Troops Out of Iraq

Well said.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

 

So many people depending Bush and his hunger for oil.

However, gas prices still soar.

And yet-- everyone forgives him of his core reason to invade Iraq.

- George W. Bush, speech to UN General Assembly, Sept. 12, 2002

The man is a liar and a bumbling idiot (google Bushisms).

 

Not everyone.

 

To the best of my (limited) knowledge, there is only one thing that the USA does not have enough of - oil, and that is the main reason that they invaded Iraq.

Darlene has already pointed out one of the other reasons - the assassination
attempt on Bush senior.

Religion and blatant racism have a very large part to pay in all of this as well, both as a reason and as a way of garnering acceptance from the populace.

Terrorism and WMD's were the excuse.


As far as Bush being compared to Hitler, perhaps that is a bit harsh; but how do you honestly think history is going to judge the USA
As the self-proclaimed protector of the world
or as yet another evil empire ?

The media and all of the propaganda has just been absolutely ridiculous and generally transparent, but unfortunately people believe what they want to believe to suit their xenophobia

Coalition of the willing
and
The axis of evil

Give me a break rolleyes

 

Correction, were the lie. Bush was not honest behind his motives.

How can people trust a leader that has lied, even if just once?

 

You may have me on the first. Not sure I'll be able to tie anything to Bush directly. That was clumsily articulated on my part.

However, the comparison makes more sense than you give it credit.
I would suggest the biggest similarity is the 'Big Lie' technique.
Originally accredited to Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister. You can read about it in Mein Kampf.

Nazi leader Herman Goering once remarked that it was easy to lead people into war, regardless of whether they resided within “a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.” All that was required, Goering argued, is for their government to “tell them they are being attacked, and then denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger.”

This sure sounds eerily similar to the justification for the Iraq invasion. I personally was called unpatriotic (despite not being American) by some rabid war supporter.

I'll agree that he takes a lot of flak that he doesn't really deserve (even here - I really didn't mean to turn this into a Bush-bashing) but he is "the decider"

Maybe people expect more leadership from someone who clings so tightly to authority? You know, in areas other than war?

This I take issue with.
I know that AT LEAST China, Russia, France, German and Belgium were all against entering Iraq to ensure compliance with security council resolutions.

That represents at least 3/5 of the permanent security council members, 1/3 of the entire security council, and 1/4 of the world's population. AT LEAST.

I think it has more bearing than you're willing to admit. US helped Saddam get into power, CIA trained Afghanis to help defend against the USSR during the cold war, and now they're both enemies, and it has nothing to do with the current situation?
However, you're right, that may be an entirely different discussion

Alright. So what mess did the US make in Iraq, and how is maintaining the occupation going to make it a LESS hostile area?

Make a desert, and call it peace?

Okay, if the US IS threatened, WHAT exactly is threatened? Your oil interests, or the safety of your citizens? I think the large part of the 'Big Lie' is that your safety is at stake. Sure, the odd extremist may get through and cause a horrorfic tragedy like 9/11, but if the safety of US citizens is really the concern, it is a drop in the bucket when compared to other things, like automobile accidents.

Not sure how to make it more clear. If lives are at stake, there are worse threats than terrorism. Automobile accidents was just an example of something that claims more lives.

I keep hearing "we need to be fighting over in Iraq so there not fighting here".
This makes no logistical sense.
If the US (supposed world military superpower) has to consider drafting (and they have at least twice now) to sustain their efforts overseas, how is a lesser power going to bring it to the superpower's doorstep, aside from sneaky, cowardly attacks like 9/11?

Alright! We're in agreement, then? I don't really believe that was what Dyamond was trying to say that.

The question is:

Why are a fanatical few a justification for invading a country, then? Why are we letting a few bad apples ruin the whole bunch? Surely moderate islamics are far more common. Especially when we know that despite a few similar passages in the Christian bible, that most Christians are peaceful.

What would happen if a foreign country invaded the US to eliminate say, the Westboro Baptist Church, for their Christian fanaticism?

That would be ugly.

You may be right about them posing a threat to oil interests. But, if that's the case, it is time for change. Lives aren't worth it.

 

Several of our leaders have lied (Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan, Clinton) and I've never seen a president bashed more then Bush is. Some people still talk highly of those above named presidents despite the fact they lied.

 

Agreed! BS is no new part of politics.

However, how many of the above lies have led to wars?
How many of the above lies led to huge compromises of civil liberties? (patriot act)

 

Perhaps it's a matter of the lies. It's a difference to say no, I didn't have sex with Monica.
than it is to say, that Iraq had WMD and we can't reveal our source of information, so that the American congress would approve an invasion for which there was no other basis.

However, I agree that it's absurd to draw comparisons between Bush and Hitler. I can think of several important differences right off the top of my head. .... um .... but ... maybe I'd better not elaborate. LOL

abri

 

I don't fault Bush for lies, they are actually part of the job, much like a diplomats. I fault him for being stupid, and for having an agenda that was not in the best interest of the USA.

My definition of a good president?

A patriotic, charming, smart, conniving, total a$$hole.

Fact is, sometimes the president HAS to say one thing and do another, in the best interests of the country. I just want him to be on the same side I am, with Bush I'm not so sure.

 

Agreed but there are so many conspiracy theories about why we went to war. Some claim oil, some revenge and others to help the Iraqis.

I've had friends serve in Iraq and when they came back they told stories of many Iraqis thanking the troops and then being glad they were there. My friends stating the Iraqis are just like us, they just want to work, support thier families and live thier lives as free as possible and appreciate the troops effort but you dont hear those on the the news. All the media portrays is the bad and the evil and the termoil.

 

His lie has killed people. Let us not forget he would bring back the Draft, if he could have. What lies did the above presidents say specifically?

 

This conversation just pisses me off.

I'm leaving before I say something I regret.

War is f'ing stupid. We are in Iraq for the wrong reasons, and people are dying because of it. All thanks to an idiotic president. IRAQ HAS WMDs! Shame he wasnt impeached for that. I supported invading Afghanistan, but NOT Iraq.

Thats my stance, and it will not change.

 

One last thing. This is only a voluntary military because Bush wasn't allowed to reinstate the Draft.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM

 

It’s a lie, in your opinion. We don’t know the real “truth” as to why we went to Iraq with all these conspiracy theories abounding. Can you tell me where did it say he would bring back the draft? I must have missed that.

Truman –

The lie: "The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, in so far as possible, the killing of civilians."
The truth: Though Hiroshima was the headquarters of a number of military units, it was mostly a civilian city. In fact, Hiroshima was rated a low military priority by the U.S. Army; that's why it hadn't been bombed yet. 140,000 people, almost all civilians, died as a result of the bombing.

Kennedy -

The lie: "I have previously stated and I repeat now that the United States intends no military intervention in Cuba."
The truth: Not only was the Bay of Pigs invasion organized and funded by the CIA, but Americans flew combat missions as well. One day after Kennedy made the above statement, an American pilot was shot down on a bombing mission over Cuba. Castro recovered the pilot's bodies and kept it -- frozen -- for the next 18 years as proof. (He returned the body when he heard that the pilot's daughter was looking for her father who, she had been told, disappeared on a training flight.) Over 100 Cuban exiles, 14 Americans, and an unreported number of Cubans died in the invasion.

Johnson -

The lie: "As President and Commander in Chief it is my duty to the American people to report that renewed hostile actions against United States ships on the high seas in the Gulf of Tonkin have today required me to order the military forces of the United States to take action in reply."
The truth: There was no unprovoked Vietnamese attack on a U.S. warship. President Johnson ran with the untrue story to gain support for American involvement in Vietnam.


Reagan –

The lie: "We did not -- repeat -- did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages -- nor will we."
The truth: Reagan approved the sale of over 2,000 anti-tank weapons to Iran in return for promises to release the American hostages there. Money from the sale of those weapons went to support the Contras' war in Nicaragua. (The White House needed this backdoor method to fund the Contras because Congress had banned military aid to them.)

Clinton -

The lie: Speaking after a White House presentation on child care, he told the nation, "I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." (He also, of course, may have told the same lie under oath.)
The truth: You know he did it.

 

Good God all mighty, want a good laugh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9EbssUgHj4

 

Its a lie, in my opinion?!

Wow...

 

As for the Draft hing, it was perople in his administration that wanted it.

I could have sworn I saw him supporting it as well, but I cannot find a link anymore.

 

Yes, unless you have solid concrete proof that we are there for oil, then yes it is your opinion. Sorry, I mean no offense.

 

Well, you did.

I said he lied about Iraq having WMDs and using it as a reason to go to war with them.

I previously said it was a war about Oil, but did not state it as fact.

 

Ok, I agree about the WMDs but we were not the only nation to believe that Saddam had them and we are not the only nation at war in Iraq.

 

I want to jump in, to defend Truman and Clinton. Hiroshima was hit because it was the Japanese equivalent of Annapolis. So choosing it as a bombing point was a matter of pride. That they hit the city and not the academy is suspiscious though, that I'll hand you.

As for Clinton, I don't recall anyone getting shot over him denying having sex. I also don't understand why it was such a big deal.

 

Previous leaders of any country would have made far worse decisions that had much broader implications including the loss of countless lives.

Perhaps it was blown out of proportion, but you would hope that the leader of your country is not morally bankrupt. Everyone makes mistakes, but with great power comes great responsibility.

 

lol morally bankrupt??? Let he who is without sin throw the first stone. I have heard the French might even have Mistresses and such and no one gives it a second thought.

The problem is the Religious Right who are often found guilty of far, far, worse moral/questionable judgment and hypocritical behavior.

 

Well he did get married and entered into an agreement to be faithful to his wife.

Someone should not be trusted to run a country if they cannot be trusted by those who love them the most.
It is not so much about the deed itself, it is more to do with the decision process.

Having never strayed myself, I am quite happy to throw stones at those who do. :neener

 

Clinton lied under oath. Thats not lack of moral judgment or hypocritical its illegal.

People go to jail for that.

 

This was always going to be an emotive subject with strong views on both sides.

i can not think of one government regime that has not lied to the electorate at some point be it over private or public issues but this has always been explained as "IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST" as was said earlier we should be able to trust our politicians though it does not work out that way they tend to treat us like mushrooms (keep us in the dark and feed us bull:crap.)

what appears to be the motivation is self esteem/power and enrichment of their own lifestyle.

the government here is in turmoil, we had elections over 3 months ago and still we do not have a prime minister due to the fact that the French speaking minority doe not think they are getting enough power, the system is you have to have unanimous approval to be first minister and 1 man from the french speakers keeps on vetoing it.

the politicians no longer have the best interest of the country in mind like they did in the past and now tend to make decisions without considering the consequences to the general public.

the decision to go to war with Iraq was made by a small number of top politicians for reasons that we can only speculate.

it has now become a public outcry in many lands and the outcome is yet to decided, in the meantime our sons and daughters are dying.

one example of the hypocrisy was Prince Harry (UK) he is a serving soldier and truly wanted to be with his troops but was refused permission to go to a war zone as it could leave him open to being a political target.

WTF are all the young men and women who are serving in a war zone if not political pawns who are doing their best in the situation that they did not create.

 

You call cheating on your wife not morally bankrupt??? wow

It's also really funny how people only use scriptures when it suites them, then its usually taken out of context.

 

why was he impeached if I werent a big deal? Like evilfantasy said he lied underoath which is a crime.

 

I'm about to say something totally off the wall and believe me it is not something I advocate in the least it is simply my observation.

All the presidents who were womanizers seemed to be more compassionate for the people.

Roosevelt pulled the US out of the depression and set up so many benefits (which most have gotten out of control) had his mistress living in the same house with his family.

Eisenhower had the task of putting the country together after WWII had his american wife and his british so called wife.

Kennedy (both) did as much as Lincoln for human rights.

Carter is a good man and did more good out of office. (he admitted sinning in his heart only)

Clinton, in my opinion did no harm to the people, depends how you view that one I suppose.

 

We have strayed a fair way from the original topic

Darlene, it is an interesting observation
Probably has something to do with having more compassionate people in their lives, bound to rub off on them to some degree.

Still makes them all somewhat untrustworthy in my eyes.

 

Bush on The Constitution, what he put his hand on the Bible and swore to uphold and protect.

http://www.gnn.tv/threads/10799/Bush_on_the_Constitution_It_s_just_a_goddamned_piece_of_paper

 

you must read my mind... I actually just said that to myself before I read what you wrote. So I think Im done with this topic.. very many interesting points of view

 

I think we may have pulled out sooner if not for web of lies that is still being pushed on the American people,a recent newyorktimes\CBS poll said that 1 in 3 Americans still believe that Saddam is personally responsible for 9\11 and the war is a "Just" war,it would be easy for anyone to say that these people are idiots but they cant be blamed if they are faced with powerful propaganda lies like this from the republican party "and entities like vetsforfreedom\freedomwatch.org who are indirectly funded by the republican party", pushing the link between 9\11 and Iraq.

I believe this ad and similar were and still are broadcast regularly on prime time TV,it sickens and frightens me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNTWYnPi8yc

http://www.freedomswatch.org/

This is the worst kind of propaganda that gets the viewer emotionally involved with the lie which stops them from accepting the truth when they hear it.

It reminds me of a story you may have heard of it,its of a father who lost his son in the twin towers collapse,when they were bombing Iraq he wanted his sons name put on the side of a 2000lb bomb and a message like "This is for 9\11",when he heard Bush say for the first time there is no link between 9\11 and Iraq he felt betrayed and was disgusted in the fact his sons memory was used in the killing of people that hadnt harmed him or his family.

This is the kind of deceit we are dealing with,it isnt a one of lie BY ONE PERSON!Even if he is the president,its an ongoing campaign by numerous people to justify an illegal,immoral war,if they had a better reason to invade iraq than they were responsible for 9\11 it would have been on TV many times before now.

 

Well said!

Yes he is the "Decision Maker" but the information he uses to make decisions comes from multiple sources.

It is interesting to hear the democrats give nearly the same responses to the war as the president does.

There is no easy way out. But I feel as long as we are willing to secure their country, they will let us.

My son was trained and is on his way to Iraq. It didn't take the Army as long to train him to fight in a foriegn land as it is taking to train the Iraqis to fight for their own country.

Something is seriously wrong with that!

 

Interesting replies on the above Thank you to all who participated and to those that gave their personal views.

 

This is what it does to someone years after when they are grown and the truth becomes clear God providing they live and come out sane, as sane as one can be after seeing death and destruction like never seen before, This is way recruiters go to high schools (which ought to be out-lawed) I was sure that after Viet Nam people would know better but it happens all over again every generation.
Sorry Evil, I wasn't going to remark any more but can't stop, it's is such a thorn in my side, paw, heart, whatever.
God save as many as you can before this horrid episode is over.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGErmKEK-bY

 

@DARLENE
if you don't stop letting yourself get so wound up you will have a heart attack.

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/8501/93968355rh5.jpg

it's a terrible thing that our young men and women have to go to war but it seems to be in the genes of the homo sapient.

we are the only species on the planet who kill their own kind and no doubt we will continue to do so for time immemorial or until we obliterate mankind from the world.

i am just glad that at 60 years old i have lived through both good and bad times many of our children will give their young lives before they get the chance to do the same.

it makes me so sad that after all the conflicts of the last 60 years we have not learned the futility of war but the driving force would appear to be greed for the possessions of another.

 

Thats it in a nut shell and keep the paddles on hand

 

A lot has been said already, and I don't want to debate with anyone, but I thought I'd share a little about why I believe we should bring the troops now. I believe we were mislead about the justifications for war and I now see our presence in Iraq as a reason to shovel billions of dollars into the pockets of the war profiteers with no bid contracts while exasperating money problems here at home. Mission accomplished happened a long time ago, yet we are still there, and many Americans and Iraqis are still dying. I love the family and friends we all have in our military and I want them home as soon as possible. That is why I write my senators and take my place on the side of the street with others who want those responsible for this unjust war to be held accountable.

The chain reaction of evil--wars producing more wars -- must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d90/bigpapa3xl/rally0jm.jpg