Subject:
|
Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 11:57:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
216 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
| |
If failing to account
for WoMD is a good reason to invade, well, didn’t someone find some stuff on
your home soil a few months back that was missing since ‘69?
|
Wait a minute. People can see that the US was missing some stuff for over 40
years and only recently found it but are complaining that we haven’t found
anything burried in the Iraqi desert after only a few months!? Color me
confused.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
It was an example. I’m sure that if and when every single rock is turned over
in Iraq that there will probably be some canisters of something that’s been
missing since around ‘91.
That said, since this stuff is missing, it couldn’t have been used, as Dubya
lead us to believe, imminently in an attack against the US, just like the stuff
found a few months back couldn’t have been used to attack anyone between the
years 1969 to 2003.
So the “imminent danger” was false. The “massive buildup of WoMD” was false,
the “He’s pursuing nuclear materials for bombs” (aluminum tubes and Niger
connection) false--what’s more was that his own whitehouse was briefed as to the
falseness of that last one *before* he gave his SOTU stating that SH was getting
his paws on nuclear material.
So where does that leave us? Once again, we’re approaching mid-july, which is
the same amount of time that Dubya gave Blix to find stuff before the war.
Nixon stepped down because there was that little thing called ‘Watergate’. And
that, boiled down to the crux of the matter, was an internal US affair--I don’t
think the rest of the world was that concerned about the Democratic party and/or
shredded evidence thereof.
Dubya has invaded a foreign country under false pretenses, and continues to get
people killed. Yeah, I think that’s just a wee bit different.
But, like some of the generations of kids I see these days, they want everything
they desire but they also don’t want the responsibility or negative
repurcussions that are the result of their ill conceived actions.
This fiasco was ill conceived from the start. Anything based on lies and deceit
cannot follow thru to a positive result. Here’s a quote (I mean we’re quoting
Franklin and all), “The ends cannot justify the means”. ‘Iraq is liberated’?
That’s suppose to be the justification (now)? They aren’t looking too
liberated. ‘It takes time!’ At least 4 years according to your president. And
with the ‘random acts of shooting’ you’re looking at lockdowns and curfews and
the like for the citizens of Iraq over those next 4 years.
So with the cost of the war, the dead soldiers and citizens (which still
continue to get killed almost daily even after this war’s been over for a few
months) what ‘freedom’ does Iraq have, or even hope to have in the next 4 years?
And what will be the cost of maintaining that?
And one last thing, it’s getting pretty obvious that there wasn’t an ‘exit
strategy’ in place. 4 more years (and who knows how many after that) does not
an exit strategy make.
How do I justify calling Dubya a moron? One of the reasons they are called
morons is that they make the same mistake over and over again. “Learn well the
lessons of history...” It is blatantly apparent that Dubya learned nothing from
Vietnam and Afganistan.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
