Bush and God's will...

Bush and God's will... [+ favourites]

I am amazed at some of the sophistic reasoning used in some of these posts. If one does something and they believe they are doing 'right' do they not also believe that they are doing God's will, assuming they believe in God?

Some people assume that war is wrong, always wrong, and thus can not be in accord with God's will. These are the same people that think terrorists can be reasoned with. These are the same kind of people that took Hitler at his word. These are the same people that believe all people are basically good and desire peace.

War can be noble. War can be just. America's role in the war in Iraq is clearly justified. Whether it was the right war at the right time and place only history will tell. However the intentions are clearly noble and will certainly be the only means that can end the radical fascist atmosphere that breeds future terrorists.

Am I surprised that so many Brits, Germans and French are opposed to ending tyrannical islamofascist regimes? Not really. Just look at their history and what they tolerated in their own backyard 60 years ago. Nor do I assume that they share Americans understanding of liberty to the same extent.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

I'd love to respond now (cuz you bring up some very controversial points), but I want to wait for Leftwood to say something first.

Oh, can you focus on one issue...it's much easier to discuss that way...

"How can we be just in a world without mercy and merciful in a world without justice?"

lol why wait? Need your talkingpoints? lol

Im sorry for having more than one issue, how many did I do.... two? Oops

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."
[  Edited by McTex at   ]

Ya, no need to wait for me. I'm nothing special.

However, McTex is misunderstanding and leaving out important information as similar right wing pro Bush straight from the mouths of others do.

I understand that much of what I say sounds familiar too, as left wing, however there is a distinction that I can't even point out well because I don't believe in right or left wing.

The problem with your argument again, which this will sound familiar too because we are having the same conversation just in another thread, is that there are reasons why people are upset at "westernized" societies.

And its not because they are all lunatics like so many would like you to believe, and of course you do, from what you say, don't let me put words in your mouth though.

When they see countless tyrants being aided by westerners who do little more than secure an area for their own interests, which America espescially is not shy in declaring, we will do anything to protect OUR interests.

When they see us killing men women and children, raping and torturing, stealing THEIR resources, which is only hidden to the westerners unless they look at the news with the sound off for once.

(Hmm, a quick digression, thats not a bad idea, we should have a week with images and no people telling us what it means and see what happens.)

But seriously, see, I'm not arguing that any left wing policy will help, they still promote war, they still call nations and faiths and desperate goat herders terrorists, yet our CIA is exactly that and we are great.

Osama worked with CIA, as did Saddam, even while Saddam killed innocents. This is nothing new, we have taken out many perfectly good leaders who were bad because they tried to keep resources that are rightfully theirs long enough to rebuild their nations. Between Europe and our various alliances and of course us, we have placed most if not all major tyrants into power to better suit OUR interests, and this is simply fact.

People see us for what we are, and we are so lied to and have the truth so blanketed in National Security that we don't know shit from shinola. American patriotism is different than current Bush american patriotism, one understands the need for knowledgable people of and for the government, the other is the epitamy of blind faith.

Now, there is a reason why people call politicians and lawyers liars, and why corporate CEO's aren't known for being nice and out to help people rather than ruthlessly make money.

These are the Bush's, they are generational past and present corporate criminals, they are royal bloodlines pampered from birth to death in a world none of us will ever know, and shouldn't, because it is a world of conquering and destruction of innocence, truth, justice, and values, no matter what rhetoric gets spewed.

They are salesman, they know what you need and want to hear to let them do what they need to do to prosper, not what is good for you or me.

Its a joke so old it is cliche, and cliches are known for being true, that is how they become cliche, they happen so often and so regularly that you get tired of even saying it.

How someone can hate Clinton but buy into Bush baffles me to this day, in terms of those cliches.

However, as long as people buy into whatever they say, then sure, they are the nicest people ever. More values than you can shake a stick at. Just so long as you buy what they are selling and don't argue they will fix the world, just gotta kill and imprison everbody to do it.

Don't skoff at atollia's talking points, you would be gagging on your own if you realized they were there. But alas, my words will mean nothing to you, you will right them off as leftist banter.

You are amazed at sophist reasoning, what do you call your reasoning? Ignorant? Follow without question? I know you are educated, but let me ask you....

Do you agree that there is at this time any degree of corruption in American government and politics, and I don't care who you blame it on? Yes or no?

And if yes, what makes you think you can know from whom and to what degree. Are you a government insider because you have studied it? Even if you managed to be involved in it?

Quite frankly, the negative Sophist reasoning seems to be coming from you, you know you are specifically schooled in certain areas, and therefore you act as if no one else but those who repeat your words are right. You think you know better than anyone unless they say exactly what you were taught.

Would you agree?

We must not claim knowledge we do not have, I can be guilty of being gullible and lied to like any other, but I am also not allowing myself to forget that history has proven that secrecy breeds lies, lies breeds corruption, and our government has throughout history, like any other, been proven guilty for illegal and harmful acts.

And that the problem is that the only changes that have been made to correct this, is that more secrecy and lies have been installed and allowed.

I understand people's desire for believing in our President, God knows I want to, but unfortunately, evidence through history and present does promote this belief. In fact, in demands that important changes in the exact opposite direction of Bush's plans are in order.

But who am I right? Just some leftist babbler that doesn't even like being called leftist.

Some confused individual who doesn't even get or accept the concept of choosing between a lesser of two evils, who would rather a good choice be presented instead for a change.

Ya, I must be delusional. Thank god for people like you to straighten me out.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Boy you love to write a lot...lol

>>When they see countless tyrants being aided by
>>>westerners who do little more than secure an area for
>>>their own interests, which America espescially is not shy
>>>in declaring, we will do anything to protect OUR interests.

Ok lets begin... In the first place a nation's number one priority is to protect their own interests. That's what nations do and have always done. The French didn't aid America during our Revolution because they were concerned about American interests - they believed it would benefit France by weakening their greatest enemy. When you say "they" see countless tyrants being aided by westerners you mean people who have allowed tyrants to determine their own future and run their own governments. You place the blame for the tyrants on the West instead of blaming the people that allow the tyrants in the first place. And yes of course we have aided tyrants when it served our foreign policy interests and should do so again in the future if it is truly believed that by doing so we harm a greater potential threat to our continued existence.

>>>When they see us killing men women and children, raping
>>>and torturing, stealing THEIR resources, which is only
>>>hidden to the westerners unless they look at the news
>>>with the sound off for once.

Actually what they see is their own people - their own leaders and despots and nobles and tyrants raping, torturing and murdering their own fellow citizens. What they see is the rich and powerful stealing their own natural resources. They surely don't see the West doing this in any way comparable to their own leaders preferred methods and they surely don't see the US stealing their resources but paying nicely for it.

You have created this monster called the CIA which in comparison to the agents of the Mossad, the KGB, the Chinese and the Saudis are actually quite lame. Our Intelligence agencies have been weakened so much over the last 30 years that your understanding of their power and threat is not seriously grounded in reality. And our CIA agents are not terrorists but are doing exactly what every other major nation's intelligence agencies are doing (but to a lesser extent). You would have us weakened, would you not? you would prefer a blindfold to reality and prefer that our agents carried daisies and skipped while humming a pretty tune? The world is a nasty place even if some like to keep their heads buried deep in the sand.

>>>Osama worked with CIA, as did Saddam, even while
>>>Saddam killed innocents. This is nothing new, we have >>>taken out many perfectly good leaders who were bad
>>>because they tried to keep resources that are rightfully
>>>theirs long enough to rebuild their nations. Between
>>>Europe and our various alliances and of course us, we
>>>have placed most if not all major tyrants into power to
>>>better suit OUR interests, and this is simply fact.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... SO WHAT. In fact I say GOOD!!! Of course our CIA worked with Saddam and Osama when our enemy was the USSR and aiding them served to help secure our own national interests This is where you sound like every leftwing professor I've ever had - so divorced from reality its scary. The problem is that you and many like you are utterly incapable of seeing the big picture and you live in the land called hindsight. Its easy to sit back and look at the past and say ohhhh we shouldn't have done that! Unless you're omniscient there is no way to ever fully know the outcome of your decisions down the road but that doesn't mean you don't protect your nation from the greatest threat simply because you may dirty your hands.

>>>These are the Bush's, they are generational past and
>>>present corporate criminals, they are royal bloodlines
>>>pampered from birth to death in a world none of us will
>>>ever know, and shouldn't, because it is a world of
>>>conquering and destruction of innocence, truth, justice,
>>>and values, no matter what rhetoric gets spewed.

Corporate criminals? Pampered? OMG... Have you ever lived in Midland? HA! In your worldview is every ceo a criminal? All politicians and lawyers and CEOs are corrupt eh? Talk about cliché!

>>>Do you agree that there is at this time any degree of
>>>corruption in American government and politics, and I
>>>don't care who you blame it on? Yes or no?

Not only yes but of course. There has always been and there will always be. This is where I detect your naiveté. And I will not only blame the Left (who by their very nature is inevitably more corrupt) but all spectrums BECAUSE human nature is corrupt. To understand political science one must first have a proper understanding of human nature. Sophistic people ignore the true nature of mankind and instead spin their hopes and dreams of a perfect world? You ask why my arguments aren't sophistic - because I strive to remain grounded in logic and not sympathetic and emotional rationale.Let me ask you, is there any nation that does not have corruption problems, has there ever been one in history, can there ever be?

>>>Quite frankly, the negative Sophist reasoning seems to be
>>> coming from you, you know you are specifically
>>>schooled in certain areas, and therefore you act as if no
>>>one else but those who repeat your words are right. You
>>>think you know better than anyone unless they say
>>>exactly what you were taught. Would you agree?

Of course not. In fact I'm not sure you even know what sophism is........? And since you enjoy assuming I will assume that you believe everyone who is educated has learned nothing but lies and only you have a corner on the 'real' truth. The truth is that most of my 'educators' are far more similar to you than to me in their thinking. I also assume that you have never heard a conspiracy theory you didn't like.

And I pegged you as being incapable of differentiating between the lesser of two evils from your first post. However, if you want to wait for that perfect choice then by all means enjoy your wait. However, I am positive that you will always discover 'truths' that will dilute that person's goodness.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

I'll come back to this tomorrow, but for now I'll just say that the reason I put any stock in even the slightest bit of possibility of any conspiracy theory or information I have previously mentioned that can be construed as such, is because of government documents and quotes from CIA and FBI ex and current, dissenters, Presidents and officials who have admitted, and even because of court convictions on these matters, impeachments etc.

You don't have to argue with me, take it up with them.

You say my head is in the sand, me backed by them say it is you.

The only argument I've heard against any dissenters is political motivation, dissenters don't usually end up with career advancements where as people who back lies and liars do exactly that. And their reasoning is exactly political motivation for personal gain, and this is all you would be defending.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

"War can be noble. War can be just."
Absolutely!

"America's role in the war in Iraq is clearly justified. Whether it was the right war at the right time and place only history will tell. "
Was the war justified? Blatantly not. You wage war as a reaction to something. You don't wage war out of the blue for imaginary reasons after 10 years of piece.

History will tell if it was a good idea.

"However the intentions are clearly noble and will certainly be the only means that can end the radical fascist atmosphere that breeds future terrorists."
What breeds terrorists? Is it Islamist regimes like Iran? I beg to differ. There are virtually no Iranian terrorist attacks. 90% of Islamic terrorism is done by Arabs.

It is done by Egyptians, Jordanian and, of course, Saudis. Very few Iraqis were terrorists until recently. What kind of regimes are these? All of them are American-supported dictatorships, one of which (and the one which provides the most terrorists) is a corrupt quasi-theocracy which only survives because they sell the US all the oil it needs.


"Do you know what kind of regimes these are?"
Do you? Saddam was a SECULAR SOCIALIST. Not an Islamist.

"Am I surprised that so many Brits, Germans and French are opposed to ending tyrannical islamofascist regimes?"
You are the one supporting them. With the fall of Iraq, Saudi Arabia the corrupt Islamic quasi-theocratic dictatorship has been stabilized. Now, Saudi Arabs will never know freedom or democracy, but will live only to provide America with black gold.

All nations assume that they are the good guys. Whether Germany, Japan or Russia, no matter how bad the regime, patriotism will make people assume that they are moral and good. Americans must learn to question this for the American Revolution is being betrayed.

"Durch Nacht und Blut das Licht"

Bravo on that post DT, but I'm afraid McTex will deem you some sort of conspiracy theorist, or he will agree and say he doesn't care because we need to support certain dictators and terrorists as long as it suits our needs.

There is no need for hindsight, and it does not take a genius to see that if you support terrorism and ruthless dictators that people will not believe or trust you when you say you are trying to help or save the world by ending tyranny and terrorism. This is where your head is in the sand.

I do not argue that human nature will persist in selfish and evil ways, but do disagree that we have to just let it just because. You see, even the bible knows man is not perfect but their job is to strive for it anyway. Which means not letting people get away with it when you know it is happening, stopping it.

There is a difference between meeting needs and gross excess at the cost of environment, mass economy, world relations, and balance in general. Our interests, which is a very ambiguous term to begin with has replaced our needs, this is a problem.

Have I ever lived in Midland, ha, have you ever lived in Midland as a Billionaire? Again, you buy into an image, I can just see you drooling over Honest Bush cutting down a cherry tree with a handy masculine chainsaw saying, See, he's not like most CEO's and Presidents. Yet you will run Kerry down for a photo op while Goose hunting. This is where you are picking one of two lesser evil hooks to bite on.

"In the first place a nation's number one priority is to protect their own interests. That's what nations do and have always done."

You see, you point out that nations have always been corrupt and always will be, to an extent that will be true, however, to curb this or change anything, we must try something different as opposed to what has always been done, again, not rocket science, not simple hindsight, which by the way, is all you refer to as well, you just say everything was the right decision unless the Left made the decision. And that is why you will remain trapped in limbo and believe nothing unflattering about your buddy Bush, because it can be written off as conspiracy and Bush bashing. There are plenty of facts available about Bush family history, you choose not to even look at them let alone give any credit to them. I've heard what you say and some of it is true, you've heard what I and apparently even your teachers say yet you don't give it the time of day, who has the beligerantly ignorant attitude that can do nothing to change anything for the better?

Actual defensive war is the closest to noble war I can think of, but when you cause unrest with cover ops assasinating people and using terrorism, which they admit to in the CIA, so get your head out of Bush's I don't have to tell you what they do because of National Security ass.

And that's just it, you aren't making a claim but that they are underfunded, yet they had funding increases after Oklahoma City bombing and 9/11. Our defense and intelligence budget is egregious and overblown as it always has been, sure we've cut back a little here and there, but that is deceptive compared to the full budget and what was cut. Even if something was underfunded it does not mean that they weren't and aren't out commiting atrocities which you blow off.

Sophism, you claim fallacious arguments and info on my part, yet I tell you what you were taught in school, hmmm, where does that leave you, it sounds as though you feel you've cornered the market on info and the big picture where as I am apparently becoming mainstream, by your argument.

As for waiting for the right choice, no, that is exactly what I know cannot happen, the system itself is designed to coddle corruption, you think that is necessary and ok, I disagree, corruption to some degree is inevitable, no argument there, however, doing something to actual hinder corruption is in need, this you seem to disagree with or think that that is what is happening.

I care not about figureheads, I have only come to dislike Bush once I learned more about him and his family history and have seen what he is doing currently today.

You seem to blow off history and any hindsight, that is the cliche of repeating history, doomed to make the same mistakes. That is part of why I keep reposting that 1946 Public Service Announcement film on Despotism, this was of a country both desperate to keep that from happening because they were faced with it and knew its evils and how it was allowed to manifest, and also learning propaganda and further demonizing an enemy, but on both accounts we are still following suit with this anyway.

Look, you know corruption exists and is rampant, however you think Bush can have nothing to do with any of it or are just ok with it. Though I find that fairly disgusting, you even think that everyone should be ok with corruption because of its inevitability, that to me is ludicrous.

You are so contradictory to yourself that I don't even know what you could possibly stand for. Its obviously not truth justice and the pursuit of happiness for all. I'm sorry if I sound so idealistic and want to actually be optimistic for a change and wouldn't mind a little peace and prosperity FOR ALL. Forgive me for thinking that American interests don't take precident over the world's and human population's interests and needs.

Everyone schooled has learned lies? Na, just half truths. You think that's bull, well dig into declassified Top Secret documents for a while, don't be a chump. The very existance of National Security proves it. Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot because you can't or won't bother to even fathom what that means.

I have not been wanting to insult you but you cease to even give me the respect of a human being, so fuck you.

Hindsight isn't just about what should have been done right then, its about seeing what is happening now in light of history. What is obvious even if untold or hidden.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

>>>Was the war justified? Blatantly not. You wage war as a
>>>reaction to something. You don't wage war out of the
>>>blue for imaginary reasons after 10 years of piece.

Although I applaud your ability to debate using reasonable arguments (void of conspiratorial rants) - I couldn't disagree more. Of course it was justified. First off it was conducted with Congressional authority and thus constitutional. But even better was the fact that it was done in response according to the legality of war. Imaginary reasons? I guess those were imaginary missiles fired at our and British jets? The fact is Saddam violated the ceasefire agreement (repeatedly over 12 years) and can not now plead innocence to the repercussions. Yes I do believe that Clinton should have taken proper action all the times Saddam violated the ceasefire but you surely cant hold Bush responsible for Clinton's actions (or lack of action). Regardless, Saddam violated the ceasefire on Bush's watch and Bush warned him about the consequences repeatedly. I don't know how the war could be anymore justified.

>>>What breeds terrorists? Is it Islamist regimes like Iran? I
>>>beg to differ. There are virtually no Iranian terrorist
>>>attacks. 90% of Islamic terrorism is done by Arabs.

Ummm.... oops! Apparently you do not know that Iran is one of the largest supporters and financers of terrorism of all the nations on the planet. And what does breed terrorism?

>>>It is done by Egyptians, Jordanian and, of course, Saudis.
>>>Very few Iraqis were terrorists until recently. What kind
>>>of regimes are these? All of them are American-
>>>supported dictatorships, one of which (and the one
>>>which provides the most terrorists) is a corrupt quasi-
>>>theocracy which only survives because they sell the US
>>>all the oil it needs.

So are you now proposing the US become their enemies? Should we go to war now against Egypt, Jordan and the Saudis? And again your facts are not grounded in reality. The Saudis do not survive because we purchase most of their oil. In fact we get a small percentage of our oil from the Middle East. You are thinking about the Europeans and Japanese.

Its funny though how the main question is being avoided. What is causing terrorism to come from these countries? I admit its not a simple answer however you are not seriously suggesting that the US is the main cause, are you?

And of course I know what kind of regimes they are which is why I fully support the war. Again it seems as if you are trapping yourself... if you know what kind of regimes they are why would you be against the war? Or are you actually suggesting we change those regimes? It is so easy to criticize but much harder to offer remedies.

>>>With the fall of Iraq, Saudi Arabia the corrupt Islamic quasi-
>>>heocratic dictatorship has been stabilized. Now, Saudi
>>>Arabs will never know freedom or democracy, but will
>>>live only to provide America with black gold.

This is your greatest error yet. You really couldn't be more wrong. The war in Iraq hasn't served to help stabilize the Saudi regime but will serve to destroy it. That's the whole point of the war. That's the genius of Bush's actions. As Iraq prospers under democratic freedom it will be a shining beacon to its neighbors. It will be the greatest destabilizing factor next to actual war that the US could introduce. In fact, it has already started to work. Local elections are going to now be held in Egypt, Libya has surrendered without a shot being fired, a Palestinian solution looks more likely, many Islamic scholars are starting to embrace democratic reforms. Why do you think the leaders of all of those countries you mentioned were opposed to the Iraq war? Isn't it amazing that all those antiwarniks are in full agreement with the Saudi Royalty? lol The contradictions of the Left are hilarious.

As for assuming that the US is the good guy - I do not assume. I know it! No nation in the history of the world that has been as wealthy and powerful as the US has been as equally benevolent and charitable. We are the single greatest force for good in the world - in fact we don't have any close competitors.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

Leftwood -

Actually yes I have lived in Midland and seen the House that Bush grew up in. It was quite modest - but I doubt you want to hear this because it goes against your preconceptions and conspiratorial beliefs.

You are a master at writing long posts but you have very little substance. You make a number of allegations and critiques but provide almost no solutions. You truly are an especially good sophist. For example - you apparently despise the Saudis yet you are opposed to going to war against them while at the same time you blame Bush and the last 11 Presidents for maintaining peaceful relations with them yet offer no remedy for how we should deal with them.

You are also the master of the assumption. You accuse me of too many things to respond to when the majority is simply not true. You assume that I agree with everything Bush has done and said yet no where have I ever made such a statement. But I am sure that it is just easier for you to view me that way because it concurs with your conspiratorial notions of what a Bush supporter is. And what's worse is that you repeatedly bash Bush yet, other than attacking his grandfather, you rarely offer any kind of example for why you despise him. You have mentioned that you have 'researched his family' a number of times as if this is an end all to the question... lol Has Bush as President lied to you as an member of the American electorate? Explain the lie then! Has Bush done anything corrupt as President? Then explain his malfeasance.

Of course I don't think people should be okay with corruption - I am just not a conspiracy nut that believes all politicians and lawyers are inevitably corrupt and who believes every opposition propaganda that comes along. If you have facts then lay them down - otherwise keep your kooky suspicions to yourself!

You haven't wanted to insult me? You insult not only me but every thinking person every time you preach your 'theories' and make unsubstantiated claims with that arrogant know-it-all style you have mastered quite superbly. Fuck me? Look dude if you cant handle playing hardball on the boards then you shouldn't be playing with the big boys! Just return to your stack of declassified files that your 'friends' have given you and buy another issue of the Enquirer.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

My friends have given me, you are being as arrogant and assumptive as you claim me to be, once again.

Every generalization you have put upon me you are guilty of, your level of hypocricy is amazing.

Look, you are disrespectful and for that I said Fuck you, I'm not crying but whatever you want to believe you will. Just as you claim of me. And whatever you need to tell yourself to make yourself feel like a bigger man you will do.

Try the national archives, try looking through the CIA, and FBI websites instead of being ignorant, assumptive, and beligerant to boot.

I only sound crass because you are so flagrently dissmissive and rude, this Hard Ball is a game of you own, this information is not a game to me, perhaps you should play games elsewhere and take an honest look at Government dissenters quotes, confessions of old and dying presidents or even those just leaving office of days past.

Do some research that isn't handed to you by Fox News, not making assumptions, but, if you disagree with the majority of your professors and all left wing thoughts, and all conspiracy fact and theory, as well as myself, I'm left awfully curious as to where you get your information.

Your abuse of the word sophists is neither right nor getting any more appealing.

If you think no one knows what it means, why don't you explain to us poor souls who thought the dictionary meant someting. Because for you use to be true, my information would have to be false, yet you cannot support that argument, for you know not my information.

I care not the size of their house, I've heard it referred to as modest and don't disbelieve it, because it doesn not matter, yet the fact remains they are billionairs multiple times over and their way of life never resembled that of the average American in anything but looks. If they live on a ranch then they would probably be farmers or something, yet they are corporate tycoons and politicians, there is quite a difference.

I don't have to provide all my substance, hopefully you would care enough to find out as I did, and like I said in the other post there is just too much and its not all in front of me, so do your own homework.

And stop with your I'm not providing solutions, bull, I've mentioned exactly that. People need the option of being properly educated on the system for the sake of exposing and correcting corruption. They cannot do this in a secret government which is a public office, a government supposedly of by and for the people.

You offer no solutions, you don't even think there is a problem, unless a democrat is in office I guess, again, I'm not trying to make assumptions but as you do with me, your words would lead me to assume just that.

Your homework is also to learn what hypocricy is. For unfortunately I have to remind you that you have provided no facts or evidence, nothing but generalizations in argument to disprove me or clarify yourself, yet you bitch at me for it.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"
[  Edited by Ironwood at   ]

I lost a huge post. So I will be brief.

"The fact is Saddam violated the ceasefire agreement (repeatedly over 12 years) and can not now plead innocence to the repercussions."
What was the war sold on? Alleged ceasefire violations? That's a lie. It was sold on: WMDs, WMDs, WMDs. Those WMDs did not exist. The United States destroyed a country, and now has to rebuild it, based on poor and unsufficient evidence.

Besides this is poor strategy. You go to war as a REACTION to something. That teaches your enemies not to do it again. Israel started the 6 day war in reaction to the Egyptians blocking Suez, America started Gulf War I in reaction to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. These wars teach hostile states not to do anything hostile to us. The current Iraq war was started out of the blue, it was not a reaction to anything Saddam had done. The result? Now dictators can argue "Whether or not I make WMD the USA will find an excuse to kick my ass. So I better make WMD as a deterrent.".

" And what does breed terrorism?"
I would say, oppression of a people through proxies and puppet states.

"So are you now proposing the US become their enemies? Should we go to war now against Egypt, Jordan and the Saudis?"
Americans are so damn violent. I'm saying we shouldn't be creating these sorts of regimes nor maintaining them by buying their oil/

"I admit its not a simple answer however you are not seriously suggesting that the US is the main cause, are you?"
I'm inclined to believe the US is the cause. The US is very certainly the reason all the terrorism is oriented towards the US and US-friendly regimes.

"You really couldn't be more wrong. The war in Iraq hasn't served to help stabilize the Saudi regime but will serve to destroy it. That's the whole point of the war. That's the genius of Bush's actions. As Iraq prospers under democratic freedom it will be a shining beacon to its neighbors."
I believe it will fail. Attacking Iraq was probably the most long-term risky indirect and unjustified way of fighting Islamism. Iraq was a secular socialist and nationalist regime. It was not Islamist.

"As for assuming that the US is the good guy - I do not assume. I know it! No nation in the history of the world that has been as wealthy and powerful as the US has been as equally benevolent and charitable. We are the single greatest force for good in the world - in fact we don't have any close competitors."
Sorry, you lost all credibility. You are a capitalofascist. 'My country right or wrong!'.

List of America's wrongdoings:
* the violation of agreements advocating peaceful unification of democratic elections in Vietnam
* the destruction of the democratically elected government of Iran and replacement with a corrupt monarchical dictatorship
* the active destruction of infrastructure and humanitarian aid in Nicaragua
* the violent replacement of the democratically elected government of Chile with a right-wing authoritarian murderous regime
* the violent annexation of the Phillipines and a following long and bloody guerrila war of occupation
* 2 occupations and diplomatic and economic domination of Cuba the former till 1934, the latter till 1959

Given the US's past of only supporting democracy when it suits the US, many Iraqis and indeed most of the world, are skeptical of US intentions. Violent installation of democracy may well be counter-productive. Turkey and Morocco may well consolidate themselves as democracies because Europe and the US have used the carrot, the promise of stability and economic aid and integration. Compare with policies of propping up corrupt regimes, and the direct use of force in Iran or Saudi Arabia.

The carrot has worked, the stick has not. If we burned 1 billion $ a week on Turkish (or even Palestinian) aid instead of war we would see far more pro-American muslims on the street. I am a pragmatist. The European policy of positive incentives in Morroco and Turkey is working, the American policy of support of corrupt pro-American regimes in Saudi Arabia, Iran (perhaps Pakistan) is not working.

"Durch Nacht und Blut das Licht"

Exactly, I've heard, from people in government (sorry for the generalization but its info out there) America actually has 50+ military/CIA supported, funded, prompted, or outright with our own assasination, democratically or otherwise elected governments that have been overthrown quite illegally under our belt, and I think that has mostly all come since the end of WWII.

And these are probably most of the free governments popping up that McTex mentioned.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Teen (and you're not dumb but the smartest debater I have read on this board yet),

>>>>"The fact is Saddam violated the ceasefire agreement
>>>>(repeatedly over 12 years) and can not now plead
>>>>innocence to the repercussions."

>>>What was the war sold on? Alleged ceasefire violations?
>>>That's a lie. It was sold on: WMDs, WMDs, WMDs. Those
>>>WMDs did not exist. The United States destroyed a
>>>country, and now has to rebuild it, based on poor and
>>>unsufficient evidence.

That is not a lie but an absolute fact. Go back and read Colin Powell or Rice or W's statements leading up to the war. Go read W's speech to the UN. Go read W's State of the Nation address. WMDs were a huge selling point of the war BUT only one of many examples of Saddams violation of the ceasefire. And even with WMDs (even if none were found) Saddam still violated the ceasefire by not being completely transparent - especially when he kicked the UN inspectors out. However, we were talking about how the war is justified and no one can argue that Saddam did not violate the ceasefire.

>>>You go to war as a REACTION to something

So you are of the type that prefers to wait until we are hit first? How many Americans must first die before you can go to war? First off if an attack against our nation can be prevented then it should be by all means. Secondly, if you have a ceasefire with a nation and they violate it and you don't resume the war what does that tell our enemies? What does that say about our resolve? Thirdly, we were attacked on 9/11 and Iraq is an essential part of the war on terror. And it surely taught Quaddafi something, didn't it? You mentioned some good examples of reactive wars, but what about when the Israelis attacked Iraq in the 80s? What about our war with Spain? There are as many examples of preventive wars. The point that Bush understands so well, thank God, is that in the nuclear age we can not wait until we are attacked for if we do then millions of Americans or our allies will be dead. Lastly, do you honestly think dictators have no desire to make WMDs and are now urgent to do so out of fear that we will attack? Or do you think that they would prefer an America that sat back and did nothing and didn't get involved in their affairs?

>>>>" And what does breed terrorism?"
>>>I would say, oppression of a people through proxies and
>>>puppet states.

Really - it isn't the conditions of life that the people experience? It isn't the lack of freedom and liberty? It isn't the brutality of their own dictators?

>>>Americans are so damn violent. I'm saying we shouldn't be creating these sorts of regimes nor maintaining them by buying their oil

Creating them? Which one did we create? I think your understanding of history is a bit flawed. And again you do not understand that the US buys very little of its oil supply from the Middle East. Lastly, do they not maintain themselves? So you would have us ignore them and boycott their products - of course we would be the only nation on the planet that did and they would simply sell their goods to the Europeans and Asians and Russians. Also, please don't forget the Cold War and the importance of the Middle East during that struggle. Would you have just sat back and allowed the USSR to gain control of the region and its oil supply? That's what I mean about arguing from hindsight.

>>>I'm inclined to believe the US is the cause. The US is very
>>>certainly the reason all the terrorism is oriented towards
>>>the US and US-friendly regimes.

WOW! Incredible and so sad. May I ask who you are learning this from? The only reason and I mean only reason the US is targeted by the islamofascists is because we are an ally of Israel. However - we did not CAUSE the creation of terrorists. Even if our policies inflame our hatred we did not cause it. We may inflame it but never cause. Its amazing how you blame us first and not their own evil mentalities or leaders or backwards lifestyles or poverty etc.

>>>Iraq was a secular socialist and nationalist regime. It was
>>>not Islamist.

Iraq was not a socialist secular regime. It was a Sunni dictatorship. It was not nationalist but practiced genocide against its own people and great brutality against the Shiites that represented the vast majority of its people. It constantly emboldened division against its three main ethnic groups ensuring the domination of the Sunni minority.

I understand you believe the purpose of the war will fail but I sure hope you don't hope it fails. And if it succeeds will you then admit you were wrong and that Bush was right?

>>>Sorry, you lost all credibility. You are a
>>>capitalofascist. 'My country right or wrong!'.

I'm sorry but you didn't dispute anything I said but just fell back on a strawman. I am a capitalist but am not a fascist. I am not sure you even truly understand the meaning of fascism. But you are clearly an America hater and delusional. Also what I said had nothing to do with my country right or wrong. Try reading it again!

In your list of Americas wrongdoings there are some I agree with you and some you are simply clueless as to why certain actions were taken which history has revealed lead to greater global peace, prosperity and security. But, other than learning from past mistakes, your list has nothing to do with the issues of today It truly is not relevant. I am curious if you could also create a list that points out all the good the US has done globally over the last 50 years? Maybe you could name all the countries that are now free and democratic because of us?

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

Being the main source of arming and training of Al-Qaeda and Osama means making terrorism, being the same thing with the Contras means making terrorism, The School of the Americas that too many disgustingly deadly dictators hold graduation plaques for means making terrorism.

Aiding Saddam as he gasses people means aiding terrorism, treating Saudi terrorist backers like family means aiding terrorism.

Physically securing our interests at all costs is terrorism.

I would love to know the names of the free countries in which you refer, because firstly, dictatorship alone isn't the problem, people like Saddam who we aid and secure power for are.

Again though, you accept the situations mentioned by DT which are what I'm referring to, then you try to blow off the relevance of what he is saying by claiming of all the good the US has done abroad.

I guarantee you that although many Americans are clueless as to atrocities caused by America, the rest of the world, especially those affected, are not.

Are you guys familiar with the School of the Americas? Or Whisc as its name was changed to?

Here are some facts and info, names and dates.

In June 2001, Colonel Byron Lima Estrada, once a student at the school, was convicted in Guatemala City of murdering Bishop Juan Gerardi in 1998. Gerardi was killed because he had helped to write a report on the atrocities committed by Guatemala's D-2, the military intelligence agency run by Lima Estrada with the help of two other SOA graduates. D-2 coordinated the "anti-insurgency" campaign which obliterated 448 Mayan Indian villages, and murdered tens of thousands of their people. Forty per cent of the cabinet ministers who served the genocidal regimes of Lucas Garcia, Rios Montt and Mejia Victores studied at the School of the Americas.

In 1993, the United Nations truth commission on El Salvador named the army officers who had committed the worst atrocities of the civil war. Two-thirds of them had been trained at the School of the Americas. Among them were Roberto D'Aubuisson, the leader of El Salvador's death squads; the men who killed Archbishop Oscar Romero; and 19 of the 26 soldiers who murdered the Jesuit priests in 1989. In Chile, the school's graduates ran both Augusto Pinochet's secret police and his three principal concentration camps. One of them helped to murder Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffit in Washington DC in 1976.

Argentina's dictators Roberto Viola and Leopoldo Galtieri, Panama's Manuel Noriega and Omar Torrijos, Peru's Juan Velasco Alvarado and Ecuador's Guillermo Rodriguez all benefited from the school's instruction. So did the leader of the Grupo Colina death squad in Fujimori's Peru; four of the five officers who ran the infamous Battalion 3-16 in Honduras (which controlled the death squads there in the 1980s) and the commander responsible for the 1994 Ocosingo massacre in Mexico.

But that's ok right? And that's just the Latin America branch of atrocity up to 2001 which was updated again in Chile case since with more indication of possible direct involement by US. To take from what you will for now.

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines04/0527-01
.htm

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"