 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jbspags
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 5
|
 Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 1:29 pm Post subject: It's the Dems Fault Berg is Dead! |
 |
|
So what does the Berg murder tell us? That the prison torture scandal led to the killing? Not even close. Terrorists (and al-Zarqawi is undoubtedly one) don't need such excuses to do their dirty work.
The lesson is that not finishing the job in Afghanistan and invading Iraq with no good rationale gave Al Qaida and similar groups time to catch their breath, reorganize, and direct their efforts against a conveniently near target -- Iraq. This is the neocon "flypaper" theory in all its glory. It's working. The neocons WANTED it this way.
And they got it. Congratulations.
And in the process, the killing of thousands of innocent men, women and children by errant American bombs, artillery shells, mortars, and bullets have swelled the recruiting offices of every militia and terrorist organization in the Mideast, in and out of Iraq. Congrats with that as well. You can't have flypaper if you don't have an enemy shooting at you. So we energized our existing enemies and gave rise to new ones who didn't seem to understand that "collateral damage" is acceptable in war.
And the abuse of Iraqi prisoners -- up to 90 percent of which could be innocent according to the Red Cross -- just added fuel to the fire.
So no, the prison abuse didn't cause Berg's horrific murder. Bush's (inept) War, in all its glory, did. The Neocon agenda, in all its folly, did. The war cheerleaders now trying to use this for propaganda purposes, in all their idiocy, did.
Congrats. Your war spirals ever out of control. Good luck trying to wash the blood out of your hands.
-thanks to DailyKos |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Montana
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 138
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What will it take to make
you realize that their are people
plotting night and day to kill every American
in this country? This includes you.
At a time when our nation needs to come together,
your post saddens me.
MONTANA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbspags
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What saddens me is that we took our eye off the prize in places like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia and went to war in Iraq. We all now know that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and was no immediate threat, so now we have diverted all that money and resources and we are all less safe. Not to mention the fact that this war has done more to creat and foster terrorism than destroy it.
So you know what saddens me, that we are all now less safe than we were before the war. Osama is an afterthought, our borders arent safe, containers arent checked at the ports, and Bush and crew thought it necessary to take on this war.
Like I said, the blood will be on their hands the next time our country is attacked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Montana
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 138
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I disagree. We don´t know all the facts. Things may turn
up in the future that may or may not prove your theory.
MONTANA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbspags
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sorry Montana, but that's not much of an argument. Bush actually made this statement last year...
"I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important." [President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
It's not that important??? What was more important, going after a country that was not threatening us. Whether or not Saddam was an evil dictator, Bush took his eye off of Bin Laden and focused on Iraq. So now Al Qaeda is only getting stronger and we are all less safe every day.
Trust me, I wish this wasn't the case, but it is, whether you choose to see it. I am scared for my country because I know that this administration, that is essentially running on a terror platform, has actually made terrorism worse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wondering
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 19
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Those responsible for Berg's death cited the prison abuses as their motive. You can only take their word for why they did what they did. If they say that is why they killed Berg then I guess that is why they did it.
Secondly, thinking that Al Qaeda is the only front in the war on terror is very dangerous. There are many fronts. Iraq is one of them. Saddam only had control of a portion of his country due to the sanctions and conditions put on him after GW1. Because of this many of those areas were becoming havens for terrorists. The lifting of the sactions were never going happen with the games that his regime were playing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It's the Dems Fault Berg is Dead! |
Hmmmm, maybe we should do a "pro" and "con" analysis of this.
Pro:
Since the Democrats, for electoral gain, arranged to have the Iraqis photographed in piles or performing pseudo-fellatio on each other, this is clearly their fault. In fact, the perpetrators have been so well paid that they haven't made a single peep about their payoff.
Con:In spite of warnings about the quagmire we'd get into, including a warning from his father GHWBush, who wrote...
| Quote: | | "Trying to eliminate Saddam .. would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq ...there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land." |
... Bush barged ahead with the oil grab, in spite of worldwide opinion opposing the move (except for Britain where Bush's lapdog will soon be spending more time with his family) and the obvious reality that Saddam wasn't linked to Al Qaeda and didn't have WMD's.
To help corporate profits, we privatized much of the war and to enhance profits, those companies had incentives to hire unprofessional flunkies who were too stupid to think that they were doing something wrong and thought some photographs would be fun to take home.
Now that the entire world hates the US and we pissed away the goodwill after 9/11, U.S. citizens in the mideast are more likely to be victimized.
I vote "con"! That first position is really looney![/u] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbspags wrote: |
"I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important." [President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
|
Source, please...
The only quotes I can find like that one are:
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
| Quote: |
Trust me, I wish this wasn't the case, but it is, whether you choose to see it. I am scared for my country because I know that this administration, that is essentially running on a terror platform, has actually made terrorism worse. |
Then Kerry ought to terrify you.
Look... on the war on terrorism, you only need to ask yourself two questions:
1. Of the candidates, who would they terrorists vote for?
2. Why would I support that person? (The fact that Kerry's a war-criminal aside, I mean.)
Simple, really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbspags
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the source you were looking for..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42480-2004Mar9?language=printer
As far as Kerry voting for the war and agreeing that Saddam was an evil man..you do realize that all of the senators, congressman, etc. were repeatedly told these things...they were shown in depth satelite photography of biological and chemical weapons plants, etc. You remember Colin Powell in front of the UN right? I'm one of those people that believe that decisions are only as good as the info you have...so if all the info you that you are given by your Secretary of State says that Saddam is doing these things, then why would you not believe him. Why would you not believe your own defense department's intelligence.
Regardless, as far as your two questions...I find them both to be irelevant arguments..since of course terrorists cannot vote in our elections and since Kerry is obviously more of a patriot than you or I will ever be.
Believe what you will, but George's War has made our country less safe. He never served, he never will serve. He has no idea what it takes. He is not concerned with protecting our homeland, but more concerned with protecting his oil interests. How can someone who claims to be a patriot support someone who at best, pulled strings to get out of Vietnam. He is a coward and it is unfortunate that anyone would consider him anything but. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carpro
Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 1176
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
All this finger pointing!
I would have thought someone would have blamed the people that actually slaughtered this young man.
By the way, you do know Berg was Jewish. Just like Daniel Pearl.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003. |
If Kerry really did say those things, I have to say I fault him for accepting BushCorp Inc's assertions that later turned out to be complete fabrications.
I can only hope that next time Senator Kerry doesn't unilaterally trust a president who has to have his PDB read aloud to him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mikest
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | So what does the Berg murder tell us? That the prison torture scandal led to the killing? Not even close. Terrorists (and al-Zarqawi is undoubtedly one) don't need such excuses to do their dirty work.
|
And this proves your point how? There are very few people on the left that do not understand how horrid these people are. We just disagree on the way this war is being prosecuted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Berg was the first of the hostages to actually have been killed. The timing wasn't random and I believe the captors when they claim this as the reason for not murdering anyone else held captive until now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carpro
Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 1176
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | | Berg was the first of the hostages to actually have been killed. The timing wasn't random and I believe the captors when they claim this as the reason for not murdering anyone else held captive until now. |
Unbelievable! You actually believe the captors. Of course their timing was no accident.
That's exactly what they are counting on. They're playing you like a string fiddle. Was there not an Italian hostage murdered in a similar fashion a few weeks ago? Did you forget about him? Berg was Jewish. He's been a dead man since the moment he was captured.
Those killers don't need an excuse to execute anyone!
I know for a fact that your kind get lonely in Texas.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carpro
Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 1176
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2004 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jbspags wrote: |
Trust me, I wish this wasn't the case, but it is, whether you choose to see it. I am scared for my country because I know that this administration, that is essentially running on a terror platform, has actually made terrorism worse. |
Actually, I was surprised to find out that worldwide acts of terrorism in 2003 were the lowest in 30 years.
2000- 423
2001- 346
2002- 199
2003- 198
Acts against American interests are down from a high of 228 in 2001 to 82 in 2003.
All in all, I'm astounded myself.
Acts of violence against combatants have never been included in the statistics. This includes Iraq. Acts targeting our troops have not been counted but acts targeting civilians have.
I can't explain it. I thought you might be right. But there it is.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
