Me Thinks The World Just became a little safer

[BJean 16]

Yea GeezerSue! It restores my faith in our military to hear from one who is honest about our presence in Iraq.

One of my best friend's son served in Baghdad. He was anxious to go and hated to come home. He thanked the President for furthering his career which he would not have been able to do so quickly without this war. Plus he got extra pay while there. I would say that he's in the regular Army, but he isn't, he's in the irregular regular National Guard.

When the Republicans are in control, the military and weapons systems in the U.S. grow by leaps - then the Dems come in and get cursed for balancing the budget. Makes lots of sense, doesn't it? Not.

Btw, my husband's business grows by leaps while the Rebuplicans are in office too. But that doesn't make it right.

[GeezerSue 7]

Btw, my husband's business grows by leaps while the Rebuplicans are in office too. But that doesn't make it right.

Kind of a moral conundrum, eh? We are in a tax bracket that is better served by the Republicans...but that damned mirror in the bathroom is easier to look into when the Dems are in office.

[Parvathi 2]

I started to read this whole thread, but then decided it'd just get me frustrated lol. So I thought I'd throw in my 2 cents on the subject and hopefully, be done with it

As an ex-pat, now living in Australia where I feel safe to walk the streets at night, I've gained plenty of new perspective that I did not have when I was sitting in small town SC voting.

Growing up, I campaigned with my Grandfather for our local Republican congressmen and such. I even sat my freckled arse in a dunking booth and endured freezing cold Water for the cause. Then I grew up. When it was my turn to vote at the age of 18, I voted for Clinton. I later kicked myself lol. Not because he had an affair, honestly, I could care less about that. But because I feel he didn't have his eye on the ball as much as he could have.

Now, I don't consider myself a republican, nor do I consider myself a democrat. I consider myself the most informed individual I can possibly be on the subject and vote accordingly (via absentee ballot).

I was raised to believe that you show respect for the President of the United States. Even though I may not agree with things President Bush has done, nor did I agree with many things President Clinton did, I respect them both for having the courage to accept the position. It would not be an easy job. It would be, for the most part, a thankless job. Either way, people are going to hate you, all over the world. I feel that most politicians enter into the line of service, to do good. It's the politics and red tape and bureaucracy that keeps them from doing that.

My husband worked in government for several years. He told me stories of how the politician he worked for was a good man and how he had things he wanted to get done in office. He had steps in place to get those things done. Unfortunately, the people that were employed in his office either a) didn't want those specific things done b)didn't want to work. They would say in the office for anyone to hear, "He'll be out of office in another two years - we'll just keep putting it off tail then."

Sadly, it seems to happen all the time.

I feel that worldwide, people are losing confidence and respect in not only the office of President of the United States, but in the USA as a whole, at an incredible speed, which saddens me. I of course, don't have the answers. I just hope and pray that the man or women that does, puts their hand up for the job and the American people are informed enough to do the right thing and vote them into office.

[BJean 16]

Parvathi: I used to believe that politicians, for the most part, wanted to serve their country and "do good" for their fellow citizens. That was before I worked for government as a legislative aide. I know now that it isn't the red tape that is preventing politicians from doing good. I saw up close and personal, exactly what most politicians in that arena were up to. Yes, some of them had goals and idealistic plans to make the world a better place. But most only had survival, profit and power on their agenda. The best I can do is to vote for people (and very importantly, the party) that will do the least amount of damage.

The present administration, from my perspective, has done so much to gain power and build their own empires, that they have become dangerous to the well being and the freedom that Americans have been promised by the Constitution of the United States of America.

That is why Democrats are screaming so loudly right now. They have real palpable fear over countless actions that this president and his administration have taken while in office.

[mousecrazy 2]

I was raised to believe that you show respect for the President of the United States. Even though I may not agree with things President Bush has done, nor did I agree with many things President Clinton did, I respect them both for having the courage to accept the position. It would not be an easy job. It would be, for the most part, a thankless job. Either way, people are going to hate you, all over the world. I feel that most politicians enter into the line of service, to do good. It's the politics and red tape and bureaucracy that keeps them from doing that.

I completely agree with this paragraph, and wish that more people would try to maintain some respect and civility, even when disagreeing with policies and directions of one administration or another. As it is, very few decent leaders are going to be willing to step up and run for any office at all, with the media and public scrutiny that goes along with it...much less attempt to lead the USA. It's a big country, and it is still, IMHO, the last great hope of many others in the world.

[anonemouse 1]

Personally, I feel that everyone deserves respect until they do something to destroy it. And to me, Bush has done plenty to destroy any respect that I once held for him. Why should I respect someone that doesn't respect me?

He had the respect and support of the ENTIRE country following 9/11. Ruining that was something only he could do. It was his to lose. He lost our respect when he lied to us and invaded a country under false pretenses. He lost our respect by sacrificing almost 3,000 American soldiers. He lost our respect when he undermined our civil rights, the rights that make us a free nation. The key words are he lost them. We didn't randomly decide to stop respecting the man. How can you say he deserves our respect? You don't continue respecting a doctor that knowingly gives you the wrong diagnosis just because he went to medical school and became a doctor, and you don't continue respecting a man who is knowingly undermining everything this country was founded on just because he was elected to office.

ETA: I just wanted to add that I have complete respect for the office of the President. I understand that it is an incredibly difficult position. I just don't have respect for the man. Saying that we should respect a man just because he got elected is like saying that the civil rights protestors in Birmingham should have respected the mayor that had dogs and fire hoses turned loose on them just because he got a majority of the vote to put him in office. It makes absolutely no sense. Being elected to office doesn't automatically make you respectable.

[BJean 16]

Now if someone accuses laurend of being personally insulting, I will have a bone to pick with them.

Well said, laurend!

[TruBlueSue 0]

Amen, Laurend! Someone who speaks with integrity and the conviction thereof. Bravo.:clap2:

[gailannr 1]

Stop in and say hello to the Jihadists on Fox News Special tonight. Do you really think this started six years ago? How can you guys be so blind to what they want to do to us? I just don't see how you aren't fearing for your lives and your children and grandchildren's lives in the future!!

[GeezerSue 7]

Stop in and say hello to the Jihadists on Fox News Special tonight. Do you really think this started six years ago? How can you guys be so blind to what they want to do to us? I just don't see how you aren't fearing for your lives and your children and grandchildren's lives in the future!!

Faux News isn't news. It's propaganda.

No, it didn't start six years ago. It's been going on a long time.

I know that all of us are in far more danger since we attacked and killed thousands and thousands of innocent people. THEY have relatives, too. THEIR children will remember the slaughter of their parents. Hell, yeah it's more dangerous since we went into Iraq for no reason.

[anonemouse 1]

Look, if this war was about getting al-Qaida and the other cells of jihadists, we wouldn't have invaded Iraq. I don't see how anyone with eyes and ears can believe that invading Iraq helped us in any way. Because we have been so focused on Iraq, the people who actually did attack us are flourishing again in Afganistan.

To be quite honest, I am not afraid of Islamic jihadists. I understand that I am much more likely to be killed in a car accident or natural disaster than an Islamic jihadist. You can't stop living your life because of fear. If you do, the people threatening you have won. You can't sacrifice everything that makes you American (i.e. civil liberties) because of fear. If you do, the jihadists and anti-Americanists really have won. In that respect, George Bush is more of a threat to our nation than jihadists.

[TruBlueSue 0]

Once again, Laurend, you speak truth. Geez, part of the problem is that we have no historical perspective - we're shortsighted - the jihadis have LONG term historical perspective - did you wonder why BuSh's use of the term 'crusader' caused such an uproar?

[gailannr 1]

Well, then what happens to the Iraqi's that begged us and continue to beg us to save them? What about the relatives of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that were buried alive or massacred/slaughtered and then buried in mass graves? What about their children, will they remember? Oh no, that's right, most of their children were buried right along with them. Just remember, our country is polorized (division or formation into two opposite or opposing groups) that's about 50/50 across the land. Liberals are just better at waa waaing longer and louder. I hate war but FREEDOM IS NOT FREE! History will tell and we will be long dead. But I hope my death comes naturally, not from the Jihadists that made it to American! Because they will come again unless we stop them! Why don't the Jihadists feel like our liberals? Why don't they stop killing their own? Don't they love their brothers like our liberals love them? Oh, not the same rules for them? DUH!

[BJean 16]

Do people really think that our being in Iraq is a deterrent to terrorist attacks in America? Bush isn't really claiming that today.

Since it has been revealed that Saddam did not have the capability to attack us with massively destructive weapons, and we are not able to deter terrorists by being there, it seems that people are saying that our worthy goal for sending American troops to Iraq has been to help the Iraqis stop being slaughtered by Saddam and to bring democracy to the region.

We can all agree that Saddam isn't slaughtering them anymore. But they are still being killed in large numbers every day. We've been impotent when it comes to stopping the killing in Iraq. Why do we continue to sacrifice American men and women when we do not seem to be able to achieve any of the goals that Bush says he set out to achieve? Peace has not been achieved, a true democracy has not been achieved, killing has not stopped AND Americans are losing their lives every day!

Why did we choose Iraq to save? Why aren't we saving the millions (!) who are being slaughtered in South Africa?

Why aren't we working toward peace in the Middle East all over the Middle East, not just Iraq? Especially since many of the other countries in the Middle East are known to have hotbeds of terrorist support.

While some Americans believe that we are in Iraq to deter terrorism, others know that the only possible way to assist in some kind of civility there, is to use our brains, not our brawn.

It is understandable that Americans who have relatives in Iraq desparately need to know that there is a tangible, worthwhile reason for their family member to be exposed to injury and death in Iraq. It is comforting to wave the American flag and boast that their relative in Iraq is safeguarding Americans' freedom. But it is reminicent of Viet Nam in that no good is ever going to come of Americans losing their lives there. It would be more sensible if families would join in the fight to GET US OUT!

[Carlene 12]

Gail...

What evidence do you have, other than political rhetoric, that Iraqis were ever "begging us to save them"? This whole liberate-the-poor-Iraqis idea came about because the WMD that prompted the invasion of Iraq simply were not there. So Bush had to come up with another reason for barging in and taking over someone else's territory. Someone that wasn't bothering us in the least. So now, instead of saving the world from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, we are over there to liberate its people. Nice save, George.

Yes, many feared Sadam and he was a cruel dictator and a despot, but he was THEIR despot. The Iraqis, by and large, are not happy that we are there. They did not greet our troops with flowers and chocolate. We are infidels to ALL Muslims, not just the al-Qaeda. These people do NOT consider us their brothers. In their minds, we are filthy dogs. Try and remember that.

And the popularity of the Bush administration regarding the war is NOT polarized at 50/50. Yesterday's AP poll put Bush's approval rating at only 31%.

As for stopping Jihadists, how will our continued presence in Iraq do that? There are terrorists all over the world - far more in Pakistan, in fact, than there are in Iraq. Why aren't we stomping Pakistan into the ground, if freeing the world of Jihadists is our goal?