politics

dogstar

Active Member
Originally Posted by Phixer
Going into Iraq for this reason was based on faulty intellegence.
I think the faulty intelegance was a munipulated excuse for going in there...used to mislead the people and congress to allow it....
the '' real reason '' I think some of the people are still trying to figure that one out.....some do already know though....
 

reefreak29

Active Member
u can almost compare saddam to hitler , were much better off without him , if he had the chance he kill all of us in the united states,
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Dogstar
Could you give a source...? Not Sen. Santorum I hope.
I know that they had found a few old decaying ( nearly 20 years old), leftover pre Gulf War devices that contained residual chemicals, but nothing that a ''reasonable person'' would consider a WMD.....IMO
?
Leftover chemical weapons are still leftover chemical weapons, imho. The condition of those weapons is not the debate, but rather did Saddam possess them are not. The debate wasn't even whether he was manufacturing, but whether he possessed bio and chemical weapons.
Google Iraq and Sarin. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...UyZWQ1MDkzOTc=
 

stdreb27

Active Member
As far as faulty intell. Every one and there dog thought there were more WMD's than they found. Clinton, Kerry, Gore the Bushes. Every serious intellegence agency. the CIA, British, everyone. So you know whatever. I still thing the strongest argument is the argument of the good neighbor. Like I said earlier. You just can't sit back and let someone commit genocide. You just can't.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
You just can't sit back and let someone commit genocide. You just can't....
True, although too often we do. Human rights violations all throughout Africa, China, etc. and we sit back and ignore them.
 

cwgibson

Member
journey you are lost, your head is so far up your .... this admistration has lied to the people,check the archives and you will see. our debt has doubled in 6yrs,halliburton has made millions; who is in charge of that company? you hail from tx so i expect your opinion to be biased. you really havent made a convincing point during this post. i think you need to find something else to spend your time on other than politics. i cant even begin to argue all the errors in your post.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by cwgibson
.... i cant even begin to argue all the errors in your post.
You haven't "argued" a point yet. You just throw out democratic talking points, nonsense, and race.
WMD's were found in Iraq.
Unemployment is near record lows
More people own houses than ever before
Taxes are lower
More people have health insurance
We haven't had an attack on US soil since 9-11
Interest rates are low
Stock Market is at record high
Which of these points am I wrong on?
 

dogstar

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
?
Leftover chemical weapons are still leftover chemical weapons, imho. The condition of those weapons is not the debate, but rather did Saddam possess them are not. The debate wasn't even whether he was manufacturing, but whether he possessed bio and chemical weapons.
Well, i remember Rice useing the term '' mushroom clowd '', Powell saying to the UN '' enriching uranium '', Bush saying '' neuclear weapons with concrete proof....the world knew that he used to have a program and the inspectors said that it was abandond and destroyed....
IMO, again, a reasonable person would conclude the possibility that some was missed....but the was not a program this time around and the Pres. knew it.
If you think we went into Iraq to prove to the world that he had a few nearly useless, 20 year old, left over, decaying weapons and that THAT is worth all of the sacrifices, all the $$$, nearly 3000 and counting daily, dead young Americans soilders, 1000s mane and wounded, 1000s employees of contractors killed and 10s of 1000s Iraq cilvians killed..... then lets throw a party...
lets raise another MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner

 

phixer

Active Member
We went back for oil and strategical purposes. When I joined the military, I knew what I was getting into and never blamed anyone for being put in harms way. It seemed like it was always the people on the sidelines doing all of the complaining about casualties not us, we were there to get a job done and didn’t think twice about it. A servicemember know this so if the active duty warriors arent complaining about it what good is it doing them to hear civillians griping about casulty numbers. Its not helping.
Its common knowledge that the damage Slick Willy inflicted during his tenure has trickled into the current administration. Basic trickle down legislation definition because government is slow to react to anything, this happens no matter who is in office. To deny this would be ignorant.
If you’re mad because you were lied to, you should wise up and realize that lies are the foundation of politics. Do you really believe any politician is telling you the truth? We are lied to everyday and most of the time don’t even realize it. Sure Halliburton made millions, so has Heinz Ketchup. Of course they lied, that’s what Politicians do, they couldnt say we went to Iraq for oil and to gain a strategic stronghold on the region and have the same legitimacy.
Slick Willy was no different; it was just a matter of timing.
 

cwgibson

Member
Runaway spending
Rather than looking at the savings rate as the amount consumers put away for a rainy day, an alternate but useful way to look at what economists call "savings" is to see it as a reflection of spending.
And in that interpretation, all economists agree: We are spending more as a nation than ever before.
In 2005, Americans spent a record $9.07 trillion, up 6 percent from 2004 when consumers spent $8.5 trillion.
Spending alone would not be a problem if incomes were keeping pace. In 2005, disposable incomes rose to only $9.03 trillion, compared with $8.68 trillion the previous year.
And if we look at spending as the economists do -- as a percentage of incomes, we see that we have been spending a bigger and bigger percentage of our salary at the end of every month and have been doing so since the mid 1980s.
We are now at a point where we are spending slightly more than we are earning.
Where's it all coming from?
Since our spending is outpacing our earnings, the money obviously has to come from somewhere. By definition, if you aren't earning enough money to pay your bills, you are forced to either sell something, such as stocks, or borrow against something, such as a

[hr]
, to make up the difference.
And that is exactly what has been happening for the past few decades.
It just so happens that stocks began a meteoric run in price appreciation at just about the same time as our savings rates began declining in the late 1980s.
Many economists believe that the increase in "paper wealth" made people feel free to spend more than they otherwise would.
After stocks crashed in 1999 and 2000, homes took over as the appreciation darling.
Again flush with paper wealth after the value of their homes ballooned, families had easy access to cash through cash-out mortgages, enabling the buying binge to continue.
And since Americans are spending more than they are earning, it is largely foreign investors who are buying up the stocks we are selling and who are financing the debt we continue to rack up.
 

phixer

Active Member
Very true but not just for the government but consumers also. Many people have an insatiable urge to live beyond their means. Everyone wants to keep up with the Joneses and drive the biggest SUV possible and live in a huge luxury house. These payday loan places (legalized loan sharking) that have popped up overnight are a good reflection of the times, same for the intrest only and reverse mortgages that have become more popular within the last 10 years. If Im not mistaken new credit card laws require an increase in the minimum payments also.
But raising taxes is not the answer, this only serves to reduce consumer spending which hurts the economy. Higher wages arent the answer either because fewer will be hired and unemployment will rise. The answer is a cultural shift in spending, one which promotes saving more and conservative consumer purchasing. This takes place by teaching our kids the value of a dollar. Will this hurt the economy? Not necessarily because the businesses that will be impacted most are the luxury based ones that already gouge consumers and deserve to go under. You could charge 3 bucks for a cup of coffee or charge 1 and sell more of it.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Dogstar
....If you think we went into Iraq to prove to the world that he had a few nearly useless, 20 year old, left over, decaying weapons and that THAT is worth all of the sacrifices, all the $$$, nearly 3000 and counting daily, dead young Americans soilders, 1000s mane and wounded, 1000s employees of contractors killed and 10s of 1000s Iraq cilvians killed..... then lets throw a party...
lets raise another MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner


Respectfully Dog, that's not the point I was making...
Look, I totally respect our military. I said several posts back that as far as I was concerned the second Iraq violated the Desert Strom Treaty by targetting our aircraft that was a declaration of war, as far as I'm concerned. I didn't need WMDs.
As for them; let's not forget that leading Democrats, Russia, EU, Israel, etc. also said Iraq had them. Iraq continually blocked UN inspectors.
Saddam brought this on himself; and the world's a better place without him.
Has the evidence so far been weak on WMd's? Absolutely. Does that mean Saddam didn't have any more? No. He was hiding something...
 

cwgibson

Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
And how is that the President's fault?
i didnt say it was:
You haven't "argued" a point yet. You just throw out democratic talking points, nonsense, and race.
WMD's were found in Iraq.
Unemployment is near record lows
More people own houses than ever before
Taxes are lower
More people have health insurance
We haven't had an attack on US soil since 9-11
Interest rates are low
Stock Market is at record high
Which of these points am I wrong on?
this points out that while you may not be wrong, but these economic points you made are somewhat of an illusion. debt is a very bad thing and ours as a country has doubled in 6yrs someone will have to pay for that.
you think sadaam was hiding something,how long do you think it will take them to find it?
as for us attacks i addressed that earlier and you posted a string of minor things that had happend,so how many have died in suicide bombings in iraq?
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by cwgibson
this points out that while you may not be wrong, but these economic points you made are somewhat of an illusion. debt is a very bad thing and ours as a country has doubled in 6yrs someone will have to pay for that.....
You started this thread by saying the President hasn't done anything right. I'm just listing a few of the many things that are going right for our country right now.
Originally Posted by cwgibson

you think sadaam was hiding something,how long do you think it will take them to find it? as for us attacks i addressed that earlier and you posted a string of minor things that had happend,so how many have died in suicide bombings in iraq?
They may never find anything else. The desert is a big place, and the borders with Syria and Iran are very porous. Again, name a predominant Democrat in 1998 that was saying Saddam wasn't a threat? If Bush lied so did Kerry, Hillary, etc.
Again, I refer back to the original post you made. We were attacked 7 times under Clinton. Osama himself said the timidity of our retaliation for those attacks gave him the confidence to plan 9-11. Not being attacked for 5 years is a monumental success.
National debt is bad... no argument from me on that point.
I'm not going to ever be caught trying to argue everything a President does is good. You, however, put yourself in the position of trying to say everything the President has done is bad. That's ridiculous.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
LOL ok all you folks today is voting day. so If you are going to vote Republican go vote, all you others stay home! lol
***)
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Phixer
We went back for oil and strategical purposes. ...couldnt say we went to Iraq for oil and to gain a strategic stronghold on the region and have the same legitimacy.
Slick Willy was no different; it was just a matter of timing.
Lets think about going invading a country for oil. vs say alaska.
In Iraq we put service men in the line of fire. Costs a couple thousand lives.
In alaska we kill a few birds and seals, a fish or two.
In Iraq it would and will cost billions of dollars rebuilding infastructure, oilwells basically have to be rebuilt.
In alaska we already have some roads and ports. And we have to drill.
There still political instability in Iraq
There isn't political instability in Alaska.
you would have to pay hazard pay in iraq
you wouldn't have to pay hazard pay in alaska.
I've got a great Idea lets invade a country for its oil when eventually it is going to join opec anyway and screw us anyway.
In Iraq we are setting up a democracy. To get political and social stability in a region to that has been mired in turmoil for longer than we have been a country. How would we take oil from that country? It doesn't make any sense.
Historically invading a country to strip it of its resources don't work. (british tea company in India)
If big oil industries were behind doing this. They would have to be just stupid. Especially since we are sitting on a find that would yield millions of barrells of oil in the US. If it were really about oil we never ever would have set foot in iraq. We could get more out of alaska. with must less fiscal and human costs.
 

dogstar

Active Member
Originally Posted by Phixer
A servicemember know this so if the active duty warriors arent complaining about it what good is it doing them to hear civillians griping about casulty numbers. Its not helping.
If you’re mad because you were lied to, you should wise up and realize that lies are the foundation of politics. Do you really believe any politician is telling you the truth? We are lied to everyday and most of the time don’t even realize it.
IMO. Its the cilvilian's duty, as a citizen to speak out about how one feels the Goverment is useing or misuseing the military and for what.....and to ''gripe'' if one feels that way......I think service members understand....They should if they understand duty.
I donk like it when Im lied to by anyone.....and no, you might, but I want just stay silent about it...all though I understand that politicians would like me to...
 

dogstar

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Now, one further point to make. WMD's were found in Iraq. Sarin and Mustard gas were both found.
1journeyman...always with respect...
Its just the way you threw that statement in as if was some new headline in the news....a NEW point to make....thats why I first asked for a source...IMO, to someone that was not already aware of those old weapons, that statement could be misleading, as is the term WMD, in describeing them....Maybe we just dont agree on what a WMD is.....
 
Top