News & Politics - Bush says US is in Iraq because of attacks on US

TokyoNiGHTS · 06-20-2005, 05:03 AM

This guy continues to amaze

Quote:

WASHINGTON (AFP) -President George W. Bush defended the war in Iraq, telling Americans the United States was forced into war because of the September 11 terror strikes.

Quote:

"We went to war because we were attacked, and we are at war today because there are still people out there who want to harm our country and hurt our citizens," Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address.

Quote:

Bush began a public relations offensive to defend the war as his approval rating has dropped well below 50 percent with Americans expressing skepticism about the invasion.

He should probably get ready for those to drop even more after this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/usiraqbushattacks

ceilirose · 06-20-2005, 05:26 AM

Like Jon Stewart said about Frist - doesn't he realize we have C-SPAN? All of his statements/speeches in the lead up to the Iraq War have been recorded.

So now the reason we're in Iraq is once again 9/11. LOL..and if you don't believe what Bush says then you must hate America. You're just aiding and abetting the enemy.

Citizen Sarah · 06-20-2005, 08:52 AM

OMG

no wonder we cant find Osama- him and saddam are the same person!! Honestly who can tell those arabs apart anyway eh

Paceysgal · 06-20-2005, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citizen Sarah

OMG

no wonder we cant find Osama- him and saddam are the same person!! Honestly who can tell those arabs apart anyway eh

Wow... that was a completely ignorant statement...

breath we drew · 06-20-2005, 04:32 PM

And another reason to add to the many, many, many reasons of why I hate our damn president... Er... The FBI won't track me down for that. Will they?

- Jen - · 06-20-2005, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paceysgal

Wow... that was a completely ignorant statement...

i think she was being sarcastic....well thats how i interpreted it

TomServo · 06-20-2005, 10:01 PM

eh....I still think the Iraq War, if successful, will be looked as a positive in world history. And in the end it will make the world safer.

TokyoNiGHTS · 06-20-2005, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomServo

eh....I still think the Iraq War, if successful, will be looked as a positive in world history. And in the end it will make the world safer.

So from now on you wouldn't have any problem with us invading other countries if the possiblity lead to us making the world better? Because there are alot of countries that could be done in and there are going to be alot of lives lost if its done.

In Fair Verona · 06-21-2005, 11:04 AM

I too interpretted her comment as sarcasm, in fact I think she's mocking the presumed view point of Bush. Which might not be too far off, I wouldn't be surprised if he did think such a thing.

I thought we were at war to help the Iraqis... no, wait, it was for the oil, no... yeah, it must have been 9/11.

Enigma, I.C. · 06-21-2005, 12:48 PM

I seem to remember hearing the (annoying) phrase "weapons of mass destruction" innumerable times before the invasion of Iraq. I think the president may think he's pulling a fast one.

TomServo · 06-21-2005, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TokyoNiGHTS

So from now on you wouldn't have any problem with us invading other countries if the possiblity lead to us making the world better? Because there are alot of countries that could be done in and there are going to be alot of lives lost if its done.

I think that having both Iraq and Afghanistan as stable, free nations will have an impact on the politics on that region and in turn make the US safer. Also, having a front in Iraq have kept the terrorists there and not here. So I dont think it was a waste at all. In any case, it was universally accepted that Sadaam had WMD's. With that in mind, Bush did the right thing.

TokyoNiGHTS · 06-21-2005, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomServo

I think that having both Iraq and Afghanistan as stable, free nations will have an impact on the politics on that region and in turn make the US safer.

That's not what i'm asking. If we were to invade other places without any hard evidence of why we're doing it other than we could make the world better, would you be ok with it? Because that's going to open up the doors to many other things happening in our own country.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomServo

In any case, it was universally accepted that Sadaam had WMD's. With that in mind, Bush did the right thing.

It was? Weren't our own weapons inspectors saying they couldn't find anything to say that Saddam had WMD's? That's universally accepted?

*Lauren · 06-22-2005, 01:10 AM

Universally acceptable? Perhaps you can show me ONE person who said that. Who actully knew what they were talking about.

Lexis · 06-22-2005, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomServo

Also, having a front in Iraq have kept the terrorists there and not here. So I dont think it was a waste at all.

So creating a lightning rod for terrorists in Iraq was a good thing as they all headed there instead of America?

What about the thousands of innocent Iraqis who have now been blown to pieces or severely injured? What about those people who are too scared to let their kids play outside, who are terrified every time they leave the house in case they get caught up in attacks?

LittleMilkJug · 06-22-2005, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomServo

Also, having a front in Iraq have kept the terrorists there and not here. So I dont think it was a waste at all.

Yeah, who cares if Iraqis get blown up and their kids blasted to pieces, I mean they aren't Americans are they?


Fan Forum > General Discussion > News & Politics > Bush says US is in Iraq because of attacks on US