First of all BsB, I think you need to grasp the concept that not everyone here is a jelly spined liberal and is more concerned about what the U.N. thinks of us rather than our children's futures. The spending is a bit much, but after the fear we all felt after 9/11 of being attacked here again, how can you put a price tag on freedom? Seems to me that if you put a price tag on that, then you can only be expected to also complain about the Iraqi lives being lost as well... I noticed you didn't mention the lives of our troops in your complaining. This is a war, and somtimes countries who have been cought with their fingers in the cookie jar don't like when the hand slapping starts (Iran, China, Russia, France, Germany to name a few). Try to remember back to Sept. 12, 2001. Our whole country was on pins and needles because of what we had seen the day before... terrorism on our own soil. It's been happening for decades to our people, just not here. If Clinton would have stepped up to the plate and done something to enforce the 17 or 18 UN resolutions of the UN against Sadam, then maybe the UN wouldn't have been laundering money back to him through Oil for Food so that he could fund terrorism. I'm not at all saying that he (Sadam) was behind 9/11, but he was supporting and harboring terrorists in his own country. That is how this war fits into the picture. I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but you can't just turn your back on a problem and hope it goes away like Clinton did, as well as that peanut farmer Carter.
Since you are obviously not a Bush supporter, and think that what he has done by getting us into this war is so stupid, How do you justify Kerry voting for the war, but not the money to support it? Seems kinda Chickens*$@! to me. Sounds kinda like the war hero was all for taking action, as long as it didn't cost too much. Scary that someone that weak got as many votes as he did.
As for the Do hitting the fan, I think it's time for it start. Worrying about not offending anyone is making this war drag on longer than it needs to. I think we need to take the gloves off and show the world what a superior military is, even if it means turning the temperature up a few thousand degrees in the Sunni Triangle.

 

To the contrary.......I don't think you understand the geopolitical importance of that region.

Please refer to my initial post.

It's about Petroleumland...........the stakes are huge..........and our National interests are at stake as are those of the rest of the globe.

In other words........what we are doing in Iraq is very much worth while and in fact enormously important.

Sometimes doing what is right is not easy or politically correct. That's why Bill Clinton ultimately was a sucky President........because he was too concerned with what every other country, the UN and polls thought about his actions. Neither he nor the UN would enforce any of the UN's own sanctions against Sadaam.

You want some history...........Harry Truman was bashed incesantly by an elitist media and others who portrayed him as a complete dim-witted moron as he made the hardest decisions for the country through the conclusion of WW2. History shows that the "IDIOT, MORONIC, SIMPLETON" Harry S. Truman was a great President in large part because he would not be swayed by all of the critics (guys like you and 'Hondbuster' that would find fault in every single thing that he would do).

Let me say this very clearly so that you and 'Hondabuster' understand it:

I DON'T CARE WHAT OTHER COUNTRIES AND PARTICULARLY THE INEPT, CORRUPT AND INCOMPETENT UNITED NATIONS THINKS!!!............THEY HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES TO BE COMPLETELY INEFFECTUAL AND NOTHING MORE THAN A COLLECTION OF NATIONS ALL WITH THEIR OWN SELF INTERESTS AS THEIR MOTIVATIONS...........AND ALL OF THOSE MOTIVATIONS ARE IN THE VERY WORST INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES.

PLEASE.........call me arrogant..........I don't care if you insult me.

The geopolitical ramifications of a Petroleumland being controlled by the BARBARIANS is a very ugly prospect for the civilized world.........it's VITAL to the United States and it's VITAL to the entire global.

Put your own petty hatred for Bush aside, look at the big picture and remember.....the BARBARIANS don't care about being "POLICALLY CORRECT!!!" or what anyone else thinks.

 

fighting terrorism would have been great, if that is what the prez actually went for. i would love for you to tell me of 1 terrorist group in iraq, BEFORE 9 11. heck, show me even 1 weapon of mass destruction? how about iraq being a threat to the u.s a.? i know, in 10 or 20 years, he would of been. how about right now? do you think he was a bigger threat that the taliban? they are still in afganistan. there in iran. saudia arabia! what about N. corea? were they a threat. they were voted the no. 1 threat to the world!!! by 99% of the world's top panelists, by the way.
please explain to my why we bypassed osama for sadam? why 5 bil on terrorism, and over 200 billion on sadam?

we need to fight terrorism 100 % . not some 3rd rate country with not enough money or army to beat a small island in the atlantic.

i think what bush did weakened our position in the world, our homeland defence, our future finances, and our ability to fight the real terrorists, that we conviently overlooked for the tirant sadam.
i am curious where iraq threatened out freedom at. is he, or was he a bigger threat than osama? how about iran, who openly supports terrorism? saudia arabia where 13 of the 9 11 attachers came from?
heck, time did a report on the 20 most damgerous country's on the planet. out of the 20, iraq came in last.
this was before the war by the way.

do some research, and you will find all this info for you to read. some produced by bush's own people who resigned over it.
i never supported the invasion on iraq. i would have supported one on iran, of corse afganistan, or even n. corea. but iraq???? where was the logic in that? what was the reason for it. becouse he threatened daddy? oil? positioning in the middle east? sounds like hitler to me, not the america i grew up knowing.

 

if we did invade iraq over oil like you are stating, they why are we not setting up the flag, and staying forever? why are we fighting for elections, when the elected party will only raise oil prices to us, to pay for there rebuilding efforts? you know it will happen, couse it always has to us. what country has paid us back, for saving there a$$es?
if you are right, then why did we not go for iran, who also has oil, and supports terrorism?
i am in no way doughting your thoughts, or calling you names. i am wondering where his intensions lie, if this is in fact what he is doing? do they not have oil in afganistan? we were there, but only lightly. no where near the power of iraq's attach.
we have the lowest cost of gasoline on the planet. we have a friendship in the middle east( another tyrant) who supply's us without question. so, why pick a country that was virtually no threat to us over true threats?
if what you say is true, then he is following hitlers attach plan. start with the small, weak country's, and go on to larger ones from there. is that the jist of it? again, not calling names, it aint like that. just trying to see othersides on this issue.

 

<<<First of all BsB, I think you need to grasp the concept that not everyone here is a jelly spined liberal and is more concerned about what the U.N. thinks of us rather than our children's futures. The spending is a bit much, but after the fear we all felt after 9/11 of being attacked here again, how can you put a price tag on freedom? Seems to me that if you put a price tag on that, then you can only be expected to also complain about the Iraqi lives being lost as well... I noticed you didn't mention the lives of our troops in your complaining. This is a war, and somtimes countries who have been cought with their fingers in the cookie jar don't like when the hand slapping starts (Iran, China, Russia, France, Germany to name a few). Try to remember back to Sept. 12, 2001. Our whole country was on pins and needles because of what we had seen the day before... terrorism on our own soil. It's been happening for decades to our people, just not here. If Clinton would have stepped up to the plate and done something to enforce the 17 or 18 UN resolutions of the UN against Sadam, then maybe the UN wouldn't have been laundering money back to him through Oil for Food so that he could fund terrorism. I'm not at all saying that he (Sadam) was behind 9/11, but he was supporting and harboring terrorists in his own country. That is how this war fits into the picture. I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but you can't just turn your back on a problem and hope it goes away like Clinton did, as well as that peanut farmer Carter.
Since you are obviously not a Bush supporter, and think that what he has done by getting us into this war is so stupid, How do you justify Kerry voting for the war, but not the money to support it? Seems kinda Chickens*$@! to me. Sounds kinda like the war hero was all for taking action, as long as it didn't cost too much. Scary that someone that weak got as many votes as he did.
As for the Do hitting the fan, I think it's time for it start. Worrying about not offending anyone is making this war drag on longer than it needs to. I think we need to take the gloves off and show the world what a superior military is, even if it means turning the temperature up a few thousand degrees in the Sunni Triangle.>>>


I know all about 9/11, I watched it burn from my house, I lost friends. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11..... You can bring up Kerry or Clinton all you want, that argument doesnt wash, I'm a lifetime republican. Pat Buchanan was against Iraq....If people would stop being so partisan in their thinking maybe they'd see things a little more clearly, it's really sad, BUT BUT CLINTON THIS AND THAT!!!

The only reason a weak candidate like Kerry got so many votes is because Bush has completely botched the war on terror. SAure we haven't been attacked, but we are breeding enemies in Iraq, who were secular Bathists. Religious fanatisism is booming in Iraq, when Saddam was there it wasn't tolerated.

Dude you have bought every little RNC sound byte hook, line and sinker....I'll give you an example of one. The Kerry voted for the war but against the money myth. Do you realize that the money bill he voted against had so many riders attatched to it, that any man of concience would have voted against it. Voting against a bill, supposedly written to fund a war, that includes pork barrel spending, snuck in, simply because the Repubs, knew guys like you don't look deep enough to see the truth. It makes for a great sound byte against any one who opposes it. Yet, they know guys like you will never take the time to reasearch to truth, thus they feed you a sound byte, because that is really all you have the time or interest to consume....


If you really understood the Mideast at all, you'd realize that Iraq was probably the last place Al Queda could operate, Bin Laden himself often called Saddam an infadel..... But again, Bush knows guys like you have neither the time or interest to research it. So they undertake this ridiculous war full well knowing that you'll march right behind them waving your flag. So go ahead and march on bro........

 

<<<To the contrary.......I don't think you understand the geopolitical importance of that region.

Please refer to my initial post.

It's about Petroleumland...........the stakes are huge..........and our National interests are at stake as are those of the rest of the globe.

In other words........what we are doing in Iraq is very much worth while and in fact enormously important.

Sometimes doing what is right is not easy or politically correct. That's why Bill Clinton ultimately was a sucky President........because he was too concerned with what every other country, the UN and polls thought about his actions. Neither he nor the UN would enforce any of the UN's own sanctions against Sadaam.

You want some history...........Harry Truman was bashed incesantly by an elitist media and others who portrayed him as a complete dim-witted moron as he made the hardest decisions for the country through the conclusion of WW2. History shows that the "IDIOT, MORONIC, SIMPLETON" Harry S. Truman was a great President in large part because he would not be swayed by all of the critics (guys like you and 'Hondbuster' that would find fault in every single thing that he would do).

Let me say this very clearly so that you and 'Hondabuster' understand it:

I DON'T CARE WHAT OTHER COUNTRIES AND PARTICULARLY THE INEPT, CORRUPT AND INCOMPETENT UNITED NATIONS THINKS!!!............THEY HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES TO BE COMPLETELY INEFFECTUAL AND NOTHING MORE THAN A COLLECTION OF NATIONS ALL WITH THEIR OWN SELF INTERESTS AS THEIR MOTIVATIONS...........AND ALL OF THOSE MOTIVATIONS ARE IN THE VERY WORST INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES.

PLEASE.........call me arrogant..........I don't care if you insult me.

The geopolitical ramifications of a Petroleumland being controlled by the BARBARIANS is a very ugly prospect for the civilized world.........it's VITAL to the United States and it's VITAL to the entire global.

Put your own petty hatred for Bush aside, look at the big picture and remember.....the BARBARIANS don't care about being "POLICALLY CORRECT!!!" or what anyone else thinks.>>>

Another guy with the Clinton arguement. You prove you have no arguemnet when you constantly resort to the Bill did this and that, blah, blah ,blah...


This has nothing to do with CLINTON!!! Our President should be accountable for HIS ACTIONS>>>


And another thing if you really had any clue Geopolitically about the region you'd realize how silly this war is....

Birthplace of Wahabbisim?....................................... ...........Saudi Arabia
#1 funder of Al Queda?............................................ ...........Saudi Arabia
15 of 19 9/11 highjackers were from? ................................Saudi Arabia
Reason BIn Laden originally turned against the US?...........Saudi Arabia

Waht don't you understand about this simple equation? You can Clinton this and that all you want, you're wrong and so is the president....

Oh more geoploitical clues for ya. 60% of Iraq is Shia, guess who wins the election, also the reason why they are not fighting us at the moment. So when the Shia win the election and turn Iraq(one of the only Arab countries that was a secular county) into a theocracy like Iran, what exactly have we accomplished? Do you think the Sunni will accept the Shia Dogs, (their refereance, not mine) as their masters? Obviously neither you nor Bush have thought this out very deeply.


I almost forgot, more geoploitical clues.. You guys like to sit there and state like macho men that world opinion means nothing. Well, watch the dollar fall, while gold and fuel rates escalte over the next 5 years. The other countries can't stop us, but they can vote with their dollars....Watch Iarn as it builds a pipeline into China next year, this is a troubling developement. Both of these countries are considered isolationists, Bush has managed to make countries like this form alliances out of fear of the big bully... Incidently China will begin to compete with the US for a bigger piece of the oil reserves as time goes on....To top that off, China owns about 20% of US debt, their loans have basically funded our war in Iraq and more......They have begun selling US dollars at an alarming rate...
-------------------------

 

it is quickly becoming apperant to me that if you ask a few, simple questions about this bush backing war on iraq, them people simply ectnore them, or disappear completly. why is that. i asked a few informed questions pertaining to the oil some feel we are fighting for, and have recieved no responce. maybe people are starting to think more clearly about it? maybe people are finally realizing i am no ( liberal) or i am no hippy protecting grass, and fighting to keep war away from america?
just maybe it is that i am not blindly following an idiot and his war mongering ways, without ryme or reason?

i watched the other post about all the anti war supporters must read post, and seen 10 responces in hours, then posted a few simple 3rd grade questions on it, only to see it stop in its tracks, lol. not 1 responce since then, go figure.


blind faith is no good for war, just ask the germans in 39. if you want to do something for your country, then support your troops, but not the moron getting them killed, for what? not for terrorism, i can tell you that. oh ya, there fighting them now, but only couse bush and rumsfelt left us so weak there, we cant even stop them from coming across the borders.

still waiting for a responce to my simple questions over the hole oil thing in iraq.

 

This is the trend I'm talking about. Another first.......Alliances being built to counter the US? Even during the cold war Nixon was smart enough to play these communist giants against each other...........

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/20...798891-ap.html


MOSCOW (AP) - Russia and China are set to hold unprecedented joint military manoeuvres on Chinese territory involving both countries' air forces and navies, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said, according to the Interfax news agency.

Ivanov said the exercise, which is expected to be held in the second half of next year, would involve submarines and possibly even strategic bombers, Interfax reported. Ivanov was speaking at a cabinet session chaired by President Vladimir Putin.

After decades of bitter rivalry, Moscow and Beijing have developed what they described as strategic partnership in the years after the Soviet collapse. China has become the No. 1 customer for Russia's struggling defence enterprises, purchasing billions of dollars worth of fighters, missiles, submarines and destroyers.

Both countries frequently have spoken about their adherence to "multi-polar world," a term describing their opposition to the perceived U.S. domination in global affairs.

Some observers have speculated that Russia, which has had a falling out with the West over Ukraine's presidential election, could respond by trying to forge a closer partnership with China.

 

Sorry...didnt mean to slight you, or mean to ignore you. Ill take a swing at an answer....
MONEY
I just got done reading a good book, which explains the events and relationships, and interviews pre 911. Its quite evident whats going on.
Its called "exception to the rulers" by Amy Goodman. Its not wacko stuff, its honest investigative reporting. Try the local library for a free read.

 

hondabuster, i agree with you about it being partly about money. by the way, my statement about people ectnoring my posts was not sent twards you, but i love you answering it anyway, lol.
i also have read, and learned through watching numerous so called experts, descuss these issues. most of all though, is just good ol' common sense.

can you tell me whay it is you think its a money thing though, and where it bacame money at?

my thoughts are twards family. bush jr. family is making money on this war, no dought bout it. contracts given through links from the higher ups, with no bids, and so on. but, it is costing this country billions of dollars, and we have not focused on the actuial terrorists yet( not on the scale of iraq, anyway) i am curious what your opinion is on it still.
we have spent billions on contracts given out, but dont share the welth, and burden with the other nations. ( again, not on any real scale) so, i see your point, on one question i asked, thanks.