An observation of three people's opinions

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gae:
The 3000 folks who died on 9/11 did not volunteer to be targets.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Normally intelligent gae once again gets into a mindless frenzy reverting into this Pavlovian 9-11! 9-11! response. For some it evokes a response that calls for action - any action. Which means Iraq is somehow an appropriate response. For others, like me, it calls for a response based on accurate history.

Let's make a deal, gae. Don't insult us ever again by mentioning 9-11 without typing the words "OSAMA BIN LADEN" right next to it.

Afterall, it was Osama that attacked us. And the last time I checked, gae, Osama is still on the loose, and we let him go. And the last time I checked, gae, Osama was in Afghanistan, not Iraq. And the last time I checked, gae, Afgahnistan was up to 90% out of control off the US military and the Afghani government.

You spend a lot of time talking about Iraq, and not any time talking about Afghanistan.

In the future, if you want to talk about Iraq, talk about how our soldiers haven't been given the resources necessary to do the job and how the job they are doing isn't at the top of the list on the war on terror.

John Kerry whipped Bush's ass in the debate because on the issue of Iraq, John Kerry was right.

<font color="#000002"><font size="1">[ October 04, 2004 08:30 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font></font>

<font color="#000002" size="1">[ October 04, 2004 08:33 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LanDroid:
Bush's weak coalition is falling apart and he has lost the international leadership credibility to reverse that. Kerry has a better chance at strengthening the coalition, a necessity to reduce our costs and begin an exit strategery, a crucial element Bush should have had in place before starting the war.

Kerry has sponsored gobs of bills, obviously you haven't bothered to look. He voted to reduce the intelligence budget at a time when a major program had been cancelled. Since the intel community wasn't going to pursue that expensive program, it made sense to reduce the budget. The Republicans also voted to reduce the intel budget at that time, by an even larger dollar amount. It shows how shameless they are to attempt to turn their own votes around on Kerry.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">To add to my previously posted list of numerous withdrawals by "coalition" nations, yesterday's Enquirer had a story of Italy removing its 3,000 troops after the election.

It will be the United States even more alone, bearing all of the cost and all of the casualties.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by travelinman:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Jigsaw Jr.:
Ah the old 9/11 "flipper upper".

Then how come we are focusing so much on Iraq and not the Afghanistan/Pakistan border looking for the one responsible for 9/11? Which is where we should be focusing most if not all of our attention on. Don't throw 9/11 around to try to justify the way Bush has handled his term. Global opinion was on our side for retaliation in Afghanistan and the destruction of the Taliban and Osama, not to finish a job daddy tried desperately to complete before he lost the election to President Clinton.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because Iraq was where the money was.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">REALITY: Saudi Arabia is where the money was. And the money is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reason:

It will be the United States even more alone, bearing all of the cost and all of the casualties.[/QB]

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You talk a lot of sense about Iraq but cmon
all Hello were called the UK you know its the nation of fat lazy alcholics

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean Pa:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by reason:

It will be the United States even more alone, bearing all of the cost and all of the casualties.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You talk a lot of sense about Iraq but cmon
all Hello were called the UK you know its the nation of fat lazy alcholics[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think most people are aware of the importance of our working relationship with the UK. Reason makes sense? That's a first.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean Pa:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by reason:

It will be the United States even more alone, bearing all of the cost and all of the casualties.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You talk a lot of sense about Iraq but cmon
all Hello were called the UK you know its the nation of fat lazy alcholics[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't mean to dismiss the UK. But the reality is that the US accounts for 90% of the costs and fatalities, and that number will go up.

I find it unfortunate the Bush will take the UK down with him.

ah so not all, Just wanted to get that straight, I know You like the correct and precise figures figures to be quoted. [img]confused.gif[/img]

Actually our election is probably gonna start in earnest next year and although at his most unpopular ever Blair will romp home, because of a completly inept opposition. God bless the right and all who sink with her.

I've said this before, but for the record, I supported the war in Iraq. I see legitimate reasons for being there.

Yes, Hussein needed to be removed. Yes, there are positive geopolitical ramifications to a free and pro-western Iraq.

My fear, though, is that Iraq has caused us to lose focus on the prize: Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. I don't think we are safer today, nor do I think we will be safer under another term of President Bush.

Here's what I think's gonna happen regardless of who wins: we are going to have to send a lot more troops to Iraq. Despite military resistance to the draft, we are going to need more people because what we have right now ain't gonna do it.

John Kerry won't be able to get any other nations to commit to Iraq. No one in their right mind would want to go now.

It will be up to us.

A part of me wants to see Bush deal with the mess he created. But the sane part of me wants a safe world that won't happen under Bush.

<font color="#000002" size="1">[ October 04, 2004 01:22 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G L:
Reason makes sense? That's a first.[/QB]

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In keeping with Gae's new rules, I am going to have to ask you to watch the thread hijacking or your posts will be deleted. Sorry about the trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jigsaw Jr.:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by G L:
Reason makes sense? That's a first.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In keeping with Gae's new rules, I am going to have to ask you to watch the thread hijacking or your posts will be deleted. Sorry about the trouble.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Delete at will. Makes no difference to me.