Originally Posted By DAR <<We are living under a ruthless regime now. >> Your free to move at any time. Unless you think this "ruthless regime" would stop you. There is plenty to be critical of the President. But that is frankly that statement is idiotic.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "If they deposed a ruthless regime and gave us a chance to live free and prosperous lives? I'd call it liberation." Except no one is Iraq is living free and easy. You're the only person left in this country who would actually believe they're liberated.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder No, you missed it. 201 people left who believe Iraqis are liberated.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Except no one is Iraq is living free and easy.> And I didn't say they were. <You're the only person left in this country who would actually believe they're liberated.> Sorry, no. But as time goes by, and conditions in Iraq continue to improve, I think more and more people will believe that. And people's opinion of President Bush will improve as well.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "And people's opinion of President Bush will improve as well." If nothing else, for the sake of your kids, quit taking drugs.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney ^^LOL!!!!!!!!!! I thought Douglas was making a joke when he said that!
Originally Posted By DyGDisney The republicans know A LOT about twisting words, don't they. They spun this war to look good for good reasons in the beginning, unfortunately for them we know the real reasons.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney "Your free to move at any time. Unless you think this "ruthless regime" would stop you. There is plenty to be critical of the President. But that is frankly that statement is idiotic." I don't agree. I would move if this regime was allowed to continue, but my home which was once worth almost double what I owe, is now worth so little I would have practically nothing after realtor fees, IF I could sell in this market, which I doublt. Besides, I was here before "W" was president, and I can stick it out until the end of the error.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney And I do consider it a ruthless regime. Think about the fact that he was planning to attack Iraq before he even became president so that he would be considered a hero in American history. That's ruthless. Ruthless means having no compassion or pity; merciless. Regime means a government in power; administration. So yes, I do call it a ruthless regime. A government in power without compassion toward the Iraqi people.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip There is no doubt that Bush has been an extremely poor president in many ways. On the other hand, he has done an excellent job at what I consider the single most important job the president has -- keeping Americans on American soil safe from attack. While terrorists have struck repeatedly throughout the world killing thousands of people since 9/11, the United States has not sustained another attack. Maybe it was because the administration was listening to our phone calls. Maybe it was because they were looking at what library books we checked out. Maybe the war in Iraq gave terrorists a convenient place to kill Americans so they didn’t have to take the extra risks involved in killing Americans here. Frankly, I don't really care what it was. We've been safe for over six years, and it has to be more than dumb luck. In spite of its many flaws I will always appreciate the fact that the Bush administration has successfully fought terrorism in the United States... something that I frankly thought was impossible the day after 9/11.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney My brother sent me these words to a NOFX song which seems just as appropriate to this topic as my Green Day quote: "someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool now angry mob mentality's no longer the exception, it's the rule and i'm starting to feel a lot like charlton heston stranded on a primate planet apes and orangutans that ran it to the ground with generals and the armies that obeyed them followers following fables philosophies that enable them to rule without regard there's no point for democracy when ignorance is celebrated"
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn I just jumped into this thread for the first time, but just wanted to have my little say: Clinton's legacy spilled over and caused Bush's failure. Clinton's legacy was that he made the American populace comfortable with plundering their own national treasury. Bush just expanded on that American comfort - especially once it became an expectation. Clinton created the neoconservatives.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Oh, here's an interesting wesite to check out about neoconservatism. <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html" target="_blank">http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html</a>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Clinton's legacy was that he made the American populace comfortable with plundering their own national treasury.> Huh? Clinton reduced the deficits that exploded under Reagan and Bush I, and actually created a surplus briefly. But you'll believe what you wish.
