I always knew right from begening that it was sham.. a plot.. I shouted loud.. like presents Iran case. That its a scam.. Iraq is NOT building WMDs.. they are NOT terrorists!! They will not bomb USA..!

quote:

Originally posted by Kinezi I have noticed many people posting here that when Collin Powell was giving his testominy in UN many people genuinly supported him and thought that invading Iraq was a good idea.. But all I want to say is that I never bought his thougts and presentation.. I mean common!! 1. Saddam destroyed all his 'Sariya' missiles (or whatever it was named) to gain your trust.. 2. He let all the UN inspectors visit his country. his so called nuclear sites, and every damn location you wanted..! 3. He said no only when US forced UN to visit Saddam palaces.. his sister's house, his home.. the so called 'Saddam's Palaces'.. it was a humiliation to him.. how could he explain this to his sister.. thats why he said no to them.. and in return he got death. Sad!!!

You are wrong! Iraq may not have had any WMD. But here is the thing that Saddam did that was interesting. He first of all never believed that the US would have invaded his country. 2. He tried to hint he did not have any WMD but at the same time purposely put suspicion on his claims, why? Because Hussein controlled and defended Iraq from countries like Iran, by putting out the notion that his country had all these weapons to defend itself or to attack. It takes a no brainier to figure that out

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton College tuition should be free, so should healthcare.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11... PERIOD...

___________________

Wow....a Saddam advocate?

Sad!!!

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

To be fair none of you are arguing his point. I semi bought it myself. (that he had some stuff). But always thought if he did then so what he have worse. And he won't be able to send it over.

At least think I did... lol

Not to mention that he did hate Osama. Saddam was not a religious man therefore for him to send weapons to Osama would seem unrealistic as some people claim he would of have done.

I dont doubt the fact that we were lied to by this administration, but perhaps it was not a bad thing?

America would not go into any war without thinking they would benefit from it. Just like what most superpowers would do.


Despite its wrong cause, I think what was more important is that Bush and his team did not have a good aftermath strategy. If they would of committed to the surge (which Powell was all for in the beginning) than we wouldn't make such a big deal now.

The reason why liberals are so anti war right now is because its just to gather political points. Most of them voted for the war, and when it came time to getting re elected, they said, they made a mistake and would pull out! It's been two years of a Democratic Congress. What is happening?

I dont think this is just Bushes plans. I just laugh at you liberals that think that he Bush lied to you. Because your same leaders are lying to you every day, but you do not want to see that.

quote:

Originally posted by Kapedano Not to mention that he did hate Osama. Saddam was not a religious man therefore for him to send weapons to Osama would seem unrealistic as some people claim he would of have done. I dont doubt the fact that we were lied to by this administration, but perhaps it was not a bad thing? America would not go into any war without thinking they would benefit from it. Just like what most superpowers would do. Despite its wrong cause, I think what was more important is that Bush and his team did not have a good aftermath strategy. If they would of committed to the surge (which Powell was all for in the beginning) than we wouldn't make such a big deal now. The reason why liberals are so anti war right now is because its just to gather political points. Most of them voted for the war, and when it came time to getting re elected, they said, they made a mistake and would pull out! It's been two years of a Democratic Congress. What is happening? I dont think this is just Bushes plans. I just laugh at you liberals that think that he Bush lied to you. Because your same leaders are lying to you every day, but you do not want to see that.

Right on point! What I find hilarious is that congress (liberals) are running around screaming if they get to the white house theyll end this military operation. But wait, if they want they can end this operation as I'm typing this post, and just end the funding. But they keep funding it!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton College tuition should be free, so should healthcare.

Another thing which I can not seem to understand is why Obama is shifting to the middle when it comes to the Iraq war? This is the same man that promised his blind supporters that he would end the war!

Really?

Does Obama want to be remembered as the first black president that lost the Middle East by the Republicans for the rest of the century? Dont think so!

Democrats will not pull out of Iraq. So what is this CHANGE really all about??

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover Right on point! What I find hilarious is that congress (liberals) are running around screaming if they get to the white house theyll end this military operation. But wait, if they want they can end this operation as I'm typing this post, and just end the funding. But they keep funding it!

Ending the funding would not end the mission, it would endanger the troops by decreasing thier support staff. The mandate would still be to have them in Iraq but without money.

Not to mention cutting funnding to troops would be politically and moraly precarious.

I'm not sold on pulling out as the best option right now even if it is looking better then before. Going in was a mistake, it ruined a country and breached one of the most important international laws. The maintenance of soverienty is one of the main reasons the UN was founded, it has kept invasions to a minimum. Now "pre-emptive strikes" are options that any country can choose to use "in thier own defence".

None of this makes pulling out a good idea. The only criteria for pulling out that the US should (morally) consider is if Iraq will be stable after the departure of the troops. The other consideration is if the US is going to go bankrupt because of the military engagements ... but it might be to late for this one.

To the casual external observer obama is just a hype machine "time for change" into what? White voters are going to give them selfs a big pat on the back for finally "not being racist" by voting in a black pres. While the black voters are gonna vote him just because he is "black" (he's just as white as he is black......half and half = black? Weird.) .

Who said racism is dead? All I see is a litany of wishy washy bull shit words and no commitments to actual policy.

That said haven't been seeing much about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Kapedano Another thing which I can not seem to understand is why Obama is shifting to the middle when it comes to the Iraq war? This is the same man that promised his blind supporters that he would end the war! Really? Does Obama want to be remembered as the first black president that lost the Middle East by the Republicans for the rest of the century? Dont think so! Democrats will not pull out of Iraq. So what is this CHANGE really all about??

He wants a withdrawal within 16 months, which is an adequate wind down.

As for losing the middle east, the Iraq war was lost when it began.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.