Is Bush's Terror War to protect America....

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

aspen1964

New member
I need to clarify what I said originally since many don't read further than the first line(headline viewers)...my doubts about Bush is that I wonder, because of his position on vital problems facing our nation..is that he wants to knock down terrorism to insure that a global corporate can be established..not because he wants our nation to retain it's TRUE sovergnity and independence as the United States of America....he supports other policies that I can only see as weakening the U.S.A.'s identity and that worries me to say the least...NO I don't trust his motives...they are too much in conflict with each other...I especially remember watching his face and listening to his half-hearted words answering questions during Presidential debates on the border issue and the retaining of American industry in America...there was no sincereity in his words and I remember my anxiety when I noticed this in his answers(lies & deception)...I'm a conservative through and through...there is something alarmingly wrong and deceptive about Bush's motives....he ignores the widening cracks within our nation...WHY?
 
Last edited:
Looks to me like he's using it as an excuse to consolidate authority at the Federal level. Well...not him, but his advisors. The groundwork that's being laid today (warrantless searches and wiretaps, secret prisons, etc) will still be there after he's gone.
 
The problem for you "Bush consolidating power" theorists is that there really IS a terror war. Whatever people may believe about "weapons of mass destruction", there absolutely ARE a LOT of Muslims trying to blow up and kill Americans and any non-Muslim people all over the world.
Or are people trying to say that all these bombings and foiled plots are made up by Bush?

During WWII, there were many privacy and Constitutional "violations" going on, not the least of which was the imprisonment of American Japanese until after the war was over.
It could be argued that, during that time, the government was "consolidating power" for later on. But gee whiz, lo and behold, the war ended and all of a sudden, the Japanese went back to their homes and life carried on.

What scares me is WHO is going to be in charge when the terrorist threats diminish. It's the Democrats (Socialists) who have a HISTORY of violating people's rights in ways much more sinister than any Republican ever did.
So if someone is going to be in charge of "consolidating power", I would definitely prefer it be by those who have not historically desired to do so during peace time, and I would MOST definitely prefer that it be Republicans who are in charge during the standing-down time in order to roll back these "violations" that some people seem to be so concerned about.

If you're not an extremist Muslim making phone calls to your buddies overseas, you don't have much to worry about. If you are, then I very much hope you are worried, and I'm counting on this administration to make sure they do what they can to stop you before you can hurt someone.

Carter
 
Read "A Pretext For War" by James Bamford. You'll find that it has nothing to do with commerce or terrorism.:mad:
 
I watched his speech on the secret camps and counterterrorism yesterday.I must admit, I was impressed, however at the same time I couldnt help wondering what the latest trick is going to be.


I have nothing to hide but no,that doesnt mean I find a warrantless search of my home,property,my person and private data acceptable. it doesnt excuse warrantless searches and secret wire taps on everyone while letting potential terrorist threats in the backdoor because of the wealth some of them bring to big business.Sorry,it just doesnt work that way for non sheeple.That policy is totally unacceptable.
 
Great post CDH. And great speech by Bush.

Yep - despite the very real terrorist attacks which have been on-going around the world - committed by very real terrorists, there are way too many that think the whole battle is some conspiracy perpetrated by our gov't.

Despite the Iranians and Syrians claiming we should all convert or die, despite the clerics saying Islam must rule the world, despite every radical with a deathwish declaring Fatwahs and jihads on the West, despite thousands and thousands of very real innocent people being murdered by Moslim extremists - it has to all be some grand plan by Bush to control us and grab more power. And Hitler was an FDR stooge set up in Germany to murder Jews so WE could start a war to kill 22 million people. And Lenin and Stalin were propped up by the US (after we caused the 1917 revolution) because we LOVED them killing 10 million of thir own people, AND we enjoyed the idea of having Communism to fight across the globe for the next 70 years. Gee - THAT'S what let us build the massive empire we have now! (pssst...Reagan wasn't in on it, so he won the Cold War instead. So it was up to 1st Clinton who obviously liked the power and so did nothing to fight it, and now Bush to need terrorism as an excuse).
And be careful - Gore is using "Global Warming" to prop up HIS power grab! (actually this last one IS true)

People are nuts. Dumb ass liberals.
 
I watched his speech on the secret camps and counterterrorism yesterday.I must admit, I was impressed, however at the same time I couldnt help wondering what the latest trick is going to be.
Click to expand...
But of course his biggest fans - the ones that cried foul when people dared to suggest that there really ARE secret prisons and warrantless wiretaps - are being nice and quiet. Or they're backpedaling and changing their tune to say it's all acceptable "in time of war".
 
His supporters didn't cry foul that there WERE secret camps, but that the secret was leaked - same with the wire taps...Many are glad to KNOW we were listening in on the terrorists AND interogating them with some worthwhile tactics. Just didn't think the enemy needed to know. And now the real success of those programs is available to all.

Hmmm...come to think of it, they did however spout a little when they found out Clinton with HIS warrantless program Echelon had done the same exact thing.
 
Well a number of people here claimed that the idea of secret camps was just abhorrent and that our just and honorable President would never approve such a thing. That being said, to think that any nation claiming to be working toward spreading the ideas of "freedom" is justified in keeping things like this a secret is mind-boggling. The enemy already knows more than we do; I doubt this press release was a surprise to them.

I just find it sad that wiretapping citizens, secret camps and borderline torture are acceptable just because "we're at war".

Oh and Echelon was not created by Clinton.
 
The problem with the "War on Terror" is the fact that it has no end in sight. So how long must a government withold or violate constitutional rights without having to provide accountability to its citizens? How long can they say that Congress or the Courts have no authority?

The FISA courts were set up for this situation, but President Bush says its not feasible to use them in the war on terror. Who is watching the administration to make sure citizen's rights are not violated? This administration feels it is not accountable to judicial branch, congressional branch nor its citizens. I dont know about you folks on the boards but that thought scares the heck out of me.

This administration has no accountability to its citizens. It is bad precedent for adminstrations in the future with the potential for abuse of citizens rights.

Usually heads of government who feel they have no accountability to the other branches of government or to citizens are called dictators.
 
"I have nothing to hide but no,that doesnt mean I find a warrantless search of my home,property,my person and private data acceptable. it doesnt excuse warrantless searches and secret wire taps on everyone while letting potential terrorist threats in the backdoor because of the wealth some of them bring to big business.Sorry,it just doesnt work that way for non sheeple.That policy is totally unacceptable." quote, gdm


Unfortunately, gdm, per your post, you don't have a clue what the government's policies are on the very subjects about which you complain. Do a little more research!
 
"there are way too many that think the whole battle is some conspiracy perpetrated by our gov't."

It gives them something to do when they aren't looking for UFO's. :eek:
 
con·spir·a·cy (k?n-spîr'?-s?)
n., pl. -cies.
1.An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2.A group of conspirators.
3.Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4.A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

Fits the definition of conspiracy to me...

By design or by stupidity the result is the same, a larger more intrusive .gov.
How anyone could be for that is beyond me...
 
Like I said, some people are nuts. I see I forgot to mention how it was the CIA and GW who blew up the Trade Center towers, attacked the Pentagon, blew up the Kobul Towers, attacked the Cole, blew up the Marine barracks, hit the subways in England, the trains in Spain, planted the bombs in India and all those discos our serviceman loved, and led the hi-jacking of the Achille Lauro. They also shot from the grassy knoll AND caused Katrina. Damn it - that bastard probably fired the riockets from Lebanon - NOT Hezbullah! Hmmm...

And people think GW takes too many vacations - he's just busy elsewhere!(sssh!) Isn't it obvious he has been planning this for decades? Just wait till he is SUPPOSED to step down in 2008/9! ;) I think Laura's pet name for him is Dr. Evil - ya know... "the world is mine, the world is mine!"
 
There has never been, and never will be, a viable way to wage "war" on "terror".

War is something one country wages against another country, as a result of diplomatic solutions to conflicts failing. War ends when both warring nations agree to stop fighting, and resume diplomatic efforts to resolve differences.

Yes, there are "terrorists", and yes, there IS a "terrorist threat". There are evil people in the world who do evil things. When does this terrorist threat end? Do we negotiate with the terrorists for their surrender? I think not. Do we wage war on every nation that has terrorists living within it's borders? We would have to invade all of Europe, most of Africa and Asia, and many parts of South and Central America. Not to mention all the Pacific Islands.

So when does the terrorist threat end? When all the terrorists are dead? I think the Imams would have no problem creating more, since the madras' are the only schools most of the Muslim children know, and the Imams are their only sources of information. Some are of the opinion that we should wage war against the entire Muslim religion, since most of our attackers are Muslims. Would it be ethical for America to promote genocide of every Muslim in the world? I think not. We're the good guys. We just don't do things like that.

So... how far has this "war on terror" gotten us? Are we safer now? Are our borders more secure? Are the cargo containers being searched? I think not.

Instead of waging an imaginary war on terror, losing real lives, and spending real money, we should be waging a real war, against real terrorists. We should have never invaded a country that had NO terrorist training camps (and actually had as many differences with the hard-core religious fanatics as we have). Now that we have, we should be moving with all haste to extricate ourselves from out position as inefficient nation-builders, as safely as possible. We should redouble our efforts to find the real terrorists, while NOT treating our Constitution as "just another damned paper".

I, for one, wouldn't mind spending the billions we've pissed away in Iraq, if it actually made us safer. I don't even care if every company earning those billions is hand-picked by Bush himself, with no competitive bidding whatsoever... as long as the end result makes for safer Americans.

My opinion, though, is that our efforts are primarily aimed at transferring hard-earned tax money from our Treasury to those non-bidding corporations that consistently thumb their noses at contracted duties, put our soldiers at risk, and avoid paying their own taxes through Caymen Island shell corporations. As such, I deem Bush's "War on Terror" an abject failure for all Americans.

But hey.... what do I know?
 
Whoever is in the White House following George Bush in 2009 will be confronted by the same exact situation that the current occupant faces. And guess what? The result will be the same. The policies will be the same. All those lefty-liberal blame-bush fanatics will blame the new occupant for all the world's ills, just like they blame the current occupant.

What will happen though is in due time, given a longish dose of reality, these liberal lefty blame-bush fanatics will begin to understand that terrorism is the fault of terrorists and illegal immigrants are the fault of illegal immigrants. That fact will be known then, though it is totally beyond them now.
 
Good post CT - except for a fact or 2.

"THE FORMER IRAQI REGIME OF Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq. The existence and character of these documents has been confirmed to THE WEEKLY STANDARD by eleven U.S. government officials.

The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing."


***************************

"Former Iraqi military officers have described a highly secret terrorist training facility at Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations. "
 
Awesome point shield, just one thing. How many of those dreaded 'iraqi terrorists' were a threat to us? During the runup to war, we heard many many explanations of why we needed boots on the ground in Iraq. That was NOT one of them.

Oh, and you forgot to attribute the bombing of the golden mosque in iraq to bush too, to start the civil war we're seeing right now.

I hope a 'Dumb Ass' liberal knocks up your children one day...would serve you right.
 
Thanks. Not sure which of those 1000s were threats to us, or 'just' threats to..oh say Israel - sure as hell bet they weren't training for the excercise. And "countries who support or harbor terrosists" was DEFINELTY in the reasons given for going to war. You have to remember all the talk about Saddam harboring a terrorist from the 1st Tower strike, and about him giving money to Hamas / Palistinian terrorists etc.?


"On October 10, 2002 the 107th Congress of the United States passed HJ Res 114 titled "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002." Among the reasons noted in the Congressional resolution authorizing force were, Iraq's non-compliance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441,[35] aid to terrorists (PALF),[36][37] a 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush (George W. Bush's father)[38] and the Emir of Kuwait, in addition to violations of the no-fly zones.[39]"
"On February 5, 2003 Colin Powell attempted to convince the UN Security Council of the threat Saddam Hussein's regime posed.[42] The Bush administration also claimed that Iraq had ties to al Qaeda and other terrorists organizations, including the Palestinian Arab Liberation Front (PALF), HAMAS, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah."

And this this from the actual resolution...

"Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq; Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens; "



Naa - won't happen - she saw what happened to a cousin who got pregnant looong before she was ready (don't know if he was a liberal though)...nothing like a real life example to scare the crap out of you!...promiscuity isn't in her nature. (Plus anyone sniffing around will KNOW Daddy's armed :)). Now my other child is a boy - That would REALLY suck if he got knocked up - by anyone!

Do have liberal in-laws though - would that help?
 
Oh, and in case someone again brings up the myth that Iraq had no ties to Al Qaeda, there is this little fact...


4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting--the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house."

and this gem..

"Abu Hajer, now in a New York prison, was described in court proceedings related to the August 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania as bin Laden's "best friend." According to CIA reporting dating back to the Clinton administration, bin Laden trusted him to serve as a liaison with Saddam's regime and tasked him with procurement of weapons of mass destruction for al Qaeda"


No threat to see here, move along move along...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top