How high will it go ..... because 'Bush Lied'?

Aaron wrote:I was saying this last year Sam when you couldn't come up with an adequate reason for continuing nation building missions in Iraq and Afghanistan and the price of gas was ~$2.40 a gallon.

Aaron, it is not my fault that you are so dense, inerexperienced and opinionated that you couldn't or wouldn't comprehend what I've been telling you and others on this Form for several years now ....... and you still don't understand it even after it happened just as I told you it would.

You are "hung up" on that "nation building crapolla" thingy ....... and that's all you can think about.

How in hell can you possibly be calling it "nation building" ...... when one destroys the "power structure" in a country ......... and then almost immediately turns control back over to basically the same ones they took control away from?

You're still saying nothing Sam. If your so smart, explain again why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If you can.

Do you prefer regime toppling?

Stephanie wrote:Do you prefer regime toppling?

I don't think that adequately describes the occupation of said country that Sam so dearly loves.

What else do you have?

I don't know, he doesn't like the term nation building. I'm just trying to be helpful but we've got a field trip and I've gtg. Later, gents.

I think it has to do with the fact that he, like Cato, somehow thinks the US is entitled to other nations natural resources because we've become accoustomed to them.

So tell us Sam, do you have a term you prefer for the actions of our government since you don't like nation building?

Aaron wrote:You're still saying nothing Sam. If your so smart, explain again why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If you can.

Aaron, why are you even bothering to ask?

You know damn well that once you decide "what's what" about any topic or issue and post your thoughts on said ............. you could literally give a shit less what anyone else thinks or has to say on said topic or issue.

In reality, it is only clueless Religious believers, wackos and/or their Leaders that want to engage in "nation building" and they don't attempt it by sending in a Military Force but by sending in Preachers, Ministers and Missionaries, ....... like they have been doing for hundreds of years. And that's because, if they are successful, it gives them control of the hearts n' minds of the populace without them having to do anything else except to ........ bleed them of their personal resources.

Aaron, here are 249 names on a list of the currently recognized 194 independent sovereign states (nations) in the world, plus about 60 dependent areas, and 5 disputed territories.

Now Aaron, in that you think you are smarter than anyone else that posts to this Forum, ....... please tell us, ........ your learned reason(s) why the US Government chose only Iraq and Afghanistan out of that list of 249 named countries to execute your per say "nation building" exercise.

Was not Palestine, Cuba, Zimbabwe or a few of the other listed "sovereign states" more in need of help in "building their nation" than was Iraq and Afghanistan?

.

I'm so glad you're asking Aaron, Sam. I got nothin'.

I'm not the one that supports our nation building efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan Sam. That would be you so why don't you explain why we are there. After all, I've only been asking and you've only been running for about a year now. Is there ever going to be a time when you simply cut the bullshit and give us an honest answers?

Why are we there?

Aaron wrote:I'm not the one that supports our nation building efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan Sam. That would be you so why don't you explain why we are there. ?

Aaron, ..... you are the one ...... that has been and still is ......
claiming that it has been a "nation building efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan",
......... not me.

Therefore, it is a disengenuous, dastardly, devious and dishonest act on your part to be constantly badmouthing and/or criticizing me for not explaining, defining and/or elaborating on something that you dreamed up or are cluelessly mimicing.

Aaron wrote:After all, I've only been asking and you've only been running for about a year now. Is there ever going to be a time when you simply cut the bullshit and give us an honest answers?

Aaron, in that it has been you that has been dishing out the bullshit about "nation building" for the past few years, ........ not me, ...... how would it be humanly possible for me to provide "an honest answer" as to why in hell you ..... do what you do?

The best I am capable of doing is to offer "an honest opinion" as to what might be or probably is ....... the "reasons" or "answers" that you do ...... what you do, ........ but you adamently discredit every one of them everytime I do said.

Aaron wrote:Why are we there?

Aaron, I have expressed my learned opinion, ..... dozens of times, ....... as to what I think and truly believe is the "real reason" for the US's decision to invade Iraq and depose Saddam ....... but due to the fact that my "reason" was/is directly contrary to what you have convinced yourself to believe, profess and/or claim ....... you have completely averted your eyes, your mind and/or your comments from addressing the "reason" I stated.

Which doesn't surprise me any ......... because iffen you did address the "real reason" for the US's decision to invade Iraq .......... then you would have to admit that you were ....... absolutely wrong about that "nation building crapolla" .......... and you are not about to admit to anyone that you are/were wrong about anythiing.

Aaron, get a clue, ....... educate yourself, ....... read what "nation building" actually consists of, ..... to wit:

On V-J Day, United States President Harry Truman appointed General Douglas MacArthur as Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers (SCAP), to supervise the occupation of Japan.

The document set two main objectives for the occupation: (1) eliminating Japan's war potential and (2) turning Japan into a western style nation with pro-American orientation. Allied (primarily American) forces were set up to supervise the country, and "for eighty months following its surrender in 1945, Japan was at the mercy of an army of occupation, its people subject to foreign military control." At the head of the Occupation administration was General MacArthur who was technically supposed to defer to an advisory council set up by the Allied powers, but in practice did everything himself. As a result, this period was one of significant American influence, having been already identified in 1951, that "for six years the United States has had a freer hand to experiment with Japan than any other country in Asia, or indeed in the entire world."

Democratization
In 1946, the Diet ratified a new Constitution of Japan that followed closely a 'model copy' prepared by the GHQ/SCAP (namely the organization headed by Gen. MacArthur that was responsible for conducting the Occupation), and was promulgated as an amendment to the old Prussian-style Meiji Constitution. "The political project drew much of its inspiration from the US Bill of Rights, New Deal social legislation, the liberal constitutions of several European states and even the Soviet Union...

(It) transferred sovereignty from the Emperor to the people in an attempt to depoliticize the Throne and reduce it to the status of a state symbol. Included in the revised charter was the famous 'no war', 'no arms' Article Nine, which outlawed belligerency as an instrument of state policy and the maintenance of a standing army.

The 1947 Constitution also enfranchised women, guaranteed fundamental human rights, strengthened the powers of Parliament and the Cabinet, and decentralized the police and local government." On December 15, 1945 the Shinto Directive was issued abolishing Shinto as a state religion and prohibiting some of its teachings and rites that were deemed to be militaristic or ultra-nationalistic. On April 10, 1946, an election that saw 78.52% voter turnout among men and 66.97% among women[21] gave Japan its first modern prime minister, Shigeru Yoshida.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Japan

Of, first Sam, I didn't read your rant. There's no reason to bother. All I need is a few sentances to see you've got your panties pulled way too tight and are going to try to divert the conversation because you don't have answers.

For the record, there are two very simple questions. The first, ask by not only me but Stephanie as well is if it's not nation building, what is it and the 2nd is, why do you support whatever it is you call it?

Neither are hard but you've been ducking and running for more then a year now even though you say you've answered it "dozen's of times." I haven't seen one answer so why don't you man up and answer them, even if you are (as you falsely claim) repeating yourself?

Aaron wrote:Of, first Sam, I didn't read your rant. There's no reason to bother.

...... even though you say you've answered it "dozen's of times."

Interesting, mighty interesting.

So, you claim "you didn't read my rant" .......... but then you quote part of "a statement from my rant".

You are absolutely amazing, Aaron, ........ a mind reader of great renown, no less.

And, spite of pride, in erring reason's spite,

One truth is clear, whatever is, is right.
Alexander Pope

Amazing Sam, simply amazing.

Once again you ducked both questions.

What do you call our mission in Iraq and Afghanistan and why are we there?

Aaron, put your dog in the chair at your PC, ...... I might have better luck conversing with him.

No, he wants you to man up and answer the questions as well. In fact, you probably wouldn't like the word he used for those who duck and run as much as you do. I thought he was talking about his mother but he informed me he was using the word in a general manner.

They are not hard questions Sam and you've said you've answered them dozens of times so why not man up and answer them one more time? Don't you have it in you?

Here you go Sam, maybe this will help you out.

Top 10 Pros and Cons
Should the US have attacked Iraq?


The PRO and CON statements below give a five minute introduction to the debate on the US-Iraq war.

1.Iraq as a Threat to the United States
2.Possible Ties Between Iraq, al-Qaeda, and 9/11
3.Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction
4.United Nations Resolutions Violations
5.Safety of the United States
6.Possibility for Democracy in Iraq
7.Oil as a Reason for Invading Iraq
8.Human Rights Concerns in Iraq
9.Legality of Preemeptive Warfare
10.Available Intelligence

The debates are listed at the source below. Why don't you see if you can pick out one of these reasons as you clearly don't have one of your own.


source

Neither are hard but you've been ducking and running for more then a year now even though you say you've answered it "dozen's of times."

He prolly learned that from Arch Moore.

He prolly learned that from Arch Moore.

I do not doubt that Arch Moore could be elected today.

ziggy wrote:

Neither are hard but you've been ducking and running for more then a year now even though you say you've answered it "dozen's of times."

He prolly learned that from Arch Moore.

I don't know about Moore but he's starting to remind me of another weaslewording distorter of the truth with his inability to answer a simple question.

NEW YORK — Gasoline prices in the United States posted their second-biggest increase ever in a two-week period, due to the rise in crude oil prices stemming from the turmoil in Libya, an industry analyst said Sunday.

The national average for a gallon of self-serve, regular gas was $3.50 on March 4, according to the Lundberg Survey of about 2,500 gas stations, up 32.7 cents from the previous survey on Feb. 18.

Traders are also responding to the "fear factor" caused by continuing turmoil in 15 countries in the Middle East and Africa, several of which are important oil producers, she said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41938193/ns/business-oil_and_energy/

Tell me it ain't so that ..........

It t’was back in 2002 when a few visionaries realized there was a highly probable "fear factor" amassing in the Middle Eastern Muslim dominant countries that would pose a terrible and gawd awful “threat” to the economic stability of the Western World iffen it was not “nipped in the bud” and/or if infrastructure was not “in place” to better deal with said “threat” at a moment’s notice.

And said visionaries also realized that the general populace of the Western World are not visionaries, but “spur-of-the-moment” thinkers, and thus are actually unconcerned and could really give a shit less about any potential or real problems, risks or threats that are highly likely to become reality, next month, next year or 5 years from now.

This “mindset” is the result of the fact that the general populace is no longer being nurtured to “plan for one’s future”, but on the contrary, being taught to react and respond to “brushfires”, ..... either real or imagined ones, ........ and to get what they can or want today and to hell with next year or 5 years from now.

Thus, to convince the general populace to support any plans for “nipping” the potential Middle Eastern problem “in the bud”, said visionaries had to convince the general populace that there was a “brushfire” burning in Iraq that needed their immediate attention. And they did, and the general populace jumped on the “fire brigade” and Operation Iraqi Freedom began on March 20, 2003.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was progressing pretty much as planned ……. but then started to “go-to-hell-in-handbasket” pretty quick like when the “Bush Hating” and partisan Democrats started doing everything they could to discredit Bush and prevent a “landslide” election for his 2nd term as POTUS.

Thus, the “Bush Hating” and partisan Democrats created a more urgent “brushfire” to captivate the general populace’s attention. This resulted in the embolden of every radical Imam, every Leader of every “Hate-the-Infidels” Muslim terrorist and partisan group and most every Muslim dominated country …… to side with, support and further enhance Muslim domination, the results of which are evidenced by the current turmoil in 15 countries in the Middle East and Africa.

And Bush still won his 2nd term as POTUS.

Oh, my, my, ....... it seems great minds think alike, ........ my above post, to wit:

SamCogar wrote:This “mindset” is the result of the fact that the general populace is no longer being nurtured to “plan for one’s future”, but on the contrary, ................ to get what they can or want today and to hell with next year or 5 years from now.

To wit, Keli's post:

I contend that our nation's "health care crisis" is not the result of a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. Rather, it is the result of a "crisis of culture", a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on luxuries and vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance. It is a culture based in irresponsible credo that "I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me".

https://gazzfriends.forumotion.com/t5415-open-diagnosis

So who are these visionaries and by what right did they have to lie to the American public? In fact, why lie at all? Why not simply state that the invasion was about Middle Eastern stability and the free flow of oil (number 7 on the list by the way) and how vital it is to the American way of comfort?

I am curious though, as you brought up planning for the future, why doesn't raising CAFE standards, conserving energy and utilizing our own resources not fit into that concept. Why do we have to invade and occupy a foreign, sovereign country to plan for the future ?

Is that the only way visionaries could think of to meet our future energy needs? If they are so smart, why did they not foresee the actions of "Bush Haters and Democrats" and plan accordingly?

I realize that's a lot of questions Sam but given that you have a penchant to not answre, I figure if I ask them all now, I might get an answer in a month or 12.

Why not simply state that the invasion was about Middle Eastern stability and the free flow of oil (number 7 on the list by the way) and how vital it is to the American way of comfort?

Well "DUH", ...... would you have believed them ..... and agreed .... it was a necessary action?

HELL NO, ...... you are a “brushfire” fighter n' beater n' thumper......... and can't be diswayed from changing your mind on what should have been done yesterday, last month or last year.

If one is considering plans for the future, .... constantly reviewing and "looking at dead horses asses" ....... will not get you down the road very far into the future.

If they are so smart, why did they not foresee the actions of "Bush Haters and Democrats" and plan accordingly?

"DUH", ...... they did, ........ and Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched.

But then you “brushfire” fighter n' beater n' thumper got to listening to n' looking at all the "dead horses asses" ......... and popped up out of the "woodwork" and beat them to a pulp.

And continue to do it any time the subject is broached.

Just re-read your writing/postings ...... and then tell me it ain't so.

No Sam, once again (it seems to be a theme lately) you are wrong. I've known all along it was about oil for you. I just wanted you to say it once again.

But you failed to answer some pretty relevant questions though. First and foremost, who these visionaries?

And what gives them the right to lie to the American public?

Do you not have the answers to these questions or is it that you don't have to the courage to post the answers?