Troop Reduction Is Possible, Bush Says

[Psycho4Bud]

AL ASAD AIR BASE, Iraq, Sept. 3 â?? President Bush made a surprise eight-hour visit to Iraq on Monday, emphasizing security gains, sectarian reconciliation and the possibility of a troop withdrawal, thus embracing and pre-empting this monthâ??s crucial Congressional hearings on his Iraq strategy.

His visit, with his commanders and senior Iraqi officials, had a clear political goal: to try to head off opponentsâ?? pressure for a withdrawal by hailing what he called recent successes in Iraq and by contending that only making Iraq stable would allow American forces to pull back.

Mr. Bushâ??s visit to Iraq â?? his third â?? was spent at this remote desert base in the restive Sunni province of Anbar, where he had summoned Iraqâ??s Shiite prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, and others to demonstrate that reconciliation among Iraqâ??s warring sectarian factions was at least conceivable, if not yet a fact.

After talks with Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the ambassador to Iraq, Mr. Bush said that they â??tell me that if the kind of success we are now seeing here continues it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces.â?�

Mr. Hadley, briefing reporters, recalled a military intelligence officerâ??s dire warning a year ago that Al Qaeda controlled the provincial capital, Ramadi, and other towns in the region. â??Anbar Province is lost,â?� he quoted the analyst as saying then. Mr. Hadley was apparently referring to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the homegrown Sunni Arab extremist group that American intelligence agencies have concluded is foreign led. The extent of its links to Osama bin Ladenâ??s network is not clear.

On Monday, after meeting with some of the local Sunni leaders who only months ago led the struggle against the American presence in the region, Mr. Bush held up Anbar as a model of the progress that was possible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/world/middleeast/04iraq.html?ref=middleeast

And the dems said it couldn't be done........:D

Have a good one!:s4:

[eg420ne]

War, Its Fantastic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWCtfUgBtNw

[medicinal]

AL ASAD AIR BASE, Iraq, Sept. 3 â?? President Bush made a surprise eight-hour visit to Iraq on Monday, emphasizing security gains, sectarian reconciliation and the possibility of a troop withdrawal, thus embracing and pre-empting this monthâ??s crucial Congressional hearings on his Iraq strategy.

His visit, with his commanders and senior Iraqi officials, had a clear political goal: to try to head off opponentsâ?? pressure for a withdrawal by hailing what he called recent successes in Iraq and by contending that only making Iraq stable would allow American forces to pull back.

Mr. Bushâ??s visit to Iraq â?? his third â?? was spent at this remote desert base in the restive Sunni province of Anbar, where he had summoned Iraqâ??s Shiite prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, and others to demonstrate that reconciliation among Iraqâ??s warring sectarian factions was at least conceivable, if not yet a fact.

After talks with Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the ambassador to Iraq, Mr. Bush said that they â??tell me that if the kind of success we are now seeing here continues it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces.â?�

Mr. Hadley, briefing reporters, recalled a military intelligence officerâ??s dire warning a year ago that Al Qaeda controlled the provincial capital, Ramadi, and other towns in the region. â??Anbar Province is lost,â?� he quoted the analyst as saying then. Mr. Hadley was apparently referring to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the homegrown Sunni Arab extremist group that American intelligence agencies have concluded is foreign led. The extent of its links to Osama bin Ladenâ??s network is not clear.

On Monday, after meeting with some of the local Sunni leaders who only months ago led the struggle against the American presence in the region, Mr. Bush held up Anbar as a model of the progress that was possible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/world/middleeast/04iraq.html?ref=middleeast

And the dems said it couldn't be done........:D

Have a good one!:s4:So his big troop withdrawel will be returning the surge guys to the USA, whoopee, he's a genious, bringing home the troops, NOT.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I was actually hoping, on the very slim chance, that the surge might actually reduce the violence with one big assault. But of course all that happened was a dispersal of the violence into the rest of Iraq, and an increase. How can he even claim success when violence has now reached record levels? Or, as medicinal pointed out, is he just bringing home the extra boys from the surge who weren't supposed to be there in the first place?

[Psycho4Bud]

Ummmm....even the head Dem leaders stated that the surge was having a positive effect. Oh well.........

Have a good one!:s4:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Ummmm....even the head Dem leaders stated that the surge was having a positive effect. Oh well.........

Have a good one!:s4:

Well personally I think voting Dem or Rep is like feeding the left and right head of the two-headed beast.

The possitive effect of the surge, not surprisingly, was temporary and artificial. Baghdad has a massive suppression in violence, and lo and behold, violence increased hugely in the rest of the country. They didn't suppress it, just dispersed it. It was only a couple weaks ago that 500 Iraqie's were killed in one day of bombings, 170 the day before that.

[jakez]

http://boards.cannabis.com/politics/132293-bush-just-playing-us-troop-withdrawal.html

[Ganja Dude]

How come every republican's comeback is something negative about the democrats? Most people who know politics know they are both equally as bad. All they do is divide the country.

Psycho if you buy that bullshit the Bush administration feeds you then you're being foolish. The current people in office are criminals and should be removed asap. If the Iraq war was just and good then it would have more support. Even Bush's republican cronies are turning on him now. Why is it that so-called repubs can't grasp the concept that these are real lives and not pawns on a chess board? We don't need to be in the middle east. If people really want to attack us taking down random people in the streets of baghdad isn't going to help. If we were attacked by an actual country it would be a different story. It's even proven now that Iraq had no WMD's which was the reason we went in anyhow.

It's sad that Bush has ruined so many lives and continues to. He sends people's children to war to die and has killed over 600,000 Iraqi people since he has sent our army to invade. It shouldn't have been this easy to do all of it. People just let it slide and those who oppose are ignored.

This war isn't meant to be won, it's meant to be ongoing. I don't know why these people need more money and power. I barely have any money and power and I am very happy.

Psycho4bud I'd like you to explain why you think the Iraq war is beneficial to anybody but those who make money off of it in any way. Bush is clearly not doing what the people of the United States want so how are we a democracy anymore? It seems much more like a dictatorship because although there are democratic processes, they don't seem to matter much anymore.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

How come every republican's comeback is something negative about the democrats? Most people who know politics know they are both equally as bad. All they do is divide the country.

I'd say both sides are equally guilty of attacking their opponent as a platform.


If the Iraq war was just and good then it would have more support.

Keeping weed illegal still has more support than those who want to legalize it. I wouldn't call popular opinion an accurate gauge for morality.




We don't need to be in the middle east.

We don't need to be in Iraq. I personally believe the Afghanistan invasion is justifiable and necessary. But to each his own.


If people really want to attack us taking down random people in the streets of baghdad isn't going to help.


Not only that, but it's massively increased terrorist recruitment. What do you expect when hundreds of thousands of people are killed, all who collectively have millions of friends and family who'd have damn good reason to hate the states post-invasion.


It's even proven now that Iraq had no WMD's which was the reason we went in anyhow.

It hasn't been proven, it's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist really, and there is some suspicion that Saddam moved some weapons to Syria (not holding my breath on that one though). The problem is more that the Bush administration failed to provide sufficient evidence or proof that they were there. The invasion was harshly lacking in justification or evidence yet they jumped in anyway. I mean, why not? Just charge in, topple a dictator, be greeted as liberators, and America has a steady supply of oil, a buddy the middle east and 'ol George can proudly proclaim he brought freedom to the middle east.
They were still stuck in the mindset of wars being a matter of toppling governments. If that's all it took, as they thought it would, the invasion would have been a piece of cake.




This war isn't meant to be won, it's meant to be ongoing. I don't know why these people need more money and power. I barely have any money and power and I am very happy.

I think it's meant to be won, Bush just can't possibly admit a mistake and own up to the people, acknowledging the hopeless situation he's created. At this point though, pulling out pre-emptively would be disastrous. He's stuck the nation in Iraq like snot to a screen door, good job George!:thumbsup:




Bush is clearly not doing what the people of the United States want so how are we a democracy anymore? It seems much more like a dictatorship because although there are democratic processes, they don't seem to matter much anymore.

You're thinking of direct democracy, not the representative democracy most (if not all) nations have today. Foreign policy (and many other) decisions under our system are based on the people voting in candidates who most closely represent their views, not candidates who govern by popular opinion.

Bush does have a moral obligation to listen to the will of his people on this matter, but not a legal one.

[thecreator]

Bring back the draft!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you dont agree your fucking dumb.If we do that we will truly be affected by the war and that is one way to end this senseless blood shed. The only way were going to write, phone, and email our local representatives is if we have an actual, evident connection to the war. I don't think it would be passed bc its political suicide to even bring the situation up but w the limited coverage of the reel stuff thats going on their how can we even begin to understand the atrocities going on in that waring nation.. Big up yourself for the thread

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Bring back the draft!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you dont agree your fucking dumb.If we do that we will truly be affected by the war and that is one way to end this senseless blood shed. The only way were going to write, phone, and email our local representatives is if we have an actual, evident connection to the war. I don't think it would be passed bc its political suicide to even bring the situation up but w the limited coverage of the reel stuff thats going on their how can we even begin to understand the atrocities going on in that waring nation.. Big up yourself for the thread


Uh oh, I don't agree with reinstating the draft, I must be fucking dumb!

Or you could, I dunno, not make a falacious argument based on poisoning-the-well. If you wanna have a different opinion argue it logically, don't outright insult your fellow members for have different views, that's just childish/assholish.

[Ganja Dude]

Gandalf! It is funny, but I actually agree with you. I'm sorry my post was written in the heat of passion because I didn't get those points across. My main goal though was to hear why people still support the war because I am actually curious in all political views.

Sorry intoxication is slowly creeping up on me so I'll have to cut this post short before I forget how to spell my name.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Gandalf! It is funny, but I actually agree with you. I'm sorry my post was written in the heat of passion because I didn't get those points across. My main goal though was to hear why people still support the war because I am actually curious in all political views.

Sorry intoxication is slowly creeping up on me so I'll have to cut this post short before I forget how to spell my name.


Hmmmm? GangaDude I was quoting TheCreator. Or are you the same person under 2 usernames? Anyway, whoever the heck I'm talking to, don't worry about it, no biggie:stoned:

[Ganja Dude]

Hmmmm? GangaDude I was quoting TheCreator. Or are you the same person under 2 usernames? Anyway, whoever the heck I'm talking to, don't worry about it, no biggie:stoned:

Sorry I forgot to quote your post. You responded to one of my posts above.

[Psycho4Bud]

How come every republican's comeback is something negative about the democrats? Most people who know politics know they are both equally as bad. All they do is divide the country.

â??Anbar Province is lost,â?� he quoted the analyst as saying then. Mr. Hadley was apparently referring to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia
Just making a point that this WAS the calling cry of the DNC a year ago.
I do agree with ya that a politician is a politician no matter what side of the fence.....it would be nice IF the left took a hard line stance on something though.

Psycho if you buy that bullshit the Bush administration feeds you then you're being foolish. The current people in office are criminals and should be removed asap. If the Iraq war was just and good then it would have more support. Even Bush's republican cronies are turning on him now. Why is it that so-called repubs can't grasp the concept that these are real lives and not pawns on a chess board? We don't need to be in the middle east. If people really want to attack us taking down random people in the streets of baghdad isn't going to help. If we were attacked by an actual country it would be a different story. It's even proven now that Iraq had no WMD's which was the reason we went in anyhow.

It's sad that Bush has ruined so many lives and continues to. He sends people's children to war to die and has killed over 600,000 Iraqi people since he has sent our army to invade. It shouldn't have been this easy to do all of it. People just let it slide and those who oppose are ignored.

Whether or not you agree with the invasion or not, both the Republican and Democratic parties acknowledge that just leaving isn't an option.

This war isn't meant to be won, it's meant to be ongoing. I don't know why these people need more money and power.

Please explain this further??

Psycho4bud I'd like you to explain why you think the Iraq war is beneficial to anybody but those who make money off of it in any way. Bush is clearly not doing what the people of the United States want so how are we a democracy anymore? It seems much more like a dictatorship because although there are democratic processes, they don't seem to matter much anymore.

We have several concerns for that area........not ONLY the resources but also the concerns with Iran, Al-Quada, not to mention our own credibility to the other Arab Nations that may one day need our assistance OR have a faction that wants to take an offensive stance against us.

I believe with the changes made in such areas such as Mosol, Najaf, Fallujah and of course the Anabar Povince.....progress is being made.

Have a good one!:s4:

[medicinal]

We have several concerns for that area........not ONLY the resources but also the concerns with Iran, Al-Quada, not to mention our own credibility to the other Arab Nations that may one day need our assistance OR have a faction that wants to take an offensive stance against us.

I believe with the changes made in such areas such as Mosol, Najaf, Fallujah and of course the Anabar Povince.....progress is being made.

Have a good one!:s4:What, You have some secret insight? I believe it has been and will continue to be a clusterfuck and we need to cut and run. With 50,000 troops so stressed out they are on prozac, Info from my friends nephew that was killed after they sent him back and stuffed him full of prozac, He said that he heard from a fellow soldier in the medical corps that as many as 50,000 troops were on prozac to relieve the stress of war, that and medical speed to keep them alert on patrols. There will be such a mass of mentally fucked up kids coming back from this clusterfuck, I hope they all move to Crawford texas and hang out around the Bush compound with deer rifles.

[epxroot]

Bush does have a moral obligation to listen to the will of his people on this matter, but not a legal one.

How do you figure he does not have a legal one. The people of this country have the final say to what happens. We are supposed to be in control of our government not the other way around. Come on people know where we come from, and what are founding fathers established.

YouTube - PJ - Masters Of War (live at the Bob Dylan 30th anniversary) (http://youtube.com/watch?v=r8GHBk_HSXg)

[thecreator]

Im soooooooooo sorry I was drinking and I know i know i had no excuse and I feel bad and I agree with everyone who at this point thinks i'm an arrogant ass. I mean IDK if I did feel that way which I don't believe you me you I don't I could and should of respected others views. I understand I should of shown some self control and I fully understand that if I can't drink and respect members and most importantly members point of views I shouldn't even bother coming here. I will do better in the future and plz forgive me my fellow toking brethren cheers and again I'm immensely sorry for my rude behavior.

[Psycho4Bud]

What, You have some secret insight? I believe it has been and will continue to be a clusterfuck and we need to cut and run.

Where some see a light at the end of the tunnel you just see another exploding IED supplied by Iran.....tsk, tsk.

Have a good one!:s4:

[Psycho4Bud]

How do you figure he does not have a legal one. The people of this country have the final say to what happens. We are supposed to be in control of our government not the other way around. Come on people know where we come from, and what are founding fathers established.

I love the comparrisons to our "founding fathers". They were only 53 days away from the closest enemy by boat. The enemy we face today is much, much closer than people want to realize.

I wonder how G.W. (George Washington) and Congress would have reacted if the Brits had I.C.B.M.s with nuclear tips back in the day?

Have a good one!:s4:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

How do you figure he does not have a legal one. The people of this country have the final say to what happens. We are supposed to be in control of our government not the other way around. Come on people know where we come from, and what are founding fathers established.



Epxroot, while I agree with you that Bush should listen to the will of his people, I still stand by my point. As I described above, America is a representative democracy, not a direct democracy like in ancient Greece. You're supposition that Bush must bow to the will of the people seems to be based on principle, not on interpretation of legal precedent. In the system under which America currently resides, leaders are accountable to the people by being voted in or out. The only way the people could legally force the army out of Iraq would be to hold a vote, and that unfortunately is done by the discretion of the government. Even if a pull-out vote was held, it would more than likely be done through congressional means; and in fact it was a few months back.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I love the comparrisons to our "founding fathers". They were only 53 days away from the closest enemy by boat. The enemy we face today is much, much closer than people want to realize.

I wonder how G.W. (George Washington) and Congress would have reacted if the Brits had I.C.B.M.s with nuclear tips back in the day?

Have a good one!:s4:


So P4B are saying the current administration is justified in throwing certain aspects of the constitution to the wind when circumstances change? Constitutional amendments are at times necessary, but shit like the patriot act goes one step further and completley disregards the principles on which your country was founded. This administration is spying on its own people without warrants, arresting without warrants, holding prisoners without charge, and now declaring any enemy a terrorist organization whether it be actual terrorists, or just a legal national army.

Sorry man, while I respect you as a decent and intelligent person, wake up! The precedents set by your current administration have given the government power to stampede over any constitutional rights in the name of protection from terrorism. Do you remember when Bush had one of his "Bush moments" and said "any Iraqi soldier that fight's for Saddam will be considered a terrorist". He declared legal combatants terrorists because they dare fight the will of the infallable USA.

[Psycho4Bud]

So P4B are saying the current administration is justified in throwing certain aspects of the constitution to the wind when circumstances change? Constitutional amendments are at times necessary, but shit like the patriot act goes one step further and completley disregards the principles on which your country was founded.

The Founding Fathers of American Intelligence
by P.K. Rose


George Washington was theobvious choice for acquisition of foreign intelligence. The Father of our Country was an adroit spymaster. Over the course of his long military career, he directed numerous agent networks, provided comprehensive guidance in intelligence tradecraft to his agents, and used their intelligence effectively when planning and conducting military operations.


John Jay--who later became Chief Justice of the United States--is consideredthe FoundingFather of American counterintelligence. Jay is seldom cited for his achievements in this arena; his historical reputation stems largely from his political and judicial accomplishments. But he clearly deserved to be considered the first national-level American counterintelligence chief.


Benjamin Franklin was the American icon after whom the remaining room was named. His efforts in what is known today as covert action were wide-ranging and usually successful. During the Revolutionary War period, Franklin engaged in propaganda operations and agent-of-influence activities and directed paramilitary operations against British property.
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/the-founding-fathers-of-american-intelligence/art-1.html

Many, many more articles, etc...on spying during the Revolutionary War on our "citizens".



This administration is spying on its own people without warrants, arresting without warrants, holding prisoners without charge, and now declaring any enemy a terrorist organization whether it be actual terrorists, or just a legal national army.

Are you making an international call to a man called Afshine in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan? If not, don't worry about the wire taps. If so, Why???

Club Gitmo.....since when did non-citizens obtain the same rights as us? To bad that the enemy doesn't abide by the same rules.

Ahhh, Irans revolutionary gaurd.....the same that trains people such as Hezbollah and insurgents in Iraq. They ARE a terrorist group in not only our eyes but other nations in the world.



Sorry man, while I respect you as a decent and intelligent person, wake up!

Sorry my friend....I believe that it is you with the sleep in your eyes.

Have a good one!:s4:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

The Founding Fathers of American Intelligence
by P.K. Rose


George Washington was theobvious choice for acquisition of foreign intelligence. The Father of our Country was an adroit spymaster. Over the course of his long military career, he directed numerous agent networks, provided comprehensive guidance in intelligence tradecraft to his agents, and used their intelligence effectively when planning and conducting military operations.


John Jay--who later became Chief Justice of the United States--is consideredthe FoundingFather of American counterintelligence. Jay is seldom cited for his achievements in this arena; his historical reputation stems largely from his political and judicial accomplishments. But he clearly deserved to be considered the first national-level American counterintelligence chief.


Benjamin Franklin was the American icon after whom the remaining room was named. His efforts in what is known today as covert action were wide-ranging and usually successful. During the Revolutionary War period, Franklin engaged in propaganda operations and agent-of-influence activities and directed paramilitary operations against British property.
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/the-founding-fathers-of-american-intelligence/art-1.html

Many, many more articles, etc...on spying during the Revolutionary War on our "citizens".

I'm more concerned about the constitution and bill of rights than the actions of individuals. Franklin, Washington, Jay, these aren't infallable gods. George Washington was also a slave owner, but we don't condone slavery on that premise.

And I also agree that spying, even domestic spying, is at times necessary. But there's a reason the judicial system requires warrants for these things, and they should not IMO be done away with. If there's legitimate reason to spy, get the warrant, otherwise you're opening the door to every home.



Are you making an international call to a man called Afshine in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan? If not, don't worry about the wire taps. If so, Why???

Oh, the government tells us they'll only spy on those calls, so I guess it's true. I don't care what criteria they claim is used for spying, when you eliminate warrant-requirements you're giving the government power that can be easily abused. Even if this administration (in the NSA, CIA, whatever) is honest, the legal standards have been set to allow abuse of the people in the future. These limitations were put in place for a reason!

And for Christ sake, I thought the biggest aspect of traditional conservative philosophy is to keep big brother out of the individual's business. Now they're telling us that, all in the name of "protecting our freedom", the government's ability to spy is based on trust in their honesty rather than real legal restrictions? Patriot act has demolished some of the people's most important safeguards.


Club Gitmo.....since when did non-citizens obtain the same rights as us? To bad that the enemy doesn't abide by the same rules.

They don't have the same rights as American citizens, but they do have rights under the Geoneva (sp?) Convention and international law. But I'll even do away with the Geoneva convention for illegal combatants, and still there are basic human rights they should have to abide to. I don't really care what the enemy does or what laws they break, the soldiers we captured aren't he ones personally instituting these policies. It's kinda like saying "you killed my kids, so I have a right to kill your kids". Any sensible person knows you hold the individual accountable, not the soldiers working for that individual.
Besides, a lot of the tortures I saw had no interrogation value, just asshole guards with a big grin on their face getting their rocks off torturing the enemy. Petty revenge is not justification for anything, we need a system that actually looks at the results of their actions, not those who think in childish terms of "I'm gonna torture them 'cause they deserve it!".

And, finally, the issue I was bringing up about arresting without warrant is more about giving the government despotic powers over its citizens that we should not allow them to have based on trust. I've already heard a few cases of men who were arrested and held without charge for months, sometimes years, then released after they decided on their innocence. Those men did not deserve long-term imprisonment with no access to legal council, informing their family of their whereabouts, and a loss of individual rights before they are even found to be guilty. Once again, the patriot act has alloted powers to the government that allow them to arbitrarily imprison and abuse its own citizens. It would be remarkably naive to believe such powers wouldn't be abused more and more as time goes on.


Ahhh, Irans revolutionary gaurd.....the same that trains people such as Hezbollah and insurgents in Iraq. They ARE a terrorist group in not only our eyes but other nations in the world.

I agree they are a terrorist group carrying out terrorist actions in Iraq. However, if America goes to war with Iran, it is not acceptable to declare government-sanctioned legal combatants "terrorists" and thereby do away with the Geoneva convention.
And like I said, the Bush administration has set a precedent giving the US power to do away with any legal military obligation simply by declaring the enemy a terrorist.




Sorry my friend....I believe that it is you with the sleep in your eyes.

Nope, that's just bloodshot eyes from that bowl I smoked:D


Have a good one!:s4:

And you too! I know I vehemently disagree with you on some political issues, but I'll say you're a worthy opponent a cut above the rest of this rabble. Boy I grow tired of teenagers arguing with posts like "Fuck Bush! He's a Nazi!" lol.

Respect to ya man:thumbsup:

[Ganja Dude]

We have several concerns for that area........not ONLY the resources but also the concerns with Iran, Al-Quada, not to mention our own credibility to the other Arab Nations that may one day need our assistance OR have a faction that wants to take an offensive stance against us.

I believe with the changes made in such areas such as Mosol, Najaf, Fallujah and of course the Anabar Povince.....progress is being made.

Have a good one!:s4:

I know we cannot pull out of Iraq and leave it in anarchy but I don't think the war was justified. I just don't see why more of our soldiers need to die for this. If Iraq wasn't a direct threat to us then why would we put ourselves in the way of danger and increase the amount of people who want to kill us?

None of this is meant to be personal just so you know P4B I respect your opinions and such.

[Psycho4Bud]

I know we cannot pull out of Iraq and leave it in anarchy but I don't think the war was justified. I just don't see why more of our soldiers need to die for this. If Iraq wasn't a direct threat to us then why would we put ourselves in the way of danger and increase the amount of people who want to kill us?

None of this is meant to be personal just so you know P4B I respect your opinions and such.

Not taken that way at all.....we all have our own opinion and this forum is all about having a respectable debate on issues......you've shown nothing but respect in my opinion.:thumbsup:

Iraq was a threat....Russian intelligence/Putin even told us after the fact that Saddam was planning a 9-11 hit on us.

Have a good one!:s4:

[eg420ne]

:detective1:Finally! P4B found a connection to 911 & Saddam-Iraq...by the ways of Russian intelligence &/or Putin....there it is folks, the last grasp of the captain going down with his ship......:glugglug::glugglug::detective1:

[epxroot]

I love the comparrisons to our "founding fathers". They were only 53 days away from the closest enemy by boat. The enemy we face today is much, much closer than people want to realize.

I wonder how G.W. (George Washington) and Congress would have reacted if the Brits had I.C.B.M.s with nuclear tips back in the day?

Have a good one!:s4:

What I meant when I said that, is we the people have a say in what should happen and what should'nt happen if we are going to be the ones funding this war on terror. People have become so used to just faithfully paying taxes and not even wondering what their tax dollars may have contributed to. No tax dollars, no war. Our founding fathers made it very clear that the government are to work for the people not the other way around.

I am just curious who in their right mind is going to launch a nuke at another country that has nukes. It is well known that they can be seen comming as soon as they are in the sky. It would be a really stupid move for a country to launch a nuke at another country with nukes. Thats like trying to rob somone who is already packing a heat!

[epxroot]

Epxroot, while I agree with you that Bush should listen to the will of his people, I still stand by my point. As I described above, America is a representative democracy, not a direct democracy like in ancient Greece. You're supposition that Bush must bow to the will of the people seems to be based on principle, not on interpretation of legal precedent. In the system under which America currently resides, leaders are accountable to the people by being voted in or out. The only way the people could legally force the army out of Iraq would be to hold a vote, and that unfortunately is done by the discretion of the government. Even if a pull-out vote was held, it would more than likely be done through congressional means; and in fact it was a few months back.

I respect your response and your stance on the subject. I understand the system that we are under, but the free republic which is the system that we were intended to be under has been taken away from us. How can we as americans keep funding this war and not even raise an eye to the fact that we can't say when we leave and when we don't? I just don't understand how we can wake up in the morning and just go on about our day as if we don't even know that 1000's of innocent humans are being killed, and that 1000's of them have no where to sleep. Hey though as long as we have are sports, cars, clothes, gadgets, and titty bars who cares.

I am not arguing your point I am just stating that somthing is really wrong with our current system. If 51% rule over the 49% who gets to decide who is in what group?

[Psycho4Bud]

What I meant when I said that, is we the people have a say in what should happen and what should'nt happen if we are going to be the ones funding this war on terror. People have become so used to just faithfully paying taxes and not even wondering what their tax dollars may have contributed to. No tax dollars, no war. Our founding fathers made it very clear that the government are to work for the people not the other way around.


Preservation of the security of the Nation from its enemies, foreign and domestic, is the obligation of government and one of the foremost reasons for government to exist.
FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: First Amendment: Annotations pg. 13 of 21 (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/13.html)

And with that our President IS the Commander in Chief of all military forces. I think that between the two the "wishes" of our forefathers is being met.


I am just curious who in their right mind is going to launch a nuke at another country that has nukes. It is well known that they can be seen comming as soon as they are in the sky. It would be a really stupid move for a country to launch a nuke at another country with nukes. Thats like trying to rob somone who is already packing a heat!

Try a society/philosophy like Iran that holds the end of the world as the next coming of Allah.

Have a good one!:s4:

[Psycho4Bud]

:detective1:Finally! P4B found a connection to 911 & Saddam-Iraq...by the ways of Russian intelligence &/or Putin....there it is folks, the last grasp of the captain going down with his ship......:glugglug::glugglug::detective1:

I guess it could be said I found the "connection" on the net.:D

Russian President Vladimir Putin says that after the 9/11 attacks Moscow warned Washington that Saddam Hussein was planning attacks on the US.
BBC NEWS | Americas | Putin says Iraq planned US attack (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3819057.stm)

Hell, even Great Spirit believed in the word of the B.B.C.

Have a good one!:s4:

[epxroot]

Preservation of the security of the Nation from its enemies, foreign and domestic, is the obligation of government and one of the foremost reasons for government to exist.
FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: First Amendment: Annotations pg. 13 of 21 (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/13.html)

And with that our President IS the Commander in Chief of all military forces. I think that between the two the "wishes" of our forefathers is being met.



Try a society/philosophy like Iran that holds the end of the world as the next coming of Allah.



Have a good one!:s4:
I guess it depends on who you think our enemy actually is. I just don't get it I suppose. I don't understand how we have been duped into a war, but yet we remain loyal just because he is our president! I mean come on, first we are told we are attacked by terrorist who are from Saudi, but yet we go to Iraq? Next we have the good o'l patriot act (does'nt the name just sound great?) which pretty much trampled on our rights. Now we can't walk out of the house without hearing something about terrorism. Hmmm sounds like some really good propaganda to me And you ask me who the enemy is? I do think we have an enemy, but I don't think it's in a desert somewhere. I believe the enemy is right here in the good USA!



I am just curious about where you get this information on Irans society/philosophy? Is it because they are Muslim? Or did you spend to much time watching fox tonight! Sorry had to throw that in there! =)
BTW love the Name :rastasmoke:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I remember this, vaguely, but if I remember correctly this Russian intelligence was just part of the whole Iraq-AlQaeda link touted by Moscow and the CIA, which was later proven to be false. It was these same intelligence agencies that insisted the weapons were in Iraq, and the CIA even went so far as to create a report of mobile chemical weapons facilities; of which we later found out they invented on suspicion alone and never actually checked. The pressure was on to give them some solid intelligence, and having none they fabricated a suspicion into fact and crossed their fingers it would turn out to be true. This whole Iraq mess is a sad state of affairs.

[epxroot]

I remember this, vaguely, but if I remember correctly this Russian intelligence was just part of the whole Iraq-AlQaeda link touted by Moscow and the CIA, which was later proven to be false. It was these same intelligence agencies that insisted the weapons were in Iraq, and the CIA even went so far as to create a report of mobile chemical weapons facilities; of which we later found out they invented on suspicion alone and never actually checked. The pressure was on to give them some solid intelligence, and having none they fabricated a suspicion into fact and crossed their fingers it would turn out to be true. This whole Iraq mess is a sad state of affairs.
Ahh yes I remember now thanks Gandalf!!!

[Psycho4Bud]

I remember this, vaguely, but if I remember correctly this Russian intelligence was just part of the whole Iraq-AlQaeda link touted by Moscow and the CIA, which was later proven to be false. It was these same intelligence agencies that insisted the weapons were in Iraq, and the CIA even went so far as to create a report of mobile chemical weapons facilities; of which we later found out they invented on suspicion alone and never actually checked. The pressure was on to give them some solid intelligence, and having none they fabricated a suspicion into fact and crossed their fingers it would turn out to be true. This whole Iraq mess is a sad state of affairs.

That's a different issue, NOT the Putin story:
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Russia denies Iraq secrets claim (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4843394.stm)

Have a good one!:s4:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

That's a different issue, NOT the Putin story:
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Russia denies Iraq secrets claim (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4843394.stm)

Have a good one!:s4:

Awsome, thanks for the link P4B! Do you have a whole archive of historical articles or something? If so that's awsome, I only wish I had such info at my fingertips (I go off memory most of the time, I have a pretty strong memory overal).

But hey this still helps my point that Russian intelligence certainly isn't more credible than American, especially when they've been proven to be feeding the US false information (not surprised). I don't blame America for going off an intelligence report that coincided with what their own boys were saying, I just think that's also a reason why I wouldn't believe Saddam was planning another 9/11 based on what Russian's say. In fact I believe that Russia has some very unscrupulous plans in the works to use the middle east to their benefit and remove America as a world power. Manipulating the US into a war with Iraq has been extremely beneficial to these plans as it's drained them of hundreds of billions of dollars, made the American public war-weary, tied them up in Iraq while real and dangerous enemy threats are emerging, and pissed off the whole Islamic world which in turn is helping the AlQaeda recuitment efforts. Invading Iraq is the best thing America could have done for terrorists.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I respect your response and your stance on the subject. I understand the system that we are under, but the free republic which is the system that we were intended to be under has been taken away from us. How can we as americans keep funding this war and not even raise an eye to the fact that we can't say when we leave and when we don't? I just don't understand how we can wake up in the morning and just go on about our day as if we don't even know that 1000's of innocent humans are being killed, and that 1000's of them have no where to sleep. Hey though as long as we have are sports, cars, clothes, gadgets, and titty bars who cares.

I am not arguing your point I am just stating that somthing is really wrong with our current system. If 51% rule over the 49% who gets to decide who is in what group?


You and I are on the same page them Epxroot. While there may be no such legal obligations, you're absolutely right that the system needs a major revamp and people need more say in something like a drawn-out international war.

I've always believed both in Canada and America that our democracies are a bit too representative, and need more of a direct aspect. And infact I'd say America is more democratic in the sense that you guys tend to hold more votes on issues like legalizing weed in Nevada, whereas Canadians are always 100% dependant on the choices of their elected officials. Which is stupid because constitutionally we do have a right to establish ballot initiates, it just never seems to happen.