Blood in the Water

[amsterdam]

their mindset is priceless!

amsterdam Reviewed by amsterdam on 05-23-2005. Blood in the Water Blood in the Water By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Thursday, May 19, 2005 http://billoreilly.com/currentarticle The Newsweek and Dan Rather situations are so similar it's eerie. Both got snookered because they bought scenarios that, if true, would have made President Bush look bad. Both ran with said scenarios. Both crashed and burned. Whenever you want anything in this world too much, it is unlikely to happen. Desperately desiring a person, a job or a lifestyle just about Rating: 5

[XTC]

Listen, It is a good thing that Iraqi people are no longer under a dictorship. IBut like I said it is nothing but a marketing scheme to distract people what is really going on and What Bush was really aiming for. OIL! Sheep.

[amsterdam]

oil huh?thanks for the deep thought jack handy.

we are gonna drill in anwar for that.

[nicholasstanko]

You conservatives really crack me up. Just the plain ignorance you guys portray is sickening. You think just because iraq holds some kind of sham election where you "empower" women makes up for all the bloodshed? Bush and rumsfeld and colin powell all ran into war touting freedom but what kind of freedom are we talking about? That must be some kind of freedom going to sleep and wondering if you'll even know you're dying if a bomb hits during the night. It must be a great freedom surviving the night and contemplating walking down the street during the day time wondering if when you get hit if it's from a suicide bomber or an american mortar shell.
All i hear is "bush did this for freedom, bush did that for liberty". Anyone actually stop and say "wait a minute...i've been duped". There have been probably a little less than two thousand american soldier casualites (im not that sure about the figure). You multiply that by four and there you have the iraqi civilian casualties. Of course we'll never know because america isn't bothering to keep accurate tabs. In fact, any reports on civilian casualties they group families as ONE casualty each. Why would they do this if everything was peachy keen? Why does the US refuse to dignify their troops by restricting filming of coffins coming home? Please dont insult me by saying its to piss off iraqi insurgents. It's terribly sad that people died during the 9/11 crisis. Canadians wept right along with Americans and we pledged our support. And so what if you conservative assholes dont like people from other countries criticizing what america does? America has a hand in pretty much almost every country worth investing in and so we all have a right to say what we feel because the actions of the american government affect our lives too.

[amsterdam]

8.5 million people is no sham kiddo.more people risked their lives voting than voted in america in the rain.

iraqi civilian casualties??are you kidding?while even one death is sad,more iraqis have been killed by foreign terrorists than americans.your facts are bs.

[bhallg2k]

I guess conservatives are just ok being lied to. That's all I can make of it.

[amsterdam]

whatever makes you feel better.conservatives are just happier people than liberals.they will come up with anything to make someone else feel stupid.thats the way they work.always good for a chuckle.

[bhallg2k]

No one is trying to make anyone feel stupid. I mean, if that happens as a consequence of being exposed to the truth, well...

It comes down to this for me on Iraq: good things are happening there that would not have happened without the American public being lied to. It's that simple.

No liberal I know is sad about the pleasant changes being made in Iraq. We're just upset that we were lied to in order for that change to occur. And apparently we're the only ones upset over this, leaving be to believe that lies are ok with conservatives.

I really would've supported the president had he said first, "We're going in to stop this brutal dictator from killing his own people and to spread democracy." And at the end of that, I would've suggested that our military make a few stops around the globe on the way back, if that was in fact the rationale for war.

Instead, we went to war under false pretenses that still don't add up, regardless of the outcome. I think that's dangerous.

[amsterdam]

No one is trying to make anyone feel stupid. I mean, if that happens as a consequence of being exposed to the truth, well...

It comes down to this for me on Iraq: good things are happening there that would not have happened without the American public being lied to. It's that simple.

No liberal I know is sad about the pleasant changes being made in Iraq. We're just upset that we were lied to in order for that change to occur. And apparently we're the only ones upset over this, leaving be to believe that lies are ok with conservatives.

I really would've supported the president had he said first, "We're going in to stop this brutal dictator from killing his own people and to spread democracy." And at the end of that, I would've suggested that our military make a few stops around the globe on the way back, if that was in fact the rationale for war.

Instead, we went to war under false pretenses that still don't add up, regardless of the outcome. I think that's dangerous.

the liberals are MORE upset than the iraqis?

i am with you on the wmd blunder.

people need to move on though,freedom is on a roll.dominoes.

[amsterdam]

not to mention that the war has gone better than anyone thought it would.i think before the war the dems were predicting 100,000 dead soldiers.lol.

war solves problems.