"This is stupid and uncalled for, Hitler created a world war and made internment camps and death camps, Bush did not come close to that and saying he is like him is quite offensive."
We are all entitled to our opinions, and you are certainly entitled to yours...
I said "Hitler, The Antichrist, whatever YOU want to call him", referring to him as what other people refer to him as. Not necessarily what I refer to him as. I don't believe in god or the bible so I don't believe in an "Antichrist", but many people believe that he was it, and many people refer to him and compare him to Hitler.
The phrase "whatever you want to call him" is always used to express your views in a way that isnt first person, like SWIM. It's just a way to make a space between you and your views by making it look like other people agree with you by putting the word:you. And if you don't think he is then DONT PUT IT THERE! I don't think Obama is good, but I wouldn't say oh yeah Obama (or HITLER or THE ANTICHRIST whatever ya wanna call him....) because I don't believe that he is those things. And many people, or you?....
I don't know if you were a G.W.B. supporter, or if the use of the name "Hitler" offended you, but what would you call what Bush did? Can you justify it in some way? He lied to the American people and he attacked a country under false pretenses. Where are these "Weapons of mass destruction"?
No, George Bush didn't start a world war, nor are there death camps...We marched into a country and took it over, causing more havoc and disarray than you can imagine. The entire country is a warzone where innocent civilians are "casualties".
I never supposrted Bush, and I think throwing around the name Hitler to describe any politician you don't like is stupid and offensive. I call what he did an abuse of power, even though he was obviously not in charge, he wasn't the ones making the decision. I can't justify it, why do you think i'm on his side? WHat did I say that made me look like a Bush supporter? OMG I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WEREN'T WMDS I NEVER HEARD ABOUT IT ON TV, OR IN BOOKS, OR IN ARTICLES! I know exactly what the Bush administration did, don't lecture me on stuff I've known for years. And actually, we took over 2 countries and made civilians free game, neither can be justified.
Initially, the invasion of Iraq was sold to the American people on the premise that Iraq posed an immediate risk to the safety and security of the United States. We were told that Iraq had amassed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and if we did not attack first, we were sure to be victimized by terrorist attacks from Iraq.
Americans were also told that there were significant ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. It was even propounded that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.
Since the completion of the invasion, however, the Bush administration has recanted every single reason it originally gave for waging war against Iraq except the vague explanation that we were "fighting terrorism." No WMD were found. Bush's aides confessed that no connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda has been established, and Bush himself admitted that Hussein had nothing to do with the September 11 terrorist attacks.
So, why did we really go to war? Some suggest that oilmen Bush and Cheney wanted to procure Iraq's rich oil fields. Others say it was revenge for Daddy Bush's embarrassment that had been lingering from Gulf War I.
However, in his recent speech before the United Nations, President Bush revealed the real reason we invaded Iraq. He said plainly that the reason we invaded Iraq was "to defend the peace and the credibility of the United Nations."
There you have it from the lips of Bush himself. The reason America went to war with Iraq was to defend the credibility of the United Nations. This must come as quite a shock to all those people who thought we went to war to defend the security of the United States.
That is NOT the reason we went to war. We went to war because Bush and his administration wanted to and used 9/11 and terrorism and WMDs as scapegoats to go to war there. Bush only likes the UN because they backed the invasion of Iraq because of Colin Powells speech in the UN. Why would you believe what Bush says now and the reasons he says now but not the old reasons? Oh right because you have a bias, you don't like the UN so you choose that reason as the real reason we entered Iraq. Please.
As to the credibility of the UN, I didn't know it had any! Since its inception, the UN has done nothing but oppose the interests of the United States. From the beginning, it has been led and controlled by Marxists and other dictators who hate freedom and Christianity. Everything the UN touches turns to ashes. The blood of millions of freedom-loving people drips from its hands. Mr. President, the United Nations has no credibility worth defending!
If our President and Congress were truly dedicated to defending the interests and security of the United States, they would expel the United Nations from U.S. soil and remove America from UN membership. They would also tell the freedom-hating socialists and Muslim dictators within the UN to politely "get lost," and they would start treating the United States as an independent, sovereign country again!
There will, no doubt, be enemy-nations that America must fight in the future; America has many enemies. When it becomes necessary to send our young men to fight and die, however, it would be nice if we knew they were fighting, not to defend the credibility of the United Nations, but to defend the security of the United States of America.
You realize that the US is one of the five consistent members of the security Council in the UN right? We have more power than most countries in the UN because of that, and the UN backed bushes invasion of Iraq, they take our side alot. And stfu about that freedom hating, christian hating, marxist dictator shit, you are a right wing asshole. You are a nationalist who puts his country before others. And where the fuck did you get the Muslim dictator shit? And freedom hating Socialists? This aint the 50's, this isnt a tea party convention, Socialists don't hate freedom, Socialism is a mch better way of attaining freedom, the Government doesnt give a shit about your freedom. And the UN isnt actually IN the US, it is in a nuetral spot, it is within NYC because it is a city that is very easy to get into, by train or car or plane or whatever, YOU DO KNOW part of the UN is in the Netherlands right? And that crap about America must fight and die for freedom is shit. We don't need to fight for shit, we only have enemies because we fucked them over, either economically, or militarilly. And wtf? Just young men? No women? Was that article written in the 50's or something?
Durng the end of Bush it was agreed that the US would hand over power by the end of 2011.
Yes, it was "agreed" that the US would hand over power by the end of 2011, with the troops withdrawing slowly...BUT, they are unable to withdraw when there are still insurgencies and chaos. The report that I heard said that we might have to stay there training their armed forces and keeping control of things (in Afghanistan as well until 2014 and possibly longer.) A friend of mine that's in the ARMY told me that we'll never leave there completely. How much that means, I can't say for sure, but he did a tour in Iraq and a tour in Afghanistan and he's still training troops to go over there...
This isn't even close to true, every channel talks about the wars and many analysts talk about how they disagree with the wars.
I know that there are plenty of "round table" news shows that have analysts talking about the war, the economy, etc...I was talking about newscasts that you see everyday, the ones that pop up in-between television shows and at 6:00 and 11:00 every night. The ones that you're talking about are specialized and aimed at a certain demographic that watches them. I was talking about your run of the mill news for people who watch regular t.v. and don't hear anything about the fact that our country is still involved in wars. It's hard to get your point across on the internet, when you're not actually talking in person. Many things can be taken the wrong way.
You made very valid points and I respect you for reading what I had to say and responding. I was trying to voice my opinion and open up some dialogue, and that's what I did. Thank you.
Ok 1st off, we never fully leave a county, we still occupy Germany and Korea, this is nothing new. You realize that those people on the news don't have the expertise to say anything about politics excet how to say the death toll right? If you wanna hear real news watch REAL NEWS.
Topic: Re: The wars we're involved in... (Read 55772 times)
Home
Help
Search
Calendar
Members
Login
Register