Hey Everybody! IF YOU ARE INTELLIGENT, YOU'D VOTE FOR KERRY, AND HERE'S WHY.
The Iraq war was wrong for many reasons:
1) When Bush first started talks of war on Iraq, he said that war is necessary because Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and has ties with al-qaeda/9-11. When the UN weapons inspectors went into Iraq in 2002, Bush was confident that they'd find weapons, thats why he didnt have to worry about what to do if they didnt find weapons, cuz he was going to war no matter what. However, the inspectors found NO weapons. Yet still bush insisted that Iraq has weapons and went to war anyway. Meanwhile, there was no evidence of a connection between Iraq and Al-qaeda, that's why bush had to make an excuse for the war...and then came the 3rd reason: he said Saddam was a bad leader. Yes, we all agree with that, however this was just an excuse because Bush couldnt find any evidence of weapons or ties with al-qaeda.
Ok, so Saddam Hussein was a bad leader. But there are other countries that the leaders are bad AND have ties to alqaeda AND have weapons of mass destruction.
1) IRAN, for example, let the 9/11 hijackers pass through their country without stopping them
2) SAUDI ARABIA funded 9/11, most of the hijackers were Saudi.
3) North Korea. It has about 8 nuclear weapons. The leader of N.K., Kim, even admitted this. Each of these nukes can destroy New York City, and a 40 mile radius around it. Also, these nukes CAN reach west coast of the U.S. Also, even if Saddam had weapons, there would be no way they could reach the U.S.
So let's review:
1) There is no evidence found that Iraq had WMD's, says a very recent CIA report.
2) Also, the Iraqi weapons facilities are old and out of use!!! This also came from the recent CIA report.
3) The 9/11 commission concluded that Iraq had NO connection with 9/11.
4) Meanwhile, North Korea has weapons, they aren't afraid to use them, and those weapons CAN reach the U.S.
5) Also, Iran and Saudi Arabia HAVE ties with alqaeda.
Also, i'd like to add this:
Osama Bin Laden is in the mountain regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. U.S. troops are searching for him there. However, they are only on the Afghan side of the border. Now wouldn't it help if we could search on the Pakistani side??, where there are many villages who support bin Laden, so theres a very good chance that he can be hiding there. So why don't we go onto the Pakistani side? Because Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff won't let the U.S. enter. First of all, the region where bin Laden could be hiding is not even under Musharaff's control, because of all the Radical Islamists that control it. So now the question is, why won't bush go into this region of Pakistan by using force?, if it's completely okay with him to go into Iraq, in which there was no evidence at all of bin-Laden/ties with al-qaeda, then why can't he go into a region of Pakistan, not controlled by it's President, AND in which there is a good chance of bin Laden being in??????????????
Spread this information to everyone, thanks.
VOTE KERRY/EDWARDS 2004
The Iraq war was wrong for many reasons:
1) When Bush first started talks of war on Iraq, he said that war is necessary because Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and has ties with al-qaeda/9-11. When the UN weapons inspectors went into Iraq in 2002, Bush was confident that they'd find weapons, thats why he didnt have to worry about what to do if they didnt find weapons, cuz he was going to war no matter what. However, the inspectors found NO weapons. Yet still bush insisted that Iraq has weapons and went to war anyway. Meanwhile, there was no evidence of a connection between Iraq and Al-qaeda, that's why bush had to make an excuse for the war...and then came the 3rd reason: he said Saddam was a bad leader. Yes, we all agree with that, however this was just an excuse because Bush couldnt find any evidence of weapons or ties with al-qaeda.
Ok, so Saddam Hussein was a bad leader. But there are other countries that the leaders are bad AND have ties to alqaeda AND have weapons of mass destruction.
1) IRAN, for example, let the 9/11 hijackers pass through their country without stopping them
2) SAUDI ARABIA funded 9/11, most of the hijackers were Saudi.
3) North Korea. It has about 8 nuclear weapons. The leader of N.K., Kim, even admitted this. Each of these nukes can destroy New York City, and a 40 mile radius around it. Also, these nukes CAN reach west coast of the U.S. Also, even if Saddam had weapons, there would be no way they could reach the U.S.
So let's review:
1) There is no evidence found that Iraq had WMD's, says a very recent CIA report.
2) Also, the Iraqi weapons facilities are old and out of use!!! This also came from the recent CIA report.
3) The 9/11 commission concluded that Iraq had NO connection with 9/11.
4) Meanwhile, North Korea has weapons, they aren't afraid to use them, and those weapons CAN reach the U.S.
5) Also, Iran and Saudi Arabia HAVE ties with alqaeda.
Also, i'd like to add this:
Osama Bin Laden is in the mountain regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. U.S. troops are searching for him there. However, they are only on the Afghan side of the border. Now wouldn't it help if we could search on the Pakistani side??, where there are many villages who support bin Laden, so theres a very good chance that he can be hiding there. So why don't we go onto the Pakistani side? Because Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff won't let the U.S. enter. First of all, the region where bin Laden could be hiding is not even under Musharaff's control, because of all the Radical Islamists that control it. So now the question is, why won't bush go into this region of Pakistan by using force?, if it's completely okay with him to go into Iraq, in which there was no evidence at all of bin-Laden/ties with al-qaeda, then why can't he go into a region of Pakistan, not controlled by it's President, AND in which there is a good chance of bin Laden being in??????????????
Spread this information to everyone, thanks.
VOTE KERRY/EDWARDS 2004
I broke a promise to myself. Peace
