Liberal - not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded. It's not a swear word pe
So, at a cost of trillions of dollars to the American taxpayer, George Bush finally got his bogey-man. The broken man was pulled from his "spider hole" by heroic American troops, and the world is once again a safe place, but what did "The Butcher of Bagdad" do to deserve this? For years, he was the darling of the American right wing, but one day, he stepped out of line by threatening America's favourite dictatorship in the region, Saudi Arabia, by invading Kuwait. Of course, we all remember what happened then, a war was fought and won, and all was well with the world again. So what was the reason for going back? According to George Bush, Hussein was the world's most dangerous man, hoarding huge stockpiles of Weapons of Mass Destruction, aiding and abetting the terrorists that attacked America on 9/11/2001, seeking nuclear armament, and threatening the security of the free world. Of course, even an idiot could see that these were all blatant lies, and while Hussein was truly an evil man, he wasn't capable of threatening the security of any other nation after having virtually all of his military hardware destroyed in the first Gulf War conflict, and being worn down by a plethora of sanctions, embargos, and continued bombing of his country.

As for the terrorist connection, anyone who took the time to even do 10 minutes of research on the matter would know that Hussein ruled with an iron fist, and terrorist groups were not tolerated in the regions of Iraq that he controlled. Despite the implied and specifc connections between Hussein and the September 11th terrorist attacks constantly fed to us through the American media, and George Bush, anyone who knew anything about the matter was fully aware that not only did Hussein not assist al-Quaeda in any manner, but he positively hated them. The feeling was mutual, with one of the tenet's of al-Quaeda's beliefs calling for the destruction of Hussein's secular government. The man was clearly an infidel - he even allowed synagogues into his country.

On the subject of his alleged stockpiles of "Weapons of Mass Destruction", again, a minimal amount of research would reveal that the only WMDs that he ever possesed were supplied to him by his old ally - the USA. The reason that the UN inspections didn't reveal any stockpiles of these deadly armaments were simply that he no longer had any - not that the UN inspection teams were inefficient, or that he was a master of hiding them. Again, many people could have told you this before the sequel to the Gulf War was ever launched, but for even the staunchest believer in the deceptions of George Bush, the truth is now painfully obvious.

Though Americans will bear a burden of financial debt for this farce for years to come, the real victims are the Iraqi people who have been murdered in the course of the American lead war. The 3,000 people that died on September 11th pales in comparison with the number of Iraqis murdered in the period from the first Gulf War to the present day. We've all heard the stories of "mistakes", such as a bus load of unarmed women and children being gunned down by nervous American troops at a checkpoint, but you can rest assured that there's a great deal more that we don't hear about in the mainstream media. Every American who supported this war is guilty of one of two things - either willfully and knowingly supporting an unjustifiable war for purely jingoistic reasons, or being so staggeringly stupid as to have not seen through the lies of their government and media in building up support for this invasion. Either way, they're as guilty as the men who flew jets into skyscrapers.

Of course, the lies don't end here. Amerca's stated goal of promoting democracy in the region is yet another totally transparent deception. America's refusal to turn over control of the country to Iraqi authorities, and their refusal to allow allow free elections to take place can only be for one reason - they know that free elections won't go the way that they want, and so they continue their illegal occupation.

The severity of the wrongs done here can never be righted, but the truly right way to go is another thing that doesn't look like happening any time soon. Control of the reconstruction of Iraq should be turned over to the UN, and be funded exclusively by the countries that took part in this atrocity. Bush, Blair et al should be handed over to international authorities, and tried as war criminals, and financial reparations should be paid to the people of Iraq by the guilty coalition members. Any country that refused to take part in this debacle should be truly proud of themselves. France, Germany, Canada, and all the others that said "No" to Bush, despite the ongoing bribe of lucrative reconstruction contracts should be commended for standing up for what is right and decent, and should be the ONLY countries allowed to bid on reconstruction projects.

So, Bush caught his monster, but there is a far more evil man still at large, who poses a threat to the security of free nations unheard of since the fall of Hitler. To hope that Bush is held accountable for his crimes is a fool's hope, but we can all hope that this monster doesn't get to serve another terms as president, and that maybe somebody with at least a shred of decency will become president at the end of 2004. If you are a citizen of America, use your vote wisely, and don't allow this man to dig your country even deeper into the dirt.
Comments (Page 3)
5 Pages1 2 3 4 5 
on Dec 30, 2003
"Improving the quality of living of muslims in Syria, Pakistan and Palestine is the only way that I see to drain the swamp of hopelessness and resentment that breeds the terrorists that are currently attacking us. In my mind, this one objective makes this a "just" war, regardless of what actually happened to the WMDs, connections to al Qaeda, or anything else."

I greatly respect this idea and is what i have tried to illustrate myself before but i simply do not believe armed intervention will help it. If the quality of life improves in Iraq in the next few years as a result of this war, than i will gladly admit my error but until then, American soldiers occupying the middle east are simply brooding more hate against the US and making terrorism more likely.
on Dec 30, 2003
Sorry AJ but you just eliminated any credibility you might have had with that last comment.  Just yet another idealogue.
on Dec 30, 2003
Mach: Michael Moore invents facts. He is in a league of his own.
on Dec 31, 2003
AJ: "When people talk about exporting the US system of capitalism and democracy to other regions, that's all well and good in theory, but in the case of Iraq, it's simply another lie. Iraq hasn't yet been allowed to hold free elections, simply because such elections would not go the way that the US wants right now."

What makes you think that a democracy is something that can be set up in a couple of weeks or months? As you state yourself, US-style democracy in Iraq is "a complex issue". You can't just run around with a cookie cutter stamping out little voters in Basra, Tikrit, etc. It SHOULD take several years, perhaps a decade or more, to make a real democracy in Iraq. They're going to TRY to do it in one year so that Bush can have another feather in his re-election cap. But telling them, as you seem to be suggesting, "Okay, you're a democracy now, so go vote!" doesn't do them a damn bit of good.
on Dec 31, 2003
That's a good point. Have there been any democracies that have been created in a year in countries such as Iraq that have lasted?
on Jan 01, 2004
The funny thing is, that all of you have forgotten, is who put this madman in power. The good ol' USA. They gave Iraq to Saddam, they trained Ossama Bin Ladin, Qadaffi was another of their puppets, and yet you all moan and cry foul when the people the USA fund, train and support become meglomaniacs looking to take over their part of the world.

Grow up America. When you stop funding terrorists perhaps terrorism will stop coming to your country. You only need to read the articles and documents on the CIA's own webpage to find out they funded all of the above, plus the Contra's plus a whole bunch of other people and organisations they now want to wash their hands of. please.
on Jan 02, 2004
I didn't know that America put these people in power to do battle with America. That seems silly.
on Jan 02, 2004
Mr Crowley,
There are two correct things you said, #1 is I will vote for ANYBODY but G.W.Bush for president. #2 Is that we stupid Ametican's will have to beg, borrow, and steal to pay the huge sum's of money it cost us to take on this tyrent for humanity. Sadam is a terrible person and should be ridiculed in front on his own people, he should be put on a streetcorner and have to see how much he is really liked by his fellow contrymen.
But all the rest of your assertations are wrong. We do have bad people wherever you may go in the world and someday everyone of us will have to look upon our lives and either repent or pay the price. We Christians have heaven to look forward to "IF" we obey the Ten Commandments. Some Muslim's believe they will go to Heaven if they break the Commandments. They commit suiside, kill innocent people, and commit worse crimes against humanity. They think they will go to Heaven after murdering people.
I have one solution, General Jack (Black ) Pershing did the world a huge favor early in the 20th century. We should do it again. IN those days Gen. Pershing was fighting Muslim insergents and found their weakness. You see Muslim's abhore Pork. In those day's you didn't need the O.K. from Washington to shoot a terrorist. In his campain he caught quite a few terrorist's and stood them up and shot 49 out of 50. He made the 50th person watch as the bodies of the terrorist's were shoved into a mas grave and pig blood was spread over the whole mess. Dead pigs were thrown in the pit and then covered. Well that 50th Muslim went back to his peopel and there was not another terrorist uprising for another 60 years. This sounds cruel but these are tough times. I choose to live in my lifestyle, they choose their's, you choose your lifestyle, and I do believe you want to be free. Our society will protect itself come whatever. Count yourself lucky that you have the intelligence to think for yourself and do it without fear of reprisal's.
on Jan 02, 2004
Anonymous Coward....
Get your history straight, theres no need to twist it or represent only one side if the point your trying to make is valid/true. First off, the US supported Saddam decades ago because he was the lesser or two evils, and the Iranian govt (if you could call it that) was supporting terrorists that posed threats to the US and its allies. Secondly no one ever 'trained' bin laden. Yes we supplied weapons and some training to oppresed afghans (yes we had 'other' reasons, limiting communist expansion and such, but thats another debate and a far cry from supporting terroists) fighting communist Russia (those guys with the nukes pointed at Europe and the us), but the US never intentionally gave money, weapons, or training to support terrorists.

Lastly, who in office serving the US government exactly did all this? Oh yes, it was decades ago by people who have absolutely nothing to do with our elected officials currently serving. Yes, a lot of Americas past deeds aren’t exactly something to be proud of, (especially in retrospect) but in any case you don’t blame the children for the parents mistakes. Especially since you can look back in history and point fingers at ANY country. If you want to point fingers fine, but worry about the here and now, not the same old regurgitated and totally inaccurate propaganda bs thats spewed by anti American gremlins.

I dont agree with a lot of things the US has done, and Im in full support of others (ousting Saddam for isntance), but America doesnt have one voice, so please dont insult and stereotype all Americans on your little crusade (speaking of history) to make others see and agree with your views.
on Jan 02, 2004
The username is just a sham. I'm not REALLY Michael Moore...



However, speaking of this guy, I know he's a bit too much of a communist for most of you (myself, too), but he seems to have a lot of good points that are backed up by about 30 pages of source-driven facts. Just got done reading his latest book "Dude, Where's My Country" and this guy managed to get me involved in the 2004 presidential election process. Since I finished his book, I have created news-delivery accounts with Wes Clark and Howard Dean, registered on this site, and registered to vote in the upcoming primary and general election. So, no one can say that Mr. Moore doesn't inspire some. I also consider myself to be a relatively average Joe with a lower-middle-class income in a city below the middle class. I come from a well-to-do family that is stauchly Republican...I just registered as a Democrat (I know, not the best, but it beats the elephants). You may not like Michael Moore, but he's not exactly an idiot. He bashes the hell out of Bush and backs it up with facts that come from not him, but either well-recognized newspapers or our own government. You don't have to like him. Don't buy his book, should you not agree. I got it as a Christmas gift from my thoughtful wife and wasn't able to put it down.



I believe in two things: 1) the Constitution of the United States and 2) that we are not the fucking boss of this world. On the first point, I believe that Bush is Public Enemy #1. His love of executive privelege for things that don't concern cigars or presidential pardons bothers me. He will willingly subvert any portion of the Constitution then vilify anyone (including judges, etc.) who attempts to correct his wrongdoings. Perfect example is the case of Jose Padilla. Yeah, he's self-professed al Qaeda. I'll give you that. These bastards are cowards that preach "jihad" in the most incorrect way possible. However, being a member of a group is not against the law. Somebody had "heard" that he was "planning" a dirty bomb attack, so they threw him in the brig without access to a lawyer...for over a year. Jose, a US citizen, was denied his 4th Amendment right to due process. He was never charged, never given counsel, and sent to a military prison all because President Bush believed it was his right and duty as commander-in-chief to prosecute the "war on terror." For God's sake, let the system work. If he's a terrorist, we'll figure it out and send the bastard to the clink. Don't try to shield everyone, however, and let this guy just rot. Pretty soon, without opposition, this kind of treatment could become more commonplace...On the second point, we are just pissin' off the world. For those of you that think we can do it all alone, look at 1940s Germany. Hell, Hitler even had a few friends and he couldn't pull it off. We need allies. We used to have England, France, Germany, Canada, etc. Now, we've pissed off all but England, and 90% of their electorate opposes the Iraq war. Blair is in trouble. The rest of our coalition "allies" are being basically bribed into helping by promises of aid and trade agreements. That'll get you allies, but not friends. Let's see how many friends we really have if the shit really hits the fan. I'd like to see everyone's response if we somehow ended up on the wrong side of the battle.



Bottom line, we all need to take a deep breath and a long look around. The current trend is not sustainable. Many of the previous posts on this thread are very hostile and vehemently nationalistic. "Hello? Nazi Germany? We need some some advice on how to garner support for more wars..." Most of this world hates us. I noticed it in Europe while there awhile back. I know that a lot of them are socialist hippies, but they still exist and still matter. The Canadians laugh at us. Bush managed to piss off the Mexican president, too. We're rackin' 'em up. Quite honestly, I'd like to live again in a time where I can travel somewhere. Maybe, just MAYBE we could go out and make some friends instead of bombing their neighbors.



Kill the terrorists. Freeze their assets. Don't trample your own country and that of others while you're at it.
on Jan 02, 2004
Thank god for someone sticking there neck out and speaking against the right wing majority here.

I wouldn't be so ignorant to post that Mike Moore makes up his facts, i am sure that he could nail you for some kind of libel...

continue beleiving what you want to beleive - i am afraid it will require another catastrophic event like 9/11 for you conservatives to realise exactly what it is that is going on in the rest of the world.
on Jan 02, 2004
Oh yeah! The courageous posts with complete anonymity on JoeUser are truly a decisive blow against "the man." The fact that nobody has attempted to lock up Michael Moore should demonstrate that free speech, no matter how wacky, is alive and well in the U.S. Moore hides behind the moniker of a humorist to gloss over his fabrications, as does Al Franken. Similarly, Oliver Stone covers his agenda behind dramatic licence. The sad part is that more people are familiar with these humorous and dramatic parodies of history than the facts we actually know.

If you're still reading, Machiavelli_incorporated:

The two components of the double-win are:

1. Victory for U.S. interests by dismantling a government that was openly hostile to us and our allies.
2. Promoting Democracy by destroying a dictatorship of unbelievable cruelty.

Yes, I do see think the price of the war is worth it. Nobody from the Bush Administration ever said it was only about the weapons of mass destruction. That over-simplification is largely propagated by the presidents critics, so they can have an easy, one-point pass/fail element of the operation. If we ever unearth a pile of weapons of that description, the critics will either disbelieve it, or just pick another narrow point of contention.

This all reminds me of the civil war, which was pretty much the only thing covered for a year of history in some rotten public school I attended. At the time, everybody had a whole host of reasons as to what it was for, but nobody ever stated the obvious. The North said it was about not wanting to lose half the country. The South said it was all about sovereignty and their unique way of life. It was never officially about slavery, but it always was actually about slavery.

This war on terrorism is actually a cultural war. When a culture mandates that it is immoral to charge interest on loans, allow women to have rights, or to eat pork, that's bad news for the capitalists, women and pig farmers, but tolerable. When they start blowing things up over because they have their own version of manifest destiny going, it's everybody's problem. Plus they continue to violate the most honored tenant of capitalism, the customer is always right. We buy all this oil from these folks, you'd at least expect a little civility, if not gratitude!

We are very tolerant in the U.S., too tolerant really. We let people believe what they want to believe, eat what they want to eat, and within reason, treat their women however they deem appropriate. But the system fails when we start tolerating intolerance. After a while, some folks are no longer satisfied to mind their own business and they start minding everybody else's. So, what you could view as Yankee Imperialism, I view as a reaction to extreme intolerance. It's the United State's fault that the money we spend on oil gets hoarded by a tiny elite class of dictators, but it has become our problem. It's truly regrettable that we have to take the initiative to fix a hopeless economic system, but we don't really have a choice, if we want to keep from getting attacked suicide cultists.

Hussein paid cash to families of terrorists. He also ordered the gassing of the Kurds with weapons of - you guessed it - mass destruction. Several terrorist training camps were dismantled in Iraq during the invasion. Unless you dismiss pretty much all of what you see as fabrications of the Matrix, these are facts. If you don't find these compelling reasons to go to war, you're probably a bigger pacifist than I am. Good for you, but I would argue it's bad for pretty almost all aspects of what we call Western Culture.
on Jan 02, 2004
First off, Ray, just shut the fuck up with your blatant racism and "go christians!! kill the infidels" type bullshit. Your no better than any of the terrorists. If you didnt have rocks for brains you would realized you completely missed the point of the war in iraq. If you wanna go on some christian holy crusade than thats fine with the rest of us, but i'll be rolling on the floor laughing when they drag your christian ass through some street in the middle east. If your gonna drag out some historical fact from the early twentith century than at least use it correctly and in context.

Whack a mole, your still arguing under the assumption that what worked for us will work for them. I am not saying that we should let terrorists attack us, i am just saying that armed intervention will only make things worse. Considering the fact that the terrorists will simply flee to Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. They will rally even more support there against the US.

"1. Victory for U.S. interests by dismantling a government that was openly hostile to us and our allies."
first off, they might have been hostile to the US but without the WMDs, Hussein simply was not a big enough threat to justify sacrifce of human lives and the trillions of dollars this war is going to cost. If there was actual WMDs there, it would pose a significant enough threat to launch an invasion.
on Jan 02, 2004
Hit that nerve AGAIN!!! Man, this is 25+ responses and counting. You carry on soldier. What else do you think?
on Jan 02, 2004
GemCityJoe: "We'll run our affairs in America to suit ourselves and protect our nnational security whenever and however we see fit. We could care less about your non-American perspective, furthermore, the fact that you are not an American suits us just fine. GCJ"

This is a point of view that I hear a lot. It is disturbing. I doubt that you comprehend why it is disturbing. What do want? You want all other people who do not think like you to be destroyed? Let's hope you don't represent the view of the majority of the American people.

A proud American: "Please don't villianize the United States just because you feel we are a threat to whatever puny country you live in."

If you want your opnion to be respected then you should start with a less nationalistic view. It shows you have no respect to whatever opnions other people may have.

A proud American: "Nobody should be completely comfortable with only one major superpower in the world, but really... who else would you want it to be than us?"

The world is not waiting for any superpower's dictatorship and it does not matter how "nice" they are.

A proud American: "You clearly live in a fantasy world, if you can watch these events unfold, and still cast the U.S. taxpayer as the bad guy. It makes me wish people like you (whatever country you are in) did not live under the protective umbrella HELD UP by the very people you seek to villianize."

What makes you so sure other countries need or want US protection? It's interesting to note that the European countries pay most of their defense budget to NATO and most of that money involved will benefit the weapons industry of the US. Which is all very well and I don't have any objection being in NATO, but don't talk about the poor US tax payer being the only victim.

Sam: "Allow me to fisk your ass."

You clearly didn't read the Lord Of The Rings or you fell asleep during the movie. Sam would never say that!

Machiavelli_incorporated: "The american public has taken on an attitude of ur with us or ur with them attitude, which is, like ive said before, an immature and fundamentally flawed view of the world. let me put this to u in terms u right wingers mite understand. There is another world out there, it doesnt end with ur boarders."

It doesn't end with being hostile to other viewpoints either. It should start there. If the discussions are just being about who is right or who is wrong or why right is bad or why right is wrong then one just tries to win arguments. In my view that is how wars are started.

Whack-a-mole: "If the mature worldview requires we spell your as 'ur' and might as 'mite' I'm willing to explore the depths of my immaturity."

It doesn't really help the conversation to act like a teacher, does it? Or does it just make you feel good?

Ray: "I have one solution, General Jack (Black ) Pershing did the world a huge favor early in the 20th century. We should do it again. IN those days Gen. Pershing was fighting Muslim insergents and found their weakness. You see Muslim's abhore Pork. In those day's you didn't need the O.K. from Washington to shoot a terrorist. In his campain he caught quite a few terrorist's and stood them up and shot 49 out of 50. He made the 50th person watch as the bodies of the terrorist's were shoved into a mas grave and pig blood was spread over the whole mess. Dead pigs were thrown in the pit and then covered. Well that 50th Muslim went back to his peopel and there was not another terrorist uprising for another 60 years. This sounds cruel but these are tough times."

Sam mentioned Godwin's law. In this case it looks we have to deal with Van der Leun's Corollary.

Whack-A-Mole: "Oh yeah! The courageous posts with complete anonymity on JoeUser are truly a decisive blow against "the man."

And who might you be?
5 Pages1 2 3 4 5