more presidential election debates

[Blazed]

:thumb:

[Wha?]

I've been thinking about what's happened, and it's really starting to look as if this is the way it went down:
[*]Bush gets into office
[*]Cheney, on behalf of Haliburton, starts persuading Bush that dependancy on Saudi oil is intolerable. Possibly suggests Iraq as a substitute, based on the sanctions from the Gulf War having crippled its military capacity, and totaly removed their air capability.
[*]Bush, being a child of big oil himself, buys into it.
[*]Before anyone can figure out exactly how to rally support for a second Gulf War, an al-Qaeda plot--a decade in the making--drops it right into their lap.
[*]Using the event as an all-access pass, all sorts of things go down under the table (mostly political self-preservation stuff and a couple over-reactions).
[*]Congressional authorization to move troops into Afghanistan, in order to neutralize the terrorist training camps (that the CIA had uncovered in their monitoring of Osama bin Laden during the 90's).
[*]Terrorists prove harder to find than originally thought, forcing a segue to the Iraq operation prematurely to make up for the lack of good news from the front.
[*]Without having time to fabricate a link between Iraq (the sociopolitical entity) and terrorism, the case is weak, and fails to compel enough people outside US borders.
[*]Multiple angles are tried, eventually resulting in mud slinging and trade disputes.
[*]Congressional authorization to move troops into Iraq to liberate the people from their dictator, and install a democratic government (those being the final arguments presented to rally support).
[*]Iraqi defense capability extremely over-estimated, soldiers desert regime falls within a month.
[*]Reparation contracts given almost exclusively to American companies, even the British get shafted. (This is actually illegal. Such contracts are to be given to local companies)
[*]Haliburton gets oil rights (and subsequently gouges US government)

If that is truly the case, then it was about oil, but not in the sense most people think. Big corporations act independantly of the government, but their actions are still considered to have been made by that government. Especially in America's case. Granted, a republican administration isn't going to stand in the way of big business, but that still only makes them an accessory.

::PostScript::
If they had played their cards right, 9/11 would have only been used to beef up security, and potentially for cleaner, more professional Afghanistan operation. They would have looked responsible (ie. the opposite of what their main political opponents portray them as), and would have been given the Sudan crisis in perfect election timing. OIF would have been an ace in the hole, in case something didn't happen on its own first. Sudani oil would have equally reduced Saudi dependance, and the whole world would be a whole lot more willing to jump on board the coalition. But hey, hindsight is 20/20.

[Gragoon]

we all know what kind of person saddam was or is. but thats no reason for a war, for killing all the inoccent humans. i dont like what he and his sons and helpers did but the war of georg w bush is not a little bit better.
saddam didnt have any weapons of mass destruction! there was no reasonably reason for this war. the true reason is that bush wants to get more oil and more money and he wants to finish what his father began.
i condemn the war!

and im sure that the fights wont be finished in the next year. the iraq people wont surender ther country.

thanks for ur attention

[Pique]

I doubt there will be a draft, seeing as we are pulling out a ton of our troops in countries such as Japan and Germany.

Also on the health plan stuff.
We are NOT a socialists country, we are a replublic. Go the Britain or something if you want all your medical stuff paid by the govt.

Just another little thing about 9/11 and hows its "Bushs fault".
Ever here of project bojinka? Probably not. Guess discovering osama's plans to crash 11 airliners and fly one into the CIA headquarters wasn't good enough a warning sign for Clinton. I'm sure changes to airport security were made after discovering this terrorist operation plot over the next 6 years of his administration.

How about the three times he missed the chance to nabbed or kill him under his administration?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958


Clearly 9-11 is bushes fault.  :rolleyes:

No i didn´t hear about taht project bajowhatchacallit...maybe cause IT DIDN¨T ***I'm Stupid for Swearing***ING HAPPEN!!

Bush actually cut spending to the counter-terrorism effort so yes...i do blame him for 9/11

Why i will not vote for Bush


- He cut a tax that directly helps the rich get richer and i can barely see the logic behind it...so the rich can reinvest their earnings into the stock market and help create more jobs/companies...but you cant have jobs/companies w/out demand...and how do you get demand? you give the middle class people more money to spend on goodies for their house (such as a medicare tax cut would do). For those of you that dont know bush cut a tax on stock divedends...the money you earn from having stock in a company...who will benefit from that more? Someone on the board of directors of a company with over 25% of the stock of a huge conglomerate or old mrs.smith, the 59 year old supermarket cashier.

- He sold us a war in Iraq. It widely known that Bush knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. Go watch a "Iraq: the truth" dvd to prove that statement, theres atleast 3 of em that i know of.

- He violated the Geneva Convention. Im sorry but you just dont torture people to get them to tell you what you want to hear. People may say that Bush didn´t know about it...well its accepted that high levels of government knew about Abu Gharib and isn´t Bush pretty damn high? if he didn´t then he isn´t as "strong" a leader as he says he is.

-The patriot act. There has never been more of an infringment on civil and basic human rights. Yea people may say its an awesome tool against terrorists...but isn´t anything powerful when its unlimted in authority and has no system of checks? again for those of you that dont know the patriot act allows any search of property of a "terrorist" suspect and they dont have to tell you...but if they dont tell you, how can you check it and make sure no none terror suspects are having their 4th amendment violated?
"give me liberty of give me death" - i forgot who
"those that are willing to give up liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty or security" - Benjamin Franklin

[Quickening]

If it didn't happen, why is the 9/11 Comission using it as evidence that Clinton didn't do enough?

[Pique]

i mean the plot was stopped...it didn´t go through as planned unlike 9/11

[Quickening]

Still, Clinton could of stopped all of it.

http://kerrylied.com/

http://www.scaryjohnkerry.com/vietnam.html

[Wha?]

Yeah.. trust a website called "kerrylied.com". gg

There was a CIA operation tracking Osama bin Laden, and a couple windows to kill him, but Clinton was dealing with that scandal--flames the republicans fanned--so he didn't want any more bad press. Bad decision? Not really. The attack happened in 2001, long after he was out of office.

It's the FBI's job to stop that kind of stuff, the president is just the guy who helps shape their policies. Covert pre-emptive stuff is CIA territory, and it's the same deal.

[Quickening]

Why I even bothered debating, I don't know. Half the time no one changes their ideas on things. So I'll end my participation with this.

You only have 2 choices girls and boys. Conservative or Liberal.

Bush or Kerry

Make your choice and go vote. Then we will live with our choice for 4 years. Good and bad.

Not so hard.

[fritoman]

I hate debates like this, because it makes me view people differently then I did before and sometimes not for the good..... so I try and stay out of it.....but its hard to bite your tonge :P

and in the end.....all you did was speak your mind and change no ones.

[Quickening]

I hate debates like this, because it makes me view people differently then I did before and sometimes not for the good..... so I try and stay out of it.....but its hard to bite your tonge :P

and in the end.....all you did was speak your mind and change no ones.

My exact reason to quit.

I still love you frito :wub:

[Wha?]

When I go into a debate (having already done some reading to know the issues), the general game plan is to learn enough to understand everybody's position, and to explain mine. Who needs to change people's minds? Just put your two cents on the table and let other people get what they will from it. That's what I like about debating with people who have an opinion other than my own. It's how I expand my horizons.

[fritoman]

I am too emotional about some things to debate them.

[FreeFall]

lol i'm right out terrible at debating. I suck with words, plus I just get angry:wacko:

[Wha?]

I find that emotion is inversely proportional to the amount of information you're conveying.