The true definition of a Liberal

Sodium Pentethol V · Mar 5, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>You have a Republican gov't, whom I presume you support, who just spent 105 billion on a war that proved to be all for naught <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Proved for naught???????????????????

How long to wait Panda? Wait till when? till it costs a trillion dollars to get rid of him?

wait till he actually poses a threat to incoming troops?

wait till he violates another 19 resolutions?

wait till france and russia fully divest themselves finacially?

any attacks to the homeland in the last two+ yrs?

yea all for naught.

Think the other malcontent leaders of the world want to be dragged by their hair from a hole in the ground? BUSH IS WINNING THE WAR THAT COUNTS

xpanda · Mar 5, 2004

If y'all just waited another year or two, Saddam would most likely have been overthrown by his own people. The insurgence, one of the results of the US-imposed sanctions over the years, was enjoying a significant rise in popularity (one needn't look much farther than Haiti or Panama to see how the US can influence a rebellion.) Now, in case you would like to argue this with me, one of my best friends is from the city of Baghdad and his entire family is still there. This is what he's told me as relayed by Iraqis themselves.

In other words, the 105 billion Bush spent to oust him had much more to do with making a global statement about US hegemony than it did about protecting your country.

Had Bush said last year that he was going to spend 105 billion building schools in urban centres to reduce the class sizes, you would have had a hissy fit.

blueedwards · Mar 5, 2004

spv, you and i agree in principle on many of the issues raised in this forum but, i don't think insulting the opposing viewpoint is going to result in them changing their perspective or even considering yours.

just my two cents.

Sodium Pentethol V · Mar 5, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>If y'all just waited another year or two, Saddam would most likely have been overthrown by his own people.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea like Castro, Kaddafi, et al. Dictators are rarely overthrown by their own people. Their primary focus is retention of power, it is evidence why Hussein had to be over thrown now, he proved he could care less about his own little feifdom, hence psychopath. Had he complied with the UN he would still be in power.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>The insurgence, one of the results of the US-imposed sanctions over the years, was enjoying a significant rise in popularity (one needn't look much farther than Haiti or Panama to see how the US can influence a rebellion.) Now, in case you would like to argue this with me, one of my best friends is from the city of Baghdad and his entire family is still there. This is what he's told me as relayed by Iraqis themselves. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bullshit hearsay. Zero shot of that happening.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>In other words, the 105 billion Bush spent to oust him had much more to do with making a global statement about US hegemony than it did about protecting your country.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? Lets see now, no terrorists attacks in over two years, moderation by former hard line leaders in the region.(desire to avoid the hole in the hole in the ground routine)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Had Bush said last year that he was going to spend 105 billion building schools in urban centres to reduce the class sizes, you would have had a hissy fit<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Watch how dumb you are about assuming things.
My wife is a teacher at an urban school. Lack of money is not the problem. Throwing 105 billion dollars at inner city schools would do little to nothing beyond superficially.

Whereas 105 billion dollars to prevent more planes crashing into buldings? to send out a message to not phuck with us, think my kids benefit more by having life first then educating them second.

xpanda · Mar 5, 2004

At least you agree that the attack on Iraq was to send a message. As for whether or not the efforts have curbed terrorism in your country, I don't think two years is enough of a time lapse to judge such a statement, especially given that the two attacks you have suffered (at the hands of foreign terrorists) were a decade apart.

I think you will be sadly mistaken about the success of Bush's agenda.

noital · Mar 5, 2004

Iraq, granted anation with a brutal dictator but the they did not attack us.We invaded Iraq under the guise of liberation to steal oil to make bush and his buddies money at the cost of the lives of our sons and daughters.