So now info Bush had given in his state of the union has been shown to be bullshit.

Guess Clinton isn't the only one who fibs a little...

I like this quote from Tom DeLay: "The overall reason that we went into Iraq is sound. The American people understand that and they support it."

Sorry...now what exactly WAS the reason? I could have sworn Bush said in his "48 Hours" speech:

"In the case of Iraq, the Security Council did act, in the early 1990s. Under Resolutions 678 and 687 -- both still in effect -- the United States and our allies are authorized to use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a question of authority, it is a question of will."

GAME ON.

Yup and now he is committing to another Viewtman, Iraqi's killing American serivcemen in hit and runs, slowly turning the general population against them...where are the WMD?. Where is Bin Laden?. How is Afghanistan?.Africa's next.

How does he do it? How do they do it? Uncanny and immutable.
This is such a happening tailpipe of a party.
Like sugar, the guests are so refined.
A confidence man but why so beleagued?
He's not a leader he's a Texas leaguer.
Swinging for the fence. Got lucky with a strike.
Drilling for fear makes the job simple.
Born on third. Thinks he got a triple."

Prove to me he was lying, and not just going on the intelligence that the British supplied to him. Prove to me that he knew the British doctored the intelligence. Plus the fact that him saying the Iraqis were trying to buy Uranium in Africa was such an insignificant point in his speech. PLUS they already found a centifuge that Qusay had buried in a scientists backyard. There is only one reason to have a centrifuge, and only one reason I could think of why he had it buried. Read

This is what I find rather amusing. Bush makes a claim that was known to be false, and it was an "insignificant" point. But Clinton says, "I didn't have sexual relations" is cause for impeachment.

Which one involved American troops putting their lives at risk?

Clinton's quote was under oath and he lied thus committing perjury which is defined as "The deliberate, willful giving of false, misleading, or incomplete testimony under oath."

Bush was not under oath and has not committed any crime. Furthur investigation will show if he "misled the public" but that, my friends, is a common occurance in politics. Bush is no different.

The question is, did he know it was false at the time? If, as far as he knew, it was true, then he did nothing wrong. This is nothing like Viet Nam. We were losing 500 soldiers a week in Viet Nam. Do you expect it to be easy, with no casualties? If so, you are a moron.

Fair point. By I still say Bush's comment has more impact - and repercussions.

Exaggeration. 1966-1971, 72 months. In only 20 did casualties reach 500 in a *month*. That's not to take away from anyone, as each one is too much. Source

Yes, anyone who thinks that IS a moron.

Oh sorry. Got my numbers mixed up a bit. Still my point was made. Thanks for the correction.

I agree that it is a problem that the British admitted they doctored intelligence. I really think Bush believed what he was saying at the time of the speech. That being said, it has been proven the Iraqi's were trying to build a nuclear (no Lisa, its Nucular )weapons program. If they didnt buy it in Africa, they purchased materials from somewhere. (France?)

Mobycat, Your time will come. 2008 will be the year. Until then grab your bwankie and get back in the corner for time out, you bwad bwoy.

It kinda proves a point, If he forged ahead with Iraq depending on an "Incorrect" source of intelligence does prove that there is something wrong?. why would could the US Government get the facts needed to make a qualified decision?.

Not saying that Saddam did not have to go, but who here sees a happy ending to the escalating shit that is going on over there?. will it end with the troops getting out of dogde with unfinished business as politics dictate Dubya needs to be re-elected and the price of dead serivcemen is too high?. Would you like to loose a borther or a sister for a cause that is obviously unwelcome and with out any longterm soloution?

We need to implode the UN building in NY, then can the whole concept of the UN and start fresh, share the responsibility of keeping the world stable (economically and politically). Create a World Law enforcement agency that has the powers to act quickly, bring shitheads to justice based on crimes against humanity and treaths to world peace and world stability.

You can get killed walking your doggie, there is a risk to everything. Risk is part of life BUT the coalation between risk and reward should and can be calculated. 60 some servicemen killed since "the end of the war" can you show me the reward?

Yes SIR! Right away SIR!

It's really sad if you sit there and believe everything that is told to you...by ANY administration...and don't question it. REALLY sad.

Read my sig . . .

Blair does seem to be in a bit of hot water now. Question is, will it spill over (and would we ever find out if it was more involved, anyway).

To me it just speaks to a trend if nothing else:

Afganistan
Iraq
Africa
.
.
.
Building new nukes?
North Korea?
Syria?

W. is a warwonger, plain and simple. By the time he is done cowboy upping the world this country is going to be in deep shit. Instead of giving us a color coded scared meter I would prefer if he would help America out a little, educate our kids, or help cure some diseases, or get homeless people jobs, SOMETHING.

Maybe he should get homeless people homes and jobless people jobs? Who the hell is scared? and what the fuck is upping?

Boooooo!

You ever hear the term "Cowboy Up?" Apparently it has something to do with being a cowboy. W. is a cowboy and its sending his little deputies all over the world -- anyway it was a joke, calm down little buckaroo.

Forget it, carry on.

What if we did not take down Saddam and he finished his weapons programs and used them, then Bush would have been skinned alive and blamed for the deaths that Saddam could have caused.I can understand why people do not agree with the Iraq issue, because yes, soldiers are still dying, but what else could we have done. Does anyone think that Saddam would ever had stopped doing what he did diplomatically?

well the issue is what excatly DID he do?. No WMD has been found the alleged solicitation of material from Africa was bogus...was it a "wag the dog" scenario?. hard to say, I would say so far this whoel mess has not shown any great results, the dictator is still loose, Terrorism is alive and well yet lives has been lost and every man woman and child in the US owed about $2000 due to this. Could the money have been spendt on homeland security?. Healthcare and the likes?.

good point. i am a little confused about owing the $2000 though

I'm assuming he's talking about the cost of this "war" to the taxpayers.

Shit! How bout even just getting jobless people jobs!

Well, his daddy couldn't do that either, so maybe there is hope

[rant]I always thought it was a mistake to bring up WMD, terrorist affiliation or any other "reason" to go to war with Iraq. Sadam constantly flaunted the U.N. resolutions that were in place at the end of the first Gulf War. All the U.N. ever did was put out more resolutions. The real mistake was waiting 11 years to do it. I'm suffering daily to make this happen and am still in harms way. I never fired a shot and spent the whole war in Kuwait, but I could just have easily been in Iraq like I was 11 years ago. We lost an ambulance driver and one of our OR techs had his wife wounded. I worked with her everyday in CA. It may be me next and even if I get killed all of this has been worth ending that regime. What did Syria do when they saw there was no bluff in our eyes? They invited,no begged, the U.N. to send inspectors. That's how it should be. We are the good guys here. We're not invading countries and annexing them. We should have invaded Liberia when the coup happened years ago. Liberia had a democracy based on our own. It was usurped by the guys with the guns. Still think our democracy is safe? It's not. It has enemies within and without. There are people who just don't like the fact that you are free. They want you to think and act like they do and if they can't force you to do it they're just as happy if you die. I'd prefer to die fighting the bastards. The number of people we are losing over here isn't much higher than what we lose in training accidents back in the States. That's another thing that pisses me off. Military members die everyday in training and everyone acts like it's no big deal. At least these guys are dying in an actual fight, not just getting ready for one.[/rant]

Well said man!

Well done, that should shut up a few people. (but it wont). Another thing that kills me is that the liberal media had taken to calling the snipers the "resistance", like its Viva La Iraq or something like that. It's little shit like this that steers the cattle in this country and the world against us. We should also point out that the people in Liberia started dancing in the street when the rumor that the Americans were coming came out.

Do I agree that the administration has some questions to answer about why they havent found weapons of mass destruction yet? Yes, but I do not think it is some grand conspiracy, nor do i think Bush is a "warmonger". Its funny how the media sort of under-reports the stuff they are finding, like centifuges buried in scientists backyards. Hidden under orders of Qusay himself.

Bush is merely trying to clean up the mess that Clinton economic policy and 9/11 left him with. But then again, I have a job, I wasn't invested in tech stocks. the Democrats are never going to win an election as long as they are preaching thier "Robin Hood" economics.

Well, they are a "resistance," aren't they?

Quote:

It's little shit like this that steers the cattle in this country and the world against us.

And the fact that the administration fights tooth and nail when it's obvious some things *should* have a little looking into.

Quote:

Do I agree that the administration has some questions to answer about why they havent found weapons of mass destruction yet? Yes, but I do not think it is some grand conspiracy, nor do i think Bush is a "warmonger".[qb][quote]

Has anyone made an allegation of a conspiracy? Last one I heard of was the one Hillary mentioned.

[qb][quote]Bush is merely trying to clean up the mess that Clinton economic policy and 9/11 left him with. But then again, I have a job, I wasn't invested in tech stocks.

Clinton didn't have anything to do with the tech stock crash. That was simply a bunch of fools thinking they could make money fast - which makes no sense - why invest in a company that isn't making any profits (pets.com anyone?)

They are a 'resistance' sure. Most of them aren't Iraqis though. They are foreign terrorists that want to become martyrs. I just wish we would hurry up and find Saddam. Once that happens lots of things will be different in the country. The people are afraid he is going to come back, and half the liberals I have talked to about this would be glad to let him. They want us to get out of there before it becomes another Viet Nam. :rolleyes: If we do that no one will ever trust us again.

Agreed. They need to capture him (hopefully soon). I personally don't see how this will be another Vietnam. Certainly the government has learned their lesson on that. Let the troops do what needs to be done instead of trying to micromanage from the pentagon. (If, on the off chance this starts to become another Vietnam, then yes, get the troops out. No excuse for men dying simply on the whim of some general sitting thousands of miles away.)

I have a question for you since you have been over there, How long do you predict the Coalition and other forces need to present for the country to be politically and economically stable?.

Do you forsee the US being able to combat adn put down the pockets of resistance for good?