by Simon 159 Replies latest social current
IMO if amyone has a rabid bias then it's you.
My comment, by obvious context...was directed as response to FHN. Not you per se.
Anyway...
So my "rabid bias" is what?
Again...you fail to see my point...because you only want an "us vs. them" context.
I think you're all wrong... (you cannot see my point of view because your too busy telling me what I think...like some elders I know.)
FOAD...
u/d
the smart thing and shut up.
That "door" swings both ways...
It's actually what I was referring to in my first reply to this "thread".
Hmmmm
u/d
If he did smart things and sensible things then I will applaud him. IMO if amyone has a rabid bias then it's you.
Amen to that.
U/D, you still are sidestepping the subject of this thread. Defend Bush and his staff all you want, thousands are still dead because of Bush's signature. Thousands that don't need to be dead. If Bush would just fess up and turn around and make better decisions, he'd get more of my approval.
Simon, this is the post U/D was responding to:
So where is your humility? It's not showing in the insulting way you are addressing people, who don't agree with, you on this thread.
thousands are still dead because of Bush's signature.
Sorry, but wrong. In the US, the President really has very little power. He can not even tie a shoe with-out permission from Congress. The Congress gave him the power to go to war, including Kerry, Kennedy, Boxer, ect........ Long story short, with-out Kerry's go ahead, it wouldn't have happened. To lay it all at the feet of one man, is not accurate. Doing that, is sidestepping the issue.
The Congress gave him the power to go to war, including Kerry, Kennedy, Boxer, ect........ Long story short, with-out Kerry's go ahead, it wouldn't have happened. To lay it all at the feet of one man, is not accurate. Doing that, is sidestepping the issue.
You know the president has the power to veto congress or go along with them. His signature seals the deal. It was him that pushed congress, telling them that there was evidence of wmd. Congress was misled into supporting the war. When it comes down to it, that signature was what made the deal and sealed the fate of all the dead, dying, injured and displaced. It's a waste, just like the first post stated. A sad waste and the lives of the survivors ruined or changed forever.
It was him that pushed congress, telling them that there was evidence of wmd.
Sorry, but not really accurate. Most of the "evidence" came from the CIA, the Clinton administration, and the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Senate Intelligence Committee gave the most damning evidence, like the "mobile chemical labs", ect......and that interestingly enough was chaired by Rockefeller, when of the leading Democrats in Congress, and has been VERY quiet.
The point is, there are 27,000 people dead. Most of them would still be walking this earth today if not for the Iraq war.
The point is, there are 27,000 people dead. Most of them would still be walking this earth today if not for the Iraq war.
Very true and I agree with you. But how many lives were saved? How many mass graves were prevented from being filled?
What is truly sickening is that the populace turns a blind eye and can't be bothered to object anymore. The politicians have done a wonderful job of destroying democracy and twisting people to where they want them.
Not all of us. Take some little solace in that.
Sorry, but not really accurate. Most of the "evidence" came from the CIA, the Clinton administration, and the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Senate Intelligence Committee gave the most damning evidence, like the "mobile chemical labs", ect......and that interestingly enough was chaired by Rockefeller, when of the leading Democrats in Congress, and has been VERY quiet.
Julia
The "evidence" was not evidence and not presented by the intelligence community as evidence. They were asked repeated questions and sent back by the politicians until they (the politicians) got the answers they wanted.
The proper course would have been to gather the intelligence, evaluate it and decide a course of action.
What Bush and Blair did was decide what they wanted to do and then try and gather (or otherwise concoct) the evidence to justify it and convince people to go along with it. But hey, it worked for Vietnam didn't it?
THAT is why we are in a mess. THAT is why Bush and Blair should be impeached / prosecuted for invading another country under false pretences and THAT is why Bush and Blair are directly responsible for the needless deaths that have occurred, both military and civilian.
Do you really think that Bush is representing the best interests of the American people by what he has done or the greedy interests of a very narrow, select self-serving group?
Doesn't exposing the identity of a serving agent as an act of political retaliation show the kind of administration that you have? They are not concerned with what is best for YOU. They only care about what is best for THEM.
Congress is like our house of commons - they vote on what is presented to them. If they are told there is evidence when there isn't then they will make the wrong decision. Is that their fault or the ones who tell the lies?
So where is your humility? It's not showing in the insulting way you are addressing people, who don't agree with, you on this thread
I've checked my job description and it doesn't mention "humility" anywhere. It does say I can say whatever the hell I want about whatever the hell takes my fancy though and that if you don't like it you should swivel
Oh, and show me the insults.
