Everybody knows this. Knowing this certainly does not make it right.

Doesn't make it wrong either.

We know our coalition was a bribed coalition

Some were some weren't. It is certainly not an uncommon (or wrong) practice when forming a coalition.

and it had nothing to do
with freedom and democracy or the supposed presence of weapons of mass
destruction.

Both of those reasons were major factors no matter how much you have deluded yourself to the contrary.

In our constitution it states, "That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from
the consent of the governed".

Yes, that means...

Everybody knows this. Knowing this certainly does not make it right.

Doesn't make it wrong either.

We know our coalition was a bribed coalition

Some were some weren't. It is certainly not an uncommon (or wrong) practice when forming a coalition.

and it had nothing to do
with freedom and democracy or the supposed presence of weapons of mass
destruction.

Both of those reasons were major factors no matter how much you have deluded yourself to the contrary.

In our constitution it states, "That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from
the consent of the governed".

Yes, that means we hold these things called "elections" and other countries are free to vote out their government if they are not happy with them (if they are representative governments).

Yet we don't expect other governments to use reason, to represent the
desires of their people but to bow down as slaves to our almighty
dollar. Pathetic.

Wow some assumptions you make there. The money from the U.S. can be used to provide many things that the people desire from their governments.

@BD

Wow some assumptions you make there. The money from the U.S. can be used to provide many things that the people desire from their governments.

When other countries accept charitable or developmental aid I'm sure their desire is not to give up control of their country to the U.S.. If that is our goal in giving charitable or economic aid it is pathetic.

Both of those reasons were major factors no matter how much you have deluded yourself to the contrary.

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

Some were some weren't. It is certainly not an uncommon (...

read more»

@BD

Wow some assumptions you make there. The money from the U.S. can be used to provide many things that the people desire from their governments.

When other countries accept charitable or developmental aid I'm sure their desire is not to give up control of their country to the U.S.. If that is our goal in giving charitable or economic aid it is pathetic.

Both of those reasons were major factors no matter how much you have deluded yourself to the contrary.

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

Some were some weren't. It is certainly not an uncommon (or wrong) practice when forming a coalition.

You suffer a values deficiency BD. When you are in a armed conflict simply for money it's wrong.

When other countries accept charitable or developmental aid I'm sure their desire is not to give up control of their country to the U.S..

They don't give up control they can make whatever desision they feel is in the best interests of their country.

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

When you are in a armed conflict simply for money it's wrong.[/qu...

read more»

When other countries accept charitable or developmental aid I'm sure their desire is not to give up control of their country to the U.S..

They don't give up control they can make whatever desision they feel is in the best interests of their country.

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

When you are in a armed conflict simply for money it's wrong.

If one is the receiver of money and joins because of it, it is certianly not noble. However, It does not mean it is "wrong" but it does not preclude it either. If one provides money to secure more allies, that is not wrong nessesarily either, it is rather practical and smart.

ooops left out an end quote tag:

When other countries accept charitable or developmental aid I'm sure their desire is not to give up control of their country to the U.S..

They don't give up control they can make whatever desision they feel is in the best interests of their country.

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

When you are in a armed conf...

read more»

ooops left out an end quote tag:

When other countries accept charitable or developmental aid I'm sure their desire is not to give up control of their country to the U.S..

They don't give up control they can make whatever desision they feel is in the best interests of their country.

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

When you are in a armed conflict simply for money it's wrong.

If one is the receiver of money and joins because of it, it is certianly not noble. However, It does not mean it is "wrong" but it does not preclude it either. If one provides money to secure more allies, that is not wrong nessesarily either, it is rather practical and smart.

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

No you were stating that WMD's and democracy were the major factors for going to Iraq. These are the lies that people were told. I am stating that they never were the reasons of the neo-cons. The neo-cons knew this was a lie and the ignorant followed like sheep. Today Bush's approval rating is 29% in one poll and that would be where you find yourself. Amongst the delusional.

They don't give up control they can make whatever decision they feel is in the best interests of their c...

read more»

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

No you were stating that WMD's and democracy were the major factors for going to Iraq. These are the lies that people were told. I am stating that they never were the reasons of the neo-cons. The neo-cons knew this was a lie and the ignorant followed like sheep. Today Bush's approval rating is 29% in one poll and that would be where you find yourself. Amongst the delusional.

They don't give up control they can make whatever decision they feel is in the best interests of their country.

Actually many citizens do lose control of their best interests because the "they" that are making the choices do so on behalf of business interests and not the common citizenry. This was the case in certain countries that gave up making generic AIDS drugs for assistance benefiting business elites (I forget which global or regional free trade agreement it was, I have to go back to 2005 to find that info again).

Our coalition was not a noble coalition, it was a bribed coalition. Seeing the results its difficult to see how it was smart in any manner or form. So much for standing up for superior values. What happened to being a world leader and getting the backing of the world community based on the merits of the evidence. There was a reason they didn't buy it and that reason is that they could see through the lies.

What I said:

Both of those reasons were major factors no matter how much you have deluded yourself to the contrary.

What you said:

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

What I said:

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

Now.... Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom wer...

What I said:

Both of those reasons were major factors no matter how much you have deluded yourself to the contrary.

What you said:

On the contrary BD, you find yourself in the group of 28 percenters. The rest of the country is not joining the delusional Bush sheep anymore.

What I said:

Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.

Now.... Before I comment further on this particular point, first please provide the poll showing 72% believe WMDs and Freedom were not major factors in the lead-up to the war for going to war with Iraq.


-------------


As for the rest of what you said (and really the first part too):

I have already ready responded to all of it in my previous comments, just go back and read my previous comments for my responses.

And I clarified what I was saying, although not eloquently or through correctly punctuated English.

Correctly punctuated. On the contrary BD.

(and this is what should follow)
Those were never the "real" reasons we went to war. The real reasons are about control of the principal energy source of world commerce and being able to control both Southeast Asia and Europe. Effective control over Iraq's oil production (and most likely Iran's if Bush gets his way) provides a veto check over their actions.

What did the gullible believe?

The Pew Research Center in a release on January 16, 2003 states that the majority believes Bush has yet to make the case. At that time a two-thirds majority of ...

And I clarified what I was saying, although not eloquently or through correctly punctuated English.

Correctly punctuated. On the contrary BD.

(and this is what should follow)
Those were never the "real" reasons we went to war. The real reasons are about control of the principal energy source of world commerce and being able to control both Southeast Asia and Europe. Effective control over Iraq's oil production (and most likely Iran's if Bush gets his way) provides a veto check over their actions.

What did the gullible believe?

The Pew Research Center in a release on January 16, 2003 states that the majority believes Bush has yet to make the case. At that time a two-thirds majority of the public continued to express qualified support for the idea of using military force to end the rule of Saddam Hussein, but with a caveat.

When individuals were asked if they "favor" or "oppose" military force given the condition "What to do if [weapons] inspectors find no weapons, but weapons inspectors can't assure Iraq has none" only 28% favor military force.

Now it's convenient for me that that polling number was 28% but what I was really referring to is that, if you are supportive of Bush's handling of his job you are amongst the 28 percenters.

The public never got what it wanted which was a strong U.N. Resolution and a coalition that mimicked the 1991 Kuwaiti coalition.

Further information from the survey reveals that even if it was determined that Iraq was capable of producing weapons of mass destruction but did not possess them on 46% of the public favored military action. The only possible outcome in which a clear majority backs military action is if the inspections show that Iraq is actually hiding weapons of mass destruction. If that were to occur, Americans would support the use of force by 76%-17%.

We all know the inspectors never got a "real" chance. Bush had to launch his invasion before the inspectors proved that the boogie man was powerless.