Guthrie

so, you wish to use semantics to weasel out of it - no surprise - but yes; "Dual use materials ARE chemical/biological weapon components." --- do you deny THAT statement?

The USA, under the Reagan admin, did certainly sell chem/bio weapons to Saddam. Link Link to Report

well, I suppose they now realize that their denial efforts are only, 'preaching to the choir,' -- and really only the remaining dumbest members of the choir - so they, not wanting to throw good money after bad, are pulling the plug - I only wonder what contractual restrictions might keep their former paid puppets from stepping up and renouncing their previous bullroar

-- hence the rallying cry - 'Impeach Cheney First'

First - I consider this type of comment nothing but the ugliest of bigotry Second - even Republican strategists are admitting: Globe and Mail Third - our soldiers went to an Iraq invasion based on lies of the administration -- over 3000 of these soldiers paid the ultimate price based on Bush's lies --- I consider this murder

exactly the point -- this whole Iraq fiasco falls on the shoulders of Dubya of course, there is still the horrendous failure of oversight by the Republican held Congress what the Commander in Chief can not do, is appropriate money on his own - in America, we call that, 'checks and balances' the Congress trusted Bush about going into Iraq - that turns out to have been a failure on the part of Congress as Bush was starting a war based on lies now, Bush is going to the well once again but this time Congress isn't his personal rubber stamp

as noted previously, talk is cheap - and also, as noted previously, none of you guys is posting from Bagdad

It is far to early to dismiss impeachment. From 2005 wait til the oversight comittees start finding skulls

how come no one ever lists Amsterdam in the choices - Got a pocket full of money got me a long night a-head quick stop by the Bull Dog ...

They were brought home from Vietnam. They were brought home from Somalia and cetera but this is just a red herring argument anyway - I agree there is an annoyingly overlived artifact from the great wars, some call it, American presence. It is an issue on it's own but it isn't the issue in Iraq, is it? There are buschista apologists whose final fingertip grip on the rock face of an argument is, 'We can't win if we leave!' --- but they have to swallow hard and pant mightily to keep down this offensive cupful and still they have to avoid the emerging truth, 'We can't win if we stay in Iraq.' The fact is, the only way we can do anything positive in Iraq is by handing it off to a broader authority. I mean, yes, the UN or a regional coalition formed into a deliberative body ... I'd want Israel to have a seat of authority on such a group btw Oh and RE: 'Freedom ain't Free,' from the scroll --- how many of you clowns making that argument are willing to put your lives where your mouths are? It's fine for YOU to say freedom ain't free when you are asking someone else to jump into the meat grinder. Heck, I don't need you to jump all the way in yourself; I just want to see you put some soft dangly parts of yourself in it, I double dog dare yeh!

so, mission accomplished? - then let's bring our boys home and have a national day of celebration.

I am currently watching a tv set to my right in between bouts of internet just saw a cell phone service commercial which ends with a father, standing in his kitchen, in his bathrobe, talkin to his kids says, " ... and what did dad get? ... No, Da-ad, got hosed' - I loved it - delivered so honestly and identifiably as a statement on the plight of modern man. ... "Dad got hosed!"

OK - let's do it this way. What will you accept as sufficient to prove my case? -- break it down point by point and weight each according to your own scale, perhaps triple score on a Pentagon press release and a half score for BBC?

we have lost a significant amount of land in Afganistan - we've recently learned the reward money given to local chieftans for intelligence (made up intelligence) -- that money goes to the Taliban. The chieftan has no way to use the money and, likely, if he is identified locally as posessing American money, he is a target for assasination - so the US military has been supplying large amounts of US Dollars in two handoffs our enemy. I am incensed merely for the worldwide embarassment given the United States of America, how clownish they make us look. of course that feeling of being incensed is immediately extinguished as the shock of the memory of the loss of our boys who stood in harms way for these moronic and unintentionally treasonous actions comitted by these members of United States of America, 'military intelligence.'

Jerry - re: I stand ready to take a lesson but I believe I am right. bush_cheney2004 - re: #1 - Gulf War??? if this is a continuation of that, why didn't Schwartzkopf stay and finish --- back when there might have actually been flowers and cheers -- additionally - here I have no proof, but the rumors I heard come from two separate sources and suggest members of one or two US special forces teams had Saddam Hussein in sights, clear shot -- if true, why were the orders, 'stand down.' #2 - no fly zone - sorry, to me, this one is a denial of war - if this works, there's not much chance of Saddam sending off a squadron of radio controlled crop dusters unnoticed, eh? so, at least, that threat was neutralized --- #3 - UN sanctions ??? if a continuation, why did the US renege on a promise to seek a UN vote to support an invasion. If the, 'Conquest of Iraq,' was to demonstrate loyalty to the UN, why did he turn his back and prevent the US delegation from proposing that vote which, 'looked like,' was going against Bush. #4 - even the Mormon Sen Smith from Oregon says he was misled about this military action from the beginning, he has not got it in his heart to believe the administration about this war nor can he support his votes previously in it's favor #5 - ????? whos' feverished brain pooped this out?

First, I object to the dismissive and insulting claim of, "handfuls of lives" --- especially when not one of those tens of thousands of Americans lives destroyed by this war need have suffered such loss Second, peddling fear about what might happen to Iraq in a pull-out is hypothetical nonsense - the truth is, there is nothing worse for Iraqis than what is happening right now - it can only get better

No, he is not. He IS Commander in Chief of the armed forces but has no authority to declare war or make treaties. Moreover, he is bound by law and constitution against a number of actions and activities he has already taken/engaged in. America was led to the Conquest of Iraq by way of a very large fraud, perpetrated by the Bush admin. Beyond that, was there a point to your question?

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.p...&CODE=01&HID=17 I've read the rules. The part of the rules I didn't read was the part about giving GWB the slack some folks think he needs to be given. Nor did I see anywhere how BAC's post would be so voluminous in context of it's offering as to violate the rules. Nor do I see your name on the list of admin so, what authority do you claim in support of your bullying effort????

I think you need children or a dog. Someone you can tell what to do. Bush deserves no defense. You might want to learn the netiquette of posting here before you shown the hard way. are threats, such as this, considered proper, 'netiquette?' --- I think not

I'd like to grip him around the throat --- but I am willing to settle for impeachment. He is, after all, not just in violation of his oath in so many areas but the worst president in US history. and THAT is saying something!!!

It may require courage but impeachment is the only logical action given the violations of not just law but of the very Constitution they swore to uphold and defend, by the current Administration. This isn't even much of a question, their admissions have been made in public.

Boston Globe I am hoping this starts a much more frank and public debate about what's going on in Iraq - the quicker we address this, the sooner our boys will be removed from the deadly peril created for them by the Bush administration

Sounds like a sunday afternoon under Saddam or the Taliban. Keep on fighting boys. Only 3,000 dead US soldiers is tiny. That's like one MONTH in Vietnam. Since the Bush admin detained combatants in Gitmo, took out Iraq and Afghan and developed a presence in the Mid East we've been taking the war to them. Now we're talking about a subversion in Syria. That would be great. Slowly but surely the plan is taking shape. If only the skittish ADD media trained zombie left would have some visino and patience to see it through... actually, it's 20,000+ Iraqis killed in 2006 - 3000 dead soldiers is not, by any stretch, 'tiny' - moreover that comparison to vietnam is severely flawed because the military in Iraq has superior body armor and medical response --- 3000 dead and 15,000 limbs and lives of families, all but destroyed - over 50% of US soldiers wounded in Iraq come home to live on welfare programs - it has been shown that with the same equiptment and medical facilities as we had in vietnam, the death toll among American soldiers in Iraq would already be greater than the entire vietnam war Bush has been taking a war to the middle east - but he hasn't helped America nor any part of the free world, not a whit -- this wreckless adventure is all the more shameful for the brutality and slaughter that marked those wreckless adventures of late 19th and early 20th centuries

Surge? that just seems to be another Buschista spin effort --- this time to avoid the word, 'escalation.' I wonder who believes them anymore?