And with people like president Bush in charge you will always be able to voice your opposing opinion. You would not do this in Iraq. Many people have died and many more will so you can call your president a traitor. Freedom is a wonderful thing and that is the American way.

 

Where were you during the 2000 election? The post he was transferred to in Alabama never saw him. He deserted his military duties for a year. The base commander stated he didn't even show up on their records. Then when the issue came up he wouldn't release his military records to prove he was there (which every other candidate did).

He neglected his mooch military duties and deserted, much worse than just being AWOL. And when he was there, the information that is available said he didn't serve all that well. Guess he wasn't very grateful for his daddy getting him off the hook.

Read -http://www.motherjones.com/news/outf...ma_217_01.html

 

He neglected his mooch military duties and deserted, much worse than just being AWOL. And when he was there, the information that is available said he didn't serve all that well. Guess he wasn't very grateful for his daddy getting him off the hook.

Read -http://www.motherjones.com/news/outf...ma_217_01.html [/B][/QUOTE]


Ah, i dont know about everybody else but i FULLY trust "motherjones.com", you can be sure mamma jones is telling the truth. god (oops, did i say god?) forbid 'ol mamma jones is wrong. why not site MAJOR sources? cant find any?

i think most folks on this board paid particular attention to the 2000 elections praying (oops, there i go again) Gore wasnt elected.

perhaps you are one of those who would rather Clinton be in office at this time of war? ok, please explain to me how you think he would handle this since he was handed bin laden on a silver platter and did NOTHING. during his "minor" infraction of the law( ie:lying under oath) he lobbed cruise missles into iraq(killing MANY innocent civilians at an asprin facory) and NOBODY said a word. where were your "service dodging" websites then? hmm? the whole world knows clinton was a draft dodger.

this war is going to happen whether you libs like it or not. it needs to happen. it needs to happen to protect our freedom and that of our friends in the reigon. it needs to happen to liberate the people of iraq AND iran.

do you like living under a "red,orange,yellow,green or blue" system of alert? personally, id rather we fight this war and erase threats all toghether.

people die, get over it. we have a military, those brave men and women VOLUNTEER to lay their lives down to give us the freedom to discuss the things we do and to disagree with one another. they fight because you or i wont or cant. how would you feel if one of those soldiers read your post?

show some respect........just because you dont like Pres. Bush, doesnt mean you and your ilk should dis-respect our fighting men and women.

 

Read -http://www.motherjones.com/news/outf...ma_217_01.html [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, I tried to read it, honest I did. But the more I read of the site, the farther my head kept having to lean to the left and I was afraid my brains might fall out too....

 

Well I tried to find something with a lot of pretty pictures in it so Republicans could understand it. Sorry, that was the best site I could do. Of course, if you wanted to be informed you might just use a search engine and type "Bush AWOL" or something like that.

Of course, I voted for Gore. He served his country in Vietnam (1969-71, spent five months in 'Nam as an information specialist/journalist). Or you could take this Associated Press quote:

Gore actually could have enlisted as an officer, but he didn't and voluntarily joined as an enlisted man. Bush, on the other hand, had some calls made and got put somewhere he wouldn't get shot at (you might notice he didn't make it into law school, probably that C average he had). Clinton, opposed the war and had no real political connections at the time, so he skipped out. Like a lot of people. But there is a reason they issued blanket amnesty to all the people who evaded draft during Vietnam.

BTW..... You should read some intelligence briefs not presented by the federal govt (its called don't trust one source, I actually looked at multiple sources before I posted that link). Most analysts of the region, experts on that region who make much more money and can travel through the area with far fewer restrictions than government employees feel there is no credible link between Al Qaeda and Saddam. But they also feel that there will be a very strong one if this keeps going. You don't make yourself look very bright when you just trust whatever bull**** your government happens to be feeding you. Thats like the ***** telling everybody Jewish people are bad. The government says it so it must be so.

 

Kc5zom, If ever there was a time to not trust your government or it's leaders, it was during the Clinton administration. How many lies did Clinton tell to the american public? And Gore? It seems he had a little explaining to do during his presidential campaign about his stories, campaign cash and his lack of memory too. But I'm sure you didn't believe them just because they said so right? After all, don't want to look like a dim wit. You sound like you never got over George Bush defeating Gore in 2000. And to make matters worse, the Republicans beat the Democrats in 2002. And to make matters worse yet again, democratic prospects don't look good for 2004 do they?

This president is a leader not driven by poll results. A strong leader not afraid to stand up to the U.N. and tell them that the United States of America does not take orders from them. A leader who recognizes the soverignty of the United States and will not compromise it my signing on with the Kayoto treaty or the World Court. A man of compassion who invokes the name of God without shame. The majority of Americans support our president and trust him more than they ever could have trusted Clinton or Gore. President Bush is the right man for this time. This just drives you crazy doesn't it?

But the issue is human shields.

These people are just anti-american, plain and simple. As one poster already stated, there are many ways to protest war without giving aid to the enemy. The idea of going over to enemy territory and offering support makes me look upon these people as traitors, not peace activists.

War or no war, these people should not be allowed to return to the U.S. and be allowed stay in Iraq where they pledge their loyalties. They should do just fine helping to rebuild the country after they convert to Islam.

Former president Clinton and Carter are also doing themselves a dishonor by publicly speaking against a sitting president. This also aids the enemy. Don't they realize that?

 

Clinton did the same thing. He fired off 240 missles, took out the pharmacy in one country and the Chinese Embassy in another. He did fire on Iraq.

It seems like 'The ends justifies the means' with Democrats. They would tear down the whole damn coutry to get another liberal in office. It's no darn wonder that most people believe that the Democratic party is now the party of the minorities and has no value to the other 89 percent of the country. They couldn't divide us anymore if they tried, there is no such thing as supporting the sitting President, only taking potshots at him and setting up the next election.

1997RangerXLT

(My handgun has killed fewer people than Sen. Kennedy's car.)

 

Well, as far as a bunch of college kids in Iraq go-I could care less, and I'm not tryin' to be a voice of reason-I really could care less-it's their business.
Hell as far as you know ,Saddam may be putting them up to it-threatening them with their lives....would you put it past him?
As far as the bum in the white house goes-I got one question for you's, what do

Alexander The Great
Julius Caesar
Darius the Great
Trajan
Artaxes IV
Attila the Hun
Ghengis Khan
Soloman
Napoleon
Robert E Lee
Erwin Johann Rommel
Eric Von Manstein

all have in common? They were great generals and conquerers.

What do
Gaius Augustus Octavianus
Hadrian
Ptolemy
Ramses III
Constantine the Great
George Washington
Abraham Lincoln
Ulysses S Grant
Franklin D Roosevelt
Adolf Hitler
Joseph Stalin
Napoleon
Benito Mussellini

all have in common? They were great politicians.

And what made all these people so great that they stand out in our minds-our memories of them uneffected by the sands of time?

WAR. Plain and simple. Had it not been for war, none of these people would be notable-we learn of them, and their deeds(both good and bad) in grade school and high school.
Had it not been for the various wars in which they took part during their lifetimes, their memories would have eroded along with those of their less notable contemporaries.

Bush knows this. This is why he will have his war.

It is not enough for him to be president(how many presidents can you remember,along with the times they served in?),he wants to be a conquerer and a Great notable historic figure.
He needs a war to accomplish that-history proves it,history has not done a good job of preserving the memories of the peacemakers.

I voted for Bush during the 2000 elections because I was concerned with preserving my 2nd amendment rights-it was a mistake, I aknowledge that now.
My right to own a gun does me no good if I cannot afford to buy one, nor the ammo to go shooting with it.

Tell me, how did we go from hunting Alqueida to a war with Iraq?
We should have taken out Saddam in the Gulf War-well daddy Bush shoulda told stormin Norman to go ahead-but he did'int.
Now baby Bush want's to finish the job and guarantee his place in history.
He'll get it, but there will be a price to pay,and it will be paid in blood.
Aren't we even concerned with OsamaYoMama anymore? Nope.
Bush got bigger fish to fry.
People compare Saddam to Hitler-not even close.

Hitler was a maniac bent on world domination, he wanted
"elbansraum" -living space, for the german people-and the best way to achieve that in his mind was through oppressing his neighbors and taking their lands for germans to settle on so that they could slowly supplant those populations of "inferiors" with those of pure "aryan" stock. Once these populations were effectively enslaved, and their lands assimilated he would then have the resources of three continents-Europe- N.Africa/w the middle eastern oil/ and Russia(asia) on which to build the foundation for the Thousand Year Reich- this Reich would be powerful enough even to cripple the United States with Japanese help. It's good that he did'int have Eric Raeder's nor Erwin Rommel's forsight, because it could have worked.

Insane as his plan was it shows that Hitler did care about his people.....as long as they were pure Germans.

Saddam is more like Josef Stalin, he is not a maniac- very sane actually,and he cares nothing for his people other than whatever power he can yield through them. He is cunning and manipulative.

Hitler desired more than anything else to have a great war with the United States, but to do that Russia had to go down, he wanted a quick war in the east-another blitzkreig like the one that was so successful in Poland in 1939 - it did'int happen.
He was not afraid of conflict with the west, and in fact did declare war on us after learning of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

The last thing Saddam want's is war with us-or any other western nation for that fact-he's too smart for that, he is interested only in power, and only in conflict so long as it enhances his power-that would not be the result in a new war with the United States, and he knows it.

Saddam likes to kick in the Iraqi new year by launching a few scud missiles on Israel for chits and giggles, it's not serious to him, and he dos'ent think the western nations would care too much about it anyway...he's right. we hav'ent done chit to stand by Israel, everytime Israel ends up in some kind of conflict with it's neighbors-our politicians hide their faces in embarassment and we pretend not to know them.

The Israeli's had the right idea-go in and kick Arafat's ***** in for em- there's your terrorist, thats who you need to go after.
How did we demonstrate our alliance with the Israeli's?
Get out or else!
What no one knew at the time was that baby Bush had other plans of his own brewing, plans that had nothing to do with erradicating terrorisim, plans that he was not willing to let those petty little Israeli's mess up on him, plans of conquest, plans to go down in the history books.

Saddam is a modern day Stalin, thats why Bush wants him-he's an identifyable opponent, Bush wants to be seen as the President who vanquished the enemy of freedom.
This will do nothing about terrorisim.

There is another difference between Saddam and Hitler.

In 1939 Hitler had assembled the greatest army known to man up to that time. The German wehrmacht was the most highly trained, most mobile, and most efficient fighting force on the planet, they utilised new techniques never before seen in warfare, integrating troops, armor, and air as one solid attack force, supporting each other closely and moving rapidly -overwhelming enemy armies-the other nations were accustomed to out dated ideas of trench warfare and assumed that the new war would play by old rules.
The Germans also enjoyed a superiority in technology, and German generals were in general bolder, more competent, and more educated than their allied counterparts.

Saddam enjoys none of these advantages.

His army is a joke-even by 1940's standards.
He does not want this war-Bush does.

Saddam does not have Stalins ace in the hole either....a 57 megaton hydrogen bomb mounted to intercontinental ballistic missile.(3,800 times the atomic power of the Hiroshima bomb)

Why is'int Bush concerned with invading N Korea?
Afterall he included them in his phrase" Axis of evil", I'll tell you why, because they do have Nuclear weapons-they may not have ICBM's but how hard do you think it would really be to sneak in a briefcase bomb-something just big enough to take out half of LA?

Then there's China......always China.

No ....he wants easy prey, right or wrong has little to do with it, personal glory does.
Bush reminds me of a would be modern day Roman general going to do battle.

Roman General;"Jupiter, Mars, Victory, I beseech thee, grant me my victory over my enemy, let all know that Rome is supreme master, and that it is in her that you bestow favor"(in Latin of course)
Bush; " Dear God, we pray to you that you will look over us,and give us the strength to endure these great evils done to us, and that you will strengthen us in our resolve to preserve liberty, and to protect those who cannot protect themselves, that we may do whatever it takes to ensure a greater tommorow for our children and their children, and we trust you will give us the wisdom to do the right thing,that we may ensure peace for all generations to come, Amen"........hmmmm, so tell me, how do you pray to God to help you kill your fellow man?
Dos'ent sound much different from what the Moslems are praying for to me.
It's more polished and not nearly as direct -but in the end it's the same thing.....what a hippocrite.

Well, I've had my rant....take it for what it's worth....may not be much to you but thats ok-I too believe in freedom of opinion.
I am no Saddam lover-not in the least-but I'm no Red,White,and blue fool either.
Call me anti american, call me whatever you want-it's all BS, I believe in America, but only in doing the right thing, if we had another Hitler on our hands or if we were actually going after terrorist(like we did in Afghanistan) I'd be GO JOE!!,hell even if I thought that war with Iraq would somehow hurt terrorisim,I'd be all for it, but this will not deter terrorisim, anymore than invading Ireland would deter terrorisim.
This is Bush's personal war and I recognise it for what it is, and nothing more.
And don't even think about tellin me I'm dishonoring the fine servicemen who fought and died for this country with my thoughts and opinions on this matter, the fact is I honor them by bringing up their times in which they lived and died in this post.



Regards.

 

What do these terms have in common?

Democrat
Republican
Liberal
Conservative
Gay
Lesbian
Rich
Poor
Sane
Insane
Black
White
Mexican
Asian
etc...

They place designations upon people so that they can be discriminated from one another, and then discriminated against. Lots of people hear one of these terms and immediately form conclusions from which to work. It's human nature, really, but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid.
So here we stand, with Republicans trying to denounce Democrats, and Vice-Versa, the liberals blaming all the problems on conservatives, and vice-versa, and everybody blaming everything on the minority group of their revile.

So nothing gets done.

And then we talk about how much Clinton lied. He didn't lie any more than any other president, he just got thrust into the spotlight by Kenneth Starr, the grand waster of time and resources. I am sure if Bush were put into a similar situation (and I believe he is accountable for just as many indiscrestions as Clinton) he would lie and throw up smokescreens also. So I think that Clinton was not only an effective president, but that he would have been much more effective if not for the Republicans trying everything they could to distract him from doing his job. I don't care what party a poitician belongs to, they are both screwed up, and neither has any more morality than the other like they want you to believe.

People need to see through all the designation judgements when it comes to politics and get down to the issues, which were NOT debated ANYWHERE in the last election, and that's the way politicians love it. If all they have to do is do a better job of trashing their opponents, they don't even have to HAVE a platform.

I hope Bush is a one term president like his daddy was, because even though he SEEMS to be strong and have our best interests in heart, he doesn't; I can see right through him. He's a mealy-mouthed, industry-slobbering, power freak with a huge ego and a penchant for hiding things. I could stand having Clinton back in office...at least all he did was get laid and mess up trying to make real estate deals we ALL would have made if given the chance...
BDV

 

what are these anti-war idiots thinking anyway, do they think that we can negotiate with iraq or something? its obvious that negotiations are not going to go anywhere with Saddam 'Insane.' I think the US needs to wait til they slip up and we can prove to the world a legitemate reason to go to war other then for what we belive to be true. Even if other countries still wont back us we can be totally sure that war is right. I think if we are patient enough and dont rush war he will slip up. Then i would say that war is the right option. But for now im not convinced. Thats not to say i dont want to flex some muscle, i just think it would be better to wait until the time is right. I dont see Bush as a strong president, everything is pretty screwed up right now, i cant even find a job. wish Clinton was still running thangs.

 

I think our first target when the @#$* hits the fan should be the "human shields". Sadam is probably relying on our humanity not to hit them and he is probably placing them where all the goodies are. Besides if we get them out of the way first, then there is one less thing to worry about. Who needs em any way?

 

BDV, Clinton an effective president? Stop! Please, your killing me!

Effective at what? Blaming others for his mistakes? Besides, I thought Clinton liked being in the spot light. Gonna blame Ken Star for that? Talk about wasting time! If the democrats had let him do his job perhaps the investigation would not have drug on for so long. But you know the liberal mind set..."let's move on" before the public finds out what's really going on. How many are now regreting their defending the scoundrel? Not many democrats who want to gain the presidency are calling on Clinton to endorse them are they? I wonder why!

And talk about distractions! How many missiles is Clinton fire in the mist of his problems in order to distract the public? Or do you believe he was really after Bin Laden? The USS Cole was attacked and Clinton did next to nothing. Effective? The world trade center was bombed and Clinton did next to nothing. Effective? Bosina? Your definition of effective must be the same as Clinton's definition of the word "is". It all depends. PUHLEEZ!

You believe Bush is accountable for indiscressions? Why? Because you want to assume the worst in a man? What do you base your assumption on? Accountable to whom? You? What Clinton did he did in the oval office and that makes him accountable to the american people. A disgrace to be sure, but if he had been honest about it the people would have forgiven him and moved on. But honesty is not a part of the Clinton legacy. Clinton and his cronies wanted to move on without accountability and that's part of what makes this whole thing stink. The american people could smell a rat. Those who just wanted it to go away just held their nose while putting blame and focus on Ken Star. Another distraction. After it's all been said and done, Clinton is still the one with the foul odor. That's why presidental hopfuls stay away from him but we've already covered that.

Talk about a transparent president! The only interest Clinton had was for himself and his hold on power and he surrounded himself with like minded people. Anyone with common sense could see through Clinton and his motives unless the wool was pulled over their eyes. And Clinton was a master at it, a smooth talker who could squrim around issues he didn't want to confront. Like the meaning of "is" but we've already covered that. A regular pied piper who tickled the ears of special interest groups and liberal Hollywood elites so they would shower him with money.

Shady land deals and sex in the White House with an intern is all Clinton did and your ok with that. I bet Mrs. Clinton is ok with that too. Lets not forget the 11th hour pardons just before he left the White House among other things too mumerus to mention. And you want to see this man back in office? Lord help us! And as far as that it's nothing that anyone of us wouldn't have done, speak for yourself.

Your opinion of president Bush is just that, your opinion. What ever. I take as much stock in your opinion of president Bush as I take Clinton at his word.

 

Well,


quote
__________________________________________________ __
BDV, Clinton an effective president? Stop! Please, your killing me!

Effective at what? Blaming others for his mistakes? Besides, I thought Clinton liked being in the spot light.
__________________________________________________ __

Trust me when I say this, because four years ago I'da laughed if anyone told me that these words would be comming from me.

Clinton WAS smart enough to surround himself with people who knew their chit about the economy, and economicly speaking I believe youd be hard pressed to find a better president.

I'm a contractor, and I may not be an economics major able to spew out numbers and statistics, but I know that my market has taken a hit since Bush has been in office.
Whether all of it is attributable to Bush or not I can't say, I would doubt it, but I do believe had had quite a bit to do with it.
People just aren't buying like they used to, you can sense the lack of confidence.
I've been forced to seriously drop my prices just to keep busy, whereas during Clintons time in office I was overbidding them deliberately just to throw the jobs away-could'int handle them all. Just look at the automakers. They've been giving their cars and trucks away when you compare the deals out now, with those of just a few years ago, and GM's the one who's pushing it most-one reason is to get sales, and the other is to put a hurtin on Ford and Chrysler, GM is the only one of the big 3 capable of sustaining these numbers for a good deal more of time.


quote
__________________________________________________ __
Talk about a transparent president! The only interest Clinton had was for himself and his hold on power and he surrounded himself with like minded people. Anyone with common sense could see through Clinton and his motives unless the wool was pulled over their eyes. And Clinton was a master at it, a smooth talker who could squrim around issues he didn't want to confront. Like the meaning of "is" but we've already covered that. A regular pied piper who tickled the ears of special interest groups and liberal Hollywood elites so they would shower him with money.
__________________________________________________ __

I whole-heartedly agree with you on this one- I hated him!
But dos'ent change the fact that he knew how to keep the right people in charge of the economy.-Greenspan.


quote
__________________________________________________ __
You believe Bush is accountable for indiscressions? Why? Because you want to assume the worst in a man? What do you base your assumption on? Accountable to whom? You? What Clinton did he did in the oval office and that makes him accountable to the american people. A disgrace to be sure, but if he had been honest about it the people would have forgiven him and moved on.
__________________________________________________ __

Yes I do believe Bush is accountable for indescressions, don't you? Or do you hold him as being above the law?

Assuming is a bad thing, but after 3 years we are way past assumptions here, it's obvious what baby Bush wants out there in the middle east-GLORY.

Accountable to the American people he is sworn to serve.

Yes us.
I agree, Clinton should have been held accountable, but like you said slick ***** was too good at charming his way outta crap, that has got to be -in all honesty the most despicable thing any American president has done in the oval office-at least the most despicable thing thats been caught anyway-made us look like a laughing stock to the whole world.

He was'int honest about it-he purjured himself, and most Americans forgave him anyway...made me sick everytime I heard some dyed in the wool libral say" What do I care what the man does in his private time, I'm concerned only with his job performance", well as far as I'm concerned what takes place in the Oval Office-is NOT his personal time.


quote
__________________________________________________ _
regular pied piper who tickled the ears of special interest groups and liberal Hollywood elites so they would shower him with money.
__________________________________________________ __

Agreed.

quote
__________________________________________________ _
Shady land deals and sex in the White House with an intern is all Clinton did and your ok with that. I bet Mrs. Clinton is ok with that too. Lets not forget the 11th hour pardons just before he left the White House among other things too mumerus to mention. And you want to see this man back in office? Lord help us! And as far as that it's nothing that anyone of us wouldn't have done, speak for yourself.
__________________________________________________ __

Agreed on the land deals. Sex with an intern in the White House is definately not O.K.- it's abuse of authority.

Hillary? Don't tell me your hearts bleeding for her...please!
Lets face it Clintons sexual indiscretion was a common theme throughout his life with Hillary-it did not start with an intern in the White House. Remember all the Paula Jones, and Jennifer Flowers controversy-I forget which one it was, but one of them had already made accusations against him when he was running for election the first time, and there was Hillary right by Bill's side.

It was in her interest that the american people saw her husband as a caring family man, who was devoted to his daughter and his wife. How could she ever become First Lady if they saw him as otherwise? How could she ever hope to become senator for N.Y.?
How could she ever hope to become the first woman President?

She was as self serving as he was, and was riding his coatails as a means to her own ambitious ends. To be honest as despicable as Clintons actions were, I really feel sorry for him being married to a wench like that! No wonder he ran around the way he did-just should'int have done it in the White House Bill! No class there, and no arguement from me either.


quote
__________________________________________________ _
Your opinion of president Bush is just that, your opinion. What ever. I take as much stock in your opinion of president Bush as I take Clinton at his word.
__________________________________________________ _

My opinion of Bush is based on seeing him for what he is as clearly as I saw Clinton for what he was, now it's time for you to pull the wool from your eyes, and take a good look at the man- he is obsessed with becoming a notable historical figure, not content with merely becoming another forgotten president, and he wants war with Saddam to achieve this.



Regards.

 

Line up all the presidents since FDR, and find me ONE honest man with an ounce of integrity. You aren't going to be able to.
Everybody holds Kennedy in this "hero" image, but what did he do that was so great? I mean, besides have parties with groups of young women in the White House (bet ME he didn't do it in the Oval Office), and get into office with the money and influence his family got through their bootlegging operations in the 1930's.
And then there was Reagan. He wasn't a BAD president, per se, just an economic fool with too many ties to industry.

What I am getting at is that every president is fallable, and of course Clinton was a scumbag. But I think Bush is just as much of a scumbag...except that Bush chooses to ignore what is going on at home in favor of pursuing his glory, whereas Clinton ignored the rest of the BS and focused on the economy and the country.

And then you have people that will bash Clinton just because he's not a conservative repooplican, such as Rush Limbaugh. Bush could accidentally nuke Los Angeles, and Limbaugh would still be spouting about how it was the liberals and the democrats that are at fault. Keep the issue polarized so that everybody takes sides instead of being intelligent and deciding what's right for themselves.

I think it's great the Clinton slept with interns and lied about it. He did the same thing any of you cheating husbands out there would have done...he lied because he figured he could get away with it. So would you, so don't try to spout "morality" on me. I can't think of any reason why a persons private life has more bearing than his ability to lead, which I think Clinton did a pretty good job of doing. Every president right on down the line has acted immorally; men with real "morals" don't get into politics in the first place!
BDV

 

Seems to me that all he is getting out of this conflict is lower approval ratings, how does that add up to glory? My opinion is he is just doing what he feels is the right thing, regardless of the outcome on his popularity. Do you realy want us to be hit first?



Aren't all Presidential Candidates obsessed with this? Just look at John Kerry (Kerry^sp?) After being called John Kerry his whole life, he announces to the media to start including his middle initial ("F")whenever they say his name. What a loser.

Funny, the foremost things in Clinton's legacy is the Monica scandal and commiting a felony by lieing under oath, but he will certainly be remembered in history. Besides, we should all be able to lie under oath so long as we think it is ok.