Bush vs. Kerry Debate

[usc]

You cannot "fix" the Middle East. They're anti-Westerners, always have been, always will. The differences in culture/history runs way too deep. America should never have entered Iraq in the first place, other than to flush out and nail Al Qaeda and Osama. In case anyone has forgotten, we still haven't accomplished that. At least back when we went after Osama, we had a true calling and the world understood and condoned it.

Democracy cannot exist in a part of the world that is not dependent on its economy. They own/deal/sell crude oil. And he who owns the oil, owns that part of the world. The biggest, baddest bully gets to sit on the throne. There will be continued chaos there until the tank is dry. When that day comes (assuming World War III hasn't arrived to end human existence), no one could care less about the Middle East.

As Kerry noted in the debate, even Bush Sr. knew better than to go all the way into Baghdad. We had the ability back in '91, but at least Bush Sr. had the wisdom to know there was no endgame to it.

Overtaking Iraq goes to show 2 things:

1) We can kick anyone's ass in conventional warfare.

But more importantly, it clearly illustrate that

2) Terrorism CANNOT be fought with conventional warfare.

So now we've created a hell hole in Iraq. We throwing money over there (not to mention the more-than-likely HUGE embezzlement of Haliburton and other contractors taking place) and nothing good is coming out of it. For crying out loud, kids are being slaughtered senselessly there, literally being blown to bits.

There is no one good in politics. As our own history stated, the only good president was George Washington. That's because he never wanted the job in the first place. Hell, at least he was there standing side-by-side w/ the men he fought with.

[dwf137]

As I said, we fucked up. Maybe invading wouldnt have been the best option, but ya know what? we did. You suffer from hindsight bias. You think how easy it would have been to see the outcome of the war before we invaded when you already know the outcome of the invasion.. 75% of this country supported the war before hand, what the hell were we supoosed to do.

Both of the candidates right now supported going in there, and now we need to fix our probelms. I agree that maybe a democracy is not the best governement for them to have, but it's better then anarchy.

We took out the government, and we can't just allow a dictator to get in charge.. People were being slaughtered left and right while we were not in Iraq, our presence has not really changed this, now its just that US soldiers are dying as well.. Kerry NOW admits that going into Iraq was a bad call, yet BEFORE the war, he was for it 100% and wanted to see saddam taken out of control, even if there was no link to terrorists. This is a fact and cannot be argued.

Pulling out of Iraq will only leave mayhem and cause Iraq to be in worse condition then it was before we got there.

[Fearit22]

Originally posted by dwf137
http://www.georgewbush.com/kerrymedi...d.aspx?ID=2439
^What will Kerry stand for 3 years from now? noone knows, not even Kerry. His opinions now are stable, but when the public opinion switches, will he stick with his beliefs? his reccord says no.

I still cant believe people voting for Kerry. He trash talked all of the honorable people who went to vietnam, died in vietnam, or are still POW MIA from vietnam. They went and fought for thier country, following orders that were given to them, and he goes on public televison and trashes them. He does not deserve to be put in charge of the country untill he appoligizes for his actions.

He wants to speed up what's happeneing in Iraq and pull the troops out ASAP. How about when Saddam got in charge in the first place? We helped to get Saddam into control in the first place, now we finally got rid of him, we cant let another crazy asshole like him get in charge of Iraq again. Even if you have something against the war now, Kerry voted for it, and now we need to take care of any mistakes that we might have made. We can't just pull out and leave anarchy in a country or else we will look like even more of a bunch of assholes to the rest of the world.

Bush is definalty the best choice to make our country not look like a bunch of pansies. Kerry will make our country look like we've been defeated by crazy militant groups and the opinion of those who dont support the war. If we pull our troops out, of Iraq, some militant group will take over and Iraq will be worse off then it was with Saddam in control.

I am democratic in just about all my views except taxing issues and this war. We fucked up, and now we need to fix it. Calling it quits and running away from the situation will not fix anything, only make it worse.

He is a flake. He flies with public opinion, not his own, someone I do NOT want representing my country.

Wow, your opinion sounds TOTALLY unbiased .... Maybe you should actually research your information instead of just believing everything George Bush tells you. Kerry doesn't want to just run out of Iraq. He wants to finish what we started, but not prolong it like Bush wants to. Maybe if it was your brother or dad that was getting killed over there for absolutely no reason you would think differently. Then you would realize that Bush is trying to blind you with fear that doesn't even exist. He goes after something to fulfill his father's goals and oil desires while letting the real terrorists like Bin Laden get away ... someone who actually IS a threat to us. Out of all the people I've heard speak their opinions yours is the most ignorant ... You sound like Bush himself

[usc]

Nice assumption you made. Too bad I never supported going into Iraq. But like you said, the "polls" showed that the majority of the public supported attacking Iraq. Now how did this support come about? (Because of misinformation presented by the government agencies.)

In this game of "right and wrong and public/world opinion," the "good guys" have to play the reactionary role. Because once you initiate something w/o provocation... you end up being the bully, the terrorist. It's the same thing as cops need to be shot at first before they're supposedly allowed to fire back. Stupid rule, but it's the only way that you'll gain the support of public/world opinion.

Osama/Al Qaeda shot at us, which gave us the green light to bury them with cruise missiles and lead. Saddam... he blew a lot of smoke.

Yes we made a mistake going in. *I* knew that before going in. Only idiots would go and open multiple fronts when fighting a war. Thin out your resources, pure genius.

We've got ourselves a new Vietnam. How's that? Because we've already handed the authority over to the "interim government." We're there only as a military presence/support. Sound familiar to Vietnam? This is called half-ass'd.

What are our options besides pulling out? We can admit we made another mistake by turning control over too early before stability/control, therefore nullifying the interim government and go back to a military occupation. Clean up the militants, and then reinstitute voting and handover.

But that's an option that no American wants to support because the government is suppose to take care of our own, not someone else. Economy is still in deep $hit, healthcare crisis. Ehjuhkashen is a joke.

I can promise you that if America stopped butting its nose into everyone else's business (not saying we can't spy on them, just don't go in and mess anything up unless absolutely necessary), then the Middle East wouldn't hate us. Don't go shoving Democracy down people's throats. They'll have it when they're good and ready. When will that be? When the "people" have the balls to revolt against an oppressor.

With Saddam, they had an oppressor. Now, they have no cause to fuel any democratic dream. It's just utter chaos.

[brownaznkid]

Originally posted by dwf137
As I said, we fucked up. Maybe invading wouldnt have been the best option, but ya know what? we did. You suffer from hindsight bias. You think how easy it would have been to see the outcome of the war before we invaded when you already know the outcome of the invasion.. 75% of this country supported the war before hand, what the hell were we supoosed to do.

Both of the candidates right now supported going in there, and now we need to fix our probelms. I agree that maybe a democracy is not the best governement for them to have, but it's better then anarchy.

We took out the government, and we can't just allow a dictator to get in charge.. People were being slaughtered left and right while we were not in Iraq, our presence has not really changed this, now its just that US soldiers are dying as well.. Kerry NOW admits that going into Iraq was a bad call, yet BEFORE the war, he was for it 100% and wanted to see saddam taken out of control, even if there was no link to terrorists. This is a fact and cannot be argued.

Pulling out of Iraq will only leave mayhem and cause Iraq to be in worse condition then it was before we got there.

America was fooled by the Bush Administration into believing that Saddam had WMD.. that's the only reason why so many people were "for" the war... that's why everyone wanted to get rid of saddam... because we THOUGHT he had WMD.. and therefore would make America and the world be "more secure"... and here's a question.. Where the fuck are they? the Bush Administration had so called "proof" of the locations of these weapons... and yet nothing has turned up after we've been there for how long?... and he repeatedly said that Saddam had ties with Osama regarding the attacks... yet the 9/11 commission disproves what he and his administration keeps on saying..

it seems now that America under the Bush Administration has dug itself a hole in Iraq.... and it's going to be a bitch to get ourselves out

[dwf137]

Kerry voted for the war in iraq, he voted to take out saddam.

well, maybe you didnt support the war from the beginning, i never said that you did, just that most of this country did. I have done my research on this, right after we invaded i had to do a report on the topic. It was a 10 page research paper, so believe me, I've done my research. Kerry wanted to just take out saddam, even if there was no link to terrorsits. Now he realizes it might not have been the best idea, and trash talks the president for following out the same exact thing that he belived in.

Kerry voted for the war in iraq, he voted to take out saddam.

Just so you know, I havnt watched any TV about this, I didn't watch the debate or anything like that. Actions mean more then words, therefore I stick to studying the history of the candidates, because when it comes down to it, they all lie to get votes, and Kerry has been changing his opinions ever since the democratic party as a whole decided to take a stance against the war.

Kerry voted for the war in iraq, he voted to take out saddam.

Sound familiar to Vietnam, not completely. But if it does then Kerry is the LAST person that I want in charge. Fucker trash talked all of the soldiers on public TV who, gave/risked thier lives in that war in the name of America. Vietnam wasn't the best war for us to get involved in, but once you do get involved, you need to follow through. You can't just go do something, realize it's too hard, and give up on everything you were fighting for. I'll argue the Vietnam thing to the death, most Vietnam vets are 100% against Kerry, as they very well should be. 3 of my relatives happen to be Vietnam vets, and I have a lot of respect for them. They were proud to fight for America, just like the soldiers in Iraq now. Then asshole Kerry comes out and says how they're all criminals.

As for the government situation in Iraq, there's very little that we can do, but we need to do everything possible. Speeding it up and pulling out the military support for the government is only going to force a militant group to try and take it over, and ya know what, they will be successfull without our support.

Your arugments are something that were good before the invasion, time to realize what situation we are in now, there's no taking it back.

[dwf137]

Originally posted by brownaznkid
America was fooled by the Bush Administration into believing that Saddam had WMD.. that's the only reason why so many people were "for" the war... that's why everyone wanted to get rid of saddam... because we THOUGHT he had WMD.. and therefore would make America and the world be "more secure"... and here's a question.. Where the fuck are they? the Bush Administration had so called "proof" of the locations of these weapons... and yet nothing has turned up after we've been there for how long?... and he repeatedly said that Saddam had ties with Osama regarding the attacks... yet the 9/11 commission disproves what he and his administration keeps on saying..

it seems now that America under the Bush Administration has dug itself a hole in Iraq.... and it's going to be a bitch to get ourselves out

Kerry was for taking out Saddam, I'll try to find the quote again, but he said that he supported taking out saddam even if there was no weapons of mass destruction becuase Saddam has a bad track reccord.

[dwf137]

read this and choke on your own words fuckers

"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." -- John Kerry 12/20/03

"I'm proud to say that John (Edwards) joined me in voting against that $87 billion..." -- John Kerry, 7/12/04
BUT WAIT
"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." John Kerry

"Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that and I disagree with the Governor [Howard Dean]." -- John Kerry, 12/15/03

"If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- John Kerry, USA Today on 2/13/03

"I would disagree with John McCain that it’s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it’s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that - that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." -- John Kerry, "Face The Nation", 9/15/02

"I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq - Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." -- John Kerry, 7/29/02

"I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him." -- John Kerry, Democratic Debate, 5/3/03

"I think the judgment of a nominee who doesn't understand that having Saddam Hussein captured will make it extraordinarily difficult to be able to beat an incumbent wartime president who captured Saddam Hussein. And let me tell you why, Tim. Saddam Hussein took us to war once before. In that war, young Americans were killed. He went to war in order to take over the oil fields. It wasn't just an invasion of Kuwait. He was heading for the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. And that would have had a profound effect on the security of the United States. This is a man who has used weapons of mass destruction, unlike other people on this Earth today, not only against other people but against his own people. This is a man who tried to assassinate a former president of the United States, a man who lobbed 36 missiles into Israel in order to destabilize the Middle East, a man who is so capable of miscalculation that he even brought this war on himself. This is a man who, if he was left uncaptured, would have continued to be able to organize the Ba'athists. He would have continued to terrorize the people, just in their minds, because of 30 years of terror in Iraq." -- John Kerry on NBC's "Meet The Press, 1/11/04

[Fearit22]

It was well established Kerry supported it. The point you are missing is he didn't support the way Bush did it, and what all has happened afterwards. Maybe it's because he was in guerilla style warfare, and knows how it is since Bush started another Vietnam. I know not many Vets are against Kerry. Everytime I drive around I see vets for Kerry stickers on peoples cars way more often than some vet against him. The last football game we had here there were some people outside that were vets support Kerry. Face the facts, Bush lied about why we were going in there. Then he had the CIA leader take the fall for him ... misinformation

The thing about multiple front wars is very true. If you know anything at all about history then you will know how dangerous they are. Anyone who did it except for us in WWII has lost ... That's one of the reasons we were hesitant to go into the war. Bush unfortunately doesn't have that much sense. It seems like he actually wants the whole world to hate us.

[Fearit22]

Since you posted that while I was typing my post up I will emphasize again you totally miss the point!

Everyone has established he initially supported it. I hate to burst your bubble, but all of your quotes show nothing except what we have said. Yes, the world is safer without Saddam. I guess our country is safer with over 1,000 people senselessly killed though? Kerry disagrees with how things were handled, not with the war on terror in general. Like Bush in the debate last night you are just off in right field picking up daisies ... nowhere near the actual subject matter.

[dwf137]

how can you not support what happens afterwords? NOONE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. you either support it, or you dont.

[Fearit22]

Because Bush chose how things were handled. You are responsible for your actions. War isn't pretty... everyone knows that. Bush made a lot of stupid mistakes that Kerry wouldn't have is the point.

[usc]

Originally posted by dwf137
Your arugments are something that were good before the invasion, time to realize what situation we are in now, there's no taking it back.

I couldn't give a flying rat's ass about Kerry. As I stated before, politics is evil. There are no honest politicians. If there is one, he/she'd never make it to the presidency.

Of course there is absolutely no good way to back out of Iraq. What's done is done. This isn't hindsight bias as you so quickly assumed the first time around.

So now one should just focus on backing out, PERIOD. There is no "face" left to be saved. The world knows Bush/America screwed up. (If it was Gore in the hot-seat and he lead us into war with Saddam, then it'd be Gore/America screwing up.) Just ask anyone in the Middle East and you'll get a resounding majority answer of, "GET THE F- OUT."

Give them what they want. You can't stop the killing by leaving them alone. And you can't stop the killing by being there. So what's your better solution, besides calling us "fuckers" and quoting Kerry?

In politics these days, you vote for the lesser of two evils. We already know Bush f'd up. If he had gotten Al Qaeda and Osama completely, then I'd say he has a fighting chance of working things out in Iraq. But his actions thus far only shows he's good at starting crap. He's not too good at wiping it clean.

[brownaznkid]

Originally posted by dwf137
read this and choke on your own words fuckers

don't make your posts so personal... just state your opinion and that's it... it's just dumb to call people "fuckers" when they have a different opinion.. it just makes you seem less respectable as a person and it'll just lead to an all out flame war

[Fearit22]

Yeah, seriously. Everyone is having a decent conversation. Don't have to get all bitchy and immature.