The liberal
- Thread starter Bodacious
- Start date
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
Ted Kennedy, and other extreme liberals are the cause for the Democrat's slow demise. Barack Obama is your only hope.
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Your oil prices are low. Ours are three times higher.
KoreBolteR
Tank
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Messages
- 3,724
- Reaction score
- 1
ONLY the colours in RED are the things i believe in :afro:
KoreBolteR
Tank
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Messages
- 3,724
- Reaction score
- 1
Tr0n said:
well what can I say, im not republican nor democratic.
what ever i feel is right i support. :angel:
i said you instead of I, sorry typo, heh
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
Gas prices in Euroland are way higher than they are in America.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
You're a righty if....
* You shrug off claims of torture at Abu Gharib
* You think that the US government decalring they found no WMDs means they really did, but are hiding the claim.
* You ignore the fact the US sold Saddam many of his old WMDs
* You believe defeating terrorism is possible
* You believe the war on terrorism will reduce the number of terrorist attacks
* You believe 9/11 happened because some people are jealous of you
* You believe that it is OK to strip down human rights of anyone you suspect of being a terrorist
* You believe that Afghanistan is a nice safe place now
* You believe this war is about peace, despite the US trading arms with dozens of countries that have appalling human rights records.
* You think Saddam wanted to attack the US
* You think Saddam had something to do with 9/11
* You believe that 4th of July is a time to celebrate your freedom from international law
* You believe you have the right to decide which middle east country should have WMD, and which should not
* You believe that being told Saddam had WMDs, wished to use them against us, and could so in 45mins is NOT a lie
* You believe that using a college students report on Iraq on the way to war is OK
* Even though the student said some of it was not true
* You're quite happy to see sanctions placed on inavded countries that force them to buy seeds which they need to survive from the US.
* You believe that giving up the search for WMD is not front page news
* You are happy to go into a war on one premise, and come out on another
* You think Iraq will flourish, despite the current state of Afghanistan
* Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth
* You think an arab being forced to strip naked is hardly humiliating for him, despite knowing little about his belief system.
* You think making a group of naked arab men pile on top of eachother is an effective way to extract good military information from them
* You believe that all these daily terrorist attacks, executions and threats would have gone on if you hadn't invaded
* You think the world is becoming a safer place.
* You think this has nothing to do with resources, and is all about doing the right thing.
* You believe you have nothing whatsoever to do with bringing terrorism on yourselfs
* You believe you cannot be Patriotic if you question your president
* You think Saddam was the only person killing his own people on a regular basis
* You don't think you still sell weapons to those people
* You think every country wants the same ideals as you
* You believe a person's military record is really a valid reason to vote them in to office, and not their policies
* You want to spread democracy, yet you did not mind when Gore won the last election, but Bush managed to become president anyway
* You think the western media is never used for propaganda
* You support freedom of speech, unless it's Al Jazeera
* You think you're better than the UN
* You believe that everyone against the war is pro-terrorist
* You find ways to insult countries not in the war
* You can't work out that tackling 9/11 by doing more things that initiated 9/11, will somehow work.
* You think that Bush is truley religious, despite paying for an ex girlfriends abortion, sniffing coke, and continuing to sell weapons to countries he knows are using them for bad.
* You think the world owes you something
* You think it's justified to give $3 billion in annual military aid to Israel on the grounds of protecting that country from its Arab neighbors, even though you supply 80 percent of the arms to these Arab states.
* You believe that your old sanctions on Iraq were good, despite killing 5000 people, mainly children, a month.
* You think it's OK to lay down demands on a country, then, when they meet them, go to war with them.
* You think stupid threads like these don't have another side.
* You shrug off claims of torture at Abu Gharib
* You think that the US government decalring they found no WMDs means they really did, but are hiding the claim.
* You ignore the fact the US sold Saddam many of his old WMDs
* You believe defeating terrorism is possible
* You believe the war on terrorism will reduce the number of terrorist attacks
* You believe 9/11 happened because some people are jealous of you
* You believe that it is OK to strip down human rights of anyone you suspect of being a terrorist
* You believe that Afghanistan is a nice safe place now
* You believe this war is about peace, despite the US trading arms with dozens of countries that have appalling human rights records.
* You think Saddam wanted to attack the US
* You think Saddam had something to do with 9/11
* You believe that 4th of July is a time to celebrate your freedom from international law
* You believe you have the right to decide which middle east country should have WMD, and which should not
* You believe that being told Saddam had WMDs, wished to use them against us, and could so in 45mins is NOT a lie
* You believe that using a college students report on Iraq on the way to war is OK
* Even though the student said some of it was not true
* You're quite happy to see sanctions placed on inavded countries that force them to buy seeds which they need to survive from the US.
* You believe that giving up the search for WMD is not front page news
* You are happy to go into a war on one premise, and come out on another
* You think Iraq will flourish, despite the current state of Afghanistan
* Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth
* You think an arab being forced to strip naked is hardly humiliating for him, despite knowing little about his belief system.
* You think making a group of naked arab men pile on top of eachother is an effective way to extract good military information from them
* You believe that all these daily terrorist attacks, executions and threats would have gone on if you hadn't invaded
* You think the world is becoming a safer place.
* You think this has nothing to do with resources, and is all about doing the right thing.
* You believe you have nothing whatsoever to do with bringing terrorism on yourselfs
* You believe you cannot be Patriotic if you question your president
* You think Saddam was the only person killing his own people on a regular basis
* You don't think you still sell weapons to those people
* You think every country wants the same ideals as you
* You believe a person's military record is really a valid reason to vote them in to office, and not their policies
* You want to spread democracy, yet you did not mind when Gore won the last election, but Bush managed to become president anyway
* You think the western media is never used for propaganda
* You support freedom of speech, unless it's Al Jazeera
* You think you're better than the UN
* You believe that everyone against the war is pro-terrorist
* You find ways to insult countries not in the war
* You can't work out that tackling 9/11 by doing more things that initiated 9/11, will somehow work.
* You think that Bush is truley religious, despite paying for an ex girlfriends abortion, sniffing coke, and continuing to sell weapons to countries he knows are using them for bad.
* You think the world owes you something
* You think it's justified to give $3 billion in annual military aid to Israel on the grounds of protecting that country from its Arab neighbors, even though you supply 80 percent of the arms to these Arab states.
* You believe that your old sanctions on Iraq were good, despite killing 5000 people, mainly children, a month.
* You think it's OK to lay down demands on a country, then, when they meet them, go to war with them.
* You think stupid threads like these don't have another side.
KoreBolteR
Tank
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Messages
- 3,724
- Reaction score
- 1
seinfeldrules said:
when you say Europe, do you include UK?
cos our prices are cheaper than yours i think...
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Tr0n said:
No, it's true. I don't know what our gas price iato you, since you speak in dollars and gallons. But the relation is somewhat like this
US gas-price: 4
Swedish gas-price: 11
It's all about taxes.
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Tr0n said:
No, not really. That was in crowns/litre, it doesn't make much sense to you , I know, but you see the relation. Ok, this is dollars/litre.
US: $0,57/litre
Sweden: $ 1,57/litre
EDIT, OK, I've found a convertor.
US: $1.06/gallon
Sweden: $2.9/gallon
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Tr0n said:Monkey you need to clean out your pm box.
Ah k I did a conversion of litre/gallon...Yea I do see the relation.
Consider it clean.
Korgoth
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2003
- Messages
- 3,233
- Reaction score
- 0
The Liberals. The Liberals.
You're liberal if..
We believe in the United Nations, and Kofi Annan, the maker of international legitimacy.
Nope, I believe the UN to be as corrupt as any.
We believe that the UN inspections worked.
I believe they were working, before halted, saddam was destroying missiles, and allowing more and more access.
We believe that SCUD missiles fired at U.S. troops minutes after the war began don’t change anything;
It was a WAR, of course it was serious, but not expecting the enemy to fight back is a republican mistake.
We believe that 3 liters of sarin gas used against U.S. troops doesn’t change anything;
First i've heard of this, still doesn't change my mind, I've known for a long time that saddam used these chemicals in the past, and I knew that sending our troops there, he'd use them on them if given the chance.
We believe that finding evidence of mustard gas doesn’t change anything.
Insignificant amount, years and years old, almost of no use, buried deep in the desert and untouched for who knows how long. Seems to fit with the story the iraqis told the world when they said they abbandoned their wmds.
We believe that the war in Iraq conducted by a Republican president was unjustified because it lacked UN approval;
Not true, rep or dem, this war is unjustified for many reasons. The public was lied to about the cost, about the justification itself, about the enemy, poor planning, poor support, and further pushing anti american sentiment around the globe, thats why this war is unjustified.
We believe that the "military action" in Kosovo conducted by a Democratic president was justified without UN approval.
Not true, still horrible, still unjustified.
We believe that the Iraq war was unilateral.
We believe that the participation of Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Thailand, United Kingdom, and Ukraine does not change the fact that the war was unilateral;
It was mainly unilateral, and all the countries listed above, can you list how many troops each country sent for the fighting? Who has the bulk of troops and money invested here, not the world, the US.
We believe that multilateralism can only be achieved with the participation of France and Germany;
Not true, multilateralism can be achieve by a shared expense in man power and money. And a willingness to help, not being strongarmed into following like sheep, or being bribed to play along.
We believe in multilateralism.
And whats wrong with that?
We believe that this war was motivated by greed and oil;
Motivated? Maybe in part, not in full. But there shouldn't even be a question as to the motives behind a war. If there is, then the public hasn't done their job, and checks and balances have failed. I ask you, how many coincedences does it take to make something a fact?
We believe that when France, Germany, and Russia opposed the war, they were motivated by principle, and not by sweetheart oil deals or Oil-For-Food kickbacks;
Nope, I believe they were motivated by their buisness dealings as well as a dislike for the west among their population. Leaning with public opinion makes you popular, popularity keeps you in office making sweet cash.
We believe that US oil prices are too high, and that the administration failed in its responsibility to do something about it.
Oil is always going up, I feel blessed to have it as cheap as I do. But there is evidence of price gouging, maybe not the fault of the administration but THEY can and should investigate and prosecute these oil giants, yet they don't. cough*halliburton*cough*millions overcharged in american tax dollars*cough*nobid contract still in tact*cough
We believe that the U.S. may only legitimately use force for humanitarian ends in one place if it does so in all places where aid might be needed;
Why pick and choose? And then why pick only oil rich nations when far more people are suffering far greater afflictions that can be far easier to fix, cheaper, safer, and improve our global image while saving millions of lives at the same time? It is my belief that we should cut our offensive military spending by a fourth and feed the rest of the world. We can do this, yet we don't, if we cut our bomb production in half we could save a million children, wheres the harm there?
We believe that the U.S. may not quell threats in places where the cost is relatively low unless it is willing to use force in places like North Korea, where the cost in lives would likely be very high;
Do not agree, and the cost of the iraq war has been relatively low? Not my opinion.
We believe that a humanitarian action is only truly humanitarian if there are no strategic interests to muddle the altruism.
Again, not true, my belief is, how is dropping bombs humanitarian?
We believe that President Bush lied.
more than once
We believe that Prime Minister Blair lied.
more than once
We believe that when Hillary Clinton and **bleep** Gephardt voted for the war based on the same intelligence relied upon by Bush and Blair, they made reasonable decisions based on the intelligence available at the time.
Read "sexed up intelligence". (would go longer, getting tired now)
We believe that the administration did not make the case for war;
We believe that the administration offered many different reasons but could not offer a coherent message explaining the need to go to war;
I believe they changed rationales for war so many times because all the old ones were becoming disproven by their actions. Read "wmd not found" "for the iraqi people" (then guarding oil fields and not hospitals schools and museums) etc.
We believe that the administration made perfectly clear that the only reason we were going to war was because of the threat from WMDs.
This is contradictory, if they made it clear it was about wmd, then what is the question directly above this one? And no, i don't believe this admin has made anything clear.
We believe that there were no WMDs.
nope, i believe there probably were, I don't believe they were a thread to american security though.
We believe that finding sarin gas is 14th page news;
nope I don't, its front page news, I never heard of it though.
We believe that if the sarin gas is old, then it really isn’t a WMD we were looking for;
We believe that it wasn’t really sarin gas;
again, not familar with the sarin gas, sorry. Still doesn't change anythign i've said however.
We believe that sarin gas isn’t necessarily a WMD.
no no no, sarin gas is a wmd, however it isn't a nuclear bomb program, it isn't a mobile weapons lab, it isn't a stockpile or a "cocktail" of deadly chemicals like we were told, now is it?
We believe that there was no terrorist connection to, or threat from, Iraq.
I do not believe iraq and al qaeda were involved, they were enemies (as suggested by cia/fbi) I do not believe iraq had the capability or the want and will to attack america on american soil. They (saddams regime) were smarter than that. A threat to israel maybe, but still not likely to do much.
We believe that members of Abu Nidal in Iraq would not have committed terrorist acts if we had not invaded;
I never said this, however, they wouldn't have such a strong recruitment tool if we hadn't invaded. The war on terror is like the war on drugs, its never going to end, get used to it.
We believe that al Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would not have committed terrorist acts
if we had not invaded;
Never said that did I, nope.
We believe that Saddam’s terrorist training camp at Salman Pak—complete with a Boeing 707 plane used for hijacking drills—did not exist or posed no real threat;
Name one hijacker from the 9.11 attacks that was iraqi, or trained by saddam.
We believe that it was merely a coincidence that the pharmaceutical factory bombed by President Clinton in Sudan was using al Qaeda funds and a uniquely Iraqi formula to produce VX gas;
But I thought clinton never did anything, and just because a defunkt iraqi weapons specialist shared secrets automatically connects all the dots?
We believe that we are responsible for bringing terror on ourselves.
Our actions don't help, tell me, how many times have terrorists attacked sweden because of its freedoms and their hatred of them?
We believe that the prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib is widespread and is probably the tip of the iceberg;
no I don't
We believe that Abu Ghraib proves that the America’s occupation is no different than Saddam’s tyranny;
no I don't
We believe that any attempt to suggest that there is a moral difference between a regime which systematically killed 300, 000 people and tortured countless others and a regime which punished the acts of Abu Ghraib is illegitimate.
no I don't
We believe that soldiers deliberately target women and children;
no I don't, I have best friends serving in Iraq right now, you would be wise not to say such foolish inflamatory things. But that is the republican rebuttal, if backed in a corner and surpassed by commen sense and logic attack ones patriotism/love of country, and question ones support for the armed service men and women.
We believe that the soldiers abuse and kill Iraqis because they are racists;
no I don't, same as above
We support our troops.
I do, I support them because they believe they are doing good there, and most are. I do not support this administration, I do not support war. I do not condone murder for whatever reason, and I believe humanity can do better. So what.
We believe that no one should question our statement that we "support our troops;"
Why should? Is that really all you have? And what does supporting the troops have to do with believing war is bad, and this one especially?
We believe that most of the troops are minorities and the poor;
Its proven fact that the majority of the enlisted in Iraq right now are middle class and below.
We believe that when the word "heroes" is used to describe our troops, it should always be enclosed in scare quotes.
WTF?
We believe in quagmire.
GIGGITY GIGGITY GIGGITY!
We believe that when fringe Iraqi groups attack hard targets and are soundly defeated with relatively low Coalition casualties, that this is inescapable evidence of crisis;
I believe one casualty is to many, this is really getting tiresome.... How repititious this stupid thing is.
We believe that Iraq is Bush’s Vietnam.
See what I mean? Isn't this basically the same as the last three only worded differently?
We believe that Vietnam is the lens through which all wars should be viewed.
Vietnam awoke the public to how horrible and useless war really is. It showed how corrupt our government can be, it taught us to watch these people like hawks who are elected to represent us. Is there something wrong with that?
We believe that soldiers in Vietnam were baby killers;
If the shoe fits...
We believe that John Kerry is a hero for his service in Vietnam.
Some one isn't supporting their troops, you unpatriotic basta.... oh hehehehe. John Kerry admitted what happened there, he admitted his mistakes and worked feverishly to fight against such horrible horrible treat of people, our armed forces, and the vietnam civillians. Do some research on this, don't just listen to joe scarlborough, you may actually learn something.
We believe that because John Kerry is a hero, he necessarily has the national security expertise necessary to be commander-in-chief.
And because September 11th happened under george bush's administrations watch, while having such reports as "bin laden determined to strike in the US"-condi rice, that his administration can keep us safe from future terrorist attacks. God knows they stopped the last one.
We believe that any attempt to question his national security expertise based on his voting record, including his decision to vote against a supplemental bill used to buy the soldiers body armor, is an unfair attack on the patriotism of a hero, who by virtue of this honorific has the expertise to be commander-in-chief.
Yet many still don't have proper armor and equipment, and they would have had the war not been rushed. I don't intend to stick up for John kerry, he "flip flopped" (oooooh magic words) on this issue, I don't deny this, and I don't approve of this. Get over it, its your best argument against him and its trash.
We believe in the trinity: NPR, CNN, and the New York Times. We believe in Ted Kennedy, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, and all the DNC, and we look for President Clinton yet to come. Amen.
And you believe in george bush, tom delay, condi rice, dick cheny, fox news, all the RNC and you look for jeb bush yet to come, pretty stupid huh?
EDIT: to fix some crap, i got tired half way through ah well i tried.
Absinthe
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2004
- Messages
- 14,037
- Reaction score
- 30
Interesting thing about some of Kerry's supposed "flip-flopping".
http://www.factcheck.org/article209.html
http://www.factcheck.org/article177.html
Even beloved Cheney was in agreement with Kerry on some of these things.
http://www.factcheck.org/article209.html
http://www.factcheck.org/article177.html
Even beloved Cheney was in agreement with Kerry on some of these things.
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
It said terrorist, not Al Qaeda. Reread the question.
Can countries like Poland donate as much as us? No, they dont have the financial resources. They pitch it what they can.
How do the populations of France and Germany hold a dislike for the West? They are the West.
Why is it the US's job to feed the world? It isnt. Why should we feed millions of people who celebrate Americans dying? We shouldnt.
And remind me how rich in oil Kosovo is.
Am I dreaming?
No Limit
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 9,018
- Reaction score
- 1
If you had support from the UN the international community would be able to provide just as many troops (if not more) as we do. The problem is the world knew the war was a mistake so they would never sign off on it. And what's amazing is that the world was actually right and the all powerful US administration (Bush & co) was wrong. But yes, f-ck the rest of the world they might be right but we don't need them :rolling: .
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
Who led the charge in the first Gulf War. We still spent more troops and money than the UN.
It was a mistake to them because it would have hurt their pocketbooks.
Yes, I suppose removing Saddam was an evil act. Shame on us.
Kind of like when the rest of the world says 'f-ck' the US, then begs for our aid when they need it.
Mechagodzilla
Tank
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 6,973
- Reaction score
- 0
Agreed with Innervision.
If that's what it takes to be a liberal, then I don't think anyone qualifies.
The list should be retitled 'the stereotypically idiotic liberal' or 'Jeff Foxworthy's "You Know You're a Redneck's Perception of a Liberal When...."'
Half those things are crude oversimplifications, and the rest are things no informed liberal, let alone any intelligent person, would say.
And what sarin gas? I've never heard about that. You'd think someone on the other side would have brought that up by now.
But even then, the article already points out it's weakness as WMD evidence: there's less that a few milk cartons' worth, and it's extremely old.
If that's what it takes to be a liberal, then I don't think anyone qualifies.
The list should be retitled 'the stereotypically idiotic liberal' or 'Jeff Foxworthy's "You Know You're a Redneck's Perception of a Liberal When...."'
Half those things are crude oversimplifications, and the rest are things no informed liberal, let alone any intelligent person, would say.
And what sarin gas? I've never heard about that. You'd think someone on the other side would have brought that up by now.
But even then, the article already points out it's weakness as WMD evidence: there's less that a few milk cartons' worth, and it's extremely old.
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
Did you take this seriously mecha? Come on now, one can tell that it was meant to be more of a joke than serious commentary.
No Limit
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 9,018
- Reaction score
- 1
You can't be ****ing serious, can you? Yes, lets dig up a scandal (oil-for-food) to make it look like they had financial interests in not invading Iraq and lets completely ignore the fact that Americans were profiting just as much from it. That will justify the enitre world's hate for us (with exception of maybe a couple countries in the ENTIRE WORLD).
No, going in an killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civillians was an evil act. Not shame on us, shame on Bush and your republican friends.
I don't remember hearing much 'f-ck the US' until Bush came in to office and told the entire world to "f-ck off'.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
seinfeldrules said:
Because the US causes a lot of problems in the world, much more than most countries. Often such actions lead to people being starved, and from there these people celebrate when Americans die.
"Why don't we take all that money we spend on defense and spend on feeding, clothing, and educating the world, which it would, many times over, not a single person excluded."
Bill Hicks, RIP
Over the top, but raises a good point
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
Red flag comes flying in. False statement. The number hasnt reached anywhere near that. Dont bother quoting that tried and disproved figure of 100,000. How about shame on the world for allowing Saddam to commit mass genocide and torture an entire country. How about shame on Saddam for squandering 12 billion dollars in aid money.
Then you werent watching. People were celebrating in the streets after 9/11. Did Bush cause that much hatred less than a year after he gained office? Did Bush cause the attacks on American civilians years before he gained office? Come on now, blaming Bush for anti-Americanism a preposterous statement.
Absinthe
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2004
- Messages
- 14,037
- Reaction score
- 30
seinfeldrules said:
How about shame on the United States for sitting by idly back in the day and even having the gall to do business with him. :shock:
Yeah, some people were dancing in the streets. On the other hand, you managed to inspire sympathy from many other nations. And then, with a few quick and decisive movements... Pfft. All gone.
No Limit
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 9,018
- Reaction score
- 1
I'm not going to argue how many civillians died for 3 pages as nobody knows, however, a very fair and well documented estimate is around 100,000. That doesn't matter, even if as little as 25,000 died I would still consider it an evil act.
Shame on the US too as they let him do this just as much as the rest of the world.
A couple hundred people in a 3rd world country celebrating in the streets isn't comparable to the millions that have protested the US since Bush told the world to f-ck off.
seinfeldrules
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2003
- Messages
- 3,385
- Reaction score
- 0
But when do something about it, shame on us again? Wow, quite a contradiction here.
There were plenty of anti-US rallies before Bush took office. It would be like blaming the USS Cole on Bill Clinton. Ever since the USSR fell, the world has become smaller and smaller for the US of A. People love beating up on the guy at the top.
No Limit
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 9,018
- Reaction score
- 1
When do something about it? That is a great question and it is the question the world community was about to solve before Bush got inpatient. You must be forgetting the fact the UN had inspectors on the ground the week Bush went in to war.
So you don't think Bush saying f-ck the world and going in to Iraq alone (after the world started to support as after 9/11) hurt our image around the world?
Absinthe
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2004
- Messages
- 14,037
- Reaction score
- 30
seinfeldrules said:
Again, the misconceptions.
I don't have a problem with the idea of ousting Saddam from power. I do have a problem with being lied to. I do have a problem with sending American troops to die for bullshit causes. I do have a problem with launching into a war with Iraq right after invading Afghanistan, and my fear of Bush's foreign policy has grown when we're apparently going to pick a fight with Iran and Syria. I do have a problem with incompetency when it comes to handling Iraq. I do have a problem with needless civilian casualties. I do have a problem with the president declaring "Mission Accomplished" only to lose even more soldiers afterwards. I do have a problem with torture which, goes hand in hand with hypocrisy when put in the Iraq context. In fact, I think I have a problem with nearly every aspect with the way the war and the restructuring have been handled. The idea of deposing a tyrannical dictator has become ****ed in the ass and entangled with so many needless complications that the situation in Iraq has become one giant cluster **** that will require a lengthy US occupation.
Daddy Bush didn't finish the job.
So Bush Jr. tries to fill Papa's shoes and ****s everything up.
