NationStates Jolt Archive

It seems that every time she protests, it is assumed by Busheviks that she

...has an ulterior agenda of self-promotion
...disrespects her own son
...betrays her country

How do you suggest that she suggest that she protest against the war? Would any way be deemed legitimate?

Kill governemnt officials?

Wave American flags, cover herself in pictures of her son, and wear no clothes.

Addresses all three problems.

She could write a letter to her representative or senator. Does anyone think about the simple ways anymore?

I also have strong feelings that there's someone else pulling the strings here.

Wave American flags, cover herself in pictures of her son, and wear no clothes.

Addresses all three problems.

allright,how about she votes democratic,oh,shoot..they voted for the war too...hmmm

how can she protest then?i dont know,put up a sign on her lawn saying she is against the war,or maybe even protested b4 the FREAKIN war started!

dissuaded her kid from joining the military were you actually do get killed in wars? :headbang:

allright,how about she votes democratic,oh,shoot..they voted for the war too...hmmm

how can she protest then?i dont know,put up a sign on her lawn saying she is against the war,or maybe even protested b4 the FREAKIN war started!

dissuaded her kid from joining the military were you actually do get killed in wars? :headbang:

Hey, good call!

She can do whatever she wants. Personally I don't think she'll make a convincing case that Bush murdered her son, because frankly if he didn't want to run the risk of dying, he wouldn't have joined the military. Both him and his mother must have realised that soldiers do tend to bite the dust with much more frequency than other professionals, so to pretend that his death was some evil sneaky assassination by POTUS and his gang of bloodthirsty conspiritors (which is the effect she seems to be attempting to create) is silly.

The prez didn't kill her son. Her son joined the military voluntarily, the USA entered into a conflict and her son got killed in action.

She can do whatever she wants. Personally I don't think she'll make a convincing case that Bush murdered her son, because frankly if he didn't want to run the risk of dying, he wouldn't have joined the military. Both him and his mother must have realised that soldiers do tend to bite the dust with much more frequency than other professionals, so to pretend that his death was some evil sneaky assassination by POTUS and his gang of bloodthirsty conspiritors (which is the effect she seems to be attempting to create) is silly.

The prez didn't kill her son. Her son joined the military voluntarily, the USA entered into a conflict and her son got killed in action.

You missed the "end of story" part, but that's okay, I'll still give you half of a cookie.

It seems that every time she protests, it is assumed by Busheviks that she

...has an ulterior agenda of self-promotion
...disrespects her own son
...betrays her country

How do you suggest that she suggest that she protest against the war? Would any way be deemed legitimate?

Well, she does. Moore(on) and Move(down) have already taken up her "cause". She has publicly stated that if would not have mattered had her son died in Afghanistan....

If she REALLY wanted to end the war she should support flooding the Country in US troops and overwhelming the insurgency, thereby getting the job done faster.

Oh, and start executing insurgents instead of giving them a 2-week holiday in an iraqi prison.

She should buy a 1960s VW van and paint it in multiple pastel colors, put daisies in her hair, and stop shaving her legs and/or armpits.

lol

She should buy a 1960s VW van and paint it in multiple pastel colors, put daisies in her hair, and stop shaving her legs and/or armpits.

lol

Pscycidellic!!!

...has an ulterior agenda of self-promotion
...disrespects her own son
...betrays her country
I think the first two apply to her, but I respect her right to protest and also respect the right for others to protest her. I can’t really get behind either side despite being against the war. I have a feeling that if either got a chance, they would silence the other.

[QUOTE=Undelia]I think the first two apply to her, but I respect her right to protest and also respect the right for others to protest her. I can’t really get behind either side despite being against the war. I have a feeling that if either got a chance, they would silence the other /QUOTE]

Oh, sure...go ahead, through months of planning out the window! I don't mind, see what I care.

How do you suggest that she suggest that she protest against the war? Would any way be deemed legitimate?
She could start by not badmouthing her country, lying about her president and being bankrolled by far left people and organizations.

Just to start.

When we are visiting a neighbor's house and the kids spill the milk bottle at the table and it flows all over, and they drop the yogurt jar and it gets splattered all over the walls and floor, I don't yell at them and say that's it, we all have to go home now... :rolleyes:

Sheehan doesn't think American needs to clean up it's mess, it says we should just leave it and go home. she needs to redirect her energies into fixing the problem she thinks we cause.

The issue of whether or not milk is even spilt or yogurt dropped is politics... they say they are just trying to clean the floor and they spilled it all on purpose, she suggests otherwise. She needs to elect politicians that see it her way.


Arguing that we should never have been in the neighbor’s house in the first place and therefore we don't have to clean up our own mess is very much improper in my opinion.

We clean it up, we leave them in better condition than they were when we found them and THEN we go home.

She could write a letter to her representative or senator. Does anyone think about the simple ways anymore?

I also have strong feelings that there's someone else pulling the strings here.

Oh yeah. A letter to her congressmen would have made HEADLINE NEWS.

Get real, folks, politics is about public opinion. If you want to sway the public, you gotta get into the news, get people talking, make your point on a national platform.

I agree with her tactics far more than i do the protesters in front of the military hospital. She's taking it to the top. The man responsible for getting us into this situation. (and even if someone else engineered it, HE is still responsible, and only HE can change the country's course. Well, that's not entirely true. If enough public sentiment turns against the war, the Republican Congress can change the course. If they would detach their lips from the "POTASS". :D

When we are visiting a neighbor's house and the kids spill the milk bottle at the table and it flows all over, and they drop the yogurt jar and it gets splattered all over the walls and floor, I don't yell at them and say that's it, we all have to go home now... :rolleyes:

Sheehan doesn't think American needs to clean up it's mess, it says we should just leave it and go home. she needs to redirect her energies into fixing the problem she thinks we cause.

The issue of whether or not milk is even spilt or yogurt dropped is politics... they say they are just trying to clean the floor and they spilled it all on purpose, she suggests otherwise. She needs to elect politicians that see it her way.


Arguing that we should never have been in the neighbor’s house in the first place and therefore we don't have to clean up our own mess is very much improper in my opinion.

We clean it up, we leave them in better condition than they were when we found them and THEN we go home.

Of late, there has been a lot of cookie handing out. Well, screw that, here's the WHOLE BOX! And a gallon of milk for it too!

Well, she does. Moore(on) and Move(down) have already taken up her "cause". She has publicly stated that if would not have mattered had her son died in Afghanistan....

If she REALLY wanted to end the war she should support flooding the Country in US troops and overwhelming the insurgency, thereby getting the job done faster.

Oh, and start executing insurgents instead of giving them a 2-week holiday in an iraqi prison.
So, to cut to the chase, you're saying she should do nothing. With the gratuitous bloodlust thing thrown in because... ?

Great suggestion. :rolleyes:

Oh yeah. A letter to her congressmen would have made HEADLINE NEWS.

Get real, folks, politics is about public opinion. If you want to sway the public, you gotta get into the news, get people talking, make your point on a national platform.

I agree with her tactics far more than i do the protesters in front of the military hospital. She's taking it to the top. The man responsible for getting us into this situation. (and even if someone else engineered it, HE is still responsible, and only HE can change the country's course. Well, that's not entirely true. If enough public sentiment turns against the war, the Republican Congress can change the course. If they would detach their lips from the "POTASS". :D

Hey, I said it was simple, not eye-catching. And HE can't change it's course, it's mostly up to Congress.

Hey, I said it was simple, not eye-catching. And HE can't change it's course, it's mostly up to Congress.

If he told Congress he wanted something different, they would gladly do something different. They are watching their re-election chances being hurt the more americans that get disgusted with the war.


And as for the spilled milk analogy....that's such a bad analogy.

American military didn't get INVITED into Iraq as guests. They were NOT OFFERED THE MILK. They INVADED the home, PURPOSELY RUINED the milk, and CONTINUES to make a bigger mess in Iraq. The HOST has asked that the Americans leave.

Americans are not welcome guests. The Iraqis did not invite them in so they could trash the place. Too bad there isn't any real world police to come arrest the rogue, self-appointed 'world police', who have gotten corrupt and megalomaniacal.

Stupid analogy.

When we are visiting a neighbor's house and the kids spill the milk bottle at the table and it flows all over, and they drop the yogurt jar and it gets splattered all over the walls and floor, I don't yell at them and say that's it, we all have to go home now... :rolleyes:

Sheehan doesn't think American needs to clean up it's mess, it says we should just leave it and go home. she needs to redirect her energies into fixing the problem she thinks we cause.

The issue of whether or not milk is even spilt or yogurt dropped is politics... they say they are just trying to clean the floor and they spilled it all on purpose, she suggests otherwise. She needs to elect politicians that see it her way.


Arguing that we should never have been in the neighbor’s house in the first place and therefore we don't have to clean up our own mess is very much improper in my opinion.

We clean it up, we leave them in better condition than they were when we found them and THEN we go home.
i hate this war. i think that we got into it for some other unmentioned motive. nothing about it justifies the many many thousands of deaths that it has caused


and i agree with you completely. its too late to fight over whether or not we should have gone in. we need to stay until we leave them safer and better off than when we arrived.

When we are visiting a neighbor's house and the kids spill the milk bottle at the table and it flows all over, and they drop the yogurt jar and it gets splattered all over the walls and floor, I don't yell at them and say that's it, we all have to go home now... :rolleyes:

Sheehan doesn't think American needs to clean up it's mess, it says we should just leave it and go home. she needs to redirect her energies into fixing the problem she thinks we cause.

The issue of whether or not milk is even spilt or yogurt dropped is politics... they say they are just trying to clean the floor and they spilled it all on purpose, she suggests otherwise. She needs to elect politicians that see it her way.


Arguing that we should never have been in the neighbor’s house in the first place and therefore we don't have to clean up our own mess is very much improper in my opinion.

We clean it up, we leave them in better condition than they were when we found them and THEN we go home.

So questioning why we split the milk and threw the yogurt around is unconscionable? (If you want to use your analogy, the spilling of the milk and spreading of yogurt was deliberate on our part.)

To question if we are doing a good job of cleaning up the mess is wrong?

:headbang: :headbang:

(BTW, are you saying we went to a neighbor's house uninvited and made a big-ass mess? Would the neighbor and the rest of the neighborhood have reason to be pissed? Would the rest of the family forced to "clean up" have reason to be pissed at the mess-makers? (Perhaps they should even be punished.))

Hey, I said it was simple, not eye-catching. And HE can't change it's course, it's mostly up to Congress.

The Commander-in-Chief is powerless?

The leader of the Republican Party can't direct policy of the Republican Congress?

This has to be the worst attempt at Bush apologism ever.

I believe that most of the insurgency has to do with the fact that they are being occupied by foreigners.

If China decided your country needed a different leader because he threatened world security (completely plausible, americans..) and they came in with missiles and bombs and troops and took out your communications towers, your electricity, your running water, your hospitals...

don't you think that as long as there are any Chinese in your country, your fellow countrymen will try to keep fighting them?

I mean, even though i want Bush out of office as much as any other peace-loving human, I sure don't want my country occupied for years after he's gone.

I think if America pulled out, things would settle down A LOT. Let the French and the Germans and the Russians get the rebuilding contracts. It doesn't seem right for American companies to be making a profit off this war.

The Bush Administration's motive has more to do with having American control of an oil producing middle east country than 'democracy' or 'freedom'. I mean, there were a lot of worse (and more dangerous) dictators than Hussein. Why doesn't American military fix all those countries?

Answer: NO OIL.

When we are visiting a neighbor's house and the kids spill the milk bottle at the table and it flows all over, and they drop the yogurt jar and it gets splattered all over the walls and floor, I don't yell at them and say that's it, we all have to go home now...You yell at your kids, go home and ask the Guest to send you the Bill.

keep in mind This is a big mess...the carped is burned
In my personal experience any Guests would rather choose WHO and HOW the mess will be cleaned.

If he told Congress he wanted something different, they would gladly do something different. They are watching their re-election chances being hurt the more americans that get disgusted with the war.


And as for the spilled milk analogy....that's such a bad analogy.

American military didn't get INVITED into Iraq as guests. They were NOT OFFERED THE MILK. They INVADED the home, PURPOSELY RUINED the milk, and CONTINUES to make a bigger mess in Iraq. The HOST has asked that the Americans leave.

Americans are not welcome guests. The Iraqis did not invite them in so they could trash the place. Too bad there isn't any real world police to come arrest the rogue, self-appointed 'world police', who have gotten corrupt and megalomaniacal.

Stupid analogy.

Sure, we weren't invited, but we were upholding America's values of freeing all from oppression and allowing them to govern themselves. There's reason enough. Oh, yeah, almost forgot, the Iraq government as ASKED us to STAY. Get it straight.

And there is a real "World-Police", it's called the UN. But wait! We helped start that! And we're the largest power in it! Gasp! Would you look at that?!

You yell at your kids, go home and ask the Guest to send you the Bill.

keep in mind This is a big mess...the carped is burned
In my personal experience any Guests would rather choose WHO and HOW the mess will be cleaned.

hear, hear.

Sure, we weren't invited, but we were upholding America's values of freeing all from oppression and allowing them to govern themselves. There's reason enough. Oh, yeah, almost forgot, the Iraq government as ASKED us to STAY. Get it straight.

And there is a real "World-Police", it's called the UN. But wait! We helped start that! And we're the largest power in it! Gasp! Would you look at that?!

The UN would be a hell of a lot more effective if the AMericans stopped interfearing. If America was isolationist, like it should be, the world would be a much better place.

No ratical islam, no famine, no breakup of the soviet union, many fewer guns.

Sure, we weren't invited, but we were upholding America's values of freeing all from oppression ...when are you going to free the Guantanamo POWs?

Sure, we weren't invited, but we were upholding America's values of freeing all from oppression and allowing them to govern themselves. There's reason enough. Oh, yeah, almost forgot, the Iraq government as ASKED us to STAY. Get it straight.

of course. THE AMERICAN PROPPED UP GOVERNMENT asked them to stay. Big Surprise.

And there is a real "World-Police", it's called the UN. But wait! We helped start that! And we're the largest power in it! Gasp! Would you look at that?!

Yes, and by our going rogue without the UN into Iraq, we sabotaged it.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. America should be disarmed by the world same as Japan was. Put the bully in the corner for a while.

when are you going to free the Guantanamo POWs?

That's just it, though. Prisoners Of WAR. Probably when this mess is all over.

Cindy Sheehan should just keep doing what she does.

The more the Busheviks screech about how she's a Commie Mutant Traitor, resort to personal malicious insults and dirt-digging, and stoop to physical intimidation (shotguns and running over crosses with pick-up trucks, etc) the more they are going to look like Bull Conner's Black Wash in Alabama.

And it'll just turn public opinion towards her side when they do.

That's just it, though. Prisoners Of WAR. Probably when this mess is all over.


Gee.. I missed the Declairation of War, can you send me a link with the document.

I wonder how many of those people are in Gitmo for just being "sand people". It would fit the racism of the American people and government.

of course. THE AMERICAN PROPPED UP GOVERNMENT asked them to stay. Big Surprise.



Yes, and by our going rogue without the UN into Iraq, we sabotaged it.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. America should be disarmed by the world same as Japan was. Put the bully in the corner for a while.

Uhhhh, WE disarmed Japan. And if anyone wants to try, go right ahead.

The UN would be a hell of a lot more effective if the AMericans stopped interfearing. If America was isolationist, like it should be, the world would be a much better place.

Naw, we let them try originally with Saddam and they failed. At least now Saddam's out. But hey! At least we both agree on isolationism!

That's just it, though. Prisoners Of WAR. Probably when this mess is all over....when this mess?...or when this War is over?
Disclaimer--No matter what you answer...I m going to fuck you up anyways :-)

Gee.. I missed the Declairation of War, can you send me a link with the document.

I wonder how many of those people are in Gitmo for just being "sand people". It would fit the racism of the American people and government.

Again with the flamebaiting. Watch yourself and your generlistic stereotypes. And what do you call this but a war?

Seeing as how Japan was "Disarmed" by the Atom bomb, perhaps the civilized nations of the world should nuke the US. Make them know what it feels to be on the recieving end, for once.

That's just it, though. Prisoners Of WAR. Probably when this mess is all over.

First of all, the NeoCons don't ever intend to let the war end until the world is an American Hegemony.

Second, and most importantly, the Geneva Convention stipulates that even if you are at war with someone, you must still treat them as humans.

Guantanamo is a festering sore on the moral 'high ground' Americans are claiming to have.

How can the American Ideals be admired and used as a basis for the war when things like Guantanamo and Abu Gharib exist?

I think if America pulled out, things would settle down A LOT. Let the French and the Germans and the Russians get the rebuilding contracts. It doesn't seem right for American companies to be making a profit off this war.

The Bush Administration's motive has more to do with having American control of an oil producing middle east country than 'democracy' or 'freedom'. I mean, there were a lot of worse (and more dangerous) dictators than Hussein. Why doesn't American military fix all those countries?


Now that is crazy. You want us to give the three countries with the biggest oil-for-food bribes profiteering records, the ability to do it again? I think not.

As for Saddam not being a bad or dangerous dictator regime, doesn't anybody remember ten stinking years of no fly zone patrolling and Iraqi forces shooting at allied forces from time to time, even assassination attempts against ex-American presidents and a total lack of following UN resolution or even his own surrender agreement?


Iraq required a permanently assigned military force just to patrol it, and it stayed unrestrined for for over ten stinking years (even Clinton had to hit it from time to time). A military person could have served half of their career guarding just Iraq, and now, people today pretend that it was not even a threat? Tens of thousands of people were involved with guarding Iraq constantly and were unavailable to be utilized elsewhere because Saddam made Iraq a rogue nation and kept it a rogue nation for ten straight years after the first gulf war.

Again with the flamebaiting. Watch yourself and your generlistic stereotypes. And what do you call this but a war?

thats not flame baiting. It was put in quotes to show that they were only using the phrase to make a point. Chill.

And i don't call it a war, i call it a crime against humanity. We attacked, invaded, and occupied a country that did nothing to us.

thats not flame baiting. It was put in quotes to show that they were only using the phrase to make a point. Chill.

And i don't call it a war, i call it a crime against humanity. We attacked, invaded, and occupied a country that did nothing to us.

Did nothing to us? Go read about the first gulf war, the surrender, and the next ten years.... then rephrase that for us again.

Seeing as how Japan was "Disarmed" by the Atom bomb, perhaps the civilized nations of the world should nuke the US. Make them know what it feels to be on the recieving end, for once.

Nooooooo, Japan was disarmed by a treaty. And go ahead, nuke us, you'll just be killing yourself, cause I can garuntee that there isn't a person in America who would stand for that.

thats not flame baiting. It was put in quotes to show that they were only using the phrase to make a point. Chill.

And i don't call it a war, i call it a crime against humanity. We attacked, invaded, and occupied a country that did nothing to us.

It would fit the racism of the American people and government.

In other words, the fact that he called American people racist includes me. He has not met me, nor my family, nor my friends, nor my associates. That's called prejudice. I don't take being called racist very lightly, because I am not. I could actually go straight to calling that flaming, now couldn't I?

In other words, the fact that he called American people racist includes me. He has not met me, nor my family, nor my friends, nor my associates. That's called prejudice. I don't take being called racist very lightly, because I am not. I could actually go straight to calling that flaming, now couldn't I?

Mna, you've got a really thin skin. Typical...

Mna, you've got a really thin skin. Typical...

Do you WANT me to consider it flaming?

1. The Iraqi government and police force, which openly support the US, are supported by the Iraqis. Sure, there are a few Sunnis and Bathists who don't want to share power, but the majority counts more than the minority.

2. I've seen footage of some of Sheehan's protests. I now know this: Many of her ways are not good ways of protesting wars. No wonder O'Riely got some hate mail after showing footage of her protests by Sheehan supporters. It's embarrassing them. If you protest the war, you'll get supported. If you link yourself with Michael Mooron and protest the US itself, you'll lose support. If you want to protest the war, protest the war. Just don't go on smear campaigns after your son died doing something he knew he might die doing. He knew the risks. He didn't have to join again. he joined. He didn't have to go on that risky mission. He was told he could stay behind. He died on the rescue mission. Bush did not kill him. Oh, I forgot. Bush forced him to join at gunpoint. Bush hancuffed him to the vehicles going on the mission. Bush gunned him down. :rolleyes:

Now that is crazy. Give the three countries with the biggest oil-for-food bribes profiteering records do it again? I think not.

As for Saddam not being a bad or dangerous dictator regime, doesn't anybody remember ten stinking years of no fly zone patrolling and Iraqi forces shooting at allied forces from time to time, even assassination attempts against ex-American presidents and a total lack of following UN resolution or even his own surrender agreement?


Iraq required a permanently assigned military force just to patrol it, and it stayed unrestrined for for over ten stinking years (even Clinton had to hit it from time to time). A military person could have served half of their career guarding just Iraq, and now, people today pretend that it was not even a threat? Tens of thousands of people were involved with guarding Iraq constantly and were unavailable to be utilized elsewhere because Saddam made Iraq a rogue nation and kept it a rogue nation for ten straight years after the first gulf war.


1. Saddam was rendered fairly impotent after the last Gulf war.

2. Do you think that FEWER military will be needed in the middle east now? And how many americans or other personell were killed by Iraq during that ten years? Compare to total casualties (military, mercenary, and civilian) SINCE the war.

3. Any military person would have preferred to serve half their career guarding Iraq to getting half their body blown off by going in over a LIE about weapons of mass destruction.

4. The UN said that Saddam did comply, and that Iraq didn't have WMD. The lie that they didn't comply is one of Bush's favorites. (That and Saddam's connection with Al Q'aida.)

If i said "GIVE ME YOUR GUN" but you didn't have a gun, and then i used the excuse that you wouldn't give me your gun to beat the crap out of you, am I justified? YOu didn't COMPLY with my request to hand over a gun.

1. The Iraqi government and police force, which openly support the US, are supported by the Iraqis. Sure, there are a few Sunnis and Bathists who don't want to share power, but the majority counts more than the minority.

2. I've seen footage of some of Sheehan's protests. I now know this: Many of her ways are not good ways of protesting wars. No wonder O'Riely got some hate mail after showing footage of her protests by Sheehan supporters. It's embarrassing them. If you protest the war, you'll get supported. If you link yourself with Michael Mooron and protest the US itself, you'll lose support. If you want to protest the war, protest the war. Just don't go on smear campaigns after your son died doing something he knew he might die doing. He knew the risks. He didn't have to join again. he joined. He didn't have to go on that risky mission. He was told he could stay behind. He died on the rescue mission. Bush did not kill him. Oh, I forgot. Bush forced him to join at gunpoint. Bush hancuffed him to the vehicles going on the mission. Bush gunned him down. :rolleyes:

And here is a cookie for you.

1. Saddam was rendered fairly impotent after the last Gulf war.

2. Do you think that FEWER military will be needed in the middle east now? And how many americans or other personell were killed by Iraq during that ten years? Compare to total casualties (military, mercenary, and civilian) SINCE the war.

3. Any military person would have preferred to serve half their career guarding Iraq to getting half their body blown off by going in over a LIE about weapons of mass destruction.

4. The UN said that Saddam did comply, and that Iraq didn't have WMD. The lie that they didn't comply is one of Bush's favorites. (That and Saddam's connection with Al Q'aida.)

If i said "GIVE ME YOUR GUN" but you didn't have a gun, and then i used the excuse that you wouldn't give me your gun to beat the crap out of you, am I justified? YOu didn't COMPLY with my request to hand over a gun.

Yeah, that made sense. The UN said back BEFORE the war that Saddam DIDN'T comply with allowing inspectors IN. Then they reverse stance AFTER the fact. Something's wrong there...

(My 911 post! Call the police! [or Moore :P ])

He didn't have to join again. he joined. He didn't have to go on that risky mission. He was told he could stay behind. He died on the rescue mission. Bush did not kill him. Oh, I forgot. Bush forced him to join at gunpoint. Bush hancuffed him to the vehicles going on the mission. Bush gunned him down. :rolleyes:


Infortunately, the economic situation among low-and middle-income families does create a duress situation in which the only job available may have been in the military. I blame Bush for the lack of good job opportunities.

Also, as the man you hate so much (Moore) pointed out...our soldiers join the military TRUSTING that they will never be sent into harms way without a good reason. a LIE about WMD is not a good reason. The Bush cabal should be tried for war crimes and be held responsible for every death of every citizen of any nationality that happened because of this war for the simple fact that he LIED to further his NeoCon agenda.

If you commit a felony and someone dies because of your crime, then you are guilty of murder.

Isn't lying to Congress a felony? (the NeoCons should know, after so many of them did prison time for the Iran/Contra scandal)

Yeah, that made sense. The UN said back BEFORE the war that Saddam DIDN'T comply with allowing inspectors IN. Then they reverse stance AFTER the fact. Something's wrong there...



Yes, your facts.

I watched the UN coverage of Hans Blix's statement BEFORE the war. Did YOU?

1. Saddam was rendered fairly impotent after the last Gulf war.

2. Do you think that FEWER military will be needed in the middle east now? And how many americans or other personell were killed by Iraq during that ten years? Compare to total casualties (military, mercenary, and civilian) SINCE the war.

3. Any military person would have preferred to serve half their career guarding Iraq to getting half their body blown off by going in over a LIE about weapons of mass destruction.

4. The UN said that Saddam did comply, and that Iraq didn't have WMD. The lie that they didn't comply is one of Bush's favorites. (That and Saddam's connection with Al Q'aida.)

If i said "GIVE ME YOUR GUN" but you didn't have a gun, and then i used the excuse that you wouldn't give me your gun to beat the crap out of you, am I justified? YOu didn't COMPLY with my request to hand over a gun.


Utter nonsense. Ask the dead Kurds in the north and the dead Shi'ites in the south and tell us again that for ten years Iraq did nothing to harm anyone, and Saddam was impotent because his power was castrated during the first gulf war.

Food-For-Oil Briberies and UN profiteering... that's the only, ONLY reason that the UN didn't assist this time. It's been reported recently that Half of the companies involved in supplying foods from the food-for-oil UN program had to pay of bribes.. HALF, think about that for a few minutes and then tell me again that the Americans are the bad guys here with ulterior motives. :rolleyes:

Infortunately, the economic situation among low-and middle-income families does create a duress situation in which the only job available may have been in the military. I blame Bush for the lack of good job opportunities.

Also, as the man you hate so much (Moore) pointed out...our soldiers join the military TRUSTING that they will never be sent into harms way without a good reason. a LIE about WMD is not a good reason. The Bush cabal should be tried for war crimes and be held responsible for every death of every citizen of any nationality that happened because of this war for the simple fact that he LIED to further his NeoCon agenda.

If you commit a felony and someone dies because of your crime, then you are guilty of murder.

Isn't lying to Congress a felony? (the NeoCons should know, after so many of them did prison time for the Iran/Contra scandal)

Jobs, sure....Walmart's always openning new stores, Kmart is hiring. There's two large corporations right there. They always look at ex-military as leadership people, making it slightly easier for them to get a job there.

And at the time, he believed that there were, or possibly that there were about to be, WMD's. Is intel said so. That's like failing a test in school because the text book had a lot of typos.

Yes, your facts.

I watched the UN coverage of Hans Blix's statement BEFORE the war. Did YOU?

No, because then I was in middle school, had no idea what the hell NS was, and therefore didn't give a crap about politics. All I remember was a big news thing in the 90's saying that Saddam wasn't letting UN inspectors in.

Utter nonsense. Ask the dead Kurds in the north and the dead Shi'ites in the south and tell us again that for ten years Iraq did nothing to harm anyone, and Saddam was impotent because his power was castrated during the first gulf war.

Food-For-Oil Briberies and UN profiteering... that's the only, ONLY reason that the UN didn't assist this time. It's been reported recently that Half of the companies involved in supplying foods from the food-for-oil UN program had to pay of bribes.. HALF, think about that for a few minutes and then tell me again that the Americans are the bad guys here with ulterior motives. :rolleyes:


Don't make me put a list of how many people America has killed worldwide in the last 50 years. And don't make me pull out proof of where Saddam got his weapons and chemicals to do the things he did. IN fact, Rumsfeld went to Iraq right before he gassed the Kurds and pretty much told him that the US would look the other way.

And the UN scandal in no way exonerates the US for the wrong things it has done. That is very childish to say 'well, THEY were bad, so you can't blame ME". Yes, you can be blamed if you did something wrong. Even if someone else did, too.

No, because then I was in middle school, had no idea what the hell NS was, and therefore didn't give a crap about politics. All I remember was a big news thing in the 90's saying that Saddam wasn't letting UN inspectors in.

So you admit you lack adequate facts. Time to step out of the debate, then.

Don't make me put a list of how many people America has killed worldwide in the last 50 years. And don't make me pull out proof of where Saddam got his weapons and chemicals to do the things he did. IN fact, Rumsfeld went to Iraq right before he gassed the Kurds and pretty much told him that the US would look the other way.

And the UN scandal in no way exonerates the US for the wrong things it has done. That is very childish to say 'well, THEY were bad, so you can't blame ME". Yes, you can be blamed if you did something wrong. Even if someone else did, too.

Don't make ME give YOU a list of how many people SADDAM killed since he rose to power.

If you pull out a list, don't forget the Korean and Vietnam wars, along with the FIRST gulf war.

So you admit you lack adequate facts. Time to step out of the debate, then.

I tell what I know. And I won't back down from what I believe in, sorry to burst your bubble.

Jobs, sure....Walmart's always openning new stores, Kmart is hiring. There's two large corporations right there. They always look at ex-military as leadership people, making it slightly easier for them to get a job there.

And at the time, he believed that there were, or possibly that there were about to be, WMD's. Is intel said so. That's like failing a test in school because the text book had a lot of typos.


If you kept using a book with typos even when there was a corrected version, because the book read more like you wanted it to...then it's your fault.

The crap about the Uranium from Niger was shot full of holes almost a YEAR before Powell used the report in front of the UN. Edmunds and Clark have testified that the civilian leaders in the CIA were pushing for intelligence that pointed at Iraq, and refusing to accept the reports that did not say what they wanted it to say. Several whistle blowers have come forward about that.

The intelligence wasn't faulty by mistake, it was manipulated on purpose. I would be happy to direct you to some sites that may fill in the gaps in your knowledge of the situation.

If you kept using a book with typos even when there was a corrected version, because the book read more like you wanted it to...then it's your fault.

The crap about the Uranium from Niger was shot full of holes almost a YEAR before Powell used the report in front of the UN. Edmunds and Clark have testified that the civilian leaders in the CIA were pushing for intelligence that pointed at Iraq, and refusing to accept the reports that did not say what they wanted it to say. Several whistle blowers have come forward about that.

The intelligence wasn't faulty by mistake, it was manipulated on purpose. I would be happy to direct you to some sites that may fill in the gaps in your knowledge of the situation.

If it was manipulated, than the blame falls on those who did said manipulating. Bush reported it, and went to war. That raises another question, if it was faulty when he used it, why did no one in Congress point that out?

Don't make ME give YOU a list of how many people SADDAM killed since he rose to power.

Considering the United States didn't care how many people Saddam killed since his rise to power until after Desert Storm and his supposed attempt to assassinate Daddy Bush, I don't see why you're bringing it up now.

America has a habit of propping up dictators and juntas who pay lip service to their interests, then once they become a political liability they turn on them with the whole "Freedom" crap which has become a joke and a catchphrase.

Considering the United States didn't care how many people Saddam killed since his rise to power until after Desert Storm and his supposed attempt to assassinate Daddy Bush, I don't see why you're bringing it up now.

America has a habit of propping up dictators and juntas who pay lip service to their interests, then once they become a political liability they turn on them with the whole "Freedom" crap which has become a joke and a catchphrase.

I don't care when anyone else cared, the list is there. And on the other angle, why didn't anyone HERE care about our list until NOW?

I tell what I know. And I won't back down from what I believe in, sorry to burst your bubble.

So if you believed that the world was flat, and all you ever saw was a map showing the edge of the world where you would fall off, you would argue and argue and argue that the world was flat, even if others had the facts for you to see?

I report what I know at the time. I'm talking in past tense for reasons going into the war. No one in Congress stopped him, so we went ahead. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm tired and going to bed. Have a good night, or day depending on where you live.

If it was manipulated, than the blame falls on those who did said manipulating. Bush reported it, and went to war. That raises another question, if it was faulty when he used it, why did no one in Congress point that out?

Yes, the blame falls on the Bush administration officials put in charge of Intelligence. Read Clarke's testimony.

Congress was unable to point it out because they received the same flawed reports. Only the actual agents that put the reports together knew the real story. That's why i mentioned all the whistleblowers.

I don't care when anyone else cared, the list is there. And on the other angle, why didn't anyone HERE care about our list until NOW?

And since you only bring up the list in an attempt to justify your pro-Bushevik stance on Iraq instead of seeing that American Interests often ignored puppet-committed atrocities until they become liabilities means you really couldn't care less how many people Saddam killed as well.

Disingenous.

:rolleyes:

Did nothing to us? Go read about the first gulf war, the surrender, and the next ten years.... then rephrase that for us again.
geee i was alive during the first gulf war... iraq did nothing to US. they invaded kuwait, we decided to push them back out again, and we did

since then they have done nothing to US and nothing that justified taking our eye off the ball in afghanistan. we could have gone many many more years of just putting pressure on him while we did what really needed to be done. then when osama bin laden was just a bad memory, we could have gone into iraq if it still seemed necessary.

There is NO way to protest against the war which would be acceptable to the pro-war faction. Period.

You can't satisfy them. Because to the pro-war crowd, being against the war is being against the US. Being against the war, to many, is "siding with the terrorists." There simply is no "should" about protesting the war, except that the pro-war crowd would like it if no one protested, at all, our involvement in the war.

There is NO way to protest against the war which would be acceptable to the pro-war faction. Period.

You can't satisfy them. Because to the pro-war crowd, being against the war is being against the US. Being against the war, to many, is "siding with the terrorists." There simply is no "should" about protesting the war, except that the pro-war crowd would like it if no one protested, at all, our involvement in the war.

Which of course would change, with no rhyme or reason, if a Democrat were President. Then of course it would be their patriotic duty to protest the war.



Probably by blowing something up or shooting guns in the air. :p

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=440467&page=1&pp=15

Enough said.

So, I've scanned through this thread and basically the gist of it is that Mrs. Sheehan wouldn't have time to bake me a pie.

Personally I don't think she'll make a convincing case that Bush murdered her son

If is Sheehan who thinks that, she has a serious problem.

But if are the conservatives who think that Sheehan protests for that (when really it isn't the reason), reveals a lack of wide-seeing.