Democrats & Liberals: Archives

BUSH HURT USA MORE THAN EVER HELPED IT
MORE LIES AND MORE DEATHS if I may add info to your post.

Motassadeq, 31, is one of only six men worldwide who have been tried or have trials pending in connection with the September 11 attacks on the United States in which al Qaeda suicide hijackers killed nearly 3,000 people in 2001.
He was the first to be found guilty — but that conviction, in February 2003, was overturned by a higher court which argued Washington had withheld information from captured al Qaeda prisoners that might have been relevant to the case.

During his year-long second trial, the United States has provided the court with summaries of information revealed under interrogation by three top al Qaeda captives being held at secret locations, including two alleged 9/11 masterminds.
One of them, Ramzi bin al-Shaibah, said Motassadeq was one of a group of Arab students in the German port city of Hamburg who had “studied jihad” (holy war) and “engaged in vitriolic anti-U.S. discussions” at the home of Mohamed Atta, the man who
crashed the first hijacked plane into New York’s World Trade Center.

The United States has refused, on security grounds, to grant the court direct access to the prisoners as witnesses. This has frustrated German officials and increased the chances that Motassadeq — like Abdelghani Mzoudi, his Moroccan friend who was tried in Hamburg on the same charges — will be acquitted. THIS HAS FRUSTRATED GERMAN OFFICIALS AND INCREASED THE CHANCES THAT MOTASSADEQ —LIKE ABDELGHANI MZOUDI, HIS MOROCCAN FRIEND WHO WAS TRIED IN HAMBURG ON THE SAME CHARGES — WILL BE ACQUITTED. Lets charge Bush with the murder of the victims of 911.

New information on crash in Greece called ‘disturbing’
It is very strange and disturbing,” said Peter Goelz, former managing director of the U.S.
Top of Form 1

Bottom of Form 1
National Transportation Safety Board.
“It’s dead odd, really odd,” said Stuart Matthews, president of the non-profit Flight Safety Foundation.
The Helios Airways Boeing 737 departed Cyprus about 9 a.m. Sunday for Athens. Shortly afterward, a pilot reported problems with its air-conditioning system, which maintains breathable air in the cabin.
Later, the pilots stopped responding to radio calls from air traffic controllers.
The F-16 pilots saw the co-pilot slumped over the controls, but the captain was not in his seat, said government spokesman Theodoros Roussopoulos. And one or two people could be seen trying to take control of the plane, Roussopoulos said.
“If (the pilots) had gotten their oxygen masks on right away, they should have been able to fly the plane,” Matthews said
Jets contain portable oxygen bottles, for example, which might allow passengers or flight attendants to make their way into the cockpit.

Could sleeping gas or chemicals have been put in the air system ? This would explain some not being affected = they used the oxygen bottles = only time will reveal all the speculation. NO one is safe and the lies are killing people around the world.

In Ramadi, west of Baghdad, gunmen opened fire with assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades on a mosque where the governor of the province was meeting senior Sunni Muslim clerics, witnesses said, adding that there were casualties.

North of Baghdad, four U.S. troops were killed by a roadside bomb, raising the U.S. death toll to more than 1,850 since the war in
Top of Form 1

Bottom of Form 1
Iraq began. Insurgents appear to have developed more powerful bombs capable of piercing newly-armored U.S. vehicles.

Talks over the constitution, which broke down before the previous deadline on Monday, prompting an extraordinary session of parliament to amend the law and allow a week longer, remained divided over three fundamental issues — federalism, the role of Islam and the distribution of revenue from natural resources.
“I think there will be some sort of agreement by the deadline but the question mark is the Sunni Arabs,” he said. “Everyone wants them to be involved, but I’m not sure that they will come around. I’m not sure it will include them.”
They worry that they will be left as a minority in the center of the country, where there is no oil. The oil fields are in the far south and in northern areas claimed by the Kurds.

EXCUSE ME WHILE I GO HAVE A GOOD CRY AGAIN FOR THE VICTIMS OF 911 AND OUR YOUNG MEN DYING FOR BUSH

Do people really believe this bunch of hooey? I believe the terrorist realize we have the capability to wipe out the entire Middle East if we so desired. Of course, they also realize we do not sink to their deplorable level and just maybe that is the basis of our doom & gloom outlook. Maybe we need to exercise our might and not care who will kill to bring this conflict to a strict conclusion. Sadaam did it and all I see is people calling Bush all sorts of derogatory names but say nothing of Sadaam

The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam’s needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam’s reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam’s 8,000-odd days in power. So just how bad are we?

The entire world knows that they can hold an entire nation, the most powerful nation in the world..America, at bay with a relatively few people on the ground in the middle of a desert because we have become wimps.

We would rather point fingers of blame at each other and invoke World Articles of War policies (that only we observe) regarding prisoners and “innocent people” as a reason to conduct “compassionate” military action.

The only time we as a nation were very successful in bringing a conflict to a quick end was… you guessed it - Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

There is only one reason to have nuclear weapons.

Russia, China and North Korea and, recently Iran realize what that reason is. Nuclear reactors my ass, the only reaction from nuclear capability of the nations mentioned above will be devastation.

A needless war with Iran that WE sponsord (also killed with weapons WE supplied Iran), and Killed Kurdish iraqis killed with Weapons WE supplied. They don’t forget that we Loved Sadam before, when he was killing. And they see now that he is gone and not killing WE took over in that department. We americans have a short attention span, and a short history.

Also, Iran sees that if you DO have WMD’s, like North Korea, the U.S. will handle it “diplomatically”. And if you don’t, like Iraq, here we come. What do you think they are going to try and do.

You know what’s interesting? Iran supported President Bush’s re-election.

The head of Iran’s security council said Tuesday that the re-election of President Bush was in Tehran’s best interests, despite the administration’s axis of evil label, accusations that Iran harbors al-Qaeda terrorists and threats of sanctions over the country’s nuclear ambitions.

“We haven’t seen anything good from Democrats,” Hasan Rowhani told state-run television in remarks that, for the first time in recent decades, saw Iran openly supporting one U.S. presidential candidate over another.

You know what’s interesting? Iran supported President Bush’s re-election.

They aren’t dummies, that’s for sure. Osama Bin Laden probably was relieved that Bush was re-elected to. Bush is helping Iran and Al Queda’s initiatives.

Let me just say that there are no busloads of Republicans rushing to enlist for Iraq. There are, however, plenty of Republicans screaming for war back home.

Go figure.

Aldous,

I see that your restraint from the “Republican war” comment was short lived. Too bad, you were posting some great stuff, albeit sarcastic.

Does anyone believe this bunch of hooey? This is not something I said - it was all reported in today’s Yahoo articles - maybe you should learn to read?

but maybe you and Bush never got past the book he was reading to the children before all this started?

After you calling it hooey - I couldn’t even get myself to read your junk

IS THIS BUSH? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL except it is so ignorant we’re all crying at stupidity

NOW WONDER THEY WON’T LET YOU MAKE ANY MORE PUBLIC STATEMENTS WITHOUT INTELLIGENT MEMORIZATION OR PICTURES TO HELP YOU UNDERSTAND

ITS NOT THE DEMOCRATS WHO HURT NOT ONLY THE USA BUT THE WORLD AROUND US

FOR GODS SAKE WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

The Living Word Tabernacle in Waverly, Ohio, terminated the membership of Loretta Davis recently, according to a July report by WCMH-TV in Columbus, because she had stopped paying her tithe. Davis’ contributions ended in January after she was hospitalized the first of 15 times this year for congestive heart failure. The church’s founder said non-member Davis could still attend, but Davis’ daughter said, “In the time of (her) need, (the church) should be caring, supporting, asking what she needs, help her if she needed help.” (When healthier, Davis was donating $60 a month out of her $592 Social Security check.) [WCMH-TV, 7-15-05]

DID YOU BUY CHURCHES IN OHIO BUSH

Chuck Shepherd’s News of the Weird (.913)
Russian cows get new feed: marijuana
‘I don’t know what the milk will be like after this,’ drug agency officer says
Updated: 5:03 a.m. ET Aug. 16, 2005
MOSCOW - Russia’s long winter will just fly by for a herd of Russian cows which, a newspaper reported on Tuesday, will be fed confiscated marijuana over the cold months.
Drug workers said they adopted the unusual form of animal husbandry after they were forced to destroy the sunflowers and maize crops that the 40 ton of marijuana had been planted among, Novye Izvestia daily reported.
“There is simply no other way out. You see, the fields are planted with feed crops and if we remove it all the cows will have nothing to eat,” a Federal Drugs Control Service spokeswoman for the Urals region of Sverdlovsk told the paper. “I don’t know what the milk will be like after this.”
Drug use in Russia took off with the decline of the Soviet Union and police have been fighting drug smugglers — often shipping heroin from Afghanistan — for years.
Such large hauls are relatively common, although they are normally burned.
Maybe you bought DAIRY farms too
we won’t drink your milk

HEY STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES! YEAH BUSH THANKS FOR ALL YOU’VE DONE!

Annie…

It seems to me that you are finding things that you dont like with the world and blaming them on Bush.

I dont suppose you can actually link Drugs in Russia and a Church in Ohio to being Bush’s fault?

Am I missing something here?

MAtt

Re the U.S. sponsoring Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war.

The U.S. supplied 0.46% of all the arms Saddam had. Most of his arms came from the Soviet Union, China and France. You can call that sponsorhship, but you would be wrong.

You may not like the U.S. for other reason, but this one is just disinformation. If you want the actual list - http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/Trnd_Ind_IRQ_Imps_73-02.pdf

Am I missing something here or are the terrorists not linked to making their money from Afghanistan heroin?
And am I missing something here or did Bush not use the crutch of the church and GOD to win the election?
YOU TELL ME

And I can all link this together but the post will be much later tonight - my only day off and my son is going to a funeral for a young boy who committed suicide and I need to hug him today.

ps I would never make anything like that up …

Bush 2 - Democrats 0

Quit whining! There is nothing worse than whining publically about something you nor your liberal compadres can nor would do anything about.

Let’s take terrorism for instance. Democrats would open up dialogue with Osama. Waste of time? or would he really listen?

Democrat answer: We should always give diplomacy a try except for when the President is a Democrat. Then when we use force it is surely justified because we always exhaust all possible means to a peaceful solution.

Republican Answer: Hell F’n NO! The day we deal with a Terrorist organization on any level of civilized accord is the day that we all become radical islamists or every last one of them is dead!. Give me a break. Reason with Terrorists. Do you think they really care about what we have to say about anything. They would probably come to the meeting strapped with explosives just to blow themselves and whom ever is present.

Lets Take a look a IRAN.

Question: Do you think that the US Stance on IRAN is different from the STANCE on IRAQ?

Democratic Answer: I believe it is and it should be. Hell we are all protesting this war. Bush wouldn’t dare start another one. His ratings would fall through the floor. He can’t afford that if he wants to have another Republican elected as President. Besides, we don’t have anymore troops left. They are all over in IRAQ and Afghanistan. Our military might is stretched to the max. We also can’t afford another war.

Republican Answer: Are you f’n crazy? You forget that we tried for, what was it 12 years to control Saddam. Let’s just say that all those years that we supported that Jackbutt was a mistake. But let’s not forget that we also had a Democratic President that did nothing for National Security slashing budgets on agencies like the CIA and FBI and NSA. We also had a Democratic President that cut defence spending by almost a third. That same Democratic President used up tons of munitions in Bozina and never replaced them. That same idiot raised your taxes 3 times and gave you nothing in return. Didn’t fix Healthcare, didn’t fix Social Security and didn’t invest in infrastructure that could have curtailed the current oil prices we see today. If you ever find yourself wondering why the president doesn’t fix everything rightaway, it is because you keep whining at every plausible solution simply because another beloved democrat didn’t come up with the idea.

The End

You cannot reason with people like Annie. Their terminal hatred goes so deep, the conscious no longer allows them to see black & white, good or bad. They will ignore any fact that deviates from their agenda with a cold hard death-grip. Where were all the Cindy supporters when her son was killed over a year ago and she had her meeting with Bush? She did not meet the Bush-bash agenda at the time therefore she was of no use tothe radical liberals. Simple really.

We all need to realize the real issue at hand here. The Reps are not the problem nor are the Dems. The system is the problem and honestly, the President of this system does not have near the control many seem to feel he does. If a Dem obtains the office, the government will still be as corrupt, inefficient and insincere as it is now. It will continue to grow out of control and persist on a course until her rendezvous with catastrophe.

The naivety of some to think a Dem rather than a Rep will make the difference. I think Bush is a pedestrian president at best yet I decide to defend him on the site rather than take the path of least resistance. Why? Some of the preposterous accusations hurled at this man are nothing more than blind misdirected hatred. Their hatred is so great; they blame the man when their dinner is late and have the inability to look at things reasonably. Sure, he has made a number of mistakes but we must see, ?the system? will never allow one to admit to such a thing.

The slogan for 2008 should read ?It?s the system stupid? in hopes of seeing that the system must be simplified and that control must be wrenched from the hands of Reps and Dems. I don?t have the all the answers but beginning with term limits is a fastidious start. The last write-in candidate to win a major office it seems was Senator Thurmond back in the 1940s so I would never expect that route would work today. The Libertarian party holds promise and if a grass-roots effort can spawn this party to greater awareness in the media there could be hope. Wake up people, you are cussing & fussing at the symptom while ignoring the real problem.

As for current troop strength

We currently have deployed 170,000 troops to Iraq. Another 18,000 troops to Afghanistan. Where in our 1.5 million man Army to do you see that we have exhausted our troop strength?

For those that can’t do simple division. It is currently at 12.5% our capacity for military operations if you count every woman and man in our Armed forces. This talk about a draft is rediculous. Subsequently, I find it even more ironic that Mrs. Sheehan, God bless her son who is probably rolling over in his grave saying MOM please STOP! I chose to do this. I enlisted under my own free will and served my country well. Honor my death and live in freedom for the rest of your days, is saying nothing about the mortality rate of our own domestic violence in our nations capital that is a far more dangerous place to be than Iraq. I guess that is why she chose to camp out in Texas.

Now remember all of you freedom mocking liberals. You use your freedoms everyday to post your offending rhetoric and force me to listen to and read it. If you are offended by what I just said, now you know how I feel.

It rained real hard here this morning. Damn Bush and his rain making machine.
I can’t believe he doesn’t care enough about my state.
I bet those evil churches in other states ordered him to do it.

I suppose it is too much to ask every American to use a little commonsense. But……
commonsense is in either camps agenda.

I think that Bush played the Church and God’s love for man beautifully. Imagine if more people were attuned to the Word.
Do you think we would have terrorism? Not if you follow the commandments. You know those forbidden elements of government by which most society laws are based on. I am sorry about your son’s friend. May God see fit to forgive him.

Jason,
You said that President Clinton slashed the CIA budget. The CIA’s budget is supposed to be classified. Could you please share the numbers with us? I’m sure Karl Rove could get them for you.

Curmudgeon,
You said

Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam’s reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam’s 8,000-odd days in power. So just how bad are we?

I’m sad to say that some estimates place the number of Iraqi deaths caused by this war at 100,000 since March 20, 2003. If (and I grant that it’s a BIG “if”) that number is accurate, then we are responsible for about 113 Iraqi deaths per day.

You said

we do not sink to their deplorable level

Imagine if more people were attuned to the Word. Do you think we would have terrorism?

I think we would have more terrorism than you see today. It would be nice if people actually followed thier scriptures, but instead, they repeatedly throughout history, have found ways to justify using a peverted version of thier religion to kill in the name of God. Human history is one jihad after another. The Crusades, Inquisition, Holicaust, Irish Catholic/Protestant decades of conflict, just to name a few highlights. Religion is a dangerous virus, that will ultimately doom humanity if we don’t snap out of it.

I think Bush is a pedestrian president at best yet I decide to defend him

Kind of…. I’d classify him more puppet than pedestrian. He’s doing just enough to do harm, but not enough to do good. In his own ignorance, he’s playing right into the hands of enemies that want to see the US fail.

I do agree that the system in the American political landscape is the source of hte problem. Bush is a symptom born of that faulty system. This doesn’t, however, pardon him in my book. He is still the most powerful person in the free world, and had he the intellect and strength of character, he could at a minimum help steer our system toward some productive reforms. Being a dimwit doesn’t cut it. Being a bubba like Clinton was, doesn’t cut it either. The US deserves much better leadership than we are getting.

Jason:

Now remember all of you freedom mocking liberals. You use your freedoms everyday to post your offending rhetoric and force me to listen to and read it.

No one forces you to listen or read. You do so of your own free will. Should you choose not to listen or read what you don’t like, feel free to do that. On the other hand, no one is forced to listen to or read what you say, either.

Annie:

All I can say is…..Wow. Quite an amazing string of posts there. I’m not sure of the connection between any of them, other than the obvious “Bush sucks” mantra. But if you can logically bring a point out of them, please do so. I’ll be amazed if you can do so logically, but…I’m willing to give you a chance.

On a different note, my condolences for your son’s loss. May God be with him and the family involved.

we do not sink to their deplorable level Let’s all celebrate! We aren’t as bad as Saddam! Woo hoo! Kinda makes you proud to be an American, doesn’t it? We’re responsible for 12 fewer Iraqi deaths per day than Saddam at his worst.

Kind of like the slave owner who considers himself more moral because he owns half the slaves his neighbor does.

Aldous:

Let me just say that there are no busloads of Republicans rushing to enlist for Iraq. There are, however, plenty of Republicans screaming for war back home.

So am I to understand that only Republicans and conservatives hold to their word? I gave you the info you requested as did several others. Now you have broken your word.

Perhaps I should make some flagrant overgeneralization about liberals not being able to keep their promises or are not good at their word. I won’t.

Keep to your word. Stop the immature posts.

Chi Chi,
You mean Aldous hasn’t passed your info on to a recruiter yet?
And he hasn’t kept to his promise and shut up about it?
I’m shocked, SHOCKED!
I figured you’d be on your way to basic training by now…

TheTraveler:

Actually, I have been contacted. I am an Air Force vet, and the recruiter who contacted me was from the Army (oh, well).

I gave him my age, etc. I guess I am too old, at least for now, and my knees that got messed up when in the service would probably disqual me anyway.

But, I held up my end.

Jack-

Your chart is not correct. It shows no weapons being sold after 1990; Iraq deployed the Russian GPS jammers during the 2003 war.

George

I don’t think it is wrong, but maybe not completely up to date.

If we counted continued arms sales into the 1990s, I suppose America’s 0.46% of the arms sales would shrink even more. I just want to point out the absurdity of blaming the U.S. for Saddam.

You know that we are also responsible for the Soviet Union? During the 1930s, we exported so much equipment to that benighted land that they thought that the most famous Soviet inventor was RegUsPatOff. You can always find American connections in everything, good or bad.

I always point out that the U.S. was by far the biggest donor of humanitarian aid to the Afghan people even during the Taliban. Our aid saved thousands of people from the mistakes and crimes of their governments. To some that makes us responsible.

Jack:

Once again, you have educated me. I appreciate the facts you have presented. I have to admit that I believed the “US made Saddam who he is” rant, mostly because no one seemed to be disputing it…at least not as publicly as the ranters.

Thanks for the info. I just keep learning.

“little to defend ourselves with and few options.”

How so? Could you please explain?
Just curious about that part, thx.

Also, Iran sees that if you DO have WMD’s, like North Korea, the U.S. will handle it “diplomatically”. And if you don’t, like Iraq, here we come. What do you think they are going to try and do.

Posted by: Matt at August 18, 2005 11:22 AM

My point is slightly off-topic but I can’t help it. If Iran sees it that way then Iran is correct. But it has been that way since the beginning of civilization. The surest way to stop someone from running into your house, street, city, country, or planet, etc., and starting fight/wars is to show them that you can kick their ass if they do. That is one of life’s simple truths. The only reason people don’t try to take over heaven is because we are scared of God.

I am sure that these governments knew this before Bush was elected. If anything, our newfound agression made them accelerate their WMD time table.

Republican Answer: Hell F’n NO! The day we deal with a Terrorist organization on any level of civilized accord is the day that we all become radical islamists or every last one of them is dead!. Give me a break. Reason with Terrorists. Do you think they really care about what we have to say about anything. They would probably come to the meeting strapped with explosives just to blow themselves and whom ever is present.

Posted by Jason at August 18, 2005 01:01 PM

That’s bad logic. In fact, that’s not logic at all; that’s emotion masquerading as logic. By believing that they are beyond reason you give yourself license to kill them without even attempting peace, even when these killings simply fan the flames and do nothing to resolve the root conflict.

We use the term ‘terrorist’ too liberally. Some of these groups are simply murderous megalomanics who want to rule or simply kill all of their enemies. Some of these groups have legitimate political motives. They are different and must be treated differently.

We don’t negotiate with terrorists because most often the direct perpetrator is insane and their demands are ridiculous and infeasible. However, we call both Hamas and Al-Queda terrorist groups even though their core motivations are different. We call them terrorists because of their tactics, when their ideology is what makes them what they are.

In all cases you have to understand your enemies. Simply placing a label on them and trying to kill them all is to do the exact same thing they do to us. They call us infidel’s and try to kill us all without seeking to understand us. We call them terrorists and seek to kill them all without seeking to understand them. Foolishness. Both sides are dehumanizing their enemies and assuming that they are beyond reason. Fighting blindly will never address the source of the problem that is producing these fighters.

The true enemies here are ideas, most likely, fear, ignorance, pride, greed, and self-righteousness. Very seldom will hatred be the primary motivator of people. Fear is a much, much better, and much more common motivator. You can’t kill all of the terrorists because the ideas are creating the terrorists not the other way around. If you kill all the terrorists, the societies in question will simply make more. In order to stop terrorism, you have to neutralize the ideas at the root of the problem.

The proper time to kill any opposition is when they prove themselves unwilling or unable to reason and they prove themselves an imminent threat to you. Then you kill as many of them as necessary to force them into cease-fire and/or captiulation.

Chi Chi:
“I have to admit that I believed the “US made Saddam who he is” rant, mostly because no one seemed to be disputing it…at least not as publicly as the ranters.”

We did help make him what he was, Chi Chi. But I won’t rant — instead I’ll just give you a great link to the honest facts from:
The National Security Archive.

Hmm. Messed up my link there somehow. Here it is again:
The National Security Archive

And just in case: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Ok boys and girls I may be able to clear things up a little. You need to go back to the 50s when IKE had the prime ministery of Iran removed and the Shah put back on the throne. That at the behest of the 7 sisters, oil companies. Thats when the rag head mulluhs got angry at us. After we continued to allow the jews in israel to kill anyone they wanted to and create thousands of refugees the angry grew. As long as we had an ample supply of crude oil the middle east was forgotten. Then in the 70s nixon put the idea in the arabs heads to raise oil prices on the europeans due they were causing us economic troubles. The arabS went one better and raised prices to everyone. When Saddam took over Iraq we did nothing. Then when he went to war againist Iran we supplied him with WMDS in the form of gas among other weapons. In Afghanistan we did the same weapons were supplied to be used againist the soviets. We never questioned what type of government or leader we supplied as long as they fought our enemies. Remember the murderous contras? You know OLLIE ,THE TRAITOR, NORTH. Remember GHWB S buddie in panama. Yes he was the senior bushs bagman when he headed the cia. Thats why he is in jail now held incommunicable. So you see we have a very tangled web that all goes back to OIL. As long as we are hooked on it we will have troops in the oil rich countries of the middle east. Thats what pissed Osama off American troops in his HOLY LAND. GWB is not interested in freedom, see patriot act, he must keep his daddies friends in the caryle group and in the oil company board rooms happy.

Hi All:
Was just passing through here, and have but one question.
IMHO
“Annie, Who pissed in your corn flakes this morning? I mean I get pretty bent out of shape sometimes, but were you looking to break the record of Most consecutive posts, without making a point?”
of course that’s just “in my humble opinion”.

Just Passing Gas,

As Always,
Wayne

kctim,

Due to the war in Iraq we have lost all but Britain as an unconditional ally.
We have lost the sympathy we had received after 9/11 from China and Russia.
Our military is stretched too thin to continue all the tough talk directed at Iran and N. Korea.
We have used questionable tactics and intelligence in the war on terror that could come back to haunt us if we were to attempt to garner support from other countries if a conflict should arise.
Bush has placed the United States at its lowest point in world opinion and has divided the people of the United States.
There are few people in the world that trusts our government.
other countries would be outraged if we were to send our military anywhere else in the world, whether we were justified or not..
We are a toothless tiger.Nobody sees us as the defender of freedom anymore. We’re just America, the divided nation that has tortured and killed based on lies and an overeager president that cannot be believed or trusted.
Is that who we are? No, but that’s the worlds opinion of us.
Thanks Bush.

Andre,

Just curious who you see as an “unconditional ally” that we lost as a result of the Iraq war. Other than Britain I can not think of any country that would qualify as unconditional.

Jason, you claim:

Let’s take terrorism for instance. Democrats would open up dialogue with Osama.

That’s just plain wrong. Democrats are not looking to “open up dailogue” with Osama. Just because Karl Rove makes that claim doesn’t make it so. But if it helps you rationalize your opinion of Democrats by making up positions that they don’t hold, be my guest.

The fact is that it is you, and Republicans like you, that apologize for this President’s failed, ignorant “attempts” at catching Bin Laden are responsible for allowing him to roam free to this day, thumbing his nose at the U.S. and all who died on 9/11. If you’re looking for someone weak on terrorists, look in the mirror.

ElliottBay,

“We’re responsible for 12 fewer Iraqi deaths per day than Saddam at his worst.”

First, you admitted you had no idea that those figures were accurate.

Secondly, we are not responsible for the deaths caused by the insurgents. The insurgents are responsible for their own choices. Since they find it acceptable to blow up trucks surrounded by innocents, the blood of those people are on their hands!!!

I’m all for Bush being held responsible for his own actions and decisions, but he never decided that the insurgents should do what they do. That was never his choice. You want to place blame, fine, but put it in the right place. Hussein ordered those deaths, Bush did not! How can you not see the difference there?

Darrius said:

The proper time to kill any opposition is when they prove themselves unwilling or unable to reason and they prove themselves an imminent threat to you. Then you kill as many of them as necessary to force them into cease-fire and/or captiulation.

9/11 was unreasonable and an imminent threat, so we attacked.

Iraq was neither unreasonable, nor an imminent threat, as we now know, and yet we attacked. That was wrong.

Now, however, the terrorists in Iraq are unreasonable (they’re blowing up children on purpose, remember) and an imminent threat, so we continue to attack.

Terrorism, by it’s very nature, is unreasonable. You can’t reason with people who feel terrorism is an appropriate way to be heard even when their cause is just! However, you can reason with people who have yet to descend to the level of terrorism. You can prevent people from becoming terrorists, without negotiating with terrorists. Negotiate with the non-terrorists who’s demands are similiar, yet make their demands in a rational manner. Don’t negotiate with the terrorists, because they are beyond reason.

Stephanie,

A large percentage of Iraqi civilian deaths reported is due to direct American actions, ie bombings, etc. Those actions were ordered by Mr. Bush.

Secondly, under the Geneva Convention an occupying authority has the duty to prevent civilian deaths from a breakdown of law and order. This is our duty, and one that we are failing at miserably!

Third, Bush was told by his own Secretary of State before the war that “If you break it, you own it.” Bush sure as hell broke it.

Yes, Saddam was a horrible, horrible individual. Much worse than Mr. Bush. But the President has much more power and a wider circle of influence. His actions, good or bad, affect many more people.

How many more excuses do you have left?

Chi Chi:

You are over 39 and not qualified for re-enlistment. I suppose you knew that or you would not volunteer your name. Give me someone under 39 and not overweight then maybe I would consider stopping.

I always suspected something was wrong when Republicans volunteer to get visited by a Recruiter.

Once again what is a terrorist? What constitutes terrorism? We use these terms too broadly. A group of three madmen bombing a federal building because they think taxes are too high is fundamentally different from a political organization resisting the loss of their country to foreigners.

Slapping the label of terrorist on groups simply allows people to turn off their brains and never consider why these people are doing what they do. If you kill the former they won’t come back; they are motivated by insanity. If you kill the latter, they’ll spawn more people; they are motivated by a just cause.

P.S.

No one will ever negotiate with you if you have no show of force. People must respect the power on the other side before they will bargain in good faith. That why North Korea and Iran are steadly persuing nuclear weapons. That is why we are trying to get everyone else to rid themselves of WMD’s while we keep ours. That is why Israel is pulling out of the West Bank now. That applies to every walk of life from your job to your marriage. If you don’t prove that you have power, people walk all over you without thinking twice.

Aldous

I am also way too old for military service, so I won’t bother you with my credentials.

But how about something even easier for Dems? Money. Many people in the blue side complain about the President’s tax cuts. To be consequent, maybe we should ask that the volunteer to pay more money or more to the point volunteer to have the IRS make sure they have paid all they should pay at the lower rates.

Or how about our environmentalists? I ride a bike to work, when I don’t take the metro. (BTW it is 17 miles each way and if you live farther away from your place of employment, as a good environmentalist you should move closer so you can ride a bike.) I own a Honda Civic hybrid for which I paid about $4000 more than a comparable car. So anyone who drives anything other than a hybrid and/or uses any car to commute to work can’t call himself an environmentalist.

You see how absurd it can get? Even with the war that you are talking about. Even most liberals claim to have supported the war in Afghanistan (although moveon.org and others opposed). Not all the fighting is in Iraq. Maybe Dems can sign up for that war. Or consider terrorism. Had we done nothing after 9/11 terrorists would have struck in the U.S. for sure. Maybe the pacifists can volunteer to be victims.

I worry about this once great country. This recent republican domination has caused meny to lose faith in thair contry instead of thair leaders. I pray that it dosnt get worse down the line.

jack:

We did do something after 9/11. Its called Afghanistan. Unfortunately, old Bush had a Plan and we pulled out of Afghanistan before all the Taliban/Al Queda were killed. Now OBL is a mythic figure and even if he dies he will rally Al Queda.

BTW, its been confirmed OBL was in Bora-Bora. We will never know if we could have caught him or not had we stayed if force.

Mike P,

We have lost Germany, Italy, Spain and France.
Allies that we could pretty much count on.
Maybe not unconditionally but you know what I mean.
Bush has also put us in a position in the rest of the worlds eyes to have a questionable government at best.

Andre
Thanks for taking the time and listing your opinions concerning my question.

Aldous

You are correct when you say that “We will never know if we could have caught him or not had we stayed in force.” Except that we were never there in force. We relied on the Afghans. We had to. It worked fairly well for most of the war. Our military decided to provide fewer American targets. That is why we were so quickly successful in the “graveyard of empires”, and avoided the quagmire moveon.org hoped for. We could not have mounted the operation ourselves in Tora Bora, for many political and logistical reasons. You might criticize the planning that went into it and there were mistakes. But it was not a political decision made by George Bush nor was it done during the time of Iraq.

And since you evidently support the war in Afghanistan, you should at least encourage liberals to sign up for that one, or maybe go yourself, if we are following your ad-hominem.

The fact is that it is you, and Republicans like you, that apologize for this President’s failed, ignorant “attempts” at catching Bin Laden are responsible for allowing him to roam free to this day, thumbing his nose at the U.S. and all who died on 9/11. If you’re looking for someone weak on terrorists, look in the mirror.

Ouch! SERVED!

Nice point Burt.

-Under Clinton, we suffered 6 major attacks that were orchestrated by Bin Laden

-The Clinton administration turned down Sudans offer to extradite bin Laden in 1996.

-Mansoor Ijaz was working towards cathing OBL also, but was left in the wind.

-In May 1996, the Sudanese capitulated to U.S. pressure and asked Bin Laden to leave, despite their feeling that he could be monitored better in Sudan than elsewhere.

-Another golden opportunity to eliminate Bin Laden was after he had been expelled from Sudan. He flew in a plane to Afghanistan and his plane could have easily been taken out.

-Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic told the U.N. tribunal Tuesday that Osama bin Laden was in Albania in 2000 and that the Clinton Administration had discussed it with him.

Look in the mirror and see someone weak on terrorism or look in the mirror and see someone who would rather ignore the problem and do nothing?
Even though weak, the one who at least tries is more respectable than the one who does not.

I’ll take “failed attempts” over DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, any day.

Burt,

I’m not using excuses. I am very disappointed in Bush and am not defending his negligence. He’s responsible for a lot of really wrong things. However, insurgents blowing up children (amongst other heinous things they have done) is not one of them. They are responsible for their own choices and they choose to kill!!!

“A large percentage of Iraqi civilian deaths reported…”

Well, a large percentage of Iraqi citizen deaths aren’t even reported, can’t even be accurately tallied, so, you’re arguement is insufficent. The whole 100,000 thing isn’t “reported” deaths, it’s estimated deaths. It’s a lot easier for us to track how many people we kill, then it is to track how many people they kill, and it’s not possible to determine how many of those we killed were innocent or were insurgents.

“under the Geneva Convention an occupying authority has the duty to prevent civilian deaths from a breakdown of law and order…we are failing at miserably!”

I agree. I have tried on previous posts to get words into actions to help rectify this, with nobody joining me to accomplish that, so your words and your outrage mean little if you’re unwilling to act. Unfortunately, what you don’t seem to get, is that just because Bush holds some responsibility for allowing the chaos, doesn’t negate the fact that the insurgents are responsible for doing what they are doing. They are killing people. That’s their choice. The “the poor insurgents aren’t responsible for blowing people up, because Bush hasn’t stopped them” logic doesn’t work with me, sorry. I’m all for holding Bush responsible for his choices, and getting him to shape up his act, but blaming him for another’s actions when the “others” are not subordinate to him is absolutely ridiculous. Under your logic, everyone alive during the Holocaust is responsible for the many deaths that occured, because they didn’t stop it, not the poor fools who stuck them in gas chambers. Sorry, justice doesn’t work that way.

“Bush was told by his own Secretary of State before the war that “If you break it, you own it.” Bush sure as hell broke it.”

Yeah, so the clamor to remove our troops and abandon the Iraqis to their fate sure as hell should stop!

“Yes, Saddam was a horrible, horrible individual. Much worse than Mr. Bush.”

Thank you, that’s my point. Insert insurgents where Saddam is and we’ll even be on the same page!

“President has much more power and a wider circle of influence.”

Yes, so instead of chanting “Bush is evil!” mantras people who realize this shoud be working together, putting real, rational pressue on him to get him to use it and fix his own mistakes. em>Like putting the murderous, deplorable insurgents either in the ground or behind bars!!!

Darrius,

“Slapping the label of terrorist on groups simply allows people to turn off their brains…”

So the media calls them insurgents instead of terrorists…they’re still WRONG!!!

Those who lost their priviledges with the downfall of Saddam are not right to demand their priviledges back (while I recognize that many liberals love to argue minorities deserve special priviledges, trying to enforce it with guns and bombs, ect, makes it even less logical, now doesn’t it?), when they gained their priviledges through genocidal means. They are not entitiled to the power to which they so desperately cling.

Those foreigners who came to Iraq for the purpose of attacking American soldiers and making us look bad by making this war as bloody as they possibly can are not doing this for justice sake. They’re doing this out of hatred for us and everything we stand for, not just because of a few fixable foreign policies.

Stephanie,

Imagine the mayor of a city who decides to cut costs, and so he eliminates the police force. Fires them all.

Responsibility for the resulting lawlessness would certainly fall on those who decided to commit crimes. But the mayor would also be partly to blame for his irresponsible and short sighted decisions.

Your holocaust argument doesn’t hold water. The “rest of the world” wasn’t in control of territory where the Holocaust took place. Germany was. And the “rest of the world” isn’t in control of Iraq. But sadly, neither are we.

I am doing what you ask, and voicing my displeasure with the current actions and decision making, but it is ignored because it comes from the left. We need more people like you, who actually voted for Bush, to put the pressure on. Only then will we see a change in the administration’s position. Unfortunately, too many from the GOP would rather make excuses for Bush at any cost rather than push for better results.

Hi All:

This question has bothered me for quite some time now. Have we (the US gov’t) Ever debated across party lines with out the usual debate(You know the ones were Politicians have made up their mind’s before they even know what the discussion is about) tactics. The question…Why do we constantly make other countries bend to our will? I mean even the biggest bulley can’t have it his way all the time. Think about that, how did it feel as a youngster to be bullied constantly? Why can’t we ever ask other people’s opinion before we force our opinions down the throats of the rest of world. Look at France and Germany, they were longtime allies but they did the “UNTHINKABLE”, they didn’t fall in line behind the US. They did what was a very brave thing to do, They stood their ground on the invasion of Iraq. The lone holdout to Kyoto Accords, was who? If you answered the US, you’d be correct. Not a popular decision, However when the polar caps melt and the seas rise by another 100 feet or so, you can thank Bushco. Oh you say not our problem, What will you say to the East Coasters when they are looking for a new place to house the White House somewhere in western Oklahoma, or how about Denver, Oh the west coast will be no different, My best guess Is at A minimum the entire LA Basin will change DRAMATICALLY if the Temperature doesn’t Rise by ten degrees celsius average, it will drop on average 15 degrees celcius across the globe. So as you can see, it’s alright to disagree with your allies and enemies alike. I’ll even bet that Haliburton even gets the contract to build The Next Generation “White House”.
Just My Thoughts on That Matter.

As Always,
Wayne

Burt,

“I am doing what you ask…We need more people like you…Only then will we see a change in the administration’s position.”

The problem with people like me is that, while I can recognize that the strategies we’re using aren’t working, I on my own cannot develop strategies that would be more effective and all-inclusive. I admit that freely. The President has military experts to advise him. I don’t.

I honestly believe (despite the fact that it might just be wishful thinking) that if I could get enough intelligent and knowledgable people together, list what’s going wrong, devise ways to fix them, write a letter delineating our conclusions, and get as many people to sign it from as wide a segment of the American population as possible (i.e. not just liberals, not just conservatives, not just Midwesterners, not just East Coast residents, ect.) then we would get some real results. Mix a layman’s think-tank w/ strategic letter writing campaign (that targets not only the President, but the Congress and probably people in the President’s administration) and you get the general idea of what I’m talking about.

The biggest difficulty is that I don’t know how to start something like this. Or, perhaps that’s the second biggest difficulty, the first being nobody takes me seriously. I want to do this. I believe good would come of it. But, I need help, and none has been forthcoming.

There are two main reasons I think taking such a drastic step is necessary.

1) If the letter-writing campaign is big enough we’re bound to get heard.

2) Without delineated steps towards success, preferably ones we could track, there would be no way for us to know if he’s trying our plan or not, so we wouldn’t know when to raise a fuss, again.

It seems that all the organization that is going on is bi-partisan. You don’t win a war by playing partisan politics, you win a war by uniting a country in a common cause. That’s what we need to do.

kctim,

When all else fails, blame Clinton.

Stephanie,

I agree. The insurgents in Iraq are wrong. They are trying to stop the Iraqi people from governing themselves. They are killing Iraqi people in the name of….liberating the country from foreigners??? That doesn’t make any sense. If they love Iraq and Muslims so much why are they killing so many of them.

Those foreigners who came to Iraq for the purpose of attacking American soldiers and making us look bad by making this war as bloody as they possibly can are not doing this for justice sake. They’re doing this out of hatred for us and everything we stand for, not just because of a few fixable foreign policies.

Posted by Stephanie at August 19, 2005 02:11 PM

The foreigners who come to Iraq for the purpose of attacking are most likely motivated by greed for power, fear, and religious zeal. I doubt that they care about making us look bad, or if they truly hate us.

If a man has a house and he tells you “don’t come in my house.” And you go into his house anyway, you went there to fight. Don’t act suprised when he fights you, because you started it. Some of them are fighting simply for that reason alone. It’s the same thing we’d do if Iraq invaded the US. We would keep fighting…and keep fighting….and keep fighting, until the last bullet is gone.

Some of them honestly believe every Muslim should fight any foreigners who occupy Muslim controlled land.

Some of them want to run the country and thus they want to disrupt any attempt at stable Iraqi democracy in hopes that they can take power some day.

Some of them are afraid that if we succeed and setting up a government in Iraq that their ideology will become obsolete.

I doubt any of them are killing their countrymen or American soldiers simply because they hate Americans. Remember at one time there were people from several other countries there, and they got attacked just the same as Americans did.

I first introduced this idea in reponse to Jason’s post saying that we would not reason with a terrorist organization until they were all dead. The counterpoint I wanted to say was that just because we call them a terrorist organization doesn’t necessarily mean that they are a terrorist organization. Some of them are, but some have legitimate political motive. To simply go in fighting blindly like a fool without regard to why they are fighting us would be, well, foolish. It would also result in long protracted guerilla wars because we would never subvert their moral influence at the source. It’s like fighting a ghost; the base society would continue producing more terrorists.

That was my argument, that we should look at each case individually. Not to imply that the terrorists/insurgents in Iraq were not wrong.

Stephanie,

The best time for you to try change the President’s actions in Iraq was at the ballot box last November. But you missed that chance. In fact, you gave your stamp of approval to his actions.

But moving forward, I do wish you luck. Just don’t rely on too many “intelligent” people. You see, the GOP regard them as “elitists”, and view anything they say with suspicion. The last thing you want to do is present ideas from intelligent people.

So try this idea, coming from me, a definitely un-intelligent person. Tell the President to get *&^% busy training the *&%^ Iraqi’s to police their own *&^(*^% mess! How many years does it really take to teach a guy to point a rifle? Then say sayonara, we’ll see ya in the funny papers.

Actually, there ARE bus loads of Republicans rushing to enlist in Iraq. Furthermore, the only wars I see being started within our nation are from Liberals and racist groups like ACLU and MoveOn. Most of you people obviously have no idea what you’re talking about, and the only reason you post here is so that you can reiterate some crap you heard some other schmuck say.

Darrius,

“That was my argument, that we should look at each case individually. Not to imply that the terrorists/insurgents in Iraq were not wrong. “

And I disagree. Negotiate with the peaceful people. Capture or kill the terrorists/insurgents/or whatever you want to call them. Even if you called them “big, fluffy teddy bears” it wouldn’t change the fact that the way they are going about it is wrong. They are not primarily targetting military targets, they are primarily targetting civilians. Call them what you will, I call their actions terrorism.

Burt,

No, I don’t like your idea at all. Your idea is the exact “lack of responsibility” mentallity that has made this world the tragic mess that is now. Thanks for the offer, but I’ll pass.

Stephanie,

How is training Iraqis to secure and police their own country irresponsible?

Again, you ratified Bush’s actions last November. What better ideas do you or he have?

Thanks in advance.

Burt,

I do not disagree with training Iraqis to secure and police their own country.

I disagree with your claim that it’s their own mess (who started this war, afterall?).

And, I disagree with leaving before a certain level of security has been obtained, mainly not having to walk around with gaurds, kids being able to go outside and play without getting blown up or kidnapped, you know, the sort of thing we take for granted here.

Besides, part of the problem with training Iraqis forces is that we keep letting them get shot or blown up before they’re even ready to fight!!!

p.s. Please read my entire post, not just latch onto what you can argue against.

“The problem with people like me is that, while I can recognize that the strategies we’re using aren’t working, I on my own cannot develop strategies that would be more effective and all-inclusive. I admit that freely. The President has military experts to advise him. I don’t.”

I posted that yesterday. Is your memory so short? Maybe you really don’t remember who started this war.

Maybe you really don’t remember who started this war.

We did.

ElliottBay,

Thank you! That was my point.

You know what’s interesting? Iran supported President Bush’s re-election.

They aren’t dummies, that’s for sure. Osama Bin Laden probably was relieved that Bush was re-elected to. Bush is helping Iran and Al Queda’s initiatives.

Al Qaeda actually did publicly endorse President Bush’s re-election,

The Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, the group that claimed credit for the Madrid bombings, is backing Bush because they feel it’s not possible to find an adversary, “more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom. Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilization. Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected.”

And al Qaeda itself issued an endorsement for Bush’s re-election “because he acts with force rather than wisdom or shrewdness, and it is his religious fanaticism that will rouse our (Islamic) nation, as has been shown. Being targeted by an enemy is what will wake us from our slumber.”

kctim, I couldn’t let this go:

-The Clinton administration turned down Sudans offer to extradite bin Laden in 1996.

-Mansoor Ijaz was working towards cathing OBL also, but was left in the wind.

kctim, both of those are right-wing myths. The first never happened, and the second is laughable because Ijaz - owner of extensive oil interests in Sudan - wanted the US to lift sanctions (he’s now a FOX News analyst).

They were most recently debunked in the 9/11 report, which is available online for free (there’s no excuse for being so uninformed). The rest of your list is similarly suspect.

You know what’s interesting? Iran supported President Bush’s re-election.

They aren’t dummies, that’s for sure. Osama Bin Laden probably was relieved that Bush was re-elected to. Bush is helping Iran and Al Queda’s initiatives.

Al Qaeda actually did publicly endorse President Bush’s re-election,

The Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, the group that claimed credit for the Madrid bombings, is backing Bush because they feel it’s not possible to find an adversary, “more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom. Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilization. Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected.”

And al Qaeda itself issued an endorsement for Bush’s re-election “because he acts with force rather than wisdom or shrewdness, and it is his religious fanaticism that will rouse our (Islamic) nation, as has been shown. Being targeted by an enemy is what will wake us from our slumber.”

kctim, I couldn’t let this go:

-The Clinton administration turned down Sudans offer to extradite bin Laden in 1996.

-Mansoor Ijaz was working towards cathing OBL also, but was left in the wind.

kctim, both of those are right-wing myths. The first never happened, and the second is laughable because Ijaz - owner of extensive oil interests in Sudan - wanted the US to lift sanctions (he’s now a FOX News analyst).

They were most recently debunked in the 9/11 report, which is available online for free (there’s no excuse for being so uninformed). The rest of your list is similarly suspect.

Lou,

Did you have a point?

Stephanie,

I really think that if we are to fix this mess, we need to watch for spin during any and all elections. We need to watch for the bashing and the mud slinging. We should vote against those who sanction these tactics. We should throw out the notion that one particular party has our best interests at heart.
Vote for the best candidates.
If those in government see that we are not going to fall into the partisan traps that were used in recent elections they will be forced to change and put our best interests in the porefront or lose the election.
Those who are corrupt will not have partisan politics to blame when they are investigated and when an administration fails it will be a united people who will hold it accountable.
We cannot afford the “Red vs. Blue”, “Liberal vs. Conservative”,”Dems vs. Reps”,nonsense that has shifted the focus of the American people to who is right and who is wrong. We need to be Americans, who care about our country and our world.
We need leaders not some candidate that has the most financial backing and has the benefit of powerful friends.

“The rest of your list is similarly suspect”

Information is always suspect when its used against the side a person supports.

“both of those are right-wing myths. The first never happened”

-According to the Sunday Times of London, Clinton himself said his refusal to accept the offer to hand over Bin Laden was the “Biggest Mistake” of his presidency.-

“and the second is laughable because Ijaz - owner of extensive oil interests in Sudan - wanted the US to lift sanctions (he’s now a FOX News analyst).”

-Mansoor Ijaz, a Pakistani-American who contributed to Clintons presidential campaign and served as a go-between for the administration and various powers in the Middle East. Ijaz presented an exchange of e-mails as evidence to prove that he had in fact met with Clinton officials and intelligence officers from the United Arab Emirates, who were offering to help to deliver bin Laden to the U.S.-

clinton never said that and Ijaz lied because he now works for FOX right?
The left can use suspect info and personal accounts of 1 year, to place the blame of 9-11 on Bush’s shoulders but the right cannot use the same type of info, spanning 8 years, to say clinton is also responsible?

“(there’s no excuse for being so uninformed)”

I AM uninformed on many things, but I try to learn something new everyday.
It’s even harder when you make both sides play by the same rules and hold them to the same standards.

Andre,

I agree completely. The difficulty is convincing the voting populace. Part of the reason the mud-slinging and spin is used is because it works. It incites people no matter what their stance is, if they’re the least bit passionate about it that can be used against them. And in recent elections, even the best candidates have used spin and mud-slinging. Even third parties use those tactics, just on a smaller scale.

“We cannot afford the “Red vs. Blue”, “Liberal vs. Conservative”,”Dems vs. Reps”,nonsense that has shifted the focus of the American people to who is right and who is wrong.”

This I agree with most strongly. I believe this is why we’re losing the war in Iraq and the greater war against terrorism. Both sides have been clashing like it’s about one (American) side against the other, when we should all be united. IMO, more of the liberals need to accept that we are at war in Iraq and unite with the conservatives to fight this war as well as history has proven America can fight, as a united effort. More of the conservatives, and especially the current Presidential Administration, needs to admit the liberals have valid points and some really good ideas that should be implimented, instead of implimenting those ideas too little, too late and taking credit for them themselves. If enough of us can realize that we aren’t each other’s enemy, then we can focus on who our enemies really are and what we can do about them.

Very nice, kctim!