Come on now we all know that Saddam have WMD's and he's so dangerous that he just didn't use them against us :)

What is your evidence that he wasn't an imminent threat? Is it that he's such a good guy? Or maybe because he wasn't intersted in making WMD's let alone using them. Oh right, he made them up just like he made up the mass graves that were filled by a ruler using WMD's. Oh wait, thats just your imagination.

I'm guessing this is a bad attempt at sarcasm. But, it is a fact that he had WMD's just no one but the people that worked with them no where they are no. Do yourself a favor before speaking. Do the research. Look through the U.N. reports on Iraq. Specifically, look for what they were supposed to do with there WMD's and look what the U.N. said they had. Then look for any hahahahahahahahas saying what happened to the WMD's, Il'll give you a hint you won't find anything saying what happened to them.

Yes let us recap...

Can anyone connect the dots?

Thanks, I love how you argue and still make my point for me at the same time.

piker, you're an imminent threat..... of wasting all of our times with your dumb ass posts. :glugglug

here, here!

anyhahahaha who questions the importance of dissent in our system needs to revisit the writings of the people who built this country.

Following a political leader simply because he is a leader is anti-American.

So you're taking my post from hours ago and the most recent one, and trying to draw connections between them?

I said in that very post you're refering to "If they had just said that Saddam was a bad man and should be removed, then people could weigh that as it is"

THEY... THEY dumbass!!!

Learn how to read.... keep the connecting the dots games to kids.

theKing:

Excuse me!! *splutter*

Are we now saying that the failure of the US Admin is because of all the lies the security services, the British, French, German and Intel agencies conveyed to this thing in the Whitehouse?? How quaint. "It was the French who made us invade Iraq".

"Words" as far as Bush is concerned are meaningless - whether he "said" this or that is totally irrelevant within this Admin. It is an Admin based on lies - from all angles. There is NO DOUBT of the attitudes and opinions of this current Admin. This are been clearly stated on many occasions.

They are also a little "smarter" than state outright lies, (tho that has lapsed at times). The technique is "suggest" and repeat the same old cliches in the hope that they will stick. That is not honest - it is lying - especially when there is no foundation.

But, as you have said many times, the US government will continue to do what they need to do (whatever the hell that means! *g*)

If you must - carry on supporting "George-Pass-The-Buck-Dubya"- this person has no honor or credibility. US people deserve a LOAD better than having this ass as a 'leader".

Bush

In my opinion, if you're:

black
latin
asian
middle class
lower class
work for a living
don't live off a trust fund
gay
open-minded
or not a sheep
you shouldn't like Bush

By the way, got something for ya.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

Please, I know the facts and I knew from the start that Saddam was no threat. Anyone familiar with the ME would've known.
But let's just say that you're right and he does have WMD's. The fact that he didn't use them against us while his doom was approaching and his country invaded proves that he's no threat. Heck, maybe he deservers the nobel prize for that one :)

Let me remind you that we've got satelittes who detect underground labs in North Korea, we've got machines in South Korea that detected enriched uranium in North Korea.

If Saddam was a threat he wouldn't have been invaded. Stop hiding your head in the sand.

I guess the argument breaks to down to this... If you think the adminstration is lying or not. I don't see what they have to lie about. Do you think, they lied about the war in Iraq because it was such a great political thing to do? they guy had a 75% approval raiting after 911 all he had to do was ride that out if he just wanted to remain elected.

What is your point exactly? America shouldn't protect its intersts? I don't get it..

Read my first post again dumbass.

Why do you think he was no thread. He had WMD's and he hated the U.S. What more do you want from him to be a threat?

Proof? And please don't say "cause Bush said so"

Yea, so how did I prove your point, Iraq isn't his own agenda it is America's agenda. Which is why the majority of the population support it. So again I ask you what is your point?

Look at the U.N. sanctions. Ill give you a tip look at the ones dealing with iraq. :glugglug

Did you listen to his speech? He talked about giving Iraq to the people, and leaving.

What American agenda was there? What interests? in freeing people? You honestly believe that? No, actually, you don't... because you implied that there was more in your post.

As for the UN Sanctions.... the UN said they found nothing and told the US to stay out. You should reconsider your posts before you make them.

I'm done talking to you. Come back after you do some homework. :glugglug

No, the American Agenda was getting rid of a hostile regime that aided terrorist against the U.S. We really have no more interests then that. That is why we are turning the country over to Iraqi's that want to live in peace in the next few years.

The U.N really found nothing huh? 20 sanctions on nothing. You really believe this? Or could this be it the U.N. he had stuff but he's paid enough of them off (France, Germany, Russia) with the money for oil program that the U.N was giving him a pass.

By the I can prove my statements with verified research.. Can you prove yours?

Do your homework...and actually read the 17 UN resolutions applied against Iraq including the last 1441. FYI...the UN did not tell the US to stay out. You should reconsider your posts before you make them.

Kim Jong Il is developing nukes and he hates the U.S., he have 400000 slaves, tests chemical and biological weapons on entire families, sent a few agents in South Korea to commit terror acts and tells his people that the US is like Nazi Germany and that war is inevitable. And on top of that his missiles will soon be able to reach the US, unlike Saddam who's missiles could barely reach Kuwait :)

So really, if Saddam was actually a threat he wouldn't have been invaded. Do you see North Korea being invaded?

So since "not approving" isn't the same as "stay out"... it's ok to go ahead and just go in?

This converstaion isn't about North Korea its about Iraq. But since you brought it up.. As the president said last night war isnt the first option it's the last option. There were no other options left in Iraq. (If you have some please post them becuase I didn't see any)

North Korea is different people with more knowledge then you or I on the subject think there are ways to handle this diplomatically. It is a totally different situation. There arent 20 U.N. Sanctions against North Korea. Additionaly, China, Russia, and Japan all are neighbors of North Korea. Which provides some leverage in our favor. In Iraq you had Iran and Saudia Arabia neither with a leverage on Saddam or Iraq. But, you want to debate what should be done in North Korea we could.

Again, go re-read the U.N's decisions. America never asked permission to invade Iraq. We just asked the U.N. to back up their sanctions which they wouldnt. Do to 3 of the veto's being on the take from Iraq.

By the way, MaskedMan, this could be why you are considered "anti-american" you spread miss-information and propaganda against the U.S. It would be one thing if you had facts to spread. You don't have to favor every American decision but at least have facts why. Not just lies and exaggerations and miss-truths. Especially if you are going to take it to a public forum.

Now you're confusing me with your president.

If they do not change their ways...attacked yes...but the last report I heard was that China had either convinced North Korea to drop their Nuclear Weapons program or are close to doing so.

Is that so? I recall Saddam sending an envoy to tell the US that he'll even allow US troops in to inspect the country for WMD's. Not to mention that the UN inspectors where already in Iraq.
No options left in Iraq? How is that? The guy obviously was not even close to a threat, heck Powell on February 2001 said that Saddam isn't able to threaten any of his neighbours even with conventional weapons.

Really? Well we obviously invaded Iraq and are struggling in there, this might very well give ideas to a guy who's much more powerfull than Saddam. Bush is making the US look weak.
What leverage? Kim Jong Il doesn't really listen to anyone.

No, last I checked, Cheney is going to China to press them to talk with North Korea.

And all of a sudden we're willing to negotiate with tyrants and give concessions as long as they're only oppressing there population? Iraqis deserve freedom but North Koreans don't :)

This does not mean that politicians do not use patriotism in times of need to match their on ends. If you think otherwise you know little of politics.

One is a serious threat, the other isn't. It's easy to use force instead of diplomacy when you know the other guy doesn't have anything to fight back with.

The report that I heard was he was going to thank the Chinese. Iraqi "freedom" is only a by product of the reason/reasons for the invasion of Iraq. It is first and foremost for what is perceived to be for the National Interests of the US and as a by product the interests of the Western world in general.

You don't get it do you. The U.N. negotiated with Saddam for what 12 years? Where did it get them? France, Gmerany, and Russia made some money from the oil i guess. North Korea is a threat I agree but lets not jump the gun and goto war. Let's try to solve it diplomatically. Are you that blind that the only difference you see between North Korea and Iraq is level of power?

if you are an american, get back in school or stay in school. There is a reason we have an Electoral College and it worked exactly like it was set up 2 work. and it wasn't put there the last election so Bush could get in office. Popular vote really don't mean shit, but the Electoral College has always gone with the Popular vote except 2 times.

I'm sure Bush would love to send in the troops to N. Korea and reform the place, but a war with N. Korea would be a much larger undertaking than a war with Iraq. A war with N. Korea would take longer, cost more money, and likely result in many more deaths than the war with Iraq.

If he doesn't have anything to fight back with why are 700 Americans, and other nations that sent soliders dead? Guy, if you don't have anything intelligent to say leave the debate in this thread to Roger. He may be missing the point but he isn't outright making stuff up to further his point.

Did you read up at all on all the votes that were never counted? the margin of error? the shady dealings going on?

You're right, popular vote doesn't mean nothing.... all it does is give you a rough idea on what the majority of the country wants.

:thumbsup but I do have think a lot of them are not even from the USA

Yes, that's very much worse than a country that truly does have WMD's. Moron.