Bush good or bad?

[eXcessiveForce]

I said I believe all things work out for a reason. I imagine if Gore had won we would be in an entirely different place right now. A nation paralyzed and an economy destroyed. I can not know that for certain as men under pressure often rise to the occasion.

As for the divine right of Kings I do not believe that has anything to do with the topic at hand.

most people think we are a democracy but we are not as S. said we are a democratic republic

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Originally posted by eXcessiveForce
I said I believe all things work out for a reason. I imagine if Gore had won we would be in an entirely different place right now. A nation paralyzed and an economy destroyed. I can not know that for certain as men under pressure often rise to the occasion.

As for the divine right of Kings I do not believe that has anything to do with the topic at hand.

most people think we are a democracy but we are not as S. said we are a democratic republic

Luckely the troops didn't have to rely on the geographical knowledge of the president otherwise they would have ended up somewhere else (Iran maybe)

What's so good about the economy anyway?

[Ghost]

Yes apparently most Americans dont know where Iraq is on the map.

[Lizard]

Ghost, I heard something about most americans think that britain is in the middle east.

How does it feel to be so close to sadam and his minions?

That's why you always get involved in american wars there.

[Ghost]

Yeah its pretty scary being sooooo close to Sadam.

ummm yes i can almost smell him from here.

Hunting time me thinks

By the way any idea where America is, I heard its somewhere in the Punjab.

President Bush is Punjabi i think.

[mr. bond]

i personally am not a fan...

we tend to only talk about his extremely controversial foreign policy. however, he's slipped past a lot of bills that are destructive to the environment. example: toxins were discovered in the vicinity of a military base. it was discovered that they were leaking from missiles. bush's response: signing a bill stating that the military doesn't have to clean up its missile leakages.

also, he sold the whole Iraq war with accusations of WOMD, a claim that so far seems incredibly exaggerated if not outright untrue, and terrorist links, which were ordered to be found in order to gain support, but never were. he even admits that it was an outright lie that Saddam tried to buy nuclear materials in africa...why not just use the actual horrific human rights violations that Saddam perpetrated to sell the war?

his constant pushing of christianity grates on me, too.

[Ghost]

I agree with you Mr.Bond but i must say that had the reason to go to war been to remove Sadam and thats it I would have supported it %100.

[Szczepankiewicz]

he sold the whole Iraq war with accusations of WOMD, a claim that so far seems incredibly exaggerated if not outright untrue

Are you familiar with UN Resolution 1441?

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Originally posted by Szczepankiewicz



Are you familiar with UN Resolution 1441?

Yes spanky we do but Iraq did give a big pile of paper with evidence but that wasn't accepted, nor did the inspectors get more time to do their work, and now that Saddam is gone, still they can't find them, so maybe Iraq had complied with the resolution afterall

[Ghost]

Ha HA yes answer that one

[Szczepankiewicz]

Ok, if you are familiar with the resolution what does say that Iraq must do?

The United Nations Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441 requiring Saddam Hussein to fully and thoroughly declare his weapons. Saddam failed to do so. Even the French admitted Saddam failed to comply. Furthermore, the resolution said that failure to comply triggers "serious consequences." What do you suppose "serious consequences" means? That the United Nations would padlock one of his presidential palaces, or let the air out of one of his Mercedes Benzes? No, "serious consequences" meant war, and all who signed the resolution knew it.

nor did the inspectors get more time to do their work

And why is that? Is it because 12 years just isn't long enough or is it because Iraq interfered at every juncture and actually kicked them out.

How much time would have been enough? 5 more years? 10? 30?

Now you see why I wanted this post closed. It has nothing to do with MA and neither side is going to 'prove' anything to the other...

[Ghost]

Well if they never find the weapons then we will be proved right and if they do you will be proved right. simple as that really.

[Szczepankiewicz]

Negative Megatron.

The burden of proof was that Iraq proves that they were clean. As a condition of the cease fire, after Iraq surrendered to the first coalition, it was up to Iraq to prove they had complied, not up to the UN, or any other member nation to prove that Iraq had not complied with 1441 and the other 17 resolutions.

[platinum_angel]

i vote he was a very bad pres.

bush looks so happy.

the richer get richer

the poor get poorer

and the hatred grows

[Szczepankiewicz]

Oversimplification of complex events is an American Pastime with no rival.

Especially amongst the ignorant.