i don't support bush or the war. we should never have gone over there in the first place. we acted irrationally after 9/11. i know what it felt like to be attacked like that. i'm an American. but we should have waited until we cooled down before sending countless men and women of this country to a pointless death. i support our men & women who fight to protect us, but this war is just killing our brave protectors. we've gained nothing, helped no one, and only made things worse for everybody involved. hundreds of families and friends are now trying to cope with losing a loved one in a war. no more people should have to suffer because of bush's idiotic blunder. he's only made problems for this country since he's been in office. and no, i'm not just a recent "I Hate Bush" bandwagon addition, i've disliked him since he began his time as the supposed leader of this country.

No one LOL!

To ampmaster:

how do you even know that the drug dealer had pot in the first place?

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
I was never talking about nukes. I was focused on the beloved old WMDs of chemical weapons (which saddam had, and used on numerous occasions, that's fact) and biological weapons which in the end are the poor man's nuke (which as I said, any one with a few competent virologists who have more idealism/greed then morals can have)
I will gladly give you that the Iraqis never developed nukes and to our knowledge stood down that program. But nukes are not the only WMDs.

Alright then.

UNSCOM's own estimate regarded 90-95% of all WMD's as being succesfully destroyed.

The CIA Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction indicates that the United States had NOT produced any, NOR stockpiled any weapons of mass destruction since 1991, when UN Sanctions were imposed.

In fact, amoung it's key findings were that while Saddam wanted to get rid of the sanctions, and had plans to develop the weapons (With Iran as your neighbor, who wouldn't?), but never actually did create the weapons.

Then later in 2006, the ISG stated, and I quote, " ISG has not found evidence that Saddam Husayn possessed WMD stocks in 2003, but the available evidence from its investigation—including detainee interviews and document exploitation—leaves open the possibility that some weapons existed in Iraq although not of a militarily significant capability. Several senior officers asserted that if Saddam had WMD available when the 2003 war began, he would have used them to avoid being overrun by Coalition forces." ( Source)

So if he did have the weapons, why didn't he use them?

So, that covers all weapons of mass destruction.

Do you have concrete evidence tying him to post UN Sanction production? Until then, your argument is a red herring.

I was never talking about nukes. I was focused on the beloved old WMDs of chemical weapons (which saddam had, and used on numerous occasions, that's fact) and biological weapons which in the end are the poor man's nuke (which as I said, any one with a few competent virologists who have more idealism/greed then morals can have)
I will gladly give you that the Iraqis never developed nukes and to our knowledge stood down that program. But nukes are not the only WMDs.

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
Right one problem with your story Saddam never publicly disarmed to my recollection and he was keeping inspection teams from the UN our of any number of facilites. So it's like that same druggy inviting the cops to check his house for weed everywhere except his closet

Then I dare you to allow U.N. weapon inspectors in to all top-secret U.S. research facilities.

My point is, coming up with these kind of "Analogies" are logical idiocies when you can't produce the evidence that there was any crime to begin with.

Remember that in 1999 Scott Ritter stated that 90%-9% of their nuclear capabilities had been destroyed. UNSCOM said the same exact thing before it's 1998 withdrawl. Also remember that UNMOVIC had been given access to all sites in January, 2003.

Right one problem with your story Saddam never publicly disarmed to my recollection and he was keeping inspection teams from the UN our of any number of facilites. So it's like that same druggy inviting the cops to check his house for weed everywhere except his closet

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
Now to the WMDs.
Let's play pretend? Remember that from when we were all kids? Now let's pretend that you smoke pot. You get a tip off that the cops are going to raid your place. Now what are you going to do? I'm fairly certain it's not "just hand over the weed when the cops bust the door in" it's more along the lines of "get rid of the freaking weed"
Now let's pretend your a scum bag middle eastern dictator, let's call you... Saddam. Now you get a tip off (from fuckin CNN) that America is going to raid your place for your WMD stash, what are you going to do? I'm fairly certain it's not "just hand over the WMDs when the Marines bust the door in" it's more along the lines of "get rid of the freaking WMDs"

Now let's pretend we're trying to prove a point.

Let's pretend that you did smoke pot, got busted one time, and got rid of them all. The cops bust down your door thinking you're still a drug dealer even after you actually got rid of your drugs publicly.

Funny thing, it turns out that no one can find any drugs in your house because you actually did follow the requests of other nations. But wait a minute, "He could have hid them! Therefore he's guilty".

Now let's pretend you're a middle eastern dictator. Let's called you... Saddam. You actually did disarm your weapons like you were told, and the U.S. still invades you anyway. They still use "He has weapons" as a cause, even though you don't..."

See the logical fallacy here? Absence of evidence is not proof of anything.

Ampmaster your like a total docuhebag it's people like you who the first amendment shouldn't apply too!

quote:

Out of curiosity

also out of curiousity what school do you go to?

quote:

So before you go attacking my opinion again, you better remember the 1st amendment on the Bill of Rights... Freedom of Speech.

Yeah...and there's roughly 300 million other individuals with that very same right to express their opinions.

Out of curiosity, what are you majoring in?

I totally blanked the whole WMD part my apologies, also sorry for those typos just woke up from a nap.

First addon to the whole gas thing from a british friend of mine "suck it up yank"

Now to the WMDs.
Let's play pretend? Remember that from when we were all kids? Now let's pretend that you smoke pot. You get a tip off that the cops are going to raid your place. Now what are you going to do? I'm fairly certain it's not "just hand over the weed when the cops bust the door in" it's more along the lines of "get rid of the freaking weed"
Now let's pretend your a scum bag middle eastern dictator, let's call you... Saddam. Now you get a tip off (from fuckin CNN) that America is going to raid your place for your WMD stash, what are you going to do? I'm fairly certain it's not "just hand over the WMDs when the Marines bust the door in" it's more along the lines of "get rid of the freaking WMDs"

quote:

Amp, do me a favor and watch Paradise Now. You'll have to watch it with subtitles because it's in Arabic, but one of the main characters makes a really good point against the use of violence. It's also an amazing movie and I think you-- and anyone who watches it-- will get a lot out of it.

I did actually, I saw an advert for it in some other independant movie I watched, it was an excellent film.

quote:

3 dollars a gallon for gas

Oooh so much money, the brits pay the equivlent of around 6usd a litre, economics happen, prices go up because there is deman, not because there are shortages (not nessicarily)

quote:

Bill Clinton was the best
thing that happened to this country, and

Right because a screwed up economy that GW managed to turn around and over 6000 soldiers killed in various idiotic "peace keeping" missions around the world is so much better?

quote:

So before you go attacking my opinion again, you better remember the 1st amendment on the Bill of Rights... Freedom of Speech.

I would guess I've read the constitution more then you have actually so let me give you a quick lesson when you broadcast your opinion in a public forum you invite debate and or attack from non-like minded citizens. If you have a problem with your beliefs being challenged I would reccomend not broadcasting them in a public place, where mean horrible people who *gasp* think differently then you lurk.

quote:

And violence war doesn't solve anything!

Read a history book dear, I know you've taken the courses. History is the standing testament that the only thing that truly settles anything is controlled violence.

quote:

not necessarily in the nicest way

Nope

The final word on violence is this. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for. Bad news is violence and fighting usually end up being the same thing. Why? Because there are dark evil people out there who hate with a burning passion the type of freedom we have in this country. It's contrary to their ideal of faith, their way of life and they want nothing more then to destroy it. This is how it's always been with democracies.
There are always Tyrants out there who want nothing more then to crush you.

Now I have question for you Jessica, it's pretty simple. If we had done nothing after 9/11 as you seem to think was a good idea, pray tell me what do you think would have happened after that?

quote:

So before you go attacking my opinion again, you better remember the 1st amendment on the Bill of Rights... Freedom of Speech.

I remember the First Amendment quite well, and he has Freedom of Speech as well. He's just debating you-- not necessarily in the nicest way, but he's stating his opinion as well.

quote:

I'm not sure why they'd say that, violence has solved more things then any other "solution".

Amp, do me a favor and watch Paradise Now. You'll have to watch it with subtitles because it's in Arabic, but one of the main characters makes a really good point against the use of violence. It's also an amazing movie and I think you-- and anyone who watches it-- will get a lot out of it.

Actually, no I am not in middle school. I am in college, and I am 16. The country is doing fine? Yeah, if you call fine 3 dollars a gallon for gas. And the unemployment rate at an all time high. Yeah, we are doing just fine. And ok, we went into Iraq to get Saddam and WMD... we got Saddam, but where are the WMD? OH! There aren't any. And violence war doesn't solve anything! We sure aren't "winning" in Iraq, almost 4,000 troops are dead. THEY ARE GONE! And they aren't coming back. That's what war does. No one wins, everyone loses! Oh and Bill Clinton was the best thing that happened to this country, and Hillary will be even better than him. So before you go attacking my opinion again, you better remember the 1st amendment on the Bill of Rights... Freedom of Speech. And despite what Bush and Chaney are trying to get rid of. This IS still a free country.


God Bless

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:

quote:

I DO NOT support Bush. He has drove this country straight into the ground. He has us at war with Iraq, and some people try to say "don't you democrats remember 9/11?" Yeah, we do... the question is.. do they? Iraq had nothing to do with it! I say impeach him and Chaney...


HILLARY IN 08!!

Wow.... the simplicity here... it's almost... are you in middle school? As to your claims the country's doing fine and Bush's tactic of taking the fight to bad guys seems to be working, I don't notice any other skyscrapers burning. Oh and as a bonus cookie for you Al-Qaeda was all over Iraq, after we went in everyone's favorite group of islamic nut cases took over multiple towns in the region. So yes the war in Iraq is killing plenty of the bad guys who's orginization is reasponsible for 9/11.
Oh and you think Bush is bad? Fuher Hillary sure won't be improving anything.

quote:

tell us not to solve ANYTHING with violence

I'm not sure why they'd say that, violence has solved more things then any other "solution".

quote:

I DO NOT support Bush. He has drove this country straight into the ground. He has us at war with Iraq, and some people try to say "don't you democrats remember 9/11?" Yeah, we do... the question is.. do they? Iraq had nothing to do with it! I say impeach him and Chaney...


HILLARY IN 08!!

Wow.... the simplicity here... it's almost... are you in middle school? As to your claims the country's doing fine and Bush's tactic of taking the fight to bad guys seems to be working, I don't notice any other skyscrapers burning. Oh and as a bonus cookie for you Al-Qaeda was all over Iraq, after we went in everyone's favorite group of islamic nut cases took over multiple towns in the region. So yes the war in Iraq is killing plenty of the bad guys who's orginization is reasponsible for 9/11.
Oh and you think Bush is bad? Fuher Hillary sure won't be improving anything.

quote:

tell us not to solve ANYTHING with violence

I'm not sure why they'd say that, violence has solved more things then any other "solution".

I DO NOT support Bush. He has drove this country straight into the ground. He has us at war with Iraq, and some people try to say "don't you democrats remember 9/11?" Yeah, we do... the question is.. do they? Iraq had nothing to do with it! I say impeach him and Chaney...


HILLARY IN 08!!

Ummm...I'm sorry to...intrude in your...serious conversations..buuut...I was told that...in 2020 or 2012 that there'd be a nuclear war...idk between who tough...i also hate the thought of war...it scares me...parents,uncles,aunts,and grandparents tell us not to solve ANYTHING with violence...and yet lots of people do...therefor setting a bad example...which I personally think violence is not the way...I wish for world peace...

quote:

---

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
the troops going in were not under american command, they were under UN or NATO command.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly how do you know that though?

---

i didn't mean that every american soldier was under the command of a UN or NATO commander; i was saying that those "peacekeeping" missions were coalition troops moving in response to a multilateral command.

somalia proved to be a weak gesture, mainly because america (or the president as you say, although i say he was just bowing to the poll numbers so i think that somalia reflects on the american public) didn't have the stomach to see freedom and peace prevail at the price of our soldiers. we have soldiers dying in iraq - why are we still there? because people know that we're there for either self-defense purposes or resource exploitation: liberating iraqis is just a bonus and it's not the reason we're staying there.

so my basic question remains: do you really think that the reason we went to iraq was to liberate iraqis? do you think that among all of the other nations only the US and England cared about peacekeeping in iraq? i say no - the real reasons we're in iraq has nothing to do with liberating iraqis. that's just a nice bonus and it's used to defend our invasion of iraq by bringing up all of these tear-jerking stories of iraqi abuse.

let's call the war for what it is: a pre-emptive strike to disarm a nation of its (theorized) weapons of mass destruction as well as disarming of its conventional weapons; it is a move to destabilize an anti-american government in the hopes of setting up a "democratic"/america-friendly ally; it is an intimidation move to other nations that will now have to think twice about challenging the united states.

saying that we're going in to free iraqis is like saying you go to the mall to boost the economy - sure, it's a nice bonus, but that's not the reason you're there.

i support Bush--but not the war in Iraq we should just leave--most of them didn't want us there anyways.

My boss is from Liberia and he almost cried with joy that the president is goi