GameClaw_268 Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 What do you think about the war in Iraq, should we have gone, nuked the country off the map, or whatever. State your opinions here. As for me, I think we should have gone, but only to search for WMD's. After we could find any we should have abruptly left, letting the country handle their own affairs.
calvinator Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 Hm... not so current but thats okay. Leaving immediately would have left them in disarray.
GameClaw_268 Posted March 10, 2005 Author Posted March 10, 2005 Actually, its pretty current, but most people at the most have an attention span of 2 months, if not of a sandwitch
calvinator Posted March 11, 2005 Posted March 11, 2005 Well... It was declared over two years ago, now it is a larger issue which means you pay more attention to it, but its still two years old since it was declared over.
myscrnnm Posted March 11, 2005 Posted March 11, 2005 After we could find any we should have abruptly left, letting the country handle their own affairs. What?! What with the insurgents?! We need to protect the Iraqi people and get rid of the ****ing insurgents!
calvinator Posted March 12, 2005 Posted March 12, 2005 Uh, yeah, thats what i meant with Leaving immediately would have left them in disarray.
myscrnnm Posted March 12, 2005 Posted March 12, 2005 Uh, yeah, thats what i meant with Leaving immediately would have left them in disarray. I am talking to the Gamemaster_268.
HerLoss Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 The way I figure it, Iraq and Saddam werent immediate threats, the so called "terrorists" were. I've been against bush since he royally screwed up his first term, and i guess it just angers me so much that he was re-elected. Anyways, there was a big investigation starting about him being involved with the Bin Ladens and all that, and the way i see it, he used the war as a diversion. We should have been searching for Bin Laden, not huissein, and that just goes to show where our priorities are. The guy who actually attacked us is still hangin out somewhere and a guy who was never a threat is sitting in some prison somewhere.
myscrnnm Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Hey! We can't go and blame Bush for all of this. I mean, he acts stupid sometimes, but being the president of the United States is a difficult job!
HerLoss Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Hey! We can't go and blame Bush for all of this. I mean, he acts stupid sometimes, but being the president of the United States is a difficult job! Yeah, I guess so, but sometimes I think I would be happier with a block of wood as the president. I guess what really gets me the most is people saying "hes not as bad as clinton" when clinton was definitly a great president, and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what was under investigation that his [bleeped!] life could have even been introduced, never mind questioned. Seriously, I was only like 7 or 8 back then and no one has ever bothered to tell me exactly what happend. Anyone wanna try and explain it to me? Seriously?
GameClaw_268 Posted March 31, 2005 Author Posted March 31, 2005 he had an affair with a college girl, or something. According to my social studies teacher, Kennedy was worse, but... they didn't check back then. And clinton did get us a balanced budget, until bush screwed it up. What I meant was, never overthrowing the government, and just make sure they didn't have WMD's. We would have only lost like, 5 guys that way.
HerLoss Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Yeah, and when the rest of the UN wont join, you know theres something goin on. My main beef is that you dont hear didly about the search for bin laden who actually attacked us, and everything about iraq which never actually was a threat.
myscrnnm Posted April 1, 2005 Posted April 1, 2005 Hey! We can't go and blame Bush for all of this. I mean, he acts stupid sometimes, but being the president of the United States is a difficult job! Yeah, I guess so, but sometimes I think I would be happier with a block of wood as the president. I guess what really gets me the most is people saying "hes not as bad as clinton" when clinton was definitly a great president, and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what was under investigation that his [bleeped!] life could have even been introduced, never mind questioned. Seriously, I was only like 7 or 8 back then and no one has ever bothered to tell me exactly what happend. Anyone wanna try and explain it to me? Seriously? Okay, Clinton allegedly had oral [bleeped!] in the Oval Office with an intern called Monica Lewinsky. They say he confessed to it, but I think that it is just a load of [bleeped!] in this media driven world.
HerLoss Posted April 1, 2005 Posted April 1, 2005 its most likely a load, yes, but from what i undestand the idea was that he lied about it in court under oath, and i just want to know under what circumstances it was allowed to be brought up in court.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now