either through the council whuich will supposedly be making decisions or our whole military there

and guess what, NO ONE ON THOSE PLAINS WERE FRM IRAQ OR PART OF ANY IRAQI FIGHTING FORCE

that doesnt even make sense, our war on terror that is supposed to decrease terrorism isntead increased it more than it has raised in 20 years, guess what WE ARNT HELPING

and whoever compares iraq and the war on terror to world war 2 is ignorant and stupid, and whoever thinks the war on terror is a war on anyone instead of an ideal is stupid, you cant win a war on an ideal by treating it like a war against a nation, an idea that bush plays flip flop games on himself

spain left iraq because they changed government officials and they got smart, they figured out they need to straighten out themselves before playing police the world with the cowboys


and you think we are hurting terrorism? we are supporting a nation everyone in the middle east despises: isreal, we are bombing and killing civilians and attackign random countries, we are facilitating the jihad and helping them recruit for it. the only way to stop terrorism is to attck the idea for it, not people behind it. there will always be this jihad if we continue supporting their enemies and attacking civilians

2) and hye captain inobvious, we have NO proof that saddam supported INTERNATIONAL terror, and if we were going to take out a supporter of terror, maybe we should have gone after sudan, you know the country that outrightsupports al-quieda, the country iraqi officials went ot to meet with al-quieda officials about things under pressure from the sudanese government

and pray tell what we are succeeding at? eliminating terrorism? international terrorism has increased since we started the "war on terror"


Let's see: I believe since al-Qaeda are international terrorists, and iraqi officials met with them, they wouldn't be doing so just for a friendly visit.

It also seems to me that the "war on terror" was kicked off by them attacking the US, and I don't recall any terror incidents in the US since then.

iraq NEVER attacked us

they were encouraged to emet with al-quieda operatives by sudanese government

Yes, I understand that. Just because Iraq didn't do anything directly, doesn't mean they didn't have a hand in it. And I already know that the 9/11 commission found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda for that specific time.

Well I'm sure the Iraqis always jumped when the Sudanese told them to. Do you really think that Iraqis officials were at that meeting just because the Sudanese wanted them to be?

While Saddam certainly rubbed elbows with terrorists and may have been friendly to Al Quaeda (did I spell that right? probably not), he was never a member and was in no way involved in the 9/11 atrocity.

We went in to remove a major threat to the Middle East who was blatantly supporting terror. If you think there is no evidence supporting the fact that Sadam was working with Al Queda, then you must live in a cave and never see the news. Him and his cronys were meeting with Al Queda and giving them money and equipment all the time. Check out the photos of it. His guys even admitted to doing it. Also, Sadam was giving I think around $25,000 to the family of every suicide bomber who killed at elast one Israeli, and he was the major funder of Hamas. And as for the WMDs, we went to take them out. Everyone said they were there, and its better to be safe then sorry. Besides, according the the laws the UN passed after Desert Storm, WE WERE REQUIRED BY UN LAW to go back and sue force to reopen the WMD search, since Sadam was not cooperating. Just cause the UN is too hypocritical and lazy to follow its own laws doesn't mean we should not follow the post-war accord. Also, as a sort of plus, Iraq is now a much better and much safer place than it was under Sadam, and we saved maybe tens of thousands of Iraqis, since he was killing about 20,000 or so a year. And yes, it is safe, according to everyone I know who was there or is there now, and that violence is the abnormality, not the norm. And although every American lost is a tragedy, and we must never forget their sacrifices, they did not die in vain.

blatanlty supporting terror? they were supporting palestinian terrorists fighting only israel, they are caring out terrorist attacks to protect their homeland, they have been fighting there for hundreds of years. there is NO proof they have supported international terrorism, as opposed to afghanistan and sudan, or facilitated international terrorism like pakistan and saudi arabia

where is your proof that shows they were giving money and weapons to al-quieda, oh right, there isnt any, the commission investigating it said there wasnt.i know who was supporting al-quieda:SUDAN, iraqi officials met with al-quieda at the urging of the sudanese government, IN SUDAN. and the top pakistani nuclea r scientist was selling nuclear technolgoy and parts to terrorists

i consider hamas more of a normal army than terrorists, especially in light of the israeli army portraying terrorists ythemselves. and hamas is a local terrorist organization fighting for their state and life, like palestine and israel have been doing for years upon years


saddam had weapons inspectors in his country, we were not authorized to use force, we were not authorized to go in and bomb baghdad.

wow he killed 20k a year, a army official estiamted we killed 30k people in the bombing of baghdad.

(Note: I do not like George Bush. I disagree with his policies. I disagree with the war. I just thought you should know these things first.) (Also note: I'd really like it non-Anti-Bushers didn't post here and clog this up with a bunch of crap.)

If George W. Bush is elected to a second term (and I hope he isn't, but if he is), we should find some way to deal and cope with his presidency. There is no point in continuance of complaints as he won't be up for re-election again, but if we could please begin supporting our soldiers and end our negativity (outwardly) toward the war and not let our soldiers here the dissent. They need hope. Our efforts right now are to get an irresponsible warmonger out of the executive office, but if we fail, our efforts must turn to instilling hope in our troops. Please take this seriously and share with your friends.


I think that seriously undermines our right to represent ourselves in government. If that sonofabitch wins again, we shouldn't just give him carte blanche do to whatever he wants! That's a pretty ridiculous suggestion in fact.

Especially for the troops' sake. I don't know why everyone is so concerned with them maybe hearing that we aren't happy with what the president is making them do. Is single-mindedness necessary for a military? Is democracy bad for war? Maybe we have to reprioritise then. Which is more important, our freedom or the war? Also, do you know what those soldiers do over there? They do awful things. Sure they do some good things too, but they are over there fighting a war, which means killing, which isn't something to take lightly or to write off simply because the president got elected again - I for one don't agree with this mindless, unconditional support for the military. Our side isn't always the "good guys."

You know I really hate people like you. It doesn't matter if you support the military or not you need to support the troops because they are the one doing the hard job while you sit on your rump playing on the computer

Yes, I understand that. Just because Iraq didn't do anything directly, doesn't mean they didn't have a hand in it. And I already know that the 9/11 commission found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda for that specific time.

Well I'm sure the Iraqis always jumped when the Sudanese told them to. Do you really think that Iraqis officials were at that meeting just because the Sudanese wanted them to be?

you are more than obviously missing the point, the iraqis were encouraged by another country to meet with al-quieda, they did not meet with the independently. you arem issing the point SUDAN ENCOURAGED IRAQ TO MEET WITH AL-QUIEDA, WE HAVE PROOF SUDAN IS OPENLY SUPPORTING AL-QUIEDA, and what are we doing in sudan? jack squat

Lets see, Money to Suicide Bombers of Hamas. Yep no terror supporting there. I never said international Terrorism did I? No I said a Supporter of Terror which he has throughout the Middle East.

As for being inobvious, your the one that didn't know that. As for the polls yes they do think that. Didn't say we weren't! We were for a time but that is changing and will change on June 30, 2004! Then Iraq will be on their own!

As for increasing terror, remember that terrorists started this whole affair when they KILLED THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE ON AMERICAN SOIL!!! We struk back as we should have. Of course Terror Increased! We have them up against a damn wall. When you cornor an enemy they are going to fight viciously or havent you read what the Japanese did at the End of WWII with Kamakaze planes! They knew they were beat so the lashed out! Still lost but still lashed out! Samething here. They are trapped and they are lashing out! It was inevitable! They are trying to change government minds and they did in Spain and now Spain is regarded as a coward in the face of Terror because the fled Iraq when 3/11 happened which caused an upset in their elections! Terrorists started this fight and now they are paying a steep price for starting this fight.

hey guess what, LEARN TO READ. i said NO support of INTERNATIONAL terrorists

they wont be on their own, we will be controlling everything still either through the council whuich will supposedly be making decisions or our whole military there

and guess what, NO ONE ON THOSE PLAINS WERE FRM IRAQ OR PART OF ANY IRAQI FIGHTING FORCE

that doesnt even make sense, our war on terror that is supposed to decrease terrorism isntead increased it more than it has raised in 20 years, guess what WE ARNT HELPING

and whoever compares iraq and the war on terror to world war 2 is ignorant and stupid, and whoever thinks the war on terror is a war on anyone instead of an ideal is stupid, you cant win a war on an ideal by treating it like a war against a nation, an idea that bush plays flip flop games on himself

spain left iraq because they changed government officials and they got smart, they figured out they need to straighten out themselves before playing police the world with the cowboys


and you think we are hurting terrorism? we are supporting a nation everyone in the middle east despises: isreal, we are bombing and killing civilians and attackign random countries, we are facilitating the jihad and helping them recruit for it. the only way to stop terrorism is to attck the idea for it, not people behind it. there will always be this jihad if we continue supporting their enemies and attacking civilians

Your the one that can't read! WHEN HAVE I SAID THE WORD INTERNATIONAL?????!!!!!!! I NEVER DID! YOU LEARN TO READ!

Your living in a fantasy world! WE WONT BE CONTROLING IRAQ!!! The INTERIM COUNCIL will do that! They will be handling the Day to day affairs of Running Iraq. The Cabinet has full control over what they are doing!

As for the PLANES not plain which is what the midwest is considered not to mention something that doesn't have a topping and is a geometrical shape! Get your words right! As for the Planes, never mentioned that. I said that the TERRORISTS STARTED THE WAR. Bush clearly stated that we will be going after the perpetrators as well as SUPPORTERS OF TERROR! Saddam has supported terror in the MIDDLE EAST!

I've stated why we have an increase in terror! They are in a corner! they have no wear to go! We drove them out of the Afghanistan and now they are on the border! They are fighting us in Iraq and are losing badly since the Handover of power is less than 3 days away now by the Iraqi Timezone! They are desprite as such they will do everything they can to try to disrupt things! They aren't succeeding. The only thing they are succeeding is pissing off innocent bystandards.

Israel here is a non-issue! That is a different topic for a different day so I won't comment on it here! As for killing civilians, the terrorists have killed more Civilians than we have. Our killing of Civilians is purely by accident and we do admit it when we do and we compensate as well. That is the honorable thing to do!

As for Spain, Spain left because of a change in government that wasn't going to happen till after March 11, 2004! That is the only reason why they changed governments and the new socialist government ordered the troops home. The troops weren't happy and neither were the Iraqis. By running, they showed themselves as cowards and now they are trying to do the same to other governments and its not going to work!

Bush brought us from the brink of another Great Depression to the strongest economy in over 50 years, caused pro-Americanism to ripple through the world community, defeated the terrorists, and is now working to bring democracy to everyone. Don't insult him! :twisted:

Yes, I understand that. Just because Iraq didn't do anything directly, doesn't mean they didn't have a hand in it. And I already know that the 9/11 commission found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda for that specific time.

Well I'm sure the Iraqis always jumped when the Sudanese told them to. Do you really think that Iraqis officials were at that meeting just because the Sudanese wanted them to be?

you are more than obviously missing the point, the iraqis were encouraged by another country to meet with al-quieda, they did not meet with the independently. you arem issing the point SUDAN ENCOURAGED IRAQ TO MEET WITH AL-QUIEDA, WE HAVE PROOF SUDAN IS OPENLY SUPPORTING AL-QUIEDA, and what are we doing in sudan? jack squat

Sudan offered to hand bin Laden over to us, but we refused. I don't see how that constitutes support.

Also, Iraqi and al-Queda officials did meet in other places:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031201-123723-4738r.htm

Doesn't anyone besides me realize that Bush has helped the economy more than any other President in history? Unemployment and inflation are plummeting!

I've stated why we have an increase in terror! They are in a corner! they have no wear to go! We drove them out of the Afghanistan and now they are on the border! They are fighting us in Iraq and are losing badly since the Handover of power is less than 3 days away now by the Iraqi Timezone! They are desprite as such they will do everything they can to try to disrupt things! They aren't succeeding. The only thing they are succeeding is pissing off innocent bystandards.

you are a fool also udner the impression we are fighitng a uniform body isntead of idealism, terrorist activity has increased because we have given them fuel for the fire

Israel here is a non-issue! That is a different topic for a different day so I won't comment on it here! As for killing civilians, the terrorists have killed more Civilians than we have. Our killing of Civilians is purely by accident and we do admit it when we do and we compensate as well. That is the honorable thing to do!
wrong israel IS an issue, they are despised by the middle east, our blind support for them makes us despised and a target as well. really, in the past decade of all terrorism i highly doubt over 10k people have died

As for Spain, Spain left because of a change in government that wasn't going to happen till after March 11, 2004! That is the only reason why they changed governments and the new socialist government ordered the troops home. The troops weren't happy and neither were the Iraqis. By running, they showed themselves as cowards and now they are trying to do the same to other governments and its not going to work!
really did you ask the iraqis? the majority of iraq doesnt like use there, why would they want even more troops occupying their country? and i suppose you knew the spanish troops over there getting shot for the americans vendetta war on saddam

Doesn't anyone besides me realize that Bush has helped the economy more than any other President in history? Unemployment and inflation are plummeting!

I've been saying it too in other threads but just keep getting hammered saying that my numbers where wrong! I hope he does get 4 more years. Can't wait to see what the economy is like under an additional 4 years! Keep the economy growing Mr. President.

You're off base there. A recent poll said 70% of Iraqis favor continued U.S. presence in their country.

Yes, I understand that. Just because Iraq didn't do anything directly, doesn't mean they didn't have a hand in it. And I already know that the 9/11 commission found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda for that specific time.

Well I'm sure the Iraqis always jumped when the Sudanese told them to. Do you really think that Iraqis officials were at that meeting just because the Sudanese wanted them to be?

you are more than obviously missing the point, the iraqis were encouraged by another country to meet with al-quieda, they did not meet with the independently. you arem issing the point SUDAN ENCOURAGED IRAQ TO MEET WITH AL-QUIEDA, WE HAVE PROOF SUDAN IS OPENLY SUPPORTING AL-QUIEDA, and what are we doing in sudan? jack squat

Sudan offered to hand bin Laden over to us, but we refused. I don't see how that constitutes support.

Also, Iraqi and al-Queda officials did meet in other places:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031201-123723-4738r.htm


i am citing the 9/11 commission report, thanks for playing

Futch that shit! I'll protest all I want! I will bring it to his door step. He's on a quest for domination, and we can't have that. He must be stopped. We must stop this evil doer.

Doesn't anyone besides me realize that Bush has helped the economy more than any other President in history? Unemployment and inflation are plummeting!

I've been saying it too in other threads but just keep getting hammered saying that my numbers where wrong! I hope he does get 4 more years. Can't wait to see what the economy is like under an additional 4 years! Keep the economy growing Mr. President.

i dont think the sarcasm train stops at your station

Doesn't anyone besides me realize that Bush has helped the economy more than any other President in history? Unemployment and inflation are plummeting!

I've been saying it too in other threads but just keep getting hammered saying that my numbers where wrong! I hope he does get 4 more years. Can't wait to see what the economy is like under an additional 4 years! Keep the economy growing Mr. President.

Thank you, Formal Dances!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D wink:

You're off base there. A recent poll said 70% of Iraqis favor continued U.S. presence in their country.
i was citing a government poll that says 80%+ of the country sees us as occupiers

I've stated why we have an increase in terror! They are in a corner! they have no wear to go! We drove them out of the Afghanistan and now they are on the border! They are fighting us in Iraq and are losing badly since the Handover of power is less than 3 days away now by the Iraqi Timezone! They are desprite as such they will do everything they can to try to disrupt things! They aren't succeeding. The only thing they are succeeding is pissing off innocent bystandards.

you are a fool also udner the impression we are fighitng a uniform body isntead of idealism, terrorist activity has increased because we have given them fuel for the fire

Israel here is a non-issue! That is a different topic for a different day so I won't comment on it here! As for killing civilians, the terrorists have killed more Civilians than we have. Our killing of Civilians is purely by accident and we do admit it when we do and we compensate as well. That is the honorable thing to do!
wrong israel IS an issue, they are despised by the middle east, our blind support for them makes us despised and a target as well. really, in the past decade of all terrorism i highly doubt over 10k people have died

As for Spain, Spain left because of a change in government that wasn't going to happen till after March 11, 2004! That is the only reason why they changed governments and the new socialist government ordered the troops home. The troops weren't happy and neither were the Iraqis. By running, they showed themselves as cowards and now they are trying to do the same to other governments and its not going to work!
really did you ask the iraqis? the majority of iraq doesnt like use there, why would they want even more troops occupying their country? and i suppose you knew the spanish troops over there getting shot for the americans vendetta war on saddam

Chess Squares, if you don't stop calling me names then I will report you to the mods! I don't want to do it but you have been calling me names since I started posting today! Stop it now! (damn, i'm feel like i'm telling a 2 yo to behave!)

Your right, a uniformed body of terrorists that we are slowly erradicating! They have increased because they are LOSING THE WAR!!!

Israel still is a non-issue here so I won't comment on it as I've said!

As for the Iraqis, they were not happy that spain was ordered home. How do I know this, they interviewed them. Even the Spanish Troops weren't happy about the new orders. Your right, they dont like us there however, they know why we are there. We are giving them a new government which has received hi approval ratings. This will all work out! Iraq is free from Coalition control in about 2 days Iraqi time! Yes we will still have troops there not denying we won't, but their orders will change when the new government takes place.

Chess Squares, if you don't stop calling me names then I will report you to the mods! I don't want to do it but you have been calling me names since I started posting today! Stop it now! (damn, i'm feel like i'm telling a 2 yo to behave!)

Your right, a uniformed body of terrorists that we are slowly erradicating! They have increased because they are LOSING THE WAR!!!

Israel still is a non-issue here so I won't comment on it as I've said!

As for the Iraqis, they were not happy that spain was ordered home. How do I know this, they interviewed them. Even the Spanish Troops weren't happy about the new orders. Your right, they dont like us there however, they know why we are there. We are giving them a new government which has received hi approval ratings. This will all work out! Iraq is free from Coalition control in about 2 days Iraqi time! Yes we will still have troops there not denying we won't, but their orders will change when the new government takes place.

we are NOT erradicating them, they are NOT losing, and its NOT a real war, its not a war on any UNIFORMED body, bush lieks to point that out and not think about the reality of it. terrorism is an ideal, we are facilitating and adding to the reason for terrorism against us, are not eradicating it, we are encouraging it, we are giving the middle easterners further reason to despise us an d join the jihad, if we are to win this "war" we must treat it like what it is, a war on an idea, not a person or place

israel is an issue whether you want to realize it or not

Yes, I understand that. Just because Iraq didn't do anything directly, doesn't mean they didn't have a hand in it. And I already know that the 9/11 commission found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda for that specific time.

Well I'm sure the Iraqis always jumped when the Sudanese told them to. Do you really think that Iraqis officials were at that meeting just because the Sudanese wanted them to be?

you are more than obviously missing the point, the iraqis were encouraged by another country to meet with al-quieda, they did not meet with the independently. you arem issing the point SUDAN ENCOURAGED IRAQ TO MEET WITH AL-QUIEDA, WE HAVE PROOF SUDAN IS OPENLY SUPPORTING AL-QUIEDA, and what are we doing in sudan? jack squat

Sudan offered to hand bin Laden over to us, but we refused. I don't see how that constitutes support.

Also, Iraqi and al-Queda officials did meet in other places:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031201-123723-4738r.htm


i am citing the 9/11 commission report, thanks for playing

Okay, I thought we were talking about any links whatsoever between al-Qaeda and Iraq, but apparently we were talking about 9/11, which I have already agreed that there was no connection for that specific event.

Chess Squares, if you don't stop calling me names then I will report you to the mods! I don't want to do it but you have been calling me names since I started posting today! Stop it now! (damn, i'm feel like i'm telling a 2 yo to behave!)

Your right, a uniformed body of terrorists that we are slowly erradicating! They have increased because they are LOSING THE WAR!!!

Israel still is a non-issue here so I won't comment on it as I've said!

As for the Iraqis, they were not happy that spain was ordered home. How do I know this, they interviewed them. Even the Spanish Troops weren't happy about the new orders. Your right, they dont like us there however, they know why we are there. We are giving them a new government which has received hi approval ratings. This will all work out! Iraq is free from Coalition control in about 2 days Iraqi time! Yes we will still have troops there not denying we won't, but their orders will change when the new government takes place.

we are NOT erradicating them, they are NOT losing, and its NOT a real war, its not a war on any UNIFORMED body, bush lieks to point that out and not think about the reality of it. terrorism is an ideal, we are facilitating and adding to the reason for terrorism against us, are not eradicating it, we are encouraging it, we are giving the middle easterners further reason to despise us an d join the jihad, if we are to win this "war" we must treat it like what it is, a war on an idea, not a person or place

israel is an issue whether you want to realize it or not

We are eradicating them! Slowly but we are! Your right, it is an Ideology. Most of that is done in the Madrassas (sp?) They have to change that before we can really fight this war! As for facilitating it? GOOD!! The more that fight us, the more we can eliminate! We have killed more terrorists than they have of us!

*knock knock* is anyone home, this is reality calling

go to yahoo.com, check out ted rall's latest column aboutthe war on terrorism.

WE ARE NOT FIGHTING A FINITE NUMBER OF FIGHTERS, WE ARE FIGHTIGN AN IDEAL, as long as that ideal CONTINUES to exist there will ALWAYS be fighters

*knock knock* is anyone home, this is reality calling

go to yahoo.com, check out ted rall's latest column aboutthe war on terrorism.

WE ARE NOT FIGHTING A FINITE NUMBER OF FIGHTERS, WE ARE FIGHTIGN AN IDEAL, as long as that ideal CONTINUES to exist there will ALWAYS be fighters

Ok! Believe what you want! Obviously you haven't been following everything since your arguements are in circles!

I'll believe what I want since it is closer to fact and you go think what you want! I'll continue this when there is an arguement that is civilized that doesn't resort to name calling or insults!

you explain to me, then, how treating a war on an ideal like any normal war on a person or country is going to solve terrorism