shepp Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 And so the personal attacks have begun. Well, for all it's vaunted religiosity, it's plain that the rightwing has really outscored the left on the nastiness scale, led by Bill "Go bomb San Francisco" O'Reilly, Ann "Let's poison a Supreme Court justice, ha ha ha" Coulter, and Rush "Let's put all the druggies in jail...except me" Youknowwho. Oh, another outright Bush lie: "I'm a uniter, not a divider." Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 I am 100% behind bush and Howard(aus pm) I get realy heated up when people say he invaded afghanistan/Iraq for oil. I have got into heated arguments with my RE teacher about this subject.... So he just 'happened' to free afghanistan from the taliban and he just 'happened' to free Iraqis from the raping, murdering ect ect dictator. I agree with you... Sorta when you say they didn't invade for oil. However i'm sure they've gained some profits... So from freeing the Iraqi people from raping, murdering... They gave the Iraqi people Abu-Ghraib and "terrorists" from all over the world are held at Guantanamo Bay for many years before they either to confess to crimes they have't commited due to torture or they are let go.. Uncharged... Yeah BIG success there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Again a few things to think about Intelligence was given and reviewed by not only the president, but also the entire senate, which overwelmingly voted to go to war, again, the entire goverment is to blame, not just Bush if you say that bush somehow misled the country into war, you are dead wrong we has some "very" reliable intelligence regarding what Saddam had, the world was in agreement that he had these weapons, but only the U.S., and a few allies attacked Iraq over it. I believe everone has an opinion, and values that are important to them. I respect everyone's opinion. If you cannot respect another persons opinion, then do not attack people for it, its not fair, and not what TPR is about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of problems with many members of Congress as well, but Congress never voted to go to war. This is directly from the resolution passed on October 11, 2002: SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq. (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION. In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and (2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. In the end, Bush had the final call, and I hold him accountable for the decision he made, which was, in my opinion, the wrong one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Well, gee, here's a simple, real simple, one for the top of your head: "For those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." George W. Bush, June 1, 2003 Actually what they found were trailers believed to be weapons labs. So, I guess that falls under the "manufacturing devices" clause. Now, granted, lying about a war in which tens of thousands of people have been killed and the U.S. has been bankrupted is nowhere near as important as lying about [oral sex], but... ::moving past the idea that the war has bankrupted the US, a topic far too complicated for internet message boards:: No, but it certainly doesn't help in the moral degradation of our society. Back during the Iran/Iraq War, when Hussein was on the ropes (and when his murderous oppression of the Kurds was at its height), who went over there to provide U.S. support? Why, Donald Rumsfeld, that's who. And when the Soviet Union was in Afghanistan, who went in and armed the Islamic fundamentalists who later became the Taliban? You really have to take things in the context of that time. Neither was as much of a support of the Afghans or Iraqis, rather, yet indirect battles with Russia and Iran. It's one of those "lesser of two evils" kind of thing... The fact is, that if the Presidential election were held today, the above map would be almost all blue. If the Democrats could get their constituents out to vote... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuakerOaties Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 War is officially declared by Congress, not the President. The last time Congress declared war was during WWII. Therefore, the decision to go to war was pretty much that of the President. Also, in response to the above post, Bush's approval rating is an extremely low 42%. Except for Nixon who was destroyed by Watergate, this is the LOWEST approval rating of a post war (Post WWII) President. Republicans have historically not fared well in 6th year midterm elections and with this horrendous approval rating, I have no doubt in my mind that the house and senate will be taken away from the republicans in the fall elections. Mark "The democrats have no problems getting their constituents to vote. I'm really going to enjoy seeing the country become more democratic" Luskus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracosavant Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 The fact is, that if the Presidential election were held today, the above map would be almost all blue. Yeah you keep thinking that, buddy. Now, granted, lying about a war in which tens of thousands of people have been killed Exactly what people are you talking about? If you mean civilians and/or US Military then you either A) Can't count or B) Don't know how to read statistics. Funny how a topic about why you support Bush becomes flooded by liberal crybabies. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Exactly what people are you talking about? If you mean civilians and/or US Military then you either A) Can't count or B) Don't know how to read statistics. Funny how a topic about why you support Bush becomes flooded by liberal crybabies. Oh well. You can all thank Dracosavant for officially killing this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts