Bush ! Stop the War

[shanti]

www.moveon.org/winwithoutwar/

[Gość: chickenShorts]

Amnesty International:
"The British and US are being selective, conviniently ignoring other countries
(...) to drive forward foreign and military goals."

www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/story/0,2763,862129,00.html
www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,852511,00.html

[Gość: UNRAA]

What war? The war in Iraq hasn't started, yet. The only war Bush is currently
involved in is the war on terrorism. Is that the one you want to be stopped?
Probably, you do, since that's the part of the bleeding-heart liberal metality
you represent.

[Gość: chickenShorts]

Gość portalu: UNRAA napisał(a):

> What war? The war in Iraq hasn't started, yet. The only war Bush is currently
> involved in is the war on terrorism.<

And where about is he fighting it? And how? By trying new legislations on
curbing personal freedoms?

Is that the one you want to be stopped?<

As well.

> Probably, you do, since that's the part of the bleeding-heart liberal
metality
> you represent.<

Get your metal head examined!

Hey, hey, hey,..........hey, hey

[Gość: Rev. Reverend]

[Gość: chickenShorts]

God bless,you, Rev. How's missionary work going? Many new converts?

[Gość: Rev. Reverend]

Bless you too. No converts at all. I am on strike.
Out of convenience. I'm doing nothing and enjoing it.

BTW. I cant find the tribe's name. About Lewis and Clark and that Oregon Trail.

[Gość: merien]

Only 13 percent of Americans know where is Iraq and they
want to stop terrotism. It is rediciulus do not you
think?

[Gość: Wigman]

It's convenient that that document declaring all the arms they have etc. Iraq
handed over today will take about 3 weeks to read. At least the Bush war won't
come before Christmas - it'll spoil it for the kids, having to worry about US
soldiers being killed, or GB soldiers being killed by 'friendly fire'. I'm more
worried about what the US forces will do to their allies than what Saddam's got
up his sleeve. Have you seen Fox News? I get it on satellite - it's quite
staggering. ? Can you lot in the States tell me whether it's popular over
there? They had a great war game scenario on last week - tanks all over Iraq -
The decision's been taken already.

[Gość: merien]

The answer is simple Bush is terrorist and aggressor he wants to assault not Saddam. I know it's naive but true. ONZ and NATO serve America. I am afraid that Bush's intets are not so clean. 20 years ago Iran was bad and now Iraq is bad. Americans are morons and they forget fast and faster create new history. Maybe Bush wants to be a God I don't know.

If you kill a man you are a criminal.
If you kill 10 people you are a murderer.
If you kill 1000 people you are a hero.
If you kill 1mln of people you are God.

a god

[Gość: mishy]

illiterate, alcoholic, a football hooligan, an arrested felon, an up the nose
shooter...tell me more

heavenly, fits the job desription

Second Gulf War Supporter!!!!! FUCK IRAQ!!!!!!

[donald_rumsfeld]

[Gość: Rev. Reverend]

A felon? Interesting.
Why not unload all at once?
When and where did he commit that alleged felony?

Let the guy start that damn war before you call to stop it.
How can something be stopped while it didn't even begin?

It puzzles me a great deal how many defenders Mr Hussein has on this forum.
I can understand antiwar sentiments but for life of me I can't understand how
can anybody defend that butcher. Unless there is a new love for brutal
dictators. The same people condemn Mr Pinochet while praising Mr Hussein.
Go figure.

good god

[Gość: erwas]

Rev., I ache with longing for pro-Gulf War arguments that carry moral weight,
make strategic sense, and convince me of the necessity of risking millions of
lives for (........................) <

[Gość: Rev. Reverend]

In your mind it's OIL, or maybe it is bringing Saddam's head for daddy on a
silver platter, according to Martin Sheen. So what is it? Pick one.

Mr Hussein pays thousands of dollars to Palestinians willing to blow themself
up in a vicinity of many Jews. Do I here a word of condemnation?
Why isn't anybody calling for Saddam to voluntarily disarm. That action surely
would avert the war. It's all politics. The left is against it the right is
for it. It has nothing to do with human lifes. When Bill Clinton was deploying
american troops all over the world and killed innocent people in Sudan we did
not here those protesting hollyweird stars. That was their guy. When Bill
Clinton in 1998 was beatting the war drum using exactly the same arguments we
didnt here the voice of protest. That was their guy.
In 1998 democratic senators passed the resolution authorizing the president
to use all necessary means to deal with Iraq. They did it not even being asked
for. Yet in 2002 they were reluctant. In 1998 that was their guy.

I view this coming war as a neccessary evil. Yes I do support it.
Honestly I consider all the antiwar activists as useful idiots.
Well, I have confessed.

So what was the felony? You didn't make yourself clear enough. Does he commit
felony just by breathing?

[Gość: chickenShorts]

'As long as the UN inspections continue, there is still chance to stop this
war. Maybe the French or Russians will dig in, will demand stronger evidence of
Iraqi cheating beyond the US's highly suspect dossier deductions. Maybe Blix
and Annan will bulk. Maybe Collin Powell can hold the diplomatic line a little
longer. All the same, this could be the week when irrationality becomes
irresistable. Now, in dread, deadly prospect, is tha dawning age of unreason.
Or, as Byron put it:

"This is the patent age of new inventions
For killing bodies, and for saving souls,
All propagated with the best intentions."

www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,860736,00.html

[Gość: Rev. Reverend]

We are not having a discussion. I'm still waiting for a felony revelation.
Why can't I get a straight answer to my arguments instead of bunch of quotes or
some kind of comments on improper use of words.

BTW, I feei you ignoring my SNL link.

[Gość: chickenShorts]

Gość portalu: Rev. Reverend napisał(a):

> We are not having a discussion. I'm still waiting for a felony revelation.
> Why can't I get a straight answer to my arguments instead of bunch of quotes
or
> some kind of comments on improper use of words.

I don't think the above should be addressed to me. Is it?


> BTW, I feei you ignoring my SNL link.

Sorry, Rev, forgot to say 'thank you'... Than you!