[Bill Gold]

…The Clinton Administration was a joke…
-weedie

Not that this has anything to do with the train of thought in this thread, or even the original meaning of the thread, but why do you say this? Clinton’s policies led to government surpluses as well as a decrease in the national debt. What’s so funny about that? Let me point you towards this post. If you want to talk about the pros and cons of administrations let’s do that, but let’s not sidetrack our conversation about Iraq, and to a lesser degree terrorism in general.

… These things take planning, even if we did pick up on it, we learned our lesson. There…
-tjrage_25

We learned our lesson? In your dreams. This country is still as vulnerable to a terrorist attack now, as it was back on September 11, 2001. The only difference between now and then is that I have to take my shoes and my hat off when I get on a plane flight. If terrorists had 5-8 fairly buff guys on a plane today, they could easily overpower the crew and passengers unarmed. Terrorists could easily destroy state capital buildings without much trouble. Even if we “learned our lesson” it doesn’t matter, because there are always new ways of killing people and reeking havoc.

/sigh

I'll refrain from posting opinion here. Instead, I'll present what may prove to be enlightening reading.
-Joel Glidden

Saddam has a gun pointed at our collective heads, people. He's been loading it with some nasty rounds since the seventies. He has openly stated and displayed his willingness to pull the trigger. Did you read the dossier that I linked?
-Joel Glidden

Pointing a gun at our collective heads? I’m sorry, but you’re mistaken. Saddam’s weapons do not have the ability to reach US soil, and no, I don’t see an old man holding a gun at my head. Those nasty rounds you’re referring to I would assume are his biological weapons, no? Yeah, that’s some unpleasant stuff he’s got in or near his hands. No one’s denying that. There are quite a few other countries on Earth who have equal if not more dangerous (quantity and quality) weapons at their disposal. So why are we ganging up on Saddam when we could be talking about North Korea, Pakistan, etc.?

In that dossier that you so kindly linked, read page 3 paragraphs 4 and 5. It’s basically saying what I had previously posted. To paraphrase “We’ve got this undeniable evidence, but we can’t tell you where we’re getting it from. Oh… we can’t tell you what some of it is either.” Well, if this is supposed to be evidence against Saddam, and it is necessary to prove that we must cripple his programs, then why is it kept secret from those who need to be persuaded? It’s not like it is information that Saddam doesn’t already know about. It is information that needs to be put on display around the world so that there is no doubt that Saddam needs to be removed or that his weapons programs need to be eliminated. This whole cloak and dagger game that the US and Britain are playing is a bunch of bull.

Why would anyone even want to have him in power makes no sense to me.
-wysiswyg

Guess what? You’ve got no say in whether or not he’ll remain in power. Plus, it’s not even about the people of Iraq wanting him in power. He’s like Castro or any other dictator, he took power, and he’s trying to stay in power as long as possible. Besides, not everyone thinks like you.

Sigh... There is something called the news. There job is to coroborate the information from the government and make sure its true. There has been credible news stories that are trickling in that show that he needs to been booted.
-wysiswyg

Ok. Get something straight here. Yes, there is something called the news, but it isn’t what you think. The news media isn’t this glorified source of truth that you claim. The news media is just like any other business. They want money. Television stations like CNN, NBC, CBS, etc. are all trying to give you something to watch, so that they can sell commercial time to other businesses. Also, (in my not so humble opinion) CNN is what the stupid people watch in an attempt to make themselves look learned. The “corroboration” that you’re talking about is done by attending press conferences held by the masters of the lie, Press Secretaries. Yes, it’s corroboration… if by corroboration you mean bending over so that the government can get you to believe what they want you to believe. My suggestion to you all is to take what you hear from our local media outlets with a grain of salt. Look around the world news to find your truth. Check the BBC (sometimes, since they like to bend over to the US Government from time to time), check TF1 (France), check out what the Germans, Russians, Chinese, Italians, Spaniards, etc. are saying. Don’t be so short sighted.

You may not feel 'served' by GW's actions. But you had better be thankful that he's protecting you. You give me the impression you'd be unwilling to do that for yourself.
-Joel Glidden

He’s protecting me? I find that hard to believe. Where was he when California needed price ceilings imposed against Enron? Oh, I know. He was hanging out with Ken Ley. If Bush was protecting us, then he’d be forcing Ley and others to give their millions of dollars to the poor employees who were bamboozled by the actions of the executives. President Bush is doing as good a job as Reagan/Bush #1/Clinton did in protecting us from Iraq. WE HAVEN’T BEEN ATTACKED. By the way, just because Ian says that he dislikes war, that doesn’t mean he isn’t willing to defend himself (or that he wouldn’t support our country defending itself if attacked). Sorry if I’m putting words in your mouth, Ian. This is where I get that impression though:

…i believe that Judiasm has a nice little law on this. i'm not exactly sure, but i do remember from one sermon or another that the Rabbi said that Judiasm states that you shall not attack another nation for any reason, but if they attack you, you can retaliate in self defense. iraq has not threatened us. they have not attacked us. we have no reason, nor right, to go in and blow up everything, again…
-Ian

Ok. Enough for now.