<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>You "skewed" the nubmers by leaving out a lot of figures that acutally make a case for the war. WMD or otherwise.<br><br>And tens of thousands of innocent Iraquis murdered before the war, versus the islolated attacks that are happening now? It's not a contest. And things are getting better over there almost every day.<p><hr></blockquote><p>The ends do not justify the means. The reasons that we went into this war were simply fabrications and now people are trying to find the "good" in it all. Sure there's some perks, but there's plenty of bad—like all of the US troops that had to die in a war that should have never started. There's plenty of other ruthless, murdering dictators out there, but we're not rushing to change those regimes.<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> I think it's horrible that our servicemen are still dying in this effort, but that's the cost of being the world's only superpower.<p><hr></blockquote><p>That's a complete fallacy. It is not the US's responsibility to the be end-word on everything, lest we be seen by the rest of the world as the 2-ton bully that no one will respect—especially when we lie to get our way (like to justify starting this war in the first place).<br><br>

When Mr. Clinton was in office, the bashing went that a way. Seems to me that anyone who is in office, or who wants to be in office, is subject to what you call bashing. As squareman says, whether it's bashing or not depends on your political viewpoint. Your first post announced that viewpoint. Substantiate it and get into a discussion, if you want. But IMHO telling people what they should or should not post is . . . well, I don't want to characterize it.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>since you love the guy so much, why don't you come up with some arguments of GOOD things he has done in the last 4 years!<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Like I said, I'm an independent. I like some things Bush does. I don't like others. But I don't have a blanket love/hate for any polician.<br><br>Good things he's done? Well, the first thing you should do, is listed and/or read the State of the Union. I have no doubt that some of that was embellished, but do you HONESTLY think everything he said was a lie?<br><br>Here are some off the top of my head:<br>- My taxes are lower.<br>- The economy is quicly recovering<br>- Sadaam is no longer violating the human rights of others, and is no longer a threat to his neighbors<br>- The worldwide terrorism network has been significantly weakened<br><br>Now I'm sure you can somehow spin each one of these things around and either a) not give Bush the credit, but some other Democrat, or b) look at any of these as the glass is half-empty and discuss some negative side effect. That's OK. I expect that from people who think EVERYTHING the man does is horrible.<br><br>Are you telling me that you cannot think of ONE thing he's done well since he's been in office? <br><br><br><br>

Your statements are "facts." Someone's response is "spin."<br><br>To quote Mr. Spock, "Interesting."<br><br>

Again, what are you talking about man?<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Cherry, I found a lot of your numbers interesting,<p><hr></blockquote><p>hi,<br>Sources: Vanity Fair magazine, Harper's Index, <br>Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, US <br>Army (Washington), US Department of Defence, <br>Iraqbodycount.net, Citizens for Tax Justice, <br>Bureau of Economic Analysis (Washington), New York Times/<br>CBS News Poll (NYC), US Department of Commerce, <br>Cap Gemini Ernst & Young (NYC), Coalition <br>Provisional Authority (Baghdad), World Health <br>Organisation (Geneva), Office of Management and <br>Budget (Washington), Centre for Responsive <br>Politics (Washington), Bush-Cheney '04, Inc (Arlington, <br>Va), Election Systems & Software (Omaha), United States <br>Central Command (Tampa)<br><br>I<br>WAS<br>JUST<br>PASSING<br>INFORMATION<br>THAT<br>WAS<br>SENT<br>FROM<br>A FRIEND<br>OF<br>MINE<br><br>Who are you talking to? Read it, believe it, don't believe it, print it out and use it for you toilet roll– it does not matter to me– and have a fine day!<br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The ends do not justify the means. The reasons that we went into this war were simply fabrications and now people are trying to find the "good" in it all.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Really? Sadaam did not violate the UN mandates for 12 years? Yes, WMDs were PART of the justification, but not the whole story. And so far as the WMDs go, there was all sorts of intelligence from both the US and British sides (as well as a few others, if I recall), as well as Sadaam's consistent reluctance to allow inspections that would give any REASONABLE person strong suspicions that they were working on a WMD program. But again, WMDs are only part of the justification.<br><br>If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you would probably be right in susbpecting that it was a duck.<br><br>

Yes, I could turn around everything that you have listed, but then again, it would be arguments that you must have already heard.<br><br>What would you call a person that hands you 10$ out of nowhere? Seriously, what would you call that person?<br><br><br>Now, what would you call a person that hands you 10$ with one hand while taking your car keys and your wallet, and your job with the other? <br><br>_________________________________________<br>http://www.geocities.com/djstefan/bush.gif

Cherry, when I said I found your numbers interesting, I didn't mean that in a sarcastic way at all. I thought a lot of that was indeed interesting. Seriously. That's why I wrote RIGHT AFTER THAT SENTENCE:<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>And I don't doubt that most (if not all) of them are accurate.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Did you even bother to read the rest of that post? Or did you just see a sentence you thought you didn't like, and fly off the handle with a response?<br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Really?<p><hr></blockquote><p>Really.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Really.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Gee, that's quite an informative response, squareman.<br><br>But you conveniently didn't bother replying to my question about the 12 years of UN voilations, or the intelligence from mutilnational sourses about WMDs, and how that may or may not justify removing him from power.<br><br>