• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

9/7/2003 Bush speech discussion thread

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
I agree with all BOBDN has said. Just more of the same BS. The sad thing is most of America will just keep waving their flags and blindly following the Charlatan in Chief a la Brittany Spears no matter what. It's just a lot easier than getting a clue about what's happening in this world and pulling their head out of their asses. We have little over a year to lay the groundwork for change. I know we all talk the talk, but now we need to literally put our money where out mouth is. Operation American Freedom in '04! Bring it on!
 

MonkeyK

Golden Member
May 27, 2001
1,396
8
81
If war is justified, the cost is not important. We need to pay whatever the cost to get things done right.

There was nothing said during the speech that would change anybodys mind.

Isn't it wierd that Bush's forehead is always wrinkled while he is giving speeches?
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,940
10
81
Like I say, he looks dumb, and he's tryin' like hell to get everyone to believe him. His facial expressions say that he doesn't seem to really even believe what he's spouting out, MonkeyK!
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
My take on Bush's speech?

I just wasted 15 minutes watching Bush tell America what we already knew:

Iraq is going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars ($70bn + $4bn/mo + another $87bn he's asking Congress for now), we are going to have 130,000 + troops there for the forseeable future and we need the UN and our allies who told us not to invade Iraq in the first place to bail us out. NO evidence of terrorist ties in pre-invasion Iraq, just another specious statement placing Iraq and terror in the same sentence again. But an admission that the US invasion has made Iraq a nexus of terror. No mention of the WMD no one has found. This was basically just a plea for help from a Bush who now realizes how badly he and his administration have screwed this up. And NO mention of Osama bin Laden, dead or alive.

At least he didn't repeat "Bring it on."

What was the point of this excercise? Bush's advisors hoping he'll get a bump in the polls from appearing on TV? An attempt to buy more time?

Bush had nothing new to say. He could have told the millions of Americans who are out of work how spending hundreds of billions in Iraq will help them. Or how using all our resources in Iraq would make us more secure at home. Or why, out of all the excuses his administration's used to invade Iraq not one has been proven.

Instead we got a replay of Bush administration propaganda for which his administration is unable to provide ANY proof.

Just more Bush sloganeering.
Things that aren't "new" to you. We abosultely NEED the UN BOBDN? We haven't been pushed out or left, it believe we could win without the support of anymore troops it would just make it more difficult. Terrorism Ties? What about Anr-Islam(sp?) and the money donated to families of Palensteinian suicide bombers? The only thing that is stupid is that he wouldn't remotely talk about WMDs.
Yes, Tabb, we absolutely need the UN. Our troops in Iraq are supposed to cycle out next April. There is no one to replace them unless the UN and NATO allies help. We may be able to afford to pay for this entire episode ourselves but will wind up needing foreign aid ourselves by the time it's over.

As far as terrorist ties the use of this charge was the Bush administration's attempt to connect Iraq with Al Qaeda with 9/11 as another excuse to invade. Those ties have never been proven. There was reportedly one base found in the Kurdish north connected with Ansar al Islam. The invasion did bring the Bush administration's charges to fruition. There are plenty of terrorists in Iraq now. As for the money paid to Palestinian suicide bombers I keep hearing that charge but I've never seen proof. Even if true the Saudis have been proven to have done the same. When do we invade Saudi Arabia?

This invasion began as a response to an imminent threat. It is not.

Then it became a war to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. It has not.

It has now become a war against the terrorists the very US invasion the Bush administration insisted on brought to Iraq.

All the while the nation of Iraq is suffering as is our nation. We are asked to sacrifice for reasons which change as needed just as the reasons the Bush administration gave for their invasion kept changing as needed.
Uh, BOBDN why would we want to wait for a imminent threat? I am collecting sources on several things too. This post will be edited.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Isn't it wierd that Bush's forehead is always wrinkled while he is giving speeches?
Perhaps, it's a result of Rove's hand up his a$$ and working his mouth just like a muppet. :p
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
My take on Bush's speech?

I just wasted 15 minutes watching Bush tell America what we already knew:

Iraq is going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars ($70bn + $4bn/mo + another $87bn he's asking Congress for now), we are going to have 130,000 + troops there for the forseeable future and we need the UN and our allies who told us not to invade Iraq in the first place to bail us out. NO evidence of terrorist ties in pre-invasion Iraq, just another specious statement placing Iraq and terror in the same sentence again. But an admission that the US invasion has made Iraq a nexus of terror. No mention of the WMD no one has found. This was basically just a plea for help from a Bush who now realizes how badly he and his administration have screwed this up. And NO mention of Osama bin Laden, dead or alive.

At least he didn't repeat "Bring it on."

What was the point of this excercise? Bush's advisors hoping he'll get a bump in the polls from appearing on TV? An attempt to buy more time?

Bush had nothing new to say. He could have told the millions of Americans who are out of work how spending hundreds of billions in Iraq will help them. Or how using all our resources in Iraq would make us more secure at home. Or why, out of all the excuses his administration's used to invade Iraq not one has been proven.

Instead we got a replay of Bush administration propaganda for which his administration is unable to provide ANY proof.

Just more Bush sloganeering.
Things that aren't "new" to you. We abosultely NEED the UN BOBDN? We haven't been pushed out or left, it believe we could win without the support of anymore troops it would just make it more difficult. Terrorism Ties? What about Anr-Islam(sp?) and the money donated to families of Palensteinian suicide bombers? The only thing that is stupid is that he wouldn't remotely talk about WMDs.
Yes, Tabb, we absolutely need the UN. Our troops in Iraq are supposed to cycle out next April. There is no one to replace them unless the UN and NATO allies help. We may be able to afford to pay for this entire episode ourselves but will wind up needing foreign aid ourselves by the time it's over.

As far as terrorist ties the use of this charge was the Bush administration's attempt to connect Iraq with Al Qaeda with 9/11 as another excuse to invade. Those ties have never been proven. There was reportedly one base found in the Kurdish north connected with Ansar al Islam. The invasion did bring the Bush administration's charges to fruition. There are plenty of terrorists in Iraq now. As for the money paid to Palestinian suicide bombers I keep hearing that charge but I've never seen proof. Even if true the Saudis have been proven to have done the same. When do we invade Saudi Arabia?

This invasion began as a response to an imminent threat. It is not.

Then it became a war to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. It has not.

It has now become a war against the terrorists the very US invasion the Bush administration insisted on brought to Iraq.

All the while the nation of Iraq is suffering as is our nation. We are asked to sacrifice for reasons which change as needed just as the reasons the Bush administration gave for their invasion kept changing as needed.
Uh, BOBDN why would we want to wait for a imminent threat? I am collecting sources on several things too. This post will be edited.
We would want to wait for an imminent threat because to attack pre-emptively based on a supposed threat which, as in the present case in Iraq is false, would make us become that which we hate. We become the terrorists when we attack another nation based on false or inaccurate supposed threats.

If there is a legitimate imminent threat we are justified in defending ourselves. If we start to indescriminately attack nations based on supposed threats we become a threat to those nations and the world.

It's the difference between right and wrong. Attacking Iraq based on the false evidence and unfounded supposed threat makes us the bad guy. Get it?
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
0
0
Tabb is absolutely correct. We thought that maybe at some point in the future Iraq might attack us. Therefore, the 'imminent threat' arguement is a valid one. Right, Tabb?
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: Gaard
Tabb is absolutely correct. We thought that maybe at some point in the future Iraq might attack us. Therefore, the 'imminent threat' arguement is a valid one. Right, Tabb?
It is a very dangerous road to go down. I'm sure invaders throughout history have felt they had good reason to attack first. But you cannot throw the first punch and be right unless you know you're about to be attacked. And can you know such a thing?

Also there was NO connection between Iraq and 9/11 (although the Bush administration keeps putting the two in the same sentence) so how can we justify attacking Iraq as an imminent threat when they were not only NOT a threat but had nothing to do with the attack we saw as our justification for the "war on terror"?

Now that the Bush administration has rushed headlong into Iraq unnecessarily and has us mired in a years long war which will cost us hundreds of billions of dollars we are forced to finish the job there because the threat from not completing it is greater than any threat Iraq posed. All the while this huge error on the part of the Bush administration will remove our focus and resources from the real threat.

The Bush administration could hardly have done more to help the terrorists even if they intended to. This is tragic. This is sad.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Just a thought for everyone.

On May 1st Bush landed on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and made a speech in front of a giant banner which read,

"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

Tonight, four months later, he made a speech that made it perfectly clear the mission has only just begun.

This is a further example of the dishonesty of the Bush administration and use of propaganda to further their misguided agenda.

We were led to pre-emptively invade Iraq based on false claims, told of a victory which didn't exist and now are left with no option but to finish a job which, based on the Bush administration's statements in the months leading up to the invasion, we should never have started.

American lives and hundreds of billions of American dollars are the price we are now forced to pay for the Bush administration's lies. We are left with no other option. No way out. Because all the while we were being fed a list of false reasons the Bush administration didn't even bother to plan for the aftermath of their invasion.

We are screwed.

And this may only be the beginning. Just like the bombs at the UN HQ in Baghdad and the Shia shrine in Najaf the middle east could easily explode in our faces because of the Bush administration's irresponsible, dishonest rush to war in Iraq.
Are you a member of A.N.S.W.E.R.? Because you sure do spout alot of their rhetoric.

CkG
I've never heard of A.N.S.W.E.R. I think for myself. But thanks for the link.

Have you ever considered Americans are coming to the SAME conclusions about Bush INDEPENDENTLY BASED ON THE FACTS?
Yes - Yes, and we have.:D

...never heard of ANSWER
give me a break...

CkG
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
0
0
Bush blew it. Iraq was a blunder. These troops should be in Afghanistan smoking out Al-Qaeda, not in Iraq hunting Bathists.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Just a thought for everyone.

On May 1st Bush landed on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and made a speech in front of a giant banner which read,

"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

Tonight, four months later, he made a speech that made it perfectly clear the mission has only just begun.

This is a further example of the dishonesty of the Bush administration and use of propaganda to further their misguided agenda.

We were led to pre-emptively invade Iraq based on false claims, told of a victory which didn't exist and now are left with no option but to finish a job which, based on the Bush administration's statements in the months leading up to the invasion, we should never have started.

American lives and hundreds of billions of American dollars are the price we are now forced to pay for the Bush administration's lies. We are left with no other option. No way out. Because all the while we were being fed a list of false reasons the Bush administration didn't even bother to plan for the aftermath of their invasion.

We are screwed.

And this may only be the beginning. Just like the bombs at the UN HQ in Baghdad and the Shia shrine in Najaf the middle east could easily explode in our faces because of the Bush administration's irresponsible, dishonest rush to war in Iraq.
Are you a member of A.N.S.W.E.R.? Because you sure do spout alot of their rhetoric.

CkG
I've never heard of A.N.S.W.E.R. I think for myself. But thanks for the link.

Have you ever considered Americans are coming to the SAME conclusions about Bush INDEPENDENTLY BASED ON THE FACTS?
Yes - Yes, and we have.:D

...never heard of ANSWER
give me a break...

CkG
Are you calling me a liar?

If you have a problem coming to conclusions on your own that's your problem.

I heard Bush's speech. I thought about the past year and the statements the Bush administration made. I thought about the statements made TODAY by members of the Bush administration sent out to set up Bush's speech. I came to my conclusions.

I feel my statements about Bush's speech as well as the Bush administration's dangerous policies are supported not only by the web site YOU found but by the news analysis I heard afterward.

Again, I came to my own conclusions. I have no trouble developing independent critical judgement. Don't project your obvious inability to do the same on me. I find your suggestion to the contrary insulting. It is the type of cynical thought I've come to expect from the Bush administration and its supporters.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Just a thought for everyone.

On May 1st Bush landed on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and made a speech in front of a giant banner which read,

"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

Tonight, four months later, he made a speech that made it perfectly clear the mission has only just begun.

This is a further example of the dishonesty of the Bush administration and use of propaganda to further their misguided agenda.

We were led to pre-emptively invade Iraq based on false claims, told of a victory which didn't exist and now are left with no option but to finish a job which, based on the Bush administration's statements in the months leading up to the invasion, we should never have started.

American lives and hundreds of billions of American dollars are the price we are now forced to pay for the Bush administration's lies. We are left with no other option. No way out. Because all the while we were being fed a list of false reasons the Bush administration didn't even bother to plan for the aftermath of their invasion.

We are screwed.

And this may only be the beginning. Just like the bombs at the UN HQ in Baghdad and the Shia shrine in Najaf the middle east could easily explode in our faces because of the Bush administration's irresponsible, dishonest rush to war in Iraq.
Are you a member of A.N.S.W.E.R.? Because you sure do spout alot of their rhetoric.

CkG
I've never heard of A.N.S.W.E.R. I think for myself. But thanks for the link.

Have you ever considered Americans are coming to the SAME conclusions about Bush INDEPENDENTLY BASED ON THE FACTS?
Yes - Yes, and we have.:D

...never heard of ANSWER
give me a break...

CkG
Are you calling me a liar?

If you have a problem coming to conclusions on your own that's your problem.

I heard Bush's speech. I thought about the past year and the statements the Bush administration made. I thought about the statements made TODAY by members of the Bush administration sent out to set up Bush's speech. I came to my conclusions.

I feel my statements about Bush's speech as well as the Bush administration's dangerous policies are supported not only by the web site YOU found but by the news analysis I heard afterward.

Again, I came to my own conclusions. I have no trouble developing independent critical judgement. Don't project your obvious inability to do the same on me. I find your suggestion to the contrary insulting. It is the type of cynical thought I've come to expect from the Bush administration and its supporters.
Settle down - cripes :p

ANSWER has been talked about many times here on the forum and is a staple for a good chuckle when talking politics - I haven't talked politics with anyone who hasn't heard of ANSWER - no matter which way they leaned.

I don't have any "trouble developing independent critical judgment". <sniffle> I'm insulted at your accusation. </end sniffle> Hehe - yeah - I FOUND the ANSWER site...because I just knew they were going to post something as ridiculous as they did. You parroted what they said so I asked.

Your intense hatred of Bush and everything he does is quite apparent. I will again not waste more of my time with you. If you wish to have a conversation or debate on an ISSUE without going off on your "Bush Bashing" tangents - maybe I'll reconsider, but until then - I won't waste any of my time on you.

CkG

**note it isn't just this thread either;)
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Just a thought for everyone.

On May 1st Bush landed on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and made a speech in front of a giant banner which read,

"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

Tonight, four months later, he made a speech that made it perfectly clear the mission has only just begun.

This is a further example of the dishonesty of the Bush administration and use of propaganda to further their misguided agenda.

We were led to pre-emptively invade Iraq based on false claims, told of a victory which didn't exist and now are left with no option but to finish a job which, based on the Bush administration's statements in the months leading up to the invasion, we should never have started.

American lives and hundreds of billions of American dollars are the price we are now forced to pay for the Bush administration's lies. We are left with no other option. No way out. Because all the while we were being fed a list of false reasons the Bush administration didn't even bother to plan for the aftermath of their invasion.

We are screwed.

And this may only be the beginning. Just like the bombs at the UN HQ in Baghdad and the Shia shrine in Najaf the middle east could easily explode in our faces because of the Bush administration's irresponsible, dishonest rush to war in Iraq.
Are you a member of A.N.S.W.E.R.? Because you sure do spout alot of their rhetoric.

CkG
I've never heard of A.N.S.W.E.R. I think for myself. But thanks for the link.

Have you ever considered Americans are coming to the SAME conclusions about Bush INDEPENDENTLY BASED ON THE FACTS?
Yes - Yes, and we have.:D

...never heard of ANSWER
give me a break...

CkG
Are you calling me a liar?

If you have a problem coming to conclusions on your own that's your problem.

I heard Bush's speech. I thought about the past year and the statements the Bush administration made. I thought about the statements made TODAY by members of the Bush administration sent out to set up Bush's speech. I came to my conclusions.

I feel my statements about Bush's speech as well as the Bush administration's dangerous policies are supported not only by the web site YOU found but by the news analysis I heard afterward.

Again, I came to my own conclusions. I have no trouble developing independent critical judgement. Don't project your obvious inability to do the same on me. I find your suggestion to the contrary insulting. It is the type of cynical thought I've come to expect from the Bush administration and its supporters.
Settle down - cripes :p

ANSWER has been talked about many times here on the forum and is a staple for a good chuckle when talking politics - I haven't talked politics with anyone who hasn't heard of ANSWER - no matter which way they leaned.

I don't have any "trouble developing independent critical judgment". <sniffle> I'm insulted at your accusation. </end sniffle> Hehe - yeah - I FOUND the ANSWER site...because I just knew they were going to post something as ridiculous as they did. You parroted what they said so I asked.

Your intense hatred of Bush and everything he does is quite apparent. I will again not waste more of my time with you. If you wish to have a conversation or debate on an ISSUE without going off on your "Bush Bashing" tangents - maybe I'll reconsider, but until then - I won't waste any of my time on you.

CkG

**note it isn't just this thread either;)
My criticism of Bush and what you see as the ensuing hatred is based on what he is doing to my country.

His policies and lies have ruined our economy, our security, our alliances, our environment, our reputation and our harmony as a nation. IMO.

If you can't stand to hear the truth, CkG, then indeed, have no more to do with me.

 

cyberserf

Member
Sep 28, 2000
58
0
61
He must have taken well over six months to memorize that.
God forbid if he had to read it live. :D
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,187
3,879
126
I was driving the long time Treasurer of the local Republican's Womens Club to take her out for her birthday dinner and had it on the radio. She asked me why I was listening and told me effectively to change the channel because she wouldn't be listening to it if she were at home. :D I kinda got a feeling I didn't miss much.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
when I see him in one of those speeches I'm always under the impression that he has some kind of anal probe forced into his rectum
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,187
3,879
126
Originally posted by: freegeeks
when I see him in of those speeches I always have the impression that he has some kind of anal probe forced into his rectum
I think that's Cheney's hand making his lips move.

 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
My take on Bush's speech?

I just wasted 15 minutes watching Bush tell America what we already knew:

Iraq is going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars ($70bn + $4bn/mo + another $87bn he's asking Congress for now), we are going to have 130,000 + troops there for the forseeable future and we need the UN and our allies who told us not to invade Iraq in the first place to bail us out. NO evidence of terrorist ties in pre-invasion Iraq, just another specious statement placing Iraq and terror in the same sentence again. But an admission that the US invasion has made Iraq a nexus of terror. No mention of the WMD no one has found. This was basically just a plea for help from a Bush who now realizes how badly he and his administration have screwed this up. And NO mention of Osama bin Laden, dead or alive.

At least he didn't repeat "Bring it on."

What was the point of this excercise? Bush's advisors hoping he'll get a bump in the polls from appearing on TV? An attempt to buy more time?

Bush had nothing new to say. He could have told the millions of Americans who are out of work how spending hundreds of billions in Iraq will help them. Or how using all our resources in Iraq would make us more secure at home. Or why, out of all the excuses his administration's used to invade Iraq not one has been proven.

Instead we got a replay of Bush administration propaganda for which his administration is unable to provide ANY proof.

Just more Bush sloganeering.
Things that aren't "new" to you. We abosultely NEED the UN BOBDN? We haven't been pushed out or left, it believe we could win without the support of anymore troops it would just make it more difficult. Terrorism Ties? What about Anr-Islam(sp?) and the money donated to families of Palensteinian suicide bombers? The only thing that is stupid is that he wouldn't remotely talk about WMDs.
Yes, Tabb, we absolutely need the UN. Our troops in Iraq are supposed to cycle out next April. There is no one to replace them unless the UN and NATO allies help. We may be able to afford to pay for this entire episode ourselves but will wind up needing foreign aid ourselves by the time it's over.

As far as terrorist ties the use of this charge was the Bush administration's attempt to connect Iraq with Al Qaeda with 9/11 as another excuse to invade. Those ties have never been proven. There was reportedly one base found in the Kurdish north connected with Ansar al Islam. The invasion did bring the Bush administration's charges to fruition. There are plenty of terrorists in Iraq now. As for the money paid to Palestinian suicide bombers I keep hearing that charge but I've never seen proof. Even if true the Saudis have been proven to have done the same. When do we invade Saudi Arabia?

This invasion began as a response to an imminent threat. It is not.

Then it became a war to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. It has not.

It has now become a war against the terrorists the very US invasion the Bush administration insisted on brought to Iraq.

All the while the nation of Iraq is suffering as is our nation. We are asked to sacrifice for reasons which change as needed just as the reasons the Bush administration gave for their invasion kept changing as needed.
Uh, BOBDN why would we want to wait for a imminent threat? I am collecting sources on several things too. This post will be edited.
We would want to wait for an imminent threat because to attack pre-emptively based on a supposed threat which, as in the present case in Iraq is false, would make us become that which we hate. We become the terrorists when we attack another nation based on false or inaccurate supposed threats.

If there is a legitimate imminent threat we are justified in defending ourselves. If we start to indescriminately attack nations based on supposed threats we become a threat to those nations and the world.

It's the difference between right and wrong. Attacking Iraq based on the false evidence and unfounded supposed threat makes us the bad guy. Get it?
Where are the weapons we gave them in 80's BOBDN? What about all the bunkers we are finding with NBC Air Filteration Systems? Metal doors with rubber gaskets around them and showers the first second you enter? Dont you think thats werid?

 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,940
10
81
Originally posted by: Tabb
Where are the weapons we gave them in 80's BOBDN? What about all the bunkers we are finding with NBC Air Filteration Systems? Metal doors with rubber gaskets around them and showers the first second you enter? Dont you think thats werid?
All those relics signify is the fact that Iraq USED to have widely-known chem/bio resources. They are obviously (since no chem/bio resources have been found) just that -- relics of the past.

Nothin' weird or extraordinary there.

The only extraodinary S##T around here is the lengths you guys (and the Bush Regime) go for your witch hunts.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: BOBDN
My take on Bush's speech?

I just wasted 15 minutes watching Bush tell America what we already knew:

Iraq is going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars ($70bn + $4bn/mo + another $87bn he's asking Congress for now), we are going to have 130,000 + troops there for the forseeable future and we need the UN and our allies who told us not to invade Iraq in the first place to bail us out. NO evidence of terrorist ties in pre-invasion Iraq, just another specious statement placing Iraq and terror in the same sentence again. But an admission that the US invasion has made Iraq a nexus of terror. No mention of the WMD no one has found. This was basically just a plea for help from a Bush who now realizes how badly he and his administration have screwed this up. And NO mention of Osama bin Laden, dead or alive.

At least he didn't repeat "Bring it on."

What was the point of this excercise? Bush's advisors hoping he'll get a bump in the polls from appearing on TV? An attempt to buy more time?

Bush had nothing new to say. He could have told the millions of Americans who are out of work how spending hundreds of billions in Iraq will help them. Or how using all our resources in Iraq would make us more secure at home. Or why, out of all the excuses his administration's used to invade Iraq not one has been proven.

Instead we got a replay of Bush administration propaganda for which his administration is unable to provide ANY proof.

Just more Bush sloganeering.
Things that aren't "new" to you. We abosultely NEED the UN BOBDN? We haven't been pushed out or left, it believe we could win without the support of anymore troops it would just make it more difficult. Terrorism Ties? What about Anr-Islam(sp?) and the money donated to families of Palensteinian suicide bombers? The only thing that is stupid is that he wouldn't remotely talk about WMDs.
Yes, Tabb, we absolutely need the UN. Our troops in Iraq are supposed to cycle out next April. There is no one to replace them unless the UN and NATO allies help. We may be able to afford to pay for this entire episode ourselves but will wind up needing foreign aid ourselves by the time it's over.

As far as terrorist ties the use of this charge was the Bush administration's attempt to connect Iraq with Al Qaeda with 9/11 as another excuse to invade. Those ties have never been proven. There was reportedly one base found in the Kurdish north connected with Ansar al Islam. The invasion did bring the Bush administration's charges to fruition. There are plenty of terrorists in Iraq now. As for the money paid to Palestinian suicide bombers I keep hearing that charge but I've never seen proof. Even if true the Saudis have been proven to have done the same. When do we invade Saudi Arabia?

This invasion began as a response to an imminent threat. It is not.

Then it became a war to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. It has not.

It has now become a war against the terrorists the very US invasion the Bush administration insisted on brought to Iraq.

All the while the nation of Iraq is suffering as is our nation. We are asked to sacrifice for reasons which change as needed just as the reasons the Bush administration gave for their invasion kept changing as needed.
Uh, BOBDN why would we want to wait for a imminent threat? I am collecting sources on several things too. This post will be edited.
We would want to wait for an imminent threat because to attack pre-emptively based on a supposed threat which, as in the present case in Iraq is false, would make us become that which we hate. We become the terrorists when we attack another nation based on false or inaccurate supposed threats.

If there is a legitimate imminent threat we are justified in defending ourselves. If we start to indescriminately attack nations based on supposed threats we become a threat to those nations and the world.

It's the difference between right and wrong. Attacking Iraq based on the false evidence and unfounded supposed threat makes us the bad guy. Get it?
Where are the weapons we gave them in 80's BOBDN? What about all the bunkers we are finding with NBC Air Filteration Systems? Metal doors with rubber gaskets around them and showers the first second you enter? Dont you think thats werid?
well you said it yourself -- the 80's. We all know that he had WMD in the 80's and the beginning of the 90's. The 2003 Iraq war was started because of a so called present WMD threat.
the fact that there are bunkers build in the 80's is no prove that he had WMD today

DAMN IT, I WANT TO SEE THE WMD

I'm not interested in bunkers, fake chem labs, tiny RV or anything else that the Bush admin tries to feed the world as WMD. We all knew he had this kind of sh*t because we sold it to him. I want to see the smoking gun (ecg a fully functional WMD warhead)



edit: phillyTIM beat me to it

the YABA's are inventing a new story every 2 weeks
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
He must have taken well over six months to memorize that.
God forbid if he had to read it live.
We was reading a teleprompter. His posture, eye movements, transient pause before words like "cache", and general lack of emotional emphasis are all indicative of reading line by line text.

Where are the weapons we gave them in 80's BOBDN? What about all the bunkers we are finding with NBC Air Filteration Systems? Metal doors with rubber gaskets around them and showers the first second you enter? Dont you think thats werid?
Every Southern state has market houses that were used to sell slaves. What happened to the slaves? Why are the market houses still there if the slaves are gone? I believe there's at least one shuttered particle accelerator in the US, several hundred ICBM silos that are no longer used, we dig up chemical/biological stores on a regular basis, and there's a multi-billion dollar project for nuke waste at Yucca mountain that may never be used. Your evidence is sufficient for extensive inspections but not an invasion . . . and certainly not justification after the fact . . . considering none of your suppositions have been proven despite full access to the alleged sites.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,707
5
0
Originally posted by: Tabb
What about all the bunkers we are finding with NBC Air Filteration Systems? Metal doors with rubber gaskets around them and showers the first second you enter? Dont you think thats werid?

Since when is it "weird" to defend yourself? America probably has the largest cache of NBC weapons on the globe, so why wouldn't Iraq want to take precausions to defend against it the best it can? Do you also find it weird Bush wants to make an anti-ballistic missile shield to protect against nukes? Does that mean he wants to nuke every other country? I just can't understand why people point at defensive measures Iraq has against WMD and claim it's evidence that they plan on using WMD! It's such a preposterous conclusion! We all remember when they found Iraqi chemical weapons suits during our invasion and of course there were people squeling that Iraq is planning to use chemical weapons- yet they ignored our troops which have their own chemical suits as well. Why the double standard?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY