I don't care whether you're a Republican or Democrat. Each and everyone of you as an American has a duty to support the War in Iraq. Whether you approve of George Bush or not you must support the war 100% in every aspect and detail. Why you ask? There are people in Iraq as well as Afghanistan that are dying so that you can live freely and peacefully. Every morning, say the pledge at school, and say it proud. We Americans are in a time of war. No matter who the President is, be it Bill Clinton or George Bush, you support them in every demeanor of international conflict. And people who live in Europe, Asia and whatnot, you ought to be thanking the United States for fighting terrorism for you and allowing you to lead a safer life. Especially France. France needs to wake up and smell the roses. I am deeply concerned about France. Mark my words "Unless France takes action now, in five years time, France will be at the mercy of the terrorists!" As long as we have a President who will not cower to the terrorists and act with an iron fist, the war on terrorism can be won.
pa·tri·ot·ic -adj. -Feeling, expressing, or inspired by love for one's country.
It mentions nothing about supporting the president. And before you say they're one and the same- The president changes every four (or eight) years. This land has been around for far longer then him/her.
Who says we're not the terrorists? Breaking into other's religions, their countries, killing their people? Your statement backs that up. Quote- "Unless France takes action now, in five years time, France will be at the mercy of the terrorists!" Those terrorists would be us, right? The other 'terrorists' you speak of couldn't be angry at them, because France refused to fight them!
quote:...you ought to be thanking the United States for fighting terrorism for you and allowing you to lead a safer life.
My life was alot safer before Bush did this whole terrorism dealy. My parents both had jobs. Now, I have to worry every day about my father losing his job, my mother already did.
quote:Every morning, say the pledge at school, and say it proud.
Personally- I don't say the pledge. First of all, it has God in it, and second, I cant support America under Bush's rule.
quote:We Americans are in a time of war.
Didn't Bushie say that the war was over? Maybe not. Anyway, just because we're at war doesnt mean we need to support the USA. In fact, I support it even less now that we're at war- I don't agree with it, especially not under these conditions.
"Thou call'dst me dog before thou hadst a cause; But, since I am a dog, beware my fangs." -Shakespeare [The Merchant of Venice, Act 3 Scene 3]
quote: And Iraq had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons while under Saddam Hussein which was reported to officials.
Yeah. Guess who gave Saddam all these WMDs we knew he had? America. Ironic. We put a despot in power. Now we have to get rid of him. Well, it is nice that we're cleaning up our own mess. but there are a lot of other dictators we need to remove, and nations invaded based on this idea.
A stubborn idiot says: I never change my political beliefs on anything, no matter what new evidence might be presented to me. A wise and reasonable man says: I change my opion on subjects as new evidence is presented. A strong leader says: I never change my political beliefs on anything, no matter
Maybe you've just been listening to Dick Cheney too much, but there is yet to be any concrete evidence linking Al Qaeda and Iraq. Sure, maybe there were a couple of terrorist training camps in Iraq, but (believe it or not) some anti-American terrorists have come right here from good old America.
As for Saddam, yes, he was horrible, and yes, he hated America, but he never did anything to us. Much of the world hates America...are you in favor of invading them? Wait, on second thought, I'm not sure I want to hear your answer...
It's quite possible to not support Bush but to support America. In my opinion, they're one and the same. At this point, all I can hope for is that all of our troops make it home safe (after stabilizing Iraq, if that can in fact be done) and that future presidents, no matter who they may be, will not get any self-righteous ideas about "fighting terror" by invading countries that didn't do anything to us. Fighting terrorism by invading Iraq is like fighting fire by pouring gasoline on it.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Aguagon,
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
Criticize something when you don't understand it, simply brilliant
quote: Hmmm, by supporting the President, that makes me a fake patriot? Can you please enlighten me on how you think this is logical.
Wait, where did I say you were a fake patriot? I thought I distinctly said "save the false patriotism.” Please explain the logic on how you can completely misread a statement and then come and criticize it. Go and reread the statement and use every level of mental competence you have (which I'm guessing is minimal) and then perhaps you will get the statement. Until you do such, there is no need to explain anything because clearly you don't comprehend what I have said and therefore you have misconstrued it.
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -Teddy Roosevelt
It means that it is unamerican to stand idle when you feel strongly about something and/or when you disagree with something that is being done. Theodore Roosevelt, one of the greatest Presidents in history, is saying that it is the right, privilidge, and duty of every American to let their voice be heard and ensure that this nation and its government are making decisions in the best interest of democracy, peace, and freedom in our nation and the rest of the world. The freedom of this nation depends on the courage of its people - we cannot stand still when the future of freedom is in question.
________________________________________________
.:: do what you can, where you are, with what you have ::.
This smells distinctly of "My country right or wrong" circa the 1960s. Which is incredibly dangerous.
So are you saying that if the U.S. decides to attack a country, for any reason at all - even just because we think it will be to our advantage politically or economically - then we support it? I don't think so. We do all we can to ensure the decisions that our country makes are truly in the best interest of the world and of FREEDOM. That's what we stand for, isn't it?
FYI: Saddam and Al-Qaeda are in no way connected other than in their hatred of the United States. But even this could never unify them (say Islamic Studies experts) - they believe in radically different interpretations of Islam, and groups with radically different interpretations of Islam tend to war. A lot.
I support the troops wholeheartedly. I have family members all over the Middle East right now because W says so. But - My country always RIGHT, and if we are not, God help us to get into the right - I will never support a wrong choice of my country.
"Wise enough to play the fool, and to do that well craves a kind of wit..." - Twelfth Night
quote: Save the false patriotism for somebody who will buy it.
Hmmm, by supporting the President, that makes me a fake patriot? Can you please enlighten me on how you think this is logical.
quote: To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
quote: Whether you approve of George Bush or not you must support the war 100% in every aspect and detail.
quote: We Americans are in a time of war. No matter who the President is, be it Bill Clinton or George Bush, you support them in every demeanor of international conflict.
Certainly a change of pace in your own little jingo filled diatribe fest. Save the false patriotism for somebody who will buy it. Another example of a neo-cons idea of freedom, freedom for you to agree with me.
quote: [The US can blow N. Korea off the face of the universe. Same for Puerto Rico. Which by the way is owned by the United States. OWNED.
Essence of civility right here folks. I forgot, all Americans are supposed to be like this.
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -Teddy Roosevelt
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -Teddy Roosevelt
yeah but you chat first, i dont think Korea has the patience to do so. and **** off about Puerto Rico, oh what the hell you **** off about everything.....
and if you dont like Puerto Ricans and wish us to leave, you can kiss our beautiful round *****, because we're legal
"Regardless, I have always, and will always, succeed."
quote: but hes too much of a coward to do so, because he knows Korea can kick your ***
You're not a very good comedian. The US can blow N. Korea off the face of the universe. Same for Puerto Rico. Which by the way is owned by the United States. OWNED.
quote: And Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with anti-terrorist efforts. Iraq has no WMDs. Iraq has no ties to Al-Queda. And Bush was talking up the dangers of Saddam Hussein since before he was (s)elected president.
First, let me address what you said about Iraq having nothing to do with anti-terrorist efforts. You must be stupid as hell!!! What was Saddam? Are you saying he's not a terrorist? And yes, the CIA has proof that there were ties between Iraq and Al-Queda. Al-Queda operatives used Iraq as a training ground. And Iraq had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons while under Saddam Hussein which was reported to officials. So how can you tell me that liberating Iraq was not an anti-terrorist effort. You are a fool to say that it wasn't.
And finally, Bush was talking about Iraq's threat to the United States because there was one and it was very serious. Oh and by the way John Kerry was also talking about how Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US at the same time Bush was. Clinton also said Saddam needed to be dealt with. The difference between Bush and Clinton is that Bush has the b@lls to do what he says.
Lets always count on Americans to misunderstand what happens in Spain.
Spain didn't pull troops out of Iraq because the terrorists held hostages, Spain pulled out of Iraq because of the more conservative government losing an election because of their lying and over-eagerness to blame a recent bombing on Basque separatists.
Lets not forget that Al-Queada WANTS us to incite a holy war between christian and muslim nations. Thats what they WANT. Al-Queda can do nothing to us without a recruitment operation.
And Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with anti-terrorist efforts. Iraq has no WMDs. Iraq has no ties to Al-Queda. And Bush was talking up the dangers of Saddam Hussein since before he was (s)elected president.
It is the duty of every American citizen to support those who are risking their lives in our armed forces. It is our right to disagree with our government's decision to send our troops into war. I'm not saying that I'm against Bush, and I certainly don't advocate a removal of American troops now that we've dug this hole so deep, but what makes democracy special, what makes our country so unique, is that we have free will and have the privilidge to express our opinions. Bush may have had good intentions in entering Iraq, but there has got to be something wrong if half of his own country and most of the rest of the world do not support what he has done. No matter what intentions our government has when it sends our military into a territory that is not ours, it is not our right. It is not America's job to be the policemen of the world. We may be the most powerful and financially well-off nation, but we do not own this world. It is the right and duty of the United Nations, as an international peacekeeping organization, to fight for the safety of all people. If we do not have the support of the United Nations, we should not take matters into our own hands. Other nations (European, Asian, etc.) are not out to get us, and they have not forgotten the aid we have provided them in the past, they are working towards a safer and more peaceful world, too, but clearly see a very different path to that end.
We can "live freely" because of the way this nation was created and the way generations before us have defined their rights, and that includes those who protested Vietnam, those who fought in the World Wars, those who went against the advice of our government and fought in the Spanish Civil War, and those who fought for our nation's independence from Britain. I am every bit as patriotic as you are, I wear a yellow ribbon proudy to show my support for our troops, I hold an American flag with all the respect and appreciation that I owe to this nation, and most of all, I am thankful for the right to hold my own beliefs in all aspects of life.
And on another note, please use "the French Government" instead of "France" in making such statements, because I know from experience that the French populus is not necessarily of the same opinion as their government, just as the American populus is not necessarily of the same opinion as the US Government.
God Bless America. ________________________________________________
.:: do what you can, where you are, with what you have ::.
quote: First off, let's just cover the hypocrisy in your post: we're free, so we have to support our government. You'd think that freedom would enable us to hold our on views and opinions about the events of the world, but apparently this issue just doesn't count.
you're exactly right this issue doesn't count, any proud American would be as Patriotic as I and supporting this war 100%. But yes, you doneed to be more appreciative of the fact that men and women of the United States Armed Forces are dying for you so that you have the ability to make a post on this site, go to school, choose your occupation, and live life free. And by you not supporting the war, you might as well be tried for treason.
Now as for the rest of your post, it was just pure ignorant. It was right to go after Saddam Hussein because he was a threat to the American people as well as the rest of the world.
quote: Your claim that we need to "support the war in every aspect in detail" only goes to reveal your black-and-white way of thinking. I personally have mixed feelings about the war. I support our soldiers, and I at least support Bush in that he thinks he's combating terrorism. Unfortunately, though, this war will do little or nothing to combat terrorism. Al Qaeda attacked us, and we went after Iraq; that does not make us look strong or tough on terror.
Oh my God, where do I start? Bush is combatting terror. The way you think is, "hmm, if we stop attacking the terrorists, then they won't attack us." This makes no since, the goal of the terrorists is to disrupt our free lives. If we quit taking the battle to them, attacks won't subcide you @$$. They will only increase. The goal of the terrorists is not to make the Americans stop attacking, it's to bring down our country in flames. And I don't think you have a clue of how serious this threat is. Take Spain for instance, the terrorists took some Spanish hostages and said pull out of Iraq or we'll kill these men. Spain pulled out. So Spain is done, at the mercy of the terrorists, now they'll do whatever the terrorists tell them to. This is exactly what we must not do because it can only make the terrorists stronger.
quote: Each and everyone of you as an American has a duty to support the War in Iraq.
I think I understand what you are trying to say but you are phrazing it wrong. I have no duty whatsoever to support the war. I have a responsibility to support American citizen warriors who have been sent into harms way. Loyal opposition is the most patriotic thing I can think of and this mad bent to destroy it--on all ends of the political spectrum--is sheer madness, and if it is allowed to succeed... Well, independant thought was a fleeting dream, anyways.
A stubborn idiot says: I never change my political beliefs on anything, no matter what new evidence might be presented to me. A wise and reasonable man says: I change my opion on subjects as new evidence is presented. A strong leader says: I never change my political beliefs on anything, no matter
First off, let's just cover the hypocrisy in your post: we're free, so we have to support our government. You'd think that freedom would enable us to hold our on views and opinions about the events of the world, but apparently this issue just doesn't count. And really, why should it? The Bush Administration has already destroyed the Fourth Amendment, so we might as well just let it take the First as well.
Your claim that we need to "support the war in every aspect in detail" only goes to reveal your black-and-white way of thinking. I personally have mixed feelings about the war. I support our soldiers, and I at least support Bush in that he thinks he's combating terrorism. Unfortunately, though, this war will do little or nothing to combat terrorism. Al Qaeda attacked us, and we went after Iraq; that does not make us look strong or tough on terror. It makes us look insane. In addition, I hate the way Bush brought us into this war. He treated us all like sheep, manipulating and exploiting intelligence to make Iraq look like an actual threat to the U.S. And if, by chance, he didn't manipulate the intelligence, he certainly didn't understand it; perhaps he should have had one of the intel experts read it to him.
Now that we're in the war, though, I do think backing out of it would be a big mistake. We're stuck there, like it or not. We have quite a mess to clean up.
I do think that Europe (especially France) needs to be more willing to aid us in fighting terrorism, but fighting this war is not fighting terrorism. If we'd spent the time, resources, and troops going after Bin Laden instead of Saddam, we might very well have him by now.
I assume that the last sentence of your post was implying the Kerry would "cower". I have reason to believe the contrary: Kerry would fight only when it was absolutely necessary, and that is exactly what we need. Bush, on the other hand, will probably be invading Egypt to fight Iranian extremists any day now.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
Just because I'm an American doesn't mean I have to support everything my government does. I do not agree with the war in Iraq a 100% because there are some iffy things here and there, but I do support it since we're in so far now. Still, Americans are allowed to have their own opinion no matter what.
"I let my brother go to the devil in his own way" -Robert Louis Stevenson
Topics 
