[snowdog]

I have already, explained that I no longer support the war in Iraq, and that
I am not happy with the way Pres Bush is leading this country (or perhaps
I should say how the conservatives are running things over Bush) but I at
first thought making Iraq a Democracy, would be great, My arguement was
that It may take 25-50 years to democracy to really take root in Iraq. mean
while.....where we at now? 2303 soldiers killed? they say that in less than
25 years the Oil will be gone, Iraq will loose the only resource that made
Saddam a threat. So, with that being said.............when the big oil money
leaves Iraq, does anyone honestly believe we will support democracy in Iraq
in 25 years? It will be like Africa, wars amongst the different people, and the
US throwing $10,000,000 into the country to show the world how "nice" we are.
we need to end this war now. I can not accept the losses incurred any more.
2,300 american lives is just not worth it. not to mention the costs.........hell
for the money spent yearly in the War in Iraq, seems to me that that money
could make a nice dent in the Prescription drug fiasco, or to be put into the
schools where NO CHILD SHOULD BE LEFT BEHIND !!! The world needs to know that the vast majority of AMERICANS have a different agenda, than the Bush
administration has.

[Jane of Arc]

The karma point system won't let me give snowdog anymore positive karma right now ... somebody give him positive karma. Get this guy out of the negative asap!!! :thumbup: :sunny: :D

[-V-]

lke you, jane. as i did taketh away in the past, so shall i giveth

[MAGI]

Done!

Thanks Snowdog!
Wishing you totally well,
Sincerely,
Magi

:sunny: :thumbup:

[snowdog]

WOW, thanks all, Have to wait till the 18 when the Direct Tv guy hooks up
the dish to find out what going on in the world. I would love to be able to turn it on and find out that the US has begun its pull out, but unfortunetly, it don't look that way from what I hear on the radio and news papers.

[wimzkl]

It seems that many of the principles espoused by all previous administrations, Democratic or Republican, are threatened by radical government policies. These include the basic American commitment to peace, civil liberties, social and economic justice, the environment and human rights. Citizens are entitled to truthful information, state and local autonomy and fiscal responsibility. Dissenting citizens are entitled to be heard and their beliefs treated with respect.

Recent presidential policies are not the real America and this is not a war on terror. Wars are openly fought. Nor can there be a war on terror since terror is no more than a word describing a heightened fear. The expression “war on terror” is a slogan, a political device meant to keep the populace in an excited fear.

Adolph Hitler used such slogans effectively: “you must harp on these slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.” Our conservative administration uses the slogan “war on terror” to maintain their control. Past administrations have used “war on drugs” and “war on crime” in the same way.

Terror as an extreme political tool is pervasive in history. The First World War was precipitated when Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand. About 30 years ago, the Baader-Meinhof Gang in Germany and the Red Brigades of Italy terrorized those nations. We had our Oklahoma City bombing and the Olympics bombing in Atlanta. There is no known effective way to combat terrorists other than the way the Italians and Germans dealt with their terrorists. They hunted them down and brought them to justice.

Hitler used an act of terrorism to justify suspension of civil liberties and fomented a hysterical hatred of Jews and communists. His rhetoric was not aimed at Germany’s enemies. It was aimed at his own people to solidify his political position. In the event of a terrorist atomic attack on an American city, is it possible that Marshall Law could be declared? Could Bush use the “war on terror” slogan to justify ending our individual liberties? Would our populace welcome it as the Germans welcomed Hitler?

Terrorism will last as long as there is prejudiced knowledge and significant inequities in the world. If you would fight a war on terror, these must be your targets and your weapons must be education and opportunity. Any traditions, religions, institutions and social classes that impede education and opportunity jeopardize the Separation of Powers and individual liberty.

Many must have a troubled feeling that we acted too quickly in Iraq based on incomplete and misleading information. Many have a further feeling that if we had expended those resources and that manpower to successfully chase down Bin Laden and his gang, we would have not sacrificed our prominence in the eyes of the world. Saddam would have continued his brutal ways, but the Iraqis probably would have incurred far fewer casualties and the area would not be so unstable. Perhaps we would not have lost so many of our own finest youth.

Most important, still, the world would know that we will not tolerate terrorism; that we will go to any lengths to punish the terrorists. We will lunch our fastest fleet, brave any storm and hunt them down. Once they know there is no safe haven, they will think more than twice about attacking us. Isn’t that really what we need to accomplish? Certainly, the vast majority of Americans now believe that Iraq was a mistake.