|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 3, 2010 19:51:40 GMT
OUR country will never be the same, thanks to dumbya. he destroyed the economy, AND made four thousand mothers without children simply to give haliburton and exxon mobil more profit. you can't get worse than that oh yes you can..the economy can recover...but giving your country away to a foriegn entity and then flooding it with people who have no knowledge or love for it and destroying the system is about as destructive as you can get...on top of which a quick re-write of history bobs yer uncle fannies yer aunt and the EU has control and all without a shot being fired in that respect, yes, you are worse off than us. the european union is definitely the most evil institution ever created by man. you do also have more of a problem with muzzies, but we are not all that far behind.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 3, 2010 19:53:48 GMT
The two most infomrative books I've read on Iraq are The Assassins' Gate by George Packer and Fiasco by Thomas Ricks. Excellent background material along with first hand accounts. The most glaring act of stupidity by Bush, Blair, and Co. was that the declared enemy, radical Islam, was ignored when they went after Hussien, a secular leader. The "War on Terror" is indeed only a metaphor. sadaam was the ONLY arab leader in the middle east who routinely killed islamofascists when he found them. there were none in iraq until dumbya invited them in
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Apr 3, 2010 22:33:49 GMT
Well, I like Tony Blair and I like George Bush. I dislike Obama and don't know much about the current UK administration. Obama is a disaster for America and the world but chin up -- he's no where near as bad as Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 3, 2010 22:44:11 GMT
Well, I like Tony Blair and I like George Bush. I dislike Obama and don't know much about the current UK administration. Obama is a disaster for America and the world but chin up -- he's no where near as bad as Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. and bliar was a disaster for the uk and you really dont want to know anything about the mob who are the current mal administrators of the uk one day please god and a fine wind they will all swing..and i seriously mean that
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 4, 2010 7:56:27 GMT
Well, I like Tony Blair and I like George Bush. I dislike Obama and don't know much about the current UK administration. Obama is a disaster for America and the world but chin up -- he's no where near as bad as Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. and bliar was a disaster for the uk and you really dont want to know anything about the mob who are the current mal administrators of the uk one day please god and a fine wind they will all swing..and i seriously mean that don't tell das when. he would definitely try to rescue them
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 4, 2010 9:03:50 GMT
then he would have to swing alongside
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 4, 2010 11:28:18 GMT
then he would have to swing alongside perhaps it might be prudent to request clemency for him beforehand
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Apr 6, 2010 2:03:46 GMT
What continues to amaze me about liberals like Jumbo, Clemie, Beth, and Mouse is that they appear to operate on fantasy and imagination. I prefer to base my opinions on reality.
9/11 was a devastating terrorist blow to America. Our highly esteemed President assessed the situation and concluded that fanatical Islamic militants were responsible. He then declared war on terrorists. He quickly realized that Islamic extremists are not a country but an element of societies in the middle eastern region. He could see that these extremists had already taken over the country of Afghanistan so he declared war on the Taliban. He could also see that Saddam Hussein's iraq had built the world's fourth largest milary and was beligerent toward her neighbors and the USA. He knew that we should have troops on the ground in that troubled region. Having an aircraft csrrier offshore wouldn't be sufficient. George W Bush made all the right calls.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 6, 2010 8:50:49 GMT
you have me down as a LIBERAL ???YIKES i have been called every political shade but NEVER a liberal..........comunist..far right..scum tory..facist ...racist are just a few.....lol however your sumation is leaving out the one country who is doing the funding...the saudis 9/11 was dreadful but devastating more on the pshyce of americans who hadnt really expected some thing like that on their soil..i think the mental affects were far deeper than the financial or loss of life[sorry if that up sets anyone and it in no one demeans the atrocity] but bush ignored the root of the problem ... sadmam was not a great problem he had no sympathisers in the mideast or elsewhere and he wouldnt have tolorated any extreemism all he did was pay the families of a few suicide bommbers etc he wasnt a big problem afghanistans taliban had been active for years and america had fed the taliban with weapons and training during and after the russian fiasco we suffered 7/7 becaise of irak..the madrid train...the bali bombers..greece..turkey..africa..australia all can be laid at the feet of america and a president who wouldnt take on the real problem...saudi irak and afghanistan totally un-necessary.. a waste of lives achieving sweet FA
|
|
|
Post by clemiethedog on Apr 6, 2010 11:23:34 GMT
"He could also see that Saddam Hussein's iraq had built the world's fourth largest milary and was beligerent toward her neighbors and the USA."
That is a load of caca.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Apr 6, 2010 11:32:01 GMT
Why oh why oh why......... The Internally Stated US Goal of Securing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East The Unstated US Goals of Increasing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East, and US Dominance of the Area The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Over the Global Oil Market The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Against Competition from the Euro OIL, PETRODOLLARS, AND THE OPEC EURO QUESTION
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 6, 2010 11:34:40 GMT
"He could also see that Saddam Hussein's iraq had built the world's fourth largest milary and was beligerent toward her neighbors and the USA." That is a load of caca. absolutely... the man was a total beast to his own people but that is no reason for a war.... fourth largest military means nothing even if it were true...it isnt size its capability which counts....and yes irak was beligerent toward its neighbours...it invaded two of them who had to be rescued...that is still no reason to go to war...iraks incursion to kuwait etc was over in a couple of days
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 6, 2010 11:35:19 GMT
thankyou fret..very to the point
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 6, 2010 11:42:17 GMT
What continues to amaze me about liberals like Jumbo, Clemie, Beth, and Mouse is that they appear to operate on fantasy and imagination. I prefer to base my opinions on reality. 9/11 was a devastating terrorist blow to America. Our highly esteemed President assessed the situation and concluded that fanatical Islamic militants were responsible. He then declared war on terrorists. He quickly realized that Islamic extremists are not a country but an element of societies in the middle eastern region. He could see that these extremists had already taken over the country of Afghanistan so he declared war on the Taliban. He could also see that Saddam Hussein's iraq had built the world's fourth largest milary and was beligerent toward her neighbors and the USA. He knew that we should have troops on the ground in that troubled region. Having an aircraft csrrier offshore wouldn't be sufficient. George W Bush made all the right calls. those of us who ARE rational would be greatly interested in when you anticipate posting something that has at least a semblance to reality. thus far, all you have given us are your fantasies and delusions. reality would be a nice change the $64.,000 question is, are you capable of it?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 6, 2010 11:44:50 GMT
"He could also see that Saddam Hussein's iraq had built the world's fourth largest milary and was beligerent toward her neighbors and the USA." That is a load of caca. our pal das just continues to think that if he keeps putting more honey on his cat shyt, someone will eventually think it's a jelly donut. he's had that delusion for quite a spell
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 6, 2010 11:46:01 GMT
Why oh why oh why......... The Internally Stated US Goal of Securing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East The Unstated US Goals of Increasing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East, and US Dominance of the Area The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Over the Global Oil Market The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Against Competition from the Euro OIL, PETRODOLLARS, AND THE OPEC EURO QUESTIONEVERY rational person knows that that is the reality
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Apr 6, 2010 12:36:32 GMT
Why oh why oh why......... The Internally Stated US Goal of Securing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East The Unstated US Goals of Increasing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East, and US Dominance of the Area The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Over the Global Oil Market The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Against Competition from the Euro OIL, PETRODOLLARS, AND THE OPEC EURO QUESTIONEVERY rational person knows that that is the reality Exactly, Jumbo. PNAC member of the week: Richard Perle
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Apr 6, 2010 12:48:49 GMT
Sorry Mouse - you have my apology. I agree that calling someone a liberal is extremely demeaning. I should have said instead that you hold liberal views on the Iraq war.
It is true that Saudi Arabia is the home of the radical Wahabism and a source of funding for fanatical Islamists including Al Queda. However, the Saudi government shows evidence of having learned their lesson from all of this. The terrorist attacks on their own soil surely had a lot to do with this. The Saudi government is now as much of an ally as any Muslim government. They still need to reign in the Wahabbi Mullahs and shut down the religious schools where terrorists are born though.
Saddam did harbor terrorists. There are multiple examples. He also provided funding for terrorists. His payments of about $25,000 to the families of Hamas suicide bombers in Palestine are well documented. Taking down Saddam was a good thing for the war on terror, the region, and the west.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 6, 2010 13:15:33 GMT
Sorry Mouse - you have my apology. I agree that calling someone a liberal is extremely demeaning. I should have said instead that you hold liberal views on the Iraq war. It is true that Saudi Arabia is the home of the radical Wahabism and a source of funding for fanatical Islamists including Al Queda. However, the Saudi government shows evidence of having learned their lesson from all of this. The terrorist attacks on their own soil surely had a lot to do with this. The Saudi government is now as much of an ally as any Muslim government. They still need to reign in the Wahabbi Mullahs and shut down the religious schools where terrorists are born though. Saddam did harbor terrorists. There are multiple examples. He also provided funding for terrorists. His payments of about $25,000 to the families of Hamas suicide bombers in Palestine are well documented. Taking down Saddam was a good thing for the war on terror, the region, and the west. lol ;D no worries i have been called far worse..i most certainly do not hold liberal views on the irak war[one sided war]i am a firm believer in if you go to war you go to war properly..not anouncing ""shock and awe"" and then come up with a bit of petty bombing..if you cannot fight a war properly dont even thing of doing it the way its been done in irak or afghanistan..do it properly or not at all both are an absolute fiasco the saudi government..have learnt nothing what so ever except to be a little more circumspect a little more devious a little more sly they are still funding and their tentacles spread far and wide from books for school kids...money transfers..fingers in pies...funding of mosques...uni chairs...scholarships..arms..housing..racing and money laundering payment to the families..sooooo hardly the same league as having training camps and funding them..small fry..america has been funding terrorists for years..strewth they even aided osama bin laden..and a few others of note..so should america be invaded ?? going into irak has exacipated the whole scenario..and taking out sadam simply drawn more to the cause..this followed by afghanistan has added thousands to the cause we didnt win in irak and we wont we havent a chance in afghanistan.....when is a war not a war... answer when its fought by politos instead of the armed forces hearts and minds... ;D ;D polito rubbish
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Apr 6, 2010 22:16:24 GMT
I believe the war was planned after Saddam Hussein announced he would send money to the families of suicide bombers, who attacked Israel. Very shortly after Hussein's announcement all the concocted stories of weapons of mass destruction were spread by the US government.
|
|