Fox News has the oldest audience of any cable channel

[judge death]

Indiana,

judge death didn't bring up Halliburton, I did, and I'm not an extremist. I'm just a guy who served six years defending our country. Further, I am not a disgrace to my country nor my uniform for having my own mind. I believe that this and the last adminstration should be ashamed of its foriegn policy.

Yes, but this administration can still redeem itself.

The bush regime is condemned to be the worst period in american history unless, god forbid, the public is mindless enough to elect something like palin or gignrich.

[Skull]

Wow... this thread has exploded like a fragmentation grenade. 

Maybe all the politics can go in this one thread, that will make it easier to avoid for the people who can't stand this stuff...

Not a bad idea. It's been getting thick lately. I've been providing plenty of fuel myself. Perhaps just a new thread that is aptly titled IF YOU DON'T LIKE POLITICS, DON'T LIKE TO DEBATE, GET YOUR FEELINGS EASILY HURT, OR JUST PLAIN WOULD RATHER TALK ABOUT BAD MOVIES, DON'T OPEN.

 

I like it!!!

Yay, Flick for passing 1000!!!

[Skull]

Indiana,

judge death didn't bring up Halliburton, I did, and I'm not an extremist. I'm just a guy who served six years defending our country. Further, I am not a disgrace to my country nor my uniform for having my own mind. I believe that this and the last adminstration should be ashamed of its foriegn policy.

Yes, but this administration can still redeem itself.

The bush regime is condemned to be the worst period in american history unless, god forbid, the public is mindless enough to elect something like palin or gignrich.

I'm really getting sick and tired of hearing that we had 8 worst years under Bush... Becuase it was the only thing that the free press kept saying day after day and soon people start believing into this brainwashing/propaganda...

Oh... the Bush lied and WMD issue was not even half the story, gee it wasnt even correct! Hello!!!! Saddam had the Burden of proof not Bush or the CIA. Does any actually read the UN sanctions? Does anybody remember the UN inspectors? Many of us dont because these facts dont get reported.

Although you are right the general public was so mindless and voted for Obama! Actually it was the free press that pushed Obama. Maybe the free press should start saying that Jumping off the Bridge is the good idea too.

[lester1/2jr]

But if Saddam had handed over some of his scraps of remainind WMD to Hizbollah or Al Qaeda, or any other group determined to strike us, how many innocent American civilians might have died?

Hezbollah  is part of the elected governmen of lebanon.  YOu want to go to war with lebanon? They attacked us in Beirut to drive us out of beirut.  Unlke al queda they are not trying to draw us into the middle east. I don't think anyone is worried about an attack from hezbollah in the US

AS far as what saddam might have given al queda??  saddam did no want war with the united states. Giving "wmd" to al queda would not have benefited his self preservation at all.

more to the point, terrorists don't need wmd. we saw that on 9/11.  and if they do want they would be much much more liekly to get it from pakistan who have nuclear warheads and are allied with the Taliban who are of course allied with Al queda.

Saddam was a bad actor who had twice invaded his neighbors.

Our enemy is terrorism done by stateless entities like al queda.  not arab nationalist dictator weirdos.

Besides one of the times we backed him! that's a pretty hypocritical.

He refused to cooperate with UN Weapons Inspectors and ultimately booted them from the  country.

He ultimately did cooperate, Bush turned him down and invaded anyway.

He contracted assassins to kill the former U.S. President who had humbled him

totally unproven.

And while he was debating with special prosecutors about what the meaning of the word "is" is, the 9/11 hijackers slipped into our country and began training

Sure clinton was a too PC about going after terrorist but 9/11 happened under BUsh.  and as we all know he ignored repeated warnings because he just wasn't interested in the subject, like most subjects.

Six months into his Presidency,

after ignoring daily briefings for 6 months yes...

The question was, what next?

getting bin laden .  making sure our ports and borders were safe. rounding up non secure nuclear material in eastern europe. extracting ourselves from the middle east so that we wouldn't have more blowback attacks on our civilians. 

And there is ample evidence Saddam manufactured and toyed with Anthrax in the late 80's.

He would have no way of getting it here. WE don't even have the technolgy to do what the neo cons claimed he could.

and saddam didn't attack us on 9/11. so anything he "may have" done is besides the point and pure paranoia.

  Going after Saddam, at that time, made sense.

he had no WMD and no connections to Al queda. It made no sense.

Had it just been a matter of mopping up the Iraqi military and installing a more cooperative government, we might have been out of Iraq in 2005.   But Iran and Al Qaeda, normally mortal enemies coming from two different sects of Islam, united in an effort to defeat us, aided and abetted by liberal Democrats in the American Congress and

yeah the liberal democrats were out there with them in the streets.    the PEOPLE, an entity you never seem to bring up the ones who pay for and fight the wars, were increasly dispproving about the war which they had been told would be a cakewalk and was the hunmane thing to do becoming  massively expensive and inhumane (abu graib, rising us and iraqi casualties).

"liberal democrats" didn't need to tell them anything.


anyway, as for al queda and iran: This is really the best argument against this war in this thread. You don't know what's going to happen so unless you have to do it to defend yourself you don't go.  Many prominent middle east experts lobbied against the war for the very reasons that it went so horribly.  ANyone who reads The Atlantic for example remembers "Blind into Baghdad" by james fallows, which basically predicted the insurgency and occupation. This was in late 2002. Pat Buchanan did too in The American Conservative and on MSNBC.


all the money we spent on the war is gone now.  It could have been used to pay down our debt.  to get us out of a recession.  We owe China as much as we've spent in Iraq.  and the interest on the debt grows and the debt grows


We are in a huge huge hole now.  All so we could got to war with a country that didn't want war with us.   


and of course, lets not forget the many families that have been destroyed (remember when republicans were pro family?)  by the long deployments, rampant alcoholism and ptsd related drug problems among veterans, horrible injuries and of course casualties.

[indianasmith]

Actually, the Kuwaitis caught, tried, and executed the assassins hired to kill Bush 41. They testified in court that Saddam paid them.

Saddam did offer to let the inspectors back in at the last possible moment, but then tried to attach conditions to their presence.

As far as Bush ignoring the warnings - that's been gone over again and again.  A president receives dozens of warnings of potential threats ever single day.  He has to decide what to pay attention to, and what to ignore.  It is true that a couple of FBI agents got it right and reported it to the higher ups.  But the reports got lost in the shuffle.  Stuff like that happens.  NONE OF US get to see what the President sees on a daily basis.  The administration blew the call, all right - but considering what a mishmash our Middle Eastern intelligence reporting was in, it's hardly surprising.  Unfortunate, but hardly surprising.

Hizbollah is the most well-organized and deadly terrorist organizations on earth. They won elections in Lebanon through violence, threats, and intimidation, after they had killed or run into exile about half the population of the country.  They killed our Marines in Beirut, who were there solely to protect the lives and safety of Lebanese civilians.  They bombed Khobar towers - where our soldiers were staying AT THE INVITATION of the Saudi government - in direct collusion with Iranian intelligence, according to former FBI Director Louis Freeh.  You want to know what I think?  We should have bombed Iran years ago.  They are the world's number one sponsor of terrorist attacks and one of the most evil regimes on earth.  If Tehran were a radioactive parking lot, I have a feeling some of those folks over there might be a little more hesitant about following the call to jihad!

Saddam did not want open war with the U.S., but he sure enough wanted us hurt and humbled, especially after the son of his old nemesis took office.  He was very convinced of his own cleverness and I'm sure would have been glad to give some third party the means to do us devastating harm.

As far as the money goes, Congress would find something else to spend it on.  They never give it back to the people, period.  I would rather see our tax money spent vanquishing real evil in the world than creating another entitlement program that will ultimately bankrupt the country and make the American people even more fat, lazy, apathetic, and dependent on that great government tit than they are already.

To sum it up, the war in Iraq was justifiable, right, and winnable.  The left may not have gone and joined the enemy, but they sure as heck helped him out in the propaganda war, doing all they could to embarass, discredit, and humiliate our commander in chief during the middle of a war. 

Had any American pulled that crap in World War II, the people would have stoned him in the streets if the President didn't place him in protective custody first!

[3mnkids]

To sum it up, the war in Iraq was justifiable, right, and winnable.  The left may not have gone and joined the enemy, but they sure as heck helped him out in the propaganda war, doing all they could to embarass, discredit, and humiliate our commander in chief during the middle of a war. 

Kinda like the right is doing now against Obama. The same ones calling everyone Un-American who had the audacity to question or criticize Bush are now among the loudest in doing the same exact thing to Obama.

[judge death]

Actually, the Kuwaitis caught, tried, and executed the assassins hired to kill Bush 41. They testified in court that Saddam paid them.

So what if Saddam tried to have the elected bush killed? So what?

America tried many times to assassinate fidel castro because the government didn't like him.

God knows how many foreign leaders, especially in south  and central america, have been assassinated by CIA ops or CIA supported hitmen.

So what if saddam tried to off the elected bush? As many foreign leaders as america's killed or tried to have killed it would have just been a quantum of karma.

Doesn't that bible conservatives like to wave around so much have some things to say about reaping what you sew?

[indianasmith]

You really hate this country, don't you, Judge?
You probably think the world would be better off without America.

3mn - I only oppose Obama's war policies when I see him trying to wimp out.

[3mnkids]

3mn - I only oppose Obama's war policies when I see him trying to wimp out.

Is it wrong to "embarass, discredit, and humiliate our commander in chief during the middle of a war"? If Bush, yes. If Obama, apparently, no. Those that criticized and complained about Bush also didn't like his war policies. You cant have it both ways. Either its wrong to criticize the commander and chief during war or its not.   

[Flick James]

The only time it is ever wrong to question the commander-in-chief is when serving in a capacity where he is in your chain of command, having taken on oath. When I served, it was toward the end of Clinton's term and during the first four years of Bush's. I didn't care for either of them, but I kept my mouth shut because I was serving in the military and took that committment very seriously, as both were at the top of my chain of command. Personally I was a little offended when Bush went on board the USS Enterprise, dressed in a Navy flight suit, trying to rally the troops. Just because you served in the Texas Air National Guard during Vietnam doesn't make you fit to wear that uniform, buddy. I found it personally a bit insulting. However, I kept my mouth shut, and in fact encouraged anyone I heard say anything negatively about it (and there were) to remember their service.

Now that I am out of the military and a full-blown civilian, I reserve my God-given constitutional right to question the commander-in-chief anytime I feel like it, and about any subject I feel like. Not being able to question our elected officials is something for systems of communism and fascism and socialism, not ours. Our elected officials are our servants. Hell, I served, and when I did I had the honor to treat any U.S. citizen who was anti-military or who protested the military or U.S. miltary action with the same respect as those who didn't.

This is not an agreement in any way, shape, or form with 3nmkid's or judge death's views about socialism, indiana, just this horrid notion that it's not okay to question to criticize the president about his foriegn policy. He serves us, not the other way around. 

[lester1/2jr]

where our soldiers were staying AT THE INVITATION of the Saudi government -

the saudi government isn't elected.  They are a tyrannical dictatorship. The whole reason we are there protecting them is that there own people hate them so much they can't have a real army.  The PEOPLE of saudi arabia didn't want us there and we knew it.  

They won elections in Lebanon through violence, threats, and intimidation, after they had killed or run into exile about half the population of the country.

lol Hezbollah is very popular in lebanon and throughout the shia cresecent. There are christians in hezbollah too

Saddam did offer to let the inspectors back in at the last possible moment

yep

The administration blew the call, all right [ re: 9/11]

indeed.

We should have bombed Iran years ago.  They are the world's number one sponsor of terrorist attacks and one of the most evil regimes on earth.  

lol.  so a country that has some semblence of democracy with elections , normal,except for mandatory head scarf, cities, and 20,000 jews!  should be bombed but countries like egypt and saudi arabia that are unabashed tryannies where women have no rights and all manners of anti semeitsm and anti western dogma are repeated in the schools and terrifying mosques as pure fact are okay.  got it.

Saddam did not want open war with the U.S., but he sure enough wanted us hurt and humbled, especially after the son of his old nemesis took office.

I don't see what this has to do with me or any americans. a dumb rivalry between two annoying politicians??  My tax dolalrs shuld go to furthering this boring intrique?  they can both get bent, I have s**t to do.

As far as the money goes, Congress would find something else to spend it on.  They never give it back to the people

They couldn't have just gone as far into debt as we are now.  the reason we are in debt is because the war costs escalate and you can't cut a war.  In general you are right though.

I would rather see our tax money spent vanquishing real evil in the world than creating another entitlement program that will ultimately bankrupt the country and make the American people even more fat, lazy, apathetic, and dependent on that great government tit than they are already.

I'd rather see americans fat than dead or brain damaged or on drugs from ptsd. wouldn't you?

more obviously: two wrongs don't make a right.  the entitlement programs are wrong and the wars are wrong.  

To sum it up, the war in Iraq was justifiable, right, and winnable.

lol.  yeah and I could beat up anyone with what I learned in my karate class I took when I was a kid if they just stood still!

at any rate you are dodging culpablity for the disaster left and right and lashing out at people who were right and defending people who were wrong.  This isn't the american way and it's why no one pays people who think like this much credence in 2010.

The left may not have gone and joined the enemy, but they sure as heck helped him out in the propaganda war, doing all they could to embarass, discredit, and humiliate our commander in chief during the middle of a war.  

that's silly.  There were tons of protests during gulf war 1 and we still won that.  There were loud criticisms of Clinton during Bosnia, mainly from the right and we didn't lose one soldier there.  Iraq was disaster because it was a horrible idea which was them horrible mismanaged.

Had any American pulled that crap in World War II, the people would have stoned him in the streets if the President didn't place him in protective custody first!

because people believed in ww2.  whose point are you trying to make here?

[3mnkids]

 
This is not an agreement in any way, shape, or form with 3nmkid's or judge death's views about socialism, indiana, just this horrid notion that it's not okay to question to criticize the president about his foriegn policy. He serves us, not the other way around. 

You dont have any idea what my view on socialism is. None.

[indianasmith]

You sure seem awfully fond if Iran, Lester.  The country has been ruled by religious mullas with an iron fist for over 25 years.  Many of the people are sick of it and would run them out of the country if they could.  But we saw what a wonderful, democratic government Iran has last year when Ahmedinijad's goons basically negated the result of an election and gunned people down in the streets for voting against them.  That's real democratic, there, Les!

Hizbollah is a murderous terrorist organization.  I don't care who their membership is; they are all about slaughtering anyone who stands in the way of global jihad.  I refuse to believe that any true Christian would ever join such a group.

As for the Saudis - technically, they are a monarchy rather than a dictatorship, but you are right that they are unelected.  The general population of Saudi Arabia is one of the most radicalized in the Middle East, due to the death grip the Wahabis have had on their education system for the last 200 years.  If they elected a government, bin Laden or one of  his ilk would probably be their first choice.  Have you ever read the CRAP they put in their history books?

As far as my comments about the criticisms of Bush - when political leaders in our country make stupid and false comments about the war and the enemy uses them in his propaganda that same day, you are crossing the line from legitimate dissent into verbally "aiding and comforting" the enemy.  They certainly got a lot of propaganda milage out of the Democrats.  Criticizing the commander in chief in such a way that it weakens our country and strengthens our enemies is wrong, no matter who is in office.

Flick, I may not agree with you, but I respect YOUR criticisms more than anyone else's in this thread.  You've been there, worn the uniform, and served with pride, as I did years and years ago.  I thank and honor you for your service to this country.'

gotta go for the moment.  This is a stimulating discussion.

[lester1/2jr]

I am fond of Iran. it's a beautiful country.   

I refuse to believe that any true Christian would ever join such a group.

do those girls look like jihadists to you?

The general population of Saudi Arabia is one of the most radicalized in the Middle East

so you are happy with them being ruled by tyrants they hate and don't WANT them to have democracy. and you wonder why people hate us!

We do this in Egypt too and what a shock this is where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from. None of them came from iran or iraq.

Criticizing the commander in chief in such a way that it weakens our country and strengthens our enemies is wrong, no matter who is in office.

who defines what "in such a way" means??  do we monitor the internet?  Do we arrest people on badmovies.org threads in 2004 who say "man, it seems like this war wasn't as simple as they told us it was gonna be?"

How about this: don't start elective wars and you won't have to worry about being undermined by your opponents or the dreaded public.

look Iraq was a fiasco. You can whine and complain and blame everyone else but it failed and because of the misguided bravado of folks like yourself and George Bush we are in a deep deep hole.  bringing these tedious arguments up again is really adding insult to injury. 

[indianasmith]

IT HASN'T FAILED!
The war in Iraq was a success, we've just become so indifferent as a people we no longer recognize a victory when we win one.  That's what drives me nuts!  We got rid of one of the most brutal dictators in modern history, fought off a largely foreign-backed insurgency and inflicted crippling casualties on its leadership.  We completely destroyed Al Qaeda in Iraq.  And, despite all the whining and naysaying, we have a democratically elected government in place there that is (for the MIddle East, at least) reasonably moderate and friendly to our ineterests.  It ain't a perfect win, but it's a win.  Will there always be some violence in Iraq?  Of course.  It's a Muslim, Arabic country, and that is a hot-blooded and volatile combination, wherever you put them.  But the government is working out its kinks, and the future of Iraq is brighter now than it has been since World War II.  That is a significant victory.

As far as the Saudis go - the royal family is corrupt and autocratic, but they are more Westernized and reasonable than the population at large.  They did recognize, in the wake of 9/11, that they had made a deal with the devil by entrusting the nation's education to Wahabi clerics and are trying to gradually de-radicalize their population by deporting or jailing the worst promoters of jihad and replacing them with more moderate leaders.  It will be several generations, however, until the Saudi people can be deprogrammed from the hate that is currently fed to them with their mother's milk.  In the meantime, for all their flaws, the royal family are the best bet we've got.  I'd love to ignore them altogether, but the fact is they have a huge percentage of the world's oil, and until we get hydrogen powered vehicles online and affordable, we need them.

Now, as for your Hizbollah poster children - they look like propaganda models.  No more and no less.

Lester, I actually like you.  I understand the pacifism that drives you and I've learned enough about you to know some of why you feel the way you do.  But pacifism, ultimately, means letting the bad guys win because you don't find much of anything worth fighting for.  It's a philosophy I just can't buy into.  What I respect about you is the tone of your debate.  You and I can chase this dog around the tree into the next decade and never agree, but we're generally going to respect each other and get along otherwise.  I wish some people could learn to disagree without being unpleasant about it.