Election: I am Ashamed to be an American

J. A. M. wrote:
We should be asking for God's forgiveness, not claiming he is on our side.

JAM

You should be using this NG for discussing coins. Not politics or
religion. THAT is what you should be doing.

Please move your thoughts on Iraq or any other US politics to a more
appropriate NG.

IM

"Shystev99" wrote in message
...
Gee, I thought that we invaded Iraq because Saddam was involved in the
9/11
attack and had WMD's ready to use on the US and Israel.


See, Here is a big part of the problem. You guys on the left keep bitching
and
moaning about Iraq when by your own words you have no idea why you are
bitching.
Nobody ever said Saddam was involved with 9/11, What they did argue was
that
Saddam had Ties to Al Queda and MAY have WMD. See this is where the left
likes
to distort the issue because you guys like to think Al Queda revolves
around
9/11.

Wrong.

Dick Cheney stated publicly on television, recorded for posterity, that
Saddam was involved in 9/11.

Prior to the election, 66% of people who stated that they were going to vote
for Bush also stated they believed that Saddam was involved in 9/11.


Global intelligence from multiple sources suggested that Saddam had or was
creating WMD, Bill Clinton and John Kerry both saw this evidence and
agreed
something had to be done. The difference with Bill Clinton and John Kerry
is
neither one of them would have ever done it because neither one of them
can
wipe their own ass without first taking a poll to see if we the voting
public
approved first. Their popularity, reputations and approval ratings to them
are
MUCH MORE IMPORTANT than the national security of this country.
Saddam was a known liar and known to want to and was building WMD in the
past,
Before the 1991 Gulf war our intelligence suggested he was 3 years away
from
completion of a Nuclear bomb. After the war we found out it wasn't 3 years
but
6 months from completion. This is all documented.

Your rant about Clinton and Kerry is without merit, spawned by your own
political world view. While intelligence worldwide and popular belief
stated that Saddam had or was working on WMD, that alone is not
justification to invade. One cannot be arrested for mearly contemplating a
crime, or even say, taking a gun into a bank with the intention to rob the
bank. If a person did take a gun into a bank but determined not to commit
the robbery, no crime has been committed.

It is the same with states. To act pre-emptively based on the statement
that weapons are at hand and may be used would in turn justify a pre-emptive
attack on the United States because we have the largest cache of WMD in the
world.


Now with that knowledge I ask you a simple question, When the evidence and
intelligence from the late 90's up to 2003 leading up to this war
suggested he
may be building WMD and was known to have his leadership meeting with
Al-Queda
operatives what was Bush honestly supposed to do? Was he supposed to sit
around
with his thumb up his ass and hope to hell the intel from NUMEROUS nations
and
sources was wrong? Was he supposed to wait for another attack and
thousands, If
not hundreds of thousands bodybags for our fellow citizens? The left would
have
massacred him either way REGARDLESS of what decision he made. So you see
he
made the decision not to wait, not to cross his fingers and pray but to go
in
and stop the problem before it became fatal for our security.
That's something the extreme left will never understand though because
they
don't care about the facts, To them its about power and if the evidence
points
to something that may effect that power then SCREW the evidence. To them
leadership is about taking a poll to see what is popular, And just because
a
decision isn't popular doesn't mean it should be ignored.

That separates leaders like Bush from the little bitches like Clinton and
Kerry
who are more interested in kissing your ass as opposed to protecting it.

Again, your pithy comments are steeped in your own personal political
mythology, that being that the "Left" or "Liberals" don't care for the
people. Roosevelt was a liberal, so was LBJ. Both led us into wars to
protect "The American Way."

Consider this, Saddam, evil as he may have been, was keeping Al-Queda out of
Iraq. He may have had meetings with operatives, but Colin Powell is meeting
with Representatives of North Korea. This doesn't indicate an alliance is
being forged.

Saddam was keeping Iran, Syria, and Russia in check in the region. Removing
Saddam has created a power vacuum that we are currently unable to fill. The
goal of creating a friendly government in Iraq is to replace the void in
American presence in central Asia left by the Shah of Iran's removal
following the 1979 revolution. Oil would be secondary to the military
presence, but only by a slight margin.

On a personal note, I believe it is a mistake to speak of the private sector
and public sector in US socio-political realm. There is a private and
public realm that we all participate in. The private realm is my bank
account, the public realm is how my bank does business. The private realm
is how I worship, the public realm is the beliefs stated by a religious
institution. The private realm is my job, the public realm is how my
employer conducts his business. The private realm is what I do in my
bedroom, the public realm is how I live my public life.

The Democrats want to regulate the public realm and leave the private realm
private. Republicans want to regulate the private realm and leave the
public realm alone. Which makes you feel secure?

The Democrats want to regulate the public realm and leave the private realm
private. Republicans want to regulate the private realm and leave the
public realm alone. Which makes you feel secure?

Well, you asked! The Republicans, and apparently 51% of the voters. You are
entitled to your opinion and to voice it. Thats what makes this country so
great. However, seeing as how this is a COIN forum, I will that you, and ALL
posters would keep their political opinions on political pages.
Bush won, Kerry lost. Get over it. I am sick of hearing Kerry whiners and Bush
gloaters.

On 05 Nov 2004 04:36:59 GMT, (Bill Yates) wrote:

Bill Yates Rare Coins
Check my ebay listings

Not likely.


BLReed

To e-mail me, remove the obvious spam trap.
For collector coins and supplies at fair prices: http://tinyurl.com/pt9r
Cool things and Bust Coin Forum: http://www.byronreed.com

"Skip Waisner" wrote in message ...
Bill,

Let's first assume that you are correct, and that George Bush is directly
responsible for the deaths of 100,000 innocent Iraqis (which I would say is
probably a little high for civilian casualties, even for Liberal estimates).
Let's also assume now that Bush had never given the order to oust a ruthless
dictator, who, by the way, has killed more innocent Iraqis than any outside
force (American, Iranian, etc.). How long would it be before you posted to
this group saying "the madness has to stop, we have to do something about a
ruthless dictator who is killing his own people?" I hope that you would
eventually get to that point.

You seem to be missing the point. The reason we were going in to Iraq
was to dis-arm Sadam Husein of weapons of mass destruction and to rid
Iraq of all the al-Qeda training camps. Well whadya know, there
weren't no WMD and there weren't no links to al-Qeda. Can you say
"subterfuge"? Freeing the Iraqi's was the last thing on W's mind when
we went in to this quagmire. Kind of like when Bush Sr. didn't march
into Baghdad in '91. Sadam Husein was waving his ass in front of the
US and it ****ed W off. If you really believe that the poor suffering
people of Iraq needed the US military to rescue them then let me pose
this question to you: When are we going to rescue the poor oppressed
people of: The Sudan, Zimbabwe, Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, North
Korea, Myamar, Cuba, China, Iran, etc?

Keep in mind that very few people with millions of dollars give a rats
ass about the poor oppressed people unless those poor oppressed people
happen to be inhabiting a plot of land with valuable resources.

Iraq just happened to be a convienent enough of a excuse for
Haliburton to rape the treasury of the US. Dick Cheney ain't smiling
for no reason.

But I digress on this coin collecting group. When am I going to see
the new Keelboad nickles here? I mean I've seen 1 handshake nickle.
Who is hoarding them?

Andy

When are we going to rescue the poor oppressed
people of: The Sudan, Zimbabwe, Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, North
Korea, Myamar, Cuba, China, Iran, etc?

When they invade a neighboring country that is one of our allies? Taken one at
a time: Sudan-who knows? We might! Zimbabwe-and be accused that the only reason
we are there is to help white farmers and take their diamonds?
Turkmenistan-huh? Saudi Arabia-er, one of our allies, dontcha know. North
Korea-hmmm be careful for what you wish for, you might just get it. Myanmar-aka
Burma, I don't think so. Cuba-all they have to do is hold free elections and
diplomatic relations will be reinstated, even if they elect Castro, but they
have to be free elections. China- are you out of your mind? Iran-WMD? See North
Korea comment. Etc-Canada and Germany make good beer, I say we go there!

So, are you saying that removing Saddam was a bad thing? Although no WMD have
been found (except that artillery shell with nerve gas), didn't Saddam have the
capability and plans to create them? Hasn't he used them in the past? Nobody
except the press has said that there were connections between Iraq and
al-Qaeda, although their politicians did have meetings with with them.
You asked some good questions, now let me ask you a few. Are the Iraqis better
off now than they were 4 years ago? Even with civilian casualties due to the
insurgents, didn't Saddam purge his political and religious rivals? Didn't he
use WMD on the Kurds? Will they will be able to vote for the first time? Are
they are receiving better medical care and education than ever before? Will
their infrastructure will be rebuilt, much like the Marshall plan? Is the fact
that they are buying satellite dishes left and right and being able to see news
other than state sponsored al-Jazeera bad?

My personal opinion is that we should get out of Iraq as soon as possible, and
it will be possible when the nation is free. The insurgents are not helping
their own cause one bit. If they want the US out of their country, then they
should lay down their arms, hold a free election, and out go the troops! A free
Iraq is better than under a dictatorship or US occupation.

In article ,
says...
100,000 innocent Iraqi people have been murdered by George W Bush. We should
lower our heads in SHAME that the American people voted to give this criminal 4
more years. God Save America.
-----------
Bill Yates Rare Coins
Check my ebay listings
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...ems&userid=*by



As a former regular poster, who has recently tended to lurk
more (the long term regulars know why), let me say that this
doesn't belong here.

The election is over. Get a grip and deal with the results.
That's what democracy is all about. The electorate is always
right.

God Bless America!


--
I hope we can all be good neighbors online!

Nobody ever said Saddam was involved with 9/11

Yeah, it was just assumed. Go to Gallup.com. In March 2003 63 percent of
republicans believed that Saddam was *personally* involved in the 9/11
attacks. After a more than year, in October 2004, that number was down --
to 62 percent!

When people get all their news from Fox news and Tush Limbaugh, that's what
happens. There was a huge correlation between education and this belief.
Ignorance rules the Right.

--Keith



"Shystev99" wrote in message
...
Gee, I thought that we invaded Iraq because Saddam was involved in the
9/11
attack and had WMD's ready to use on the US and Israel.


See, Here is a big part of the problem. You guys on the left keep bitching
and
moaning about Iraq when by your own words you have no idea why you are
bitching.
Nobody ever said Saddam was involved with 9/11, What they did argue was
that
Saddam had Ties to Al Queda and MAY have WMD. See this is where the left
likes
to distort the issue because you guys like to think Al Queda revolves
around
9/11.
9/11 was simply 1 Al Queda operation within a larger group of murderers.
overall I suspect maybe 1/4 of 1% of Al Queda followers and Supporters
knew
about 9/11 beforehand. That doesn't make them any less guilty of being
part or
supporting a terrorist group.

Global intelligence from multiple sources suggested that Saddam had or was
creating WMD, Bill Clinton and John Kerry both saw this evidence and
agreed
something had to be done. The difference with Bill Clinton and John Kerry
is
neither one of them would have ever done it because neither one of them
can
wipe their own ass without first taking a poll to see if we the voting
public
approved first. Their popularity, reputations and approval ratings to them
are
MUCH MORE IMPORTANT than the national security of this country.
Saddam was a known liar and known to want to and was building WMD in the
past,
Before the 1991 Gulf war our intelligence suggested he was 3 years away
from
completion of a Nuclear bomb. After the war we found out it wasn't 3 years
but
6 months from completion. This is all documented.

Now with that knowledge I ask you a simple question, When the evidence and
intelligence from the late 90's up to 2003 leading up to this war
suggested he
may be building WMD and was known to have his leadership meeting with
Al-Queda
operatives what was Bush honestly supposed to do? Was he supposed to sit
around
with his thumb up his ass and hope to hell the intel from NUMEROUS nations
and
sources was wrong? Was he supposed to wait for another attack and
thousands, If
not hundreds of thousands bodybags for our fellow citizens? The left would
have
massacred him either way REGARDLESS of what decision he made. So you see
he
made the decision not to wait, not to cross his fingers and pray but to go
in
and stop the problem before it became fatal for our security.
That's something the extreme left will never understand though because
they
don't care about the facts, To them its about power and if the evidence
points
to something that may effect that power then SCREW the evidence. To them
leadership is about taking a poll to see what is popular, And just because
a
decision isn't popular doesn't mean it should be ignored.

That separates leaders like Bush from the little bitches like Clinton and
Kerry
who are more interested in kissing your ass as opposed to protecting it.
Steve

**** you. I fought in the Korean War. I was in the reserves in Vietnam. I
love this country, but I will not support this government when it has been
taken over by the PNAC crowd.


-----------
Bill Yates Rare Coins
Check my ebay listings
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...ems&userid=*by

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 09:47:38 -0500, Michael Azzam
wrote:

Bill Yates wrote:
100,000 innocent Iraqi people have been murdered by George W Bush. We should
lower our heads in SHAME that the American people voted to give this criminal 4
more years. God Save America.
-----------
Bill Yates Rare Coins
Check my ebay listings
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...ems&userid=*by

Move to canada, let the door hit you on the way out. Oh yeah,
337,000 more jobs last month!

Right, tell the whole story about how many of these jobs went to folks
working 2 & 3 jobs to make ends meet!

Sanford