If the president could stand for a third term...

[kallend 2,117]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fixed it for you. (You sound like the people you despise, judging the majority based on the minority.)

They are the fucking wingnuts who have gotten us to this point in time. They are the people who put this trainwreck in the Whitehouse. If they cant handle that now.. TOUGH FUCKING SHIT.... live with it.

Actually, both the democrates and republicans voted for the war in Iraq (along with many other things). If you don't realize that ...

The wording in the resolution did not "vote for war". It approved the use of force as necessary (to paraphrase). Clearly the president over-rode his authority, since we all (well, excepting rushmc) know that the use of force was not actually necessary at all (see section 3.B.1 of the resolution).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

It's clearly an ultra-Lefty website, with a whole bunch of information (which mostly looks like crappy analogies). I'm sure "somewhere" on that site there is some information on how we are clearly headed towards a right-wing controlled, marshall law situation.

I just didn't feel up to looking through that massive pile of bullsit, to possibly find compelling bit of info.

Quack Quack Quack.......waddle waddle waddle.

Okay. If you're incapable of seeing the site for what it is, how about directing me to where the case is made that "It will only take one major attack with ANY form of WMD or bio weapons...the right will have its wet dream just handed to them."?

Where specifically is the case made?

[Amazon 7]

The site show the analogs of fascism to previous fascist states.

There are far too many similarities to ignore them...as you seem to want to do.

This administration has set it in motion.. and those of you on the right do not seem to mind that.. and argue that wiretapping.. and other abuses of our constitution are just peachy keen with you... and its the price YOU are willing to go to, to achieve "VICTORY"....

So why let a few prison camps in out of the way places overseas..and surveillence of americans illegally.. and police powers that have been allowed to run amock... it seems the law enforcement agencies from top to bottom.. are using the Patriot Act to act on false intel.. at will.. and now little old ladies in their homes... are just seem as more "collateral" damage in the system without the checks and balances that once existed in our society.... all for the sake of "freedom".

I guess your freedom means something far different to you than it does to me.... at least once upon a time I raised my hand and swore to defend the constitution..
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; .

I guess for others who did not... it does not hold nearly as much meaning to them.

http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/flag/1bfc_pledge_print.html

Liberty and JUSTICE.. FOR ALL... I guess that is meaniless now too.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Clearly the president over-rode his authority, since we all (well, excepting rushmc) know that the use of force was not actually necessary at all

Berger thought SH had them and would use them again, Kerry thought the same, Gore too.

What possible reason did they have to support Bush?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Berger thought SH had them and would use them again, Kerry thought the same, Gore too.

Right, so they supported Bush in saying that if Saddam would actually pose a direct threat to the US, Bush would be allowed to use force (as per the resolution voted on).

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

It will only take one major attack with ANY form of WMD or bio weapons...the right will have its wet dream just handed to them.

Do you have anything more than a distorted take on the remarks of one person from three years ago to support your concern?

If so, I'd love to heard about it.

Here is one a little more current>http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356103,00.html"Israel is in the greatest danger it has been in since 1967. Prior to '67, many wondered if Israel would survive. After '67, Israel seemed military dominant, despite the '73 war. I would say we are (now) back to question of survival," Gingrich said.
He added that the United States could "lose two or three cities to nuclear weapons, or more than a million to biological weapons."
Gingrich added that in such a scenario, "freedom as we know it will disappear, and we will become a much grimmer, much more militarized, dictatorial society."

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[NCclimber 0]

You seem to overlook that our system has forced the Administration to abandon a number of its suspect practices.

All you seem to see is a slippery slope to Fascist Dictatorship. I have too much faith in our system to entertain such notions.

The Dems control both Houses of Congress. I don't think the White House has as much power as many people fear.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It will only take one major attack with ANY form of WMD or bio weapons...the right will have its wet dream just handed to them.

Do you have anything more than a distorted take on the remarks of one person from three years ago to support your concern?

If so, I'd love to heard about it.

Here is one a little more current>http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356103,00.html"Israel is in the greatest danger it has been in since 1967. Prior to '67, many wondered if Israel would survive. After '67, Israel seemed military dominant, despite the '73 war. I would say we are (now) back to question of survival," Gingrich said.
He added that the United States could "lose two or three cities to nuclear weapons, or more than a million to biological weapons."
Gingrich added that in such a scenario, "freedom as we know it will disappear, and we will become a much grimmer, much more militarized, dictatorial society."

Thanks.

It certainly sounds like Newt, as well as Mitt Romney, are saying this is a particular threat that we want to avoid at all costs.

Not exactly the same as Amazon's claim about "the right will have its wet dream".

[billvon 3,089]

>You seem to overlook that our system has forced the Administration
>to abandon a number of its suspect practices.

Very true, and it gives me hope that the system will be able to (eventually) rein in our executive branch.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Gingrich added that in such a scenario, "freedom as we know it will disappear, and we will become a much grimmer, much more militarized, dictatorial society."

Hell that is where yall have been takin us.....the politics of morality...the politics of fear...You are with us or against us.....are you now afraid of where you have been taking OUR country????

This administration is like a kid with his hand in the cookie jar... what has he learned from getting caught........DO NOT GET CAUGHT next time.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Berger thought SH had them and would use them again, Kerry thought the same, Gore too.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Right, so they supported Bush in saying that if Saddam would actually pose a direct threat to the US, Bush would be allowed to use force (as per the resolution voted on).

I didn't say what they voted on, I said what they said about SH and WMD's.

***

Quote

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country" --Gore, September 23,2003

Quote

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."--Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fixed it for you. (You sound like the people you despise, judging the majority based on the minority.)

They are the fucking wingnuts who have gotten us to this point in time. They are the people who put this trainwreck in the Whitehouse. If they cant handle that now.. TOUGH FUCKING SHIT.... live with it.

Actually, both the democrates and republicans voted for the war in Iraq (along with many other things). If you don't realize that ...

The wording in the resolution did not "vote for war". It approved the use of force as necessary (to paraphrase). Clearly the president over-rode his authority, since we all (well, excepting rushmc) know that the use of force was not actually necessary at all (see section 3.B.1 of the resolution).

I'm still looking for the phrase in there that says "If Congress thinks it is necessary"... can you point it out for me?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[SkyDekker 1,465]

None of those quotes indicate they believed SH and Iraq were a clear and presernt danger to the US though.

Secondly, there were other options to disarm him than invading the country. As a matter of fact, as it turns out, what was being done was pretty successful.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

None of those quotes indicate they believed SH and Iraq were a clear and presernt danger to the US though.

It goes to the frequently made claim that Bush intentionally lied about Saddam had WMDs.

Good point about clear and present danger, though.

As I saw it, whether or not Saddam had WMDs, there was little danger of him successfully sending one our way.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

It goes to the frequently made claim that Bush intentionally lied about Saddam had WMDs.

Good point about clear and present danger, though.

As I saw it, whether or not Saddam had WMDs, there was little danger of him successfully sending one our way.

I don't think there are many people who believe Saddam was honest about anything, including WMDs.

The premise for the invasion was a supposed threat of a mushroom cloud in the US, as paraphrased from another State of the Union.

That threat, to me, was a big lie, but one that sold the American public on the necessity of invading Iraq.

That statement was a lie then, is a lie now, but Bush needed that lie to be able to invade under the resolution as voted and passed.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

It goes to the frequently made claim that Bush intentionally lied about Saddam had WMDs.

Good point about clear and present danger, though.

As I saw it, whether or not Saddam had WMDs, there was little danger of him successfully sending one our way.

I don't think there are many people who believe Saddam was honest about anything, including WMDs.

The premise for the invasion was a supposed threat of a mushroom cloud in the US, as paraphrased from another State of the Union.

That threat, to me, was a big lie, but one that sold the American public on the necessity of invading Iraq.

That statement was a lie then, is a lie now, but Bush needed that lie to be able to invade under the resolution as voted and passed.

What statement are you talking about, specifically?

This one?
“The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .”

Here's a link:
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html

[billvon 3,089]

>What statement are you talking about, specifically?

Probably this one:

"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. . . .

Understanding the threats of our time, knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst, and we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring."

[GravityJunky 0]

Other :
I would blow my fucking brains out, before I voted for that shit!

*My Inner Child is A Fucking Prick Too!
*Everyones entitled to be stupid but you are abusing the priviledge
*Well I'd love to stay & chat, But youre a total Bitch! {Stewie}

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

This one?
“The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .”

Even if that were true, which is somewhat open for debate, and we assume that saddam had the ability to acquire it, and the ability to put it in an actual weapon, he didn't have the ability to actually deliver it to the US.

If he sought to acquire it, we can assume he doesn't have it yet, which also means that Iraq wasn't a clear and present danger to the US, which again makes the threat of an imminent mushroom cloud a fallacy.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

The premise for the invasion was a supposed threat of a mushroom cloud in the US, as paraphrased from another State of the Union.

Quote

>What statement are you talking about, specifically?

Probably this one:

"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. . . .

Understanding the threats of our time, knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst, and we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring."

Which SOTUA is that from?

[Amazon 7]

The one where he was about to start Dick and George's Excellent Adventure.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

None of those quotes indicate they believed SH and Iraq were a clear and presernt danger to the US though

"Without question, we need to disarm SH"-Kerry and then he voted to support the use of force.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

The one where he was about to start Dick and George's Excellent Adventure.

January 20, 2001 ???

I don't think Inaugural Addresses are considered SOTUAs.

[Amazon 7]

No the one where Bozo.. and the guy with his hand up the others ASS making the dummy's mouth work...... were talking up going to war VERY SOON to protect the American people, because a Mushroom cloud was going to happen any day now.. when Saddaam sent one of his aircraft to washington armed with a NUKULAR weapon.. the Iraqui.. cruise missile.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

No the one where Bozo.. and the guy with his hand up the others ASS making the dummy's mouth work...... were talking up going to war VERY SOON to protect the American people, because a Mushroom cloud was going to happen any day now.. when Saddaam sent one of his aircraft to washington armed with a NUKULAR weapon.. the Iraqui.. cruise missile.

And which SOTUA was this? Do you have an actual date?