A message to all the Bush hating liberals...

[FordFasteRR]

Food for thought!

Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 10:01 PM
Subject: JOHN GLENN SAID

Things that make you think a little:

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January.
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the
month of January. That's just one American city,
about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.
When some claim that President Bush shouldn't
have started this war, state the following:

a. FDR led us into World War II.
b. Germany never attacked us; Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ...
an average of 112,500 per year.
c. Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost ...
an average of 18,334 per year.
d John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
e. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost ..
an average of 5,800 per year.
f. Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three
times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on
multiple occasions.
g. In the years since terrorists attacked us , President Bush
has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled
al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran, and, North
Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who
slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
The Democrats are complaining
about how long the war is taking.

But

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation.
We've been looking for evidence for chemical weapons
in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the
Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his
Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took
to count the votes in Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant
to realize the facts

But Wait .

There's more!

JOHN GLENN (ON THE SENATE FLOOR)
Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13

Some people still don't understand why military personnel
do what they do for a living. This exchange between
Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum
is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it's also a good example of one
man's explanation of why men and women in the armed
services do what they do for a living.
This IS a typical, though sad, example of what
some who have never served think of the military.
Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
"How can you run for Senate
when you've never held a real job?"
Senator Glenn (D-Ohio):
"I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps.
I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions.
My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different
occasions. I was in the space program. It wasn't my
checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was
not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the
daily cash receipts to the bank."
"I ask you to go with me ... as I went the other day...
to a veteran's hospital and look those men ...
with their mangled bodies in the eye, and tell THEM
they didn't hold a job!
You go with me to the Space Program at NASA
and go, as I have gone, to the widows and Orphans
of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee...
and you look those kids in the eye and tell them
that their DADS didn't hold a job.
You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in
Arlington National Cemetery, where I have more friends
buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch
those waving flags.
You stand there, and you think about this nation,
and you tell ME that those people didn't have a job?
What about you?"
For those who don't remember ..

During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney
representing the Communist Party in the USA.

Now he's a Senator!

If you can read this, thank a teacher.

If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran. :bowdown:

It might not be a bad idea to keep this circulating

[Nerraux]

As far as I'm concerned, that's all the more reason why we should get our asses out of Iraq and straighten up our situation at home before we police the world. How many people do you think would have dies in Detroit if we were sinking 1/1000th the cost of the war into education or creating new jobs in that city?

How many Iraqis were involved in September 11, 2001 anyway? None? How could that be? Propaganda is propaganda, no matter which side it's coming from. Be smart enough to see the truth for yourself.

By the way, that quote from Glenn is from 1974. Check your facts.

[05xd]

Good find man.That will piss off the liberals in here ;)

[FordFasteRR]

Good find man.That will piss off the liberals in here ;)


=)

:phone:

[n0c]

Didn't read the whole thing but I object to b :p

Japan/Germany/Italy Axis power alliance - Iraq had little if any connection to Al Qaeda
Secondly Iraq had NO WMDs. Yea yea , everyone thought they did... and... why did Dems give the pres the authourity to go to war then? (cause they are invertebrates)... :D

Let's face it, we went in to secure our next 50 years worth of oil supplies, other objective (Spread democracy, free Iraqi people, blah blah blah are VERY secondary). We knew once the UN cleared Iraq of WMDs, we would not likely see much of it's oil as we are no longer the only super-consumer of oil so Iraq would not be obligated to sell to us. China WILL pass us with in a generation in terms of energy needs, probably sooner, and they were clearly going to be a big market for Iraq. Let's also not forget India growing energy needs either.

You know the Dems are glad we are in Iraq (I am talking about the middle of the road pragmatist dems). Yea they may be *****ing, but that is politics. We secure our energy needs at the expense of their political rivals. Sounds like a good deal to me! You think Kerry would bring our troops home if he had won the election? I don't think so.

*All predictions and opinions were pulled out of my a$$.

[getfuzzd]

79 people died of heroin/fentynal overdoses in and around D-town last month. For the most part, I have to agree with Nerraux.

Blame the source of your news and the general advancement of communications technology. The fact that the sensational news information or misinformaton can now make it around the world in about 20 seconds, and it takes time for the true facts to get around the world months, days, and/or years is truely sad. During previous "conflicts" it would take days or weeks for the story to actually get out to the average joe.

True knowledge is learned by first hand experience and observation. The best question to ask yourself: "Do I believe everything I read, see, and hear?"

[Doohickie]

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation.

Correction: Iraq has still not been "taken". Mission is NOT accomplished, despite the propaganda.

[mbv2001]

Seems like total b.s.
How can he compare a war from 60 yrs ago to the war goingon right now? And as it was said b4 maybe if some of our tax dollars were used here in our country it wouldn't be so much crime in our country.

[hyunelan2]

Apples to Oranges + your typical political ranting. Bush is still an idiot. He can give an order to take a country, but completing a grammatically correct sentence... there's the challange ;) I have a hard time beleiving Bush is running the government... not that I'm thinking there is some smoking man in the shadows pulling the strings, but the thought that THAT GUY (Bush) is in control of our country still scares the hell outta me.

[paki]

http://allowe.cillix.nl/Humor/sight/images/OfficeAsstW.jpg

[soullesselantra]

LMFAO Paki!!!

[CTele02]

ACTUALLY Food For Your Conservative Mind.... After Japan Attacked Pearl Harbor... the Day after HITLER himself declared war on the US. Plus what are you trying to say? You would rather have nazi running europe and nuking us with v3 rockets?

[WytchDctr]

Hitler was also trying to get mexico to attack us...

[J-son]

Yeah war is always the best solution...

Lets forget about out teachers that teach everything our future leaders will need to know. Lets keep funding a war that will never end...

I understand that we as a country need to protect our selves, but we should also protect ourselves from the country that controls us? Not taking care of us? Just curious...

My bro and many of my friends are/was in the Army and I supported him and them in their choices, I just don't support a corrupted group of leaders that what nothing but to pad their wallets. But hey I might be retared to think this way, but thank goodness for my freedoms to think this way...for now!

[GrGaKC]

Well, I'd like to give my opinions to this debate, altho I'm not from USA... First of all, I think that the war in Iraq was really unnecesarry. The fact is that Bush already spent 10 times more money just on the Iraqui war than my country's (Croatia) GDP. If a part of that money was to be spent on school systems, poverty relief and on increasing police coverage, it'd be way better in USA.
Another thing is that after Bush got Saddam, they decided to make most (but not all) reports public. BIG MISTAKE! If you already know that he didn't have any biological or nuclear weapons, why make it public? Two days before the Senate approved going to Iraq, Bush received a report saying that no evidence of such weapons can be found at the moment. If they couldn't find them, what made him think that they'd find them later?
Most soldiers stationed in Iraq DON'T have high morale. In fact, one of them sent a letter to Walter Jones, a republican from North Carolina, with a message for Bush. In short, the message was: "Tell those a**holes in DC to get us out of here! This is bs! Either that or tell Bush to send us his daughters! At least that might be useful." IF some of you on't know who Walter Jones is, he's a rep who's been fighting for an oben debate about Iraq for the last few months. He was promised a debate will be held in April, but eventually they made a mockery out of it, turning it into a debate about same-sex marriages!
Bush mostly needed Iraq for the oil reserves. But let's not forget that Iraq is also a country that has the BIGGEST clear water reserve in the world! I doubt Bush didn't know that, especially since he increased the extend of Iraqui operations AFTER the near riot in Texas caused by water shortage!
You mentioned Iran. Does Bush have any proof of their attempts to make an A-bomb? Can he really say with 100% accuracy that their nuclear program isn't for producing power? In case you didn't know, 60% of Iran doesn't have electric power. They do have power lines laid all over the country, but they don't have any power sources. During nights ony Teheran uses 75% of their awailable power... Iran has on few occasions stated that they are ready to discuss the issues, they even alowed inspections last month. And then came along Bush and started threatening with sanctions. Maybe he's just being ignorant, but Iranians are very proud people, and they react to every threat. So they did. They cancelled the inspections. Yesterday they again said they'd be willing to talk, but only if no more threats will be made. I don't know about you, but I'm expecting Bush to make another "phenomenal" reaction to that... Now, if I were him, I'd give them the technology to create power without enrichening Uranium. And you can't make A-bombs unless the Uranium is enriched to a certain degree...

P.S. sorry about the long post...

[paki]

Well, I'd like to give my opinions to this debate, altho I'm not from USA... First of all, I think that the war in Iraq was really unnecesarry. The fact is that Bush already spent 10 times more money just on the Iraqui war than my country's (Croatia) GDP. If a part of that money was to be spent on school systems, poverty relief and on increasing police coverage, it'd be way better in USA.
Another thing is that after Bush got Saddam, they decided to make most (but not all) reports public. BIG MISTAKE! If you already know that he didn't have any biological or nuclear weapons, why make it public? Two days before the Senate approved going to Iraq, Bush received a report saying that no evidence of such weapons can be found at the moment. If they couldn't find them, what made him think that they'd find them later?
Most soldiers stationed in Iraq DON'T have high morale. In fact, one of them sent a letter to Walter Jones, a republican from North Carolina, with a message for Bush. In short, the message was: "Tell those a**holes in DC to get us out of here! This is bs! Either that or tell Bush to send us his daughters! At least that might be useful." IF some of you on't know who Walter Jones is, he's a rep who's been fighting for an oben debate about Iraq for the last few months. He was promised a debate will be held in April, but eventually they made a mockery out of it, turning it into a debate about same-sex marriages!
Bush mostly needed Iraq for the oil reserves. But let's not forget that Iraq is also a country that has the BIGGEST clear water reserve in the world! I doubt Bush didn't know that, especially since he increased the extend of Iraqui operations AFTER the near riot in Texas caused by water shortage!
You mentioned Iran. Does Bush have any proof of their attempts to make an A-bomb? Can he really say with 100% accuracy that their nuclear program isn't for producing power? In case you didn't know, 60% of Iran doesn't have electric power. They do have power lines laid all over the country, but they don't have any power sources. During nights ony Teheran uses 75% of their awailable power... Iran has on few occasions stated that they are ready to discuss the issues, they even alowed inspections last month. And then came along Bush and started threatening with sanctions. Maybe he's just being ignorant, but Iranians are very proud people, and they react to every threat. So they did. They cancelled the inspections. Yesterday they again said they'd be willing to talk, but only if no more threats will be made. I don't know about you, but I'm expecting Bush to make another "phenomenal" reaction to that... Now, if I were him, I'd give them the technology to create power without enrichening Uranium. And you can't make A-bombs unless the Uranium is enriched to a certain degree...

P.S. sorry about the long post...

Thanks for your post man. It helps out the argument in our favor :)

My parents are from Pakistan and they've been watching the world unfold in that country.. and let me say this.. the US has really ****ed up on the other side of the world. Back in the early 90's, when Asshole Sr. was president, the president/prime minister/leader of pakistan was killed in the AIR.. by none other than US CIA. For what reason? Who knows. Pakistan wasn't a threat to the US at all, only to India because of the arms race.. but that wasn't til about 5 yrs later.

So lets put a twist on this, shall we?

Bush Sr had the president of Pakistan assassinated in the early 90's.
Pakistan never attacked us. Hell, now they are our allies in this "war against terrorism". Why? Because they know that Bush will create hell if they try to defend their grounds and restrict US movement, so to prevent anything from being destroyed they allowed the US in and promised to help them.

Sure, we're talking about a different Bush who killed the president.. but this basically contradicts the point FF was trying to make. Although you make valid points about who started what war, take a look 4-8 years before that president's term.. and see who caused the problem.

In the years since terrorists attacked us , President Bush
has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled
al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran, and, North
Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who
slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

Liberated two countries? Let me guess. Iraq and Afghanistan? He didn't really liberate either.. its more like he took them under his own control.

Crushed the Taliban? Don't think so. There are still many Taliban members around, and I'm sure they will come together sooner or later and take back the country Bush took away from them. Also, Taliban means "Student". There will always be students of the Taliban.. so it will never be crushed.

Crippled Al-Qaeda -- but wait.. he hasn't caught Osama yet!? how did he cripple Al-Qaeda?

Nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran, & North Korea w/o firing a shot: Let me ask you this. If someone pointed a loaded gun at your head and told you to give them all your money.. would you do it? Thats basically what Bush did.. instead of just one gun, he used the guns of the U.S. Army

Captured a terrorist that killed 300,000 of his own people.. but he didn't catch Osama.

As far as who's pulling the strings.. its probably Sr... after all he and Osama were good buddies when freeing Afghanistan from Russian control.. he DID buy Osama the weapons to free themselves, which were later used against the US

half of my stuff probably doesn't make sense because im sleepy as ****.. so im off

[GrGaKC]

And while we're at it... He didn't cripple Al-Qaeda. Unless those bombing attacks in Madrid and London were an "accident". Those were also Al-Qaeda's doing...

[Mr. Dan]

People either love Bush or hate him. I've NEVER heard anyone say "Oh, He's an okay guy" :) So spreading either Liberal or Conservative propaganda on a site like this is just trolling for arguments that will convince no one and serve only to fuel the inevitable outbursts of name calling and other personal attacks.

[skeetre]

I agree with just about everything in the original message... except the military morale. I don't think it's ever been lower. There is no job security in the military anymore even... they're kicking out 50% of O2 (Lts) in a certain year group, getting rid of 40000+ members over the next 2 years, sending people to iraq with 3-7 day notice, and then sending them again just a few months after they get home sometimes. I can't stand politics, but what I hate most... is that people don't back their president. He is THE president of the United States. Whether you voted for him or not, think he's doing a good job or not, you shouldn't flame him, just say I disagree with how he can't speak in complete sentences, or something like that. He's the commander in chief, my boss, so I -can't- speak bad about him, but it still bothers me to see how bad others trash their own president.

[BlackElantraGT]

I agree with just about everything in the original message... except the military morale. I don't think it's ever been lower. There is no job security in the military anymore even... they're kicking out 50% of O2 (Lts) in a certain year group, getting rid of 40000+ members over the next 2 years, sending people to iraq with 3-7 day notice, and then sending them again just a few months after they get home sometimes. I can't stand politics, but what I hate most... is that people don't back their president. He is THE president of the United States. Whether you voted for him or not, think he's doing a good job or not, you shouldn't flame him, just say I disagree with how he can't speak in complete sentences, or something like that. He's the commander in chief, my boss, so I -can't- speak bad about him, but it still bothers me to see how bad others trash their own president.

Maybe if we didn't have an idiot for a President, we wouldn't need to bash him? The first amendment allows for freedom of speech. He is an elected official. Without the people's vote, he is no greater than you nor I. Since we, the people, gave him Presidential power, we also expect him to represent us well. So if the majority of the country (along with the rest of the world) is not pleased with him, why should we shut up and keep supporting what he's doing?

Next time you see your boss, give him a pat on the back for sending you and your friends back to Iraq with barely a notice when all you want to do is spend time and start a family with your newlywed wife.

[BobMs_wht2k2]

This is funny. Lib's will argue about anything giventhe chance. Don't let historical facts get in the way now. Wouldn't want TRUTH to stop your argument.

It is what it is. The fact of the matter is, almost every major conflict we have been engaged in with the exception of Iraq has been started on flimsy excuses by DEMOCRATS.

[yevRPS]

i'll chime in i guess...work is boring. for whatever it's worth, here's another perspective from a foreigner. i've been in this country for almost 10 years and am not going to flame it. if i didn't like it here i could've and would've moved. after 10 years though i still can't vote but even if i could i don't think i would affiliate myself with either rep. or dem., liberal or conservative. actions speak lowder then words, promisses and party affiliations. now onto the points mentioned so far.

if Bush went into Iraq for oil then wtf is going on with the prices at the pump? did he go in the for oil for the people of the US or for the oil companies?

high or low moralle arguments aside, nobody can argue that the military budget is the highest it's ever been. higher than any countrys' in the world. high enough to wipe out record budget surplus and create record deficit. now there's gotta be something wrong with that. even if one consideres the achievements mentioned in the first post as signifficant, would they say they are worth such enormous spending? personally i don't think that the price is worth it. that money could've been put towards numerous domestic issues (eneregy policy - absent, medicare/health insurance - crap, immigration - complete mess, and many many more). aside from the minor "achievements" the spending has done nothing but made the government contractors rich and created a huge deficit. deficit which has to be covered at some point. most likaly by tax dollars.

and lastly. i've read a while ago and tend to agree with the logic and the strategy of it. yes Clinton did know whene Osama was and yes he did not eliminate him. why? because he had him in the corner. Osama was not welcome in any country other than Afghanistan. he was being watched through a scope of a sniper and had little support around the world. his holy war consisteted of fighting off the nothern alliance, training gorilla fighters to go to Chechnya and for the Israeli/Arab conflict. so i think the choice was right to keep Osama under control. monitor everything he does and everywhere he goes. eliminating him would have only turned him into a martor in the eyes of his followers and would've brought somebody new to the picture and there are no guarantees that that new person wouldn't have been worse than the one he replaced. with an added problems of not knowing of who/where/when and how he is.

[GrGaKC]

Skeetre, I'm not from USA, and I'm glad that I'm not. Not because it's a bad country to live in, it's because people like it less and less because of Bush and his actions. I'm from Europe and I can tell you that most of Europe doesn't like Bush, and based on that everyone has presumptions that all other US citizens are as bad as him (eg. talk without knowing the facts, think they're the best in the world etc.). I know that's not the case, I have many friends from USA. But the fact is that if he IS your President, he does not represent only himself, he represents the etire nation. And if someone sees him disoriented on TV, the first impression is that all others are like him... Not a nice thing to say, but that's how things are. He should be more careful because his actions will not be forgotten the day someone else becomes President. USA will throughout history be remembered by those actions. Even now people talk about how Vietnam was a mistake. Bush should be careful so it doesn't happen with Iraq. In 30, maybe 40 years maybe all will be forgotten. But if not, people all over the world won't blame Bush, they'll blame America... And now he's trying to do the same with Iran and South Korea. That's sad...
And another note... It maybe would've been wiser to spend all that money on something needed more (eg. Kyoto protocol), something that would benefit the whole world...

[hyunelan2]

As far as supporting the President just because he's the president - that's total B.S. If we all bowed down and kissed the feet of our leader only because he is our leader, what makes us different from any other dictator-controlled nation where they blindly follow their leader?

On Iran... that's not the U.S. deal in the beginning... Germany, France, Britain are the main negotiators saying they are trying to build an A-bomb, we are involved because we make up the largest 'enforcment' arm of the U.N., and Iran wanted to deal directly with the U.S.

As for Republicans Vs. Democrats - we've had this debate before, and nearly NO-ONE supports all the ideals of either party. I was/am mainly a conservative (small gov, strong military, authoritative foreign policy, less day-to-day control of people's lives) - but absolutely cannot stand the current Republican party and the 'fake' religious preachers they pretend to be to foster the conservative-christian voters. Futhermore, although they are the supposed 'conservative' party, they practice none of the things that a conservative party is 'supposed to' - i.e. the largest government in history is the current Republican controlled governement. This republican party is more liberal than the 1960s democrats!

[Leviathant]

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant
to realize the facts

All hail the GREAT LEADER and his POWERFUL military! Do not trust the slanted opinions of the empowered citizens! Those who question authority will no receive straight answers, but will be watched carefully by our THOUGHT POLICE. Trust your LEADERS, not yourselves.

[Doohickie]

But let's not forget that Iraq is also a country that has the BIGGEST clear water reserve in the world! I doubt Bush didn't know that, especially since he increased the extend of Iraqui operations AFTER the near riot in Texas caused by water shortage!

I agree with much of what you say, GrGaKC, but that statement about Texas is totally untrue. I live in Texas and there are no water riots, not even close. Water has been rationed at times (not so much household use, but for watering lawns), both before and after the 9/11 attacks. That's just a fact of life when you live in a dry area like Texas. There has not been any civil unrest as a result of water shortages and I doubt Bush is planning on bringing Iraqi water to the U.S.

[hyunelan2]

Do you know how much it would cost to ship water half-way around the world? People would pay nowhere near what the cost would be. That is the dumbest of all conspiracy theories I've ever heard.

As for water rationing / watering bans - we have those up here too, and I'm only 40 minutes away from Lake Michigan, and less than a mile from the Illinois river. It's not that there is 'no water' just that summer use occassionally exceeds pumping capacity, especially when people try to water their lawns all summer long.

[BlackElantraGT]

LOL I was wondering if that's what he meant to because the idea of shipping water from Iraq to the U.S. is pretty absurd.

[wazntme]

Ford, All i have to say is very Nice, Some Things Could be better, but he's doing an excellent job

[ilanpro]

http://drabruzzi.com/images/bushandcheney[1].jpg

http://drabruzzi.com/images/Lesbians%20against%20Bush.jpg

http://drabruzzi.com/images/Bush%20and%20Link.jpg
:abovelol: :abovelol: :abovelol: :abovelol:

He Is still and IDIOT

[kizzo]

Im not against war or liberal at all, but i think the main concern of america is the problems at home. If 35 people die in detroit and 31 die in iraq the same month, i think that all the more reason we should concentrate on problems at home first.

Just think about how much better our generation could be if we all had college educations, work ethic, and a trust in our government.

Maybe it sounds bad or whatever, but even if we did go to iraq to secure oil its for the better of the country. Just think about it, America cannot even function without oil. You wouldnt have travel, mail, nothing. I remember reading a speach in my history class by a captured Republic Gaurd officer from desert storm. He said something along the lines of "Whoever owns the oil can control the world, and we are fully aware of that". One of the most important statements i have ever read.

[GrGaKC]

I didn't mean shipping water to USA, but shipping it to Mid-East countries. Sorry about that with Texas, my bad... I know that there is a shortage in Mid-East since our local still water producer got a contract for selling water somewhere there (sorry, don't know how the country is named in English), and it got the 100 million $ profits after tax per year. Now that's alot of money where I come from...
Kizzo, you mention oil. Someone else did before, so I'll just tell you this... You complain about gas prices. Back here 95 octane gas is priced at 1,5$ a liter (5,7 $ a galon). Now, I remember times when it was almost half as much, an that was 5 years ago... Before Bush started playing rent-a-cop!

[Mr. Dan]

There is no way that Iraq has more fresh water in it than Canada. That's just absurd. If you added up even half of the lakes in northern Canada you could put Iraq under several feet of water. Rivers choked with dead don't count as clear water.

Bush invading Iraq for water? Not bloody likely. Bush invading Canada for water? Coming summer 2008. We're in line just after Iran and Syria, we got in before North Korea because they can just drive right in. :)

[skeetre]

As I was driving to work, I realized that the information Ford was quoting, was from a couple years ago, and military morale was probably at it's highest at that time, because that's when the cuts and stuff started pretty much.

And I wasn't saying people should kiss Bush's feet, or anything, you can still not like him, I just think people shouldn't bash him the way they do, be a little more polite about calling him stupid or something, that's all.

[hyunelan2]

Ok, in polite terms, he seems "unsmart."

[Guess]

Heres food for thought Dem or Rep they are all a bunch of ****ing liars, weather a Dem or a Rep was in the house at the time of all this one nor the other would not have handled it better and yes we can argue all day that one would have done better but honestly you have no idea in the long run so lets not act like we KNOW for a fact. Now with that said Bush is still a ****ing idiot and Kerry was not really all that better. Thank you and good not thats my only thought on this.

[jalmir]

But let's not forget that Iraq is also a country that has the BIGGEST clear water reserve in the world! I doubt Bush didn't know that, especially since he increased the extend of Iraqui operations AFTER the near riot in Texas caused by water shortage!


GrGaKC, check you sources carfully, specialists clearly stated that the world largest fresh water supplies are in North America and in Canada to be more specific!

Carefull with your statements ;)

[Doohickie]

GrGaKC, check you sources carfully, specialists clearly stated that the world largest fresh water supplies are in North America and in Canada to be more specific!

Carefull with your statements ;)I think that's already been handled...

[evan938]

yeah...the water situation wasnt the bulk of the topic...lol

[GrGaKC]

I'll really have to check my sources for that water, seems Pentagon isn't reliable anymore... ;) Anyway, ere's a bulleting from yesterday (don't get me wrong, I'm still against Bush), I got this from a Croatian news server... Bush made a statement claiming that chemical weapons WERE found in Iraq, but the information was not released right away since they didn't want to raise panic... And he also said that most of it was too degraded to even be used. Any thoughts on that?

[hyunelan2]

There was a former Iraqi air force general that was in 'Saddam's circle' whom defected to the U.S. around the time of the invasion. He wrote a book that came out a few months ago, which talked about the chemical weapons that Iraq did have were removed and smuggled into Syria... He was on a talk-show I saw saying one of the reasons that the U.S. cannot say "the weapons were here, now they're in Syria" is becasue of the tender political situation with Syria, and not wanting to immediately start a war with them by accusing them of wrongdoing. 'If we attacked Iraq for having the weapons, why don't we attack Syria for having them' sort of thing.

Don't know how much truth is behind it, but that's what the guy said.

[GrGaKC]

Yes, but allegedly the weapons were made back in 1991, when Saddam was making stockpiles for future conquests, and that's the reason for their degraded state...

[Leviathant]

On the discovery of "hundreds of chemical weapons" as reported by Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html), this was debunked very quickly, ironically also by Fox News (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/06/22.html#a8810).

To quote...

Santorum showed up to do his thing with Peter Hoekstra on H&C and it took one phone call by Jim Angle of FOX News to debunk Santorum's WMD claims today. That's pretty embarrassing when the Dick Cheney network undermines him...

Santorum: I'll show you the classified documents right here...

Colmes: It's Alan Colmes. Senator, the Iraq Survey Group, uhh, let me go to the Duelfer Report-says Iraq did not have the weapons our intelligence believed were there. And Jim Angle who reported this for Fox News-quotes a defense official who says these were pre-1991 weapons that could not have been fired as designed because they already been degraded.

And the official went on to say that they are-these are not the WMD's this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had-and [these are] not the WMD's for which this country went to war. So the chest beating that the Republicans are doing tonight thinking this is a justification is not confirmed by the defense department.

Santorum: Well, ahh, I'd like to know who that is. The fact of the matter is I'll wait and see what the actual Defense Department formally says or more importantly what the administration formally says.

[Tx_boy]

It is just the orange gas that is messed up because it starts out in a liquid form and when it sits for a long time in that kind of heat it hardens and than gets messed up. They also found some serium or however you spell it is still good and could of been used against our soilders. To talk about Bush the only thing I like about Bush is when he was governor of Texas he changed a lot of laws that that dumb *** chick that was governor before him put in. She mad it a zero tolerance state and Bush made it a possetion state.