If bush wasnt president do u think this war would have happened?

Post-9/11 Era Forum

If we had a diiferent prsident do u think would would have this war?
I don't think we would have.Bush is just power hungry and wants to get hold of anything that will give him more power. I think he started this war just so that he could prove to the US that he's better then his father.Plus hes a freaking red necked Texan that wants all the oil he can get. I seriously wonder if Gore had been voted president if we would have this war. Or if Iraq's major export was broccoli would bush care as much?

He** no I dont think we would be in war but know people wanted that a--hole to be president....and now look we need to hurry up and get him out of his presidential postion. I told you we should of had Gore!

If Algore was president, would we have had this war? Probably not. (Which is why I'm thankful George Bush won the Election)

I'm with you sayzak. Democrats have shown they are unwilling to sacrifice popularity to do what is best for the american people. Terrorists attacked the USS cole under clinton, they attacked and killed US troops, and we basically did nothing. And you wonder why they thought they could get away with 9-11.
I'm glad it happened under bush's watch. As for oil greed and "proving he's better than his father." give me a break. Let me know when we start shipping iraq's oil to the US, then i might buy it.
Listen up. We are at war with global terrorism. If you don't support the war, fine, that's your opinion. When you start making up theories for the "real" reason behind the war, you only expose yourself as people who would jeopardize american lives to put a liberal president in office. America first! Political parties 2nd.

im also with sayzak...I dont think it would have happened, which i why i am so glad that Bush is president...he is the best president we have had for quite some time...that is also why i am nervous about Bush not being re-elected, if he is not, we will probably draw out of Iraq and the Middle East and then who knows what hell they will build up and unload on the US

Yeah, if Bush doesn't get elected peace could break out at any time.

Some people forget that terrorist attacked us. It's sad that people will conciously forget 9-11 to blame conflict agains terrorism on bush.

Al Queda kills 3000 Americans - Bush invades Iraq kills 10,000 Iraqis.

Gore wouldn't have done it - he's not surrounded by nutjobs - Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Pearl - these people are dangerous nuts.

Actually it was Bush who ignored all the warnings before 9/11

If Gore was in office, 9-11 wouldn't of happened simple as that

They took advantage of the republican controlled congress and unelected president, and let 3000 people die to accomplish their own agendas

Its no coincidence that both wars have to do with oil

And its no coincidence that most of the Bush Administration worked in the oil industry

The entire world knows Bush is a fraud.......except for those naive fools, who think it is inconceivable for a small group of people with an enormous amount of power to abuse it

good grief, 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. Where have you been? The reason for Bush's War was to pay back the corporations who gave the big money to his campaign. His way of paying them back is to see that they get the big contracts to rebuild iraq.

Algore WAS in office for 8 years. You are forgetful, eh search4memory?

Ahem: "if algore was in president this wouldn't have happened"

Tell me this (make sure you think first): Were there ANY terrorist attacks on the United States or it's allies between 1992 and 2000?

(Why are you calling me right wing? Wait till you get to know me, I have some pretty intriguing (spelling?) Liberal thoughts upstairs)

Can you justifye Algores inactions? Seriousely. Can you?

Not to mention legions of would-be martyrs, people who've lost family and now want to avenge them by blowing themselves up and getting it on with the 72 virgins.

Bush's premise, that a lot of people in this forum have swallowed, is that Iraq is a battle ground in the War on Terror - that Iraq was involved, somehow, with the horror of 9/11.

This despite there being no evidence Saddam was involved with Al Queda. No evidence Iraq was going to give WMDs to Al Queda. Indeed no WMDs period.

I think most Americans actually realize that Saddam is a terrorist, and that's how he relates to the war on terror. That's how I understand the war in Iraq. In fact I don't think I've talked to anyone who believes Saddam was responsible for 9/11 -- related, probably only in the fact that he despised American's and funds terrorist organizations (directly or indirectly).

Evidence, Sayzak - there's nothing that links Saddam with Al Queda, the perpetrators of 9/11.

Saddam gave money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers - I've heard that one and seen evidence for it ... but nothing concrete about his links with Al Queda/Osama, the perpetrators of 9/11 and numerous other ****.

He was a bastard and no-one's going to shed a tear for him, but the reasons given for his expulsion are spurious in the extreme. And people don't like being lied to, particularly not during the State of the Union speech.

OK... Can you provide a transcript? I don't remember the president saying Saddam was directly linked to al Queda or the 9/11 terrorists. If I was lied to I'd like to know about it.

Could you please highlight where that says "Saddam Hussien is directly linked to those responsible for 9/11" I can't seem to find it. Could be my eyes, they've been fuzzy lately.

Whichever way you look at it, a majority of American's thought that Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Bush and his team consistently implied the two were linked without actually saying the words - HE DID IT.

So now he didnt say it, but you somehow found the link? Before you said that he tied them together directly...
You who you are? A stinky piece of pathetic propagandist who LIES and SPINS and then forgets stuff and makes up new lies. You are not worth debating even a bit.

You're all wrong. This war was inevitable, regardless of who was in office. The war plan was in place when Bush Sr. was in office.
Waiting for the UN to get off their butts, which never happened.
France pleading with the N to not allow the war to happen was only a delay strategy to protect French Oil interests in Iraq.
This has to be the only reason for France, because a real leader and humanitarian would NOT have looked the other way when Saddam murders his people. Chirac had to know what was happening in Iraq being closer to Saddam than any other leader. The U.S. knew and so did the U.N. (France knew but....)

Here's, Dubya in the State of the Union address: "[Saddam] is a brutal dictator, with a history of reckless aggression, with ties to terrorism."

And ...: "Today, the gravest danger in the war on terror, the gravest danger facing America and the world, is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. These regimes could use such weapons for blackmail, terror, and mass murder. They could also give or sell those weapons to terrorist allies, who would use them without the least hesitation."

Pretty scary stuff and everyone crapped their pants and Americans said let's just shoot the mad dog (Saddam, not Dubya).

And so we went to war. They didn't have any evidence of WMDs or Saddam's links to Osama but didn't matter.

The whole thing stinks. USA1's right - they've had this war/invasaion in mind for a decade - 9/11 was the (semi-)perfect excuse for the 'crazies' (as Rumsfeld, Pearl and co. are known in the intelligence community) to launch their vision of American world dominance. Scary times.

Do you seriousely believe he's two "I.Q." points away frmo being retarded? I have no reason to replye to that, other than to make you look twice at how desperate your tactics against Bush are. You're such a hypocrit, don't you think? How could someone THAT CLOSE to being RETARDED trick enough people into believing he should be president to get him elected? Your words really speak for themselves... lol

how many retarded people have an mba from harvard? i'm just curious.

i know what shakespeare would say about you tangysweet: "Methink thou art a general offence, and every man should beat thee."

Search -- there are no more pennies in the cushions of that couch. Go get a job.

sayzak21 is taking this very personal! don't be ashamed that your hero is the village idiot

I don't think in no way I'm a genius!

This is the part of the quote I would like people to focus more on

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident

OK. But what about ideas and theories that are just plain dumb and wrong?

There are plenty of those too - right?

Or the utterly fallacious theories that in certain contexts and usually after the fact can be shown to be true and correct - like a broken clock that is accurate twice every day...

"sayzak21 is taking this very personal! don't be ashamed that your hero is the village idiot"

Actually I'm not taking it personal at all. I can clearly see what your motives are and I have the maturity to overlook them. I was just saying that you can't do anytying with this argument. It's dead. It died.

Even though I do notice that your posts are almost always condescending, I focus more on your actual argument. Occasionally I take some things personal. And when/if that happens there will be no question about it.

Notice how nothing new has been brought to the argument since you said "the ones with a rich and influencial father" ? That's like pissing in the wind. That argument died before Bush was elected President.

Do you seriousely believe he's two "I.Q." points away frmo being retarded? I have no reason to replye to that, other than to make you look twice at how desperate your tactics against Bush are. You're such a hypocrit, don't you think? How could someone THAT CLOSE to being RETARDED trick enough people into believing he should be president to get him elected? Your words really speak for themselves... lol
- sayzak21

You are as narrow minded as they come. He won the presidency because of his fathers influence, and ofcourse politics and Money. Do you seriously believe Bush could plan all that? HELL NO! Have you even looked at the people in his cabinet? Ever think they could somehow convince Bush to go to war?

And sayzak, I couldnt help but notice that you only responded to the forst part of my post. Maybe I over estimated your memory capacity. So here it is again:

You are ok with the fact that had they looked at it twice, almost 3500 people would not be dead today. You are thankful for the fact that hundreds of American troops have died form this war. You are thankful for the fact that thousands of Iraqi citizens, who btw are still human beings, have died. You are thankful for the fact that our president lied to us in our state of union address. You are thankful for the fact that there are still No WMds found, which would prove that this war was unecessary?

Certain powers behind the military defense corporations are known to use puppets to juggle and hide responsibility, direction, and intent. As long as the actor or "retard" can trick enough people into believing he's leading...they will follow.

"Do you seriousely believe he's two "I.Q." points away frmo being retarded? I have no reason to replye to that, other than to make you look twice at how desperate your tactics against Bush are. You're such a hypocrit, don't you think? How could someone THAT CLOSE to being RETARDED trick enough people into believing he should be president to get him elected? Your words really speak for themselves... lol
- sayzak21

You are as narrow minded as they come. He won the presidency because of his fathers influence, and ofcourse politics and Money. Do you seriously believe Bush could plan all that? HELL NO! Have you even looked at the people in his cabinet? Ever think they could somehow convince Bush to go to war?"

Are you capable of stepping outside of your political bias and asking yourself that question? Could you even understand the words? I can do that. I can understand both sides. You're entitled to beleive whatever you want, you can even think I'm narrow-minded if you wish -- it's your choice. You speak so matter-of-factly --and only from your point of view. You're calling me narrow-minded because I don't AGREE with you. (Notice how it's no longer Bush's fault, but rather his cabinet's?) So which is it? Is Bush Evil, leading the ignorant Americans to murder inoscent children? Bush is retarded, and his cabinet forced him to do everything? Or (And this requires an open mind for you) Is Bush a very smart man, and actually cares about freedom?

"And sayzak, I couldnt help but notice that you only responded to the forst part of my post. Maybe I over estimated your memory capacity. So here it is again:

You are ok with the fact that had they looked at it twice, almost 3500 people would not be dead today. You are thankful for the fact that hundreds of American troops have died form this war. You are thankful for the fact that thousands of Iraqi citizens, who btw are still human beings, have died. You are thankful for the fact that our president lied to us in our state of union address. You are thankful for the fact that there are still No WMds found, which would prove that this war was unecessary?"

Am I ok that almost 3,500 people died? No. Are you blaiming Bush for that? (Open-mindedness question for you What if Algore was president instead of Bush? Do you think he would have predicted it or stopped it frlom happening?

I'm thankful for the troops serving this country. Of course I'd like to see all of them come back alive, but that just can't happen in a war. There presence there now is important to stablize the country while a new Government is put in place. I need to see the real report on how many "citizens" have died in Iraq do to Americans. It was my understanding that we have the best technology on the planet which allows us to squeeze a missle through a window and land it right on someone's lap. (Even if it was Bush's intentions to steal oil, don't you think purposely killing inoscent people for fun would be detrimental to his oil campaign?)

This war was necessary whether or not we find WMD. And the argument is justified. Saddam was told he has to prove he destroyed the weapons. He was supposed to record and document the dismantling of those weapons, and show is proof. He said "we have no weapons of mass destruction" so we insisted again, PROVE IT. He didn't. THEN we passed a resolution giving him a last chance. I'm thankful Saddam can't hurt his people anymore, or lie to us. (Can you answer this question?) It may require an open mind: Do you think Iraq is better off now than it was with Saddam?

Man, there's no such thing as a "smart" bomb. They've killed and maimed tens of thousands of INNOCENT Iraqis, Afghanis. Proof? There's nothing conclusive because we don't count dead bad guys or collaterol damage.

But give this guy a go: John Pilger - http://pilger.carlton.com/

Now Iraq's had the **** bombed out of it because Saddam didn't keep any notes? The guy was bluffing that he had 'em. There's no WMDs.

I will agree Iraq is better off. Who wouldn't? But the way we went about it, unilaterally invading, bombing, killing, against the wishes of the UN ... well, it's killed thousands and ****ed up lives and created MORE enemies, not less.

Should have waited - gone in multi-laterally - made a better case - drafted another resolution - talked about it more - whatever.

Should have waited - gone in multi-laterally - made a better case - drafted another resolution - talked about it more - whatever.

I am sure UNSC members would find something to do to keep themselves busy. You are actually the first person to admit that UN intends to do nothing.

"I am not calling you narrow minded because you dont agree with me but rather because you dont even consider my point of view. Which you cant do, and you probably wont do."

I told you I can, I have, and I did. Am I still narorow minded?

"Shouldnt a smart man be able to use proper grammer and pronounciation? Or how about knowing the meanings of the words he is saying?"

No, a smart man, or person, should be able to overlook the lack of perfect grammer and still crack the code as to what he or she was trying to say. (Perception is a very complicated thing).

"Is the US better off now that we have gone inside of Iraq, and found no WMD, and have caused the death of thousands of people than we were before we went in there?"

Yes, the US is better off. Saddam is no longer a threat. A democratic Iraq is healthier for the entire world's safety and economy.

*I used to be a perfect speller -- but some things happened in my life where I learned what's really important.

Prcefet Gmarmer is not one of tehm.

Not being Narrow minded is not when you consider someone elses point of view, not being narrow minded is when you consider the possibilty that you might be wrong. you keep claiming that Saddam is no longer a threat to the U.S. Sayak You NEVER provide any evidence that this incompetant despot was a threat to anyone outside Iraq and briefly Kuwait! this dumb dictator had no navy to speak of No ICBm's When the U.S. wanted to fight him it had to got to 'his' place it was able to build up an army unhindered a announce its military stratergy on the news and destroy his army in 2 weeks with scarcely a battle! The nearest thing to a victory he had was when a dumb blonde fell out of her truck and broke her leg. Do you want to make an argument that makes sense Sayak that Saddam was a threat to the U.S.?

A smart man, who btw represents a great country should atleast know his right from his left. And the last time I checked misunderestimate was not a word.

" They misunderestimated me." - Bush

Being a graduate from ahem Harvard with an mba you would think he would know that children is not learning, but children "are" learning. But I assume your standard of smart is rather complicated, as is you view on perception. The US is better off? exactly how? by having hundreds of our soldiers killed? By having spent millions of $$? By looking profondly stupid in front of the world by still not finding any WMD? By increasing hatred of our foreing policies to fanatics who dont have the guts to say it do they blame an innocent religion?

Perfect spelling and proper grammer are not vital to intelligence nor strength. But a person representing the most powerful nation in the world should atleast know how to speak properly in his first language? I think search4truth was right: Dont be ashamed that your hero is the village idiot.

tangy: obviously you aren't familiar with the bard. i didn't make a spelling error. i was quoting. hence the " around the words. and just so you don't go around proclaiming that shakespeare couldn't spell either i'll direct you here.

halve a niece dai.

"Sayak You NEVER provide any evidence that this incompetant despot was a threat to anyone outside Iraq and briefly Kuwait!"

You must be assuming that I was afraid Saddam could launch a big fat Weapon of Mass Destruction in my direction: You were wrong.

What I am (was) concerned about is him packing it up on a boat and sending it here, or selling it to terrorists who want to spend eternity with 72 virgins. Can you imagine a suicide bomber with a Hydrogen Bomb in the middle of New york? Sounds far fetched doesn't it? Well so did 9/11 before it happened which is why no one was prepared for it. If Bush was supposed to stop 9/11 WHY on WHY are you so against him taking out Saddam? Would you SERIOUSELY put it past him to send a Nuke -if he had the chance- to America or give it to a terrorist who would LOVE to? This perception of Saddam is common knowledge.

Me -- "You're calling me narrow minded because I don't agree with you"

Tangy -- "I am not calling you narrow minded because you dont agree with me but rather because you dont even consider my point of view. Which you cant do, and you probably wont do."

Me -- "I told you I can, I have, and I did. Am I still narorow minded?"

Tangy -- "Not being Narrow minded is not when you consider someone elses point of view, not being narrow minded is when you consider the possibilty that you might be wrong."

So... we're back to this? I am narrow minded NOT because I don't agree with you, but because I don't consider NOT agreeing with myself? What a funky loop hole! Are you exempt from this rule?

Tangy, you're starting to sound like Bill Clinton. Which one is it? And how did you come to read my mind? Are you probing me right now? What am I thinking?

Maybe you misunderstood me:

I said I am capable of seeing things from your prespective. By that, I meant (And hopefully this is the last time I have to explain this because I'm breaking it down as much as I am capable) that I can consider being wrong, and I can consider you being right. I'm not so hell-bent on my preference that I only look for ways to prove you wrong, in fact I sacrafice a lot of my argument looking for the truth which is why I don't claim to be all-knowing like some people in these forums.

Have you taken any of your own advice about considering the possibility that you might not be right when assuming the other person is assuming you're assuming you're assuming you're not always assuming you're not always right?

Since you know what I think, what am I thinking? I'm looking forward to this. And don't tell me you didn't say you knew what I was thinking, every post you've quoted me in has had some kind of assumption about the way I think in it, and the only way to cover those tracks is to beg the moderator to delete this thread.

sayzak21,
I think it was 1993 when a bomb went off in the twin tower's basement almost toppling it then, so 9/11 was neither a far fetched idea or something that the government could not have been prepared for, especially when they were given warning by at least two countries, France and Israel, that an attack was likely. Using planes as weapons wasn't a new idea.

Conspiracy or incompetence? Who knows, Bush isn't about to look too closely into that one.

sayzak, did we forget our glasses?

why did you qoute something Dragonhalitosis wrote and direct ur post to me?


jeesh, soorry Larke. touchy arent we?

bush is doing just fine.

Americaaah welcome back - if you want to have fun, read through the latest threads.
"I was with stupid."

LOL WOOPS. If I've mistaken someone for someone else I apoligize! I was REALLY tired when I wrote all that. hahahahahahahaha! SORRY!

Let me sift through and figure out who I was talking to...

OK I see what happened now. Dragon came to Tangy's defense. Like I said I was tired (And I think I need glasses) Sorry for the mix-up. Tangy, for the record, you don't sound like Bill Clinton. You and Dragaon have two different definitions of 'Narrow-minded'. All I saw was the acusation that I'm narrow minded and I replied to that.

ok I feel a bit better now.

But Dragon, please don't feel that you can't talk to me, I'm not such a bad guy, I promise. Feel free to challenge me, but expect me to challenge back.

FIRST OF ALL I CAN'T STAND BUSH IF HE WASN'T PRESIDENT NONE OF THIS WOULD'VE HAPPENED SO THE BLAME IS ON HIM. THAT'S WHY GORE SHOULD'VE BEEN PRESIDENT I DON'T CARE WHAT PEOPLE SAY BUT I CAN'T STAND HIM. SINCE HE WANTED TO GO IN WAR SO BAD HE SHOULD'VE WENT OUT THERE AND FIGHT HIS OWN SELF. HE NEED TO KNOW HOW FAMILIES FEEL WHEN THEIR RELATIVES HAVE TO FIGHT IN WAR PEOPLE ARE LOOSING LIVES OUT THERE IN WAR. I BET CHA IF ONE OF HIS RELATIVES IS IN THE ARMY OR WHAT EVER I BET CHA HE DIDN'T SEND THEM IN THE WAR. AND I HOPE HE READS THIS BECUZ HE NEED TO KNOW HOW PEOPLE FEEL AND HE NEED TO KNOW PEOPLES' FEELINGS AND HE NEED TO KNOW THAT HE IS NOT THE ONLY ONE IN THIS WORLD THAT HAS OPINONS TOO. CUZ I GOT ALOT OF RELATIVES THAT'S FIGHTING IN THE WARS AND THAT'S HOW I FEEL TOWARDS U.S GOING T WAR. AND IT'S GONNA BE ALL HIS FAULT IF THEY GO TO ONE OF THE PLACES IN THE UNITED STATES AND BOMB CUZ HE AIN'T EVEN HAD TO GET IN IT I UNDERSTAND THE 9-11 THING BUT I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH GOING TO WAR AND THAT'S MY OPINON SO NOBODY CAN'T GET MAD. SO SUCK IT UP AND JUST DEAL WITH IT

babygurl (qute name) I know where you're coming from. And anyone reading your post can see that you have a lot of anger towards Bush administration. I dont understand how the death of 3000+ people justifies or even brings about the death of hundreds of soldiers and thousands of innocent Iarqis. But Here's the thing though, you cant change the past. What we need to do is show em whos boss in 2004.

"FIRST OF ALL I CAN'T STAND BUSH IF HE WASN'T PRESIDENT NONE OF THIS WOULD'VE HAPPENED SO THE BLAME IS ON HIM."

Are you saying that the terrorists attacks on the U.S. wouldn't have happened since the 70's? Bush has only been president since 2000. Or are you talking about the war on terror? I absolutely understand that you're angry to personally know people in harms way over seas, I don't blame you, and I'm sure the president wouldn't blame you. I think everyone feels frustrated with this war, even die-hard Bush fans -- those who don't are either lying, or disillusioned.

My question to you is: Do you know the purpose for this war? I'm sure you're open to the critisisms of the war, everyone should be, though some are not -- which brings me to my next question: Are you open to the purpose of the war, and the vision afterward?

I'd also like to point out that you're not the only person effected by the war. I know people who've been in war, I know one person in the war, I know people who are going to go to war, and I know a lot of people who know someone in the war. So you're not alone.

Your question is,"Do you know the purpose of this war?''

Certainly, we should all as good, patriotic Americans know the purpose of this war. It is FREEDOM. The terrorists over in the third countries of the world hate us because we are FREE. They cannot stand it so they take our airplanes and fly them into the twin towers. We cannot have them destroying our FREEDOMS and our LIBERITIES in such a way and especially on our own soil. After we have changed the regimes in Afganistan and also Iraq the people living there will be able to have FREEDOM, too. The terrorists will not like them then, I guess, if they have freedom, but afterall, we are doing our ultimate in men, women,and money to give it to them.

Fy, Frenchie,
Please explain to all of us, exactly what it is that France did do to help the Iraqi people, before an now?
Please clarify for us the humanitarion relief to Iraq or the military might to keep the Iraqi government form killing 100s of thousands of innocent people.
Explain how sending Saddam night vision goggles, missles and satallite phone transmission numbers helped the people of Iraq?
Explain how pumping all their oil from the ground and making Saddam rich from it improved the quality of life for the mjaority of Iraqis?

All i have to say is I agree with "moo"... The USA has a responsibility to overthrow governments that kill thousands of thier own innocent people everyday. To bad the president that was in power during hitlers rule didnt go wipe him out and woop his a**. Sadam was just like hitler, he wanted to take over, now he is running around with his tail between his legs wondering when he is going to get shot. And ya know what, i wish i was the one shooting him.

Well where are the WMD? That's why we went to war isn't it? Because of these weapons.

WHERE ARE THEY?

General Patton know?

And exactly what would you do, Americaaah? stand by anything and everything someone in the oval office decides to do? Let mass murder be justified by propoganda? Patriotism is not just going along with everything a country's gov does. The world belives that the US gov reflects the avg American. But had they met you, I think they would think vice versa.

I would like to know where the WMD are. And if they find some actual WMD that they can prove was a great threat to America/World, and the Wmd is not likely to have been planted, I will swallow my words, apologize and agree with you. But I have yet to see them capture/kill Osama, or Saddam. And I fail to comprehend how a passport of one of the terrorists were found but not the blackbox. Yes I know, same old same old. How exactly is this a legal war? Did we go to congress?

Oh and you should know the "egg" is on your face. But if you cant see it, then to you its not. Your perception is your reality.

Happy Halloween! to you too.

Thw word "whatever" pops into my head.