"Gear" up now!, they don't like us!!

[Rednesz]

I agree with liftsiron. Frachal and freakmonster have presented some very strong points.
so what does are gov't due now? Pull out of Iraq?
I think not.. We are to for in this to pull out now. some type of military altercation is inevitable at this point.

 

[FreakMonster]

I agree with liftsiron. Frachal and freakmonster have presented some very strong points.
so what does are gov't due now? Pull out of Iraq?
I think not.. We are to for in this to pull out now. some type of military altercation is inevitable at this point.

We won't be pulling out. This war has been in the planning for many months. Iraq is just our first stop in the path to a global empire. The question is if this is good or bad for us?

Also Bush doesn't have to explain shit to us why we are invading Iraq. Have you read Bush at War by Bob Woodard When he asked the president whether he ever felt that he needed to explain anything as he planned a possible attack on Iraq, Bush replied, “Of course not. . . . I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I don’t need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.”
What remains of the traditional conception of limited, constitutional government with separation of powers and Congressional responsibility for declarations of war when the president of the United States believes that he owes no one any explanation for what he says or does when it comes to military conflict?

 

[Frackal]

Freak,

Very interesting, I have read a good portion of Bush at War....during reading it I began to really wonder about the book...it was written more like a storybook than an actual recount of facts....so I did some digging....

What I found was VERY interesting.... before Bob Woodward was a lowly reporter who 'lucked out' with the watergate scoop, he was a HIGH level naval intelligence officer, who briefed top level officials and brushed shoulders with the likes of Henry Kissinger...

I'll try to find the article for you... my guess is that woodward is NOT simply a reporter, but a paid asset....

 

[slobberknocker]

Also Bush doesn't have to explain shit to us why we are invading Iraq. Have you read Bush at War by Bob Woodard When he asked the president whether he ever felt that he needed to explain anything as he planned a possible attack on Iraq, Bush replied, “Of course not. . . . I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I don’t need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.”

That really scares me. Is it too late to recount the votes again?

 

[sergio]

That's funny!!! Every time someone like you is losing a debate you resort to their anti-US sentiment. I'm just telling it like it is. The US is obviously looking to become the world superpower for a long time by increasing it's military power.
Have you heard of the National Security Strategy? It's a document in which each administration outlines its approach to defending the country. It envisions the creation and enforcement of what they call a worldwide "Pax Americana," or American peace. To address the terrorism threat, the president's report lays out a newly aggressive military and foreign policy, embracing pre-emptive attack against perceived enemies. It speaks in blunt terms of what it calls "American internationalism," of ignoring international opinion if that suits U.S. interests. "The best defense is a good offense," the document asserts. So basically this is good for both of us. I'm not complaining here, I'm just telling you that all this may benefit us in the future. So I really don't see where your anti-US sentiment comments are coming from. And we are definitely not stopping with Iraq. Syria, Yemen, Iran, and hopefully Saudi Arabia are next on the list.



Wow you obviously know what the Iraqi people want since you asked them personally. LOL
This notion of “liberating” the people of Iraq is a people friendly way of justifying the war. A regime change in Baghdad is not part of any U.N. directive. We should ask ourselves, what right do we have to rip apart a country so we can establish a form of government that we like? We cannot assume that the people of Iraq are on their knees begging for us to bring them democracy. The people of Iraq could rise up on their own against Saddam Hussein.


The US interferes with other countries affairs all the time. This is not something new!! We did it in Iran when the U.S. Marines and the CIA deposed Mossadegh because he wanted to nationalize the oil industry. We replaced him with the Shah and armed, trained and paid his hated Savak national guard, which enslaved and brutalized the people of Iran -- all to protect the financial interests of our oil companies. Is it any wonder that there are people in Iran who hate us? We did it in Chile. We did it in Vietnam. More recently, we tried to do it in Iraq.
And, of course, how many times have we done it in Nicaragua and all the other banana republics of Latin America? Time after time we have ousted popular leaders who wanted the riches of the land to be shared by the people who worked it. We replaced them with murderous tyrants who would sell out their own people so the wealth of the land could be taken out by the likes of Domino Sugar, the United Fruit Company, Folgers and Chiquita Banana. I could go on and on but you probably get the point. If you think we are just there to protect our embassies then I suggest you stop watching CNN.

FM, I think you watch too much Star Trek lol
You and your prime directive of non-interference of developing countries
Stop trying to impress everyone with your rhetoric. Your views are your own, and they're not necessarily the truth.
You stated what right we have to rip a country apart??
That country IS ripped apart ! With the reasons I mentioned in my last post .
And yea, I know what the Iraqi people want ( I'm psychic) They WANT to live in squalor, they LOVE being oppressed, having poor quality of life etc, etc.. you get my point.
Them rising up against Saddam?? Is this a joke? They'd be put to death..and they're not even family !

Btw, I'll stop watching CNN if you stop reading bullshit unauthorized autobiographical books of fictitious conversations with Bush. There's no way he made those comments !! He's more responsible and has better character than that !

 

[liftsiron]

FM, I think you watch too much Star Trek lol
You and your prime directive of non-interference of developing countries
Stop trying to impress everyone with your rhetoric. Your views are your own, and they're not necessarily the truth.
You stated what right we have to rip a country apart??
That country IS ripped apart ! With the reasons I mentioned in my last post .
And yea, I know what the Iraqi people want ( I'm psychic) They WANT to live in squalor, they LOVE being oppressed, having poor quality of life etc, etc.. you get my point.
Them rising up against Saddam?? Is this a joke? They'd be put to death..and they're not even family !


Today Iraq, tomarrow, the world, I'll do as I please and nobody can stop me , I'm bad I',m one bad ass shit kicking Texan and I'm president of the world. I explain nothing to no one, let's run up the deficit another trillon or so I want to give all my multi-millionaire and billonaire friends another tax cut, fuck education, fuck medicare, fuck soc. sec, fuck any lowlife who dares question me, who earns under a mill a year. I have the mindless minons on my side. I promised them tax cuts, there to stupid to see that only the very rich are getting anything. Fuck I can't believe how fun this job is and how stupid the american populace is. G.B.

 

[FreakMonster]

FM, I think you watch too much Star Trek lol
You and your prime directive of non-interference of developing countries
Stop trying to impress everyone with your rhetoric. Your views are your own, and they're not necessarily the truth.

I'm not trying to impress anyone Sergio, my views are the truth. And my views are shared by many different people around the world. There is increasing recognition that America is moving from Republic to Empire.

I think you need to read "An American Empire!" by Richard M. Ebeling, shows Garet Garrett's diagnosis of American empire in 1953 as conforming to these qualities:

"First, the executive power of the government becomes increasingly dominant."
(We have seen that with the presidential order, the accrual by the executive branch of the power to declare war, the increasing irrelevance of Congress as federal agencies like DHS, the FBI, CIA, the new IAI--all become more prominent in the nation's affairs.)

"Second, domestic-policy issues become increasingly subordinate to foreign-policy matters."
(Iraq; the Middle East; geopolitics; America as the world's policeman; the UN. Foreign intervention creates enemies, and Americans are then asked--nay, told--to hand over some of their liberties as a result of consequent, yet avoidable, danger.)

"Third, Empire threatens to result in the ascendancy of the military mind over the civilian mind."
(The ascent of the military; the increasing centralization of government power in the hands of the federal government.)

"Fourth, Empire creates a system of satellite nations."
(For example: Kuwait before Gulf War I as a client state of America. U.S. troops are stationed in S. Korea, which then becomes a tripwire for U.S. involvement in the event of a N. Korean invasion.)

"Fifth, Empire brings with it both arrogance and fear among the imperial people."
(I hate to say it, but I see arrogance, hubris, and contempt expressed on this very Web site by American chauvinists. Not all of you are this way, but it is noticeable. Fear expresses itself in the irrational dread that Iraq can actually hurt America, or that 9/11--as horrifying as it was--was bad enough to justify placing the destinies of American citizens in the hands of an increasingly tyrannical regime in Washington.)

"And, finally, Empire creates the illusion that a nation is a prisoner of history."
(A sense of inevitability, a sense of mission, a sense of responsibility to address all wrongs in the world at large.)

You can also read Andrew J. Bacevich, in his Sunday article "Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work", says that American "grand strategy" consists of these goals:

"First, the imperative of America's mission as vanguard of history"

"Second, the imperative of international openness and integration"

"Third, the imperative of American 'global leadership'"

"Finally, the imperative of military supremacy, maintained in perpetuity"

So you see, my views are shared by many.

You stated what right we have to rip a country apart??
That country IS ripped apart ! With the reasons I mentioned in my last post .
And yea, I know what the Iraqi people want ( I'm psychic) They WANT to live in squalor, they LOVE being oppressed, having poor quality of life etc, etc.. you get my point.
Them rising up against Saddam?? Is this a joke? They'd be put to death..and they're not even family !

They want to get rid of Saddam but they do not want to be bombed!! They feel that they have suffered enough with the sanctions and the constant bombing going on Southern Iraq. All they want is to be LEFT ALONE to live the way that they want to live. Is that too much to ask of the US?

Btw, I'll stop watching CNN if you stop reading bullshit unauthorized autobiographical books of fictitious conversations with Bush. There's no way he made those comments !! He's more responsible and has better character than that !

Read the book!! He did make those comments. Bob Woodard is an author of eight "New York Times" bestsellers. This is hardly fiction. This book is based on hundreds of interviews in the administration. Ask Frackal about Woodard, he's a republican.

 

[Frackal]

Sorry Sergio, the Woodward thing is very-Bush friendly...Bush has said worse things than that anyway...Bush granted woodward a 2 hour interview for the book as well.

BTW, the Romans also believed that they always had a 'reason' when they invaded another area. (as I understand it)