or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › DEBT: Republicans Versus Democrats
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DEBT: Republicans Versus Democrats - Page 3

post #81 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Mindless, partisan, flamebait.

Naw! You guys never do that do you!

Ps. And it's not that I can't I just realize with some types it's just not worth it. SDW lost all of these arguments a long time ago ( hint : Before you showed up ) he just doesn't apparently know it.

How is his saying how he sees your post partisan? You are lowering your standard of posting considerably with your last couple of posts today. And whether you care or not, are losing the benefit of the doubt from me.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #82 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

How is his saying how he sees your post partisan? You are lowering your standard of posting considerably with your last couple of posts today. And whether you care or not, are losing the benefit of the doubt from me.

Well I'm sorry to inform you that the minute you came back after saying " Have fun storming the castle " and didn't leave it alone you lost mine.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #83 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

And there we have it. The old "I was here before you" putdown.

Not to mention the audacity of accusing someone else of "mindless, partisan" posting.

Oh! Imagine the horror of this coming from you!

But what do you expect from a group of people that sound like vigilates " Obama must be stopped " or " These people must be stopped " sheesh!

Annie get your gun!

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #84 of 102
Now we return to our regularly scheduled programing. Republicans cause more debt than the Democrats.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #85 of 102
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Now we return to our regularly scheduled programing. Republicans cause more debt than the Democrats.

Yes, the repubs are the party of debt, unemployment, inflation, big government and slow growth. Even whilst milking the environment for every last dollar they still can't compete with the Democrat's. What a bunch of assholes!
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #86 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh! Imagine the horror of this coming from you!

But what do you expect from a group of people that sound like vigilates " Obama must be stopped " or " These people must be stopped "

That reply was directed at me, so I'm sure you won't mind linking to the post(s) where I have made those remarks you quoted.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #87 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

That reply was directed at me, so I'm sure you won't mind linking to the post(s) where I have made those remarks you quoted.

Quote:
But what do you expect from a group of people......

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #88 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Mindless, partisan, flamebait.

He called you out for not offering a real response. How is that mindless? How is it partisan flamebait?

Quote:

Naw! You guys never do that do you!

Not really, no.

Quote:

Ps. And it's not that I can't I just realize with some types it's just not worth it. SDW lost all of these arguments a long time ago ( hint : Before you showed up ) he just doesn't apparently know it.

Wow..a triple negative! Might be the first one I've seen. After deciphering this babble, I have this response.

Let the record show that I answered your questions multiple times. I then asked one of my own. You ignored said question, and posted a little quip with a smilie-wink, as usual. You then claim that I've "lost" these arguments years ago. I'll leave it to others to decide what they think of this exchange. I'll say this...you're consistent.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #89 of 102
One more thing that happened under Republican watch is the disappearance of 12 Billion $ in CASH in Iraq.
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #90 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

He called you out for not offering a real response. How is that mindless? How is it partisan flamebait?



Not really, no.



Wow..a triple negative! Might be the first one I've seen. After deciphering this babble, I have this response.

Let the record show that I answered your questions multiple times. I then asked one of my own. You ignored said question, and posted a little quip with a smilie-wink, as usual. You then claim that I've "lost" these arguments years ago. I'll leave it to others to decide what they think of this exchange. I'll say this...you're consistent.

Quote:
He called you out for not offering a real response. How is that mindless? How is it partisan flamebait?

Because he can't even follow his own rules.

Quote:
Let the record show that I answered your questions.........



Let the record show that SDW tried to spin his way out of a corner again and didn't answer anything ( other than dodges ) ( SDW ) " History Commons is just.....so .. well you know ....anti war.... it's obvious don't you see? They left out a few items that I find more important than anything else there ( not that everyone else does ). ( jimmac ) " What? " ( SDW ) " Instead let me ask you a few things that meet my criteria " ( Jimmac ) " What? " ( SDW ) " Well if you can't anwer my questions ( Without really addressing the first set asked of me ) and don't see the horrible bias then I'm certainly not going to tell you. ".

Jesus!



Sorry I couldn't let you turn this into a board of inquiry for me when you couldn't even properly address the questions put to you. However I expected as much.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #91 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Because he can't even follow his own rules.



Let the record show that SDW tried to spin his way out of a corner again and didn't answer anything ( other than dodges ) ( SDW ) " History Commons is just.....so .. well you know ....anti war.... it's obvious don't you see? They left out a few items that I find more important than anything else there ( not that everyone else does ). ( jimmac ) " What? " ( SDW ) " Instead let me ask you a few things that meet my criteria " ( Jimmac ) " What? " ( SDW ) " Well if you can't anwer my questions ( Without really addressing the first set asked of me ) and don't see the horrible bias then I'm certainly not going to tell you. ".

Jesus!



Sorry I couldn't let you turn this into a board of inquiry for me when you couldn't even properly address the questions put to you. However I expected as much.

<sigh>. For the fourth time:

1. History Commons attracts those who tend to be anti-establishment, anti-military, etc. This is demonstrated by the list of events in each timeline, as I previously posted.

2. History Commons posts factual information. However, it does not post ALL of the facts. Example: There is no reference to President Bush being told the case that Saddam had WMD was a "slam dunk"--by the Director of the CIA, no less. This is a well-established fact that has not been included.

3. A comprehensive list of what's not there is impossible. There are examples however, as listed above in point 2.

4. A list of facts isn't balanced or neutral in and of itself.

Example of a list of facts:
  • Barack Obama broke a campaign promise to televise the healthcare debate on C-SPAN.
  • Obama promised unemployment would not exceed 8% of the stimulus passed. It's now at 10%.
  • The annual deficit has gone from about $450 billion to $1.4 trillion since Obama took office.
  • The United States has suffered two terrorist attacks since Obama was sworn in.
  • Obama referred to his bowling game as "like the Special Olympic or something." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w20b8gL6SBI

There ya go, jimmac! A list of FACTS. Tell me, is it a balanced and neutral list? Could you please list everything that I didn't include? I mean, it's just a list of facts.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #92 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

<sigh>. For the fourth time:

1. History Commons attracts those who tend to be anti-establishment, anti-military, etc. This is demonstrated by the list of events in each timeline, as I previously posted.

2. History Commons posts factual information. However, it does not post ALL of the facts. Example: There is no reference to President Bush being told the case that Saddam had WMD was a "slam dunk"--by the Director of the CIA, no less. This is a well-established fact that has not been included.

3. A comprehensive list of what's not there is impossible. There are examples however, as listed above in point 2.

4. A list of facts isn't balanced or neutral in and of itself.

Example of a list of facts:
  • Barack Obama broke a campaign promise to televise the healthcare debate on C-SPAN.
  • Obama promised unemployment would not exceed 8% of the stimulus passed. It's now at 10%.
  • The annual deficit has gone from about $450 billion to $1.4 trillion since Obama took office.
  • The United States has suffered two terrorist attacks since Obama was sworn in.
  • Obama referred to his bowling game as "like the Special Olympic or something." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w20b8gL6SBI

There ya go, jimmac! A list of FACTS. Tell me, is it a balanced and neutral list? Could you please list everything that I didn't include? I mean, it's just a list of facts.

Your first post pretty much invalidates everything! How the hell do you know who it attracts?

Quote:
There is no reference to President Bush being told the case that Saddam had WMD was a "slam dunk"--by the Director of the CIA, no less. This is a well-established fact that has not been included.

So in light of many people telling him the exact opposite this makes all the diffgerence in the world ( besides it's common knowlege ). It may be a big deal in your mind but not a deal breaker in mine. I think many feel the same way.

Oh god! Youtube? You know what type that attracts!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #93 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I think many feel the same way.

For those of you who are new, this is what Jimmac commonly refers to as 'proof' of his position.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #94 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

For those of you who are new, this is what Jimmac commonly refers to as 'proof' of his position.

I dunno, the burden of proof you require seems pretty low. I mean, you just need circular logic from a moldy tome to devote your life to a fictional pursuit. Why raise your standards for Jimmac's post, something which should be of far less importance than the questions about life, the universe, and everything?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #95 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I dunno, the burden of proof you require seems pretty low. I mean, you just need circular logic from a moldy tome to devote your life to a fictional pursuit. Why raise your standards for Jimmac's post, something which should be of far less importance than the questions about life, the universe, and everything?

Because it's all different when they ask the questions!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #96 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

One more thing that happened under Republican watch is the disappearance of 12 Billion $ in CASH in Iraq.

Is this anything like the jobs save or created in imaginary congressional districts in imaginary zip codes?

Thanks for proving government can't do anything right. Now we can all agree on whoever will provide less government.

This is what is so sad about this whole thread. Government is a giant screw up and we are only left arguing who screws it up worse. Where are the guys arguing that government isn't the solution?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #97 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Your first post pretty much invalidates everything! How the hell do you know who it attracts?

Because the list of headlines. They are all anti-establishment and anti-military. None are pro-military, conservative, etc. Ergo the site attracts those with similar views.

Quote:

So in light of many people telling him the exact opposite this makes all the diffgerence in the world ( besides it's common knowlege ). It may be a big deal in your mind but not a deal breaker in mine. I think many feel the same way.

You asked for an example of something not there. I gave it to you. Whether or not there are other facts is irrelevant.

Not to digress, but it wasn't common knowledge. Every major intel agency in the world thought he had them, including then CIA. You can say there was some debate, but not that it was "common knowledge."
Quote:

Oh god! Youtube? You know what type that attracts!

It was supporting evidence of the special olympics claim. I fail to see why YouTube would be invalid. Doesn't it post video clips? Are you claiming the clip is inaccurate, jimmac? Are you saying that YouTube only attracts conservatives?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #98 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Because the list of headlines. They are all anti-establishment and anti-military. None are pro-military, conservative, etc. Ergo the site attracts those with similar views.



You asked for an example of something not there. I gave it to you. Whether or not there are other facts is irrelevant.

Not to digress, but it wasn't common knowledge. Every major intel agency in the world thought he had them, including then CIA. You can say there was some debate, but not that it was "common knowledge."

It was supporting evidence of the special olympics claim. I fail to see why YouTube would be invalid. Doesn't it post video clips? Are you claiming the clip is inaccurate, jimmac? Are you saying that YouTube only attracts conservatives?

There was a lot of debate. At the university where I work there were many protests.
No wonder the young voters aren't going republican. Bush only listened to what he wanted to hear.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #99 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

There was a lot of debate. At the university where I work there were many protests.

There were protests at a University? Surely not! By the way, you realize this does nothing to bolster your claim of "a lot of debate?" We are talking about debate within the intelligence community and military establishment. There wasn't much debate at all...not about the final conclusions of the estimates. John Kerry himself thought Saddam had WMD as late as January 2003!

Quote:
"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his contin ued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

Quote:

No wonder the young voters aren't going republican. Bush only listened to what he wanted to hear.

When and why did we start talking about young voters? That is a huge topic on so many levels.
As for the latter, you can't support that, as usual. Just another empty rhetorical flourish from jimmac. Expected, I suppose.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #100 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

There were protests at a University? Surely not! By the way, you realize this does nothing to bolster your claim of "a lot of debate?" We are talking about debate within the intelligence community and military establishment. There wasn't much debate at all...not about the final conclusions of the estimates. John Kerry himself thought Saddam had WMD as late as January 2003!





When and why did we start talking about young voters? That is a huge topic on so many levels.
As for the latter, you can't support that, as usual. Just another empty rhetorical flourish from jimmac. Expected, I suppose.

Do I really need to post Senator Byrd's statement again? At the time the Bush supporters here brought his KKK past as a counter argument.

But he was right wasn't he?

Quote:
When and why did we start talking about young voters?

Because they represent the future of Republicans getting elected ( or not ).

Quote:
John Kerry himself



Not John Kerry himself!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #101 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Do I really need to post Senator Byrd's statement again? At the time the Bush supporters here brought his KKK past as a counter argument.

But he was right wasn't he?

You'll have to. I don't remember seeing it.

Quote:

Because they represent the future of Republicans getting elected ( or not ).

Not really. They don't now. If the past is any indicator of what's to come, people tend to get more conservative as they get older. In other words, they won't be young forever. Secondly, Dems have been sounding off about "rocking" the youth vote for 30 years. They don't decide elections. Never have. What decided the 2008 election, for example, was white suburban voters. The same people that elected Obama are now mad as hell. My, how things have changed.

Quote:





Not John Kerry himself!

The same John Kerry who just one year later was running as if he never supported the war, never thought Saddam had WMD, etc. Yes...the same one.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #102 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You'll have to. I don't remember seeing it.



Not really. They don't now. If the past is any indicator of what's to come, people tend to get more conservative as they get older. In other words, they won't be young forever. Secondly, Dems have been sounding off about "rocking" the youth vote for 30 years. They don't decide elections. Never have. What decided the 2008 election, for example, was white suburban voters. The same people that elected Obama are now mad as hell. My, how things have changed.



The same John Kerry who just one year later was running as if he never supported the war, never thought Saddam had WMD, etc. Yes...the same one.

Quote:
Not really. They don't now. If the past is any indicator of what's to come, people tend to get more conservative as they get older

I'm 56 and I'm still pretty liberal. A friend of mine ( the same age ) was a staunch republican until George W. Bush.

Quote:
I don't remember seeing it.

Not this again!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd

Easy find!

Here's waht Wikipedia has to say about it :
Quote:
War in Iraq

Byrd with Secretary of Defense-designate Robert Gates, November 30, 2006
Byrd with then-Lieutenant General David Petraeus, January 23, 2007In the 107th Congress, Byrd suffered some legislative setbacks, particularly with respect to debates on homeland security. Byrd opposed the 2002 law creating the Department of Homeland Security, saying it ceded too much authority to the executive branch. He led a filibuster against the resolution granting President George W. Bush broad power to wage a "preemptive" war against Iraq, but he could not get a majority of his own party to vote against cloture and against the resolution.[60] He also led the opposition to Bush's bid to win back the power to negotiate trade deals that Congress cannot amend, but lost overwhelmingly. In the 108th Congress, however, Byrd won his party's top seat on the new Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.

Byrd was one of the Senate's most outspoken critics of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He appeared on March 7, 2003 on CNN's Larry King Live to discuss his U.S. Senate floor speeches against the Iraq War Resolution in 2002.

In a speech on March 13 he stated:

If the United States leads the charge to war in the Persian Gulf, we may get lucky and achieve a rapid victory. But then we will face a second war: a war to win the peace in Iraq. This war will last many years and will surely cost hundreds of billions of dollars. In light of this enormous task, it would be a great mistake to expect that this will be a replay of the 1991 war. The stakes are much higher in this conflict.[61]

On March 19, 2003, when Bush ordered the invasion after receiving U.S. Congress approval, Byrd stated:

Today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination.[62]

Byrd also criticized Bush for his speech declaring the "end of major combat operations" in Iraq, which Bush made on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln. Byrd stated on the Senate floor:

I do question the motives of a deskbound president who assumes the garb of a warrior for the purposes of a speech.[63]

On October 17, 2003, Byrd delivered a speech expressing his concerns about the future of the nation and his unequivocal antipathy to Bush's policies. Referencing the Hans Christian Andersen children's tale The Emperor's New Clothes, Byrd said of the president: "the emperor has no clothes." Byrd further lamented the "sheep-like" behavior of the "cowed Members of this Senate" and called on them to oppose the continuation of a "war based on falsehoods."

Byrd accused the Bush administration of stifling dissent:

The right to ask questions, debate, and dissent is under attack. The drums of war are beaten ever louder in an attempt to drown out those who speak of our predicament in stark terms. Even in the Senate, our history and tradition of being the world's greatest deliberative body is being snubbed. This huge spending bill$87 billionhas been rushed through this chamber in just one month. There were just three open hearings by the Senate Appropriations Committee on $87 billion$87 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born$87 billion without a single outside witness called to challenge the administration's line.

In July 2004, Byrd released the book Losing America: Confronting a Reckless and Arrogant Presidency about the Bush presidency and the war in Iraq.

Of the more than 17,000 votes he has cast as a Senator, Byrd says he is proudest of his vote against the Iraq war resolution.[64] Byrd has also voted for funding the Iraq war with a timetable for troop withdrawal.


And here's the actual statement :
Quote:
Robert Bird: Iraq War,
"Unprovoked Invasion of A Sovereign Nation"
by U.S. Senator Robert Bird, May 23, 2003

Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time. No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually.

But the danger is that at some point it may no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in politics. I see a lot of it - - more than I would ever have believed - - right on this Senate Floor.

Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this Senator that the American people may have been lured into accepting the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, in violation of long-standing International law, under false premises.

There is ample evidence that the horrific events of September 11 have been carefully manipulated to switch public focus from Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda who masterminded the September 11th attacks, to Saddam Hussein who did not. The run up to our invasion of Iraq featured the President and members of his cabinet invoking every frightening image they could conjure, from mushroom clouds, to buried caches of germ warfare, to drones poised to deliver germ laden death in our major cities. We were treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein and his direct threat to our freedoms. The tactic was guaranteed to provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of post traumatic stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 911. It was the exploitation of fear. It was a placebo for the anger.

Since the war's end, every subsequent revelation which has seemed to refute the previous dire claims of the Bush Administration has been brushed aside. Instead of addressing the contradictory evidence, the White House deftly changes the subject. No weapons of mass destruction have yet turned up, but we are told that they will in time. Perhaps they yet will. But, our costly and destructive bunker busting attack on Iraq seems to have proven, in the main, precisely the opposite of what we were told was the urgent reason to go in. It seems also to have, for the present, verified the assertions of Hans Blix and the inspection team he led, which President Bush and company so derided. As Blix always said, a lot of time will be needed to find such weapons, if they do, indeed, exist. Meanwhile Bin Laden is still on the loose and Saddam Hussein has come up missing.

The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually became one.

What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that Iraq was no immediate threat to the U.S. Ravaged by years of sanctions, Iraq did not even lift an airplane against us. Iraq's threatening death-dealing fleet of unmanned drones about which we heard so much morphed into one prototype made of plywood and string. Their missiles proved to be outdated and of limited range. Their army was quickly overwhelmed by our technology and our well trained troops.

Presently our loyal military personnel continue their mission of diligently searching for WMD. They have so far turned up only fertilizer, vacuum cleaners, conventional weapons, and the occasional buried swimming pool. They are misused on such a mission and they continue to be at grave risk. But, the Bush team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a preemptive invasion has become more than embarrassing. It has raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use of power. Were our troops needlessly put at risk? Were countless Iraqi civilians killed and maimed when war was not really necessary? Was the American public deliberately misled? Was the world?

What makes me cringe even more is the continued claim that we are "liberators." The facts don't seem to support the label we have so euphemistically attached to ourselves. True, we have unseated a brutal, despicable despot, but "liberation" implies the follow up of freedom, self-determination and a better life for the common people. In fact, if the situation in Iraq is the result of "liberation," we may have set the cause of freedom back 200 years.

Despite our high-blown claims of a better life for the Iraqi people, water is scarce, and often foul, electricity is a sometime thing, food is in short supply, hospitals are stacked with the wounded and maimed, historic treasures of the region and of the Iraqi people have been looted, and nuclear material may have been disseminated to heaven knows where, while U.S. troops, on orders, looked on and guarded the oil supply.

Meanwhile, lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and refurbish its oil industry are awarded to Administration cronies, without benefit of competitive bidding, and the U.S. steadfastly resists offers of U.N. assistance to participate. Is there any wonder that the real motives of the U.S. government are the subject of worldwide speculation and mistrust?

And in what may be the most damaging development, the U.S. appears to be pushing off Iraq's clamor for self-government. Jay Garner has been summarily replaced, and it is becoming all too clear that the smiling face of the U.S. as liberator is quickly assuming the scowl of an occupier. The image of the boot on the throat has replaced the beckoning hand of freedom. Chaos and rioting only exacerbate that image, as U.S. soldiers try to sustain order in a land ravaged by poverty and disease. "Regime change" in Iraq has so far meant anarchy, curbed only by an occupying military force and a U.S. administrative presence that is evasive about if and when it intends to depart.

Democracy and Freedom cannot be force fed at the point of an occupier's gun. To think otherwise is folly. One has to stop and ponder. How could we have been so impossibly naive? How could we expect to easily plant a clone of U.S. culture, values, and government in a country so riven with religious, territorial, and tribal rivalries, so suspicious of U.S. motives, and so at odds with the galloping materialism which drives the western-style economies? As so many warned this Administration before it launched its misguided war on Iraq, there is evidence that our crack down in Iraq is likely to convince 1,000 new Bin Ladens to plan other horrors of the type we have seen in the past several days. Instead of damaging the terrorists, we have given them new fuel for their fury. We did not complete our mission in Afghanistan because we were so eager to attack Iraq. Now it appears that Al Queda is back with a vengeance. We have returned to orange alert in the U.S., and we may well have destabilized the Mideast region, a region we have never fully understood. We have alienated friends around the globe with our dissembling and our haughty insistence on punishing former friends who may not see things quite our way. The path of diplomacy and reason have gone out the window to be replaced by force, unilateralism, and punishment for transgressions. I read most recently with amazement our harsh castigation of Turkey, our longtime friend and strategic ally. It is astonishing that our government is berating the new Turkish government for conducting its affairs in accordance with its own Constitution and its democratic institutions.

Indeed, we may have sparked a new international arms race as countries move ahead to develop WMD as a last ditch attempt to ward off a possible preemptive strike from a newly belligerent U.S. which claims the right to hit where it wants. In fact, there is little to constrain this President. This Congress, in what will go down in history as its most unfortunate act, gave away its power to declare war for the foreseeable future and empowered this President to wage war at will.

As if that were not bad enough, members of Congress are reluctant to ask questions which are begging to be asked. How long will we occupy Iraq? We have already heard disputes on the numbers of troops which will be needed to retain order. What is the truth? How costly will the occupation and rebuilding be? No one has given a straight answer. How will we afford this long-term massive commitment, fight terrorism at home, address a serious crisis in domestic healthcare, afford behemoth military spending and give away billions in tax cuts amidst a deficit which has climbed to over $340 billion for this year alone? If the President's tax cut passes it will be $400 billion. We cower in the shadows while false statements proliferate. We accept soft answers and shaky explanations because to demand the truth is hard, or unpopular, or may be politically costly.

But, I contend that, through it all, the people know. The American people unfortunately are used to political shading, spin, and the usual chicanery they hear from public officials. They patiently tolerate it up to a point. But there is a line. It may seem to be drawn in invisible ink for a time, but eventually it will appear in dark colors, tinged with anger. When it comes to shedding American blood - - when it comes to wrecking havoc on civilians, on innocent men, women, and children, callous dissembling is not acceptable. Nothing is worth that kind of lie - - not oil, not revenge, not reelection, not somebody's grand pipedream of a democratic domino theory.

And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see so often of late by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal opposition quiet for just so long. Because eventually, like it always does, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall.


And SDW I'm not the only one to post this over the years. But of course you natural filter would obscure it from view.http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/...unprovoked.htm

And the house of cards did fall didn't it.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › DEBT: Republicans Versus Democrats