Bush Puts a Cancer on the Presidency

[Fruit & Veg]

Touchy!

I'm interested in hearing how America is becoming 'Socialist'.

[bytech]

Originally Posted by Brian

Ah yes, I'm so misinformed. Thanks for letting me know ... guess I can't handle this whole decision process on my own.

I never quite realized how stupid I really was. Thanks for opening my eyes.

Didn't say that.... all that I am saying is that the issues I bring regarding Bush's decision making process are answered with "we do as we wish, and that justifies it". "Because" is not an answer. Most of what I am hearing so far is exactlly that. "The war was justified" is an empty statement unless the justification is explained... 90% of world population feels that it has not been justified, so I am saying what makes Bush such a smart individual with god like powers to dismiss those people without good reason.

Bush promised the smoking gun for a loooong time. Remember that term? Smoking gun? No one uses it anymore because there was no smoking gun, the same non-existent smoking gun for which he got support for the war.

Bush jumps from reason to reason for the invasion. For a while he was saying that it was "confidential information, we have sources but in the end you will see it was justified". BS. BS. BS. The war did not help us see anything we didn't see before: There is no WMD, Bush is a weasel. Just like Hitler was.

[John Scott]

The only reason such a large percentage of American's supported Bush was because of "Code Orange", terms like "Axis of Evil", and "Uh, oh, they are breathing down our necks with WMD". Bush misled the public, therefore any support he had is nulled out as it was based on lies fed by the Admin.

LOL. That sounds like the argument of desperation. We supported him and still support him in the war because Saddam is a murdering tyrant.

[Paul]

Originally Posted by bytech

"The war was justified" is an empty statement unless the justification is explained... 90% of world population feels that it has not been justified, so I am saying what makes Bush such a smart individual with god like powers to dismiss those people without good reason.

There is no WMD, Bush is a weasel. Just like Hitler was.

bytech: The initial reason for the last invasion of Iraq may have been to find WMD’s, but even if none are ever found, was the war still not justified? Was it not enough that Saddam massacred thousands of his own countrymen, and posed a threat to the rest of the world? Should he have been left in power still?

Just because the rest of the world did not agree with the war with Iraq does not mean there was not justification for it. If you look back at when Hitler was in power (since you brought up Hitler) and millions of Jews were being killed, much of the European population stood back and ignored what was going on. The Einsatzgruppen massacred thousands of people, and in many cases no one said a word because they thought to themselves, they are coming for the Jews, and I’m not a Jew so I have nothing to worry about. We as a nation are less likely to stand back and let un-humanitarian acts occur especially when you add in a threat to our nation security.

Home of the Brave ring a bell to you?

[John Scott]

Welcome to the forums, Paul.

[Jazzee]

Hi Paul

[Paul]

Thanks for the friendly responses amidst all the debate

[Brian]

Hey Paul.

Welcome to this debate We have debates on a wide variety of subjects every now and then, debates are healthy for a forum IMO.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by bytech

Didn't say that.... all that I am saying is that the issues I bring regarding Bush's decision making process are answered with "we do as we wish, and that justifies it". "Because" is not an answer. Most of what I am hearing so far is exactlly that. "The war was justified" is an empty statement unless the justification is explained... 90% of world population feels that it has not been justified, so I am saying what makes Bush such a smart individual with god like powers to dismiss those people without good reason.

Bush promised the smoking gun for a loooong time. Remember that term? Smoking gun? No one uses it anymore because there was no smoking gun, the same non-existent smoking gun for which he got support for the war.

Bush jumps from reason to reason for the invasion. For a while he was saying that it was "confidential information, we have sources but in the end you will see it was justified". BS. BS. BS. The war did not help us see anything we didn't see before: There is no WMD, Bush is a weasel. Just like Hitler was.

Thanks for clarifying. I thought you were seriously calling me stupid. I have trouble sometimes understanding posts on a forum. Thanks again ...

[John Scott]

Didn't say that.... all that I am saying is that the issues I bring regarding Bush's decision making process are answered with "we do as we wish, and that justifies it". "Because" is not an answer. Most of what I am hearing so far is exactlly that. "The war was justified" is an empty statement unless the justification is explained

We've explained in simple, easy to understand terms why the war was justified several times. If you don't want to read and/or understand those explanations, then that is on you.

There will always be people like you around. The "non intervention" policy was put forth by Bill Clinton, and a few presidents before that. We watched Bill Clinton apologize for that mistaken policy when he went to Rwanda.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/

I said earlier in this thread that war was justified the moment SH murdered the first child. He's murdered thousands and thousands since that. He slaughtered innocent, unarmed Kurds. He ordered the murder of innocent Kuwaiti children. He and his sons raped and murdered Iraqi women at will.

But there will always be the non-interventionists. Same thing happened back in the 1930's. We knew that Hilter was murdering millions of Jews, gays, gypsies and the non-interventionists toed the same line you are toing. "It's none of our business."

Well, it is our business if we choose to make it our business. Morality demands we make it our business.

[rtroxel]

This has certainly been a lively thread to follow, partly because healthy debate in a democracy is always a good thing.

However, I've noticed that a lot of you don't really know what you're talking about. You throw around terms like "socialist", "Nazi", etc.., but it's clear to me you don't know what those words really mean. You're using them to demonize ideas and people you don't like or don't understand.

OK, some of you are probably thinking: "Who's this jerk?"

OK, here's what I'm trying to say:

Why don't you all take some time and read some good books. Forget the sound-bytes and graphics you see on TV "opinion" shows. Forget the shouting "experts" on talk radio. Forget the hate-oriented web sites.

Instead, go to your local public library and read some books. They're free.

That's right: I'm asking you to READ BOOKS.

"What's that?," you're thinking. "The man's mad..."

If you want to understand US politics and history, read the US Constitution and the Federalist papers. Read Bruce Caton's History of the American Civil War. Read Stephen Ambrose's biographies of Nixon and Eisenhower. Read David McCullogh's biography of Harry Truman.

If you really want to learn about how the Nazis seized power in Germany, start with Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

Why am I recommending these books? Because they're written by people who have researched facts, and have come to specific conclusions based on those facts. This is called inductive logic. (Look it up in the dictionary. There's one in every library.)

If you're a European and you think America sucks, then visit the graveyards of US soldiers in France and the Netherlands. Or get onto Google and search on "Normandy" and "Battle of the Bulge".

In closing, I have to say that most of you seem to be intelligent people, so what I'm suggesting here shouldn't be too difficult.

[Fruit & Veg]

So America doesn't suck purely on the basis of their participation in WWII?

Looks like we're not the only ones due down the library....and of course, books are immune to bias, propaganda and lies right?

[rtroxel]

So America doesn't suck purely on the basis of their participation in WWII?

If you're saying that the US isn't perfect, I would agree with you, because no country is perfect. But the US has also done some great things, like defeating the Nazis in Western Europe.

Looks like we're not the only ones due down the library

Are you saying I owe library fines? I don't.

and of course, books are immune to bias, propaganda and lies right?

The books I mentioned aren't lies and propaganda. Each of the authors has his own viewpoint. The great thing about books is that you can get different viewpoints, compare them and then come to your own conclusions.

This is my last post to this thread. I have to work on my taxes.

[bytech]

Originally Posted by Paul

bytech: The initial reason for the last invasion of Iraq may have been to find WMD’s, but even if none are ever found, was the war still not justified? Was it not enough that Saddam massacred thousands of his own countrymen, and posed a threat to the rest of the world? Should he have been left in power still?

Welcome Paul.

Bush decided for war based on WMD. Iraq has none, everyone seemed to suspect that except Bush.

China does have WMD, and is a communist country that kills and tortures their own. Everyone knows that too.

Bush acted like a school yard bully: don't like em, will get em, I am big enough to their behinds, np. China, sure, they do the SAME things that Iraw does, but gee, they are a little bigger... not sure if I should take that challenge on.

How to explain American foreign policy to your child:
http://forum.bytechcanada.net/viewto...ighlight=china

[SVB]

But the difference is, a schoolyard bully does it for no reason. It ends up pointless. But the Iraq invasion ended up freeing a country from Saddam.
And welcome Paul :-)

[GEWbert]

bytech. look, its very simple. lets try this analogy on you.

Lets say Saddam came to power in the United States. He was doing the exact same things that he was doing in Iraq. Now, if you were an American, would you want to be freed? I know i would. There was an interesting article written by the guy who wrote Black Hawk Down on the whole war and especially the Falluja thing. He very plainly stated that though there may not have been WMD, and though things may not have been true, now that we are in there, we have to finish it out, for if we pull out, Iraq will fall into the same place it was before, and the world will say "You stupid Americans, why didn't you stay in Iraq??" The article continued and talked about how most of the insurgency is a small minority trying to stir up the majority of the population.

The world is completely fickle. It can't seem to make up its mind. I don't really go with what the world thinks all the time.

[Ferre]

My thoughts?

I'm all for getting rid of the dictators in this world and it's a good thing Saddam is out of leadership. Still I have my questions, if I may.

When Bush had told the American people and the UN he was going to take Saddam out of power becouse he was a danger to the Iraq people would he have gotten as much support from the American people? I doubt it. They would ask themselves why not go for ALL the other dictators then.

before Bush invaded Iraq, he had already given (sold) the contracts to "rebuild" the oilfields and infrastructure to his close friends and their busynesses. As if the Iraquis don't have technical construction companies.

then there's the 4 million tons of depleted uranium they dropped in order to free the country, do a search on that one and you know what I'm really talking about. WMD's and killing civillians. (AND at the same time getting rid of nuclear waste that otherwise costs money to handle.)

All to take one man out? How much did it cost? And with this kind of money there was no other solution to get rid of Saddam then destroying the country and poison the population with radiation for the next 400 years?

Why did ALL the broadcast licenses for radio and tv in Iraq go to American companies? can't they make radio of their own?

Why did the Americans appoint the NEW head of Iraqw intelligence last week BEFORE there is an Iraq voted parliament?

And I have many other questions, same questions the 90% of the world has about this whole stinking busyness deal.

And you know what? I am paying for this too, the Dutch government gave Bush money and troops. So I guess that gives me the right to ask questions.

As I said, Dumping Saddam is one thing, going for your own agenda another. Don't mix them up. My guess is Bush did.