Why Bush and Cheney are lying idiots.

[manu1959]

damn......missed the whole thing...by the by for me the war that most seemed like vietnam............somalia......

 

[deaddude]

That has to be a record. How much time elapsed between the time of registration and the time of banning?

 

[dmp]

I'm older than 12 years old. I don't just believe things because people tell me its so.



"even schartzkoff said on Hardball that our abandoning the S. Vietnamese was a travesty. "

And? So? It wasn't a travesty to the thousands of Americans who didn't lost their sons or their fathers or husbands or arms or legs or mobility because we pulled out.

"Almost every Vietnam vet I have EVER talked to supported the war. Just like now, the ones over in Iraq fighting by far support the war while the yellow-bellies sitting here at home protest it."

The yellow-bellies sitting at home? What are you doing?

You can't quote for shit, brother....but I've lost your point..wtf IS your point?

 

[Hobbit]

take his word for it. he is right.

I'm older than 12 years old. I don't just believe things because people tell me its so.



"even schartzkoff said on Hardball that our abandoning the S. Vietnamese was a travesty. "

And? So? It wasn't a travesty to the thousands of Americans who didn't lost their sons or their fathers or husbands or arms or legs or mobility because we pulled out.

"Almost every Vietnam vet I have EVER talked to supported the war. Just like now, the ones over in Iraq fighting by far support the war while the yellow-bellies sitting here at home protest it."

The yellow-bellies sitting at home? What are you doing?

Uh, it was a travesty to the thousands of Vietnamese who lost their sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and friends when the North invaded.

Also, my Uncle was in the Army during Vietnam. He was in Korea, but later worked with a lot of 'Nam vets, who I have met. I haven't met one that didn't support the efforts. Most of them just thought it was done incorrectly.

Now, on one final note, we tell you he's right because we have our own personal experiences to back it up, but you go off on a completely unrelated defense by stating that you're older than 12. Why 12? Why not 3, 7, or 10? Hiding something?

 

[manu1959]

I don't just believe things because people tell me its so.

"even schartzkoff said on Hardball that our abandoning the S. Vietnamese was a travesty. "

it is just me or is this ironic?

 

[FollowerOfKeeb]

Uh, it was a travesty to the thousands of Vietnamese who lost their sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and friends when the North invaded.

Let them deal with their own problems. Its not our responsibility to defend the world.

Now, on one final note, we tell you he's right because we have our own personal experiences to back it up, but you go off on a completely unrelated defense by stating that you're older than 12. Why 12? Why not 3, 7, or 10? Hiding something?

12 is generally the age children stop believing everything you tell them.

And your personal experience is anecdotal, it isn't fact.

 

[freeandfun1]

The yellow-bellies sitting at home? What are you doing?

Well young feller, I have done my time. 7 years, 9 months and 21 days on active duty as an infantryman in the Army. 2 years more in the Oregon National Guard.

I served on the DMZ in Korea as well in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. I have been around enough to know of what I speak.

And you?

What have YOU done?

 

[Avatar4321]

You can't quote for shit, brother....but I've lost your point..wtf IS your point?

I think he was trying to call fun a yellowbellied because fun said that the troops in Vietnam supported it while it was the yellowbellies at home that didnt.

 

[FollowerOfKeeb]

Well young feller, I have done my time. 7 years, 9 months and 21 days on active duty as an infantryman in the Army. 2 years more in the Oregon National Guard.

I served on the DMZ in Korea as well in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. I have been around enough to know of what I speak.

And you?

What have YOU done?

So why aren't you in Iraq?

 

[Avatar4321]

So why aren't you in Iraq?

Can i ban people for being stupid? :bangheads well i guess technically i can since i have that power but should i... i hate moral dilemnas

 

[freeandfun1]

So why aren't you in Iraq?

I have given my time to my country. And you?

 

[FollowerOfKeeb]

I have given my time to my country. And you?

Unfortunately, I've never had the chance to kill anyone in the name of freedom. Do you have children in Iraq?

 

[jimnyc]

Unfortunately, I've never had the chance to kill anyone in the name of freedom.

Me neither, and it's such a shame. I would rather enjoy watching some bullets pass through a couple of those scumbags.

 

[manu1959]

And your personal experience is anecdotal, it isn't fact.

If my personal experience are not factual....then no one elses is either .... by extension everthing that has come before this moment and everything that will come after is not factual and thus did not an will not happen....therefore bush has done and will do nothing wrong.... :funnyface

 

[manu1959]

Can i ban people for being stupid? :bangheads well i guess technically i can since i have that power but should i... i hate moral dilemnas

turn the other :moon4:

 

[freeandfun1]

Unfortunately, I've never had the chance to kill anyone in the name of freedom.

Don't worry, there have been many that have sacraficed for you. Enjoy it!

 

[manu1959]

killing for freedom............

i always liked the line....

"if i am going to kil for a word..my woord is pooontang"

 

[Hobbit]

My favorite quote is:

"Anybody who thinks there is nothing worth fighting for, nothing worth putting his own life on the line is only afforded the freedom to say so by the lives of better men than him."

 

[oxbow3]

Thanks for the reality check, guys. Let's place blame and accountability where it needs to be placed and avoid singling out individuals if everyone else was shouting wolf too.

The Bush admin. can be 'blamed' for taking the initiative to go to war against Saddam. Other people talked about stopping him. Some wanted more sanctions or other international pressure. Some favored the military option. Bush decided on the latter, and went ahead even when other nations were hesitant. In hindsight, he was going on flawed intelligence. This included witnesses who remained anonymous to Congress "for their own protection", as well as British Intelligence reports. The witnesses turned out to be untrustworthy after their identities were exposed, and many congressmen say they would not have accepted their testimony if their identity was known at the time. We can't go back and replay it all, so I accept this at face value. The British intelligence report was a forgery. It was made up of various reports, some over a decade old, on the weapons capabilities of Iraq. Whoever went on the info in it without checking the sources is to blame in this situation. That is PM Tony Blair in my opinion, but perhaps the CIA could have done their homework and double checked it, to.

There are also IAEA reports cited by the President in his Sep 2002 state of the union address that warn of Iraq's WMD capabilities. These reports need to be found so the public can see how if what they say and what the White House says match. To date, I only know of a 1998 IAEA report that says that no evidence for WMD's were found in Iraq. I myself am not sure at this point which report the president is referring to.

There is also the matter of the meeting between Mohammed Atta (the 9/11 cell leader) and the Iraqi Embassy consul Al-Ani Samir in Prague. This was supposed to have happened in April, 2001, and was the main piece of evidence in support of a tie between Al Qaeda and Iraq. Czech officials now say there is no evidence that Atta was in in their country at the time. FBI Director Robert Muller ran his own investigation and in April 2002 said that he could find no evidence of Atta being outside of the US at the time either. We need to find where the breakdown of intelligence here was.

These bad trails need to be followed up and people responsible for the intelligence held accountable. There are other problems, such as the alleged "mobile chemical factories" and bio-weapon silos shown in satellite photos by the Pentagon, that can be attributed to people seeing what they wanted to. I believe that everyone was so sure of Iraq having WMD's that they just made a leap of faith into assuming that's what these things were.

Perhaps the White House does ultimately bear some reponsibility for this. It is up to an independent panel to determine whether the intelligence community was working with uncorroborated intelligence (as has been shown to be the case, atleast in part with CBS' 'memo-gate'). It could also be that pressure was put on the intelligence community by the White House to make a good case for war where there was none. Perhaps there is more than one version of "the case against Iraq," with later versions more faulty but with an affirmative for WMD's. If this is so, then the White House should take reponsibility, for not accepting the CIA's initial results.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Biochem WAS found. The Brits still stand behind their claim TO THIS DAY, regardless of the existence of a forged document. That document was not the only thing they were going on apparently. Our own 9/11 commission report said Saddam had ties to terrorist orgs and was giving money to suicide bombers. You can haggle about what "operational" means if you want to. Saddam WAS in violation of many U.N. resolutions. He was a mass murdering tyrant. All in all, the war was highly justified.