Bush Haters Association - Argue Page

[Xirath]: Weedy: The weapons inspectors where allowed in iraq, however they where not allowed to search just anywhere they wanted. Saddam told them when and where they can search. As far as not supported by the UN, that is because many nations of the UN (including france) was profiting on the oil for food program in which iraq would trade oil for food, however iraq wasn't actually getting food they where getting all sorts of things, including munitions.

[Weedy]: Xirath<< wrong... after 911 and a resulution from the UN which said that an attack was allowed unless the weapon inspectors could search even saddamn palaces unannounced saddam let the inspectores do that..... and yes iraq got some amunition from france but that was without the knowlege of the french goverment....

[Xirath]: Just so you know that I haven't gone away, I'm looking up some references on the last UN resolution which I believe Saddam denied, but don't take my word for it let me find the references.

[littlechichibean]: Xirath<< I'm going to go back to your question of why we hate bush. I personally don't like him because he puts on an act on tv (which what didn't but none the less) I believe he is a bit ignorant, as is the democratic candidate this year. I also didn't like his dad and of course he's going to be like his father because that's the home he grew up in, but of course my main reason is the war, i personally believe it was unnesscessary. I would also like to thank you for treating us as human beings.

[littlechichibean]: i shall be right back i'm doing some research

[Balthizar]: your welcome..i think(not sure if your being sarcastic or not) i respect your opion

[littlechichibean]: The United States was using the rhetoric of fear and ignorance to jusify it's attack on Iraq instead of truth and fact. Even though it had no substantial evidence to support its allegations that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction or supported terrorism. Iraq had legitimate reasons for not like the US inspectors after previous teams had been used by the US and UK intelligence services to gather information on Iraq outside its mandate. There is no basis under international law for a nation to go to war under speculation alone. 3 weeks after the fall of baghdad, with may I mention Iraqi scientists and officials in custody, no chemical or biological weapons had been found.

[littlechichibean]: <continued> Nor was there any evidence of a nuclear program. We spent $300 million for inspectors to go and search for weapons of mass destruction and they found none. Then we spent even more money for our troops to go out there and start a war, on (like I said before) speculation alone. I believe that’s unjust.

[littlechichibean]: The Iraqis and almost all middle eastern countries have done and lived the same way for all their lives, they've always had the same government, and were obviously not unhappy about it or it would have changed a long time ago, we just went in there with our western government and traditions and took over, like it was ours to take. We've made their lives harder now, civilians have been killed, tortured, abused, punished. The war didn't start with oh let's go in there and help out this poor country, give them a better life. Bush and his administration used that to cover up the fact that they were wrong with their speculations

[Weedy]: i agree with what you have said darkredfaery....

[littlechichibean]: thank you, as do i agree with everything you've said, and now i have just one more thing to add to my reasons i hate bush list...This new thing he is trying to pass to get the logging ban lifted

[Xirath]: I'm going to break down and address each comment seperately: Weedy, Iraq found non-compliant to the Final resoluation, in which stated if they where not, we would declare war. The resolution is 1441 and the results are here: http://belgrade.usembassy.gov/iraq/030127a.html and as far as treating everyone as human beings, I see no reason I wouldn't I mean we are all people, we just have different views and opinions on things, and unlike under Saddam's rule where you can be killed for thinking differently here in the US you can express you opinions. I also feel that when it comes to opinions, no one is wrong .. It is up to you to make up your own mind.

[Xirath]: After the non-compliance of 1441 came back to the UN, they voted to go to war. It had 8 votes instead of the 9 needed to succeed. Among those countries that did not vote with the US where France, Germany and Russia. We are now discovering a massive scandle that was going on with the Oil for Food program in which billions of dollars where given to these countries. All the information isn't in on that, so I won't make judgements until I read more, but if you ask me it seems pretty obvious why they didn't want us to go to war. It had nothing to do with right or wrong, it was all about them making more money. (By them, I mean France, Germany and Russia)

[Xirath]: The weapon's inspectors where in search of anything that did not comply with the UN resolution, which included several missles that shot too far (they where able to reach Isreal) and several chemical warheads (albeit they where empty at the time). Those weapons where destroyed because Iraq was not allowed to have them, so the weapons inspectors did find somethings in places they where allowed to look. The UN resolution 1441 stated that if Iraq did not comply, we would go to war. Saddam had been warned and still refused to comply, the only other course of action at that point is war. After many resolutions (12 total I think) that Saddam refused to comply too, that was the final straw.

[Xirath]: I ask, what do you think should have been done? Should we have drafted another resolution that Iraq wouldn't complied to? Should we have done nothing at all and back down completely and show that we will let anyone walk over us? When a police officer has his gun pointing at you and tells so someone to put down their gun or he will shoot, what choices does the police officer have if the person does not put the gun down? Shoot, or get shot. Personally I prefer not to get shot.

[Weedy]: i dont see where your going with all this.... the weapon findings your talking about was back in 1998 and before that..... no chemical weapons have turned up in iraq in the inspections 4 years before the war and none after either yet you say that iraq did not comply.... how should they be able to comply more? produce chemical weapons so they could give you them? and if i a policeman said i shot him because i thought he might be hiding a gun on his person he will go on trial for murder especially if it turns out he dident have a gun and the officer had allready searched him many times

[Maurer's conclusions]: Xirath, that is not a good analogy. Iraq had not the means nor the intentions nor the will to attack the US. Even before 9/11 Iraq was on Bush's agenda, and 9/11 was a great excuse for them to invade Iraq, so they made up stories about Al-Qaeda links and WMD's. So far, none of these have been found in Iraq; and to top that off, the US has abused Iraqis, causing even more people to join anti-USA factions. They are shooting themselves in the foot...

[Xirath]: Ert, I disagree on a few things. One being that Saddam did have the intentions, it was public knowledge that he hated the US. As far as links with Al-Qaeda, imo there is only 1 link that matters. They both hate the US, and the enemy, of my enemy, is my friend. That is what got us into trouble with Osama originally when we gave him money and weapons to fight the Russians along time ago. Weedy: I'm not saying they didn't comply, I am saying the UN said they didn't comply, big difference. The UN inspectors stated they did not comply, so the UN voted to go to war. As far abusing a few radicle Iraqi's, I don't see how liberating them from a man who commited genocide on a regular basis as (cont.)

[Xirath]: regular basis as a bad thing. War is ugly, ugly things happen during war, including torture's. How many german's where tortured during World War 2? Are you saying we shouldn't have invaded? The German's didn't attack us, the Japaneese did, yet we invaded and liberated Europe (with help of course). I see very little difference, except that now, it is far more publicized and people like to pretend that we are better than that. War is ugly and it causes good people to do bad things. Sometimes, war is needed, to end a conflict plain and simple.

[Weedy]: Xirath<<< your wrong about the weapon inspectors..... actually hans blix who was the leader of the weapon inspectors until the beginning of the war stated that all they needed was more time to search now that they had access to what they wanted..... actually he said that if his inspectors got 6-8 months more they would be able to find everything sadam might still be hiding..... but bush wanted a war and even though the UN dident approve of it the US attacked anyway.... they UN did not vote for a war but against it.... and i really dont understand why bush havent attacked Zimbabwe where "president" Mugabe is murdering and terrorising the opposition and its supporters

[Weedy]: (continued) and why dont you do something about israel? they kill thousands of civilians in their "hunt/war" agains terrorists......

[Anti_Anti_Groups]: Excuse but... It has been found that the leaders of germany and france had a kind of friendship with Iraq suppling him with things. Also, they were supposably friends. Another thing, they were to what I have been told that trucks were on the Iraqi boarder that were constantly moving... their contents are unknown... thuank you...

[Xirath]: Weedy: "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it." that is a direct quote from Hans Blix himself. As for voting "for" the war, yes that was poor wording on my part, I meant there was a vote, and it did indeed fail (only by 1 vote). As far as Isreal, I think we should do something about them, I don't think we should support Isreal anymore, I mean we helped them establish the country, and yet they invaded other lands, imo thats BS .. and we should not be supporting that. Angelboy: I'm not exactly sure what your point is, its kind of hard to determine. It is well known that France, and Germany had relations with (cont)

[Xirath]: Iraq, and there are current investigations into what exactly was in those trucks. On a side note, anyone hear the fake report of the nuclear weapons? I found it amusing an Iraqi paper prints that they found nuclear warheads, and all the sudden news places in the US wanting to be the first to break the story just start pounding out "OMG NUKES", without any investigation what so ever. Makes ya think twice about the daily drivel the news media pumps into everyone doesn't it.

[Weedy]: just because they dident accept it they still allowed it..... and i understand why the iraqi hated the inspectors..... they knew that the CIA had agents among the inspectors..... and i agree with you..... the media sucks..... especially the us medias.....

[Xirath]: But part of what they where supposed to agree to, was that they had to accept dissarmament, in which Hans Blix is clearly stating they where not. And on the media thing ;) hey at least we agree on something *grins*

[Weedy]: well in the same sentence blix said that all they needed was 6 months more.... and actually they had dissarmed as we can clearly see now.... so how should they be able to agree to it more ?

[Xirath]: I will agree, that they had disarmed, and that we didn't find any weapons, but I still believe that we did not know that at the time of entering the war, and imo .. its more important to know that he doesn't have them, than he does. But that is an opinion thing, and I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on that point. ;)

[Weedy]: well thats because your not looking at the broad picture.... because of the us attack on iraq we now have another country in the middleeast where terrorism is a part of everyday and where normal people either are with the terrorists or risk beeing blown to pieces..... and at the same time the terrorist organisations have been getting and more more recruits as the war in iraq continues..... people in iraq seek safety and confidence in the one thing you cant take from them.... religion.... which creates fanatism.....and so on.... just because you won this battle it disent mean it will help you win the war.... actually it will properly do just the opposite

[Xirath]: It could be worse, we could have him for a president: http://media1.stream2you.com/rnc/072304v2.wmv

[Rommel_]: did eny of you graduate with honors from Yale?

[Weedy]: nope...... kinda hard when i live in dk though.... so i guess im excused...

[littlechichibean]: ok Xirath...I don't think you're quite understanding that Hans Blix said himself "if we had 6-8 more months" meaning if bush had just waiting that many more months we might not have had to go to war. But, no, he had plans the entire time to go to war with Iraq or he would have waited those few more months. If we had waited we would have known for sure, "yes they do have them" or "no they don't have them" It could have saved the US millions of dollars, gas prices probably wouldn't have shot through the roof. The economy probably wouldn't really suck right now. We probably wouldn't be in the threat of terrorism in New York right now causing armed guards to have to stand around it

[littlechichibean]: <continued> do you see where i'm going with this? 6-8 more months and we might not be going through this. but no we have an ignorant bastard for a president who just wants to go to war with...anyone...hold on i'll be coming back with more

[littlechichibean]: ok now after some research, I don't agree with Kerry's views either, he's pro on this war too. That's why i'm glad I can't vote because neither of them would be getting my vote. I don't agree in what is going on in this world. And also i can't believe that the democratic party would choose a pompous conservative such as Kerry. By choosing him all the democrats that are against this war and bush and just contradicting themselves because they're voting for someone who has many of the same views on the issue with this war on iraq as does bush. I can't understand what they were thinking

[sexynerd]: if we elected kerry i think it would be more like just electing his party since he seems to to be easily swayed with other's opinions

[littlechichibean]: true, but he's still for the war, so i don't like it. but it's a good thing i can't vote, or i'd be raising some hell in the democratic party thing

[sexynerd]: i thought he last said he wasn't for the war didn't he vote against finacing the war?

[Dil*]: anybody is better than bush.

[littlechichibean]: the last thing i heard (on the tv today) was on the war and how we're gonna fight it and we're gonna win...blah blah blah...he may have been against it in the first place...but now it looks like he's ready to jump in and fight it...

[Dil*]: that's stupid...

[sexynerd]: so you'd be happy with bin laden as your president? thats sad. as least bush accomplishes things and if kerry really is for war then all we have is the same sitution except 'democratic'

[littlechichibean]: yea i know...but you know when it comes down to it, if i could vote...i'd vote for kerry just because he's not bush...i'm so sick of hearing about war...this war has caused too much crap...by this war...there's even more terrorist threats...and...bush is a dumbass basically as was his father

[sexynerd]: well it is started it is NOT a good idea to just pull out

[sexynerd]: why is he a dumbass?

[littlechichibean]: yea you're right we can't pull out, but we shouldn't be in it in the first place...

[sexynerd]: i can partially see why we shouldn't be in it but ita hard to say when we should and should mess in other's affairs many people thought we should not have gotten involved in WWII

[littlechichibean]: if you do the research Hans Blix (former UN inspector) said to bush, in another 6-8 months...if we wait, we might be able to prove that they do not have weapons, which would have kept us out of the war. Bush had all intentions as soon as he got into office to attack Iraq, 9/11 just gave him a good excuse with the public, even though the UN was mainly against it

[sexynerd]: ok so in a way he lied to go to war that doesn't mean we can't find justification now i don't suppose you agree with the way saddam ruled? i don't suppose you belive that their colleges for creatign terrorists were terribly great? and much as i hate to say it.... oil

[littlechichibean]: that's their country, if they had wanted us to come in and start a war with them to get rid of saddam...i could understand it, but they were fine living that way, we were not welcomed. So i do not agree and you will find no justification to work for me

[sexynerd]: So of them DID want us to get rid of Saddam .... and for example most of Germany was so caught up in WWII they had very few people wanting to overthrow hitler does that justify what he did? and of couse i won't find a justification that you like you have different beliefes than me i just want you to understand that now that we are there and have some control why don't we turn this into something good? 

[littlechichibean]: something good? we have destroyed these people's cities, their homes, many have been killed? and what did they do, they got unfortunate and lived in their home...did you watch the news today? more iraqis were killed today along with U.S. soldiers.

[littlechichibean]: how would you feel if some country just started bombing the place where you live with no proof of anything...how would you like to have to hide someplace, afraid at anytime that you could be shot...or walking through your town, buildings gone, people dead...how would you feel

[littlechichibean]: Bush has wasted billions of our country's dollars to send troops back and forth and pay for all this...our country already has enough of a debt...and they didn't even have weapons of mass destruction...the UN weapons inspectors even told him straight out, they don't have this stuff...but he didn't listen

[sexynerd]: okay for one the scientist forced to work for saddam supposively told him that they had developed those weapons because they were afaid of being killed so we had a credible sorce that wmds were there and now since it turns out there are not and as for how would i feel ?! i would be hopeful because now there is someone saying its not right that i cannot say anythign against my country i would have hope that finally i may have a government that didn't ruthlessly kill anyone he didn't like i would have hope and YES i will admit he didn't act in the best way i said that before he screwed up i'll say it again so you listen HE SCREWED UP okay now hopefully you have gotten the point it is over 

[sexynerd]: now and we should do somethign to make the situation better

[littlechichibean]: and this would be to?...you know what would really help make this country better, and the rest of the world better...and might be an actual good use for our money, to go to africa and teach these poor people about aids, because they don't know, and it's killing millions of them...why not do that? i ask you that why?

[sexynerd]: rebuild it rebuild it in a way that shows we are tryign to understand their culture and in a way that shows we want them to be equals. There are people in africa teaching them about aids but it is probably a little more important to find a cure because that would benifit the entire world. Why should we? we can't go around solving everyone's problems i don't think the way we went into iraq was right but now we owe it to them to do something. 

[Sagacious Turkey]: what? no "clinton haters page"?

[Maurer's conclusions]: What is wrong with clinton?

[sexynerd]: which one? or all of them?

[pleiades]: This really isn't an argument... I don't support Bush at all, but I am wondering something. Is it just that you hate the US president because of all of the negative things he has caused for our country? Bush has done some good things, I can imagine, though I don't know of any. I don't follow politics well enough to be talking about it, I guess. Every president has downsides, and I find it very interesting that normally only the mistakes of our presidents are the topics that are discussed. Does that make any sense? I do not support war in any way, but I do believe that "getting rid" of Sadaam (or however you spell it...*sigh*) was important.

[pleiades]: I don't think that Bush's potential was to ruin America. It was already ruined. I have no idea what to say, however, for what he has done to the rest of the world.

[Dil*]: well, go to this page and you'll find out how he's ruining america more...Stop Military Slavery

[BramJumelet]: when bush sr. left america clinton helped america out of the red numbers, but than bush jr. came and he thought the collor red was nice so he started some wars and made a lot of lies about anything and everything... there are invisible weapons of mass destruction in iraq and thats all the proof we need...

[Lord Kügenheim]: ive just been reading through the comments, as for [sexynerd]'s statement on ww2. Yes america Should have gotten involved. if it didnt, then the germans would have wiped out the RAF and won the battle of britain. at the same time, opperation barbarossa would have succeeded and the germans would have most of the world under their control and with the russian nuke program in their hands, by the time america divised the atom bomb, the nazis would have one too so the war would have went nuclear. which timeline would you prefer? this one or that one?

[BramJumelet]: the russians didn't have nukes at that time, they where forced to build an army after germany attacked them, they barrely had guns... during the second world war the usa developed nuclear weapons, but that was already after germany was defeated (hiroshima) damn americans are bad in history...

[Lord Kügenheim]: Yes but how long do you think it took for the Sovitet Union and the US to build them? The soviets and the americans only got the nukes before the nazis because of the vast resources available to them. the Germans had a project which the british knew about and managed to delay it enough so that they were still years away from a breakthrough at 1945. If they had gotten hold of Soviet materials and the british hadent delayed them, they would have had nukes before the US.

[Weedy]: actually it was discovered after the war that the nazi nuclear project was only for energy purpose.... not as a weapon..... and even that project was far behind anything the americans knew..... the russians dident even have a nuclear pogram during ww2..... the russians dident develop nuclear weapons before august 1949..... and fact is that the germans had lost the war no matter the us intervention..... russia was allready recovering from the first german attack and actually held the germans back with gurilla tactics at places like stalingrad..... and the fierce russian winter combined with thin stretched supply lines made it impossible for the germans to advance much further....

[Weedy]: (continued) without running out of everything from gass to food..... the war in russia would be a little longer that is true but allready in 1943 the russian tanks was an even match for the germans simply because of the german lack of gass......with time the russians would be able to drive the germans back....and as the germans never held any countrys in europe becaue of constand sabrotage actions from a number of resistance groups in all major cities they would not be able to bring europes full potential agains russia.... not in manpower neither in materials.... the main change in the world if the us hadent joined the allies would be that most of europe would be a part of the soviet union

[Lord Kügenheim]: yes but the germans knew of the weather and thats why they planned to go before winter. They expected to crush the RAF in weeks but a stupid mistake on behalf of a lancaster crew who accidently bombed berlin shifted hitlers intentions away from the airfields and onto the cities. If he had kept at the airfields the RAF would have collapsed and operation Barbarossa would have succeeded since it went on time.

[BramJumelet]: actually if the russians would have been defeated, than D-day was a failure, beceause almost every german soldier was fighting in the east against russia, so all our 'freedom' is thanx the soviet union and jet these 16 million soviet-soldiers who died aren't commemorated on days like freedom-day (the netherlands)

[Weedy]: lord<<< well what you said there still show that intervention from the us wouldent be nessesary to stop the nazis

[Lord Kügenheim]: not totaly, britain would have been able to hold out, but as for the invasion of hitlers "fortress Europe", that would have been impossible without the US

[Weedy]: i dont agree..... the russians had more manpower and materials than germany and germany lacked gass long before the end of the war..... and though the war would have laster longer the russians would win at the end....

[Lord Kügenheim]: of course the Red Army had greater numbers, but the germans had better tech and Training. if they had gone in summer then supply lines wouldnt have been cut and they would have over ran moscow with ease. When the red army invaded some country somewhere with a 1/4 million troops, they lost a million themselfs due to their badly trained troops.

[BramJumelet]: jup thats treu... the soviet union lost 16 million troups (probably more) and germany 9 million (on 2 fronts)

[Weedy]: but even so the russians had an allmost endless supply of manpower...... while germany lost allmost every man old enough to be put in a uniform...... and the better tech dident help germany much when they dident have fuel to power their tanks.....

[Lord Kügenheim]: Ahh thats the thing, they didnt run out of fuel. the Panzers and german weaponry were too good for their own good. You look at the AK47, that thing is like, unjamable, but the german guns and tanks werent built for the cold. thats why it didnt work.

[BramJumelet]: jup, you gotta look more at discovery channel... the battle of stalingrad was luck... if that battle was lost by the soviets world war 2 would have been won by the germans...

[Weedy]: not true lord..... the main problem for the germans at the end of the war was that they dident have access to any oil wells inside german territory...... which crippled the german tanks greatly.......    and bram<< if you belive everything discovery says you are very naive.....

[Lord Kügenheim]: i dont have discovery, i watch UKTV history. Just as bad...

[BramJumelet]: i dont believe everything, lots of capitalist propaganda on discovery, but its not all lies... there are real interesting things on discovery (you gotta hear things from 2 sides, not one)

[Weedy]: true but if you use discovery as one of those sides your still quite naive..... discovery needs to make everything it sends seem like some newly discovered truth so the viewer finds it interesting..... this results in discovery showing pograms with little to no true sientific facts in...... or discovery bace their pogram on a single proffesors theory and make it seem like the one and only truth when there in face is many other proffesors who disagree with the theory...... (thos is not that well written i hope you get my point though)

[BramJumelet]: i get your point, but everything has a treuth, even discovery, even bush, even poll pot

[Weedy]: true..... but is it worth the lies to find that little truth?

[BramJumelet]: yes :D

[Acomplished Exile]: Most ppl here dont really know why teh hate Bush, its all an ignorant teenie band wagon really. snap out

[Dil*]: You may be right, but there are also loads of people on here who know why they do, hell, i even made a reasons why we hate bush page for people to put their reasons in...i definately didn't jump on no band wagon, and maybe people will learn enough on this wiki page to form their own opinion.

[BramJumelet]: read everything before you start calling people ignorant, i cant really come up with 1 good thing that bush did... but kerry is probably just as bad, vote thirth party :D

[Dil*]: umm third party eh..i support kerry more, cause he actually went to war (in vietnam) and he knows how horrible it is and at least he's not a coward like bush.

[BramJumelet]: i agree with you on that, cause bush really doesn't know what war is, but still i dont like kerry's policies

[Dil*]: what are some of his policies?

[BramJumelet]: he supported the war in iraq and than says it ended up wrong... and i dont mean ideals cause bush has SOME good ideals... but all his policies suck

[BramJumelet]: ps check this comic :P

[sexynerd]:

[BramJumelet]: actually nothing is rebuilt in iraq, the first city where they started rebuilding was najaf... and that was in the possesion of so called rebels, and the taliban came in power beceause of the US, saddam came to power beceause of the US, and Al Qaueda got power beceause of the US, and that new government isn't the government the iraqi's want but a puppet-government of the USA

[Maurer's conclusions]: good point bram. also note how nothing positive has been done in the usa since 9/11...

[BramJumelet]: the image disapiered, now nobody knows wtf i'm talking about :D

[BramJumelet]:

[Darth Wobble]: Brum Brum

[Punkity spaz91]: lol

[Punkity spaz91]: hi

[Brittonash007]: Who will you vote for if not Bush. Kerry is a looser and Nader is a communist.

[Dil*]: communist? hah, how did he go around america without getting lynched?

[BramJumelet]: he's a liberal not a communist... thats like the opposite of eachother... i forgot the name of the socialist but if i lived in america i would vote for him

[Dil*]: yes, liberal all the way! :P

[Panda-monium]: YAY Liberals!

[IvySting]: Mmm, Dilandau... Sorry this is so late, but Kerry did go to war in Vietnam, and he came back and protested the war he fought in. I could tolerate this if he was drafted, but he actually signed up for the war, proving that Kerry is the coward. Sure we want peace in this country, but it's something that may never come to be. Don't forget that the rest of the world is still two steps behind America. I mean, by the time Kerry would be done negotiating anything, all of America would be in ruins. At least Bush has a dangerous plan rather than no plan. That's why the terrorism has stopped, but once you put a coward in office, it's gonna start all over again, because he's a coward.

[BramJumelet]: terrorism has grown beceause of mr. bush and the fact that he protested against is was beceause he noticed how horrible the war was and witnessed it with his own eyes (my theory, doesn't have to be true)

[Dil*]: No, i can understand why Kerry came back and protested against the war. He's no coward, he is admitting he was wrong and wants to let people know the truth. War is horrible and he was wrong.

[BramJumelet]: he was absolutly wrong! the war in vietnam was wrong!

[Brittonash007]: Name One reason why Bush is bad. And I must say that war is not prettu at all but do tell me where we would be without the revolutionary war. Also, Kerry lied about his awards and now its becoming to late to prove that he lied. The SwiftVets against John Kerry are 15 times more numerous than the vets for Kerry. And another thing, Kerry's Picture is in a war museum in the VietCong with the text "A Man Who Helped Us Win the War". Let me tell you something. The USA Won that War. It was the Chaos afterwar that made the aparent Loss. And a Democrat started that war

[BramJumelet]: look at the bush haters associations main page and than on the page why we hate bush and you'll find more than just 1 reason :D

[Lord Kügenheim]: yeah we do have a page full of them.

[BramJumelet]: or check the comic above, maybe your a rich dick and in that case you'll be fine with bush as your president...

[Dil*]: haha, there's a billion reasons, go visit my page: reasons why we hate bush...there's also links to other pages that have other reasons on that page too.

[Brittonash007]: As to your reasons why you hate bush let's start with the first two. Tell me what countries have had trade embargoes on them because of not agreeing to fight in the war. and for your second reason why you hate Bush, Where did the Inteligence come from that Saddam had some or did have Nukes. Oh and I'm no rich dick O.K. I'm just a poor middle class 18 year old who is standing for what is true. Would y'all agree that Kerry is a flip-flopper?? And how old are you guys??

[BramJumelet]: i dunno about the first one, dont think thats true though... but they have an embargo on cuba beceause of they're socialist system... while other dictatorships get support from the USA, the second one were lies to justify the war. and yes kerry is a flip-flopper but thats every american president except for uhm... i forgot his name... roosevelt! i thought that was the one who fought rassism.

[BramJumelet]: but back to the first one, they do have an embargo on iraqi goods to nations that didn't help 'saving' iraq

[BramJumelet]: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/28/125045/132

[Brittonash007]: that is a blog. find an official sratement of embargoes. I'm not to sure about this one. Besides the prime Minister of Iraq KNOWS who helped and who didn't and he will dictate who Iraqi's trade or don't trade with

[BramJumelet]: no, the prime minister of iraq is a puppet of the US-government, even if he would be 'democraticly' elected... beceause a lot of people are banned from the elections beceause the americans dont like his ideals and they have a chance of winning

[Dil*]: How about all that french bashing?

[Brittonash007]: A Puppet MY ASS. I have some contacts in the higher up's in government and they would be able to refute what you just said. We only have a hand in training Iraqi Troops, help maintain peace and be the guard of higher authority in Iraq. The Marines have a division that protects the Iraqi government and a special body of Marines to protect the U.S. Ambasador. That is all we are doing and unless the situation chages dramaticaly to a sudden attack on higher Iraqi government officials then the U.S. Military is waiting for the attacker any time and belive me, the U.S. Military knows how to fight. Oh and by the way, how would you like the feel of a cool dull blade sawing off your head...

[Brittonash007]: ...like the terrorists did to Nick Bergg. I really want you to consider that and tell me how you would feel about that.

[Maurer's conclusions]: I wouldn't like it. And what do you think about the so called "democratic" elections? And what about Bush lying about WMDs and Al-Qaeda links? What do you think of the mistreatment of the Abu Ghraib prisoners?

[Maurer's conclusions]: Also, if the US military knows how to fight so well, why did they lose in Vietnam? And why didn't they win the Korean war? The army isn't everything in life...

[BramJumelet]: well i dont hope the puppet-government is in your ass... unless your gay, which would mean you cant marry in the USA... and off course these high people will refute it, what else did you expect, dont you think poll pot also had some lies covering his actions, and these blades on these heads are there beceause the only thing the americans are doing is 'protecting' (read supressing) the iraqi citizens (the pictures of that prison, etc... etc...)

[Dil*]: Haha, you don't know the Iraqi govt is a puppet..funny, they installed this guy called paul bremar, he's the puppet. Besides, the US govt WONT let the Iraqies vote anyways (at the moment), because chances are; they'll vote for another fundamentalist extremist: Meet the new boss, catch is, he's the same as the last one.

[Dark Geisha]: Bush sucks period. Thats all that needs to be said. The only thing that he is good at is convincing america that Saddaaam Hussein is Bin Laddin.

[Dil*]: lol

[BramJumelet]: no, fundamentalist extremists are banned from the elections by the USA

[Dil*]: i mean if the US didn't restrict them, that's probably what would happen.

[BramJumelet]: that already happened

[Dil*]: ?

[BramJumelet]: oops, i misunderstood you, sorry i'm kinda tired :D

[Normal_Man]: Dudes, bush might be bad. but I agree with the Clinton haters he got a bj in the office that’s disgraceful. Also all of you people who hate bush about the abortion thing, you shouldn’t need abortion unless your raped which is evil and twisted.

[BramJumelet]: so what... he didn't rape monica...

[IvySting]: That has nothing to do with what was being said. You don't need abortion, because pregnancy is something that can be avoided completely and totally. If people were smart enough to realize that that's what condoms are for, then we wouldn't even be on the issue of abortion.

[Dil*]: You think that condoms are foolproof? no they aren't, they can break.

[IvySting]: I'm well aware of that. The point I'm making is that pregnancy in itself can be avoided, birth control, condoms, or even withdrawal can be used to avoid unwanted pregnancy.

[Dil*]: how about rape?

[IvySting]: The chances are very low of rape causing a pregnancy. I should know, I've been raped, several times.

[Dil*]: what i'm getting at is that, shit happens..you know, and you don't want to ban abortion all together; that's just cruel.

[sonna cool na kimi wa plastic]: i got raped and got pregnant...i aborted thou...

[BramJumelet]: yes, but he said that you should hate clinton beceause of monica...

[this site fucking sux]: i like monkeys!!!!11 john kerry wants to ban monkeys from the zoo... :( i dont like that

[BramJumelet]: uhm.. who cares....

[Dil*]: ya..wtf?

[Maurer's conclusions]: If you like monkeys, why would you want to see them confined in a small cage at a zoo?

[this site fucking sux]: he wants to ship all the monkeys to africa!!11 not cool!!!!

[IvySting]: ...

[Maurer's conclusions]: So you would rather they become extinct...

[BramJumelet]: thats where the monkeys belong... they should do that with all poor ZOO-animals

[this site fucking sux]: no they shouldnt! the monkeys need to stay in the zoo so i can watch them fling their poop!!!11

[farfy girl]: How about you guys go to pro-life.com and then get back to us on abortion? I didn't know much about abortion, but wow.... it really is gruesome, how the babies' heart rate increases, and they helplessly squirm for their lives when the doc comes to get them, then when they do... *shudder* I think that MAYBE abortion MIGHT be acceptable if the pregnancy were dangerous to the mother and baby and/or it was caused by rape. I do not think that legitimate, healthy children should be killed just because their parents didn't want a baby at the time. It's not just contraception, it's KILLING a living human being instead of preventing one.

[Weedy]: lol farfy.... i dunno how far into the pregnancy you can be in the us dbefore it is illegal to remove the child but here in enmark its 12 weeks and at that stage the child dosent even have a heart yet, much less is able to squirm.....

[farfy girl]: Well here in the US, I think that even partial-birth abortion is legal in some places, and the child is certainly old enough to squirm then...

[Weedy]: well i agree on the fact that its wrong to make an abortion after the 12'th week..... but before that im definatly pro choice

[BramJumelet]: its a choice...

[Lord Kügenheim]: Abortion is Wrong full stop. It is a life and all life is sacred. it doesnt matter how it happens it happens and the child deserves to be given a chance.

[Maurer's conclusions]: The unborn baby knows nothing of happiness, only a cramped, dark life, so we are putting it out of its misery, especially if is going to be born into a poor, unprepared family where the kids are abused.

[Lord Kügenheim]: so what? i would think that it should be given the oppourtunity to live first. and about the "it doesnt know about stuff" i dont agree with that. an unborn baby is a human being so it knows.

[Maurer's conclusions]: When a baby, the human mind is too untrained to know many things. It cannot communicate and has trouble co-ordinating itself.

[Lord Kügenheim]: where ive come from, we get taught that all life was created by God and therefore it is sacred and no one has authority to destroy what God has made.

[Maurer's conclusions]: Perhaps, but not everyone comes from where you do...

[Lord Kügenheim]: Indeed they dont. But ill stick to my belief that no one has the right to play god, picking and choosing wether to let something live or not.

[Maurer's conclusions]: Fair enough.

[Dil*]: how about the death penalty?

[BramJumelet]: if its all about god, than ur wrong... adam and eve were created by god they fucked it up and got children so we are not children of god but grand-children :P

[Goldice]: well surely a hole load of greats should go before that

[Dil*]: how about the people that don't believe in god?

[Goldice]: or not one specific god

[BramJumelet]: for the last category you can say something like the god of birth, but in the first category it really depends on the person, like me (agnost) 1. its a choice 2. its a living thingy :P

[Goldice]: gd answer, cant find anything to question about it

[Lord Kügenheim]: i still think that abortion is murder.

[Goldice]: kugy, darlin, we really dont want this arguement agen, it got rather messy last time

[Weedy]: lord<<<< i wonder..... what if a scan shows that the child cant survive and that when its given birth it could endanger the mothers life too..... and what about the fact that ever since god ( if he exists which i doubt) created life on earth the species have been killing each other and themself without god interveining..... so why should he care if we kill each other as we kill the other species?? how can you know that it isent god's will that we do this?? he is after all allmighty (and after all he cursed humanity with the abillity to think and so also the abillity to become gods through genetic enginering etc)

[BramJumelet]: yes, we do kill animals just to eat them...

[this site fucking sux]: we dont kill monkeys just to eat them so we shouldnt ship them to africa!!11

[IvySting]: Shut the fuck up about the God damned monkeys. It has nothing to do with what anybody is arguing about, and yet you continuously bring it up. You're being immature, you stated that you wanted to see them fling poop? That's just disgusting! Maybe we should just ship you to Africa, and put you in a cage. You'd provide enough entertainment with your idiotic statements.

[this site fucking sux]: your mean!!!11 holy crimanys ghost your mean to the monkeys!!!1

[BramJumelet]: ivysting is nice to the monkeys... as stated before it is cruel to put these monkeys into cages

[farfy girl]: Oh, the owner of this wiki is very fair... He/she deleted some posts of mine where I was stating my conservative opinions even though this place is meant for arguing.

[this site fucking sux]: lol farty girl!!!!!! you like the monkeys to right

[Lord Kügenheim]: if you read the rules, we are actually entitled to do that [farfy girl]

[Goldice]: yes indeed we are.if you broke the rules then we are quite within our rights

[BramJumelet]: rules?

[Lord Kügenheim]: yeah, Bush Haters Association - Rules. We have asked everyone to read them.

[this site fucking sux]: you owners are being hypocrites then. rule number 1: 1 - Althougth we are Anti-Bush, you will respect the opinion of everyone even if they say they like the guy. what you did to [farfy girl] was not respecting her opinion.

[Lord Kügenheim]: well i didnt actually see the comments at all and i cant even delete comments on this page so dont blame me.

[farfy girl]: I did read the rules, and the very first one is "1 - Althougth we are Anti-Bush, you will respect the opinion of everyone even if they say they like the guy" So, whoever disrespected my opinion by deleting it was not following the rules.

[farfy girl]: A lot of people here are using very bad language, but I don't see their posts getting deleted. I take care not to use rude words that polite company would find distasteful. In my opinion, such extremely foul language is more inflammatory than one just stating his opinion.

[BramJumelet]: sigh... just another way to get right... its no that you are winning the debate about bush by ant-fucking about such little thing...

[this site fucking sux]: they're breaking their own rules. it's not "ant-fucking", as you called it, about such little things. it's stupid to make rules, and then not abide by them.

[Lord Kügenheim]: look stop bitching about us, we try our best to stop WW3 from happening in here and we use rules to enforce that. Perhaps the rules do need changing and that will be looked into. As far as i know, no posts have been deleted, i havent seen them at all.

[farfy girl]: So, in other words, the rules are too fair, and even the owner can't abide by them, so they will be changed to be unfair to accomodate that. Typical liberals are all for "freedom of speech" as long as it's the right speech... I would like to know who it was that deleted my posts, because I have gone through the entire history of the comments on this page with a fine-tooth comb, and they have indeed been deleted.

[Weedy]: have people thought about this.... those damn comments was properly lost in the crash a few days ago??

[Lord Kügenheim]: thats possible. We dont actualy delete coments unless they were going to start a WW3 scale argument and what i can gather this particular comment didnt.