this is an excellent video…
brought to you by the democRATS themselves…
defeat and retreat is NOT an option…
NO chairman dean… we will win this war…
NO comrade pelosi… it is not time to cut and run…
NO comrade kerry… our troops are NOT terrorists…
-Imp
You are funny imp. I kept waiting for an actual
argument and got GOP talking points.
Iraq is simply a GOP reason to fill their coffers
with taxpayers money. It goes like this.
And proof will come with the recent cunningham
resignation and the magical tour buddy of his named
Wilkes who is the defense contractor who bilked
the American taxpayer for millions and then turn around
and donated those millions back to the GOP.
Here is how that works.
wilkes creates a bogus company called XYZ,
XYZ is a phony company with an address, but
no actual business. Wilkes goes to GOP brass,
say cunningham or tom delay, get a multimillion
dollar bid for some phony project. The money arrives
at the false address and then wilkes takes out his cut
and takes the rest and donates it back to cunningham and
delay and bush and Kathleen harris, jeb bush, all the oldies
but goodies in the GOP party. It is thought Wilkes has upward of
20 false business that donates money back to the GOP this way.
Not huge amounts so as not to attract too much notice, but
if wilkes does this with say 20 companies at say 5,000 or 10,000
bucks a pop it adds up and let us assume wilkes is not the only
crook on the GOP payroll, so we are talking about multimillion
dollar, multi person kickback scheme to defraud the American
taxpayer. this war in Iraq is a front to defraud the American
taxpayer via illegal schemes like this. It is guessed that over
10% of all the money going into Iraq (and at this point that is
over 200 billion dollars) is going into fraudulent ventures such
as this. Remember that 8.8 billions dollars simply
disappeared in Iraq and no one knows where it went,
it simply vanished. 8.8 billion of your money
went into … well somebody’s pocket.
Way back when during WW 2, harry Truman said
anybody who stole money from the U.S. government during
wartime was committing treason. Multiple acts of treason
are being committed every single day with your money.
Keep reading the newspaper about cunningham.
that is where one of the most corrupt actions going on
today will get headlines.
Kropotkin
Ah hem…
BUSH (on Today Show, 08/30/04): “I don’t think you can win [the war on terror].â€
What were you saying about retreat and defeat, Impenitent?
I’m sure you would be fine with the Democrats putting Bush’s words to the back-drop of a white flag, as well?
No President Bush…We will win this war!
Too bad he didn’t say that:
“You’ve got to begin to transfer authority to the Iraqis. And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not…”
War IS Peace!
Ignorance IS Strength!
Slavery IS Freedom!
Keep your eye on the little birdie!
what’s really interesting, is that this war is still being driven by the right wing agenda that Iraq was involved in 9-11.
Do people actually believe that? We could’ve had Osama three times over if he was the administrations actual target. It should be obvious to anyone that it wasn’t.
What was funny, was when bush so used to saying “September the 11th” and equating it to america’s new pearl harbor to start the war in Iraq (if you want I’ll link the memo), that when speaking December 7th about Pearl harbor he said “December the 11th”.
deleted
deleted
We probably could have won Nam if not held back at the 38th Parallel, and UN and then there was China and its billions of brainwashed troops. Now, take a look at the country, a totalitarian nightmare. I have had students who supported Ho, and fled the land to the U.S. They all claim we were right and wish we had driven out the communist.
We do have objectives, and the first has been met, bye bye Saddam. The man is a menace and I will not cry when he dies. The second objective is creating a democracy in a very strategic region, take a good look at a map. Right in the middle and next door to Syria, Iran, etc. Granted, I am not happy regarding Sharia Law, and many Iraqi women are not either, but eventually this may be changed, as our Constitution is ammended and some amendments are revoked. Our troops are amazed when they return home and hear that the Iraqis hate us, many of the troops on the ground in Iraq do not see this, and claim we are winning. The strategy has changed, and once the insurgents are driven from an area, the Iraqi toops stay put to maintain order and create cordial relations with the civilians. Try reading both sides of the equation, and not only the liberal and Arab media. I have read more lies in these sources than I can recount, especially in the Arab media.
Didn’t they? They are trying to erradicate the insurgents, and have caused Syria a great deal of concern as U.S. and Iraqi troops are sitting on their border. Beside, if we pull-out, a blood bath will ensue.
Yes, I know George W. probably knew that Saddam was not a major direct threat to the U.S., but have recently read many of the the remarks made by Clinton, Kerry, etc., regarding how Saddam was a major threat. How odd, that they are all changing their tune and jumping on the political bandwagon of Bush bashing.
I hope we win this, as if we do it will work to the West’s favor.
Also, I keep thinking regarding how many terrorists have attacked countries that do not support this conflict. They claim they will use our laws to defeat us; I take them at their word.
Yes, this is a tough war, but much of the Muslim world is turning against the insurgents as they are targeting Muslims and blowing Muslim children to bits with their bombs. Look at the huge demonstration in Jordan after the bombings there. Slowly, the people are turning against them.
… of large oil reserves. But it is just a coincidence.
“Retreat is not an option”. Mmmm, of course it isn’t - thanks for telling us.
Funny, If Saddam was a a drug dealer, he would be out right now. What happens when there is probable cause, but no drugs are found? How was there evidence to support an invasion, but none was found? Did they flush the evidence? What would happen, to a dealer, if the cops roll in and smoke half his family while serving a warrant, only to find no drugs? there is so many different variables, that bring different measures, for the same actions, it really confuses me. The Law as we know it, is in my opinion, obsolete. There is nobody to implement it fairly, and it must be broken by someone to punish someone. It is self-destructive. Instilling fear, to reduce fear? Can this ever be successful?
I am sure studies have been done, we know it is doomed to failure. Yet we continue doing it anyway… Is it because we don’t know any other way? Hey WE thought up the idea for laws right? God didn’t really give us the idea right? So why with all our incredible technology, can’t we come up with something that works? Shouldn’t that be the MAIN goal here? Or is a smaller ipod more important? I guess people are not suffering enough yet.
David,
There’s a lot more money to be made by keeping the legal system in the paradoxical loop you identified than in fixing it. It also means that the demanded standard of government is in practise quite low…
It would have been cheaper in blood and gold to lift the sanction and purchase the oil. I still find this an invalid claim.
All politicians and leaders are corrupt, at least I do not know of an honest one, but the U.S. is not worse than most of the world’s leaders and is often better.
Why not slam China, North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, Mexico, and the many other corrupt governments? Why is it always the U.S., probably because we are the big gorilla with probably the lowest unemployment rate in the world. Yes, Bush, Cheney, Rummy are very rich and very corrupt, but what leader is not corrupt? Any ideas?
aspacia
Jesus Imp, if you’re going to back an opinion, don’t use propaganda.
Oh, Peter, listen to both sides, it is not as bad as your think. There is much good going on and we just simply do not hear about it because many hate Bush. Do not misunderstand, I am a major cynic, but am wise enough to read what our troops and many Iraqis say regarding the situation.
Do you really think so many would have voted if they did not feel they did not have a voice. Now just think about that, they are risking their lives to vote, and how many U.S. CITIZENS vote?
Having been part of the anti-war movement in the UK (I was only of the many who appeared in London in the largest public protest in British history) and I spent ages explaining to idiots that the war wasn’t ‘just about the oil’. I must have heard that claim a thousands times, never with any explanation other than ‘The Americans will install a puppet government and bleed the country dry’. Well I haven’t seen a puppet government yet, apart from the very first administration which quickly gave way to the interim government that ran the country until the recent election. So that one just seems like a nonsense…
There are reasons why the war happened that we’ll probably never know, in particular the reasons why Blair thought it wise to take Britain into it, but I don’t think banging on about the price of oil is an intelligent or accurate approach…
Thanks SMIATD, this sentiment is appreciated in the U.S. We probably ended up in Iraq because Saddam tried to have Bush Sr. assassinated. Publically the Saudis were quiet and periodically denounce the war, but privately they told King George “Go for it.” Saddam is very much hated in the Middle-East, especially in Kuwait. He is now used for political anti U.S., Israel and Western sentiment by the rabid religious fanatics.
not too sure about that, mate
iraq doesn’t have the most proven oil reserves, but it does have the most possible oil reserves (some 20% of the total if i remember correctly)
looking at how badly the americans hang on to their precious oil and looking at how they are consuming it… having a big economic power coming up in the east, with an exploding consumption of energy (mostly from oil)
nowadays as big as the UK, in some decades as big as germany and some decades later, it will probably be catching up with the US
so… someone else is coming for the oil… while europe slowly switches to other sources (mainly gas), china is becoming a major competitor for the US, which will probably drive the oil prizes up
now, considering the americans are consuming at incredible rates, spending more than they earn… both the people and the government…
what if the oil prizes go up and life becomes expensive in the US? people will stop buying and then what? the US economy collapses? i don’t think many people like this prospect…
just some ideas
Willem,
I don’t deny anything that you’ve said, control of oil reserves is a possible (any may even be a partial) motive. As I said before the totality of motives for that war will probably never be clear but making out that it is all an oil issue is precisely the sort of headless popular criticism that renders protest essentially pointless. A lot of ignorant people who haven’t really thought things through unite by chance upon a good idea (that war should be a last resort and this doesn’t appear to be a ‘last resort’ situation) and descend upon London. It’s not really political activism, is it?
Yes, you are on target. Also, National Geographic ran a piece discussing how the world is running out of oil.
We need to develop an alternative energy source, but the oil industry, especially the Dutch owned Shell, have a very powerful lobby and many politicians in their pockets.
Hydrogen, solar and wind are being tossed around, and are used in certain areas. What really ticks me off, is the fact that suggested wind farms off the Eastern coast are being blocked by the liberals, Teddy Kennedy in particular, as these farms will spoil the view, albeit the argue that these farms are not environmentally friendly. Hypocrites.
Aspacia,
Well, sooner or later you have to make a choice, don’t you? Either you go for wind (and other alternative energy sources) and ruin a few views by building wind farms or you run out of energy when the oil drips dry.
This came up in the British press recently because apparently we’ve got the most wind in the whole of Europe here and are therefore best positioned to develop the technology and do trials, but the Green movements are divided (between those whose concern is energy and those whose concern is aesthetically ideal landscapes) and little progress is being made. I say forget the landscape, we can create beauty artificially (cinema and so on) if there’s a shortage, energy is energy. There’s no such thing as artificial energy, if you see what I mean…