View Single Post
Old 04-21-2004, 02:49 AM
Crimson Spider's Avatar
Crimson Spider Offline
Experienced Trainer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vegas Baby Yeah!
Posts: 132
Default Re: George W. Bush: What do you think?

Originally Posted by VenusaurTrainer
Finally someone agrees with me. Lets say George W Bush did not send our troops to Iraq and Suddaum Hussiean had weapons of mass destruction. 4 years down the road USA is attacked by Suddaum with weapons of mass destruction. I think Bush made a great descion to take out Saddaum. Before he attacked us.
Relax. I'm not going attack you. Just set a few things strait.

Firstly, Iraq did at one point in time have WMD. They destroyed it and their studies and information on it, and we didn't believe them. Satelites picked up a whole lotta nasty junk in Iraq when we were inspecting them, so we decided to strike.

Second, Iraq DID infact get Uranium Oxide from Africa. It's use was debatable. It was being used for two things (after we found out when we invaded): Power plants, and the construction of a WMD. You see, Saddam had quite a few weapon-creating programs in action when we inspected him. He denied their existance. If we had inspected a year later, we probably would've found something more solid than a bunch of in-action programs.

"There once was a man named Saddam,
Who I thought had a nuclear bomb,
So I started a war that few nations were for,
And now its the next Vietnam.
Vietnam had no results. This war is having results.

I don't like all of the wars his administration has gotten the US into.
The Administration doesn't like all the wars it has gotten itself into, and BTW: it isn't his administration. The people serving now were the same people who were serving for Clinton.
The fact the Iraq had WMD was never proven sufficiently,
They didn't have WMD. They just had more evidence than Osama attacking America for it, and had programs making them.
and has made almost every country in the world's public opinion of the US go WAY down.
This is the media's fault. Not Bush's. Little lesson here: the media is a bunch of blood-sucking bastards.
Not to mention all of the money these wars take. Does anyone remember the huge surplus we had in 2000?
(Relizes his lack of knowledge on the matter). There was no surplus. NONE! The whole surplus/deficit notion came from a projection of the growth of the economy back in the 40s. We've been in a deficit for 50 years now.
Was never there.
And our nation debt is getting way out of hand.
Besides the fact that our nation debt has been reduced. O.K. I don't think you have the propper definition of a nations debt. So let me ask YOU: what is it?
Ours and future generations will have to pay for that debt.
No duh!
Plus, the baby boomers will be going into retirement soon, and considering we don't have enough money to pay them at the moment, how are they going to get social security checks?
We really do not know. That's part of why the Medicare program passed (not issued) slightly limits the range of the benifits. The Baby boomers would've put the medicare plan into debt.
To be fair though, I don't favor Kerry that much either. Most of what I've seen so far from his campaign is just anti-Bush propoganda.
That isn't his campaign. It's other peoples accusations. He just passes them.

Bush had lied to us and ****** us long enough. Bush wants to kill someone for a crime that didn't actually work.
Firstly, watch your mouth. Second, Gore would've done the same thing because it was in the nations to-do list from daddy Bush. A crime not working does not give reason to ignore what they did. If I tried to kill you, would you just shrug it off?

EDIT: Homosexual marriages is another topic. Don't bring it into here.

Sup, Dog? Check this out.
Reply With Quote