THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NEVER WITHSTAND CHRIST JESUS.
America please wake up and elect RON PAUL!!

Try telling the people the truth for once in your miserable exitstance. Like the trillion plus contracts for gas pipe lines pulled out of Afganistan. How in 2000 the United States was facing it worse finacial crisis ever and how it was tied in to the 90% destruction the poppy{in Afganistan} plants and the dollar being dumped in oil trading. What about CIA conection to AL-Queda and the Taliban and the destroying the wheat fields to replant the popy seeds.

This may come to shock to some, however at this time their is the greatest poppy plant harvest ever and our stock market is soaring!

Back to the chess pieces known as the PNAC boys.
The real{chess}master behind them,is no other then the monster known as Z.Brzezinski. Any one who has not study and or read THE GRAND CHESS BOARD is in a rude awakening. How much clout does he possess? Hmm;TR/CFR/BILDERBERGERS!!

You will find the Z. Brzezinski and H. Kissinger{the henchmen}are the rooks in the GRAND CHESSBOARD! Want proof? The dumbass bishop GW Bush called in MR.Kissenger to clean up the QUAGMIRE called 9/11. This is a documented FACT.

I think where we Republicans are in serious error is the belief that we are at war with all Muslims of the world and not just a radical few, for if we are at war with them all, every American Mother and Father with their sons and daughters in tow needs to walk down to the military recruiting station and sign on the dotted line. It is going to take a lot of bodies to kill 1 billion Muslims. Nukes in places like India wouldn’t be a good idea or we will end up fighting 1 billion Hindu’s

You underestimate the ability of the clintons to weasel. Were you alive in the 90s? You might think these are far fetched, but consider what she actually said. Here’s what she could say to your declaration of war:

1) That was that congress, this is technically a new congress, and the authorization is automatically voided with the election

2) Yea, “Into the country”, not the cities of Iraq.

3) It depends on what is meant by the word “destroy”. We certainly didn’t mean what Bush seems to think it means.

4) We meant any “Saddam”, not necessarily that nice dictator guy. We were hoping to have him over for dinner to meet Castro.

5) ahh, we said “Secure his WMD”. There is no proof that the WMD you found were actually owned by Saddam Hussein himself.

6) That couldn’t have come from Congress. We would have spell checked first. Those dastardly neocons must have replaced the bill we actually passed.

7) This is a war, and we didn’t use the word “war”. We obviously meant that if the enemy fights back, to immediately return to the safety of US based barracks, like Ft Dix.

8) ahh, we said “Weapons of Mass Destruction”. Duh, we meant any weapon that would destroy a catholic church service, certain pieces of music, or the state of Massachusetts. Ted really wanted that line in there.

But as I was saying… we could leave the country a smoking ruin with a lot of dead Iraqis.

“I think you had better think harder. You’re deluding yourself if you think Congress didn’t declare war.”

That unfortunately was not a declaration of war, only an authorization to have the option.
A declaration of war would go like; “We the Congress hereby order the President of the United States as comander in chief to sent US armed forces into the country of iraq, distroy its army, kill or capture Saddam and secure his WMD.”
Then when things didn’t go well you don’t have politicians saying “well if I would have known then what I know now…. or “I didn’t say he had to go to war, just that he could…”

Well that is just the problem. I don’t have faith in these type statements “significant evidence that WMD were moved to Syria.” I remember the damning evidence Collin Powel presented to the UN.
Either we have the absolute worst Intel or we are being lied to.

“Besides, using WMD in your own country would be insanely suicidal. His best bet was to lay low, and wait for the americans to leave, like they did the first time.”

I don’t think so. He had no problems using the nerve agents in northern Iraq against the Kurds.

“>> [Politicians should] Just speak the truth!

Sounds very naive.”

Yes, true but even a politician can get by with only so many. Whether they were lies or misjudgements.

“Actually, he didn’t. The senate just voted with big numbers.”

I am not talking about funding. I am talking about rallying the American public. That is what matters. If you think the Republicans lost the last election for any other reason than the war in Iraq, Think again.

“That’s just plain false.”

I would have appreciated a little more reason as to why we haven’t lost.
When I say we have lost that battle doesn’t mean the Troops are straggling back in disorder and defeat like Pickett’s men at Gettysburg. It means that the mission that the politicians have given the troops cannot be accomplished- establish a peaceful democracy in a country of three different groups that absolutely hate each other, that has thousands of foreign fighters randonly killing thousands of them to keep the hate going. We have the firepower in the country to leave the country a

First of all, there is significant evidence that WMD were moved to Syria. I also think that he sincerely believed that his bribes of UN members would be sufficient to stall the US long enough.

Second of all, in that environment (constant UN inspections), he probably wouldn’t have weapons ready to deploy. Besides, using WMD in your own country would be insanely suicidal. His best bet was to lay low, and wait for the americans to leave, like they did the first time.

>> [Politicians should] Just speak the truth!

Sounds very naive.

>> American people behind the war. As a leader he failed to do that.

Actually, he didn’t. The senate just voted with big numbers.

>> I have come to realize that it can’t be won

That’s just plain false.

>> Kerry by his own admission committed atrocities

He lied.

>> The more I think about the whole issue of congressional constitutional duty to declare war the more I think it is absolutely right. Had Congress voted to declare war

I think you had better think harder. You’re deluding yourself if you think Congress didn’t declare war.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

Good points, however that still doesn’t answer the question about why Saddam didn’t use them against us. I was over there and flew over and around much of the whole country. There is so much excavation and disturbed ground from all the wars, WMD could have been buried anywhere but again back to the question of why he didn’t use them.
As far as Bush trying to figure out which story to use against Kerry, that is what is frustrating people so much in that it is all about getting elected. Just speak the truth! To do otherwise only feeds the conspiracies.
As the political and military leader Bush needed to keep the American people behind the war. As a leader he failed to do that.
Now as far as the battle in Iraq I have come to realize that it can’t be won. Just strategically look at the numbers. There are a billion muslins around the world that are all now highly critical of us. With those kind of numbers all it takes is a small percentage of them to join the jihad and filter through the Iraq’s borders (Which we cannot control) and US troops cannot tell the difference between them and innocent Iraqis. As the troops struggle to fight this enemy they get more and more frustrated as they watch their comrades die with no real target to fight back against. Soon some crack and start killing innocents which only adds fire to the Jihad.
Every great general in history knew when he had lost a battle and had sense enough to withdraw and regroup and rethink his strategy. To do otherwise and the soldiers see that they are dying in vain, that general rapidly loses the support of his men and even more so when he is giving orders from the rear. It doesn’t help when they know he didn’t spend time in the foxholes in his youth.
No as far a Kerry spending time in the foxholes in his youth. Kerry by his own admission committed atrocities in Vietnam. He was an officer and a leader of men. He should have had the moral courage and leadership to stop it. Do I blame the man for cracking? No, but how could I vote for a man to hold the most powerful leadership position in the world?

So, I feel I was wrong about the war and have to admit my mistake. AS I look around for a leader to replace Bush I have to go back in history and see who was making sounder judgments than I at the time. That man was Ron Paul. The more I think about the whole issue of congressional constitutional duty to declare war the more I think it is absolutely right. Had Congress voted to declare war instead of voting to give the option to Bush they couldn’t have backed out after it wasn’t politically unpopular and labeled it Bushes War thereby dividing the country and allowing the men and women in the foxholes to be forsaken.

That’s silly. If folks around the world stop trading in USD, the treasury can simply respond by sopping up the excess liquidity. Sure, it’s inconvenient, and does affect the economy, but it’s hardly an act of war, and certainly not a threat to US security. The strong dollar policy of the Clinton admin helped foreigners like China export more goods to the US, hurting US businesses. The bush admin have been deliberately allowing the USD to weaken, according to market forces, which is having the effect of helping the US economy.

a few more that are unstated.

Anybody who doesn’t understand that Iraq was US mob enforcing its dollar policy is either blindly “patriotic” or don’t know how the world of high finance operates (like the mob), or both. Iraq, Iran, and Syria’s threat to the USA isn’t WMDs, it’s their willingness to convert the oil currency to Euros. As weak as the dollar is now, it’d be that much worse if wasn’t the default reserve currency for the rest of the world who wants to buy oil. And, the muscle and enforcers (aka US Military) is going to ensure it stays that way.

Ron Paul, being the only candidate that has any idea about econ and finance, has been the only one who has dared to even say something like this.

http://www.furl.net/item.jsp?id=7437761
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umGpLGbWs9U
http://www.warisaracket.com/

A lot of people are basing a lot of opinions on the official story coming from the admin. People figure, if there were WMD, then the Bush admin would trumpet that, since they took such a beating over the idea that they weren’t there.

However, consider this: Bush was running for re-election. From a political point of view, which position would you rather be in:

1)WMD materials were there, and they were not recovered. We don’t know where they are. We were too late or too incompetent.

2)Darn, we made a mistake, sorry, no WMD.

If you were Kerry, consider that option 1 is far weaker for Bush. That Kerry was deperately trying to organize his campaign around option 1 shows that he knew. In fact, there was a big story during the campaign about how Bush let nuclear facilites be raided. Doesn’t anyone see the contradiciton? Why would our troops need to guard nuclear sites, if there was no threat. IOW, Bush had a strong political interest in “not finding anything, and saying they weren’t there”.

People should be smart enough to see through this, and recognize that 500 tons of yellow cake uranium is a WMD.

Besides, there are about 22 other reasons for this war, and a few more that are unstated.