Why Palin can't win in 2012
- Thread starter bradlyallen2
- Start date
bradlyallen2
Well-Known Member
Bush is a feeb. The terrorists weren't in IRAQ but they were around, when we went to Iraq they sought us out per the stupid Jihad coda. Rather than them coming to us via suicide airline hijackings Iraq has provided a great theatre of operations where we can mercilessly destroy them and where some collateral death to civillians is acceptable. I think Obama is correct in that the front has now moved back to Afghanistan as that is more favorable (terrain, Pakistan next door) to Jihadists.
shimmer
Well-Known Member
Or....their children were mutilated, their friends Mothers were vapourised, and having nothing left to live for decided to have a pop at the invaders. Terrorists are made my friend.
Jonus
Well-Known Member
There is no doubt there were different sections of Iraq that wanted Hussein gone. Of those groups an even smaller grouping of people were open to the US doing the dirty work. Of that smaller grouping were people prepared to feed bullshit to the US to fill in the 'why we need to invade' card the Bush Administration needed to sell the idea to the USA.
On the US side were also people keen on ousting Saddam for ideological and personal reasons. Some wanted his oil and some others just wanted a war to boost their business. Collectively these two main factions, in Iraq and the US were going nowhere fast until the greatest mistake in the history of the US was not just voted in as president, but voted in twice.
As soon as idiot boy walked into the whitehouse groups on both sides of the equation began working to bring the US army to dethrone Hussein. Firstly the bullshit artists in Iraq began feeding falsified information to the intelligence networks, documents forged, false witnesses, whatever it took to give idiotboy and his team the necessary goods to manufacture consent to invade.
9/11 came along and was actually a hinderance and a distraction at first. Without directly lying to the world now, there was no way they were going to be able to invade Iraq and take its assets and knock off Hussein when every bit of evidence was pointing to Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Out of all those countries, Afghanistan was the only one not allied to the US, and allegedly where the Big O was hiding.
So that job was left to Rumsfeld and Chenney to spin the yarn that there was a link between Al Qaeda and its enemy, the Iraqi Government. It worked and they invaded. While those that wanted Hussein wiped off the planet were initially passively supportive of the US invasion, most of them were not supportive of what happened after that.
Most of the Iraqi army were not loyal to Hussein, but were treated as terrorists, and lead to the biggest mistake of the war, the disbanding of the Iraqi army, and that lead to the second phase of the war.
The rest is history.
The key issues are:
- That without such a fool as a president these groups would have never been able to pull that Iraq stunt off.
- This is not the first time the US has wrongfully invaded a country.
- There were obviously no WMDs in Iraq, that is something Hussein was telling the truth about, but what he was hiding, and people in the oil industry were well aware of, was that there was about 4 times more oil in the ground under Iraq, than the Iraqi Government had ever admitted existed. Access to that oil is now in the hands of the US, the new regime and their oil contractors.
- When you go looking for reasons to invade, there are always scumbags out there that are willing to manufacture them for you.
On the US side were also people keen on ousting Saddam for ideological and personal reasons. Some wanted his oil and some others just wanted a war to boost their business. Collectively these two main factions, in Iraq and the US were going nowhere fast until the greatest mistake in the history of the US was not just voted in as president, but voted in twice.
As soon as idiot boy walked into the whitehouse groups on both sides of the equation began working to bring the US army to dethrone Hussein. Firstly the bullshit artists in Iraq began feeding falsified information to the intelligence networks, documents forged, false witnesses, whatever it took to give idiotboy and his team the necessary goods to manufacture consent to invade.
9/11 came along and was actually a hinderance and a distraction at first. Without directly lying to the world now, there was no way they were going to be able to invade Iraq and take its assets and knock off Hussein when every bit of evidence was pointing to Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Out of all those countries, Afghanistan was the only one not allied to the US, and allegedly where the Big O was hiding.
So that job was left to Rumsfeld and Chenney to spin the yarn that there was a link between Al Qaeda and its enemy, the Iraqi Government. It worked and they invaded. While those that wanted Hussein wiped off the planet were initially passively supportive of the US invasion, most of them were not supportive of what happened after that.
Most of the Iraqi army were not loyal to Hussein, but were treated as terrorists, and lead to the biggest mistake of the war, the disbanding of the Iraqi army, and that lead to the second phase of the war.
The rest is history.
The key issues are:
- That without such a fool as a president these groups would have never been able to pull that Iraq stunt off.
- This is not the first time the US has wrongfully invaded a country.
- There were obviously no WMDs in Iraq, that is something Hussein was telling the truth about, but what he was hiding, and people in the oil industry were well aware of, was that there was about 4 times more oil in the ground under Iraq, than the Iraqi Government had ever admitted existed. Access to that oil is now in the hands of the US, the new regime and their oil contractors.
- When you go looking for reasons to invade, there are always scumbags out there that are willing to manufacture them for you.
medicineman
New Member
Bush followers remind me of abused wives; they get the shit kicked out of them and are lied to constantly yet they still love their man.
Great analogy! They must be Masochists.
Great analogy! They must be Masochists.
medicineman
New Member
Great post: Pretty much sums it up I'd say.
medicineman
New Member
I agree, But more likely is that the right wing zealots on the site (you know who they are) never admit mistakes. Their pride, coupled with their utmost ignorance will not allow them to ever admit they were wrong. Hell, some are still trying to defend Bush for christs sake. Some of the real hard core Bushies have left the site, I guess shame finally reached the core.Doesnt look like anyone wants to answer the question (or maybe just too baked to be bothered). I wonder if it is because deep down we all know that if those were real choices we would have a Bubbles/Botwin presidency, even though theyre not real.
Jonus
Well-Known Member
Thats the interesting thing about weed. It is used by people from all sides of the political spectrum, from communitarianism to individualism, leftism, rightism and centrism.
Yep Bush was a sad mistake and a scar on the history of the US presidency, but I kinda enjoy debating and toying with the pro bushites though. I hope we don't scare them away.
The rightists are in a bit of limbo at the moment though, reforming their ranks after taking a hit from the just left of center centrist liberals. But they will be back, once they get a new team leader and a fresh bit of zeal.
Lets hope the debate blazes on
Yep Bush was a sad mistake and a scar on the history of the US presidency, but I kinda enjoy debating and toying with the pro bushites though. I hope we don't scare them away.
The rightists are in a bit of limbo at the moment though, reforming their ranks after taking a hit from the just left of center centrist liberals. But they will be back, once they get a new team leader and a fresh bit of zeal.
Lets hope the debate blazes on
bradlyallen2
Well-Known Member
You statements are the same basis that keeps marijuana illegal today. These people have to much pride to allow for admission (even to themselves) that the weed prohibition is absurd. And because it mostly only affects people with little to no geopolitical influence no one cares to take this issue up.
medicineman
New Member
True true true, But here's another reason I believe. Older people (People in charge of government) that have never tried weed, or tried it and got paranoid, still believe all kinds of evil things about weed, IE "Reefer madness". Myself, I smoked daily for 25+ years, quit about 20 years ago and had a pretty expensive coke habit. Finally I quit everything, even smoking and drinking. Last year I decided to give pot another try since I'm retired and don't have any drug testing. Made me paranoid as hell, nothing close to the euphoria I once enjoyed with weed. So what I'm saying is that most of the people that would be approving weed laws, probably have had similar experiences, or been told by someone that had a paranoid experience. In my case, I believe the Coke altered my perception of pot, it never was the same after I got into the coke.