Rant: Evil Doer's Strike Again.

[Katchoo]

Atrocities said:
I love you to man , and no I am not supporting him because of his war record. I am supporting him because I do not like Kerry, as he is nothing more than an opportunistic liar who promises us a better tomorrow but has no intention on delivering. Bush, although flawed, is a far better choice. Kerry has been in the Senate a very long time and he has done nothing of consequence except to get rich.

Atrocities, I hope you have some proof to back statements like "I do not like Kerry, as he is nothing more than an opportunistic liar who promises us a better tomorrow but has no intention on delivering", otherwise your gonna come off here as just a ranting loon.

- What makes John Kerry "an opportunistic liar"?
- What proof do you have that John Kerry doesn't intend to fullfill any of the plans he's putting forth on his campaing trail?

Maybe you hate John Kerry because George Bush hasen't been able to fullfill the promises he made during his campaign in 99/00: George W. Bush: 100 Days of Broken Promises

As for "Kerry has been in the Senate a very long time and he has done nothing of consequence except to get rich", perhaps you should spend less time believeing everything you see on TV, and actually do some research for yourself. You can find John Kerry's Senate record here: John Kerry's Senate Record. It's pretty lengthy, but if you're going to smear Kerry's record or accomplishments, at least make sure you know what you're talking about.

As for the "rich" comment, Kerry's been completely open with his finances. He inherited a good chunk from his parents, but the majority of his current wealth comes from wife.

You can see Kerry's finances here: John Kerry income record

George W Bush was rich (and still is) when he ran for the Presidency in 99/00, but it's Kerry you're siding against. Hmm...

And to be honest, Bush never ordered the deaths of 10,000 Iraqi�s. The wording of that statement is inflammatory. It should read,

"The war on terrorism, instigated by the horrific acts of 9-11 have lead our great nation into a war of moral choices. To do the right thing over the objections of world opinion and take the war to any nation that would willingly harbor, support, or defend terrorism and or terrorist. To that end, the path of righteousness has led us to the shores of Iraq where many have died, and many more are going to as we continue to fight the good fight against those who would kill innocent women and children. Iraq is the chosen battleground for this fight against evil. Away from Pakistan and their nuclear weapons of mass destruction, we wage this war of idealism that the right for all people to live free and to live free from tyranny and terrorism is the right thing to do. "

"To do the right thing over the objections of world opinion"? In other words, as long as George Bush thinks it's right, he'll do what he wants, where he wants, to whomever he wants too? And you feel safe with this man who has the authority to push the big red button that ends all life on Earth? I hope you bought plenty of duct tape.

"take the war to any nation that would willingly harbor, support, or defend terrorism and or terrorist." So I guess if, say, an American in Seattle drove a truck full of propane tanks into the Space Needle, we could expect Bush to invade the Washington area with as much vigor as he did Iraq? Unlikely. North Korea posed (and still does) a much bigger threat to the US than Iraq did, yet Bush wanted to go into Iraq. The Bush Administration doesn't care where the terrorists are or might be, otherwise Iraq would have been futher down the list of Countries to invade.

Still believe that Bush truely cares about stopping/ending terrorism?

- AP: Superiors Hindered Terror Prosecutors
- Unmasking of Qaeda mole a security blunder
-

"Iraq is the chosen battleground for this fight against evil. Away from Pakistan and their nuclear weapons of mass destruction, we wage this war of idealism that the right for all people to live free and to live free from tyranny and terrorism is the right thing to do." So apparently Iraq was worse than Pakistan, even though Pakistan has nuclear weapons (as you point out), but Iraq doesn't, and apparently never did? Hmmm...

CIA Intelligence Reports Seven Months Before 9/11 Said Iraq Posed No Threat To U.S., Containment Was Working

Was Saddam a terrorist, yes? Just ask those who were terrorized by him.

Ah, but terrorism is such a broad term. Do you consider Human Rights Abuses terrorism? If so, then you have to call the prisoner abuse going on at Abu Ghraib by the American Military terrorism towards the Iraqi detainees.

Oh, but I guess since it's the United States doing it, it's not called terrorism. Hmmm...

Military Fact: It is better that you choose the place and time for the battle. Iraq is that place, and the time is now. And oh look, the scumbag, mind warped, twisted, honor less, nimrod terrorists of the Arab world are flocking to Iraq in droves. Seems to me that this tried and true tactic has worked.

*clap*clap*clap* Well, congratulations are in order then. Hooray for the United States! You've not only invaded a non-threatening country, you've made that country more hazardous for it's own citizens and for the Military presence there. Now that's what I call a plan.

I would say that you are right. 1991, Iraq invaded Kuwait and that is exactly what happened. However many Americans now believe that most of the European nations lost there stomach to stand up to Saddam and enforce the terms of the cease fire. They felt it was better to simply let him do as he pleased for the Last twelve years, prior to the war, and well, that dog just won�t hunt any more. You see, in that time Saddam continued to build up his military, he killed millions of Kurds, ordered the assignation attempt on George H. W. Bush, and had continued to disobey and disregard the terms of the cease fire by targeting US and allied planes. He took the money he got from food for oil sales and built lavish palaces while his people starved. Those who stood up to him, well we know what happened to them.

"However many Americans now believe that most of the European nations lost there stomach to stand up to Saddam and enforce the terms of the cease fire. They felt it was better to simply let him do as he pleased for the Last twelve years" How about providing us with some proof that the Eurpoean community was allowing Saddam to "do as he pleased.

Or perhaps you're referring to the proposed switch from American Dollars to Euros for selling Iraqi oil? Hmmm, I wonder what that would have done to the US economy...

The real reasons Bush went to war

So should Bush now be called before a world court and tried for war crimes? Well no, in fact hell no. He should receive a medal for having the courage to what many European nations feared to do. Sometimes you must do what no other will do, and fight the bully on his terms. Bush did that, and now he is viewed as the bully. LOL! I often wonder what Europe would be like if the US had minded its own business and stayed out of the European conflict. Don�t get me wrong, I am glad that we didn�t, but I still wonder how that conflict would have turned out if we had.

What would have happened? Bush, Cheney, and their cirle of Oil magnates would have lost a ton of money, and the American economy would take a substantial hit from the conVersion of oil sales from American Dollars to Euros.

"European conflict" What conflict are you referring to here?

Really. And I suppose they also view Saddam as a War Hero?

Ah, so you're taking the simple minded approach that if one person is good, then the opposing person must be bad. So if I say Bush is bad, that must mean that I think Saddam is good.

Hmmm... You see, this is one of the huge flaws with the Republican Party; the view that everything is black or white, good or evil. If you don't Subscribe to Republican beliefs, you get labled as a Liberal, and you sumarily get dragged through the mud. The scarier corner of the Republican Party even believes that if you're not white, then you're not pure.

Eugenics Backer Causes Stir in Tenn. Race

I don't hold any misguided beliefs that the Democratic Party his it's kooks too, but nothing compares to the ones the Republican Party has.

Anyways, back to your first assessment of me. No, I don't like Saddam, nor do I view him as a War Hero. Anyone who takes pleasure in taking away human life deserves whatever fate eventually befalls them.

Bush Mocks Condemed Killer

I ask you, do you consider terrorist to be a form of bullying? (Bully being a person that goes around enforcing his will onto others through violence and intimidation.)

Ok let�s say for arguments sake that you agree that Terrorist are nothing more than bullies. What is the one thing a bully fears most? If you said someone who will stand up to him, well your right. Now I want you to think about this in those terms as you read what I have written.

A clear and unmistakable message had to be sent to Arab nations that the days of reserved responses were over. To prove this point we took on the two biggest bullies on the Arab block, the Taliban and Regime of Saddam Hussein.

The Taliban I can understand, considering they're the ones who took part in 9/11. But Saddam Hussein?!? I'll repeat this again: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Invading Iraq make the United States the bully in that conflict.

We took on the worst of they had to offer and by doing so, even without Europe�s support; we proved that our word does mean something. �We will take the fight to you if you harbor, support, or otherwise engage in any act of and for terrorism.� What Bush did, was to lead a united coalition of nations against two very bad Groups of men and their armies of darkness,

?!?!?!?!?!?!?! "Armies of darkness"?!?!?!?!?! Atrocities, seriously, is someone pointing a gun to your head and making you type that, cause that's the only way a sane thinking person could come out with that.

and by doing so he prove a point that if we can take down the biggest bad asses on the block, then we can take the rest of them down, so pay attention to our warning.

Really, who sounds like a bully now...

And you know what, it worked. Pakistan, Libya, Sierra, Saudi Arabia and the others got the message and are now playing ball.

And the message, was, what? "Do as we say or we're going to bomb your country into the stone age, and there's nothing the UN can do to stop it"? Or is it "Do as we say or you're population will have to look forward to some good old fashioned American justice (re: torture and dehumanizing at Abu Ghraib)?

Now there is no doubt that this is going to be a long and deadly fight, but we have no choice but to win. And not just in Iraq, but everywhere we go. We must stop the terrorism regardless of how bloody we become in the process.

The United States will be stuck in Iraq for years because of the mess and corruption going on over there. As for "everywhere we go", the US won't be going anywhere else. Afterall, the current Administration got what it wanted: total control of Iraq's oil production and reserves.

What, you still think Bush took the US to Iraq to, what, free the poor Iraqi people?

<insert continuous laugh track here>

Now I know that Iraq was really not a terrorist state per say, however Saddam was supporting terrorism by funding it.

"Saddam was supporting terrorism by funding it"? Proof please.

He was not a War Hero as the Europeans are now making it seem

Please back this statement up with some facts aswell, please.

, and he was not a nice man. He was a very bad individual with aspiration for, and the means to obtain weapons of mass destruction. When we went in, we believed he had, in one form or another, WMD�s. Only until after it was all said and done did we discover that he, for likely the first time in his life, was kind of sort of telling us the truth. What can I say, hindsight is always 20/20.

So what you're essentially saying is "Oops, sorry for invading your country, and destroying your infrastructre. My bad".

?!?!

Yeah, I'm sure the Iraqi people appreciate it.

But now, after the fact, to call Bush a war criminal because we did not find WMD�s is like saying Church Hill was guilty of mass murder for ordering the carpet-bombing of Berlin. Its ludicrous to think that, and equally so in Bush�s case.

Hmm... What could be wrong about this statement. Hmmm... What could it be... What could it be... Hmmm...

<insert drumming fingers on desk>

What could it be... Oh yeah: Germany actively attacked Britain, and invaded every surrounding country. IRAQ NEVER INVADED THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

As Charlie Brown would say, "good grief"!

Many Americans believe that Europe does not have the balls to stand up against terrorist. They fear them like frightened little school children that would rather run home and cry to momma than stand up and fight. Just look at what happened in Spain. The terrorists attack a train station killing a hundred or more innocent people, and in response, the people of Spain vote out their government because their leaders supported the US. What does that tell the terrorists? I will tell you what it tells them. It tells them that they have won. If they can scare people into accepting their actions out of fear that they will continue, then the next attack will be even more deadly. You cannot reason with these kinds of people, for they only understand one language, and that is the language of the strong. Kill or be killed.

I'm all for killing/punishing terrorists, but the Bush Administration isn't interested in doing that. Not unless there's a profit in it...

I ask you, would you want to live under the threat of that kind of black mail every day? Do what they want or they will blow up a train station or school?� No, of course I can�t think of anyone who would want to live under that kind of situation. So what do we do? Do we invent a time machine and go back and stop the invasion of Iraq? Will that help us? Or will it just simply give the terrorist a platform from where they could launch wave after wave of attacks against us.

And what if Saddam did have a nuke, or acquired one? He would have held the entire Middle East hostage and nothing would have stopped him from using it against Israel.

Ah, so now the US invaded Iraq to free Israel. The excuses never cease.

We need to work from here to make a better tomorrow with the hope that we never see the day when terrorist hold our freedoms in the palm of their grubby little [censored] encrusted hands?

What is done is done. Saddam is no more. And it would be wise for those who live in Europe to remember what the Nazi had accomplished when they were left along and ignored as we were doing with Saddam. Remember, Saddam is directly responsible for the death of over a million Iraqi people. And our soldiers are not fighting Iraqi's, they are fighting militant Islamic extremists from many Arab countries who came to Iraq to do nothing but kill Americans. And what have they done, they have not only killed Americans, but Iraqi�s, Australians, Koreans, Brits, and many many others. Hell they cut off the heads of more than one of them, and you call Bush a War Criminal? If Bush is guilty of anything, it�s being man enough to stand up to these bastards and do the right thing. He took the fight to them, gave them a target, and now we are where we are and I hope that one day we can rid the earth of these maggot eating, bomb making, kid killing, psychopaths that kill in the name of God.

"...I hope that one day we can rid the earth of these maggot eating, bomb making, kid killing, psychopaths that kill in the name of God." George Bush thinks that God is talking to him. Doesn't that mean that the end of your paragraph can apply to him aswell?

President Bush Receiving Orders from God?

How many Americans died saving Europe from Nazi Germany? If memory serves, Germany was lead by only one man, and if we had �sacrificed� a 1,000 men to remove him from power before he could start the great Nazi war machine, then I would bet those men would have gone to their graves hero�s.

Gotta love these comparisons with Nazi Germany...

And for record, supporting Bush is not an insult to the fallen. To say otherwise is the insult. Many Oregon and Washington State Gaurds men and women have fallen in this war and the local news stations have conducted interviews with most of their families. And do you know what they all have said? Teary eyed and sobbing they praised their sons, daughters, brothers, fathers, and yes even mothers for doing the right thing and fighting as soldiers of the Untied States. Not one of them, not one, has ever said a bad thing about Bush. In fact most when asked, say they will vote for him again because they understand the sacrifice that their loved ones had lived and died securing. That says a hell of a lot about the American people and even more about your news sources. (That being that they are all full of [censored] for reporting such tripe.)

In other words, you believe everything you see on TV?

<Whispering> Psssst... You do know that Fox News isn't really 'Fair & Balanced', right?

Of those soldiers interviewed both abroad and here at home, most believe in what it is they are being asked to do. They don�t want to die doing it, but they are willing to put themselves in harms way not for politics, but for each other. Of the men and women interviewed upon returning from Iraq, most say the same thing. They don�t understand why the news media�s are so hell bent on focusing on only the small fraction of negative things that go on, when there are so many good things happening.

Maybe it's because the bad things outway the good by a margin of 10 to 1.

How about providing us with some links to support all the good work the US is doing in Iraq and to their people? I'm sure it would be news to them...

Most say that although the situation is dangerous, most Iraqi�s are glad that Saddam is gone, and they are more than thrilled that it was the Americans who finally came to their rescue. They are proud of what we are doing, and despite the constant bull**** from the world media, more and more Iraqi�s are offering support for the Americans and their allies and what it is they are trying to do.

Now please do not take this wrong, but why are you taking the side of Saddam Hussein?

I'm not. I'm criticizing Bush. You're the one who brought up Hussein.

Bush is not a mass murder, nor was any of his predecessors.

I don't remember saying anything about the previous American Administrations.

In the Last twenty years we have not deployed chemical weapons against our own people, nor we did not invade Kuwait and Iran. Additionally, aside from some questionable military practices recently, we have not tortured people to death, persecuted the innocent, or held sham elections where the people had two choices, vote for Saddam, or die. Our Last three sitting presidents never ordered the assassination of a former leader of another nations, nor have any of them supported or funded terrorism.

Ah, so now the US invaded Iraq in response to Saddam's actions over the Last 20 or so years. Right. Gottcha!

The role reversal that Bush is somehow the bad man and Saddam is the innocent victim is quite inappropriate.

Funny, but I don't remember ever saying or implying that Saddam "is the innocent victim". Feel free to make stuff up, but don't drag me into it.

I know that we have different opinions on these subjects, and I want you to know that I did read your post and I did try to understand your POV. I don�t know what else I can say other than I feel that Bush, despite his flaws, is simply a better choice than Kerry. Kerry has lied about a great many things, and I simply do not trust the man. If only we had a viable third option, but we don�t, so I am voting for the lesser of two evils.

Again, I would love to know what you think Kerry has lied about that makes him worse than Bush.

I'm glad to hear that you're keeping an open mind. I'd like to think that I am too. Afterall, we were all born with a brain, and to not use it is a waste.

What is important is that we all remember that nothing means anything for we are all going to die. All of this, every Last bit of it, will mean nothing in a hundred years.

So we can sit here and piss and moan about what has happened all we want, the truth is, it simply does not matter. The world will go round, and if we can keep from killing ourselves off, maybe one day we can all learn to live in peace. Until then, we will continue doing what we have since the dawn of our time; killing each other for BS reasons.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but it almost sounds to me like you're giving up. I'm a firm believer in fate, and that we're all here on this planet for a reason (big or small), but that doesn't mean that we should follow blindly, or don't ask questions when we see or hear something that we know deep down isn't right. One of the worse things anyone can do is to stop learning. Wether it's trying out a book by a new author or spending time with someone you may not agree with politically (), we have to stay aware of the world around us, and grow along with it.

The old adage that "one vote doesn't count" is a crock. By casting that vote you are, most importantly, standing up for yourself. That one vote says "Hey! This is who I am, this is what I believe, and nobody can take this away from me"!