The Original Vune

Misguided President

Misguided President

Sonething's the wrong way round here

Why does George W. spend billions of dollars on invading, and maintaining an occupation, of Iraq under false pretences but then refuses the plans for debt relief and fair trade in Africa because it doesn't fit in with his budget plan?

I do not understand this man and the team of people he surrounds himself with!
21,369 views 56 replies
Reply #27 Top
No, Bush has documented that by stating the danger from countries like Iran, Seria and North Korea. No intelligence or military expert I have listened to has said we are SAFER. Just because there has not been another attack in the US is NO proof we are safer. Look at how long a time passed from the first and second attacks on the Twin Towers. OUR homeland security is more active but even there there are problems like our ports and borders which Bush has not addresses in almost FOUR YEARS. WHY NOT?
Reply #28 Top
No intelligence or military expert I have listened to has said we are SAFER.


You mean just the one's you choose to listen to.


Look at how long a time passed from the first and second attacks on the Twin Towers.


Yes, by not waging war after the first attack on our country, Clinton showed weakness and gave the terrorists more time to prepare. We are at war now, the terrorists are on the run now.
Reply #29 Top
Yes, by not waging war after the first attack on our country, Clinton showed weakness and gave the terrorists more time to prepare. We are at war now, the terrorists are on the run now.


Are you meaning to present yourself as an American caricature?
Reply #31 Top
Iraq did not attack the US. Why did we attack a country that had nothing to do with attacking America? That is like attacking Mexico after Dec 7, 1941.
Reply #32 Top
I never intended this to be an Iraq war discussion. I think we are getting distracted away from what I wanted talk about which was the isue of debt and trade laws in Africa and the developing world.

Do you have any thoughts on that?
Reply #33 Top
Are you meaning to present yourself as an American caricature?


No, what are you trying to present yourself as? Michael Moore maybe?


Iraq did not attack the US. Why did we attack a country that had nothing to do with attacking America? That is like attacking Mexico after Dec 7, 1941.


The reasons were given. Your quote is something I read at the DU all the time. Democrats said Iraq had WMD's, they were are a threat to America, and that Saddam had to be removed. Are you telling me the democrats lied?


I never intended this to be an Iraq war discussion. I think we are getting distracted away from what I wanted talk about which was the isue of debt and trade laws in Africa and the developing world.

Do you have any thoughts on that?


Sure. I think other countries should contribute and stop running to the U.S.
Reply #34 Top
We have a greater obligation to stop adding to the debt in this country and creating a trade policy that is fair to American workers before deling with third world trade and debt. We are the greatest debt and have the largest trade problem of any nation on earth and Bush has done more to add to these problems then ANY President in history! His tax and fiacal policy are adding to the debt and he continues with the free trade policy that failed during the Clinton administration. Our children and grandchildren will be paying for the Bush fiscal and trade policies for decades!
Reply #35 Top

#15 by The Original Vune
Wednesday, June 08, 2005





At best it's a tired old arguement that has been shown to be a false assumption many times over!


Were you talking about oil here, or the presence of WMDs, or the immediate threat posed by Iraq, or maybe the links between Saddam and Al Quaeda?


War for oil.
Reply #36 Top
We have a greater obligation to stop adding to the debt in this country and creating a trade policy that is fair to American workers before deling with third world trade and debt. We are the greatest debt and have the largest trade problem of any nation on earth and Bush has done more to add to these problems then ANY President in history! His tax and fiacal policy are adding to the debt and he continues with the free trade policy that failed during the Clinton administration. Our children and grandchildren will be paying for the Bush fiscal and trade policies for decades!


I have to look at the date of your posts because they are all the same.
Reply #37 Top
this Blog was about the policies of Bush and how misguided he and the people who adviuse him are from reality. the Bushies NEVER want to accept that what Bush is doing does not make sense and is not in our best interests. The news shows today again are talking about how the American public has turned away from Bush and what he is doing. Both Bush and Congress are out of sink with what is most important to the majority of Ameicans.
Reply #38 Top
You cannot go after every dictator at the same time, you have to start somewhere.



Is that what we're doing? Oh God, forgive us for we have sinned.......... and are continuing to sin.
Reply #39 Top
last time I check gene { I refuse to adress you as col.} shooting at an american warplane IS AN ACT OF WAR. but I am sure you will say they did not shoot any warplanes down so it does not count.
Reply #40 Top
the Bushies NEVER want to accept that what Bush is doing does not make sense and is not in our best interests.


And people like you never accept anything else except "blame Bush".


s that what we're doing? Oh God, forgive us for we have sinned.......... and are continuing to sin.


So you would prefer dictator stay in power?
Reply #41 Top
Moderateman

Not when the aircraft is flying over your country. If Russia sent combat aircraft to control our population the act of flying across America would be the act of war not trying to shoot them down. You are so full of BS. The Iraq War was a war of choice not because we were attacked or in danger from Iraq. History will record this was as an American error.

IslandDog

I just blame Bush for the things he is doing that are harming our country. There just seems to be a never ending string of those things. The deficit, trade problems, lack of an effective energy policy, lack of border and port security, lack of a policy to fix Social Security , Medicare and Medicade, the war in Iraq etc.
Reply #42 Top

#41 by COL Gene
Wednesday, June 08, 2005





Moderateman

Not when the aircraft is flying over your country. If Russia sent combat aircraft to control our population the act of flying across America would be the act of war not trying to shoot them down. You are so full of BS. The Iraq War was a war of choice not because we were attacked or in danger from Iraq. History will record this was as an American error.


YOUR the one full of it around here bud. Our planes were not there for ANY other reason than enforcing a "UN" no fly zone!
Reply #43 Top
No, what are you trying to present yourself as? Michael Moore maybe?


Just because I don't agree with the Bush administration does not mean I am a "Moore-ite". You seem incapable of seeing the other side of the argument in a rational way.

So you would prefer dictator stay in power?


Scary talk! I think Imissed the meeting where America was given juristiction over the whole world and appointed "Team America: World Police" ...........sounds familiar.......

War for oil.


Have you heard of saracasm?

Reply #44 Top
What made the US the enforcement agent of the UN? The fact remains, the Iraq War was an elective war not a war to protect this country from danger like WWI, WWII or Korea. It was the Bush choice and it has turned out badely. It was not Quick, clean or low cost in lives or dollars the way Bush said it would be. We have created a major area for future terrorists to plan attacks aginst us. Some way to make us safer!
Reply #45 Top


#44 by COL Gene
Thursday, June 09, 2005





What made the US the enforcement agent of the UN?




Just an FYI yo-yo...we were NOT the only ones enforcing that no-fly! I don't know where you've been lately, but maybe you should just crawl back into whatever hole it is you crawled from.
Reply #46 Top
Only about 95% of it. I still want an answer, who appointed the US and England enforcesr of the UN? Answer NO ONE!
Reply #47 Top

#46 by COL Gene
Thursday, June 09, 2005





Only about 95% of it. I still want an answer, who appointed the US and England enforcesr of the UN? Answer NO ONE!


First it was who made us the enforcers, now it's who made us and the brits enforcers. There just ain't no pleasing you is there? Can you say we're the ones with the planes that could be spared?

And just an FYI...if your going to answer your own questions then don't bother asking!
Reply #48 Top
The reason I provided an answer is the Bushies just give PURE BS no answers.
Reply #49 Top

#48 by COL Gene
Thursday, June 09, 2005





The reason I provided an answer is the Bushies just give PURE BS no answers.


I gave you an answer. I noticed you ignored it.
Reply #50 Top
The War on Terrorism...yet extremist right wing groups were omitted from the Homeland Security annual report on threats.

If Iraq was such a threat, then why did Gen. Schwarzkopf negotiate a ceasefire ending DeAsert Storm allowing Sadaam to keep his weaponry and airfleet? Why did a soldier do a diplomat's job?

If we are serious about winning hearts and minds in Iraq, then why aren't the most trained, most qualified and most educated about Arab culture and religion there instead of 50% Guard/Reserve and conventional active duty?

Battling counterinsurgency demands those warriors trained in COIN tactics. Why isn't this happening?

Why were fundamentalist Christian groups allowed in country to proselytize freely knowing it would create friction with the Moslems?

President Bush promised Iraqi reconstruction would be paid for with Iraq oil proceeds yet Congress is being tasked for more and more money.

Outsourced American security groups have been recently arrested by our military and held for firing into Iraqi civilians. How many are there and what restraints exist for their actions?

The questions are endless, but the answers are not so forthcoming from this administrationl. Glib responses in this thread nor from the Bush Administration cannot be excused by pasting over with supposed patriotism nor blind obedience. America has a right to know why servicemembers are dying and what for instead of some of the responses in this thread. We have a right to survey the Reagan and Bush Sr. presidential records which Bush Jr. sealed by executive order in deference to established federal law requiring openeness, research and analysis and academicians.

If Sadaam was so bad, then why did the United States supply him arms, WMD information and chemical/biological weapons under the Reagan/Bush Sr. administrations? Understandably the US had a policy of letting Iran and Iraq decimate each other in a bloody war, but why supply both with WMD information and chemical/biological components? Was Sadaam any less cruel to his people during this time? The answer is of course not since he gassed the Kurds, tortured freely and this nation did nothing but look the other way.

Iraqi helicopters flew shortly after General Schwarzkopf concluded armistice talks killing thousands of Kurds and Shias in open view of US units and American controlled airspace. This country did nothing to curtail the violent activities in spite of President Bush Sr. encouraging both groups to open rebel, but failed to support those words when the rebellion occurred. He was later criticized even the most conservative commentators for his reluctant.

Methinks this current American leadership is at a loss due to their own guiding ideology and values which are suspect since they also involve letting servicemembers and veterans die for lack of care. Saving a dollar is more important than providing a grateful nation's thanks for a job done. Find this hard to believe, a recent GAO report found the pentagon had withheld compensation and medical care for the wounded due to a lack of funding. Pentagon reps stated national security was more important than the wounded. Veterans Hospitals have already began closing down wards due to lack of funding and diversion of money to other sources by the administration.

So in the end, who is the greater enemy? The terrorists within or the ones external.






Why aren't soldier and