GTA
Politics and Religion => Politics And Religion Discussion => : Gene_SC June 09, 2009, 02:14:35 PM
-
By Lou Pritchett
Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.
You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.
You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.
You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
Lou Pritchett
Note: Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.
Mr. Pritchett confirmed that he was indeed the author (http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp) of the much-circulated "open letter." “I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the ‘experts’ has had over 500,000 hits.
-
Amen
-
Oh, - you're talking about BO, - for a second there I thought it was Ted Kennedy. Kennedy NEVER held a job in his life until he became a U.S. Senator. (Come to think of it, add Pelosi & Reid to that list)
-
i'm gonna regret this...
but guys, you need to chill out. not that i'm on obamas side (since i'm not even american), but we all agree (at least the majority of the world) that Bush did far worse.
most things accused in that letter haven't really got any backup.
i don't want to get into conflict, but you're overreacting.
like i've said...i'm not on either side, since i don't like this left/right wing version of the world, i just observe things for now.
-
geiger - 6/22/2009 9:00 AM i'm gonna regret this... but guys, you need to chill out. not that i'm on obamas side (since i'm not even american), but we all agree (at least the majority of the world) that Bush did far worse. most things accused in that letter haven't really got any backup. i don't want to get into conflict, but you're overreacting. like i've said...i'm not on either side, since i don't like this left/right wing version of the world, i just observe things for now.
I don't care to get into discussions on politics online usually. But ; I'd really like to sit down one day with a BO supporter over a cup of coffee or favorite beverage and just let them explain to me just what is so great about what BO has done and just what was so bad that GW did himself . Contrary to what a lot of people believe , this country is not "ran" by one person , although the #1 supposedly in charge gets all the blame and most of the glory . The President can't do a whole lot without support of the House and Senate . We are not ruled by a king or queen . Over Taxing the achievers in order to share with the "less fortunate" builds a nation of deadbeat dependent sheeple . I support the passing of the Fairtax myself , where everybody pays their fair share and the true less fortunate are taken care of . http://www.fairtax.org kirby
-
i'm regretting it already :P
can't talk about obama really...but as for bush, a few things come to mind.
-war in iraq...most agree that it was an unjust war, that cost many american and other lives plus an insane amount of money, that is on par with the bailouts. obviously the war was made for different reasons, like securing energy resources...but as far as i can tell, we/you don't really get the benefits yet. and iraq is really a mess still and once you leave it will become an extremist heaven.
-threat of terrorism...statistics show an increase in global terrorism.
-the decline of freedom...patriot act and similar attempts. and foreign countries joining the anti terror bandwagon, basically people are now getting arrested on charges of terrorism when years back would just be considered plain criminal.
-recession...there is strong evidence that bushes poor economic plan lead to the recession
-this is gonna get touchy but i'm just reporting on what i read...increase in teen pregnancy due to failed abstinence only programs.
-and what's really frightening is that...i've read articles of respected media where they showed proof that bush was aware of 9/11 but did nothing to act. and also there was written evidence that showed the war in iraq was preplanned far before 9/11 happened.
i'm sure there are many other things to criticize, but these were the first that came to mind. to me it seems that being pro Bush is actually anti-american and unpatriotic. sending some five thousand US soldiers to their death in an unproductive and poorly planned war is just one factor to be concerned about.
i really don't want to be confrontational, but most of the points i made have substantial evidence to back them up, so i'm not just pulling it out of my a**.
for the record: i actually approve the war in Afghanistan...not that i approve people dying, but it's a far more genuine war than iraq will ever be
-
BO spent more in his first 100 days that it took to fight WWII - start to finish. Unfortunately, he's just getting stared. He, BO - has already sown the seeds for high inflation, - you'll see it starting next year. (he knows it too)
.
Any decline in freedom has NOTHING to do with the Patriot Act - it's known as "political correctness".
.
This recession was a looong time in the making - and started under Clinton. There was a "tech bubble" as you may recall under Clinton in the 90's - and that burst starting in 2000. Then we had the housing bubble, - fast forward to today. ... Thanks wholly to BO, - we are now in a BO inflicted "debt bubble" which going to ruin the dollar down the road a few years. Something far more serious a problem that housing or tech bubbles.
.
Sadam could have stopped the whole Iraqi mess by NOT kicking out the U.N. inspectors. He gave the (wonderful) U.N. and world the finger, - and thankfully he and his two sons, both of whom were mental cases, were eliminated. If some European countries had any balls, they'd have taken Hilter out before he got started, - saving millions and millions of people. But no, - we had to have chat after chat with him ... "Peace In Our Time" ... yeah right. Some folks just can't understand things, - and never will. .... BTW, - we have all volunteer armed services these day, anyone one that doesn't want to join - doesn't have to.
.
Teen pregnancy is a family/personal matter, - not some senator who looking to start another program. BTW, - abstinence works 100% of the time.
.
Bush knew about 911 before it happened? Do you know how silly and stupid that really sounds? ... BTW, - there are little green men from a flying saucer somewhere in New Mexico too. How's everyone over at MoveOn doing these days?? ... Don't answer - I'm not really interested. ... What a shock you agree with BO on Afghanistan, - lets see what happens. ;)
.
You are simply blowing smoke with that post my friend, ...
-
Mike, The best thing that you probably said was also most likely the most truthfull,(your not AMERICAN)! As in any war since the beginnig of time, it's sad but many casualties are the result,After 9/11 We as a nation,not just Bush had & still have every right to defend the saftey of this country from any nations harboring terrorist or any others who wish to bring down & destroy our way of life! I do not wish war on anyone but sometimes there are no alternatives! How many times would you allow me to attack or threaten to attack your family whether it be phsycally,mentally,financially or any abusive way before you fought back in attempt to destroy me! Bush may not have been the best president too many but he also had many supporters,since 9/11 there has not been an attack on U.S. soil, please inform me of what Bush single handedly did all by himself that you believe ruined our country that makes him so terrible in your eyes! BTW..Please tell me who BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA truly is! Terrorism has increased since it ever began but we still have not been attacked since 9/11! To defend others, one must first defend & protect oneself before being able defend others as we do & have been since the beginnig! Through our struggles & difficult times, WE ARE STILL A GREAT NATION! If this were not true why have our people not fled to other countries for a better life as they continue to flee to our homeland The United States of America! BTW..I'm not a political person, just an AMERICAN!
-
John, well put, I don't have the knowledge of politicts that you may have but I try & use my NYC street common sense to get my point across as you have admirably have! Thank you my AMERICAN BROTHER!
-
Mike,where do you actually come from?
-
North Pack - 6/22/2009 9:16 AM
BO spent more in his first 100 days that it took to fight WWII - start to finish. Unfortunately, he's just getting stared. He, BO - has already sown the seeds for high inflation, - you'll see it starting next year. (he knows it too)
.
Any decline in freedom has NOTHING to do with the Patriot Act - it's known as "political correctness".
.
This recession was a looong time in the making - and started under Clinton. There was a "tech bubble" as you may recall under Clinton in the 90's - and that burst starting in 2000. Then we had the housing bubble, - fast forward to today. ... Thanks wholly to BO, - we are now in a BO inflicted "debt bubble" which going to ruin the dollar down the road a few years. Something far more serious a problem that housing or tech bubbles.
.
Sadam could have stopped the whole Iraqi mess by NOT kicking out the U.N. inspectors. He gave the (wonderful) U.N. and world the finger, - and thankfully he and his two sons, both of whom were mental cases, were eliminated. If some European countries had any balls, they'd have taken Hilter out before he got started, - saving millions and millions of people. But no, - we had to have chat after chat with him ... "Peace In Our Time" ... yeah right. Some folks just can't understand things, - and never will. .... BTW, - we have all volunteer armed services these day, anyone one that doesn't want to join - doesn't have to.
.
Teen pregnancy is a family/personal matter, - not some senator who looking to start another program. BTW, - abstinence works 100% of the time.
.
Bush knew about 911 before it happened? Do you know how silly and stupid that really sounds? ... BTW, - there are little green men from a flying saucer somewhere in New Mexico too. How's everyone over at MoveOn doing these days?? ... Don't answer - I'm not really interested. ... What a shock you agree with BO on Afghanistan, - lets see what happens. ;)
.
You are simply blowing smoke with that post my friend, ...
1. bush was for the bailouts, not that i defend obama on this issue. i think the bailout was a wrong decision.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/24/bush.bailout/index.html
iraq's cost since the start is estimated to 3 trillion, the bailouts about 5 trillion. i think both numbers together will cause the US a headache.
2.misuse of Patriot act
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/09/security.letters/index.html
but i agree with you that the patriot act is not the main cause for loss of freedom. it's just an indicator. but people had their rights repressed/arrested due to the terrorist threat
http://www.rense.com/general61/feds.htm
http://www.lex18.com/Global/story.asp?S=2989614
http://legalift.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/activists-arrested-under-terrorism-law-before-g20-summit/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9zGhYSIAP8
plus many innocent foreign people who were taken to Guantanamo on no charge whatsoever, only to be released years later
3. sure, the recession has its roots deeper than bush and both sides have dirty hands.
4. so sadam forced war on himself? not that he was any threat at all in the first place
this video with taped proof says otherwise
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvDe7Z-ykDo
and also this article
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2006/03/31/bush_lies/
actually...most conclude to the same point
clinging on to that idea even after unable to locate the alleged WMD...it's really kind of silly.
some people argue that the US army is for US defense only. sadam posed no threat, since you've already had him by the balls with all the sanctions and no fly zone.
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0721-02.htm
5. personal matter...i definitely agree, but someone has to tell the kids about contraception if the parents wont. because we all know most teens won't do as they are told (to abstain from *_*_*_*_*_*).
6. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/06/flashback-seven-years-ago-today-bush-receives-bin-laden-determined-to-strike-in-us-memo/
it contains the actually memo bush got.
http://www.pubrecord.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=179:eager-to-tap-iraqs-oil-industry-execs-suggested-military-intervention-&catid=1:nationworld&Itemid=8
the oil industry pushed for a military strike on Iraq
MoveOn?...never heard of it
smoke?
edit: and i'm for afganistan no matter who's the president. why connect me with "BO"?
airgun/cuz - 6/22/2009 9:42 AM
Mike, The best thing that you probably said was also most likely the most truthfull,(your not AMERICAN)! As in any war since the beginnig of time, it's sad but many casualties are the result,After 9/11 We as a nation,not just Bush had & still have every right to defend the saftey of this country from any nations harboring terrorist or any others who wish to bring down & destroy our way of life! I do not wish war on anyone but sometimes there are no alternatives! How many times would you allow me to attack or threaten to attack your family whether it be phsycally,mentally,financially or any abusive way before you fought back in attempt to destroy me! Bush may not have been the best president too many but he also had many supporters,since 9/11 there has not been an attack on U.S. soil, please inform me of what Bush single handedly did all by himself that you believe ruined our country that makes him so terrible in your eyes! BTW..Please tell me who BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA truly is! Terrorism has increased since it ever began but we still have not been attacked since 9/11! To defend others, one must first defend & protect oneself before being able defend others as we do & have been since the beginnig! Through our struggles & difficult times, WE ARE STILL A GREAT NATION! If this were not true why have our people not fled to other countries for a better life as they continue to flee to our homeland The United States of America! BTW..I'm not a political person, just an AMERICAN!
actually i do agree with alot of your opinions.
personally i'd take America over china or any other repressive *_*_*_*_*_*hole out there, any day. but america set their standards high and it's judged based on them.
maybe america wasn't hit...but other countries were.
ehh...i knew i shouldn't get involved in politics, there's a huge chance it's gonna get messy.
-
Your obsession with Bush is a waste of time, - he's not the President today. Whether he agrees with the bailouts or not is totally immaterial, he has no say in the matter.
.
The cost to fund the conflict in Iraq was voted on a number of times, by a Congress loaded with Dems, - who voted YES.
.
Sadam did kick the inspectors out, - and if he had gonme along with the U.N. who sent them there, he'd probably still be in power today. You quote left wing material - not usually
very reliable. They come from a certain "point of view" just like anyone else. That's the stuff they put out, - and nothing is going to benefit ex President Bush. If it suits your purpose,
and agree it, - fine, go with it. ... Taking Sadam, and especially both of his insane sons out, - was beautiful. Sadam was not about to bomb, invade or whatever the U.S. - and no one
claimed he was. The danger he posed was starting local war that would automatically drag in the more powerful countries, - and things could easily get out of hand. Remember he's
a real nut case to begin with. During the first Iraq war - he launched Scud missiles into Israel, - who hadn't done a thing to him. That my friend is a blatant ACT OF WAR, - and Israel
didn't respond - although any other county would have in a freakin' heart-beat. ... If you're incapable of seeing the danger he posed - so be it. It's good he's gone, - and the foolish
Europeans should have done the EXACT same thing to Hitler, - just didn't have the cookies to do it.
.
Posting links to lefties sites is meaningless, - if I wanted to I could find/post links that say just the opposite.
.
MoveOn is far left political outfit - and well financed too. ... Blowing smoke - just a term, - use your imagination.
.
Here's a few quotes for you to glance at from Democrats on WMD ...
.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1051684/posts
-
you see...simply dismissing the actual data in the links that doesn't suit your pov is kind of dishonest.
left wing material, well some is, some is not...some is just plain fact despite which side you take. not finding WMDs is a fact from whatever pov you look from. or the fact that there is videotaped evidence along with other proof about the truth behind the UN inspectors.
from all honesty i watch both FOX and CNN/MSNBC. both have their history in being biased. but persuading the nation to start a revolution is something unique to FOX. obviously, sticking to foreign media is the best choice for "objective" reporting. from experience i think FOX manages to get things wrong way to often. Like for instance when Bill'O Riley accused Americans for committing murders of german prisoners at maldamy (not sure how is it written), which in reality was the other way around. A pretty strong accusation...from a proclaimed "patriot".
just check youtube on "fox exposed" i'll guarantee you you'll find more hits than "CNN exposed". also FOX usually uses quite dubious tactics of getting their info...Bill O rileys famous ambush approach.
but like i've already said...thanks to the internet FOX or CNN aren't the only sources of news. like for instance where they both failed to properly report on recent events in Iran.
i'll stick to the internet.
As for Sadam...he was not in any position to attack anyone because his army was barely holding together and besides, he was getting old to do anything meaningful. On the other hand North Korea is a perfect example how untrue the motive to topple Sadam was. NK has WDMs, it regular threatens US and it's allies and its leader is truly a maniac that starves his people and literally enslaves them. Sure...on dictator less the better...but this would be reasonable if iraq after 7 years would at least be stable, but once US troops are gone, then s*** will really hit the fan.
Toppling hitler was quite another story...at the time he began showing signs of agression he already had one of the world's top army and Europe was barely getting on their feet.
well if you find credible evidence of the contrary, be my guest.
anyway...this debate has gone in ways i didn't really wanted to. all i really wanted to say in the first place is that people should stop all this hating, because it really doesn't help.
the link you posted is not surprising really...just goes to show how both sides were wrong. the difference is that they were mostly talking about it, Bush actually almost invented evidence up to start a war (Uranium from Niger, ties with al Qaeda). and if you look at the time frame of when those quotes happened, Sadam didn't actually do anything dramatic or aggressive. Funny enough...the US sold iraq weapons at a certain point (WMD amongst them).
-
Sadam absolutey DID have WMD at one point, - gas & bio are considered WMD. As you may recall he used gas on both his own people and Iranian troops during THAT conflict. Remember, the guy is a tad nuts, - and that, not having the biggest army is why he was was so dangerous.
.
NK is another weak country - who has spent all is resources on weapons. You see NK as a threat because it has WMD? Maybe BO should do something about it then, - huh? NK is more of a threat to SK and Japan than the U.S. ... There's the hitch, like the mid-east. NK could easily start something on the peninsular that would drag in other countries. NK is run by another Looney Tunes. Do you see a pattern yet?
.
Assassinating Hitler would have been the right thing to do, - period. The reason he had developed such a large military is because the Euro's didn't enforce the restrictions imposed on Germany after WWI - see a patten here? ... They just stood by and let it happen, - don't want any problems. So another fruit cake ends up starting a war that killed millions, - because he wasn't stopped.
-
yes he did have (back in the late 70', 80', early 90', and the US even supplied him).
nuts...well, he obviously was brutal, but he didn't really have the power to do anything. if he for instance attacked israel, he'd be wiped off the map in a day or so. israel is the strongest country in the middle east for quite some time now.
NK is threatening to shoot a long range missile to Hawaii next month...how is that not threatening? SK is a close ally of US, so is Japan. and do you really think China would intervene to help NK if the US attacked? US is the biggest importer of Chinese goods and so is China the biggest exporter to the US. you really think china would sacrifice it's lifeline for some halfa**ed country that has nothing to offer it?
but i'm just curious...would you support OB if he decided to "free" the people of NK, just like Bush "freed" Iraq?
as for hitler...i kinda happen to agree with you partially. europe's sanctions were way to mild.
-
NK isn't going to hit Hawaii - the missile won't go that far, several hundred miles short. That kind of bs usually backfires or fizzles out. The chance of the U.S. and Russia or China "going at it" on their own are actually quite low. Everyone has too much to loose. ... That's where the fruitcakes of the world enter - and they don't need huge armies to cause some very serious problems. Hitler certainly didn't start out with much of anything, - but look what he did, - and ALL because no one stood up to him. ...
.
Would I support BO if he sent U.S. troops into NK? That simply isn't going to happen. Personally I don't think it's our job to instill democracy on any country, including Iraq, China or wherever. Now, if NK invaded SK again, - it's my view that fruitcake running NK HAS to be killed, by us if necessary - but preferably by one of his own or SK.
-
maybe not this missile, but the new and improved version might. that's beside the point if it will hit or not. fact is that NK has nuclear weapons and soon to have ways of transporting them (ballistic missiles). sadam had nothing at the time of the invasion. i remember vividly watching on TV the start of the Iraqi war, when sadam launched missiles on US and British encampments but none contained poisons/nuclear warheads/bacteria...actually alot of them didn't even explode, makes me think if they were even loaded with a warhead.
i hardly doubt Russia or China would go through the trouble of defending NK considering how much trade they have. russia and china did nothing when iraq was attacked, despite the place having the biggest oil reserves on the planet. one would think that iraq is way more worth than some muddy, barren NK.
actually the only reason China would be against a NK war is the close proximity to it's land. but like usual a buffer zone would be established that would suit both nations.
hitler didn't start with much yes...he started becoming a threat when he began to annex Austria, Czechoslovakia, that was after 1935. at that time he was already quite strong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graph_top7_def_expd_1930-38.png
you have to remember that back then people didn't look at hitler as a monster as we do today. yes he discriminated against jews and such, but you have to remember that at the time much of the world wasn't that civilized either (US had black segregation, France/UK weren't to polite in their colonies either), basically it wasn't that obvious what a man he is going to become.
so you're against the Iraq war? you always were?
personally i'm tempted to see that idiot Kim Long dong il thrown to the dogs for what he did, but as you i'd like to see SK do it.
-
No - I was never against the war per se, but taking out dangerous people is another matter. Sadam was dangerous, and if "something" happened to him and one of his Looney Tune sons ever took over, - all bets are off. There was absolutely going to be VERY serious problems. ... Neither you or I really know what China or Russia would actually do, - pure speculation. However, in the long run ALL countries do what they believe is in their own best interests, so-called friendships mean nothing.
.
New and improved missile by NK, - gonna happen, absolutely. You're making my point for me, - that sort of thing HAS to be headed off, or history will repeat.
-
if the sons took over. well yeah, that's also quite a bit of speculation. you do have a point, but the same logic could be applied to any lunatic in the world.
given the data iraq was no threat, what if it would...well what if russia reverted back to a dictatorship and nuked everyone's a**. you're talking about a preemptive strike, which is a controversial topic by itself. actually NK was being a pain in the a** through most of the 90' and somehow Iraq ended up first on the list.
and if you remember the start of the war in Iraq...how many tanks did we see? how much resistance there was? soldiers surrendered in thousands. even if one of his sons would get in power he wouldn't have the ability to do anything for a long time.
it's speculation yes, but the data presents quite a strong point if you ask me.
NK is by all means considered a threat now, not sometime in the future in some speculative scenario. also it wasn't dealt with before being able to make a functional nuclear bomb.
i see no reason why you don't push for war with NK if you agreed with Iraq.
as for the big ones going to war...let's see...nobody did anything about Chechnya, Kosovo, Serbia (close ally of Russia), Afganistan, Iraq, Georgia. yes, part of them weren't proper wars. sure friendship means nothing to them...but trillions of dollars trough trade do.
however i do agree that less lunatics in the world the better...just don't do it like Iraq, cause that caused even more lunatics to gain influence.
-
No one I know prefers war, - but taking out a dangerous leader is another matter. I'm NOT talking about a preemptive strike on NK (you were with BO freeing them) rather an assassination. The Kosovo's of the world are VERY unlikely to spill into something much larger, they're simply not worth it. The middle east with Israel and oil is entirely different. You seem to be hung up on how big was the army, how many tanks etc. - that's NOT the issue. It's what that fool could do to Israel or impact the world oil supply which would escalate this into a much larger problem. You're comparing apples to oranges and then wondering why they aren't the same. ...
-
now we're getting somewhere...so it was a war for oil security? and israel of course...not that it cannot defend itself with a far superior army.
when we move from freeing the people and removing an evil dictator to issues about oil supply...that's a whole different game. obviously when Saddam was a buddy of the US and the oil kept flowing they didn't really have any problems. when he began closing the pipe, things got interesting.
november 2000...Saddam switches to Euros
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998512,00.html
you see...it all comes down to this. Saddam wasn't really a threat to anyone, not in the military sense at least. but he did hit us where it hurts...on our gas prices. which is actually our own fault for relying so much on foreign resources.
is that a cause for war? american imperialism? you decide. keep in mind that 4300 US soldiers dies plus some 3 million civilians and the gas is still not cheap. and considering we'll lose all influence once iraq is left to the islamic extremists (something that almost both sides can agree about)...i don't see any decrease of oil prices.
edit: as for NK leader assassination...how would that be done?
-
"Getting somewhere? You're sounding like the leftie you are. Some kind of stability in the mid-east is vital, - and always has been.You do understand that - right? Sadam became a threat to that stability. If you remember right he moved in on Kuwait - you do recall that - right? The ONLY reason he wasn't taken out then is because we listened to the U.N. - and simply drove him out of Kuwait. He should have been eliminated at that point, - but another "Peace In Our Times" approach was used, - with predictable results. With WMD the threat is higher, - one that has to be dealt with. I already posted a link for you showing how many Dem Congressman in this country thought/believed he had them. Sadam was in the cats seat with U.N. inspectors in Iraq, - but his ego couldn't handle it. ... You over estimate Israel, - it's VERY small and can't retreat, it hasn't anywhere to go. A real military attack on them could easily escalate into nuclear - they'd have no option if defeat looked even close. It's not as simple as you folks love to believe. ... NK assination?? I have no doubt SK has a number of folks (agents if you like) in the north, - just as NK does in the south.
-
leftie? wait...don't go calling out names just like that. since i'm not even a leftie and besides...being a "righty" doesn't really mean anything better.
yes...vital for what? obviously it's the oil there and partially our friends the Israeli.
The war ended in stalemate in 1988, largely due to American and Western support for Iraq. This was part of the US policy of "dual containment" of Iraq and Iran. Between half a million and 1.5 million people from both sides died in the 1980-88 war.[30]
In 1977, the Iraqi government ordered the construction of Osirak (also spelled Osiraq) at the Al Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, 18 km (11 miles) south-east of Baghdad. It was a 40 MW light-water nuclear materials testing reactor (MTR). In 1981, Israeli aircraft bombed the facility, in order to prevent the country from using the reactor for creation of nuclear weapons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq
israel actually prevented iraq way back in 1981. from then israel just got stronger and iraq got weaker.
i've already replied to the democrats WMD response.
large parts of africa are in flames...and what do we do? nothing really...except for the parts that have valuable resources to be extracted.
i'm going to bed now...so i won't reply anytime soon. i'd just like to mention that no hard feeling were meant at least from my part, despite being "the leftie i am" or as "the folk" i'm supposedly from.
we can continue the debate later if you want, i think it's quite interesting really.
-
The stability is VERY vital to that whole region, - especially the oil exporters. Saudi Arabia comes to mind as one, - it costs them about $40.00-$42.00 a barrel to run their country at today's spending. No country in the region came to Iraq's aid, but we were able to put bases in the region to attack them, - there's a message there. Yes, we supported Iraq at one point, so what? Things change, politics, finance, weather, personal lives, - big deal, what we did a generation ago doesn't mean it has to go on for eternity. No country operates like that. Glad to here you're "not one of them", ... ;)
-
of course it is vital to the region, but for maintaining a stable oil supply. not because saddam would nuke someone.
ok, let's not focus on the connections into the past...though the same people were involved (Rumsfeld, Bush senior,...). i agree it's not that important, but it's sill worth to keep it in mind.
you see...ironically i'd probably feel more supportive of iraq if bush came clean with the real intent at the start. to secure oil reserves. but he had to lie to the US and everyone else so he can start a war. but he'd be still guilty of being totally incompetent to stabilize iraq.
warning...a bit off topic:
('ve seen footage of real US soldiers complaining about the poor tactics and management of the war. actually iraq is unjustly costing US taxpayers too much. i've seen, heard an read reports about how the private organizations that supposed to reconstruct iraq were literally ordering stuff there only to have it quickly dumped away or burned, so they can order some more...guess where all the fees and profit margins went? not to the iraqis nor the US soldiers. i watched a documentary where a dump manager was interviewed right there on the field, but after the documentary aired he got honorably discharged.
and that's just one piece of the big failed mosaic that iraq is.
as you remember...when US invaded Iraqis greeted them, but being jobless and insecure quickly cut happiness to an abrupt end. i guess it's the fault of the oil strategy implemented for the invasion that lead to the discontent of Iraqis. of course we shouldn't dismiss the sectarian tensions between Shina and Sunnis. it's actually a culmination of both)
returning to the main point...the so called lefties accuse the US of being imperialistic. is that wrong or right. it depends from person to person. although i think this comparison wouldn't be that off...drivers of big SUV and large consumers would welcome new oil supply. Prius drivers might look at things differently.
my opinion...the more you're reliant on others (lunatics as it is the norm with oil) the more you're likely to get s*****d.
-
This thread is already far too long - it's been a pleasure but no more. ;)
-
yeah i agree...we're also running out of subjects to talk about.
pleasure same here :)
it was just an online debate, so i hope there aren't any grudges after it.
-
You know being young compared to all of the rest is truly a daunting thing to face. I feel intimidated as I am scared at being shot down but there are some things that I do not agree with.
As I came on this section, I was extremely surprised at the different sides of people here. I was surprised to find out that most here are what I would consider extreme conservatives. I see nothing wrong with that and I respect that. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. I have not seen the youth majority post in this section and I can understand why.
Today's society teaches us to be fair to everyone and that is what I was taught to believe.
Gene_SC - 6/9/2009 7:14 PM
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
I think that different doesn't always mean bad does it? Sometimes radical change is needed just like FDR has done in the past. We may not agree with what Obama does but why not give him a chance? It hasn't even been a year.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.
So did FDR, one of our greatest presidents.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
It doesn't hurt to invest in new and more efficient technology. Don't we need to stop our dependence on foreign oil? (As Warren Buffet said)
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.
I think that statement is really subjective.
Once again, this is just my interpretation of the statements said above.