Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Well would you look at this! I can not believe it. But for one of the first times in Laughing Place History, I do believe my sisters and I seem to be agreeing with jonvn--and on a very significant topic! ORGOCH: Hallalujah--er whatever it is yer s'posed ta say at a time like this! ORWEN: I nearly dropped my box of Krispy Kremes!
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< We don't have two trillion dollars. Yet we've already spent it. It's a bill that will have to be paid off for generations, burdening our nation's economy for decades to come. >>> What would the opinion of the above be for someone that had a strong personal belief that Christ was going to return to Earth within their lifetime?
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>The problem with viewing the war as nothing but an elaborate hoax for money is that anyone devious enough to launch such a plan would have surely planted the necessary evidence to show that Iraq had large quantities of WMDs.<<< Unless, K2M, those devious people WANTED Bush to look like an idiot eventually and "take the fall". Which is pretty much what happened.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***it would have been absolutely stupid to believe a mad dictator, with terrorist connections, a penchant for butchery and an entire army at his disposal would be better left in power. Bush had no choice, unless he wanted to gamble with the lives of millions of innocents*** So, why is Kim Jong Il still in power? He's even worse...he DOES have WMD's!! So why is Bush "gambling with the lives of millions" in THIS case. No oil in N. Korea, maybe?
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< So, why is Kim Jong Il still in power? He's even worse...he DOES have WMD's!! >>> Not to mention Iran, which is actively working on them. Since those three countries (Iraq, Iran, and North Korea) are the three identified as the Axis of Evil, why was Iraq chosen first?
Originally Posted By Mr X Cause Saddam tried to kill George's Dad! Didn't you KNOW that, SD? Why else would you go to war if not to act like a spoiled, idiot child? Bush should have been a King instead of a president. Oh well, he's working on fixing that problem. Just wait til we get another attack somewhere in response to Hussein's death and Bush declares his intention to run in 2007, because it's very dangerous to change leaders and he is a great wartime president like Lincoln was (that's a quote folks).
Originally Posted By SuperDry Although the military-industrial complex no doubt has benefitted from current US foreign policy, I don't think that was the driving factor (sorry, gadzuux), although that certainly didn't hurt convincing those that stood to benefit. Nor do I think that the assasination attempt on Bush Sr was the reason, although that didn't hurt in convincing W to go along with it. There's no single cause or reason, and there are several other important factors at work here, and different people supported it for different reasons.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <It must be frustrating, Doug.> It is. You point out the facts over and over, and yet people keep repeating these wild conspiracy theories, or claiming people lied when there is simply no evidence for it.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>You point out the facts over and over, and yet people keep repeating these wild conspiracy theories, or claiming people lied when there is simply no evidence for it.<< As most discussions on this board prove, "facts" are in the eye of the beholder.
Originally Posted By jonvn "You point out the facts over and over, and yet people keep repeating these wild conspiracy theories, or claiming people lied when there is simply no evidence for it." The problem with your position is that fewer and fewer people agree with you, and that means your facts are less and less believable.
Originally Posted By Mr X Yeah, Gerald Ford was such an emotional guy. Facts never got in HIS way. FACT...the republican party is distancing themselves from Bush II. FACT...most Americans are dissatisfied with the Bush II presidency, and have spoken loud and clear by rejecting Republican control of the House AND the Senate recently. FACT...Bush senior himself was moved to tears at the notion that "the wrong son" was elevated to the presidency, and has made a mess of things! (well, no...that's not a fact. interesting conjecture though. why else WOULD daddy Bush be so upset giving a speech about his "other son". and it's funny how Bush II talks about that fact that he "doesn't discuss policy with his dad". Huh?? That's just STUPID! Your father happens to be one of the few people in such a powerful position, and you don't CONSULT HIM!? Well, I always thought Bush II was an idiot anyway, so no surprise there. FACT...Doug is a really cool guy by standing by his beliefs, which I can totally respect.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I cry with pride for my children and my son is only 4. If my son happens to become a governor (I hope he doesn't chose politics...but if so, so be it) I'd be proud of him as well and that would move me to tears. Must there be an alterior motive?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>>The problem with viewing the war as nothing but an elaborate hoax for money is that anyone devious enough to launch such a plan would have surely planted the necessary evidence to show that Iraq had large quantities of WMDs.<<< Unless, K2M, those devious people WANTED Bush to look like an idiot eventually and "take the fall". Which is pretty much what happened.<< See, this is where the whole thing gets even more unlikely. For that to be true, the evil military industrial complex overlords would: a. Have to KNOW that there were no WMDs b. be able to script thousands of events beyond their control, everything from the response of military personnel at every level, in countless battles and skirmishes c. be completely, and I mean completely, devoid of any thought or care for the troops of the US and partenring nations involved in Iraq. d. be certain of the outcome of US elections in 2004 so that they wouldn't be discovered in the giant scheme. e. not a single member of the media, nor anyone at any level of government would ever uncover this plan. Sorry, guys, it's a bit much to take. You want to say evidence that countered their presumptions existed and they ignored it? Okay, I can believe that. But these increasingly elaborate Dr. Evil plots and schemes are just too wild for me. And, frankly, they're a real distraction that weaken the very good arguments about why we ought not engage in preemptive wars.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka To me, the fact that they might have ignored evidence because it didn't say what they wanted it to say is a type of lie. It's a lie of omission. When they were giving all of the "facts" about why they needed to go to war and they decided to ignore things, that is a lie in my opinion. It's a different sort of lie, but don't we teach our children that a lie of omission is still a lie? I don't know what their motivations for ignoring evidence are. I don't know if they had honorable reasons or selfish reasons...but it's obvious that Bush is extremely stubborn. I can't stress enough how stubborn I think he is. He gives us examples all the time of how he refuses to work for what America wants and is only interested in what he wants. Does that mean that he sneakily lied...not really, but it doesn't make him the most honest guy in my book.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>Must there be an alterior motive?<<< For you? No. For Bush senior...well, since he was famously quoted as saying something like "the Kennedy brothers? wait til you see MY sons (plural)"! You have to imagine he had some vision as to what they would do. And, him bursting into tears seems pretty relevant given everything that's happened (never saw him cry about George II, have you?). Again, MY point was more based around the fact that there is a clear LACK of respect between the former and current president...coupled with the fact that George the first has a clear, special fondness for Jeb. But, like I said, it's all conjecture.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I don't know what their motivations for ignoring evidence are.<< The bulk of the evidence, and Saddam's own actions suggested he was hiding 'something.' People in both parties and the UN thought so, hence the push for inspections. Sometimes, people with the very best of intentions, wind up making situations worse. Sometimes people become entrenched and surrounded by advisors who have become entrenched. I mean, think about the 2004 election. Wouldn't being able to campaign on a platform of 'I won the Iraq war' be much more a sure thing in these eleaborate plots than 'I am still fighting the Iraq war"? Again, for these schemes to work, the people conjuring them up would have to be rather unaware that things like insurgencies might occur to change everything.
