Steve Posted March 21, 2008 Report Share Posted March 21, 2008 While I'm no fan of Cheney and can't print what I think of some of his actions, and disagree with our Iraqi strategy, I would not want my president or VP to govern by polls. They were elected and that is their mandate to do what they feel is best. The public isn't privy to loads of information they have access to. The polls were against us getting involved in World War II but the pols knew we needed to get involved because the consequences were dire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted March 21, 2008 Report Share Posted March 21, 2008 ...I would not want my president or VP to govern by polls. They were elected and that is their mandate to do what they feel is best. The public isn't privy to loads of information they have access to. Hear, hear. And in addition to having more information, even more importantly they have responsibility. It is easy to be a private citizen, or even the leader of a militarily and economically insignificant country, as no matter what you say or do you will never be faced with and held responsible for the horrible costs of your actions or inaction. When one is the President of the United States one is uniquely responsible for the fate of millions. Whether the U.S. invaded Iraq or not five years ago there would have been unspeakable suffering in that country over these last five years, and there would as well have been the same people on this board and elsewhere screaming and accusing the "fascists" Bush and Cheney for their venality and corruption. To fail to understand this is to be too stupid for words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jitagawn Posted March 21, 2008 Report Share Posted March 21, 2008 Whether the U.S. invaded Iraq or not five years ago there would have been unspeakable suffering in that country over these last five years, Impossible to compare and a weak speculative stance. Tell that to the Iraqi poeple that dont have electric,water and some without any legs or arms OR any stability and allof the children without homes,the wives of GIS wo lost their husbands and a US economy in tatters with the Patriot act mocking our founding forefathers. If your son was draft age would you have cheered as he left for an unsubstantiated WMD invasion-doubt it. The Iraqi war Cheney and Bush are all hideous embarrasements to the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted March 21, 2008 Report Share Posted March 21, 2008 Impossible to compare and a weak speculative stance. Compare what? Speculate what? I made no comparison between the resultant carnage of the various options facing Pres. Bush. What I said is that there would have been carnage however he acted and that Bush would have been blamed in any event. Do you dispute these points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogueyam Posted March 21, 2008 Report Share Posted March 21, 2008 If your son was draft age... That you speak of "draft age" in reference to a country that hasn't had a military draft in over thirty years makes me suspect that you enjoy and/or have enjoyed recreational chemicals to a debilitating extent. Am I wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelseafan Posted March 22, 2008 Report Share Posted March 22, 2008 And here we go again... The lying, murdering, thieving, cowardly bastards: WASHINGTON â?? President Bush contended that Iran has "declared they want a nuclear weapon to destroy people" and that the Islamic Republic could be hiding a secret program. Full Story And there lies the problem, they COULD be hiding a secret program, Iraq "could" have weapons of mass destruction. I am belying the fact that Iran COULD be a problematic state, but we've been lied to so many times that its no wonder we have no belief in our politicians. I wish they would stick to putting their dicks in their secretaries rather than spouting out constant bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted March 22, 2008 Report Share Posted March 22, 2008 Iraq became a problematic state due to the USA influence. If we never supported Suddam, things may have turned out differently. If we never have supported Ben Laden, we might not have a war on terror. With the war in Iraq, all one has to do is remember the first usage of the expression "Axis of Evil". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted March 22, 2008 Report Share Posted March 22, 2008 The NIE report was a setback for the war party but they managed to ridicule it. The Iranians are being asked to prove a negative. A logical impossibility. No amount of inspections would make any difference. It was the same with the lead up to the Iraq invasion...the goalposts kept getting moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelseafan Posted March 23, 2008 Report Share Posted March 23, 2008 My point was not about the NIE or whether the US supplied Sadam back in the 80's. It was only to say that the politicians very rarely use truths, they cover themselves with "could" or "maybe" or "probably". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted March 23, 2008 Report Share Posted March 23, 2008 Iraq could have easily have become a pro US bastion in the Middle East if Saddam had been given the type of soft soap Karimov in Uzbekistan is getting. Or Musharraf in Pakistan for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.