Originally posted by West Coast
I think you have taken the moral equivalence to an illogical extreme. If you think anything Bush has done comes close to comparison to Saddam
intentionally gassing his own people, along with all the other brutal treacherous crimes Saddam and his delinquent sons perpetrated against their own
country men and women, then, you are ignorant.
War is war. It's not acceptable, by Saddam or Bush or Benny puny pun.
Saddam was merely a "war puppet" to create the havok nesecessary, for the American policy agenda to reign in and eventually take full control of
Iraq. Iraq been rich of oil recources and border the persian gulf a vital asset for America. If you think the American government cared so much about
a "democratic peaceful Iraq", why did Bush Senior let him live after the Gulf war. Remeber George Bush's father shook hands with this man and
traded weapons too!
I bet that you think the Iraq War is the worst atrocity in the history of humanity,
Grow up, It's like I'm speaking to a child right now. I
don't think that. I do think the Iraq war was unacceptable. I don't think American foreign policy is striving for peace or diplomacy, by mean's of
war and aggression throughout the world.
Before or after Bush came into office? Your argument is to blame Bush, this question comprehensively negates that argument... tee hee
As I
said grow up and stop "using the blame" excuse. Children behave like that.
Furthermore, and while I do disagree with a lot of the actions the CIA does or "doesn't" do, the CIA used Saddam as a proxy, nothing more, nothing
less.
The CIA used him, and allowed the situation to get ugly. That is and was the whole purpose of this unwarrented made up war!
No, its just another way to disguise your vehement fanatical hate.
Now your been ignorant and petty. Take a deep breath and learn to accept other people's view on their own feeling's. I've already told you stop the
personal jabs, and twisting of my words. I don't hate anyone. This is now my third to ask you to stop trolling and disrespecting other people's
viewpoint.
Yet you don't mention anything of great specificity... You're clearly a biased individual with an agenda.
This war was not acceptable, and these kind of action's of the last 8 years, was incompetent and making zero chance of peace. War doesnt work. It has
upsetted any diplomacy the western world has built up over the years. As we now today are in a very unstable world. America is now loathed. War
creates resentment and bitterness. Thanks to bad example's of your adminstration. Do tell me my agenda?
However, I need only revert back to my main talking points. Two countries are now free and prospering democracies that are experiencing certain
freedoms and rights they were never accustomed to before.
Back it up please.
Aid to Africa under Bush has quietly tripled, and increases in $billions more are expected.

I'm sure Bush cares alot about Africa.
Seriously get real.
The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the US used US naval assets to help assist victims. This was then, and still is now, an unappreciated burden the US
was/is expected to undertake.
But the Bush administration couldn't sort out Katrina in their own country, or give a duck about the
environment.
What part of it was illegal?
Invading on no proof of any weapons of mass detruction. This kind of behavior is not logical or sane.
If you want to say it's legal. Then Iran has the right to invade America legally, since America has nucs too! Sure this is right?
Also, tell me this, were you supportive of the Saddam regime and all their ill-dealings? You seem to think the US was horrible for going in, but under
Saddam, people were killed, tortured and mutilated for unjust causes. Why aren't you more happy that Iraq is free and becoming an ever increasing
prosperous nation?
If the CIA and previous American policies were not there, we wouldn't have this ravegery.
Iraq is not happy. Bagdad is destroyed. They didn't find any terrorist's. A million dead. Million's left bereaved. The oil industry is not in the
hands of the country. The country is now under the control of the USA directly. The USA control what goes in and what goes out etc. It's history
repeating itself. Where the superpower invades other lands.
Bush did not, nor has the US military, killed 1,000,000 Iraqis.
Then Saddam didn't kill his own people either

The CIA funded
terrorist's and all the weapons coming from your country did it

But Under Bush's administration, he declared this war, against the UN. He behaved
irratically and implusively. It is not acceptable to rage war like what we have seen over the last 8 years.
Additionally, those numbers are heavily skewed beyond belief. They do not differentiate Iraqis who have died from natural causes from those who have
died as a result of collateral damage.
Then the Bush admin should not have went to war. So how many people do you think it become's ok to die and not ok to die?
You are so pathetic, it's unbelievable.
There is no positive correlation to fighting a war.
Only sanity I've witnessed yet from you
by finishing the job and making Iraq a strong, prosperous democracy.
By what killing more people? How will the people be strong when
America has wiped a large percentage of the population, and those left to suffer. Do you call a country strong in this respect?
Only in places such as Europe, however, in Asia, the US is looked at favorably. For instance, India has 3x the total population of Europe, and
is the most pro US nation out there.
You live in the US how would you really know, especially since your reality of the world is your box in your lounge.
Have you seen the protest in countries, on their anger towards America over the years. you need to back up your statment's. Have you seen the riots
in South America? Have you seen the protest all over Europe and Australia. The majority of this world unfavours America sadly.
There is very few countries that support America. The majority of Asia do not support your country. Russia, Middle East, Pakistan, Iran, China etc.
BTW. get your fact's right.
Europe 500,000,000 million
India 1 billion people.
So your incorrect on India having 3x times the population of India
Only if the future is significantly brighter as a result.
Yes for America only of course. Iraq and other countries have to suffer for it.
It's called greed.
No, and if you remember correctly, the Bush admin used diplomacy with Saddam, but as he continuously restricted UN inspections, along with the intel
several other nations had, we had to act and act immediately.
No they didn't. Your going to have to explain what you mean by diplomacy. They
threatened him, based on nothing. Infact BusH made it clear he personally wanted to take him out. It was his father's wish. That is not acceptable
under political policies. UN inspections went after? why suddenly forget to mention this fact. When the UN found none, why did Bush take the hands of
his own country into an uneseccary war?
Also recall the US 'quietly' using effective diplomacy in disarming North Korea.
Why don't the US quietly disarm too?
Furthermore, regime change in Iraq was official US policy before Bush came into office (a man name Clinton is responsible for that).
Because
Clinton got paid to do the job. It was the USA that put Iraq into the mess it was in to begin with.
What war crimes? For Christ sake
What's your definition of a war lord.
Someone who kills 10ppl or 10m
[edit on 25-11-2008 by mind is the universe]