Printable View
Why does some **** always have to come into these sorts of threads to spout off with their anti-American diatribe? :spamsign:
If you want to hang crap on them, there is a section called the 'soapbox' (or even better keep that **** to yourself!) :mad:
I think he was referring to a Four Corners report. You'd better take your complaint to the ABC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Treads
And it is possible to be anti U.S. foreign policy and still be supportive of the American people.
Well said, no one is a winner out of this situation, whatever side of the fence you are on. Bob 10:(
Not at all anti - USA. Overall, they have made the world a better place. I am, perhaps, a little suspicious of George W. Did he use the tragedy of the World Towers to further US influence in the middle east? It is a valid question, particularly as he ignored the advice of his own CIA in invading Iraq. If you have not followed the post 9/11 events, here is a quick, and very rough, summary:
Afghanistan was a CIA operation. It involved minimal US (or allied) troops and was a brilliant success, overthrowing the radical Taliban and ousting Al Qaeda from their bases (we will not go into the more moderate Taliban that were, at the time, taking control of the party and also wanted Al Qaeda gone). When George W. floated the idea of the Iraq invasion, the CIA response was that it was ill advised in that there was no real evidence of WMD's and a high probability of long term instability and difficult to disengage US involvement (proved an accurate assessment). However, their main objection was that Afghanistan needed priority to fully defeat the Taliban and win the population to US sponsored democracy, and Iraq would take the focus off Afghanistan which would allow the Taliban to re-establish.
The WMD argument was based on a fawning NSA assessment, not the CIA which argued against the NSA.
George W. did not consider the information with unbiased reason and chose only to believe that which fitted his objectives.
The ABC and especially four corners has always been notoriously biassed with a left wing anti US leaning.
Most people believe Micheal Moore even though he has been proven to be a liar.
Most people believe George Bush even though he has been proven to be a liar.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad
the widespread and not unjustified belief that the invasion, and all those lost lives on both sides, is about securing oil supplies
If they had been honest about Iraq many who remember the oil embargo of the seventies would have supported them. Remember americans shooting each other in the lines at servos and aussies beating each other up on the odds and even days waiting for their 2 gal of fuel those who say oil isnt worth fighting for proberbly dont remember what its like when there is none:(
:(:(
PS what do you mean Mickeal Moore dosnt tell the truth:eek::wasntme:
I doubt the person who posted this thread was intending to have a mob of anti's hijack it for their own political agenda :angrylock:
Otherwise he would have just put this in the soapbox to start with
How about for once we talk about the construction etc instead of who's **** is bigger? :p
Spot on Mate, As a retired firefighter I felt for all the rescuers.The email I received came from a retired NYFD firefighter whom I have known for many years.
John ( disco44)
Terrists all over the world know firefighters, ambos and police will run straight to an attack and try and help they plan for it, this was not so much an attack on the american govt as claimed but an attack on the people:(
No matter how much you dislike the US govt policies this was wrong:mad: