|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 16:55:10 GMT -5
Starm Americans are a funny lot! all any true american wants is his freedom and to work for what he has? We are not subjects of some crown and don't like outside people telling us how to conduct our business! WE as a free people refuse to bow at the alter of the united nations.9/11 changed every thing we no longer have the tollernce to listen to a group that has been riding our coat tails for the last 80 + years I know you don't want to hear this but a lot of lives and money has been spent in the past saving europe and for the way france and some other countrys have treated us I don't blame BUSH at all IF your not going to help stay out of our way do I realy care what other countrys think? no! I would make a very poor statesmen and I admit that !  |
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 17:14:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by starm on Nov 4, 2004 17:22:10 GMT -5
Why the hell are you talking about the UN. I never mentioned the UN. I never said that they were good. What the hell??? Anyways the UN doesn't have any power so its pretty much irrelevent. Theres something to be said about a little cooperation between allies though. Acting as a bully generally wont do you no good in the long term.
|
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 17:46:15 GMT -5
Let me rephrase that TNRighty there _weren't_ any terrorism towards the US in Iraq. Now that Bush has made it a terrorism breeding ground there is. |
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 17:53:32 GMT -5
I'ts known fact Saddam's government was training terrorist you liberals talk so much about human rights what about the toture and mass execusion of his own people and the use of bio/chemicals on the Kurds ? Your people didn't object to us involvement Cosovo and sure didn't complain during wwii I guess they don't teach history in socialist states? |
|
|
|
Post by starm on Nov 4, 2004 17:56:45 GMT -5
There were much better ways (less cost, less deaths) to deal with Sadam than an invation.
|
|
|
|
Post by starm on Nov 4, 2004 17:58:53 GMT -5
Bush senior new better. (He was a 1000 times better president):
"We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero. Assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinable urban guerilla war, it could only plunge that part of the world into ever greater instability."
-President George Bush in this book "A World Transformed"
|
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 17:59:09 GMT -5
Why the hell are you talking about the UN. I never mentioned the UN. I never said that they were good. What the hell??? Anyways the UN doesn't have any power so its pretty much irrelevent. Theres something to be said about a little cooperation between allies though. Acting as a bully generally wont do you no good in the long term. If you were told the truth to begin with you would know what i'm talking about If the the UN is irrelevent which I believe it is. Has done it to them selves?  ?? |
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 18:03:57 GMT -5
Bush senior new better. (He was a 1000 times better president): "We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero. Assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinable urban guerilla war, it could only plunge that part of the world into ever greater instability." -President George Bush in this book "A World Transformed" leftwing propraganda IF you don't know the facts just spin! |
|
|
|
Post by starm on Nov 4, 2004 18:06:06 GMT -5
If you were told the truth to begin with you would know what i'm talking about If the the UN is irrelevent which I believe it is. Has done it to them selves? ?? That sentence is incomprehensible. |
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 18:07:30 GMT -5
There were much better ways (less cost, less deaths) to deal with Sadam than an invation. your right we could of starved the Iraqi's and made millions like the Euro's |
|
|
|
Post by KKSlyder on Nov 4, 2004 18:09:42 GMT -5
Listen Starm, or whatever your name is. Bush did the total opposite. If bush never sent troops over in iraq. Terrorists would have swarmed all over. Guns, nukes and even WMD. And If Bush never sent over troops and taken out terrorists, we would have been attacked more than 9-11. And Im dang sure since Bush got blamed for 9-11 anyway. He would surely get blamed for the other attacks. Nothing will stop the terrorists if we the US dont. That is all for now.
|
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 4, 2004 18:10:08 GMT -5
That sentence is incomprehensible. you know what I'm saying your just can't respond to the truth! |
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Nov 4, 2004 18:12:06 GMT -5
OK Starm, for the sake of argument lets just say you're right and that there were better ways to deal with Saddam other than removing him.
The stage is yours. What do you suppose would have been a better course of action?
|
|
|
|
Post by starm on Nov 4, 2004 18:21:27 GMT -5
I have to go, I'll respond to these later.
|
|
