Anti-Semitism In France!

[Ron Cusano 0]

I never said that did I?? All I said was that the legal system that we have was based arounf Biblical principals. You are putting words in my mouth.

So you don't think the 10 commandments are all that important as Biblical principals?

I personally think there are principals in the Bible that are there to keep us from harming each other. It was those that I think look like a lot of our laws, but I don't believe it was a religous thing, I simply think it's about protecting our selves from each other.

[Ron Cusano 0]

I disagree that he was not aiding and abeting terrorists and there is a lot that you are leaving out that points in the other direction, but all that aside, at least we can agree that he was a major threat to the stability of the Middle East that is the life blood of the oil that keeps our country functioning. In my humble opinion, that in itself was good enough reason to take him out of power.

Actually, he was a pretty secular leader. Many Islamic groups weren’t happy with him or his leadership.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam#Saddam_Hussein_as_a_secular_leader

“Saddam saw himself as a social revolutionary and a modernizer, following the Nasser model. To the consternation of Islamic conservatives, his government gave women added freedoms and offered them high-level government and industry jobs. Saddam also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law (Sharia). Saddam abolished the Sharia law courts, except for personal injury claims.”

“However, no conclusive evidence of any kind, linking Saddam and bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization has ever been produced by any US government official. It is the official assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community that contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda over the years did not lead to a collaborative relationship. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was able to find evidence of only one such meeting, as well as evidence of two occasions "not reported prior to the war, in which Saddam Hussein rebuffed meeting requests from an al-Qa'ida operative. The Intelligence Community has found no other evidence of meetings between al-Qa'ida and Iraq." The Senate Committee concluded that while there was no evidence of any Iraqi support of al-Qaeda, there was convincing evidence of hostility between the two entities”

None of this is to defend what he did, but he wasn’t aligned with radical Muslims.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I am not going to get into a political debate because nothing good can come of it. I don't approve of everything that Bush has done and every decision that he has made, but I do support the war on terror.

The war on terror has become the war on Islam. On 912, the day after 911, BuSh said that we must mount a new Crusade. Is he that stupid or that smart?

 

Iraq had nothing to do with 911

 

Based upon the information that was available at the time, which was accepted by leaders of both parties, it was believed that there were weapons of mass destruction there. There is no question that Saddam was in bed with Islamic radicals and that there were training camps in the country. This man committed genocide against his own people, was a constant threat to the middle east, and harbored those who would destroy America. There were numerous reasons why I believe we needed to invade Iraq..

The information available at that time was manipulated by BuSh. Every time a CIA report or Richard Clark told him no, BuSh said go back and look again. Clark being honorable, quit. George Tenant needing his job as CIA director over-rode CIA intelligence and said "Yes master".

 

Watch the Scooter Libby trial. It is all coming out, about how the evidence was cooked. PNAC operatives in the BuSh White House had decided that Iraq was coming down in 1998. BuSh brought up the invasion of Iraq in his first cabinet meeting.

 

The big difference between this war and the invasion of Poland by Hitler is that this was an act to attack our enemies where we found them, and defend our national interests, whereas Hitler's goal was world domoniation. There is no comparision.

Hitler had a better excuse for invading Austria than BuSh had for invading Iraq. Hitler was unifying his country. BuSh had to send troops half-way around the world. Hitler only had to cross the river.

 

Weather you believe in the war or not; weather you like Bush or not, he is the President of the United States, duely elected my the majority of the people in this country, and deserves our respect and support during this time of war and constant threat against our country.

I would respect him if he was not a murderer. Over 3000 US military personal are dead because of his misadventure. Maybe 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians are dead because of his pride.

 

By starting a war that was not needed, he has been able to cry "support us in time of war". That is about as disingenuous as Lizzie Borden asking for mercy because she was an orphan.

[TruBlueSue 0]

Actually, he was a pretty secular leader. Many Islamic groups weren’t happy with him or his leadership.

None of this is to defend what he did, but he wasn’t aligned with radical Muslims.

I can back this up - Saddam was a Ba'athist first - a party wholly based on secular principles and aligned with Nasser's socialist political ideology. Both Shi'i and Sunni "islamists", in Ba'athist terms, are bad. And, if you think Saddam's demise has brought about the end of the Ba'athist ideology, think again - the Syrians are Ba'athists too.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I can back this up - Saddam was a Ba'athist first - a party wholly based on secular principles and aligned with Nasser's socialist political ideology. Both Shi'i and Sunni "islamists", in Ba'athist terms, are bad. And, if you think Saddam's demise has brought about the end of the Ba'athist ideology, think again - the Syrians are Ba'athists too.

Do you think George W. BuSh knows the difference between Suni and Shiite?

[Sunta 5]

I had a friend at my last job who was gay and found out later had AIDS. He knew my stance and I knew his and we got along fine. In fact, we he had a spell of sickness and was off work for a period, myself and some co-workers bought graceries and visited him at home. I say that not to pat myself on the back, but to say it is possible to let your beleifs be known and not hate or shun people.

It is inspiring to see someone who is a Christian and also actually embodies what Christian principals are really all about: Kindness, love, acceptance, and doing good works. I wish more Christians would follow your example!

[TruBlueSue 0]

Iraq had nothing to do with 911. I would respect him if he was not a murderer. Over 3000 US military personal are dead because of his misadventure. By starting a war that was not needed, he has been able to cry "support us in time of war". .

As a veteran of the Iraq misadventure, I hold BuSh and his neo-con cronies personally and directly responsible for the deaths of some of the finest people I have ever known, and for my own disability. I have to deal with this, as does my veteran non-disabled husband and my three year old, for the rest of my life. This was and is not a case of what is known in hebrew as "ein brera", an existential war. This was started by a president (duly elected?) whose first thought was that of a toddler throwing a tantrum - "you didn't like my daddy, so I'm gonna get you..."

I am proud to have served my country, and yes, I took on that obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion (as the oath of office goes.) However, I expected to be DEFENDING my country and the ideals that it stands for NOT embarking on a 21 century crusade.

[TruBlueSue 0]

Do you think George W. BuSh knows the difference between Suni and Shiite?

G-d I hope he does BY NOW.:omg:

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

As a veteran of the Iraq misadventure, I hold BuSh and his neo-con cronies personally and directly responsible for the deaths of some of the finest people I have ever known, and for my own disability. I have to deal with this, as does my veteran non-disabled husband and my three year old, for the rest of my life. This was and is not a case of what is known in hebrew as "ein brera", an existential war. This was started by a president (duly elected?) whose first thought was that of a toddler throwing a tantrum - "you didn't like my daddy, so I'm gonna get you..."

I am proud to have served my country, and yes, I took on that obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion (as the oath of office goes.) However, I expected to be DEFENDING my country and the ideals that it stands for NOT embarking on a 21 century crusade.

That is so important to hear. At another site where I post I was told that it is people like me who never served, who don't understand.

Hey TOM " As you were 20 just as the Vietnam war was escalating,I have a question or two,which of course you need not answer if you choose . Were you ever in any of the armed forces ? and if so, did you serve in Vietnam ? And if not Vietnam ,where ?

I have posted this many times before, so you can look it up.

When I was 19, in 1964, I was gung-ho military and tried to enlist in the US Air Force. I failed my physical because of injuries suffered while playing freshman football in college. The last step of the pre-induction physical was a 26 page questionnaire and the last question was "Are you the sole surviving son of a man killed in the service of the US Military". My father was a US Army Sargent killed in Berlin in WW11 on the day after I was born in 1945, so I answered “yes”.

I was told that I failed the physical that day and about 3 weeks later a new draft classification card came in the mail with a classification of “4A”. I was ready to serve, though knowing what I know now, I am glad my knee kept me out of that war; Another war in which we dismissed the French. We laughed at the French for leaving Vietnam and we kept laughing at the French until 65,000 of our youth were dead, many times that many more maimed and many times that number who had miserable lives because of much higher rates of alcohol abuse, drug abuse, crime, spousal abuse and suicide than that of the people who did not serve in Vietnam. And for what? We lost. The dominoes never came down. We were fed a line of crap, just like in 2002 leading up to the 2003 Illogical Illegal Iraqi Invasion. When will we learn?

Aren't you glad you asked?

No I am not glad I asked, and more information than necessary. There was not a "why" in any of my questions. You are of course entitled to your opinions. I was curious ,as you seem to know so much about the armed forces. And as I suspected, those that know the least ,holler the loudest are the ones that did not contribute anything. Have a nice day.

I contributed my father.

Can you top that?

[lisah25 3]

I never said that did I?? All I said was that the legal system that we have was based arounf Biblical principals. You are putting words in my mouth.

Not really. If the laws are based on Biblical principals, it would follow that the ones thought most important would be represented. Most of the 10 commandments are not. So logically, either they aren't that important, or the law isn't really based on Biblical pricipals.

[Ron Cusano 0]

The war on terror has become the war on Islam. On 912, the day after 911, BuSh said that we must mount a new Crusade. Is he that stupid or that smart?

To use the tern "Crusade" was a poor choice of words! Yes, it was stupid!

Iraq had nothing to do with 911 Not directly, but it gave support to those who planned it!

The information available at that time was manipulated by BuSh. Every time a CIA report or Richard Clark told him no, BuSh said go back and look again. Clark being honorable, quit. George Tenant needing his job as CIA director over-rode CIA intelligence and said "Yes master".

That is not what I have read and heard. I have seen transcripts and articles from those present that paint a completely different picture.

Watch the Scooter Libby trial. It is all coming out, about how the evidence was cooked. PNAC operatives in the BuSh White House had decided that Iraq was coming down in 1998. BuSh brought up the invasion of Iraq in his first cabinet meeting. I will! If it can be proven that the information was "cooked", I have an open mind on the issue! I don't think that will be the case though!

Hitler had a better excuse for invading Austria than BuSh had for invading Iraq. Hitler was unifying his country. BuSh had to send troops half-way around the world. Hitler only had to cross the river. I disagree and I think history bears it out. Hitler's only goal was world domination and the intent of the Iraq war is self-defence.

I would respect him if he was not a murderer. Over 3000 US military personal are dead because of his misadventure. Maybe 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians are dead because of his pride.

By starting a war that was not needed, he has been able to cry "support us in time of war". That is about as disingenuous as Lizzie Borden asking for mercy because she was an orphan.

He is not a murderer. In a war, people die! If you want to talk about innocent people dieing in war, NO country is without blood on it's hands. We were attacked on 911 by brutal factions that want to destroy our country. Unless we destroy the enemy where we find them, we will be fighting them on the streets of our cities. Regarding Iraq, setting aside his aiding and abetting these people, Saddams threat to the Middle East and his genocide against his own people was enough reason to undertake to take him out of power. This is not the first timem our country has used force to stop genocide.

Regardless of how much you disapprove of him personally and/or his politics, as a citizen of America, I believe we all have an obligation to be unified behind our President regardless who he is, especially while our nation is being threatened.

[TruBlueSue 0]

Aren't you glad you asked?

I contributed my father. Can you top that?

TOM, I know you weren't point that at me directly, and no, I can't top that, except to say that my husband and I served in order to give something back to the country we live in. I too, lost my father - not in Vietnam in 1967-69, but here of untreated PTSD and alcoholism 35 years later. I do know something of loss from that and my armed forces service.

[Ron Cusano 0]

That does not sound logical at all! The laws that WERE ESTABLISHED were based upon Biblical principal. Apparently the founders of our country did not consider some things, like "not worshipping idols" something that belonged within the framework of a free and open society as part of the legal system. If you doubt that our laws are based upon Biblical principals, speak to any attorney or law professor.

Not really. If the laws are based on Biblical principals, it would follow that the ones thought most important would be represented. Most of the 10 commandments are not. So logically, either they aren't that important, or the law isn't really based on Biblical pricipals.

[lisah25 3]

Apparently the founders of our country did not consider some things, like "not worshipping idols" something that belonged within the framework of a free and open society as part of the legal system.

Bingo. The laws may be the same as some Biblical principals, but they aren't based on it.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

TOM, I know you weren't point that at me directly, and no, I can't top that, except to say that my husband and I served in order to give something back to the country we live in. I too, lost my father - not in Vietnam in 1967-69, but here of untreated PTSD and alcoholism 35 years later. I do know something of loss from that and my armed forces service.

No. I was praising you writting.

I was retelling a series of posts that I had at another forum today.

I have nothing but respect for you, your service to this country and the service by your family.

PLEASE, PLEASE, REREAD MY POST SO THAT YOU MIGHT SEE THAT I WAS TALKING TO SOMEONE ELSE.

I AM SO SORRY FOR THIS MISCOMMUNICATION!!