I expected our troops to be welcomed as liberators: my government told me so.

[Jason Tate]

As the US solider deaths in Iraq reach 32 in 48 hours, I found this article (http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/257892|top|04-06-2004::10:26|reuters.html) to be very interesting:

Former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix says, "Iraq was better off under Saddam.."

[Bucc4019]

As the US solider deaths in Iraq reach 32 in 48 hours, I found this article (http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/257892|top|04-06-2004::10:26|reuters.html) to be very interesting:

Former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix says, "Iraq was better off under Saddam.."

well blix is an idiot...its obvious the world is better without him even though alot of people are dieing which is sad but they served there country and signed up to do that

[JAX]

Somebody please tell me where these so-called "weapons of mass Destruction" are Show me those and then I'll agree that US soldiers arent dying in vain. Right now it looks as though bush was doing nothing more than finishing his daddy's war

[Mr Forrester]

Nothing like the opinion of one man, who is nothing more than a weapons inspector to back your whole "Bush sucks" argument. Then again being a former lawyer I'm sure he is well versed in government affairs, because we all know that a weapons inspector knows exactly what it takes to run a country. Besides he must be right because a human murdering machine is better suited to run a country than a democracy, but what do I know, Mr. Weapons Inspector knows best.

[ghostyouare]

Nothing like the opinion of one man, who is nothing more than a weapons inspector to back your whole "Bush sucks" argument. Then again being a former lawyer I'm sure he is well versed in government affairs, because we all know that a weapons inspector knows exactly what it takes to run a country. Besides he must be right because a human murdering machine is better suited to run a country than a democracy, but what do I know, Mr. Weapons Inspector knows best.

I agree with you but watch what you say before JT kicks you off the forums.

[nick_a]

I agree with you but watch what you say before JT kicks you off the forums.

hehe. But hey, it's always easier when you are surrounded by only people who have the same opinions and views as you.

[Jason Tate]

Nothing like the opinion of one man, who is nothing more than a weapons inspector to back your whole "Bush sucks" argument. Then again being a former lawyer I'm sure he is well versed in government affairs, because we all know that a weapons inspector knows exactly what it takes to run a country. Besides he must be right because a human murdering machine is better suited to run a country than a democracy, but what do I know, Mr. Weapons Inspector knows best.
I (sadly) feel he is correct in his statement, both in Iraq and the world at large. Only time will tell who's right and who's wrong on this one. I pray you will be right; fear you won't.

[PuNkJaSo]

i agree with forrester.

[Jason Tate]

I agree with you but watch what you say before JT kicks you off the forums.
no one has ever been removed from the forums or the website due to contrary views to my own, they have been removed for making persona attacks on AP staff members, flaming, and disregarding our posted terms of service and forum rules. It's that simple.

[BrandNew20]

Nothing like the opinion of one man, who is nothing more than a weapons inspector to back your whole "Bush sucks" argument. Then again being a former lawyer I'm sure he is well versed in government affairs, because we all know that a weapons inspector knows exactly what it takes to run a country. Besides he must be right because a human murdering machine is better suited to run a country than a democracy, but what do I know, Mr. Weapons Inspector knows best.

The argument against Bush goes much deeper than the opinion of one weapons inspector...but obviously as he is someone that has seen and inspected Iraq for the very thing which we went to war for, his opinion is valid and should be taken into consideration.

[heresforhoping]

Nothing like the opinion of one man, who is nothing more than a weapons inspector to back your whole "Bush sucks" argument. Then again being a former lawyer I'm sure he is well versed in government affairs, because we all know that a weapons inspector knows exactly what it takes to run a country. Besides he must be right because a human murdering machine is better suited to run a country than a democracy, but what do I know, Mr. Weapons Inspector knows best.


Funny how you have a BETTER OPINION of what is going on over there than someone that has been inside Iraq. What is to say that President Bush is better off, or knows anything more about running a country than a weapons inspector. Before Bush decided that the UN wasn't needed to fight this fucking mess of a war, the UN was very important. Now that Mr. Bush has decided to go behind the back of the UN, they (the UN) have all but fallen apart as a worldwide mediator. Bill O'Reilly even said on tonight’s Factor that we are in the middle of a "second war" that is completely out of control and is, "a huge mess" that is costing us American lives. Bush's approval rating is the lowest it has been in his tenure, and I don't think that is a coincidence that is comes now as things are literally falling apart in Iraq. :veryangry :

[Jason Tate]

Blix is certainly owed an apology from the Bush camp, it turns out he was right on the lack of weapons at the least. However, I'm sorry Dr. Blix, you'll have to get in line at the rear. We can't assassinate your character again until all of our critics in house have been shamelessly vilified once.. take a number, step to the back sir.

[JAX]

My opinion of the bush administration is based on how he has affected my day to day life.

[heresforhoping]

The argument against Bush goes much deeper than the opinion of one weapons inspector...but obviously as he is someone that has seen and inspected Iraq for the very thing which we went to war for, his opinion is valid and should be taken into consideration.

i gave you a reputation point...whatever that is good for....
:chickenru:

[OCNickLTJ13]

come on tate, as if we are gonna take hans blix's word for how better off or not better off iraq is, also, we are there now and we can't just leave these people to their own devices. unfortunantly, freedom isn't free, and we are paying the price right now with U.S. lives, which is unfortunante, nonetheless, those heros will be remembered forever in iraq once all this madness stops and we catch these assholes who are killing our soldiers, also, i doubt that blix has spent much, if any, time in iraq since the war began or ended, so i doubt it is really his place to say who is better off and who isn't...

[thejerm1000]

I'm not even gonna fuel the fire. Everyone should check this this (http://www.ebaumsworld.com/annoyingasians.html) out before they post again.

[AtlanticEast247]

I found this to be an interesting quote;

"Disarmament by war and Democracy by occupation are difficult prospects."
-Hans Blix

[fftlisgoodstuff]

you can moan and bitch all you want about this, but there is NOTHING you, i, or anyone else can do about it.

[ForsakenProdigy]

Iraq needs to be ruled with an iron fist, cuz these people are out of control. saddam did that, he was a bad guy, but kept these animals in check

[truerockstar]

To say that Iraq would be better off with Saddam is ridiculous. Yea people died due to removing him, but who can seriously say that Saddam was better for the Iraqis? Personally I think we should get out of the Middle East, not because of Iraq but because I don't think a large group of the Middle East community is ready or willing to work with Western Society. I'd really like to see what would happen if we all just stepped out of the ME and just let them do their thing. I think within weeks Israel would basically conquer the area and have it on such lock down the other countries would come crawling to ask for help. Just a thought...

[SloppyBob]

no one has ever been removed from the forums or the website due to contrary views to my own, they have been removed for making persona attacks on AP staff members, flaming, and disregarding our posted terms of service and forum rules. It's that simple.
this is bullshit. i got banned like 10 times for calling tate a ***got.

[off the record]

To say that Iraq would be better off with Saddam is ridiculous. Yea people died due to removing him, but who can seriously say that Saddam was better for the Iraqis? Personally I think we should get out of the Middle East, not because of Iraq but because I don't think a large group of the Middle East community is ready or willing to work with Western Society. I'd really like to see what would happen if we all just stepped out of the ME and just let them do their thing. I think within weeks Israel would basically conquer the area and have it on such lock down the other countries would come crawling to ask for help. Just a thought...


For the most part I agree. But we wont know untill this things over if they are better off or not. Your right about Israel though, the crazy Zionists would try to take over the whole continent if they could, fueled by our aide. Unless... we cut off our 3 billion in aide to israel and made them sign the "nuclear technology with no weapons" treaty that the rest of the ME had to sign.

[lackthereof]

when will you realize that calling someone that is a persona attack (and a lame one at that)

[Jason Tate]

this is bullshit. i got banned like 10 times for calling tate a ***got.
and you prove you can't read too .. good job.

[Jason Tate]

Of course the fact remains that NOBODY here in these forums are qualified to opine whether Iraquis are better off or not, seeing as we have absolutely no real clue about life in Iraq. I wonder how the Iraquis feel. Let's look at senseless slaughter of soliders, the running of their burned bodies through the streets .. that MIGHT be a clue to their opinion on the subject. We will be given the chance in November to remove the man in power responsible for these atrocious actions, a man who came into office with an agenda to go to Iraq at whatever cost ("From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go, says ONeill (As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council), who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.)

[yeat182]

For the most part I agree. But we wont know untill this things over if they are better off or not. Your right about Israel though, the crazy Zionists would try to take over the whole continent if they could, fueled by our aide. Unless... we cut off our 3 billion in aide to israel and made them sign the "nuclear technology with no weapons" treaty that the rest of the ME had to sign.


the israelis would take over the whole continent if they could? are you serious? you do realize that the current situation that affects Israel has been brought about by 3 seperate wars of agression carried out by the Arab nations? and that nearly all the land that is in dispute was gained in the defense of their nation during those wars...Israel doesn't want more territory, they want to be left alone.

[yeat182]

Of course the fact remains that NOBODY here in these forums are qualified to opine whether Iraquis are better off or not, seeing as we have absolutely no real clue about life in Iraq. I wonder how the Iraquis feel. Let's look at senseless slaughter of soliders, the running of their burned bodies through the streets .. that MIGHT be a clue to their opinion on the subject. We will be given the chance in November to remove the man in power responsible for these atrocious actions, a man who came into office with an agenda to go to Iraq at whatever cost ("From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go, says ONeill (As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council), who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.)

bush wasn't responsible for those burned bodies or the fact that they were dragged through the streets, the terrorists that killed them and the fanatics that mutilated them are the only ones responsible. and as for bush having an Iraqi agenda from day 1, that makes perfect sense, saddam had openly flaunted 16 UN resolutions up to that point, continued to target and shoot at coalition aircraft, kicked out UN inspectors, and used the international UN aid recieved through the sale of his oil to get even richer by selling those goods to neighboring countries. that doesn't even get into the fact that the entire world thought he had WMD's (at the time bush came to power anyway, now is a different story admitedly). Of course bush would have a plan to deal with this, because it was a problem that had been passed along to him by the clinton administration, who took almost no action in preventing this situation, and simply passed the buck. it wasn't as if Iraq was some unknown country that bush had a beef with, it was a legitmate threat to the region and a international problem for upwards of 10 years. someone was going to have to deal with it eventually and bush more that likely felt that he should deal with it rather than ignore it. the fact that he didn't act until last year, rather than early in his presidency was due to the "hostage" crisis in China and the attacks of 9/11, which obviously became top priority, a mere 9 months into his term. i have no problem with the fact that bush had a goal to deal with iraq, just as i would expect any canidate running this year to have a plan to deal with countries that pose threats (N. Korea, Iran, Syria, etc...). If kerry felt strongly that Syria had to be dealt with and won the election, and 2 or 3 years into his term he did something about it, would anyone complain that he came into office with a plan to deal with them? i doubt it...

[Jason Tate]

According to the documents just released (after months of dragging their feet) by the White House, Clinton's administration was actually very in the know on the entire terrorist situation and passed the buck as you so dilligently put it, to Bush with different plans outlined on how to deal with Al Queda, and discuss the threats against the country (all these documents vindicate Clarke btw) - and as Clarke said, he voted for Gore because he felt that administration best understood and "got it" on how to deal with terrorism. Going into Iraq has hurt the so called newspeak "war on terror" and has cost this country dearly and has set forth a precident that scares me to my core. Most of the other nations look at our country as the terrorists in this situation ... we had a chance after 9/11 where the world looked upon us with a kind eye and sympathy and there was a fleeting moment in which there was a chance for change in this world, and certain key countries started to re-think their harboring of terrorists. However, it is now apparent (seeing as our president has had more people in this world protest him than any other person who has ever lived) that the rest of the world no longer looks to the country of the west with any sort of tender heart - but instead with the same contempt they intially spewed for the terrorists who attacked on our soil.

And unfortunatly Bush IS responsible for thos burned bodies because as president of the united states he gains the title of command and chief of our nation's army. Now this 'war' was never declared, was never voted on in congress, and has violated numerous world laws, United States laws, and at the peak of all: the United States constitution. Therefore I put the blame not only on him, but I put the blame on the shoulders of all Americans who have not stood up and demanded our constitution be followed. Instead most of America sits back in their jobless homes and watch Fox news all the while thinking that everything is fine abroad in that middle eastern country because, coincidently, the Bush Administration has banned any and all caskets being shown on televison in a ploy to curb moral and public opinion. This is why a large number of the parents, family, and friends of many soliders in Iraq are demanding a censor on Bush, and demanding legal action be taken. This is why letters and notes are coming from our women and men over in Iraq that echo the same sort of 'why are we here, they don't want us here' crys that painted the Vietnam war.

[worldstheory]

Bill Clinton said it best. Said he, "The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world. The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently."

Let's look at senseless slaughter of soliders, the running of their burned bodies through the streets .. that MIGHT be a clue to their opinion on the subject. Don't you think for one second that THIS is the spectrum of opinions on the matter. Even if millions of Iraqis are pleased with the removal of Saddam, don't expect them to light themselves on fire and run through the streets yelling "Hey! I'm OK with the occupation!!!" You should know by now that the loudest opinion isn't always the most popular opinion.

...a man who came into office with an agenda to go to Iraq at whatever cost ("From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go, says ONeill (As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council), who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.)Tate, CLICK HERE AND READ THIS PLEASE (http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html). These are the words of Bill Clinton more than five years ago. Don't pin your retarded-ass accusations on Bush.

I'm gonna close with a quote from that transcript. Remember, this is Clinton talking, over FIVE YEARS ago:

Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people. And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.

[Sinister Rouge]

Nice work Tate, keep posting more political items on your site...might as well post this.

http://www.fatwreck.com/junk/rab.html

Bush is nothing new, he does the the same kind of shit other presidents done before. It is that Bush is just much worse. Lying or misleading about invading a country...been done before by Kennedy and LBJ. We went into Vietnam with the fictious reason we were attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin. Back then, communism was the fear the US used to pursue goals of capitialsim and pursuing national interests. Terrorism (although a worthy fear) is the fear used today. The Bush administrations message is that if you aren't with us, you are with the terrorists, kinda like you were a communist if you didn't go along with the government in the 60's. Terrorism needs to be fought and Iraq was a sideshow to the war on terror, a complete mistake. Now Bush is saying things are going well and we need to stay the course. LBJ said the same thing about Vietnam.

We say the Iraqi people are better of without Saddam. One day it could be the case...but not right now, Iraq is going from a brutal dictatorship to a civil war. Third world civil wars are not pretty, look at Congo. And the biggest lie is not the WMD claim or the Al Qeada-Saddam claim..nope. This lie rings throughout our history...the lie that we are the protectors of human rights, freedom, and democracy. In the Cold War, we supported some pretty bad dictators and we used the CIA to overthrow left wing democracies to install dictators. Take Pinochet in Chile for example, we overthrew Allende to put in a brutal dictator who killed thousands in the name of capitalism. We supported Saddam, gave him chemical weapons and he killed millions. Several democracies turned into dictatorships by our hand. South Korea and South Vietnam were dictatorships when we supported them. The worst is Pol Pot.We supported him because he was an enemy to Vietnam after the Vietnam War. He had a Maoist agricultual plan which he displaced millions from their homes and killed almost a third of their population. When Vietnam took Pol Pot out of power, Cambodia had very few people to defend the country. So, the media calling the US the fighters for democracy and liberators is propaganda and a "half-truth" at best. The reality is we fight for capitialism and corporate interest and we formulate reasons (ex. terrorism links) to get the people to go along with the military action. Because without the people's support (ex. Vietnam), you rarely win the war. Bush is learning this with his approval rating nose dive.

The US is about to be caught in some serious violence. Civil wars, uprisings, more terrorism. Look at Israel, they keep using bombs and bullets to fight terrorism...it results in more terrorists. I am afraid it is happening to the US. And Bush doesn't get this.

I seriously do not like Kerry to much, he is better than Bush though.

[UL11]

you can moan and bitch all you want about this, but there is NOTHING you, i, or anyone else can do about it.

i disagree with this statement. we can definitely do something about it. why not get out at protest? thats the only way the vietnam war ended. when nixon wanted to send in more troops, his advisors told him it wouldn't be a good idea because there would be a revolution in this country. we can do something about it. so for those of you who oppose this war, get out and do something about it because in reality it affects us all. throughout history all social change has been brought about by the common people. we live in a system where our government is supposed to act according to the desires of the people. unfortunately, however, we do not. so it is important for us to put pressures on the government so they will. oh yeah, and let's learn to respect other's opinions. personally, i don't feel this war was justified, but some do. i am not going to say they are wrong because of it or call them names. and for the kid who said he got banned for calling tate a ***got, i hope he bans you again. that's a horrible word and should not be tolerated.

[Sinister Rouge]

you can moan and bitch all you want about this, but there is NOTHING you, i, or anyone else can do about it.

This type of thinking leads to incredibily dangerous politcial situations.

[Jason Tate]

This type of thinking leads to incredibily dangerous politcial situations.
It's this sort of apathy needs to be reversed and then hopefully people will realized this kind of thinking is what has led us to this sort of problem in the first place.

[thenewline]

ur fucking wrong man,see people like you are the reason why bush is president.you are right you we cant do anything as one but together we can do alote.

[Sinister Rouge]

It's this sort of apathy needs to be reversed and then hopefully people will realized this kind of thinking is what has led us to this sort of problem in the first place.

America has major problems with apathy along with ignorant patriotism. Although there has been heroic examples of Americans questioning their government, America has problems questioning their government and holding them accountable. Spain saw their government lie to them about the blame for the train bombings. The Spanish held them accountable and voted Aznar's party out of power. The US people are too apathetic to see that the government lies to them.

[Jason Tate]

True.

/may be going to spain next week. kinda worried.

[knivesbatstats]

tate said:"seeing as our president has had more people in this world protest him than any other person who has ever lived"

ummmmmm.......HITLER??? i like how people like you honestly think that bush is as bad as someone like hitler, that just goes to show how full of shit you are

[Sinister Rouge]

tate said:"seeing as our president has had more people in this world protest him than any other person who has ever lived"

ummmmmm.......HITLER??? i like how people like you honestly think that bush is as bad as someone like hitler, that just goes to show how full of shit you are

Actually Hitler wasn't really protested the way Bush was. Fear snuffed protest.

Bush is no way near Hitler..but the creation of threats and falsehood to put in the propaganda so the people support attacking a country is comparable to Hitler.

[thenewline]

i wish bush would be acountable for the shit he has done or at lest tell us the truth.everything thats going on we only hear little bites and peices of the whole story,but i guess with our fucked up gov thats how its always going on be unless we do something about it and not just bitch about it on absolutepunk.net

if we did half of what we say we should do we would have this country in alote better shape then it is.

its sad how canada has more freedom this us in alote of aspects and we have to change that.

[Jason Tate]

Bill Clinton said it best. Said he, "The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world. The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently."

Don't you think for one second that THIS is the spectrum of opinions on the matter. Even if millions of Iraqis are pleased with the removal of Saddam, don't expect them to light themselves on fire and run through the streets yelling "Hey! I'm OK with the occupation!!!" You should know by now that the loudest opinion isn't always the most popular opinion.

Tate, CLICK HERE AND READ THIS PLEASE (http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html). These are the words of Bill Clinton more than five years ago. Don't pin your retarded-ass accusations on Bush.

I'm gonna close with a quote from that transcript. Remember, this is Clinton talking, over FIVE YEARS ago:
All of the quotes listed above are substantially correct reproductions of statements made by various Democratic leaders regarding Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's acquisition or possession of weapons of mass destruction. However, some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S.

[Sinister Rouge]

i wish bush would be acountable for the shit he has done or at lest tell us the truth.everything thats going on we only hear little bites and peices of the whole story,but i guess with our fucked up gov thats how its always going on be unless we do something about it and not just bitch about it on absolutepunk.net

if we did half of what we say we should do we would have this country in alote better shape then it is.

its sad how canada has more freedom this us in alote of aspects and we have to change that.

We don't just hear bits and pieces from Bush, we hear fucking lies... other than that, the post is right on target.

Our government needs to get its head out of capitalism's green ass and serve the people.

[Jason Tate]

tate said:"seeing as our president has had more people in this world protest him than any other person who has ever lived"

ummmmmm.......HITLER??? i like how people like you honestly think that bush is as bad as someone like hitler, that just goes to show how full of shit you are
On Feb15-16th, more people world wide protested George W Bush than ANY person in the history of the world.

[Basketcase]

Somebody please tell me where these so-called "weapons of mass Destruction" are Show me those and then I'll agree that US soldiers arent dying in vain. Right now it looks as though bush was doing nothing more than finishing his daddy's war
i agree

[yeat182]

According to the documents just released (after months of dragging their feet) by the White House, Clinton's administration was actually very in the know on the entire terrorist situation and passed the buck as you so dilligently put it, to Bush with different plans outlined on how to deal with Al Queda, and discuss the threats against the country (all these documents vindicate Clarke btw) - and as Clarke said, he voted for Gore because he felt that administration best understood and "got it" on how to deal with terrorism.

i was refering to the Clinton administration passing the buck on Iraq, however, they certainly could have/should have done more to deal with al-qaeda, rather than pass a plan on to his successor...but that is just my opinion.


And unfortunatly Bush IS responsible for thos burned bodies because as president of the united states he gains the title of command and chief of our nation's army.

those people that were burned and dragged through the streets weren't soldiers, they were civillians.

Now this 'war' was never declared, was never voted on in congress, and has violated numerous world laws, United States laws, and at the peak of all: the United States constitution.

on the contrary, it upheld the 17 UN resolutions passed over the course of 10+ years. not to mention that congress voted in support of military action in Iraq, including bush's competition, John Kerry.

Therefore I put the blame not only on him, but I put the blame on the shoulders of all Americans who have not stood up and demanded our constitution be followed. Instead most of America sits back in their jobless homes and watch Fox news all the while thinking that everything is fine abroad in that middle eastern country because, coincidently, the Bush Administration has banned any and all caskets being shown on televison in a ploy to curb moral and public opinion. This is why a large number of the parents, family, and friends of many soliders in Iraq are demanding a censor on Bush, and demanding legal action be taken. This is why letters and notes are coming from our women and men over in Iraq that echo the same sort of 'why are we here, they don't want us here' crys that painted the Vietnam war.

that is obviously your view of things, which is fine and is shared by many people, however, I don't think the majority of america is jobless and i know they don't believe everything is fine in the middle east, if it were, we wouldn't have to be there in the first place.

[Love As Arson]

I think it is fairly obvious that we did everything the terrorists wanted us to do. They have gotten us to overthrow a secular regime while destablizing Iraq which allows them to exert their influence over the people. The longer we stay in Iraq the more we look like the evil imperialist nation and allows for the terrorists to have more influence in the Arab world. Terrorists were too weak to take over any country but we did it for them in Iraq and now we are paying the price. This war in Iraq has given the terrorists the power and what's more we fell for it. Now we are losing soldiers and money by fighting the terrorism we helped to perpetuate. If this is the war on terrorism then clearly the terrorists are winning because our actions are allowing them to gain power.

[Jason Tate]

i was refering to the Clinton administration passing the buck on Iraq, however, they certainly could have/should have done more to deal with al-qaeda, rather than pass a plan on to his successor...but that is just my opinion.




those people that were burned and dragged through the streets weren't soldiers, they were civillians.



on the contrary, it upheld the 17 UN resolutions passed over the course of 10+ years. not to mention that congress voted in support of military action in Iraq, including bush's competition, John Kerry.



that is obviously your view of things, which is fine and is shared by many people, however, I don't think the majority of america is jobless and i know they don't believe everything is fine in the middle east, if it were, we wouldn't have to be there in the first place.
How can you uphold 17 UN resolutions while breaking them at the exact same time? It's like kicking a dog for peeing on the rug all the while whipping it out and letting loose a stream all over the carpet. It's this paradoxal hypocritical stance that makes us look like, for lack of a better word: wanks, to the rest of the world.

[Jason Tate]

I think it is fairly obvious that we did everything the terrorists wanted us to do. They have gotten us to overthrow a secular regime while destablizing Iraq which allows them to exert their influence over the people. The longer we stay in Iraq the more we look like the evil imperialist nation and allows for the terrorists to have more influence in the Arab world. Terrorists were too weak to take over any country but we did it for them in Iraq and now we are paying the price. This war in Iraq has given the terrorists the power and what's more we fell for it. Now we are losing soldiers and money by fighting the terrorism we helped to perpetuate. If this is the war on terrorism then clearly the terrorists are winning because our actions are allowing them to gain power.
Which is exactly what Clarke (and now almost every analyist in the country) was saying. We only vindicated Bin Laden, made him out to be a hero to most of the middle east, and by then going into Iraq we only assured ourselves that there would be hundreds of new bin laden types coming out of the woodworks, and took our own place, and placed a firm grip as known terrorists to most of the rest of the world.

[justinevans]

All of the quotes listed above are substantially correct reproductions of statements made by various Democratic leaders regarding Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's acquisition or possession of weapons of mass destruction. However, some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S.

Jason, Jason, Jason. First, lets open up our eyes to see that Clinton pardoned some of the people who flew the planes into the towers. Now is that is way of solving problems? Being nice to terrorists does not work. Either does angering them, but there is no median. The only safest way for the world is to eliminate them. We are trying to transform Iraq. A nation who has been taught violence is the answer by their former great leader Sadaam. Lets look at how Clinton drove OUR economy into the ground. Bush has economic figures that Clinton never saw. Low inflation, higher GDP, and the same unemployment rate of 5.6%. Money controls the world. If we were all rich, we would side with Bush more and more. The war? It had to be finished, yes, but it should have been by the lame duck named Clinton. The UN opposed the war because many of those top countries are in business with Iraq. So yes, money drove them again. Money may have drove us, but before we start bitching about gas prices, lets look at this. Gas in Europe is over $5 for a liter. This war is nothing comparable to Vietnam beside the fact that no war was declared, and we were fighting to remove something "evil". Only in vietnam it was communism. Even if we are over there for oil, we are no better than Bush, because our opinions would change if we had money in our hands. You know that and I know that. We can say now, blah blah, I'd be the same person. Bull Shit.
Also, go here. http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/GW/GWBush1_Start.htm

See in America we focus on what is instantly wrong. Yeah, war is not good. But when have treaties come before blood has been lost? We are educated by a liberal media, liberal educators, and so forth. We only want to look at what is wrong and do something about it, we forget we can praise Bush for the good he has done also. Thank you, I've said my piece.

Justin.

[Jason Tate]

Jason, Jason, Jason. First, lets open up our eyes to see that Clinton pardoned some of the people who flew the planes into the towers. Now is that is way of solving problems? Being nice to terrorists does not work. Either does angering them, but there is no median. The only safest way for the world is to eliminate them. We are trying to transform Iraq. A nation who has been taught violence is the answer by their former great leader Sadaam. Lets look at how Clinton drove OUR economy into the ground. Bush has economic figures that Clinton never saw. Low inflation, higher GDP, and the same unemployment rate of 5.6%. Money controls the world. If we were all rich, we would side with Bush more and more. The war? It had to be finished, yes, but it should have been by the lame duck named Clinton. The UN opposed the war because many of those top countries are in business with Iraq. So yes, money drove them again. Money may have drove us, but before we start bitching about gas prices, lets look at this. Gas in Europe is over $5 for a liter. This war is nothing comparable to Vietnam beside the fact that no war was declared, and we were fighting to remove something "evil". Only in vietnam it was communism. Even if we are over there for oil, we are no better than Bush, because our opinions would change if we had money in our hands. You know that and I know that. We can say now, blah blah, I'd be the same person. Bull Shit.
Also, go here. http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/GW/GWBush1_Start.htm

See in America we focus on what is instantly wrong. Yeah, war is not good. But when have treaties come before blood has been lost? We are educated by a liberal media, liberal educators, and so forth. We only want to look at what is wrong and do something about it, we forget we can praise Bush for the good he has done also. Thank you, I've said my piece.

Justin.
a) gas prices have always been significantly higher in the rest of the world [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3594475.stm]

b) the fact you call our media 'liberal' renders any other part of your argument mute.

c) if you want to talk about how money crafts the world then fine, the money we WASTED (and I mean WASTED and CONTINUE TO WASTE) on Bush's Vietnam - would have paid for half of the bill to get us into a hydrogen based economy. With a hydrogen based economy, we could dictate all of the terms involved in getting to play along with the world and pretty much get whatever we wanted from any nation. We'd have so much clout it would be sickening. Ie: Don't want to play ball? FINE. Stay in the fucking stone age my friend. It's not very hard to do the math and figure out why something like a hydrogen based economy would not be pursued at this time, with this particular regime in power in the US.

A key train of educated thought is that you can NOT impose democracy on people, especially in the middle east. It just isn't possible to force people to make that change without first addressing the underlying problems they already face ... this we are seeing now on a first hand basis.

[justinevans]

"we could dictate all of the terms involved in getting to play along with the world and pretty much get whatever we wanted from any nation. We'd have so much clout it would be sickening."

isn't this what the world hates about us now? They hate how we are the super power.

We wasted money in a lot of wars. IE. Rebuilding Europe, Japan, and so forth. Countries have wasted money to fight our wars too. IE. France in the revolutionary War, which gave us the freedoms we love and exploit. Our history is based on wars we shouldn't have fought and things we didn't do. We look at the problems. Never the successful aspects.

And yes our media is very liberal and pathetic. Back when there was not a competition for news, we got the complete truth. I mean you do realize five days after the attacks on WTC and the Pentagon, CNN actually announced Osama Bin Laden was killed?

And whatever you were posting to me about the gas prices, you proved my point.

Also, how about the money we waste on celebrity court trials to give them a house arrest and probation. How about how much we waste letting people sit on Death Row? How about the money we waste in our prisons in general? You do know their is a prison somewhere for CEO's and celebrities can bring their golf clubs and their family's can visit often.

Lets not even begin on how much we waste on welfare. Welfare is great for the people who need it.

[yeat182]

How can you uphold 17 UN resolutions while breaking them at the exact same time? It's like kicking a dog for peeing on the rug all the while whipping it out and letting loose a stream all over the carpet. It's this paradoxal hypocritical stance that makes us look like, for lack of a better word: wanks, to the rest of the world.

how did we break the UN resolutions?


and note: following the 1991 war, Iraq signed a cease-fire agreement with the US. under the terms of that agreement, Iraq had to comply with UN resolutions and allow inspections. The instant they refused to do that, they broke that contract, and the result is a continuation of the original hositilities from 1991.

[yeat182]

I think it is fairly obvious that we did everything the terrorists wanted us to do. They have gotten us to overthrow a secular regime while destablizing Iraq which allows them to exert their influence over the people. The longer we stay in Iraq the more we look like the evil imperialist nation and allows for the terrorists to have more influence in the Arab world. Terrorists were too weak to take over any country but we did it for them in Iraq and now we are paying the price. This war in Iraq has given the terrorists the power and what's more we fell for it. Now we are losing soldiers and money by fighting the terrorism we helped to perpetuate. If this is the war on terrorism then clearly the terrorists are winning because our actions are allowing them to gain power.


while you make some very good points, you fail to mention the fact that Lybia (a terrorists state) has agreed to fully comply with UN inspections and will dicontinue their WMD programs, and the fact that Iran has agreed to inspections as well and has stated they will halt their nuclear program...due almost entirely to the fact that we are in Iraq.

[yeat182]

Jason, Jason, Jason. First, lets open up our eyes to see that Clinton pardoned some of the people who flew the planes into the towers. Now is that is way of solving problems? Being nice to terrorists does not work. Either does angering them, but there is no median. The only safest way for the world is to eliminate them. We are trying to transform Iraq. A nation who has been taught violence is the answer by their former great leader Sadaam. Lets look at how Clinton drove OUR economy into the ground. Bush has economic figures that Clinton never saw. Low inflation, higher GDP, and the same unemployment rate of 5.6%. Money controls the world. If we were all rich, we would side with Bush more and more. The war? It had to be finished, yes, but it should have been by the lame duck named Clinton. The UN opposed the war because many of those top countries are in business with Iraq. So yes, money drove them again. Money may have drove us, but before we start bitching about gas prices, lets look at this. Gas in Europe is over $5 for a liter. This war is nothing comparable to Vietnam beside the fact that no war was declared, and we were fighting to remove something "evil". Only in vietnam it was communism. Even if we are over there for oil, we are no better than Bush, because our opinions would change if we had money in our hands. You know that and I know that. We can say now, blah blah, I'd be the same person. Bull Shit.
Also, go here. http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/GW/GWBush1_Start.htm

See in America we focus on what is instantly wrong. Yeah, war is not good. But when have treaties come before blood has been lost? We are educated by a liberal media, liberal educators, and so forth. We only want to look at what is wrong and do something about it, we forget we can praise Bush for the good he has done also. Thank you, I've said my piece.

Justin.


well done.

[yeat182]

c) if you want to talk about how money crafts the world then fine, the money we WASTED (and I mean WASTED and CONTINUE TO WASTE) on Bush's Vietnam - would have paid for half of the bill to get us into a hydrogen based economy. With a hydrogen based economy, we could dictate all of the terms involved in getting to play along with the world and pretty much get whatever we wanted from any nation. We'd have so much clout it would be sickening. Ie: Don't want to play ball? FINE. Stay in the fucking stone age my friend. It's not very hard to do the math and figure out why something like a hydrogen based economy would not be pursued at this time, with this particular regime in power in the US.

hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, just because we developed a fuel based on hydrogen would not give us any clout at all, since it would most likely been done by a private industry that would sell its products all over the world. and i didn't see Clinton trying to push a hydrogen based fuel system either.

[off the record]

hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, just because we developed a fuel based on hydrogen would not give us any clout at all, since it would most likely been done by a private industry that would sell its products all over the world. and i didn't see Clinton trying to push a hydrogen based fuel system either.

Why bring Clinton into it? He never said Clinton made an effort for a hydrogen fuel source. I think the point he is trying to make is that we are content with living off oil, letting oil companies rape us each of hundreds if not thousands of dollars a year, and the government has no plans on researching, and USING, alternative fuel source probably until oil runs out. Its too good for the econmony, the US oil companies make a killing off their fellow americans, and SUVs are at the highest sales rate averaging 15mpg. So as citezens it doesnt seam like we are trying to push for the use of other fuel sources when we drive gas guzzlers. haha i drive a lifted Tahoe that gets 10 mpg so im not better than anyone else. Really we are all to blame, the government and its people, but if a private company were smart enough they could probably make a killing off hyrdogen based fuel...

[Love As Arson]

while you make some very good points, you fail to mention the fact that Lybia (a terrorists state) has agreed to fully comply with UN inspections and will dicontinue their WMD programs, and the fact that Iran has agreed to inspections as well and has stated they will halt their nuclear program...due almost entirely to the fact that we are in Iraq.
Fear isn't a tool that should be used to solve problems. It only leads to more hostility. Those countries don't pose a threat. The people who are being influenced by Al Quaeda do. So you see while you think we may be making progress we are only setting up more enemies for ourselves.

[pezpenguin03]

Does anyone here watch the news!? Fox news which is owned by and ran by conservatives. Even they have a hard time defeating the fact that bush has made mistakes. Now if you're a diehard conservative and activist if you will then you realize everything he has done rather it be entering war or making a speach about how he believes due to his religion there should be a admendment banning gay marriage has been extreme. The war in Iraq is a 200+ billion dollar deficit in our hands. We will be the ones if not us our children paying for years to come. Bush complains Kerry is going to raise taxes but hey he leaves out the fact that its going to be the people who are making 6 figures and up that will be emptying their pockets more often, they only make up 18% of the population. I laugh at the fact that he is running on terms of our fears claiming as president he has kept us safer after 9/11. 9/11 has come cliche its a term just thrown around now! Since 9/11 I havent been anymore scared up until the Iraqi war then i have 3 years ago. If anything im more scared now then i have been since ive had the acknowledgement of violence. Thanks to the uprisings in Iraq, bombings in Spain, treats in Britian and terrorist sprouting up ever were, and the lack of safety on our borders. The economy is down....the job employment and nasdaq go up .5% and conservatives throw parties cause they've done something. We need Kerry and we need Clinton to back him up as vice president! Because I dont remember anyone complaining when they had jobs, peace, and knew nothing of terriosm.

[yeat182]

Why bring Clinton into it? He never said Clinton made an effort for a hydrogen fuel source. I think the point he is trying to make is that we are content with living off oil, letting oil companies rape us each of hundreds if not thousands of dollars a year, and the government has no plans on researching, and USING, alternative fuel source probably until oil runs out. Its too good for the econmony, the US oil companies make a killing off their fellow americans, and SUVs are at the highest sales rate averaging 15mpg. So as citezens it doesnt seam like we are trying to push for the use of other fuel sources when we drive gas guzzlers. haha i drive a lifted Tahoe that gets 10 mpg so im not better than anyone else. Really we are all to blame, the government and its people, but if a private company were smart enough they could probably make a killing off hyrdogen based fuel...


because it was implied that bush hasn't promoted hydrogen energy because he is affiliated with oil companies, and i pointed out that clinton didn't either, despite not sharing those same affiliations. but i agree, we are all to blame and we will all have to deal with it when the oil runs out. and i believe private industry will develop alternative fuel source before the government does (unless its for the military).

[yeat182]

Fear isn't a tool that should be used to solve problems. It only leads to more hostility. Those countries don't pose a threat. The people who are being influenced by Al Quaeda do. So you see while you think we may be making progress we are only setting up more enemies for ourselves.

Lybia and Iran didn't pose a threat?

[yeat182]

The war in Iraq is a 200+ billion dollar deficit in our hands. We will be the ones if not us our children paying for years to come.

the government shouldn't be spending so much on other programs when defense of the country is their number one priority. cut wefare and other wasteful programs and stop creating new ones that don't work, and you wouldn't have a defecit.

Bush complains Kerry is going to raise taxes but hey he leaves out the fact that its going to be the people who are making 6 figures and up that will be emptying their pockets more often, they only make up 18% of the population.

those people also already pay the majority of the taxes, why should they have to pay more?

I laugh at the fact that he is running on terms of our fears claiming as president he has kept us safer after 9/11. 9/11 has come cliche its a term just thrown around now! Since 9/11 I havent been anymore scared up until the Iraqi war then i have 3 years ago. If anything im more scared now then i have been since ive had the acknowledgement of violence. Thanks to the uprisings in Iraq, bombings in Spain, treats in Britian and terrorist sprouting up ever were, and the lack of safety on our borders.

all the more reason to be pro-active, rather than reactive.

The economy is down....the job employment and nasdaq go up .5% and conservatives throw parties cause they've done something. We need Kerry and we need Clinton to back him up as vice president! Because I dont remember anyone complaining when they had jobs, peace, and knew nothing of terriosm.

no president is in control, nor is responsible, for the economy.

and clinton can't be vp.

and those that new nothing of terrorism when clinton was in power are ignorant and should be mocked accordingly. USS Cole, 2 embassy bombings, World Trade Center attack #1, attack on military barracks in the Middle East...all courtesy of Al-qaeda, all more or less ignored by Clinton and his administration, including Richard Clarke who thinks it was bush's fault that 9/11 occured.

[Jason Tate]

how did we break the UN resolutions?


and note: following the 1991 war, Iraq signed a cease-fire agreement with the US. under the terms of that agreement, Iraq had to comply with UN resolutions and allow inspections. The instant they refused to do that, they broke that contract, and the result is a continuation of the original hositilities from 1991.
The fact that you ask that, means I don't even have to respond to anything else you post because you have shown you have an intellegence closer to that of a dead fish than someone who actually has researched or knows what they are talking about.

All of these posts you made are full of proven lies, mistruths, and neocon bullshit that I doubt you even really understand. Most of your assertations have been destroyed and debunked time and time again by White House documents, ex-White House staff, and even Ms. Bitch Condolza Rice. Do some research before coming on here and posting a bunch of things that anyone with access to CNN and Google can prove to be wrong.

And just for the record: If we spent 900 more billon dollars on defense, do you think it will help? If you really do, than that's some pipe dream you are living in, the world is not safer now than it was the day after 9/11, America is still JUST as vulnerable to attack as almost every other country - and throwing money for "defense" (do a little research and we soon learn how many of these defense contractors paid a nice contribution to GW) is not the way to stop this problem. For example, just because you have the most expensive program, and the best technology, it only takes the simpilist mind, and the most rudimentary plan and weapons to bring it down. History has shown this to be true in all accounts.

[justinevans]

The fact that you ask that, means I don't even have to respond to anything else you post because you have shown you have an intellegence closer to that of a dead fish than someone who actually has researched or knows what they are talking about.

All of these posts you made are full of proven lies, mistruths, and neocon bullshit that I doubt you even really understand. Most of your assertations have been destroyed and debunked time and time again by White House documents, ex-White House staff, and even Ms. Bitch Condolza Rice. Do some research before coming on here and posting a bunch of things that anyone with access to CNN and Google can prove to be wrong.

i agree with you referring to that kid. we did break UN resolutions, but so did Iraq. And theoretically, us going to war over them breaking their resolutions is legal, and that should have given the UN enough to support it, but trade kept them out.

[off the record]

the weathly dont pay more taxes, they write most of it off, middle class pays more than the majority of taxes

[Love As Arson]

Lybia and Iran didn't pose a threat?
I don't believe so. No country in their right mind would take on the United
States. Terrorists on the other hand would take on the US because they actually believe what they are fighting for and willing to die for it.

Fact:
Turkey has human rights violations and we were going to pay billions to them to fly over their airspace.

Israel is guilty of more human rights violations than Iraq and we support them.


How do you justify this hypocrisy?

[yeat182]

The fact that you ask that, means I don't even have to respond to anything else you post because you have shown you have an intellegence closer to that of a dead fish than someone who actually has researched or knows what they are talking about.

All of these posts you made are full of proven lies, mistruths, and neocon bullshit that I doubt you even really understand. Most of your assertations have been destroyed and debunked time and time again by White House documents, ex-White House staff, and even Ms. Bitch Condolza Rice. Do some research before coming on here and posting a bunch of things that anyone with access to CNN and Google can prove to be wrong.

and any point that you've made is readily available for consumption on punkvoter.com. but as i have already stated, i respect your opinions despite the fact we disagree, you obviously, don't extend the same courtosey.

And just for the record: If we spent 900 more billon dollars on defense, do you think it will help? If you really do, than that's some pipe dream you are living in, the world is not safer now than it was the day after 9/11, America is still JUST as vulnerable to attack as almost every other country - and throwing money for "defense" (do a little research and we soon learn how many of these defense contractors paid a nice contribution to GW) is not the way to stop this problem. For example, just because you have the most expensive program, and the best technology, it only takes the simpilist mind, and the most rudimentary plan and weapons to bring it down. History has shown this to be true in all accounts.

i didn't say we should spend more money, but spending money is nessisary to provide an adaquate defense, which is the main purpose of government. i would say spending money wisely is better than spending a lot of money, but just because we have to spend money is nothing to get worked up about.

[kamikazeguy92]

the fact is that soldiers are getting killed everyday in iraq.. and ignorant americans claim its all in the name of "freedom".. well thats total bullshit because how can life be much better there when iraqis are just as angry as before saddam was ousted? you think that by being patriotic and going to another countries to spread democracy is so great. well our country isnt even a democracy, never was, and probably never will be. if we were smart we'd take innocent lives out of there so that no more soldiers are killed, i'm sure that they have no desire to remain there. plus our country has special interests, namely padding the capitalist empire within our country, this time through "the rich resources of iraq" aka oil. this has happened before and history is just repeating itself. i guess millions of dumbfounded americans never learned that "those who ignore the past are condemned to repeat it"

[yeat182]

the fact is that soldiers are getting killed everyday in iraq.. and ignorant americans claim its all in the name of "freedom".. well thats total bullshit because how can life be much better there when iraqis are just as angry as before saddam was ousted? you think that by being patriotic and going to another countries to spread democracy is so great. well our country isnt even a democracy, never was, and probably never will be. if we were smart we'd take innocent lives out of there so that no more soldiers are killed, i'm sure that they have no desire to remain there. plus our country has special interests, namely padding the capitalist empire within our country, this time through "the rich resources of iraq" aka oil. this has happened before and history is just repeating itself. i guess millions of dumbfounded americans never learned that "those who ignore the past are condemned to repeat it"

so genius, all this oil that we are apparently taking from Iraq has somehow made our gas prices increase?

[yeat182]

here is a list of some of the success we've had in Iraq, the ones that are rarely, if ever, reported. for example, cities in Iraq now have electricity 24 hours a day, whereas before they were lucky to have in one hour out of the day, if saddam didn't shut it down all together to get even with the people of that city who didn't like him:


Friday, March 19, 2004

On the anniversary of the start of the Iraq War, the United State Central Command in Tampa, Fla., listed these accomplishments of Operation Iraqi Freedom (search):



Operation Iraqi Freedom Coalition Forces have successfully liberated 25 million Iraqis from the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.

These highlights provide information regarding the accomplishments of the Coalition throughout the past year.

The OIF Coalition is comprised of 34 countries, including 11 NATO countries, and they have provided over 22,000 troops to support the efforts in Iraq. There are two multi-national divisions in Iraq: one led by the United Kingdom in central-south Iraq, and one led by Poland in south Iraq.

The international community has pledged at least $32 billion to improve schools, health care, roads, water and electricity supplies, agriculture and other essential services.

The World Bank, International Monetary Fund, the European Union, and 38 countries have pledged to extend loans and grants to Iraq. Other nations are contributing humanitarian assistance, extending export credits and reducing Iraqi debt.

The UN Security Council on Oct. 16, 2003, unanimously approved Resolution 1511 that calls on member states to support the work of the multinational force in Iraq.

Security:

America's armed forces are taking the offensive against remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime and foreign terrorists, leading more than 1,600 patrols a day and conducting an average of 180 raids a week.

45 of the 55 most wanted Hussein regime members have been captured or killed, including the brutal dictator himself, whose capture sent a powerful message to the Iraqi people that the tyranny of the past will never return. The capture of Saddam Hussein provided a boost to intelligence throughout western Iraq.

The quality of intelligence is cascading as a result of the Saddam capture: the intelligence is of higher quality and allows a higher level of captures. Saddam's capture is allowing the Coalition to apprehend more mid-level financiers and organizers.

More than 230,000 Iraqis now provide security for their fellow citizens, and Iraqi security forces now account for the majority of all forces in Iraq. These forces include Iraqi Police, Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, Iraqi Border Police, Iraqi Facility Protection Service and the New Iraqi Army.

Law/Governance:

Since July, the 25-person Iraqi Governing Council has had the authority to: name interim Ministers; exercise government oversight; prepare policy initiatives on Iraq’s national security, including reform of the armed forces, police and courts; lead development of a constitution; and approve Iraq's national budget. 24 Iraqi Cabinet Members also contribute to the business of the government.

First time in 13 years, an ambassador to the US was appointed to restore diplomatic relations.

90 percent of Iraq’s districts have municipal/government councils with more than 19 million Iraqis engaging in local political discourse.

Ministry of Justice has established a Council of Judges to oversee the judiciary and prosecutors. Also, defendants are now provided lawyers.

Public Health:

240 hospitals and most of Iraq’s 1200 clinics have reopened. 70 private hospitals are operating.

800 tons of high protein biscuits have been delivered to 15 Governorates for malnourished children and pregnant/nursing mothers.

1.09 million humanitarian daily rations have been distributed to date.

22 million children and 700,000 women have been inoculated against diseases since the war; 90 percent of all Iraqi children now receive routine vaccinations.

Pharmaceuticals distribution improved from 0 to 12,000 tons today, more than $210 million approved for the Iraqi Ministry of Heath for pharmaceutical supplies and equipment, basic health care services, medical equipment and power generators for hospitals.

Schools:

Nearly all schools are open and 5.1 million students are attending class.

25 Fulbright Scholarships awarded for the first time in 14 years; Fulbright Office added 2 new programs for Iraqis.

Over 13,500 school buildings in Iraq; $4.4 million spent to complete 2,299 school renovations; UNICEF and other NGOs are rehabilitating 105 schools; 183K desks, 57K chairs, 61K chalkboards and 25K metal cabinets have been distributed.

33,000 teachers and 3,000 supervisors trained in instructional practices and classroom management strategies.

Commerce and Trade:

Iraqis use a single, unified currency for the first time in 15 years; 4.6 trillion new Iraqi dinars in circulation.

Iraq Stock Exchange will open in April; Iraq Central Bank is fully independent and has been opened since Sept 03.

83 percent of all pre-war bank branches are open.

Umm Qasr Port turned over to Iraqi control in Jan 04.

393,950 jobs have been generated.

Estimated crude oil export revenues exceed $3.3 billion for Iraqi reconstruction.

Telephone service continues to expand with 95% of service outside Baghdad.

More than 170 newspaper are published in Iraq

Power:

4400 megawatts per day is the current seven-day average, this is up from 300 megawatts per day in 2003.

USAID will spend more than $250 million infrastructure repair funds on power rehabilitation and an additional $75 million allocated to power reconstruction.

Water:

Coalition programs have cleared over 16,500 km of irrigation canals, helping over 10,000 farms.

Water storage in most Iraqi reservoirs is approaching historic averages.

Rehabilitated water treatment plants will treat nearly 800 million liters/day, benefiting 3.5 million people.

90 percent of Iraqis will have potable water by Apr 05.

Quality of Life:

Religious rites are being re-established for all sects.

New Ministry of Housing and Construction has started 1,008 new homes and is working with the UN to start 7 housing projects with 3,528 units.

Military Supplies Used:

Item Quantity Dollar Value
MREs 42.1 mil meals $285.0 mil
Bottled water 120 mil bottles $31.0 mil
Cots 342,000 $18.2 mil
Lumber 17.25 mil board-feet $6.9 mil
Plywood 750,000 sheets $10.9 mil
Combat Boots 673,000 pair $48.7 mil
Body Armor 191,000 vests $105.0 mil
Body Armor 361,000 plates $180.5 mil

[Jason Tate]

So? Good.. we are fucking over a country for no real reason, and spending and arm and a leg to do it..

*clap*

[Jason Tate]

and any point that you've made is readily available for consumption on punkvoter.com. but as i have already stated, i respect your opinions despite the fact we disagree, you obviously, don't extend the same courtosey.



i didn't say we should spend more money, but spending money is nessisary to provide an adaquate defense, which is the main purpose of government. i would say spending money wisely is better than spending a lot of money, but just because we have to spend money is nothing to get worked up about.
Nothing I posted in this thread at all is available on Punkvoter.com - at least do some research on some statement like that...

I'm over this thread.. it's now inhabited by someone who thinks the government's main role in our lives should be "defense" - beautiful.

[yeat182]

Nothing I posted in this thread at all is available on Punkvoter.com - at least do some research on some statement like that...

I'm over this thread.. it's now inhabited by someone who thinks the government's main role in our lives should be "defense" - beautiful.

first of all, i've tried to be respectful, but it appears that you obviously don't offer that same respect to people with different views that yours, which is your choice. i really hope that isn't because for once you aren't making your points to a bunch of 15 year old kids who don't know anything and will believe whatever anyone tells them, you are making them to someone that actually knows what they are talking about. if you disagree with my opinions, fine, that is your right, and i enjoy a good arguement, but there is no need to disprespect me or anyone else that doesn't agree with you. frankly, i expected more.

also, i'll include the preamble to the consitution, as it would seem you have apparently overlooked it:

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"

[yeat182]

the weathly dont pay more taxes, they write most of it off, middle class pays more than the majority of taxes

you are wrong. very wrong.

[yeat182]

I don't believe so. No country in their right mind would take on the United
States. Terrorists on the other hand would take on the US because they actually believe what they are fighting for and willing to die for it.

those countries openly support terrorism and have commited terrorists acts against the US.

Fact:
Turkey has human rights violations and we were going to pay billions to them to fly over their airspace.

Israel is guilty of more human rights violations than Iraq and we support them.


How do you justify this hypocrisy?

israel didn't start their war with the Palestinians or any of the arab nations, they were attacked and they are the ones that can't ride a bus with out fear of being blown up. how many human rights violations do the palestinians have?

[Jason Tate]

Uh, the wealthy SHOULD pay most of the taxes, that's the point our government, go take an econ class.

http://www.osjspm.org/101_taxes.htm

[Jason Tate]

first of all, i've tried to be respectful, but it appears that you obviously don't offer that same respect to people with different views that yours, which is your choice. i really hope that isn't because for once you aren't making your points to a bunch of 15 year old kids who don't know anything and will believe whatever anyone tells them, you are making them to someone that actually knows what they are talking about. if you disagree with my opinions, fine, that is your right, and i enjoy a good arguement, but there is no need to disprespect me or anyone else that doesn't agree with you. frankly, i expected more.

also, i'll include the preamble to the consitution, as it would seem you have apparently overlooked it:

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"
All that does is prove my point, that our main thinking should never be JUST about defense ... just because this party picked one of those words, and forgot about all the rest - does not make them saints.

[yeat182]

All that does is prove my point, that our main thinking should never be JUST about defense ... just because this party picked one of those words, and forgot about all the rest - does not make them saints.

first of all, it doesn't make them devils either. secondly, it proves my point that it is one of the primary functions of government and spending money on it is nessisary.

[pezpenguin03]

alright so lets get rid of welfare and while we are at it social security dont worry about paying that tax cause we wont have that around either in 20 or so years anyways. Clinton can run as VP if he wanted to it just wouldnt help the democrats out as much as if edwards was to run next to kerry. Clinton did not pardon anyone who was directly involved in 9/11. If we want to point fingers what bush did is even worse. http://www.rollingstone.com/features/featuregen.asp?pid=1992 Even as recent as this morning CSPAN had people calling in wondering why president bush let those family memebers of bin laden go. I can admit i was ignorant of terror before. 9/11 did open my eyes and thats why i have watched the news everyday since...at least 3 hours, sad i know. I do think that the more financial gains you have been blessed with the more you owe back to not the government but to help others. If you know anything about philosophy you will know a man by the name of kant he explains the moral worth and responsiblity of our actions to do what is good, not in hopes of personal gains. I supported the war in Iraq cause bush played on my fears and his claim of weapons of mass destruction was so convincing. As well as in the ideas of government the president has to his advantage our ignorance, apathy and our thoughts to do what is right for "Our" country, patriotism. Just this morning in two two hours in two different attacks, one city in Iraq, 12 of our citizens died. War is bad but we have to go into it with a smart mind & sound wallet.

[yeat182]

Even as recent as this morning CSPAN had people calling in wondering why president bush let those family memebers of bin laden go.

because they are innocent people that did nothing wrong.

Just this morning in two two hours in two different attacks, one city in Iraq, 12 of our citizens died.

12 soldiers

[Love As Arson]

those countries openly support terrorism and have commited terrorists acts against the US.



israel didn't start their war with the Palestinians or any of the arab nations, they were attacked and they are the ones that can't ride a bus with out fear of being blown up. how many human rights violations do the palestinians have?
They would never openly attack the US. Those countries have interests that they have to worry about. Terrorists beliefs are built around dying to destroy so I would say they pose more of a threat than those countries.
This has nothing to do with the Palestinians. It has to do with the human rights violations that Israel and our allies have committed thus making us hypocrites because we are not going to overthrow those nations.

[yeat182]

They would never openly attack the US. Those countries have interests that they have to worry about. Terrorists beliefs are built around dying to destroy so I would say they pose more of a threat than those countries.
This has nothing to do with the Palestinians. It has to do with the human rights violations that Israel and our allies have committed thus making us hypocrites because we are not going to overthrow those nations.

they have already commited terrorist acts against americans. and it does have something to do with palestinians since they are supposedly the ones that have had their human rights violated. how many human rights violation have they had? is blowing up a bus full of innocent people a humans rights violation? is demanding the complete and utter destruction of the Israeli state and people a human rights violation? Is strapping a 12 year old boy full of dynamite and asking him to blow himself up a human rights violation?

[Love As Arson]

they have already commited terrorist acts against americans. and it does have something to do with palestinians since they are supposedly the ones that have had their human rights violated. how many human rights violation have they had? is blowing up a bus full of innocent people a humans rights violation? is demanding the complete and utter destruction of the Israeli state and people a human rights violation? Is strapping a 12 year old boy full of dynamite and asking him to blow himself up a human rights violation?
Terrorists present more of a threat than a single country. A single country as I said has interests and would never attempt to take us down whereas terrorists would. Saudi Arabia has commited terrorist acts against America. Why do we not threaten them? Because we need something from them. Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?
I don't justify the violence that some of the Palestinians perpetrate but I do understand their plight. I do understand how one could feel that way if one had their land taken away from them by western countries and are constantly having their homes infringed upon. I am not saying this justifies their violence but I am saying I can understand why they would feel as if they needed to do that. Don't act as if Israel is innocent. They are guilty of killing innoncents and the acts of the Palestinians doesn't justify their violence.