Will Geaorge Bush talk to congress before he attacks Iraq or will he use the legal loophole to attack without the support of congress and the american public.Now this shows the value of picking a good president.Because of possible personal problems with Saddam thousands of innocent americans could get killed.On the other hand maybe he does know something about Iraq that the rest of the world doesn't know.And this strike could be a lifesaver.I think it's personal between him and Saddam.But hey i didn't vote him in so i can't feel bad about what he is doing.What am i saying i'm affected like everyone else.We could get dragged into a war we don't need and have 9/11 happening every other day if we are not careful.
[This message was edited Tue Aug 27 6:37:47 PDT 2002 by theC]

theC said:

Uh-oh, theC has spoken!!!

theC said:

I second what you are saying. Good news: W seems to be a little bit more careful now. The objections worldwide to his plans were overwhelming. Even Tony Blair cant back him up this time, Germany made it very clear that they wont even give money. last polls show that only 45 percent of all americans are supporting the war in iraq, last month it was 65 percent (however, its still too many. most of them are orgers, obviously). He does not have as much support as he thinks, and especially with no other country financing this little adventure, it might become a very expensive ball for the US, one they truly need to justify in front of the tax payers.

FUCK IT!!!
Do the DAMN THANG, and explain it later...
aint that how he got to be president in the first place?
and rite on time for summer sweeps... or fall sweeps.

I agree, C. I didn't vote him in either. But then again, did the people really vote him in? Nope. Al won the popular vote, and the numbers would have been less for W if the Truth would have been allowed to shine through.


Peace,
JD

JDODSON said:

But can you imagine what would go on if Al got in? He's a pussy (IMO). I bet he'd back right down after the Sept. 11th attacks. Whatever. We can't change what's happend, just hope and pray that Bush does the right thing. We'll never know everything that is going on. Hopefully Georgie will talk it over with Congress before making a decision. And hopefully we won't go to war.

RIIIGHHHTTT Al won the popular vote. But only if you count the "disenfranchised" voters who couldn't figure out how a ballot works. Oh, and that ballot...designed by Dems. Get over it. Clinton didn't have a majority in '92 either...but no one complained then. And BTW...Sadaam has already proved he has weapons of mass destruction and he wants to use em. But to answer your question, to remain within the bounds of the constitution...yes, GW should talk to congress.

00769BAD said:

I reluctantly agree!!!

doesn't it frighten anyone else that a rogue power like Iraq likely already has weapons of mass destruction? doesn't anyone else think a menace like that needs to be interdicted?

What's the answer to Saddam Hussein?

theC said:

that's an interesting thought, because when you think about WW2, 9/11 really did happen every day. I don't think people wanted to deal with Hitler then either, until it was too late NOT to.

Rudy said:

This whole preposition that Iraq may assemble nuclear weaponary applies to every country on the planet near enough.

aggie said:

theC
Disenfranchised???Gore won by a landslide in Cali,and a good margin in NY.This is where your brains and money are.Your hi-tech area Bush won because of the deep south
and texas where thechronic is
[This message was edited Tue Aug 27 16:20:35 PDT 2002 by theC]

Essence said:

theC
Nobody is even thinking that far.All we know is bush told us iraq is bad so that is who we should go after.To hell with what the rest of the world says.What the hell do they know.

what's really scary is that this week the minneapolis papers have been running articles about georgie, about how his daddy enacted a special authority in 1991 (gulf war) by which georgie can declare war ALLL by himself, without congress' support, and against the advice of his peers.

georgie is a fool, plain and simple. political connections and money bought him the election. he cannot speak intelligibly in public, seems to have trouble even thinking, and is carrying out his daddy's personal, ego-driven agenda to the detriment of our national safety.

i'd like to see georgie prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for his involvement in enron. dude knew what was going down, and if he didn't he should have because half his 'peeps' are former enron execs. enron money bought him his current position. he's an evil, corrupt entity. if i were his hairdresser, i'd be looking for that little 666 tattooed into his scalp . . .

XxAxX said:

theC
You are soo fucking on the money it isn't funny

theC said:

Your right, if the threat was so real surely every country in the World would be ready to take a bite out of Iraq, as it stands it's USA's personal war.

What I actually meant was any country in the World could assemble nuclear weaponary, who's position is it to judge who can be be trusted before the bang?

CarrieLee said:

But can you imagine what would go on if Al got in? He's a pussy (IMO). I bet he'd back right down after the Sept. 11th attacks. Whatever. We can't change what's happend, just hope and pray that Bush does the right thing. We'll never know everything that is going on. Hopefully Georgie will talk it over with Congress before making a decision. And hopefully we won't go to war.[/quote]


You know what...I love ya Carrie but I get sooo offended when people *assume* what Al Gore would have done..The fact of the matter is, Al Gore was one of *two* Democratic Senators who voted in support of the first Bush's actions against Saddam...So, your *p* theory is just straight out wrong..

besides, I would rather have a deep thinker like Al deciding what to do..its obvious George W isnt...Or we wouldnt be hearing laughable things like "axis of evil", or "wanted dead or alive"...

the man is as smart as a block of wood...

SkletonKee said:

my favorite is "evil-doers"

Aaron said:

or war on terror for that matter...lol.

what? are we after John Carpenter now? Or Anna Nicole Smith...it makes me laugh, instead of having an intelligent dialog about what led our peoples to be in this situation...W is busy creating soundbites and running around the country raising money for his and his parties re-election campaign...

oh wait, I just remembered another one, "Moral Authority"...straight out laughable...

Essence said:

so what you're saying is that we should give saddam the benefit of the doubt - because it's only fair?

get serious!

Rudy said:

uhh...Saddam has never been a real threat to the US after the Gulf War..Even Papa Bush's aids have come out and said that Saddam is less interested in engaging the US in War...Sure, he dabbles in instigates the Muslim community against the US...but, when did words become grounds for attack?

Remember: NEVER!! EVER!! has a country attacked another in *pre-emptive* measures...This could set a precedence that could ruin our country as we know it.

Rudy said:

theC
Listen to the REST of the WORLD!!!They can't all be wrong can they???Oh yeah i forgot deep down inside the rest of the world WANTS us to attack they just don't want to admit it

theC said:

is the rest of the world saying he's not a dangerous man? I have yet to hear anyone come to his defense

it's very scary to think about what might happen in a war, even unthinkable. but consider what could happen if we don't deal with that monster now

Rudy said:

theC
Read your local paper of the internet.Most(almost all) countries are against us attacking Iraq.

Rudy said:
-----
it's very scary to think about what might happen in a war, even unthinkable. but consider what could happen if we don't deal with that monster now[/quote]
-----
theC
We haven't dealt with him for a decade.Nothing has happened.
What about Lybia,Iran,Korea???Why don't we bomb them too,let's Take on the "whole axis of evil".Then we can conquer the WORLD!!!
[This message was edited Tue Aug 27 19:18:31 PDT 2002 by theC]

This was in the cards long ago. Baby Bush is trying to do what Daddy Bush couldn't get done; oust Saddam by any means possible. Daddy's orders.

what's even more scary is to think that there are people foolish enough to believe that america has the right to judge, condemn and declare war on another country all without presenting good cause for such actions.

and what about all the other 'monsters' out there? all the other oppressive regimes? following that logic when we're through with saddam we'll have to just keep on going until we've wiped out every single country which might pose a threat to us. . .

i'm not saying he's someone to look up to. he sucks.

but stop. and think. what happens when you poke a stick into a hornet's nest???

think of the vietnam war. did that do any good?

and this war will not be like any other fought before. this ain't your world war II. that was hand to hand combat, guns, trenches and stuff. this coming war will be nuclear warfare and germ warfare and planes flying over cities dropping loads of poison gas. millions more than died in the holocaust will die overnight in a war of this type. we can kiss los angeles, new york, chicago, and most of our major cities goodbye if we start this fight. and, the rest of the world will distance themselves from us. even our allies condemn this move. you think hussein won't bring it on? he's been getting ready for ten years now.

simply speculating that hussein might present a threat to us does not justify a pre-emptive strike. if and when we prove that he was behind 9/11 THEN we may have a case for war.

his conversation with congress, if it comes to pass, will be quite brief. they've been on the case for weeks now, coming up with the evidence.

so i don't know what good you think talking to congress will do if it's an invasion of Iraq you want to avoid...

theC said:

I'm sure Kuwait likes the idea of a man being in power who invades their country if he feels like it. If Saddam decided to do something similar all these countries (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan) would be BEGGING us to step in and help...

XxAxX said:

I disagree. I think we would easily win the war with minimal casualties. The last time we fought the Iraqi soldiers didn't even put up a fight. I don't see why this time would be different. Sure, we'll be going in to Baghdad and there will be some resistance.

As far as more terrorist attacks...they are going to happen regardless of if the US attacks Iraq. I don't think we are going to see anything on the scale of 9/11 again in my lifetime (cross fingers, knock on wood)

SkletonKee said:

Didn't mean to offend you, nor anybody else. I just don't care for Gore, but I really don't care for Bush either. I try to stay out of this politics bs because I really don't know too much that's going on. I've been following the Iraq situation a little more closely lately because it's really scaring me. But then how do you distinguish what is the truth???

The whole thing sucks and I just hope we don't go to war.
[This message was edited Wed Aug 28 8:14:39 PDT 2002 by CarrieLee]