darfur

[AliceInChains02]

http://www.savedarfur.org/content

i wonder why president bush doesn't view THESE people as terrorists? is there no oil in sudan?

[RACER X]

"is there no oil in sudan?"

bingo. is that a problem?

you live the lavish (compared to the rest of the world) lifestyle you do, thanks to cheap oil.

[AliceInChains02]

"rescuing" a nation because it can benefit our economy and then trying to pass it off as a noble cause, yeah that's a problem..especially when you don't want to help the dozens of other nations that have it even worse because they can't benefit your economy. and there are lots of countries that pay 5+ $ a gallon for gas and manage to live decent lives.

[Moody]

Maybe you should move there?

[TxVrod]

How, again, has Iraq "benefitted" our economy?

[AliceInChains02]

and i don't think america is the most lavish country, maybe the country with its head furthest up it's ass though.

[AliceInChains02]

How, again, has Iraq "benefitted" our economy?

"you live the lavish (compared to the rest of the world) lifestyle you do, thanks to cheap oil."

and yet you come after me?

[TxVrod]

Leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass!

[AliceInChains02]

Maybe you should move there?

maybe i will!

[AliceInChains02]

Leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass!

yes, anyone who has anything negative to say about their country, relocate to another.:gesture:

[Moody]

Most countries are not going to accept you my friend... unless you have some monitary value for them. Welcome to the reality of the 21st century. Come on inside.

[TxVrod]

"you live the lavish (compared to the rest of the world) lifestyle you do, thanks to cheap oil."

and yet you come after me?

Hmmm... let's see. Gas was less than $2 before 9/11. It's gone WAY above $2 and has sustaned for the most part. How's that a benefit? You think the US dictates the price of oil?

Leave.

[Moody]

The best thing you can truelly do for change is to live an oil conservative lifestyle.

[ArturoC]

I think I missed the point of the thread. :dontknow:

[AliceInChains02]

Hmmm... let's see. Oil was less than $2 before 9/11. It's gone WAY above $2 and has sustaned for the most part. How's that a benefit? You think the US dictates the price of oil?

Leave.

Why did we invade Iraq then? When SO many more countries have it so much worse, and then they have the nerve to try to pass it off as a humanitarian act.

[AliceInChains02]

The best thing you can truelly do for change is to live an oil conservative lifestyle.

i do what i can as far as conservation goes, and i also compost.

[AliceInChains02]

I think I missed the point of the thread. :dontknow:

america = #1 = :)
america < 1 = :(

[TxVrod]

You tell me? Judging by the price of gas, I don't think oil was the reason.

[Moody]

Why did we invade Iraq then? When SO many more countries have it so much worse, and then they have the nerve to try to pass it off as a humanitarian act.
Alice,
This is getting old. We are there... the question to ask is "What are we going to do now?"

and more importantly... What is Alice going to do?

[Moody]

i do what i can as far as conservation goes, and i also compost.
Great choices then my brother. Spread the word about your efforts and how others can help.

Sidenote: What kind of setup you have for composting? I really need to get something decent for my garden I am building. Want an inexpensive solution though.

[kstrs]

yes, anyone who has anything negative to say about their country, relocate to another.:gesture:

"Talk is cheap".... Go beyond the usual criticism:gesture: & offer a well thought of solution or alternative course of action. Otherwise your just a malcontent whiner.

[AliceInChains02]

Great choices then my brother. Spread the word about your efforts and how others can help.

Sidenote: What kind of setup you have for composting? I really need to get something decent for my garden I am building. Want an inexpensive solution though.

well, i try to alternate brown (pine needles, dead leaves, etc) with green (grass clippings, non-dead leaves, etc) It's supposed to keep the PH right, and I also throw in whatever biodegradable garbage I produce.

there are a lot of people who are much more knowledgable than me and lots of good sites out there if you want to make an A1 compost.

[AliceInChains02]

"Talk is cheap".... Go beyond the usual criticism:gesture: & offer a well thought of solution or alternative course of action. Otherwise your just a malcontent whiner.

offer me a solution on how i can offer people solutions

[AliceInChains02]

http://www.howtocompost.org/
that's the site i learned what little i've learned from.

[Moody]

well, i try to alternate brown (pine needles, dead leaves, etc) with green (grass clippings, non-dead leaves, etc) It's supposed to keep the PH right, and I also throw in whatever biodegradable garbage I produce.

there are a lot of people who are much more knowledgable than me and lots of good sites out there if you want to make an A1 compost.
Sounds like I am doing the same thing currently. Are you stirring it up manualy or have a container that rotates or something?

[kstrs]

i do what i can as far as conservation goes, and i also compost.

This thread is a good example:keke:

[AliceInChains02]

Sounds like I am doing the same thing currently. Are you stirring it up manualy or have a container that rotates or something?

i layer it

[Moody]

I would really like to hear some realistic solutions for where we are at now. Obviously we can not just pull out and leave a country in shambles and at civil war.

[kstrs]

offer me a solution on how i can offer people solutions
Quit whining about bush....... it solves nothing. He'll be gone soon.

[AliceInChains02]

why shouldn't i complain about bush and/or america? is it wrong to complain, and if so should no one complain about anything, but only act on their disagreeances through telepathy?

[Moody]

Unfortunately complaints alone solving nothing and just make people irritable.

[kstrs]

Talk about composting (or anything else) instead, exchanging ideas/ info is helpful. Complaining isn't very constructive.

[AliceInChains02]

i think complaining is part of the path to resolution

[RACER X]

"rescuing" a nation because it can benefit our economy and then trying to pass it off as a noble cause, yeah that's a problem..especially when you don't want to help the dozens of other nations that have it even worse because they can't benefit your economy. and there are lots of countries that pay 5+ $ a gallon for gas and manage to live decent lives.

decent is all relative. you want the truth or the reality of the world. politicians try and make the picture pretty, but in the end it;s the same BS. you have what you have due to low oil prices, like it or not. do you have a car? how old are you? in most euro/asian/anywhere but the US, young people don't own cars and bikes, usually bikes only. you have high-speed internet........your in the top % of the WORLD.

don't like the niceties we have here, go travel the world then get back to us. maybe you'll find a nicer more "liveable" place for yourself.

[kstrs]

By the way...
i do what i can as far as conservation goes, and i also compost.

You must be a conservative then! J/K :icon_smil

[AliceInChains02]

decent is all relative. you want the truth or the reality of the world. politicians try and make the picture pretty, but in the end it;s the same BS. you have what you have due to low oil prices, like it or not. do you have a car? how old are you? in most euro/asian/anywhere but the US, young people don't own cars and bikes, usually bikes only. you have high-speed internet........your in the top % of the WORLD.

don't like the niceties we have here, go travel the world then get back to us. maybe you'll find a nicer more "liveable" place for yourself.

i know that america is better than most countries as far as the per capita goes, but it seems like people think that every country besides america is impoverished which is not true.

[AliceInChains02]

By the way...


You must be a conservative then! J/K :icon_smil

i just don't know anymore:sad7:

[TxVrod]

...but it seems like people think that every country besides america is impoverished which is not true.

Those people are just plain ignorant. :angry7:

[RACER X]

who said impovrished, i said lavish........tell me where in the world you can go eat till your hearts content for the price of a chinse buffet?

let alone the price of a big mac?

your 20 something and on your 2nd bike.........lol poor poor alice.

[AliceInChains02]

who said impovrished, i said lavish........tell me where in the world you can go eat till your hearts content for the price of a chinse buffet?

let alone the price of a big mac?

your 20 something and on your 2nd bike.........lol poor poor alice.

paid for both of my bikes. the last thing i'm looking for is pity. the fact is i am grateful to live in america, as opposed to Sudan, but i don't understand why people get so offended when someone suggests there are better countries out there. maybe we could learn from them instead of smiting them?

[paniro187]

ahem i blamed bush for high gas prices and now that the gas prices are way down i praise bush for lower gas prices.

[TxVrod]

ahem i blamed bush for high gas prices and now that the gas prices are way down i praise bush for lower gas prices.

That makes you a fair-weather hater :laughing6 :laughing6

[paniro187]

That makes you a fair-weather hater :laughing6 :laughing6
arent' we all:hs: if he's doing a good job we praise him he's doing a bad job we anal him. :keke:

[paniro187]

That makes you a fair-weather hater :laughing6 :laughing6in all honesty if i see he's doing a good job or i feel he is i'm behind anyone no matter what party. I f i see you ****ing up then.........

[TxVrod]

Not me man... I didn't blame him for high oil prices.:icon_bigg

[paniro187]

Not me man... I didn't blame him for high oil prices.:icon_biggi did i blame him for everything that happens under his watch. :laughing6

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

ahem i blamed bush for high gas prices and now that the gas prices are way down i praise bush for lower gas prices.

Don't kno about thta praisin' Bush mess, but I do find it a lil ironic that the price of gasoline has dropped around 40 cents or so in the span of the last two weeks when we have the Nov 7 elections around the corner at a time when the Republicans are thought to be in danger of losing a few seats in the Senate and possibly even the House. :read2:

[MadseasoN]

Just as I've said before:

The USA needs to stay out of others' Civil Wars. Only the strong survive.

[TxVrod]

Keep thinking... Bush has no control over the price of oil.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Don't kno about thta praisin' Bush mess, but I do find it a lil ironic that the price of gasoline has dropped around 40 cents or so in the span of the last two weeks when we have the Nov 7 elections around the corner at a time when the Republicans are thought to be in danger of losing a few seats in the Senate and possibly even the House. :read2:

Don't kno about thta praisin' Bush mess, but I do find it a lil ironic that the price of gasoline has dropped around 40 cents or so in the span of the last two weeks when we have the Nov 7 elections around the corner -and- the Republicans are thought to be in danger of losing a few seats in the Senate and possibly even the House.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Keep thinking... Bush has no control over the price of oil.

This I realize...*influence...now that is an interesting concept :nod:

[RACER X]

and summer driving season is over..........coincidence?

[RRCBR]

When was oil under $2??????

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

and summer driving season is over..........coincidence?

So I guess the market decided to drop over 40 cents in a week or two as a result huh ? :gesture:...get tha fuk outta heah

[MadseasoN]

When was oil under $2??????

2001

[TxVrod]

When was oil under $2??????

Oops

[RRCBR]

I think you guys are referring to gas not oil being under $2.....

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

When was oil under $2??????

I kno it was still under two when I was in college (two yrs ago)...that was back when I used to be mad about payin $1.87

[TxVrod]

I think you guys are referring to gas not oil being under $2.....

Yeah, i edited

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I think you guys are referring to gas not oil being under $2.....

yea cuz oil is around $80 a barrel these days...lol

[RACER X]

So I guess the market decided to drop over 40 cents in a week or two as a result huh ? :gesture:...get tha fuk outta heah
if you live in the big city, you could see the huge increase in morning traffic, after school got back in........why cuz everybody was off on vacation. happens every time at the end of summer.

demand goes down, price goes down.

[TxVrod]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003257679_oilconsumers14.html

Analyst predicts plunge in gas prices

By Kevin G. Hall

McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — The recent sharp drop in the global price of crude oil could mark the start of a massive sell-off that returns gasoline prices to lows not seen since the late 1990s — perhaps as low as $1.15 a gallon.

"All the hurricane flags are flying" in oil markets, said Philip Verleger, a noted energy consultant who was a lone voice several years ago in warning that oil prices would soar. Now, he says, they appear to be poised for a dramatic plunge.

Crude-oil prices have fallen about $14, or roughly 17 percent, from their July 14 peak of $78.40. After falling seven straight days, they rose slightly Wednesday in trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange, to $63.97, partly in reaction to a government report showing fuel inventories a bit lower than expected. But the overall price drop is expected to continue, and prices could fall much more in the weeks and months ahead.

Here's why:

For most of the past two years, oil prices have risen because the world's oil producers have struggled to keep pace with growing demand, particularly from China and India. Spare oil-production capacity grew so tight that market players feared that any disruption to oil production could create shortages.

Fear of disruption focused on fighting in Nigeria, escalating tensions over Iran's nuclear program, violence between Israel and Lebanon that might spread to oil-producing neighbors, and the prospect that hurricanes might topple oil facilities in the Gulf of Mexico.

Oil traders bet that such worrisome developments would drive up the future price of oil. Oil is traded in contracts for future delivery, and companies that take physical delivery of oil are just a small part of total trading. Large pension and commodities funds are the big traders and they're seeking profits. They've sunk $105 billion or more into oil futures in recent years, according to Verleger. Their bets that oil prices would rise in the future bid up the price of oil.

That, in turn, led users of oil to create stockpiles as cushions against supply disruptions and even higher future prices. Now inventories of oil are approaching 1990 levels.

But many of the conditions that drove investors to bid up oil prices are ebbing. Tensions over Israel, Lebanon and Nigeria are easing. The hurricane season has presented no threat so far to the Gulf of Mexico. The U.S. peak summer driving season is over, so gasoline demand is falling.

With fear of supply disruptions ebbing, oil prices began sliding. With oil inventories high, refiners that turn oil into gasoline are expected to cut production. As refiners cut production, oil companies increasingly risk getting stuck with excess oil supplies. There's already anecdotal evidence of oil companies chartering tankers to store excess oil.

advertising
All this is turning financial markets increasingly bearish on oil.

"If we continue to build inventories, and if we have a warm winter like we had last winter, you could see a large fall in the price of oil," said Gary Pokoik, who manages Hedge Ventures Energy in Los Angeles, an energy hedge fund. "I think there is still a lot of risk in the market."

As it stands now, the recent oil-price slump has brought the national average for a gallon of unleaded gasoline down to $2.59, according to the AAA motor club. In the Seattle area, prices per gallon have fallen to $2.856 currently from $3.071 a month ago, a decline of 7 percent, according to AAA.

Should oil traders fear that this downward price spiral will get worse and run for the exits by selling off their futures contracts, Verleger said, it's not unthinkable that oil prices could return to $15 or less a barrel, at least temporarily. That could mean gasoline prices as low as $1.15 per gallon.

Other experts won't guess at a floor price, but they agree that a race to the bottom could break out.

"The market may test levels here that are too low to be sustained," said Clay Seigle, an analyst at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a consultancy in Boston.

On Monday, the oil-producing cartel OPEC hinted that if prices fall precipitously, OPEC members would cut production to lift them. But that would take time.

"That takes six to nine months. If we don't have a really cold winter here [creating a demand for oil], prices will fall. Literally, you don't know where the floor is," Verleger said. "In a market like this, if things start falling ... prices could take you back to the 1999 levels. It has nothing to do with production."

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

if you live in the big city, you could see the huge increase in morning traffic, after school got back in........why cuz everybody was off on vacation. happens every time at the end of summer.

demand goes down, price goes down.

So show me a time where "it" has dropped so steeply and I'll hear your argument genius...

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003257679_oilconsumers14.html

Analyst predicts plunge in gas prices

By Kevin G. Hall

McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — The recent sharp drop in the global price of crude oil could mark the start of a massive sell-off that returns gasoline prices to lows not seen since the late 1990s — perhaps as low as $1.15 a gallon....

Dayum it would be nice if that turns out to be correct...but I think I'll wait till Nov 8 to come to any "real" conclusions...good read tho thx :icon_thum

[TxVrod]

So show me a time where "it" has dropped so steeply and I'll hear your argument genius...

During the Clinton era, I recall it going up to $1.70(something) then back down to <$1.00

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

During the Clinton era, I recall it going up to $1.70(something) then back down to <$1.00

In what period of time ?

[TxVrod]

I don't recall, exactly, but it was in a short-enough span so that I noticed. I was praising Clinton right about then :keke:

[MadseasoN]

Here ya go, guys. How about some facts for your arguments?

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/gas1.html

[paniro187]

dn houston.......you link states ".gov" can't possibly be true.

:laughing6

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I don't recall, exactly, but it was in a short-enough span so that I noticed. I was praising Clinton right about then :keke:

Shhyttt I bet. I've come to realize over the last few years tho that the executive branch doesn't really have any actual control over the price of oil/gasoline....sucks but it's reality...

[MadseasoN]

The world is not running out of oil and supply is not a problem.

Bottom line is they charge for oil what they think they can get for it.

[paniro187]

I don't recall, exactly, but it was in a short-enough span so that I noticed. I was praising Clinton right about then :keke:funny you praise cliton for lower gas prices. alice in chains praises him for smoking weed. :icon_bigg

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

dn houston.......you link states ".gov" can't possibly be true.

:laughing6

yeah it's a valid link...very nice too....I see no "significant" changes in cost of gasoline within a 2 week period though...

Racer X...DenHou...gentlemen?

[TxVrod]

funny you praise cliton for lower gas prices. alice in chains praises him for smoking weed. :icon_bigg

:laughing6 :laughing6

[Moody]

Exactly why I continue to state that if you want to see a difference then use conservative gas methods.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I retract DenHou from that as he was the one who gave the link...I meant TxVrod

[TxVrod]

T'was me. 2 weeks :eek3: Be that as it may - show me where it's happened before?

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Man I got a civic and am considering gettin a 2nd car...a damn Corolla...

[MadseasoN]

yeah it's a valid link...very nice too....I see no "significant" changes in cost of gasoline within a 2 week period though...

Racer X...DenHou...gentlemen?

Funny, when Bush first got elected I recall telling my wife "How much do you want to bet that gasoline will hit $3 a gallon."

I voted for him though. He's easier to make fun of than Kerry.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

T'was me. 2 weeks :eek3: Be that as it may - show me where it's happened before?

'tis all good...:nod:

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I never said it did...hell I was thinkin it was unprecedented...

[Moody]

I hope it goes up to $10 a gallon. I would love to retire next year. :laughing6

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Funny, when Bush first got elected I recall telling my wife "How much do you want to bet that gasoline will hit $3 a gallon."

I voted for him though. He's easier to make fun of than Kerry.

LMAO...true. But Kerry had his moments where he looked a bit like something out of a SciFi flick.

I will gladly say I voted for Kerry even tho I couldn't stand his ass either. I just figured he couldn't do any worse than Bush, no one in congress would have allowed for anything he wanted to pass the congress, and he would be in and out in 4 years instead of more of the same from Bush...

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

btw, I hate voting along party lines. Vote for who is best for the job and if neither is the case then vote for the "lesser of the two evils"...

[TxVrod]

I think it's safe to say they all suck - just some suck worse than others. :eh:

[paniro187]

btw, I hate voting along party lines. Vote for who is best for the job and if neither is the case then vote for the "lesser of the two evils"...+1 i had this theory about voting for someone liek kerry. i thin it's safe to vote for osmeone like that cause he flip flops and goes the way the popular vote ( what the people want) bush does what he wants no matter what. i think if enough people speak kerry would have gone along with it. you can call it being brave or being steadfast on bush's part but it can also be taken as being bull headed and not admitting you'e wrong.

[Drumboy]

Darfur is in a horrible condition and hopefully somebody (why is it always us?) helps them out.

AliceInChains, I noticed you are from Crosby, me too. Did you go to school there?

[paniro187]

Darfur is in a horrible condition and hopefully somebody (why is it always us?) helps them out.

AliceInChains, I noticed you are from Crosby, me too. Did you go to school there?it's a trap next thing you know you'll be blazing it up with him in a crack house.

[TxVrod]

it's a trap next thing you know you'll be blazing it up with him in a crack house.

LMFAO! Dude, you're in rare form today. You musta fornicated last night?

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

+1 i had this theory about voting for someone liek kerry. i thin it's safe to vote for osmeone like that cause he flip flops and goes the way the popular vote ( what the people want) bush does what he wants no matter what. i think if enough people speak kerry would have gone along with it. you can call it being brave or being steadfast on bush's part but it can also be taken as being bull headed and not admitting you'e wrong.

+1...it's one thing to stand fast to your beliefs and a complete other to stupidly continue down a destructive and foolish path.

[paniro187]

LMFAO! Dude, you're in rare form today. You musta fornicated last night?I told my wife those blinds were to bright. shit!

[AliceInChains02]

it's a trap next thing you know you'll be blazing it up with him in a crack house.

:keke: true

[Rick H.I.C.]

http://www.savedarfur.org/content

i wonder why president bush doesn't view THESE people as terrorists? is there no oil in sudan?
Probably the same reasons Clinton didn't. Guess cause they don't have weapons of mass destruction threatening to use them on the rest of the world. Or maybe it's because the UN is suppose to be doing something about it. Oh that's right they only do things that benifit them personally (food for oil). Stop or we'll say stop again.

[AliceInChains02]

Probably the same reasons Clinton didn't. Guess cause they don't have weapons of mass destruction threatening to use them on the rest of the world. Or maybe it's because the UN is suppose to be doing something about it. Oh that's right they only do things that benifit them personally (food for oil). Stop or we'll say stop again.

so you're one of the 30% of people who still believe there were WMDs? i should think genocide would provoke more of a response than whatever Saddam did, but it seeems like no one has ever payed much attention to Africa unfortunately

[law750]

The U.S. has given more money in aid to the Sudan than anyone else; the UN was supposed to take care of this just like they were Iraq. Iraq was perceived as a threat to US. Sudan is not a threat to us. Alice, you act like the threat thing had nothing to do with it, but it truly did. You can say whatever you want now, but everybody thought Hussein had W'sMD . . . he was PERCEIVED as a threat. Sudan is certainly not a threat to us. Does this mean that the whole "noble country building" thing is a lie? NO! You can have more than one reason for doing something . .. if it were just to fight threats, we'd have to invade: Syria, Egypt, N. Korea, China, Palestine, Venezuela etc ad inf. However, we don't do that, because there is not ENOUGH reason. The two reasons (noble idea, and security) are not mutually exclusive. You want to frame everything like America is the bad guy, and I honestly don't know why. People in Iraq can vote now, Suddam Hussein is out of power, many of Al Queada's head ppl are gone, and all you can do is scream about how we've caused or failed to help all these probs. Do you really want us to go clean up every global mess? Come on. I don't think you should have to move out of the country because you disagree. However, I don't understand why you wouldn't leave of your own accord if you TRULY believe we are responsible for all this stuff. Why not rant about the UN? They actually vowed to deal with the prob! If you're really concerned about genocide, why do you never speak about the radical muslims killing Jews around the world everyday? Why does it HAVE to be framed in this America sux, and Bush is dumb/the cause of all the world's probs light? It's so one sided it's disgusting. There's more to the global picture than that. AND YES! I am one of those 30% who KNOW Hussein had W'sMD. You should know that too: WE GAVE THEM TO HIM IN THE EARLY 80's. For God's sake. the poor pope, the poor ppl in Sudan. . . my poor country that ppl don't appreciate when we do so much for the world. We're like this huge target - so big even our own ppl shoot at it, and when others in the world spit in our eye, raise their flag over our country . . . we can't get mad. . . its our fault. It's bush's fault. Let's try to "talk" with Ahmadinejad; let's let radical islam brew and fester while our buildings fall; let's let illegals steal from us everyday (pretend they aren't criminals and pretend bush is, and pretend there's no irony). And while we're at it. . . let's pick out the rest of the world's problems . . . and blame then on ourselves too. Great plan for the future Alice. .. that kinda attitude is irrational, narrow minded, unproductive, unpatriotic, and lame.

[TxVrod]

AIC, I typically don't stoop to the level of calling people names but, you're a dumbass! You couldn't possibly think that SH had PLENTY of time to rid Iraq and all evidence of WMD's between the time invasion was threatened and the time it took place? Why would some many others believe there were WMD's - including your democrat butt-buddies? What was it he used to kill the Kurds? Fairy dust?? I don't know why we're not looking for the WMD's in Syria and Iran.

[law750]

He is on record using anthrax, mustard and serin gasses. . . . W'sMD for those of you who don't know. This was stuff we gave him to fight Iran . . . ehem . . . that's right IRAN. Hilary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Howard Dean, Annan, and on and on ALL said Hussein had them. Further: ALL BUT TWO CONGRESSMAN GAVE BUSH THE RIGHT TO USE FORCE IN IRAQ!!!! Why doesn't anybod EVER blame them about anythign? It's ALL bush. What about the intelligence ppl who gave him the allegedly incorrect info? What about CLINTON who had Bin Laden in his sights and didn't take him? Nobody EVER blames Clinton . . . did clinton help Sudan? NO! Did Clinton do well in Boznia? NO! Did Clinton bomb aspirin factories? YES. Was unemployment higher under Clinton, and interest rates, and ppl on welfare? YES!!! Did anyone mention any of that? NEVER! It's all Bush . . . . no . . . it's all a lie. The real prob with Bush is his inconsistency on Security (ignores border while fighting foreign war), his expansion of executive power at the expense of individual liberty (NSA, Patriot act) and his failure to put his foot down on the expansion of judicial power under his watch. I am NOT afraid to criticize, but jeez . .. these bush haterz are way too one sided. It's like they're blind

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

According to the Senate Intelligence Commitee Postwar Assessment...-There were no WMD's and Saddaam Husein posed no 'immediate' threat to the natl security of the United States, as some individuals would have you believe...

"Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) judgment that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Information obtained after the war supports the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research's (INR) assessment in the NIE that the Intelligence Community lacked persuasive evidence that Baghdad had launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. The ISG found that, following the Gulf War, aggressive UN inspections forced Saddam Hussein to destroy or surrender Iraq's nuclear program. The ISG found no evidence that Saddarn Hussein attempted to restart the nuclear program, and found that Iraq's ability to restart a nuclear program had progressively decayed after its destruction in 1991."- Senate Intelligence Commitee Report 2006

And as far as Chemical Weapons, this is interesting....According to conclusion#4:

"Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National
Intelligence Estimate (NIE) assessment that "Iraq has biological weapons"
and that "all key aspects of Iraq's offensive biological weapons (BW)
program are larger and more advanced than before the Gulf war."'

"The ISG found no evidence that Iraq had developed mobile BW production
facilities as alleged in prewar intelligence reporting..."

And this is important as it speaks to the false sense of urgency that the President seemed to demonstrate when it came to going to war with Iraq...

"Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National
Intelligence Estimate (NIE) assessments that Iraq "has chemical weapons" or
"is expanding its chemical industry to support chemical weapons (CW)
production." The ISG uncovered no evidence indicating that Iraq maintained a
stockpile of chemical weapons or had been producing chemical weapons. The
ISG found that Iraq likely destroyed its chemical weapons stockpiles after the Gulf War due to invasive UN investigations."

Source: http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf

[paniro187]

He is on record using anthrax, mustard and serin gasses. . . . W'sMD for those of you who don't know. This was stuff we gave him to fight Iran . . . ehem . . . that's right IRAN. Hilary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Howard Dean, Annan, and on and on ALL said Hussein had them. Further: ALL BUT TWO CONGRESSMAN GAVE BUSH THE RIGHT TO USE FORCE IN IRAQ!!!! Why doesn't anybod EVER blame them about anythign? It's ALL bush. What about the intelligence ppl who gave him the allegedly incorrect info? What about CLINTON who had Bin Laden in his sights and didn't take him? Nobody EVER blames Clinton . . . did clinton help Sudan? NO! Did Clinton do well in Boznia? NO! Did Clinton bomb aspirin factories? YES. Was unemployment higher under Clinton, and interest rates, and ppl on welfare? YES!!! Did anyone mention any of that? NEVER! It's all Bush . . . . no . . . it's all a lie. The real prob with Bush is his inconsistency on Security (ignores border while fighting foreign war), his expansion of executive power at the expense of individual liberty (NSA, Patriot act) and his failure to put his foot down on the expansion of judicial power under his watch. I am NOT afraid to criticize, but jeez . .. these bush haterz are way too one sided. It's like they're blindand you bush lovers are blind yourselves. bush is jsut way to bull headed to ever apologieze and say well he didn't have what we thought he had. he would rather change the meaning of the war to help justify his **** up. sure the dems voted to go to war because everything we were given indicated saddam somehow had something to do with it. but after you find he didn't you have to accept a mistake and admit you're wrong. it's almost like being on vacation and you make a turn your wife says honey you made the wrong turn back there. You see it on the map that you made a wrong turn yet you say honey we're going to stay the course. :gesture:

[paniro187]

AIC, I typically don't stoop to the level of calling people names but, you're a dumbass! You couldn't possibly think that SH had PLENTY of time to rid Iraq and all evidence of WMD's between the time invasion was threatened and the time it took place? Why would some many others believe there were WMD's - including your democrat butt-buddies? What was it he used to kill the Kurds? Fairy dust?? I don't know why we're not looking for the WMD's in Syria and Iran.wtf is that all about???:gesture:

[TxVrod]

wtf is that all about???:gesture:

I think it's pretty clear but consider to whom it was directed.

[law750]

all of the evidence sited about W's MD does not dispute my point at all: I agree we haven't found any, and in hind sight, it appears SH was LESS of a threat than we thought. But still, he did use chemical weapons against the kurds . .. therefore he HAD W'sMD. Further, PANIRO, you admit that everybody voted to go to war. My point is that if everybody voted for it, AND they unanimously voted recently to stay the course, then WHY BLAME EVERYTHING ON BUSH? I would like to correct your analogy: It is more like you and your wife and 98 of your best friends are on a big ol bus; you all vote to take a turn based on one map given to you by the bus driver. Later, you find that map to have been mistaken (the roads have changed since it was made). so, you vote AGAIN, AND EVERYONE UNANIMOUSLY SAYS STAY THE COURSE! according to your reasoning, you should simply blame one of the people. . .in fact, blame the one who didn't have a vote. jeez. and by the way, I HATE GEORGE BUSH!!! I think he's one of the ten worst presidents ever. i am just not an idiot

[TxVrod]

For the record.... I am NOT a Bush lover (well, you know :keke:). I just don't think anyone could have done any better.

[paniro187]

all of the evidence sited about W's MD does not dispute my point at all: I agree we haven't found any, and in hind sight, it appears SH was LESS of a threat than we thought. But still, he did use chemical weapons against the kurds . .. therefore he HAD W'sMD. Further, PANIRO, you admit that everybody voted to go to war. My point is that if everybody voted for it, AND they unanimously voted recently to stay the course, then WHY BLAME EVERYTHING ON BUSH? I would like to correct your analogy: It is more like you and your wife and 98 of your best friends are on a big ol bus; you all vote to take a turn based on one map given to you by the bus driver. Later, you find that map to have been mistaken (the roads have changed since it was made). so, you vote AGAIN, AND EVERYONE UNANIMOUSLY SAYS STAY THE COURSE! according to your reasoning, you should simply blame one of the people. . .in fact, blame the one who didn't have a vote. jeez. and by the way, I HATE GEORGE BUSH!!! I think he's one of the ten worst presidents ever. i am just not an idiotnoone said your'e a idiot and to be honest I figure we amercia should just stay the course to because let's be honest we can't leave it like that. I'm more of a straight shooter. if we're going there to free the iraqi people then by golly let me know. if we're going there looking for wmds then let me know. don't go there for one reason don't find what you were looking for then try to turn it around into some kind of humanitarian effort. the oppressed people of iraq were never mentioned before the war. Now you jsut can't hear enough about them. the way i feel is be real with me. frankly i'd rather have troops on the borders because that affect amercian people DIRECTLY. i jsut hate when republicans down dems as if their solutions are better. I can tell you one thing about the two parties is a democrat is a snake you can see coming to bite you on the other hand republicans or snake that crawl through tall grass to bite you when you never saw it coming. Kind of like fox news saying they are fair and balanced yet they obviously lean to the right. let me know what your intentions are then let's talk about it. it just seems that bush was all to eager to get after saddam.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

He is on record using anthrax, mustard and serin gasses. . . . W'sMD for those of you who don't know.

...and North Korea is on record for invading the south...I ran is on record for calling for the complete destruction of Israel...The Sudanese government is on record for allowing for the continued genocide of a group of people strictly on the basis of color....yet for the former two, we are continually looking to the "diplomatic" approach all of a sudden and as for the latter, we ignore it altogether. Yes, we pour lots of money into it, but as a conservative I don't believe "throwing money at it" will make it go away...

Further: ALL BUT TWO CONGRESSMAN GAVE BUSH THE RIGHT TO USE FORCE IN IRAQ!!!! Why doesn't anybod EVER blame them about anythign?

Trust...they take flak for that...I consider the congressmen that voted to give him the power to do so spineless. If the UN had reservations about goin per the advice of the IAEA...then I believe we should have perhaps been a little more diligent as well...I realize the UN lacks credibility but then I ask...why are we still a part of this organization ? Probably because, although checkered with a few negative happenings, it serves as a catalyst (however small...the US is the largest catalyst for such a goal) for the "overall" good of the world...

It's ALL bush. What about the intelligence ppl who gave him the allegedly incorrect info?

They take plenty of flak...and it has been said that Bush was not willing to hear any opinion that was not in support of going to war in Iraq. (Mr. Richard Clarke comes to mind.)

What about CLINTON who had Bin Laden in his sights and didn't take him?

Absolute False statement...there was no such happening. Get your facts straight. Here are a few entries from the 911 Commission Report addressing that particular topic:

"By early 1998, planners at the Counterterrorist Center were ready to come back to the White House to seek formal approval. Tenet apparently walked National Security Advisor Sandy Berger through the basic plan on February 13. One group of tribals would subdue the guards, enter Tarnak Farms stealthily, grab Bin Ladin, take him to a desert site outside Kandahar, and turn him over to a second group.This second group of tribals would take him to a desert landing zone already tested in the 1997 Kansi capture. From there, a CIA plane would take him to New York, an Arab capital, or wherever he was to be arraigned."

"Tenet told us that given the recommendation of his chief operations officers, he alone had decided to “turn off” the operation.
He had simply informed Berger,who had not pushed back.Berger’s recollection
was similar. He said the plan was never presented to the White House for a decision." (Well now that's interesting...if Clinton had never seen such a plan...how would he 'decline-to-sign' it into action, in effect "doing nothing" as you so amply put it)

"At 18 minutes after noon on February 26,1993,a huge bomb went off beneath
the two towers of the World Trade Center...President Bill Clinton ordered his National Security Council to coordinate the response. Government agencies swung into action to find the culprits."

"In 1993, President Clinton chose Louis Freeh as the Director of the Bureau.
Freeh, who would remain Director until June 2001, believed that the FBI’s
work should be done primarily by the field offices.To emphasize this view he
cut headquarters staff and decentralized operations.The special agents in charge gained power, influence, and independence. Freeh recognized terrorism as a major threat. He increased the number of legal attaché offices abroad, focusing in particular on the Middle East. He also urged agents not to wait for terrorist acts to occur before taking action. In his first budget request to Congress after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, he stated that “merely solving this type of crime is not enough; it is equally important that the FBI thwart terrorism before such acts can be perpetrated.”(Pretty good guy huh...he "urged agents not to wait for terrorist acts to occur before taking action"...sounds pretty familiar huh?)

"President Bill Clinton’s counterterrorism Presidential Decision Directives in 1995 and May 1998 reiterated that terrorism was a national security problem,not just a law enforcement issue." (Well now THAT is an interesting concept)


Was unemployment higher under Clinton, and interest rates, and ppl on welfare? YES!!!

Prove it...I'd love to see a side-by-side presidential performance query of Bush and Clinton...

SOURCES:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/fullreport.pdf
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec4.pdf

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

all of the evidence sited about W's MD does not dispute my point at all: I agree we haven't found any, and in hind sight, it appears SH was LESS of a threat than we thought. But still, he did use chemical weapons against the kurds . .. therefore he HAD W'sMD. Further, PANIRO, you admit that everybody voted to go to war. My point is that if everybody voted for it, AND they unanimously voted recently to stay the course, then WHY BLAME EVERYTHING ON BUSH? I would like to correct your analogy: It is more like you and your wife and 98 of your best friends are on a big ol bus; you all vote to take a turn based on one map given to you by the bus driver. Later, you find that map to have been mistaken (the roads have changed since it was made). so, you vote AGAIN, AND EVERYONE UNANIMOUSLY SAYS STAY THE COURSE! according to your reasoning, you should simply blame one of the people. . .in fact, blame the one who didn't have a vote. jeez. and by the way, I HATE GEORGE BUSH!!! I think he's one of the ten worst presidents ever. i am just not an idiot

All I'm saying is...read the reports before you draw any conclusions. Secondly, I wasn't necessarily refuting the fact that Saddaam had chemical weapons but I am refuting that he was 1) Not an immediate threat and 2) He wasn't actively building chemical weapons as some would have us believe

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

noone said your'e a idiot and to be honest I figure we amercia should just stay the course to because let's be honest we can't leave it like that. I'm more of a straight shooter. if we're going there to free the iraqi people then by golly let me know.

EXACTLY...let me know the real reason behind your actions...not a convenient untruth to get me to go along with you...

[law750]

Paniro, I agree with your last statement. Cajun, unemployment is lower than it has been since the very beginning of the first Clinton years . . . I feel no compulsion to prove what is fact, and even if I did, I can't right now because of work restrictions. However, i think Clinton was a better Pres. than Bush. i never said otherwise. I merely point out that the man did some pretty bad things in office, and I wouldn't even mention them except for the insanity that Bush takes for lesser things. I hear you about korea and the other threatening countries on record. I don't think we should attack them - JUST LIKE I DONT THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ATTACKED IRAQ. I swear ppl project views on each other round heah. Anyway, my point earlier was that SUDAN is not a threat AT ALL. Paniro, I agree that there was a change in rhetoric, and that's messed up. All I'm saying is that in regard to Sudan, it is no threat. I bet many people, the pres., and many congressmen would vote to bomb the hell outa Iran if they could get away with it, but our country is full of a bunch of "let's talk, and be open, and give peace a chance" pussies who wouldn't stand for it . . .thank God. I am one of them. The point is like you said, "getting facts straight." Maybe we'll have a better pres. candidate in 08

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

All I'm saying is...read the reports before you draw any conclusions. Secondly, I wasn't necessarily refuting the fact that Saddaam had chemical weapons but I am refuting that he was 1) Not an immediate threat and 2) He wasn't actively building chemical weapons as some would have us believe

*correction
...but I am refuting that he was 1) an immediate threat

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

. . . I feel no compulsion to prove what is fact, and even if I did, I can't right now because of work restrictions. However, i think Clinton was a better Pres. than Bush. i never said otherwise. I merely point out that the man did some pretty bad things in office, and I wouldn't even mention them except for the insanity that Bush takes for lesser things.

In that case I wouldn't have offered it up...and yes Bush takes alot more flak than Clinton, then again...he brings it on himself with his bullheaded nature. Yeah Clinton got his head sucked a few times...did it cost thousands of lives or millions of dollars? Highly unlikely...


I hear you about korea and the other threatening countries on record. I don't think we should attack them - JUST LIKE I DONT THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ATTACKED IRAQ. I swear ppl project views on each other round heah.
Anyway, my point earlier was that SUDAN is not a threat AT ALL.

I never projected that or any other view onto you...I was simply rebuting what you offered...Sudan is no threat but since we are fighting "for the good of the Iraqis"...why wouldn't we fight to stop racial cleansing? We all have our opinions as to why the Iraq war was started but the reason being offered...as Mr. Paniro alluded to before...is a fake one that seems to be most convenient at the moment.(you obviously agree as evidenced below)


Paniro, I agree that there was a change in rhetoric, and that's messed up.



Maybe we'll have a better pres. candidate in 08

I severly doubt it...

[paniro187]

Maybe we'll have a better pres. candidate in 08
whoever it is certainly has a ****ing mess on his hands................

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I hardly know who I'm voting for in Congress...very hard decision...nearly all the candidates a insufficient- atleast in my personal opinion...they all seem power hungry, which I imagine is the "nature of the beast"...The democrats because all they do is bitch and moan about what Bush is doing wrong, yet I have yet to here a feasible course of action for the coming years from them. Can't stand the republicans as they look out for either big business or the higher echelon of the tax brackett...Dems are for open borders, Repub's are for more tax breaks for the rich and are sneaky sons of bitches...all of them saw fit to raise their own salary and yet, with consideration to the increasing cost of living here in the US...don't deem it neccessary to raise the national minimum wage...absolutely amazing...we need a revamping of political options...

[Crystalline]

Damn.... I missed the argument. But it was something good to read... All I can add... Its the Palestines and the Jews are killing eachother.. I have a friend from Palestinian friend... Informs me of all this stuff.:eek3: He told me this Jews control the border and wont let them cross for weeks at a time.. And can take their Passports... Not too long ago the Jews dropped a bomb on a few people.. :eh: