Five Brigades, Twenty-Thousand troops

[geocajun]

im not american so im not afraid to think what i want

What does that mean? I'm American and I think what I want...

 

[dave90]

What does that mean? I'm American and I think what I want...

i find it odd that the people on this forum overwhelmingly support bush

 

[geocajun]

i find it odd that the people on this forum overwhelmingly support bush

They are free to do that, or free not to do that. You indicated Americans were free to think what they want. Is it your assertion that if folks were free to think what they wanted they would not support Bush? That would be incorrect, obviously.

 

[SolomonVII]

i find it odd that the people on this forum overwhelmingly support bush

A quick head count woud show that, if anything, the majority of posts in this thread don't support Bush.

Apparently, it's can't be the numbers, so it must be the logic of the pro-Bush arguments that you find overwhelming.

 

[Michael G]

the man should be crying buckets of tears for what he's allowed to happen.

I think you mean Clinton should be allowed to carry buckets of tears. If we had dealt with this issue in the 90s when it first started to get bad, 3,000+ would not have died on 9/11.

 

[princess_ballet]

In all the arguements I hear about the war, Vietnam is always the worst. Comparing these two wars seriously shows a lack of understanding both of the wars.

And again, it doesn't matter whether you think we should be there or not. We are there. We have to finish now. We have no choice.

And how come we never see this in the media?

 

[Michael G]

In all the arguements I hear about the war, Vietnam is always the worst. Comparing these two wars seriously shows a lack of understanding both of the wars.

And again, it doesn't matter whether you think we should be there or not. We are there. We have to finish now. We have no choice.

And how come we never see this in the media?

This war and Vietnam have NO comparison to each other historically.

 

[kimber1]

I think you mean Clinton should be allowed to carry buckets of tears. If we had dealt with this issue in the 90s when it first started to get bad, 3,000+ would not have died on 9/11.

no actually i blame his father on this one. (bush's not clinton's )

 

[Michael G]

no actually i blame his father on this one. (bush's not clinton's )

Yeah, we should have sacked Bagdad the first time and made Iraq a US Military zone.

 

[stray bullet]

i find it odd that the people on this forum overwhelmingly support bush

Who here supports Bush?

I agree with Bush on some issues. I would question whether or not people are really free to think that grow up in cultures that hate America and have access to media that feels likewise.

 

[stray bullet]

the man should be crying buckets of tears for what he's allowed to happen.

What has Bush allowed to happen, exactly?

 

[stray bullet]

no actually i blame his father on this one. (bush's not clinton's )

His father wasn't the one that gutted our intelligence agencies. Clinton was the one that rejected the US receiving bin laden. He also treated the first WTC bombing as a criminal matter, not an issue of terrorism.

He did absolutely nothing to fight terrorism, despite it being such a problem in his adminstration. From embassy bombings, to barracks blowing up, to Somalia, to the USS Cole, WTC (1993).. and on and on.

 

[stray bullet]

oil, is to be found. I truly believe that bush is doing it for oil, using men and woman for the greed of money

How is Bush doing it for oil? Considering the oil is the property of the Iraqi government, with profits going to the people.

This is actually very bad for his oil buddies, who want there to be less oil on the market. The best thing to do would be nothing, just keep up sanctions against Iraq.

You look at the same involved with France and the food for oil scandal. Europe was against the war because the Middle-East's oil is their lifeblood. The oil in the US comes from the Americas (Canada, US, Mexico, Latin America)

 

[plaid_pixie]

In all the arguements I hear about the war, Vietnam is always the worst. Comparing these two wars seriously shows a lack of understanding both of the wars.

And again, it doesn't matter whether you think we should be there or not. We are there. We have to finish now. We have no choice.

And how come we never see this in the media?

while i think you're right, knowing that my brother might be drafted at some point doesn't make it any easier for me. you and i don't have to worry about that, but i have to worry about my bro. i love him too much.

gabby

 

[plaid_pixie]

How is Bush doing it for oil? Considering the oil is the property of the Iraqi government, with profits going to the people.

This is actually very bad for his oil buddies, who want there to be less oil on the market. The best thing to do would be nothing, just keep up sanctions against Iraq.

You look at the same involved with France and the food for oil scandal. Europe was against the war because the Middle-East's oil is their lifeblood. The oil in the US comes from the Americas (Canada, US, Mexico, Latin America)

what was the food for oil thingy?

 

[stray bullet]

what was the food for oil thingy?

Iraq had sanctions against them for their refusal to do weapons inspections for a number of years.

Meaning, Europe couldn't get their precious oil, while Iraqis starved. So the UN decided to make an exception, where they would give food in exchange for the oil. They wouldn't be supporting the state, while the poorest wouldn't suffer (in theory).

The system was full of scandal after the invasion, where documents revealed France had been giving them money (kickbacks) and food in exchange for oil.

 

[princess_ballet]

while i think you're right, knowing that my brother might be drafted at some point doesn't make it any easier for me. you and i don't have to worry about that, but i have to worry about my bro. i love him too much.

gabby

Actually, I have two little brothers, one who will turn 18 this year. So yes, this is something I worry about as well. I certainly do not want him to go over there.

And I am strongly against a draft.

At the same time, we cannot just sit here and let these radicals attack us. We have to step up and do something.

 

[WarriorAngel]

His father wasn't the one that gutted our intelligence agencies. Clinton was the one that rejected the US receiving bin laden. He also treated the first WTC bombing as a criminal matter, not an issue of terrorism.

He did absolutely nothing to fight terrorism, despite it being such a problem in his adminstration. From embassy bombings, to barracks blowing up, to Somalia, to the USS Cole, WTC (1993).. and on and on.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/9/10/181819.shtml?s=ic
And NewsMax has the former President making the claim on audiotape. [You can listen to the tape yourself] -- Click Here

During a February 2002 speech, Clinton explained that he turned down an offer from Sudan for bin Laden's extradition to the U.S., saying, "At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him."

But that wasn't exactly true. By 1996, the 9/11 mastermind had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by prosecutors in New York.
9/11 Commissioner former Sen. Bob Kerrey said that Clinton told the Commission during his private interview that reports of his comments to the LIA were based on "a misquote."
During his interview with the 9/11 Commission, Clinton was accompanied by longtime aide and former White House counsel Bruce Lindsey, along with former national security advisor Sandy Berger, who insisted in sworn testimony before Congress in Sept. 2002 that there was never any offer from Sudanese officials to turn over bin Laden to the U.S.

 

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

How does this continue? How has this man not been impeached? Or at least gotten a mad stare from his wife?

How can President Bush send all those people over there? I'm not a pacifist by any means, but seriously...

I would think it should be more like 50,000.

Think about this:

1) The result of a coalition victory in Iraq will be a strong and stable democracy and an end to the insurgency.

2) A failure in Iraq will result in the deaths of countless millions of individuals. The insurgents have stated that they will kill every person and their families, including children, who have voted in the elections. The population of Iraq is around 27 million people and 85% of the population voted.

Knowing this, is failure really an acceptable option in this situation?

 

[InnerPhyre]

King George should have listened to Pope John Paul II, who told him that if he went to Iraq, God did not go with him.

I'm disgusted by the entire operation. The more soldiers I know who come home and tell me their stories cement me deeper in my position every time. This war was a waste of life. The Iraqi government will end up either being a puppet of Iran or a heavy fisted dicatorship which is what we removed in the first place.

God save us from our government.