BUSH LOOKS LIKE A MONKEY!!

I think Bush pushed us into a war. There where other ways out. Why do you think he pushed us into a war?

He did not. This was a moral and just war and it should've been fought.

Originally posted by JediMaster
He did not. This was a moral and just war and it should've been fought.

No War's are morlal or just. Get a clue

That's what I'm saying.

You may wish to review this thread before you say that...

www.digitalf8.com...

Wasnt this war a holy economic war ?

Ok just for starters, bush has absolutely no power in what he as President does, or half the time says. He is a puppet by those behind the scenes, he is a figurehead. Who do you think stays when ever we get a new president, thats why they come and go. But there are people who never leave government positons. They are the ones who need to be removed like the cancers they are. Thats what I think though, but am I alone in this thinking? I think not other wise People like Reagan and others on this site wouldnt talk about the NWO or Secret societies.

To say that no war is moral or just is not truthful. Half the reason for the war is not moral or just. WWII, for example. Hitler's side of the war was neither moral or just, but the allies struggle against him was.

I was against terror, Hussein being part of that war, is.

Muffin Man, are you schizophrenic, by chance? What does the title of your thread have to do with the body of the thread, and why do you think a discussion on the options on Iraq should be here.

Why we are discussing options and say there were other ways, please explain the other ways that were not tried by the Amerian administration and its allies, and please explain why you believe the U.N. had not bothered to try these options and thereby causing the allies to do its job militarily?

he did not push the US to war. it was something that we had to do. if it didnt get done then the entire world wouldnt be safe with a cico like Saddam in power. he had nuclear and bio weapons and he is crazy enogh to use them. so once again Bush did not put us into this position it was Saddam and his followers that put us into this situation.

Weapons of Mass Destruction X
Links with Al-Queda X
Terrorism X
Saving all those poor Iraqis from a terrible dictator, when the USA wont even allow African drugs companies to make generic drugs for Malaria that kills 3000 Africans a day or AIDS, and therefore doesn't give a flying f*ck about poor people in 3rd world countries X

A huge reserve of oil, freed up and on the world market, thus driving down oil prices ****

True reason revealed. Though, it's not patriotic for you Yanks to disbelieve the official government line..............

Well now that its winding down, America being the only victors, they will soon be putting the atrocities,pain and loss the war brought behind them.-----Vienam that is-----

complete story: Curious GWB

I think that ultimately what we did could be good thing, but ONLY if we do not now allow corporate nepotism and greed rule Iraq instead of the Iraqi people.. Oh sorry, Haliburton and Bechtel already have huge contracts to "rebuild" Iraq so that has already happened. Let's just hope it does not get worse.
I am curious, however, the how the ultra hawks justify the war. First it was links to terrorism, and I am certain that there are terrorists in that country, but is that alone enough grounds for war? Britian just had one their own (legally their own anyway) blow up a cafe in Israel, does that give us the right to bomb London? After all they were harboring a terrorist, whether they know it or not. In fact, let's bomb NY state, Northern KY, California and Washington State, after all there were suspected terrorists there. I know I am being sarcastic here but I feel that this reasoning alone cannot justify a war.
Next, WMD. The war is barely over, and we have yet to really investigate unimpeded, but if we do not find a HUGE cache of weapons the US/UK/Australian alliance will look like complete fools. On this, only time will tell.
Lastly, I read here and elsewhere that we liberated the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator. I even relied on that argument here, when I posted a lengthy note about how a liberal like myself can justify the war. However, I wonder more and more, if the liberation of these poor souls was so incredibly important why did we wait for 30 years to do free them? If we knew Hussein was such a brutal and evil man from the beginning of his regime (which we did) why did we let him stay in power? The answer to that is a combination of the Zero Sum game of Realpolitik the US played with the USSR allowed us to turn a blind eye to tyrants so long as Washington held sway over them and not the Kremlin and our reliance on easy access to Arabian oil. Alexander Haig once said "We know he (Hussein) is a Son of a B@*tch, but he's OUR SOB." (Tarock, The Superpowers Involvement in the Iran Iraq War, 1998) During the GW1 we had the opprotunity to liberate the Iraqi people but were forced to pull back by the international community. The US then let the regime viciously repress any opposition for 12 years. Because of these issues I think the "liberation" theory falls short of the mark.
If 9/11 had never happened the Bush admin, I don't think, would have ever thought about a pre-emptive strike. But 9/11 did happen and Bush managed to send so many mixed messages about why we were going into Iraq that the majority of us just simply said "OK, just do this fast so you can focus on the horrid economy."

Alright! Let the flaming begin!

I'm calling PETA right now!Monkey's are cute & smart!

That is hysterical! Great job on capturing the "feel" of a Curious George book, hehe.....