WMD was that really important anyway?

It seems that the war was sold to the public on the WMD facts. Just because we havent found them dosent mean they wernt there or are there now.

The fact is we liberated a counrty from an evil dictator.

In my opinion it was worth going over there if the only reason was to prove a point that if you dont do what we say we will make you by force.

Comon people what really matters is our safety and maintaining our way of life and with countrys like Iraq seeing that they can get away with things makes them get bolder and the U.S. get unsafe.

We took care of a problem and sent a messege to the rest. If they dont put their tails between there legs this administration will put them into submission one way or another to make sure America is safe.

Sometimes the only thing that hits home is an ARSWOOPIN and when these other Countrys that dont like us see the kind of ARSWOOPIN we can lay down they know they better do what we think is best or be prepared to get there ARS WOOPED. I think they realize now that they are dealing with Bush and not Clinton.

This president has guts and guts go along way. I am behind him 100%

The anti-war , anti-capitalism, anti-America crowd and the ACLU and like minded lawyers have tried to cripple this country by making the perpetrators the victims and the world of terrorism saw us as vulnerable which we were. I am glad we have an administration that can stand up to the badgering from the left and go after the sick vermin in the world who want to kill us all.

How about this. Truth, integrity, instilling trust in people.

I want to be sure you understand this, my son is in the military, was in Afganistan. My dad lost his hand in Korea, I was in the Air Force. I am NOT a dove. In fact I alway felt that war with Iraq was going to happen. But I wanted him to prove his reasons were more than rumors.

Let me ask you this. If it had been a Democrat in office telling you all of this an then going to war. Would you have supported him the way you are supporting Mr Bush?

The turth is the same no matter what party you belong to.

Well said RichG.

Your Damn right, it wouldnt matter who was in Office.

By the way I was a Marine for a while myself. Many of my fellow Marines that I served with were over there as well.

The sad truth is that the world isnt fair. There are people starving and in poverty. We have it good here and most governments hate us for that because the people in their countries want what we have but these governments wont let them have it.

Rich

Lots of times we tend to have different opinions on fish issues, but this time I stand with you 1000%!


Cowlitzfisherman

I dont believe for a second that we were lied to about the WMD. Sadam had lots of time to hide that stuff or smuggle it to other countries.

The biggest thing is that he couldnt account for it and that is enough threat in itself.

The thing that is different about Bush is that he makes our Military proud to serve. They do not question there service. They know that the President is behind them and they genuinally feel that he cares about them.

Bush has proven that the United States comes first and foremost above all.

For all the liberals out there the sad truth is your going to have to endure Bush untill 2008. Id be willing to wager that bush is going to get re ellected without a doubt!

Even though everyone dosent agree with his policies I truely believe bush has made most people proud to be an American agian. That is something we had lost as a whole with the prior administration.

If Bush had mentioned that Iraq was in the same shape that Germany was in during the Hitler movement then he would have had world support to fix Saddam.

However, if our intellegence is so poor that we have now given up the search for MDS's then we should be worried about our current administration being honest.

Did we do the right thing? In retrospect yes, but that still does not let the Bush admin off of the hook for perpetuating and/or exagerating the truth.

It wouldn't matter which president was in office, we just can't have a president deciding to create war whenever the thought comes to mind.

It is crazy how all the Democrats are squawking the same parrot-speak..and all you followers are chirping the same tune...OH WHERE ARE THE WMDs? Luckily I was relaxing and fishing all weekend and only got to see that pathetic Carl Levin for a minute or two on Meet The Press...they get this mantra going and it spreads like a disease. Pretty soon the faithful start in and now somehow, like magic, Bush made it all up and lied ...blah blah blah..what a lame bunch of BS...

With all the justifying out there, the "all muslims want christians dead", the
"evil dictator", the "they support terrorists", I had forgotten we were there to find WMD's.

So, they haven't found any, aye?

Bw,
I wish the deomocrat in office would of took the bull by the horns.Alot of innocent americans would still be enjoying happy birthdays in this wonderfull country.

Hay there Grandpa, I am NOT a Democrat. I am just as hard on them. I have a real problem with any one who just votes a straight party ticket. There is a person where I work that hated everything that Bob Dole said I meen every time he opened his mouth this guy hated what he had to say. But he still voted for him because of his party. To me that is nothing short of wasting your vote.

I can still recall this scene, Adlea Stevenson (sp) sitting in front of some enlarged pictures at the UN security counsul.

You see this, this is Cuba, you see this, this is Soviet misseles in Cuba.

And this was done when we did NOT have hands down the BEST military in the world. It took a lot of nerve to tip our hand like that. But the whole country knew what the story was.

And that is what I am talking about. I was more that willing to go along with what Pres Bush had to say. All he had to do was convince me.

Somebody shoot me please, I have this masochistic bent to attempt to engage folks in meaningful debate. Ah well, one convert at a time. Some questions for Rich (who I usually agree with on fishing issues), CFM, Grandpa, & others.

1. Is it important that Tony Blair is dying a slow death over in Britain because his constituents are holding him to account for the WMD issue?

2. Does it matter at all that GW's and by extension the US' credibility suffers? This time we virtually went it alone, will it matter if next time (Iran, Syria, N. Korea) we go it totally alone?

3. I thought GW was all about reestablishing integrity in the White House or are we just debating what the definition of is is?

4. Sadaam Hussein did account for the WMD (at least in his mind). He said he had none and then provided a mountain of documentation about their destruction. We chose not to believe him.

5. I thought "revisionist history" was supposed to be only practiced by the left. Can any of you honestly say that the Administration was not selling this war as being vital for the security of the US because of Sadaam's WMD?

My concern is integrity and credibility. Once again, is it good that Hussein is out of power? Absolutely!! Can we all have perfect 20-20 hindsight? Why not, this is America!! But, on a deeper level I am concerned about the Machievellian nature of this Administration. It's an old arguement - Does the end justify the means? If you gain what you want at the expense of your credibility - have you gained anything at all?

Rich G

Way to go Richie! I served under Regan and Bush Sr. It is good to see that those on active duty can once again hold their head high and be proud to serve in the US Armed Forces. I felt sorry for guys still in under Clinton. Let's see, his war was what. Oh yea, Haiti. Man, talk about disgraceful! Glad I wasn't there for that one!!!

So, are you finding any fishies over there??

Well said Marsha, don't really like the fat part though.

Marsha, I agree with you in regards to the real reasons that GW fought this war. I think that there is one more (and one that I would agree with BTW) of saying to the terrorists, "We are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore". The question that I am asking is not necessarily germane to the American voters. I believe that the fact that we won this war (although with 43 dead after the military action was over, I'm not certain that we can declare it totally won) is enough for the voter. I am truly concerned about our standing in the world community. We can go it alone and we can do that for some time into the future - But (and it is a big but), history has taught us that there is only one inevetable result from being the world's superpower. Eventually, you aren't the superpower anymore. And unfortunately, when that time comes, is when the chickens come home to roost.

Maybe I'm too idealistic, certainly I've been accused of being naieve - but I do believe that there is an inherent good in doing the right thing. Being honest, having your word mean something, thinking through issues logically and long-term are all values that I prize highly.

I agree with you about the political parties, I have no idea which party you call yours but it really doesn't matter. They all have a different agenda than mine. They want to win and retain power, I want them to do the right thing. Very rarely do the stars align and both desires will coexist. Oh well - just another example of perfection not occuring here on this planet. But I am hopeful about the next place I call home.

Now, I really am getting pretty deep.

Steve, I have always been proud of what I did and my dad and son. No matter who is the pres, our military should always hold there heads high. We owe them everything....

Well spoken eddie You are not as lonely as you may think

Marsha,

One point of clarification, who are "these people"? Are you talking about the Governments of so-called Islamic republics, are you talking about the populations, or are we talking the sum total of 1 Billion Muslims throughout the world? This is not a rhetorical question, I truly am interested in understanding your perspective.

Excellent question Rich.

Here is my take...

No, it does not matter. War with Iraq was as predictable as the sunrise. It would have happened regardless of how it was sold to the American public the rest of the world because of 9/11. Whether or not they had WMD was just an attempt to galvanize the international community into a coalition. Seems the rest of the world did not buy into that line...

If the USA is looking to improve its 'security' I submit to you that alienating the UN, NATO and arab countries is not a very wise place to start.

Just removing a brutal dictator from power is all the justification we need for our soldiers and innocent civilians to kill and be killed? Ok...when do we go get Kim Jong Il?? ...after all, isn't he starving millions of his own people to death to feed his army? Better yet, lets start knocking off the problem countries (we'll start with the middle east and then work our way downto the commies and third world countries) until the whole world is Democratic...does anyone see the parallels between communist pathos and the direction of 'New American Foreign Policy'?

I seem to recall that diplomacy HAS worked in the past to bring down 'brutal' regimes, apartheid being one succes that comes to mind.

Lasting Peace has never and will never occur by the use of force.

1. If a Democrat was in office not word one would be said about WMDs if the roles were reversed, from the left

2. If an election were near as is now and #1 applied(see above) the Republicans would be doing the same thing.

3. Since an election is fast approaching, the Democrat talking points are flying through cyberspace and corralling the naive and the impressionables.

4. The WMDs are a non-issue. (see RES. 1441) and all subsequent non-compliance of the U.N. sanctions, dis-armament, accounting of the WMDs that he did have or may still. And violations of human rights.(where is Amnesty Intl ?)

5. Speaking of rights groups, why does the A.C.L.U back all Constitutional amendments other than the 2nd? Just a point to ponder.

6. IMHO

Marsha,

Thanks for the clarification. What percentage do you believe that those people account for in the Muslim world? This really isn't a smarta** question, I have not been able to get to that number as yet. I vacillate between believing that most people in the world care about food, shelter, and the welfare of their kids; or that most really live their life according to a political or religious dogma. I would be interested in your thoughts.

What matters is that in the court of world opinion, President Bush has perjured his office.
However, in that venue, nobody is held accountable - although as Americans we should be profoundly concerned that we've been purposely and repeatedly lied to.

For a view from a legal viewpoint - is lying to create a pretext for war an impeachable offense? - check out this law site:

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html

BW-Touche, always be proud to serve. There are some actions that don't always make sense militarily, and even though you do your job, you know that there is no logical reason for it and the one in command has his head up his rectal cavity. Still, you do your job to the best of your ability and hold your head high. From what I remember, the marines on the ground were not given ammo for their weapons in Haiti just so we didn't shoot someone and cause an uprising. It is silly to use our military might, but then tie their hands behind their back. That's what I meant by an embarrasment. Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers!

Not to worry, no problem here. There are not too many places in the world where you can count on the military doing there best to carry out what the politicians want not matter if they agree with it or not.

Thata boy Richie. It's nice to see your name on the board again. Especially posting what you did.

Gary, Pretty fascinating article. Hard to paint John Dean as a lefty - actually pretty hard to paint him as anything, which in my mind lends credence to his article. Although he did cite the "Iraq swims on a sea of Oil" statement and I have yet to determine if that is true at all. Personally, I sincerely hope that we find internationally verifiable evidence of the WMD. If not, I can see some radical Democrat (McDermott comes to mind) introducing Articles of Impeachment as we prepare for the 2004 election. Make no mistake about it, there are plenty of Democrats who are very steamed about the Clinton impeachment. Steamed enough to do the same to GW? I hope not, I don't think this country would do well with a second impeachment within 6 years.

Aunty, I wish I knew the answer to my original question as well. I would love to know the size of our enemy. It will be interesting to see the form and outcome of the Iraqi democratic Government. Clearly, that offers the best hope for long-term stability in the Arab world and the best possible outcome of our war with Iraq.

You guys are really on a roll...You should all get together and start a cable radio show...
" We Hate Bush All The Time Radio" No matter what he does we hate it! 24/7...........There is something to be said for a dictatorship sometimes...You would all be taken to the showers...

Spoken in true Nazi fashion.

Remember, he gassed the old and infirm to...you'd be next.

Grandpa,

Is something interferring with your reading comprehension? Most of the posts in this thread are of a like mind, supporting the war and its outcome thus far, despite the lack of WMD evidence. I've observed that you have a beef with everything "liberal", but you just appear to have your nose out of joint with respect to this thread.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Careful Salmo, you made what could have been construed as drug reference when you said 'joint'...

....expect to be trolled with Cheech and Chong references for the rest of your BB life...

So I guess the larger issue is, "Should we believe the government, regardless of who is in office?" Do they have a good track record? What about the government concealing chemical weapons tests in the Utah in the 70's? What about vietnam and agent orange? The list could go on foreverer but somehow we're being asked to really believe this one...So ask yourself again, "Do you believe what the government says?" Or do you only believe them when it comes to this last issue with Iraq?

Rich G,
You've managed to take the most repeated political topic in the news, paste it to a fishing forum, and get the emotional response anyone could predict. All emotion, little understanding of true politics, and most importantly, no piscatorial content. You might also either want to type slower, use spell check, or have a dictionary by your side when trying to start a thread that has no significance to the pursuit of fish. WMD, please, let me here about the springers in the Sol Duc!

Did you read the title of the thread? Did you notice it wasn't related to fishing? Why did you read it if you are here to just read about fishing?

...looks to me like you'd rather troll than post your actual opinion.

Why don't you go find a nice, comfortable 'boondoggin the cowlitz' thread where you can post your opinion on such important things as: 'One cheater or two?' or 'bait size for boondoggin'?

Why don't you go find a nice, comfortable 'boondoggin the cowlitz' thread where you can post your opinion on such important things as: 'One cheater or two?' or 'bait size for boondoggin'? Well now, that's real nice, SteelH2Ohead.

You come onto a fishing BB and RIDICULE people because they want to talk about fishing.

There are 100's of political argument BB sites out there. Why don't YOU pack up your little show and move to one of them?

While you're at it, you can find a nice devil worship site where your avatar will be appreciated.

BTW, good post, Bulldog!

Lay off the Avatar.

It's cool........and WHERE did you get the devil-worship thing?

I was wondering where the h20 of the past was hiding..... .....welcome back!

I never fish.

I commit animal sacrifices 24/7.

Oh...and post on the internet alot the rest of the time....

I guess that I'm not smart enough to understand the meaning of that avatar or why someone would choose it for a fishing BB.

To me it looks like some sort of creepy-evil-death deal.

And, coincidentally......it is. But what's to get all wound up about?

While I do find that skull thing a little hard on the eyes, please be assured that I am not in the least bit wound-up.

But as long as we're on the subject, what is this: \m/ ?

Are we being mooned?

Well, I'm sure h2o could really freak you out by putting HIS picture in the avatar.

\m/ is what you see everyone's hand doing at a rock concert.

In Hawaii, that hand gesture always meant: "hang loose".

Is that what the kids at the concerts are trying to communicate? I wonder if they even know?

(talk about nfr)

Now that we've totally hijacked Rich's thread, the two gestures are different.

The thumb and pinkie are 'shaka' but most people associate it with the tourist t-shirts that say 'Hang Loose'.

The forefinger and pinkie are many things, including 'hook 'em horns' Does anyone else find it odd that more Texans don't find fault with 'sign of the devil' being flashed at college football games?

Ohh...time for another thread......

I thought it was an "M" with oars -

Yeah, the Avatar is better than an actual picture. :p And it's not that good.

The World is a better place without Saddam Hussien!

I agree completey, as do the majority of Americans, I'm sure. However, that isn't reason enough for killing over 3,200 innocent Iraqi civilians.

And before anyone mentions "collateral damage," remember, that is exactly how bin Laden views those that died in New York. Let's not lower ourselves to that level, please.

What disturbs me most is not that the Bush regime keeps changing its stated mission and goals to fit the current situation, but that a large portion of the population is quietly accepting it like they have no choice. Those that do have questions about the integrity of the administration are instantly branded as unpatriotic. That's absurd. If we never questioned those in authority we'd still be flying the Union Jack. Of course the beer would probably be better.

I remember some of Bush's campaign speeches about bringing the nation back together and increasing the esprit de corps of the American people, but I haven't seen the American people this divided in over 30 years.

<sigh>

Not trying to hijack (or rehijack) the thread from symbols but I wonder if the world is truly free of Sadaam Hussein. Kinda like WMD, just can't seem to find him.

Regime change, starts at home!

The nation is divided alright...about 70/30..worst in 30 years if you are part of that 30% or less but pretty united if you happen to be part of the 70%. By the way, the tax cut kicks in soon so you 30%ers get those envelopes and stamps fired up to send it back to Uncle Sam...come one now be consistent atleast.

Spin...you mean like '70/30'?

Good luck next November, I hope the Bush campaign is as equally over-confident.

BTW...

Boston Globe

...and...

Atlanta Journal Constitution

These are AP stories, the deaths were recorded by Iraqi hospitals, the death toll was surely higher.

I heard 58% approvel on the home front this today. Sounds like he's slipping a little

3200??? .....Needs of the many compared to the few??

How many innocent people have already been killed by that worthless pig?? Do you people seem to forget that? All you seem to want to do is find any fault that you can with America trying to get rid of a cancer! You same people seem to put sadam on some type of pedestal! How about the BIG picture?? Do you seem to forget all of those that have already died and lived in fear? It seems that you all think that they are worse off now than they were with Sadam running the country!!

I try to keep out of these 'debates' because I found it to be worthless talking to people with their heads buried so deep into the sand. I really am trying to understand what some of your points are? Where are the WMD's? Who gives a Sh!t. The only reason that the WMD's even came up was to try to appease those that you will never appease. Remember 1141? Our current leadership saw a terrible wrong in this world and apparently he was the only one with the cahonas big enough to do something about it!!! I am proud of how we handled the situation. I could really care less if we fine those weapons now. Is there really any doubt that they were there? Is there any doubt about the basic lack of regard for human life that dictator gave to his own people whom he should have been looking out for the most?

Get those daisies ( or pansies ) out from behind your ears because they seem to be blocking and distorting your reality. Once again, the world is a little better today than it was just a few short weeks ago! And that is the what REALLY matters!!

Hail to the Chief!



H20.. Sure you didn't get that from biased?

"The AP excluded all counts done by hospitals whose written records did not distinguish between civilian and military dead, which means hundreds, possibly thousands, of victims in Iraq's largest cities and most intense battles weren't reflected in the count"

Sounds more like "Sig Heil" to me. Talk about someone with their head in the sand.

Now that hurt

Point made, thank you...

Seems the ends justify the means crowd is getting a bit defensive. Isn't "patriotism" squashing dissent (reason) anymore? I'm sure this same crowd bashed Clinton up and down for lying. Why is lying OK now? Why was knowingly submitting forged documents to the UN OK? Pure bias.

where was your great brave president during the vietnam war? thats right awol drunk and snorting coke off some chicks butt. funny how brave an armchair quarterback he and you are. btw i did my 3 years service b 4/61 ada if it flies it dies.

He received a bachelor's degree from Yale University in 1968, then served as an F-102 fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard.

Clinton...Never served. Hid out in Englad doing bong hits

Can't really say which is better, kinda funny they call it dope though..wonder why??

bios


YNOT. Your AIT was about 3days right private?? Load, realaod. 50% pass rate? Don't ASSume LEG..

Aco 1st MI BN (AE)
Kco 159th AVN REGT DET. (82nd AB DIV)

Clinton lying = maybe some dead sperm cells

Bush lying = 130+ dead American soldiers and counting

Harley, Pull your head out just for a second, please.


After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000, President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

Perhaps if Clinton had kept his promises, over 3,000 people would be alive today.


In 1996 the government of Sudan had Osama bin Laden in their custody and offered to hand him over to the United States. Bill Clinton and his liberal cohorts elected not to take the Sudanese up on their offer. Why? Because they couldn't figure out a legal means of trying him! But Clinton sure knew how to argue the meaning of is!


Everything was more important than fighting terrorism. Political correctness, civil liberties concerns, fear of offending the administration's supporters, Janet Reno's objections, considerations of cost, worries about racial profiling and, in the second term, surviving impeachment, all came before fighting terrorism.
- Dick Morris, New York Post, Jan. 2, 2002


This is a soul so small God Himself cannot perceive it without a magnifying glass.
- Deb Weiss, Drudge Report, October 16, 2001


Bubba

PS Harley, Ynot... How's Billarys new book?

"Clinton...Never served. Hid out in Englad doing bong hits"

I guess if you consider hiding out in Texas doing rails 'serving', you've got us there....

LOL

Pmartin-

You really need to take those blinders off. Of course you may get out of step, then.

Just for the record Clinton did try to get Bin Ladin. Every once in a while you would hear about a cruse missile launched into Afganistan or someplace else. He wanted to get it done with limited risk to our military.

But what I find strange is how everybody thinks thier party (which ever it is) has some kind of monapoly on the truth.

Now class, that is an excellent example of the "pot calling the kettle black"

Ok folks i didn't read the thread but here is the deal.

The Bush administration sold us on the idea of war with Iraq based on that regimes threat directly to the United States of America via it's use of wepons of mass destruction. I was there I saw powell, cheney rumsfeld and bush all make that as their primary reason for the wayr. The primary reason for spending billions of dollars we didn't have, invading another country angainst the will of our"allies". That the reason we sent our patriotic young men and women to fight thats why they killed Iraqi's in my name, Thats why they said they were sending our young men and women to die. Thats why our men and women did such a wonderful job fpr us as we all knew they would.

As of yet no wepons of mass destruction... If thoes wepons are not found then the primary reason we went to war was false and in my opinion most likely a flat out lie. IF!!!!! that turns outto be the case the Bush administration it completely imcompetent or they are evil. Take your pick and when you are given the opportunity vote accordingly...

Oh wait wanna perdiction???? After bush gets re-elected then they will come out and say Iraq had no wmd's proving once again they they do not care about Americans or America they are only evil selfish little men.

hopefully i am wrong but i don't think so

Rob, there is no disputing that he "had" them. Its just he never accounted to the U.N. as to what he did to them, like he was supposed to. (remember he gassed the Kurds) so he did have them, but no one knows what became of them. Did he destroy them? doubt it because he would have told the U.N if he would have complied, otherwise why comply? He either shipped them off to Syria or he buried them someplace in the desert? Who knows. Maybe someday we may.

Well you see racerdan he did tell the UN that he had distroyed them. A number of times. It's just after everything he did in the past no one believed him.

He told them? Come on, he was suppose to prove that he destroyed them and he never did. The only thing he proved he desroyed were the some Al-samoud missles.

Your right Aunty.. There are dozens of reasons to not re elect him... When it comes to terrorism investigations and civil liberties i say... Protect my freedom and let me worry about protecting my life... I'd rather live free with terrorists running around than to life under the watchful eye of the government Ohhh and still have terrorists running around even if some do get caught..

This is what i think about the Patriot act 2

Benjamin Franklin

Let's assume that we don't vote for Bush. Who do you suggest we should vote for?

Okay, I am converted. Bush is the BIG evil monster and Sadam was just in the wrong place at the wrong time... Poor guy. He never had WMD's. That was Bush gassing the Kurds and blaming it on Sadam. ya, that's it... And it was Bush and co that were killing all the civilians that spoke out against Sadam. Ya, ya, that's it. And it was Bush and co that made up that Sadam was breaking 1141 for about 10 years or so.....And it was Bush and co that had to make up this story to the UN so that we can get this poor sweet Sadam out of his beautiful country and it had nothing to do with the fact that France and Germany had BILLIONS tied up in it. My eyes are swelling as I sit here and think of the atrocities that my country and elected leaders have brought down on those poor Iraqi's... maybe we should bomb ourselves for a few weeks so we can all fell better. Or we can just hold hands a light a candle? How was I so blind? The blinders I think were it.. How did it get so bad? Why did I think we were actually doing SOME good? I shall now repent and give myself 50 lashes, pick a daisy, buy some Birkenstocks, not take a shower for a week and I think I will fit right in?

Gee, thanks people, you are so right!! I see that light now. My blinders are off, I am out of step and walking blindly into the light of FREEDOM....

PS. Anyone know where I can get one of those Impeach Bush signs? I am also looking for a signed copy of Hillary Clintons new book to replace my signed copy of Colin Powells book, if you know of one please send me the 411.

World Wide Public Opinion of the United States is not important. Reasons why as follows;

1. We are the great consumer. If you piss us off we wont import your products. How Much do we export anyways in relation to what we import? It dosent matter if you like us or hate us because if you want your government to succeed you will make sure the United States is still consuming your products or you wont have much of a government.

2. We feed the world. We have the recources to feed the entire world within our nation. We do feed most of it and we do it for nothing. We still even feed the ones who hate us.

3. The world economy revolves around us becuase agian we are the great consumer.

4. At any time we could cutt everyone off, and not import any goods into our nation and be completely self sufficient. Yes we would suffer somewhat and not have all the money we have now but we could do it. The rest of the world would crash. No more food, no more medicine so on and so on.

This is why world opinion of us dosent matter. the UN, NATO, and other such groups are nothing without US money and goods. They can hate us all they want but their way of life couldnt survive without us.

Let's see. OPEC could kick the price of oil up out of spite.

Any number of countries could kick our military off the bases in side thier boundries.

And that is just the start. Even Pres Bush could through out some reasons. I am sorry but the whole world dosn't revolve around us.

If you piss off everyone pretty soon it will not be safe for any of use to go any where.

Good grief, talk about an over blown opinion of our selves.

And besides that, our military is good. But even they could not stand against the whole world with out dropping the bomb.

Rich -

Its interesting to me how closely our opinions match on issues related to fishing and that we can so be so far apart on the political issues.

The idea that United States could be self-sufficient is just plain wrong though, my friend.

What you are suggesting would mean we could not export our goods to the rest of the world either.

Ahem.....bye-bye Boeing, bye-bye Microsoft, bye-bye Intel and every other major corporation in the united states. Say goodbye to international travel....airline industry? See ya!

And we would get our oil from.......?

World opinion does not matter? You will hate that I say this but...this is exactly the kind of overly-nationalistic patriotism that the Germans encouraged during WWII. As if to say that we are SUPERIOR to other countries, cultures and races.

Very, very dangerous territory and exactly the reason Americans are so unpopular overseas. Because in general terms our arrogance is only matched by our military might, which I'm sorry to say, is not invincible. We've just chosen some pretty winnable wars to participate in over the last few years.

Short of Nuclear attack how would we impose our will on say the North Koreans? Conventional warfare?

What an opportune time for the Chinese to attack that would be, eh?

So what right?

We used to impeach Liars!!!!!

Bush and Company have lied to the American People in trying to justify the unjustifiable. Threats surrounding WMD in Iraq were wildly overblown by the Bush Adm. for purley political reasons.

Remember the sing-a-long called Bomb Iraq?

If you can not find Osama, bomb Iraq
If the Markets are a drama, bomb Iraq
If your politics are sleezy, and..........
Bomb Iraq, bomb Iraq, bomb Irag

anyway a lot of you already know this sing-a-long from some of the pre-Iraqi War threads where there were intense discussions regarding this mess.

I see what your saying.


If it came down to it and we were in a defensive position we could beat them all hands down.

Dont you think our goverment thought about that a long time ago.

Most everyone in the world would be dead but we would win.

There is only one downside to re-electing Bush.
And thats having to hear all the crying and whining from the small but vocal anti-Bush group. Bush is a very smart and strong president and he will get my vote again. Just to bad we cant keep him in there for a third term.

Now were gonna fight the whole world? Geez you guys relax. Its seems that if you like Bush the WMD is only one reason out of a handful for the war with Iraq. If you dislike or are of the opposite party, than the WMD was the only reason for war. For me its still to early for me to say that no WMDs will be found.

I'm not sure you could say ANYBODY won if the rest of the world is dead. Sounds more to me like it's a game that shouldn't be played.......by anyone.

I'm just glad they're busting and convicting a few of these rich rip-off stock manipulators here at home. Otherwise we probably would look like idiot duped warmongers.

Max

You are aware that Pres Bush LOST the popular vote DML. Right...

You are aware that he won the electoral vote. Which is the only one that matters.

I think the statement above is what the "popular vote" response stemmed from. Seems the "small" group was actually the majority of the voters.

Like you said, though, you either win the electoral college or you lose the election.

As the son of a Missouri Democrat whose widow, my step-mother, is a Canadian Liberal (and GOOF: Good Old Ontario Family--G-O-O-F) and whose father was a devout Republican (my grandfather, dead years ago in the car he drove on his rural postal route--Willow Springs, MO), I tend to stick to myself.

I'm just glad somebody busted a few rich rip-off stock manipulators here at home. Otherwise we WOULD look like duped warmongers.

Anyone remember the administration chant leading up to the war?

The two words that Bush -Chaney-Rumsfeld-Powell and their minions repeated at every oppotunity?

"Imminent Threat"

That was the justification, everything else was secondary.

And to me, at least, it's proving out to be the biggest lie of this new millenium.

Where was the left when Clinton Lied to the entire world under oath.

Where was the left when Clinton gave the Chinese classified military technology that gave them the power to strike us at home. Giving them 50 years of technology. Before and after the Demecratic party took contributions from the chinese.

Where was the left when Hillary Clinton used inside information in the Stock Market.

I think we got lied to a little in that era.

Now people are saying that our president is lying to or lied to us. Why are people jumping the gun with him.

Aunty M - ah the voice of sanity (didn't think I'd say that did you?) you are absolutely correct this time. It truly is scary. I've said a few things on this board that were critical of GW. Would that be enough for me to be dubbed a "suspected terrorist"? I'm afraid, after looking at Atty. Gen Ashcroft, that it just might in his mind. And with the attitude of "you are either with us or against us" we all, Liberals and Conservatives, Republican, Democrats, & others need to look long and hard at this. And please don't forget, the greatest Civil Libertarians of our country have been from all stripes of the political spectrum. Barry Goldwater and William O. Douglas come to mind, but there are many others.

Rich, I too agree with you most of the time in regards to fishing issues, but are you on crack? If the rest of the world or even a significant portion of it (say OPEC for instance) decided to take a stand against the US economically, it would be devastating. Devastating to all but we have so much farther to fall. Obviously we would not want that and we would protect our "national interest" militarily. And we can not make that fight work for us or the world. Read your history man, every superpower throughout time has gone through the ebb and flood of power. That ebb of power will happen to the US, why would we seek to accelerate it by pi**ing off everyone else?

But listen to Aunty - she is right. Wouldn't it be ironic if the largest terrorist attack on our liberty came from the man from Missouri?

All I can say is isolation would be fine with me if it came down to it. Screw the rest of the world if need be.

If we run out of oil than Ill get a horse. I could raise a garden some cows and chickens and be fed. Got wood for the wood stove and candles.

Who Electricity who needs T.V. and a computer and all that crap. I could get by without it.

With a fishin rod and a gun and a little piece of land my family and I could be just fine

With a few motivated people that are a little nutts, lotts of guns and ammo anything is possible.

Forks for instance. You could cutt of the rest of the world and Forks would be just fine.

Now Seattle. Uh Ohh, things would fall apart a little without OPEC and the Internet.

I might be a little crazy!

Fortunately, I don't think GW is as extreme as ol' Rich here.

Heck, huntin' and gatherin' and living to the ripe old age of about 45-50..........who could ask for more?

Is'nt there anything we all can agree on? How about this.

Going fishing is better then sex.

Well maybe not

Boy the Bush Haters Club is out in force on this thread...Same old ..same old....The old appeasement mentality which I believe got us into the mess we are in with terrorism in the first place. After 9/11 we finally started backing up our rhetoric with action and it is paying off. I think if all you socialist maniacs get your way we're all dead. Thanks to Allah you are all in the vocal minority where you belong.

This left leaning rant is sucking the life out of me....... I suspect that those most at risk of losing their "civil liberties" don't belong in this country anyway....Don't worry eddie, JA isn't after that copy of Clinton's innaugural speech just yet. I think the FBI is keeping an eye on all of those purchasing Hillary's new book though ....talk about lies....oooo weeee

i don't get the problem here. so we were lied to about WMD so the public would support millitary action in Iraq. it shouldn't matter.
i mean it's not like little bush lied about a blow job or anything that important right?

grandpa... Whats not to hate about Bush?????

Also though i think he did lie to the world i am not prepared to accuse him of it hence all my comments about the uncertainty and my judgement bing based on the outcome.

What i will say is that Bush has done nothing for me in ant way shape or form.. I don't know of a single decision he has made that benefits me at all. Yet done many things that ultimatly hurt my interests and my wallet.
Now granted the world doesn;t revolve around me however his actions determine how i will vote.

If Bush turns out to have lied or was even wrong on the WMD issue that is far worse than everything clinton did during his entire presidency. Why??? because he asked Americas young men and women to go kill and be killed and put their blood on my hands. That is infinantly worse than any sex scandle

Thank you pmartin!You just spoke the truth.

What a bunch of friggin idiots....... Yeah, right..... Like allowing our missle secrets to be sold to the chinese..... Like pardoning convicted felons so his wife could get the votes needed to win the senate seat. If a man lies about one thing that you all see as minor (blowjob), then what the hell makes you think there were not many many more important ones in there??
All parties do the same old crap, and the system (entire system) needs revamped. It is all about money, power, and special interests.... Not "We the people" anymore. When you idiots realize this and quit bickering simply on party lines, maybe it will start to turn around.
That is why I am an independent........

Final word? Baaaaaaaaa, Baaaaaaaa...


MC

That is sooooooooooo funny! Yeah, like nobody was crying and whining for over a year about the "Great Human Tragedy" of 9/11..... 3000 dead? Big friggin deal, hell, they lose that many in a week in monsoon season in Bangladesh. But it sure gave good cause for everyone to sceam that the Gov't needed to protect it's citizens. Now that we are losing some freedoms, those same whiners that demanded the Gov't protect us are whining about losing their freedoms..... While at the same time saying that we need to let even more illegals cross the border so "they can make a better life for themselves". I am begining to despise Americans (myself included) as much as other countries do. You lefties cry about losing "our freedoms" in this country due to Bush, but where are you when Schumer and Hillary try to take guns away "for the safety of all Americans"... You are right there voting for them and their kind. Or, when they want to take another 10% of your hard earned dollars to build homes for loser drug-addicted-baby-popping mommies in the south bronx..... No problem for you, now is it. What about my freedom to give or not to give?

People suck..... Thank God (oops, that is not PC is it) that we do have the outdoors in common, or we would all likely kill ourselves off (like our poor brothers in the inner-city who wouldn't know a trout from a turd).

Cant' we all just get along (and go fishing)?
Oh, and you dont want me to get started on the Rodney King (Now a multi-millionaire druggie)....

MC

Master caster.. you may find this hard to believe but i agree with you 100%

I am not a left winger, i never whined about wanting the governments protection, am against gun control,against any more taxes of any kind for any reason including paying 10 dollars more for my fishing license next year.
I never voted for clinton or Gore. ect.ect....
I just think lying is a heck of a lot worse when your using thoes lies to take human life for political or any purpose. I know there is no difference between dems and reps and i desperately wish there were reasonable alternatives but the media,polititians and special interests have us so divided and scared of eachother that we dare not vote against "our own" party. I have no kids and plan on not having any so from a selfish standpoint i hope i can just fish and enjoy nature for the next 40 years or so then the world can take care of itself. In the end thoes are the things that really matter. A man could burn up his entire will to live and end up a bitter disgusting hulk if he tried to fight the system his whole life. Or maybe there are people more noble than I. Me just give me a stick of graphite and i am happy enough..

Grandpa, don't worry. I took my copy of the Clinton Inagaural speech and put it in a coffee can. I buried it in the backyard under my hemp patch. Ashcroft will get my copy when he pries it from my cold, dead hands!!

Hey Pmartin actually I was a vulcan system mechanic repairing the radar and fire control systems. It dont take allota brains to jump out of a plane or be a lifer. My Ait was considerably longer than airborne school and required some intelligence. Now go goose step along with rush .

Ynot, Like I said. Your Assuming..

68L 64weeks

By the by....There is no MOS for just airborne.

AB is after AIT...You have to apply and be accepted.

ULEG

I'll bet you'd change your tune pretty quick if an Al-Quida bomb exploded at your local mall and killed your wife and kids.

And don't think it can't happen...

Hail to the thief !!!!

RichG- man, welcome back to the board with a BANG!!

How is the fishing over there, anyway??

Is there actually anyone here who believes that Saddam didn't have WMDs? Before the weapons inspectors were kicked out of Iraq in 1998, they had documented many cases of weapons violations. We knew he had them. Now, what has changed? What do you think Saddam did with the weapons? If he destroyed them, why didn't he give us the information so we could have confirmed it? Do you think he wanted to be kicked out of power? Use you brains. We know that as of 1998, he had several thousand liters of weapons grade anthrax. Where did it go?

Political idealogue creates short memories. Square peg in a round hole.

Incredible!
Let's review: 4 pages, 124 replies. To what and from whom? From: accountants (senior), consultants, financial analysts, homebuilders, fishing guides, etc... To: a political post on a fishing forum from someone (in the world of cyberspace, via Forks) proclaiming to have some insight into the foreign policy world governing this earth. Rich G, the following spelling lesson would have been one that I would have thought you would need to pass in order to debate (with any credibility) an eighth grade classroom at Forks High School: dosent = doesn't, wernt = weren't, counrty = country, Sadam = Saddam (part of the topic you proclaim to have insight into), agian = again, a while = awhile, becuase = because, genuinally = genuinely, etc... Most importantly, demecratic = democratic! Thank god for democracy, any fool in this country can hop on a fishing forum and insight some otherwise intellectual fishermen into a juvenile debate over issues they cannot control.

...at least no one challenged anyone else to a 'dull'...



Fortunately ones ability to spell correctly does not preclude one from expressing his opinion. You understood what he meant, right?

Good enough for me...

BTW...you just put twelve separate thoughts into one paragraph. Anyone ever show you where the return button is?

i think bush lied. pete

It is reeelee eezee to make miss steaks when u r tiping fast

There are some smart guys on here with ideas that offend some of the other smart guys...pretty basic politics...I'm right and you're an idiot..or sumthing lyk that

Good one Bullgog

You exposed me as a real idiot.

Whatever man! :p

stlhdh2o


Don't think that you are getting off the duel issue that easy! I have already figured out a place and time to do it with you. I just can't figure out what size of a "rubber" to use on you as of yet! I know that you will require a very large rubber, because you are really a very big. . . . .


Cowlitzfisherman

In fact it's more likely to happen now than pre 9/11, that's the irony in this whole mess.

Just how is it more likely now that people are looking out for this sort of thing and security is increased?

Jacob, I am 16 and I personally know many people (not saying if I do... ) who CAN make those kind of bombs. Making a bomb is simple man! And how hard is it to get a custom stamp designed?

Hmm you really think its hard to play the mail system? I have a friend who just shipped his paintball gun, completely assembled w/ air tank (Which was half full) to Texas. Yes, that is illegal.

It IS easy, and I believe a mail bomb would definitely be a choice further up the list then taking out another plane.... Considering all that genius security is going into the airlines.

Imagine it... 3000 bombs all placed to go off on the same day. You dont think Al Quaida could put 50 or so of their guys together making bombs in a house?


E-mail me what ya think... I dont check this particular forum much. ctwiggs1@yahoo.com

Curtis

Voodo,

Not very smart what you just posted.

People dont take things with a grain of salt these days, even more so things to the affect of what you just associated yourself with.

I'm not saying it's not easy, I just want to know how someone could make the claim that it's actually MORE likely to happen now.

I would expect there are more people out there that hate Americans now than ever before. Looking at it that way it may be more likely that an act of terror could happen now.

The reason that it is possibly more likely now, is that the muslim world is more against us now, after the Iraq war, than it was before. It's a simple matter of numbers - you can't have suicide bombers without volunteers, and the Iraq situation is good advertising for that. The radical muslim clerics are having a field day. I'm not justifying that, just pointing out the situation.

The other issue is that, for all the noise being made about homeland security, the hard fact of the matter is that our borders are still quite porous, and explosives are not hard to obtain. Witness Oklahoma city, where the federal building was leveled by 5000 lbs of fertilizer soaked with diesel. Litereally anyone could go down to Pendleton Grain Growers and get 200 lbs of ammonium nitrate without anyone blinking an eye. Go over to Chevron, get yourself some diesel. Go to the indian reservation, get yourself some firecrackers and fuse. Now you've got a bomb.

In fact, one might ponder the question, why have we only been hit once in the US? I don't believe that it is because we have magically become effective in finding all the terrorists. Far more likely that there aren't that many terrorists to begin with. For which, I, for one, am grateful.

Silver Hilton..... It says home port is Bellevue, but you say Wow, must be from there? Not many people know what PGG is..... My son lives in Pendleton. You a member of Blue Mountain Flyfishers?

MC

Attention Bush Haters Club members>

Join the other haters and read the following:

After hearing that the state of Florida changed its opinion and let a Muslim woman have her picture on her driver's license with her face covered:

This is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a Tampa newspaper. He did quite a job; didn't he? Read on, please!

IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others.

I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!

"In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.

If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every! citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

If you agree -- pass this along; if you don't agree -- delete it!

AMEN

How about freedom of religion. Or freedom from presicution. What is frightning is that you don't seem to realize who you sound like.

Yep, despite the current trappings of urban prosperity, I'm really a transplanted redneck. Never belonged to BMFF, as I left Pendleton to go to kollidge in 1975, and now only visit my Mom there. The fly shop didn't exist when I lived there, and I had to get flytying materials via mail order when I lived there. Got a nice little crick to fish over there, as long as you're willing to hike 1200 feet down into a canyon that the elf don't even want to run up.

Nice area, but no work, and the schools are suffering.

"After hearing that the state of Florida changed its opinion and let a Muslim woman have her picture on her driver's license with her face covered:"

Last I read the State of Florida disallowed this decision.

The Bush Haters are the same ones who gave us MARIA, Our Tennis Shoe wearing Senator, McDermott, Simms, Yassar Lowery, Sound Transit, and Locke all proven winners.

Yeah Right! And Clinton wasn't Impeached, Patti didn't join the "Brady Bunch" (tried to impose a $20 tax on each Box of Ammunition Sold) or make Pro Saddam comments at a shool in SW WA, McDermott & Lowery now there's a pair one is known as "Bagdad Jim" and the other as "Mike Arafat" both "Born Loser's".

Nice editorial. Completely contradicted by history, the Constitution, and common sense, but nice editorial.

"In God we trust" is not our national motto, it is a phrase on our currency. It dates to the Civil War, when the treasury catered to increased religious sentiment. Source, US treasury website.

The phrase, "one nation, under God " (pledge of allegiance) dates only to the 1940's.

The founders of this country, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin, were not Christians, they were Deists. Deism is hard to define concisely, but basically it takes the position that it is unlikely that Earth and humans are the most important things on God's to-do list.

George Washington, in 1796, in the treaty of Tripoli, said, "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, based on the Christian religion." Since he was president when the country started, I'd say he was in a position to know.

While the fervently devout christians are very energetic in trying to paint this as their nation, the fact is, it ain't so. It's everyone's nation, and the founding fathers were very explicit in their desires to keep the Cotton Mathers and Ayatollah Khomeini's of the world from interfering with the freedoms of others. That is why it is illegal, and appropriately so, to put the ten commandments on the wall of a classroom.

The history of the US is rife with cycles of increased evangelical sentiment, followed by legislation to attempt to implement the religious sentiment into law. This gave us prohibition and the war on drugs, among other things. Generally these laws fail. We're in one of those cycles right now. Not surprisingly, these cycles often concide with periods of war and economic uncertainty.

There are numerous nations in the world whose government is religiously based. Most of them are muslim, and they work to implement Sharia as the basis of law. I think we would all agree that that is a disaster. Stoning our daughters for sexual activity and cutting off the hands of petty thieves doesn't meet my definition of civilized law. It ill behooves us as the leader of the free world to not set an example that freedom of worship, or not to worship at all, is such a fundamental right that any attempts to implement religion by the state are inherently suspect.

After all, isn't the freedom of religion one of the freedoms that we are trying to bring to Iraq?

Well we had "slippery slade". A champion for the people.....lol.

Thank you Silver Hilton.

Best post on this thread.

Best post of the year.

In the running for best post ever.

Ditto on h2o's post. Very well put, SH.

We haven't found Saddam either. I suppose next we'll be hearing that he didn't exist either.

Sounded stupid when Cheney said it and hasn't gotten any better the umpteenth time around.

Turn off "Pravda (Fox) News" and start reading some periodicals from around the world. You'll be amazed at what "fair and balanced" reporting really means.


BTW-- excellent post SH.

Interesting post(s), one of the ironies is that I hear the echos of "America, Love it or Leave it" in both the editorial and some of the comments on this board. I wonder why I never heard those statements directed towards the "Clinton Haters". Just a thought.

Silver Hilton, I like your style.

I don't know who said it first. A friend of mine said it to me this morning so it was the first time I heard it. Either way, the point is made. We know Iraq had WMDs. The weapons inspectors in 1998 knew about them.

Silver Hilton,

Thats an excellent, well thought out post.

Sure stands out in contrast to those ugly and hateful threads. " Just say No" to Hate, Ignorance and Racism.

You're absolutely correct. The key word, however, is had, as in past tense. More and more evidence suggests that prior to the invasion no WMDs existed. Therefore there was no imminent threat to the world, no link to al Quida, nothing to disarm, ergo, no reason to invade.

And the argument, "Doesn't matter, we're better off without Saddam around" is not the issue here. The issue is that the American people were convinced that weapons existed, there was an imminent threat, and there was a link between Osama and Saddam. We're finding out now that the administration grossly abused its power to mislead the American people. Nixon was the last to do that and he had the integrity to resign.

Dosent matter if it helps your idealogical argument. We all know he had them and they are probably hidden somewhere. The whole point is he didnt account for or show anyone he destroyed them. Why would saddam destroy the weapons and then not show the inspectors?

Who has them then Hans Blix? Do you believe he destroyed them out of the kindness of his heart?

In all of history have you ever heard of a leader who did not use everything in his power to stay in control of his country?

If he had them he would have used them! He demonstrated in the past that he was not afraid to do so.

Again, we ALL knew he had them, so if you know for certain he would have used them, than maybe you could tell us where they went.

I take it that you did not hear the weapons instectors say that when they were kicked out of Iraq it had been pretty much disarmed.

There were still some lose ends to take care of but for the most part the weapons had been dealt with.

There is at present no prof that he built more. Only speculation.

Your kidding right? They were "stonewalling" according to Hans. Then in the same sentence stated they were starting to cooperate.

An argument could be made that he would have proved he destroyed WMD in order to stay in power also. He also could have been busy hiding them while the inspectors were there. Maybe not enough time to ready them from the time the inspectors left and when the first bomb dropped.

Man, I wish I knew for certain. I've read quite a few theories lately, and one of the most plausible is that he did, indeed, destroy them. So why didn't he tell anyone? He ruled with fear. He remained in power simply because the world was convinced he had the weapons and was not afraid to use them. How long do you suppose Iran or Turkey would have waited to invade had they known Saddam was defenseless? Saddam is also known for great tactical blunders; I think this was another. It's quite possible he destroyed all the WMDs but stalled reporting it thinking it would keep him in power longer.

Of course the weapons could be buried out there somewhere, but I think each day that possibility becomes more remote. Considering all the CIA and Special Ops people over there investigating, even before the invasion, something more tangible should have turned up by now.

I think the administration may owe Hans Blix an apology soon. They accused him of running around like Scooby Doo without finding anything. The Coalition has much more intelligence resources available than Blix ever did and they have yet to find anything substantial.

GH, good points. We can not know what he was thinking. I believe we will find some, but it will still not be a good enough reason for some and it will justify the war for some also.(some Americans thought he used chem/bio weapons on us during the war,wtf?, the ignorance is kind of scary) I for one hope they find weapons as opposed to more mass graves.

goharley

Good posts, saved me some typing

One point about the CIA, they stated before the war began that they did not believe there was enough evidence to act on!!!

Racerdan, I was not against a war with Iraq. In fact I always thought it was inevitable. I just wanted to hear something more definete than" he could build more." And , "he might make them available to terriorists." Or,"he may us them on the US."

If he could have sold me on the war I would have been as adamant about it as Grandpa. But in the end he just could not do it.

It's clear that the Bush Administration stretched the truth to go to war, and now they're trying to blame the intelligence, Saddam's brutality, and middle east peace process to justify the war.

This is exactly why we need a smart president who adequately understands what's going on to make critical decisions like going to war. As bad as Gingrich was, I'd take him as the president, over dumb ass Bush, anyday.

Speaking of candidates (we WERE speaking about candidates were;t we?).....do you think McCain will make another go of it?

Any thoughts on McCain ?

Aunty M you got it right .....the radical lefties are here in force with the same BS they spew every time...I figured that quote I posted that I received from someone else would bring out the best in them...and it sure did....VIVA FIDEL

I'd love to see McCain run. But from everything I've read, Bush has such a tight leash on the Republicans that no one dare challenge him. That in itself is kinda scary.


I agree, Racerdan, it is scary how some are misled and refuse to consider any other possibilities. I'm sure I'm just as guilty at times, but I try to gather my information from a wide array of news resources, not just the left, right, or US.

Grandpa

<quote by Grandpa>
the radical lefties are here in force with the same BS they spew every time...I figured that quote I posted that I received from someone else would bring out the best in them...and it sure did....VIVA FIDEL

If you consider Silver Hilton reply to that post as BS, then I would beg to differ. His response was that of an educated American, not trying to sell his political party or candidate.. Enough of this Left- Right crap. Time to use some common sense.

My 2 cents

Well, I am REALLY gonna stir up the Hornets nest now, so I imagine as usual this thread will close soon.......

It is ALL about Israel..... You know, God's chosen people and all?
If Israel wasn't in the middle of the Arab world, persecuting the Palestinians and placing all of their immigrating brothers in Palestinian territory..... We would not be doing any of this. I knew a Jewish scholar once (very credible and at a large University) that told me of "The Samson option" which has been policy of the Israeli Gov't since the formation of the Jewish state and the aquisition of the Nuke.... It is a policy that if the existence of the Jewish state comes under question (such as an Arab invasion) and the real threat of them losing their place in the mideast, they will nuke the whole area, effectively keeping their "Birthright" out of enemy hands.
We are so afraid of this option that we will do every thing we can to protect them.
This includes conquering Iraq, Iran, Syria, etc... to show the Arab world that we will conquer them if they don't behave. I doubt there will ever be peace over there, and the quagmire has just begun. Saddens me that we do it for a country (Israel) that thinks they have a "God given" right to occupy what was never theirs and we support that crazy way of thinking.

Ohhhhhhh, I cannot wait to hear whats coming from you folks now..... Just please do not call me "Anti semetic".... any thing else is acceptable....

MC

Sorry AuntyM, guess I should have read them all........ Speed reading on a bulletin board is not the way to go I guess.....

Thanks for not flaming me though!

MC

Aw, you're gonna make me blush...

Well, that's six pages.

Check out this deck of cards!

http://www.warprofiteers.com/

Having H2O praise Silver Hilton's posting as the best of the year is great ...kind of like Saddam Hussein high fiving Kim Jung Il

This thread has been like watching the Phil Donohue show or reading the DNC talking points emails. Same old "anti" hogwash....Some of you guys must spend hours dredging up "historical facts" to try to prove that the pledge of allegiance has no place in our society and the words "In God We Trust" are some republican conspiracy to force religion on the masses. Same old , same old......being patriotic is for suckers....what else was it? Bush is a liar...Saddam never had WMD.....Howard Dean for president? Gay marriages are cool...tax cuts are only for millionares...

About as predictable as you grandpa...



I Love it when you argue without actually making a counterpoint.

Kind of exposes the weakness of your argument and mirrors the actions of your party's leader. Hammer on a bunch of stuff that just flat isn't true (like 'h2o is a communist') hoping that just repeating it over and over and over again people will believe it.

When confronted with fact that your conclusions about the religious foundation of this country are based on fallacy, not fact, all poor grandpa can do is make further attempts to discredit the other side.

Actually, I thought SH was doing you a favor, Grandpa. He was merely pointing out some historical descrepencies in what you posted. I'm sure you agree that we should all stick to historical facts and not become "revisionist historians."

Although, sadly, some are being accused of acting as revisionists simply for correcting past reports to ensure that history is, indeed, factual.

I think it's more a demonstration of the benefits that education and research can provide to an argument.

Those historical facts are available to anyone with the energy and commonsense to sit down to Google, enter the words, "in god we trust", and then wait 15 seconds. So, because I will actually take the effort to do some research, I have opinions that are at least partly based on fact. Unlike the Bush groupies, who cannot be troubled to think for themselves, and have Rush Limbaugh do it for them.

I always chuckle when ditto-heads slam me in these forums as being liberal. It's nearly a 100% indicator that they are poorly educated on the issue at hand. It always happens just like this: produce facts that indicate that their position is illogical, and BOOM, I'm a commie. Oh, well, I guess 25 years of being a registered republican and a life member of the NRA don't mean what they used to...

Winston Churchill was once taken to task by another member of parliament for changing his position on an issue. "Sir," Churchill harrumphed, "when I encounter facts that indicate that my prior position was wrong, I change my opinion. What do you do?"

In the current debate around weapons of mass destruction, we are talking about what our government does when the data does not support their position. We are also talking about what we do as a people, if and when it appears that our data about our government changes. These are important questions. It is very clear that George W. does not change opinions easily. The question is, is he being a leader, or is he being unwise?

I, for one, wish he listened better and was more thoughtful about these questions.

"I think it's more a demonstration of the benefits that education and research can provide to an argument." Ouch

Are you really just being polite, or are you subtlely reasoning with blunt trauma? LMAO

The original posting of a quote from someone in a Florida paper was extreme for sure but I posted it to bait the loyal lefties into doing just what they did which is jump all over the "God" references and search Google for logical arguments as to why the country was really not founded by religious men and women. If this was "College Bowl" and I was in a serious debate I would do more research but I will just say that the arguments on this thread from SH and H2o and others simply reflect our fundamnental philosophical difference. I don't think most religion is dangerous or scary. Islam maybe but the good muslims who don't want to kill us all don't say much. I also think the majority of Americans would like a more wholesome life in which morals and religion are good things. Family is a good thing. Going out of your way to tear it all down all the time is pathetic from my viewpoint which , of course, is different from the philosophies of some of those here. The small minority is very vocal and the majority don't want to get involved and risk being ridiculed by those who vehemently oppose their honest views.

Here's a good article explaining the situation from Washingtonpost.com


By John McCain
Sunday, June 15, 2003; Page B07


Like many Americans, I am surprised that we have yet to locate the weapons of mass destruction that all of us, Republican and Democrat, expected to find immediately in Iraq. But do critics really believe that Saddam Hussein disposed of his weapons and dismantled weapons programs while fooling every major intelligence service on earth, generations of U.N. inspectors, three U.S. presidents and five secretaries of defense into believing he possessed them, in one of the most costly and irrational gambles in history?

After the first Persian Gulf War, the discovery of Hussein's advanced nuclear weapons program following years of international inspections surprised everyone. When U.N. inspectors left Iraq in 1998, they catalogued Iraq's continuing possession of, or proven failure to disclose, one of the biggest chemical and biological weapons arsenals in history.

Critics today seem to imply that after seven years of elaborately deceiving the United Nations, Hussein precipitated the withdrawal of U.N. inspectors from his country in 1998, then decided to change course and disarmed himself over the next four years, but refused to provide any realistic proof that this disarmament occurred.

I am not convinced. Nor was chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, who recently catalogued Iraq's failure to come clean on an array of weapons programs the United Nations believed were continuing. Nor were Congress and President Clinton, who advocated regime change in Iraq in 1998 -- before the U.N. inspectors left.

While war was never inevitable, it was, in retrospect, the most telegraphed military confrontation in history. Hussein had plenty of time to destroy or disperse weapons stocks and to further conceal weapons programs, which often rely more on human knowledge than physical infrastructure. If Hussein had the weapons destroyed or concealed, reconstituting them would have required primarily the skills of Iraqi scientists. Precious few Iraqis would have been involved in the actual destruction or concealment. That's why capturing and interrogating Iraqis involved in concealment -- as well as scientific personnel -- is essential.

Despite highly intrusive inspections after the Gulf War, U.N. inspectors were shocked in 1995 when an Iraqi defector revealed the existence of Iraq's enormous biological weapons program. Until we capture Hussein or prove him dead and eradicate the remnants of his apparatus of terror, which continues to coordinate daily attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq, Iraqi scientists will not feel free to talk, and warped dreams of outlasting America will persist.

We went to war in part because Hussein failed to account for his weapons, had proven his willingness to use them and behaved in a way that encouraged governments around the world to believe he possessed them. Our intelligence about a hostile foreign government is never perfect. When it tends overwhelmingly toward one conclusion -- in Iraq's case, that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction -- should we give the benefit of the doubt to a dictator with a record of deceit and aggression?

It is certainly appropriate to examine the quality of the intelligence that influenced the administration's decision to go to war. It is appropriate to examine what went right and what went wrong in the prosecution of the war and in its aftermath. But I find it impossible to credit as serious the suggestion that this war shouldn't have been fought because, lacking better intelligence, we ought to have assumed Hussein's good faith.

We should not let legitimate debate about the search for weapons minimize the task now at hand: the reconstruction and democratization of Iraq. Discovering the truth about Iraqi weapons is important, securing Iraq's democratic future even more so. This will be the final measure of our victory, not how many gallons of anthrax we find. The United Nations found a lot, and we will either find more or find out where it went.

We fought this war to defend the security of the United States against the threat from Hussein's proven weapons programs and his refusal to come clean, his record of aggression against his neighbors, the utter collapse of containment, the possibility of his cooperation with terrorists, and his brutal oppression of the Iraqi people.

Does anyone believe that the United States, the Iraqi people or the Arab world would be better off if Hussein were still in power, if 8-year-old children were still held in Iraqi prisons, if Hussein were still threatening his neighbors? Hussein alone was responsible for this war, and we need make no apologies for supporting the use of U.S. military force to rid the world of his murderous regime.

It is too early to declare final victory in Iraq. But we're well past the point of knowing that our war to liberate Iraq was right and just. The discovery of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered children should have convinced even the greatest skeptic. We made America more secure, liberated millions from a reign of terror and helped create the prospect for the establishment of the first Arab democracy. That should make Americans proud -- and critics of the administration's decision to go to war a little more circumspect.

It is too early to declare final victory in Iraq. But we're well past the point of knowing that our war to liberate Iraq was right and just. The discovery of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered children should have convinced even the greatest skeptic................................................................

Oh no Senator McCain! the greatest skeptics will not give up their attacks no matter what evidence anyone finds.

We already got the weapon of mass dstruction,Saddam himself.

I don't know if there is a lot to add to this thread but I'll try. Given that WMD's have not been discovered, given that Sadaam is not found (hopefully soon to be remedied) - Do you feel safer and more secure? Though the result of getting a Hitler out of power is a good one, I go back to the arguement that I made earlier. That result, in and of itself, is NOT the right and just thing to do. If we are to committ the American military to a war, the overriding result must be - A strategically safer, more secure USA. I, for one, do not feel any safer or more secure after the war in Iraq. Certainly, the American soldiers deployed there are not.

eddie.........I will come over with my 300 Win Mag and sit outside your house just in case any of those pesky terrorists show up...Would that make you feel safer? or will it take a Demo in the presidency to make you feel better? I'm not sure what would happen if we went into isolation and let all the crazy people in the world run wild...Wanna try it and find out? Make Jimmy will come back with that cardiagan sweater??? He did a great job in North Korea...and earlier in Iran...Maybe Bill could come back and invite Kim Jung Il over to the White house for some head. That may calm him down without military action.
keep the faith eddie...

Not yet, according to the recent news stories, but maybe soon. Sounds like that are on a hot scent...

"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along, whether it is a democracy, or a facist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
--Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall
at the Nuremberg Trials after WWII

Grandpa, Do not get me wrong, I am no isolationist - I believe that American Military Action is absolutely justified when protecting our safety and security. I also believe that concept is the basis of GW's pre-emption policy. The question is then legitimate - one significant outcome of preemptive military action must be an enhancement of US safety and security. On that basis, the Afghanistan action passes the test, Iraq - probably too early to tell but the signs are not good.

In regards to your kind offer of protection - it is appreciated but I live in Puyallup. I'm afraid that your weaponry only works against commie, pinko, liberals. They are few and far between here and represent no threat. King County, however, that may be something different. Take care Grandpa.

silver hilton,
If there has to be a northwest fishing website that continually divulges far too much information about things (fishing spots, gear to use, launches, techniques, etc... ) that would normally have to be determined by trial and error, it's nice to hear a voice of reason. Grandpa2, your rearing (Jackson, Mobile, Macon, Shreveport?) would be fine on a 1960's political (NRA maybe?) forum if there were such a thing. This is 2003, it is a fishing forum, and you have very little insight into piscatorial pursuits. Do you fish? Or, Do you (like so many on this site) just want to be recognized in a fishing world you otherwise never would?

Damn!

Thought for sure it was a dead horse this time.

Bulldog, Grandpa may be many things but I can tell you a couple of things that he aint. He is a Northwest boy through and through and he is a damn fine fisherman. And for what its worth, he also contributes a lot of his time to insuring that sports fishermen opportunities are maximized. When it comes to fishing, Grandpa walks the talk.

Now, about his politics....

I agree with Eddie. While I disagree with Grandpa on many issues, he is involved in our fisheries. Usually on the wrong side, but he's active and involved.

Seriously, I respect people who go past the stage of ranting and get involved, and he's done that. That puts him head and shoulders above most folks. Even if we disagree on the issues, it's good to simply have the debates, because it elevates public awareness.

As to his politics and manners, well, that's unfortunate. We can choose whether to be mannerly and informed, and that's up to each of us as individuals. It would be nice if we could disagree and debate without the name calling, but that seems to be part of the sport for him. It seems like he hates opposing viewpoints, but is drawn to them, as a moth to the flame. After the recent noise, I've decided not to respond to his posts anymore, as it looks like all he wants to do is fight.

Hilton, you are right on a couple of points regarding Grandpa. #1 - this bulletin board ranting is a sport to him, a past time. #2 - Grandpa is actively involved. On a personal note, I know Grandpa and believe it or not, in person, he's a funny, nice, & good man. The whole package (including baggage) comes with him as with everybody. I only have to look in the mirror to see the truth of that.

Now Eddie you are pretty darn supportive of old grandpa...I have to admit to the "sport" part of this BB....I am no where near as radical as I sound...This forum does some crazy things to a "confrontational" guy like me...too outspoken I guess.... I can say one thing though, the postings about hot button political issues and hatcheries seem to get the most participants and the most name calling. People have a tendancy to get pretty hot when they oppose someone else's viewpoint enough. If someone thinks they are so right and you are so wrong it can dgenerate quickly. In person would be a totally different story. I can banter back and forth with you and disagree with you on many things but the difference is that I know you personally and respect you very much. It is inherently unfair for all of us to make judgements about each other based on what goes on here. Some judgements.,ok but not major ones. I have always refused to take the easy road and shut up..the easy road is what most take...so some of the people refuse to answer me..so what? doesn't mean much to me at all...But if Eddie scolds me and says I have my head up my ass...I'm gonna bend over and check. Having a big mouth and fast typing hands can get you in trouble...And I have never learned the lesson of being careful what you put in print as it is a permanent record. ...Oh well I do have quite a bit of fishing information..those threads only last a short while and can be boring. And believe it or not I spend a fair amount of my time every day on fishing issues and concerns. I have spent many years helping handicapped kids with swimming boating and fishing...I'm working on making this a better place to enjoy fishing for kids like my 1 year old grandson....He is what counts not all the politics and arguing...grandpa has a thing or two to teach the grandkid and it ain't about politics.

[QUOTE] by Grandpa2

...grandpa has a thing or two to teach the grandkid and it ain't about politics.

Well, I, for one, have always found that I learn more when I keep my mouth shut and my ears open. Don't know how I learned it, since I find it so very difficult to practice. I should, and shall, practice more.

SH..what you are describing is the
"Crocodile Syndrome"...BIG MOUTH...LITTLE EARS..................chomp chomp!!

OK....200 posts.

Have you guys beat this dead horse enough yet??

your pathetic little car has 200,000 miles on it and you still drive it??? This thread is just trying top prove that political controversy will never be won and will go on and on and on.....Try to find a fishing topic this long???

I couldn't agree more. Especially when it comes to the GOP (Fox) News Channel.

When one broadens their information base, they will learn things like:

The prior administration gave substantial intelligence information to the Bush cabal that would have identified the Twin Towers as a target. However, because Clinton's name was associated with it, the report was ignored.

The cabal also recieved information about bin Laden on three separate occasions and could have taken him out with unmanned drones, however, intra-administration squabbles over who got credit for the kill prevented the arming of drones with warheads.

There is NO connection between Iraq and al Quadea.

Saddam was NOT responsible or involved in the attacks of 9/11.

There was NO nuclear program in Iraq.

Experts have determined that the two trailers found were used for activities such as manufacturing helium for weather balloons or perhaps refueling rockets, but NOT for chemical or biological warfare.

World opinion shows that America has lost a great deal of its credibility.

The American people were lied to by its leaders. The American media prostituted itself by glorifying those lies for ratings. (Okay, that last senctence is really just my opinion.)

40% of Americans believe we've already found WMD in Iraq. 30% believe that chemicals were used against us in the war. About 50% believe Saddam was responsible for 9/11 attacks.

I find it very scary, and unsettling, that the American people can be so easily conditioned by misinformation to believe erroneous facts. And I find it appalling that a man of self-proclaimed strong Christian faith can deliberately lie, and that lie lead to the death of thousands of people. All politicians lie, I can accept that. But when that lie leads to the death and destruction of late, that I cannot accept. Especially by a man whose platform was to bring morale integrity back to the Whitehouse.

What kind do you mean? He was building a plant, and it was well on its way until Israel bombed it. And what about the hidden crucial nuke bomb part or parts just recently found? I did hear that on FOX so i guess its just propaganda. I also heard it on CNN so it must be true. Everyones an expert these days zzzzzzzz

Sorry, I should have stated that there wasn't a current nuclear program creating an imminent threat as alluded to by Bush, et al, in numerous public addresses. By the way, that part (buried 12 years ago) was one centrifuge out of a thousand needed to enrich uranium. It was, more than likely, a template to be used should the sanctions ever be lifted and the nuke program reconstituted.

I've never claimed to be an expert (don't even play one on TV), but I do read as many opinions as possible from recognized experts to educate myself on current issues.

You know, I've tried very hard to not post on threads that don't directly address WT-related issues, but I just have to say something here. Please understand and acknowledge that I am not on the clock and am writing representing only myself and my own personal opinion.

Let me get this straight. Some of you that have posted here are the same ones who were ready to practically march on Olympia because you found out that F&W Commissioner Lisa Pelly was at one time a member of Washington Trout, but you think that it's OK for the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES to LIE and/or DISTORT FACTS to justify SENDING U.S. FORCES INTO HARM'S WAY, not to mention spend biliions of dollars of the US treasury, sacrifice US credibility and stature abroad, kill thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and tens of thousands of Iraqi conscripts, and further destabilize an already powderkeg-like situation. Is that about it?

Now THAT'S what I call clear, consistent thinking.

Sheesh.

I have not read all six pages but I just have to ask. Werent the missles being fired over kuwait wmds? I seem to remember on the news that they were not suppose to have those long range weapons, or the bunch of chemical weapons warheads they found that was also reported in the news but now it seems to be all about making bush look bad.

all i can say is bring our boys home now we are loseing to many for that damn country. lets just send bush and company over instead.

Ive got an idea. When all you Bush bashers get some real evidence that he purposely mis-led us, than flail away, ill be right besides all of you. Untill then lets contend it as alledgedly and or arguably, until the FACTS come to light as lying or perhaps WMD are possibly found.

101 just to keep things straight the war heads were supposedly stored and forgotted about. Even our government admitted that with Iraq that is very possable. Says a lot for thier record keeping right . As for the missles they are allowed a max range of 100 miles (I think, can't recall the exact range they are allowed).

The one they had to get rid of the the Al Simud (sp) the shorter range stuff was ok.

Racerdan, I don't think you quite get it. We own that country now. It is time for Pres Bush to prove what he said was true. If he can't then he is the one with the problems. So far all he has been able to show us is body bags.

I begin to fear the day my son may come home in one.

Bw,
The majority of America does get it you are the one of them that does not.

BW

Thank God for kids like yours, who will stand up and fight for America's as well as other nations rights.

Thank God they are willing to put men like Houssein out of business.

Thank you BW, and when your son returns, thank him for me as well.

Curtis

Itlcleo, you want to try that one agian . His popularity is erroding, a lot of people, even congress are starting to ask some pretty hard questions about his reasoning, and motives. In the end if he has not done a much better job of telling us the truth, he will not win in 2004.

I agree, for the most part. Although I know I'm guilty at times when something I've read particularily peeves me, it is much easier to discuss an issue when facts and emotion are kept apart.

With that in mind, here's something that bothers me. It's a known fact that the documentation Bush used concerning Iraq's nuclear program in his "State of the Union" address was forged (and poorly at that). Why then, has he not come out and demanded an investigation into how that information was passed to him? I would think it had to pass through quite a few channels before he would include it into an address to the American people. Or at least he could tell the people he regrets passing along false information. In my opinion, failure to do so makes him look guilty of lieing.

Proving that he lied will be nearly impossible; misled is a more accurate term, I think. But it's not just him. Rumsfield, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rice are the real culprits here. Bush has done the same thing that Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton had done before him. They abused the power of office and the trust of the American people. Nixon and Clinton were impeached for it, and they didn't even send the nation to war which cost the lives of thousands and destruction worth billions of dollars.

Just like Bush I have "gut" feelings, too. And my gut tells me something about Operation Iraq Liberation is terribly wrong.

LtlCleo-- I can't say the majority of Anericans don't get it, but a large number don't. Earlier I posted, "40% of Americans believe we've already found WMD in Iraq. 30% believe that chemicals were used against us in the war. About 50% believe Saddam was responsible for 9/11 attacks," which I'd gathered from various news sources. That shows there are a lot of Americans that "just don't get it."

Curtis (BBVD)-- I sincerely appreciate your patriotic fervor, and I feel your sentiments are well placed. And that is precisely why this issue is so important. If it turns out that the US and UK (the two most powerful and influential governments in the world) misled its own people, and the rest of the world, to invade another nation it will be much harder to gather support when a genuine threat really MAY exist.

Trusting those that have the power to send us to battle is the reason we don't need a draft or conscript service.

Spoken like a true Gentleman SilverHilton!

We need more people like you on this board. Although I have disagreed with some of what you have said in the past, I truly love a good debate and never hold a personal grudge against any one just because we disagree. When it becomes personal, that is a different matter. Debate is healthy as long as people remember that eventually we need to agree to disagree.......

Regards,

MC

So then Harley, why do folks like you (and on the GOP side too) not just admit all around that ALL TOP LEADERS ARE THE SAME????!!!
You made the comment that we could have bombed Hussein because we had info on his where abouts from the Clinton admin...... Hello? Why then didn't Mr. Bill get it done? Or the one about the fact that the Mr. Bill Hill people gave warning that the twin towers were a target....Again, Hello???? They were first hit while Mr. Bill was in office, so NS they were a target. As far as excusing intellegence in the whitehouse, I wont go there. But there was no way to really prepare for what happened on 9/11. It could have just as easily been a train that they commandeered with tanks of anhydrous ammonia and then ran them into the heart of a city, crashed them, and then many, many would die. Also, the left is now whining about "loss of freedom" in this country, but criticize the white house for not doing more to prevent the terror attack.....

We need to quit going head to head due only to party affiliation, and instead start hanging the guilty leaders for wrong doing...WHOEVER AND WHATEVER THEY ARE!! But, alas, I am only dreaming I am sure.
I am an independent, but what I do like about the Fox network is that they will most always have both views presented and then I can decide based on that, unlike most media that will portray one view and I am left to wonder..... Just my $1.49 worth....

MC

Originally, what I'd said was:

In reference to the Towers' attack, the evidence pointed to an imminent attack. It may have been hard to prevent the attack, but from reports I've read there was enough evidence that we should have known something big was about to happen. The blame doesn't necessarily point to the Bush regime, it falls mostly on the CIA and FBI not being able to play together. Their bureaucratic inability to share information with one other needs to be addressed.

The reference to bombing with drones was about bin Laden, not Hussein. The intel was presented in 2000, and in 2001 the drones still had not been outfitted with warheads. Again, this is not necessarily a Bush SNAFU as much as inter-agency squabbling, this time between the CIA and the Pentagon.


I openly admit that I don't completely trust any politician. I firmly believe they will tell you whatever you need to hear to further their own agenda. I listen to every one of them with a bit of skepticism.

I agree whole-heartedly with you on not attacking one another over party lines. I, too, believe we should punish whom ever is responsible for wrong-doing regardless of their political affiliation. And in this case I strongly believe the Bush adminstration has committed some serious wrongs that should be investigated, and subsequently punished if my suspicions are correct.

I just learned the actual reason why Bush decided to invade Iraq, and it has nothing to do with oil or WMDs. This is an excerpt from an Israel newspaper (via a Russian newspaper) reporting on the meeting between Bush, Abbas (Palestinian Prime Minister) and the head of the Hamas concerning the "Roadmap to Peace."
Cool, eh? Evidently, though, the Pope didn't get the memo. If I remember correctly, the Pope was opposed to the war. Seems to me the leader of the Catholic Church would be pretty close to God and would get, at least, a courtesy copy of any instructions He gave to Bush. Pretty amazing, IMHO, that Bush would have a closer relationship with God than the majority of clerics in the entire free world.

Sure hope he can end all that bloodshed in the Middle East soon; I'd hate to see it interfere with his re-election effort, and all.

Funny thing, too, about some of the other guys in history that have used the "God told me to" excuse, most of them were eventually incarcerated... or institutionalized.

GH,

Although I vehemently disagree with Bush on his adventure in Iraq - I would caution you to do some due diligence on this quote. I'm surprised that this has not come out before now and that makes me suspicious as to its authenticity. If it's true, we have a much bigger problem than I thought. Can you post a link?

On another note - I hope everyone has a wonderful and safe 4th of July. It is symbolic of our freedom to be able to have this discussion openly. I love my freedoms and I love my country.

ya right if bush said that it would be all over the news. were did you read that on the internet?

Harley,

Do you hate GOD? Is that why you hate President Bush so much because he says he's a man of GOD?

This has nothing to do with hating God. That is the problem. The Whitehouse has taken great pains to say this war has nothing to do with religion. And just about everytime Pres Bush opens his mouth he seems to contradict that.

And now he is telling the Iraqi people to "Bring em on".

I have to tell you sometimes I really wonder how smart he is. Even our military is a little put out with that remark.

P.S, I really don't think he said God made me do it. <img border="0" alt="[wall]" title="" src="graemlins/wall.gif" />

Here's the link to the article. Russian Article It's the second instance I've seen of that quote, but the first I'd seen a complete article reference it. If it was just the Russian paper I'd be very skeptical of it, but referencing the Israeli paper lends more credence, I think. But then, again, who knows in today's world of media spin.

<Edit>I searched the Isreal paper (Haaretz) and couldn't find anything. So, it could be BS. But it is rather entertaining, none the less.

<Edit II> Here's another link to the same quote. Toronto Star


Maguana, I am so intune with God you wouldn't understand. Besides, my affiliation with a supreme being is not the issue here. Someone possibly letting the little voices in his head dictate policy is the issue. Try to stay focused.

I think we need to see if we can set a BB record here for length of a post..... First off,
Huh!??
Oh, those Israeli's are such honest people. That is why they have disclosed and admitted to having Nukes (had em since the 50's), and that they have "The Sampson Option" as one of their dictates. I think I'll wretch now.
Secondly, I doubt GW would ever say that to a person that would quote it in a paper.... As far as the comment that it is scary a "world leader" would listen to little voices and say "God told me to do it", let's talk about the Pope for one. He has a lot more hold on the world than GW, and he says all the time that God told him to do it, or say it. Why, he even told the Mexican people on his last trip there (You know, the country so over-populated that they cant feed all their own) that God did not want them to use birth control. Now THAT is a scary thing for someone of such power to say. Makes me wonder what kind of common sense God would make a comment like that, when children are starving because their parents have 11 of them.......... Keep it going, this is getting fun....

MC :p

Master Caster, It is clear that you know nothing about the teachings of the Catholic religion.

You are just like the people you are trying to discredit, twisting a statement around so it will fit your point of view.

The POPE nevers says that God told him to do or say anything. I am a CAtholic and more than a bet on a historian and I can tell you that has not happened.

You know in all the time I have been on this board I have yet to attack anyone, till now.

This will be my last post on this, As there seems to be just a few here that don't know their arse from a hole in the ground on this subject.

BW, I apologize since it is apparent I insulted you. That was not the intent. I also was raised Catholic, and I assure all readers that the belief in religeous sects, including the Catholics, Mormons, etc. believe that their leaders do get "divine inspiration" directly from God. This you cannot deny, and it is tantamount to "God told me so". I was trying to make the point that if a religeous leader makes that statement, or infers it, the majority do not think twice. If a layperson or official makes that kind of statement, we automatically assume they must be nuts...... I watched the Pontif's mass speech in Mexico, and he did state that God did not want his followers to use birth control (not a word for word quote) which I thought was irresponsible to say, since poverty reigns supreme in that country due to the family size/income ratio....... Again, I did not mean to offend, it is just what I feel and things I observe......

MC

If you can admit that Al Gore never said "I invented the internet", I will admit the President was misquoted. However, the media will continue to steamroll a story, true or not.

MC; I'm with you on the birth control and Catholicism issue. Doesn't make much sense, much like the current issue of preaching abstinence to the Africans. Yeah, like that'll work.

However, the Pope doesn't command a nuclear-equipped military, so the guidance he begets from prayer is a little more benign.

When I mentioned the Israel paper lending credence to Bush's quote, that was merely in a relative way. Given an Israel paper versus a Palestinian paper or Al-Jazheer, my bet would go with the Israeli paper.

More than likely, Bush was mis-quoted, or it lost its original context through translation. Sadly that doesn't really matter. Those in the Middle East will read it, believe it, and the damage is done.

Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfield all have a problem with speaking before thinking. But I guess Rove can't be everywhere at once.

I'm thinking we can get 8 pages out of this.

Good post Harley, couldn't agree more with you (big deal right.. LOL)
The points you make are very good. The AlJazeera thing really drives my point home. No matter what religeon (some worse than others), people follow so blindly and believe that all their clerics say is straight from God's will...... Why do you think that religeous leaders refer to their believers as "their flock"..... Baa Baaahhhh...

MC

After fishing for over a week and not seeing a newspaper or a news program on tv and not reading anything on the internet I feel quite content. A large group of people got together for a week at Neah Bay and we didn't bring up politics once. Isn't that great! This long , overworked thread only illustrates that political viewpoints are set in stone and one side can only taunt the other side and criticize the other side but never change the minds of the other side. One side gloats over their set of "facts" while the other side presents its own "facts" that prove the opposite is true.

After being away doing what I love most, fishing with friends, and coming back and scanning this thread I can only conclude that it is a stupendous waste of time.

MC I also must apologize. My wife had just gotten burned by some fireworks and I was not in the best of moods. But I stll should not have made the remark I did. I am sorry about that.

I think I better stick to fishing posts.

Accepted, as I hope mine was. That attitude (being able to apologize) is what separates men from idiots....... Grandpa, I agree that this thread has gone on a long time, but when people can talk and agree to disagree, apologize when necessary (such as the gentleman above did), and LISTEN at the very least to all involved, then discussions such as this can be very productive and rewarding. I now feel that although BW and I may not agree on all points, that I would be happy to share a cold one and a day of fishing with him..... And probably be able to call him friend. How can that be a negative thing??

Hats off to you BW.......

MC

Aunty

More wood is not always needed on the fire.

I enjoy a thread like this for a number of reasons. Mostly it's because I consider those that contribute to this board my friends because we share a common interest in fishing. When I read posts by others on other topics it gives me an insight to that individual's personality. Therefore I can better understand where they are coming from when making political posts.

What's happened internationally in the last year, and how it affects us locally, is a significant issue. I can't think of better people to discuss it with than friends. A friend can call me an idiot for having certain political ideals and still be welcomed on my boat any day.

For some perverse reason, I clicked on this dumass thread again - I guess to see how the mudslinging was going.

Anyway, I'm glad I did.

So you see grandpa, minds can be changed. You have come around to my way of thinking regarding participating in these BS topics.

It just took a few fish to get you to see the light.

Aw come on, it's no more meaningless than talking about baseball. Ooops, this could start a whole new argument. <img border="0" alt="[wall]" title="" src="graemlins/wall.gif" />

Actually, that's a good point, BW.

If I wanted to talk serious baseball, I'd go to a baseball BB.

If I'm looking for a quality political discussion, I don't go to a fishing BB.

Eh?


PS: Can you believe the size of that hog on the "Fishing with THE REALLY BIG ONE" thread?

So Harley, have you been watching that new show on the Discovery channel called American Chopper. That is one entertaining show. I find my self looking forward to it each week.

Maguana

Is that the one where the Dad does nothing and yells at his son the entire show?

Good show, the Dad needs to be slapped up side his head for his childish acts.

From the looks of his dad, feel free.

My co-workers have told me about that show, but I haven't caught it yet. I don't watch much television for some reason.

I've heard about the dad on that show. Really goes balistic over everything, and the kid doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. Must be a "youth" thing because my kid does the same thing.

BW

Not me, maybe Arnold

Please read the whole thing...

mishandled or ignored intelligence

Not a smoking gun but pretty close...

Yeah, that's pretty amazing stuff. I read the op-ed piece by Wilson in the NY Times and find it extremely derelict that Bush would include it in his speech.

The other really funny thing is the documents Bush said the British had that supported his claims of Iraq's nukes were both from the US. One was the plagarized thesis from a grad student in California, and the other was the CIA intelligence report.

What this all really means is, there was no threat to the US. We were in no imminent danger. Not from nukes, not from chemicals, not from biological weapons. Iraq posed no threat what-so-ever. The CIA has also stated last Thursday that they concluded there was no link between Iraq and al Queda. And Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfield knew it all along.

There was no reason to send our troops to war. The safety of America - our freedom - was never in jeopardy. Saddam was contained, being watched, and posed a threat to no one.

In other words, all those brave soldiers died in vain.

They didn't die for the noble cause of protecting our way of life - our freedom. They didn't die for the security of America. They died because a group of men with ill intent conjured up an image that scared the public into believing them.

And they continue to die because the arrogance of those same men refuse to acknowledge their miscalculations. They grossly underestimated the Iraqi peoples' will to be Arabs, not Americans.

The bottom line is, over 200 Americans and 6000 Iraqi civilians have died because someone lied. That is inexcusable.

Sounds like the same old dogs barking on the same old porch to me....Wish I was back in Neah Bay soaking up all that beauty and fishing and sunshine......what a great country.

Slabquest I do see some light here...I read these postings and see nothing but hatred for opposing political views....pathetic and blind hatred as if it is a cause celeb... some sort of elitist badge of honor.

I feel sorry for the haters as they march to
the same drum. I much prefer to appreciate what we have here in this country and enjoy the freedoms we have all around us every day. Cruising out into the Pacific ocean to seek out the fish we all are supposed to be here talking about I can't help but be very thankful. What a shame that this thread consumes 8 pages of rehashing the same ground trying deperately to prove a spiteful theory.

Wake up and smell the salt air my misguided friends ....

Hilarious

*sigh*........ Where do I start?

Just to clear the air..... I DID send a PM trying to clear up a misunderstanding and received quite a lecture and discounting of my attempt to apologize...... At THAT point I returned a PM stating that, if that was how my PM trying to smooth out the misunderstanding was going to be accepted then you could "kiss my ass" and "have a good one", if I remember correctly. I will not waste my breath trying to correct a misunderstanding I created, on someone who obviously could care less if I am sorry or not.
Search a few of my threads, and anyone will see that I have agreed with and quoted Aunty several times.... Not to mention the times I have stated that she was "right on", etc.....
I just have little patience for "debaters" that will accuse me of bigotry, racism, or "intolerance of others who disagree" from someone that can equally give a good verbal flogging (Ramon of WT is a good example.....

To ALL I may have PERSONALLY offended, I apologize here and now! I do not mean any personal attack on anyone, just because I strongly disagree with their ideals.

Can't we all just get along and go fishing???


MC

Grandpa tell me something. Did you defend Clinton as much when he was in office? Or do you only defend the right wing.

Personally I am rather hard on both.

You said 'hard on'....



hehehe

hehehehehehehe

It is not my intention to defend anyone. When Clinton was in office I didn't spend hours searching the internet for possible dirt to try to prove some case about how bad he was. So grab your fishing rods and go fishing.

Boy I would if I could. Still looking for a women that wants to support me in a mannor I in which I would like to become acustomed. For now the best I can do during the week is stuff like this.

goharley...

Osama Bin Laden was being watched and was supposedly "contained" as well

Granpda... When Clinton was in office you wouldnt have to go looking on the internet for dirt on him... He pretty much brought enough out into the open by himself.

Curtis

Sorry, Curtie, but Osama was/is not the head of a regime in a strategically important geo-political area. He did not have sanctions leveled against him. He was no more "contained" than you or I.

I realize that Clinton-bashing has become a national pastime rivalling baseball, but eventually some of you will need to put things in perspective. Clinton's sexcapades significantly pale in comparison to the loss of life caused by Bush's world-opinion-be-damned attitude.

When pundits around the world wrote of Clinton's scandal it was with a wink-wink, nudge-nudge, atta-boy smirk. Time will tell how the world evaluates Bush, but thus far it is with a disdain and abhorrence of his arrogance.

So what? Who cares what the world thinks - we're Americans, by God! Sorry, but that attitude just doesn't work in today's geo-political arena.

Umm goharley...

Do you and I have whole sections at Langley watching our every move, looking for evidence of our location, to tip off local authorities for our arrest?

And sorry to bash your beloved Clinton... You're right, having a man who can't hold back his sexual desires as president is far better then a president who doesnt turn a blind eye to embassy bombings and such.

Sorry man, but when I'm 40-50 years old (if I make it ), I'll be living in the world our leaders are making for me now... Although I dont agree with all Bush's environmental issues, I do like the fact that I may be able to live securely in a nation not under attack.

Curtis

I'm sure that above question is rhetorical, and, honestly, I don't see where it fits into the discussion. However, I think it makes my point of not being contained.

Read material other than National Review and you'll learn that most of the individuals responsible for embassy/US interest bombings have been apprehended. (Oh, and btw, coincidently, none were Iraqi) These people are apprehended through the help and cooperation of other governments - we don't send our law enforcement all over the world chasing bad guys. It's called a good foriegn policy.

Now imagine if you do live to be 40 or 50 and our leaders, by then, have trashed our foriegn policy so badly that other governments are no longer willing to help us hunt down terrorists. It's already happening. (do you really think bin Laden and Hussein are that good at playing hide and seek without help?) Will you then still feel safe and secure?

That says alot where your coming from. Blinded by the idealogical light. Free your mind from the left vs right shackles.

Check this out if you want a laugh. I thought it was pretty funny when I clicked on it.


Try this soon, before Google changes its no.1 site:

1) Go to Google.com;

2) type in (but don't hit return): "weapons of mass destruction";

3) Hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button, instead of the normal "Google
search" button;

4) READ what appears to be a normal error message carefully.


You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.