When Liberals Say...

[Murphy]

When liberals say "George Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world", does that mean that they would rather have Osama Bin Laden as president? Since obviously in their mind he's not as bad of a terrorist as Bush.

[bigzak25]

When liberals say "George Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world", does that mean that they would rather have Osama Bin Laden as president? Since obviously in their mind he's not as bad of a terrorist as Bush.

idiot liberals (that means, NOT all of them, just the idiots, okay, back away from the keyboard malcontents) will say "GW is the biggest terrorist in the world" because they are focusing their insecurities outward. The KNOW, deep down, that GW is on a course that could lead to him being recognized as one of the GREATEST PRESIDENTS EVA. Rebounding this country from the tragic events of August, 23rd, for example. I had a friend pass away, long story, check the Vices thread.

Anyhow, democracy headway in Afghanistan, Iraq, and a Roadmap to Peace in a region that hasn't had it since ever. I think caveman palestinians were throwing rocks at jews in the stoneages. Anyhow, they FEAR his success. So they throw the wittiest insults they can muster and all laugh and put on greenday, try to act smart so other hot female idiot libs can lay them.

I never voted for clinton, but dayum if I don't respect the man and all that he accomplished while in office. Sure he was a liar, but their in politicians, they are ALL just ty used car salesmen in an armani in Washington. Yes, even the Republicans. All their s stink peeps. Focus on what matters is what i'm sayin. That is definitely bringing our Troops Home, I think we can all agree on that, but the question is WHEN. Not yet is the answer. Godbless our troops, and quite frankly, the haters, although yadda yadda yadda, i respect their right to an opinion.

[smeagol]

Whoever thinks Bush a terrorist is a moron.

[bigzak25]

well he is invading countries at whim smeegs.

did you know he has a stratego game with the USA on one side and all the oil bearing countries on the other and that's how he decides who to invade?

i'd be afraid if i was IRAN, but they are making their own bed.

Korea? they're cool. no oil there, so it's like wuteva kimjongcrazy, just don't get the shakes around the button, k dawg. thanks.

[boutons]

"The KNOW, deep down, that GW is on a course that could lead to him being recognized as one of the GREATEST PRESIDENTS EVA.'

Absolutely won't happen outside of the nutcase right and idealogues who took us into Iraq.

The nation wanted, needed to trust shrub for post-WTC leadership, and gave him, or at least the Office of the President, the benefit of the doubt.

He returned the favor by cynicallly, dishonestly exploiting and politicizing 9/11 to justify every ing Repug program, but worst of all, he and his posse of criminal liars said, and the the majority of stupid, naive Americans believed:

"9/11 = Iraq = terrorism",

... and therefore used 9/11 starting the bogus Iraq war.

History will not be kind to shrub. He will be remembered above for the Iraq war, which is an unmitigated, unending disaster.

[Clandestino]

"The KNOW, deep down, that GW is on a course that could lead to him being recognized as one of the GREATEST PRESIDENTS EVA.'

Absolutely won't happen outside of the nutcase right and idealogues who took us into Iraq.

The nation wanted, needed to trust shrub for post-WTC leadership, and gave him, or at least the Office of the President, the benefit of the doubt.

He returned the favor by cynicallly, dishonestly exploiting and politicizing 9/11 to justify every ing Repug program, but worst of all, he and his posse of criminal liars said, and the the majority of stupid, naive Americans believed:

"9/11 = Iraq = terrorism",

... and therefore used 9/11 starting the bogus Iraq war.

History will not be kind to shrub. He will be remembered above for the Iraq war, which is an unmitigated, unending disaster.

10+ years of iraq firing at us and british airplanes was not enough to attack iraq? what about 10+ years of violating the UN and bribing officials?

[boutons]

"does that mean that they would rather have Osama Bin Laden as president"

no, idiot. I explain it, but it would be a waste of effort.

"10+ years of iraq firing at us"

THAT was the threat to the USA? THAT is YOUR justification for starting the Iraq war?

I much prefer our planes and sanctions nailing Saddam's + sons' balls to a palm tree (which, as was shown by what we didn't find after the invasion, had totally removed Iraq as threat to anybody, let alone to the US) vs. the bogus Iraq war, so the US could get on with going after the real threats to the USA. "staying the course" in Iraq is totally OFF THE COURSE of fighting jihadis and their terrorism.

[Clandestino]

they hadn't done anything. saddam was still as powerful as ever. he still gaves tons of money to terrorist groups. he was a big terrorist financier. if you support terrorists, it is just a matter of time before you will be taken out..

you are probably on the list.

[boutons]

"they hadn't done anything. saddam was still as powerful as ever."

totally false. His military might in spring 2003 was non-existant (that's the only way the Repugs like to go to war), and nowhere near to 1991 when he was at his peak but still got his military destroyed. And it stayed destroyed for the next 12 years.

"he was a big terrorist financier"

again, totally false, which doesn't prevent head from repeating it in the face of no evidence, before or after the war. Saddma had no truck with jihadis and Osama, or any Islamic fundamentalism. Iraq was a secular dictatorship, NOT a theocracy like Iran. HOWEVER, due to shrub's bogus war and the Iraq cons utional charade, there are very good chances the Iran will end up controlling Iraq and turning it, and Iraqi oil $$$, into Iran West.

Saddam giving $25K to Palestinan familiies of suicide bombers was NOTHING compared to the $Ms given by the Saudis and Iran to terrorists, to Wahabbi madrasas all over the world. But the Repugs are scared into less inaction opposite Iran, and have their mouths firmly on oily Saudi s. Saddam was a known pushover intended to impress the naive, especially red-state, electorate back in the USA.

[Clandestino]

so, then it is TRUE. you proved it in your own post!

[Useruser666]

Sometimes, people climb a tree so high on emotions, they forgot why they climbed the tree in the begining.

[FromWayDowntown]

When liberals say "George Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world", does that mean that they would rather have Osama Bin Laden as president? Since obviously in their mind he's not as bad of a terrorist as Bush.

I think when "liberals" say that, they are expressing a view that they'd rather not have any terrorists in the White House. Saying that I disapprove of Bush's politics is not the same as saying that I approved of Hitler's.

[smeagol]

If Bush is a terrorist for going into Irak, Clinton is terrorist for bombing Bosnia, Bush senior is a terrorist for invading Panama, Reagan is one for invading Grenada, and so on and so forth.

It makes no sense.

[boutons]

smeagol, you've been infected by right-wing thought ups.

shrub starting the bogus war in an emasculated, defeated Iraq in any context, but esp in the context of real threats to USA from elswhere, is totally different from the UN, Europe, and US trying to stop the genocide in the Balkans.

There is Iraq-Balkans parallel in the tribalism, religious, ethnic conflicts fueling the centuries old hate between the groups. sunni vs shiite vs Kurd.

[Clandestino]

so, should we have stopped the genocide in the balkans?

[Jelly]

"
History will not be kind to shrub. He will be remembered above for the Iraq war, which is an unmitigated, unending disaster.

The apocalyptic hysteria that some people apply to this war makes me realize how so many Americans seem to have no sense of history. I am not happy about how things are going in Iraq, but can we keep just a little perspective?

We have been in Iraq going on 3 years. Our casualities number 1,850.
We were in Korea for 3 years. In that time we lost 57,000.

In Iraq, civilian casualty estimates are in the tens of thousands.
In Korea, 3 million people lost their lives and half a million people were made homeless refugees for decades after.

Truman is now considered by many as one of the greatest presidents we've ever had.

Bring it down a notch, Boutouns. You sound ridiculous.

[boutons]

"should we have stopped the genocide in the balkans"

Of course. Is that a serious question?

[Clandestino]

yes.

then why should we have let saddam continue on his genocide?

[boutons]

Saddam's genocide on the Kurds (I think that occurred when Cheney was visiting/selling Halliburton goodies to Saddam in the 80s) and the marsh Arabs (remember? the ones Bush pere encouraged to revolt against Saddam then abandoned ed them to Saddam's killers) was very much over by 2003, so in 2003 there was no genocide to stop. Whatever bad stuff Saddam and sons were doing in 2003 didn't justify a ing goddam war.

[Clandestino]

i see you haven't renounced your baathist membercard yet.

[samikeyp]

Korea? they're cool. no oil there, so it's like wuteva kimjongcrazy, just don't get the shakes around the button, k dawg. thanks

That is #1 Great Leadah! He no get shakes! American imperialist dog!

[boutons]

"apocalyptic hysteria that some people apply to this war"

dissent against the bogus war is not apocalyptic hysteria, although as the months pass, the red-state righ-wingers may be excused from seeing it as massive and intimidating as dissent and demontrations against the war build up. Repugs up for re-election in 2006 are already distancing themselves from shrub and coming down against the war. As Krugman said last week. "the Iraq war is already over, somebody tell Bush".

btw, I, for one, am in no way pleased or "gleeful" that the Iraq war is a fiasco, a disaster in every sense. I am pleased that the Iraq war fiasco is kicking the Repugs in the balls and teeth, which is too gentle a punishment for their crimes.

Starting a bogus war in Iraq based on lies is not mitigated or excused by low US casualties compared to Korean war. One life lost in Iraq war for Repug domestic ploys is one too many.

The chicken- Repugs wouldn't have started the Iraq war if Iraq had been as strong as NK was, and supported by Iran the way China supporte NK. The Repugs saw Iraq as low-cost, easy, "slam dunk". Totally wrong, totally incompetent, but promotions and Medals of Freedom for all the perpetrators.

[MannyIsGod]

Here's an idea.

Zak (and other people before him) have mentioned how the actions of Bush might have put fear into the hearts of some countries. Invading Iraq should have Iran scared in other words. Same thing for North Korea right?

Well, when you have a threat to your country, how do you respond? How would the United States respond? If France just upped and invaded Canada () one day, would we capitulate to what they wanted or would we make ourselves better suited to defense?

I wonder why NK and Iran aren't eager to give up their WMD programs.

[Hook Dem]

Saddam's genocide on the Kurds (I think that occurred when Cheney was visiting/selling Halliburton goodies to Saddam in the 80s) and the marsh Arabs (remember? the ones Bush pere encouraged to revolt against Saddam then abandoned ed them to Saddam's killers) was very much over by 2003, so in 2003 there was no genocide to stop. Whatever bad stuff Saddam and sons were doing in 2003 didn't justify a ing goddam war.

Go to the head of the class! You have now replaced NBADan as #1 handwringer!

[Clandestino]

Go to the head of the class! You have now replaced NBADan as #1 handwringer!

too ing funny... go to the head of the class! but yeah, boutons has been going nuts lately.