So: WMD, don't matter; ties to al Qeada, whatever; liberation of Iraqi people, 'em. And the liberal spin masters are keeping the rightousness of the cause from the people.
Libis? Hippi Libi? Liberal filters and spin masters?
The war in Iraq advanced by none other than Bush has more than just to do with left or right wing politics.
Bush has failed to make a case for war spin or no spin.
Fellowship
Ok. I'll be the first to admit it didn't take much the sell me on the Iraqi operation. I could almost intuitively see its advantages and I wrote as much in my many posts. Now, since you are a neutral voice, what or where exactly has the Bush administration fail to make a case to your satisfaction. I'll assume you've taken the time to read what the President had to say, and not what the talking heads say the President had to say.
Or is it really that at the first sight of casualties you want to cut ran? I don't know which it is. But I hope you're honest enough with yourself to make that judgment.
So: WMD, don't matter; ties to al Qeada, whatever; liberation of Iraqi people, 'em. And the liberal spin masters are keeping the rightousness of the cause from the people.
"Oh, so there are "no plans" to re-instate the draft? No, there are just EXERCISES and $28 million extra to get the whole Selective Service ready and open for business by June 15, 2005!!
Read this official budget carefully and you will see that Bush is gearing up the draft--there is no longer any doubt about it. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005, that the system is ready for activation within 75 days. So on June 15, 2005, expect the announcement that the first draft lottery since Vietnam will be held for 20 year-olds.
Here is where the DU rubber hits the road, my friends. This is a DU EXCLUSIVE as far as I know, so please read this one carefully and let me know what we are going to do about it. To put this all into context, the SSS has lain basically dormant for decades and now in the 2004 budget, Bush has added $28 million to get the whole thing ready to fly in 2005. The 4 performance goals below basically make the system ready for activation. "
Ok. I'll be the first to admit it didn't take much the sell me on the Iraqi operation. I could almost intuitively see its advantages and I wrote as much in my many posts. Now, since you are a neutral voice, what or where exactly has the Bush administration fail to make a case to your satisfaction. I'll assume you've taken the time to read what the President had to say, and not what the talking heads say the President had to say.
Or is it really that at the first sight of casualties you want to cut ran? I don't know which it is. But I hope you're honest enough with yourself to make that judgment.
No it is not about the first sight of casualties that forms my view of this war in Iraq. My view is formed solely on the BS that was fed to the world that we had to get in Iraq and quick!!! had no time to wait for UN inspections. (Don't get me wrong I think the UN is lame in many ways) but Bush said in fewer words that we had to get in there and quick. Now I am standing here waiting to see why that was... So far I have seen no reason.
Nor have many in the world seen this reason to start war in Iraq.
No it is not about the first sight of casualties that forms my view of this war in Iraq. My view is formed solely on the BS that was fed to the world that we had to get in Iraq and quick!!! had no time to wait for UN inspections. (Don't get me wrong I think the UN is lame in many ways) but Bush said in fewer words that we had to get in there and quick. Now I am standing here waiting to see why that was... So far I have seen no reason.
Nor have many in the world seen this reason to start war in Iraq.
Fellowship
Fellows, we've gone over this a zillion times here on AI. You know inspections couldn't work without credible force behind them and our French Allies made it clear that's not going to happen. Saddam kicked out the inspectiors, and was managing fine with the sanctions in place. We know he had WMD programs because Israel blew his nuclear reactor some years before, and he used Chem/Bio artillery against the Iranians and the Kurds. And there was intelligence that he's at it again. We also knew he supported and financed terrorists, and that they had training facilities and were conducting active operations from Iraq. And there is still more.
What is this nonsense? We're not dealing with some illiterate Afghanis. This is Iraq we're dealing with. The most modern Arab society on the planet. Anyway, even if I was to accept your argument that the Iraqis are a bunch of uneducated 3rd world carpet weavers there isn't time for this. These things were needed to be build yesterday.
The infrastructure doesn't need to built right away whatsoever. It was already quite deteriated for the past 10 years, and it can wait and be rebuilt at a steady pace. What the Iraqis need right away is security to do their business.
The reconstruction funding only going to Iraqis is just plain Keynesian economics, albiet they won't have to go into debt because the funding is "free" as it were.
The reconstruction funding only going to Iraqis is just plain Keynesian economics, albiet they won't have to go into debt because the funding is "free" as it were.
HAHAHAHA, good one!
Yeah, only you libbi hippi pinkos believe that you can get something for nothing. Well, the world doesn't work that way. Even the Commies learned that lesson. There are no free rides in this world.
Yeah AND that was what... 15 years ago? When we were supporting them... paying for those weapons.
We had no problems with Saddam and WMD back then.
SO what exactly was the rush? That's the point.
The rush? How long do we need to wait? The guy violated his ceasefire commitments for 10 years, commited genocide, attacked the WTC, attacked his neighbours, used WoMD, tried to kill the President, and after all that you're asking what's the rush to take him down?! You must be one lethargic procrastinator.
Comments
Originally posted by addabox
So: WMD, don't matter; ties to al Qeada, whatever; liberation of Iraqi people,
I find this..... border line insane.
border line? it is insane.
Fellows
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Libis? Hippi Libi? Liberal filters and spin masters?
The war in Iraq advanced by none other than Bush has more than just to do with left or right wing politics.
Bush has failed to make a case for war spin or no spin.
Fellowship
Ok. I'll be the first to admit it didn't take much the sell me on the Iraqi operation. I could almost intuitively see its advantages and I wrote as much in my many posts. Now, since you are a neutral voice, what or where exactly has the Bush administration fail to make a case to your satisfaction. I'll assume you've taken the time to read what the President had to say, and not what the talking heads say the President had to say.
Or is it really that at the first sight of casualties you want to cut ran? I don't know which it is. But I hope you're honest enough with yourself to make that judgment.
Originally posted by addabox
So: WMD, don't matter; ties to al Qeada, whatever; liberation of Iraqi people,
I find this..... border line insane.
Yeah. That's what I said.. keep trolling..
Originally posted by chu_bakka
I love how Bush is having problems in Iraq because of the liberal propaganda machine. Like that makes any sense whatsover.
I guess bad news is liberal news?
Bush is trying to spin a trainwreck.
If you're in your 20's I hope you don't vote for Bush... because their getting the draft ready for 2005.
http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com...opic_id=716016
"Oh, so there are "no plans" to re-instate the draft? No, there are just EXERCISES and $28 million extra to get the whole Selective Service ready and open for business by June 15, 2005!!
Read this official budget carefully and you will see that Bush is gearing up the draft--there is no longer any doubt about it. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005, that the system is ready for activation within 75 days. So on June 15, 2005, expect the announcement that the first draft lottery since Vietnam will be held for 20 year-olds.
Here is where the DU rubber hits the road, my friends. This is a DU EXCLUSIVE as far as I know, so please read this one carefully and let me know what we are going to do about it. To put this all into context, the SSS has lain basically dormant for decades and now in the 2004 budget, Bush has added $28 million to get the whole thing ready to fly in 2005. The 4 performance goals below basically make the system ready for activation. "
Already dancing in the streets are we?
Originally posted by aapl
Ok. I'll be the first to admit it didn't take much the sell me on the Iraqi operation. I could almost intuitively see its advantages and I wrote as much in my many posts. Now, since you are a neutral voice, what or where exactly has the Bush administration fail to make a case to your satisfaction. I'll assume you've taken the time to read what the President had to say, and not what the talking heads say the President had to say.
Or is it really that at the first sight of casualties you want to cut ran? I don't know which it is. But I hope you're honest enough with yourself to make that judgment.
No it is not about the first sight of casualties that forms my view of this war in Iraq. My view is formed solely on the BS that was fed to the world that we had to get in Iraq and quick!!! had no time to wait for UN inspections. (Don't get me wrong I think the UN is lame in many ways) but Bush said in fewer words that we had to get in there and quick. Now I am standing here waiting to see why that was... So far I have seen no reason.
Nor have many in the world seen this reason to start war in Iraq.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
No it is not about the first sight of casualties that forms my view of this war in Iraq. My view is formed solely on the BS that was fed to the world that we had to get in Iraq and quick!!! had no time to wait for UN inspections. (Don't get me wrong I think the UN is lame in many ways) but Bush said in fewer words that we had to get in there and quick. Now I am standing here waiting to see why that was... So far I have seen no reason.
Nor have many in the world seen this reason to start war in Iraq.
Fellowship
Fellows, we've gone over this a zillion times here on AI. You know inspections couldn't work without credible force behind them and our French Allies made it clear that's not going to happen. Saddam kicked out the inspectiors, and was managing fine with the sanctions in place. We know he had WMD programs because Israel blew his nuclear reactor some years before, and he used Chem/Bio artillery against the Iranians and the Kurds. And there was intelligence that he's at it again. We also knew he supported and financed terrorists, and that they had training facilities and were conducting active operations from Iraq. And there is still more.
But how many reasons do you need?
You sound JUST like him.
And isreal bombed the reactor... BEFORE the first gulf war.
Originally posted by aapl
?!!
What is this nonsense? We're not dealing with some illiterate Afghanis. This is Iraq we're dealing with. The most modern Arab society on the planet. Anyway, even if I was to accept your argument that the Iraqis are a bunch of uneducated 3rd world carpet weavers there isn't time for this. These things were needed to be build yesterday.
The infrastructure doesn't need to built right away whatsoever. It was already quite deteriated for the past 10 years, and it can wait and be rebuilt at a steady pace. What the Iraqis need right away is security to do their business.
The reconstruction funding only going to Iraqis is just plain Keynesian economics, albiet they won't have to go into debt because the funding is "free" as it were.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Is aapl really Rummie incognito?
You sound JUST like him.
And isreal bombed the reactor... BEFORE the first gulf war.
So did Saddam the Kurds and the Iranians with chemical warheads. What's your point?!! (Damn, sometimes I feel like I'm talking to 5 year olds here).
Originally posted by aapl
! (Damn, sometimes I feel like I'm talking to 5 year olds here).
Five years old are not interested in politic
We had no problems with Saddam and WMD back then.
SO what exactly was the rush? That's the point.
Originally posted by THT
The reconstruction funding only going to Iraqis is just plain Keynesian economics, albiet they won't have to go into debt because the funding is "free" as it were.
HAHAHAHA, good one!
Yeah, only you libbi hippi pinkos believe that you can get something for nothing. Well, the world doesn't work that way. Even the Commies learned that lesson. There are no free rides in this world.
So it seems they are getting something for nothing.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Yeah AND that was what... 15 years ago? When we were supporting them... paying for those weapons.
We had no problems with Saddam and WMD back then.
SO what exactly was the rush? That's the point.
The rush? How long do we need to wait? The guy violated his ceasefire commitments for 10 years, commited genocide, attacked the WTC, attacked his neighbours, used WoMD, tried to kill the President, and after all that you're asking what's the rush to take him down?! You must be one lethargic procrastinator.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Well Bush refused to put anything in the latest appropriation for Iraq that would have them pay the U.S. back...
So it seems they are getting something for nothing.
That's what you think.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Five years old are not interested in politic
And they obviously shouldn't be! LOL
Originally posted by chu_bakka
That's what everyone thought when they voted for the new appropriation. Do you know something congress doesn't?
Nope. I believe Congress knows just as much as I do, and probably more.
That's why they tried to get a loan guarantee or anything that would require someone to be accountable for the money spent... but that didn't happen.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Much more than you. I'm sure.
That's why they tried to get a loan guarantee or anything that would require someone to be accountable for the money spent... but that didn't happen.
Who is they? Specifically. And who were they trying to acquire the guarantee from? Ie. Who was required to be the guarantor?