|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 12:37:34 AM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lightshineon
Rich you already own your home at a young age, so I do not see the problem?
My dear sister Lightshineon, you're missing the point. My issues with Bush are first and foremost issues of disagreement with his foreign policy, most glaringly the Iraq war. I wrote a post just now summarizing facts about rational discussion which tafkam says is not possible due to what tafkam qualifies as hatred from the left.
However much I dislike Bush's policies, I do not think that the reasonable person will say that I am either hateful or leftist (regardless of my antiwar stance).
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 1:35:33 AM
|
|
|
lightshineon
Posts: 3359
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
I did not say you were hateful, I like you as a brother in Christ. I said I was proud of you.
_____________________________
Remember, whenever you have pearls, there are always plenty of pigs nearby who would be glad to step on them.
F.T., 2007
Be sure you vote for those, whose views you want your children to emulate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 10:25:32 AM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2004
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Well obviously, there is already a thread on the war, so I'll just say this....Saddam was long overdue to be dealt with. He had not abided by his ceasfire agreement from the end of the Gulf War, and had consistently thumbed his nose at the world community.
We all knew Bill Clinton didn't have the stones to deal with him, so I was looking forward to a new adminstration that would. 9/11 or no 9/11, Saddam needed to be held accountable.
Again, has George W. made mistakes in the War On Terror? Yes. For instance, I wouldn't have put Iraq on the priority list right behind Afghanistan. Iran and/or North Korea seemed to be more of an immediate threat. I also knew that any action taken against Iraq would have serious political repercussions.
Do I agree with George W.'s policies on big government, amnesty for illegals, and this non-solution to a weakening economy by throwing money at it? No, I do not.
However, for the most part, I do support his efforts to keep this country safe in the wake of 9/11, and for any mistakes made, his decisions are still light years better than the unconditional-surrender, gather-our-enemies-round-and-sing-khum-by-ya, raising-taxes, socializing-medicine, punishing-achievement, tolerating-every-abomination-known-to-man ideas of the nation's left.....
_____________________________
"A knight must not complain of his wounds, though his bowels be dropping out."
- Don Qixote, MAN OF LA MANCHA
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 10:48:10 AM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
Tafkam said:
Well obviously, there is already a thread on the war, so I'll just say this....Saddam was long overdue to be dealt with. He had not abided by his ceasfire agreement from the end of the Gulf War, and had consistently thumbed his nose at the world community.
We all knew Bill Clinton didn't have the stones to deal with him, so I was looking forward to a new adminstration that would. 9/11 or no 9/11, Saddam needed to be held accountable.
Again, has George W. made mistakes in the War On Terror? Yes. For instance, I wouldn't have put Iraq on the priority list right behind Afghanistan. Iran and/or North Korea seemed to be more of an immediate threat. I also knew that any action taken against Iraq would have serious political repercussions.
Do I agree with George W.'s policies on big government, amnesty for illegals, and this non-solution to a weakening economy by throwing money at it? No, I do not.
However, for the most part, I do support his efforts to keep this country safe in the wake of 9/11, and for any mistakes made, his decisions are still light years better than the unconditional-surrender, gather-our-enemies-round-and-sing-khum-by-ya, raising-taxes, socializing-medicine, punishing-achievement, tolerating-every-abomination-known-to-man ideas of the nation's left.....
Saddam Hussein was not a threat; he was contained. As for partisan preferences: Bill Clinton, along with the British Royal Air Force, conducted many bombing raids over Iraq in 1998 (Operation Desert Fox). As I said earlier about Al Gore, speculating what an earlier politician would or would not have done is irrelevant. It is a tangent off the argument at hand: Bush's handling of US foreign policy.
George W. Bush's primary error in the WOT is switching focus and resources from Afghanistan to Iraq. Afghanistan at last had the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Iraq had neither. I have repeatedly written here that it has been determined, as was claimed before the war, that Saddam Hussein's regime had no alliance, collaborative partnership, or friendly relations w/ al-Qaeda. 600,000 captured Baath documents prove this, as does Osama Bin Laden's hate for Hussein, his denunciation of Hussein as a Muslim infidel, and Bin Laden's condemnation of Hussein's 1990 invasion of Kuwait.
George W. Bush turned a secular Arab country INTO a training ground for anti-US terror. THIS is one of the biggest miscalculations Bush is guilty of. And 4000 US troops and dozens of thousands of Iraqi civilians are dead as a result.
Finally, as for this quote of yours:
"... any mistakes made, his decisions are still light years better than the unconditional-surrender, gather-our-enemies-round-and-sing-khum-by-ya, raising-taxes, socializing-medicine, punishing-achievement, tolerating-every-abomination-known-to-man ideas of the nation's left....."
This is a gross oversimplification and conflation of issues and of views, and I would like to know just what could be worse than a war bill of $3 trillion dollars (don't ask me; ask Nobel-prize winning economists. Look up "The Three Trillion Dollar War" on Amazon.com), a huge state like Iraq fractured along sectarian lines with 4 million Iraqis having fled their homes to save their own lives, the rise of Iran and the influence thereof in Iraq, the decimation of American credibility abroad, and the growth of already high anti-American sentiment in the Middle East.
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 11:09:35 AM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2004
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Nobody has said that Iraq was in cahoots with Al Quaeda. Even the administration has said this. Was Iraq a terrorist nation? Yes, by any definition you care to name.
And Bill Clinton's actions in Iraq were hardly intended to make Saddam comply with the UN resolutions adopted after the first Gulf War.
quote:
as does Osama Bin Laden's hate for Hussein, his denunciation of Hussein as a Muslim infidel, and Bin Laden's condemnation of Hussein's 1990 invasion of Kuwait.
Unfortunately, Bin Laden is not he be all and end all of terrorism. Bush promised us that we would deal with terrorists and the nations who harbor them. Iraq had been supporting terrorist activities for quite some time, including paying off the family members of suicide bombers.
quote:
This is a gross oversimplification and conflation of issues and of views,
Well, that certainly gets you out of responding t oany of them, doesn't it? Perhaps you can explain to me where any of these "oversimplifications" are incorrect. Then again, maybe not....
_____________________________
"A knight must not complain of his wounds, though his bowels be dropping out."
- Don Qixote, MAN OF LA MANCHA
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 11:23:22 AM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Nobody has said that Iraq was in cahoots with Al Quaeda. Even the administration has said this. Was Iraq a terrorist nation? Yes, by any definition you care to name.
And Bill Clinton's actions in Iraq were hardly intended to make Saddam comply with the UN resolutions adopted after the first Gulf War.
quote:
as does Osama Bin Laden's hate for Hussein, his denunciation of Hussein as a Muslim infidel, and Bin Laden's condemnation of Hussein's 1990 invasion of Kuwait.
Unfortunately, Bin Laden is not he be all and end all of terrorism. Bush promised us that we would deal with terrorists and the nations who harbor them. Iraq had been supporting terrorist activities for quite some time, including paying off the family members of suicide bombers.
quote:
This is a gross oversimplification and conflation of issues and of views,
Well, that certainly gets you out of responding t oany of them, doesn't it? Perhaps you can explain to me where any of these "oversimplifications" are incorrect. Then again, maybe not....
Tafkam, a quick reply:
1. The administration made statements trying to link Iraq to AQ after 9/11 and before the war.
2. Being a terrorist nation? I would like YOU to provide a definition of what a terrorist state is. Besides, if Iraq was such an evil state, then we were complicit with Iraqi terrorism, as US companies, with US Chamber of Commerce knowledge and authorization, sold biochemical agents which Iraq used to manufacture bio/chemical weapons in the 1980s.
3. But Bin Laden and AQ were the central focus of our response to 9/11, and we diverted resources and troops from Afghanistan to go to a state which everyone knows not to have been involved w/ 9/11. And Saudis did the same re: suicide bomber money, but we didn’t invade them.
4. I will refute one for now. “Unconditional surrender.” WHO wants to surrender? This is a lie propagated to make antiwar folks look like defeatists.
As for explaining anything incorrect: I have given you several fact-based statements in my last posts to you and you’ve refuted none, and you’ve ignored several of them (you ignore them and go off on tangents. Changing the topic of discussion is not going to make your arguments any more solid).
The facts within my statements refute the claims you made. If you are unable to show that my fact-based statements are NOT based on facts, then what else can you proffer to back up your statements?
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 1:44:28 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2004
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
1. The administration made statements trying to link Iraq to AQ after 9/11 and before the war
I think most everybody had the same suspicions. But they were quickly dismissed and Bush has said repeatedly that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
quote:
Besides, if Iraq was such an evil state, then we were complicit with Iraqi terrorism, as US companies, with US Chamber of Commerce knowledge and authorization, sold biochemical agents which Iraq used to manufacture bio/chemical weapons in the 1980s.
That's right, the predictable "blame America first" assault. I don't care what we did with or for Iraq in the past. If a friend starts indulging in anti-social behavior, then you don't keep them as a friend.
quote:
3. But Bin Laden and AQ were the central focus of our response to 9/11, and we diverted resources and troops from Afghanistan to go to a state which everyone knows not to have been involved w/ 9/11.
What part of "Terrorists and the nations who harbor them" do you fail to understand? This war is not solely about one man or even one group.
quote:
“Unconditional surrender.” WHO wants to surrender? This is a lie propagated to make antiwar folks look like defeatists.
Whether they intend to actually follow through or not, the Democratic leadership has been wholly in favor of setting a timetable for withdrawal, whether or not the job is complete. That is giving in to the enemy, That is surrender. And yes, most of the anti-war crowd are defeatists. Sorry about that.....
_____________________________
"A knight must not complain of his wounds, though his bowels be dropping out."
- Don Qixote, MAN OF LA MANCHA
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 1:48:46 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1797
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
That's right, the predictable "blame America first" assault. I don't care what we did with or for Iraq in the past. If a friend starts indulging in anti-social behavior, then you don't keep them as a friend.
Funny how when Iraq attacked the Iran they became our "friend". When they attacked "Kuwait" they became our enemy. What was the difference?
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 2:00:13 PM
|
|
|
kernsfamily
Posts: 1222
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: Dallas (originally Detroit)
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Nobody has said that Iraq was in cahoots with Al Quaeda. Even the administration has said this. Was Iraq a terrorist nation? Yes, by any definition you care to name.
actually, many in Clinton's Administration made clear links between Saddam Hussein and Al queada.....Clinton's defense secretary made the statement....and, so did the "indictment" charging bin Laden with murder in two US embassies in Africa (issued in 1998)....
Remember the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan? Well, a link between Saddam & Al Queada was used to justify that so-called "military action"....
Were there really? Perhaps. Maybe not. who knows? but, to say George Bush "made it up" all on his own is not accurate...
but, now it's politically expedient to "ignore" those findings....and, say otherwise. (the newspaper article which documents all of this is no longer posted on the newspaper's website...since the article is from 2004)...
here's a summarized version:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/articles/Clinton%20first%20linked%20al%20Qaeda%20to%20Saddam.htm
_____________________________
Proud dad of 3 great girls....Erin, Emilie and Elise
Blessed to have all of them in a "totally awesome" public elementary school!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 2:02:44 PM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
I think most everybody had the same suspicions. But they were quickly dismissed and Bush has said repeatedly that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
AFTER the war. Before, we were lied to.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
That's right, the predictable "blame America first" assault. I don't care what we did with or for Iraq in the past. If a friend starts indulging in anti-social behavior, then you don't keep them as a friend.
Wrong again. This is typical: anytime examples of US foreign policies past showing the US government working with dictators, accusations of “blaming America.” Oddly enough, this tactic (as others you’ve used today) NEVER address the factual accuracy of what the so-called “America blamers” claim. It’s just an ad hominem.
And as RLJ said, when Iraq invaded Iran they were our buddies; when they attacked Kuwait they were our enemies.
Anti-social behavior? Might you be alluding to Kuwait 1990? Well, we didn't exactly tell them we were opposed to their invasion (not that Hussein had any kind of justification).
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
What part of "Terrorists and the nations who harbor them" do you fail to understand? This war is not solely about one man or even one group.
You mean like Pakistan? Ah, there’s a trustworthy ally in the WOT.
Still waiting for your definition of what a “terrorist state” is – although I doubt you’ll ever give us a real one considering your repeated evasion of fact-based statements.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Whether they intend to actually follow through or not, the Democratic leadership has been wholly in favor of setting a timetable for withdrawal, whether or not the job is complete. That is giving in to the enemy, That is surrender. And yes, most of the anti-war crowd are defeatists. Sorry about that.....
Regardless of what you may think about America’s capacity for war (and it’s an awesome capacity indeed), not even our country can afford an indefinite military deployment in Iraq. This war will cost us around 3 trillion dollars. The Army is strained. We are stretched. Withdrawal is an ultimately inevitable necessity. We can argue about how soon to execute it, but we cannot afford to stay there forever – regardless of what John McCain says about staying there for 100 years.
Now, may I ask you. Why are we there? No WMDs, no ties to Islamic terror. We’re not achieving democracy. 4000 dead troops, dozens of thousands more injured, many more Iraqi civilians dead/wounded, 4 million Iraqis displaced, Iraq now a training ground for terror, Iran the strongest power there sans Israel, 3 trillion US dollar price tag.
Or are you going to say something to get yourself “out of answering” my fact-based statements? Because I hope you will not resort to groundless, sidestepping personal attacks?
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 2:04:58 PM
|
|
|
lightshineon
Posts: 3359
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Lord help, us, all I said was thanks GWB for stimulis package.  war is war, sorry, but when they pulled down Saddam H. statue it was like pulling down Nebbucanezzar( sp) in the book of Daniel. What about the little baby who would have died, with spinal bifia, and such? Savd by the troops. Those peoples life has to be better, watched a history channel documentry, on saddam. I am sure the Lord pulled him down. He did have WOMD Remember the gassing of the kurds. If we let him stay in power it would have been sin, like letting Hitler. I know everyone will be upset at this statement, but God chooses, who he puts on thrones, and takes off. So GWB, did not do anything God is, and was , and is not in control of. No tearing of garments and nashing of teeth please (lol). I am waiting for the storm this is ging to cause, but like I said I am a free thinker, and people will have different views than others.
< Message edited by lightshineon -- 3/25/2008 2:11:06 PM >
_____________________________
Remember, whenever you have pearls, there are always plenty of pigs nearby who would be glad to step on them.
F.T., 2007
Be sure you vote for those, whose views you want your children to emulate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 2:14:18 PM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lightshineon
Lord help, us, all I said was thanks GWB for stimulis package. war is war, sorry, but when they pulled down Saddam H. statue it was like pulling down Nebbucanezzar( sp) in the book of Daniel. What about the little baby who would have died, with spinal bifia, and such? Savd by the troops. Those peoples life has to be better, watched a history channel documentry, on saddam. I am sure the Lord pulled him down. He did have WOMD Remember the gassing of the kurds. If we let him stay in power it would have been sin, like letting Hitler. I know everyone will be upset at this statement, but God chooses, who he puts on thrones, and takes off. So GWB, did not do anything God is, and was , and is not in control of. No tearing of garments and nashing of teeth please (lol). I am waiting for the storm this is ging to cause, but like I said I am a free thinker, and people will have different views than others.
My dear sister Lightshineon:
Good things came out of Hussein's deposition, but a WHOLE LOT of very, VERY bad things resulted as well. I am not sure God wanted 4 million Iraqi refugees, dozens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead.
God bless.
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 2:51:20 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2004
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Why are you so desperate for a definition of "terrorist nation"? It should be oh so obvious, a nation that either directly or indirectly supports terrorist activity against other nations or ideologies.
quote:
Before, we were lied to.
So where's the lie? In the run up to the start of the war, it was about WMD's, not 9/11.
quote:
Anti-social behavior? Might you be alluding to Kuwait 1990? Well, we didn't exactly tell them we were opposed to their invasion (not that Hussein had any kind of justification).
Well, I would call kicking their turbans back into Iraq a considerable opposition. But that's just me.
quote:
Or are you going to say something to get yourself “out of answering” my fact-based statements? Because I hope you will not resort to groundless, sidestepping personal attacks?
Well, if you'll be so kind as to name a single personal assault I've made against you, that would be appreciated.
quote:
Now, may I ask you. Why are we there? No WMDs, no ties to Islamic terror. We’re not achieving democracy. 4000 dead troops, dozens of thousands more injured, many more Iraqi civilians dead/wounded, 4 million Iraqis displaced, Iraq now a training ground for terror, Iran the strongest power there sans Israel, 3 trillion US dollar price tag.
Again, this discussion is better suited for the IRAQ WAR thread, but if you insist.....Saddam needed to be dealt with. He had been given 12 years to comply. He refused and now he's gone. Good riddance.
In a post 9/11 world, I completely support the notion of pre-emptive action, to stop countries before they can strike here. Was Iraq such a priority that should have been second on the list? I don't think so, but the President thought otherwise. And now that we're there, for whatever missteps have been made, we have to see it through. You don't quit a job just because the going gets difficult.
_____________________________
"A knight must not complain of his wounds, though his bowels be dropping out."
- Don Qixote, MAN OF LA MANCHA
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 4:03:33 PM
|
|
|
lightshineon
Posts: 3359
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Dear Bro Rich, God is always in control, he is soverign. That is my faith and I believe and can provide scripture to this thought. Lean not on your own understanding, but in all you ways, acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight. His thoughts are not our thoughts, and his ways are not our ways. I know without a doubt God decides who is on the throne, and who he puts down it is scriptural also. Bllessings
quote:
ORIGINAL: RichLP
quote:
ORIGINAL: lightshineon
Lord help, us, all I said was thanks GWB for stimulis package. war is war, sorry, but when they pulled down Saddam H. statue it was like pulling down Nebbucanezzar( sp) in the book of Daniel. What about the little baby who would have died, with spinal bifia, and such? Savd by the troops. Those peoples life has to be better, watched a history channel documentry, on saddam. I am sure the Lord pulled him down. He did have WOMD Remember the gassing of the kurds. If we let him stay in power it would have been sin, like letting Hitler. I know everyone will be upset at this statement, but God chooses, who he puts on thrones, and takes off. So GWB, did not do anything God is, and was , and is not in control of. No tearing of garments and nashing of teeth please (lol). I am waiting for the storm this is ging to cause, but like I said I am a free thinker, and people will have different views than others.
My dear sister Lightshineon:
Good things came out of Hussein's deposition, but a WHOLE LOT of very, VERY bad things resulted as well. I am not sure God wanted 4 million Iraqi refugees, dozens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead.
God bless.
_____________________________
Remember, whenever you have pearls, there are always plenty of pigs nearby who would be glad to step on them.
F.T., 2007
Be sure you vote for those, whose views you want your children to emulate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 7:06:35 PM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Why are you so desperate for a definition of "terrorist nation"? It should be oh so obvious, a nation that either directly or indirectly supports terrorist activity against other nations or ideologies.
I was hoping for a better definition, because by this definition, you’ve just called America a terrorist state.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Well, I would call kicking their turbans back into Iraq a considerable opposition. But that's just me.
“Kicking their turbans back into Iraq?” – this is a very derogatory statement bordering on racism. Ironically, the Iraqi military personnel in Iraq wore uniforms… the ones w/ turbans were Kuwaiti civilians.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Well, if you'll be so kind as to name a single personal assault I've made against you, that would be appreciated.
You said I was blaming America. Blaming America is an indirect accusation of despising America, and I do not like being called an America hater. Now, will you please refute my claim that US corporations, with knowledge and authorization from the US Chamber of Commerce, sold agents which were used to create biological and chemical weapons by Iraq?
Also – you said:
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
I don't care what we did with or for Iraq in the past.
This statement stands out in that you look at history as a vacuum, as do so many Americans who are so uninformed of history and world events. It’s as if history only starts when Americans are the victims. What we did with or for Iraq DID and DOES matter very much. Saddam Hussein was our ally, as were other 3rd world dictators who laughed at the notion of “democracy.” But as long as US interests were parallel to keeping these despots in power, our leaders didn’t care.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Again, this discussion is better suited for the IRAQ WAR thread, but if you insist.....Saddam needed to be dealt with. He had been given 12 years to comply. He refused and now he's gone. Good riddance.
Should you wish to continue this discussion in the Iraq war thread, we can resume this there. Odd, though… you say nothing about 4 thousand dead US troops, 4 million Iraqi refugees, etc… I do wonder whether your unpleasant reference to “kicking their (Iraqi) turbans” demonstrates a callous attitude towards the sufferings of Iraqi civilians… sufferings caused by the disastrous foreign policy decisions of George W. Bush.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
In a post 9/11 world, I completely support the notion of pre-emptive action, to stop countries before they can strike here. Was Iraq such a priority that should have been second on the list? I don't think so, but the President thought otherwise. And now that we're there, for whatever missteps have been made, we have to see it through. You don't quit a job just because the going gets difficult.
In other words, you approve of the use of military force - unprovoked aggression - against states who have done nothing to threaten us, as George W. Bush did against Iraq, which was weakened by a decade of sanctions, had no nuclear weapons program as declared by inspectors, had a military far weaker than the conventional army of 1991 which US military force obliterated, and which, as per Condi Rice and Colin Powell, was neutralized and posed no threat to its neighbors (let alone to the world's lone superpower).
Tafkam, what is your definition of “victory” in Iraq and how will it be achieved? Please, no vague statements like “staying the course.” I mean in details, re: awakening councils, the Mahdi Army, Grand Ayatollah Sistani, the Kurdish situation; the utilities being far below what they were before George W. Bush’s decision to invade; the ghettoization of Baghdad, the ethnic cleansing.
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 9:16:46 PM
|
|
|
lightshineon
Posts: 3359
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
My thank you GWB today is this, thank you for the stimuls monies again. Thank You, because You take much flack from media, and people from every walk of life, and you have not Said the "G" and the "D" to America. LIke militant pastors. Thanks for taking our abuse. And our bullying ways to you. Jesus loves GWB 
Remember people he is a man with feelings too, and I believe in the war, just because I believe God is soverign, and nothing slips past the Lord. God is always right. GWB is not, but the Lord is. Think I will write GWB a letter of encouragement, might actually get to him, because the rest is hate mail. Pray for him, and other leaders it is the right thing to do.
< Message edited by lightshineon -- 3/26/2008 12:45:06 AM >
_____________________________
Remember, whenever you have pearls, there are always plenty of pigs nearby who would be glad to step on them.
F.T., 2007
Be sure you vote for those, whose views you want your children to emulate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/25/2008 11:56:56 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1797
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Nobody has said that Iraq was in cahoots with Al Quaeda. Even the administration has said this.
Welcome back Tafkam. ; ) I'm not going to debate too much with you yet because it would be easier for us to cut and paste from a couple of years ago, lol. Anyway I'm going to discuss this because there is some more news on it that I didn't have back then:
Dick Cheney June 2004:
quote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, and he said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible."
"There clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to. The evidence is overwhelming," Cheney said in an interview with CNBC's "Capitol Report."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/18/cheney.iraq.al.qaeda/
Colin Powell Feb. 2003:
quote:
But what I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al Qaida terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, an associated in collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaida lieutenants.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html
Dick Cheney January 2004:
quote:
(01-23) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Vice President Dick Cheney revived two controversial assertions about the war in Iraq Thursday, declaring there is "overwhelming evidence" that Saddam Hussein had a relationship with al Qaeda and that two trailers discovered after the war are proof of Iraq's biological weapons programs.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/01/23/MNG3M4G9GV1.DTL
Dick Cheney said April of 2007:
quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney repeated his assertions of al-Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein's Iraq on Thursday as the Defense Department released a report citing more evidence that the prewar government did not cooperate with the terrorist group.
Cheney contended that al-Qaeda was operating in Iraq before the March 2003 invasion led by U.S. forces and that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was leading the Iraqi branch of al-Qaeda. Others in al-Qaeda planned the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-06-cheney_N.htm
George Bush said June 2004:
quote:
President Bush insisted today that "numerous contacts" between the ousted government of Saddam Hussein and the al Qaeda terrorist network showed that the former Iraqi leader was a threat to the United States, despite a report by the Sept. 11 commission that found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda.
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush told reporters after a Cabinet meeting at the White House.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48970-2004Jun17.html
Condoleeza Rice Feb. 2002:
quote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's national security adviser Wednesday said Saddam Hussein has sheltered al Qaeda terrorists in Baghdad and helped train some in chemical weapons development -- information she said has been gleaned from captives in the ongoing war on terrorism.
The comments by Condoleezza Rice were the strongest and most specific to date on the White House's accusations linking al Qaeda and Iraq.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/25/us.iraq.alqaeda/
The Pentagon March 2008:
quote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. military's first and only study looking into ties between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda showed no connection between the two, according to a military report released by the Pentagon.
The report released by the Joint Forces Command five years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq said it found no "smoking gun" after reviewing about 600,000 Iraqi documents captured in the invasion and looking at interviews of key Iraqi leadership held by the United States, Pentagon officials said.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/
Now either the Pentagon isn't for the troops and is lying when they said that in all their research, with all the intelligence, with 600,000 pieces of evidence that there was no Iraq and AQ connection. Or it could be that Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney aren't part of the current presidential administration or else when you refer to "administration" you mean some other admnistration like maybe Herbert Hoover's? I don't believe they ever accused Iraq of harboring terrorists. Or else it is wrong to say that the administration never said there was an Iraq AQ connection. They said it many times repeatedly over the years.
As far as what the administration has to say about the official Pentagon report with all those guys that "don't support the troops since they disagree with a big excuse for why Dubya sent us to war"? They censored it and you can no longer read it unless you request it and get it on CD form. It was originally posted for the entire world to see but in what is typical of this administration the truth hurts them. 
On the flip side, welcome back the Iraq thread has been awful quiet lately. ; ) I'll go look for you in some of the other threads I don't think I've ever disagreed with you on anything outside the realm of politics. :D
--edited to remove a caption from an irrelevant photograph in a quote--
< Message edited by rlj -- 3/26/2008 12:24:58 AM >
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/26/2008 2:36:05 PM
|
|
|
wing2000
Posts: 906
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
rlj - thanks for those quotes by the George W. Bush administration (then again, maybe it was Herbert Hoover :) ).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/26/2008 6:39:04 PM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
Bush said on Sep 11 America would make no distinction between terrorists and those who harbored them.
Saddam Hussein and Iraq:
- did not harbor al-Qaeda let alone Osama Bin Laden
- Zarqawi, upon his entry in Iraq: the Baaths were alarmed and issued a warrant for his arrest
- none of the perpetrators of 9/11 were Iraqi
And as for Hussein sending money to suicide bombers' families: why did we not attack Saudi Arabia since the Saudis have done the same? (not to mention Osama is Saudi and so were most of the 9/11 perps?)
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/29/2008 3:58:53 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2004
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Um, Rich? Al-Quaeda is not the only terrorist organization in the world nor is Bin Laden the only terror leader in the world.....
_____________________________
"A knight must not complain of his wounds, though his bowels be dropping out."
- Don Qixote, MAN OF LA MANCHA
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/30/2008 12:28:18 AM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1777
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Um, Rich? Al-Quaeda is not the only terrorist organization in the world nor is Bin Laden the only terror leader in the world.....
In other words, you cannot refute anything I wrote, you have no evidence to back up your claims (the most egregious of all being that what we did with Iraq didn't matter - as I said, you believe like many other Americans do that history starts only when Americans are victims), you have no regrets in saying extremely hurtful things like "kicking their turbans," and you make assertions supported by the most tenuous and vague of claims (AQ not the only terrorist group).
You cannot prove Iraq was in line with terrorists and you cannot say anything about Iraq being a "terrorist" state.
And by the way, did you know the US government has supported groups that qualify as terrorist groups?
Good night.
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/31/2008 8:42:57 PM
|
|
|
lightshineon
Posts: 3359
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
I want to thank GWB for taking down Saddam with God's permission. He and his sons terrorized those people, and thier life has to be better. Come on would you want to live under that monster, that would kill you at his whim. I mean everyone is acting like we took down a saintly man. His acid vats are famous, so are his gassing of the kurds. I bet they say thanks GWB also.
_____________________________
Remember, whenever you have pearls, there are always plenty of pigs nearby who would be glad to step on them.
F.T., 2007
Be sure you vote for those, whose views you want your children to emulate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bush and the rollback of tyranny: a look back - 3/31/2008 11:35:38 PM
|
|
|
jbow
Posts: 708
Joined: 2/16/2007
From: Dixie
Status: offline
|
I wish I could vote for GW again. I think he has been a great president! However, I did scrape the BUSH part of my Bush Cheney buper sticker off so that it just say's CHENEY.. I thought it might aggrivate some liberals. You never know..
I am in favor of the war. I think it was a great idea! First we go into Afghanistan, then into Iraq. That splits the arab world up... good for us I say! we are there if we need to put out foot on anyone.
I thank Bush for keeping us safe. I never imagined that we would go so long without another terrorist attack. He has done a great job!!
We have an all volunteer force who are comitted to the job. All the ones w | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
