It states: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.".
A terrorism suspect qualifies as the exemption far as I'm concerned. Now if they start calling drug dealers or jay walkers "terrorism suspects", then I'm with you. As of now, I have neither seen nor heard of that happening.
We are fully aware that people like you (the bad people) are out there trying take away our liberties for the smallest and most false sense of security. Thats why we applaud this. Its a victory against you bad people. Don't worry we know you exist!
Just curious. What liberties have you lost due to anti-terror legislation in whatever country you are living in?
I ask because I keep hearing about how the US has become a police state. Well, I'm in the US and as far as I can tell, this new Bush police state looks exactly as it did under Clinton, except the economy is better. I think it is only fair that I stand with my fellow Americans and suffer as they have, but before I do that, I need to know what it is I'm missing.
I'm "intolerant" because it's purely believing in fairy tales, no more, no less. It's a problem of philosophical judgement, not a problem of "not sharing my beliefs". It's you that have beliefs to share with other -I simply don't have beliefs of this kind.
A majority of scientists believe in global warming. Therefor, global warming is true. Those that disagree should lose their jobs and certifications because they are either stupid, ignorant or bribed.
A majority of people in the world believe in God (about 2/3, I believe). So, according to the rules we here at Slashdot have set up to deal with global warming deniers, that makes religion correct and those that disagree either stupid, ignorant or bribed.
So, what's your story?
(I know the logic is ridiculous, but, hey, if it's good for global warming, then it's gotta be good for religion!)
Back on topic... if we had enforced ratings on games, game buyers could go tell these people where to stick their WiiMote since kids could not buy any of the "violent or sexually related games". As to the Wii having the Internet browser and the Internet being violence and porn ridden... well, take that up with the DOD!
These days it doesn't get cold enough to kill them so they are just laying waste to huge swaths of the forest. =(
I know it is offtopic, but the same thing was happening in East Texas. The pine beetle was devastating the forests there. However, a control method was found that stopped the problem cold. Whenever you found a tree that was infected, you cut the tree down. Unfortunately, the Clinton administration banned cutting down tree on national forests to prevent logging. While his intentions were well meaning, it ended up destroying forests. Like in the west where forest fires had no breaks to stop them, the pine beetle wiped out many national forests in East Texas. It was almost humorous to be driving along and see an empty field surrounded by wooded areas. I asked my uncle what happened and he told that the clear area was a national land while the area around it was privately owned. The private owners would spot the infected trees and cut them down, but since that was illegal in the national forest, the whole plot was wiped out.
Crap, wait, I've confused something there. When did Hezbollah attack us, again?
Marine barracks, Beirut, 1983.
Before you start yammering about 'killing civilians', about 1100 Lebanese were killed, at least half of them civilians, and just 43 Israeli civilians were killed. And, just in case you were living in a box, Israel got seriously critizied by, well, the entire world for their indescrimate targeting of basically everything. Civilians, civilian infastructure, the Lebonese Army that was trying stop Hezbollah, and even Mexico at one point. (Okay, I made that last one up.)
I saw the videos of rockets being launched from apartment complexes and elementary schools. However, the apartments and schools were not the targets of the retaliatory strikes, the launchers were. So, I agree that many civilians were killed, more on the Lebanese side than the Israeli. However, I blame Hezbolla for the Lebanese deaths since they used the civilians as human shields, and I blame Hezbolla for the Israeli civilian deaths since they INTENTIONALLY TARGETED CIVILIANS, which is something Israel never did.
That's not to say Hezbollah is blameless, their idiotic soldier-kidnapping stunts caused the war,
Were those soldiers ever released? It's funny how Israel will decide that the cost in civilian casualties and world-wide condemnation had grown too much to continue the attacks. Hesbolla still has not released those soldiers to the best of my knowledge, which tells me that the costs to their own civilians is minuscule to the benefit of holding those soldiers. Yet, somehow, Israel is the bad guy and Hezbollah is simply "not blameless".
modern science has benefited humanity in so many ways, yet people deny it when it goes against their opinions/politics.
Exactly! I couldn't agree more. Of course, it also needs to be said every time an article comes up where a scientist says something against the group-think, like "Global Warming is not man-made".
While it is OK to voice your opinion, I don't think it is OK to question the ethics of the scientists involved.
Iran, after all, not only hasn't ever attacked us, it hasn't attacked anyone for as long as the US has existed, nor have they ever threatened us. (Perhaps you have confused us with Israel?)
Uh, let's see. Embassies are considered sovereign territory, right? In the 1970's, didn't Iran capture and hold Americans from our embassy over there? I think that pretty much proves that YES, IRAN HAS ATTACKED US AND YES, THEY HAVE ATTACKED SOMEONE. Granted, it was a long time ago, but it does invalidate your point. I assume you had forgotten about it or never knew that it happened, otherwise, you are fucking liar.
Of course there are all the Iranian made weapons we are finding all over Iraq. But I'm sure you think those were planted by the NSA, CIA, FBI or Bush himself. Maybe that's what Rice was doing while she was visiting Iraq recently
And finally, let us not forget Iran supplying Hesbolla with thousands of missiles, missiles that are made with ball bearings all along the casing so when they hit, they will shred anyone near by. Of course, these missiles were both designed for and targeted at civilians, with the intention of causing as much terror on the civilian population as possible and to kill or injure as many men, women and children as possible.
Yeah, those Iranians are fucking saints. I see no reason why they shouldn't have a nuclear weapon. I mean, what's the worst that can happen?
As far as England goes. You're right. If you can show me a Red-Coat that was alive in 1861, I'll gladly shoot his ass for messing with the US!
How lucky for us that the statement never was "wipe off the map" then!
By God you're right. From your own source,
The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).[8]
Would a more accurate translation be "Cease to exist"? Phew, I guess we can relax now. What is Israel so worked up over? I mean, Iran is just suggesting that Israel must vanish from the page of time. What's the big deal?
"Wiped off the map", "must vanish from the page of time"... To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to....
I've occasionally thought it would be a good idea to wipe Israel off the map, or more to the point, relocate it. Israel is the Israeli people. These generations of fighting are over a patch of dirt. Let's relocate all of human trappings in the 7800 square miles of the Nation of Israel, to say Texas. (262,000 square miles). What is that cost compared to all of our military expenditures in the Middle East, directly caused by our support of Israel.
Great idea. Better yet, since Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a UN mandate, how about we move everyone else? Where to you live? How 'bout we move you and all your people to Texas?
Don't get me wrong, as a Texan, I'd be happy to see all the Israelis move here. They'd be welcomed, just as the Katrina evacuees were welcomed.
Oh, yea, let's not not forget; the US also mistranslates Arabic to meet it's own goals of regime change. Just like it did with spanish and the 'communist threat' from south America in the 80's.
I had no idea that America was the only country with the ability translate Arabic. Maybe some other country should learn so they could set the record straight.
How about Mr Bush's pledge to "change the Iraqi regime"?
Let's see... Change Regime, free elections and equal protection under the law is the same as "Wiping them off the map". Are you fuckin kidding me!!??! Can you be so narrow minded that you believe the shit that you type? Gee, and here I though "Wipe off the map" meant killing all those getting "wiped off". Only if they had been clearer and said something like, "drive the Israelis into the sea" then we may have some clue as to their true intentions.
Is it humanly possible for you to be against anyone the Bush administration is also against? Are you so blinded by your hatred of Bush (because your guy lost, I guess) that you think an Islamic controlled country with Sharia law is preferable to life under Bush?
You mean like Osama Bin Laden, a terrorist in the 1980s who was going to take down the soviet-sponsored Afghan gov't?
If you implying that the US supported Bin Laden in the '80's? The I would have to imply that you are wrong.
True, the US did support the Moujahadin in the 80's, or at least we helped them knock down a few Russian helicoptors, but we did not support Al Qaeda nor Bin Laden. The people we supported were the same groups that helped us overthrow the Taliban.
Or, would you have had us sit by silently while the Russians slaughtered Afghanis by the thousands?
If Hezbollah or Hamas got an ICBM that could reach the USA, then I'd be concerned. But they don't. They can't even reach Europe right now.
Uh, if Iran just sent a satellite into orbit, then Hezbollah has the ability to strike anywhere in the world. All Iran has to do is conveniently leave the control room unguarded one day and... oops, someone launched something.
More likely, these groups won't need an ICBM. All they would need to do is make a phone call to someone in the US and tell them how they are going to smuggle the bomb in, what their orders are and how to carry them out. (You know, since we can't listen in on the phone call and all)
Probably because Iran ignores the Geneva Conventions with regard to prisoners...no..US does that too...
If ignorance is bliss, you must be in ecstasy! The Geneva convention does not apply to non-uniformed combatants. So, now that you know that fact, can you tell me how the US is ignoring the Geneva conventions?
Probably because Iran makes veiled threats to use Nuclear weapons if diplomatic demands are not met...no...US does that too...
Really? When? I have never heard a US President threaten to nuke anyone. Unless, of course, you use your "re-written" history books.
I guess the bottom line is that the US does not actively and intentionally support the targeting and slaughter of civilians. Unfortunately, it looks like you do.
Either everyone honestly believed there were WMD, or you heard the WMD deniers loud and clear. Not both.
Good catch. How about every world government believed their were stockpiles of WMD's based on their intel services. However, at least in our own gov't and population, there were those that refused to believe. Compare it to the Global Warming debate. Many slashdotters will say that everyone knows that it is man made, even though there are those that disagree.
And, while I am the last person to defend Saddam Hussein's human rights record, it is worth pointing out that the US govt carefully studied the effects of destroying Iraq's water treatment plants (thousands dead, mostly children, from polluted water sources), then went in and destroyed them in the Gulf War. (http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0401c.asp) That is responsible in large part for the dead children - the direct, premeditated actions of the government you're defending.
True, but Hussein could have rebuilt and maintained the water plants simply by "dry-docking" a few palaces. He chose not to. Besides the oil-4-food program provided funds for clean water. Corruption from Iraq and the UN bled those funds off.
When it is all said and done, what makes up my mind is Russia telling the US that its Intel is reporting that Iraq was planning a US attack. Given the current intel on Iraqi WMD's, that would make 9-11 look like gang-related drive-by! I'd rather have a Prez that would act on that info than try to protect his political career and legacy.
Have you ever even been in a combat situation like what's going on in Iraq? Have you been in that situation for a year or more at a time? Nope. Signed up for it but served during a peaceful period.
We were lied to in order to start the war. They kept changing their story on why we invaded. Bullshit! Everyone honestly and truly believed that Iraq had WMD's... well most everyone, just like most everyone believes in global warming. The administration didn't keep changing the reasons for invading Iraq, the presented a shitload of them and what stuck was the WMD's. That's all the press reported. The conveniently left out the half million dead children (according to UNICEF, anyway), the mass graves, the torture chambers (REAL torture, not cheerleader pyramids).
They lied about how long it would take, how much it would cost, and how difficult it would be. You mean how Clinton lied about how long US soldiers were to be in Bosnia. I remember hearing "Christmas of this year". BTW, servicemen are still in Bosnia, and Japan, and Germany, and Panama, and Korea... need I go on. No one knows how long a war will take. Besides, the Iraqi regime was overthrown in a couple of days. Since then, we've been cleaning up.
They did everything they could to silence those that disagreed with them. So it's OK to silence Global Warming deniers, but not WMD deniers? Actually, if they were silenced, they must have gotten their message out telepathically, because I heard it.
The ones that said we needed a lot more troops The same ones that say we don't need more troops now? It's funny how fast they change their tune when it is no longer counter to the President. Which proves my point that these guys would take down America if it was the only way to take down GWB. They care more about their own political careers than they do about the country or ethics. (See my SIG for an example). NOW CAN I QUESTION THEIR PATRIOTISM?
Mostly I wish people hadn't been stupid enough to believe the crap that the administration was spewing all the way up to and throughout the war. It's fucking sad. The crap the admin spewed was the same crap everyone else was fed. The admin just repeated it. France, Germany, Spain, Great Britain, China, Russia and the list goes on all bought into the same crap without the administrations help. So you can call the Prez dishonest, but you are being dishonest yourself when you say that. Google "George Tenet" "Slam Dunk" for several examples. And then ask yourself, when the director of the CIA tells the president that we are in danger, do you want a president who will act or one who will take a poll to see which way the wind is blowing? Once the war starts, do you want someone who will finish the job, or someone who will abandon it to turn into another Afghanistan?
The World Health Organization has nothing to do with this.
You don't even know who your enemy is. Stop trying to pretend you're fighting a "war"!
Seriously, if we can have a "War on Poverty" and a "War on Drugs", we can have a war on terror. If you call it a crime, there's not a damn thing we can do about it. While boats are headed for the Cole, did you expect the Navy to call the NYPD? While a truck bomb is barreling towards an embassy, do you call the local Nambian police force? Fuck NO! You call the fucking Marines! Policeman don't blow up training bases and overthrow terror supporting regimes such as the Taliban.
#1. If you start a war, you send your kids to the frontlines of whatever country you are attacking.
I served so the Bush twins wouldn't have to. I'll gladly donate my service to them. That's why it's called a Volunteer Force. No one is in Iraq that doesn't want to be. If they wanted out, all they have to do is make a pass at their commanding officer (provided their commanding officer is the same sex they are)
#2. Your kid stays there till your term is over.
Did that... served in the MidEast under two administrations.
#3. You cannot own any companies or be a shareholder of any.
Their money is in a blind trust. They don't know where their money is. Besides, if they had to put their money into common interest baring accounts, they would get blasted everytime the interest rates went up. Or would you prefer that they just keep all their money under the mattress in the Lincoln bedroom?
Like it or not, the only reason we have anything to fear from Islamic terrorists is because we've spent decades interfering with their politics. You can't fight an idea, but you can arrange things so that people don't have any motive to blow themselves up.
What has Indesia done? How are they interfering in Islamic politics?
Slashdot Mirror
It states: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.".
A terrorism suspect qualifies as the exemption far as I'm concerned. Now if they start calling drug dealers or jay walkers "terrorism suspects", then I'm with you. As of now, I have neither seen nor heard of that happening.
We are fully aware that people like you (the bad people) are out there trying take away our liberties for the smallest and most false sense of security. Thats why we applaud this. Its a victory against you bad people. Don't worry we know you exist!
Just curious. What liberties have you lost due to anti-terror legislation in whatever country you are living in?
I ask because I keep hearing about how the US has become a police state. Well, I'm in the US and as far as I can tell, this new Bush police state looks exactly as it did under Clinton, except the economy is better. I think it is only fair that I stand with my fellow Americans and suffer as they have, but before I do that, I need to know what it is I'm missing.
I'm "intolerant" because it's purely believing in fairy tales, no more, no less. It's a problem of philosophical judgement, not a problem of "not sharing my beliefs". It's you that have beliefs to share with other -I simply don't have beliefs of this kind.
A majority of scientists believe in global warming. Therefor, global warming is true. Those that disagree should lose their jobs and certifications because they are either stupid, ignorant or bribed.
A majority of people in the world believe in God (about 2/3, I believe). So, according to the rules we here at Slashdot have set up to deal with global warming deniers, that makes religion correct and those that disagree either stupid, ignorant or bribed.
So, what's your story?
(I know the logic is ridiculous, but, hey, if it's good for global warming, then it's gotta be good for religion!)
Back on topic... if we had enforced ratings on games, game buyers could go tell these people where to stick their WiiMote since kids could not buy any of the "violent or sexually related games". As to the Wii having the Internet browser and the Internet being violence and porn ridden... well, take that up with the DOD!
These days it doesn't get cold enough to kill them so they are just laying waste to huge swaths of the forest. =(
I know it is offtopic, but the same thing was happening in East Texas. The pine beetle was devastating the forests there. However, a control method was found that stopped the problem cold. Whenever you found a tree that was infected, you cut the tree down. Unfortunately, the Clinton administration banned cutting down tree on national forests to prevent logging. While his intentions were well meaning, it ended up destroying forests. Like in the west where forest fires had no breaks to stop them, the pine beetle wiped out many national forests in East Texas. It was almost humorous to be driving along and see an empty field surrounded by wooded areas. I asked my uncle what happened and he told that the clear area was a national land while the area around it was privately owned. The private owners would spot the infected trees and cut them down, but since that was illegal in the national forest, the whole plot was wiped out.
Crap, wait, I've confused something there. When did Hezbollah attack us, again?
Marine barracks, Beirut, 1983.
Before you start yammering about 'killing civilians', about 1100 Lebanese were killed, at least half of them civilians, and just 43 Israeli civilians were killed. And, just in case you were living in a box, Israel got seriously critizied by, well, the entire world for their indescrimate targeting of basically everything. Civilians, civilian infastructure, the Lebonese Army that was trying stop Hezbollah, and even Mexico at one point. (Okay, I made that last one up.)
I saw the videos of rockets being launched from apartment complexes and elementary schools. However, the apartments and schools were not the targets of the retaliatory strikes, the launchers were. So, I agree that many civilians were killed, more on the Lebanese side than the Israeli. However, I blame Hezbolla for the Lebanese deaths since they used the civilians as human shields, and I blame Hezbolla for the Israeli civilian deaths since they INTENTIONALLY TARGETED CIVILIANS, which is something Israel never did.
That's not to say Hezbollah is blameless, their idiotic soldier-kidnapping stunts caused the war,
Were those soldiers ever released? It's funny how Israel will decide that the cost in civilian casualties and world-wide condemnation had grown too much to continue the attacks. Hesbolla still has not released those soldiers to the best of my knowledge, which tells me that the costs to their own civilians is minuscule to the benefit of holding those soldiers. Yet, somehow, Israel is the bad guy and Hezbollah is simply "not blameless".
modern science has benefited humanity in so many ways, yet people deny it when it goes against their opinions/politics.
Exactly! I couldn't agree more. Of course, it also needs to be said every time an article comes up where a scientist says something against the group-think, like "Global Warming is not man-made".
While it is OK to voice your opinion, I don't think it is OK to question the ethics of the scientists involved.
So who is right (metaphorically speaking?), or what has changed since the first article was written?"
Who was paying for it.
Iran, after all, not only hasn't ever attacked us, it hasn't attacked anyone for as long as the US has existed, nor have they ever threatened us. (Perhaps you have confused us with Israel?)
Uh, let's see. Embassies are considered sovereign territory, right? In the 1970's, didn't Iran capture and hold Americans from our embassy over there? I think that pretty much proves that YES, IRAN HAS ATTACKED US AND YES, THEY HAVE ATTACKED SOMEONE. Granted, it was a long time ago, but it does invalidate your point. I assume you had forgotten about it or never knew that it happened, otherwise, you are fucking liar.
Of course there are all the Iranian made weapons we are finding all over Iraq. But I'm sure you think those were planted by the NSA, CIA, FBI or Bush himself. Maybe that's what Rice was doing while she was visiting Iraq recently
And finally, let us not forget Iran supplying Hesbolla with thousands of missiles, missiles that are made with ball bearings all along the casing so when they hit, they will shred anyone near by. Of course, these missiles were both designed for and targeted at civilians, with the intention of causing as much terror on the civilian population as possible and to kill or injure as many men, women and children as possible.
Yeah, those Iranians are fucking saints. I see no reason why they shouldn't have a nuclear weapon. I mean, what's the worst that can happen?
As far as England goes. You're right. If you can show me a Red-Coat that was alive in 1861, I'll gladly shoot his ass for messing with the US!
"Jerusalem must/will vanish from the pages of time"/"Jerusalem must/will be wiped off the map"
To-MAY-to/To-MAH-to
By God you're right. From your own source,Would a more accurate translation be "Cease to exist"? Phew, I guess we can relax now. What is Israel so worked up over? I mean, Iran is just suggesting that Israel must vanish from the page of time. What's the big deal?
"Wiped off the map", "must vanish from the page of time"... To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to....
I've occasionally thought it would be a good idea to wipe Israel off the map, or more to the point, relocate it. Israel is the Israeli people. These generations of fighting are over a patch of dirt. Let's relocate all of human trappings in the 7800 square miles of the Nation of Israel, to say Texas. (262,000 square miles). What is that cost compared to all of our military expenditures in the Middle East, directly caused by our support of Israel.
Great idea. Better yet, since Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a UN mandate, how about we move everyone else? Where to you live? How 'bout we move you and all your people to Texas?
Don't get me wrong, as a Texan, I'd be happy to see all the Israelis move here. They'd be welcomed, just as the Katrina evacuees were welcomed.
Oh, yea, let's not not forget; the US also mistranslates Arabic to meet it's own goals of regime change. Just like it did with spanish and the 'communist threat' from south America in the 80's.
I had no idea that America was the only country with the ability translate Arabic. Maybe some other country should learn so they could set the record straight.
How about Mr Bush's pledge to "change the Iraqi regime"?
Let's see... Change Regime, free elections and equal protection under the law is the same as "Wiping them off the map". Are you fuckin kidding me!!??! Can you be so narrow minded that you believe the shit that you type? Gee, and here I though "Wipe off the map" meant killing all those getting "wiped off". Only if they had been clearer and said something like, "drive the Israelis into the sea" then we may have some clue as to their true intentions.
Is it humanly possible for you to be against anyone the Bush administration is also against? Are you so blinded by your hatred of Bush (because your guy lost, I guess) that you think an Islamic controlled country with Sharia law is preferable to life under Bush?
You mean like Osama Bin Laden, a terrorist in the 1980s who was going to take down the soviet-sponsored Afghan gov't?
If you implying that the US supported Bin Laden in the '80's? The I would have to imply that you are wrong.
True, the US did support the Moujahadin in the 80's, or at least we helped them knock down a few Russian helicoptors, but we did not support Al Qaeda nor Bin Laden. The people we supported were the same groups that helped us overthrow the Taliban.
Or, would you have had us sit by silently while the Russians slaughtered Afghanis by the thousands?
If Hezbollah or Hamas got an ICBM that could reach the USA, then I'd be concerned. But they don't. They can't even reach Europe right now.
Uh, if Iran just sent a satellite into orbit, then Hezbollah has the ability to strike anywhere in the world. All Iran has to do is conveniently leave the control room unguarded one day and... oops, someone launched something.
More likely, these groups won't need an ICBM. All they would need to do is make a phone call to someone in the US and tell them how they are going to smuggle the bomb in, what their orders are and how to carry them out. (You know, since we can't listen in on the phone call and all)
Probably because Iran ignores the Geneva Conventions with regard to prisoners...no..US does that too...
If ignorance is bliss, you must be in ecstasy! The Geneva convention does not apply to non-uniformed combatants. So, now that you know that fact, can you tell me how the US is ignoring the Geneva conventions?
Probably because Iran makes veiled threats to use Nuclear weapons if diplomatic demands are not met...no...US does that too...
Really? When? I have never heard a US President threaten to nuke anyone. Unless, of course, you use your "re-written" history books.
I guess the bottom line is that the US does not actively and intentionally support the targeting and slaughter of civilians. Unfortunately, it looks like you do.
And the general public still won't give a damn.
No, but if enough companies sue M$ and Ballmer personally, it will make headlines. Enough of the bullshit and blackmail. Put up or sit down.
(obviously NAL)
Ignorantly accusing a veteran of bragging for mentioning that he is a veteran = time + cost of Internet connection
Completely disregarding the merits of a post and replying with insults = worthless
Either everyone honestly believed there were WMD, or you heard the WMD deniers loud and clear. Not both.
Good catch. How about every world government believed their were stockpiles of WMD's based on their intel services. However, at least in our own gov't and population, there were those that refused to believe. Compare it to the Global Warming debate. Many slashdotters will say that everyone knows that it is man made, even though there are those that disagree.
And, while I am the last person to defend Saddam Hussein's human rights record, it is worth pointing out that the US govt carefully studied the effects of destroying Iraq's water treatment plants (thousands dead, mostly children, from polluted water sources), then went in and destroyed them in the Gulf War. (http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0401c.asp) That is responsible in large part for the dead children - the direct, premeditated actions of the government you're defending.
True, but Hussein could have rebuilt and maintained the water plants simply by "dry-docking" a few palaces. He chose not to. Besides the oil-4-food program provided funds for clean water. Corruption from Iraq and the UN bled those funds off.
When it is all said and done, what makes up my mind is Russia telling the US that its Intel is reporting that Iraq was planning a US attack. Given the current intel on Iraqi WMD's, that would make 9-11 look like gang-related drive-by! I'd rather have a Prez that would act on that info than try to protect his political career and legacy.
Have you ever even been in a combat situation like what's going on in Iraq? Have you been in that situation for a year or more at a time?
Nope. Signed up for it but served during a peaceful period.
We were lied to in order to start the war. They kept changing their story on why we invaded.
Bullshit! Everyone honestly and truly believed that Iraq had WMD's... well most everyone, just like most everyone believes in global warming. The administration didn't keep changing the reasons for invading Iraq, the presented a shitload of them and what stuck was the WMD's. That's all the press reported. The conveniently left out the half million dead children (according to UNICEF, anyway), the mass graves, the torture chambers (REAL torture, not cheerleader pyramids).
They lied about how long it would take, how much it would cost, and how difficult it would be.
You mean how Clinton lied about how long US soldiers were to be in Bosnia. I remember hearing "Christmas of this year". BTW, servicemen are still in Bosnia, and Japan, and Germany, and Panama, and Korea... need I go on. No one knows how long a war will take. Besides, the Iraqi regime was overthrown in a couple of days. Since then, we've been cleaning up.
They did everything they could to silence those that disagreed with them.
So it's OK to silence Global Warming deniers, but not WMD deniers? Actually, if they were silenced, they must have gotten their message out telepathically, because I heard it.
The ones that said we needed a lot more troops
The same ones that say we don't need more troops now? It's funny how fast they change their tune when it is no longer counter to the President. Which proves my point that these guys would take down America if it was the only way to take down GWB. They care more about their own political careers than they do about the country or ethics. (See my SIG for an example). NOW CAN I QUESTION THEIR PATRIOTISM?
Mostly I wish people hadn't been stupid enough to believe the crap that the administration was spewing all the way up to and throughout the war. It's fucking sad.
The crap the admin spewed was the same crap everyone else was fed. The admin just repeated it. France, Germany, Spain, Great Britain, China, Russia and the list goes on all bought into the same crap without the administrations help. So you can call the Prez dishonest, but you are being dishonest yourself when you say that. Google "George Tenet" "Slam Dunk" for several examples. And then ask yourself, when the director of the CIA tells the president that we are in danger, do you want a president who will act or one who will take a poll to see which way the wind is blowing? Once the war starts, do you want someone who will finish the job, or someone who will abandon it to turn into another Afghanistan?
Against WHO, God damn it?
The World Health Organization has nothing to do with this.
You don't even know who your enemy is. Stop trying to pretend you're fighting a "war"!
Seriously, if we can have a "War on Poverty" and a "War on Drugs", we can have a war on terror. If you call it a crime, there's not a damn thing we can do about it. While boats are headed for the Cole, did you expect the Navy to call the NYPD? While a truck bomb is barreling towards an embassy, do you call the local Nambian police force? Fuck NO! You call the fucking Marines! Policeman don't blow up training bases and overthrow terror supporting regimes such as the Taliban.
Terrorism is a global problem. Police are local.
#1. If you start a war, you send your kids to the frontlines of whatever country you are attacking.
I served so the Bush twins wouldn't have to. I'll gladly donate my service to them. That's why it's called a Volunteer Force. No one is in Iraq that doesn't want to be. If they wanted out, all they have to do is make a pass at their commanding officer (provided their commanding officer is the same sex they are)
#2. Your kid stays there till your term is over.
Did that... served in the MidEast under two administrations.
#3. You cannot own any companies or be a shareholder of any.
Their money is in a blind trust. They don't know where their money is. Besides, if they had to put their money into common interest baring accounts, they would get blasted everytime the interest rates went up. Or would you prefer that they just keep all their money under the mattress in the Lincoln bedroom?
Random acts of violence are crimes, not military offensives, and should be treated as such.
Some say that attitude is what caused 9-11. I'm sorry, but jaywalking is a crime. 9-11, the Cole, and various embassy bombings are acts of war.
We did it with Iran (Shah/Khomeni), Panama (Noreiga), Iraq (Hussein), and Afganistan (Bin Laden),
Actually, bailing on Iran was Carter's doing. The other two you can "blame" Republicans, but notice how Panama and Afghanistan have been "fixed".
Actually, number 2 does not work too well either.
See Indonesia.
Like it or not, the only reason we have anything to fear from Islamic terrorists is because we've spent decades interfering with their politics. You can't fight an idea, but you can arrange things so that people don't have any motive to blow themselves up.
What has Indesia done? How are they interfering in Islamic politics?