Check out the video that's sweeping the nation. It is great!!! If you're not quite sure about who to vote for this election year, I'd highly recommend viewing this. A vote for Kerry is a vote for War!... and no War!... uh... War again!... but well... uh... no war... but wait... I think now it's war... or was it no war? Well, whatever opinion you have Kerry supports it! {Sound is needed} http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/080304v1.wmv ----------------------- "Good friends are hard to find. Especially in tall grass." - Scott E. Roeben II

---

right... what about Bush? does voting for him leave any alternative? or just one, and that's war?

---

. . .and they call Bush a dumbass not fit to pick his own nose, never mind govern a country. . .

---

and these 'other alternatives' would be? negotiating with bin laden?

---

and how does war with iraq connected with bin ladden?... i'll give you a hint - no connections.. bush had to be honest with everyone... here is the truth: 1) sadam is the madman that kills his own people (especially during the times reagan and bush sr were in the office and supported him); 2) he is a threat to stability of middle east and therefore or oil interests; 3) sadam is not a direct threat for the territory of usa or any american; 4) war in iraq is needed to liberate people from the dictatorship but it will make our war against terrorism much harder (i wonder how many republican would've supported the war if bush said this - the truth); 5) the war will be long and hard.. will cost a lot of money (i.e. we will have to increase taxes - which we did), a lot of dead and woned americans... 6) people of iraq will not treat us as liberators.. we will have to impose freedom on them... if bush would said that, i would support this war.. but i cannot support stupid liers (i.e. our president) and their mismanaged war...

quote:

---

Originally posted by ivanivanix: and these 'other alternatives' would be? negotiating with bin laden?

---

lyosha ****************** What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.

---

lyosha
******************
What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.

Snake’s is right – President Bush, despite all intelligence reports (foreign and domestic), should have known that there were no WMD in Iraq!! First he stole the election and now he failed to see (using his psychic powers) that there was nothing wrong with Iraq!! How could he??!!

---

For example, if I believe that someone stole my jewelry and it is at their house, and then I invade their house, kill a bunch of people, but do not find the jewelry, it is not unfair that the buck should stop with me, and I should be held responsible. Bush had reasons to believe that there were weapons, and he had reasons to doubt it. He was told it was a "slamdunk" by some, and he was told that it was not by others. The degree of confidence required to invade a country however was pretty easily achieved, as he was getting his arms and legs pulled by his brain-trust cabinet. Congress on the other hand (as well as the rest of us), did not have the information that the president had, or at least not all of the information. The president demanded our trust, and the original vote for war authority (which if I remember correctly was 100-0 in the senate) was based on trust. It is not now unreasonable to make a case that the trust was violated. I am not saying Bush should have known. And he will probably (i hope) never make such a mistake again, because his threshold for preemtive invasion has been moved to where it should have been in the first place. He is responsible for making judgements for which he should and will be held accountable.

---

________________________________________
"Я это понимаю на рациональном уровне, но не могу принять на эмоциональном" --Бизнесмен Борис Березовский

quote:

---

Originally posted by Egor: For example, if I believe that someone stole my jewelry and it is at their house, and then I invade their house, kill a bunch of people, but do not find the jewelry, it is not unfair that the buck should stop with me, and I should be held responsible. Bush had reasons to believe that there were weapons, and he had reasons to doubt it. He was told it was a "slamdunk" by some, and he was told that it was not by others. The degree of confidence required to invade a country however was pretty easily achieved, as he was getting his arms and legs pulled by his brain-trust cabinet. Congress on the other hand (as well as the rest of us), did not have the information that the president had, or at least not all of the information. The president demanded our trust, and the original vote for war authority (which if I remember correctly was 100-0 in the senate) was based on trust. It is not now unreasonable to make a case that the trust was violated. I am not saying Bush should have known. And he will probably (i hope) never make such a mistake again, because his threshold for preemtive invasion has been moved to where it should have been in the first place. He is responsible for making judgements for which he should and will be held accountable.

---

Egor, was WMD issue the ONLY reason given to us to go into Iraq?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TAP3AH: Egor, was WMD issue the ONLY reason given to us to go into Iraq?

---

Wasn't addressed to me, but yes, initially it was the reason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 412:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TAP3AH: Egor, was WMD issue the ONLY reason given to us to go into Iraq?

---

Wasn't addressed to me, but yes, initially it was the reason.

---

412, I knew that you or snake will say this and this is why I didn't address this to you... But since you were kind enough to reply, please read my other post with top 10 reasons...

---

It was not the only reason. I have not read your other post yet (I am about to), but for many democrats who voted for the war, that was the reason that tipped the scale.

---

________________________________________
"Я это понимаю на рациональном уровне, но не могу принять на эмоциональном" --Бизнесмен Борис Березовский

quote:

---

Originally posted by Egor: It was not the only reason. I have not read your other post yet (I am about to), but for many democrats who voted for the war, that was the reason that tipped the scale.

---

So they say… So they say… If we in fact found WMD but could not prove tortures, they would still call Bush a liar and say that that particular reason was decisive… So far democrats have proved to me that they are simply power hungry bunch of careerists who will do whatever it takes (lie and flip-flop) just to get elected and satisfy their hate against President Bush.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TAP3AH: So they say… So they say… If we in fact found WMD but could not prove tortures, they would still call Bush a liar and say that that particular reason was decisive…

---

That's not just what they are saying now, that's what they always said. The weapons were THE "over the top" reason why the war was approved, not just by democrats in congress, but by the American electorate at large. (this is shown in all polls over the last 2 years). For me personally, it was always the best reason out of the 100 others that we both would probably agree on :) As far as the torture, no one has ever doubted it, and no one doubts it now. Not the democrats, and not even france :) Although I think Michael more tried unsuccessfully.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TAP3AH: So far democrats have proved to me that they are simply power hungry bunch of careerists who will do whatever it takes (lie and flip-flop) just to get elected and satisfy their hate against President Bush.

---

But you would admit that you are pretty harshly biased, wouldn't you? You dislike democrats very strongly, which makes your criticism seem subjective. I am personally very turned off by the democrats as well. They were lured into a trap by Bush, when it was unpopular to dissent, and they chose to trust him. Of course they had to flip-flop later when they found out they were mislead about the weapons. As a result, they look like fools. I do not think flip-flopping is bad in principle, i think it shows intellect when done in moderation. Situations change, and information changes. Like I said before, Bush flip-flopped on his nationbuilding policy when we invaded Afghanistan, and thank god he did. Unfortunately he decided not to flip back.

---

________________________________________
"Я это понимаю на рациональном уровне, но не могу принять на эмоциональном" --Бизнесмен Борис Березовский

quote:

---

Originally posted by Egor: That's not just what they are saying now, that's what they always said. The weapons were THE "over the top" reason why the war was approved, not just by democrats in congress, but by the American electorate at large. (this is shown in all polls over the last 2 years).

---

I gonna have to refer you back to the beginning of this topic: http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/080304v1.wmv

quote:

---

Originally posted by Egor: I do not think flip-flopping is bad in principle, i think it shows intellect when done in moderation.

---

Well, to me it shows lack of planning and weakness in principles...

---

WMD (ready to be used withinn 40min) was not the only reason.. the main reason was the statement that Iraq is imminent threat to United States of America (a lie) and that Iraq was connected to bin laden (a lie)... Bush had all intelegence but he only picked the one that suited his agenda.. then he presented this to the american public (which called withholding information - another form of lying)... so yes, bush is a lier and i belive he should've been impeached for lying in the state of the union - the lie that lead to death of thousands of people (most of them innocent civilians); and for incompetent conduct of the war... as for torture - most of the turtures and murders in iraq were committed in 80s - the time when we (republican administration) supported sadam and helped him to gas his own people... it is very nice that finally we remember that we helped the murder ans decided to remove him... lyosha ****************** What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.

---

lyosha
******************
What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.