For the first time in my life, I absolutely agree with Karl Rove!

[LynneSin]

:wow: :scared: :wow:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050623/ap_on_re_us/rove_sept_11

Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," Rove said. "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."

Only savages would respond to savages with war. Only dumbass savages would response to savages by invade the wrong fucking country!!

War is not the answer, it only causes more pain like the 1700+ families who are now morning the loss of a loved one due to the illegal war in Iraq.

[OrlandoGator]

1. How about the 100,000+ Iraqi families who now want to kill us?

Those are the people I'm afraid of now.

[wildwww2]

12. Are you afraid they will swim over here and kick our asses?

I am more afraid of the faulty leadership of the USA myself. They are a thousand times more dangerous that the survivors of the 100,000 plus we have murdered in the Bu$h Inc. war crime.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[MetaTrope]

13. It's all a plot to make BATMAN BEGINS a hit movie among Iraqi youth

:hurts:

[wakeme2008]

2. Right LynneSin, and by this time next year

we will have lost more of our troops than we lost in 9-11.

While I supported Afganistan when I thought Bush was really going after bin Forgotten... I see now it was just a PNAC goal, and bin Forgotten was just an excuse...

[Oversea Visitor]

3. Note

the prepare for war
See they not denying it
Since they like to shove it down our throat
IMPEAH the whole bloody lots of them

[elehhhhna]

4. BULLSHIT! THEY PREPARED FOR THIS WAR BFORE 911

[demnan]

5. I don't agree

From what I remember most people felt invading Afghanistan was a good idea. The conservatives were the ones who fucked that up and failed to capture Bin Laden (either on purpose or by mistake). Congress and the American people were behind that effort.

But expanding the war to include a country that didn't participate in terrorism was their brilliant idea. Again, most of the Democrats even went along with that.

Rove should shut his big fat mouth. Bring out Dean to say something to shut it for him.

[LynnTheDem]

6. "Most people" as in Americans? Not really. And certainly not the world.

Another rightwing myth. Most Americans betcha do not know that the vast majority of the entire world opposed US attacking Afghanistan.

And so did the majority of Americans.

[BeFree]

8. Lynn

As I recall, we here were included in the ten-percenters who were against the war from the get-go. I'm sad to say this, but 90 percent of America was all for blowing up the Afghanis and their villages. Even sadder to say that America acted with bloodlust as it evolved into a lynch-mob lead by the boy king.

I believe America is coming around now, but the fact that a near majority voted to keep the boy king in power does make me question that belief.

Peace

[LynnTheDem]

17. BeFree

"90%" is what the US m$m told us. They spun. Big time. Dontcha love it when our faithful media misinforms us over life & death issues!

On September 14-15, 2001, after hijackers' attacks on the World Trade Center buildings and the Pentagon, a Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll reported that 62% of Americans favored "military strikes, BUT ONLY WHEN those responsible are identified." Another 14% of respondents opposed retaliation; another 18% favored retaliating before investigating.

What happened to this poll? Oddly, major news media proclaimed across the board that "90% of Americans" favored military strikes, presumably right away.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/02/05/02_identified.html

Furthermore there have been consistent majorities against the current action in the UK and sizeable numbers of the US population had reservations about the bombing.

The poll also found that majorities in the US and Israel (both 56%) did not favour attacks on civilians.

Furthermore there is evidence that dissent in the US is being underrepresented in responses to opinion polls.

When they are asked their own preferences about what should happen (rather than approval questions about what is happening) then there is much less support, even in the US. In other words there is no world support for the attack on Afghanistan and public opinion in the US and UK is at best dubious and at worst flatly opposed to what is happening.

http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/MiddleEast/TerrorInUSA/Polls.asp

[LynneSin]

19. This Lynne agrees with you Lynn

:D

[LynnTheDem]

20. I gotta say...

and no one on this thread, but in past threads, I've seen people who KNOW bushCO and the m$m have lied & are lying their arses off to us...and yet these same people don't realize they did so about Afghanistan, too.

Afghanistan was one big fraud, just like Iraq. And most Americans simply do not know. The rest of the world certainly knows. No surprise there, the rest of the world actually has a real media.

It's nice we Lynn/Lynne types see things the same way. Must be something in the name... :D

[LynneSin]

23. yes, but my name is better than your name

I have the "E" on the end

:eyes:

[LynnTheDem]

26. Mine has an 'e' too. In fact, TWO of them!

:P

My real name is Evelyn. As a kid I went by "Lyn", and then that became the popular way to spell it, so I added another 'n' when I was a teen, and then that became the common spelling for everyone & their dog, and I said hell with it, I am not gonna go to "Eve".

:D

[LynneSin]

9. I disagree with your disagreement

I don't think of Afghanistan as war. War is such an evil hateful action! We had justification to go into Afghanistan and track down the people who caused this and we had support from the entire world to do so.

I'm not one for beautifying words in order to cover the horrible truth but I do believe that Afghanistan, like Kosovo are not examples of war but military interventions where our troops are being sent in with a globally supported mission. We went to Kosovo because the world wanted to stop the Ethnic Cleansing (although we all neglected Rwanda - that's a different rant). We went to Afghanistan because the whole world agreed that bin Laden & Al-Qaeda needed to be stopped.

We went to Iraq because we have greedy motherfuckers in the white house who want that big puddle of oil for themselves and we have a boy idiot for king who wants to suck up to his daddy by finishing the job that daddy never did.

To me, Iraq is a war. Afghanistan was not

[Vladimir]

24. I think the dead Afganis would disagree...

you went to Afganistan for oil, same as with Iraq. And even if you hadn't, it was war, because Afganistan was a sovereign nation, however much you disliked its government. A sovereign nation which you attacked, whose government you removed, and which you replaced with a puppet government more conducive to your business interests. Bin Laden was an excuse, then and now, and calling it a military intervention just gets away from its true horror. We all know how bloody wars are, but interventions - that sounds so much more benign.

WWI started over something similar after all, when Serbs refused to allow Austrian police on their territory to hunt down the assasins of Archduke Ferdinand, and no-one would call that anything other than war. Lets also not forget that the Taliban repeatedly offered to turn Bin Laden over to an independent court if presented with evidence of his guilt, and that the USA repeatedly refused any negotiations.

PS I don't want to go into Kosovo, because I know how most people still idolise that intervention, but lewt me tell you - sitting in Belgrade with the bombs raining down, it sure as hell felt like a war.

[The Magistrate]

27. Afghanistan Was Indeed War, Sir

And a necessary one, as proper as the act can be. That it has been badly botched after the initial phase does not really alter that, though it has deprived our country here of any real benefit by the victory.

There is no real question that the attacks in September 2001 were authored by Bin ladin and carried out by his operatives. Similarly, it is undeniable that the territorial base of his operation was in Afghanistan, and that that country's government was in effective alliance with, even sponsorship of, his organization. A sovereign nation has every right to use military force against a body that has assailed by arms its citizenry, and any other nation that hosts such a body on its territory openly is just as liable to assault in such a circumstance. Persons who urge that the matter ought to have been treated as a police affair ignore practicalities of the situation, that rendered impossible ordinary police routines. Military action would have been required, on the same scale it was actually employed, to put ordinary police power in a position to operate in the matter. The statements of the Taliban leadership on the subject have no credibility at all, and were, and are, properly dismissed as mere temporizing noise.

No administration in this country would have, or could have, acted otherwise than to levy war against Afghanistan in the aftermath of those attacks: the Mahatma Gahndi himself, if he wished for continuance of his party and himself in office, would have had to give the order. In this matter, Rove is being an even more despicable liar than usual: not a hundredth part of the citizenry proposed what he claims here to be the response of "liberals" in this matter. The response was near universal, being visceral and biological, even, in its root. Surprise a man by a blow to the face, and he will not think why, or if you might be right to do it, or any other thing but a rage to break your bones, and if your blow has done nothing more substantial than to cause some pain, and failed to fill him with shocked fear, you will be in a damned bad way. The whole function of the world depends on this, and it is not to be trifled with.

The claim that this action was merely in furtherance of business interests has always struck me as particularly thin. There is no real business interest to be gained in the region: even the English did not find anything to exploit in the place, except for its simple existance as ground the Czar's forces would have to cross before reaching India. Speculation concerning pipelines is no more than a pipe dream: the thing is not a feasible investment, and remains today just as unfeasible as it was before the invasion. There is no stretch of terrain on this earth so thoroughly bandit-ridden as the supposed route for this exercise in fantasy, and no industrial device so vulnerable to extortion and sabotage as the one proposed. As a scam for fleecing the unwary of their funds, perhaps, it might have some merit, but not as anything else.

[Village Idiot]

11. You don't remember very well, then...

Check the International polls...there wasn't a lot of international support for the invasion of Afghanistan, either...

[LynnTheDem]

18. There wasn't any (not even the UK) except for Israel and India.

And even they weren't all that gung-ho.

Sure isn't what bush & Co tell us, is it.

[Pryderi]

7. uhhh...have we captured bin Laden?

[Village Idiot]

10. Even Afghanistan was the "wrong fucking country!"

Read the 9-11 Investigation Report...Especially FBI-Cheif Robert Mueller's conclusions...it's very educational...


Two years after the WTC bombing, the FBI is willing to admit that they THINK that terrorists from Al-Qaeda MIGHT have committed the act...

Interesting, 'cause when Bush said that the US was bombing Afghanistan because HE KNEW they were responsible, I was a bit confused...seeing as the US government REFUSED to present ANY EVIDENCE to the Afghan government when ShrubCo presented extradition demands...

[leesa]

15. You are so right. Never mind that 9-11 was a criminal act and should have

been investigated and prosecuted like a crime (it was NEVER investigated), they bombed a country that had nothing to do with 9-11.
9-11 was created by BushCo so they could go forward with their already prepared, publicly disclosed, plans to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. The plan was to flank Iran so we can conquer the entire ME. What's a few thousand American deaths to these guys? Absolutely nothing!

[LynnTheDem]

21. And the Kuwaiti-Pakistani mastermind sits in a Pakistan jail as we type,

But bush refused to allow the Taleban turn OBL over to the authorities of PAKISTAN.

NONE of the hijackers were Taleban, NONE of the hijackers were Afghanis.

14 of them were Saudi. The rest were Pakistani, Kuwaiti, and Egyptian.

And had they been 19 criminals with a CANADIAN mastermind, Canada would NOT have extradited him to the USA without being shown PROOF first. That is what extradition laws are for.

The USA has the same laws.

Yet when the Taleban asked for proof of OBL's guilt, bush refused and carried on where the Soviet Union had left off; bombing the bloody hell out of a whole lot of innocent people and destroying their country.

*So, would bush have attacked CANADA had the mastermind been Canadian and had bush refused to show proof of guilt? Canada's on a large puddle of oil, too. And natural gas. And fresh water. But Canada can fight back, and the entire world, especially the UK, would have said HELL NO. Nope, I don't think bush would have ordered an attack on Canada...and I don't think 911/OBL was the reason he attacked Afghanistan.

As with Iraq, it gave him an EXCUSE to do so.

[leesa]

14. It really helped to carpet bomb Afghanistan for 10 months...now we have no

more terrorism.

[LynneSin]

16. Now we have more Heroin too

As horrible as the Taliban was they at least cut the heroin trade off at the knees. IT would have been nice if we could have ousted the taliban and help keep the heroin trade out of business

Oh well!

[ProfessorGAC]

22. My Question To Little Karl

Who were these liberals that wanted to provide therapy? Suspicious that he gets away, given the liberal media and all, with making this statement, but conspicuous by their absence are names.

I don't know of 1 liberal who wanted to mollycoddle the perpetrators. None in know personally. None i read about in the news. Everyone i know knew that somebody's ass was going to be kicked by about 11am that day!

So, he says the conservatwits wanted to go to war, but the liberals wanted to forgive? Name names, Karl, or shut up.
The Professor

[bridgit]

25. seriously so, having received what they thought...

to be a blank check for fucking up the civilized world from the, for all intent, entire congress; what, indeed, could he possibly be talking about but his re-election stats as an 'advisor'; and for that matter, in that imo that IS what he's referring to...how poor can he feel his chances truly are if he feels he needs to lie so outright in order to protect them = a sign of failing poll numbers is what i ultimately think when i think of rove :thumbsdown:

let dean be dean :thumbsup: