Is Bush as bad as Bin Laden?

Nope, I'm a happy camper. Folks like you are the blood sucking parasites, not me.

Oh, unless you've changed your myspacedotcom webpage, aren't you the one flipping off the entire world??

 

You're unfortunately right about that last part Squid. But all the evindence against the WMD argument is what the Bush backers ignore. All the other "facts" that you didn't mention like:

1) Saddam was a secular leader, and in no way shared the "Islamofascist" ideaology. Therefore, deeming that Iraq would be the "next nexus of terrorism, a-la Afghanistan" indicates a complete lack of understanding of Islamic terrorism, who commits it, and what their motivations are. Saddam's Iraq was about as likely a candidate for that as North Korea.

2)Bush quote:
..."You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two.* And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." --WP, "Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons. President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof, " May 31, 2003

*At the time of this statement, no such weapons were found, and no such weapons have been found to this day. On this point as well as the use of the captured trailers as biolabs, the WP said this in the above article: "U.S. authorities have to date made no claim of a confirmed finding of an actual nuclear, biological or chemical weapon. In the interview, Bush said weapons had been found, but in elaborating, he mentioned only the trailers, which the CIA has concluded were likely used for production of biological weapons." There was no statement of fact, there was no smoking gun. The CIA's finding was advanced as an opinion based on its own particular process of elimination, and it was immediately challenged by both U.S. and U.K. intelligence analysts who had seen the trailers. --Politex, 08.09.03

3) Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration CHOSE to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program."

4) Duelfer's report stated flatly that Iraq had secretly destroyed its biological weapons stocks in the early 1990s.

5) Duelfer reported that after 1991, Baghdad's nuclear program had "progressively decayed." He added that the Iraq Survey Group investigators had found no evidence "to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program."


The Bush administration obviously made things up to support the Iraq invasion. This is not an acceptable course of action leading up to war except to those who are under-informed or blindly loyal.

 

Oh God, not this again. Look, I'm as Bush-hating as the next liberal, but these sort of arguments about how "they" planted charges to purposely destroy the WTC buildings makes the person arguing look like a nutcase. All of the information that I've seen on this seems to be along the lines of, "Gee, this really looks like a purposeful destruction." This does not constitute anything like solid evidence. If you have reasonable evidence that this is true, then present it. If you don't, stop trying to sound like you are party to some information that the rest of us aren't.

 

And this is a FACT. When we talk about FACTS , this is a hell of an undisputable FACT. Squid, would you like to dispute this FACT?

 

Nope I didn't say that.

There were major changes in fire code regulations - eg fireproofing applied to key trusses and columns - that may have doomed those buildings. A key factor in that was the Asbestos removal drive. Another key factor was the use of "fire rated" gyproc instead of concrete for stairwell protection.

It has to do with whether a commercial building has "active" fire safety (Alarms, sprinklers, standpipes, etc) or "passive" safety (Fireproof concrete, exposed trusses and I-beams covered in a fireproof material, etc). The commercial building codes here changed as a result of WT1,2, &7.

In the interest of public safety, we should have mandatory inspection and retrofit of large commercial buildings, as they are easy targets. To date I haven't seen much interest in that, it would be a costly endeavor.

 

I served in Viet Nam, as did my brothers. So don't start asking if I would fight for my country. Better you should ask Bush since he seems eager to send our countrymen overseas without having gone to war himself.

Chasing OBL was right, but we didn't do it correctly, he isn't stopped. Invading Iraq was wrong on all counts. Are you proud of your country for being an invader and aggressor? I'm not. We were once known at the nation of peace. We didn't learn our lesson in VN, apparently, when we last were aggressors.

Then you talk about the freedoms we have won for others, but take a glance at the freedoms we have given up! Our freedom to travel without restriction is hampered. Our media's freedom of speech is threatened by the administration if it doesn't meet their standards, or in some cases report what they want reported! Our personal freedom of speech is threatened by the phone taps, and by the internet eaves-dropping. Warrents used to be required to invade our privacy, but Bush seems to think that is a frivilous right.

I went to war for my country so we could enjoy our freedoms. Bush has gone to war and taken them away.

I grieve for the people lost in the towers on 9/11, and those lost in the Pentagon that day, and those lost in the plane crash as well. But my grieving hasn't stopped there because of the war in Iraq (in the name of OBL/terrorists?) because of the thousands that have been killed or permanently maimed - those guys in the VA hospitals - and for the tens of thousands that we have killed or are being killed for our cause in Iraq.

In our quest for revenge we have gone far over 3,000 innocents killed here, and most of them were not in the towers. They too were on their home soil.

When will it end? How will it end? Is Bush really as insane as Osama? Or just close.

I love my country and I love you all. I would like us all to be free again with out fear of tyrany and oppression from terrorists on any continent.

What I want is peace. I want my friends to come home to their wives and children. I want you and your children and grandchildren not to go to war and die.

I am going for a ride in my Prius now to achieve some balance and harmony with my world. I hope all of you are safe always.

 

My apologies. I thought you were heading us down the "purposful destruction" path. As far as the points you've made here, I couldn't agree more.

 

Wondefully spoken, thank you for your service to our country.
Peace

 

Now that you've got me fired up on *that* topic (Warning!):

How about the purposeful dumbing down of engineering to save a few bucks? Most of my career was spent in utilities, chemical plants, petrochemicals, etc. It seems starting around 1970 or so, heavy infrastructure was made a lot cheaper and flimsier too.

Things like recovery boilers, compound-turbines, even buildings, are made cheaper and flimsier all the time. With all this attention on the potential of terrorist attack, why the hell haven't we beefed up our infrastructure??

One sour point for me - at least when I still lived in the U.S. - was how fragile the typical electric utility grid-tie was. First of all, absolutely precise synchronization to source is required. Even a minor shift and "magical" things happen to transformers and pf correcting capacitor banks.

Same as load or source side surges, especially if a HVDC line is in use. Remember around 13 years ago when the province of Quebec - and portions of the NE United States - went dark due to sunspots?

I will say this though: the Canadian regulatory agencies were quick to study the problem and dream up great solutions. Ever hear of the Rotary Transformer? They were trialed in Canada with great success:

http://gepower.com/vft

Of course, they're awfully expensive. There is no easy answer to our infrastructure problems.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but you're still a moron for even suggesting the comparison.

 

A moron is the one who makes a statement as such without presenting arguments against it.

 

More than anything else, americans should realize that obl could not care less what americans do in america. His fight is against american presence and influence in the Islamic world, which he views as similar to a colonial aggressor.

Agree or not with his position, but at least understand it.

 

It's a flat out rediculous statement. It doesn't need any arguments against it.


I saw a T-shirt a few days ago that said, "What about all the good things Hitler did?"

It's just wrong, and doesn't need any arguments against it. It's that simple.

 

While I strongly dislike bush and have never voted for him... George W. Bush is nothing like Osama bin Laden... That is just common sense, Bush is an idiot and a negative influence globally, but he is not a cold-blooded killer....

 

obl says there are no innocents
the shrub says collateral damage

I say they are both farking maniacs, and richly deserve what they dish out.

 

Not really, a moron is someone that can't read a statement such nice person this moron's (jared2) statement apply a little common sense and come to a reasonable conclusion that the guy is a Flame Trolling Moronic Bush Bashing Idiot and then has to ask for evidence to support a conclusion that the guy is a moron. Geeez dude get a clue or are you 41.1c? :lol:

Wildkow

 

No, a moron is the one who can't read as this statement wasn't jared2's. Go and get childrens history book and tell us what you learnt about saving everybody's nice person. You will probably be gone for a while as it might be a bit challenging. You could probably get one on tape if reading poses such a big problem.

 

What did Clinton call it when he bombed the passenger train in the Balkans Conflict?

 

Let's take a little look at history and see who the real War Mongers are Democratic Presidents or Republican?



Mexican American - James K. Polk (D)
Spanish American War - Grover Cleveland (D)
WWI - Woodrow Wilson (D) elected with only 42% of the popular vote.
WWII - Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) 4 terms
Korean War - Harry S Truman (D) still at war.
Vietnam War + Bay of Pigs- John F. Kennedy (D) only war lost by USA.
Balkans Conflict - William J. Clinton (D)


Civil War - Abraham Lincoln [R] Freed the Slaves
Desert Storm - George H. Bush [R] Freed the Kuwait's from Saddam Hussein
War against Terror - George W. Bush [R] freed 50+ million people from a repressive Islamic regime and once again Saddam Hussein

Wildkow

 

Yeah, wildcow what happened? You didn't follow my rebuttal, you always seem to disappear when confronted with valid arguments. I know your type, always looking for an easy pray! :blink:

Very observant Vibe, wildcow stated "we have saved everybody's nice person" his pronouncement is a reflection of great acumen. Historian? :lol: :lol: :lol: