Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Bush's Speech to U.N.

I read some of Bush's speech to the U.N. and I wonder what kind of drugs must Bush be doing. He really is out of touch with reality.

Last time I checked, there were no WMD, no evidence linking Iraq with 9/11, no Hussein, no Bin Laden-but billions of dollars from our pockets going into Iraq to rebuild a country we shouldn't have been in in the first place. Saddest of all, the one thing in Iraq are American servicemen being killed daily to support Bush's quest for power. It really makes me quite sick to think that I voted for the Tyrant.

On top of it all, the money going inot Iraq is going to the Bush cronies. It really is quite disgusting to me. I sure hope this mess ends soon, but it looks like Bush is not going to bring the U.N. into Iraq anytime soon. He made no concessions on giving up power over there and used the tired old logic that if you don't support the U.S. invasion of Iraq, you support terrorism. Kind of like saying if you don't support PETA, you support cruelty to animals. It's all a bunch of crap.

kind of the way your post is a bunch of crap.....



(edited to make it clear that i disagree with rick_g)

Would you rather have Bush sitting on his hands and playing pee pee tickle with his intern like Klinton? At least Bush made a promise and lived up to it to kick ass and go after the scum bags. If it were up to Klinton, he would have been seen kissing Bin Laden and Sudam on the cheek and grabbing their butt's with the other hand. So, as an expert, what would you do different? I TOTALLy disagree with rebuilding the country and waisting our tax money on rebuilding a country that will continue to kill itself. I completely agree that we need to protect America and get OUT of the UN. Other than that, Bush has done a hell of a job. It looks a whole lot easier than it is. He has done a lot more than the pussey ass democrats would have EVER done. Flinch

Flinch-baby .... Com'on now ... stop sugar-coating it and tell us how you really feel on the topic <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

FLINCH - RIGHT ON!!!!!!! THIS COUNTRY SHOULD THANK GOD THAT WE HAVE A PRESIDENT WILLING TO STAND BY HIS CONVICTIONS..
DAVE

I'm a republican and voted for Bush the last time. I am sad to say that I will not do that next time. He has been a huge disappointment to me. I think the Iraq situation is emensely costly and now we have no alternative but to try and rebuild what we have wrecked without cause. There don't seem to be any WMD or super guns or any other real threat. Sure, guys, George kicked ass. Was it really needed and are you ready and willing to keep spending the money and lives to support him? I'm not. I think the invasion was a mistake and uncessary. I said so from the start. Let's not compare him to Clinton, please. Or, to anybody else either, for that matter. This is about the US world leadership and the Presidency of George Bush, nobody else. The economy under George's leadership is another question. Do Bush supporters think he's doing a good job there?

Rolly got to disagree with you on every one of your

points.

George is the man and here is why I believe so.



They did displace THE WMD. "Sadistic Insane" himself,

It's just a matter of time before they put him 6' under.



More people have died in France from heat stroke than

our troops in Iraq, thousands more, I'll bet drunks on the road here in America kill more people daily as well.



As far as our occupation of Iraq for some 6 months now?

How about Germany how long were/are we there now

since WWII.



I very much believe that George was handed from the

previous administration an

economy that was going south and due to his

above board leadership has prevented it from sliding

further.



I'll vote for George again, anybody can whine and snivel. Especially those who want or choose to believe the

propaganda that comes from the radical left.

I'll have nothing to do with the gun grabbers and

those who want to destroy our constitution.

Go ahead a vote for a President that will put

in a bunch of Ruth Ginsbergs. You wont be

welcome at my camfire.

Rick_g, I have to assume you have been brain washed by the leftist media, because I don�t want to think of you as a democrat panty waist.

I can not prove Sadam has/had weapons of mass destruction, but the games he was playing with the UN inspectors, I am reasonable sure he did. Sadam was killing his own people. We were spending a hell of a lot of money keeping the no fly zone and massing troops to defend the area. We were getting shot at although the news didn�t want to report on it. So we sent in ground troops. We kicked ass. Now all the nut cases that want to kill Americans are heading to Iraq to �attempt� to kill Americans. Congratulations, now we have two options. We can go home (as most middle eastern radical predicted) and be prepared to terrorist that breed in third world nations where there is a power vacuum. OR stay the course, have sand in our boots, pay the price, spend the time. MAYBE, just MAYBE we will not be fighting terrorist on US soil in a year or two. Maybe, just maybe Iraq will not be a thorn in our side and a [censored] hole of the middle east.

BTW, Iraq is the size of California. More people have been killed in California than in Iraq for the same time frame.

An English saying " In for a penny,in for a pound "

I am for George. He has done a job that had to be done. My only problem was going to an area that has fought for hundreds of years and really expecting to change the minds of the people.

I know it isn't the American way but the release of anyone under arms originally was not smart.

An old friend from WWII said that after his unit liberated the first POW and internment camps, no prisoners were taken. I can understand the mentality that would create. Any one who has seen the camps would understand. As I said, it isn't our way, but. Anyone who tries to tie rules and civility to war is in error.

My $0.02.

Oh yes, did you recognize his use of the term grave yard instead of cemetery. That is typical East Texas.

Bush is the President of the United States of America. Just what 'quest for power' are you referring too? I can't imagine position with more power.

Those people who just can't understand that these things take years, not days, truly amaze me.

The power that comes with controlling the worlds largest oil supply. Why do you think a two bit player like Hussein got so much attention? Look how much attention Charles Taylor got. Not even close.

It's just too bad that Bush had to lie about his reasons for invading Iraq. Once I heard that Bush had lied about Iraq trying to procure nuclear fissionable fuel from an African country, and that he new the documents purporting the sale of the fissionable material were faked, I new we were in for a propaganda session and everything from then on out would probably be lies. The WMD, the terrorist link with 9/11, all lies. Yet, 70% of the U.S. citizenry believes that Hussein was linked to Bin Laden. What a masterful job the Bush administration did in pulling the wool over the eyes of the American public.

i do not agree with most of the presidents policies..... i do support him on his position in iraq. saddam hussein has asked islamic believers everywhere to carry the war to America.....

i am ready. Mr. President Bush appears to be ready. if you are not ready, you must not have been awake for the last few years.

it seems to me that any one who defends the fallen iraqi regime flirts with mantling themselves as "ENEMY, foreign or DOMESTIC".

BW is correct, in that the president has nothing to gain in empire building..... there is simply no percentage there..... and it will take time, there are no simple solutions in iraq..... john w

this was found in one of saddam's palaces. i am sure that you can call it propaganda or a fabrication if you want.







anyone who thinks that there was no connection between saddam and terrorism is in complete denial.

as for the reconstruction funds going to Bush cronies, bechtel corp. is one of the largest, most experienced, and most capable of the energy service contractors.... who might detractors and naysayers recommend..... the backstreet boys???

rick

You are making the typical "news" spiel arguments against the invasion of Iraq..The facts are we could of/should of went in right after the first go around as soon as they started jerking the UN inspectors around and firing on aircraft enforcing the no fly zone!

We have totally turned around a country of 23 Million people, soon we will have a democracy, and hopefully a Republic, in a region wrapped with religeous tyrants..

Whoever made the comment about Bush's cronies getting some money out of the deal, exactly who would that be? You mean the American companies who will be employing thousands of Americans to rebuild Iraq??

It's a shame so many in this country have lost the guts to make a stand to try to make the world a better place..how many more fallen buildings would it take for them to realize this will not just go away on its own?

This could have been taken care of under the Clinton administration through a CIA backed Coup led by Iraqi military and Kurds, but ole gutless former President crawfished and got a bunch of good Iraqi's killed..

Rant mode off..

Mike

john_g,

Your certainly welcome to share your opinions, and I too was dissappointed to learn that some of the intelligence was misleading. But...

I belive that the invasion of Iraq, and the ousting of Saddam has sent the desired message abroad. The USA (under this administration) will take the fight to the terrorist, wherever they reside. That may not mean much to the actual terrorist, but I've got to believe that the rulers of the hosting countries got the message LOUD AND CLEAR. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Those governments are now looking very hard at their decision to allow such orginizations to exist within their borders. If our actions in Afganistan and Iraq have reduced the amount of support terrorist orginizations receive from those countries, then we're making progress.

Sure there are countries like North Korea (which many Iraqi War opponents like to point to) which may harbor terrorist groups, but the administration has to weigh the advantages of eliminating hostil goverments against the cost of war with said countries. It seems logical to me, to deal with the 'Axis of Evil' countries based on a scale of 'how much damage are they inflicting on the US, versus how much damage will we incure if we attack them'. If we take several of the 'easier targets' (and no target is easy to individual Service Member who gives his life, or is wounded) with obvious terrorist connections, then we're getting more 'bang for our buck'.

Remember, if you don't vote for Bush, then what is your other option?...

Rick_g

Why do you think that the reason we defeated Saddam has any thing to do with controlling oil ? Do you remember what happened in the Gulf War of 91 ? We could easily have taken control of Iraq and Kuwait then if we wanted control of the oil. We didn't do it then and won't do it now.

We attacked Iraq for the following reasons:

1) Prevent him from providing aid to the terrorists.

2) We can now threaten Iran and Syria who provide aid to terrorists.

3) We showed the rest of the world that they should not mess with us.

We pay attention to the Middle East than Africa for the following reasons:

1) the Middle East is a source of a vital commodity and we want to protect our access to it.

2) The countries who produce oil have a lot more resources that can be used to threaten us.

Bush did not lie about our reasons for invading Iraq. He did not lie about Iraq trying to procure uranium either. He only reported the claims of British inteligence.

Bush did not lie about WMDs. We knew that Saddam had WMDs, that he had used them against Iran and his own people. We also knew that Saddam had a large supply of the chemicals used to manufacture poison gas and germs to conduct biological attacks that he could not unaccount for. Saddam refused to meet his commitments to provide proof of what happened to these WMDs. He only said that they were destroyed. Do you think that it would have been wise to take Saddams word that they were destroyed ? We cannot afford to take that chance that they were not destoryed.

Conrad and others, these post's were in jest surely,?? Please let me know when W.O.M.D. are found with the mechanics to deliver them. Gee I read the Washington Post other International papers daily via the Internet and have yet to find proof of the allegations posted above, I have no love of any Terrorist countrys or supporter's but do like to see proof of any allegations.
Oh by the why is know body questioning the stockpile of W.O.M.D. held by Israel and their stockpile of Plutonium, why has the whistle blower of their capabilities been held for 8 years in Isolation.
I don't know guys I s'pose I just like to see balanced media presentation, I dont think that all that CNN presents on Primetime is completly objective.