Tonight - Bill O v. Bill M

[Mad4stevie]

Originally posted by Sugar
But it seems no conservative will DARE say a bad word about Bush, and that's more frightening to me that any of gldstwmn's opinions...

There are several things that I don't agree with GW on - such as capital punishment. But that is another thread entirely.

I agree with Strand in that GW had more than enough reason, irregardless of the WMD argument, to take Iraq to task. You cannot let bullies run rampant, and in my opinion, that is exactly what SH was doing. This guy was going to run wild until someone did something to hold him accountable for all the atrocities that he inflicted on his people. Eventually, you have to stand up to these type of people to stop them, or they will just continue the same damn activities. People like that will take advantage until you draw a line in the sand and are willing to hold your ground and show that talk is cheap, and action is everything. Again, just my opinion.

[Mad4stevie]

Originally posted by Sugar
Mad4Stevie, do you also agree with strandinthewind?

About which point? There are alot in this monster thread.

If you are talking about stretching the truth - I think it is wrong to mislead people - but I think that there were more than enough other reasons to take SH to task (as posted above) - so I still think it was the right thing to do.

If GW did knowingly LIE about how much he knew about WMD, then that was an incredibly stupid thing to do. I personally cannot understand why you would state something as a specific fact about SH having WMD, unless you know it to be true, when everyone is going to find out eventually whether the WMD are there or not.

[Sugar]

Originally posted by Mad4stevie
About which point? There are alot in this monster thread.

Same one jwd was agreeing on, but your last point pretty much answered that. So do we invade North Korea next, in your opinion?

[jwd]

Damn, I feel like I'm being cross examined. I didn't do anything wrong, really I didn't!

Sugar:
You were a little vague, saying that you thought the truth was being stretched, but I appreciate the clarification.

What I agreed with(Jason's post) is that Bush didn't overstate the reasons for going to war per se himself, he was using intelligence given to him much in the same way Clinton did when he carried out bombing raids etc on Iraq. I never said the truth was being stretched, I said that saying Bush was telling a flat out lie was inaccurate.


Joe

[Sugar]

Originally posted by jwd
Damn, I feel like I'm being cross examined. I didn't do anything wrong, really I didn't!



What I agreed with(Jason's post) is that Bush didn't overstate the reasons for going to war per se himself, he was using intelligence given to him much in the same way Clinton did when he carried out bombing raids etc on Iraq. I never said the truth was being stretched, I said that saying Bush was telling a flat out lie was inaccurate.


Joe

Ah, there's that "C" word again...but I get what you're saying...

[Mad4stevie]

Originally posted by Sugar
Same one jwd was agreeing on, but your last point pretty much answered that.

I added to this - all you liberals should love that I used "GW" and "stupid" in the same sentence!

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
How about Karl Rove outing a CIA agent? That's a felony.

Now Now - no dispositive proof exists to support that If however, there is or it becomes available, they will fry him to save W.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by Sugar
Same one jwd was agreeing on, but your last point pretty much answered that. So do we invade North Korea next, in your opinion?

Well, North Korea is factually different in that the UN is not as involved and, unlike the Middle East, let that idiot leader of North Korea go one step past what China is willing to put up with and North Korea will be part of China. So, I think the ousting of him can be acheived via other methods. If not, however, then yes, I say we take him out. After all he HAS nukes and is nuts.

[jwd]

Sugar:
Ah, there's that "C" word again...but I get what you're saying...

I know, and I TOTALLY get what you're saying. Our government really needs to do something about its' intelligence.


Joe

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Now Now - no dispositive proof exists to support that If however, there is or it becomes available, they will fry him to save W.

Someone has already named Rove, it's just a matter of them signing some sort of non-confidentiality agrrement. It's in one of the articles I posted on one of the other threads.

[strandinthewind]

Interestingly, I think we should Israel to task for its human rights violations and apparent desire to control far more land than was robbed from other people and given to it when it was formed. But, that will never happen for earlier stated reasons.

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Well, North Korea is factually different in that the UN is not as involved and, unlike the Middle East, let that idiot leader of North Korea go one step past what China is willing to put up with and North Korea will be part of China. So, I think the ousting of him can be acheived via other methods. If not, however, then yes, I say we take him out. After all he HAS nukes and is nuts.

So then where are all the troops going to come from? Are we reinstating the draft?

[Mad4stevie]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Well, North Korea is factually different in that the UN is not as involved and, unlike the Middle East, let that idiot leader of North Korea go one step past what China is willing to put up with and North Korea will be part of China. So, I think the ousting of him can be acheived via other methods. If not, however, then yes, I say we take him out. After all he HAS nukes and is nuts.

(*clap*clap*clap*)

Sheez . . . I wish I could post this fast

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Interestingly, I think we should Israel to task for its human rights violations and apparent desire to control far more land than was robbed from other people and given to it when it was formed. But, that will never happen for earlier stated reasons.

I agree with you 100 percent. Doing this will go a long way to better our image in the Arab world.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
So then where are all the troops going to come from? Are we reinstating the draft?

There is gossip that the draft will be reinstated after the election if W wins. But, I have no way of confirming that etc. So, take it for what it is worth.

Interestingly, aside from the political suicide the draft will cause, I agree a volunteer armed forces is better from the point of view that the people that are there for the most part are there because they signed up for it. I know exceptions exist, but I am speaking about the majority of the people in the armend forces. I do think, however, the child of every elected official should be forced to go the war zone and participate in combat as should the President.