Would you vote for Bush again?

**itld** · 03-07-2003

howdy,

President Bush has not been very clear on what exactly it is about other than a vague reference to a possible future threat and presumed connection with today's terrorist organizations

Vague References???
your kidding, right???

M.R.

**Bajanine** · 03-07-2003

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20020912.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...380889,00.html

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20020916-28573872.htm

RESOLUTION ON IRAQ (1441)
http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/iraq/unscr1441.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...s/satindex.htm

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=2231238

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110002994

"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of sanctions and ignore the commitments he's made? Well, he will conclude that the international community's lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. The stakes could not be higher. Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."
-President Bill Clinton in 1998

Unregd · 03-07-2003

It's interesting you brought up Bill Clinton. I think we all know why he decided to bomb Iraq, and oil definitely was not the top concern.

I am satisfied with stepping up weapons inspections in Iraq--for now.

Speaking of terrorist supporting, repressive regimes, what about Saudi Arabia? We'd be after them too if it weren't for the very same Saudi oil princes who support terrorism negotiating bargains with American oil companies.

**Bajanine** · 03-07-2003

How many decades should we allow for Iraq to comply with 1441?

**dP munky** · 03-08-2003

with some of these people 1 wasnt enough, he probably needs a few more, i dunno, it just seems to me that the guy is hiding something. he's made no attempt, none, zero, nada, nilch, zip, zippo, uh-uh to comply w/the resolution. i cant believe some people just wanna let this go by w/nothing, "lets keep inspecting" thats like taking one guy from belgium placing him in the us and saying, find this guys lucky sock...???

***ClownPimp*** · 03-08-2003

I think allowing a few more months or whatever for inspections for the sake of having the backing of the UN is worth it. Iraq is not an _immediate_ threat us or anyone for that matter (if he were to try and attack one of his neighbors right now, that would be the impetus for war)

**itld** · 03-08-2003

howdy,

having the backing of the UN

at this point UN backing is probably impossible and for the most part meaningless.

M.R.

***ClownPimp*** · 03-08-2003

The UN represents the international community and having the backing of the international community is very meaningful. I am alarmed at the growing anti-Americanism in countries that are our strongest allies. The US would be foolish not to address that, and the US taking unilateral action against Iraq will just fuel the fire.

**itld** · 03-08-2003

howdy,

and the US taking unilateral action against Iraq will just fuel the fire

unilateral suggests we would go it alone, as far as i know we have several other countries in agreement with us. and only a few disagree with us.

M.R.

**Bajanine** · 03-08-2003

If you read the links you would see that we are supported by others. If we need to have EVERYONE agree on every matter we would never accomplish anything!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...380889,00.html

**LouDu** · 03-08-2003

If i was President Bush's secratery i would do as fallows...

1. Change His current war plans and plans to propose to the UN to Blow up Iraq and put a missle thru osma bin ladne and saddam husanes head.
2. Vote for bush till he dies, even if he isnt on the ballow, that will make florida recount more

**zahid** · 03-08-2003

No allowed to vote for US President,

But if allowed, Vote would go for "No" .
Even for both Bush.

I know very little about US internal Politics but because of Last US President, I found little idea on Republicans and Democrats. Their attitude.
I'm not sure if i'm right, republicans love war more than democrats.

**itld** · 03-08-2003

howdy,

I'm not sure if i'm right, republicans love war more than democrats.

neither LOVE war.

M.R.

***ClownPimp*** · 03-09-2003

ok, unilateral wasnt accurate. But, without the UN, our actions against Iraq will lose credibility in the eyes of those who oppose it. It will seem like Bush just has something personal against saddam or some ulterior motive for wanting war so badly. The best thing we can do is to keep working through the UN and also keep giving the inspectors intelligence so they might be able to expose beyond any doubt any Iraqi deception.

**itld** · 03-09-2003

howdy,

they might be able to expose beyond any doubt any Iraqi deception.

IMO the inspectors have proven many violations of Res 1441. the existance of the "forgotten" chemical war heads, the existance of the buried long range missles, the purchase of the precsion aluminum tubing, the inspectors have to LOOK for roof instead of being PROVIDED proof of the destruction of weapons.
Sadam is a very clever man whom at this point is playing the UN like a fiddle, he (Sadam) needs to end this threat of war by complying with res 1441 and other UN Resolutions.

M.R.