Please excuse typos I have not the time to check my post for them..

^Very logical and well thought out post, this is how you get your point across for serious disscusion. I appluad your ability to combine concious thought with just a hint of personel emotion. You make clear pooints, I respect that greatly.
(even for a lefty j/k)

IN response to the WMD portion of your post. I think I have made it clear that the UN resolution left open the opt for War based on many circumstances one of which the WMD's. The resolution it's self states any hesitation on the part of Iraq to comply, is grounds enough for an offensive. We as a nation, had been hit in our homeland, not by Iraq but by terrorist. We have prior knowledge of Iraq's WMD programs, plus the huge amount of non compliance on thier part to reopen her country for inspection. This equates to speculation, which equates to reasonable cause, which is just idiotic on the part of Saddam. He knew were we hit, and he knew we would be looking to protect ourself from even the most remote possibility of such an attack using non conventionla means. He should have imediatly opened his country up for inspection without hesitation. I know first had we have unearthed several violations of international sanctions and non compliance with the UN resolution drafted after the first gulf war. No jumping of the gun, Clinton was advised in the same manner as Bush, except Clinton decided to leave the problem to the next administration. Enough said, no jumping of the gun, it's more like why so late in the game. Either way that point was crushed...

Now about the results, no one said the conflict was resolved ever, the statment was that 'major conflict was over'. Once again a civilians misconception fueled by the radicle left and the media.
So another point decimated. I too hate to see our people being killed, I happen to work side by side with them in evey hostile arena they enter. I give them sight when they can't see and I give them targets they otherwise could not touch. One thing I know is that they are doing this for you and I. I respect their sacrifice and charecter. Removing a regime has never been as easy operation, but to do it as tactically as we have is unheard of. It's a major victory in the hearts and minds of those sworn to protect our freedom. Our death toll is a huge price to pay, one we are paying for daily, but in comparison to other campains we are doing what no ohter nation before us has been able to do without gross loss of life.
Once again with the circumstances and the fact that we are doing a job, that europe should be doing, again I think your point has been weakened. ( no beef, I really enjoy your debate)

We have captured or killed many of those infamous faces on the deck of cards, plus shut down the future Saddams. Sure Sadaam may have evaded us for now, as well as Osama, but that does not take away from the fact that we have him themon the run. While the las administration let them get away with murder. I can refer you to some good reading on the subject of Mr. Clinton allowing several most wanted to escape time and time again. I assure you this administration will not allow that to happen.

The distrust and resentment you mention is once again fueled by misconception and lack of awareness from the general population. It's not that the information is not out there in the public domain. It's more to do with how lazy we have become in this country, we rather be force feed our information than go to the trouble of searching it out ourself. Of course we would never suspect our papers and tv news to be less than accurate now would we?

The UN has proved itself useless and spinless in the face of international threats. It has become a utopia of liberal ideologies and world conformity. I do not stand for that, the majority of Americans who understand just how dangerous that is to our everyday life here in America, do not stand for that. Hence the overwhelming support for the War. Like I have mentioned Congress voted to wage war prior to any of the staements made by the President in that address. Now there is an election comming up, and guess what the left has changed face, a 180 degree turn around prior to the days leading up to the war.
Points nullified...

On another note, I can agree with you on the health care issue as you brought them up. Reform of current policy is great, but nationalized health care is not the answer here in America. I think you understand my reasoning behind that, since you parrelled my thoughts to a point. Lets skip that for now because I am currently writting an essay on this topic to be posted on the health care debate forum of a nationally syndicated talk show. Conflict of interest, since I am trying to push an agenda there.

I can also understand your preference to larger government in the sense of guiding a wayward state. I just do not believe governemnt should be in every aspect of our life. Social issues are not the sole function of governemnt, private sector and people need to make contributions in this area. I am against higher taxes, unlike you as a leftist. I would like to keep the money in the private sector, with big governemnt comes higher taxes and more government dollars to squander. Can you tell me why you call yourself a leftist? It is the agenda to the left, that is propelling our country into a socialist republic. Big government that has to regulate everyday life, from food to work, to health care, not only harms induviualism, but resemble's that of communisim. If you have ever opended a history book, you should know where that path leads, to total destruction of state. Look at how many socialist societies have crumbled to date. I care about the future of this country enough to look at the domino affect liberal socialism will have on my Daughters United Sates of America. I say my daughters because most of these issues will not be appearent to the general population until the near future. One which I amy or may not see. If I only cared about myself I would not be so passionate about this issue, or even allow myself to be blinded. I do care, about our children and thier right to grow up in a free nation, not one flung into socialisim. I do not expect everyone to understand my position or even care, but it one you should concern yourself with. When you look into the eye's of an innocent child and feel what I feel for my daughter you will understand. The left is on a crusade to destroy family values, which will destroy our country and it's founding principles.

Until next time, respectfully submitted by Bounce...

QUOTE]Originally posted by MR. LEGEND
Whatever, Bush is a the worse president so far in my lifetime. I mean we're supposed to getting better. The Economy was the best it ever was b 4 him. Everybody was working, they raised minimum wage twice, technology was advancing at a blazing speed (the internet was commercialized and made more main stream). And the only thing they could put on Clinton was when he got his dick sucked. Yet they always find a way to blame todays problems on yesterdays administration.

If you hired me to do a service for you, and I fuck up, I can't blame it on the last guy!!!!!I called being responsible...

You see middle to upper class America is kept blind, because they got money, and money MOVES shit. The lower class is shitted on and they don't care if we know, because we don't have any money to MOVE anything.

Then Bush get's in office, (by cheating first of all), and mysteriously 100's of thousand people get laid off. Planes crash into the trade center. Corporate crimes run rampant, and no one is prosecuting them. Then we not only go to war, but we don't find the people responsible for it or the Weapons which were the main reason we went in.

So now we look like Jack asses to the world especially the people who opposed the war.

Free? who do you trust? Bush himself said that he was misinformed by the CIA. So the info that your spittin NOW can be more bullshit.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 17 — President Bush said Wednesday that there was no evidence that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, disputing an impression that critics say the administration tried to foster to justify the war against Iraq. MSN.com today NEWS [/QUOTE]


Please excuse typos I have not the time to check my post for them..






so you blame Bush for 9/11, you blame bush for the cheating of rich ass CEOs who so desperetly sheated out thouseand of people, you blame bush for the lack of jobs, you blame bush for the economy drop, wo what a dumbass. Sure all this happened when bush came to office, but everyone loved him when 9/11 came around, you think gore would have done better, he said him self he would have stayed in camp david, safe. And you blame Bush for the actions of CEOs who only care about money, becuse of them ripping off the american people (im bettin 99% of all CEOs ripp off the employees so they get more $$, cuz thats al that matters) cuasing a bind, sure i see your point, but like bounce said look at both sides before you make decisions based on the media. Givin the emaple by opey, what the press says is usually BS, alll that matters to them is rateings, ratings bring money, and thats all they care about. For Iraq, sure you dissagree, i respect that, so does almost 48% of the population, but befor you go and make remarks, remember, you dont know 5% of whats really goin on, and that 5% is from the press...

^^You see we tried to keep this on an mature intellectual level. Everybody was respecting everybodies view. Every thing was cool, until ^THIS DICK BAG^, had to call me a dumbass. Welp..ahhhhhhhhh, I'm droppin out of the convo, cause this is turning into a "Tupac is alive"-ish debate. Cause in reality if you just look at how things are right now, things are bad. And thats period point blank. Who is responsible for the state of the union? President George W. Bush

You can type a thousand words, and you will still have some sort of EXCUSE for him.

*It was the last administrations fault
*They had to lie to the American public

Bounce be cool man, unlike America itself I respect your views and I will not condemn you for your beliefs. I do not see you as a threat, so I see no need to belittle you, nor destroy you....

Unlike The United States of America

Belittle me or destroy me? Now that is comedy, please I have no ill intent towards you, I just feel for your lack of awareness. I never said this country was in good shape, it has been going downward for a while now, even prior to that last presidential election. Bush is not my boy, and I do not protect him at all cost, I am only sheading light from a non biased standpoint. If Bush does something detremental to our nations secuirty or governemnt structure, you can be sure I'll be the first to stand against him. If this administration puts us in a more compramised world position that the last, I will slam him and his administration, you can be sure of that. I am not mindless or easily lead astray, I am aware and I do my very best to keep informed and current on all the issues. I am not mislead by the populist, or am I one to blindly follow orders. I base my political views on intense analysis, historical record, and normalazation of trends. I do have a good understanding of constitiutional and international law, as well as foriegn policy. I was a very young and eager actitivist who wanted to pursue a future in politics as teenager, but things changed for me. So believe me when I say, I do not have the slightest concern that you could belittle me or destroy me. From what I have read in your diluted and heavily influenced debate, you couldn't even touch me on a political platform. But you did make me laugh, so I'll give you that..

__________________
FUCKA BABYLON BANDIT!!!

i swore i wouldn't get involved in this....alas

The problem as I see it with the actions of the Bush Administration and the British is that they acted alone. Yes, other countries joined (were bought off), but it was manly an American/British war.

It doesn't matter if there were WMD's, terrorist, etc.etc. There are lot's of countries that qualify for these things (Korea). Saddam was the worst among many in a region where the US wanted to make a show of force and so he got taken out as an example to other leaders (dictators) in the surrounding countries.

Why did the Bush administration do this?

- To protect against terrorism? Maybe a little.
- To gain control of more Oil? Doesn't hurt to have more Oil.
- To test drive their new tanks? Hey, generals can only play defense for so long.

- To set a new precident in American foriegn policy that will allow the US to increase their Political/Economic/Military dominance in the world? Bingo.

The US did what they though was in their best interest. And maybe in the long term it will be. My own opinion is that countries shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they think is in their own best interest when it comes to international affairs without the consent of a UN majority. Why? Because every country does what is in their own best interest. Everyone.

So should we let Korea develope a nuclear program because they might need to destroy Japan sometime in the future? Should China be allowed to kick Taiwan's ass? etc. etc.

Frankly, I don't buy the 'We are the US and we are the most free nation in the world therefore we are the best and we know what's best for everyone esle so shut up if you don't like us' philosophy.

Sure the US is free, but if they are any more free than people in Canada, UK, France, Netherlands, Japan, etc. etc. then it is by fractions, and in no way gives you the moral superiority that is used to justify it's actions in many of these debates.

(Side note: In my opinion Americans who believe this look at other countries and think 'they don't have the NFL and Macdonads' and this translates into 'America is more free than they are'. Don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against American culture, in fact i am quite fond of it. However, lack of American culture does not equal lack of freedom. Sure you have the most magazines and newspapers, you have more money to pay for them all. But name a western country where freedom of speech is not allowed.)

The thing is, if you want to remove dictatorships then they should have said that's what they wanted to do. However, if they want to remove terrorism then you will have to work with the countries where terrorist ideolgy is breeded into youth (Saudi Arabia) and stop it at the source. Attacking Arab nations, even if it is for their own benefit, will only encourage terrorism.

The last point i'll make is that both Afganistan and Iraq are a mess. Instilling democratic structures into these countries will take decades because the majority of the people have to get used to placing there trust in the government and it's institutions for stability to occur. Historically democracy has usually only worked succesfully after a significant period of occupation by a nation (usually England or France) that forced these institutions into place.

If the US continues to occupy Iraq for the neccessary time required for democracy to take hold terrorism will grow tenfold. They are now realising this, and now they need the UN because it is seen as a neutral authority, and not the 'western devil'. (Well, not as much as the US). Which is why they should have taken the time to lay out the entire strategy and get everyone on board, instead of jumping the proverbial gun because they though the population is stupid and they could only get support while 9/11 was fresh on the collective conscience.

__________________
<B><font size=4 face="still time"><A href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/21stavenueproductions.htm">21st Ave Productions</A></font></b><font size=5> / </font><b><FONT face=gunplay size=4><a href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/knockoutzcru.htm">KnocKOuTz</a></FONT></SIZE></B>

<FONT face="bankgothic md bt" size=4> Exclusive Beats for Qualified MC's</FONT></SIZE>

^very good points, I just wanted to let you know this stated out as a national debate, but for some reason it grew to world affairs. Which is ok with me, but I am more concerned with the topic, which relates to our [the people], relationship with the gov't. Which keeps it's sheep blind so they may do their dirty deeds...

u people just don't get how much danger the US is really in.

__________________
<center><img src="http://www.rapbattles.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5068&stc=1"><p>Featuring Splivit Jams Artists: OpeY, Mystah Biggs, Chassis, July, Grimes<p>...and Pills the Doughboy, Kronik, Nimrod, Papi Stores, Young Cell, Skillz, Tony Ccino, Cin Laden, Cel Spit Fire, Clockwork <br>...Plus Many More...</center>

^ Bravo! You (phate) understand exactly why it is we approached the UN, instead of assuming it's because we are losing or scared or could not handle the heat in the kitchen so to speak.

I too thought the UN should have been involved, but as the UN wasted time, the elites in Iraq were making negotiations with sirria, not only for asylum but for more troops and pasasge. We knew this ahead of time, and the UN just sat by and allowed those elite to escape into other countires. So you tellme, does the President of the US, sit back and allow the UN time, meaning the leaders escape while thier look a likes pretend to be working with us? Hell no, GWB knew the american people or the world community was not going to stand for the escape of those in charge. He had to act accordingly. Remember the decapitation strike, that was a well planned and thought out tactic to end the War in one swift move, by killing the leaders only. If Bush was the evil war monger the liberal press has made him seem, why would he go to such troubles to end the conflict in one blow. Do you see now why most of the bashin in the media and on RB, is so in correct. I wish the UN had acted with us, for the very reasons you stated above. I now think the UN is a useless, spinless entity of the liberal left in this world. They wanted to get everyone to agree before taking action, sheep like! What good is the UN, if they are going to allow dictators like Sadaam to play them like fools. I am glad the president and prime, stood up to the UN and the world. It shows they believed in something more meaningful and significant than thier popularity and re-election. Now that is courages leadership at its best. How can you argue otherwise? Thier entire political career were put in jepordy due to world opinion, they stood their ground and did not falter. If it was greed or money or popularity they wanted, they would have never went to war under such conditions. They did what they felt was right for the people of thier counties and for the free world. Regardless if it cost them thier re-election or careers. Now that is what I consider a leader. Not some weak, fragile suit who only cares to get himself re-elected and futher his career. The more the liberal left speaks out the more they prove my points...

__________________
FUCKA BABYLON BANDIT!!!

hmm... isnt this the same plot as Starwars... very interesting huh...

__________________
<center><img src="http://www.rapbattles.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5068&stc=1"><p>Featuring Splivit Jams Artists: OpeY, Mystah Biggs, Chassis, July, Grimes<p>...and Pills the Doughboy, Kronik, Nimrod, Papi Stores, Young Cell, Skillz, Tony Ccino, Cin Laden, Cel Spit Fire, Clockwork <br>...Plus Many More...</center>

WTF? Satrwars does not deserve to be contaminated with what's going on today, at least they had Jedi, we only have Kofi Anan.

__________________
FUCKA BABYLON BANDIT!!!

i guess u didnt pay attention very well. u sed to read the books. the whole story reflects this situation almost perfectly.

__________________
<center><img src="http://www.rapbattles.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5068&stc=1"><p>Featuring Splivit Jams Artists: OpeY, Mystah Biggs, Chassis, July, Grimes<p>...and Pills the Doughboy, Kronik, Nimrod, Papi Stores, Young Cell, Skillz, Tony Ccino, Cin Laden, Cel Spit Fire, Clockwork <br>...Plus Many More...</center>

While I agree the UN needs drastic reform, I still wonder if the war in Iraq would be more succesful in the long term if they had been able to bring more people on board.

However, while I may disagree with how it was done, I must admit he did have the balls to do it. And while the execution of the plan was not perfect, well what plan can be, it was better than most. (Russia -> Afganistan).

My fear concerns the precident that has been set. Because while I trust the US/Britain to only go after military targets and to conduct an the occupation in a fairly just manner, I cannot say I have the same trust in other nations who may use the example set by the US/Britain to pursue similar foriegn policies of their own.

For example: Isreal is considering taking out Arafat. I don't want to get into an Isreal - Palestine debate here, but I just wanted to make the point that this might not even be in the realm of possible actions had the US/Britain gone through the UN.

I hope that the Iraqi people can settle their internal differences and justify the efforts of the coalittion. However, not every situation can be resolve through force because if the people are not up to the challenge of reform (Somalia - 'Black Hawk Down') then 5 years down the road Iraq may have become another theocricy like Iran, and all the efforts which have been made will have done nothing but enflame those segments of the Arab world who wish to see harm done to the west.

__________________
<B><font size=4 face="still time"><A href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/21stavenueproductions.htm">21st Ave Productions</A></font></b><font size=5> / </font><b><FONT face=gunplay size=4><a href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/knockoutzcru.htm">KnocKOuTz</a></FONT></SIZE></B>

<FONT face="bankgothic md bt" size=4> Exclusive Beats for Qualified MC's</FONT></SIZE>

starwars lol...




germany would make a good Jaba the Hut.

__________________
<B><font size=4 face="still time"><A href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/21stavenueproductions.htm">21st Ave Productions</A></font></b><font size=5> / </font><b><FONT face=gunplay size=4><a href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/knockoutzcru.htm">KnocKOuTz</a></FONT></SIZE></B>

<FONT face="bankgothic md bt" size=4> Exclusive Beats for Qualified MC's</FONT></SIZE>

@ phate

I admire your ability to look at the situation in that respect. You are so right about other nations adopting the same policy, that has always been a concern of my own. We can only hope the UN, has the intellectual capacity to see the same issue. It's up to them to change thier policy and be more active, until the offensive in Iraq, they were benign in nature, maybe now they will show thier grit. It's the only way to ensure our concerns are addressed head on. Ihave good feeling the UN, will see things in a new light, after the Bombing of thier facilty in Iraq. Prior to that, they felt as if the world did not see them as a threat. In the Arab world freedom is a threat, the UN was in Iraq promoting freedom, not occupation. Thier eye's have been opened for the first time in a long while. It's not the occupation the Arab world is fearing, it's the freedom. With freedom comes education and equlaity, that is very worriesome for some Arab leaders. I will leave it at that, please read into what I mean...

__________________
FUCKA BABYLON BANDIT!!!