Shut Up And Act

Robert Redford:

But the shock revelation has reminded the actor of the power of the media and the similarities between Bush's secret cover-ups and the Watergate affair.

He says, "There are deep similarities going on but where is the press? where is the press?"

"There is stone-walling, not telling the truth, getting people under wiretaps. The US public continues to be told things that are not true and what worries me is that we have these brave young American guys risking their lives everyday.

Comments

[Betty Boo]

Hey, Dan:

Shut Up and Blog About Missing White Women.

[clintcarter]

Hey, Dan:
If I may, on behalf of (most) contributors, thanks for this forum. And I have learned at least one thing... Betty Boo is a troll! ;-)

Back to the pit.
RHOD, since 1978, 37 acts of terrorism? 800 people killed? Did you know anyone who died on 9/11? I did. 18 yrs. in Manhattan, I was. I read your description of the evil done to Americans in this world and with a few word changes it would be no problem to have it reflect the evil that Americans have done to each other. Far, far more than 37 acts; far, far more than 800 lives. Evil in human beings everywhere is the foe, and there is no shortage of that in the USA or anywhere else. You do read the local papers, yes? Evil in Montana, evil in Green River, Oklahoma City, the Bronx, you name it. And in Afghanistan, 17 US men dead and we drop bombs on a house and kill 17 women and children and people barely look up from their morning coffee. Islamofascists hold no monopoly on evil, RHOD.
To hell with fighting for peace, RHOD. I'm fighting AGAINST war. And that's where the great power and leadership of the US can come into play. We can choose to FIND ways to combat the presence of evil everywhere by setting the kinds of examples that our religions and our societies recognize as unquestionably GOOD. And we can change the nature of conflict in this world if we truly want to because of the great force that we possess. It takes strength to do good in the face of angry warmongers and justice?seekers everywhere. How come when I hear the word justice it usually sounds like revenge?
And SALLY, The TRUTH, etal; you think I'm some sniveling leftist weakass liberal for that position? Your mama. A wiser man than I once told me to live my life as though everything were being written down. And that's why I would gladly stand before the nation and say exactly the things I'm saying here, and that's why I proudly sign my name to this. How about you, RHOD? Somehow I don't think so. I'm the coward? I'll kick your ass up and down the stairs, RHOD, because I'm FIGHTING AGAINST WAR. My daughter deserves a future and if you think we're going to defeat Islamofascism with bombs, you're dead wrong. We need ideals and leadership, not a profiteering war machine.

Brian Carter

[TheAlamo]

Excellent post Brian.
Most Americans do not realize we have military forces in over 33 nations. What does that look like to the world?
While we're TOLD that we are there to "help" the people, the facts are that we are there to help the hand chosen of the money powers to stay in office, so that "we" (right) can have more favorable trade status etc., etc.,
To the rest of the world it looks like imperialism. Check out how we are characterized in foreign newpapers. The world thinks we are trying to conquer the world. Whether it is, or is not true is IRRELEVANT. Why?, because when the rest of the world comes against us--it won't matter what is true--it will only matter what they think. I know the difference between a liberal and a conservative, and right wing and left wing---not a whole hell of a lot. Check the right and the left and you will find they are almost identical today. Communism on the far left--fascism on the far right. What is the difference? Only who holds legal title. Other than that, they are both police states. The USA is rapidly joining in, with the so called "patriot" acts and the new land confiscation laws. This is not college degree material. The common American should be able to read and understand all of these abominations. If not....then perhaps we are not the America our founders gave us.

[TheAlamo]

Get 'em Noel! :)

[TheTruth]

All three of you fail to see the forest for the trees... it's absolutely mindblowing.

No, Rhod and I are definitely not one and the same, we're just like-minded. (Yet another comment stated as a fact when it has zero merit. Catching onto a trend here?)

And, Noelle, "not bitter due to the loss of my husband"? LOL! You're so damn bitter that you're blinded by it.

Thank goodness our country is not run by people as narrowminded as you all. You still probably think the war in Iraq was about WMDs. LOL! Get off your high horse, get over your cynicism, and get real. Otherwise, if you hate America so much, leave, this country doesn't need you anyways. Canada is but a short drive away. ;)

[TheAlamo]

Clown brothers...
As usual, when one points out OBVIOUS illegalities occurring in government, the blind simply try to cover up their ignorance by "patriot" bashing...leave America etc.
Why don't you go back to my original posts and bring out some FACTS against the statements made? No, you won't do that because you cannot. No, name calling, profanity and "leave America" is all you are capable of. Says a lot of your intellectual ability--or I should say, lack thereof. You have absolutely no idea what an American even is, let alone telling someone to leave.
In case you don't know it, breaking the law is not a "right" of government officials. Hiding behind the scam that it is "unpatriotic" to bring out their crimes is very....Nazi of you. IF you were interested in freedom as you say--then you would want these people to answer for their crimes. In case you are not aware of it (which I doubt you are)the Constitution of the USA is the SUPREME law of the land. When one violates it (including congressmen, judges and presidents)--they should be tried, and if found guilty imprisoned--just like any other common criminal. This idea that you all have that these clowns are diety, shows how well the educational system has done its job. You not only attack those who seek to eliminate the wrongs, you promote and protect the criminals in doing so, which, makes you complicit. Your lack of knowledge is the most dangerous thing facing America today.
One thing is for sure. If you government slaves continue to have your way, we won't need to leave America. America is leaving us. You....of course..in all your majestic pseudo-intelligence just can't get it because you know nothing of which you speak. Why? Because the ONLY news you get is from MSM and the only training you have had in freedom is that which suits you---without the responsibility that is inherent in that freedom. Ah, but soon, these clowns will eliminate all politically free speech....then you will be happy...or will you?

[TheTruth]

You are WAY off, Alamo, on just about everything you say.

I learn everything from the MSM, and blindly follow things without actually learning about them??? ROTFL! Are you serious??? Do we need to rehash the one about the pot and the kettle again, Alamo?

You said that I "won't bring out facts against the statements you made", because I couldn't. Once again you're wrong, on both counts, though that shouldn't surprise any of us at this point.

I am at work, and have more to do in life than debate with someone whos mind is already sealed shut, and is completely unwilling to even entertain other schools of thought that differ from the ones they already believe and claim to be so self-righteous through. But just to show how far off you are, I will quickly, and briefly...

Listening to your unintelligent and trendy ranting makes me realize that you are just like those idiots who call the Bush Administration a "crime family", the Supreme Court "criminals" (your own words), and compare the "torture" that has been claimed against our US Troops to the torture that took place under the Baathist regime. Apples and oranges, bud, but in your blind cynicism you have lost sight of the reality of that, which is true across the majority of your extremist views actually.

Let's see... where to even begin....

"Why is the Bush background oil, and we are fighting "terrorists" only in oil rich countries? You think the criminals in N. Korea, China, don't rank as "terrorists?" -Alamo

OMG, you're one of those people that truly believe this war is about oil, aren't you??? LOL! Man, I don't know why I even hold a discussion with you, you are WAY too simple minded. Do I need to even point out the fallacy of this stance? We would LOVE to dismantle Kim Jong Il's regime, but we CAN'T, for two reasons: first, they are a MUCH stronger adversary than Saddam was, larger military, and they have nuclear weapons. We likely would not be able to successfully invade N. Korea. Secondly, they are so close to China that we could NEVER do it on our own, any move against N Korea MUST involve China, it's that simple. Would we love to dismantle the N Korean regime? You bet your bottom dollar we would! But we couldn't. Iraq we could, and did.

We made a preemptive move/strike against a growing anti-american sentiment and force that was building in the Middle East and gel'ing together. Combine that anti-American theology, with the wealth of Saddam, and throw in a powerful nation (ie: N Korea or China) who hop in at an opportunistic time, and that is an Axis force that would likely defeat us in WWIII. We knew that's where we were headed, knew we were losing our support and ability to move military forces in the Middle East (see the change in Saudi Arabia's policies towards us in the past decade), and realized WE had to make the first move, before we were stuck in a checkmate. Dismantling the Iraqi regime and instilling a Democracy in the Middle East, not only gives us a physical ally in the region (and a land to conduct operations through in the future), but the true hope and purpose is that it will serve as an example of freedom to the rest of the Middle East, a movement that once started is unstoppable, and will uproot the very entities that were growing to become our country's greatest threat. You are already seeing this in the younger generation in Iran who does not want to live in Islamic supression, but wants to live a modernized life; a generation that will one day overthrow the Islamic moolahs that dominate their society. Once freedom and technological advancements catch on, there is no stopping it. What is the alternative? Let the rest of the world globalize, while sections of the Islamic Middle East stay in a bubble of dark ages? It won't happen that way, so this change towards modernization is inevitable, and with it comes a pull towards freedom, and the free way of life. It is contageous, and once it starts, there's no stopping it, and it will tear apart the Islamic extremists, and in turn their threat to us. Instituting a Democracy in Iraq is the first step in this process, from our own perspective. THOSE were our our goals in Iraq, it is much more selfish than people who "don't get it" realize. The war had nothing to do with WMDs, it had to do with self-preservation, and future national security. Again, make the first move, before you find yourself in checkmate. WMDs were just the platform used to justify it to the world, as we couldn't have told everyone the REAL reason we were doing it. (More on this to follow).

And that is where you and I differ. I understand what the point of the war really was. You don't, so you just continually beat a dead horse. And yet you constantly profess that you are "more educated" than evetyone else. How laughable! I liked the quote above that was directed to you Alamo, "Your rhetoric bores me."

"... do you have a son, husband, daughter over there possibly being sacrificed so these neo-fascists can conquer America from within? Easy to cheer, when you have no risk." --Alamo

Wrong once again, pal, I've got several family members currently stationed in Iraq, and have lost numerous members of my family in combat so that idiots like you have the freedom to have your own opinions and run your mouth like you are right now. But I don't mind that, that's the beauty of America, I'm just thankful that Nation's defense and future aren't in the hands of people like YOU!

[TheTruth]

An editorial for you, Alamo, maybe it'll at least get you to understand the other side of the coin. Your views are not echoed by most of our society, they are extremist, and are clearly pegged on one side of the spectrum. Your weakness is that you are unable to even entertain ideas that contradict your own opinions. All you do is attack and block out. It's a shame. Read this, written on "Villainous Company":

Was War "Worth It"?
From all accounts, the American people are tired of war. From the safety of their comfy Barcoloungers and gas-guzzling SUVs they have determined that the cost of war - a cost they themselves have not had to bear - is too high. This conclusion is not surprising when one considers their appalling ignorance, both of history and contemporaneous events, on war-related matters. Rather than take the time to learn, the ADD nation finds it far easier to focus its attention on unsupported charges contained in a single paragraph from an unverifiable foreign memo.

Robert Kagan examines, in depth, the question of whether the Iraq war was "worth it". Rightly, he concludes that the real issue was never WMDs. Rather, it was the question of whether Saddam could be contained or not. This argument was also made quite clearly in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address:

To assess whether the Iraq war was worth it requires seriously posing the question: What would have happened if the Bush administration had not gone to war in March 2003? That is a missing but essential piece of the current very legitimate debate. We all know what has gone wrong since the Iraq war began, but it is not as if, in the absence of a war, everything would have gone right. Those who want to have this debate cannot simply point to the terrible toll in casualties. They have to address the question of what the alternative to war really would have meant.
There is not much dispute about what kind of leader Saddam Hussein was. Former secretary of state Madeleine Albright once compared him to Hitler, and the comparison was apt in a couple of ways. Hussein, as we will soon relearn in excruciating detail, had contempt for human life and no qualms about killing thousands of his own citizens and many thousands more of his neighbors' citizens, about torturing women and children and about using any type of weapon he could buy or manufacture to burn, poison, infect and incinerate political opponents and even entire populations, so long as they were too weak to fight back. This alone placed him in a special class of historical figures, a not irrelevant factor in determining whether his removal, even at the present cost, was worth it.
Kagan argues that Saddam was not just a homicidal maniac responsible for at least 400,000 Iraqi bodies lying in mass graves (with new graves still being discovered, a circumstance that gives rise to doubts we have fully searched all of Iraq for WMDs). Hussein also had a long history of attacking his neighbors. Kagan quotes several statements by Clinton-era NSC advisor Sandy Berger that containment was "not sustainable in the long run":

A more intriguing question is whether a decision not to go to war in 2003 would have produced lasting peace or would only have delayed war until a later date -- as in the 1930s. There is a strong argument to be made that Hussein would have pushed toward confrontation and war at some point, no matter what we did. His Hitler-like megalomania does not seem to be in question. He patiently, brutally pushed his way to power in Iraq, then set about brutally and impatiently making himself the dominant figure in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, using war and the threat of war as his principal tools. In the early 1980s he invaded Iran and fought it to a bloody standstill for the better part of a decade. No sooner had that war ended than he invaded Kuwait. He fancied himself the new Saladin, much as Napoleon and Hitler had fancied themselves the new Caesar.
Finally he looks at the future WMD threat - a threat President Bush said we could not afford to ignore until it was imminent:

...another fact not in dispute is that Hussein remained keenly interested in and committed to acquiring weapons of mass destruction, that he maintained secretive weapons programs throughout the 1990s and indeed right up until the day of the invasion, and that he was only waiting for the international community to lose interest or stamina so that he could resume his programs unfettered. This is the well-documented, unrefuted -- and unnoticed -- conclusion of both David Kay and Charles Duelfer. Whether Hussein would have eventually succeeded in acquiring these weapons would have depended on other nations' will and ability to stop him.
It is worth noting that these three factors are precisely those which finally persuaded me that war was inevitable. Unfortunately, the majority of Americans have either forgotten or never knew the facts. Furthermore, their impressions of our progress are willfully distorted on a daily basis by a mainstream media intent on presenting only the bad news of today and rewriting history to suit their anti-war agenda.

Inability to remember why we went to war coupled with an inaccurate picture of our current situation, render any meaningful cost/benefit analysis virtually impossible for the average American. As Chester notes, it's time for a pep talk. Americans must be reminded of the case for war. And the administration must counter destructive and easily disprovable criticisms like the 'imminent threat' meme and the Downing Street memo with facts.

It is said that the Tree of Liberty must be nourished from time to time with the blood of patriots. Likewise, the minds of a complacent and ill-informed public must be provided with facts to counteract the anti-war spin.

This is not propaganda, as the media will undoubtedly assert.

It is simply common sense.

[TheAlamo]

Interesting. Wrong, but interesting. (you do seem to have a couple of points right--and unlike you I WILL note those, but for the most part...very fascist)
I'll be back. You sure can write fast for somebody who has to work.
Look often! This will be fun. Easy, but fun.

[TheAlamo]

Part I
Well, heck Rhod, or Truth…whichever, you almost did it. You were almost able to reply without innuendoes and slander, but you just could not bring yourself to do so. But…I have to give you credit, you are making progress.

I won’t bother to go back to the beginning because you are able to do so yourself. You can easily see who began the attacks. What you guys did not take into account is that there may be somebody as good as you are at it. But…that is neither here nor there since we are supposed to be talking about issues instead of personalities---at least I believe that is the basis of forums.

So, I will get to your very long-winded verbiage. I admire the tenacity you have even when you are wrong…but you of course see yourself as “open minded” while for some reason only those that oppose your viewpoint have “closed” minds. Excellent propaganda attempt, but won’t hold mustard.

I quote you: “I am at work, and have more to do in life than debate with someone whose mind is already sealed shut, and is completely unwilling to even entertain other schools of thought that differ from the ones they already believe and claim to be so self-righteous through..”

You have just now…for the first time shown any school of thought other than diatribes and attacks. And…you are actually right about a few things, which, unlike you, I will be fair and point those out.

Okay, here we go: A totally false statement right off the bat. I quote you:
“Listening to your unintelligent and trendy ranting makes me realize that you are just like those idiots who call the Bush Administration a "crime family", the Supreme Court "criminals" (your own words), and compare the "torture" that has been claimed against our US Troops to the torture that took place under the Baathist regime.”

I’ll skip the personal attack portion because I am totally aware that insecure people have to resort to such to try to bring themselves to at least a semblance of equality, so let’s get on the rest of your statement.

NO Where have I brought up torture ANYWHERE AT ALL in any of my posts. I realize it is a good “trick” to try mixing falsehoods in to cover your insecurity, but won’t work with me. And you wish credibility?

Next, I will answer your statement about my using the word criminals, with a question. Let’s see if you know the answer. Is government, or a member of government excluded from obeying the law? Or only if a “group” of government officials break the law? Then it is okay? Or is it only okay when the majority of a governing body break the law? They, being “superior beings” should be allowed to break the law because………
Can’t wait to hear your answer to that one.

This part is funny: YOU: “Apples and oranges, bud, but in your blind cynicism you have lost sight of the reality of that, which is true across the majority of your extremist views actually.”

I will admit to being a might cynical due to the fact that I have seen this stuff ongoing and ongoing and it does tend to make one that way. If I am extremist, then I hate to think what you say about guys like Thomas Jefferson or Fredric Bastiat. I assume you DO know who they are. However, if being grouped with them makes me extreme—so be it. Proud of it.

Speaking of LOL. Your next slant is even more telling. Yep, this is just flat mind boggling for a supposed American. Sorry, but I just HAVE to quote you on this part too:
“We would LOVE to dismantle Kim Jong Il's regime, but we CAN'T, for two reasons: first, they are a MUCH stronger adversary than Saddam was, larger military, and they have nuclear weapons. We likely would not be able to successfully invade N. Korea. Secondly, they are so close to China that we could NEVER do it on our own, any move against N Korea MUST involve China, it's that simple. Would we love to dismantle the N Korean regime? You bet your bottom dollar we would! But we couldn't. Iraq we could, and did.”
Oh, before going into this, let’s all remember who put Saddam in power in the first place. OUR government. I know, I know. We just didn’t know he was evil. Same when we put Castro into power. Same when we made Chiang Kai Check sign an armistice with Mao in effect, putting him into power. Same, same, same old lie.

Now, on to your statement. Basically what you are saying here is that even though we know N. Korea and China are evil governments, both killing ant torturing their own people as well as those of other nations they don not rank as terrorists because we can’t conquer them. How sad. How hypocritical.
Yeah we could dismantle Iraq so we did. What about Castro? I guess that criminal is just too strong as well. How about Long Beach Naval base and the Panama Canal? Blackmail? Are we afraid of the Chinese? Hell then why don’t we just surrender and get it over with.

You see, Rhod, truth or whichever you are, you cannot have it both ways. IF we are fighting “terrorists” because they are “bad” (which I do not dispute) then that means “terrorists”—period. Otherwise we are only going after “selective” terrorists—easy ones, so to speak. But the big guys can just go on killing, torturing etc, and it is okay with us. You have a totally different view of America than I do—if that is your stance. If so, then you are no better than Hussein or anyone else like him.

Next….sorry but you sure wrote a lot for being busy at work. But I will say it is fun! Easy, but fun!
Now I am in agreement (somewhat) with the next part. Yes, it IS possible that Hussein could throw in with China, and even more likely Russia. Doubt whether anyone other than China would lift a finger for N. Korea and vice versa.
But next is where you lose it>>>
.” Dismantling the Iraqi regime and instilling a Democracy in the Middle East, not only gives us a physical ally in the region (and a land to conduct operations through in the future), but the true hope and purpose is that it will serve as an example of freedom to the rest of the Middle East, a movement that once started is unstoppable, and will uproot the very entities that were growing to become our country's greatest threat.”

Where in the HELL did you get the idea we have a right to topple one government and establish what we want ANYWHERE? And you compound the lie that it is by saying we showing the world an example of freedom? Give me a break. We CONQUER a country, and tell them we have made them free? SELF DETERMINATION? Yeah right. How you can walk around with this type of hypocrisy and assume anyone would accept you as credible is beyond me.

Just because you or I do not agree with what another country chooses to have as its governing body does not give us the right to FORCE change. If so, then I again make the statement…N. Korea? China? Russia? Cuba? Etc., IF you subscribe to the idea we have the right to do so, then I say let’s not be hypocrites, let’s “set them all free.” And you see no similarities with Germany in 1939? (BTW—don’t you think it strange that although Russia and Germany were allies at that time, the powers that declared war, only declared against Germany? They BOTH attacked Poland, and then split it---but no declaration against Russia, anyway that’s a whole other story

You see, America WAS a land of integrity. That changed along about the time of Teddy Roosevelt, and has gotten steadily worse. It is easier to use force and espionage, than trade—If you are the biggest kid on the block.

Integrity says if we go after terrorists—then that means terrorists. Castro, and all the rest of the criminals. Yep used that word again. If not then we are no better than imperialists, conquering that which is expedient, and using integrity as the “excuse.” Man if you cannot see that….

As far as Saddam becoming dominant in the Middle east—would never happen. Iran or Israel either one would have put an end to that before it ever began…especially if what you say about the Iranian people is true. And IF what you say about the Iranian people is true, then you have just eliminated your own position of “going to war” to set up a western style gov’t—simply because we obviously did not have to do so in Iran, and they are “changing “

People want our lifestyle—worldwide. IF we would have held to our own integrity, then just as you say it is happening in Iran (and DID happen in Japan, although we did conquer them. Not only that, had the idiots in government not sold out our treasury to the Chinese, they would not be in position to blackmail us like can right now—again different story though…although involved in a round about way, as you know)

This one is funny:
“Instituting a Democracy in Iraq is the first step in this process, from our own perspective. THOSE were our goals in Iraq, it is much more selfish than people who "don't get it" realize.”

First question. Can you name one democracy that has survived? Do you understand the difference between a democracy and a republic? If you do, then why do you keep calling the US a democracy, when it is (was) not? Secondly, what about the people of Iraq’s goals? Do you hold yourself so superior that you can make that decision for them? OUR goals should not have anything to do with a sovereign nation, other than what can be accomplished peacefully. The idiotic idea that we somewhere got the right to take over a country just because we want too is antagonistic—totally to the foundations of this nation.
(don’t use Saddam here—we put him into power. Not only that, to take him out of power, if it REALLY was necessary, he could have been assassinated. I guess you think we can put somebody in, but not take them out? Believe me, if Kennedy can be hit…anybody can be hit. There was no one who could have replaced him with the strength and power to continue business as usual.)

Well, heck, just when I think you are getting sane, you go and do it again:
YOU “And that is where you and I differ. I understand what the point of the war really was. You don't, so you just continually beat a dead horse. And yet you constantly profess that you are "more educated" than everyone else. How laughable! I liked the quote above that was directed to you Alamo, "Your rhetoric bores me."
You understand what the war is about, but I, (nor anyone else, I am sure) do not. Your statements are THEORY, just as mine are. The fact that you have a warped view as to how American power should be used, destroys what little credibility you may have been able to produce. Continually beat a dead horse? I don’t see a whole lot of repetition, maybe you need to read these two or three times? I “constantly profess that I am more educated than the rest?” Where did you come up with that? And who is “everyone.”
See, you just can’t do it. At times you are rational, even when you are wrong…..then you go off the deep end totally making up stuff, thinking that somehow that bolsters your credibility, when, it is totally fiction, and in fact eliminates what little credibility you managed to gain by the few coherent lines you did write.
Are you really that insecure? I realize your arguments are weak, but that does not mean you need feel insecure as a person. Hell, neither one of us is running for office (least I am not) and there is no prize.

The next part I will not disparage. If you have relatives in Iraq, or anywhere in our armed forces, I have never disparaged them nor would I. I have the utmost respect for our soldiers. And for your losses, I am sorry to hear that.
But the rest: Fighting for freedom? Are you serious? Hell Iraq couldn’t conquer Iran, or Israel or even Turkey. They have no means to invade the US. We’re not fighting for “freedom.” Position. Maybe. Oil—most definitely, but our freedom? Get a grip. Iraq nor Afghanistan has the means, nor the will to conquer America. Iraq was as much a threat to our freedom as Ethiopa.

Well, this is part one of your two posts. I will say, you cause a great deal of ground to be covered. Unfortunately, you are severely misguided in what you consider “patriotism” but my guess is that you are a victim of the public school system, and have not had the opportunity to correct some of the misinformation provided by the schools.

This is not meant to be demeaning, but if you aren’t a student of history and economics (and they DO go hand in hand) then it is quite possible that you have acquired these views from a very narrow study of the subjects. If that is the case, then I can understand your errors. I would not do well if we were in a math debate.
Okay….I will get to part two…soon as I can.
At least you have become fun to deal with!

[TheAlamo]

Ummm, this part is WAY OUT THERE!

PART II

Well, there you go again. Talk about rants. Sorry, but I have to quote you because I am getting the idea that you don’t remember what you write. So here we go.
YOU: “Your views are not echoed by most of our society, they are extremist, and are clearly pegged on one side of the spectrum. Your weakness is that you are unable to even entertain ideas that contradict your own opinions. All you do is attack and block out.”

My views are not echoed by most of society? Interesting. Tell me, how could you poll 200 million people in the last 24 hours? I am “extremist.” Why because I don’t agree with you? Or did you poll 200 million on that idea as well. See, you just cannot help but destroy any credibility you may have acquired by making ludicrous statements like that. You have no way of knowing whether either one is true, so why bother? Again, don’t destroy your own arguments before you even begin them. You wipe out any facts you may be able to put up here by showing such insecurity.

Man, I can see why your views are as they are. First of all, the beginning alluding to there somehow being a correlation between SUV’s and wars is nothing more than a propaganda piece. You can call it leftist if you want. In a free country, if you or I want to drive an SUV AND we are willing to pay the price of gasoline—then that is NOBODY else’s business, especially government. War and SUV’s have absolutely nothing in common except the same old propaganda lie that we, being “rich” in America should somehow feel ashamed of it, and give everything away to the ‘poor and downtrodden.”
Excuse my language on this part, but this is typical communist bullshit. The gas savings from everyone being forced to drive volkswagons instead of SUV’s isn’t even measureable, and it certainly has nothing to do with war. Oil does, but on a much grander scale that gasoline used by automobiles alone.

LOL…get this. I quote the clown.
“There is a strong argument to be made that Hussein would have pushed toward confrontation and war at some point, no matter what we did. His Hitler-like megalomania does not seem to be in question. He patiently, brutally pushed his way to power in Iraq, then set about brutally and impatiently making himself the dominant figure in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, using war and the threat of war as his principal tools.”

A strong argument to be made? Hitler-type megalomania? Man if you cannot see the manipulation here, then perhaps I gave you more credit than you deserve.
First of all WE put Hussein into power. Let’s begin there. WHO is responsible? Anyone involved should be held accountable for the deaths he produced. While I am in total agreement that the guy is evil, comparing him to Hitler? The person who wrote this obviously could not even pass history 101. Pure “sales” rhetoric.
Check this part out. This guy totally eliminates his own credibility with the next part of his lie.
“He patiently, brutally PUSHED HIS WAY INTO POWER…?” total lie. WE put Hussein into power. He did not have to wait patiently, and he had no struggle in getting there.

Man, you should check the FACTS before using crap like this. We are not dealing with my or your opinion here (unless you believe this crap) because it is a KNOWN FACT that we put Hussein into power.

(I DO agree that this bullshit will work on most of the population who have no idea what to think until they are told how to think—with articles like this. Truth? Who cares. AGENDA. That’s what matters. I hope this clown does not have the audacity to even claim he is an American.)

I quote the article again:
“...another fact not in dispute is that Hussein remained keenly interested in and committed to acquiring weapons of mass destruction, that he maintained secretive weapons programs throughout the 1990s and indeed right up until the day of the invasion, and that he was only waiting for the international community to lose interest or stamina so that he could resume his programs unfettered. This is the well-documented, unrefuted -- and unnoticed -- conclusion of both David Kay and Charles Duelfer. Whether Hussein would have eventually succeeded in acquiring these weapons would have depended on other nations' will and ability to stop him.”

While this may be true, where does ultimate responsibility lie? With THOSE WHO put him there in the first place. Anything he MIGHT have done is conjecture. And NO I am not defending Hussein, but I am calling for those who put him into power to be put on trial for their complicity in his war crimes.

Boy talk about arrogant…look at what this clown writes next:
“Inability to remember why we went to war coupled with an inaccurate picture of our current situation, render any meaningful cost/benefit analysis virtually impossible for the average American”

The excuse for war was first…terrorists, even though Hussein and Bin Laden have been proven to have no connections.
Next, since that didn’t work, the WMD lie was foisted upon us. We all know the results of that lie as well.
Then it was our “freedom”, which even the dumbest American can figure out—
Now it is “Iraqi” freedom.
Next week……..????

The wonderful thing for this guy and those for whom he works is that he is right about one thing. For the average American, this is too confusing. They will actually read this crap and believe it—because it is easy. They do not have to think, and since being told that the powers that be say everything is okay---then heck it must be okay. In this….we do agree. Cynical. Guess so.

Sorry, but this guy should be a screen writer for Hollywood. I had hoped you were beyond this type of manipulation, but it does give a glaring account of how and where you get your ideas.

[clintcarter]

What's more, I LIKE to use my scrollsaw...

[TheTruth]

*chuckles* Again, you fail to see the forest for the trees, Alamo. You just don't get it.

Go re-read my post above (not the other guy's editorial, but my post), actually READ it and grasp it, stop your constant blocking out and attacking that you just can't help yourself from doing. And maybe you'll start to get it. Maybe the light bulb will turn on. 'Cause man, you're just not seeing the big picture, bud.

Look at it more selfishly, Alamo, look at it in terms of "what did WE have to gain by going into Iraq". Stop approaching it as a "campaign for freedom", or purely a movement against a terrorist regime, and then casting that light on all the other elements of your argument. Step back for a moment and consider what the war's goals REALLY were for the US, solely for the US. Not what you were told, not what the media spins, but what really were OUR objectives, our reason for making the move.

You constantly mention Cuba, China, N Korea, etc etc etc... you are missing the point! We made the first move BEFORE we were stuck in a checkmate. That first move didn't involve Cuba or China or Korea. The citizens of Iraq will benefit from what we did, but stop thinking it was for them, it wasn't, it was for US! It was a military operation that we felt was strategically advantageoues and necessary for us for the future safety of our country (not in terms of a foreign invasion - my gosh do you spin things off into oblivion! - but in terms of the growing hostility in the Middle East and the amounting terrorist threat). How do you fail to see this?

I think we should just agree to disagree. I have no desire to change your views, a society without polarization would be frightening indeed. And I have ZERO interest in countering your OWN insecurities that you so conspicuously try to cover up by attacking me as insecure. LOL. What irony! The fat bully picking on fat kids. Pathetic.

A good debate is a good debate, and I'm always up for that. To your credit, for the FIRST time all thread you actually made an attempt to discuss, rather than to badger and bully, so I commend you on that. But as quickly as that flashed by, you ruined it by yet again presenting your views in a condescending "holier than thou" method... something that ruins any attempt of yours to hold a civil conversation.

You are not more educated than everyone else here, your views are not inherently more correct and thought out. (You claim you didn't say this, yet another fallacy. Go read your first few posts on this thread, time and time again you tell people they are "uneducated" for having views that are different from your own, inherently implying that you are more intelligent and educated than the rest of those here). Get over that, get off THAT high horse, and you are actually a rather intelligent person. But, alas, I have no interest in a pissing contest, and with your hostile nature it is clear that is all you desire. Your way or the highway. Well, thanks, but no thanks.

[TheAlamo]

truth?
Well, how did I guess that this was the kind of response I would get? You did not address antying, but....back to the attacks. And you wonder why I am condescending?
Actually what you call condescending was some coaching that you so obviously need, but as we can see by your confirmation of my statements, it had no effect.
I UNDERSTAND what you are saying about being "selfish" about Iraq, and it is obvious you do not understand the response thereto.
This is WHY I asked you about the Iraqi people...etc.
You seem very intent on pushing this conquest as the "right" thing to do, regardless of the justice of such. So, I once again re-state the fact that you are not an American. You are no different than the Nazi's or communists. Conquering nations for our own expediency and trying to cover it up as being for "their" well being is quite juvenile, and certainly not American.
However, in keeping up with the rhetoric of this whole affair (the "war" on terrorism) I can conclude that you are no more juvenile and inept than those who are carrying out this travesty at the highest levels.

You keep harping on this "uneducated" innuendo, and I could care less what your formal education is. You may have a Phd for all I know. Who cares, if the "education" produced the results that it did. The issue is not the letters behind your name, it is your own ability or lack thereof to understand the events of the time. Sadly, as we have seen, you have a very narrow anti-American view. Unfortunately, for us, this administration is saturated with those like you.

I wonder just how knowledgeable you really are, or whether you are just actually a part of the program. Makes me no difference one way or another, but if you are just an accident, and you acquire some knowledge of history and government, then watch. This country will continue to slide into fascism. I realize that you possibly have not had the same opportunities that others have had, but....it should not take long for you to do a quick study of fascism, so that you have a general idea of what it is. Possibly this could help you in your discovery.

As usual, you totally failed to answer my question about government personnel breaking the law, because you obviously support such. You attacked my use of the word criminal, but you have no ability to absolve those which were thusly labelled. Of course, I know why, but when in a debate, it is prudent that you take time to answer questions, or...else where is your creditbility?

This point you make is quite telling:
"You constantly mention Cuba, China, N Korea, etc etc etc... you are missing the point! We made the first move BEFORE we were stuck in a checkmate. That first move didn't involve Cuba or China or Korea. The citizens of Iraq will benefit from what we did, but stop thinking it was for them, it wasn't, it was for US!"

You totally missed my point in your eagerness to justify this conquest of Iraq. I UNDERSTAND where you are coming from. And it is wrong. I guess you just don't get it. Strategically wrong? Depends upon what this group has planned for our future as a nation. Morally wrong? Un-American. You damned right.
You see, taking the political side of the equation, without including the economic side is quite dangerous. It leads people to the conclusions that you obviously have made. The ONLY WAY you can see to interact with the globe is military power and positioning. In other words, since we are the biggest kid on the block we can just go take what we want. Bullshit.
You have never even studied the alternatives, so you know not.
One day it would behoove you to do an in depth study of the free market, what it means, what it could do and who would benefit. The only thing necessary for it to work is to eliminate criminals in governments. Shouldn't be too hard, since we put them there in the first place.

In any event, you are not capable of answering anything I stated above with anything other than verbal bashes, and you ask why do I feel superior? Hell, it's your fault--you make it that way. Truthfully, I could care less one way or another. I don't get paid for this. I was slightly encouraged when you actually made a few points during your long diatribes above, hoping to glean some type of intelligent response from you...but alas, you fell right back into attack mode, answered nothing I said with any substance....and you ask why do you get the idea that I am acting superior? You set your own level my friend, I didn't.
I took your post, point by point and explained the fallacies and mistakes. You, of course, countered with repetition of what you said above. Why? Because you have no other course. You see, no one is claiming superiority, you seem to constantly be stating such, but if you do feel inferior, as you must, then this is why you continue to harp on that tune rather than address the points I made. Nothing new here, and you do a fairly good job of masking it, but not good enough.
Go study some, and when you have some concrete answers, rather than attacks possibly there will be something to talk about.
Well..., you have a lot of work to do. When you feel a little more confident in your ability to address the points, please, by all means...come on back.

[TheTruth]

ROTFL! A typical Alamo-response, why am I not surprised? "Attack attack attack, I am this I am this I am this, you are not this, you are not this, you lack this. I understand everything and have researched it, you don't know anything and have formulated your opinions off of nothing of substance. I am so above you, get on my level and then come back and I'll talk with you. Bully bully bully." LOL!

When you come down from the fantasy world you live in, then maybe you are capable of actual discussion. You're a piece of work, Alamo, almost every statement you directed at me above is actually 100% applicable TO YOU! The irony in that is absolutely fantastic, comedy at its best. It shows how irrational your thought process is, and is a very common wall that most extreme leftist liberals use as their constant defense mechanism to maintain their "I'm right and you're wrong" mentality and avoid having to consider other opinions and schools of thought. Quite typical, I was hoping that maybe you were more sophisticated than that.

It's funny, your generalizations about me are so glaringly incorrect I can't help having a smile across my entire face when I read your posts. I didn't respond to the points in your post because, as said, you lost me with your attitude and approach long ago. There is no discussion to be had with you, Alamo, you've already made that quite clear. I could answer every one of your statements if I so desired, but with you there's nothing to be gained. I'm done with you, bud, you're right and I'm wrong. You're superior in every way and I am inferior. I get it. If that's the conclusion you want, fine, you got it. Meanwhile, I'll continue living on this planet.

Your rhetoric bores me.

[TheAlamo]

Oh, but you did respond......just as predicted!
Like I said before. When you begin something by bashing and attacking as you did, don't think it strange that you get it right back. Your consternation is that you found someone who can do it just as well, while still answering the points you made. Not superior, just better prepared.
Like I said before. You have shown it all right here in front of God and anyone who can read. You cannot answer the points, so you must resort to this. Nothing new, as I said before.
When you have some real answers...come on back.
(Don't forget to practice your goose step, you will do well in the new order.)

[TheTruth]

Go re-read this entire thread, and then tell me, who started the bashing? Your initial post was a bash, buddy, nice try! I didn't even join this conversation until you were already in a full-fledged condescending bash session against Rhod. Only then did I join the dicussion, Alamo, and you had already made your hostile demeanor quite clear. And so I figured, "When in Rome" ... And I say once again, I AM NOT RHOD. I am not him, and don't know him, I had never read a post of his prior to this thread. I just agreed with many of his points.

You falsely state that I started by swearing and bashing, not the case, you did, Alamo, and you continue to do so.

I say once again, "I could answer every one of your statements if I so desired, but with you there's nothing to be gained. I'm done with you, bud".

[TheAlamo]

Well, I did as you asked. Re-read my entire first post, and there was not one person attacked. Rhod, your alter ego was the first to lash out, and you chimed in right behind yourself....er....him.
Man, how can you just lie right here when all one need do is scroll to the top and read?
In any event, I notice you ..."could answer...if you so desired...."

Uh-huh.

Remember.....keep practicing your goose step---it will be unseful for you in the future!