Originally posted by capt. apathy
finally, now you're catching up with the rest of the country.
you see some people where a little faster on the uptake, which accounts for a formerly extremely popular president, not being quite so extremely popular anymore.
I didn't vote for the man the fist time around, and I don't think he's good for our country. but after 9/11, we traced the alquada terrorists to Afghanistan and had to invade. I supported that(as most of the country did), and supported Bush, he seemed to be making good decisions.
then they got on to the idea of invading Iraq. or more accurately they decided to start talking publicly about their plans to invade Iraq.
they saw money to be made and thought they could just toss it in with the whole 'war on terror' package. I guess they figured we where to stupid to tell one rag-head from another, and would cheer them on without wondering why we where fighting them.
it worked on a lot of people, but some Americans had been paying enough attention to ask why we where going after Iraq.
we got a bunch of different answers, not many made sense and when they fell apart this administration just pulled a new reason out of their ass.
for the billionth time, let go through some of them again-
1. it's because they won't cooperate with the UN and follow UN resolutions.
A: thats the UN's job to enforce UN resolutions. and the UN doesn't want us to go in. you can't go against someones wishes and say your actions are in support of them. so reason #1 is BS
2. they have WMD that are an immediate threat to our countries security.
A: they haven't been found. much of the 'proof' that they where there at the time of invasion was found to be unreliable or just plain fabricated. had they actually had them and were ready to use them, why didn't they use them on us when we invaded? SH faces a good chance of execution as it is, he had nothing to lose by using these weapons to try and keep his country.
if you use the argument that he didn't because he was afraid of our reaction, then that would cancel out the whole argument of them being a threat to our security, since he was afraid to use them on us.
to sum up reason #2 is BS
3. SH is a evil man and should be taken out of office.
A: simply put it's not our job. our politicians are elected to look after the best interest of America, not Iraq. policing other peoples gov'ts is that countries business, not ours. worst case scenario the UN can deal with it.
sum up reason #3- it is not our war to fight.
4. this administration ran this war for private reasons, mostly relating to profit. the war sold to America was just a scam to pull it off. they used it as a way to drain our Treasury and the only Americans to see any benefit are those who make money off of war. good men died, wifes are widows, children are fatherless, families separated and members of this administration and their buddy's are richer.
A: and your well thought out reason why this isn't possible is "
"
well at least you thought it through 
I never said it was not possible. I said the idea was absurd and ludicrous.
You however, propose that it is not only possible, but that you believe it to be the truth.
However, for all your baseless accusations and assumptions, you provide no FACTS. You provide no hard evidence that Bush and Cheney invaded Iraq for the express purpose of of ripping off the United States citizens and enriching Cheney Haliburton.
Now, since
CLINTON went into the nasty mess in Europe (yeah, you know the one)
WITHOUT UN AUTHORIZATION and then awarded Cheney Haliburton several lucrative no bid contracts, then it would be just as easy to accuse
CLINTON and GORE of doing what you accuse Bush and Cheney of, by merely inferring that Cheney Haliburton, being as crooked and greedy as you claim they are, greased the right palms in the Clinton-Gore administration.
See, it is just as easy to make accusations that are unfounded and baseless so long as you don't have to back them up with FACTS.
So, why don't you provide some FACTS to PROVE that Bush and Cheney invaded Iraq to award lucrative no bid contracts to Haliburton? That is, if you have some.
