President Bush must have failed math

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by demonsvx

I see I have opened up a whole can of worms I think our country has lost its "checks and balances" system due to fear and corruption. Anyone care to give me a absolute reason we went to Iraq? WMD's Saddam etc in my opinion were not a viable threat to the U.S. I DO think North Korea and Iran will be future issues with America. Also what is Bush doing about our border with Mexico,nothing. Any terrorist can fly into Mexico and run across the border with a good chance of NOT getting caught. Tell me if I am wrong but I think Bush's policies are vague and indecisive.

Why Iraq?
Well, the reason wasn't WMD's. That one fell through before we even got there. The UN watch guys told us that before we dropped the first bomb.

It wasn't to stop terrorism. Al-qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before we got there, and Saddam was secular and didn't trust religious zealots. So thats out.

It wasn't to set up a democracy, since the two major parties are based solely on religion. Bush made it clear prior to his inauguration he was against nation building, and never even mentioned the word democracy prior to his mission accomplished bumble.

So it's either money:
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/news/stock_troop2.html

Or they like dead Iraqis:
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

Or they like dead Americans:
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/ira...es/casualties/

These are the only hard facts we have. There are no hard facts for any other reasons.

I go with Haliburton.... That one makes sense.

[demonsvx]

Oh I thought America was running low on SAND

[Noir]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

Why Iraq?
Well, the reason wasn't WMD's. That one fell through before we even got there. The UN watch guys told us that before we dropped the first bomb.

It wasn't to stop terrorism. Al-qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before we got there, and Saddam was secular and didn't trust religious zealots. So thats out.

It wasn't to set up a democracy, since the two major parties are based solely on religion. Bush made it clear prior to his inauguration he was against nation building, and never even mentioned the word democracy prior to his mission accomplished bumble.

So it's either money:
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/news/stock_troop2.html

Or they like dead Iraqis:
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

Or they like dead Americans:
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/ira...es/casualties/

These are the only hard facts we have. There are no hard facts for any other reasons.

I go with Haliburton.... That one makes sense.

You're wrong. We went to Iraq because Saddam was the anti-Christ. There's still WMD's in Iraq. It's probably buried somewhere in teh desert.

I tell you Robert, the Iraqi people <plays music>were sending out a SOS.</plays music>

We saved so many people by going over there. Thousands, millions, maybe billions!!!!!

We brought water to the deserts. We brought peace to their troubled villages. We brought milkshakes and french fries to the hungry children.

Iraq's a better place now that we're there!!!!

We should nominate Bush for sainthood!

We, my friend, are heroes!

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by Noir

You're wrong. We went to Iraq because Saddam was the anti-Christ. There's still WMD's in Iraq. It's probably buried somewhere in teh desert.

I tell you Robert, the Iraqi people <plays music>were sending out a SOS.</plays music>

We saved so many people by going over there. Thousands, millions, maybe billions!!!!!

We brought water to the deserts. We brought peace to their troubled villages. We brought milkshakes and french fries to the hungry children.

Iraq's a better place now that we're there!!!!

We should nominate Bush for sainthood!

We, my friend, are heroes!

I'm laughing so hard, my throat is starting to hurt.

I guess I stand corrected.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

Why Iraq?
Well, the reason wasn't WMD's. That one fell through before we even got there. The UN watch guys told us that before we dropped the first bomb.

It wasn't to stop terrorism. Al-qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before we got there, and Saddam was secular and didn't trust religious zealots. So thats out.

It wasn't to set up a democracy, since the two major parties are based solely on religion. Bush made it clear prior to his inauguration he was against nation building, and never even mentioned the word democracy prior to his mission accomplished bumble.

As usual, your time line is inaccurate and much of your information incorrect. At the onset of the war it was still widely believed that there were WMDs in Iraq. The troops wore chemical gear throughout the assault and that is like wearing insulated overalls in 100+ degree weather. Initial findings of Iraqi chemical protective gear in forward postions further reenforced the likelihood of at least chemical weapons.

Zarqawi (sp?) was already in Iraq and there was at least one terrorist training camp in Eastern Iraq. While direct links to Al Qaeda were never alleged by Bush--open and wide support for terrorist organizations was clear and evident. If Saddam did not trust terrorists, why did provide suicide bombers families with significant monetary rewards.

On the other issue above--late term abortions ARE being performed on a voluntary basis.

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

[lhopp77]

Noir--I am also laughing but there may be more truth in that than you suspect or intended.

Lee

[Noir]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

At the onset of the war it was still widely believed that there were WMDs in Iraq. The troops wore chemical gear throughout the assault and that is like wearing insulated overalls in 100+ degree weather. Initial findings of Iraqi chemical protective gear in forward postions further reenforced the likelihood of at least chemical weapons.

check. a friend of mine was in one such unit. hearing the stories and seeing the battle scars does make one think twice.

Originally Posted by lhopp77

While direct links to Al Qaeda were never alleged by Bush--open and wide support for terrorist organizations was clear and evident. If Saddam did not trust terrorists, why did provide suicide bombers families with significant monetary rewards.

that's funny. i thought that there was quite a few ME countries that also offered 'open and wide support for terrorist organizations'.

we really need to wrap up this Iraqi business so that we can go flatten the rest of these clear and evident supporters!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by ihopp77

Noir--I am also laughing but there may be more truth in that than you suspect or intended.

Lee

don't worry, what you suspected and intended was already factored in.

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

As usual, your time line is inaccurate and much of your information incorrect. At the onset of the war it was still widely believed that there were WMDs in Iraq. The troops wore chemical gear throughout the assault and that is like wearing insulated overalls in 100+ degree weather. Initial findings of Iraqi chemical protective gear in forward postions further reenforced the likelihood of at least chemical weapons.

Zarqawi (sp?) was already in Iraq and there was at least one terrorist training camp in Eastern Iraq. While direct links to Al Qaeda were never alleged by Bush--open and wide support for terrorist organizations was clear and evident. If Saddam did not trust terrorists, why did provide suicide bombers families with significant monetary rewards.

On the other issue above--late term abortions ARE being performed on a voluntary basis.

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

At the onset of the war, there was absolutely, positively, no evidence of WMD's anywhere in the country. The UN inspectors had found absolutely nothing. Before we get into the "Saddam" refused at the end and threw out the inspectors", remember why. They had searched everywhere but his main palace, and he refused to allow them to invade his home. His argument was "I have allowed full access, but I will not allow the invasion of my home." He finally gave in and allowed them to search his home.

The Bush administration had nothing. Just one thing.... You cannot prove that something does not exist. That's what they used to their advantage.

Remember..... the final ultimatum given by Bush wasn't "Allow the UN to search or we will invade." The UN was there, and told to leave by our administration. Bush's last ultimatum was "Step down and Leave Iraq, or we will invade."

All they had was a bunch of aluminum tubes that was PROVEN unsuitable for nuclear use by both UN and US experts.

There was absolutely no proof. Come on, Lhopp. Your memory is not that short. Unless you rely solely on the Spears doctrine.

We also wore chemical gear. Did we use chemical weapons? Of course not, because it's standard issue for every military in our world.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is Jordanian and is from a very prominent family. He was disowned by his family and exiled from Jordan years ago. He is wanted for capital murder there, and escaped to Syria. He migrated from Syria to Iraq after the war began. He founded Al-Qaeda of Iraq 18 months after the invasion. It never existed and would not have been tolerated by the secular Saddam. Saddam was very careful to avoid religion in his government beyond daily prayer. He is from the minority religion in Iraq. Come on... think about it. To say what you say would have caused him to lose power in a religious coup decades ago. He ran things strictly secular.

There is no proof anywhere that Saddam funded suicide bombers. He did not encourage that behavior due to it might,,,correction,,, absolutely would happen to him. He was a sympathetic supporter to the Palestinian movement, as the majority of ME leaders happen to be, but after a careful review of all financial records by our CIA, there is no indication he contributed directly to any of the suicide bomber funds.

3rd term voluntary abortions are easy to . Try it to get yourself the correct answer, and quit relying on propaganda from Fox news. Try a different channel occasionally.

[Electrophil]

After re-reading my last post, I need to further clarify a point.

There were absolutely no terrorist organizations operating in Iraq. Islamic Terrorist organizations are without fail based on religion. Saddam would immediately crush any upspings in his territory. Not due to some moral belief, but for his own survival. Logic.... Just pure logic is needed to understand any terrorist organization would be a threat to his party, and he would crush them at the onset. He saw terrorist organizations, such as Al-Qaeda, as a politcal activist group with big guns.

All those stupid propaganda points of terrorists meeting with Saddam have all been proven untrue.

What happened to the Logic of the republican party? It's still there. They are just relying on ignorance to further their own objectives. And wow! Did they ever succeed.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

We also wore chemical gear. Did we use chemical weapons? Of course not, because it's standard issue for every military in our world.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is Jordanian and is from a very prominent family. He was disowned by his family and exiled from Jordan years ago. He is wanted for capital murder there, and escaped to Syria. He migrated from Syria to Iraq after the war began. He founded Al-Qaeda of Iraq 18 months after the invasion. It never existed and would not have been tolerated by the secular Saddam. Saddam was very careful to avoid religion in his government beyond daily prayer. He is from the minority religion in Iraq. Come on... think about it. To say what you say would have caused him to lose power in a religious coup decades ago. He ran things strictly secular.

There is no proof anywhere that Saddam funded suicide bombers. He did not encourage that behavior due to it might,,,correction,,, absolutely would happen to him. He was a sympathetic supporter to the Palestinian movement, as the majority of ME leaders happen to be, but after a careful review of all financial records by our CIA, there is no indication he contributed directly to any of the suicide bomber funds.

3rd term voluntary abortions are easy to . Try it to get yourself the correct answer, and quit relying on propaganda from Fox news. Try a different channel occasionally.

Of course WE wore chemical suits--that is what I said. And yes it is standard ISSUE equipment to US troops, BUT it is NOT WORN unless there is strong reason to believe that it is needed. You never saw our soldiers in Afganistan wearing the gear.

As to Zarqawi I will bow to this unslanted information which is slightly different from your recollection.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3483089.stm

And I did not say that Saddam FUNDED suicide bombers. I said he REWARDED the suicide bomber families which is indirect support of terrorism.

If this was not a family site I would post pictures of late term (23 weeks and later) aborted fetuses with coroner affidavits of term. They are sickening and horrendous. You need to do that search you referred to and see that they are essentially voluntary with no real grounds for medical considerations of the mother.

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Of course WE wore chemical suits--that is what I said. And yes it is standard ISSUE equipment to US troops, BUT it is NOT WORN unless there is strong reason to believe that it is needed. You never saw our soldiers in Afganistan wearing the gear.

As to Zarqawi I will bow to this unslanted information which is slightly different from your recollection.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3483089.stm

And I did not say that Saddam FUNDED suicide bombers. I said he REWARDED the suicide bomber families which is indirect support of terrorism.

If this was not a family site I would post pictures of late term (23 weeks and later) aborted fetuses with coroner affidavits of term. They are sickening and horrendous. You need to do that search you referred to and see that they are essentially voluntary with no real grounds for medical considerations of the mother.

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

In my 20 years in the military, we always wore chemical gear. Regardless. If battlestations was sounded, we put on our masks, we tucked our pants into our socks, and buttoned our top shirt buttons. It's routine. Yes... they did the same in wartime situations in Afghanistan. Full chemical suits are issued during wartime.... to everyone.

I don't understand how what I said on Zarqawi was different that what I recollected. Just that he went to Afghanistan? Now he's in Iraq. Did you notice the rivalry part between Zarqawi and Usama? I guess the enemy of my enemy comes into play here. The most important point made on both what I said and what the article said is: Al-Qaeda in Iraq did not exist prior to our invasion. We caused the spread of terrorism by poking our nose where it didn't belong. It's undeniable things are a hundred fold worse now due to extremely bad decisions being made by this administration. They've bungled everything under the name of Haliburton.

3rd term abortions are sickening. no doubt. But they aren't voluntary, are extremely rare, and almost entirely due to medical reasons.

http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/definejm.htm

Full report from the Center for Disease Control:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5407a1.htm

(See graphs and detailed charts toward bottom.)

[Electrophil]

So you won't have to read a bunch:

Direct cut and paste quote from article:

Quote:

These are our most difficult problems. Thankfully, they are rare. The Guttmacher Institute and the CDC estimate only about 100 3rd trimester abortions are done in the United States per year. In 1991, we performed 65. All 3rd trimester abortions are, of course, non-elective.

Unquote:

And you are right, I don't want to see a picture of one of these hundred.
It would only serve as propaganda for a non-issue created to sidestep the actual loss of freedoms our citizens would endure with a ban on abortion.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

In my 20 years in the military...... If battlestations was sounded

Do I detect boats in your background in your military experience?

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Do I detect boats in your background in your military experience?

Lee

Freedom is NOT Free

Yeah. Have I ticked you off yet? I'm trying awfully darned hard here.

[demonsvx]

Ive never been in the military other than ROTC but STRONGLY support our troops. I understand Bush's lopsided budget primarily because war is expensive, but with Iraq it seems to be a waste especially on the human factor. Rumors of a 2007 withdraw would place the U.S. in a difficult situation as another year of American soldiers and Iraqis would be killed. What is our final objective? 5000 dead Americans 30-60k Iraqis for what? Iraq is a lost cause, bring our troops home and let THEM figure it out. Have you ever asked yourself why Middle Eastern countries hate the U.S.? Its because America tries to "guide"these countries for the better and they dont like it. Why is the U.S. doing nothing about the border? because they want terrorists to come into our country to have a reason to go to their homeland and destroy it.