Author Topic: Video : Gore criticizes Bush for ignoring Iraq's ties to terrorism ! !  (Read 2945 times)

Eyeball Chambers

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14344
  • Would you hold still? You're making me fuck up...
1. This isn't even remotly in the realm of a conventional war, so that comparison cannot be made. When will people realize this? Beside, it was obvious that Roosevelt wasn't a pacifist.

2. You didn't answer my question.

I'd prefer a Traditional Conservative (Non neocon), I have a question for you.

In your opinion is Bush a Traditional Conservative?
S

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
OH HELL NO..he's not even a republican..he's puppet.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
1. This isn't even remotly in the realm of a conventional war, so that comparison cannot be made. When will people realize this? Beside, it was obvious that Roosevelt wasn't a pacifist.

2. You didn't answer my question.
What does pacifism have to do with a liberal president?

It would seem that you are confusing two different concepts.

You say this isn't "conventional warfare so a comparison cannot be made"?  Nonsense.  Leadership and ability will always shine through.  That's why Bush is such a failure and FDR was such a success in their handling of the respective military conflicts.

There is no war on terror in Iraq.  Does that help?  The US attacked Iraq.  Iraqis are fighting back.  That's not a war.  That's a mafia hit.

Let's get a little closer to concrete reality and away from speculation about a nameless liberal president and how he/she would handle the current military conflict.

It was Bush that created the Iraq quagmire.  He's mismanaged it to the tune of Tens of thousands of people dead and billions of dollars wasted and there is no end or victory in sight.

We know that as a fact.

Just what exactly are you arguing on this topic?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
"Lib" is used as a pejorative by neocons.

It's a simplistic way to view the world

Everything "Lib" is bad - that goes without saying

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Yeah it is..libs are a cancer which needs to be crushed..the neocons will fade after 8 years of proof that their world view is to extreme.
L

The Coach

  • Guest
What does pacifism have to do with a liberal president?

With the protection of our country, it has EVERYTHING to do with it, simply put, Libs want to cut and run, give drivers licenses' to illegals (no questions asked), threaten to cut off funds in the middle of a war, "talk" to the enemy as if they can be reasoned with after blowing up two of our towers and murdering over 3000 innocent people, "talk" to that Iranian midget while he's giving arms and supplies to the insurgents to kill OUR troops, dude, I can go on for days with these anologies.

It would seem that you are confusing two different concepts.

You say this isn't "conventional warfare so a comparison cannot be made"?  Nonsense.  Leadership and ability will always shine through.  That's why Bush is such a failure and FDR was such a success in their handling of the respective military conflicts.

Nonsense????? are you freaking serious?? In war there are rules of engagment, these cowards play by no rules, they use women and children to do their dirty work, you don't who the enemy is......is it a man, women or child?

There is no war on terror in Iraq.  Does that help?  The US attacked Iraq.  Iraqis are fighting back.  That's not a war.  That's a mafia hit.

There is no war on terror?? Sorry, but you've been clearly brainwashed and that naive statement pisses me off more than anything, it's already been proven that Iraq was giving safe haven for al quada and proving training camps just outside of Baghdad, Bush made it clear in a speech right after 9/11 that we would go after anyone that had anything to do with terrorism and that went for harboring the terrorists, Huissan clearly did that!!



Let's get a little closer to concrete reality and away from speculation about a nameless liberal president and how he/she would handle the current military conflict.

It was Bush that created the Iraq quagmire.  He's mismanaged it to the tune of Tens of thousands of people dead and billions of dollars wasted and there is no end or victory in sight.

We know that as a fact.

Just what exactly are you arguing on this topic?

This post alone proves to me that most Liberals are terrorist sympathizers and have no reguard for the protection of the country...and just to make it clear........I meant OUR country!!

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
This post alone proves to me that most Liberals are terrorist sympathizers and have no reguard for the protection of the country...and just to make it clear........I meant OUR country!!
Not to be insulting but where are you pulling this idea that ‘liberal’ = ‘pacifist’.  I have an idea but I want to hear it from you.  As for your other points:  The Iraq war has little to do with battling terrorism effectively—since the war's inception, worldwide terrorism has grown exponentially.  Unless Bush is using reverse psychology for battling terrorism.

Score 1 for the liberals. 

Before going off on a tirade over soft treatment of illegals, I suggest you look at Pres. Bush’s plan for granting all illegals in this country AMNESTY. 

If the Reagan could negotiate with the Soviet Union, we can do it with anyone.  We’ve negotiated w/ Iran before and we can do it again.  Boy, somebody threatens violence to our troops and you practically piss your pants.  See, this is where calm, cool and competent people take over (or should take over)….Frankly Bush’s effort to scare the shit out of the American public in the run up to the illegal invasion still pisses me off.

You were offering examples and not analogies. 

The use of unconventional tactics by the enemy only underscores the brutal folly of the US using military troops to achieve what is and always has been a non-military problem.  Thank you for making my point.

There is no war on terror in Iraq.  Al Qaeda was never in league with Hussein in Iraq.  There are countless resources that verify that.  Just b/c you wish it to be doesn't make it so.

Bush wants to go after terrorism all over the world.  Well I want everyone to have $1000 in their pockets and smiles on their faces.  IF you want to fall for such bullshit nonsensical ravings, go ahead.  That's like wiping evil off the face of the earth.  That's for children.

If you're serious about going after all countries that have supported terrorists, here's a partial list:

The USA,
Israel
Palestine,
Viet Nam,
China,
Iran,
Sudan,
Syria,
Nicaragua,
North Korea,
Libya,
Pakistan,
India,
East Timor,
Egypt,
any of the "stans" really

You get the idea don't you?

The Iraq fiasco is fueling the spread of terrorism not reducing it.  Show me I'm wrong and I'll admit it.

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
With the protection of our country, it has EVERYTHING to do with it, simply put, Libs want to cut and run, give drivers licenses' to illegals (no questions asked), threaten to cut off funds in the middle of a war, "talk" to the enemy as if they can be reasoned with after blowing up two of our towers and murdering over 3000 innocent people, "talk" to that Iranian midget while he's giving arms and supplies to the insurgents to kill OUR troops, dude, I can go on for days with these anologies.

Kind of like when a certain presidential grandfather funded the nazi's in their war machine against the allies?
Or how about when a certain ex president negotiated with the "enemy" to keep his nation's citizens hostages until such time that an inaugural ceremony could occur, ...while at the same time supplying arms and supplies in opposition to an international embargo, knowing these weapons would be used to kill their allies, ...and the proceeds from which would be used to finance terrorist groups in other parts of the world.

Quote
Nonsense? ??? ? are you freaking serious?? In war there are rules of engagment, these cowards play by no rules, they use women and children to do their dirty work, you don't who the enemy is......is it a man, women or child?

It is all of the above, ...but more specifically, it is the ignorant asses who through lies, spread paranoia, fear, and hatred, among the masses, to keep everybody "terrorized", ...and use those very same lies as justification to invoke actions to annihilate non-existent threats, ...and in the process create them. Got a mirror handy?

Quote
There is no war on terror?? Sorry, but you've been clearly brainwashed and that naive statement pisses me off more than anything, it's already been proven that Iraq was giving safe haven for al quada and proving training camps just outside of Baghdad, Bush made it clear in a speech right after 9/11 that we would go after anyone that had anything to do with terrorism and that went for harboring the terrorists, Huissan clearly did that!!

Hussain above all else wanted to stay in power. He was many things, and among those, was smart enough to know that opening his country to terrorists was a threat to his absolute rule, ...not because the US would oppose it, but because first and foremost it undermined the authority he would have in his own nation. This was someting he avoided. The evidence is clear, SH kept the terrorists out of Iraq. The areas he could not police however, were in the US imposed no-fly Kurdish regions. Terrorism that flourished in Iraq prior to the US led invasion, did so without the support of SH. That is a fact.

Quote
This post alone proves to me that most Liberals are terrorist sympathizers and have no reguard for the protection of the country...and just to make it clear........I meant OUR country!!

The above post is one of the biggest reasons why some people should NOT be allowed to vote, and should never be in a position to make decisions impacting on the lives of others.

That has got to be the scariest amount of tripe I've seen in a long time. Scary cause I believe I-One believes every word of it. Talk about brainwashed!  ::)

Goebbels sure knew what he was talking about didn't he?  Nostradamus pales in comparison.

Such hubris as we've seen from the white house, coupled with the support of the rampantly paranoid and woefully ignorant is a sure-recipe for worldwide disaster.

ps - when you give illegals driver's licences, you ensure they know the rules of the road, while at the same time,
...ensures you know who they are, ...as well as where they are. dah! pps - Never take up chess.
w

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
...The evidence is clear, SH kept the terrorists out of Iraq. The areas he could not police however, were in the US imposed no-fly Kurdish regions. Terrorism that flourished in Iraq prior to the US led invasion, did so without the support of SH. That is a fact...
This is a great point.  Chris Hitchens always defends the invasion on the grounds that Iraq was in league with Al Qaeda b/c there were terrorists in Iraq during Hussein's rule.  That type of disingenuous claim must be debunked b/c, like Hitchens, there are still apologists for the old worn lies of the Bush administration.  Vigilance is important here.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)

Hussain above all else wanted to stay in power. He was many things, and among those, was smart enough to know that opening his country to terrorists was a threat to his absolute rule, ...not because the US would oppose it, but because first and foremost it undermined the authority he would have in his own nation. This was someting he avoided. The evidence is clear, SH kept the terrorists out of Iraq. The areas he could not police however, were in the US imposed no-fly Kurdish regions. Terrorism that flourished in Iraq prior to the US led invasion, did so without the support of SH. That is a fact.


Or not.  http://www.husseinandterror.com/