I didn't mean to imply that YOU made insane arguements. I can see how it sounded that way, and I apologize. You did ask for quotes where Bush used both terms in the same sentence. I provided them. If you don't see what I see in them, that is fine, but I did provide what you asked for. I know you like Bush, so I didn't really expect you to come away from the quotes with the same opinion I did. I don't know your background, but in 2000, I didn't have an opinion regarding Bush one way or another. Right after 9/11, I thought he was excellent dealing with the tragedy. He spoke well, he was firm and determined to bring the people responsible to justice. He really helped America feel good and move forward. After that I lost faith in him. I do feel he mislead us, but I didn't start out as anti-Bush.

 

As you can see, I didn't say that. If you would like to point out which part was BS, I would be more than happy to explain.

 

Sounds like momalle1 doesn't believe people are smart enough to listen and understand what GW is saying. He might have used them in the same sentence and speech but, what it looks like he is doing to me is comparing Al queada and Iraq on the terms of a terrorist organization. That would be no different than comparing the US and Britan, not an unreasonable comparison.

 

Not true at all. I actually said if Odin's Wrath got something different out of it, that I was OK with that. Drawing your own conclusions is fine, but if you are not interested in another viewpoint, why read forums like this?

 

July 28th 2003:
Nearly a year and no change with 113 days to go.

Never thought Bush was evil. Never accused him of lying.
My vote is an effort to get him fired for incompetence.

He has mis-managed 87 Billion terrorism dollars.
He has bankrupted America's moral authority account.
(In this account the US does not determine the balance.
The balance is what those outside the US thinks it worth.)
800 plus dead, 3,000 plus injured, and counting.

What has he delivered at this cost?
A sarin filled artilllery shell and a two bit Dictator that was in power when Jimmy Carter was President.

And before I hear yet again that the entire free world thought he had WMD I will say this. No one pulled the trigger that brought us to this except Bush. He pulled the trigger and he must be held accountable. This happened on his watch at his hand.

9/11 happened on his watch and I looked to him for leadership and was glad Gore was not in Office. I didn't start pulling back from the way this Country was going until attention turned to Iraq and the evidence was questionable. I stood in the minority and hoped that I would end up with egg on my face and the farther we go sadly it looks like this was indeed unneccessary.
How do you square that with families that lost loved ones in this mess?
Oops?
Made a mistake, so sorry.
They can't do that. They have hitched their wagons to this star and have to ride it out.

Fired for incompetence.

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Raoul...They better find some WMD before November 2 2004, even if they have to manufacture them in Minnesota, ship them over by boat and bury them in the middle of the night or I will not vote the Republican ticket for the first time since 1976.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You must go where your heart leads you. The right will miss you very much. Farewell and may your journey be pleasant.

 

Uh, you make it sound like I'm buying a chevy.
I think F150online is big enough for those with a dissenting view.

 

 

I have the utmost respect for my good friend Raoul and I can completely understand his assessment with the current situation.

With that said I guess I have a different outlook on the current situation, or the situation in general. Granted I stood behind this war in Iraq from the very beginning and I continue to stand behind it and say yes it is worth it, it is worth it in the long run not only for a “possible’ more stable Middle East but “maybe” to help reduce terrorism in general.

What do I base my “beliefs” on, because that is all they really are until proven to be correct or incorrect, I base them on the theory that free people are not nearly as violent as those people who are repressed. I base it on the fact that when people can actually get decent information about the outside world that perhaps they may change their opinion about the outside world, specifically the west.

None of that is possible until someone actually takes an action to cause a reaction. Will Iraq work out to be a great story of freedom, people that can actually succeed, people that are less violent, people and a region that are more stable and people that are more friendly towards the west? Nobody knows this answer, not yet because it has yet to be played out. It has not really been given the proper chance to unfold with so many people ready to call it a failure before it has even started, or that it is just not possible to do in the Middle East.

These people could be right and our current attempt could be futile however it is an attempt and it is a grand attempt to try and curb terrorism. I don’t think there is anything that can be done to completely eliminate terrorism it will always be with us, just like murder, rape and other violent crimes in America.

However when you attempt to curb such things as violent actions like terrorism or murder and rape you do have success and you do have failures but to do nothing brings complete failure and a greatly increased world of violent actions and fears.

The war in Iraq is a direct attempt at curbing world terrorism because much of those involved with terrorism come from the Middle East, people who are repressed and taught to hate based on what someone tells them to think rather then being able to think for themselves.

Yes we know many of the terrorist came from Saudi Arabia (911 attacks) and perhaps that should have been the starting point but Iraq was the country believed to be much more dangerous to the west based on many conclusions from many countries and including Saddam’s own admission that he had WMD’S. It was also the country out of all of them that was not following the laws, the UN resolutions to disarm and prove it. They did not prove they had met all the UN requirements that they had signed on to after the first gulf war.

Yes many of the other Middle East countries are almost or as bad as Iraq was but you can’t take on everybody at one time so you have to pick and decide which makes the most sense and where can the biggest gains be made.

Iraq was the current one that had the most against them in regards to UN resolutions and not following what had been agreed to. Yes there are many other countries not following UN resolutions or agreements they had agreed to either.

It is just like tax evasion, the IRS is not going to go after the person who cheated them out of $100 first when they can go after the person that cheated them out of $10,000. Not all people will get caught who evade paying their taxes and not all the bad guys in the world will meet justice.

You have to decide where can the most gain be had and make a decision. Iraq was that place. It is a starting point and if enough people believe in it and try there best to help it succeed then maybe it will make a big difference on how stable the Middle East is as well as curb terrorism in general.

To do nothing is to guarantee continued and more violent terrorist acts against the free world, specifically America…

 

Why was Iraq the place to start? WMD's? we haven't found anything current. Iraq was pretty far down on the list of states sponsoring terrorism, least dangerous to most dangerous listed per the state department.


Cuba

Iran

Iraq

Libya

North Korea

Sudan

Syria

 

First, Iraq yes because of WMD’S. It doesn’t matter that we haven’t found a lot. Not to get into another argument but the entire free world and Iraq (Saddam) himself ALL agreed that Saddam had WMD’S. Clinton and the vast majority of democrats and liberals as well as President Bush and the vast majority of republicans and conservatives ALL agreed that Iraq had WMD’S.

Second, Iraq is in a central location in the Middle East. They border Iran, Syria, Jordan and Saudi. Start in the middle and work your way out. You could look at it like this, if freedom comes to Iraq in some forum then other neighboring countries will see this or learn about this and it could possibly spread.

Why to not start with:

Cuba: They are small and can be taken out in hours if we really needed to and they know that and thus not much trouble from them, not in the big picture.

Iran: It is a huge country that would take at least twice the man power we currently have in Iraq. Iran is somewhat on the verge of collapsing, at least the current ruling factions. All they need is some help from special forces and/or support in weapons and they may be able to succeed in becoming another free Middle East country. Why do you think some from Iran are spending millions of dollars and sending terrorist into Iraq to disrupt what we are doing? They are AFRAID, VERY AFRAID of Iraq succeeding because IF Iraq succeeds the current regime in Iran is DEAD.

Libya: They have seen the light and are now “attempting” to work things out with us. Though I think Kodifia (sp?) should have to go as the leader in order to receive our help. In either case it “appears” they are willing to work with us and destroy their stockpile of WMD’S.

North Korea: That is currently in progress, though not a lot has happen it is being handled in another manner. We are first trying diplomacy before we have to attack them. Remember Iraq had this same opportunity for over 10 years.

Sudan: Basically the same reason as Iran. They are a huge country and resources are limited. Since they are across the Red Sea from Saudi it wouldn’t be the greatest place to start a “possible” spreading of freedom. I don’t think Sudan becoming free would have the same bang for the buck as Iraq.

Syria: That may have been a good possibility but Iraq is better since the have Iran on one side of them and Syria on the other side. Spread the freedom from the center out has the biggest “possible” affect.

This is why you see these terrorist counties you listed being so afraid and scared to death at what is going on in Iraq. They are indeed scared to death of Iraq succeeding because that would mean their current regimes will die and that includes Saudi as well.

However many of those terrorist countries take reprieve watching Americans argue among ourselves and have great hope in those Americans that would like to see Iraq fail for political gain because for the terrorist those that have something to gain political here in America if Iraq fails means the terrorist also have something to gain, their livelihood, existence and their way of life…