FREE RAMOS and CAMPEON!!

Ummm, no. It’s not personal. It’s actually about what has happened to all of us over the last eight years. Admittedly I had some good years with my business, but all in all it’s about 50/50. Not sustainable. For me it’s all really about economics, which is about to become a deep dark hole according to many financial experts. I could give a rat’s ass about whether or not these guys are prosecuted. Personally, I don’t think that it would be good for the public’s morale given the current economic situation. Let them fade away. If you want to know how I feel about prosecution, read my 1st Nov 13th post above. And yes, Obama won. He’s got a shitload of work to do and a high likelihood of failure. That works in your favor politically. He was also not my first choice, so I don’t have a lot of personal feelings vested in his presidency. I just hope things improve economically. If his ideas make this happen, great. If they don’t, I’ll be first in line at the ballot box in Nov. 2012 to cast him out of office. That’s the beauty of being independent – I don’t feel compelled to tow either party’s line.

The Saudi Royal Family has been “friends” with the US for some time, not just the Bush’s. There is no doubt that there are other bad people, leaders, governments, etc around the world. Iraq was special, not because of its oil, but because of its location. Iraq has been a destabilizing force in the Middle East for quite some time, no one denies that. The 9/11 connection was not the reason for invasion, the presence of WMDs was. As it turns out, there was yellow cake uranium in Iraq, but reality has not been able to overcome the perception. Just like no amount of yelling “Iraq was not responsible for 9/11,” will convince some of the reality.

As for Afghanistan, we are still there, we are still trying to do the right thing. Will we be successful? Time will tell. I am not sure there is a closer relationship between al Qaeda and the Taliban now than there was prior to 9/11, but I am not sure that it makes any difference. They are both enemies of democracy that want to oppress the people of Afghanistan, all the while celebrating their strong religious beliefs by growing and exporting drugs. Whatever.

We shall see what is most important to BO in regard to National Security. Like you said, be careful what you wish for…

No worries. I was just giving you a hard time.

Furthermore, Bush NEVER said Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks, only that Iraq was a State Sponsor of Terror. Which, they were.

Pointing out the terrorist training facility at Salman Pak and pointing out that Saddam Hussein Al-Tikriti (as opposed to Barack Hussein Obama) had meetings with Osama Bin Laden is not suggesting that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.

Any suggestion that the above means Bush was blaming Iraq for 9/11 is an illogical inference.

But I will give you some credit – at least you didn’t call it a war for Oil.

As I recall, the main reasons for going into Iraq were that Hussein and his regime posed an immediate threat to our security, and that Iraq had something to do with 9-11. These were the overarching justifications for invasion. Chemical weapons alone are not a justification, especially since Hussein had no delivery system to get them to the US, therefore they were not an immediate threat. As for the 9-11 connection, well, you know where that whole theory went. We’ll conveniently leave out the fact that most of the hijackers were Saudis, “allies” of the US whose leader is a good friend to the house of Bush. So yes, they lied. They later ammended their argument for invasion several times. Was Hussein a nice guy (maybe we should ask Rummy – they were pals in the late 80’s)? No, but neither are any number of other dictators in the world that we seem to ignore (or prop up -remember Pol Pot?). As to the payouts to Palestinian bombers, it’s a separate issue and has nothing to do with Bush’s main justification for invasion. Should it have been stopped? Clearly yes, but I doubt that it would have taken a full blown invasion to accomplish.

Clinton and Kerry effectively put the nails in their own coffins by voting for this mess, and now we have BO for president because of it. Kerry was a schmuck anyway, but I could have lived with Clinton. I would have prefered her over BO any day of the week, but the far left got ahold of her and beat her down almost as bad as the right did for the last 16 years (be careful what you wish for).

Thanks for the clarificaton on the definition of “lie”. I’m learning so much here…

The fact that the intelligence was wrong about the number of WMD’s in Iraq is not a lie.

Furthermore, using truthful statements, I can lie to you. I call this the Michael Moore method:

I want to convince you that I own a small dog.

I can invite you to my house, and I can show you a dish of food on the floor next to a dish of water. I can show you white hair on a couch, and in a small grooming brush. I could also show you a small bottle of flea shampoo.

By then, you would probably believe I have a dog. However, despite the 100% truth of the above facts, I would have lied to you.

I own a cat.

Bush acting on intelligence that was wrong is not a lie; there was no intent to deceive. If there was an intent to deceive, then every member of Congress who voted to use military force in Iraq also deceived, and that includes John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.

Don’t forget that aside from the WMD issue, there were 13 other UN Resolutions that Iraq was breaking. Did you forget about the $25,000 payouts to families of Palestinian suicide bombers, or are you intellectually dishonest and willfully ignorant?