I ♥ BUSH. Or not.
I don't know how many of you listend to Bush's innageral address yestorday, but I did. (He used the word freedom something like 45 times, by the way, but don't tell that to the homosexuals who dont have the freedomto marry). Anyway, I found somethings a little ironic
( Read more... )
I really don't mind losing some people.
Think of how many people we lost of the civil war? Or so many others. We have lost barely a percentage compared to everything else.
Reply
You "honestly don't mind losing some people"?? I'm sure you don't seeing as you are in no danger to lose someone.
Still-thats a disgusting thing to say. My Uncle is deploying to Iraq in a few months and if he died while thiere, the fact that YOU dont "mind losing SOME PEOPLE" wouldn't really be a comfert to me.
I wonder if that is how you would feel is Jared, or your Dad, or your brother died. That you "don't mind losing some people."
And a war for OUR freedom. The reports are back in by the way--NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
You're right that percentage wise not that many people have died (the total is now at 1,371 and just under 5,000 wounded) but the longer we occupy, the more deaths we get. And I, for one, do mind "losing some people."
Reply
I don't mind losing people to keep our freedom.
but did you know that we gave iraq MONTHS in advance that we were going to come on. they mad MONTHS to destory everything. that was saddams plan.
Reply
I do mind losing people for a reason I don't understand. For a war that no concrete explination has been given, and while we parade around saying we are giving people "freedom" while letting others die in genocide. I can understand World War Two, and I can understand the resoning behind most all of the wars America has fought in. But if we are spreading freedom, what makes those in Sudan less worthy?
Yes, we did give Suddam months of warning, and the inspectors found nothing durring those months too.
Reply
here's what it boils down to...
PEOPLE SAID THERE WERE WMD. There were confirmed papers or whatever you want to say that they were there.
NOW, regardless of wethere they are there or not, WE are there now.
BASCIALLY you would want any president to react the way Bush did, if he believed that there were WMD there. Bill Clinton has even admitted that he got the same thing Bush had. But he didn't act on it, we actually had a change to take saddam out, with one bullet, and Clinton said no.
Reply
The key findings was that there was NO EVIDENCE that the nuclear programme had been revived during the forced absence of INVO from 1998 until 2002. If you dont believe me, check out the United Nations website on Internal Atomic Energy. The site even states that
"the IAEA has successfully removed from Iraq all weapons-grade nuclear material, i.e. highly enriched uranium and plutonium; has taken custody of all known remaining uranium compounds; has destroyed and rendered harmless all known dedicated facilities and associated equipment; and has monitored all known dual-use equipment while in Iraq." (March 2003)
They also found in December of 1998 that
"There were no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable nuclear material of any practical
Reply
the fact is people lie. and because of that, bush has gone to war.
but on another note... it may have started out with WMD but i was for the war because of saddam.
Reply
But when you are going to war, risking peoples lives, you should have more then assumptions, and know for sure that thier are FACTS you are basing your decisions on.
And, yes, I agree with you 100% Saddam is a horrible leader who has murderd thousands. But what about the other leaders in the world that kill thousands? Why arent we going to war against them?
Reply
Bush did admitt he went about the war wrongly.
Reply
But Bush promised to spread democracy around the world. But I guess the 1.9million who have died (This massive loss of life surpasses the civilian death toll in any war since World War II.)in Sudan in the past 17 years. Do they not deserve democracy? Or is there maybe a little bit more to this war then Bush admits too?
Reply
Reply
Reply
as for everything.
ok.
and what does slave raids have to do with bush?
Reply
I can not undersand why Bush says we, as a nation, are not going to stand for tyranical goverments are compleatly ignores one.
Slave raids are just one example of the the atrocious human right violations that are going on in Sudan. But Bush has yet to wage a war aginast the Janjaweed goverment. As Bush said:
"America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies."
In that context, slavery has everything to do with Bush.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment