We Are Finishing the War

[siceone]

Moral and vocal support for anything makes a big difference as well.. That is what our country is based on that even if some cannot do for them selves the ones who can do will do for them.

What are these lies you speak of? WMD was only one of the reasons we went to war in iraq is the liberation of the iraqi people also a Lie? is the interim constitution they signed also a lie is the building of schools and roads and Sewer systems and power plants and increasing employment and the cessation of the embezzelment of over 100 billion dollars of iraqui oil for food money? is that a lie too? What about the fact that David Kay said that some materials were moved to Syria how comes you're not asking anything about that the man said it himself, don't you want to know what went to syria? Do you even care?

I think all you care about is america being wrong about this. You don't want us to succeed because it would mean that Ideas that differ from your own work and maybe you would be wrong.

and I have never seen Bush make a joke out of anything to diminish it's meaning and impact.

And you know what else I can appreciate a little bit of humor even when it's about a dire and tense situation cause you know what that's just the way I fucking am Im a human being.

even when my girl friend died I laughed about it sometimes.. it's how we cope.. you have no IDEA what his fucking job is like, let alone what it means to be an american citzen and to have family in battle. so stop armchair quarterbacking every little thing the mand does he's not perfect just like all of us he's doing the best he can which in my opnion is pretty damn good.

It took us way less than 12 years and a 100 billion dollars in bribes to our gov't officials to get saddamn out of iraq.

by the way those men and women who willingly signed up for a job knew what they would be called on to do. if you don't agree with what they are doing then shut up about it. if you haven't got anything good to say don't say it at all you should listen to the troops when they tell you all this shit talking is just bringing them down.

[marksimons]

and I have never seen Bush make a joke out of anything to diminish it's meaning and impact.

And you know what else I can appreciate a little bit of humor even when it's about a dire and tense situation cause you know what that's just the way I fucking am Im a human being.

you made some good points in that post, prefer to deal with some of them in a one on one chat, but this is the bit I'd like to draw attention to, I will now point you to bush making a joke about the iraq war:

"It's standard fare humor. Bush says he is preparing for a tough election fight; then on the large video screens a picture flashes showing him wearing a boxing robe while sitting at his desk. Bush notes he spends "a lot of time on the phone listening to our European allies." Then we see a photo of him on the phone with a finger in his ear. There were funny bits about Skull and Bones, his mother, and Dick Cheney. But at one point, Bush showed a photo of himself looking for something out a window in the Oval Office, and he said, "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere."

"The audience laughed. I grimaced. But that wasn't the end of it. After a few more slides, there was a shot of Bush looking under furniture in the Oval Office. "Nope," he said. "No weapons over there." More laughter. Then another picture of Bush searching in his office: "Maybe under here." Laughter again.

"Disapproval must have registered upon my face, for one of my tablemates said, "Come on, David, this is funny." I wanted to reply, Over 500 Americans and literally countless Iraqis are dead because of a war that was supposedly fought to find weapons of mass destruction, and Bush is joking about it. Instead, I took a long drink of the lovely white wine that had come with our dinner. It's not as if I was in the middle of a talk-show debate and had to respond. This was certainly one of those occasions in which you either get it or don't. And I wasn't getting it. Or maybe my neighbor wasn't."

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0325-17.htm

After a few more slides, there was a shot of Bush looking under furniture in the Oval Office. "Nope," he said. "No weapons over there." More laughter. Then another picture of Bush searching in his office: "Maybe under here." Laughter again.

would the people you know in Iraq find this funny?

[siceone]

oh you're talking about fundrasider thing?

he can't poke a little fun at himself? but everyone else can?

I think they would find it funny, cause they would see it was in a context.

do I belive he was trying to tell the world ha ha jokes on you no WMD no. I think this whole thing is just a bit ridiculous.

[marksimons]

a little fun at himself?

hello.

it's the reason he gave for the war, and he's not only poking fun, he's making frikkin' slideshows, they're dying, while cheney's old company is scamming the tax payer and bush is smirking all the way to electoral defeat.

[siceone]

It's ONE of the reasons we went to war ONE of many

[marksimons]

I believe at the time it was THE reason.

one of many.

I can think of three, WMDs (lies), getting rid of saddam, oil.

any more?

[igloo]

Originally posted by marksimons

I believe at the time it was THE reason.

one of many.

I can think of three, WMDs (lies), getting rid of saddam, oil.

any more?

Take your tired ass baseless bullshit, shove it up your ass, and kill yourself.

[marksimons]

nope, that's not a reason for war...

any more. come on, surely there are so many you can add to my list of three, well, two, if we get rid of the lies.

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by marksimons

I believe at the time it was THE reason.

one of many.

I can think of three, WMDs (lies), getting rid of saddam, oil.

any more?

Here is just 1 part that highlights the humanitarian effort in the U.N speech on September 12, 2002... I've [posted this before but you clueless idiots ignore it!

In 1990, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the world imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions were maintained after the war to compel the regime's compliance with Security Council resolutions. In time, Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues to buy food. Saddam Hussein has subverted this program, working around the sanctions to buy missile technology and military materials. He blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself, and arms his country. By refusing to comply with his own agreements, he bears full guilt for the hunger and misery of innocent Iraqi citizens.

Put aside your hatred for the U.S. and READ THE SPEECH!!!!

http://www.bushcountry.org/bush_speeches/president-bush-speech-091302.htm

[igloo]

Originally posted by mr mahs

Here is just 1 part that highlights the humanitarian effort in the U.N speech on September 12, 2002... I've [posted this before but you clueless idiots ignore it!

In 1990, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the world imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions were maintained after the war to compel the regime's compliance with Security Council resolutions. In time, Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues to buy food. Saddam Hussein has subverted this program, working around the sanctions to buy missile technology and military materials. He blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself, and arms his country. By refusing to comply with his own agreements, he bears full guilt for the hunger and misery of innocent Iraqi citizens.

Put aside your hatred for the U.S. and READ THE SPEECH!!!!

http://www.bushcountry.org/bush_speeches/president-bush-speech-091302.htm

Don't even bother with this jerkoff...he is a moron.....plain and simple....

The jerkoff is incapable of reason or rationale, and clearly enjoys ignoring facts and reality in favor of bullshit....

If he did join reality, his pathetic life would have no meaning, and he will quickly come to realize he is a blowhard who should kill himself

[marksimons]

what facts?

that speech doesn't spell out any more reasons than the one's I've given. saddam was a baaaad man (no shit sherlock) he took money from his people and spent it on palaces (ooooh my god, who has heard of such a thing) and he brutally repressed his own people.

no shit. but that still doesn't give any more reasons for the war (they would fall into the getting rid of saddam catagory)

WMDs (lies), getting rid of saddam, oil.

three reasons, one of which was bullshit, one humanitarian, but was handled in such a way that it killed 10,000 innocents, and caused great animosity to the invaders/occupiers/liberators (delete as applicable to your worldview), and the last reason, well that speaks for itself.

so do you have any more reasons for the war? i was assured there were many, but to me, three doesn't seem like many.

it seems one more than a couple.

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by marksimons

what facts?

that speech doesn't spell out any more reasons than the one's I've given. saddam was a baaaad man (no shit sherlock) he took money from his people and spent it on palaces (ooooh my god, who has heard of such a thing) and he brutally repressed his own people.

no shit. but that still doesn't give any more reasons for the war (they would fall into the getting rid of saddam catagory)

WMDs (lies), getting rid of saddam, oil.

three reasons, one of which was bullshit, one humanitarian, but was handled in such a way that it killed 10,000 innocents, and caused great animosity to the invaders/occupiers/liberators (delete as applicable to your worldview), and the last reason, well that speaks for itself.

so do you have any more reasons for the war? i was assured there were many, but to me, three doesn't seem like many.

it seems one more than a couple.

wait hold on....

You complain about a fallacy of a number concerning civilian deaths but don't support a war to stop a brutal regime who is responsible for close to million Iraqi deaths? WOW your screwed, up listen to yourself.... That why I or no other sane person takes your movemnet seriously, it's hypocricy in the fullest extent of the term...

And the oil argument? The National GDP of Iraq is 22 billion per year and we have spent close to 200 so far... besidees 22 billion is what most Blue chip companies make in a year and the U.S. economy pumps out 10 trillion per year what the fawk would we need with a few wells in Iraq, see how dumb that sounds?

What do you think will happen we would smuggle the oil in cargo ships with out going through OPEC? This war for oil argument is so stale I think the peacniks lack of understanding of world & capital markets blinds you in seeing how rediculous the War for Oil rant is....

[marksimons]

I would have supported a war to remove saddam if that is what it was billed as, a humanitarian mission to get rid of a brutal dictator (that the US, UK, France, German, Russian and Chinese governments helped sustain and arm) then I would have supported it.

The tactics used by the US and UK were wrong, 3000 missiles fired on Bagdhad, a massive invasion, a callous disgregard for innocent life. A targeted special ops assasination would have been far better in my eyes.

at the time the reasons were security and WMDs, if it had been about removing saddam for the benefit of the iraqi's if that's how the war had been presented, then there would have been more international support.

it wasn't, it was based on lies, about WMDs and terrorist links that were not there.

I think the interest in the war on Iraq has made them have to persue different tactics on the oil front, i.e. that's what Libya was all about...

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by marksimons

I would have supported a war to remove saddam if that is what it was billed as, a humanitarian mission to get rid of a brutal dictator (that the US, UK, France, German, Russian and Chinese governments helped sustain and arm) then I would have supported it.

The tactics used by the US and UK were wrong, 3000 missiles fired on Bagdhad, a massive invasion, a callous disgregard for innocent life. A targeted special ops assasination would have been far better in my eyes.

at the time the reasons were security and WMDs, if it had been about removing saddam for the benefit of the iraqi's if that's how the war had been presented, then there would have been more international support.

it wasn't, it was based on lies, about WMDs and terrorist links that were not there.

I think the interest in the war on Iraq has made them have to persue different tactics on the oil front, i.e. that's what Libya was all about...

Why would FRANCE suppport a war to oust their gold mine in Iraq. Haven't you heard about the massive scandal regarding that debacle "Oil for food" program? Yoiu say tyhe U.S had underlying motives of oil which is just speculation but the cold jhard facts of France and Germany's swetheart deals struck in Iraq are fact bottomline and hypocricy!

A planned assasination? Son this isn't James Bond...Sadam inner web of security was one of the best and brutal in all of the world.

You're still harping on the WMD issue when the initial speech to the U.N highlighted the humanitarian effort why can't that sink into your head I've posted the speech PLEASE READ!!!!

[marksimons]

I reckon saddam could have been taken out in the same way as Pablo Escobar.

more from that speech, the scary bit:

"Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its nuclear program -- weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, an accounting of nuclear materials, and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year. And Iraq's state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons."

bit in bold is lies.

oh, where's the humanitarian concern...

"We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in the country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take.

"Delegates to the General Assembly: We have been more than patient. We have tried sanctions. We have tried the carrot of "oil for food" and the stick of coalition military strikes. But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be completely certain he has nuclear weapons is when, God forbid, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming."

what's this? bush implying saddam will use nukes?

oh, the concern for the iraqi people is clear as bush continues:

"The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding or will it be irrelevant?"

oh here's some concern:

"The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people, who have suffered for too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it and the security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate through cruelty and conquest and open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty in a unified Iraq."

we have no quarrel with you, so it doesn't matter if 10,000 of you die, our intentions were honorable, so what if we don't do body counts, more of you died under saddam than we killed, so we're not as bad.

ah here we go, this is good:

"We can harbor no illusions. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980, and Kuwait in 1990. He has fired ballistic missiles at Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel. His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15 and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in Northern Iraq. He has gassed many Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages."

*cough* right, now, america helped him gas Iranians in the war, by supplying sattelite images of iranian troops, america and the west supplied him with the materials for his war against iran, he was your dog, our dog, in that fight.

apparently before the invasion of Kuwaitm America said it had no opinion on the matter (diplomatic speak for, we don't give a shit, do it) and then he got busted for it. After fighting a war against Iran that America wanted him to fight.

He attacked Iran in 1980 and in 1983 Rumsfeld was there doing business with Saddam.

Anyway, this is about the humanitarian stuff, not WMDs, right?

"With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors."

Here's the concern for the Iraqi's, this would almost be funny were it not so tragic:

"The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine, inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world."

hmmm... yes... quite... I bet the Iraqis look to Palestine now and think, yes, we have joined them... I have to wonder if the situations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine are helping reform the region in a positive way...

"Neither of these outcomes is certain. Both have been set before us. We must choose between a world of fear and a world of progress. We cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand up for our security, and for the permanent rights and hopes of mankind. By heritage and by choice, the United States of America will make that stand. Delegates to the United Nations, you have the power to make that stand as well.

"Thank you."

two sentances on danger, one sentace about rights and hopes of mankind, with security before them.

I stand by my assertion that at the time this war was mainly, predominantly about WMDs and the security of America from more 9/11 style stuff.

I think this speech proves my assertion accurate.

[bigpoppanils]

Originally posted by igloo

Don't even bother with this jerkoff...he is a moron.....plain and simple....

The jerkoff is incapable of reason or rationale, and clearly enjoys ignoring facts and reality in favor of bullshit....

If he did join reality, his pathetic life would have no meaning, and he will quickly come to realize he is a blowhard who should kill himself