• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

BUSH & London, Madrid, DC & New York

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
As a resident of Manhattan I've endured the nightmare of 9-11. My children were in school that morning, less than 2 miles from the WTC. I lost several friends and know of several other families that were touched directly by Al Quaeda that day.

Eventually Bush got it together and invaded Afghanistan. I think almost all of the USA and most of the world supported our military action. We had a real enemy to go after, a group of terrorists who had killed thousands of Americans and were a real threat to do it again. Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats & Liberals et al were united, for once, in their resolve to get Al Quaeda.

Problem was we didn't finish the job. Concurrently to the invasion of Afghanistan the Bush NeoCons fuc*ked us all by creating an enemy that wasn't, Saddam Hussein. Instead of putting all of our resources into getting Al Quaeda they took our resources out of Afghanistan and put them into Iraq!

To me, this sick and horrible decision making contributed to the bombings in Madrid last year and in London today. Of course Al Quaeda is 100% responsible for these acts of terror, no Westerner, not even Bush and his boobs are to blame.

However, if Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice et al had kept the pressure on Al Quaeda maybe, just maybe these events don't happen? No way to ever know, but not doing what he promised:

Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.....[snip]

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.....[snip]

These measures are essential. But the only way to defeat terrorism as a threat to our way of life is to stop it, eliminate it, and destroy it where it grows.
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html

Read it again? Has Bush led us to the defeat of terrorism / Al Quaeda as he promised? NO! He instead started a WAR in Iraq, a country that had zero terrorists, that was not a threat to the USA, that had not killed even one American in years!

The mistakes of this administration are monumental, and sadly have led to the death of more than 1700 Americans in Iraq and indirectly contributed to the deaths of many in Spain and today in London.

I am sick over this. I fear for my life and my families well being. I live in NYC, a city that most definitely is still a target for our enemies (none of which are Iraqis!).

Perhaps those of you who do not live in or near NYC, or DC, or Madrid or London cannot grasp the real fear that we live with everyday? After all how many people in Kansas City or Little Rock have to worry about getting blown up on the way to work. I take the subway everyday, and let me tell you that it was damn unnerving going to and coming back home from work today.

Why did Bush stop going after our enemy and instead attack Iraq? WHY DAMN-IT!

George W. Bush is an asshole, yes, an asshole, as are his damn henchmen and women.

I want to know what you all think now? All the bullshit about fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here is just that BULLSHIT, and it's costing thousands of innocent people and their families their lives.

SHAME ON YOU GEORGE W. BUSH!
 

Messerschmitt

Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
There are terrorists in Iraq. Those are the people US soldiers are fighting in Iraq. We are trying to help the people of Iraq to gain control of their own country. I talk to several friends who are from Iraq, and they said it is great that finally someone has taken Saddam out of power. Under Saddam the people there lived in fear and many people were killed for no reason and dumped into mass graves. Right now US soldiers are taking down insurgence in Iraq to help stop terrorism in Iraq and to stop them before they get to the US.

Why did Bush stop going after our enemy and instead attack Iraq?
Thats what the war is about stopping terrorists and yes there are terrorists in Iraq, who have been there since Saddam's rule. The people who attack US soldiers in Iraq aren't Iraqis they are insurgence, and they were there before we got there.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,895
Reaction score
6,014
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Champ, seems like you are forgetting that Saddam paid Palestinian suicide bombers. It also seems like you are forgetting how he came into power. It also seems like you are forgetting the law the Clinton singed that would eventually relieve Saddam of that power and how we would be the ones to do it.

I personally believe that even if Gore was Prez (thank heaven he is not), that we would have went back to Iraq.

I do not believe that terrorism is in one place. London's bombing proved that today. It's all over the world. The most strategic move was to change Iraq into a democracy.
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Messerschmitt said:
There are terrorists in Iraq. Those are the people US soldiers are fighting in Iraq. We are trying to help the people of Iraq to gain control of their own country.
There are terrorists in Iraq because we started a war and brought them to Iraq. They were NOT there before we invaded. It's a debacle! Helping the Iraqis is very noble, but I strongly believe we need to protect ourselves from our real enemies before we "help" the people of Iraq!
Messerschmitt said:
Thats what the war is about stopping terrorists and yes there are terrorists in Iraq, who have been there since Saddam's rule. The people who attack US soldiers in Iraq aren't Iraqis they are insurgence, and they were there before we got there.
Sorry, not true, at least in reality. Saddam was in power, the insurgents were part of that power. There weren't ANY terrorists. Saddam was a dictator, and like all dictators he needed to exert absolute control meaning that he wouldn't allow terrorists in his country, he controlled everything, including terrorists.

My point, again, is that Bush stopped the war on terrorism and instead started a war against a lame dictator that was zero threat to us! How can anyone not see this as pure fact?

Maybe if you lived in a city that's been attacked and saw some of your neighbors killed you would be less inclined to fight a useless war in Iraq and more inclined to take on our real enemies?
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
Champ, seems like you are forgetting that Saddam paid Palestinian suicide bombers. It also seems like you are forgetting how he came into power. It also seems like you are forgetting the law the Clinton singed that would eventually relieve Saddam of that power and how we would be the ones to do it.
I do not dispute your facts at all. What I'm saying is that we stopped our attack on Al Quaeda to go after Saddam, and to me that's been a very fatal mistake. Vague, please tell me that you believe that Al Quaeda has been a zillion times greater threat to US than Saddam? Let's look at the scoreboard since, say 1998? Al Quaeda killed = 3000+. Saddam killed = 0 (outside of Iraq, I have no idea how many, if any Iraqis he killed after 1998).
vauge said:
I personally believe that even if Gore was Prez (thank heaven he is not), that we would have went back to Iraq.
I respectfully disagree. The NeoCons had an agenda that was actually facilitated by 9-11. Democrats had no such agenda and would not have had the passion for war that Bush and his cronies have.
vauge said:
I do not believe that terrorism is in one place. London's bombing proved that today. It's all over the world. The most strategic move was to change Iraq into a democracy.
Agreed! Trouble is that we're so occupied (literally) with/in Iraq that we've let our guard down against our true enemies!

Do you think that any Iraqis had anything to do with what happened in London today? Do you think Al Quaeda did? If you think it's Al Quaeda don't you have to ask yourself why we're not fighting them instead of Iraq?

Some of you on this board accuse Dems of being against ALL wars. The truth is that we are against WRONG wars and are very much in favor of RIGHT wars. You see what I mean?
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
vauge said:
It also seems like you are forgetting the law the Clinton singed that would eventually relieve Saddam of that power and how we would be the ones to do it.
Albeit somewhat differently than some folks seem to think.

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize or otherwise speak to the use of United States Armed Forces (except as provided in section 4(a)(2)) in carrying out this Act.[/font]
[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]SEC. 4. ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT A TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ.
[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]([/font]a) AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE- The President may provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations designated in accordance with section 5 the following assistance:

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]([/font](2) MILITARY ASSISTANCE- (A) The President is authorized to direct the drawdown of defense articles from the stocks of the Department of Defense, defense services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training for such organizations.






 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,895
Reaction score
6,014
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
26 X World Champs said:
I do not dispute your facts at all. What I'm saying is that we stopped our attack on Al Quaeda to go after Saddam, and to me that's been a very fatal mistake.
We didn't stop any attack on Al Quaida, we simply do not know where they are. Sorry, hard to imagine but some Al Quaida may live down the road from you or Canada or Mexico. Not all of them are from or in Afganistan.

Simon, thanks for that snippet (was too lazy to look), nowhere did I mention that it would have to be through force, but we were indeed required to get the job done. Force was from other legistalation.

Vague, please tell me that you believe that Al Quaeda has been a zillion times greater threat to US than Saddam? Let's look at the scoreboard since, say 1998? Al Quaeda killed = 3000+. Saddam killed = 0 (outside of Iraq, I have no idea how many, if any Iraqis he killed after 1998).
Unknown about true threat to the US, not sure it could be supplied even if it were true do to Intelligence reasons. As regular Joes we simply do not know all the facts and must trust (at least an itty bitty amount) in our President.

As simple humanitarians, why is it so bad to oust a BRUTAL dictator? Which has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraq people. We are simply not the bad guys.

Agreed! Trouble is that we're so occupied (literally) with/in Iraq that we've let our guard down against our true enemies!

Do you think that any Iraqis had anything to do with what happened in London today? Do you think Al Quaeda did? If you think it's Al Quaeda don't you have to ask yourself why we're not fighting them instead of Iraq?
Ok, tell me where Al Quaeda is? Please pin point on a map. The dialy raids here in the US; we are benign to. We hear about them, but somehow it doesn't sink in that we are fighting an invisible enemy. The truth of the matter is that darn near ALL the countries in the world are fighting Al Quaida- we are not alone in this war to fight terrorism.

Some of you on this board accuse Dems of being against ALL wars. The truth is that we are against WRONG wars and are very much in favor of RIGHT wars. You see what I mean?
I have never said that, but I understand your position.
 

teacher

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
Why did Bush stop going after our enemy and instead attack Iraq? WHY DAMN-IT!
Maybe it's better to know where they are and what they're doing. Kill or capture all of them and they will be replaced by those you don't know. How many known spies do you think we left in place during the cold war just so we could see who their contacts were. What the chain of command was. He leads you to other unknown spies. You use known spies as channels of disinformation. You feed them information and see where it ends up. Don't think our leaders think small, petty revenge. They are smart long term thinkers like me. It's how I would do it. It's how it is done. We had lot's of practice with the reds.

I'd be surprised if London's attack was done by Al Quedda.
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
We didn't stop any attack on Al Quaida, we simply do not know where they are. Sorry, hard to imagine but some Al Quaida may live down the road from you or Canada or Mexico. Not all of them are from or in Afganistan.
I agree with you again. However, had we invested our resources into finding them rather than invading Iraq I believe we would be much safer than we are today. That is my point.
vauge said:
Unknown about true threat to the US, not sure it could be supplied even if it were true do to Intelligence reasons. As regular Joes we simply do not know all the facts and must trust (at least an itty bitty amount) in our President.
I did trust him after 9-11 until I came to realize the scam that became Iraq. He lost my trust from there on. I absolutely supported him when we invaded Afghanistan. Iraq is another matter, a really bad, bad decision.
vauge said:
As simple humanitarians, why is it so bad to oust a BRUTAL dictator? Which has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraq people. We are simply not the bad guys.
Of course, and I agree. Sadly, however, before we can be humanitarians shouldn't we protect ourselves? I live in NYC and believe me I do not feel safe or protected. I want my kids and my wife to be safe. Living outside of the "war" zones eliminates the fear that one feels personally, and without that real fear people are OK with being a humanitarian first. I want to be protected first and I want our resources spent on fighting our enemies not being a humanitarian, especially at a cost of more than $5 billion PER MONTH.
vauge said:
Ok, tell me where Al Quaeda is? Please pin point on a map. The dialy raids here in the US; we are benign to. We hear about them, but somehow it doesn't sink in that we are fighting an invisible enemy. The truth of the matter is that darn near ALL the countries in the world are fighting Al Quaida- we are not alone in this war to fight terrorism.
I think if we spent $5 billion per month we'd have accomplished a lot more by now....we've done a shitty job on this, and our guard, again, is down. Anyone can get into this country for God's sake!
 

anomaly

Anti-Capitalist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
6
Location
IN
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The problem is that the Bush administration is simply picking and choosing which countries are on the 'axis of evil' and are therefore evil. For example, we begin this grand war in Afghanistan. For the record, I support the Afghan war. It was a legitimate war, we set out to fight terrorists, and so we went to a country that supported terrorists. But then, we decide that Saddam is just a bad fellow. How many terrorists were in Iraq before the war? A few, maybe. How many are there now? Well, now it seems Iraq is being used as justification for heinous terrorist attacks like the one we saw today in London. Have we really done more good than bad in Iraq? In my humble opinion, the only thing we have done, from a US perspective, is fan the flames of terrorism.

So let's go over this. We invade Afghanistan, because they harbored terrorists. We invade Iraq because (conservatives usually fill in some bullshit there...). We do not touch our friends the Saudis, even though we know they harbor terrorists. Is there any logic in Mr. Bush's plan for war? I'm with Champ here, Bush's logic makes no sense. Why did he simply stop attacking the enemy, and instead engaged a dictator who hated Islamic Fundamentalism?
 

teacher

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
teacher said:
Surprise! Then you would be wrong, again.
Aren't you giddy. Notice I said "be surprised" not "they didn't". (Sound of nice try buzzer). Seriously, I haven't heard, did they claim responsibility? Or have we found out they did it? Consider after some attacks sometimes multiple groups claim responsibility. Proving at least sometimes some of those claiming responsibility are wrong. I said before I'd be surprised if they launched an attack on American soil, not other nations soil. If it is an Al Quedda attack on the UK it would be (I think) an attempt to break the will of the Brits. It worked in Spain. I don't think it will work in Brittan. The opposite I would think. The whole stiff upper lip thing. Remember the monkey :monkey fiasco? Got to get up earlier than that to burn ol teacher.
 

GarzaUK

That European Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,682
Reaction score
625
Location
Belfast, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
anomaly said:
The problem is that the Bush administration is simply picking and choosing which countries are on the 'axis of evil' and are therefore evil. For example, we begin this grand war in Afghanistan. For the record, I support the Afghan war. It was a legitimate war, we set out to fight terrorists, and so we went to a country that supported terrorists. But then, we decide that Saddam is just a bad fellow. How many terrorists were in Iraq before the war? A few, maybe. How many are there now? Well, now it seems Iraq is being used as justification for heinous terrorist attacks like the one we saw today in London. Have we really done more good than bad in Iraq? In my humble opinion, the only thing we have done, from a US perspective, is fan the flames of terrorism.

So let's go over this. We invade Afghanistan, because they harbored terrorists. We invade Iraq because (conservatives usually fill in some bullshit there...). We do not touch our friends the Saudis, even though we know they harbor terrorists. Is there any logic in Mr. Bush's plan for war? I'm with Champ here, Bush's logic makes no sense. Why did he simply stop attacking the enemy, and instead engaged a dictator who hated Islamic Fundamentalism?
Also the Iraq war has created a new generation of jihadists that are more dangerous, more capable, more experienced than their predecessors.
The War on Terror is being fought the wrong way.
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
world champ.. yes the fundies have escalated this thing. We can thank those **uck wit Rumsfeld Bush & Blair for the London bombs becuase they have fought the war on terror in the wrong way & in the wrong place !
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,895
Reaction score
6,014
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
robin said:
world champ.. yes the fundies have escalated this thing. We can thank those **uck wit Rumsfeld Bush & Blair for the London bombs becuase they have fought the war on terror in the wrong way & in the wrong place !
For some reason it no longer is the Terrorists fault - it's someone else. The guilty become the victims.

The idea that maybe they may have been planning this for 5+ years just never seems to be thought of.
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
robin said:
world champ.. yes the fundies have escalated this thing. We can thank those **uck wit Rumsfeld Bush & Blair for the London bombs becuase they have fought the war on terror in the wrong way & in the wrong place !
To be fair, the only people really responsible for the London bombings is Al Quaeda.

What Bush and his evil cabal did do was contribute to a general lack of security around the world and they've allowed Al Quaeda to stengthen itself twofold:

1. By shifting our focus to a non-enemy in Iraq our resources have been so diminished that Al Quaeda, like a bad virus left untreated has festered.

2. The war in Iraq has harvested more and more terrorists from a place in the world that used to be a barren desert for terrorism. Now Iraq is an oasis for terrorists, fertile and a place where not only are terrorists encouraged to be, but they are trained in all sorts of violence. They even get to learn how to make bombs. Iraq has become a University of Terrorism and the USA is providing "scholarships" to train terrorists.

Until we refocus our resources into stopping terrorism, acts like what happened in London will happen again. The most chilling quote that I read was this one from the NY Times on Friday:
Since Sept. 11, 2001, senior police officials have warned that a large-scale terror attack in Britain was not a matter of if but when, a prediction repeated by a senior police official late last month.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/08/international/europe/08intel.html?

Again, as a resident of Manhattan I am reminded that sometime in the future my city will be attacked. I want more resources spent to prevent this from happening, as much as possible.

Do you know how scary this is? My 18 year old daughter has had trouble sleeping the last two nights due to fear of another 9-11 attack. Her school was only 2 miles from the WTC, and she was affected greatly by that day, as were millions of New Yorkers.

I wrote previously that those of you outside the US "war zone" of NYC & DC simply do not have enough empathy for what we inside the "war zone" live with on a daily basis. One example? As I stood on the subway platform waiting for the train to come to take me to work on Friday morning I did something I've never done before. I stood with my back against a steel beam, my logic being that if there was an explosion perhaps the steel beam would protect me!

How many of you worried about being blown up yesterday? How many of you took precautions to prevent your personal destruction? I want the focus of our government, our military, our intelligence community to be centered on stopping Al Qaueda, not Iraqi insurgents.

Sadly this ain't gonna happen! Bush and his assholes who lick his butt and follow him like drones (or is it clones? ooops...can't be clones, they're against cloning) to "great victory" in Iraq at the expense of American lives in the USA and in Iraq.
 

Tashah

wʜɪтe яussɪaи
DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,379
Reaction score
9,226
Location
ישראל • אמריקה
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
I have always felt that the US foray into Iraq was akin to putting the cart before the horse. Although no one can say with certitude that the Iraq War directly occasioned Madrid and London, it is probably valid to assume that it is a contributing factor to some degree.

I feel that the battle against al-Qa'ida in Afghanistan, if prosecuted with extreme prejudice, would have tactically demanded that US forces cross the border into Pakistan at least as far east as Peshawar.

In simple terms, the Bush administration allowed al-Qa'ida safe-passage and santuary in Pakistan for the sake of geo-political correctness. In my view, this political abandonment of a military/tactical necessity borders on criminal negligence.


 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
teacher said:
Hey champs, I fail to see the humor you posted on me in the Top Ten thread. Not cool man.
Stop the bullshit I've never wasted a moment of my time in that thread, nor will i ever....I also don't want to waste my time on you in general.

I do not like people who have bigoted views of the world, I find them to be lowlifes.
 

teacher

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
Stop the bullshit I've never wasted a moment of my time in that thread, nor will i ever....I also don't want to waste my time on you in general.

I do not like people who have bigoted views of the world, I find them to be lowlifes.

He answered. (sigh) I'll never wash this post again. I'll love it and hold it and treat it like my very own. I'll feed it and wash it and nurture it and read to it at night.

Champs with bricks come,
Champs with blocks come,
Champs with bricks and blocks and clocks come.

I'll wait for this post's bus to come in the morning,
I'll be there when this post gets off the bus.

I'll hold this post in my arms and sing,
kumbaya my post, kumbaya.

I'll be so sad when this post leaves the nest.

Maybe some day this post will bring me grandposts, unless he's gay.

I'll name this post, 27x world champs.

And I'm sure hell love me just like his grand post.

Oh, (swoon) he answered me. Hear that?

Lub-dub. Lub-dub.

It's my heart all a titter.

I believe I feel the vapors coming on.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It's my heart all a titter.

I believe I feel the vapors coming on.
When you were a kid, did you have to wear hockey equipment, but you weren't on a team?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom