Bush is worse than Clinton

[BengalsCat]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 26 2005, 12:24 PM']What about the fact that Bin Laden's brother invest 50g's into George W. Bush's first of many failed business ventures, Arbusto...Don't you think that it's odd that the same family who has a long standing business relationship with the Bush family has a family member that is responsible for 9/11, but we don't pursue him and we go after a guy who the Bush family has a personal vendetta against?  Blind Bush Sheep is the best description so far...Bush is a liar who is ruining our Country, Clinto hasn't been president for 5 years, you can't continue to blame all of Bush's fuck up on him..
[right][post="96522"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Do u realise bin ladens family disowned his ass along time ago???? Also who would u have put in office. kerry is just as bar or worse liar then bush. I wont suport bush in all things but i def think he is better for our country then someone coming out of the liberal party. Until they change there ideals on welfare, ss and military spending(the cuts) the republicans get my vote

[Guest bengalrick]

hey smoov... i'm tired of the lies man... i did a search on the[url="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/search.asp"]link[/url] you gave me and found not a muthafuckin' thing... care to explain..

this is being reported by "pardonmyenglish.com", "wonkette", "dissident voice", "infoshop new"... there are a few more, but have you heard of any of these... wouldn't this be at least mentioned, by anyone w/ any crediability...

this is a joke... i am begining to think its not even true... this probably started on a liberal website and someone took it seriously...

[Guest bengalrick]

i did see this though... [url="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44451"]click here[/url] can anyone explain why this very crediable woman that was supposedly raped, is not being explained to me??

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='BengalsCat' date='May 26 2005, 11:28 AM'][b]Do u realise bin ladens family disowned his ass along time ago???? [/b]Also who would u have put in office. kerry is just as bar or worse liar then bush. I wont suport bush in all things but i def think he is better for our country then someone coming out of the liberal party. Until they change there ideals on welfare, ss and military spending(the cuts)  the republicans get my vote
[right][post="96527"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Says who?? In the 90's one of sons got married and Bin Laden's family was in attendance...If they disowned him, why did they fly all of his family out of the US after 9/11? They are still in contact with him..

Also why do say that Kerry is worse than Bush, he never took the country to war and put millions of lives at risk based on lies!!

More facts that Duhbuya is the worst president ever..


WARNING: BLIND BUSH SHEEP DO NOT READ, IT MAY CAUSE YOU TO WAKING THE FUCK UP AND REALIZETHAT YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO AND ARE SUPPORTING A FRAUD...
[quote]President Bush's State of the Union Addresses

American Progress Takes a Look Back at Bush's 2002, 2003 and 2004 speeches

January 31, 2005

State of the Union 2004: Claims, Promises and Proposals

CLAIM: "If we failed to act in Iraq the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day."

STATUS: "The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq," Charles Duelfer. Washington Post, 10/7/04

STATUS: The hunt for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq has come to an end nearly two years after President Bush ordered U.S. troops to disarm Saddam Hussein. A senior intelligence official said Duelfer's findings will stand as the Iraq Survey Group's final conclusions and will be published this spring. Washington Post, 1/12/05

CLAIM: "America is committed to keep dangerous weapons from dangerous regimes."

STATUS: Under Bush's watch, North Korea's nuclear arsenal is thought to have quadrupled. Charles Pritchard, formerly Colin Powell's top official dealing with North Korea, has warned for months that "the White House lacks an effective strategy to dissuade North Korea from building up its nuclear arms." And, according to Pritchard, the situation has deteriorated because "the administration has neither offered much of a carrot nor wielded a stick." New York Times, 5/7/04

STATUS: According to a recent Harvard University report titled "Securing the Bomb: An Agenda for Action," "less fissile materials were secured in the two years after Sept. 11 than in the two years before." Harvard Report, 5/04

CLAIM: "The American economy is growing stronger."

STATUS: Job growth over the last 18 months has fallen short of administration predictions by 1,703,000—more than one-third fewer jobs than the president's Council of Economic Advisers said would be created even without the tax cuts. EPI, 1/05

STATUS: The most recent data from the Census Bureau show that the average income for middle-class households has dropped by $1,525 since its peak in 2000. American Progress, 10/29/04

CLAIM: "The tax relief you passed is working."

STATUS: The tax cuts have drained resources from domestic programs utilized by middle-class families. The Bush tax cuts for the richest 1 percent of Americans this year alone will cost $148 billion. "That is twice as much as the government will spend on job training, $6.2 billion; college Pell grants, $12 billion; public housing, $6.3 billion; low-income rental subsidies, $19 billion; child care, $4.8 billion; insurance for low-income children, $5.2 billion; low-income energy assistance, $1.8 billion; meals for shut-ins, $180 million; and welfare, $16.9 billion." UFE, 4/7/04; Detroit News, 9/29/04

STATUS: Between June 2003 and December 2004, the economy produced 3.1 million fewer jobs than the administration predicted would result after the last round of tax cuts. Jobwatch.org, 1/7/05

CLAIM: "We are providing more funding for our schools."

STATUS: "The bipartisan National Governors Association voted unanimously in 2003 to name No Child Left Behind an 'unfunded mandate,' which means the federal government isn't supplying the money needed to make the law work." Bloomberg, 1/12/05

STATUS: For 2005, the administration has requested $9.4 billion less for No Child Left Behind than the bill supposedly ensures. Title I, the program to help poor kids, is underfunded by $7.2 billion, leaving nearly 5 million kids without academic help. Star-Telegram, 2/26/04

PROMISE: "I will increase support for community colleges."

STATUS: Last year, the Bush administration proposed cutting the largest direct aid initiative to community colleges, the Perkins program for technical and vocational training, from $1.3 billion to about $1 billion. Congress had to step in to save the funding. Cincinnati Enquirer, 1/26/04

PROMISE: "Millions of Americans will be able to save money tax-free for their medical expenses in a health savings account."

STATUS: "Approximately 440,000 Americans signed up for health savings accounts between December 2003 and September 2005.... A study released by the Commonwealth Fund concludes that people who used high-deductible insurance plans were more likely than those with traditional medical coverage to have difficulty paying their medical bills." Fox News, 1/27/05

STATUS: HSAs will likely drive up the annual deductibles paid by workers. Because of their adverse effects on employer-based coverage, HSAs could swell the ranks of the uninsured. USA Today, 5/25/04; CBPP, 5/10/04

PROMISE: "I will defend the sanctity of marriage."

STATUS: Efforts to pass a constitutional amendment that would effectively ban same-sex marriage failed in July. CNN, 7/16/04

PROMISE: "I will double the federal funding for abstinence programs."

STATUS: Bush more or less made good on this promise, requesting $270 million for abstinence-only programs in 2005. Studies have showed the well-funded programs "teach adolescents false and misleading information about reproductive health" and fail to increase abstinence. Waxman Report, 12/2/04; WP, 12/2/04; Advocates for Youth, 9/27/04

PROPOSAL: "I propose series of measurements called Jobs for the 21st Century."

This initiative included increasing Pell grants…

STATUS: For three straight years, Bush has proposed freezing or cutting Pell grants. Ed Workforce, 2/2/04

STATUS: A spending bill the White House helped push through Congress last November allows the U.S. Department of Education to proceed with a new eligibility formula that will remove an estimated 90,000 qualified students from eligibility for Pell Grants. St. Petersburg Times, 12/24/04

…And Community-Based Job Training Grants

STATUS: Bush's 2005 budget proposed cutting job training and vocational education by 10 percent – that's $656 million – from what Congress pledged to those programs in 2002. Workforce Alliance, 4/5/04

STATUS: Two federal banking agencies headed by Bush appointees are trying to change laws that would cripple the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a civil rights law prohibiting discrimination by banks against low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. AP, 10/21/04

PROPOSAL: "Pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign energy sources."

STATUS: The energy bill proposed by President Bush would allow power companies "to set up multiple subsidiaries and blur their financial reports, leading to market manipulation similar to that seen during the California energy crisis." Sierra Club

STATUS: The president's bill allows "automakers to sell more gas guzzlers by failing to raise fuel economy standards" and "fails to increase our use of clean, renewable energy by excluding a Renewable Energy Standard (RES) that would ensure that more of our electricity comes from clean, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power." Sierra Club

STATUS: President Bush's primary plan to reduce foreign energy dependence, drilling the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, would not reduce the price of oil and would produce only 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil (the United States consumes about 7 billion barrels each year). Sierra Club

PROPOSAL: "Reform in immigration laws and a new temporary worker program."

STATUS: President Bush blocked the Dream Act, which had bipartisan support and would have enabled 65,000 high school graduates who are undocumented immigrants to become citizens if they completed college, and allowed them to pay the in-state rate for tuition at public colleges and universities. Washington Post, 7/21/04

PROPOSAL: "New funding to continue our aggressive, community based strategy to reduce demand for illegal drugs."

STATUS: In his FY04 budget, the president proposed cutting funding for the Safe and Drug Free Schools program by $25 million. The 2005 budget proposes freezing funding for the program. House Committee on Education and Workforce, 2/2/04

PROPOSAL: "Grassroots campaign to help inform families about medical risks of STD's."

STATUS: Abstinence-only programs lavishly funded by the president have undermined this goal, increasing unsafe sex and encouraging hostility to contraception. Advocates for Youth, 9/27/04

State of the Union 2003, Highlights

PROMISE: "I will send you a budget that increases discretionary spending by 4 percent next year—about as much as the average family's income is expected to grow."

STATUS: Real median household income fell 0.1 percent in 2003, from $43,381 to $43,318. According to the latest census data, median household income has dropped 3.5 percent since the beginning of the Bush presidency in 2000. Mother Jones, 8/27/04; Census

PROPOSAL: "I have sent you Clear Skies legislation that mandates a 70-percent cut in air pollution from power plants over the next 15 years."

STATUS: The Bush administration's "Clear Skies" proposal, due to be debated in Congress in the coming weeks, would not reduce pollution as much as existing Clean Air Act regulations, according to an interim report by the National Academy of Sciences. LA Times, 1/14/05

PROMISE: "I ask Congress to commit $15 billion over the next five years, including nearly $10 billion in new money, to turn the tide against AIDS in the most afflicted nations of Africa and the Caribbean."

STATUS: Congress approved $2.9 billion to fight HIV/AIDS and other diseases in 2005, but it cut the U.S. pledge to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria to $350 million – almost $200 million less than last year's donation. "The administration is also blocking the Fund from receiving $88 million that Congress appropriated in the 2004 fiscal year." Kaiser, 11/19/04

PROMISE: "I am instructing the leaders of the FBI, and CIA, the Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense to develop a Terrorist Threat Integration Center, to merge and analyze all threat information in a single location."

STATUS: "The Bush administration's effort to create a national database of potential terrorist targets such as dams, pipelines, chemical plants and skyscrapers is far behind schedule and may take years to finish." USA Today, 12/8/04

PROMISE: "We're strongly supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency."

STATUS: The Bush administration campaigned behind closed doors to prevent respected Egyptian diplomat Mohammed ElBaradei from sitting for a third term as head of the IAEA because of "his willingness to challenge the administration's assertions on Iraq and Iran." No country would join the U.S. effort, however. The administration stooped so low as to install "dozens of intercepts of Mohamed ElBaradei's phone calls with Iranian diplomats and…scrutinized them in search of ammunition to oust him." Washington Post, 12/12/04; Washington Post, 01/22/05

State of the Union 2002, Highlights

PROMISE: "We need to replace aging aircraft and make our military more agile, to put our troops anywhere in the world quickly and safely. Our men and women in uniform deserve the best weapons, the best equipment, the best training—and they deserve a pay raise."

STATUS: In December, a soldier serving in Iraq asked why he had to "dig through local land fills" to find scrap metal to properly arm his military combat vehicle. Rumsfeld's response? "You have to go to war with the Army you have." CNN, 12/9/04

PROMISE: "We'll increase funding to help states and communities train and equip our heroic police and firefighters."

STATUS: According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), "At least two-thirds of the nation's fire departments are understaffed." Cuts in federal aid to local police agencies have pushed local agencies "to the breaking point." USA Today, 11/28/04; USA Today, 11/16/04

STATUS: Under the SAFER (Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response) Act, Congress authorized $7.6 billion over seven years to improve fire department funding, but President Bush "didn't request any money for the program in his 2005 budget." USA Today, 11/28/04

PROMISE: "Our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term, so long as Congress restrains spending and acts in a fiscally responsible manner."

STATUS: The federal budget deficit will reach a record $448 billion this year, exceeding last year's record of $412 billion. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), "the long-term outlook for the US budget deficit has deteriorated since the end of last year." FT, 1/26/05[/quote]

That info was taken from this website...[url="http://www.americanprogress.org/site/c.biJRJ8OVF/b.8473/"]American progress..pretty good site.[/url]

[BengalsCat]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 26 2005, 01:16 PM']Says who??  In the 90's one of sons got married and Bin Laden's family was in attendance...If they disowned him, why did they fly all of his family out of the US after 9/11?  They are still in contact with him..

Also why do say that Kerry is worse than Bush, he never took the country to war and put millions of lives at risk based on lies!![/quote]

smoov if the WMD didnt exist before we went in. Why did the UN issue all of the sactions agaisnt him???????????????????


i think u are smoking to much shit man u call us sheep but u are the one who cant see past the retoric of your own party. its easy to critise someone when u have no idea what is going on none of us trully do. I put my faith in the white house and the presidency to do the best they can to help our nation. I wouldnt expect any less from clinton. But u come off like a pissy baby because all u do is hate on W. nothing constructive. Nothing that proves a point just a bunch of liberal retoric... thats all u have to hold on to man. and u call us the ones that live the lies.

[Guest bengalrick]

kerry did help us go to war... i mean, he did vote for the use of force if saddam didn't comply to the weapons inspectors, right? go back to that time... we were all scared they had them, so that was a huge deal then...

btw, don't avoid my ?'s above smoov...

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='Gonzoid' date='May 26 2005, 10:07 AM']The [b]ENTIRE[/b] US Congress did not vote to go to war in Iraq.

The [b]ENTIRE[/b] US Congress (except for one member) voted to "authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States" after 9/11.
[right][post="96509"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.
Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

[b]The measure passed the Senate and House by wider margins than the 1991 resolution that empowered the current president's father to go to war to expel Iraq from Kuwait. That measure passed 250-183 in the House and 52-47 in the Senate. [/b]


[url="http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/"]http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/[/url]





Well it sure as hell looks like they approved it to me. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/23.gif[/img]

[BengalsCat]

For all of you who dont think there is any reason to be in iraq

[url="http://www.iraqitruthproject.com/"]http://www.iraqitruthproject.com/[/url]

Read that it will take about 2 seconds...

[Guest BlackJesus]

Clintons Bigget Mistake is not intervening in Rwanda.... not a Blowjob

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='May 26 2005, 01:52 PM']Clintons Bigget Mistake is not intervening in Rwanda.... not a Blowjob
[right][post="96563"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

agreed... another mistake higher than the blowjob was hurting our troops and intellegence by cutting funds... the blowjob just gave him a black eye...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='BengalsCat' date='May 26 2005, 01:42 PM']For all of you who dont think there is any reason to be in iraq

[url="http://www.iraqitruthproject.com/"]http://www.iraqitruthproject.com/[/url]

Read that it will take about 2 seconds...
[right][post="96552"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


If nothing else watch the making of video, that was a pretty good piece.

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='May 26 2005, 01:52 PM']Clintons Bigget Mistake is not intervening in Rwanda.... not a Blowjob
[right][post="96563"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

i just thought of something bj... if clintons biggest mistake was not stopping the genocide in rwanda (which i agree), why is bush's biggest mistake, stopping the genocide happening in iraq?

<edit> btw jaime, i am watching that now... if anyone can watch that, and all they can think to their selves is "but bush lied" then you have serious problems... reguardless of your stance, be happy that these people are not dealing w/ saddam anymore... seriously...

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='BengalsCat' date='May 26 2005, 12:21 PM'][b]smoov if the WMD didnt exist before we went in. Why did the UN issue all of the sactions agaisnt him[/b]???????????????????
i think u are smoking to much shit man u call us sheep but u are the one who cant see past the retoric of your own party. its easy to critise someone when u have no idea what is going on none of us trully do. I put my faith in the white house and the presidency to do the best they can to help our nation. I wouldnt expect any less from clinton. But u come off like a pissy baby because all u do is hate on W. nothing constructive. Nothing that proves a point just a bunch of liberal retoric... thats all u have to hold on to man. and u call us the ones that live the lies.
[right][post="96544"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


The resolutions came about after the first Gulf War, the resolutions and sanctions were effective in keeping Saddam from delevoping WMD's..But that is the great diversion....Saddam and Iraq had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, WHICH IS WHAT STARTED EVERYTHING...Bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11 and he's yet to be captured, we invaded Iraq based on lies and let the terrorist who claimed responsibility go..

You keep on talking about my the rhetoric of "my party", you lost me with that, what party am I? Because I think the Bush administration is the worst ever, doesn't make me a democrat, you guys keep trying to label me a democrat, but for the 1,000th time I'M NOT A DEMOCRAT...

Lastly, Oldie please quit trying to blame Saddam for the war, that's real weak...Saddam didn't mastermind or fund 9/11, Saddam didn't go to Congress and lie to world about Iraq having WMD's, Saddam didn't take troops away from hunting for Bin Laden to invade Iraq...Bin Laden, Bush, and the people in his administration are responsible for all of those things..I'm not defending Saddam, just stating the truth..since your so brainwashed by this administration you might not know what that is..No one in this administration has any accountability, they fuck up everything and blame someone else..Economy goes bad, blame Clinton..No WMD's, blame the CIA....Whatever happened to "the buck stops here"?
Saddam had no WMD"s, the Bush administration used a tragedy to settle personal vendettas' and increase their wealth.

[BengalsCat]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 26 2005, 04:40 PM']The resolutions came about after the first Gulf War, the resolutions and sanctions were effective in keeping Saddam from delevoping WMD's..But that is the great diversion....Saddam and Iraq had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, WHICH IS WHAT STARTED EVERYTHING...Bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11 and he's yet to be captured, we invaded Iraq based on lies and let the terrorist who claimed responsibility go..

You keep on talking about my the rhetoric of "my party", you lost me with that, what party am I?  Because I think the Bush administration is the worst ever, doesn't make me a democrat, you guys keep trying to label me a democrat, but for the 1,000th time I'M NOT A DEMOCRAT...

Lastly, Oldie please quit trying to blame Saddam for the war, that's real weak...Saddam didn't mastermind or fund 9/11, Saddam didn't go to Congress and lie to world about Iraq having WMD's, Saddam didn't take troops away from hunting for Bin Laden to invade Iraq...Bin Laden, Bush, and the people in his administration are responsible for all of those things..I'm not defending Saddam, just stating the truth..since your so brainwashed by this administration you might not know what that is..No one in this administration has any accountability, they fuck up everything and blame someone else..Economy goes bad, blame Clinton..No WMD's, blame the CIA....Whatever happened to "the buck stops here"?
Saddam had no WMD"s, the Bush administration used a tragedy to settle personal vendettas' and increase their wealth.
[right][post="96606"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

ur not even trying to find info are u smoov. ur just posting bullshit... they have been issuing resolutions against saddam and his WMD since the last War they have issued them Several times in the 90's and early 2000'th so yeah i guess if we faught in the gulf war for over 15 years yep they were all issued during the war [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/30.gif[/img]


The intelligence services of all involved nations and the U.N. inspectors over more than a decade all agreed that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to international peace and security.

ANd u still havent adress anything benals rick threw out there u are avoiding everything he posts.. Just so u can put in more typical bush sucks bullshit. Ur just unhappy because we are doing the right fucking thing for once and it happens to be a conservative in control...


So your telling me we had no buisness being in Iraq???????? After Saddam was conducting mass genocide. Even after He ignored UN weapons inpectors and violated several request that he let them into his country. nope just let him keep ingorning the UN and killing his own people.

[BengalsCat]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 26 2005, 04:40 PM']The resolutions came about after the first Gulf War, the resolutions and sanctions were effective in keeping Saddam from delevoping WMD's..But that is the great diversion....Saddam and Iraq had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, WHICH IS WHAT STARTED EVERYTHING...Bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11 and he's yet to be captured, we invaded Iraq based on lies and let the terrorist who claimed responsibility go..

You keep on talking about my the rhetoric of "my party", you lost me with that, what party am I?  Because I think the Bush administration is the worst ever, doesn't make me a democrat, you guys keep trying to label me a democrat, but for the 1,000th time I'M NOT A DEMOCRAT...

Lastly, Oldie please quit trying to blame Saddam for the war, that's real weak...Saddam didn't mastermind or fund 9/11, Saddam didn't go to Congress and lie to world about Iraq having WMD's, Saddam didn't take troops away from hunting for Bin Laden to invade Iraq...Bin Laden, Bush, and the people in his administration are responsible for all of those things..I'm not defending Saddam, just stating the truth..since your so brainwashed by this administration you might not know what that is..No one in this administration has any accountability, they fuck up everything and blame someone else..Economy goes bad, blame Clinton..No WMD's, blame the CIA....Whatever happened to "the buck stops here"?
Saddam had no WMD"s, the Bush administration used a tragedy to settle personal vendettas' and increase their wealth.
[right][post="96606"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Honestly I can believe how much of your own bullshit u swallow..

SECURITY COUNCIL HOLDS IRAQ IN ‘MATERIAL BREACH’ OF DISARMAMENT OBLIGATIONS,
OFFERS FINAL CHANCE TO COMPLY, UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTING RESOLUTION 1441 (2002)

Instructs Weapons Inspections to Resume within 45 Days,

Recalls Repeated Warning of ‘Serious Consequences’ for Continued Violations

Holding Iraq in “material breach” of its obligations under previous resolutions, the Security Council this morning decided to afford it a “final opportunity to comply” with its disarmament obligations, while setting up an enhanced inspection regime for full and verified completion of the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991).

By the unanimous adoption of resolution 1441 (2002), the Council instructed the resumed inspections to begin within 45 days, and also decided it would convene immediately upon the receipt of any reports from inspection authorities that Iraq was interfering with their activities. It recalled, in that context, that the Council had repeatedly warned Iraq that it would face "serious consequences" as a result of continued violations.



This was issued before we went to war................. BUT NO SADDAM NEVER DID SHIT TO PREVOKE US>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This was pulled from the FUCKING UN archives. Right before we went to war. Also there was a RESOLUTION attached one of 14 they have issued since the END<< KEY HERE SMOOV of the gulf war...


If u had any idea what u were talking about none of this stuff would exist right since there were no resolutions since the last gulf war... u make me laugh. U let your hated blind you to the truth


So by your logic smoov the whole world lied so we could go war real bright there buddy

[Guest bengalrick]

this is exactly what happens... i have pretty much shot down everything in this thread, but i am mysteriously being avoided... hmmmm, wonder why... smoov was so proud to be able to start another bush bashing thread, but forgot to check the sources... i haven't found a shred of evidence that you are right about this benefit dance... i have looked and looked, but nothing... all i get, is a stupid website that tells how the mainstream media is easy on bush [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] yeah right, i crushed that too, but you don't reply back... quit avoiding the truth and present facts instead of solely your opinions... if there is something that is too hard to explain, then i'd start avoiding the thread too

j/k

[Khatmandude]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='May 26 2005, 09:49 AM']Blame Saddam....he is the REAL villian here.
[b]He could avoided all of this if he had done what
he was supposed to do for 11 years BEFORE 9/11
and a full year AFTER 9/11[/b]....he was given another
resolution (17 in all) and that lead to an ultimatum.
Saddam didn`t comply AGAIN ...
even though Saddam didn`t comply and the [b]ENTIRE[/b] U.S.
Congress voted to go to War... it is all Bush`s fault...
yeah that makes sense. 
[right][post="96470"][/post][/right][/quote]

Old, you talk about UN resolutions until you lose breath. Did you know there is a country who had had more UN resolutions against them then Iraq, a country who HAS nuclear weapons, a country who throws aside any condemnation against it labelling it "anti-semitism"? Why haven't we attacked this country yet? Hell, they even have spies caught in the US frequently and one of their spies passed NUCLEAR technology to this country.
Why haven't we attacked this country?

[Guest Gonzoid]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='May 26 2005, 12:38 PM']Well it sure as hell looks like they approved it to me.  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/23.gif[/img]
[right][post="96548"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Yes, Congress approved it. But Congress didn't entirely (read: unanimously) approve.

[Khatmandude]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='May 26 2005, 05:53 PM']this is exactly what happens... i have pretty much shot down everything in this thread, but i am mysteriously being avoided... hmmmm, wonder why... smoov was so proud to be able to start another bush bashing thread, but forgot to check the sources... i haven't found a shred of evidence that you are right about this benefit dance... i have looked and looked, but nothing... all i get, is a stupid website that tells how the mainstream media is easy on bush  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   yeah right, i crushed that too, but you don't reply back... quit avoiding the truth and present facts instead of solely your opinions... if there is something that is too hard to explain, then i'd start avoiding the thread too

j/k
[right][post="96615"][/post][/right][/quote]

You must be a ninja [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//37.gif[/img]

[Guest Gonzoid]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='May 26 2005, 11:55 AM']hey smoov... i'm tired of the lies man... i did a search on the[url="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/search.asp"]link[/url] you gave me and found not a muthafuckin' thing... care to explain..

this is being reported by "pardonmyenglish.com", "wonkette", "dissident voice", "infoshop new"... there are a few more, but have you heard of any of these... wouldn't this be at least mentioned, by anyone w/ any crediability...

this is a joke... i am begining to think its not even true... this probably started on a liberal website and someone took it seriously...
[right][post="96535"][/post][/right][/quote]
You didn't look on [url="http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=227238"]AVN[/url].

[Guest Gonzoid]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='May 26 2005, 04:23 PM']all i get, is a stupid website that tells how the mainstream media is easy on bush  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img]   yeah right, i crushed that too,
[right][post="96615"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Really? Where? Because I'd love to see how you crushed it.

[Guest bengalrick]

typical... can't answer the ?'s so you try to make fun of me... your the ones looking like shmucks right now, not me... [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]













btw fuck you...

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='CP1' date='May 26 2005, 03:23 PM']Old, you talk about UN resolutions until you lose breath.  Did you know there is a country who had had more UN resolutions against them then Iraq, a country who HAS nuclear weapons, a country who throws aside any condemnation against it labelling it "anti-semitism"?  Why haven't we attacked this country yet?  Hell, they even have spies caught in the US frequently and one of their spies passed NUCLEAR technology to this country.
Why haven't we attacked this country?
[right][post="96616"][/post][/right][/quote]




I assume you are talking about Isreal ?


Yeah they have commited the atrocities that
Saddam has...yeah they invaded their neighbor and we
went to war withy them in the 1990`s...yeah they totured and killed
hundreds of thousands of their own people...yeah they kicked out
weapons inspectors...yeah they profitted from our Allies with the Oil for Food
program...yeah they defied an ultimatum...oh wait...


Isreal has done nothing but try to protect theirselves.
I wouldn`t even begin to try to act like THEY are anywhere
near the THREAT to the U.S. that Saddam WAS...

But if that makes YOU sleep better at night...then so be it.

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='Gonzoid' date='May 26 2005, 04:29 PM']Really? Where? Because I'd love to see how you crushed it.
[right][post="96622"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

nobody answered me... i don't see where i'm wrong:
[quote][quote name='bengalrick' date='May 26 2005, 11:01 AM']
i clicked on the bush bashing link smoov... what a joke...

the first thing they point out is a exit strategy (our strategy is to win... and that involves training the iraqis to do it there self)

then he says that we need TO BE VERY CAREFUL when nation building... duh...

then he says the moral is low right now (2000)... again, duh... 8 years of clinton and of course the military had low moral.. he could care less about them...

then the "overextended" part... we had clinton for 8 years cutting the fuck out of our military...

this whole website/argument is totally baseless...

btw, i'm not saying your story is wrong... just wondering why i can't find a good source to confirm it...
[right][post="96507"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
[/quote]

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='Gonzoid' date='May 26 2005, 03:24 PM']Yes, Congress approved it. But Congress didn't entirely (read: unanimously) approve.
[right][post="96618"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



Hell it wasn`t unanimous the 1st time we went to war with them.
But this time it was a wider margin than before.

My point is that you can`t act like Bush is the only person to blame.

I think Saddam should have been taken out when we went there in
the 1st place. After 11 years ...a full year of that being after 9/11...
I think that just amplified that he HAD to be dealt with.
He could have avoided all of this...let`s not forget that...