Progress in Congress? Opinions, please

[Dave Schwartz]

Reuters Link (http://today.reuters.com:80/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=governmentFilingsNews&storyID=2007-01-05T211551Z_01_N05265843_RTRIDST_0_USA-CONGRESS.XML)


U.S. House passes more ethics reform, budget rule

By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON, Jan 5 (Reuters) - The new Democrat-led U.S. House of Representatives on Friday passed a second batch of ethics reforms in as many days and resurrected controls they said would help end deficit spending.

One day after taking over the House after Republicans' 12-year rule, Democrats won rules changes they claimed would restore civility to the badly tarnished chamber and curb "earmarks" -- special-interest money and tax breaks often secretly inserted into legislation.

The move won applause from some of the most conservative House Republicans, including Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona, who said Democrats "had more guts than we did to tackle earmark reform in a meaningful way. I compliment them for that." much more...

[dylbert]

Here are some results:

1. Scheme dictators
2. Demitasse crotch
3. Shattered comics

You can't make this stuff UP... it is hilarious!

[highnote]

Reuters Link (http://today.reuters.com:80/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=governmentFilingsNews&storyID=2007-01-05T211551Z_01_N05265843_RTRIDST_0_USA-CONGRESS.XML)


I've heard a lot of bi-partisan back slapping these past few days since the new players have been sworn in. Let's see how well everyone is playing together 6 months from now. :D

[rrbauer]

It's pretty easy to be cynical because, after all, these are politicians talking. If they remove "earmark" spending (and not just name it something else or slightly change the process) they deserve some kudos.

[Tom]

Considering dems are just a evil and crooked as repubs, you have take this crap with a grain of salt. anyone got any data on how many checks were cashed at the Congressional Bank after the swear-in? :lol:

I, unlike some libs here, do not root for failure. I hope they live up to 10% of what they promised. It would be monumental. I have little hope and less respect for any government stooge, but I still will support them if they do genuiniely good things. and of course, I still believe in Santa Claus.:rolleyes:


The acid test - come Monday, will they address REAL issues?
We are in a position where our military is turning tail and running away from mexican drug deals violating our borders. This cause to call a time out and everyone sit down and ask - WHAT THE HELL IS THE MATTER WITH THIS COUNTRY ANWAYS????????

Whoever gave that order should be tried for treason and hung.

[Lefty]

Will these Dems fund the wall that's supposed to be built between U.S. and Mexico? Any bets?

[Tom]

You got a better shot at building a wall between us and Canada.
BOTH parties wnat illegal to come here. Both sides and Bush, tri-partisan.
All are content to sell out this country. Very funny how the repubs failed to fund it when they voted for it. That was noting but a campaign ploy - the repubs never had any intention of protecting our borders - those rotten SOBs.
While I don't ;like dems in charge, the repubs we had were sickening bastards.

If only that fourth plane on 9-11 had found it's target........

The only way illegal crossing will ever be controlled is if concerned citizens do it themselves. Perhaps a row of corpses will replace a wall.....

[Secretariat]

Will these Dems fund the wall that's supposed to be built between U.S. and Mexico? Any bets?

God I hope not.

It looks like ethics reform (and boy was it needed after the Delay and Abramoff scandals) was first business. Probably next is minimum wage, and whenever GW figures out what his new plan for Iraq is and which generals he wants to fire next, then I imagine that'll be the next big item.

For now, it's 10 seconds into the first quarter, anybody's guess.

[Tom]

So securing our borders is an ethical issue????????

[DJofSD]

resurrected controls they said would help end deficit spending.

If this means restoring some of the oversight committees that were abolished by Bush's co-conspiritors, then this is a good move.

[46zilzal]

Will these Dems fund the wall that's supposed to be built between U.S. and Mexico? Any bets?
what a waste of money

[kenwoodallpromos]

Here are some results:

1. Scheme dictators
2. Demitasse crotch
3. Shattered comics

You can't make this stuff UP... it is hilarious!
"Hi Democrat Sect"

[GameTheory]

what a waste of moneyWaste of money because it won't secure the border, or because securing the border is a waste of money?

[Show Me the Wire]

what a waste of money


Money well spent.

[JustRalph]

Landmines are cheaper..........

[JustRalph]

God I hope not.

It looks like ethics reform (and boy was it needed after the Delay and Abramoff scandals) was first business. Probably next is minimum wage, and whenever GW figures out what his new plan for Iraq is and which generals he wants to fire next, then I imagine that'll be the next big item.

For now, it's 10 seconds into the first quarter, anybody's guess.

If you don't know what Bush has in store by now? You have a problem. Suppose you are a General 2nd in Command and have had to sit back and watch our troops be leashed for the last 2-3 years......... you have been chomping at the bit to increase troop levels enough to build a ten thousand man force of killers to start chasing down the bad guys. You thought your day would never come. But suddenly those guys in front of you just got "re-assigned" and you move up. In fact one of those guys in front of you suddenly decided to retire....what kind of message do you think that sends to you now that you are in command. BTW, you are gonna get a troop bumb of ten thousand too. Do you want to suddenly get re-assigned in the near future? I doubt it.

I hope I am right.............. and the Dems stay the hell out of the way.

If I am right, you will soon see reports on Aircraft moving back into Kuwait and Iraq etc. Air Support being bumped up is always a clue. And it happens usually about a month before the shit hits the fan.

[46zilzal]

so more can die for nothing...great

[hcap]

War is too important to be left to the Generals. Let alone the guys that brought us into this fiasco, the guys that supported those guys, and for sure the guys on this board who supported those.

Ralph, I see you are chomping at the bit.
Killers? Land mines? Iraqi civilians are da enemy?

Watching them old rambo movies are we? On steroids
I guess the Iran adventure is gonna require tons of popcorn.

[Tom]

Waste of money because it won't secure the border, or because securing the border is a waste of money?

Since he lives in Canada, build a fence along that border to keep here there would be money well spent! :lol:

[46zilzal]

Since he lives in Canada, build a fence along that border to keep here there would be money well spent!
would be a bigger waste of money there since it is so much longer. Interesting tidbit though: the Army Corps of Egineers keep the border "clear cut" of all trees so one can see it from the air for very long streches.

[Lefty]

what a waste of money
Why? First step to controlling the border.
sec, you don't want the wall because...

[JustRalph]

War is too important to be left to the Generals. Let alone the guys that brought us into this fiasco, the guys that supported those guys, and for sure the guys on this board who supported those.

Ralph, I see you are chomping at the bit.
Killers? Land mines? Iraqi civilians are da enemy?

Watching them old rambo movies are we? On steroids
I guess the Iran adventure is gonna require tons of popcorn.

You are right. I am. I am hoping that we actually decide to fight a war, this time. You gotta kill a few people to make a war. And in this case, a whole lot more people. Why does that fact evade you? It is a war. Not a debate team practice.

[skate]

well man, we gotta look at what we have.

'Paygo' is not on current entitlements.

so what is it that you (house) are gonna cut?

Military? after all the crying 'about not enough troops", gees.
Education? Great idea, but Never Ever gonna happen.
Defense, Hwy, borders, Space program, Police , Cia, fbi, what you cutten Sweatheart? Nothing, says skate.

so you raise taxes and slow down the economy, just to be able to say "we balence d the budgit".

whereby the National Debt will increase even greater. but you wont here of it, cept from

the Skate

Money will be in the hands of the Gov., and not the People, GDP will fall.

While war in Iraq will become a Victory.

[Show Me the Wire]

Landmines are cheaper..........

Too indiscriminate. Cattle and other livestock will be at risk, otherwise a good idea.

[Show Me the Wire]

so more can die for nothing...great

They only will die for nothing if the U.S. withdraws.

[hcap]

JustRalph
Originally Posted by hcap
War is too important to be left to the Generals. Let alone the guys that brought us into this fiasco, the guys that supported those guys, and for sure the guys on this board who supported those.

Ralph, I see you are chomping at the bit.
Killers? Land mines? Iraqi civilians are da enemy?

Watching them old rambo movies are we? On steroids
I guess the Iran adventure is gonna require tons of popcorn.RalphYou are right. I am. I am hoping that we actually decide to fight a war, this time. You gotta kill a few people to make a war. And in this case, a whole lot more people. Why does that fact evade you? It is a war. Not a debate team practice.Again
War is too important to be left to the Generals. Let alone the guys that brought us into this fiasco, the guys that supported those guys, and for sure the guys on this board who supported those.Track record, dismal. Why oh why should any of us accept any of your prognostications about what we should do now in light of your totally wrong assumptions. Not only that but the continous shifting of blame away by out-right lying about what youse guys actually said.......

http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_01_15/article1.html

Selective Amnesia

The pundits who sold the Iraq War change their tune and bury their records.

by Glenn Greenwald

"When political leaders make drastic mistakes, accountability is delivered in the form of elections. That occurred in November when voters removed the party principally responsible for the war in Iraq. But the invasion would not have occurred had Americans not been persuaded of its wisdom and necessity, and leading that charge was a stable of pundits and media analysts who glorified President Bush’s policies and disseminated all sorts of false information and baseless assurances.

Yet there seems to be no accountability for these pro-war pundits. On the contrary, they continue to pose as wise, responsible experts and have suffered no lost credibility, prominence, or influence. They have accomplished this feat largely by evading responsibility for their prior opinions, pretending that they were right all along or, in the most extreme cases, denying that they ever supported the war. "

************************************************

If I didn't know better I might get the idea that we should just sing along

http://www.bartcop.com/cheney_sing_along.jpg

[Show Me the Wire]

You know what you do with mistakes? You erase them.

[Show Me the Wire]

What the Dems need to do is secure the Southern border and bring back manufacturing jobs to the U.S. from China. Current erroneous policies are funding China into a formible opponent on our dime.

[Dave Schwartz]

War is too important to be left to the Generals. Let alone the guys that brought us into this fiasco, the guys that supported those guys, and for sure the guys on this board who supported those.Track record, dismal. Why oh why should any of us accept any of your prognostications about what we should do now in light of your totally wrong assumptions. Not only that but the continuous shifting of blame away by out-right lying about what youse guys actually said.......

I am not enamored to this war. As someone said on this board about the time we invaded Afghanistan, "If you are in favor of war, you've obviously never been in combat."

However, before saying that "the whole thing was a mistake" I would ask the question, where would Iraq (and the world, for that matter) be if Saddam were still in power?"

The mistake, IMHO, was not in invading Iraq but rather in staying so long in Iraq.

I recall being (personally) highly critical of George Bush (senior) for letting go of Saddam when he had him. When asked several years later why he did not completely topple Saddam, he said that no matter how hard they tried, he and his advisers could just not come up with an exit strategy.

And here we are today without an exit strategy.


When we (many of us) look at the GWBush legacy, we have a tendency to lump the entire middle-east thing together. My opinion is that the invasion of Afghanistan was a good thing; they were a terrorist-supporting nation and we sent the message, "Attack the U.S. and you lose your country." That is a right and proper message to send.

A similar message was sent when we attacked Iraq. LOL - Remember the "Mother of all battles?" Saddam clearly supported terrorism and claimed he had and would use WMDs.

So, attacking Iraq was a good thing to do. Think back to how relatively unscathed our troops were when victory was clearly earned in a relatively short time (and well ahead of "schedule").

The mistake has obviosuly been staying to long.

We American's have a legacy of helping rebuild after we conquer/overthrow. That is, on the surface, a good thing. It is akin to offering your hand to the bully you just beat up.

But what about the guys that will not be helped? We overthrew Saddam because of his threat to us. Fine. Leave his country in a state of shambles. Send the message clearly: "Attack us and life as you know it on this planet is over. Rebuild with the same stance and it will happen again."

Sure, this sounds a lot like "might makes right." So, instead we live in the world that the Muslims would have us live in? I don't think so.



So, in closing, I think George W. did it right - up to the time where his ego got in the way. Now it is costing us too many American lives and dollars. (In order of importance but the "dollars" are not without value.)



Just my opinion.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz
May this year be a better one for all
of America's sons and daughters.

[Tom]

The mistake was not nuking them and never having gone in to begin with.
Much more powerful message.

Problem is now, here we are. The only solutions start from today and where we go and how we get there tomorrow. This will take a lot, and the dems would rather continue to point fingers and re-hash the past and try to assign blame rather than address a real solution - because they have no clue what to do.

This is the uttmost of ignorance - "What do we do about Iraq?"
"We never should have gone there in the first place!" Duh???????

[hcap]

Problem is that "youse guys" appear to all have graduated together fro the GW Bush Used Car Academy. Why after being sold a lemon would anyone wanna buy another from any of these alumni?

Not only that, but each alumni is not honorable enough to stand up and accept the blame for the extreme sourness of said lemon. What happenened to the service agreement? I guess an admission of responsibility is needed before you will honor the contract. So far, none of these slick salesman-you know- the ones with the pencil then moustaches-will even do that. Seems to go for the pencil lips on this board as well.

Sorry guys I ain't buyin it, and neither is the rest of the country.
So Slick Tommie, no I ain't buyin nukin.
And no Fast Ralphie I ain't buyin land mines, or killin civilians who dress up as Islamofascississts.....

No wonder the US auto industry is in shambles.

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah, the US just sucks. How about you guys make it a point to once again show us how poorly the stock market is doing. Remember, you did this when it was going down a couple of years ago....you pegged it on Bush's poor domestic and international skills.

Funny, you haven't mentioned the stock market in quite some time. I guess it doesn't fit your agenda at the moment. But the US auto industry does....

Laughable.

The point here is the anti-Bush crowd really wants to paint this man as Satan (as does most of the Middle East). YET, you pound your chests way too hard in order to get this point across.

The fact of the matter is that the Bush-bashers on this board have themselves repeatedly told us how Iraq was NEVER a threat to the US. If this is so, then the current situation in Iraq should NOT be as big a topic as it is being presented by the Bush-bashers.

If Iraq isn't a threat, then what's all the fuss about? Yeah, we invaded Iraq, but it's not like we haven't done it before. It's not like Saddam wasn't worth taking out (the US has a history of invading countries to take out their leadership, so this is NOT unprecedented). It's not like we've suffered catastrophic casualties to American forces (3,000 lives lost - every LIFE lost is devastating in the small scheme of things, especially to the hero's loved ones - but averaging 1,000 deaths a YEAR in a combat scenario should not be considered blighting to the cause at hand). So really, why is Iraq such a polarizing issue in America today?

Or is it really? Where are the mass demonstrations against the war? Where are the riot police shooting bean bag guns at mobs of Bush/Iraq protesters? Where are they? There ARE NONE that I am aware of!

And why is that? Is it a case of reality vs. perception? The Bush-bashers on here would have you believe this is Vietnam all over again.

But it's not. You know why? The casualty rate for American forces just doesn't support such a label, for one thing.

The cold hard facts remain that the US economy is NOT in a depression! The stock market is far from CRASHED! There have been NO terrorist attacks on the US mainland in five+ years.

Yet, if you were an Alien from another planet, and you visited a house occupied by Hcap, Sec, Light and 46zilzal, you would HAVE to come away with the belief that the US economy WAS in a depression, the stock market HAD CRASHED to new lows, and there have been MULTIPLE terrorist attacks in MULTIPLE US Cities since 9/11.

How does one reconcile such disparity in what is reality and what is being espoused as reality by the Bush-bashers? Iraq is the one major "hat-hanger" for this crew, but even that is debatable, as history is FAR from ready to pass judgement on what the long-term effects will be from our recent actions in the region. And from the looks of things, we're not quite finished "over there."

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:

:ThmbUp:

[46zilzal]

The economy has nothing to do with a position against a ridiculous invasion. Wars have often been about making money

[Show Me the Wire]

ridiculous indeed. The Iraqis' fail to take advantage of the gift given for them.

[46zilzal]

ridiculous indeed. The Iraqis' fail to take advantage of the gift given for them.
stuffing it down their throats is the real part they might object to.

[Show Me the Wire]

What did we stuff down their throats?

[PaceAdvantage]

stuffing it down their throats is the real part they might object to.

Shouldn't they be used to that by now, what with Saddam in power all those years?

[JustRalph]

stuffing it down their throats is the real part they might object to.

yeah, I seem to remember all those people running around the streets celebrating and taking their shoes off and banging their shoes on Saddam posters and then standing in line for a whole day or more to vote. I am sure these acts are the international symbol for "our throats are being stuffed"

[Secretariat]

yeah, I seem to remember all those people running around the streets celebrating and taking their shoes off and banging their shoes on Saddam posters and then standing in line for a whole day or more to vote. I am sure these acts are the international symbol for "our throats are being stuffed"

We're not seeing too much of that stuff now.

[Secretariat]

ridiculous indeed. The Iraqis' fail to take advantage of the gift given for them.

23K Iraqi civilians killed last year by conservative estimates, losses in the hundreds of thousands.. Massive infrastructre damage. Countless wounded. Massive emigration from the country. As Yakov Smirnov would say, "What a gift!"

[Show Me the Wire]

The gift of shed U.S. soldiers' blood. Yes, what a gift. The same gift America gave during the great World Wars.

You see youse guys do not see the big picture.

[PaceAdvantage]

We're not seeing too much of that stuff now.

Thanks to all that encouragement our enemies obtained from certain people right here in the good ol' U.S. of A. (And by certain people, I don't mean YOU Sec....)

In any event, I'm talking about those who did nothing but report the NEGATIVES, even WHEN there were POSITIVES to report....

[Lefty]

23K Iraqi civilians killed last year by conservative estimates, losses in the hundreds of thousands.. Massive infrastructre damage. Countless wounded. Massive emigration from the country. As Yakov Smirnov would say, "What a gift!"
Kinda amazing that Iraq has the fastest growing economy in the world amongst all this, eh what?

[Lefty]

Oliver North has just returned from Ramadi and has encouraging things to say about Iraqu Sunnis and Shiites working together to police the streets. Why is outr mainstream media not reporting one friggin positive from Iraq?

[Tom]

stuffing it down their throats is the real part they might object to.

Again, you area lying.
They voted in greater percantages than American did.
The vast majority WANT democracy, want to be free.
You ignorance is far too deep to be believed.
You're a doctor, not a politician, Jim! :lol:

[Secretariat]

The gift of shed U.S. soldiers' blood. Yes, what a gift. The same gift America gave during the great World Wars.

You see youse guys do not see the big picture.

I don't see the shedding of US soldiers in Iraq as a gift. I see it as the result of an order that lead to tragic consequences for them and their families, and the country.

[Show Me the Wire]

Difference between you and me. I see dedicated young men and women giving their lives for the greater good. And I will not tarnish their noble act.

[46zilzal]

Difference between you and me. I see dedicated young men and women giving their lives for the greater good. And I will not tarnish their noble act.
wave that flag!

[Dave Schwartz]

wave that flag!

Yes, please do. Higher, please.

[Secretariat]

Yes, wave it higher so we can be proud of it. Just don't wave it needlessly where we're not wanted.

[Dave Schwartz]

Just don't wave it needlessly where we're not wanted.

You mean like Omaha Beach?

[46zilzal]

You mean like Omaha Beach?
that was a completely different situation

[JPinMaryland]

you know after a whle you sort of get jaded to the whole thing. I guess that is to say that when government reaches into the well too much you start to disbelieve it. They said it happened during Vietnam, I dont know, but if it did, its understandable. I dont think it's that americans are too weak, or too rich, it's just a natural outgrowth of seeing something and wondering why.

After a while you wonder what do words like "noble" or "dedicated" mean? Maybe it doesnt mean the same thing to you or I. These are just constructs after all, no one can actually define exactly what is meant.

SO you go back to ww II. Yeah I can see what those words mean. BUt today, I dont know if they mean the same thing. Maybe that is what I mean by going to the well too often.

[JPinMaryland]

Yeah, the US just sucks. How about you guys make it a point to once again show us how poorly the stock market is doing.

I know what you are getting at here, but if you read your quote out of context, it sounds quite crass. Even read in context, it sounds like you are equating lives lost to money.

Im not saying I disagree entirely, but the way you frame this argument, you will never convert anyone that the stock market justifies what has happened in Iraq.

the US has a history of invading countries to take out their leadership, so this is NOT unprecedented.

Id like to see your sources on this..

[PaceAdvantage]

I know what you are getting at here, but if you read your quote out of context, it sounds quite crass. Even read in context, it sounds like you are equating lives lost to money.

Im not saying I disagree entirely, but the way you frame this argument, you will never convert anyone that the stock market justifies what has happened in Iraq.



Id like to see your sources on this..

Don't read the quote out of context then.....

And as for my "source".....how soon we forget 1983 and the battle for "Spice Island"

[JPinMaryland]

Grenada! Who'd have thunk it? Can anyone name who the leader was? The Adolph Hitler of the Caribbean...

[Tom]

that was a completely different situation

No.

[JustRalph]

If you don't know what Bush has in store by now? You have a problem. Suppose you are a General 2nd in Command and have had to sit back and watch our troops be leashed for the last 2-3 years......... you have been chomping at the bit to increase troop levels enough to build a ten thousand man force of killers to start chasing down the bad guys. You thought your day would never come. But suddenly those guys in front of you just got "re-assigned" and you move up. In fact one of those guys in front of you suddenly decided to retire....what kind of message do you think that sends to you now that you are in command. BTW, you are gonna get a troop bumb of ten thousand too. Do you want to suddenly get re-assigned in the near future? I doubt it.

I hope I am right.............. and the Dems stay the hell out of the way.

If I am right, you will soon see reports on Aircraft moving back into Kuwait and Iraq etc. Air Support being bumped up is always a clue. And it happens usually about a month before the shit hits the fan.

Iraq: 300 Insurgents Killed in Battle

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - U.S.-backed Iraqi troops on Sunday attacked insurgents allegedly plotting to kill pilgrims at a major Shiite Muslim religious festival, and an Iraqi official estimated some 300 militants died in the daylong battle near Najaf. A U.S. helicopter crashed during the fight, killing two American soldiers.

Mortar shells, meanwhile, hit the courtyard of a girls' school in a mostly Sunni Arab neighborhood of Baghdad, killing five pupils and wounding 20. U.N. officials deplored the attack, calling the apparent targeting of children "an unforgivable crime."

Some 300 militants were killed in the Najaf fighting, along with five Iraqi security forces, a provincial spokesman said Monday, citing reports from officers at the site. The figure could not be independently confirmed.

Ahmed Deaibil, a spokesman for Najaf province, said the fighting had stopped but U.S. and Iraqi forces still had the area surrounded and had seized heavy machine guns, ammunition and other weapons.

~~more at the link~~~~
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070129/D8MUR8S80.html

[Secretariat]

You mean like Omaha Beach?

It is as 46 says, an entirely different situation. And here is why. It is important to understand the difference.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, the US declared war on Japan on Dec. 8, 1941. At this point we had NOT declared war on Germany. Japan had actually invaded us. When we did declare war on Japan, Germany then declared war on us. Only AFTER that did we decalre war on Germany.

Here is the war resolution declaring war on Germany:

"Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the Government and the people of the United States of America: Therefore be it

"Resolved, etc., That the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany, which has thus been thrust upon the United states.."

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/wwii/dec/decmenu.htm

The above is an important distinction in that we did not invade Germany UNTIL Germany declared war on us. Iraq NEVER declared war on us, and NEVER invaded us.

So Omaha Beach is a lot different than invading a country that had not formally declared war on us prior to attack, and never attacked us directly.

People forget that even when Germany was invading Poland, the vast majority of Americans did NOT want to go to war with Germany.

You need to look at the actual timeline of some of these events:

Germany invades Poland - US does not enter war against Germany - 1939
Germany enters Paris taking over France, May 28.1940. US does not enter war agaisnt Germany.
Germany beguns Battle of Britain in July of 1940. US does not enter war against Germany.
Japan attacks Pearl Harbor - US does not enter war against Germany - December 41
Hitler declares war on US - December of 41
US declares war on Germany - December of 41

[Tom]

There was no way we were not going to war wtih Germany as well. Even if they did not declare war on us. It was Roosevelt's plan all along.
Lend-lease was done with us being there soon enough.
The reason we went to war with Germany is not becasue they declared war on us, it was because Roosevelt - as unpopular as it was - knew we had to stand up to the evil.

[Lefty]

sec, didja ever think that if we hadn't let Hitler have his way for so long that maybe a lot more lives woyuldv'e been saved?
We were attacked, and no matter how you guys try to deny it, Saddam was funding terrorists, letting them train in Iraq and broke 17 U.N. resolutions. GW did the right thing. There ya go...

[Secretariat]

sec, didja ever think that if we hadn't let Hitler have his way for so long that maybe a lot more lives woyuldv'e been saved?
We were attacked, and no matter how you guys try to deny it, Saddam was funding terrorists, letting them train in Iraq and broke 17 U.N. resolutions. GW did the right thing. There ya go...

Tom,

We did not declare war on Germany despite Germany's invasion of almost all of Europe. It took Pearl Harbor and even that didn't do it until Germany declared war on us. Look at the congressional war resolution. That is a fact of history. What you speculate is your opinion, but it is not a fact. The war resolution is.

Lefty,

Do you know how many UN resolutions that Israel broke during the same time of the 17 Iraqi violations? Check it out and get back to me. Double the amount. Saddam was a paper tiger as has been verfied by history. Hitler had the power of the Third Reich behind him and Italy and Japan. A lot more power and a threat to our national security. Get it right for once.

[DJofSD]

Saddam was a paper tiger as has been verfied by history.

Paper tiger? Verified by history?

What a steaming pile of so much bull sh*t.

[Tom]

Sec is good at spreading that stuff around - in between his bouts with delusion. :lol:

Sec, anyone who votes yes on that resolution is a low life traitor and believe me, REAL Americans will not forget thier names. You do not trash our trooops in time of war like that, unless you are total scum or a democrat. Same frigging thing. Disgusting bastards. Bunch of Kerry-wanna be's.

[JustRalph]

We did not declare war on Germany despite Germany's invasion of almost all of Europe.

and that was a mistake. Think of all the people we could have saved......

[DJofSD]

Saw a program on either the History channel or Discovery about the technology being shared between Germany and Japan during WWII. Cutting to the bottom line: if the US had not dropped the nuclear bombs on Japan, they would have had superior air technology within 6 months that would have defeated any invasion fleet.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Agree, we entered the WWII very late - and let Hitler get very seriously entrenched before we got involved. It was a big mistake, and made for even more harder work eradicating them from France, Belgium, and much of eastern Europe, and many of the Middle Eastern Countries (Saudia Arabia? Iraq? Palastine/Israel. We even had to become allies with Soviet Russia so that we were 'ONLY' fighting in Europe, the Middle East, and so much of the Pacific Islands against Japan. That helped us not to have to ALSO fight in Eastern Europe, much to the continued disappointment of Poland, the Check Replublics, the Balkans, etc.

So, Sec, how many hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's and Iranians were killed and had their lives wasted by that 'Paper Tiger' Sadam Hussein vs. the Aiatola Khohmeni (spelling, glad we don't use the A word that often anymore), during their war years, and within Iraq after their two countries declared a truce/stalemate - and then crushing any and all appearent opposition within his own country. Oh, and how many Kuwaitties were killed, injured, displaced, by that 'Paper Tiger' Sadam Hussein, how many of their women were raped by his troops. Hell, how many of his own countrywomen who were mere relatives of his perceived enemies in Iraq were raped by his sons or his milatry and/or police.

Yes I know that we aided Sadam with military hardware in his fight with Khomeni, who was being aided militarily by the U.S.S.R. But don't even try to tell us we were responsible in any way for his ongoing problems with Iran.

Geeze your Bush Haterd has turned you into a damned, revisionist fool. We've heard some doozies from you these last few years, but 'Sadam Hussein the Paper Tiger being proven out by history' has GOT to be the biggest so far.

I've got to stop posting any more. You led me to waste too much of my time before, and you've led me into wasting more of my time again.

[Tom]

and that was a mistake. Think of all the people we could have saved......


That "cowboy" FDR refused to negotiate with Germany or Italy.

[skate]

Tom,

We did not declare war on Germany despite Germany's invasion of almost all of Europe. It took Pearl Harbor and even that didn't do it until Germany declared war on us. Look at the congressional war resolution. That is a fact of history. What you speculate is your opinion, but it is not a fact. The war resolution is.

Lefty,

Do you know how many UN resolutions that Israel broke during the same time of the 17 Iraqi violations? Check it out and get back to me. Double the amount. Saddam was a paper tiger as has been verfied by history. Hitler had the power of the Third Reich behind him and Italy and Japan. A lot more power and a threat to our national security. Get it right for once.



so?
you say we should've let Saddamy establish his "turd Reich"? in that way we could have the likes of (SEcism, hicups, and Zilly) behind us, huh?

lemmi think, i gonna get back...

and im tinking, about the violations, you didnt say how many..."?

[PlanB]

All the more reason to vote for Hillary. MEN Start all wars, with the exception of a few British queens, maybe they didn't start a war, but they were ready. We need more thinking first.

[JustRalph]

Awith the exception of a few British queens, maybe they didn't start a war, but they were ready.

What the hell does Izzard have to do with this?

http://www.marilyn.nu/ArticlePages/200507/01/20050701144618_Administrators319/eddie_izzard.jpg

[PlanB]

ooooooooH, "gorgeous, what are you drinking? I see you appreciate a good wand. Need a light?"

[skate]

All the more reason to vote for Hillary. MEN Start all wars, with the exception of a few British queens, maybe they didn't start a war, but they were ready. We need more thinking first.


i would love to see the Hiill in charge.

recall, that we had three woman in charge, all at the same time and All three were at war, at the same time.

of coarse, Thatcher
and Golda Meir (the real iron lady)
and Indias leader, forget? gandis daughter ??

ok yeh, Janta party, 70s, Sushm...