Americans Dont Care!!! (1 Viewer)

[Nevio]

The Bush Administration said they where going to Iraq for WMD's!!!!!!!
Alas, there werent any so they changed the war motive to "Liberate Iraq"?

How the hell did they spin this? There is no way to spin this!

Pure logic people.

Yeah blame it the false CIA information, well if the information was false and we found no WMD's how the hell do you change the plan for a pre-emptive strike to a plan to liberate a country!!!!!!

This is the biggest B.s. ive seen in my short life, but really makes me mad is everyone seems to just take it with a grain of salt.

But alas BUSH OWNS US ALL!!! and theres no changin that.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Nevio
The Bush Administration said they where going to Iraq for WMD's!!!!!!!
Alas, there werent any so they changed the war motive to "Liberate Iraq"?

How the hell did they spin this? There is no way to spin this!

Pure logic people.

Yeah blame it the false CIA information, well if the information was false and we found no WMD's how the hell do you change the plan for a pre-emptive strike to a plan to liberate a country!!!!!!

This is the biggest B.s. ive seen in my short life, but really makes me mad is everyone seems to just take it with a grain of salt.

But alas BUSH OWNS US ALL!!! and theres no changin that.

More like Bush OWE'S US ALL. He has changed the reason for attacking about a half a dozen times, which makes this even more ridiculous.

Welcome to Debate Politics.

 

[cnredd]

The objective of "liberation" was not changed...If there are 5 reasons to do something, and then later find out one of them was wrong, that doesn't negate the other 4...

This is the ACTUAL transcript from the 2003 State of the Union speech...

If your accusation of "changing the motive" is true...we would've never have seen the term "liberation" previous to the war...

But alas...there it is in black and white...

Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained: by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape.

If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning.

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country, your enemy is ruling your country.

And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript/

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by cnredd:

Ouote from George Bush:
Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained: by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape.

If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning.

This is no different than the 10 year olds we are torturing in front of their parents at Abu Grhaib right now.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

This is no different than the 10 year olds we are torturing in front of their parents at Abu Grhaib right now.

Cite please.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The objective of "liberation" was not changed...If there are 5 reasons to do something, and then later find out one of them was wrong, that doesn't negate the other 4...
This is the ACTUAL transcript from the 2003 State of the Union speech...
If your accusation of "changing the motive" is true...we would've never have seen the term "liberation" previous to the war...
But alas...there it is in black and white...

I agree that it wasn't the only reason provided. There was one study done that detailed 27 different reasons given for invading Iraq.

I agree w/ Wolfowitz that the reason that sold the war to the electorate was the threat to the US from Iraq. W/o that, the invasion is nakedly a liberal, social-engineering experiment in a country halfway around the world.
That wouldn't fly.

 

[cnredd]

I agree that it wasn't the only reason provided. There was one study done that detailed 27 different reasons given for invading Iraq.

I agree w/ Wolfowitz that the reason that sold the war to the electorate was the threat to the US from Iraq. W/o that, the invasion is nakedly a liberal, social-engineering experiment in a country halfway around the world.
That wouldn't fly.

Bingo!

From an earlier post of mine...

I think the UN was under the assumption that sanctions
would be imposed, the inspectors would come in and
monitor the destruction of chemical & biological weapons
that he already had, and then the sanctions would be lifted.

But Saddam threw in the monkey wrench...He STOPPED the
inspections and kicked the inspectors out. The UN sanctions
didn't have the intent they thought it would, but the UN would
look incredibly stupid if they lifted them after Saddam
removed the inspectors, so to save face, they left the sanctions on.

Now Saddam knew the UN buckled...the ball was in his court...
He'll get the sympathy vote from the Arab nations that the big,
bad UN had killed the little children. Not that he really cared.

So the UN went for Round 2...Inspection time again!

First, the UN would put on that "determined" look and ratify
Resolution 1441, which says, "Saddam's been screwing up; if he
continues to screw up, we might do something extreme." Saddam must've
hurt his abdomen laughing at that one...The only thing they've done
in ten years was put on sanctions, which he was getting around anyway...
What were they going to do next? Put up a billboard saying, "Saddam's
not a very good person"?

This time, Saddam said he would allow inspectors as long as the head
of the inspection team was not American...Guess what?...The UN said "OK"!

Since when was any of the UN demands negotiable?...The UN, as the world
speaking with one voice, should've said "NO...YOU do things OUR way...
not the other way around." The Buckle Boys are VERY consistent...

Meanwhile, the US said, you know what?...These sanctions aren't hurting
the regime...they're hurting the people...and if the UN is stupid enough
to keep this 3-card monte game up, we're gonna have to do this ourselves.

But Bush knew the American people are fickle. If he told them that he
was going into Iraq to free the people and get the sanctions off of
the people's back, the Americans would've yawned and said, "Keep it
down...I'm watching Sex & the City."

So he used data from the previous administration that was outdated and
incomplete recent data and stirred up the troops with the "threat" angle.
It was a complete roll of the dice, and, as we've learned, came up craps.

It probably would've shocked him if WMDs were actually found, but by this time,
he had what he wanted...An open window to get rid of a bad guy and to plant the seeds
of Democracy. Just like childbirth, he knew it was going to be painful, both in military and political policies, but he knows that, long term, the world will be better off for it...Let the critics bitch & moan...
Hell, Abe Lincoln was elected President for a second term with only 39% of
the vote! Nine states had ZERO votes for him! And I don't think Abe get
crapped on for what he did, does he? Bush is following the same form...

Hate him now...hate him all you want...but in about 20, 30, or even
50 years from now, when most, if not all, of the dictatorships in the Middle
East are gone and Democracy rules the roost...look back to April, 2003...
Watch the Saddam statue coming down...then you'll know why this was all started.

insert picture of waving flag with a Sousa march in the background...

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon:
Cite please

Here's one from the Associated Press (re-posted by truthout.org).

Prisoners at Abu Ghraib Said Included Kids
By Matt Kelley The Associated Press

Friday 11 March 2005

Washington - A boy no older than 11 was among the children held by the Army at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, the former U.S. commander of the facility told a general investigating abuses at the prison.

Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski did not say what happened to the boy or why he was imprisoned, according to a transcript of her interview with Maj. Gen. George Fay that was released by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The transcript of the May 2004 interview was among hundreds of pages of documents about Iraq prisoner abuses the group made public Thursday after getting them under the Freedom of Information Act.

Karpinski, who was in charge of Abu Ghraib from July to November 2003, said she often visited the prison's youngest inmates. One boy "looked like he was 8-years-old," Karpinski said.

"He told me he was almost 12," Karpinski said. "He told me his brother was there with him, but he really wanted to see his mother, could he please call his mother. He was crying."

Military officials have acknowledged that some juvenile prisoners had been held at Abu Ghraib, a massive prison built by Saddam Hussein's government outside Baghdad. But the transcript is the first documented evidence of a child no older than 11 being held prisoner.

Military officials have said that no juvenile prisoners were subject to the abuses captured in photographs from Abu Ghraib. But some of the men shown being stripped naked and humiliated had been accused of raping a 14-year-old prisoner.

The new documents offer rare details about the children whom the U.S. military has held in Iraq. Karpinski said the Army began holding women and children in a high-security cellblock at Abu Ghraib in the summer of 2003 because the facility was better than lockups in Baghdad where the youths had been held.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/031105I.shtml

This is the one that is most disturbing. And is the story from which I referenced the 10 year old comment.

Iraq's Child Prisoners

A Sunday Herald investigation has discovered that coalition forces are holding more than 100 children in jails such as Abu Ghraib. Witnesses claim that the detainees – some as young as 10 – are also being subjected to rape and torture By Neil Mackay

Proof of the widespread arrest and detention of children in Iraq by US and UK forces is contained in an internal Unicef report written in June. The report has – surprisingly – not been made public. A key section on child protection, headed “Children in Conflict with the Law or with Coalition Forces”, reads: “In July and August 2003, several meetings were conducted with CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) … and Ministry of Justice to address issues related to juvenile justice and the situation of children detained by the coalition forces … Unicef is working through a variety of channels to try and learn more about conditions for children who are imprisoned or detained, and to ensure that their rights are respected.”

http://www.sundayherald.com/43796

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by cnredd:
Now Saddam knew the UN buckled...the ball was in his court...
He'll get the sympathy vote from the Arab nations that the big,
bad UN had killed the little children. Not that he really cared.

Wouldn't have mattered if he did. It was the sanctions that contributed to their deaths.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by cnredd:
First, the UN would put on that "determined" look and ratify
Resolution 1441, which says, "Saddam's been screwing up; if he
continues to screw up, we might do something extreme." Saddam must've
hurt his abdomen laughing at that one...The only thing they've done
in ten years was put on sanctions, which he was getting around anyway...
What were they going to do next? Put up a billboard saying, "Saddam's
not a very good person"?

UN has already stated 1441 was not an authorization to use military force. And it is their postion that this war is not in concert with the UN Charter.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by cnredd:
Meanwhile, the US said, you know what?...These sanctions aren't hurting
the regime...they're hurting the people...and if the UN is stupid enough
to keep this 3-card monte game up, we're gonna have to do this ourselves.

Can't have a shell game without a marble to hide.

 

[KevinWan]

WMD's were not the only reason we went into Iraq. Liberation, enforcing UN sanctions, ousting Saddam, etc. etc. were amongst the other reasons. I think many Americans don't care that the initial cause changed, because we are already there and need to finish the job. Not finishing it is a huge defeat to the US... an embarassing one at that. The failure of intelligence is also embarassing, but turning our back on the mess we would leave in Iraq if we leave, would be more embarassing.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by KevinWan:
WMD's were not the only reason we went into Iraq. Liberation, enforcing UN sanctions, ousting Saddam, etc. etc. were amongst the other reasons. I think many Americans don't care that the initial cause changed, because we are already there and need to finish the job. Not finishing it is a huge defeat to the US... an embarassing one at that. The failure of intelligence is also embarassing, but turning our back on the mess we would leave in Iraq if we leave, would be more embarassing.

Because of DSM, this is all a moot point. He was going to attack, and he did attack. 9 months before receiving permission from Congress. Which is an impeachable offense.

 

[theheartbreakkid13]

The Bush Administration said they where going to Iraq for WMD's!!!!!!!
Alas, there werent any so they changed the war motive to "Liberate Iraq"?

How the hell did they spin this? There is no way to spin this!

Pure logic people.

Yeah blame it the false CIA information, well if the information was false and we found no WMD's how the hell do you change the plan for a pre-emptive strike to a plan to liberate a country!!!!!!

This is the biggest B.s. ive seen in my short life, but really makes me mad is everyone seems to just take it with a grain of salt.

But alas BUSH OWNS US ALL!!! and theres no changin that.

I am not that old but I am a big history fanatic and I know that when we went to war against Japan & Germany not everybody was behind Roosevelt. It happens in every presidential term, someone disagrees with either the cause of the war or just the war or even just the president of the United States. We all have our own opinions, thus the nature of this country. There is or was a connection between Iraq and 9/11, the Bush, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, and Ashcroft testified in court that there was no connection. That is my opinion and I'll stick to it from now and always.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by theheartbreakkid13:
I am not that old but I am a big history fanatic and I know that when we went to war against Japan & Germany not everybody was behind Roosevelt. It happens in every presidential term, someone disagrees with either the cause of the war or just the war or even just the president of the United States. We all have our own opinions, thus the nature of this country. There is or was a connection between Iraq and 9/11, the Bush, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, and Ashcroft testified in court that there was no connection. That is my opinion and I'll stick to it from now and always.

This is a debate forum. Not the "Pro-Bush Poster Society!"

 

[Navy Pride]

Because of DSM, this is all a moot point. He was going to attack, and he did attack. 9 months before receiving permission from Congress. Which is an impeachable offense.

A link please, and not moveon.org or the New York

Times.........Thanks...........

[This is a debate forum. Not the "Pro-Bush Poster Society!"
/QUOTE]

Its not a bash President Bush forum either but you could never tell by your posts..........

 

[Navy Pride]

I am not that old but I am a big history fanatic and I know that when we went to war against Japan & Germany not everybody was behind Roosevelt. It happens in every presidential term, someone disagrees with either the cause of the war or just the war or even just the president of the United States. We all have our own opinions, thus the nature of this country. There is or was a connection between Iraq and 9/11, the Bush, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, and Ashcroft testified in court that there was no connection. That is my opinion and I'll stick to it from now and always.

You are right on my friend...........Welcome to the forum, Looking forward to your input................

 

[Arch Enemy]

I do believe that Iraq's regime needed to go, but not in this manner and not at this time. I believe we should have aimed our efforts in other, more serious threats in general. Example, Sudan.. we should have taken Sudan out first, got the support for doing such a good deed, then liberated Iraq.

I am not for the Iraqi War because we rushed into it. It's terribly stupid to rush into a country and engage war without an escape or "exit" plan. I wish George W. Bush would quit treating the populace as kids, we need to be told more then "we'll be done when we're done" or "we'll leave as soon as the mission is finished", I am sick and tired of these comments.. if he really knows what he's doing he should take the time to explain more in-depth. Instead of telling us these repeated quotes.

 

[Navy Pride]

I do believe that Iraq's regime needed to go, but not in this manner and not at this time. I believe we should have aimed our efforts in other, more serious threats in general. Example, Sudan.. we should have taken Sudan out first, got the support for doing such a good deed, then liberated Iraq.

I am not for the Iraqi War because we rushed into it. It's terribly stupid to rush into a country and engage war without an escape or "exit" plan. I wish George W. Bush would quit treating the populace as kids, we need to be told more then "we'll be done when we're done" or "we'll leave as soon as the mission is finished", I am sick and tired of these comments.. if he really knows what he's doing he should take the time to explain more in-depth. Instead of telling us these repeated quotes.

What you or I believe does not really matter at this time.......We can argue about the reasons for going and the WMD until the cows come home...Bottom line we are there and we need to finish the job..........

Things don't always go according to plan in a war........We lost 6,000 men in one day on Omaha beach in the invasion of Normandy.trust me that was not part of the plan........

You say there is no exit plan.........I disagree........We will leave Iraq when the Iraqi security forces and army are able to protect the country and not a minute sooner.........When Iraqi battalions stand up ours will stand down......That is the plan........You may not like it but that is it.........

We still have troops in Japan, Germany and Korea and those wars ended over 50 years ago.........The Iraqis have a constitution in less then 3 years..It may not be perfect but it took us 12 years to ratify a constitution........

The most important thing is to back the troops and their mission....They can get this done but when liberals back here in the states don't back their mission then it affects their morale.........The terrorists can't beat us there but people wanting to cut and run here can like they did in Vietnam.............58,000 GIs 6 personal friends of mine are on the wall in DC...They died for nothing.........

Please lets not make the same mistake in Iraq.........

 

[Arch Enemy]

I understand your worries and I'm sorry for your 6 friends. But let's not forget, most Republicans don't want this war to be compared to Vietnam. I doubt it'll turn out like Vietnam, not matter what happens. We're fighting terrorism, terrorism cannot be beaten.. it can only be fought. No matter how many people we have to kill, terrorism will live on and on and on.

This war has NO comparison to Normandy. Normandy was a one-day affair.. this has been going on for years. In Normandy, they couldn't create a plan on the run.. they had to fight and fight somemore. But with this war in Iraq, we've had time to create a back-up plan and we've yet to even see this so-called plan we've got.

You may not have been blessed with those fiendish things, some people like to call "kids". But I picture this war like it was this kids first time riding a bike. You've got to hold on to the kid so that it won't lose control and hurt itself. But you've also got to pick the time that this kid has a control of this, you've got to do this at an early stage of the development process and you've got to let the kid go. If you hold your kid too long, it'll be dependent on you and could possibly never be able to ride the bike on its own. But if you let go of the kid too early it'll fall down and may not want to rise up again.

I believe it's time for us to let go of this new government, before they become totally dependent on us.
They'll have a civil war, I'll garauntee you that! They'll also have wars, but that's just becasue that's what nations do.. we cannot grieve and feel terrible if these people start their own battles, it's just the nature of the beast.

My Grandfather's brother was killed on D-Day at Normandy, by a mortar shell.. as soon as he left the landing craft.

I've got faith in the new Iraqi Government, they're big boys.. they can handle theirselves.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Navy Pride:
A link please, and not moveon.org or the New York

Times.........Thanks...........

Originally posted by billo:
This is a debate forum. Not the "Pro-Bush Poster Society!"

Originally posted by Navy Pride:
Its not a bash President Bush forum either but you could never tell by your posts..........

Post #320 on the Bush is a War Criminal thread has the link.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

The Bush Administration said they where going to Iraq for WMD's!!!!!!!
Alas, there werent any so they changed the war motive to "Liberate Iraq"?

How the hell did they spin this? There is no way to spin this!

Pure logic people.

Yeah blame it the false CIA information, well if the information was false and we found no WMD's how the hell do you change the plan for a pre-emptive strike to a plan to liberate a country!!!!!!

This is the biggest B.s. ive seen in my short life, but really makes me mad is everyone seems to just take it with a grain of salt.

But alas BUSH OWNS US ALL!!! and theres no changin that.

Question: WHy did we kill nazis?

Answer: Genocide

Question: Why did we kill Baathists?

Answer: Genocide



No Apology's and no surrender!

 

[Navy Pride]

I understand your worries and I'm sorry for your 6 friends. But let's not forget, most Republicans don't want this war to be compared to Vietnam. I doubt it'll turn out like Vietnam, not matter what happens. We're fighting terrorism, terrorism cannot be beaten.. it can only be fought. No matter how many people we have to kill, terrorism will live on and on and on.

This war has NO comparison to Normandy. Normandy was a one-day affair.. this has been going on for years. In Normandy, they couldn't create a plan on the run.. they had to fight and fight somemore. But with this war in Iraq, we've had time to create a back-up plan and we've yet to even see this so-called plan we've got.

You may not have been blessed with those fiendish things, some people like to call "kids". But I picture this war like it was this kids first time riding a bike. You've got to hold on to the kid so that it won't lose control and hurt itself. But you've also got to pick the time that this kid has a control of this, you've got to do this at an early stage of the development process and you've got to let the kid go. If you hold your kid too long, it'll be dependent on you and could possibly never be able to ride the bike on its own. But if you let go of the kid too early it'll fall down and may not want to rise up again.

I believe it's time for us to let go of this new government, before they become totally dependent on us.
They'll have a civil war, I'll garauntee you that! They'll also have wars, but that's just becasue that's what nations do.. we cannot grieve and feel terrible if these people start their own battles, it's just the nature of the beast.

My Grandfather's brother was killed on D-Day at Normandy, by a mortar shell.. as soon as he left the landing craft.

I've got faith in the new Iraqi Government, they're big boys.. they can handle theirselves.

You are young......All you know about Nam is what your liberal teachers have told you........Every other year I go to DC and go to the wall and get down on my knees and cry for the loss of my friends.......They died for absolutely nothing because of Liberals like Kerry and Fonda..........We won every battle but lost the war..........As I said before the terrorists can not beat us in Iraq....The only thing that can beat us is Liberals back here in the states who have no stomach for finishing the job.......I hope your not like that.........

I don't know what is going to happen in Iraq...Nobody does.......My friends who are in the military tell me that it is nothing like the liberal media paints it to be.............Thirteen of the 16 provinces are free of violenc.........Only the ones in the Sunni triangle are a problem......They tell me the Iraqis want us there and are grateful that we freed them from Saddam...........They only want a chance to live and prosper as free men and we are giving them that chance.......They might blow it...who knows but they deserve the chance.......

One thing i can tell you for sure Iraq is nothing like Vietnam............

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Navy Pride:
You are young......All you know about Nam is what your liberal teachers have told you........Every other year I go to DC and go to the wall and get down on my knees and cry for the loss of my friends.......They died for absolutely nothing because of Liberals like Kerry and Fonda..........We won every battle but lost the war..........As I said before the terrorists can not beat us in Iraq....The only thing that can beat us is Liberals back here in the states who have no stomach for finishing the job.......I hope your not like that.........

I don't know what is going to happen in Iraq...Nobody does.......My friends who are in the military tell me that it is nothing like the liberal media paints it to be.............Thirteen of the 16 provinces are free of violenc.........Only the ones in the Sunni triangle are a problem......They tell me the Iraqis want us there and are grateful that we freed them from Saddam...........They only want a chance to live and prosper as free men and we are giving them that chance.......They might blow it...who knows but they deserve the chance.......

One thing i can tell you for sure Iraq is nothing like Vietnam............

Do you not believe we should hold our elected officials accountable for their actions? If yes, how, when and under what conditions, does this occur? I would like to know your thoughts on this.

 

[Navy Pride]

Do you not believe we should hold our elected officials accountable for their actions? If yes, how, when and under what conditions, does this occur? I would like to know your thoughts on this.

Of course you hold them accountable and the way you do that is at the ballot box........

It applies to when they are making decisions that are against what you elected them for........

Since you did not vote for President Bush that does not apply........