Mace MacLeod Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Problem with that is then you get a power vacuum and either end up with a full blown civil war or someone worse then Saddam comes into power. Yeah, good thing that's not happening in Iraq now, huh? *whew* Dodged a bullet there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 It's not a full blown civil war, it's just sectarian violence which there has allways been just not to this degree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Isnt' this poll a few years behind the times? What purpose could it possibly serve, now, other than to just cause conflict among the members? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 I recently watched a special on PBS about why we went to war. It showed that Cheney and Rumsfeld worked behind the scenes to pressure Tenet (the former CIA leader) and his staff to come up with a NIE (which is an intelligence report on all of the foreign countrys; takes months to come up with one) in two weeks. The NIE stated information that was told to them by a man codenamed "Curveball", who worked in the Iraqi government. Curveball could not be trusted, but Cheney and Rumsfeld took his info. His info stated that Saddam was buying tubes for Uranium, and had many biological weapons. Curveball later admitted that he lied about it all, but not before Cheney decides to give the info to Bush. The lead weapons inspector in Iraq started telling people that it was false, and there were no weapons. Not coincendaliy, his wife was revealed to be a CIA agent, and he knew that it was a threat.Tenet knew that the info was false. He met with Bush. He had two choices. He could tell Bush that the info was false, and that they needed to stay in Afganistan. Or he could approve of fighting in Iraq, which would keep him friend with many in the White House. He chose his friends. Bush used the false info. We went to war. Most of the CIA people resigned, and Cheney gave his followers jobs there. That's in a nutshell. Now, this all may be false, but it greatly angered me. Part of me believes it, part of me doesnt. I don't know what to think anymore. Anybody in America could be lying to me. But I still stand by my previous beliefs: Bush and his administration are one of, if not the worst administrations that the U.S. has ever had. Nixon lied so he could be reelected. Clinton lied so he wouldn't be caught. Bush lied so we could go to war. And we wonder why we lost Bin Laden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace MacLeod Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 @InsaneSith: Healthy debate? This forum is a lot better mannered than most... @DarthOxyClean: The US hasn't found Osama bin Laden because he's in the one spot they won't look. And yeah, of course the US population was lied to. They're lied to so often and so consistently that unfortunately enough of them were willing to buy the BS to re-elect Bush, Cheney and the rest of that nutball regime. I never realized how much I liked Clinton until Dubya came along. There was a great editorial cartoon I saw after the 04 election results came in. It had the Statue of Liberty being taken down and replaced with a statue of Yosemite Sam. If anyone can find it, stick a link to it. I'll buy whoever finds it a beer if they drop by my neck of the woods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Bush and his administration are one of, if not the worst administrations that the U.S. has ever had. It's not good but it still has not sunk to the level that "Peanut Boy" had us at in 81' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-1162 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 The US hasn't found Osama bin Laden because he's in the one spot they won't look. are you suggesting Laden is IN THE US?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 The US hasn't found Osama bin Laden because he's in the one spot they won't look.[/Quote] are you suggesting Laden is IN THE US?? He is suggesting one of the following things: He is in the U.S. He is in the White House. He is at the World Cup. He is on Mars. He is at Dubya's Texas ranch. He is buried 6 feet underground in the desert in Afganistan. (Which just proves that we Americans are lazy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-1162 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 like duh americans are lazy. the FIFA matches proves that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igyman Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 NO, I don't support the war in Iraq. Why? Because the US troops didn't give a damn about the Iraqi people when they invaded the country and they don't give a damn about them now. Saddam was just Bush's lame excuse. He never had any kind of nuclear weapons factories, they would have been found and destroyed by now. Bush wanted the oil, it was clear enough to anyone who watched the news at the time - the first thing the US troops went for were the oil platforms (they didn't want them to be destroyed by Iraqi troops, or there was no point in staying), not Bagdad, not Saddam, not the supposed nuclear weapons factories, OIL. USA is starting to act a lot like WWII Germany, only USA present themselves as peacekeepers, while infact there isn't a single country in the world they've invaded for the right reasons. On a side note: Bush can't even pronounce ''nuclear'' properly, he says ''nucelar''. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 while infact there isn't a single country in the world they've invaded for the right reasons. Are you suggesting that occupying Japan after WWII was wrong, after Japan commited numerous war crimes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lantzen Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 The US hasn't found Osama bin Laden because he's in the one spot they won't look.[/Quote] I think Bin Laden is dead, one of the bomb probaly killed him, dont think the US troops take ID on all they kill. And it's not full scale war in hole Irak, i know because i have a friend that live down there, he gonna move to another country in 10 days, but he have been there for maybe a month or two and not got killed. But i fear for his life, thats another thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igyman Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Are you suggesting that occupying Japan after WWII was wrong, after Japan commited numerous war crimes? I'm talking about Bush's so-called ''War on terror'' and Clinton's ''peacekeeping'' campaign, not the WWII aftermath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthSion101 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 This war like everything Bush has done, has been constructed on lies. I for one do not support him, or his phoney war, which by the by had nothing to do with stopping terrorism, but rather to line his and elmer fudd cheney's wallets by seizing and overtaxing on oil. wow im on a tear today hehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Source Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 This war like everything Bush has done, has been constructed on lies. I for one do not support him, or his phoney war, which by the by had nothing to do with stopping terrorism, but rather to line his and elmer fudd cheney's wallets by seizing and overtaxing on oil. You need to see the whole story. Bush wasn't soley responsible. Eventually, everything will become public knowledge. All I know is that after I saw PBS's documentry, my perspective changed slighty. Chaney and Rumsfeld are two of the most powerful men in office. They worked behind the scenes for 30+ years. There is a extensive story to what has happened. Bush was being played by the CIA and Chaney/Rumsfeld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 I do not support the war, but strongly support the troops and the non-combatants in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Personally I do not believe U.S. troops can be pulled out anytime soon. The President and his advisors made a criminal mistake that will cause all involved to suffer for many years to come. I do not believe in Bush's bright idea of “preemptive strikes” (he may have watched Minority Report one too many times). Iraq was an international problem, not a U.S. problem, thus should have been handled by the international community and not just the U.S. and England. I hope and pray that the all the death and destruction is not in vain. I hope some good comes out of this stupid war and I pray that the leader of the U.S. will finally learn that war is not the answer, but I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 You need to see the whole story. Bush wasn't soley responsible. Eventually, everything will become public knowledge. All I know is that after I saw PBS's documentry, my perspective changed slighty. Chaney and Rumsfeld are two of the most powerful men in office. They worked behind the scenes for 30+ years. There is a extensive story to what has happened. Bush was being played by the CIA and Chaney/Rumsfeld. But in the end, the CIA got played by Cheney and Rumsfeld. That PBS documentary stirred up an anger inside me. I sat there, and I started mumbling curses under my breath. It just proves that even Government can be corrupted. I think George Lucas portrayed that fact perfectly by making one of the highest ranking beings in the senate a Sith Lord. In alot of the books about the last years of the Republic that I have read, many senators, such as the leader of the Commerce Guild (he tryed to assasinate a group of senators and a young boy so that his illegal schemes wouldn't be revealed), were doing illegal things, killing innocents. And at the center of it all: money. I think Lucas purposely did that to show that even the most powerful organizations can turn sour, and crumble from the inside. Learning that the U.S. government is corrupted really pissed me off, and it also saddened me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peff Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 What a stupid question... Of Course NOT !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 I hope and pray that the all the death and destruction is not in vain. I hope some good comes out of this stupid war and I pray that the leader of the U.S. will finally learn that war is not the answer, but I doubt it. Quoted for emphasis. Amen to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 I do support the war because in my opinoin you have to stand up to these people, one thing I do not support however is how some in the GOP have turned this into a religious issue. If they keep this up I'm going to register as a libertarian come December. I'm sick as hell of people using their status as a Public Official to promote their religion. See Texas Taliban thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace MacLeod Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 He is suggesting one of the following things: He is in the U.S. He is in the White House. He is at the World Cup. He is on Mars. He is at Dubya's Texas ranch. He is buried 6 feet underground in the desert in Afganistan. (Which just proves that we Americans are lazy) Uh, no (insert bannable insult here) I was asking you to remember where Osama comes from. And where the 9/11 bombers came from. And where Osama's hundreds of millions of dollars are. And where the source of a whole lot of...well, figure it out. Haven't I said this before in another thread? Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. Am I the only person here who thinks there's something wrong with the Vice President and President of the US being able to personally profit from a war they themselves start? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Source Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 But in the end, the CIA got played by Cheney and Rumsfeld. That PBS documentary stirred up an anger inside me. I sat there, and I started mumbling curses under my breath. It just proves that even Government can be corrupted. I think George Lucas portrayed that fact perfectly by making one of the highest ranking beings in the senate a Sith Lord. In alot of the books about the last years of the Republic that I have read, many senators, such as the leader of the Commerce Guild (he tryed to assasinate a group of senators and a young boy so that his illegal schemes wouldn't be revealed), were doing illegal things, killing innocents. And at the center of it all: money. I think Lucas purposely did that to show that even the most powerful organizations can turn sour, and crumble from the inside. Learning that the U.S. government is corrupted really pissed me off, and it also saddened me. There is an old saying, "The most deadliest war to be lost is one that no gun was fired." That PBS documentary ticked me off as well. How can two men move up in the ranks, and take advantage of a political system. What I am looking at is their cognitions. How can they seriouslly and morally allow themselves to do what they have done. Chaney's and Rumsfeld's actions will be a history lesson for decades to come. After watching that documentary, I can only say that George was warned by his dad and Powel about them, but he did nothing to stop them. I blame George for his inactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woogiee Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 No, because Bush had asolutely no right to invade a foreign country, seize it's power and establish a broken democracy in the midst of anarchy. The situation in Iraq has become more dangerous and volatile than it was under Saddam's rule. pretty much sums up exactly how i feel about the war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Obi-Wan Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 No, I don't. But, this poll is a bit late. Meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace MacLeod Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 *Edit* Screw it. The edit button is still my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.