Bush Haters - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-02-2004, 11:12 AM   #61
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:19 AM
I understand that Iraq has holy places, however, the issue/is was we were protecting Saudi Arabia. We are moving in a direction that will eventually, God willing, lead us to a place where we no longer do that.

Which is better, sitting in Saudi Arabia and getting attacked, or doing something about the problem and getting attacked.

I chose the latter.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 11:23 AM   #62
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Dread, I remember when you first mentioned the troops in Saudi Arabia issue, I wondered why in hell's name the Administration didn't use that issue. They should have.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 11:34 AM   #63
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Point #2 most definitely is. There are more terrorists going into Iraq which = safer America. It has created a battlefield.
And there aren't enough terrorists to attack two places simultaneously?

Despite that, what really bothers me about this argument is the idea that it's acceptable to turn an entire nation into a 'battlefield' in order to make the United States safer. Did anyone ask the Iraqi people if they minded their country being flooded with suicide bombers and masked gunmen, or did we just decide that was acceptable if it meant Americans could feel safer?
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 11:48 AM   #64
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
RockNRollDawgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 3,307
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
I understand that Iraq has holy places, however, the issue/is was we were protecting Saudi Arabia. We are moving in a direction that will eventually, God willing, lead us to a place where we no longer do that.

Which is better, sitting in Saudi Arabia and getting attacked, or doing something about the problem and getting attacked.

I chose the latter.
Iraq has some of holiest places in the region.
Bin Laden, if he's still alive, is probably laughing his butt off as to how stupid we Americans are to attack a country like Iraq.
The hatred of anything American was
already growing in the Middle Eat.
The US attacking Iraq has created
even more hatred in the region directed
at us. Bush's war has opened up a "Pandora's Box."
Afghanistan. We're still there. but you
never hear about it on the news anymore.
If Bush had set out to do what he
"promised" to do and get Bin Laden
in Afghaniistan, we wouldn't be in the
mess. The countries in the region
were pretty much on our side, when
we attacked there.
But, our "wonderful" president decides to attack Iraq instead
I can just hear Bin Laden now,
"Thank you Allah, Bush has fallen into
my trap."
__________________
RockNRollDawgie is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 11:55 AM   #65
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 07:19 AM
RockNRollDawgie

you're right, nothing helped Mr. Bin Laden more than the invasion of Iraq.
Now he has the chance to turn Iraq into a muslimic country - a man who's organisation was to weak to remove Saddam, thank Allah Mr. Bush did it for him

But besides that i'm pretty sure Bin Laden will be captured in the last days/weeks of the election campaign
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 12:29 PM   #66
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 10:19 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees


And there aren't enough terrorists to attack two places simultaneously?

Despite that, what really bothers me about this argument is the idea that it's acceptable to turn an entire nation into a 'battlefield' in order to make the United States safer. Did anyone ask the Iraqi people if they minded their country being flooded with suicide bombers and masked gunmen, or did we just decide that was acceptable if it meant Americans could feel safer?


And the worst part is that it's not even working. On the one side we have President Bush, "America is safer," and on the other the Department of Homeland Security, "Al-Qaeda is preparing to attack!" Is America really safer?
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 12:34 PM   #67
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 10:19 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
But besides that i'm pretty sure Bin Laden will be captured in the last days/weeks of the election campaign
Klaus, that is just a crazy conspiracy theory! After all, I'm sure if you asked any Republican in here why Clinton bombed that aspirin factory in Sudan they will tell you it was definitely NOT because he was trying to draw attention away from the Monica Lewinsky case. We all know that politicians wouldn't dare do something like that for political gain.
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 12:43 PM   #68
Blue Crack Supplier
 
kellyahern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8 years and I still can't think of anything witty to put here
Posts: 34,698
Local Time: 02:19 AM
I just wish he would learn to pronounce the word "nuclear" correctly.
__________________
kellyahern is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 12:48 PM   #69
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 07:19 AM
ThatGuy
Well i think Clinton bombed that factory do draw the attention away from Miss Lewinsky. He didn't bomb "any place", there was some inteligence information.But he might have ignored them otherwise.

I don't know how trustworthy there are rumors on tv here because of a pakistani military who claimed that pakistan will send "high value targets" of al-quada on "important dates" (like the Democrats convention, Torture scandals, end of the election campaign)
And why not? The government knows about the short time effects of these news, they have prisons around the world where the international red cross has no access to... why not wait with success stories until it's perfect for the next election?
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 12:55 PM   #70
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 10:19 PM
I agree with you, Klaus. I guess I'm just feeling some residual frustration with the responses to my post about the high value target that was paraded out just hours before Kerry was to give his speech at the Democratic National convention.
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 01:30 PM   #71
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ThatGuy


And the worst part is that it's not even working. On the one side we have President Bush, "America is safer," and on the other the Department of Homeland Security, "Al-Qaeda is preparing to attack!" Is America really safer?
Exactly. And excellent point, Fizz . The bottom line is, it just seems we're screwed either way-we'd either alienate Iraq by letting all the terrorists float there, therefore making them angrier with us and more likely to have some of the people be recruited by the terrorists, or we'd have them come here and attack us. We're just caught in a world of a mess-this whole thing just is not working.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 02:18 PM   #72
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
RockNRollDawgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 3,307
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by kellyahern
I just wish he would learn to pronounce the word "nuclear" correctly.
I also wish he could complete one sentence without tripping on his tongue.
The dude can't even read a teleprompter
without stumbling on his words. LOL!
__________________
RockNRollDawgie is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 02:33 PM   #73
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
RockNRollDawgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 3,307
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
RockNRollDawgie

you're right, nothing helped Mr. Bin Laden more than the invasion of Iraq.
Now he has the chance to turn Iraq into a muslimic country - a man who's organisation was to weak to remove Saddam, thank Allah Mr. Bush did it for him

But besides that i'm pretty sure Bin Laden will be captured in the last days/weeks of the election campaign
I wouldn't be surpriised at all if Bush did something like that. Bin Laden
pops out, right before the November
election.
Then you have our beloved fearless leader on TV saying, " I kept my promise folks. We captured him!"
__________________
RockNRollDawgie is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 08:15 PM   #74
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 07:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by RockNRollDawgie


I wouldn't be surpriised at all if Bush did something like that. Bin Laden
pops out, right before the November
election.
Then you have our beloved fearless leader on TV saying, " I kept my promise folks. We captured him!"
A-Wanderer, you reading this? Plenty of people here (Australia) believe this is why Howard dropped our election from an August certainty to late-October, a week before the US. Conspiracies are great fun.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 08:36 PM   #75
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 07:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Point #2 most definitely is. There are more terrorists going into Iraq which = safer America. It has created a battlefield.

Iraq is not the holy land, Saudi Arabia is.

Its nice to have differing opinions.
My point is, the people in Iraq (the terrorists) wouldn't even be the same people attacking the US. You have a look at the attacks in Iraq and they are just bombings, car bombings etc. This doesn't take much skill or planning or even intelligence. The support Al Queda is giving them may be just moral, financial or may include 'foot soldiers' but it certainly wouldn't be distracting them away from the main goal, which for them would most definitely be attacks within the US or other major western capitols or targets. Those attacks require a different type of terrorist, a lot of planning, a lot of money etc. The hard truth is that if there is another major attack on the US, the people who commit it are probably already in the country, are very intelligent, are a part of a plan that has taken some time and money to develop, while those involved in attacks within Iraq are probably young, uneducated and recruited daily from within the region who need no greater ability than to pack a car with explosives and drive it into a wall.

And on Saudi Arabia and Iraq. The truth is it doesn't matter whether it's a holy land or whatever. The point is there are over 100,000 US troops there. They will only go when a US supported, financed and ok'd government is in place, and even then I'd say there'll be US bases in Iraq for as long as we live. It's the US/Western power/presense in the Middle East that's the problem. Attacking Iraq IS inflaming it, regardless of what is done in Saudi Arabia. The "desecration of the Holy Lands" are just a nice convenient way to wrap it all up in religion and sell it.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com