• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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.

Iraq war!

Do you support the war in Iraq?


  • Total voters
    50
aps said:
I like seeing that the % that do not support the war is higher than that of those who support the war. Interesting.

I do not remotely support this war. I support our troops. Those who say you cannot support the troops if you do not support the war, let me tell you something: Tom DeLay said I could, and he's 'da hammer of the GOP.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/3/17167/05105

"You can support the troops but not the president."
---Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)



And see I see it just the opposite from the way that these GOP bigots see it. If a person is in support of this 'war', or ridiculous blood for oil charade, you automatically are NOT in support of the troops. If you support this war in Iraq it means that you don't give a rats ass about the troops.
 
sissy-boy said:

And see I see it just the opposite from the way that these GOP bigots see it. If a person is in support of this 'war', or ridiculous blood for oil charade, you automatically are NOT in support of the troops. If you support this war in Iraq it means that you don't give a rats ass about the troops.

See, there are several different views of the war. Many believe that we are doing a good thing by getting rid of a Dictator and promoting a "democratic" government.
I agree that getting rid of the dictator and promoting the "democratic" government are good.

Where I see wrong with the conservatives who believe in this, is that, Was it necessarily our job to do this? We're we in the right?
Thier answer is, "Of Course, We're America"
I disagree that simply being a great nation puts us in the position to liberate other countries and install governments. We should not be obligated to do so.

Thats where everyone has different views.
Now, in the case of the Oil/Halliberton (no-bid contracts). That is just typical corporate-political corruption. Thats what we get for putting Businessmen in office instead of men of the Law.
 
sissy-boy said:

And see I see it just the opposite from the way that these GOP bigots see it. If a person is in support of this 'war', or ridiculous blood for oil charade, you automatically are NOT in support of the troops. If you support this war in Iraq it means that you don't give a rats ass about the troops.

I wouldn't go that far, but yea, saying things like if you don't support this war, then you don't support the troops is such BS. I have never heard such nonsense. We have lost almost 2,000 of our brave men and women, and for what? To fatten the pockets of a select few, while at the same time, killing 1000s.
 
Caine said:
I disagree that simply being a great nation puts us in the position to liberate other countries and install governments. We should not be obligated to do so.

I agree, but the conservatives are gonna say we are morally obligated to do so, if we have the power. They'll say if we have the power to stop Hussein's rampage, then it is immoral not to.
 
kal-el said:
I wouldn't go that far, but yea, saying things like if you don't support this war, then you don't support the troops is such BS. I have never heard such nonsense. We have lost almost 2,000 of our brave men and women, and for what? To fatten the pockets of a select few, while at the same time, killing 1000s.

I agree the statement of saying you can't support our troops and not support thier mission is bullshit.
Because, alot of the troops themselves don't even support the mission, they are doing it because the are obligated by Military Law.

Sadly enough, the un-taxed pay you recieve during the deployment is the only positive thing about them. And this is what influences the soldiers who DO request transfer to a deploying unit to go right back over there.
And this is usually to support thier drinking binges they go on when they return. If any of you live in a military town, you'll know what im talking about.
 
sissy-boy said:
That's it, GO with that thought. Just because it's on 576,000 websites ALL over the internet doesn't make it true. Just because the US government and the rest of the world already knows it as the fact that it IS doesn't mean that YOU have to believe it!! You are a truly brainwashed fuk-tard.

I saw Bush holding hands with the SAUDIS on CNN only a couple months ago for chrissakes! Are you that fuking BLIND that you can't see these simple FACTS in front of your own *******ed face?

BTW: I already stated that the money was used to pay off the opium dealers, that's hardly 'humanitarian'. That was only to prevent his own extended family, his junkie nieces and nephews from getting strung out again. Why don't we start sending money to the drug lords in Colombia to have them stop sending us coke! That sure makes a lot of sense!!

You're a fukin' IDIOT!

A) Dumbass, just because something's claimed on a partisan website doesn't mean it's true.

B) Did you read any of the news articles? The money was NOT to pay off the opium dealers, you ****suck. It was an increase in already paid out humanitarian aid.

C) I know Bush walked hand in hand with the Saudi king. My point was that your stupid picture was photoshopped, and that you were an idiot for posting it.

Feel free to choke yourself.
 
RightatNYU said:
A) Dumbass, just because something's claimed on a partisan website doesn't mean it's true.

B) Did you read any of the news articles? The money was NOT to pay off the opium dealers, you ****suck. It was an increase in already paid out humanitarian aid.

C) I know Bush walked hand in hand with the Saudi king. My point was that your stupid picture was photoshopped, and that you were an idiot for posting it.

Feel free to choke yourself.



Do you actually believe that Bush was using good judgment by giving 243 MILLION to the TALIBAN for ANY type of 'aid'?? And this was all after there were DOZENS of petitions floating around about how horrible the Taliban really WAS. I had just signed a couple!! I don't know if the photo was touched or not, could be -- I didn't really look at it long enough. You see, those kinds of shots are not surprising to me in the least, yet somehow to you, they are. Bush has been doing business and aiding terrorist regimes ever since daddy showed him HOW! And since grand-dad did business with the nazis, Bush Sr. used the CIA to seduce, arm and train terrorists like Noriega, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussien & Bin Laden -- what makes you think ole DUBYA is any different??!

But don't let THOSE facts sway you against Bush, why not just look at things here at home? Gas prices soar higher than EVER while Chevron makes the highest profit in any single quarter, an entire city is destroyed, 9/11, the education system is falling to pieces, poor people are dying by the THOUSANDS, and to top it all off, Bush goes around whining about how same sex love will 'destroy marriage'!!

You are a complete imbecile! You must really hate this country to support a man who has tried to destroy it, so his corporate friends can make a fortune at the expense of human lives.
 
sissy-boy said:
Do you actually believe that Bush was using good judgment by giving 243 MILLION to the TALIBAN for ANY type of 'aid'?? And this was all after there were DOZENS of petitions floating around about how horrible the Taliban really WAS. I had just signed a couple!! I don't know if the photo was touched or not, could be -- I didn't really look at it long enough. You see, those kinds of shots are not surprising to me in the least, yet somehow to you, they are. Bush has been doing business and aiding terrorist regimes ever since daddy showed him HOW! And since grand-dad did business with the nazis, Bush Sr. used the CIA to seduce, arm and train terrorists like Noriega, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussien & Bin Laden -- what makes you think ole DUBYA is any different??!

But don't let THOSE facts sway you against Bush, why not just look at things here at home? Gas prices soar higher than EVER while Chevron makes the highest profit in any single quarter, an entire city is destroyed, 9/11, the education system is falling to pieces, poor people are dying by the THOUSANDS, and to top it all off, Bush goes around whining about how same sex love will 'destroy marriage'!!

You are a complete imbecile! You must really hate this country to support a man who has tried to destroy it, so his corporate friends can make a fortune at the expense of human lives.

I'll try to speak slowly so you can understand.

Bush didn't "give" 243 million to the Taliban.

He continued to fund humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, just the same as Bill Clinton did, just the same as the UN and the entire world did. Up until the invasion, Iraq was getting humanitarian aid through the UN for oil-for-food, does that mean that the entire world was supporting Saddam Hussein? No, you ****ing idiot.

Also, how did you not know the photo was photoshopped? Did you LOOK at it? Moron. You'd fit in well with Dan "So the documents are forged? Whatever, I still think it's true" Rather.

And you're right, Bush has made it his personal vendetta to cause 9/11, destroy New Orleans, kill all poor people, and make gas prices rise.

It's like debating with an illiterate. I'm done with you. Much better things to do.
 
RightatNYU said:
I'll try to speak slowly so you can understand.

Bush didn't "give" 243 million to the Taliban.

He continued to fund humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, just the same as Bill Clinton did, just the same as the UN and the entire world did. Up until the invasion, Iraq was getting humanitarian aid through the UN for oil-for-food, does that mean that the entire world was supporting Saddam Hussein? No, you ****ing idiot.

Also, how did you not know the photo was photoshopped? Did you LOOK at it? Moron. You'd fit in well with Dan "So the documents are forged? Whatever, I still think it's true" Rather.

And you're right, Bush has made it his personal vendetta to cause 9/11, destroy New Orleans, kill all poor people, and make gas prices rise.

It's like debating with an illiterate. I'm done with you. Much better things to do.


That's only one of the amounts he gave and that was not what he did in 2001. He gave a DIFFERENT amount for the 'humanitarian aid' (which is JUST as bad when you consider what the Taliban was capable of--- ALL facts that he KNEW ahead of time. It was like giving money to Bin Laden to pay for 9/11 for chrissakes!! JESUS you're a MORON! Even a CHILD could figure that out!

But check out just a LITTLE of his ties to the Bin Laden's and terrorism:
QUESTIONABLE TIES
Tracking bin Laden's money flow leads back to Midland, Texas
by Wayne Madsen
On September 24, President George W. Bush appeared at a press conference in the White House Rose Garden to announce a crackdown on the financial networks of terrorists and those who support them. “U.S. banks that have assets of these groups or individuals must freeze their accounts,” Bush declared. “And U.S. citizens or businesses are prohibited from doing business with them.”

But the president, who is now enjoying an astounding 92 percent approval rating, hasn’t always practiced what he is now preaching: Bush’s own businesses were once tied to financial figures in Saudi Arabia who currently support bin Laden.

In 1979, Bush’s first business, Arbusto Energy, obtained financing from James Bath, a Houstonian and close family friend. One of many investors, Bath gave Bush $50,000 for a 5 percent stake in Arbusto. At the time, Bath was the sole U.S. business representative for Salem bin Laden, head of the wealthy Saudi Arabian family and a brother (one of 17) to Osama bin Laden. It has long been suspected, but never proven, that the Arbusto money came directly from Salem bin Laden. In a statement issued shortly after the September 11 attacks, the White House vehemently denied the connection, insisting that Bath invested his own money, not Salem bin Laden’s, in Arbusto.

In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests. In fact, Bath has extensive ties, both to the bin Laden family and major players in the scandal-ridden Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) who have gone on to fund Osama bin Laden. BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the ’80s in what has been called the “largest bank fraud in world financial history” by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. During the ’80s, BCCI also acted as a main conduit for laundering money intended for clandestine CIA activities, ranging from financial support to the Afghan mujahedin to paying intermediaries in the Iran-Contra affair.

When Salem bin Laden died in 1988, powerful Saudi Arabian banker and BCCI principal Khalid bin Mahfouz inherited his interests in Houston. Bath ran a business for bin Mahfouz in Houston and joined a partnership with bin Mahfouz and Gaith Pharaon, BCCI’s frontman in Houston’s Main Bank.

The Arbusto deal wasn’t the last time Bush looked to highly questionable sources to invest in his oil dealings. After several incarnations, Arbusto emerged in 1986 as Harken Energy Corporation. When Harken ran into trouble a year later, Saudi Sheik Abdullah Taha Bakhsh purchased a 17.6 percent stake in the company. Bakhsh was a business partner with Pharaon in Saudi Arabia; his banker there just happened to be bin Mahfouz.

Though Bush told the Wall Street Journal he had “no idea” BCCI was involved in Harken’s financial dealings, the network of connections between Bush and BCCI is so extensive that the Journal concluded their investigation of the matter in 1991 by stating: “The number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken—all since George W. Bush came on board—raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son.” Or even the president: Bath finally came under investigation by the FBI in 1992 for his Saudi business relationships, accused of funneling Saudi money through Houston in order to influence the foreign policies of the Reagan and first Bush administrations.

Worst of all, bin Mahfouz allegedly has been financing the bin Laden terrorist network—making Bush a U.S. citizen who has done business with those who finance and support terrorists. According to USA Today, bin Mahfouz and other Saudis attempted to transfer $3 million to various bin Laden front operations in Saudi Arabia in 1999. ABC News reported the same year that Saudi officials stopped bin Mahfouz from contributing money directly to bin Laden. (Bin Mahfouz’s sister is also a wife of Osama bin Laden, a fact that former CIA Director James Woolsey revealed in 1998 Senate testimony.)

When President Bush announced he is hot on the trail of the money used over the years to finance terrorism, he must realize that trail ultimately leads not only to Saudi Arabia, but to some of the same financiers who originally helped propel him into the oil business and later the White House. The ties between bin Laden and the White House may be much closer than he is willing to acknowledge.


 
sissy-boy said:


That's only one of the amounts he gave and that was not what he did in 2001. He gave a DIFFERENT amount for the 'humanitarian aid' (which is JUST as bad when you consider what the Taliban was capable of--- ALL facts that he KNEW ahead of time. It was like giving money to Bin Laden to pay for 9/11 for chrissakes!! JESUS you're a MORON! Even a CHILD could figure that out!

But check out just a LITTLE of his ties to the Bin Laden's and terrorism:
QUESTIONABLE TIES
Tracking bin Laden's money flow leads back to Midland, Texas
by Wayne Madsen
On September 24, President George W. Bush appeared at a press conference in the White House Rose Garden to announce a crackdown on the financial networks of terrorists and those who support them. “U.S. banks that have assets of these groups or individuals must freeze their accounts,” Bush declared. “And U.S. citizens or businesses are prohibited from doing business with them.”

But the president, who is now enjoying an astounding 92 percent approval rating, hasn’t always practiced what he is now preaching: Bush’s own businesses were once tied to financial figures in Saudi Arabia who currently support bin Laden.

In 1979, Bush’s first business, Arbusto Energy, obtained financing from James Bath, a Houstonian and close family friend. One of many investors, Bath gave Bush $50,000 for a 5 percent stake in Arbusto. At the time, Bath was the sole U.S. business representative for Salem bin Laden, head of the wealthy Saudi Arabian family and a brother (one of 17) to Osama bin Laden. It has long been suspected, but never proven, that the Arbusto money came directly from Salem bin Laden. In a statement issued shortly after the September 11 attacks, the White House vehemently denied the connection, insisting that Bath invested his own money, not Salem bin Laden’s, in Arbusto.

In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests. In fact, Bath has extensive ties, both to the bin Laden family and major players in the scandal-ridden Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) who have gone on to fund Osama bin Laden. BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the ’80s in what has been called the “largest bank fraud in world financial history” by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. During the ’80s, BCCI also acted as a main conduit for laundering money intended for clandestine CIA activities, ranging from financial support to the Afghan mujahedin to paying intermediaries in the Iran-Contra affair.

When Salem bin Laden died in 1988, powerful Saudi Arabian banker and BCCI principal Khalid bin Mahfouz inherited his interests in Houston. Bath ran a business for bin Mahfouz in Houston and joined a partnership with bin Mahfouz and Gaith Pharaon, BCCI’s frontman in Houston’s Main Bank.

The Arbusto deal wasn’t the last time Bush looked to highly questionable sources to invest in his oil dealings. After several incarnations, Arbusto emerged in 1986 as Harken Energy Corporation. When Harken ran into trouble a year later, Saudi Sheik Abdullah Taha Bakhsh purchased a 17.6 percent stake in the company. Bakhsh was a business partner with Pharaon in Saudi Arabia; his banker there just happened to be bin Mahfouz.

Though Bush told the Wall Street Journal he had “no idea” BCCI was involved in Harken’s financial dealings, the network of connections between Bush and BCCI is so extensive that the Journal concluded their investigation of the matter in 1991 by stating: “The number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken—all since George W. Bush came on board—raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son.” Or even the president: Bath finally came under investigation by the FBI in 1992 for his Saudi business relationships, accused of funneling Saudi money through Houston in order to influence the foreign policies of the Reagan and first Bush administrations.

Worst of all, bin Mahfouz allegedly has been financing the bin Laden terrorist network—making Bush a U.S. citizen who has done business with those who finance and support terrorists. According to USA Today, bin Mahfouz and other Saudis attempted to transfer $3 million to various bin Laden front operations in Saudi Arabia in 1999. ABC News reported the same year that Saudi officials stopped bin Mahfouz from contributing money directly to bin Laden. (Bin Mahfouz’s sister is also a wife of Osama bin Laden, a fact that former CIA Director James Woolsey revealed in 1998 Senate testimony.)

When President Bush announced he is hot on the trail of the money used over the years to finance terrorism, he must realize that trail ultimately leads not only to Saudi Arabia, but to some of the same financiers who originally helped propel him into the oil business and later the White House. The ties between bin Laden and the White House may be much closer than he is willing to acknowledge.




"It has long been suspected....it is reported....the truth may be..." Those are all ways to say bullshit without admitting it.

You're an idiot, and there is no point in debating with you. Better things to do.
 
RightatNYU said:
"It has long been suspected....it is reported....the truth may be..." Those are all ways to say bullshit without admitting it.

You're an idiot, and there is no point in debating with you. Better things to do.

NYU, you said you were done with Sissy yesterday and that you had better things to do. I guess you didn't have better things to do. ;)
 
RightatNYU said:
"It has long been suspected....it is reported....the truth may be..." Those are all ways to say bullshit without admitting it.

You're an idiot, and there is no point in debating with you. Better things to do.

O man, no rebuttal? Sissy-boy makes alot of interesting posts, and he makes alot of points.
 
RightatNYU said:
"It has long been suspected....it is reported....the truth may be..." Those are all ways to say bullshit without admitting it.

You're an idiot, and there is no point in debating with you. Better things to do.


You're just upset that we aren't killing Jews instead of Muslims. Even when you've been clearly beaten in a debate you have to resort to name-calling instead of looking at the facts. You nazi's are ALL the same. hahaha!!
 
SixStringHero said:
I was ambivalent about going to war. We all now know that ties between Al Quaida(sic) and Sadam were tenuous at best, but that does not change the fact that he did in fact harbor and fund terrorists through-out his years.

QUOTE]

I was more concerned with the ties between Bush ,the bin laden family ,Saudi Arabia's OIL CARTEL ,and the fact bin laden was an American CIA operartive
in many pictures you will see bin laden wearing an American army Jacket !
given to him by CIA operatives that recruited him

The tenuous ties between bin laden and Saddam ,dont even show up on my radar.
I am,however perplexed ,that people keep sayin Binladen and Sadam and
not Bush, Binladen, oil ,CIA , Saudi Arabia and isreal

it is not bush , clinton or terrorists,that beat the drums of war
it is the rich elite americans with off shore bank accounts .that you die for
The dots are all there if you see through eyes that don't tell you lies
 
Last edited:
Canuck said:
SixStringHero said:
I was ambivalent about going to war. We all now know that ties between Al Quaida(sic) and Sadam were tenuous at best, but that does not change the fact that he did in fact harbor and fund terrorists through-out his years.

QUOTE]

I was more concerned with the ties between Bush ,the bin laden family ,Saudi Arabia's OIL CARTEL ,and the fact bin laden was an American CIA operartive
in many pictures you will see bin laden wearing an American army Jacket !
given to him by CIA operatives that recruited him

The tenuous ties between bin laden and Saddam ,dont even show up on my radar.
I am,however perplexed ,that people keep sayin Binladen and Sadam and
not Bush, Binladen, oil ,CIA , Saudi Arabia and isreal

it is not bush , clinton or terrorists,that beat the drums of war
it is the rich elite americans with off shore bank accounts .that you die for
The dots are all there if you see through eyes that don't tell you lies


Were aliens involved in this also? By the way ya dropped your tinfoil hat and you ability to actually stand up for something.... It might have rolled under the table...LOL
 
Back
Top Bottom