OK, you're right. I was wrong to assume you had gotten the whole thing. My apologies. On your other points, you are just wrong Giddy. Small-scale wars don't cripple the readiness of the world's only Superpower. Good results don't equal daily deaths, lies, and misdeeds. The criticisms aren't minor, but completely eviscerate the junk you posted.
Is the converse true? Is that why you keep up with the body count and cite it as a reason to get out of Iraq?
You post this dubious material with no source or link and change material in the post to your liking... This thread has Zero Credibility
what about the fact that GWB is constantly trying to take away our liberties, or the fact that he's setting record deficits, or the fact that he had to resort to lies to persuade the people of this country that war was neccessary, or.....
I don't know if Democrats do or not. There haven't been any such things posted on the board of similar things by Democrats. Prior to the past few letters I would have thought that it was indeed both parties who did it. But I haven't seen any by Democrats.
Let's see. After his brother Jeb helped keep them thar colored folk from voting in Florida, and after being represented before the Supreme Court in his election bid by a law firm that included the son of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Incurious George Bush has embarked on a presidency that serves only the rich and major corporations and military contractors. He defines himself by war, which is why he had already decided in his first week at the helm that he would go after Iraq....but he needed a pretext (thanks, Osama). Then, if anyone had the guts to actually publish an article in a major periodical about the questions surrounding 9-11, well, yes, Bush Jr is the worst president in history. Oh, let's not forget his trashing of the environment and how he takes marching orders from God....a vengeful, wrathful, warlike God who has nothing in common with Jesus.
I just heard that Hastert is going to block the extension of the 9/11 investigation... that Bush supposedly wanted. How convenient! I've gotta run. Maybe someone can check it out and start a thread on it. It was on CNN a minute ago. Later!
IMHO..... George W. Bush is the worst President in US History because of the arrogance of his administration's policies and the fact that he is the first President in US History to actually restrict the constitutional rights of United States citizens.
What started as the War on Terror was the most powerful country on earth versus a few thousand guerillas. In two years we have gotten to the point where there are almost monthly warnings about authentic terrorists threats and apparently there are the same number or more terrorists - but now they are not concentrated in one place but spread around the world because we didn't dedicate the resources to doing it right when we started and spread ourselves thin with a war to satisfy the neocons in Iraq. This is pretty much according to our own intelligence assessment. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1993-2004Feb24.html Tenet Warns of Al Qaeda Threat CIA Chief Says Group Is Fragmented but Still Dangerous By Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, February 25, 2004; Page A01 Despite U.S. success in attacking al Qaeda's hierarchy, the network is still capable of "catastrophic attacks" against the United States, and acquiring chemical, biological and radiological weapons remains a "religious obligation" in Osama bin Laden's eyes, CIA Director George J. Tenet told the Senate intelligence committee yesterday. The U.S. assault on al Qaeda has "transformed the organization into a loose collection of regional networks working autonomously," Tenet said. The smaller groups "pick their own targets, they plan their own attacks," but they share an anti-American goal. The most immediate threats include the possibility of "poison attacks" and al Qaeda's ongoing effort to produce anthrax material, Tenet said. He added: "Extremists have widely disseminated assembly instructions for an improvised chemical weapon using common materials that could cause a large number of casualties in a crowded, enclosed area." "We are still at war against a movement," said Tenet, appearing with other administration officials to discuss global security threats. "People who say it's exaggerated don't look at the same world I look at. It's not going away anytime soon." . . .
I think I get dumber every time I read one of giddyup's (or, to be fair, someone else's) threads like this one - with mass circulated stuff. Entertaining, no doubt...but still.
Actually, I did a couple of searches on Google for some phrases, and it's kind of scary how many different types of form letters are being printed in newspapers with the exact same wording. It's like push polling but for letters to the editor.
Why does something that is speculative need a source or a link? It can be discussed at face value, period. Don't participate if you can't handle that. I changed a couple of things that I immediately knew to be in error so as to keep the discussion moving forward. So hang me.
Why do I get the feeling that Bush salivated at the idea of starting a war? You know, all heroic and romanticized, music in the background...kinda of like those old WWII movies. Dilusions of grander, with a dream of a font page cover on TIME Magazine: "The War Time Hero" There he is, GWB, standing there posing for a picture looking into the distance, trying to look distinguished...ugh.. He reminds me of a "child" at the wheel of this fathers car...or should I say TANK? You mean, it's all mine!?!?! I can do what I want? Oh, goodie!!!!
Why has the substantive issue not been addressed, after this thread seems to have been dedicated to my behalf? Giddyup, do you agree with the premise of your original post, that the number of american combat deaths determines how good/bad a president is as far as history is concerned? Please answer. All day long, guys like you, basso, and jorge have been ducking my attempts to tie you down to a substantive position in any number of threads. What are you afraid of?
