Page 4 of 43 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 845
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    But again, the inspections worked, Saddam had no WMD. To satisfy Bush's fake facts we rushed to war. War is not to be taken lightly.
    "Gonna go 'round in circles" - can't remember what song that's from. Clearly you and I have a difference of opinion and each of us has trouble seeing the others
  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Could the unrest in the region have anything to do with it, AGAIN?
    The Arab oil embargo was an economic play, not a result of regional instability.

    And since we're on the subject, how, pray-tell, would you suggest that instability be minimized. Afterall, it's not like there are thousands of years on instability history...............oh wait..........
  3. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    "Gonna go 'round in circles" - can't remember what song that's from. Clearly you and I have a difference of opinion and each of us has trouble seeing the others
    Could we comprise and say maybe give them time (2 months) to inspect. Then if he did not comply then move forward with the war?
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by ekuzco
    Um...the US already did...on Tuesday, November 2, 2004...these are the same arguments that were around before the election...since they obviously didn't prevent Bush from winning the election (popular and electorial vote), what is your point? move on!
    i voted for bush in the last elections but didnít know about the british memo then. i donít know if i represent the average voter but i donít want to ďmove onĒ i do want to know the truth. if my president lied to me i want to hear his reasons. i like bush but now i am not sure that he was honest.
  5. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    And since we're on the subject, how, pray-tell, would you suggest that instability be minimized. Afterall, it's not like there are thousands of years on instability history...............oh wait..........
    Same way we did ours a "revolution" from the citizens within a given country.
  6. #66  
    This self-fulfilling prophesy is exactly what gives politicians (and politics) thier power.

    Quote Originally Posted by ekuzco
    I agree with most of what you say, especially this part, however, I honestly feel that the maturity level of today's society won't ever allow for this. There is too much partisanship. The anti-Bush nay-sayers are trying to make it be 'un-popular' to be a Bush supporter no matter what he says or does.
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Could the unrest in the region have anything to do with it, AGAIN?
    Yes and no...
    An excellent informational article from a liberal news source:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3708951.stm#
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by ekuzco
    Either way, whatever Bush would have done, anti-Bush-ites would whine whine and whine.
    Could you imagine the whining that would occur if a third Bush became president... I don't know much about Jeb, but if the anti-Bush-ites are against them, then he can't be that bad, right?!


    Senior Bush plugs Jeb for president "some day"
  9. #69  
    Exactly, case and point.

    This is exactly why you must include foreign policy and politics as a premise in your argument (along with supply and demand). This is a highly volatile commodity, one which the US was aware would hurt the American people economically once they went to war.

    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    Four letters:

    O P E C

    http://www.opec.org/aboutus/history/history.htm

    The 1970s
    OPEC rose to international prominence during this decade, as its Member Countries took control of their domestic petroleum industries and acquired a major say in the pricing of crude oil on world markets. There were two oil pricing crises, triggered by the Arab oil embargo in 1973 and the outbreak of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, but fed by fundamental imbalances in the market; both resulted in oil prices rising steeply. The first Summit of OPEC Sovereigns and Heads of State was held in Algiers in March 1975. OPEC acquired its 11th and final current Member, Nigeria, in 1971.
  10. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by BugzLife
    i voted for bush in the last elections but didnít know about the british memo then. i donít know if i represent the average voter but i donít want to ďmove onĒ i do want to know the truth. if my president lied to me i want to hear his reasons. i like bush but now i am not sure that he was honest.
    I am glad to see some people are willing to look for truth. Congrats to you and if you need any help in understanding any of this I would take a look at reading "Against All Enemies" by Richard Clarke, or "The Price of Loyalty" by Paul O'Neil. These are very good accounts on what goes on within the Bush admin. The reason why is because the authors of these books were in the admin. If you would like to read about how the facts were "fixed" you can read about it here The Lie Factory
  11. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by ekuzco
    Yes and no...
    An excellent informational article from a liberal news source:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3708951.stm#
    Braaaawk! Liberal news! Braaaawk!
    Seriously thanks for the link. I will check it out.
  12. #72  
    The US decided that Bush was better candidate than Kerry. That's it.

    Nixon won the election in 1972. He lied earlier that year too (and was an accessory to a felony!)

    I understand what you're trying to say - logic just seems wrong though. Original poster was probably just trying to advance a position notwithstanding what people thought of (and, more importanly, knew) at the time of the election.

    Quote Originally Posted by ekuzco
    Um...the US already did...on Tuesday, November 2, 2004...these are the same arguments that were around before the election...since they obviously didn't prevent Bush from winning the election (popular and electorial vote), what is your point? What do you expect to happen? Why continue this debate? Talk about 'move on'. It's about time you anti-Bush people take your own advise...move on!
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    I would read this if this is what you think:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158228,00.html

    Downing Street Memo Mostly Ignored in U.S.
    Wednesday, June 01, 2005
    By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
    FoxNews

    WASHINGTON ó A British government memo that critics say proves the Bush administration manipulated evidence about weapons of mass destruction in order to carry out a plan to overthrow Saddam Hussein (search) has received little attention in the mainstream media, frustrating opponents of the Iraq war.

    -snip-

    The memo suggests that British intelligence analysts were concerned that the Bush administration was marching to war on wobbly evidence that Saddam posed a serious threat to the world.

    -snip-

    "But the case was thin," reads the memo on Straw's impressions. "Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."

    -snip-

    "Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD," the memo reads. "But the intelligence and the facts were being fixed around the policy," according to Dearlove's impressions
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There is much more there at the link to read. To me this pretty much says the facts were adjusted to fit the policy of removing Saddam, without much regard to what the real facts said. This also states to me that Bush had already decided to goto war with Iraq even before he had all the facts, a knee-jerk reaction if you will, or is it something else?
    Went to lunch, so missed out on a bit. However, I like how you've posted this article just like a politician would...one-sided. Did you "forget" to also post comments made further down?
    ""As a smoking gun it leaves a lot to be desired," said Kevin Aylward, a northern Virginia-based technology consultant who runs the conservative-leaning blog, Wizbangblog.com. "It's interesting, but it's probably fourth- or fifth-hand information." And what do we call that kind of information kiddies? Heresay.

    None of the information is an irrefutable fact. The memo just pops up nearly 3 years after it was supposedly written. If this person who leaked it thought it was so important, it would have been brought to everyone's attention long ago.

    You, like so many other people, think that all politicians are liars and all media news is gospel. The Weekly World News probably has more accurate articles than the drivel that is posted in papers everyday.
    --> Me fail english? That's unpossible!! <--
  14. #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Could we comprise and say maybe give them time (2 months) to inspect. Then if he did not comply then move forward with the war?
    A little late don't you think
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    I am glad to see some people are willing to look for truth. Congrats to you and if you need any help in understanding any of this I would take a look at reading "Against All Enemies" by Richard Clarke, or "The Price of Loyalty" by Paul O'Neil. These are very good accounts on what goes on within the Bush admin. The reason why is because the authors of these books were in the admin. If you would like to read about how the facts were "fixed" you can read about it here The Lie Factory
    And they're completely unbiased and unslanted too
  16. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by RicoM
    Could you imagine the whining that would occur if a third Bush became president... I don't know much about Jeb, but if the anti-Bush-ites are against them, then he can't be that bad, right?!


    Senior Bush plugs Jeb for president "some day"
    Seems like it is not just "anti-bush people". It seems to me the American people don't want Jeb to run.

    Do you think Jeb Bush should run for president?

    Yes 20% 22742 votes

    No 80% 91532 votes

    Results page

    Poll near bottom
  17. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by dcsipe
    Went to lunch, so missed out on a bit. However, I like how you've posted this article just like a politician would...one-sided. Did you "forget" to also post comments made further down?
    ""As a smoking gun it leaves a lot to be desired," said Kevin Aylward, a northern Virginia-based technology consultant who runs the conservative-leaning blog, Wizbangblog.com. "It's interesting, but it's probably fourth- or fifth-hand information." And what do we call that kind of information kiddies? Heresay.

    None of the information is an irrefutable fact. The memo just pops up nearly 3 years after it was supposedly written. If this person who leaked it thought it was so important, it would have been brought to everyone's attention long ago.

    You, like so many other people, think that all politicians are liars and all media news is gospel. The Weekly World News probably has more accurate articles than the drivel that is posted in papers everyday.
    So in essence you are denying an actual Brit government documnet?
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Seems like it is not just "anti-bush people". It seems to me the American people don't want Jeb to run.

    Do you think Jeb Bush should run for president?

    Yes 20% 22742 votes

    No 80% 91532 votes

    Results page

    Poll near bottom
    Not sure I would site a CNN website poll as indicative of the general American public's opinion.

    Personally, I'd have to say I don't know enough about Jeb's political stance to make a decision - I'm guessing that goes the same for a very large portion of poll respondents. I'd think the results have more to do with the Bush-haters than Jeb?
  19. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    A little late don't you think
    Yeah, but that is my point.
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Yeah, but that is my point.
    Round and round and round we go, where she stops no body knows......

    Seriously, I congratulate you on the strength of your convictions but believe this is one disagreement neither of us will win.
Page 4 of 43 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions