President's Veto of the War Spending Bill

[BIG SHAFE]

Again keep believing what CNN tells you there buddy. I urge those opposed to the war to talk to someone that's been there. Thanks <3 2 time OIF Vetran

 

By all means set us straight.

[Scotty2Hotty]

As for the WMD thing, they exist that's all I will say. We went over for the right reasons, we're still there and will continue til the Iraqi government pulls it's head up out of it's ass. And yes, Al Qaeda is running wild there. I've captured people from Syria, Iran, and even Sudan. So that's a mute point. One way or another we need a showdown with these cockbags, and it's better we do it there, than on OUR own soil. Be thankful the US military isn't at every street corner like we could be, IF Al Qaeda decided to bring more of their people over here.

[HotCarl]

As for the WMD thing, they exist that's all I will say.

 

That's all you will say because you have no proof otherwise? Don't believe every rumor/scuttlebug you hear. Just because so and so in unit xyz said they heard from a guy who know's a guy that they found a aerosol can full of small pox... doesn't neccessarily mean it's true. Such rumor's can/will be fabricated to keep troop moral high. Trust me I know, I know people that have served and still are serving that are fed this bs all the time. And if it wasn't for my dad, I'd be one of those people. Dont believe everything you hear bro.

 

As for a party affiliation? Does it really matter? John has somewhat of a liberal point of view, big deal. In the long run it doesn't matter. Keep looking at your fellow countrymen/woman as enemies and we won't need terrorism to bring us down, we'll do it ourselves. All this bi-partisan bickering makes me sick. Believe what you believe, dont be conservative just because you want to be a republican. I've got many liberal view's and many conservative view's but their my belief's, I could care less about being a democrat or republican and I think alot of people would benefit from not being so damned close minded about that.

 

Oh and scott, your right everyone should talk to a vet and get their point of view having been in the shit themselves. Fortunatly every vet I've talked about has mostly the same opinion that the Iraqi people are lazy and don't need/want control of their own country. You can't help a person who doesn't want it. So what do you think?

[cptn janks]

well you blantantly are one.... dont have to say it to be one.

 

again tell us what you would have done....

 

i like how you try to use "democrat" as some sort of insult.

 

didnt you ever learn that ad hominem is a fallacious argument?

 

being opposed to the iraq war does not make one a democrat. there are a number of members of congress who are republican and opposed to the war. walter jones comes to mind. so does ron paul. although one could argue that paul is pretty much a republican only in party affiliation. his views are much more libertarian than anything. john duncan is another. william f. buckley even said "One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed...it's important that we acknowledge in the inner councils of state that it (the war) has failed, so that we should look for opportunities to cope with that failure"

 

buckley is a staunch conservative, yet if he is opposed to the war in iraq does that mean he is a democrat?

 

As for a party affiliation? Does it really matter? John has somewhat of a liberal point of view, big deal. In the long run it doesn't matter. Keep looking at your fellow countrymen/woman as enemies and we won't need terrorism to bring us down, we'll do it ourselves. All this bi-partisan bickering makes me sick. Believe what you believe, dont be conservative just because you want to be a republican. I've got many liberal view's and many conservative view's but their my belief's, I could care less about being a democrat or republican and I think alot of people would benefit from not being so damned close minded about that.

 

^ hit the nail on the head. there are issues that i agree with republicans on and there are issues i agree with democrats on.

 

 

 

 

as for what i would have done (as if anyone can TRULY say what they would have done. i dont think anyone would know unless they are in that position)

 

i probably would have done what bush did in AFGHANISTAN. i was 100% in support of the invasion of afghanistan and the overthrow of the taliban.

 

however, i wouldnt have stopped half way through, and started a conflict in iraq... since, ya know... IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. i wouldnt have stopped in afghanistan until we had OBL's head on a pike... but OBL is still out there somewhere.

 

the invasion of iraq was decided BEFORE 9/11. "after all, this is the guy who tried to kill my daddy"

 

if we truly needed to go in there, then the president should use the proper channels. congress should declare war and the UN should approve as well. there is a reason that congress is the sole power authorized to declare war. its called "checks and balances". so no one branch of the government can become too strong.

 

further, adherence by the U.S. and other member states to the UN Charter and to other international treaties is NOT A CHOICE, but a legal obligation; exercising military power in violation of the UN Charter undermines the rule of law and is illegal vigilantism on an international scale.

[cptn janks]

As for the WMD thing, they exist that's all I will say. We went over for the right reasons, we're still there and will continue til the Iraqi government pulls it's head up out of it's ass. And yes, Al Qaeda is running wild there. I've captured people from Syria, Iran, and even Sudan. So that's a mute point.

 

the claims were that saddam RESTARTED his WMD programs, not that he simply possessed them. of course there was SOME chemical weapons there. if you recall, WE GAVE THEM TO HIM in the 80s.

 

http://www.awolbush.com/rumsfeld_saddam.jpg

 

the claims were a) he started a new program (untrue) and b) that he was giving support to al-qaeda, or somehow tied into 9/11 (also untrue)

 

al qaeda IS running wild there. now.

 

they were not running wild in iraq before 2003 though.

 

if we were TRULY concerned with WMD's then why didnt we do anything with North Korea? we KNOW they have a nuclear program. its not just speculation.

 

One way or another we need a showdown with these cockbags, and it's better we do it there, than on OUR own soil. Be thankful the US military isn't at every street corner like we could be, IF Al Qaeda decided to bring more of their people over here.

 

they dont need to bring people over here now. they are happy with us being in iraq. they WANT us there. so does iran. probalby china too. they want us to fight in iraq because in doing so, we are depleting our fiscal and physical resources.

[TTQ B4U]

I agree completely. We're killing ourselves and losing the war on our own. We're not going to defeat "them" because we don't have the manpower to do it and unless we nuke the entire middle east it's the biggest effort in futility there is. It's like trying to control mosquitos in Florida with a fly swatter.

 

How many Billions of dollars have been completely tossed away fighting over there. How bad has the economy gotten since we got involved in the war(s) after 911.

 

IMO, the 911 killings and attack wasn't what the enemy was trying to accomplish....the state of what we have in our country today is. They succeeded beyond any goals they set and it's been all our doing.

 

I won't make any fans by saying this, but IMO after 911 we should have just stuck to a direct simple plan to get Osama and his crew, Period. No huge war, no huge deal, just quick, simple and effective.

 

Sorry, but IMO we fucked up. We've over extended ourselves, worn out our military and equipment, fucked up a whole bunch of lives and spent way more money than we can afford. If Bush and our officials would spend as much money, time and put forth all these resources towards fixing the real problems affecting our country, we'd be 100x better off than we were in 2003.

 

Fix the education system, fix health care, work on the SS plan/retirement and get our country back on track to supporting itself once again from a manufacturing standpoint and you'd be president for life. Kick Clinton in his nuts for his part years ago too.

 

I could actually see everyone behind the costs involved in getting the above worked out. But no, Bush and his fake I'm a Texan attitude and dumb as plan have dug a whole that my kids will end up with in 20 years.

 

Good plan guys, things are working out great. We can't fucking fix our own country's problems, so what makes them think they can help the mess we created in Iraq? Now we're stuck with a shitty economy, a tired military, shit for gear that is left, an education system that sucks, healthcare that sucks, taxes that continue to rise and pay for programs that suck and don't work and a country that can't build or support shit. The list goes on.

 

Rant off, but not over.

 

they dont need to bring people over here now. they are happy with us being in iraq. they WANT us there. so does iran. probalby china too. they want us to fight in iraq because in doing so, we are depleting our fiscal and physical resources.

[HotCarl]

Originally Posted by Redneck-Scott

One way or another we need a showdown with these cockbags, and it's better we do it there, than on OUR own soil. Be thankful the US military isn't at every street corner like we could be, IF Al Qaeda decided to bring more of their people over here.

 

they dont need to bring people over here now. they are happy with us being in iraq. they WANT us there. so does iran. probalby china too. they want us to fight in iraq because in doing so, we are depleting our fiscal and physical resources.

 

This is ABSOLUTLY true. Why should China go through the trouble of a war when they can just wait it out and we'll destroy ourselves, or go bankrupt. My 7th grade history teacher said something once about war that I didn't understand at the time but now make's complete sense. That war can bankrupt and destroy even the greatest of nation's and empire's. I didn't believe it then but now I do.

[Scotty2Hotty]

That's all you will say because you have no proof otherwise? Don't believe every rumor/scuttlebug you hear. Just because so and so in unit xyz said they heard from a guy who know's a guy that they found a aerosol can full of small pox... doesn't neccessarily mean it's true. Such rumor's can/will be fabricated to keep troop moral high. Trust me I know, I know people that have served and still are serving that are fed this bs all the time. And if it wasn't for my dad, I'd be one of those people. Dont believe everything you hear bro.

 

As for a party affiliation? Does it really matter? John has somewhat of a liberal point of view, big deal. In the long run it doesn't matter. Keep looking at your fellow countrymen/woman as enemies and we won't need terrorism to bring us down, we'll do it ourselves. All this bi-partisan bickering makes me sick. Believe what you believe, dont be conservative just because you want to be a republican. I've got many liberal view's and many conservative view's but their my belief's, I could care less about being a democrat or republican and I think alot of people would benefit from not being so damned close minded about that.

 

Oh and scott, your right everyone should talk to a vet and get their point of view having been in the shit themselves. Fortunatly every vet I've talked about has mostly the same opinion that the Iraqi people are lazy and don't need/want control of their own country. You can't help a person who doesn't want it. So what do you think?

As for proof, if you see it in person it therefore exists now don't it? :grin2: If you do a search for Operation: Murrow you may find something. Yes Iraqis are extremely lazy people, and IT IS TIME they get up and do something. I honestly don't wanna go back myself, but if I have to I will. Not a problem, and you ask most guys, they'll go right back if need be. But I think the time needs to be right for us to pull out 100%. But at the same time, it's time for AMERICA to light a fire up their nasty asses and force them to get shit done. And done right, like it could've been. But that's what happens when politicians run wars. Civilians need to stay the fuck out of our lane. Amen.

[Scotty2Hotty]

Here's a nice sweet simple response to it all, We had to do it at some point or another. If it wasn't this generation, then our kids would've gone. History has a tendency to repeat itself. So honestly I'm glad we did it, and now my future chillins should never have to do or see what I did.

[Scotty2Hotty]

they dont need to bring people over here now. they are happy with us being in iraq. they WANT us there. so does iran. probalby china too. they want us to fight in iraq because in doing so, we are depleting our fiscal and physical resources.

Exactly, and I'm happy to say I've captured/killed and engauged a few Al Qaeda folks myself. No reason to lie bout any of this, if you're thinking I sat behind a desk and made all this up. I've got fancy pieces of paper, stupid ribbons, and a loss of over 20% of my hearing thanks to it. IMO, all worth it, but I agree once we finish, then we get the fuck out for good.

[HotCarl]

Exactly, and I'm happy to say I've captured/killed and engauged a few Al Qaeda folks myself. No reason to lie bout any of this, if you're thinking I sat behind a desk and made all this up. I've got fancy pieces of paper, stupid ribbons, and a loss of over 20% of my hearing thanks to it. IMO, all worth it, but I agree once we finish, then we get the fuck out for good.

 

I don't think anyone here is questioning whether or not your telling the truth. But if you did indeed discover/see/witness a WMD in Iraq, you might want to tell... I dont know... the president, news media, ANYBODY. This would support the president's claim why we went to Iraq in this first place. That's why I really don't think that they exsist, because if they did the world would've known about it by now there's no point in keeping something like that a secret it just makes the white house look worse than it already is.

[Scotty2Hotty]

They know, it's just not the "stockpile" we were looking for. Not sure why they haven't said anything, other than to keep in on the low. Got me confused when we didn't hear anymore about it.

[Jeffrey]

They are probably waiting to find the mother load and then rub it in all the doubters faces, and make the dimocrats look bad like they have been trying to do to President Bush the entire time he was in office.

 

And you guys should really stick to talking about the President veto'ing this bill, 10xworse may get upset if you don't keep it on topic.

[Scotty2Hotty]

We'll get what we seek. Iraq ain't the tiniest country in the world. There's still a LOT of shit left over aka motar rounds, artillery shells, etc...

[HotCarl]

They are probably waiting to find the mother load and then rub it in all the doubters faces, and make the dimocrats look bad like they have been trying to do to President Bush the entire time he was in office.

 

Yeah your probably right.

 

Though world poitic's doesn't work like that, you show your hand and get it over with in order to justify your action's.

[cptn janks]

1) mortar rounds and artillery shells are NOT repeat ARE NOT weapons of mass destruction. and they most certainly were not what we went in looking for. chemical, biological and nuclear weapons are WMDs.

 

we didnt go into iraq saying "he has mortar rounds and artillery shells" EVERYONE has those things. lol i bet the vatican has a few mortar rounds in the basement of st. peters basilica.

 

2) the claim was not that he had SOME chemical weapons. everyone knew that. like i said before, WE GAVE THEM TO HIM. (although by now the leftovers are all but worthless. about as lethal as a can of raid)

 

the claim was that he was MANUFACTURING more chemical weapons and possible nuclear technology. that he had an active chemical weapons program. mobile labs, secret underground chemical weapons plants, etc etc.

 

from what we know now, he didnt.

 

this raises the question that if he DID have these things, then why didnt he use them against our troops? it was obvious we were not going to back down. and that we were DETERMINED to overthrow his government. so what did he have to lose by unleashing a plauge of anthrax or a cloud of mustard gas?

 

 

and redneck scott, i NEVER thought you were lying about your service in iraq. far from it.

 

They are probably waiting to find the mother load and then rub it in all the doubters faces, and make the dimocrats look bad like they have been trying to do to President Bush the entire time he was in office.

 

he makes himself look bad IMO. suspending habeus corpus doesnt make ANYONE look good.

[Jeffrey]

Yeah but if you come out and say, yeah we found a small cache of WMD's this is what we went to war over, or come out and say holy shit we found a full arsenal of weapons, what will make the bigger impact to your advantage?

[Jeffrey]

 

this raises the question that if he DID have these things, then why didnt he use them against our troops? it was obvious we were not going to back down. and that we were DETERMINED to overthrow his government. so what did he have to lose by unleashing a plauge of anthrax or a cloud of mustard gas?

 

 

If you knew the US had little support going into this war, and their main reason was to find your WMD's that other believed you did not have. Would you justify what the US was saying by using those weapons against them? Or would you still deny it and let the US go about it and drive their popularity further down than it was before?

[cptn janks]

well lets see...

 

most powerful army in the world bearing down on me. my own soldiers surrendering to their water trucks... bombs being dropped all around me...

 

hannibal is at the gates for gods sake. what else do i have to lose? credibility? its not like that matters because im gonna be imprisoned the minute they find me, and eventually executed...

 

nope, doesnt look like i have shit to lose. im going to lose my reign over my country... may as well put the hurt on them before they kill me. im not going to hold out to try to make them look bad, and then have them find my stockpile in 2 months after my army is decimated. im going to use every weapon i have to try to gain an advantage.

 

besides that , the point of having these weapons is to use them. they dont just look pretty.

 

saddam used them when he was fighting iran. he also used them on the kurds. so he had no qualms over putting them to use.

[cptn janks]

Yeah but if you come out and say, yeah we found a small cache of WMD's this is what we went to war over, or come out and say holy shit we found a full arsenal of weapons, what will make the bigger impact to your advantage?

 

WMD's, since that was the claim that was made for going to war.

 

just saying "they had a shitload of mortar rounds" makes it look like you are trying to divert attention from the claim that you made before the war that there was a new chemical weapons program going on...

 

oh no... we havent found that... but if you look over here you can see a warehouse full of artillery shells...

 

OF COURSE they had artillery. i mean, their country IS at war, and they had a standing army. of course they are going to have some mortar rounds and some artillery shells. if they didnt have these things, and iraq's army was an un-armed army, then there wouldnt really be a war now would there? its not really a war if one side has guns and the other has nothing. maybe a skirmish, but i dont think that even applies.

 

hell, they probably got some rifles too, and probably a few hand grenades as well. and thats just the army. not to mention every tom, dick and muhammed that lives in iraq that has an AK-47 in his closet.

 

the UN did not prohibit them from having artillery either, so thats a moot point, and not a sufficient cause for going to war. if it IS cause to go to war, then there are 192 other countries in the world that we need to take on, because everyone has those kinds of things.

[Jeffrey]

Well then I guess you'd better get the trucks on there way to Syria and have them bring the WMD's back so you can use them. Honestly someone like you (anti-war radical, conspiracy theorist) there is no point in arguing because your right I am wrong, atleast in your head. You have people that HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN THERE UNLIKE YOUR SOURCES!! telling you how it is and you don't listen. To me all of your points are mute because what the media, the VERY LIBERAL media btw, reports is not always the best source to base your opinions on. I would listen to Scott or any other veteran, before some reporter from CNN.

[cptn janks]

conspiracy theorist? don't you know that ad hominem is a fallacious argument?

 

if i posted that bin laden is an active CIA operative who bush had cause 9/11 for the purposes of taking over iraq and getting their oil, then maybe i could be called a "conspiracy theorist".

 

but i dont think i said that.

 

i never said there were NO chemical weapons ANYWHERE in iraq. everyone knows there were. like i said, he used them against iran. im not arguing that fact.

 

but what im saying is there was NO NEW WMD program, like this administration claimed there was. my source isnt CNN, MSNBC or even faux news. it came straight from the CIA. read the Duelfer Report from 2004. it pretty much spells out that iraq's WMD program was essentially destroyed in 91, and saddam ended the nuke program after the 91 gulf war.

 

and as far as you or i, or anyone without a top secret security clearance goes, there has been no evidence of a new chem program. no hidden underground labs. no stockpiles of anthrax. no tons of mustard gas.

[HAOLE]

Well then I guess you'd better get the trucks on there way to Syria and have them bring the WMD's back so you can use them. Honestly someone like you (anti-war radical, conspiracy theorist) there is no point in arguing because your right I am wrong, atleast in your head. You have people that HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN THERE UNLIKE YOUR SOURCES!! telling you how it is and you don't listen. To me all of your points are mute because what the media, the VERY LIBERAL media btw, reports is not always the best source to base your opinions on. I would listen to Scott or any other veteran, before some reporter from CNN.

QFT X 1000

[cptn janks]

also, if they DID move them to syria, being able to move hundreds of tons of chemical, biological and nuke material without being detected by CIA satellites or NSA radio listening posts or by any other of the myriad of intel gathering systems, then no question, that was the must successful intelligence operation of this century.

[Scotty2Hotty]

Motar rounds, artillery shells, and other ballistic missiles ARE all means of a delivery system. FYI And IED's are made of these types of munitions. So it wouldn't be all that difficult to deliver it to various places. Al-Husseins/Scuds can be packed with whatever they wanna put in them besides an HE warhead. I know, we were busy taking care of SA-2's and all that crap the first time. So, yeah they didn't have ICBM's, but never the less could easily hit our interests abroad in the middle east. And ol Saddam could've made a march on Israel etc..