If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Newsweek)   Bush has created more terrorists than anyone else. Ever   (msnbc.msn.com) divider line 215
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

2742 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Aug 2007 at 3:18 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



215 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-08-06 05:28:05 AM
"Chomsky: There is no war on terror" (pops) Basically, he explains to you why the US really invaded Iraq. (Oil.) He also explains how, yeah, there wre WMDs in Iraq (like Santorum pointed out) they were the WMDs the US sold to Iraq in the 80s to help them in their war against Iran.

After we invaded, no guards were posted at the various facilities around the country, and the WMDs were systematically removed from those sites by knowledgable fellows.

So the world is indeed a much more dangerous place now, since Bush&Co basically gave the insurgents access not only to WMDs, but the ones we put there. (also pops to new tab/window.)

Really horrifying article.

Also, Bush & Cheney will declare war on Iran before their terms are up in 18 months. They 'don't trust future presidents to handle the problem properly.'
 
2007-08-06 05:31:52 AM
Bush didn't create the terrorists, Wahhabist schools did. To make this situation easier to understand, I'll put it in Fark terms.

Bush is used by the Wahhabi clerics like Bush is used by the 'Liberal Farkers'. An excuse for action against another person.
 
2007-08-06 05:32:51 AM
phillydrifter: Also, Bush & Cheney will declare war on Iran before their terms are up in 18 months. They 'don't trust future presidents to handle the problem properly.'

Only the Congress can declare war.
 
2007-08-06 05:33:22 AM
SJ

Do you honestly think a conflict that has been brewing for centuries will stop because America politely asks them to?

No, I think it will take a big bloody war. You may have noticed one going on. That is why I am not shocked and outraged with my head buried in American soil, hoping if I ignore it that all of "those people" will just kill each other and ignore me.

This surge is just a façade? Not according to Brookings.

As to lost weaponry - that sucks and will probably result in more death. From what I read, the claim was not that they had vanished (e.g. hijacked by baddies) but that there was poor record keeping. Maybe those responsible for tracking those weapons should be disciplined, but that does not argue for immediate withdrawal.
 
2007-08-06 05:34:06 AM
DeathByGeekSquad: Bush didn't create the terrorists, Wahhabist schools did. To make this situation easier to understand, I'll put it in Fark terms.

Bush is used by the Wahhabi clerics like Bush is used by the 'Liberal Farkers'. An excuse for action against another person.


Apparently whoever was responsible for Abu Ghraib created the first terrorist described in the article.
 
2007-08-06 05:37:33 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: that sucks and will probably result in more death.

Yup. I guess we can just ignore the US's culpability in this case! How callous you seem about this! Don't you care if your government is exporting death at a rate exceeding any other nation on Earth?

Don't you care that your president has gutted the Constitution - the very basis of this nation?

HOW can you not care about this stuff? HOW can you SUPPORT it?!?

Seriously?
 
2007-08-06 05:37:52 AM
Bill Kristol has been wrong about pretty much everything in the last five years. That means that the people who have been quoting him the last five years have pretty much been wrong about everything as well.

If I was you, I'd stop quoting Bill Kristol.
 
2007-08-06 05:42:20 AM
JustAnotherWednesday:

Reagan did reluctantly pull out of Lebanon amidst cries for withdrawal from a Democratic House (members of which then used the pullout to attack Reagan).


Cap Weinberger was Reagan's Secretary of Defense at the time. Do your research and you'll find he had as much (or, more likely, more) to do with the pull-out as did any pressure from Congress.
 
2007-08-06 05:47:52 AM
JustAnotherWednesday

No, I think it will take a big bloody war. You may have noticed one going on. That is why I am not shocked and outraged with my head buried in American soil, hoping if I ignore it that all of "those people" will just kill each other and ignore me.

HA! We were the ones telling you that if we went into Iraq, THERE WILL BE INSTABILITY OF MAMMOTH PROPORTIONS, and you and your ilk called us treasonous. The neo cons are the ones who had a wet dream thinking we will bring democracy to Iraq by instituting Starbucks next to a mosque. Bush naively went in thinking, oh what was the phrase Cheney proudly proclaimed, "My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators" or do you remember this beauty, "I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." WHOSE HEAD WAS IN THE SAND THEN BUDDY????? Ron Paul and Obama predicted this and that much we should give them credit, but that is neither here or there, my question is why Bush didn't see it.

It amazes me how some people chose to ignore history
 
2007-08-06 05:51:25 AM
SeismicJizzer: JustAnotherWednesday

This is a war that had to be fought eventually. I am thankful that it is fought in Iraq rather than here in the U.S.

This is the stupidest comment I hear from the neo-cons, "we have to fight them there so we won't fight them here" BULLshiat.... What did your lord Savoir Ronald Reagan do when there was a civil war in Lebanon, HE CUT AND RAN!!! He knew these people have no threshold for freedom; they want to blow themselves up because THIS CONFLICT HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 632 A.D. Did the Algerians follow the French when they left in 1962? You do not have a facet of an idea in regards to Middle East Politics... This is why our military has to suffer because of the incompetence of this administration and people like you. The military has prevailed on every single mission given to them, and THE ADMINSTRATION WILL NEVER ADMIT IT IS THERE FAULT THAT IRAQ HAS BEEN POLITICALLY DESTABILIZED. Remember what Colin Powell said, if you break it you own it and G. BUSH owns this travesty. I just read the Pentagon lost 190,000 AK-Rifles and 80,000 Pistols in Iraq. Do you remember the $8 Billion dollars that somehow vanished? Time after time they want to blame S. HUSSEIN for 9/11 when O. Laden is sadly, having a great time watching his empire grow. However, do not let facts get in the way of uber partisan politics




Ahhh... Nothing like a fresh mixup of Nationalist movements with Jihadist-world counquest-nutjob ideologies for a cool morning start (or afternoon, in my case).
Keep up the good ranting.
/Random words and phrases capitalized in my post, too.


lohphat
Only the Congress can declare war.

FTFY. kinda embarassing, you Americans should know your own grammar.
 
2007-08-06 05:58:13 AM
grxymkjbn

As has been explained repeatedly to you, this is not a case of "intolerance from the left". This is a case of rational people looking at something and making a judgement based upon the facts. If you really support this administration, it can be objectively demonstrated that your support is not based on a rational assessment of reality.


I never claimed intolerance from the left here. That claim was made by others. Couching your accusation of psychosis as in bold, above, does not transform your ad hominem attack into argument.

So-called "partial birth abortion" is a boogyman invented by the right to unify their base; it has NEVER REALLY EXISTED as they define it.

We actually discussed this quite a bit in OB-GYN classes. I recommend Gabbe's Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies. You are quite wrong about this. I used the term PBA because it is probably the most widely recognized in common parlance. The AMA now refers to this procedure as intact dilation and extraction (intact D&X). It is a small fraction of the abortions performed in US, but I am still glad it has been at least made more restricted.

The Taliban is STILL ASCENDANT in Afghanistan. I never claimed otherwise (assuming you mean moving upward rather than dominant). But they are no longer in CONTROL of the government. Like the silverfish I occasionally find in my library, they must be fought with vigilance.

Most of the rest of the points on your list are just as badly flawed.

Ditto.
 
2007-08-06 06:02:35 AM
DrBenway

JustAnotherWednesday:

Reagan did reluctantly pull out of Lebanon amidst cries for withdrawal from a Democratic House (members of which then used the pullout to attack Reagan).


Cap Weinberger was Reagan's Secretary of Defense at the time. Do your research and you'll find he had as much (or, more likely, more) to do with the pull-out as did any pressure from Congress.


Yes, but my point was more that they cried for withdrawal then, when granted this, they used it to attack Reagan. I did not mean to imply that it was only Congress which forced Reagan to withdraw.
 
2007-08-06 06:03:05 AM
Don't blame Bush... he's just carrying out God's will.
 
2007-08-06 06:06:22 AM
Well at least George finally found something he's actually good at.
 
2007-08-06 06:12:30 AM
SeismicJizzer

HA!
I believe that is what Rabbit, Pooh and Piglet planned to say when they wanted let Kanga know they had kidnapped Roo.

We were the ones telling you that if we went into Iraq, THERE WILL BE INSTABILITY OF MAMMOTH PROPORTIONS, and you and your ilk called us treasonous. The neo cons are the ones who had a wet dream thinking we will bring democracy to Iraq by instituting Starbucks next to a mosque. Bush naively went in thinking, oh what was the phrase Cheney proudly proclaimed, "My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators" or do you remember this beauty, "I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." WHOSE HEAD WAS IN THE SAND THEN BUDDY????? Ron Paul and Obama predicted this and that much we should give them credit, but that is neither here or there, my question is why Bush didn't see it.

I am sorry you were called treasonous. I would no more call you treasonous than I would call one of our servicemen a baby-killer. I doubt you have committed treason, but I base this on our limited conversation and a general belief in the goodness of men. I always believed this would be a long conflict and remember many speeches by the President warning the world of this. Perhaps you were distracted by your grief over the one of the elections between 2000 and 2006. (Please do not post photos of the mission accomplished banner that was intended as a celebration of completion of the ship's mission).

It amazes me how some people chose to ignore history.

Yep. Me too.
 
2007-08-06 06:15:06 AM
Poolio

Don't blame Bush... he's just carrying out God's will.

You mean the search for some flakes of Parmesano Reggiano with which to flavor Himself?
 
2007-08-06 06:17:49 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: DrBenway

JustAnotherWednesday:

Reagan did reluctantly pull out of Lebanon amidst cries for withdrawal from a Democratic House (members of which then used the pullout to attack Reagan).


Cap Weinberger was Reagan's Secretary of Defense at the time. Do your research and you'll find he had as much (or, more likely, more) to do with the pull-out as did any pressure from Congress.


Yes, but my point was more that they cried for withdrawal then, when granted this, they used it to attack Reagan. I did not mean to imply that it was only Congress which forced Reagan to withdraw.


It's okay, it's just like when the Republicans forced Bill Clinton to pull out of Somolia.
 
2007-08-06 06:33:17 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: Do you mean in the UN Oil for Food Program? Got any leads?

Well, since Halliburton was heavily involved in that scandal as well, perhaps an interview with the Vice President would be in order?
 
2007-08-06 06:34:00 AM
Darth_Lukecash

It's okay, it's just like when the Republicans forced Bill Clinton to pull out of Somolia.

Well, you realize G.H.W. Bush had initially sent in troops and met with some success in '92. Bush also resisted turning control of those troops over to the un. Clinton then sent them back to disaster under un control.
 
2007-08-06 06:38:31 AM
Atillathepun

Well, since Halliburton was heavily involved in that scandal as well, perhaps an interview with the Vice President would be in order?

Could his heart take it? Maybe he will talk after his surprise presidental win in 2008.

I used to have a hard Al case for my old Powerbook G4 made by Halliburton. It used to anger my liberal colleagues for some reason. I didn't tell them about my love of Bush Beans.
 
2007-08-06 06:57:49 AM
Bush didn't create them. They created themselves. They were always there, waiting for a reason, any reason to give in to the hate and intolerance that was already in them. Islam--not Bush--creates haters and murderers. Put the blame where it belongs: on the false religion that these wackos embrace.
 
2007-08-06 07:00:43 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: Could his heart take it? Maybe he will talk after his surprise presidential win in 2008.

I used to have a hard Al case for my old Powerbook G4 made by Halliburton. It used to anger my liberal colleagues for some reason. I didn't tell them about my love of Bush Beans.


Actually, I have to hand it to you JAW, you've handled yourself here with good humor and you actually respond, in part, to specific questions/scenarios presented. The frustrating thing about Fark is that most of those that defend the Bush administration here don't exactly do your "side" any favors because they tend to duck the question, misconstrue (intentionally,) what others are actually trying to communicate or simply dismiss any and all points as mere liberal hate.

That being said, you're still carrying water for a policy that could only have prevailed under the most ideal of circumstances. Pulling off a victory in Iraq would have and still does require way above normal strategic, tactical and logistical ability. In addition, it would have required exceptional levels of incorruptibility, forward thinking and empathy towards an alien and unfamiliar culture (alien to the primary architects of the strategy.) In short, it would have required the type of genius usually only seen in history books.

Now what seems strange to me about the main stream conservative ideology about this war is the extreme skepticism conservatives in general have about governmental efficacy even withing the decidedly more placid borders of our own country doesn't match up with their faith that a miracle can be pulled off in Iraq. How can one expect government's ability, which one is already skeptical of, to do wonders in a chaotic setting such as Iraq was has become? A setting not exactly friendly to American ideas and ideals to begin with? I mnean, if government isn't the answer here, how can it be the answer there? Seems like a double standard to me.

It's like not trusting a teenager to drive a car, but being perfectly happy to let him/her drive a tank.
 
2007-08-06 07:10:44 AM

The republicans have such strong candidates going up against a black Muslim (unelectable)


Ummmm.....
 
2007-08-06 07:11:48 AM
tony41454: Bush didn't create them. They created themselves. They were always there, waiting for a reason, any reason to give in to the hate and intolerance that was already in them. Islam--not Bush--creates haters and murderers. Put the blame where it belongs: on the false religion that these wackos embrace.

There are 2 things you're ignoring:

1) How many more moderate followers of Islam have been pushed over the edge by seeing friends/family members die, neighborhoods being torn up and basic utilities such as water and electricity go to hell in a handbasket? People are often irrational animals when the shiat hits the fan.

2) People aren't exactly rational when it comes time to scapegoat. I hate to Godwin, but rational Germans were perfectly willing to irrationally blame Jews for all their ills because of how bad things were post WWI for Germany. Likewise, when things go to hell around normally rational Iraqis, who is the easiest target for their anger, justified or not? That's right: Americans and their neighbors who may share slightly different religious beliefs. That's who. This is a simple fact of human nature, and Bush completely disregarded it. If things are shiatty and you're walking around in a uniform and you're foreign, you're going to get blamed. And in circumstances where violence is nearly omnipresent, that means shiat is going to get blown up, and that shiat is going to be us.

Bush didn't create the hate, he just made a situation where that hate was amplified and directed at us.
 
2007-08-06 07:40:16 AM
JustAnotherWednesday:,

You know, after reading your posts for the last few days (I see you are becoming more vocal in expressing yourself) I would like to welcome you to Fark. As a liberal (card carrying and long standing) I find is somewhat refreshing to have someone represent your views with the the constant barrage of "Libs" or the more common "Libtard" and I believe Fark would be a far less rich place if there wasn't a full spectrum of opinions.

That said, while I find your opinions interesting, I also find them somewhat naive.

You say there has been a war coming, apparently for a long time, yet I do not hear you admitting that a fair share of the responsibility for starting that war resides with the West. Whether we believed we were doing the right thing when we interfered in Iran in the 1950s or when we sold the helicopters to Saddam that dispersed that poison gas in Halabja, our hands are bloody, right past the elbows in this. I would like to point out that almost all of those acts occurred under Republican administrations and that the "blowback" that was generated was dealt with, on many occasions, by Democratic administrations.

However, the bottom line is that this destabilization in the Middle East is wholly owned by the Bush Administration, I don't believe there would have been very much opposition to a continued conflict in Afghanistan and I believe that we could have actually achieved several things by focusing our efforts there - even though there were certainly other reasons for that war than simply spreading democracy - you know, gas pipelines, and all that.

But when the Bush Administration attacked Iraq, we both know this was part of the PNAC plan, published on their site for all to see, and magically, who do we find as having fingerprints all over that concept? Why your source for inspiration William Kristol, and yet you post him here as a resource to back up your argument. I believe we can both understand that this is not the best tactic to use if you are trying to get your point across.

From my perspective, William Kristol has managed to elevate himself to the status of garbage and people who read his views will inevitably suffer from the well documented phenomenon of GIGO.

As they say, going through life filled with bad information to base your most critical decisions on is, well, no way to go through life.

Welcome to Fark, slip off your shoes, put your feet up, grab your favorite beverage and expect to get your ass handed to you every once in a while - just like the rest of us.
 
2007-08-06 07:50:13 AM
Conservatives can't even run a war properly. So much for the "we are the real men of America. Those Liberals are a bunch of flower-farking pansies" crap. At least our servicepersons would be alive with the left in power.
 
2007-08-06 07:56:35 AM
submitter: Bush Perversion of Islam has created more terrorists than anyone else...ever

FTFY

(Nice job JustAnotherWednesday)

You'll have fun figuring out which of the left-leaning Farkers are challenging, civil debaters and which are...other things. One's thing's for sure, we may be outnumbered but are seldom outmatched.
 
2007-08-06 07:56:59 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: So (after he gets all the name calling out of his system) the guy with the "Dissent is Patriotic" poster is telling dissenters to go away because he can't stand to listen to them. This is why I love Fark! (Well, this and the free beer.)

A) Crying "help help I'm being oppressed" when someone doesn't like you isn't political dissent or patriotism.

B) Suggesting a safe haven for the oppressed little baby isn't telling them to go away.

C) Thanks for proving my point that it's like god took away all the conservatives and replaced them with these whiny little biatches that cry every time their tripe isn't treated like it's somehow respectable.
 
2007-08-06 08:07:53 AM
PC LOAD LETTER: Conservatives can't even run a war properly. So much for the "we are the real men of America. Those Liberals are a bunch of flower-farking pansies" crap. At least our servicepersons would be alive with the left in power.

Funny, most Democrats don't even want to fight when we are attacked and innocent Americans are murdered. They'd rather just let the lawyers do it for them. That surely worked during the Clinton years when he and his administration were too scared to do anything because his poll numbers were more important than the security of the country. And don't mistake this post as pro bush. The puppet president won't secure our border with Mexico until Mexico tells him it's ok to do so.
 
2007-08-06 08:08:07 AM
HappyDaddy: submitter: Bush and Perversion of Islam has created more terrorists than anyone else...ever

FTFY

(Nice job JustAnotherWednesday)
You'll have fun figuring out which of the left-leaning Farkers are challenging, civil debaters and which are...other things. One's thing's for sure, we may be outnumbered but are seldom outmatched.


You must not be reading the same things I am. Right leaning people are nearly always outmatched.
 
2007-08-06 08:13:40 AM
asinine, next they'll claim he causes nuclear proliferation and the common cold.
 
2007-08-06 08:18:06 AM
HappyDaddy:

One's thing's for sure, we may be outnumbered but are seldom outmatched.

Only in your own mind, only in your own mind.
 
2007-08-06 08:29:14 AM
Funny how conservatives weren't "outnumbered" up until late 2003. I wonder what happened?

Oh right, they turned from respectable Americans into Little Lewinskis.
 
2007-08-06 08:29:33 AM
Practice Safe Farking:

Funny, most Democrats don't even want to fight when we are attacked and innocent Americans are murdered.

But, but the Democrats voted for this war too! Damn, thanks for lampooning another one of the right-wing's ridiculous talking points.

They'd rather just let the lawyers do it for them.

Paging Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Alberto Gonzales, please pick up the white courtesy phone in the lobby - if you can remember what a phone is.

That surely worked during the Clinton years when he and his administration were too scared to do anything because his poll numbers were more important than the security of the country.

Hmmm, I'm torn between "Wag the dog!" and wondering how dare the bastard actually listen to the people who elected him. So many things wrong with just that one sentence and too little time to address them all.

And don't mistake this post as pro bush. The puppet president won't secure our border with Mexico until Mexico tells him it's ok to do so.

Okay, while I won't "mistake this post as pro Bush" I will point out you have included a pile of already debunked right wing talking points.
 
2007-08-06 08:29:51 AM
More than Muhammad????

/trolling?
 
2007-08-06 08:31:10 AM
HappyDaddy: submitter: Tyrants and repression have created more terrorists than anyone else...ever

Fixed. Thread over.
 
2007-08-06 08:34:35 AM
prjindigo:

asinine, next they'll claim he causes nuclear proliferation and the common cold.

Nuclear proliferation? Let me point this out to you. and yes, I will assign all the blame for this to the Bush administration exclusively - as for the common cold, I'll just assign a little blame that the Bush administration didn't sink One Trillion Dollars into research to eradicate the malady. It would have been money better spent.

Consider yourself made a fool of - by your own words.
 
2007-08-06 08:35:42 AM
You can count on us for job creation.
 
2007-08-06 08:35:45 AM
Bored Horde:

Tyrants and repression have created more terrorists freedom fighters than anyone else...ever

Fixed. Thread continues.
 
2007-08-06 08:39:32 AM
jcooli09: You must not be reading the same things I am. Right leaning people are nearly always outmatched.

Random Reality Check: Only in your own mind, only in your own mind.

Y'all don't mean to suggest that I and you believe that our own opinions are correct? Shocking.

Planterz: Oh right, they turned from respectable Americans into Little Lewinskis.

Again with the fixation on Presidential pudenda. Strange, very strange.
 
2007-08-06 08:39:47 AM
Random Reality Check

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, and with that I'm going to pass out and sleep the sleep of the dead.

/hopefully not the sleep of the dead from a bad zombie movie
 
2007-08-06 08:43:12 AM
Y
A
W
N
 
2007-08-06 08:45:01 AM
Practice Safe Farking: Funny, most Democrats don't even want to fight when we are attacked and innocent Americans are murdered.

Are you saying Iraq attacked us or that Dems didn't support action in Afghanistan? Both statements are outright lies. Or did you mean something else altogether?


They'd rather just let the lawyers do it for them. That surely worked during the Clinton years when he and his administration were too scared to do anything because his poll numbers were more important than the security of the country.


Unlike Bush, Clinton's people actually tracked down the people responsible for an attack on the World Trade Center. . .

And don't mistake this post as pro bush. The puppet president won't secure our border with Mexico until Mexico tells him it's ok to do so.

No, it's just an anti-lib/dem post containing nothing much but blather based in imaginary-land.

/Not that Dems are any great prizes themselves.
 
2007-08-06 08:46:33 AM
Bored Horde: Random Reality Check

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, and with that I'm going to pass out and sleep the sleep of the dead.

/hopefully not the sleep of the dead from a bad zombie movie


You won't find many brains to feast on in a Fark politics thread. . .
 
2007-08-06 08:47:39 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: I think there are a few Afghanis that might disagree.

yeah you're right, i forgot, he aided and abetted them where it would hurt them nasty commies.
 
2007-08-06 08:54:03 AM
Bored Horde:

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist


Every possible thing except this
 
2007-08-06 09:06:54 AM
z.about.com

JustAnotherWednesday: Do you support anything he has actually done? Yes.

1. Ban on Partial Birth Abortion.
Killing the mother and child in pregnancies gone wrong... hooray, tehy can be together in heaven!

2. Income tax cuts.
The only war ever paid for with tax cuts, hooray!

3. Increase in Educational IRA contribution limits.
Clinton did this too, but I do support it

4. Removal of Taliban from control in Afghanistan.
Hey, that's going really well.

5. Kyoto Treaty.
KYOTO TREATY NEEDED

6. Capture of Khalid Shaykh Muhammad. Death of Muhammad Atef.
Osama bin Laden, we don't worry about him.

7. Disarming of Libya wrt chemical and other weapons.
They were bankrupted by sanctions before Bush entered office

8. Choice of Supreme Court Justices.
Ooh, like Harriet Miers, who is now refusing to testify in front of Congress about her role in illegal political firings at DOJ? Now that's judicial timbre!

9. Removal of S. Hussein from power.
Hey, that's going really well isn't it!

This is all I can think of at the moment, but it is late. Feel free to rebut them by placing "fail" after each point.

fail
 
2007-08-06 09:10:55 AM
WEDNESDAY:

1. Ban on Partial Birth Abortion

Do you know what an ectopic pregnancy is?
 
2007-08-06 09:11:26 AM
MadSkillz: What do you think the point is?

Honestly.

Don't you get it?




You nailed it. I don't know about creating three classes of people, but it is ALL about spending money. While the general public is busy debating that cause or this purpose and who is right/wrong, this is simply about raiding the piggy bank.

If you look at nearly every policy ('cept for those based on Bush's strange personal ideology -- e.g. stem cell research), it's about spending the money.

Period. The faster we realize that, the faster we can stop the endless debating.
 
2007-08-06 09:11:50 AM
JustAnotherWednesday: This is a war that had to be fought eventually. I am thankful that it is fought in Iraq rather than here in the U.S. If the number of terrorists has increased, they have not been able to manifest this newfound strength through attacks on U.S. soil. With the previous policy of sanction, appeasement and friendship-building, 3000+ Americans were also killed, not over a few years, but in a few hours. I value the sacrifice of our servicemen so much that I have fought in the Middle East myself, and I have been shot at in the service of my country on two continents (other than N.A.).

Coming from a military family to you:

Your knowledge of terrorism is weak, they take years to develop real plans.

Your knowledge of Middle East politics is weak, we're still supporting questionable governments.

Your knowledge of Military Planning is weak, we've lost Afghanistan now because Dubya can't finish one thing before he starts another (which there aren't enough troops for).

America was attacked before terrorists took down the towers. Undoubtedly we will be attacked again, get used to the idea. It's going to happen for sure in the next decade (probably the next 5 years). How many lives will it cost? No telling. There's no way to prevent it, even if you invade every middle east country. Get used to the idea that America is a target now, we got used to it during the Cold War.

Your favored guy didn't do anything to fix it, hell he made it worse. There are going is going to be at least one new terrorist haven, and it was previously run by an a$$hole of a secular dictator we helped keep in power because he was secular, and a check on Iran.

Say hello to the new, Islamic-Theocracy your favored pres created: Iraq. Say hello to the old one he let fall back into it's ways: Afghanistan (with the Taliban coming to a town soon!).

Dubya failed at catching Bin Laden, also he failed both the Afghani's and Iraqi's long-term. In other words: history is going to see him as a guy whom overreached and failed completely.
 
Displayed 50 of 215 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report