bush sends $555 billion to Iraq

it's the use of the word "we". I dont care about Iraq, never have, never will, if the people if Iraq wanted their freedom, get guns and fight a revolutionary war to EARN it, just like we did.

Remember when Saddam invaded Kuwait? When did Iraq start for you, after 9/11? What happens when one sovereign nation signs a ceasefire with another sovereign nation that kicked it ass years before and then breaks that ceasefire agreement and fire's at our planes? When in our history do we not attack? It's in the history books already, you should read one?

It is our problem because a Government installed and supported by the US, turned into a Genocidal Dictatorship.

When Saddam was making his move to Kuwait, Osama offered up to send his fighters to protect, but the Saudi royals and the US struck a deal to deploy US forces instead. One of the worst moves we have ever made, prior to invading Iraq. Our "good intentions" to protect our oil interest have done nothing but **** our people over.



Without denying that Saddam, and his sons did some pretty terrible things to their polulace, most of the stories of genocide have been so convoluted over the years, it's hard to say what's real, and what's not. I suggest you do some indepth reading on the issue, try to find sources that span from 89 to present, and see if you can find the inconsistancies. From what I have gathered, the initial reports from Hababja read anywhere from a few hundred dead, to several thousand, depending on the source.

Communism can absolutely be discussed without the worlds attempts and failures... Its called theory, happens all the time, the REMOVAL of practical application.

Anyone who thinks only a few hundred were killed, also thinks that George W BUSH was genius enough to pull off the massive conspiracy of the 9/11

I suggest you educate yourself from source OTHER than the ones biased towards war. It isn't always a question of how many, though [SIZE="2"]often the truth is little more than unsubstantiated claims[/SIZE], but who was actually responsible.

"Truth", usually being defined as individuals prefer to it to be defined. You obviously don't approve of rugonnacry's sources therefore they are without credence.
Damn, I wish he'd change his name.
Websites, though great reading, almost always have an agenda. That agenda becoming quickly exposed with little effort. Left or right.
Who was "actually responsible is generally a matter of political agendas as well when using websites spinning their spin.

Websites? lol, maybe they can help you find the sources, but I assure you, there's more to researching than websites. What has become of the American mind?

Yes, and the results will be the same as theorizing about nuclear power until practical application comes into play. One major difference however, nuclear power actually functions as theorized.

I suggest you educate yourself from source OTHER than the ones biased towards war. It isn't always a question of how many, though often the truth is little more than unsubstantiated claims, but who was actually responsible.