Mistaken
 

I found this and wondered what you all think

http://www.hategun.com/features/mistaken/index.html

Everybody has someone that hates em, and sees their mistakes. Many people will not even pay attention to what good Mr.Bush might have done. Though it is hard to pay much attention to this site, to lefty for me. freak:

Doesnt matter how many mistakes are pointed out, the people have already made up their minds on whether they approve of him or not. We have another 4 years of this shit.

How has he directly affected your life? God forbid you pay a couple extra dollars to free a country.. sleeping:

So you base his entire term of presidency on freeing Iraq?

While letting the bastards behind the death of thousands...live a lot longer to pursue this "freeing of a country".

many people probably forget that bush had no care on earth about iraq when he became president. No one gave a crap about the middle east or al queida. Yes maybe he used the hatred/panic that america was struck with to get permission to do things normally not done but remember he did what everyone wanted. We wanted him to go after Osama, we wanted him to take out sadam because of what he has done in the past and because of what he may have been planning. fact of the matter is yes you can find fault anywhere, yes people always get blamed for their mistakes, for their wrong doings, but when it comes to the good things they have done no one looks or even cares because it doesnt involve lotso f money, blood, or sex.

It's funny. I was talking with a professor at my College about Bush and the Iraq war. He said he has some neighbours from Texas. There are a lot of Texans in Calgary because of the Oil business, and vice versa. Calgary has the largest population of Americans anywhere in the world outside of the USA. At any rate, he was asking these people from Texas why they were bush supporters, even after all that has happened. They simply responded that they trust him. They think he's doing the best for their country, and they don't see anything wrong with his actions. I think this is the belief of many Americans, and even Canadians. 2 of my closest friends said they would vote for Bush if they lived in the states.

Last year in the Canadian Federal Election I voted for the Conservative Party of Canada. This is essentially the republican party equivalent. I think I did this most part because everyone else in my province votes this way. If you look at an electoral map of Alberta, it's all Blue. (The conservative party in Canada is Blue, liberals are red). I've significantly changed the way I look at the electoral process and parties running in it. In the next election I think I’ll be voting Green. Going from Conservative to Green is a big leap. Pretty much all the way across the spectrum.

As for the video, it's just propaganda against Bush. Although I agree with its message, it doesn't tell me anything I didn't already know, and shouldn't tell anyone on the face of the earth something they didn't know, unless those people are very uninformed. I find it hard to rationalize after knowing these simple facts that people would still vote for the man. I think a part of it is just blind patriotism toward Bush and his party and what they stand for.

And we always hear the question "are you sorry you went into Iraq?" When have you ever heard any politician apologize and admit they did something wrong? Especially on the scale of the War in Iraq. There is no way that Bush would ever concede that going into Iraq was wrong, even if 10,000 or 100,000 troops died in the process. So I don't know why anyone would expect him to say, yes we were wrong, there were no weapons, Saddam wasn't a threat to anyone, and we screwed up.

I really don't know what good Bush has done for the US or the rest of the world. He put the US into an enormous amount of debt that continues to climb. He'll be out of office in 4 years, but someone is going to have to clean up his mess. What does this say to his children who have to bear this burden? Bush also pretty much undermined the entire world community and divided Western Civilization and NATO. I believe attention should be put on solving conflicts, not creating them. Especially not unilaterally.

The US was home free with the Iraq situation. I remember when Saddam was not cooperating, yes I admit that he gave Inspectors a run for their money, He wasn't honest, and that was why Canada had proposed a drop dead date to let UN inspectors into certain areas. If Saddam did not let them in, Canada would have supported military action. This Idea was tabled only a few days before the election. If the US had waited another 2 weeks maybe, they might have had support from the UN, and then nobody could be blaming the US for its actions.

Bush tried to make the link between Al Qeda and Iraq. Really, he succeeded. I believe the majority of US citizens at one point thought Iraq had something to do with 9/11, which is absolutely false. It was always clear to me that it was false, yet people seemed to believe that it was true. I was baffled by this for quite some time.

While the below wasn't written specifically in response to Proteus' comment above since he typed it as I was typing my long ass thing out, it exemplifies my position even more.


I'm still baffled at why people still support the war. So there were no WMD. But getting rid of Saddam was good because he was bad to the Iraqi people, right?

Truthfully, do you really care about the Iraqi people? Are the Iraqi people worth 1,300 US soldiers? Do you really care if an Iraqi dies?

So if the Iraqi people are really worth 1,300 lives, then why not the Congo, or Iran, or Sudan?

Tens of thousands of people in Sudan are dying right at this very moment. I bet more people have lost their lives in Sudan in the last 6 months, than in Iraq in the past 10 years. Whether or not you call it genocide, it doesn’t matter. Entire villages are being wiped out right now. As you read this, people are being massacred by the thousands. Why is this not a worthy cause to try to contain or fight for?

http://www.webindia123.com/news/showdet ... &cat=World
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jh ... yID=665030

[quote:73afa]at least 70,000 people have died from killings or disease and 1.8 million people are homeless after pro-government militia pillaged, killed and raped.[/quote:73afa]

Doesn't add up to me. Bush screwed up in Iraq, so the argument turns to: "we're freeing the Iraqi people." Bull shit. Bush doesn’t give a flying fuck about Iraqis, or Iranians, or Koreans or Sudanese. Nobody does. But this argument isn't valid anymore "we're helping the Iraqis". There are a lot of people in need of a lot more help than the Iraqis.

===========
hope someone actually reads that. it took me a long time. happy:

what, thats it? thats why you feel like he should be president? who the fuck cares about freeing Iraq when we should be directing our troops to find Bin Laden? That was the whole point people were voting for him, right? He said Kerry in office would weaken the countries defenses. We are no safer now than we were before 9/11. Bush should have sent the army to Afghanistan/Pakistan and combed every last inch of that desert before he had any ideas of liberating Iraq.

oh yeah he also increased spending after bitching about how the democrats spent too much money.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy ... st08z8.xls

I think the main point a lot of ppl get at is the guy really appears to be an idiot. i dont mean that to offend simply a statement of what perception of most of the world thinks. I was suprised he got another term but from what i saw (i'm english so i dont get as much of it down the tv as you all did)
kerry was a weak candidate and all the spin and adverts worked. saddam has been a target for many years by the US even as far as when they paid osama to assassinate him. My opinion is the main reason (apart from makin sure oil goes where they want) for keepin troops in iraq is now no WMD's were found and saddam is under lock and key they cant just pull out quietly so it has to be ensuring "democracy". this isnt a bad thing but i do think at the end of the day it should be put to an end and let them go from here on their own. all that is happening now is the situation is gettin worse and america and here allies are gettin made to be the bad guys.

I wasn't suprised Bush won the election especially after the tons of information avaliable the days after the election took place. No doubt in my mind, the election was rigged. But that's another topic.

My personal opinion is that Bush and Cheny and Rumsfeld should stand trial for war crimes. How can 100,000 civilians lose their lives, and no one be held responsible?

I wholeheartedly agree with you, Ninty, even about voting Green. I was against this war in Iraq since the begining for two main reasons:

- They didn't have WMD's, nore could they strike North American soil even if they did have them.

- Iraq has not openly attacked anybody since Kuwait in '91.

Since Iraq has been shitbagged already, there' isn't much we can do. All I can hope for is that is war doesn't turn all quagmire (which I'm sad to say, it's starting to turn ntio another Vietnam), and that the suffering on both sides will be resolved... soon. Maybe there might be hope, and Iraq might be the first peaceful democratic country in the middle-east, shit they had their first election a couple days ago, that's a step in the right direction.

[quote="Unknown_Sniper":34a28]many people probably forget that bush had no care on earth about iraq when he became president. No one gave a crap about the middle east or al queida. Yes maybe he used the hatred/panic that america was struck with to get permission to do things normally not done but remember he did what everyone wanted. We wanted him to go after Osama, we wanted him to take out sadam because of what he has done in the past and because of what he may have been planning. fact of the matter is yes you can find fault anywhere, yes people always get blamed for their mistakes, for their wrong doings, but when it comes to the good things they have done no one looks or even cares because it doesnt involve lotso f money, blood, or sex.[/quote:34a28]

Yes, nobody really cared about the terrorist. Especially Clinton who did nothing at all, thats why 9/11 happend. annoy:

Iraq did not openly attack anyone, that is if you don't count their own People. What about the mass murder of Kurds? Is that not a terrorist attack?

[quote="Pick Axe":892f3]Iraq did not openly attack anyone, that is if you don't count their own People. What about the mass murder of Kurds? Is that not a terrorist attack?[/quote:892f3]

No, thats just cleaning house. annoy:

[quote="Pick Axe":9fc94]Iraq did not openly attack anyone, that is if you don't count their own People. What about the mass murder of Kurds? Is that not a terrorist attack?[/quote:9fc94]

As I statesd in my post, what about the mass murder and genocide of the sudanese people going on right at this very moment? Why should the US save the Kurds, but let tens of thousands of Sudanese be massacred? Why do we choose between which people we save?

[quote=ninty9]As I statesd in my post, what about the mass murder and genocide of the sudanese people going on right at this very moment? Why should the US save the Kurds, but let tens of thousands of Sudanese be massacred? Why do we choose between which people we save?[/quote:09073]

Becuase of there is oil in Iraq. We went to war because of oil. If they did not have oil, they would not have had the means to attack us.

So knowing that, why would you still vote for Bush and the Republican party?

its all about getting people to vote for blue state sucession

[quote="Duke_of_Ray":176ac][quote="Unknown_Sniper":176ac]many people probably forget that bush had no care on earth about iraq when he became president. No one gave a crap about the middle east or al queida. Yes maybe he used the hatred/panic that america was struck with to get permission to do things normally not done but remember he did what everyone wanted. We wanted him to go after Osama, we wanted him to take out sadam because of what he has done in the past and because of what he may have been planning. fact of the matter is yes you can find fault anywhere, yes people always get blamed for their mistakes, for their wrong doings, but when it comes to the good things they have done no one looks or even cares because it doesnt involve lotso f money, blood, or sex.[/quote:176ac]

Yes, nobody really cared about the terrorist. Especially Clinton who did nothing at all, thats why 9/11 happend. annoy:[/quote:176ac]

ummm 9/11 happened 9 months into Bush's term and he had ample time and intelligence to prevent the attacks. Clinton was in power for a few weeks when the WTC was first attacked and the person responsible was caught and sentanced. He also launched missle strikes on areas Bin Laden was thought to have been, so how can you claim Clinton did nothing and come to the conclusion that 9/11 happened because of any lack of effort by Clinton? Also, what has Bush done, Bin Laden is still at large and has had plenty of time to escape.

[quote=Madmartagen][quote="Duke_of_Ray":46423]Yes, nobody really cared about the terrorist. Especially Clinton who did nothing at all, thats why 9/11 happend. annoy:[/quote:46423]

ummm 9/11 happened 9 months into Bush's term and he had ample time and intelligence to prevent the attacks. Clinton was in power for a few weeks when the WTC was first attacked and the person responsible was caught and sentanced. He also launched missle strikes on areas Bin Laden was thought to have been, so how can you claim Clinton did nothing and come to the conclusion that 9/11 happened because of any lack of effort by Clinton? Also, what has Bush done, Bin Laden is still at large and has had plenty of time to escape.[/quote:46423]

He could be dead. But it's not like no one would have taken over.

Osama going under, whether it be because he's dead, or because he was hiding hasn't really quelled the Terrorists.

[quote=Quze][quote=Madmartagen]ummm 9/11 happened 9 months into Bush's term and he had ample time and intelligence to prevent the attacks. Clinton was in power for a few weeks when the WTC was first attacked and the person responsible was caught and sentanced. He also launched missle strikes on areas Bin Laden was thought to have been, so how can you claim Clinton did nothing and come to the conclusion that 9/11 happened because of any lack of effort by Clinton? Also, what has Bush done, Bin Laden is still at large and has had plenty of time to escape.[/quote:56ab7]

He could be dead. But it's not like no one would have taken over.[/quote:56ab7]
Clinton handled the whole OBL thing so poorly and it cost America in the long run. He could have taken Bin Laden out on a few occasions but didnt want the press to have a field day. Bin Laden wasnt a factor when Bush Sr was in office .

I love it how the leader is always the first to be blamed and how ill-informed so many people are... [not regarded to any certain person]

Bush is not the only one in charge. He doesn't make ALL of the decisions. He suggests them and Congress and such approve of them. It isn't just like Bush saying, "Hey, today I think I will bomb Russia..." and it happens. That would take weeks for approval by other government members.

The whole "Lets Liberate Iraq and make it Free" to me is nothing but a cover up. Bush and his Cabinet/Advisors and whatnot messed up and they knew it.