Bush/Cheney four more years!!

[Leftseat86]

Herpa2003, GrantT

I think you are missing the point again. Kerry did not get the same information as Bush. Thats just not how our government works. It was Bush's job, based on the information that he and his staff analysed, to determine whether or not Saddam and Iraq was a great enough threat to the United States to call for a full scale war. Bush presented his information, saying there was imminent and grave danger posed by Saddam and Iraq, that Saddam had an active weapons program, and even going so far as to say he had links to Al Qaeda.

Regardless Grant, of Saddam's intentions, as the CIA report clearly states: There was no way Saddam could try to aquire weapons, or begin any sort of advanced program, with sanctions and inspections still in place.

This is NOT an imminent threat. And if you think it is, then what about North Korea, who has an ACTIVE and proven nuclear program, who has KICKED out inspectors, and who has on several occasions THREATENED the United States and our allies. (Japan)

I am a Republican supporter 75% of the time. But my 25% of other is realizing the bullshit that was this war. If you can't see that well, theres not much I can do for you. Its plain and simple.

There are so many greater threats to our country that are not getting the attention they should. Security at our Nuclear powerplants is a joke. Osama is hiding in Pakistan. North Korea is making nuclear weapons as we speak.

This is just ridiculous.

-Clovis[/b]

[herpa2003]

Clovis, hindsight is 20/20.

Kerry was on the Senate Intelligence Commitee. He had access to information on Iraq's supposed WMD program. He saw this intelligence, and then voted for the war, saying that Iraq's WMDs were a grave threat that must be dealt with.

If you look back, Kerry has been saying the same thing of Iraq's WMD program (that it was a grave threat) since the early 1990s. So why is it only a lie when Bush says it?

[Longreach747]

I want to officially declare that all the Australian members that have spoken in this thread so far have their heads hopelessly far up their asses!!!

Longreach 747 is the worst. He seems like he's taking his talking points straight from the Communist Party of Australia... or Michael Moore, who seems to revere...

hahaha, your a laugh n a half, if i'm a communist because i like more than 70% of my fellow Australians who didn't want our govt to go to war or can see a disaster staring at you in the face then sobeit.

i don't take to kindly to watching innocent men, women and children being slaughterd, you don't need to be a communist to object to it, nothing positive has happend in Iraq, casualties mount, discontent amont troops, it show signs of a disaster in the making.

and as for the Mike Moore comment, i posted nothing to do with him except some letters to him from YOUR soldiers, which clearly shows things are NOT good.

herpa,
interesting how the second reason was to free the Iraqi people, i'd have thought that would be the main reason, a good reason to go to war would have been to free the persecuted Iraqi people, but no, it was about nonexistent WMD's, and even if they did have them, how much of a threat are they to the US??

Iran is producing them too, but the US don't dare go there, for fear of a blood bath of monumental proportions, same with NK, so they tried to bully a small country like Iraq, cos GWB's dad was a target of Saddam, so the rest of Iraq has to suffer at the ignorance and stupidity of your leader. i wonder what the everyday Iraqi thinks of what's happening around them?

where n when does it end??

[Leftseat86]

Then I'm voting for Ralph Nader.

[Longreach747]

and what's even worse is that our PM's son is over in the US helping DUBYA get re-elected! he was sent over by our PM to help in his campaign. how far up his ass is our PM.

[herpa2003]

interesting how the second reason was to free the Iraqi people, i'd have thought that would be the main reason, a good reason to go to war would have been to free the persecuted Iraqi people, but no, it was about nonexistent WMD's, and even if they did have them, how much of a threat are they to the US??

Well, if it was the main reason, then people would ask why we couldn't invade countries like Sudan or Congo.

Iran is producing them too, but the US don't dare go there, for fear of a blood bath of monumental proportions, same with NK, so they tried to bully a small country like Iraq, cos GWB's dad was a target of Saddam, so the rest of Iraq has to suffer at the ignorance and stupidity of your leader. i wonder what the everyday Iraqi thinks of what's happening around them?

Israel will probably take care of Iran, with our help. NK is very fragile; an invasion by us could lead its neighbors getting nuked. Plus, they know better than to try anything with us. They don't want to be turned into a radioactive parking lot!

[AEagle40]

You guys do realize that these political threads aimed to sway people here are pointless? There are less than 5 weeks before the election. People have decided or they haven't. The percentage of the undecided that will vote now is very, very small. People already have their opinions and won't change them, unless something major happens. Potshots at each other now are truly pointless. If you guys want to change the political world, then by all means do something productive. Posting crap on an internet website thats supposed to be aviation related is not the way to do that. Just my opinion.

And Clovis, not to discredit you at all, but I have a hard time listening to anybody from California. I mean the court in Sacramento just passed this. California Bans Weeding Fields By Hand I mean come on, some labor never hurt anyone.

[indian airlines]

A system that violates Darwin's laws of evolution (trying to make humans all equal) is bound to fail...

Bullshit. Then why fight for equality at all? Anywhere? After all it goes against Darwin, doesn't it...

when Darwin wrote his laws I'm sure AK-47's, submachine guns, chemical weapons and nuclear weapons weren't around.

It was the right decision to neutralize Iraq, whether you agree with it or not.

Yeah, we'll just take your word for it. NUKE 'EM ALL...

So why is it only a lie when Bush says it?

Because Bush had access to MORE information, more complete information. HE overrode the weapons inspectors, not Kerry. He overrode the UN, not Kerry.

And for all those who say that the UN is a weak organization, then why doesn't the US get the hell out of it? What's the point of being a member of an organization and not abiding by it's rules.

And Grant, I don't care what any report says, you show me the WMD's and only then will I believe you.

George Bush sidelined the actual war on terror (in Afghanistan) to pursue a personal agenda. Nothing more to it.

[Leftseat86]

You guys do realize that these political threads aimed to sway people here are pointless? There are less than 5 weeks before the election. People have decided or they haven't. The percentage of the undecided that will vote now is very, very small. People already have their opinions and won't change them, unless something major happens. Potshots at each other now are truly pointless. If you guys want to change the political world, then by all means do something productive. Posting crap on an internet website thats supposed to be aviation related is not the way to do that. Just my opinion.

This is the OFF-TOPIC forum.

This isn't meant to sway anyone. But if you can't see the absurdities presented, then you're blind.

[FlyCharlestonSC]

WMDs, and our secondary reason was to free the Iraqi people.

why Iraq then?

there are other countries we could have freed.

honestly--if WMDs in Iraq were actually a problem, Israel would have 'taken care of it' as the did in the 80s.

[Leftseat86]

WMDs, and our secondary reason was to free the Iraqi people.

why Iraq then?

there are other countries we could have freed.

honestly--if WMDs in Iraq were actually a problem, Israel would have 'taken care of it' as the did in the 80s.

Exactly. If ANYTHING the greatest threat posed by Iraq was to Israel, and even then, you could have argued otherwise.

-CLovis

[indian airlines]

(except for a few hundred thousand Iraqis, Iranians, Kuwaitis, Israelis).

Yeah. I don't see America in that list, Grant. Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but what was the big itch in Dubya's pants that he HAD to override the UN, and go in before the weapons inspectors could finish their job? Where was the "big threat", the "grave and imminent danger" etc posed by Iraq? Saddam wasn't really a threat to the US, face it.

[srbmod]

Instead of putting on the hipwaders to get into this muck that this thread has become, I'll just say this:

https://www.votetoimpeach.org/

And for those curious on what grounds Bush (And Cheney, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld as well) should be impeached:

http://impeachbush.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=VTI_articles

[herpa2003]

WMDs, and our secondary reason was to free the Iraqi people.

why Iraq then?

there are other countries we could have freed.

That's why it was our secondary reason. Perhaps you didn't notice what I said earlier on this page-

Well, if it was the main reason, then people would ask why we couldn't invade countries like Sudan or Congo.

[FlyCharlestonSC]

That's why it was our secondary reason. Perhaps you didn't notice what I said earlier on this page-

As I said before...the first reason was bs. Israel would have taken matters into their own hands.

Don't gimme that "well John Kerry voted for the war" crap. He his the lesser of the 2 evils.