Open letter to all the Bush haters.

[OzmO]

take the blinders off. every intelligence agency in the world believed he was up to no good. was it good info, no. was it the right decision with that info? yes
would bush or the senate do the same thing with the info we have now? no

EVERY?  How many leaders are up to no good now?  should we just arbitrarily invade them too?

Open you eyes!  they had the perfect excuse to go grab the oil and take control of it and establish a military presense in the area. 

They didn;t go in for the reasons you specified:  Iraq was a danger to the USA.  At the time Iran and N. Korea were more of a danger. 

[headhuntersix]

The United States had plans for war prior to march 03. They were clearly out to invade, despite knowing he had nothing. Those who called Bush out and questioned the invasion (Annan, France) were ridiculed right away. Looking back, France and Kofi Annan were RIGHT.

Fact is that Bush was openly pushing for war and he conned the American people into supporting his bullshit.

France continually tries to recapture former colonial glory so any time it can project the polar opposite postion of the US it will try. Their military is worthless so they would be of no help. As for Kofi Annan and the UN......

[Eyeball Chambers]

France continually tries to recapture former colonial glory so any time it can project the polar opposite postion of the US it will try. Their military is worthless so they would be of no help. As for Kofi Annan and the UN......

 

[mightymouse72]

the real threat was ( and more so now)  N. Korea and Iran becuase knew then that they were short years away from Nukes.  Now becuase we are so strung out we do not have the resources to fight another conflict as large as Iran or N. Korea.

saddam was a threat.  i said before, there were and still are other threats and you can debate this all day, but we chose to take iraq.  as history would tell us, saddam had more hatred toward the US than NK or Iran. 

  We caused this.   We allowed it to happen becuase the American poeple were sold a bull shit bill of goods planned by idiots like Rumsfield who didn;t even have the wisdom to do the right amount of research before they created a living hell in iraq.

Fucking brilliant of them and you run around saying shit like we won?  Priceless!

are you an american?  do you constantly bad mouth the US?  can you not see that the US has tried to do the right thing.  did we create the war? no.  saddam did.  we told him to comply. and yes, 17 times you break an international law and something needs to be done.  how many times would let a child break a rule and not punish him.  have a backbone man.  are we continually killing innocent people now.  no.  i never said this was planned right.  name me any war or conflict where there were no mistakes.  for you to say we are causing all the innocent killing is the same as you defending the bombers and terrorist.  why would you do that.  why don't you get on our side for once and stop defending them.   maybe if they stop, we can come home.  do changes need to be made?  yes.  i'm glad rummy is gone.

of course you said you were against it, you knew what was going to happen.

[240 is Back]

saddam was a threat.  i said before, there were and still are other threats and you can debate this all day, but we chose to take iraq.  as history would tell us, saddam had more hatred toward the US than NK or Iran. 

Um, the president of Greenland might have more "hatred" for us than anyone else in the world.  It's capability to attack - which NK obviously has far greater capacity than Iraq.  Just because "sadaam had more hatred"... um, who gives a shit if a leader doesn't like us?  If he had no WMD (besides that 80s crap buried), and he hadn't attacked us, why the heck did we take on them before North Korea, who 1) has nukes, and 2) FIRES MISSILES AT US?

Why are people so blind?  NK fired missiles at hawaii on the 4th of July.  Yet you want a 3rd war in the middle east against a nation which hasn't attacked us.  Incredible.


*And no- afghanistan didn't attack us - Taliban warned us about 9/11 and offered up bin laden.  We wanted war instead.

[muscleforlife]

This is always a hot debate.

I don't hate Bush, I don't agree with his policies.  That doesn't mean I hate him.

I think he isn't Presidential material.  But he is the Prez, end of that story.
Is he better than Kerry would've been?  Who knows, We can only speculate as to what another person would do in the Oval office.

As stated by others, there are other countries that hate us more than Iraq.  Iran is a country of religious fanatics.
Now Bush is globetrotting to get some of these countries that hate us to figure out a solution to the mess in Iraq.

He is looking for a solution to the problem by talking to others.  You can teach old dogs new tricks.
The generals on the field seem to want more  people to train the Iraqi army, not more troops to kill, kill, kill.
Obviously, what has been going on in Iraq is not working and Bush has to change the plan.

Working on getting troop withdrawal after all of this time.  Would that be considered "cutting and running"?
I do believe that is what the warmongers always said whenever anyone mentioned getting out of Iraq.

sidebar:  Word on the street is there is a book coming out about the rocky Bush marriage, his drinking binges in the whitehouse and his having the hots for Condi rice.
Sandra

[ieffinhatecardio]

This is always a hot debate.

I don't hate Bush, I don't agree with his policies.  That doesn't mean I hate him.

I think he isn't Presidential material.  But he is the Prez, end of that story.
Is he better than Kerry would've been?  Who knows, We can only speculate as to what another person would do in the Oval office.

As stated by others, there are other countries that hate us more than Iraq.  Iran is a country of religious fanatics.
Now Bush is globetrotting to get some of these countries that hate us to figure out a solution to the mess in Iraq.

He is looking for a solution to the problem by talking to others.  You can teach old dogs new tricks.
The generals on the field seem to want more  people to train the Iraqi army, not more troops to kill, kill, kill.
Obviously, what has been going on in Iraq is not working and Bush has to change the plan.

Working on getting troop withdrawal after all of this time.  Would that be considered "cutting and running"?
I do believe that is what the warmongers always said whenever anyone mentioned getting out of Iraq.

sidebar:  Word on the street is there is a book coming out about the rocky Bush marriage, his drinking binges in the whitehouse and his having the hots for Condi rice.
Sandra

Wow, that's a hell of a sidebar. I didn't need to know about his hots for Rice. Yikes.

[Camel Jockey]

are you an american?  do you constantly bad mouth the US?  can you not see that the US has tried to do the right thing.  did we create the war? no.  saddam did.  we told him to comply. and yes, 17 times you break an international law and something needs to be done.  how many times would let a child break a rule and not punish him.  have a backbone man.  are we continually killing innocent people now.  no.  i never said this was planned right.  name me any war or conflict where there were no mistakes.  for you to say we are causing all the innocent killing is the same as you defending the bombers and terrorist.  why would you do that.  why don't you get on our side for once and stop defending them.   maybe if they stop, we can come home.  do changes need to be made?  yes.  i'm glad rummy is gone.

of course you said you were against it, you knew what was going to happen.

He didn't have much hate when we sold him those chemical weapons so he could gas his own people. We only singled him out at a badguy when he threatened our oil interests by invading Kuwait.

Saddam could have kissed the ass of Bush and still it wouldn't have mattered considering the fact that the US was openly out for war. Hell, they conned the American people into supporting the war via the faulty intelligence reports.

People like you are beyond stupid. You must admit 1) Iraq was a huge mistake
Don't give a half-assedly reply say we are doing it wrong. Bottom line is that Iraq was a HUGE MISTAKE.

[Straw Man]

If Bush committed an impeachable offense then he should be impeached.   No one's "opinion" matters. 

The Republican controlled congress refused to do their job and so there have been no investigations (for perspective - the Republican controlled congress held ~ 100 hours of hearings on the Clinton administrations alleged abuse of the White House Christmas List). 

The 110th Congress will do oversight (hopefully) and if crimes were committed then he should be impeached. 

[OzmO]

saddam was a threat.  i said before, there were and still are other threats and you can debate this all day, but we chose to take iraq.  as history would tell us, saddam had more hatred toward the US than NK or Iran. 

Are you so simple that you think Saddam's motivations were pure hatred?  Saddam motivations were power and money.  He wanted to keep his power and money.  He only had a problem with the US because we partially controlled his power and money by not letting him project power economically/militarily outside of Iraq.   World politics is not like the play ground, MM.  You don't have people that "hate" you so that you have to pick a fight with them before they do.  Saddam was interested in one thing:  Keeping his power.  Any idiot including Saddam knew in order to do that he'd have to NOT f**k with the US. 

But this may be way to complex for you to comprehend outside your playground mentality.

are you an American?  do you constantly bad mouth the US?

YES.   

NO.  And i don't hide my head in the sand or stop using my brain.  I speak out.  It's my right.  It's your right too.

can you not see that the US has tried to do the right thing.  did we create the war? no.  saddam did.  we told him to comply. and yes, 17 times you break an international law and something needs to be done.  how many times would let a child break a rule and not punish him.  have a backbone man.   

You are priceless!  You are more brainwashed than most of the neo-cons on this board.  You make this fun.

WE INVADED A COUNTRY UNPRVOKED!   IRAQ DID NOT ATTACK THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.   

17 times they broke UN laws....DID THE UN BACK THIS INVASION?    FUCKING NO.

and guess what:  Iraq isn't our child.  it's  country.....  (more of your play ground mentality)

no.  i never said this was planned right.  name me any war or conflict where there were no mistakes.  for you to say we are causing all the innocent killing is the same as you defending the bombers and terrorist.  why would you do that.  why don't you get on our side for once and stop defending them.   maybe if they stop, we can come home.  do changes need to be made?  yes.  I'm glad rummy is gone.
.

You think that because I'm against the iraq war that I'm defending bombers and terrorist? 

How fucking stupid are you?

I'm not saying we caused the innocent killing..............I'm saying we caused this mess.

Classic,  uneducated, brainwashed, drone to think that some who is against this war is for the terrorist.  You'd make a good candidate for a cult.

Get out of the play ground and join the real world.

of course you said you were against it, you knew what was going to happen.

I was against it before it happen.  I have friends in the military who told me it looked as though we going in there months before we did.  I was against it then because i think America isn't about attacking first.  (although we have in the past)

I had no idea this current mess would have happened until the looting started after we took bagdad.  then i found out about how many troops we had used there and knew it was a fucking stupid mistake by BUSH to allow us to invaded a country with out enough troops to keep order.

[Dos Equis]

If Bush committed an impeachable offense then he should be impeached.   No one's "opinion" matters. 

The Republican controlled congress refused to do their job and so there have been no investigations (for perspective - the Republican controlled congress held ~ 100 hours of hearings on the Clinton administrations alleged abuse of the White House Christmas List). 

The 110th Congress will do oversight (hopefully) and if crimes were committed then he should be impeached. 

I suspect "impeachment" will be reserved to internet message boards and outgoing kooky members of Congress. 

[Straw Man]

I suspect "impeachment" will be reserved to internet message boards and outgoing kooky members of Congress. 

by "impeachment" I"m guessing you mean talk of impeachment.   Actual impeachment proceedings will only take place in Congress (first) and then the Senate.   My suspicion is that the whole tenor will change once the 110 congress starts investigating Bush.

[Dos Equis]

by "impeachment" I"m guessing you mean talk of impeachment.   Actual impeachment proceedings will only take place in Congress (first) and then the Senate.   My suspicion is that the whole tenor will change once the 110 congress starts investigating Bush.

I mean talk of impeachment and actual impeachment proceedings.  The whole idea is silly.

[Straw Man]

No investigations have been done and actual impeachment proceedings haven't been started - how can you conclude that the idea is silly?   If there is evidence of a crime that is an impeachable offense then he should be impeached. 

[Dos Equis]

No investigations have been done and actual impeachment proceedings haven't been started - how can you conclude that the idea is silly?   If there is evidence of a crime that is an impeachable offense then he should be impeached. 

It's silly because Bush hasn't committed any crimes.  Absurd.  We tried that nonsense with Clinton.  I think Congress learned its lesson.  There won't be any witch hunts in the next two years.  The Dems cannot afford to make fools of themselves with a wide open presidential election less than two years away. 

But we can still talk about it on this message board.   

[Straw Man]

"It's silly because Bush hasn't committed any crimes"

How do we know that?  There's been no oversight.

[Dos Equis]

"It's silly because Bush hasn't committed any crimes"

How do we know that?  There's been no oversight.

They are not going to have a committee go on a fishing expedition looking for possible "crimes" committed by Bush. 

Most of the people who talk about impeachment refer to the war.  There will be no impeachment over the war.  No laws were broken and there were too many Democrats involved. 

[Straw Man]

sounds like you've done your own investigation - shouldn't we let Congress do one now.

[Dos Equis]

sounds like you've done your own investigation - shouldn't we let Congress do one now.

No.  See my prior posts. 

[Straw Man]

No.  See my prior posts. 

As you've said - on the internet it's all talk

Congress' job is oversight and regardless of our various points of view - oversight is coming .... or not.  I don't have a lot of faith in Democrats either quite frankly.   

[muscleforlife]

Actually,
There is a Rep.  Henry Waxman out of Los Angeles who has been investigating different things in this administration for the last 6 years. 
Now that the dems are back in the house, he will have more leeway.  Some of the things he is credited for investigating are steroids in baseball, abuse at Abu Gharaib, contracts given to halliburton, etc.(NJ star ledger)

So, things will be interesting as time goes on.
Sandra

[Straw Man]

John Dingell is another one to watch.  From Wikipedia:

During his first stint as chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Dingell was regarded by analysts as one of the four or five most powerful members of the House.

Dingell was well known, and often feared, for his vigorous approach to oversight. He hung a portrait of the Earth near his committee's hearing room, and pointed to it when asked about his committee's jurisdiction. He subpoenaed numerous high government officials to testify before the committee and grilled them for hours. He insisted that anyone testifying before his committee do so under oath, thus exposing them to perjury charges if they didn't tell the truth. His committee uncovered numerous instances of corruption and waste, such as the use of $600 toilet seats at the Pentagon. Dingell takes credit for forcing the resignations of many Food and Drug Administration officials, and sending many Environmental Protection Agency officials to jail.

After serving as the committee's ranking Democrat for 12 years, Dingell is poised to regain the chairmanship. He told Newsweek that he wants to investigate the Bush Administration's handling of port security, the Medicare prescription drug program and Dick Cheney's energy task force. [3]
link to Newsweek article:  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15365610/site/newsweek/

[OzmO]

If they get some good solid dirt on BUSH maybe they will try to impeach.  I just don't they will be able to in time before he leaves office.

[Dos Equis]

Actually,
There is a Rep.  Henry Waxman out of Los Angeles who has been investigating different things in this administration for the last 6 years. 
Now that the dems are back in the house, he will have more leeway.  Some of the things he is credited for investigating are steroids in baseball, abuse at Abu Gharaib, contracts given to halliburton, etc.(NJ star ledger)

So, things will be interesting as time goes on.
Sandra

I like what Waxman did to the tobacco company chiefs, but other than that he isn't all that useful. 

[Straw Man]

Steroids in professional sports?

Who'da Thunk It

what a colossal f'ng waste of time and money

Then again, I guess there was nothing else going on at the time that needed their attention