You sad, sorry little man. Do they not teach civics in schools around here?

YUO = IGNORANT WARTARD TOOL!

I guess well see how much our folks over seas like all this anti war crap when they come back. My Uncles my Dad and My Granpas have all been to war, I would be over there too if it wasnt for a disability dammit! You dont sign up for the military for an easy check, People sign up to defend our way of life no matter where that may be. Another thing I would like to say to the left is that an attack on our president is an attack on the Country and billy blow job did nothing about the attack on herberts dad so yes its time for some payback! Why are you people so deadset against whats best for America.

You cant close your eyes click your heels and make the world a better place to live.

Just go form your own country and make pee wee herman your leader and see how long you stay free.

Screw the excuses Micro! (or should I say Rambo ) Grab that deer rifle you got, hop the next redeye for Kuwait city and lead the charge! Whatcha waitin' fer?

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, it's easy to be a hero from behind a computer screen, ain't it.

Turn off the Rush Limbaugh and give the keyboard back to your dad, okay? You can post again after you turn 13.

Gutz

Its possible, believe it or not, to be against the war but smart enough to step out of the way of an oncoming bulldozer.

Given what I have seen here though, I'm not convinced that it is possible to be 'for the war' and not result to either name calling or degradation of one kind or another. Kinda makes Chappy's point (as poorly made as it was) that much more relevant, doesn't it?

micropterus101

Just what are you basing "what's best for America" on? How in the world are we benefiting from disarming a weak country that can't harm us (IMO) and has no ties to terrorism? This conflict WILL have the result of increasing islamic fundamentalism. That WILL lead to increased problems. It could easily lead to myrtardom on a much larger scale than we've seen previously. This is not going to just be about whoopin' Iraqi's around a bit and going home with the trophy... There are much bigger consequences.

If we want to stamp out terrorists, we'd take out the Saudi's. Most 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. Money? From the Saudi's....Hmm... Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Indonesia.....All have ties to terroism......none are getting any aggression from the US.

I guess whatever takes our minds off the economy.....

And nope, not a lefty... I'm a libertarian, which is a little more to the right of the Republican party, in general.

Yeticaster,

Bless you for those fine words.

Is it your goal to see how many responses you can get from your ignorant ramblings? I'd say you did pretty good on this one.

With all those vets in your family I find it hard to believe you didn't learn anything from them. Surely they couldn't have come home bragging about the glorious experiences of battle.

For the record, most military DO NOT join simply to protect your right to sit behind your computer and rally to send them to war. Young kids join to make money for college; married kids join to provide for their family; mid-20 year olds join to re-pay college debts or because of the depressed job market; etc. I knew one girl that joined simply to go to Germany so she could buy a BMW cheap and have Uncle Sam ship it back free. I also knew one kid that joined simply because that girl joined (she was a little cutie).

However, I can probably count on one hand the number of kids that joined for purely patriotic reasons. There just aren't a whole lot of people out there begging to be bullet stoppers these days.

goharley,
sense when is the military a scholarship program or welfare program. If people joined just to make money they are sadly mistaken. Remember the army slogan "Its not a JOB its an adventure". And it sounds like the adventure may be starting soon.
When people join they have to know that there is always a chance of war and that was a
risk they were willing to take by signing up.

First of all, that is the Navy's slogan. The Army's used to be, "Be All You Can Be." Now it's "The Army of One."

I wouldn't say the military is a scholorship program, per se, but it has been offering those that qualify additional money for college as an incentive to join since the '80's. A young man/woman can now qualify for as much as $30,000 for college with a four year enlistment. Yes, that's why they join.

Welfare program? Not really, but with the pay we receive a lot are kept at welfare levels. Just as an aside; the largest pay raise the military received since the Vietnam era was when Clinton was in office.

Yes, the kids that join realize that there is a remote possibility that they may see war. But you'd be amazed at how effectively recruiters can downplay that possibility.

Pardon.
That was over the top.

Inflamatory posts such as Yeti's are bound to inflame some.

Nonetheless, If you chose to call me and those who belive that we are on the right course arrogant, traitorial fools, you are certain to get a reaction.

As to this point I have been unable to find any meaning to the word Wartard.

I'm definitely opposed to the war at this stage of the game. If G.W. had the goods on Iraq possessing weapons, then why wouldn't he be able to convince the heads of other nations? Truth is, he doesn't have any evidence or he'd show it to somebody.

Secondly, he has been unable to demonstrate a connection between Al Quida and Iraq. Just because he says theres a connection doesn't make one. He needs to prove the connection and once again, has not.

Thirdly, G.W. lacks to ability to unite people. His tough Texas-speak has polarized nations, not brought them together.

If Bush goes against the U.N., is he any different than Saddam?

Twig

Twig,

Why enact resolution 1441 if you don't intend on doing anything about it? It is clear that some nations (i.e. the French) will never pull the trigger regardless of the threats in front of their nose. I have thought like you up to this point, however, I think the US Gov has more classified materials than is being shared with the press. We are seeing more dem's and repulicans coming out and calling Sadham what he really is, a threat to his people and the rest of the world. The United Nations would debate this to eternity.

The other factor to this is how long is it going to take to accomplish the mission. I don't claim to have all the answers, but the fact is we're going to war and it is undisputable that this guy is a menace.

Well I voted for no War, not because I don't think the ******* doesn't have the weapons or won't use them, I'm pretty sure he will. I just prayed for no war.

There are plenty of warriors in U.S. uniforms that have enlisted, for pure love of country, and believe very strongly that they have a job to do that needs doing, and I salute them, and I pray for them.

I don't believe Pres. Bush is a bad person, and I don't believe he's a warmonger.

I also don't believe that Colin Powell would remain in the position he is in if he didn't believe the job needed doing.

Having said all of this I'm not sure that I agree with either of them (thats my right)

If this war will make it safer in the U.S. then we need to do it. My reservations, come when we start trying to convince the rest of the world that its good for THEM, or that we are doing the Iraqi people a FAVOR.

To hell with that!

If the Problem is Sadam Hussein and his death will make it safer here, then let's send in the guys that take care of that kind of business, (CIA, SEALS,SPECIAL FORCES) and let them do THEIR thing,.... tomorrow,.... next week,.... or two months from now. Why kill a bunch of OUR troops, and colateraly a bunch of iraqis, when we don't have to?

The world already knows were the baddest guys on the block.

We've got a lot of things that need to be done to make the U.S. a safer place, rather than goin to Iraq to kill a mosquito with a sledgehammer. IMHO

herm

How can you argue that we should just trust our leaders blindly, just with faith that they know more than we do? Sorry, that is just not good enough for me!!

What is the threat the French are unwilling to face? By most accounts, the Iraqi army is going to fall quickly. Saddam in "threatening" the world has only gone to war for territorial disputes- Gulf War and Iraq-Iran war. If we go after Saddam, where do we stop? I wouldn't even put him in my top 5 menacing world leaders! Yes, what he's done to the Kurdish people is horrible. What about what went down in Rwanda in the late 90's? Genocide of 100,000 people in days.... No US intervention.

How about Israel? Annan said today that they were flouting international law with their continued oppression and overt aggression towards palestinians. Are we just going after some law breakers, or should our #1 welfare recepient be in the axis of evil as well?

Failing to disarm is just not a reason to go to war. It is the fundamental right of every nation state to self-determination as per Wilson's 14 points speech (point 13). As a part of that, all nations have the right to be able to defend themselves. Even Japan which has given up its right to war has a "self defense force."

You know, it's sad when not even MEXICO will vote for the UN resolution... We knew France wasn't, but Mexico? Hmmm... interesting.

"undisputable that this guy is a menace."

Half of America (or more)is already disputing whether or not he is menace...what IS undisputable is that Dubya will lead this nation into war in spite of what his consituency, the American people, think.

This conversation is really moot because of that....whether you appreciate the connotation or not, Chappy's reference to Goering's remarks at Nuremburg look to me like the words most worth consideration...consider whether or not we are 'protecting freedom' (which is threatened how?) or settling a score. To say that we are going into this conflict to 'protect freedom' is a bigger lie than Bubba's.....and one with far greater consequences.

Hell, I am opposed too, but it's my job! It is a duty I swore to- Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

First, Iraq is not in compliance with the first resolution. Documented destruction of their MWD. Where is it if it hasn't been documented as destroyed? If it has been destroyed, why isn't it documented? Unfortunately the burden of proof is on us... I have a strong feeling we'll have an answer shortly.

Secondly, most Americans are using selective hearing on this issue. Connection issue? Yes, future connections. This, my friend, has been proven through numerous intelligence sources. To demonstrate this would be costly to security of the nation and the personnel collecting it!

Most unfortunate will the use of WMD on our troops this war. Then, the Administration will say, "Told you so." And that scares the sh!t out of me...

Downriggin'

DR,
That I told you so line is the one that scares the **** out of me too! Keep your head down friend.



I guess the thing that confuses me the most is why, we have to resort to ridiculing each other or trying to demean people who have a different perspective on this issue.

I don't think it makes one an idiot to post an opinion that differs from mine.

herm

G.W.B is on in 15 minutes. I guess we all owe it to ourselves to watch and listen. We all have brains, I feel we should use them. Let us see what's up according to George. Should be interesting to say the least.