croak
Trickster
http://islamic-world.net/warnews/index.htmDo you think that Bush is telling the news channels to cover up the huge mistake he's made? It seems so.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Read News Stories About the "War on Terrorism" You Will Never See On CNN
- Thread starter croak
- Start date
Christy
Member
No mistake has been made. Freeing people from a despot is not a mistake. Wanting to have people choose their own leaders is not a mistake. Improving the lifestyles and the futures of millions of Iraquis is not a mistake.RearingArabian said:
Here are the mistakes: Thinking that Iraquis could never be happy living under a democracy. Thinking that terrorism will ultimately succeed.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Did Bush make a mistake? Assuredly.
Are the news channels trying to cover for him? Nope. Great conspiracy theory though!
Are the news channels trying to cover for him? Nope. Great conspiracy theory though!
For those who can walk and chew gum at the same time, recognizing the appalling character of the Bush Doctrine in no way diminishes our hatred and contempt for the pervasive human rights violations of that despicable regime.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
That would be mt contention.
Now Bush may be controlling access by the agencies... but the agencies are reporting the good, the bad and the ugly as they aee it.
Now Bush may be controlling access by the agencies... but the agencies are reporting the good, the bad and the ugly as they aee it.
Rex
Founder
NetDoc said:
I find they have a biased interest in reporting the good, bad, and ugly. If they are giving millions of dollars to a campaign to fund a particular candidate why would they report the bad and the ugly. It's only hurting themselves. In the end it always boils down to money.
No*s
Captain Obvious
Christy said:
That wasn't why went to war, though, was it? We went to war because Saddam supposedly would have WMDs very soon. I don't believe the president lied there (he does lots of other places), but there were no WMDs. That, by definition, is a mistake.
All the reasons you've mentioned were initially nice side-effects while stopping the WMDs was the principal issue. Now that we don't have WMDs they don't detract from the fact that it was a mistake. Are they good? Absolutely? They just weren't why we went to war.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Could you back this up, please? In what way did Bush benefit by rushing into another war with Iraq, other than almost costing himself the election?huajiro said:
HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
1-money, whether it be haliburton or otherwise
2-and the election could of course only been rigged to be close.
http://www.welfarestate.com/binladen/surprise/
2-and the election could of course only been rigged to be close.
http://www.welfarestate.com/binladen/surprise/
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
He was able to coin the one slogan which won him the campaign;
"Four more wars!"
Let's face it, he allowed Bin Laden to slip through his arrogant grasp and simply needed a trophy. IF he had not caught Sadamn, he would not have been elected. What he erroneously thought was a "sure thing" almost backfired on him.
Isis-Astoroth
Member
Do I think the war was a mistake? No. Do I think Bush made some mistakes during the war? Yes. Do I think the media are covering it up? No. Do I think that Bush tried to make some excuses and cover some of it up? Yes.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
What are you talking about? After the Afghanistan conflict Bush had the highest approval rating of any president in U.S. history. If he had not invaded Iraq, he would have easily won re election. Again, how exactly did the war in Iraq benefit Bush?Net Doc said:
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
It benefitted the man's incredible pride. He is even more arrogant than I am, and I didn't think that was possible.
We went to war over Dubya's need for a trophy.
He wasn't prepared.
He didn't get enough help.
Even his motivation (wmd's) was in error.
And somehow in an act of corporate stupidity, we have elected this madman president.
We went to war over Dubya's need for a trophy.
He wasn't prepared.
He didn't get enough help.
Even his motivation (wmd's) was in error.
And somehow in an act of corporate stupidity, we have elected this madman president.
Yerda
Veteran Member
Christy said:
No mistake. I agree. Certain people wanted a war. Certain people got one.
Freeing people from a despot is not a mistake. Again I agree. Liberation for an Iraqi must be nice...'til coalition forces shoot you. Saddam Hussein had mass graves reported to be almost ten thousand in number, but turned out to be much less. Horrible yes, I must concede. But how many people have died as a result of the war now? Duet?
Improving lifestyles? Is that better living conditions? There are thousands without water. Sounds great. Anybody know about the situation concerning disease and medicines?
Improving their futures too? Dead people have no future. I'm sure the families of the dead might argue that their futures are drastically damaged. On the bright side Coca-Cola can poison them like in India, and murder off union leaders like Colombia. Nestle likewise in Brazil and well almost everywhere. Oil refineries can totally destroy the air quality, just like in Durban. Oh things look rosy.
If Saddam Hussein had handed over the weapons he may or may not have had he would still be in power, brutally murdering his oponents etc. That was how it all started. He had weapons, needed to hand them over, cooperate with inspections etc etc. How can such a thing then be morally justifiable? Looks like he had no weapons but he was a bit of a git so it's cool.
I also agree that Iraqi people will be happy under a democracy. I'm also completely positive they will never have one until they take power for themselves.
Will the economic system be based upon the IMF's star pupils like Argentina? Chile? Russia? Privatise everything including water FFS, remove funding from education and health, sell assets to the USA, France, the UK and other western states, and worry about foriegn investors not starving peasants. Stand back and watch it burn when speculators decide it's time to cash the currency.
I'm sure every Iraqi president will be carefully groomed by America. Infact Wall Street will decide more Iraqi policies than Iraqis. And just in case western investments are threatened there will always be that massive foriegn embassy maintained by the USA to straighten things out and show where the priorities lie.
Oh and sorry to spoil the run, but I disagree on your last point. The terrorists have won and will continue to win in future cases. With the weapons that the USA, the UK, and others possess how can the little people win?
linwood
Well-Known Member
You`ve read the link I posted awhile back haven`t you Spinkles?Mr_Spinkles said:
The Defense report from the Project for a New American Century?
The report states the manner in which America could dominate the globe militarily and says it will take a long time unless of course there is...
"Some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl harbor."
(Sept 11?)
The report speaks of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as the three countries that are the biggest threat .
(Axis of Evil?)
Have a look at the bottom of their Statement of Principles to see who formed this group and wrote these reports.
These are the people running our country, Google the names you don`t find familiar and you`ll see they are all in powerful governmental, religious, or media, positions .
The invasion of Iraq was at the very least much desired by the current admin well before they ever took the first election.
This coupled with the statements made by Richard Clarke about Bush`s desire to find Iraq responsible for 9/11 and it isn`t much of a stretch.
This coupled with the statements made by Richard Clarke about Bush`s desire to find Iraq responsible for 9/11 and it isn`t much of a stretch.
The report is long, the site even larger...read it all.
tell me what you think.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
linwood said:
Thanks linwood I will.