BUSH IS EVIL
Find a Conversation
BUSH IS EVIL
| Wed, 09-08-2004 - 10:51am |
After reading all these posts, its seems fruitless to even argue with eachother. Bush is just plain evil. That's it. He will be remembered in 100 years (if he doesn't destroy the world before then) as a terrible person, like Pinnochet, Stalin, etc. There is no arguing. He is causing misery and heartache to too many people to ignore this fact.
Bush just wants to start a holy war. And the fundamentalist Muslims want to keep him in power so the war can begin.

Pages
Sorry, that's just false. What they reported was that they were being denied access to areas and people who could give them the real answers.
They were actually getting into even the palace and Iraq was being very cooperative at the end. They just did not find any evidence of any WMDs of any kind. They found evidence there had been some but it was long gone and nothing there any more.
For purposes of discussion, let's say you could tell us their names. But they apparently aren't what could be called well known international experts. So even if you could give us names, it wouldn't mean anything.
So you say I wouldn't believe you anyway. Well that's true for several reasons; they could be less well informed than they appear to be to you, they could be exaggerating to make themselves look better, maybe you misunderstood them. All possibilities you disagree with I'm sure. But the reason we like links here is so we can check out the info too & make our own decisions. You are making these statements with no way for us to verify the allegations naturally doesn't meet the standard of evidence people here expect. There are other possibilities too, the homeland security consultant was probably given a briefing that includes worse case scenarios for his own safety. The defense contractor has an interest in keeping that business going. So my lack of enthusiasm comes not from doubting you, I'm sure you completely believe what you've been told, but I see this info from you in a different light than you do.
And lastly, you didn't respond at all to this part of my post;
"I heard somewhere else, & online too, altho it was a while ago, that Saddam hated Muslim fundamentalists. Seems our info is in direct contradiction. But I hold my info to be more reliable since it didn't come from unnamed sources."
Are you choosing to ignore info that doesn't fit your preconcieved ideas?
And every time there is a protest, there are people who would like to participate but are unable to, so the total number of people artound the world who are against Bush & the Iraqi war is what then? 30 million? More? Even if you don't agree with them, this should give any intelligent person reason to hesitate.
< Nor do I doubt the presence/voice of thousands of anti-war demonstrators. Nor do I doubt the authors of 'leter to the editor'.........But they simply dón't represent "the rest of the world", do you honestly believe they do? >
And I believe that those less fortunate have a moral duty to at least try to become self-sufficient and not expect or (even worse) demand others support them.
<<"The international fight against terrorists needs an international approach as well as a domestic one.">>....what makes you believe it isn't there?
What makes you believe it's the sole responsibility of Bush/the US to fight against terrorists, and gather worldwide support?
Why do you seem to ignore that there's a Coalition in Iraq and a slightly different Coalition in Afghanistan?
http://messageboards.ivillage.com/iv-elpoliticsto/?msg=2910.109
I really am annoyed with that term of "going it alone". The US is nót and has never been "going it alone". Kerry loves to repeat this nonsense, and in the same breath says that the US needs to make amends with its allies. He can ONLY be refering to France, Germany and Belgium..... ignoring and dismissing the others.
A reminder: e.g. my country has (proportionally)
Pages