Let's clear the air.....AGAIN

[distortion9]

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war.
They complain about his prosecution of it.
One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S history.



Let's clear up one point: President Bush didn't start the war on terror.
Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.
Let's look at the "worst" president and mismanagement claims.



FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,
an average of 18,333 per year.

John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost,
an averag! e of 5,800 per year.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by

Sudan and did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
Over 2,900 lives lost on 9/11.



In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has liberated two countries,
rushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot,
captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
We lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year.
Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.

Worst president in history? Come on!



The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...

It took less time to take Iraq
than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.



We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq
than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

[Warham]

Amen!

[Cathedral]

distortion9, You just earned another vote with this post.

History will show Bush as one of the greatest Presidents in American History, right next to Ronald Reagan as far as Leaders who took NO SHIT from our enemies.

The man has restored our image as the strongest nation on earth and is proving to the Tarrorists that we will not surrender or alter our policies as Clinton did during his admin.

Viva La Bush in '04!!!

[Satan]

When did the Taliban attack the US?

When did Iraq attack the US?

And why did Junior, the "kick ass pResident", not go after the 2 countries who definitely WERE involved (assuming the BCE didn't do it entirely themselves), Saudi Arabia and Pakistan?

The hijackers were Saudis, and Pakistan is willingly harboring Bin Laden. Yet the BCE calls them "allies"

What the fuck?

Sounds like you Busheep are asking entirely the wrong set of questions.

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by distortion9

FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.




how many times do i have to point this out?

germany openly and formally declared war on us BEFORE we ever attacked them. comparing attacking germany in WWII and iraq in gulf II is like comparing sam and dave. completely different. you can't.



however, i must also question the, bush didn't start the war; the terrorists did.

i agree. they started it, and afghanistan was justified.

iraq, however, is another different story. saddam was a prick of the highest order. he treated his people brutally. whether or not he had actual, existing stocks of WMD at the time, he was clearly in violation of the U.N. regulations and at the minimum, improperly kept the ability to quickly produce them.

still...personally, i don't believe that justified our pre-emptive war against them. "freeing the iraqi people" is a laudable goal, but it was not our primary goal. (yes, i think they'll be better off in the long run. but had saddam fully complied with bush's initial demands for complete inspections, we wouldn't have freed them. nor will we free other oppresed people's who's brutal dictators lack the ability to be a threat to us.)

i'm fine with attacking people for national security reasons. but i don't think the imminence of the threat was enough, in the case of iraq, to justify our attack.



(and, as a final note:


President Bush has liberated two countries,
rushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot

uh...someone needs to update this internet chain message...both iran and north korea are back at their programs.

[Warham]

Hey Knuckle,

What's imminent for you? When Hussein has his finger on the 'fire nuke' button?

At that point, it's too late.

[knuckleboner]

uh, do you really think saddam was anywhere close to attacking the U.S.?

he didn't have any missles that could reach us. assuming he actually had bio/chem weapons. (we know he didn't have nukes at the time.)

he never once threatened us; other than the planes flying over the no-fly zones. (now, i'm not saying those threats were justified. we were properly doing the no-fly. i had no problem with us hitting every radar he used to target our planes.)

but yes, i would want to wait a little closer to the finger on the trigger before pre-emptively attacking. it's a fairly big step that shouldn't be taken lightly.

[Cathedral]

Some of you just don't understand the unconventional tactics of a Terrorist.

Iraq was just the beginning, and success there gives Democracy a foothold in that region.
Then from there it will spread like wildfire to the citizens of other Arab nations who will soon hunger for freedom.
Good things need to happen and are happening in Iraq. If you think that every other oppressed Arab Nation isn't watching and getting ideas then you are saddly mistaken.

Iraq, more than anything, is an example of what other countries that harbor and support terrorism can look forward to.
We as a Nation have ignored Terrorism for far too long, and those days are gone forever.
The question was, Do we sit back and wait for another attack or do we go on the offensive and strike those animals first?

Like it or not, The rules of engagement have changed and waiting to be hit again was not an option.
Saddam Hussein WAS a WMD himself, to his own people and to the rest of the free world.
His constant refusal to conform to U.N. Resolutions without punishment sent a message to all the world that we were all talk and no action, but that changed didn't it?

The war against Terror is one of Strategy, and Iraq was the initial front to which the rest of this battle will be staged.

There is far more going on than we will ever know, but Bush has my support in facing those thugs head on, and in their own backyard, not here at home.

[Satan]

Some of you just don't understand who created the goddamned terrorists in the first place.

[Mezro]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Some of you just don't understand the unconventional tactics of a Terrorist.

Do we sit back and wait for another attack or do we go on the offensive and strike those animals first?



North Korea and Iran posed more of an immediate threat to the United States than Iraq.

Mezro...I would have been impressed with GWB had he committed as much effort in capturing Osama as he did invading Iraq...

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by distortion9
Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war.
They complain about his prosecution of it.
One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S history.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.


See that "point" of yours up there? That's where you lost your credibility. You want to equate an entire administration's terrible handling of a crisis to one Senator's supposed mistake from 30 years ago?

And when you say "crushed" the Medina guard, do you mean completely destroying their war-making capacity, or simply destroying all the armor and barracks that we could see from space?

You appear to have some sense. Stop believing every word you hear on the fucking news.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Cathedral
The war against Terror is one of Strategy, and Iraq was the initial front to which the rest of this battle will be staged.

Fine, we invaded Ass-crackistan and Iraq so we could flank Syria, Iran (on two sides), and Pakistan. Why didn't W just tell us that instead of bullshiting us, and doing a crappy job of it? It's not like it's a fucking secret to those nations. They live there, I think they notice the US taking shit over.

He lied to us and his whole administration lied about almost every material fact going into that war.

[Angel]

Originally posted by Satan
Some of you just don't understand who created the goddamned terrorists in the first place.

Amen to that! ;)

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
uh, do you really think saddam was anywhere close to attacking the U.S.?



I think the biggest threat Saddam posed to the U.S. was by giving WMD weapons to terrorists for proxy attacks or his attacking Israel. Face it, if he attacks Israel, we're in it BIG TIME. It's late........zzzzz....zzzzzzzz..........zzzzzzzzzz. ....................

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Some of you just don't understand the unconventional tactics of a Terrorist.

Iraq was just the beginning, and success there gives Democracy a foothold in that region.
Then from there it will spread like wildfire to the citizens of other Arab nations who will soon hunger for freedom.
Good things need to happen and are happening in Iraq. If you think that every other oppressed Arab Nation isn't watching and getting ideas then you are saddly mistaken.

Iraq, more than anything, is an example of what other countries that harbor and support terrorism can look forward to.
We as a Nation have ignored Terrorism for far too long, and those days are gone forever.
The question was, Do we sit back and wait for another attack or do we go on the offensive and strike those animals first?

Like it or not, The rules of engagement have changed and waiting to be hit again was not an option.
Saddam Hussein WAS a WMD himself, to his own people and to the rest of the free world.
His constant refusal to conform to U.N. Resolutions without punishment sent a message to all the world that we were all talk and no action, but that changed didn't it?

The war against Terror is one of Strategy, and Iraq was the initial front to which the rest of this battle will be staged.

There is far more going on than we will ever know, but Bush has my support in facing those thugs head on, and in their own backyard, not here at home.


then why, exactly, did president bush give saddam several chances to avert invasion and allow him to remain in power, if he fully submitted to the U.N. weapons inspections?

doesn't really sound like freeing the iraqi people or fighting terrorism in iraq, rather than the mainland, were either of our 2 original goals.

the "terrorists" that are flocking to iraq now are not all the al-qaeda, "trying to strike America, everywhere" variety. many are just the low-level thugs that realize that they're likely out of power in iraq. if the U.S. stays, or if a truly free iraq remains, they don't get to control. for most of these attackers, it's not about ideology. it's about power. plain and simple. we represent a huge impediment to their power. look at al-sadr. realizing he was never going to completely win a military victory, he used his terror just long enough to get into a position of authority.

after all, if they all were really about hitting the U.S., why didn't they all just go to afghanistan? there was/is the battlefield.

[Big Train]

Posted by OD

Fine, we invaded Ass-crackistan and Iraq so we could flank Syria, Iran (on two sides), and Pakistan. Why didn't W just tell us that instead of bullshiting us, and doing a crappy job of it? It's not like it's a fucking secret to those nations. They live there, I think they notice the US taking shit over.

He lied to us and his whole administration lied about almost every material fact going into that war.





Saying those kinds of statements out in the open and making sure everyone understands kinda makes those countries a bit nervous and tense, ya know? So you try to keep it low, those who can figure it out do and that's it.

WMD's were portable and easy to make. I believe in the long run they will show up, even if it ends up in a horrible fashion like poisioning their water somehow. It's a big sandbox the size of Texas, until most of that has been searched, you can't rule it in or out. It was thought we would find them, but I think the mistake was we gave them too much time. No Bush is a liar supposedly and until they are found it is all inconclusive, not right or wrong.

[Cathedral]

Hey, we all know Saddam had them. Intel from our allies told Bush he had them, his own Intel says he had them, but now they're all gone?

The story doesn't end there, it just begins.

Where did the weapons go?
The Bush Administration didn't lie if they were following a huge crumb trail to the same conclusion.

Maybe terror groups already have them?

Sorry, but i am more worried about where they went than i am saying "Neaner neaner neaner, The Bush Admin. lied, he sucks, i hate him" etc.

Saddam was a Capitalist, he would sell weapons to the highest bidder if the price was right.

And to answer your question, Knuckleboner. Bush knew he wouldn't comply and he had no intentions of leaving Saddam in power.
Saddam is to world peace what Edward Van Halen is to his band, an egocentric bastard who was far too comfortable with ignoring what everyone was telling him to do.

When they dug him out of that hole, what did he say?
"I am Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq"

No, I firmly believe that he was a target, albeit an easy target, he was a target in the War on Terror.
Look at the maps of that region. it is a prime place to buddy up with to continue the War.
The only real problem is that Bush and the Coalition Forces underestimated the insurgency, but that is slowly working itself out.

The key test will be that once a calm has settled over Iraq in the next year or two, will the Iraqi's be able to keep order and remain free?
With our help, they will

Any Nation that harbors and supports terrorism is a target, and they know it.
I am proud to have a man in office that won't back down or alter his policies like Clinton did.
That fucking asshole sent a message to all who hate us that if they hit us hard enough they will get what they want.

Every freedom we enjoy as Americans was paid for by the blood of our soldiers. Defending that freedom has proven to be as hard if not harder than achieving it in the first place.

Sitting in our $150,000.00 homes and driving our gas guzzling SUV's has done little more than make us soft. the spirit that flowed through this country when i was a child is no longer there.
All i seem to hear is the call of the coward claiming fowl that we are taking action against the very people that wish us dead, and for what?

Because we are free, free to choose what we do with our lives. free to choose our religion, free to speak out against our government, and free to assemble wherever the hell we damn well please within our borders and in some cases, other countries.

I cannot for one second think that voters are about to elect a guy who hasn't stuck to damn near anything he has ever done in Washington without changing his fucking mind, waffling if you will, flip flopping all over the damn place, to replace a man who had the balls to look at the world and say "Enough, we will not sit and wait for you to attack anymore."

Naaaaa, I love the man we have in office. he's no Reagan for sure, but he has integrity and the best interests of the American People close to heart.
We've needed a guy like that for a long time and it's a damn shame so many people believe the lies that are printed about him to the point they stoop to hatred to repay him for his courage after 9-11.

Thing is, I also believe in my heart that more people feel the same damn way i do, and they outnumber those who support John Kerry.

If Bush gets re-elected we'll have 4 years worth of fighting chance.
If Kerry gets in, Our guard will come down and another attack will be forth-coming.
And trust me, their lack of success in 2001 at bringing us to our knees will bring about a fury like we've never seen if another attack makes it through Kerry's Hands of Appeasement.

My gut feeling has never let me down and believe me when i tell you that if Kerry becomes our President in November, a very large portion of our nation will pay the price, and it's too damn high, brothers and sisters.

You don't want Bush?
Fine, then put up a candidate that has the security of our Nation as a top priority and not some guy playing politics with citizens lives.

You all say anyone but Bush?
I say any damn one but Kerry...

Peace!