oh and some things that the vid didn't say
after 9/11 when surveyed (by NY Times) well over 50% of people supported invading iraq
saddam had used weapons of mass destruction on his people before and didn't let the UN investigate his labs, despite his agreement to do so
he's human, and i hardly ever hear anyone speak with proper grammer...ever. so don't go saying he's stupid because he cant speak correctly.
its fascinating to me that as americans, we love to rewrite our history :~)
12 comments:
sorry, i forgot to mention that you need to click the title to see the video :~)
i agree. God Bless George W. Bush. When you think about it, he's had one of the toughest administrations in America's history, from 9/11 to Katrina to Iraq, etc. Many of his problems were set up by the carelessness of the Clinton administration. I do not beleive that Bush was the best President this country has seen by ANY means, and think he really dropped the ball on some things and disagree with him on others. And so what if he is a horrible speaker, Hitler was an amazing speaker... it doesn't make him any less of a President (Bush obviously). However, he was a good President that deserves our respect. He had a tough job and did it well. And i agree Sarah with your points!!!! Thanks for speaking for the small conservative population at Poudre.
I'm going to have to strongly disagree. Yes, he's had a tough presidency, but many of the issues mentioned were created by his administration and has screwed up the country so badly that I'm on the verge of saying 'to hell with it!' and leaving to study in Europe after graduating.
Furthermore, though the GOP attempts to make John McCain seem as though he is a Theodore Roosevelt Republican, he's not. He may have done a few good things back in the 80's (under Mo Udall (D-AZ)'s guidance), but since then his record has gone downhill. He's just another Bush Republican.
I'm sorry but what on earth does this have to do with TOK?
That's all I'm going to say.
idk, I never said I didn't like GW, i just don't like the way he's leading the country. I disagree with the war because, well frankly I don't understand why we are in iraq anymore, the terrorists arent even there. Theres my 2 cents
Those of you who don't know why we went into iraq have some serious research to do. We went in there to stop a dictator who was breaking the rules. Just like we should have done with Hitler but didn't... we all know how that turned out. We should never again practice apeasement (sp) which is what we were doing with Saddam. That's why i say God Bless George W. Bush. He didnt let the bad get worse. But don't take my word for it. Research why we went into Iraq, and look at more than what the Democrats say. It might surprise you. That is one thing that TOK does encourage, and my attempt to relate this to TOK, Karam. Looking at multiple view points. I continually see people who have an opinion, and look for research that supports that opinion, whithout researching the opposition, and then say you have a strong argument. I have trouble with this sometims too. But I only respect your opinion if you can back it up with unbiased research. I don't agree with Karam and Tae on a LOT but i do respect their opinions becuase they do seem, at least to me, to look at more than just their opinions, and i encourage more to do the same.
sorry one thing i forgot to mention. Vincent, the will to go into Iraq was more than looking for terrorists. It was to take down one of their aides (Saddam). The fact that no WMD's were found does not seem like a logical reason to say Iraq was a mistake, because the entire international community knew he had them. We gave them to him!!! It's as if a prison guard went to check on Hannibal Lecter, only to find that he was missing from his cell. You would not simply go, "oh, guess that takes care of that problem, no more Hannibal!"... no! It would be a HUGE cause for concern. In the case of Saddam, we don't know what he did with the weapons. He could have given them to his terrorist allies... and the fact that they are gone is not a just argument against the war... it's just scary!!! I'm not saying this to argue what you said vincent because you didn't even mention WMD's, im just putting it out there to help explain why we went in, which is a question you and others have been asking.
Sorry Ryan, but i disagree. The US and knew there were no WMDs in Iraq, as Tyler Drumheller, the former highest-ranking CIA officer in Europe told the press. Also, the Bush Administration chose to ignore crucial intelligence from Iraqi Foreign Minster Naji Sabri, that indicated Iraq had no WMDs. And why isn't the fact that there were no WMDs found a logical reason? Maybe it simply means that there were absolutely none to begin with
Also, the US DID NOT invade Iraq to dispose of Saddam. The US had a chance to dispose of him since the days of the Iran conflict of the 70s, and if you search 'rumsfeld and saddam' on google, you can find a picture of them enthusiastically shaking hands.
Everybody knows that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, so why did we invade?
The short answer is, America, or should I say the Bush Administration invaded Iraq not to save ourselves from weapons of mass destruction, not to rid the world of a brutal dictator and not to avenge the murders of Sept. 11, but invaded Iraq because Bush and his pals think America should rule the world. Bush wanted to take over Iraq, set up a "democracy" (which is failing miserably, costing us the lives of thousands of brave young soldiers), and take over their oil supplies. No country in the Middle Eastern area wants America to succeed; not Saudi Arabia, not Syria, and not even the Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis of Iraq as demonstrated by the surge of sectarian violence.
and if anybody in the US needs to utilize proper grammar and have great speaking skills, it's our President, out of all people, because he represents our nation. If our 'Great President' makes grammatical errors and speaking errors, people of the world tend to think that Americans are stupid as well
First of all, Tucker, you said that "don't go saying he's stupid because he cant speak correctly." I don't know about other people, but I have rarely heard this as an argument against him. I HAVE heard people say that he is stupid (usually with poor justifications,) but to go so far as to say that someones accent reflects their intelligence is wrong.
As far as Arnold Schwarzenegger saying "God Bless George W Bush" goes, I also believe that this is wrong. I am a firm believer in seperation of church and state. If you personally want to "God Bless" someone; more power to you. But saying, on natioal televison, that a certain person deserves to be blessed over anyone else is something I disagree with. Church has no place in a democratic system. Comments such as these deserve to stay at home, or in your personal - not political - life. This is especially true when there are people who will find the comment contreversial - weather they disagree with the statement, or the person it is concerning.
Post a Comment