Obama wants heath insurance companies to pay for injured warriors.

Well, more Change!

(just pushing the Nike ads down)

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
Well, more Change!

(just pushing the Nike ads down)

That's change I can believe in!

quote:

Originally posted by Wire Paladin:
Obama wants heath insurance companies to pay for injured warriors.

Taxpayers should take care of the our men and women in the military. Taking money away from the insurance companies only makes insurance coverage more expensive, hard to get, and hurts the economy.

Stupid idea.

Obama may "want" private companies to provide Federal funding for injured warriors but the Constitution does not give him or Congress the authority to specifically target those companies.

Yet, as we've seen, Fascists like Obama have no problem attacking private companies, even shutting down profitable privately-owned car dealerships.

About half the voters were stupid enough to vote for Fascists. The Che Guevara banner on the Obama campaign office wall was enough warning to the rest.

quote:

About half the voters were stupid enough to vote for Fascists.

yes and i'm sure Bush never dwellved into facism.


" if you're not with us, your against us"

- George W. Bush

In war, Zero, that is a basic fact. A nation is a group of people who work together to defeat an enemy. Bush was not the first to point out that truth.

Let's not forget Democrats working against the US. The enemy is revealed by efforts to demoralize and defeat our nation.

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
In war, Zero, that is a basic fact. A nation is a group of people who work together to defeat an enemy. Bush was not the first to point out that truth.

Let's not forget Democrats working against the US. The enemy is revealed by efforts to demoralize and defeat our nation.

though Speak2truth he was talking to other nations,not just americans.

even if it was just addressed to the nation,that's BS to say "if you don't agree with my government you will be classified as a traitor" Look what happened to the senators that spoke out against the Iraq war,and look at the Dixie chicks who also stated their opinions.

What did the government do to the senators who (traitorously) tried to undermine our war effort or to the Dixie Chicks? Did government do anything to punish them?

Bush understands something that is not spoken of publicly. Western civilization as we know it is in peril.

In the past, limited by conventional weapons, Islamist expansionism could be fought in conventional ways. The Crusaders used conventional means to drive the invaders out of Europe and to knock down their strength to the point they could no longer be a global menace.

But now, radical Islam is building nuclear weapons.

Bush used a term that has been used before. Choose sides. There is no middle ground. Those who do not oppose the enemy empower it.

"All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing"

"You are either with us or against us"

Sadly, there are simpler-minded folks who do not grasp the truth of this.

( Link )

President Bush said Tuesday that there was no room for neutrality in the war against terrorism.

In a joint news conference with French President Jacques Chirac, Bush said coalition partners would be called upon to back up their support with action. He said he would deliver that message in his speech Saturday to the United Nations.

"A coalition partner must do more than just express sympathy, a coalition partner must perform," Bush said. "That means different things for different nations. Some nations don't want to contribute troops and we understand that. Other nations can contribute intelligence-sharing. ... But all nations, if they want to fight terror, must do something."

Bush said he would not point out any specific countries in his speech.

"Over time it's going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity," he said. "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."

Bush said threats by Osama bin Laden to use weapons of mass destruction must be taken seriously. "This is an evil man that we're dealing with, and I wouldn't put it past him to develop evil weapons to try to harm civilization as we know it," Bush said. " And that's why we must prevail, and that's why we must win."

quote:

"All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing"

"You are either with us or against us"

you admit bush used fear to get countrys to comply to his demands then.

Fear? No. Fact and reason with a dash of historical perspective.

If you fear his statements, I can't help you.

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
Fear? No. Fact and reason with a dash of historical perspective.

If you fear his statements, I can't help you.

wouldn't you admit that was kind of a "if you don't agree with our methods then we are enemys"
statement,and many leaders found it as a fear statement,i mean Dick cheney even admited that their was no real connection between Iraq and 9/11.

quote:

i mean Dick cheney even admited that their was no real connection between Iraq and 9/11

Bush and Cheney are smart enough to get the job done without wasting time wrestling with pigs in a public forum. US Federal court has already determined that there is sufficient evidence of Saddam's involvement to convict him.

On May 7, Manhattan U.S. District Judge Harold Baer ruled that attorney Beasley
and his legal team had presented enough evidence to convince a "reasonable jury"
that Iraq played a material role in the deadly attacks.
Link

9/11 Bombshell: Judge Rules Saddam Trained Hijackers
Link

Salman Pak: Iraq's Smoking Gun Link to 9/11?
Link

Iraq terrorist training airliner simulator
Link


OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the
early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass
destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps
and safe haven in Iraq
Link


There is more than enough evidence of Saddam's involvement in 9/11 as well as previous attacks on US soil such as the World Trade Center bombing of 1993, the Oklahoma City Bombing and so on. Saddam happily took credit for his victory.



As for their "with us or against us" statement, it was a clear message not about "methods" but about taking a stand in a global conflict. This is similar to the conflict against the Socialist Workers Party (NAZIs) rampaging around Europe. Take a stand against or aid and abet the enemy by stepping out of his way. That is the nature of war.

Speak 2 Truth- It does not suprise me that Iraq and Al Qaida were chummy and that Iraq provided resources for the training of terrorists. Not so long ago we were quite chummy with Iraq too. What I would like to see is the proof WMD's- y'know the reason we invaded that country before the message of making a democracy in middle east was distrubuted. THAT is the smoking gun I would like to see. Do you have some links for that? BTW- the first 3 of your posted links are dead. As far as the whole you're either for us or against us attitude, it is nothing more than saber rattling. That statement you must admit is somewhat provocational.

Dead links? Dagnabbit. I hate it when sites go dead.

The reason we went into Iraq was not merely because Saddam had WMD but because he had demonstrated his intentions - international conquest and destruction. During a temporary cease-fire, he was given one last chance to eliminate all his WMD and the plans and programs to create them. Saddam then spent years giving the "inspectors" the run-around, requiring them to announce weeks in advance where they intended to go, then the inspectors would find sanitized sites. That's why Clinton bombed Iraq repeatedly during the 1990s then finally called off the cease-fire in 1998. America was committed, by Congress and Clinton, to the use of force to destroy Saddam's regime and replace it with a democratically elected government.

Read the Iraq Liberation Act for the details.

Clinton's own bombing campaign against Iraq in 1998 was a miserable failure. Saddam declared victory and refused to allow the UN inspectors back in. THAT is the key reason Al Gore and GW Bush both campaigned on the promise to fulfill the Iraq Liberation Act, to finish off Saddam's regime once and for all.

And when Bush got elected, the Damned Democrats pretended they had amnesia, that none of the above occurred, and started spreading rumors that Bush was "starting" a war, speculating it was in retaliation for an attempt on his daddy's life. If that doesn't inspire you to loathe the Democrats, I have to wonder if anything can.

And what about the "smoking gun"? Sure, that's been common knowledge for a while. We also know, thanks to Georges Sada (one of Sadda's top generals) that Saddam worked quickly to move damning materials out of Iraq in preparation for the US invasion. We also know a lot of it ended up in the hands of Al Qaeda after it was shipped to Syria...

Here's more reading.

CIA Statement on Recently Acquired Iraqi Centrifuge Equipment
Link

Nuke program parts unearthed in Baghdad back yard
Link

Hundreds of Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq Since 2003, U.S. Intelligence Report Says
Link

Saddam chose the wrong path. He was warned, repeatedly, but apparently did not believe the UN or the US would take decisive action to compel him to obey the disarmament mandates. Clinton's weak attempts at bullying probably encouraged that sort of thinking. Saddam seriously misunderestimated "the cowboy".