first off, i would like to applaud the vast majority of you in this thread for conducting extremly well thought out arguments. this is, i believe, the first time i've ever seen this kind of deductive reasoning on this site. reps to everyone i can for keeping it civil (for the most part) and making for some VERY good reading.
that being said, i believe most people in her have brought about valid arguments as to what they believe. i will go ahead and state that while i support our president, i do not necessarily agree with all of his decisions. again, that being said, i'd like to remind everyone that it is not just good 'ol g.dub making these decisions. congress can veto just about any bill that the pres tries to get passed if they find it inadequate or unnecessary after review. lol he most definatly is not the best public speaker, but his speaking falacies aren't AS common (note: not saying they dont happen lol) as the media and those funny little calanders try to convey.
as previously stated by a couple of you, the intel that there were WMDs (lol @ team america reference) was gathered by troops on the ground and not by bush himself, but i also think that the dateline of such intel should've been observed more closely than it was. if more recent findings would have shown that they had been moved/sold then the outcome of what happened might've been different. however, i do believe that bringing saadam (i dont think i spelled that right) down was a definate plus. however, the man that this whole war was started over has yet to be accounted for. personally, i believe that is part of the reason we're still over there in such force, as well as to keep protecting american soil. while attacks on us are few and far between since we're over there, i cant help but think somehow somewhere more terrorists (not necessarily of middle eastern decent) are/will be plotting yet another attack. but that is for a different day.
tony, to answer your 2 questions...
1: absolutly not. i take in every bit of info given and try to use my own logic to decide wether i need to agree or disagree with what the media is trying to portray.
2: i think you have a valid point and agree to an extent, but i disagree if your point was that is the only reason we're currently over there. however, if it is one factor of the decision to remain, then i'll support it. if they're doing all they can to regulate the value of the dollar then i'm all for it.
again, kudos to everybody in this thread as many valid points and arguments have been brought forth.
edit:
damn, am i REALLY reading this in the WHORESLOUNGE?!?!?! i am impressed.
Reply With Quote