When is justice to be served?

[haraldo]

while I agree with you in spirit, don't you have a group of European nations that are united for economic and defensive reasons that you could appeal to?

I certainly see what you mean, I just think Europe and EU is to small to have any effect....
US and Russia is so much larger... for instance, California is the third largest economy in the world, ahead of Germany

I don't reallt believe Bush would have any credibility to target such an Issue, perhaps a new democratic president would....

 

[haraldo]

Well, war did have somewhat of an effect on that madman running Germany from the early 30's up until 1945. Do you really think politics would resolved the issues he presented to the world? Ask Chamberlain. Wasn't Norway counting on remaining neutral then? How did politics help Norway?

Thank God for US and UK saving us back then )))
That's a different situation.... That's a whole united world opposing one madman and it's country... The situation today is different...

What I really mean is that one must be extremely cautious about the state of war, generally it doesn't work.... Diplomacy would never have stopped Hitler, and in that case war was legitimate....

I don't think there would have been an Iraq war if it wasn't for the oil resources in that region.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

As to the sinking ship... It looks like the war, the economy, Dubya and the public's opinion of same are the things that are sinking.

True, and these things are closely related, not separate.
Making up a new excuse to continue with the war after the original excuse turned out to be a lie was just pathetic. The only real reason for the war was to make profits for big oil and military contractors, who pay off Dubya in return. It is called corruption, and has been around as long as politics.

 

[haraldo]

True, and these things are closely related, not separate.
Making up a new excuse to continue with the war after the original excuse turned out to be a lie was just pathetic. The only real reason for the war was to make profits for big oil and military contractors, who pay off Dubya in return. It is called corruption, and has been around as long as politics.

It is actually quite convenient to Lockheed Martin and the rest of the weapon industry to have a new "Strategic Enemy", once the cold war is over... This saves the budgets for the armed forces and the industry in general...

 

[Halon451]

I think the difference here is the reason we were "sold" the Iraq war -- it was because Iraq had WMD and then oppression and tyranny was an "oh yeah, and by the way" side note. If Bush had said we want to rescue the Iraqis from Saddam because they are oppressed, and if he clearly stated that there was nothing to do with Saddam being linked to Al Qaeda and 9/11, I don't think we would be at war in Iraq.

Instead, we were told (and told, and told, and told, until people actually believed) that Iraq was linked to WMD and 9/11 and whatever else. I strongly believe that 1) most Iraqis were better off as they were (at least for the time being), 2) Iraq/Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, 3) there is no evidence of WMD found in Iraq (regardless of what this guy or that guy said, there was never any "proof"), 4) "Al Qaeda in Iraq" didn't exist previous to us starting the war and if they had tried to organize in Iraq, Saddam would have given them the smackdown. We still don't have binLaden, and you'd better be sure that they are planning some type of attack, while we run around in circles in Iraq chasing demons of our own creation.

When that attack occurs, we can all blame George Bush for focusing on the wrong thing, just as those that like to assign blame have assigned it to Clinton for not doing enough when binLaden and company were poking at us during the Clinton years. The sad thing is, we definitely, clearly and positively have a reason to kill binLaden and dismantle his operations, but we choose to spread ourselves so thin that we cannot succeed in our primary mission. Pathetic leadership.

As to the sinking ship... It looks like the war, the economy, Dubya and the public's opinion of same are the things that are sinking. My hope and belief in this country have also taken a hit, but I believe that with some changes, things will get better again.

Typical rhetoric... you speak as if this is something I haven't heard before. It's like listening to a broken record for the umpteenth time. Don't get me started Otto. The world isn't what you see and hear on CNN.

And I consider madmen blowing up our soldiers and sailors a tad bit more than merely "poking". I have to agree with you for the most part about Clinton's inadequacy at dealing with the Bin Laden threat when he had the chance.

But, everyone always cries about why we're not still in Afghanistan. Why? Because we came in, turned on the lights and the cockroaches scattered. Our mission is no longer IN Afghanistan because the terrorist groups have FLED the country and dispersed all throughout the middle east, INCLUDING....(you guessed it) Iraq. So you could say that we caused an increased Al Qaeda presence in Iraq by concentrating our efforts in Afghanistan to begin with - it's silly to think that they are there only because we invaded Iraq in 2003, two years after 9/11 when they could have otherwise been sitting pretty in the foothills of Afghanistan watching us from a distance.

Sillier still to think that 5 years after the fact, everyone is hopping up and down over the lack of WMD. I suggest you take a closer look at Syria. Saddam was not the kind of ruler to allow outsiders to come into his country and find the seeds of his murderous intent. He had plans for any inevitability.

So yes, we're spread thin alright, but it's not because of "Dubya" - it's because of the world we are in these days. Time for people to start waking up a little and seeing how nasty things have become outside of our cozy, comfy living room windows.

 

[Halon451]

True, and these things are closely related, not separate.
Making up a new excuse to continue with the war after the original excuse turned out to be a lie was just pathetic. The only real reason for the war was to make profits for big oil and military contractors, who pay off Dubya in return. It is called corruption, and has been around as long as politics.

And I suppose you have concrete evidence to back up these claims? Oh right... just further regurgitation of what is spoon fed to the masses by liberal outlets. You're not enlightening anyone Joe - you're simply a conduit for propaganda.

 

[haraldo]

Darn if the Iraq war has even the slightest reasoning with Al Qaida, 9/11 or WMD, these are just excuses to go in...... With the goal of trying to stabilize the situation and make sure the Oil deliveries from that region are stable

Oil deliveries are stable, which is why they now call it a success ==:-O

In Tibet the resources are different, Just about all the rivers in Southeast Asia originates from Himalaya, and basically Tibet, which means this country is of immense strategic importance to the surrounding countries... They need the water.... And for the same reason, no strategic importance to anybody else.....

 

[OttoMatic]

Typical rhetoric...

That's cool.

I guess we'll all have to check back in 10 or 20 years...

 

[Joe Schmoe]

You're not enlightening anyone Joe - you're simply a conduit for propaganda.

Except for being right-wing propaganda, the nonsense you are saying is different how, exactly?

 

[Joe Schmoe]

In Tibet the resources are different, Just about all the rivers in Southeast Asia originates from Himalaya, and basically Tibet, which means this country is of immense strategic importance to the surrounding countries... They need the water.... And for the same reason, no strategic importance to anybody else.....

If Tibet had large oil reserves, you can be sure the US would have been in there "securing" them some time ago.

 

[Halon451]

Except for being right-wing propaganda, the nonsense you are saying is different how, exactly?

Because there's actually truth in the words Joe. Wake up from your sleepwalk buddy, you're going to trip and fall one of these days.

Btw - I am not right-wing, so please do not label me as such. Nor am I a registered Republican. What I am is a realist, and I am damn proud of my country and wish to preserve what little bit we have left these days.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Because there's actually truth in the words Joe.

Everything I say is true. I never claimed you had to like it. (It is a sure thing I don't like having the absolute worst president in history.)

 

[Halon451]

Everything I say is true. I never claimed you had to like it. (It is a sure thing I don't like having the absolute worst president in history.)

I never claimed he was the best President either, but you keep getting centered around "Dubya" when the real meat of these issues are spread all across party lines and around the globe. He's just a man for Criminey's sake. Pick another target already - and for the love of god stop repeating the same old tired song... There is a liberal radio talk show host in my area that uses those exact words - worst president in history. Catchy little phrase isn't it?

You're a conduit Joe, nothing more.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

There is a liberal radio talk show host in my area...

There is a liberal radio talk show host??!!

 

[Halon451]

There is a liberal radio talk show host??!!

Yep - he's on Saturday mornings, during my AM workout. I used to listen to aggressive music while I worked out but I found out that listening to this guy actually gets my blood going a lot more than any music would ever do.

He is absolutely ridiculous and absurd. You'd love him.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

this guy actually gets my blood going a lot more than any music would ever do.

If I need to get my blood boiling, I listen to pond-scum like Rush Limbaugh.

 

[Halon451]

If I need to get my blood boiling, I listen to pond-scum like Rush Limbaugh.

No argument there (surprised?). Anyone who is so blinded by partisan politics in general isn't worth listening to IMO. It does the country not one ounce of good, and in fact only fuels the divide that much more.

 

[Rickster71]

Except for being right-wing propaganda, the nonsense you are saying is different how, exactly?

That's cool.

I guess we'll all have to check back in 10 or 20 years...

Otto and Joe Schmoe,
I'm very disappointed in most politicians, from both sides of the aisle.
With that being said;

do you think Clinton should've done more when the Trade Centers were bombed the 'First' time?

 

[OttoMatic]

do you think Clinton should've done more when the Trade Centers were bombed the 'First' time?

In retrospect, of course.

Similarly, if/when there is another big terrorist attack, will we look back and say "we should have done more to get the terrorists, rather than waste our time, money, resources and LIVES in Iraq."

 

[Matt34]

In retrospect, of course.

Similarly, if/when there is another big terrorist attack, will we look back and say "we should have done more to get the terrorists, rather than waste our time, money, resources and LIVES in Iraq."

We are not wasting lives and to say so is so disrespectful it makes me sick, we are now(finally) bringing the fight to them on their own turf. It is not a country we are fighting either, it's Islamic extremist. We just so happened to remove a vile dictator in the process.

Don't use the military as a scape goat either, it's an all volunteered force and has been for 30+ years, retention is higher now than it was in 2003. We know what we signed up for and the dangers involved.