50,........

Didnt see the link but 40% is a number that I believe is much more accurate, and to most "poor" people(who on average are Democratic and are not too concerned with worldly matters) yes Saddam and Iraq probably mean the same thing to them.
There is a big difference between 40% and 70%.

As far as Bush playing the 9/11 "card" so to speak, look you have to understand the magnitude of 9/11. It was a catastrophic event for the United States, Pearl Harbor was the only thing that was remotely similar... and we all saw the end result of that. 9/11 was and should be revered and we should work to make sure something like that doesnt happen again. It hasnt... yet.

Should we be afraid of terrorists, figuratively speaking yes, but not everyday literally being afraid. Should we have been afraid of terrorists in 1993 when they attacked the WTC the first time, yes of course, but we werent, we blissfully ignored them like some people in this thread are ignoring threats now.

They guy in N Korea needs to go. The guys running China need to go. The guys running 2/3 of Africa need to go. Most of the guys running the Middle East need to go. All of them suppress freedom and kill and torture political dissenters. Are we going to invade everyone in the name of "spreading democracy"?

You really are a simple creature arent you? You honestly believe that you will have no problems in life if you dont "start" something? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

If it serves Americas interests, yes of course. Kind of a stupid and naive question, but you wont see my intelligent reply because you are a spoiled uneducated child who chooses ignorance over reality.

"Splum

A semi combonation of splooge and cum. It is a weak ejaculation do to physical status or poor sperm count. A weaker built person may splum verus a more in shape and heathy person who would climax normally."

Yeah what a thing to name yourself after.

Nice spelling Ben, here is a cluepon to redeem, user Firefox it has a spellchecker.
I hope your porn websites look better than your Myspace page http://www.myspace.com/gatorb :1orglaugh :1orglaugh
Ouch no wonder you are a broke motherfucker.

You made the claim that you "operate MANY adult websites". I called your bluff and you folded. You are the only webmaster on GFY that I have ever known to be afraid to name even one of their websites - the idea is to promote your biz here.

As for your paranoia about me having malicious intents, not sure where you got that. Name a single time I have done anything malicious towards anyone else's website? I assure you, I don't hack people's sites, conduct DoS attacks, or any stuff of that nature.

From what I can tell you are a liar and a coward, and don't actually operate adult websites. You have provided no evidence whatsoever to make anyone think otherwise.

Bravo genius. Technically, we are not at war in Iraq...if you could even grasp that simple fact, then you might not appear to be such a dupe of the neocon propaganda machine.

The Joint Resolution authorizing sending troops into Iraq is different than a Declaration of War.

Regardless, most people place their trust in the President when the lives of U.S. troops are at stake, and the support Bush had post-9/11 was unprecendented. But, when you have been lied to so many times, at some point you have to say enough is enough. I don't ascribe to the "good Nazi" defense.

The lies and continued deployment of our troops, years after "mission accomplished", have caused many in the President's own party, many in the intelligence field, and several former General's and others to call for our withdrawal from Iraq.

You think that just because you like to wrap yourself in the flag, that makes your opinions correct, and that you are more patriotic than people who disagree with you. You disgrace the flag when you do that.

I served six years in the Navy (I was on active duty longer than Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld combined), so I will never bow down to idiotic posturing, nor salute failed policies resulting in the unnecessary deaths of our troops.

My criticisms are not limited to the Bush administration, I have been known to criticize bad policies, regardless of the political party or ideology promoting them.

The Bush/Cheney neocon driven propaganda machine and their agents planted much of the false intelligence the world relied upon, and they ignored any intelligence that contradicted them, or interfered with their desire to invade Iraq. Most of the world understands this now.

See my previous post about Chalabi and the INC. They were a major source of much of the false information, correct?

You should be pissed that billions of dollars of taxpayer money and thousands of precious lives have been lost due to bad intelligence. You should be doubly angry it's the people that you trusted, whom deliberately twisted the intelligence in order to pursue and implement a disasterous agenda that otherwise would have not been possible.

I'm not sure about Rosie's sanity, I haven't seen what she has to say yet on this issue. Celebrities are not generally the people I look to first on world affairs and political issues. :1orglaugh

I'll sell you one of my websites if you ever want to be able to honestly say that you are an adult webmaster... :winkwink:

ADG Webmaster

That's not me dumbass. You think I have GatorB everywhere?

i guess iraq has nothing to do with 9-11, or correct me if i'm wrong

I agree we should be afraid and our fear should have been starting to build many years back, maybe even before 1993, but like you said we are often blissfully ignorant and assume it won't happen to us.

It just seems like if Bush wants to do something that erodes freedoms or could be misused, he breaks out the 9/11 references. I understand how terrible it was and it should always be in the back of our minds, but it shouldn't be dragged out every time he finds opposition to something he wants to do.

It's hard for me to buy him has someone trying hard to protect the country while we have somewhere around 10,000 illegals a day sneaking in from Mexico.

Let's see

http://www.myspace.com/gatorb :

Male
32 years old
LIVE OAK, FLORIDA

Status: Married
Religion: Christian - other
Zodiac Sign: Gemini
Children: Someday


ME: Male, 38, I don't even live in Florida anymore, divorced, atheist, Sagittarius and I have a child.

So yeah that's me alright. If you looked at my profile here it says my birthday is DECEMBER 8th that tells you I'm not a Gemini. Also I already posted I registered to vote in 1987. So if I'm 32 I was what 12 when I did that? What a dumb ass.

No Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. Saudi Arbia did, but we didn't invade them because they are buddies with Bush.

Thank you for posting at least something semi-intelligent instead of cutting and pasting and attacking "who is the mysterious splum" angle.

We ARE at war buddy its technically called the "Global War on Terrorism".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism

Criticize all you want, it wont help your cause. Obviously your government no longer represents you so you have to live with it.


Even if that was true, and Ill grant you some latitude there, Saddam had violated many UN resolutions for years as well as breaking the cease fire agreement several times. He did import BANNED missle parts, he did fire on coalition aircraft in the no fly zone. We had every right in the world to invade and take him out period.


As far as my websites, I will never tell you them but I will tell you this to be a little bit more specific, my "web sites" are merely "door ways" to sponsors/advertisers. In the "traditional" sense I dont run a "content" site and Google is my main traffic source. Does that help you at all.

Shoud I assume this is you?

http://www.myspace.com/splum

Did I see a link to Fox News? The White House lapdog "news" organization?

I completely agree with almost everything you said up there, keep in mind Bush IS a politician and well politicians in general do disingenuous things. I always think in terms of lesser of evils, sure could there be a much better President in office yes, could there be a worse one, yes it could be Jimmy Carter who would have ran in fear from Al Qaeda. As far as Bush eroding freedoms that is an issue I am not so convinced of, I have yet to see one freedom he has eroded of mine personally. Much of it is anti-Bush propaganda, we are a nation of laws, new laws are enacted by each congress and president. Hell Clinton took the freedom of soldiers to come out of the closet. Shrug, I want to come down to the basics...

1. We cant withdraw from Iraq until it is somewhat stabilized.
2. Bush only has a couple years left and we need to start healing the culture gap in our country so we need some people in Congress to step to the plate and start the healing process or this bitter divide in America will just get stronger and stronger each Presidency.
3. American policy has always been pre-emptive it just hasnt been so blatant as the Bush administration has made it. We need to do more actions covertly.
4. The United Nations is useless it should be disbanded and another organization formed from the ground up.

Lol if you wish, I dont really care what you think you know about me. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh Hey I thought I was on ignore? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

It must suck not to be allowed to vote and still be a citizen of the United States?

Yes, that is him. :thumbsup

I WISH I was 22. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh
Lol the funny part of your comment is you KNOW who I am and dont even know it, we have done business before a LONG time ago.
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

It does indeed. Although I'm unsure of the relevance of your statement.

For future reference, if you need to make a claim backed by a news story, try to post a reference not from Fox News, as they're about as bogus as it gets. Go for a more reliable source...if such a thing really exists in this spinster-saturated media world.

Most of the 9/11 hijackers were supposedly Saudi, and bin Laden himself is a Saudi, and it's true that Bush and the Saudi royal family have deep economic ties, but recent news out of the Middle East suggests the cozy relationship between Bush and the Saudis is starting to sour...

(Source: Time magazine)

It's not hard to understand this when you consider that Bush's disasterous actions in Iraq have removed a Sunni governed state (Iraq), which had been a buffer between Saudi Arabia (which is Sunni run), and Iran (which is a Shiite state).

You've heard the expression wagging the dog, well, in the Middle East, Bush screwed the pooch...

ADG Webmaster

I would hope not. If so then.

A) he's nothing but a punk kid

B) he complains about my supposed layout? That's crap and he can't even do it himself. He had to get help from KilerKiwi.net to do that crap.

Its a video of "Rosie Odonnell in her own words" buddy, dont even listen to anything but Rosie and you will see how fucked up she is.

Haha woah for a minute there I almost thought you had a clue until that last part. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

You do realize Iraq attacked Kuwait which was Sunni? He also annexed the UN mandated buffer zone between Saudi Arabia and Iraq without the Saudis approval. The Saudis BEGGED for us to protect them after Saddam attacked Kuwait. Saddam was more dangerous to Saudi Arabia than Iran that is a fact, hell Iraqs military decimated and beat the Iranians. Saddam was dangerous for EVERYONE, Bush did the Saudis a favor by removing Saddam.

I never made reference to Rosie O'Duh-nell in this thread, just to Fox News and how much they suck ass. Take a looksee. I think they're all fucked up, including her. In fact, my general opinion is that if you're on television, you're probably a shithead who can't be trusted.

Actually thats probably very true. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

You are right and wrong. Saddam WAS a threat to Saudi Arabia back in the day. The keyword being WAS. Saddam was desperate for money back then and probably would have gone into Saudi Arabia had we not stepped in. He had the 5th strongest army in the world at the time I believe.

But that was then. After the first Gulf War, his army was decimated and not allowed to build up again. They were not allowed to fly outside the "no-fly zone" and posed zero threat to Saudi Arabia (especially considering our position out there and ability to step in immediately). He simply didn't have the military power to pose any threat to Saudi Arabia.

So this move is actually bad for Saudi Arabia who will now have to deal with a Shia controlled country. It is why the Saudi Prince came out the other day to bash the occupation of Iraq. I don't think either poses a threat to them, especially with the fact that we'd step in to protect them in a second. But I think their concern is that Iraq will become a breeding ground for anti-Sunni groups that can slowly infiltrate the country and cause trouble.

I agree strongly that the number one thing this country needs right now is to heal the culture gap in this country. It kind of started with Clinton. A lot of people on the right dispised him and they did everything they could to get the white house back after he left office. I think much of the country still has a bitter taste in its mouth over the 2000 election and even to a smaller extent the 2004 election. There are few more polorizing figures in politics than Bush and I think he needs to try to help bring people back together after a long, crazy 6 years. Although I don't think he can do it. We are stuck in Iraq with no end in site and his current policiy seems to be to pass it on to the next president. The democrats who were elected on a campaign the included a heavy dose of "unity for the country" seem only interested in going after the republicans. I have a feeling that unless someone moderate wins the whitehouse in 2008 the gap will only widen.

We trully are a country made up of red and blue states now. It's going to take a hell of an effort to bring them back together.

I agree with a lot in your post. But this is the part I can't. I don't think it will ever be stabilized.

It's the Middle East. And it might not be PC to say it, it's a fucked up part of the world with a lot of fucked up people. Our presence is not going to stop the Shia and Sunnis from hating each other. It won't stop them from killing each other. Simply put, that part of the world simply does not want peace and has proven it for centuries. I don't think it matters when we leave, they'll kill each other still. I'd rather them do that then kill us.

I have always said that since the begining of recorded history that part of the world has known nothing but blood and violence and it shows no signs of ever changing.

Oil, money and everything else aside we are dealing with religious radicals and you can't rationalize with people like that.

EXACTLY. MCCain says you can't imagine how worse thing can get if we leave. Sure I can. I know it's going to go to shit. it is goingto anyways. Us staying there delays the enevitable and olny prolongs the process it will take Iraq to finally come out of this.

See Bush and his ilk have to fantasy that if we just stay there long enough and spend enough money and send enough troops things will get better. NO THEY WON'T. If we leave things go to shit even worse. If we stay things will get even worse. So why stay and get guys killed and mangled if the outcome is the same?

Bush says we can't leave because we'll embolden the ememy. We'll he does have plan to leave SOMEDAY doesn't he? So even he agrees that SOMEDAY the troops will leave. What is going to stop all the insurgents then?
What happens if after that the insurgents take over? Are we going to re-invade?

I don't believe Bush has any plans to leave. It's been said for a long time that the US has way too many vested interests in the Middle East and the best way to see that they stay protected is by military intervention. You don't get much better than by occupying a country in the thick of it. This goes double for Bush though, and I don't think I need to explain why.

Rosie: "Do you trust Bush as much now as you did when he was elected?"

Blonde: "I think in a time or war, you have to trust your president no matter what."
---------------------------------

Now you tell me which one is using the "ignorance is bliss" approach? In a time of war, you just your brain off, question nothing and just trust explicitly without giving it any consideration?

She doesn't WANT to question anything. She wants to just be told how to think by her war time president.

Heaven forbid someone question the things they're told. Free thinkers.... they're "insane"!

So if Bush had his way in 2027 we'd still be there?

Kuwait as a nation state is primarily a creation of Britain, whom Kuwait only declared independence from in 1961. European colonialists have historically used clever partitioning of countries when pulling out, whether in Africa, in Southeast Asia, or the Middle East to keep their access to prized resources, or to ensure political divisions that benefitted the Europeans even after they ceded political control.

To summarize the Iraq invasion of Kuwait (which I believe was dealt with better than the current US invasion of Iraq), Kuwait was a huge financeer of the Iraqi's in their war with Iran. Following the end of that war (which ended in a stalemate), Kuwait demanded that Iraq repay them, even though Iraq was still in shambles economically and unable to do so.

The situation deteriorated further when Iraq claimed that Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq (from disputed area to begin with) and pulling out Iraqi oil.

When Iraq flew some trial balloons up about an Iraq invasion of Kuwait, it has been suggested that the U.S. (under the first President Bush) sent mixed signals to Iraq, precipitating their attack.

True, while the Saudi leaders feared Saddam, and were undoubtedly happy to see him toppled, I very much doubt that they would prefer a Shiite regime in control of Iraq, that allies itself with Iran, although that appears to be what is transpiring.

Short of the U.S attacking Iran and attempting to overthrow their government too, and thereby risking a world war, it would appear that Iraq will devolve into all out civil war, and that a Shiite run government allied with Iran will emerge.

The U.S. course in the Middle East has been a treacherous one at best for many decades. It will likely remain so.

I like to believe that there can be some long-term diplomatic solutions to the problems plaguing that region.

To do so will require that the Republicans and Democrats come to some consensus as to what is practical and achievable, and at what price. The Bush style was never about consensus, which is why it cannot succeed.

Hopefully, the next President (since I doubt anything will be resolved until a new Administration is installed), will be wiser, and will share such a view, whichever party prevails, otherwise we will remain a nation divided.

We are badly served, when either side winning an election, ignores the other side. It is a shaky foundation to wage war from.

As for the "War on Terror", read the entire Wikipedia article you cited, expecially the "criticism" about the War on Terror section.

The war on terror is just more political rhetoric used for it's propaganda appeal by cynical and manipulative politicians, and is not a formal Declaration of War, which carries a far different meaning.

It's been fun playing, but I need some sleep...

ADG Webmaster

Funny thing is I bet she did't have that view when Clinton was president. Nor do I think she would have that view if Gore or Kerry were the president right now. Nor do I think she'll have that view if a democrat gets elected president in 2008.

I love people with situational ethics and morals.

Iraq was a creation of Britain after WWI. which is why things are fucked up today there. Face it, when whitey gets involved we fuck it up good.

I don't like how quickly they were able to pin it on Al-Qaeda. Conservatives will have us believe we were blind sided on 9/11. How is it then that we knew exactly who was behind the attacks like the next day? The terrorists supposedly assumed false identities here in the US, yet we knew their real names that quickly.

And you seriously think the US didn't start anything? It's funny seeing the bully play the victim. Actually, its pathetic but I said funny because that was nicer. :1orglaugh

Here's the funny thing. I used to be from Sarasota and so I read the online version of the local paper. I read at least 3 articles that paper had written on Atta in the year before 9-11 accusing him of having ties with Al queda. he was living in Venice florida at the time which is in southern Sarasota county. Yet the governemt claims to not know WTF was going on. That's why I was even more shocked than usual on 9-11 when they showed Atta's name and pic on TV. I'm like "Thats's the guy in the articles!!!"

Also ironic that on 9-11 Bush was in Sarasota visiting an elementary school.

So we have the President of the US the day of the 9-11 attacks visiting a place 20 miles from( and in the same county )where the head guy in the 9-11 attacks was living and planning the attacks.

Not just Bush, it's the entire line of people who support the concept. And there are dozens of them who will eventually vie for control of the nation, and thus, control of the situation. So I say yes, we'll still be there, and a great number of others also say yes. Whether or not it will happen is anyone's guess, but if things continue the way they are right now, you can count on an extended US occupancy of not only Iraq but eventually other Middle Eastern countries.:helpme

Whatta nonsense.If country is in war that doesnt mean you can do anything you want to win it.

Well said :thumbsup

I fail to see how Rosie comes across as insane in that interview. If anything the blonde seems seriously ditsy and borderline retarded.

hate to say it but I agree with Rosie on this one, and I am not a Rosie fan at all! She has a point. I feel like blondy just doesn't have a clue! She would have sent more troops to Iraq? What the hell would that have done?

She must have read that in Mein Kampf. It's exactly what the people of Germany believed during WWII. Look where it got them.

I finally saw the Rosie clip from The View. There was nothing particularly outrageous about it, and in fact she made several good points. Rosie certainly did not come across as insane. I'm not a big fan of free-for-all arguing about important issues, common on many TV shows these days, in which people feel they have to shout or talk over others to make a point.

Then I read the transcript of the O'Reilly show attacking Rosie. Now I see where you get much of the tone for your comments from, Splum. Vintage hysterical O'Reilly, in which only people that are of a like opinion with him, can have a valid argument.

I am not surprised that O'Reilly's style of populist ranting is popular with some. If you close your mind and disengage your brain, it's easy to get a bunker mentality and get swept up in self-righteous fervor.

The popular ratings style of TV debate, where people take provacative polemic positions, and then proceed to shout at each other and call each other names is not conducive to building understanding or for problem solving, whether it comes from the right or left.

I prefer more rational discourse, and thoughtful consideration of various viewpoints to arrive at my understanding of events, and I do try to keep an open mind.

Well, off to a photo shoot - talk (or shout/argue/call names) amongst yourselves...

ADG Webmaster

I don't think he wants to stay there, he just doesn't know how to leave. His actions now seem to show that he is planning to basically stay the course and let the next administration handle it. It is the only thing he can now do that won't risk political disaster for his party.

If he tries to pull us out of there and chaos erupts people will blame him and the republicans for getting us into the mess and never finishing the job correctly and it will give a huge advantage to the democrats in the 2008 election.

By staying there if a republican wins the white house in 2008 they have another 4 years to figure it out and if they fail so be it. If a democrat wins and they pull out immediately and chaos erupts the republicans can say, "see, I told you so."

It's the safe thing for him to do. He has created a mess he can't clean up so he's sweeping it under the rug.

I saw the view segment yesterday live and I my comment was "Rosie is gonna make the national news again" because of the comments about building 7. I knew people would call her nuts, lol. but she did make some decent points to Elizabeth.

Elizabeth is a die-hard bushie, although she'd deny it because it's not popular to be a die-hard bushie these days. She regurgitates the party line on a VERY regular basis. Try it yourself. Check the political controversial news and make a mental note of the republican response. Then watch the view the next day and wait for her comments.