O/T Can we talk?

[Chris Rizzo]

Bush presented the argument for war based on these points:

 

- Saddam had stockpiles of WMD

- Iraq was on the brink of nuclear capabilities

- Iraq was a haven for Al Queda

 

All of these facts have been proven wrong. Why can't you hold him responsible for what he said? What am I missing?

[Rekd™]

gcode, it's typical leftist ignorance.

 

They think people will forget what they said or what they believed last week, last month, last year etc.

 

What ever.

 

They also think they can dictate how others feel and how they believe. (for example, that I "so admire Bush", or that I have no "cards in my hand")

 

I can deal with liars. I can deal with hypocrytes. I can deal with stupidity.

 

Mark,

 

I don't want to insult you. I want to pity you. But I can't because you're a (supposedly) intelligent person, and yet you choose to stand behind those that believe that the rest of us will sit back while they continue to insult us with double-talk and lies. They continually dis-regard what they have said/written in the past, and support what works best for them at that particular time of the day, week, month or year.

 

To me that is just as bad as not being able to admit you made a mistake. I don't think taking out that ******* was wrong. I don't think freeing the Iraqi people was wrong. I don't think we went to war for oil, either. If we did, then Bush is more of a loser than you think; have you seen the price of gas lately?

 

Bottom line, I'm glad Bush was/is in office during these times of terrorists and dictators. I, for one, am not willing to sit by while others try to take my freedom, my family or my well being.

 

If that means taking out the trash, then so be it. ..

 

'Rekd

[gcode]

Mark,

I agree that Bush bears the ultimate responsiblity

for the war. However, a lot of Democrats are standing around pointing fingers acting like the war started in a vacumn. I can dredge up countless quotes from Democrats calling for action against Iraq for the last ten years.

It's hipocracy in its rankest form.

[Jimmy Wakeford from Barefoot CNC]

If Gore was in (shudder) the dem spin would be different.

 

The war was not over the things listed. Saddam was told to cooperate or get his a$$ kicked, he got his a$$ kicked, iraq is on its way to being free.

 

The joke is on the dems though cause I dont think kerry can make it to nov without withdrawing. Edwards would have been the better choice to run against Bush.

[Chris Rizzo]

Sure the world is a better place with Saddam in custody, Iraq "free", Middle East "safer", etc. etc. etc. Sure the U.S. is the almightly super power in the world. I don't think your going to find argument here.

 

Everyone seems to be missing the point though...

 

One cannot wage a war "because the world will be better without Mr. XXX". Fact is, we were sold on the war by our leader with his clearly defined reasons. Those reasons were found to be untrue. PERIOD.

 

Flag wave all you like, but we STARTED a war based on completly false and persuasively misleading information. PERIOD. Who's gave us those reasons?

 

Let's call a spade a spade here...beat up on the dems, Kerry, Clinton, and anyone else and their mother... but cut the crap and see the FACTS that BUSH LIED TO YOU, ME, AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

...Let's call a spade a spade here...beat up on the dems, Kerry, Clinton, and anyone else and their mother... but cut the crap and see the FACTS that BUSH LIED TO YOU, ME, AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE...

---

lie: A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.

 

You mean to tell me that at the time our soldiers first hit the ground Bush knew there were no WMD's? Is that what you're saying to us?

 

Also, as I stated earlier, Iraq is roughly the size of the state of Califorina (3rd largest state in the USA). How long do you think it would take to comb every inch of Iraq. You've seen the picture of the MIG [b}BURIED{/b] in the ground right? So you tell us that you KNOW FOR A FACT that no WMD's exist in that country anywhere, underground or otherwise?

[Jimmy Wakeford from Barefoot CNC]

Not to give too much of a clue here, but the "Mr. XX's" of the world are taken out all the time. Not with cnn taping it neither. This is done so we can sleep at night with no more to worry bout than if gays can legally be married.

 

If an injuneer draws a print wrong and you machine an incorrect prt to the incorrect print then who is at fault? Information is everything. The dems point is that saddam said he had none? and we should believe him? Lord forbid that we cant dial up terrist on phone and ask them if they are doing anything wrong.

 

"Hello, Saddam? Hi this is Kerry. Listen Bro, the intelligence were getting from our sats and from the ground out there kinda looks like you have wmds. No, I'm not acussing you, it just dont look good. Yeah, I know what you saw on cnn, but we actually have some new top secret spying stuuf that we cant show on cnn. Oh I didnnt know you had not seen it yet. Whats your email? I've got some cool pics, sorta star wars looking stuff here. Uh huh. Yes. Ok, I tell the americans that you dont have them nomore. I'll make sure to do it in front of the cameras.

 

On another note, can you still get any of that opium? Great! Just send it over with your diplomat."

[Rekd™]

quote:

---

FACTS that BUSH LIED TO YOU, ME, AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

---

 

'Rekd

[A-ron1286490684]

It’s good to hear everyone’s opinion on this matter and somehow I knew Mr. Lovelace couldn’t pass up the chance to respond. Good to hear from you Mark. And surprising enough I do agree with some of what you and Jack espouse. You both ask the questions that should be asked anytime we commit to fighting. It would be foolish not to. It’s just too bad it’s always when it’s politically convenient. Do you really, I mean really think Iraq was a total failure? And would the criteria for that judgment take on a whole new meaning if it were your guys running the show, as in the Balkans where ethnic skirmishes, rape and murder continue to this day? Yes we never did commit ground troops but people died, bombs were dropped, bridges and infrastructure were destroyed and it was war with no defined exit strategy. The ethnic cleansing argument worked fine then why not now? The point I never ever get a reply on is why the double standard? You’ve never replied to this question and nobody on the left will EVER, EVER, EVER, f#&%ing address this question. How can any of your guy’s arguments be considered credible when it morphs simultaneously with the change in leadership? Wasn’t Saddam the biggest weapon of mass destruction in the literal sense? And when Clinton dropped bombs in Iraq back in ’97 citing that they were stockpiling nerve agents and VX gas he seemed to get the free pass from the press and communist anti-American protest groups like Answer even though it was obvious the timing was very suspicious.

 

What about the eight years of lying, evading and bluffing the U.N.? Now if I were holed up in my house during a standoff with a history of previous violence and weapons use do you think it would be smart for the police not to operate on the assumption that I am armed to the teeth? And Mark you are mis-stating facts. Did you forget the Al Samoud missiles found at the beginning of the war that were modified to have enough range to reach Israel? I have issues with the cost of this war but in my opinion it was not a failure. And lets’ not forget how liberation plays such a role when it comes to the liberal doctrine. We lost Saudi Arabia as an ally the day 9/11 happened, if they ever really were. We needed a presence in the region and nestled right between Syria and Iran, lurked a tyrannical dictator and mass murderer named Saddam who happened to draw the Sh!t card in an American post 9/11 tarot session.

 

And although you Jack have quite an eloquent pen I think you are dead wrong about the debates. I’d love to see the very scenario you described but after all that went down there would be a curtain drop with a huge silver screen flipping through slides of Kerry with the N. Vietnamese flag behind him then him throwing SOMEONE ELSES’ medals on the white house lawn while his remained on his chest. Then they could zoom in on his chest revealing the Ho Chi Min medal of bravery. Then he could be left to explain why he has voted against every defense bill he ever saw and try to tie that into his record as a wartime leader… Yeah right!

[Rekd™]

quote:

---

The point I never ever get a reply on is why the double standard? You’ve never replied to this question and nobody on the left will EVER, EVER, EVER, f#&%ing address this question.

---

You never will. Ever.

 

That would mean admitting they're wrong, and we know that's not gonna happen unless they're forced to.

 

'Rekd

[mayday]

I dont like getting into politics but this stuff pisses me off

 

 

quote:

---

but he should at least have the guts, the courage, and the integrity to admit that the WMD, the nuclear capabilities, and the link to Al Queda were simply false.

---

so if you dont see the needle in the hay stack it just never existed right

 

at least the current admin dont let nobody pushem around. especialy the sorry arse media

[Jack Mitchell]

The scenario never seems to change.

Leak a little info to the press, follow it up with comments like were looking into the possibility that, follow it up with we believe we have some intelligence to support XXX, follow it up with we now know that YYY is being done by ZZZ, it’s how the Professionals work the media to influence me and you, Republican or Democrat.

I look upon the media spin of both major party’s like Wiley Coyote and Ralph the sheep dog standing at the time clock tree punching in every morning – going through hell all day long – then punching out while bidding each other good day & see you tomorrow.

 

I am little busy at the moment trying to string together a bunch of poor excuses might take a couple of days or weeks.

 

This discussion still remains a polite and interesting debate, at least in my humble opinion

 

 

Regards, Jack

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

At least Bush and the current Administration has the cajones to fight for what they think is right regardless of what some of the world thinks. True leadership is making tough decisions and standing by them.

 

Oh, I have a real lie for you libs...

"...I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." That's a real lie. It was deliberate, pre-meditated, full blown (literally) lie. I tell you what. For me, I would have fully respected Billary if he would have 'fessed up, admitted his failure and asked forgiveness. I woudl not have been happy with him or liked him, but I would have respected him admitting his humanity/frailty. But no, instead, we get a raging, defiant, treasonous(sp) coward. That was impeached and it shameful that we don't heve enough people of integrity in the Senate to see he shoudl have been removed from office. Nixon was guilty of FAR less than Billary.

[Rekd™]

quote:

---

quote:

---

The point I never ever get a reply on is why the double standard? You’ve never replied to this question and nobody on the left will EVER, EVER, EVER, f#&%ing address this question.

---

You never will. Ever.

 

That would mean admitting they're wrong, and we know that's not gonna happen unless they're forced to.

 

'Rekd

---

'Rekd

[gcode]

As the American political system negotiated its way through Richard Clarke Week, there is one overarching political lesson: The national media monolith manufactures the "news" any way it desires, a crude daily sculpting of political Silly Putty. It can make someone a household name. It can leave someone utterly unknown in Idaho.

 

Richard Clarke Week was the latest widget of propaganda from the liberal-media assembly line, designed with an extremely partisan purpose -- destroying whatever polling advantage George W. Bush enjoys on protecting the nation from terrorism.

 

Ask this question: If this previously obscure Richard Clarke had come out with a book in March of 2000 arguing that the Clinton administration was soft on terrorism, would he have received a similar parade of encomiums (and soon, honorariums)? Would his remarks have been received as a refreshingly independent voice raising serious questions that must be seriously answered by a negligent President Clinton?

 

Answer: No stinking way.

 

Why not? Because the liberal-media establishment, starting with the New York publishing houses and then trickling onward to the networks and national print kings, never had any interest in books that could prove damaging to President Clinton. Richard Clarke couldn’t count on "60 Minutes" or Simon & Schuster to make him a millionaire back then. (Simon & Schuster is well-known as the long-time publishing home of Hillary Clinton, as well as James Carville.)

 

Any Clinton administration insider who pondered a tell-all book knew that the probable reception at the end of the tunnel was at worst, complete obscurity with all your bridges burned. At best, you’d get a serious media beating as a disloyal snake, with all your bridges burned.

 

The exception to this rule was George Stephanopoulos, but he was far too famous to be relegated to obscurity when his memoir "All Too Human" came out in March of 1999. If his long stint as a paid liar for President Clinton hadn’t made him famous, ABC News certainly had already invested several years into making him "Objective" News Man. But he still was hammered as a disloyal fink. In her interview, Katie Couric suggested he was "creepy," a "Linda Tripp type," who was betraying those people who made him, which is "sorta gross."

 

A better example of the serious-media-beating principle is Gary Aldrich, the former FBI agent assigned to Clinton White House security, who wrote the best-selling book "Unlimited Access" for the conservative Regnery house. Aldrich received one TV interview on ABC’s "This Week," in which conservative George Will ripped him up one side and down the other. (The next segment was Clinton aide Stephanopoulos ripping the author up and down.) Intense White House pressure caused Aldrich to be dropped from scheduled bookings on ABC’s "Nightline," NBC’s "Dateline" and CNN’s "Larry King Live."

 

Showing he’s still good with a bald-faced lie, Stephanopoulos insisted on "Good Morning America" that no White House had never mobilized before Richard Clarke Week to challenge an author’s credibility with such intensity: "On a book? No, never. It’s never happened before." Shame on ABC for putting that ridiculous notion on the air without correction.

 

Let’s examine a more recent example of how a disloyal Democrat is received. In mid-October 2003, former Clinton HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo performed publicity for his new book "Crossroads," a compilation of liberal and conservative pieces he edited. He appeared in tepid interview sessions on Fox with Bill O’Reilly, on MSNBC with Joe Scarborough, and on NPR with Tavis Smiley.

 

A week later, the New York Post’s Fred Dicker noticed that Cuomo’s introduction was a blazing attack on the Democratic establishment. Democrats lost elections in 2000 and 2002 because "we were lost in time ... To voters, we seemed bloodless, soulless and clueless." Young Cuomo was especially harsh on September 11. Democrats "fumbled the seminal moment of our lives -- the terrorist attacks of 9/11." While Bush "exemplified leadership ... on the Democratic side, there was chaos. We handled 9/11 like it was a debate over a highway bill instead of a matter of people's lives."

 

The media could have made it Andrew Cuomo Week. Instead, Cuomo’s book introduction received a very supine TV silence. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN did zilch. Chris Matthews mentioned it in passing on MSNBC, and Fox’s Sean Hannity and Brit Hume each noticed for a minute. But days later, no one could remember these passages ever being published.

 

This is how 2004 is unfolding with our partisan press. Every week is a Bush-bashing week. There’s Paul O’Neill Week. There’s National Guard Dental Records Week. There’s 9-11 Ad Bad Taste Week. There’s Richard Clarke Week. Won’t it be deeply funny when we get to November and the voters revolt at the transparent liberal bias, and it ends up being Bush’s Re-Election Year

[pimij]

I started to write a long reply about all this - but political arguments are never ending - you can't convince anyone of anything they don't want to hear - no matter what side you are on.

 

- nuff said.

[A-ron1286490684]

quote:

---

you can't convince anyone of anything they don't want to hear - no matter what side you are on

---

I said it before... My wife went to Los Gatos High with Mark Bigham. There are relatives of 9/11 victims and plaques with 9/11 victim's faces on them right down the road from me and since they were west coast bound planes it shouldn't surprise me that it touched us so close but it did.

 

So I ask you... -What right do non-American citizens have to try to "convince" me of ANYTHING related to 9/11 or terrorism in general for that matter? State your opinion but do not presume to enlighten me sir. Maybe the cloud of emotion and anger doesn't linger for you but Americans have a long history of being on the right side of history in these types of situations.

[ssibiski]

quote:

---

Americans have a long history of being on the right side of history in these types of situations.

---

It is funny but one thing I have notice about how history looks at events like this is whoever wins is the right one.

 

Personally I don't beleive we should have gone to war. But the fact is we did. Whether is was for the right reasons or the wrong ones no longer matters because we have already passed that point. What is important now is the rebuilding in Iraq and getting it done correctly. Not only that but we must continue keeping our nation safe from other terrorist attacks.

In the end when it comes to election time I know for myself when I go to vote I will have to consider who I think will be the best at keeping my family, myself, and this country safe. This will not be the only point I consider, but it will weight very heavily on my mind.

 

Steve S.

[Smit]

Personally I don't think there's a major difference between democrats and republicans when it comes to telling truths, partial-truths, lies and deceits. Both sides play politics. Neither side is inherently better or worse than the other. Neither side is to be entirely trusted or distrusted. The person with the most power is a target for people who want the most power, whether democrat or republican.

After 9/11 I was totally impressed with President Bush, as were most Americans I think. Since then I am becoming less and less impressed. I thought the reasons for the war with Iraq were dubious at first, now I'm thinking the war effort was entirely misplaced there. Saddam was certainly a very bad leader, and a bad man, but it strikes me he was much more dangerous to his own citizens than to the United States. Even before the war started the ties between 9/11 and Iraq were questionable at best, now it appears many of them were fabricated.

Many more countries would seem to pose more danger to our present existence, freedom and way of life than Iraq did. Our "friends" from Saudi Arabia for instance. Massive amounts of money, and most of the participants in the 9/11 terrorist attack, came from that country. North Korea is a very bad country. The clergy in Iran and Syria are very bad people. All of them wish us harm.

But war with Iraq was something we could do quickly and fairly inexpensively, as opposed to an attack on North Korea (which has a very formidable army).

But now it appears the difficulty in rebuilding Iraq into a democracy has been underestimated. Credit for this underestimation goes to the obvious people. Time will tell, but it appears we've entered a quagmire we are unable to extract ourselves from. We are (in my opinion) obligated to rebuild their country. To leave now would invite the anarchy that enveloped Afghanistan and bred hatred and terrorists.

But as long as we are there our troops will be targets not only of discontent Iraqis but of terrorists from other countries. Hopefully we can turn this rebuilding over to the U.N. eventually, but we will still be paying for the vast majority of the rebuilding costs.

Are we safer now that Saddam has been captured? It's difficult, maybe impossible, to know. Only history will tell.

One question I have is whether the funds we've invested in the war with Iraq could have been spent more effectively pursuing Al Qaida and other terrorist organizatins that do not reside in a single country.

That's my opinion...worth what you paid for it...

[mayday]

1 last time for me

 

if George Washington was the Father of our counrty... Then should'nt all Presedents be considered that too ?

to put this in simple terms even a democrat should understand

your son comes home from school with a black eye and says..

Dad the bully's beat me up today and I dont wanna go outside any more

do you

 

1. say ok son if you stay home no one can hurt you

 

2. let me see what the neighbors think before I do somthing about it, dont wanna get em mad

 

3. time to defend your self son cause no one else is gonna look out for you but me. Im here for ya

 

I'll leave it at that

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

...

1. say ok son if you stay home no one can hurt you

 

2. let me see what the neighbors think before I do somthing about it, dont wanna get em mad

...

---

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!

... go check wit the neighbors.... BBBBBBUUUUUUUAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAHHHHHHHAAAAA

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yeah, sure. That's what we should do.

 

.... stay home ....

Ouch, the back of my head hurts from falling over backwards. OMG that was hilarious. Darn pacifists(sp?) are the cause of the spread of terrorism. Those "people" are bugs and need to be squashed, not allowed to fester and multiply.

 

Perfect analogy, perfect!!!!

[wtsylvester]

DID HE KILL 6,000,000 people

 

when did the number get that high....

25% of the population????

 

Enron & Hallibuton working those number are they...

 

Lets see how far down the chain do you have to go to find any military experience?

Bush.... not to discredit the guard

but talk about a skate.

 

Cheney... zero..military experience ...

making a fortune with Halliburton

capping the wells that saddam blew

with George I wars that they blew too

 

Rummmy .. what a naval instrutor and

a loser from GW I

 

Condalessa Rice .. now there is some real experience...

 

Powell .. finally someone who didn't have it handed to him through out life. read his book

But then that was before he was SoS.

 

Then there is the information thing.But

reliable enough to send a 40 cruise missile

salvo for the opening act of break the bank.

Who used to be head of the Cia??

George I.

 

You can say what you want about Clinton, but

9-11 happen during jr. watch.

Even tho the FBI was misdirected by Conduit ... , wanting to find out where Bill kept his cigars ..lol We still manage to avoid anything of the magintude of 9/11

 

Where was GW , his was down in Fla. with Jeb.

Thanking him for the election work. and raising money for 2004.

 

Was Saddam a scumbag... all the way, he deserves to die.

Funny , with all the new news about how we could of put the hit on Osuma. Asssignated him, not a bad idea they forgot that they said they couldn't do that with Saddam.Now it's why didn't Clinton do it... wahhhh we have had only 200 days to ignore the the previous admins. warning

but then again look at the qualified cabinet.

right off the enron board...

 

The whole Bush family is full of atrocitiys.

Well Jeb , he kind of cute. Bet his picture is next to the word half-wit in the dictonary.

 

And then there is the other bush boy.. Neil

you remember the S&L collapse. Guess he over in China, striking trade deals.. can you say goodbye jobs

 

But hey I like Bush certainly he can't do any worse if he is re-elected or should I say

re-selected.

 

Finally we have a President who has a criminal record, family ties with a family that flys airplanes into building. carlise group, if you are wondering. Did a great job of getting rid of all the extra money that was laying around from the previous admin. Then like Emirl says Bam

kick it up a notch.... new levels of debt

Hears what he wants to and hires on basis of how much did you contribute to me.

Doesn't get any better than this

[gcode]

I amazes me that people actually believe this drivel.

[ssibiski]

Thanks Mayday

 

Nothing I like better than wiping coffie off my monitor.

 

"2. let me see what the neighbors think before I do somthing about it, dont wanna get em mad"

LOL

 

 

Steve S.

[A-ron1286490684]

quote:

---

The whole Bush family is full of atrocitiys. Well Jeb , he kind of cute. Bet his picture is next to the word half-wit in the dictonary.

---

That pretty much says it all I'd have to say...

 

Articulate AND insightful.