Bush still doesn’t know....

who attacked us on 9/11. Actually, he does, but he still invokes multiple references to the September 11th attacks when talking about this goatscrew in Iraq to try to justify it. Pathetic.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050629/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush;_ylt =AvDWbhzUOKvMWyZeZ2agaA.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0b Q--

Who cares man. The soldiers are happy because they get to do what they have trained long and hard for. They know they can die at any moment, and have accepted it. The ones the media keeps talking to are the pansys who tried to get a free ride through college in the military and don't want to be there. The media is the equivalent of the Nazi propaganda machine, they tell you what they want you to believe man....make up your own mind.

I quit watching TV alltogether because of all that crap. The media takes the facts and twists them to get ratings.

Also, we just did what we should have done during Desert Storm. Thats what happens when politics gets in the way of war.

Take this to heart whenever you think about stuff like this.

"Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy forget in time that men have died to win them." -FDR-

We fight conflicts abroad so the turmoil has no chance of finding its way to our shores as this did.

By the way, I'm proably going to Iraq within the next year or so. I hope so anyhow.

Edited by Murdock

Me personally, I liked his Speech, and I'm one of the most Democratic-liberals you'll meet.   Don't think there is a Democratic-Conservative, so untill the next election comes around, I'll hide with favoring with the green party. 

Linus wrote: Well, there is no proof that they DID help, but also none that they DIDN'T. They did harbor terrorist, which is one reason why we went in... Anyway.. I could care less, we are in now and we won't leave just becasue he is criticised

I was unaware of that... Saddam harbored terrorist in Iraq? Funny to here you guys talk about the media, and misinformation. I was sure he was the ony regime of terror in Iraq. Saddam ran a secular regime. That means they had no religion. To Alcaida, Taliban, and other religious extremest, Saddam was even as us "infedel" Americans. Saddam would never surrender any WMD to a terrorist group that would then possibly use them against him. Everyone who knows Saddam says he is the ultimate control freak. He did have some terrorist way up near the boarder in the north, that region was very rural and out of his control. Saddam could not even exert conventional military might on his neighboors after we disarmed him in the first gulf war. He is evil and it is good that he is out of power, but there are far worse and threatening leaders in the world. The "insurgensts" we fight now flooded in after the invasion from across the boarders so that they may fight, harrass and demoralize a standing American army.

The IDF intelligence said that the 9-11 guys where Egyptians.

Give him an AK47 have him fight in his wars and impress daddy that way.

flame me if u want but i belive there could of been bttr plannin b4 goin in.

nEmRoÐ wrote: Give him an AK47 have him fight in his wars and impress daddy that way.

Why give Bush an Ak47 when we use M16's and M16 > Ak's

No flamage will take place, but you are ignorant of that remark "Let him fight his own wars"

How could it have been better planed? We kicked ass going in, they were down for the count in a matter of weeks, fastest military op in history.


Strato, that doesn't change the fact that it WS a Sunni run government and he WAS a Sunni.

But, don't deny that HE was a Sunni and his governemnt was Sunni run.. why do you think Shi'its were pissed so much at him? Why do you think the Shi'its faught for Saddam, if he fell, they would be out of power and the minority again.

This was a legit war.

They had in the past attacked Kuwait.

They were in missle range of Israel

He had WMDs before (DOn't know where they are now, But i believe that he still had them)

When we were staging in Kuwait, he launche missles at us, which was an act of war, so in all technicality, he attacked first



So, dune, you'd rather have us fight an army that stands a chance? This is war, war is not fair. I am content with kicking the ass of people that can't fight back becasue if they try and fight back, it's futile.

Edited by Linus

Who care if they attacked Kuwait? Who cares if they were in missle range of Israel? You sure don't see them fretting too much over it anymore. In fact, claiming we went in because they were attacking our allies is false because they had not attacked any allies since the early 1990's. How is this legit? I mean, eventually you can make up excuses, much like Bush has done, but the intelligent people remember the crap that was spoon fed to us since Korea about the necessity of war.

So we should only attack those that we will beat? I mean, plenty more countries have tyrannical government ten fold worse then Iraq (which still makes no sense why we chose there). If we were truly going after tyranny, we would have been in North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the Sudan by now. However....we're not.

I am stunned you quoted the president there. It's a scare tactic. We are more likely to be injured or killed by our own countrymen then by another group of individuals that want to blow stuff up. Attacking an entire country in order to "prevent" attacks in our country by people not even associated with the country but with extremism is ludicrous.

Edited by Dune