good it is here by mistake.

A few facts, maybe...

If you think there was no reason to go to war with Iraq except Bush's personal vendetta and oil, you must all be rather ignorant of the realities in Saddam's Iraq and the actual value of oil.

And if you are against Israel or have "issues" with the place, see if you can make the argument without making up nonsense. Israel did NOT expell the Arabs living there and take over the land, it was founded as a country in which both Jews and Arabs could live side by side. The Jews did not make that impossible, the Arab attack did. Arab leaders told the Palestinian Arabs to leave until the Jews are dead, Israel did not expell them out of racism.

If you cannot make an argument against Israel without resorting to lies, don't bother. What's the point? You are not convincing anybody but those who already believe that the Jews have a predisposition to being evil. (Proof? Compare how easily people are willing to believe that the Jews took the land of the Arabs and how many people know that the Arabs expelled and took the land of an even greater number of middle-eastern Jews from all over the (now Jew-free) Arab world. Tell someone that the Arabs expelled Jews and they won't believe you. Tell them that the Jews expelled Arabs and they will believe it. And that is anti-Semitism.)

As for US help, Israel did not have it during the time of the big wars. But ever since Israel has US help, there have been no bigger wars and the Arab countries are no longer trying to destroy Israel, because war with the US would be too expensive. If you like peace, make sure war doesn't happen.

And if Israel didn't exist, where would middle eastern Jews go? America? And why would it be acceptable? The Arab states did expell their Jews after mistreating them for hundreds of years. But somehow the UN only have money for Arab refugees and when the "refugee problem" comes up, it is always about Arabs, not Jews.

The Arab who supported the invading Arab armies and tried to throw the Jews into the sea is the victim, but the Tunisian Jew who fled his country of birth to escape persecution is the aggressor. And that position is obviously not anti-Semitic, how could it be.

Before you criticise Bush you should realise that there are many reasons to overthrow a dictator who gases people and is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in the 1990s alone (not to mention millions in the 80s). I know Bush cannot possibly have acted for good and moral reasons. After all, he is evil. Proof? Look at what he did in Iraq without a good and moral reason. Isn't that right?

And don't even try to use the stupid "the invasion killed 600,000 people" argument. First of all, consider how many bodies that would be per day, then think about how the Americans and the Iraqi government could possible handle that many bodies.

This is how Saddam did it:

http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

Then have a look at Iraq under Saddam:

http://halapja.9neesan.com/

And consider whether it is really so obvious that only oil or revenge could possibly make someone want to remove that dictator from power. Assume for a moment that Bush was not evil, or that you don't know whether he is.

Frankly, I don't know anybody I respect who can look at the pictures and not see at least one reason for an invasion that has nothing to do with greed.

Then consider that it is not the American army who blows up people and mosques, but Arab terrorists and nationalists. Do you blame George Bush for what his sworn enemies do to people?

And don't argue that they only do it because Bush attacked Iraq. Arab nationalists have killed 300,000 people in Sudan over the last four years and George Bush did not invade the place. These people are not triggered by invasions.

frogboy this happens evertime or at least a lot of the time when you try to post directly from another political or current event post.

Plus, compare the Iraq that is already liberated to Saddam's Iraq and the Iraq of the terrorists:

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001407.html

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001517.html

(Make sure you also read the first part.)

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/come-home.htm

Children are painting graffities of America and Iraq fighting hand in hand against the terrorists. People in northern Iraq name new cities after America and build pretend-American fast food restaurants. Iraqis elected a government that wants the American troops to stay and a president who keeps thanking the US and the UK for liberating his country.

Just assume, for a minute or so, that Bush is not evil and look at the difference between Iraq under Saddam and those parts of Iraq where the war is over.

You might just find that the bad guy here is the man with the moustache who gases people.

Again.

It only happens when people make posts in the wrong forum.

then how come i only post in politics and current forums and most of my posts end up in personal computers if i do it from an existing post.

So who is this Bush anyway? I don't really take an interest in foreign politics.

Just one question even though were no wmds the fact that he gassed his own pepple was reason enough for me and i believe it was for the iraq people

Well danilost, you might want to think about that.

your right frogboy i am so stupid that i am in the personal computing section when i am reading about president bush. i just don't know it.

If autonomous countries wish to deal in Euros rather than US dollars, it is their right and the US has to get over it and adjust its own economic affairs as best it can asbest it can. If the US invades another country on the basis of switching to Euros, it stops becoming the world's policemen and becomes world bully.



There's mongrel called Mugabe in Zimbabwe who's just as power hungry and demented individual as Saddam ever was....but Bush hasn't intervened there, so the idea he was on some sort of moral crusade in Iraq is a crock of shit. Of course, Zimbabwe has no oil and is of no strategic importance to the US...so its people continue to suffer, unlike the oil rich/strategically placed Iraqis.

Yep, Bush can find it in his heart to liberate when it fits into the over-all economic plan/hidden agendas, but not if there are no bonuses/rewards to reap.... no price to pay/debts to call in. What, you thought the US mobilises its huge war machine for nix/gratis/free...didn't call in all the debts? Well put it this way, if you could take out the huge war related component out of the US economy, you'd probably find it falls flat on its arse. That's why there has to be a widespread war mentality to justify the incessant war machine. Sadly, it's not hard to incite/arouse....the war mentality in the US goes back 400+ years, and through early teaching/indoctrination, it seems more culturally acceptable as a means of attack rather than self defense....sad, sad, sad.

i am sorry frogboy

you wanted to know how this ended up in the wrong place.


you can choose to believe what i said or not.


this isn't even my thread i was just trying to help.

or we are at the moment over drawn and are unable to interven. but i do believe bush was calling for sanctions against that countries government.

starkers: YOU DA MAN! I agree with everything you said!

I'll say it again: BUSH LIED BUSH LIED BUSH LIED BUSH LIED BUSH LIED BUSH LIED BUSH LIED BUSH LIED! I DON'T LIKE LIARS!!!!!

We (Americans) didn't give a rat's ass about Rwanda where it is estimated that between 800,000 to 1 million died. Clinton was in charge then. Like starkers said, there was no strategic or greed reason to care. My point is about Americans in general. What about Bhhopal in the 80's where Union Carbide got away with mass murder! 5,000 killed outright and an estimated 120,000 still suffering! An American Company to be proud of! Don't kid yourself, America was founded on the principal of greed. All that crap you learn in school is propaganda. THE BUSINESS OF AMERICA IS BUSINESS. The real robber baron rich guys are still around and they don't care who gets killed as long as the profits keep rolling in. Haliburton in Iraq, LOOK IT UP!

unclerob - You're right.

I'm not a strong Bush advocate. In fact, I don't advocate him at all. I'm just an observer without any say in the matter. My vote carries no weight, so I don't worry myself with it. There's no benefit in polarizing myself against another fellow American citizen, when we could better utilize our energies by working together.

Although, Bush has made some obviously poor decisions, he has done many things right.

I don't think he is the worst president we have had to date. Clinton is responsible for selling out 15 million jobs, and under the Bush administration, they vanished. It was Clinton's signing of the NAFTA bill. Remember how the Democrats squaked about Bush's policies costing us 15 million jobs? It was Clinton who signed his name on the line.

This is another one of those bizarre, "Wizard of Oz" scenarios where they will insist up is down, and down is up. Like Cindy Sheehan. She falsely portrayed her son as a helpless little boy, trapped in a brutish military regime who forced him to do unspeakable attrocities because Bush LIED. If the truth be known, her son went back for a second tour of duty because he loved the military so much, and wanted to serve even if he died doing so. She is an ignoramus. If he were alive, he'd slap her.

Who here hasn't ever lied? I see bumper stickers with bold text, "Bush Lied." Well, of course. That's the human condition and we all are well acquainted with lying. For those of us who strive for perfection, we seek to find the equalibrium - the equal tension between expedience and truthfulness.

If a woman asks me, "How does my dress look?" and it looks like a potato sack on a goat, I will kindly and gently say, you look wonderful. Was it true? No, I lied. But was it wrong? If I said anything else, I would deeply regret it and wish I just lied in the first place.

Some say the US Government is under some sort of obligation to publicly disclose their secrets. These simpletons have no idea the threats we face and how secrecy plays a major role in ensuring our safety.

Imagine if our Govt. announced publicly, "We are disclosing a list of our secret operatives stationed in 191 countries. We cannot tell a lie!" They would all be apprehended, tortured and probably dead within hours.

We have to realize we are at war. The generation we live in has a hard time grasping the concept of "loose lips sink ships." And, what's even more difficult for them is the idea of lying...using propaganda as a tool of military disinformation to steer the war in our favor. The naive, sophomoric simpletons of our day just don't understand.

After all, it is war. It's not rainbows and lolly pops. And, this very war was declared long before GWB was born.

After the League of Nations held its final counsel and disbanded, the UN began remapping and drawing the lines of demarcation for the Middle East. The present-day borders, by and large were created by the UN. Most countries in the Middle East reject these borders. There were no "Jordanians", "Syrians", or "Iraqis" before this occurred. Each associated themselves with their independent ethnic groups. The resentment runs deep and is unresolved.

The West is seen as an incessant meddler in their affairs. They're right! That we are!

It's my opinion that WWI never ended. WWII was only after the intermission, and all following wars are one and the same. The Cold War is the cartoon before the movie and WWIII is only a continuation of the same world war which hasn't ended. Same political strife and contention. Same issues. Same regions of the world.

And it's all George W. Bush's fault! Can't you see? Lies! Lies!