Our President
POSTED BY: howdyrockerbaby1
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 16:36
VIEWED: 49385
PAGE 3 of 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Doran:
"Started a war with Iraq that by any realistic account will make terrorism much, much worse..."
Does terror get much worse than 9/11? How many times did Saddam have to shoot at our planes before we should have responded? Words and resolutions mean things. To not do what Bush did would be making light of the UN and her resolutions. If it weren't for the USA the UN would be nothing just like the pathetic league of nations that preceded her. Most people recognize that the gulf war never ended. There was a 'stay' set up in a UN resolution.
There has never been any proof that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11, in fact i think there is already proof that he had NOTHING to do with it. and when asked about going to fight Saddam Bush said "well...we know he was dangerous" yeah what else is new! But lets try getting Osama before taking over Iraq for its oil
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
"Here's to Jayne, the box dropping man-ape-gone-wrong-thing"
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
(Spoken in a plummy cockney accent...)
"Hello, Peter here! I've just made a post about how we should rationally consider each other's arguements on another section of the site before leaping to poorly argued, 'X' is good/evil/has good dress sense. I certainly hope that I'm heeded and that any following posts take into account both sides of the story and use proper factual evidence to back up their... (slipping into a raucous Scouse accent) ... AW NO! WHAT 'AVE I DONE? MA WIFE'S GONNA KILL ME!"
One for you 'Reeves and Mortimer' fans out there. All one of you, probably. *Sniff* Now back to our regular broadcasting.
P.S:
(Paraprhased)
Bob Mortimer: "Honestly, that Mel Gibson! He's terrible! He smashed my window the other week with his football, he owes me a fiver for that."
Vic Reeves: "And he owes me a trip to the swimming baths, bus fare and a fish supper."
Bob: "Honestly, Vic, that Mel Gibson, eh?"
(Etc.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't have time or will to go point by point, but it seems that the reason why people are angry over WMD has been either purposely or inadvertently misrepresented by the Bush supporters. It is irrelevant that "other people" thought Saddam had WMD too. If you will remember, there were UN inspectors in Iraq already, trying to confirm either way Saddam's posession of WMD, precisely because people thought he had them.
The reason why people (including myself) are angry is that Bush didnt even give the inspectors a chance. He was openly contemptuous of the UN and its inspectors (so I can't believe some of the claims of "we attacked Iraq to uphold the legitimacy of the UN"), mostly because they were being methodical and wouldnt bend their statements to make it politically expedient for the US. The inspectors said they needed another month or so, but that wasnt good enough for the administration, they wanted to start the war anyway. If the administration only waited to give the inspectors the time they wanted, I am sure a lot more people would be supportive, and we will really have a coalition in there now.
The reason why people say he lied was because he said Saddam was ABSOLUTELY AN IMMINENT THREAT. Remember the claims that Saddam can attack us within 45 minutes? or Colin Powell's waving of satellite photos saying we have proof of WHERE EXACTLY the WMD are? Those are pretty big lies I think. The administration is now saying that intelligence is never perfect, but if that is the case, why were they making so definite and absolute claims back then?
It is a stretch to say that it is still possible Saddam had WMD, but I think its pretty safe to say it wasnt an imminent threat.
ob Firefly remark: Which political party best reflects "Alliance-like" thinking?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The reason why people say he lied was because he said Saddam was ABSOLUTELY AN IMMINENT THREAT
-------------------------------------------------
Actually, Bush never said that. Sadly, the left wing Press isn't doing much to clarify that, and in fact are perpetuating that urban legend.
Bush never lied about the IMMINENT THREAT, and Colin Powell only showed where WMD's WERE, months and years before Saddam moved them.
More than anything, I'm annoyed, no, REALLY PISSED that this topic has come to this thread. A million places on the net and everywhere else folks can make their views known on politics.
For the record, I voted Libertarain in 2000. I plan on voting for Bush in 2004. That's all I got to say about that.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The reason why people say he lied was because he said Saddam was ABSOLUTELY AN IMMINENT THREAT
-------------------------------------------------
Actually, Bush never said that. Sadly, the left wing Press isn't doing much to clarify that, and in fact are perpetuating that urban legend.
Bush never lied about the IMMINENT THREAT, and Colin Powell only showed where WMD's WERE, months and years before Saddam moved them.
More than anything, I'm annoyed, no, REALLY PISSED that this topic has come to this thread. A million places on the net and everywhere else folks can make their views known on politics.
For the record, I voted Libertarain in 2000. I plan on voting for Bush in 2004. That's all I got to say about that.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
Another thing the press (nor the administration) isnt clarifying is the lack of link between Al Qaeda and 9/11 with Iraq, so I dont agree that the press is predominantly left wing. Some people still believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and no one in the administration seems interested in clarifying that "urban legend"
Bush never specifically said the words "imminent threat" but now we are getting into parsing words, just like with "is" and Clinton. I think taking Bush's speeches and the comments of other officials (notably Cheney and Rumsfeld) it can't be helped if people get the impression that the administration thought that Saddam was an imminent/immediate/grave/whatever threat.
How do you explain not giving the UN inspectors enough time to complete their mission? Yes, Saddam was being evasive and uncooperative. But the UN inspectors didnt give up saying they can't make any progress, they said they were making (slow) progress) and they just wanted more time.
As for Colin Powell, his satellite images are
from Mar~Dec 2002 (definitely "months" but not "years" before the attack), and shows not only historical artifacts (where WMD were) but then current spikes in activity, from trucks (supposedly carrying wmd) moving in and out to repavings/etc.
Hmm if you are so pissed about this thread then no one is forcing you to respond, or even read it. I think it's still a free country, and unless the FFF webadmin objects then I think it's still fair game, as long as we don't resort to name-calling and disrespectful behavior.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As any true browncoat knows, both them parties are Alliance.
Okay, I should know better, but it's no different then Mal in an Alliance-friendly bar on U-Day. 
insight spinner
__________
Just an object. It doesn't mean what you think....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's nothing remotely like Clinton's parsing of words at all. Bush said BEFORE the threat became imminant, something should be done. Once you see the smoke from the gun, it's already been fired. Sadly, many in the press ( which is indisputably left wing ) decided to run w/ what he DIDN'T say. Just like the 'warnings' that went unheeded for yrs about al qaida. AFTER 9-11, we could no longer afford to turn a deaf ear to what we already knew to be a threat.
The UN inspectors were given 12 yrs. More accuratly, Saddam was given 12 yrs to comply. He didn't. Resolution 1441 was passed. It's a moot point now.
WMD's are very mobile and easy to hide. Why are we still talking about this?
All I'm doing is voicing my opinion that this forum isn't the place for politics. So I'm done w/ this now. G'day.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's nothing remotely like Clinton's parsing of words at all. Bush said BEFORE the threat became imminant, something should be done. Once you see the smoke from the gun, it's already been fired. Sadly, many in the press ( which is indisputably left wing ) decided to run w/ what he DIDN'T say. Just like the 'warnings' that went unheeded for yrs about al qaida. AFTER 9-11, we could no longer afford to turn a deaf ear to what we already knew to be a threat.
The UN inspectors were given 12 yrs. More accuratly, Saddam was given 12 yrs to comply. He didn't. Resolution 1441 was passed. It's a moot point now.
WMD's are very mobile and easy to hide. Why are we still talking about this?
All I'm doing is voicing my opinion that this forum isn't the place for politics. So I'm done w/ this now. G'day.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Um, only the French could come up with that wacked a conspiracy theory. What kind of a loser thinks an airliner could be fitted with missles? I've heard some really wacked theories but this one takes the cake. It's also interesting to note that liberal thought could go that far to the extreme of their hatred. I would think it was in jest if it wasn't in such bad taste.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Bush didnt even give the inspectors a chance"
They had 14 months from the utimatum given by the UN... and 12 years before that..
"he lied was because he said Saddam was ABSOLUTELY AN IMMINENT THREAT."
A threat I believe he was. If for no other reason that he was shooting at our planes daily. He thumbed his nose at the UN. The only time he ever cooperated with the UN was when the USA had troop camped on his borders and even that was grudging. What should we have done, camped there for years while Blix and his crew let Saddam and his goons run circles around them? He was under a stay of hostilities that stipulated full cooperation which he never gave. The action against him was overdue as shown by all the mass graves and torture room found so far. To say that he was a imminent threat may have been an slight exaggeration.. but then again it could have been spot on... we may never know.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME