Defending the Truth

You make it sound like rocket science. You cut funding to the point where we can defend our homeland and a bit extra for overseas support of allies when necessary. Cut nukes to a reasonable amount.

Don't bother me with your trifling arguments alias.

Iraq never housed any terrorists and you know it. There are terrorists there NOW because the american's shot the infrastructure to bits.

Whatever saddam was, he was never a threat to the US. And don't give me the BS about freeing the Iraqi p[eople. THere are plenty of dictators still on the US payroll. Iraq was about OIL.

Afghanistan was different. THe government adm,itted to harboring terrorists, and the world knew it to be true. SO invading afghanistan didn't piss people off.

It was when America invaded a country that was NO threat to them, had no wmds, had no chemical weapons, had no links to alqaeda( bush kept repeating that lie, but the fact is that saddam would never allow any other outfit in Iraq i.e no terrorists). See THAT was when people styarted getting pissed off.

And that's why more people wanna bomb the hell outta america. We never know when the US is going to find a weak excuse to bomb the shit out of us.

Time for some honesty.

honesty.. yes i like it. here's a dose of honesty.

Saddam had NO affiliation with AQ. two reasons. Firstly, Saddam never worked the religious angle. In fact Iraq was the first arab nation to actively involve the female population in the workforce. Secondly, AQ would never have been allowed by saddam as he never shared power. And if AQ was active, it WOULD mean split loyalties.

In fact AQ was BANNED in Iraq and Osama spoke out officially against saddam on several occasions. No link here my friend no matter how many lies your president tells you.

Iraq most certainly DID have WMDs at one time. However as hans blix stated, there were NO WMDs in iraq when the US invaded. And that too has been proven by the US inability to FIND anything.

The UN NEVER sanctioned any invasion of Iraq. Only thing that happened was that colin powell tried to CONVINCE the UN to go to war based on a couple of sketchy sattelite images. And honestly if the US didn't have so many nukes, he would hav ebeen laughed out of the security council. ANyow it seems the images were irrelevant since no WMDs were found.

The UN REFUSED to invade IRaq which is why the US invaded with the *giggle* "coalition of the willing". the unwilling didn't need a coalition.. they were a majority of the world population.. most of them non muslim.

There is NO QUESTION that the Saudi government in vehemently supported by the US government. Otherwise saudi arabia should hav ebeen invaded for the same reasons as Iraq. It has VERY ACTIVE AQ support. It is horribly discriminating against women. And it is a despotic dictatorship. So how come no coalition of the willing goes in there to shoot some terrorists.

I agree that the terrorists are the most awful thing. I mean i would slap the shit out of one if i saw him. But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about the fact that the US actions about the world is REDUCING your security. Not increasing it.

My stance is always that of non-violence. No violence is ever justified. That goes for unwarranted invasions of a foreign land AS WELL AS blowing your ignorant ass up in a crowded restaurant.

Bullshit. If Iraq is about oil, then where in the hell is it? I could sure go for some of that cheap oil we were supposedly supposed to get. Go to this link and read the entire thing and get back to me. Time for you to get educated instead of reading your propaganda in newpapers.

http://husseinandterror.com/

No doubt Iraqi oil is not the only reason.

BUT

It has also been established that no WMDs existed. It has also been established that AQ and Iraq have no link. No AQ cells were active in Iraq prior to Us invasion, and there was a closer working relationship between the bushes and saddam than there is between saddam and osama.

Quite obviously the americans are not there out of altruistic reasons. The Saudi people arebeing suppressed by their despotic dictator. The kuwaitis get their dictator REINSTATED by the american forces.

SO iraq was not invaded because saddam was a mad dictator, cuz many US pals in the Middle East are loony dictators.

Saudi Arabia is THE MOST discriminatory country in the world against women. All the horror stories about suppression of women in muslim countries are based in SAUDI LAW. In fact saddam made sure that IRaqi women were given EQUAL RIGHTS as one of the first arab nations to do so.

SO iraq was also not invaded because of women's rights. I think this argument in itself is silly as gender equality has never been a reason for armed conflict.

You may be right that the US had deeper motives than OIL. BUT it's none of the above.

WHat then ?

You obviously did not go to the link I provided and you offer no evidence for your statements. You need to read the link and counter what it states specifically or else you're just farting in the wind. Here it is again. Read all of it and counter it with some evidence.

http://husseinandterror.com/

1. Did Saddam have - and use - WMDs in the past? THE ANSWER IS YES.
2. Did Saddam refuse to allow full and unfettered access to UN inspectors? THE ANSWER IS YES.
3. Did Saddam repeatedly refuse to abide by UN Resolutions? THE ANSWER IS YES.


Let's stop acting like Saddam was some innocent little fella that accidentally got caught in the crossfire. Everything Saddam got, he arrogantly brought on himself.

We blew up the infrastructure, can't F*ck it, then break it and expect it to work!

Shock and awe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

http://www.marchforjustice.com/shock&awe.php

You might want to educate yourself on what is really happening instead of spreading propaganda. Here is a link. Be sure to get back to me if there is something you don't understand.

http://www.defendamerica.mil/iraq/rebuilding.html