Bush a Nazi?

[loncray]

Tain't a matter of not wanting to believe it. Tain't even a matter of you using the derogatory 'libs' for anybody who doesn't toe the company line. After all that time the conservative nutballs (see how easy it is to be derogatory?) spent going after President Clinton for sex in the White House, did you really think the Bush Administration would be able to launch a WAR without some really serious questioning? Hey, the conservatives set the system up to harass the President, now they have to live within it.

And even if I believed every word of that article, you didn't answer the question (typical conservative avoidance of answering things that embarrass their President): why would the Bush Administration even bring up the notion of Iraqi WMD's if they had proof of a direct al Qaeda contact? After 9/11, anything linked to al Qaeda would've been fair game for us to attack and there wouldn't have been a whole lot for the rest of the world to say. So why even introduce shaky intel about WMD's and invite the world to possibly question the war? If I were the Bush Administration, and in possession of GOOD intelligence that al Qaeda and Iraq were in bed with each other, I'd be trumpeting that all over the place. But the Bush Administration isn't doing that. Can you answer why not?

 

[dpuckett]

Originally posted by Elite1

Thx, Daniel... but I believe I spelled it correctly...

waist=that part of your body your belt goes around

waste= material you flush down the toilet



pantywaste=one who either goes no. 1 or no. 2 in her (his) panties, usually because they are so scared.



;-)

I stand corrected.



CF-



I'd glady join up- Air Force or Navy; Do you have enough money to pay off the prosecutor & judge to drop the case and let me get the heck out of here? #@$%! If so, I'd be forever in your debt. If not, shut your hole on that matter.

 

[Boomer II]

WMD's are a fact! He used em on his own people. Don't know what it takes to get that across. I think he played em up more than necessary, but they weren't the primary reason for going in, just one of many. It will all come out in the wash one way or the other, problem is that no matter what the President does the Bush haters won't accept it. As far as sex in the Whitehouse, it's more the lying under oath for me I guess, the sex was just an embarrassment to me.

 

[dpuckett]

Wash Post link

Funny how they "needed more information for me to porceed"- sex, age, country. Hmmm. Reeks of liberal totalitarianism, huh?



On the note about the Iraq/ Al-Qeida connection- who heard about the 727 (737?) fueslage they found in a terrorist training camp in Iraq? I heard about it on the radio a few weeks ago. Funny how two people in the same geographic region hate the free world (and US, as the leader of such), and yet they have ABSOLUTELY NO CONTACT OR COLLOBORATION? Give me a break. Had I been in office on 9/11/01, I'd have nuked the enitre region and saved countless billions. The governments need it, and the oppressed civilians would no longer be suffering.



Daniel

 

[loncray]

No, WMD's were a fact. Maybe he used them all? Maybe they really did do what the UN demanded and destroyed them? Maybe those they had left didn't work. I dunno. But shoulder-mounted SAMS are a fact, and they're using them in their guerilla war against us. If they had WMD's, and it would only take one guy with access to one secret cache, they'd've used them on our troops. If the current strategy is to kill enough troops that the US Govt gives up and goes home (ala Somalia under Clinton - or Lebanon under Reagan), then why on earth wouldn't they be using bioweapons or mininukes? We know for a fact that Saddam had mustard gas - he used it on the Kurds. Fine - then where's the mustard gas attacks on American troops?

 

[loncray]

Oh, they needed more information because of marketing - you can't even pin that on totalitarianism. If you're that worried about it, lie.

Yes, I heard about the airplane fuselage in the Iraqi desert. There's a lot of desert out there, I can certainly believe that terrorists were training out there. Were they connected to the Iraqi govt. ? We don't know - saying they are just because there was a base in that country is like saying that Atari is responsible for terrorist training because the Columbine attackers used video games to help plan their attack on the school.

Also, do you have any idea how many different groups there are in the middle east, operating on different agendas? Any one or several of them could've been responsible for the base in Iraq, and they might've been part of al Qaeda, or opposed to them. Nobody knows. There's a lot of folks in the world that hate the US in that region - and they ain't all met each other. Saddam was a paranoid person - why would he risk his regime to some Saudi nut when he was better off with his own plans?

 

[Champane Flight]

Present

Right now in every middle eastern country there is a presence and most likely training of Al Queda personel. So that is a lame excuse for war, unless the country itself is claiming responsibility of training and harboring of terrorists. We could go back and forth call each other pantywaists and neo nazis, and prove nothing. I am saying that the move into Iraq was a mistake, it is proving out to be that way. I wish I was wrong, it makes no sense at all for anyone to wish any other way. I do not approve of this Presidents actions, I think he is on a private agenda. I cannot prove it, but I believe history will.



If I am wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. I am just glad that DP isn't in office.

 

[dpuckett]

Re: Present

Originally posted by Champane Flight

I am just glad that DP isn't in office.

So am I.



Bush said on or shortly after 9/11 that you are either with us or against us. If that is truly the case, then yes, Sadaam is guilty of harboring terrorists. It is not quite the same as the video game analogy- Atari did not give the Columbine idiots the guns or training or space to carry out their attacks. Not to say Saddam did, either, but you can bet your butt he didnt do much to discourage them, esp if they were against the US. THESE PEOPLE WANT US DEAD. WE can not afford to let them strike first again- we need to take the war to them, keep them on the run, and wear them down and kill them. We've already lost too many lives- remember the towers? had it been an hour later when the first plane hit, it would have killed upwards of 20K.



On that note, what should we have done? There was good reason (at the time) to believe Hussein was harboring terrorists, that in itself should be enough to take him out. We have found no WMDs. Have they searched under every rock and up every robe to make sure they are not there? It takes very little Sarin (sp?) gas, mustard gas, or biologicals/chemicals to do extensive damage. There doesnt have to be some large elaborate facility to house them. Just enough agar to keep the bacteria alive, or something to keep the chemicals stable. I hear constant "we had no business going into Iraq," but no alternative solutions.



Daniel

 

[Champane Flight]

Given

I have given plenty of alternatives to invading Iraq. I have said over and over again that you cannot fight a guerrilla war with conventional warfare. First you have to strengthen your own borders. Then you have to go after them with the same tactics they used on us. You go after them by infiltrating their own cells. You go after them with old fashioned police work. Not near as dramatic as all out invasions, but twice as effective. Any country not cooperating with our personnel in their country has the same thing as Afghanistan to face. A full out invasion like the one on Iraq is like going after cockroaches with a hammer, you might get a couple, but most will make it back to the dark.

 

[Elite1]

Secretary Donald Rumsfeld -- a former Navy pilot... the former U. S. Ambassador to NATO... a former U. S. Congressman... the youngest secretary of defense in the nation's history back in the 1970s... who was even awarded the nation's highest civilian award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom -- is under attack... by the same coalition of Socialist-led anti-war demonstrators and radical left-wing Hollywood "actors" that tried to undermine our fight against terrorism with their "blame America" tactics during the war.



As we told you, these radical leftists, led by groups like MoveOn.org, have taken out a full-page ad in the New York Times, with a headline stating that Donald Rumsfeld "BETRAYED" our nation. You read that right -- these left-wing "hate-America" radicals are calling Secretary Rumsfeld a TRAITOR, and demanding he be removed from office.



We told you that, like millions of Americans nationwide, we're FED UP with these un-American tactics that are doing nothing more than demoralizing our troops in the field.



We also told you about our plan to do something we've only done once before: we're going to take out a FULL PAGE AD in USA TODAY, giving a strong statement of support for Sec. Rumsfeld, President Bush and our troops, and listing many of the groups who are standing strong with us in this endeavor. NO ONE will be able to IGNORE us at that point, regardless of whether the liberal media tries to cover their eyes and ears. WE WILL BE SEEN AND HEARD!



It's EXPENSIVE to take out that ad; we don't have the deep pockets of the liberal groups like MoveOn.org. But we're excited to tell you... we've almost reached the mark! We're just $3,935. 00 short of the amount we need to purchase a FULL PAGE and have it run in that newspaper NATIONWIDE!



Your fellow citizens -- and our men and women in uniform -- *need* to see the TRUTH: that millions of Americans nationwide support them! Right now, when they turn on the mainstream media news, all they see is attacks from the radical Left on our leaders and our troops.



All they see is full-page newspaper ads calling our Secretary of Defense a TRAITOR. All they see is left-wing Congressmen like Charles Rangel calling for Sec. Rumsfeld's resignation, saying he'd be doing the country "a service". All they see is radicals like Gore Vidal suggesting that our leaders like President Bush would be "hanged" by our Founding Fathers, as if they were some sort of despotic traitors.



THIS HAS GONE TOO FAR, and now we can fight back!



Over 1,000 of our fellow Americans have contributed their hard-earned dollars to help pay for this ad. $25 from a man in Memphis TN, $10 from a lady in Ridgeland MS, $50 from a man in Santa Cruz CA... we've received a whole range of donations, from a hard-to-write $25 check that an elderly lady in Lukeville AZ sent in, to a generous $1000 check from a gentleman in Newport Beach CA. Americans nationwide are stepping up to the plate and saying, "It's time to put my money where my mouth is, and FIGHT BACK!"



Right now, there are hundreds of thousands of members of conservative e-mail lists and at conservative websites that are reading this message. Some of our patriotic members really can't afford to help, and we certainly understand that. But others can, and just haven't taken the time to yet.



If you've already given to help out, THANK YOU. Your support is appreciated more than you can imagine.



If you haven't given yet, could you take just a moment to do so? If every one of our readers gave just $30, we could put that national full-page ad up *this week*. Some of you might be able to give more to make up for those that can't, maybe as much as $100, $500, or even $1,000.



In fact, if you or your organization can give $2,000, we'll include your name prominently in the full page ad!



But remember, whatever you can give -- even if it's only $10 -- we'll make YOUR support known right there -- in black and white -- in a full-page ad, distributed nationwide in USA TODAY. From New York to California... Florida to Washington... the nation's capital to every single state capital... Americans everywhere will see that they are not alone, and that the grassroots of this great nation support our President, our leaders and our troops.



Again, we're not a non-profit organization, so your contribution is NOT tax-deductible. But we promise this: every dollar that comes in to RightMarch.com for this project will be SPENT on this project. If we don't get enough to pay for a full page nationwide, we'll buy a half page, or a fourth page, or a full page in a single region... whatever we can afford with what you give. And if USA Today were to reject our ad (they DID accept our last full-page ad), we'll make SURE it still gets out there in newspapers distributed across the country.



Help us take the next shots in our "battle strategy" to counter the Socialist-led "blame-America" crowd. Go to the site below to help us pay for a FULL PAGE pro-American hero ad in USA Today:



https://www.campaigncontribution.com/contribution.asp?id=2370&jid=rumsfeld-keyes&sid=1



NOTE: We don't want anyone to be left out. If you can't afford to give ANYTHING right now, go to http://www.ContactRumsfeld.com/ to send a FREE message in support of Secretary Rumsfeld and our troops. Be sure to forward this e-mail to everyone you know who wants to help "fight the battle" on behalf of patriotic Americans. Thank you!



CLICK BELOW TO CONTRIBUTE NOW:



https://www.campaigncontribution.com/contribution.asp?id=2370&jid=rumsfeld-keyes&sid=1

 

[Champane Flight]

Not a traitor

Just an idiot.

 

[loncray]

Agreed, Rumsfeld's no more a traitor than the lefties pilloried by Ann Coulter. I don't think he's an idiot either, really, he's following his President's orders. That said, I really wish he and his boss would've come up with a plan for what to do after the initial invasion. Of course, I also wish we'd not gone in there without A) decent intelligence; B) good justification; and C) an international coalition.

 

[Steve M]

"Had I been in office on 9/11/01, I'd have nuked the enitre region and saved countless billions. The governments need it, and the oppressed civilians would no longer be suffering. "



Now that's about the most intelligent idea I've heard yet!



"Bush said on or shortly after 9/11 that you are either with us or against us. "



This is a perfect example of how right wing extremist whacko's make enemies of people who might just be "neutral" on an issue. They don't have the ability to understand anything but black and white narrow minded knee-jerk redneckism.

 

[Sled Puller]

There is NO NEUTRAL on terrorists.



You either help us kill them, or you are the enemy.



Redneck, damn straight.

 

[Steve M]

So now Galapagos is our enemy? They had nothing to do with it. How are they against us?

We are what the terrorists accuse us of being. The USA is corrupt, immoral, self righteous, and glutenous. I'm ok with that. How the terrorists (religious extremists) decided to address their displeasure with us is what I have a problem with. It's our beef with them. Not the entire world. Maybe our allies but not every country on the planet. Bush is trying to make it a world war. That will backfire on us in ways yet to be seen.

 

[loncray]

Thinking that the US is full of imperialistic warmongers is NOT the same as being on the side of the terrorists. So the idea that you are either for us or you are the enemy is right-wing nonsense worse than the normal right-wing nonsense. After 9/11, most of the world fully understood the US attack on Afghanistan and the Taliban and had no problems with it. The attack on Iraq isn't the same thing.