It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Gov. G.W. Bush said if elected President, he'd invade Iraq

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:24 AM
reply to post by ChineseSuperGenius

I think the invasion was a mistake but...

If you have a horse stuck in the mud there is no point in arguing about how it got stuck just get it out. This is from another earlier post I wrote about this topic.

Edit to Add: We need to learn from this and not repeat the process.

Yeah most of the violence has been Iraqi on Iraqi for the past two or three years. What they also count are the deaths caused by insurgents as being victims of the US

I threw in a little story about how Iraq may have to return to a police state in order to maintain peace just like Good old Saddam did in order to stop the violence between the two groups who are now blowing each other up again.

After Years of Secrecy, a Glimpse Into the Numbers of Civilians Dead in Iraq

As sectarian violence drove the number of civilian deaths in Iraq to thousands per month in 2006 and 2007, many Iraqi ministries, morgues and hospitals were under government order not to release the embarrassing figures, and the prime minister’s office generally disputed the ones that did leak out.

American forces in Iraq were no more helpful, often refusing to release figures or claiming that they did not exist. Obtaining information on the deaths was an exhausting, grisly and often clandestine affair, and — Iraq being Iraq — no two sets of figures ever seemed to match exactly.

11 Iraqi soldiers killed in bomb disposal accident

MOSUL, Iraq, Sept 25 (Reuters) - Eleven Iraqi soldiers were killed on Friday in a roadside bomb disposal accident in northern Iraq, Iraqi security officials said.

Bombs kill 3 near Shiite shrine in central Baghdad

BAGHDAD — Two bombs exploded moments apart near the tomb of a revered Shiite religious figure in central Baghdad on Saturday, killing three people and wounding 22, police and hospital officials said.

The first bomb went off next to the tomb of the ninth-century sheik, Othman al-Omari, where a number of people were praying. A few minutes later, a car bomb exploded in a nearby parking lot as crowds were gathering. The shrine was damaged.

Iraq civilian deaths are highest since April

BAGHDAD, Sept 1 (Reuters) - The number of civilians recorded killed in violence in Iraq shot up to 393 in August, its highest level since April, after a spate of huge bombings caused carnage in Baghdad and northern Iraq.

Figures from the ministry of health showed a big increase on last month's 224 violent deaths in Iraq. The figure was also slightly higher than the 382 killed in August last year.

Iraq death toll in August highest in 13 months

BAGHDAD — Violent deaths in Iraq hit a 13-month high in August, official figures showed on Tuesday, raising fresh concerns about the country's stability after the government admitted that security is worsening.

Statistics compiled by the defence, interior and health ministries showed that 456 people -- 393 civilians, 48 police and 15 Iraqi soldiers -- were killed, the highest toll since July last year when 465 died in unrest.

There were also 1,592 civilians, 129 police and 20 soldiers wounded.

Iraqi death toll in August is the highest in more than a year

A total of 456 Iraqi civilians and security personnel were killed in attacks in August, the government figures show. It was the deadliest month since July 2008, when 465 Iraqis died violently, though the tally was far lower than at the height of the civil war in 2006 and 2007 when monthly tolls sometimes soared past 2,000.

Could a police state return?

He had a point. The Shia-led government has overseen a ballooning of the country’s security apparatus. Human-rights violations are becoming more common. In private many Iraqis, especially educated ones, are asking if their country may go back to being a police state.

[edit on 3-10-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:25 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:28 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:35 AM
reply to post by ChineseSuperGenius

I'm not sure if they are ready for a representative type Government.

Yes The Iraqis are a honorable and ancient people but they have never had that type of freedom. They cant even get along within their own religion. Sunni vs. Shia. So who are we to try and force our version of Government on them?

I feel that if they wanted that type of freedom they would have risen up and forced the issue a long time ago. They have always been dominated as a people by one form or another of strong central control, That's all they know. Not everybody in the world is ready for an open society. Freedom of religion etc.

They have 0 experiences in these matters. So we should not be surprised that they fall back on what they know. Attacking the differences instead of embracing variety.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:38 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:44 AM

Originally posted by ChineseSuperGenius
reply to post by SLAYER69

I totally agree with your point. I dont think they know how to handle freedom or even understand it, and even more importantly they dont value it.

[edit on 3-10-2009 by ChineseSuperGenius]

Yes, that's sad but true. Middle Eastern culture is based on Sharia law... a theocracy basically. And although I can't wrap my brain around it, that's how they like it.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:59 AM

Originally posted by Angus123
Yes, that's sad but true. Middle Eastern culture is based on Sharia law... a theocracy basically. And although I can't wrap my brain around it, that's how they like it.

We will never make it to a Type 1 civilization if we don't learn to get along.

Just a thought.

Watch the whole video.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:03 AM

Originally posted by ChineseSuperGenius
reply to post by SLAYER69

I kinda of agree with what you say. This is why disagree with Bush's desire to Liberate them. You cant set people free who werent wiling to earn their freedom by fighting those that oppress them. People who gain freedom by proxy cant handle the responsibility and sacrifice that freedom demands. I guess another way to say it is that nothing worth having comes free of cost.

China person. You seem like you would like us to think you are American. And that you can speak for American policy. Your speak seems to come from two corners of your mouth. What can you say for yourself when it comes to your sacrifice for freedom.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:46 AM

Originally posted by ChineseSuperGenius
reply to post by jd140

Great point JD. We all know how those bleeding hearts like to make up things about GW just to make him look like the Devil. He is going to be 100 and in a wheelchair with alzheimers and they will claim he tried to rape a woman in his resthome. Poor guy cannot catch a break.

your kidding right,,,,, who needs fantasy land when reality gave us more than enuff to talk about for years to come

why do people refuse to admit bush was terrible and obama will fail as well,,,, by letting party affiliation blind them to the horrors that both these candidates are, will be and both are out for anyone but the avg american

posted on Oct, 6 2009 @ 03:34 PM
Due to recent concerns over increased drug overdoes in
New York communities I sense what was once stated about
government control by drug money that Bush went to
Afghanistan first to appease the drug cartel then finished off
the oil trade with the IRAQ venture.

Just a thought.
Conspiracy forums always said it was drugs or oil so why would
anything change.

They still miss a few conspiracies.

posted on Oct, 6 2009 @ 05:20 PM

Originally posted by Angus123
Yes, that's sad but true. Middle Eastern culture is based on Sharia law... a theocracy basically. And although I can't wrap my brain around it, that's how they like it.

I'm not entirely sure that is really that big of an issue with not being able to handle a free open society. Look at France and the UK they have allowed it in their countries and for the most part it's doing OK from what I can gather anyway.

Side note; What happened to Chinadude?

Oh well another one bites the dust.

[edit on 6-10-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 06:28 AM
Didn't Bush's first Treasury Sec say in his book the administration was planning an Iraq invasion within the first month of taking office ? Wolfowitz said it was the easy target. They should have followed the Powell doctrine.

Who thinks there should be oil concessions from Iraq for "freeing its people from tyranny" ?

Carve out a 100x100 mile chunk of prime oil land and call it even. Put all our forces there to guard it. And get the pumps started. That's how they made it sound to the public. The oil would pay for the war.

posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 04:23 PM
Where would Gore have gone after the 9/11/01 terror attack.

Given the TPTB would have been working on the terror plot
and would have suggested war with somebody.

So Bush had some inside telepathy or prediction abilities we never
knew about. He didn't say Afghanistan and he went there first.

Bush did what some powerful people do, go to war.
Bush read the minds of the many powerful people wanting to go
to war with IRAQ.

It doesn't make him a bad person.
He just has great mind powers we thought he never had.

posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 05:09 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by ChineseSuperGenius

Exactly but many Americans didn't know that was festering under Saddam. He kept the peace with extreme brutality. Now we have a civil war on our hands.

We don't do good with civil wars.



Move in and take over, done well perhaps with Hawaii and Philippine
and Cuba Islands and other locations.

We do better with Islands.

posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 09:36 PM

Originally posted by Angus123
Not that anyone that's been paying attention didn't know this already, but here's proof Bush had his mind made up about invading Iraq before he even was even in the White House...

Clinton did the same.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

I don't see in source for it in your link.

posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 07:16 PM
I see a problem here.
There mind was made up.

Was there ongoing geopolitics and world news that caused these
great leaders to focus on the future as they did.

So their mind was a product of their environment.
So guess their past ideas are not so strange but Clinton needed
the guarantee he would not be impeached if he bombed Osama.

Clinton finally struck and missed and we got 9/11/01 attack as
predicted by Osama.

<< 1   >>

log in