Is anyone up to the task?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Ok, it's pretty clear that this election will be determined by those who are "sitting on the fence" and are unsure as to whom they will vote for.

Here is an idea that I feel will help in getting those particular individuals to realize that whats best for this country would be to NOT have Bush re-elected.

Basically, we should start to put together short messages that use FACTS (not rhetoric or heresay) which bring Bush's contradictions, distortions and lies to light.

Every one should be brief, LINKED to a CREDIBLE news source (I rely on BBC and CNN for the most part), and straight to the point.

Sadly, there are just TOO MANY Americans who don't know and don't want to know the facts of what is going on. If we begin to inform our friends and they in turn forward these messages to others, little by little we may be able to bring them to light.

Below is an example of something I threw together. Something along those lines is what I'm talking about.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,585 • Replies: 25

No top replies

Straight FACTSEach fact is a link. Click it to find out more.

As of May 2nd, 2003 (the "Mission Accomplished" photo-op):
450 American Soldiers have died in Iraq..

Here are the faces and names of our relatives and friends who have died fighting a war that should not have taken place. May they R.I.P.

Between 8,000 and 9,800 Iraqi civilians have been killed as a result of the war.

The other side of "Shock and Awe". Warning: graphic images.

The administration knew LONG before the presidential address to the nation that the "uranium from Africa" claim was false.

Bush's constant talk of WMD has turned up nothing thus far.

There was never a link between 9-11 and Iraq.

After the pledge that finding Osama was a top priority
"I truly am not that concerned about him." - Bush on Osama Bin Laden, CNN, 3-13-2002
(8th paragraph down)

After all the hype, Dick Cheney finally admits, "We never had any evidence that he had acquired a nuclear weapon".

Take a closer look at what money spent on war could have provided for America.

Its time to wake up America.
If you're not upset,
you're not paying attention.

Note: some of the links connect to transcripts from programs. To avoid sifting through the entire document, simply click "Edit" from the toolbar, select Find (on this page), type in the phrase and hit "enter". It'll take you right to the spot.

0 Replies

Heywood
Excellent thread. As hard as it is to look at those photo's I think everyone should see what this war has done to all those innocent people. Hopefully this will be an eye opener for some.

0 Replies

You should see the photos of the mass graves our forces are finding of Iraqi's who were slowly tortured and killed. They are equally disturbing.

0 Replies

And your point would be???????????????

0 Replies

McG's point seems to be that since we haven't found WPMs in Iraq, we can now justify the war based on Saddam's brutality. The logic fails, of course, when we consider all the brutal dictators the U.S. leaves alone...

0 Replies

No, my point is that anything can be sensationalized to evoke an emotional response.

Sheesh.

0 Replies

Either way McGentrix, there is no justification for all this brutality. I know you have you own ways of justifying it, but I can't for the life of me fathom how you can think the way you do, but I stopped trying to figure out what makes you tick a long time ago.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

No, my point is that anything can be sensationalized to evoke an emotional response.

Sheesh.

McG, I'm not "sensationalizing" anything. I'm putting out FACTS. Is there another way to say what I did without it hitting a nerve?

You can try to dismiss what I say, but the truth is the truth. No amount of smart-ass comments are going to make it otherwise. Hopefully, enough people are going to wake up in this country to see that they have been decieved.

In any case, you can put up all the photos of Saddams mass graves you want. Saddam was a bad man, and we know it. But then, as previously stated, there are plenty of evil dictators in the world.

I encourage you to click each link and look long and hard at what has happened. Your blind love for this administration is sickening.

0 Replies

I'll second that post!

0 Replies

The truth? No. What is posted is SOME of the truth. It's one side of the truth. Sometimes, to end one form of brutality, more brutality is neccessary.
Each of the "truths" laid out here has another side to it.

450 US Soldiers died? That's a small number when considering the number of troops we have there and the job that they are doing. Frankly, I am surprised the number has remained so low.

The number of innocent Iraqi's, while numerous and sad, is inconsequential when applied against the number of death's that Saddam is responsible for. Sad for the individual, good for the population in general.

When I get more time, I will try to answer the rest of these "truths, but for now, I think you get my point...

Heywood wrote:

Straight FACTSEach fact is a link. Click it to find out more.

As of May 2nd, 2003 (the "Mission Accomplished" photo-op):
450 American Soldiers have died in Iraq..

Here are the faces and names of our relatives and friends who have died fighting a war that should not have taken place. May they R.I.P.

Between 8,000 and 9,800 Iraqi civilians have been killed as a result of the war.

The other side of "Shock and Awe". Warning: graphic images.

The administration knew LONG before the presidential address to the nation that the "uranium from Africa" claim was false.

Bush's constant talk of WMD has turned up nothing thus far.

There was never a link between 9-11 and Iraq.

After the pledge that finding Osama was a top priority
"I truly am not that concerned about him." - Bush on Osama Bin Laden, CNN, 3-13-2002
(8th paragraph down)

After all the hype, Dick Cheney finally admits, "We never had any evidence that he had acquired a nuclear weapon".

Take a closer look at what money spent on war could have provided for America.

Its time to wake up America.
If you're not upset,
you're not paying attention.

Note: some of the links connect to transcripts from programs. To avoid sifting through the entire document, simply click "Edit" from the toolbar, select Find (on this page), type in the phrase and hit "enter". It'll take you right to the spot.

0 Replies

Your dismissal of the deaths in Iraq, both to US troops and to Iraqis, as a "small number" or "inconsequential" speaks volumes about your world view, McG. No rebuttal needed...

0 Replies

It's said that truth is the first casualty of war. Anyone have some credible and reasonable estimates of deaths caused by the Iraqi War? (military and civilian, Iraqi and American, direct and indirect)

British group puts Iraq casualty toll at 21,700 to 55,000

Why am I interested? US Evades Blame for Iraqi Deaths

Quote:

We continue to make a great deal about the deaths of 3,000 innocents in this country on Sept. 11, 2001. But our avenging war on terrorism has now turned into a terrorist attack of its own, killing perhaps three times more innocent civilians. USA Today reported this week that cluster bombs dropped during the invasion killed untold numbers of Iraqi civilians. Unexploded cluster bombs are continuing to kill Iraqi civilians that stumble upon them, including children.

On March 23, at the beginning of the war, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. General Richard Myers, responded to early reports that scores of civilians were killed by cluster bombs by saying: "The one thing you can be sure of from the Iraqi regime is that they're masters at lying and distorting the truth. . . . we only target militarily significant targets. In the first couple of days, we used essentially 100 percent precision-guided munitions." On April 25, Myers said the United States and Britain dropped 1,500 cluster bombs on Iraq during the invasion. "There's been only one recorded case of collateral damage from cluster munitions so far," Myers said.

Of course there was only one recorded case -- the United States has never counted civilian deaths. Worse, USA Today found that the United States used 10,782 cluster weapons, not just 1,500.

0 Replies

D'artagnan wrote:

Your dismissal of the deaths in Iraq, both to US troops and to Iraqis, as a "small number" or "inconsequential" speaks volumes about your world view, McG. No rebuttal needed...

Way to take what I said out of context! I said they were "inconsequential when applied against the number of death's that Saddam is responsible for."

That in no way says I think they were inconsequential at all. Please do not misquote me.

0 Replies

So the deaths are only inconsequential within a specific context? It's all relative, eh?

Sure, as long as it's someone else who's dying...

0 Replies

Exactly. In other contexts, those deaths are horrible tragedies that alter many, many lives.

Context is very important to the truth and it's good to keep that in mind.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Context is very important to the truth and it's good to keep that in mind.

Funny that you bring up the importance of context.

Lets look at this president, who is so eager to send others to war when he himself had the chance to go to 'nam and was able to use his family name to get into the national guard (after which he goes AWOL from)...

Or better still, his hard line on drug users, when he himself liked to dabble in a little "nose candy" himself...

Maybe we can look at the concept of going to the moon and beyond when we have record deficits and are in the middle of two wars...

My favorite is the subtle change from claims of actual WMD to the hilarious "Weapons of Mass Destruction related program activities"...

or am I thinking of irony? Razz

BUT your starting to pull the thread off track, man. If you want to bitch some more, create a new topic.

So does anyone else have an idea for a brief message that can be e-mailed around that is linked, factual, easy to read and educative? Joe from Chicago came up with two great ones already. I know we have a few talented writers among the group....

0 Replies

I am sorry you feel that way Heywood, but if you want anyone to take your message seriously, it would be better to offer the whole truth instead of painting the truth to look good to your viewpoint.

You made some good examples of the painted truth right there in your last message. The real truth doesn't quite fit your agenda, so you paint it and make it fit.

Both sides are guilty of it, I don't think that the liberals have a monopoly on making the truth fit, so don't think that I do. It's just that if you want to send a message, send one that people will read and actually believe.

0 Replies

I have to reluctantly agree with McGen, paint the whole truth man.

I myself have found myslef too often painting a picture for people according to my view points, and not telling them "the whole truth and nothing but the truth".

0 Replies

Oh well, so much for a thread that lists facts that are linked to credible news sources.

Refer: Thread Dies and also Thread Breaks! Laughing

0 Replies

Is anyone up to the task?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know