coluber2001 wrote: Brandon9000 wrote:
Think of George Bush going into therapy instead of Iraq; thousands of lives and billions of dollars could be spent elsewhere.
Unless Hussein had had WMD, as Bush and a few million other Americans thought, in which case one might have woken up one morning to news of the obliteration of Los Angeles. That would have cost a lot of money and lives too. In fact, it really isn't clear that if Bush hadn't threatened invasion over and over there wouldn't have been WMD or at least WMD development programs there today.
Come on and admit it; Bush is a reactionary and so deeply intertwined in lies and spin that telling the truth even once would cause a ever widening chink in administration's armor. Don't expect the Bush administration to be straight with the public even once;
Please give two or more examples of these lies you assert Bush has told, or admit that you can't.
...it is a house of cards, and no dissention is tolerated within or without.
Your reference to a house of cards implies imminent collapse. I see no evidence of this. Bush was elected to a second term. As for dissention not being tolerated within, I'm not sure how much dissention a president ought to tolerate within his administration. As for dissention not being tolerated without, please give an example.
...Bush's true calling is dictator of a bannana republic. He is incapable of leading a first world country,
Mere name calling
..and his reactionary politics will backfire with diastrous results, if not for us in the immediate future, then for our children.
My viewpoint is that there will be disastrous results if we do not (a) very aggressively pursue terrorists, and (b) very aggressively act to stop certain countries from acquiring WMD. You pretty much ignored my point, which was that at the moment of invasion, our level of information left a very real possibility that Hussein was continuing to hide his WMD, and WMD programs, and that these doomsday weapons in the possession of someone like him could be far more costly in money and lives than the invasion has been.
The intelligence on WMDs was manuipulated by the Bush administration...
There was enough just in the overall timeline of events and the basic history to pose an unacceptable risk that Hussein had not destroyed his WMD and/or programs, regardless of anything Bush did or didn't say.
...to justify his dreams of invading Iraq and transforrming the Middle East. The rest of the world depended on our intelligence reporst regarding the WMDs. They'll know better next time.
You are simply guessing Bush's motive, which could just as easily be exactly what he said - fear of WMDs augmented by hatred of Hussein's behavior towards his people.
It is widely believed by left-wingers as well as right-wingers including Pat Buchanan that terrorist attacks on America and American-occupied countries in the Middle East was motivated by an opposition of Islamists to America occupying lands in the Middle East. Our occupation in Iraq will only encourage and not discourage terrorist attacks on American soil and interests.
First of all, if the insurgents would simply stop, we'd be out of there fairly quickly. It's primarily they who are keeping us there. Second of all, extreme Islam has declared war on us whether we fight back or not. Osama bin Laden, in his manifesto, said that they are calling to us to convert to Islam whether we like it or not. That strikes me as an unreasonable demand. We need to actively oppose them, since they will try to subvert our civilization whether we do or we don't. The idea that we should not fight back to keep from offending them is a cowardly philosophy. Fighting the axis powers in WW2 probably also angered them.
That Bush was able to convince the U.S. people that they were under danger of attack from Iraq speaks of our gullibility and the willingness of this administration to resort to any form of propaganda. That Bush was willing to use outright lies to attain his distorted vision reminds me of how Hitler was able to move the German people into a frenzy of aggressive attacks on the rest of Europe.
Some people are able to think for themselves and wanted to invade Iraq before Bush even ran for president. Like I said, give two examples of the lies you assert he told, or admit that you can't.
Bush's vision of solving future energy problems involves constant war and occupation in the Middle East rather than creating a solution at home via renewable energy and hydrogen and power is tantamount to nineteenth century politics.
You are simply guessing his motives. Give some evidence that this, rather than what he claims, is motivating him.
War will only destroy our country; it won't solve problems.
It seems to have solved a few problems in the past, starting with the American Revolution.