Firm, No war.Our Generation is waiting for all the warmongers to die so we can have a Peaceful Earth.There is a Diplomatic solution,when stubborness and ego are taken out of the equasion.~Peace Glenna~

This war in Iraq is my generation's Vietnam. Either get the hell out of there or demolish the insurgents (analogous to the Viet Cong). You can't just stay in the middle ground, there are too many casualties and its a no win situation unless you step up the efforts. I say pull out before more lives are needlessly lost on either side, because its the innocent Iraqi's who are suffering the most losses.

I am now a grand father who served in Nam. I have seen war up front and personal and even had one of my friends die in my arms—so I know what war means. I encourage my kids and grandkids to learn all they can about the conflicts from our Revolution to present. I hope they understand the cause and effects. We went to Nam because of the fear our leaders had of the “domino effect” of communism that was engulfing unwilling people into their cause that could eventually effect us. We did not have the political will to win that war and paid dearly for it. When we left prematurely, the communists killed 3,000,000 people between Cambodia and Viet Nam because those people were against Communism. Now we are in a conflict called the War on Terror that is real and has much more direct consequence to our security then Nam id. If we were to leave with out stabilizing Iraq, we see them here trying to kill us and our way of life--- they really hate us and are unwilling to compromise. The stakes are much higher than Nam. The Communists killed 3 mil people in a foreign land, but they were not us—so most people really have a hard time relating to that—especially teenagers.
The real questions are: what would happen if don’t stabilize Iraq and what would it be like if we did not evade and remove an evil dictator who offered sanctuary to terrorists and was struggling to obtain WMD’s. I think Iran can help answer that question. The strife in mid east would have been diminished a long time ago if it were not for Iran. Terrorism can not succeed without a state like Iran sponsoring it.

I say we should have used all that money we wasted and are using now to help the people here in the USA and we should not force our military to get involved in this.

As for if I would shelter my little Kelly from it?? Well...since my views
I have a predjudice of sorts I would try not to expose my Kelly to it...I
would not hide it..I would let her listen and if She had questions I would say "Go ask your Mother"..yea I know...But, I want my little Kelly to be able to make up her own mind on things in life

Glen

There is more to every conflict than just is on the surface. As long as there are humans on this damn planet, there will be conflict...the sooner people realize that the better..its how you DEAL with it....

I tell every kid I meet

wake the frig up

Gw is a crook

when your older NEVER EVER VOTE FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE BUSH OR CHENEY FAMILIES ESPECIALLY THE FREAKIN TWINS

It would be nice if someone calls someone a crook that they would site some specific examples that are supported by varifiable facts.

When something is common knowledge it does not require a citation.

You have an inspiring future in the "fortune cookie" industry, Little.............:)

My children are 8 and 3. I do everything I can to hide the violence from them. They are way too little to have to know about war. When they get older like teens, then they will start to learn about war through their Social Studies textbooks. Hopefully this one will be over by then. HOPEFULLY. My children are lucky that they have both parents home with them and that I can shield them from war scenes and talk. Other children aren't so lucky as they have one or both parents actually serving in it and know exactly what sacrifices they have to give to it.

What worries me is that as both my children are boys, I read in the Post Office that males when they turn 18 they are REQUIRED to Register with the services. That it is punishable by law if they don't. It is in case, even though they haven't drafted since Nam, if it comes up where they have to re-inact the draft, my sons are signed up. I love my country. But I love my son's more and can not even think of sending them off to fight. If they choose to enlist is one thing. It will be a decision they think of very carefully, but to basically say you have no choice....you will serve your country and if you die...well you did it for your country. That should never be the governments decision.

Until the perfect world is invented, there will ALWAYS be a possibility of conflict, you cant expect OTHERS to do ALL the dirty work..... even true "warriors" would rather NOT fight, but you need the ones who WILL

Dave, you want examples of Gw's crookedness

childs play


He and Cheney call Halliburton an agency and give it billions of dollars worth or NO BID CONTRACTS

He appointed a Horse Judge, Brown to run FEMA and gave him a fake resume

he had his entire administration work to fins him a reason to invade Iraq since 2000, that's all he cared about

after 9/11 he wanted to invade Iraq and blame 9/11 on Hussein

he just pardoned a guy that lied to protect his lies about Iraq

he has not done one thing for the PEOPLE OF THESE UNTIED STATES

everything he has done has been for Halliburton, Big Oil,
and his dads buddies at the CARLYSLE GROUP

and he comes from a long line of criminals starting with grandaddy Prescott

1918

Prescott Bush Sr., leads a raid on a Indian tomb to secure Geronimo's skull for Skull & Bones.



1937

Prescott Bush's investment firm sets up deal for the Luftwaffe so it can obtain tetraethyl lead.

194Os

GUARDIAN - George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany. The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism. His business dealings . . continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. . .

The new documents . . show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty. . .

see all the wonderful Bush Family Histoty at :

learn a little America about your leaders

http://prorev.com/bush2.htm



Ohhh I almost forgot, the quintessential GW lie and crime

Ex-Aide Questions Bush Vow to Back Faith-Based Efforts

By Alan Cooperman and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, February 15, 2005; Page A01

A former White House official said yesterday that President Bush has failed to deliver on his promise to help religious groups serve the poor, the homeless and drug addicts because the administration lacks a genuine commitment to its "compassionate conservative" agenda.

David Kuo, who was deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives for much of Bush's first term, said in published remarks that the White House reaped political benefits from the president's promise to help religious organizations win taxpayer funding to care for "the least, the last and the lost" in the United States. But he wrote: "There was minimal senior White House commitment to the faith-based agenda."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24561-2005Feb14.html


is that enough for ya or you want more??

Let's try to stay on topic and not degrade ourselves to the level of our politicians. The war in Iraq is being fought for a number of reasons, these include: The US’s and the world’s dependency on oil, the growing destabilization of the Middle East and power changes taking place throughout the region, the rising impact of radical Muslim terrorism throughout the world and the support to those organizations being provided by countries in the region, etc.

I think the teenagers should realize a few things: They need to learn to listen carefully and scrutinize everything they hear. They need to be able to discriminate between commentary, biasness and facts. They need to understand that someone owns the media outlets and decides what gets presented and how it gets presented. They need to ask why am I being presented this topic and what are the core issues to the topic. They need to be taught to research carefully the topics being presented to them in bullet points and feel free to question their teachers, leaders and parents. They need to be more informed than reading one news article and listening to one show. Ultimately, they need to be prepared to raise the discussions above name calling and blaming. No party or ideology is perfect.

I do find the previous comments interesting though. For the person saying that diplomatic solutions exist, I would hope so and you should take DaveR’s lead and read up on prior wars. I’m afraid you’ll find that history does tend to repeat itself and once a leader gets their way it emboldens them. Typically they want more and more and will negotiate to buy time and then disregard treaties that don’t support their needs. This typically leads to real conflict. Similarly, the UN today is controlled by many countries with very complicated trade agreements. They won’t likely undermine their economies and favorable agreements to do help another country out.

To the person saying that we should have spent all the “wasted” money on people in the US, sounds good too. Do you think the growing federal government is capable of spending our money competently or do you think the taxpayers should be able to use their own money to do the right thing? With 4.7% unemployment (technically full employment) do you think things are really that bad here? Read what the definition of poverty in this country is (by the US gov’t. standards) and then compare that with the standard of living in other countries. It’s a bit eye opening.

My only other comment is: If we are going to go to war, let the Dept. of Defense do it’s job without letting politicians getting involved. We can’t worry about other countries not approving our actions if it gets to that point or that our news media is upset so long as we don’t reduce our standards and rules of engagement. We have to build up alliances and do what is in the best interest (defense) of our republic. We can’t afford to let the politicians play games of earmarks, threats and avoiding funding votes when we ask our fantastic military to do the toughest part of their job. We shouldn’t tolerate our politicians calling our military evil. Fight only when we need to and then support them 100%.

we are in Iraq because Hussein tried to assasinate George H.W. Bush, momma Bush and Laura Bush while GW was running for reelection to the Texas Governors position, or he would have been there too, that was in Kuwait when Clinton first took office.


OK??

The balls that GW should have taken his eye off of was in Afghanistan and Iran


Iran has been our enemy since the Shah fell and has printed billions of US counterfeit dollars and used them to support terrorism, 9/11 and to destabilize our economy.

YET FOR DECADES THE BUSH FAMILY IS FRIENDLY WITH THEM, HALLIBURTON DOES BUSINESS THERE, DO YOU EVEN REMEMBER IRAN/CONTRA???????????

excuse'

that should read

The balls that GW should NOT have taken his eye off of was in Afghanistan and Iran

YOU GIVE IT TO HIM, Robin Hood!!!

I have the utmost respect for our servicemen/women serving all over the world, but sometimes I think that these conservative Right-Winged wackos seriously brainwash these people from the get-go.

Robin, keep spilling the facts all over these blogs, because at some point, people are GOING TO HAVE TO WAKE UP!!!

Just the facts, man, just the facts. . .

Thanks

how soon we forget

Iran/Contra

the Shah of Iran

who really was behind 9/11

try these in regards to Libby & the road to Iraq

At the heart of the obstruction case against Scooter Libby is a cover-up involving co-conspirators from the White House Iraq Group. And they're hiding something far more damaging than the vindictive outing of a war critic's undercover wife, as this chilling timeline reveals:

Sept. 8, 2002: Vice President Dick Cheney and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice go on the Sunday talk shows to warn the nation that Saddam Hussein is "actively and aggressively" trying to acquire nuclear weapons. They cite a front-page New York Times story planted with neocon tool Judith Miller. Rice even draws the specter of a "mushroom cloud" over America.

Sept. 9: Following the kickoff of the propaganda campaign against Hussein, Rice's deputy Stephen Hadley meets with Italy's intelligence chief, Nicolo Pollari.

Oct. 1: The U.S. intelligence community sends a 90-plus page dossier on Iraq to the White House. Italian rumors of an Iraq-Niger uranium deal are not credible enough to make the report's "Key Judgments" section. They do not rise anywhere close to the top of the report – the executive summary read by top decision-makers like the president. In fact, they are called "highly dubious" in footnotes contained in Annex A.

Oct. 5 and 6: The CIA warns Rice and Hadley that the uranium allegation is dubious, and advises them to pull it from a draft of President Bush's planned speech in Cincinnati. They reluctantly agree.

Oct. 9: An Italian journalist working for a magazine owned by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi provides the U.S. Embassy in Rome with copies of documents alleging an Iraq-Niger uranium deal. Berlusconi later joins Bush's "coalition of the willing" to attack and occupy Iraq.

October: Later in the month, the State Department receives copies of the Niger documents from Italy, which had also provided them to the British government. Copies are shared with CIA officials around the middle of the month.

Dec. 19: State releases a "fact sheet" on Iraq accusing it of hiding "efforts to procure uranium from Niger."

Dec. 19: Seeing the alarming charge, the IAEA, a watchdog group conducting nuclear inspections in Iraq, makes a formal request to State to see any "actionable information" underlying its uranium allegation so it can confront Baghdad with it.

Jan. 28, 2003: Bush, in making a case for war in his State of the Union address, cites evidence that Iraq "recently" tried to buy uranium from Africa – a charge that, when combined with his twin charge that Iraq is trying to obtain aluminum tubes to help process the uranium, makes it seem as if Saddam Hussein is one step away from making a nuclear bomb. Of the litany of charges in the speech, they were the freshest and most shocking.

Jan. 29: IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei casts doubt on Bush's uranium claim in a Washington Post interview: "Niger denied it, Iraq denied it, and we haven't seen any contracts." He also shoots down the tubing claim.

Feb. 4: After a long struggle, IAEA's Iraq Nuclear Verification Office finally obtains copies of the documents it requested from the administration alleging contacts between Iraq and Niger officials.

Feb. 5: Secretary of State Colin Powell makes the case against Iraq to the UN, but leaves out the uranium charge.

Feb. 14: IAEA officials make a preliminary finding that the Niger documents are forgeries, based on the identification of several crude errors overlooked by the Bush administration for months.

March 7: The IAEA, in a report to the UN Security Council, formally announces the Iraq-Niger letters were faked.

March 19: The U.S. strikes Baghdad.

July 6: Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson reveals in an explosive New York Times op-ed that he shot down the Iraq-Niger rumors back in March 2002 following a CIA-sponsored fact-finding trip to Niger prompted by Cheney's intense interest in the rumors. Wilson at the time had reported back that the rumored uranium deal was "highly doubtful." The CIA circulated his findings in a report to the White House and other agencies.

July 7: The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee releases the findings of an investigation into the merits of Britain's dossier on Iraq, and among other things, they reveal that the CIA had tipped the British government off to the Niger uranium hoax the previous year.

July 8: The White House releases a prepared statement expressing regret for the State of the Union charge, admitting for the first time: "We now know that documents alleging a transaction between Iraq and Niger had been forged."

July 12: Cheney devises a scheme with his top aide Libby to attack Wilson and control the fallout from his New York Times bombshell. Later that day, Libby calls pal Miller of the Times, along with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper, to discuss Wilson's wife and how she works at the CIA.

July 21: Bush and Rice meet with Italy's Berlusconi at the president's ranch in Crawford, Texas.

July 22: Bush's communications director Dan Bartlett calls an unusual press conference at the White House to brief reporters on Bush's discredited uranium charge after news of the CIA's earlier warnings find their way into the press. It turns out they are memorialized in at least two CIA memos to the White House. At the lengthy briefing, Hadley takes the blame for the radioactive 16 words finding their way back into the president's speech. His explanation: he simply forgot the CIA had previously tried to wave them off the charge (even though CIA analysts had raised new objections when they saw it resurface in the State of the Union drafts they were clearing). Hadley is not fired for serving the president poorly. Nor is he demoted or reprimanded. Far from it, the president subsequently promotes Hadley to Rice's position after she replaces Powell at State.

For starters, why did the White House delay telling Congress and the American people that the president's uranium charge was spurious until after the war, when it knew it was underpinned by counterfeit documents before the war? Was it conspiring to defraud Congress and the American people?

Why did the administration delay sharing the Iraq nuke documents with the IAEA until after the president's State of the Union speech? Was it afraid the nuke watchdog would expose them as fakes to the world, and knock out a key charge in Bush's war speech?

Did the president know the information was bad and use it anyway in an historic speech to Congress? Did he use the Brits as political cover? Did he clear this with Tony Blair?

And why didn't Powell correct the Iraq "fact sheet" his department issued in December 2002, which included the bogus uranium charge – especially when Powell left it out of his own speech? And why did he leave it out of his speech?

source: http://www.antiwar.com/sperry/?articleid=7925

so, why we have all been looking at Wilson/Plame/Libby WE HAVE FORGOTTEN ABOUT THE LIES TO INVADE IRAQ

which was their plan all along

a DISTRACTION

we were so intent on finding out who outed a CIA agents indentity we forgot the why

shame on us

I see we have some “cool aid” drinkers on this forum who hate the President. It seems that all Presidents get these kind of "cool aid" posters. The tip off for their left wing garbage is when they make personal attacks on anybody which includes politicians. I guess they feel personal attacks make their point while in truth it exposes nothing but shrill extremely biased garbage. Some of the things some have delineated as facts against the President either are left wing talking points or dribble that would never stand the light of honest evaluation or investigation. I am surprised WTNH allows that kind of rhetoric. It does not bode well for their professional journalism.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.4655.ENR:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act

The Whitehouse isnt capable of keeping a secret of a president getting oral sex in the oval office and we have to believe some of this "conspiracy" garbage..lol.it is funny............

ATTENTION: All you right-wing brainwashed cronies:

When you can't afford to send your children to college because it's too expensive. . .

When you can't afford to fill up your auto with fuel because it's too expensive. . .

When you can't afford to heat your home with heating oil/natural gas because it's too expensive. . .

When you can't buy groceries to put on your table and feed your family because it's too expensive. . .

When you can pay your utility bills because it's too expensive. . .

When you can't buy clothes for you and your family because it's too expensive. . .

DON'T FRIGGING COMPLAIN!!!

Hey "Neal"

Remember Bush losing the Presidency in 2000. . . thought so.

Blame "CAPITALISM" and the "FREE MARKET" because you cant afford anything...plus a government that believes TAXES and government "programs" are all the answers...you are right...we ARE doomed.....

I see Moveon.org has found this node to spew their garbage.

Hey "Neal"

Maybe you need a reminder:

Remember Rumsfeld kissing Saddam's ass in the 80s - all buddy-buddy like.

Or, if you like, keep your head in the sand.

As a well-compensated social-liberal and fiscal conservative, I just have to laugh. So many low-income white people keep voting for the party that wants to screw them! If you're making less than six figures and you vote republican, you get what you deserve.

I can afford a doubling our tripling of my food and fuel budget. I'll just take cheaper vacations. I can handle a doubling in my health insurance costs too. I vote Democrat mostly, because I feel that I've done well in life and I don't mind helping out my fellow Americans.

Hey, anyone remember when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility (Borrowing a Billion bucks for an optional war?!) and small unintrusive government (Homeland Insecurity and warrant-less wiretaps?!)

When will we learn to stop messing with other nations? Remember all the meddling in Central America? Ollie North doesn't. Too bad we armed and trained Osama BinLaden in the 80s, then left him out to dry...which seems to have pissed him off!

I have the utmost respect for our servicemen/women serving all over the world, but sometimes I think that these conservative Right-Winged wackos seriously brainwash these people from the get-go.

Robin, keep spilling the facts all over these blogs, because at some point, people are GOING TO HAVE TO WAKE UP!!!

Just the facts, man, just the facts. .

Man In Tights has tights wrapped around his head. He should loosen his tights. They're cutting off his oxygen.

Bob posted some good historical links, facts as you call them. Maybe you should read them. I'll repost them for your convenience. Hopefully you'll know how to copy and paste.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.4655.ENR:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act

When will we learn to stop messing with other nations? Remember all the meddling in Central America? Ollie North doesn't. Too bad we armed and trained Osama BinLaden in the 80s, then left him out to dry...which seems to have pissed him off!

The last I remember North wanted to have him assassinated and the good ole jackasses shot the idea down.

what personal attacks??eh?

GW has ruined this country and we are not safer, in fact if England is any indication the slop is about to hit the proverbial fan.

I try, I really try to understand how some people 23% of the population at last count, still support this scumbag.

He did nothing about the warnings before 9/11.

He appointed a Horse Judge to run FEMA

He wanted to blame 9/11 on Hussein so he could invade Iraq right after 9/11

He left the hunt for bin to go to Iraq

now bin is back

he left the borders with Mexico wide open

big oil still gets subsidies even thought they reap huge profits

and what's important to him????

that Libby goes free

i just wanna thank everyone all ur comments were very helpfull for my school report...f*%^ GW and im out...LMAO!!!

Well my husband is now over in Iraq for the 3rd time, I was in the army as well and did the first tour. When we first invaded it was good they people were happy to have us I mean they would come up and hug you, practice there English on you. Now why are we not keeping the equipment over there and having the units rotate one infantry unit to replace another so the equipment is useful to them, And why are the deployments now 15months..it was the hardest thing to let my husband go and not see him for over a year. Why not keep the equipment there and make 6 months deployments. I know that we can not pull our troops out but maybe a company from one area and give more reponablity to the Iraq ploice and military. Our best friends just had a baby a month ago and now her husband is deployed so he will miss the firsts of his child. Shorter deployments would be a lot easier for the family's back home, It seems that the government forces so much on the war that they for get about the war that the family's fight every day to get by and the emotional part about the wife, the husband and the children that are wondering and going to bed at night alone and looking at the couch that they sit on. WHY NOT MAKE SHORTER DEPLOYMENTS.....