News.
Well, according to some people (I will not say names) President Bush "lied" to the American people and said that Iraq had nuclear bombs. Let me just start by saying, why would Bush say that Iraq has nuclear bombs, if he didn't believe so? How would it benefit him to say that they did? According to them, "At least when Clinton lied no one died"----what Clinton did was absolutely horrible and very embarrassing. How do you think other countries looked at America? Oh, just look at America---they are the most powerful country and they elected a president who cheats on his wife!!!! If I were a Democrat (which will never happen) I would be VERY EMBARRASSED that the president I elected had no morals and lied to the American people about having an affair with another woman. Bush did not lie to the American people, he did what everyone thought was the right choice at the time. The media, as many of you know is very biased and is always critizing Bush. It really bugs me when people say incredibly stupid things like "Bush lied".
I also thought it was a bit funny that the people whom I am referring to brought this issue up in math class.
posted by Alexandra at 6:53 PM
13 Comments:
go to http://drewthesteakman.blogspot.com/
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
i fixed it
First of all, Bush did lied. He made up an excuse to go to war with Iraq to get their oil. He also used it to draw attention away from Osama Bin Ladin. This is the United States of America, if we really wanted to find Osama Bin Ladin we could have, the technology we have is unimagginable. We can pretty much do anything. PLus what about past presidents cough cough... NIXON!! Republicans should be ashamed of him!!!
Also, BUsh's 32% approval rate isn't exactly good.
Bush didn't lie! He went to war with Iraq because he truly believed at the time that Saddam was close to acquiring nukes or biological/chemical weapons. He was was willing to risk our oil addicted economy to protect Americans. Was he completely right?-No, but he made the best decision at the time. It is easy to be a revisionist, a back bencher, and claim it was all about oil, but don't forget that at the time we were just recovering from 9/11. If it was all about oil, he would have let things be, just as Clinton had done before him. The risk of intervention was an unstable Iraq, and unstable oil market. That is what we have today!
Only time will tell if it was the best thing to do, but at the time he felt it was worth the risk to be wrong. Imagine, if Saddam had allowed terrorists such as Bin Ladin to get their hands on a nuclear bomb, or had orchestrated an attack on Israel or another attack on the US. Many more would have been killed, and at a much greater cost to Americans and the rest of the world. Tony Blair, felt the same way.
Many times, greatness is not doing what is safe and popular, but doing what the situation demands. Imagine, if Churchill had played it safe, like Chanberlain had before him, what kind of world we would be living in today! Imagine if we had intervened early during Hitler's rise, how many millions would or could have been saved.
To say that we could have found Bin Ladin is either incredibly stupid, or cynical, or both. We have been trying, and continue to try to track down Bin Ladin. No, even as a great power "we can(not) pretty much do anything"- there are limits to even our power. Make no mistake about, whether one realizes it or not, this is not a game, this is about our survival as a free world and a free country!
The survivor's families of 9/11. and the families of soldiers today have not forgotten this point. To say it is all about oil, not only is just plain wrong, but it trivializes the sacrifices that have been made, and that are continuing to be made by our brave soldiers today! The next time you express your opinion-think of the people who sacrificed their lifes to allow you to express yourself-no matter how misinformed!
and what about NIxon....? I still don't understand why you critisize dems for clinton and not repubs for nixon. It doesn't take 5 years to find somebody.
whats worse? cheating to win an election you are already going to win or lieing to your country and to your familie?
Nixon was an embarrassment, and he needed to go, but he also resigned before he was impeached-he did it for the good of the country and for himself.
No party has a lock on purity or ethics any time.
Don't forget that Nixon should have been elected in 1960, but the election was stolen by mayor Daley and the democrats in Chicago by buying illegal votes and stuffing ballot boxes. This is a well documented fact.
If Bush did start the war for oil, where is the oil? Why is gas now in such short supply and getting more expensive?
If our technology is or was so great, why didn't Clinton capture Osama?--- Get real!
The basic facts are, that whether democrats or republicans are in power, fighting the war on terror is going to be very long, very costly, very difficult, and very painful. To shut down the Islamic radicals/terrorists is going to require a multifaceted approach that demands we stay resolute in our actions, that we stay united in our values, and that we stay the course. To withdraw now would be a huge mistake. A mistake we would pay for now, as well as many times over for the years to come.
Remaking the middle east is a herculean task-but do we really have a choice?
If we don't stay engaged, we will be engaged sooner or later, whether we like it, or not.
It would be nice to turn back the clock, but the events today were decided for us a long time ago.
ummmmmm... actually, 9-11 didn't happen when clinton was in office...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said:
ummmmmm... actually, 9-11 didn't happen when clinton was in office...
Wow. what a typical liberal, afraid to put your name. You are an embarrassment to the Democrat party.
Well duh 9/11 didn't happen when Clinton was in office, but Clinton knew the threat of Osama and could have easily tried to find him. But Clinton was such a wimp that he didn't have enough backbone to take a stand.
Post a Comment
<< Home