Stiras1, the “your” above should be “you’re” as in “You are childish”. I’m just saying.

“SA, you’re probably a lot of fun to go out and have drinks…with”

I don’t drink, VM, but I am a lot of fun! Thanks for the info on getting back to my blog from yours, and the offer to stop by PGZ still stands.

SA, prepare yourself. My defending Bush against hyperbole and unwarranted attacks will never, in your book, be good enough. Your mind was made up about me long ago. I don’t expect it to change which is why some of my responses to you are lazily written.

Although this blog is mostly political, I’ve only rarely spoken about Bush. But you are also more than welcome to my archives that begin in Feb. of 2005. You’ll find a lot of my politics there as well.

Additionally, this “Bush was a barbarian president” thing that you bring up that you are committing to my having said needs to be proven by YOU as you are the one making the accusations. In any event, one could easily argue that Bush IS barbaric as he was aiding and abetting a barbaric war along with Gitmo torture tactics. So, who knows.. maybe I did say that?! But it is a trend with you that you are never able to quote me.And that’s frustrating!!

SA, you’re probably a lot of fun to go out and have drinks and shoot some pool with, but regarding politics and religion, I never see any grays in your arguments. Your thinking for the most part is too black and white which makes it hopeless to have a stimulating intense debate with you.

If arguing proves impossible later on, we can always agree to disagree. I mean, after all, politically (even though I’m not a true left liberal — see my political profile) we are polar opposites!!

About your not being able to return to your page after visiting mine, I have had those problems on other websites before and what I do is right click the back button and hit the site I had visited previously, and presto – I’m there!

About the oil thing: yes, it does make the world go around, and we’re going to continue to need it for a while. I think the Bush admin was so steeped in the oil industry that that’s all they could really understand. Their goals never changed.
But, unless they were hoping for kickbacks for themselves, I can’t understand how they thought the economics would work. The war and occupation are far more expensive than anyone was led to believe.

Oh and thank you Patrick Sperry. For a nice comment. You might be able to teach Sean-Anna a thing or two.

Just because we take the time to critizise the most powerful govenment in the world does not make us mean, it shows that we do care about what is going on in the world.

I don’t know how old you are, but your reminding me of a bitchy thirteen year old girl. Your childish and if I might add STUPID!!!!

Now as far as your second point is concerned, any expression of opinion is accompanied by inherent risks and appropriate strategies. So again, what’s your point? In communist Russia, sometimes dissidents spoke out in spite of the risk. In the comfy west, people often keep quiet to preserve what they have, even as their rights are being eroded, so long as it is not them that is being targeted. Now, with the neocons safely out of the way, perhaps we can all breathe just a little bit easier. Your point?

Oh, and Alex, if our democratic principles have been so assaulted how come you feel perfectly free to write the stuff you did? Aren’t you afraid you’ll be carried off in the middle of the night, never to be seen again?

VM, the spam thing is ok. Even you’re not perfect. But I have a suggestion. Everytime I come to your blog I have a hard time going back to my own. I have to hit the return arrow on my laptop a gazillion times before I can get back to my site. I thought it was my computer but this doesn’t happen on any other blog or website I visit. So how about stopping by PGZ? We can trade jabs there just as well as we can here. And as for the links to the posts where you defended Bush, I didn’t see them. Really. So if it’s not too much to ask I’d like to have them again. I really want to read what you wrote about Bush. And yes, you DID call Bush a barbarian. Like I said, I believe it was in a post you wrote in November, but I could be wrong. You referred to him as a “barbarian president”. Yes, you did.

And JM, it’s nice to see you’re psychic and can read my mind. I didn’t know that my calling Obama Osama was a reference to Obama’s Muslim father. I thought it was a reference to my opinion that the Sultan of Surrender would be soft on terrorism. Silly me. Thanks for setting me straight.

One more thing. America has been attacked by terrorists, but you have not had a war in America in a very long time. Yes soliders die, but the people are usualy safe. People here are still remebering what they went through in WWII and that is why we hate war. My gradmother tells me stories all the time about how scary it was having soliders going through the streets of Norway. We had them in our country and we do not forget.

There must be a better way of dealing with things.

Alright, I may have misinterpreted the communication.

“And, please, don’t delude yourself”

I said the legal reason i.e. International law and the treaty. Which also addresses “enough to mount a preemptive war on a country for it”

“esp since none of it was ever enough”

I had no idea that you were an expert in radiation related illnesses. For my part I have cared for a lot of yellow cake miners that died horribly from cancers related to mining uranium, and they had “protective gear” that limited the amounts of material inhaled or ingested.

Yep, it was all about oil! Not that western economies would last a year without oil. It must have been all about that though, since the wonderful low prices at the pump last year were a direct result of warfare economics. Or was that so that Cheney would have a cushy retirement? I forget, I mean really, I can’t keep up with all those war for oil conspiracies.

BTW, I argued against going to Iraq in part because I believe that if we did in fact need to stick our collective noses into other countries business we should have went to Sudan or Zimbabwe. We had our hands full with Afghanistan then, still do, and never should have even attempted any other foreign excursions at least until we had that tigers tail chopped off. But I digress…

Patrick: stiras1 confined his criticism to the government, which I think is generous given the percentage of Americans supporting attacking Iraq in the runup to the war in 2003. And, please, don’t delude yourself: the Iraq war was never about making a better life for other people (if that were the case, many, many times more are being killed in Darfur than ever in Iraq). The work is, at this point, stabilization, which, of course, involves building civilian infrastructure.
The weapons found notwithstanding (esp since none of it was ever enough to mount a preemptive war on a country for it), the main reason we attacked Iraq was for oil. This has been confirmed by many affiliated, allied actors such as Poland.

Did Bush et al screw up the aftermath of the Iraq invasion? well, if you listen to just about everyone in America then the unequivocal answer is yes. Further, one does not need a degree in Military Science to figure that one out. However, the fact of the matter is that we did go there and break the damned thing. (Iraq)
Now, for some damned reason, we think we have a moral obligation to fix it. Question; Why is it that you think we should not still be in Iraq ( and/ or Afghanistan) attempting to make life better for the people in those places? Is it because their skin is brown? Or perhaps because they follow a different religion? In case you haven’t noticed our people, troops and civilians alike have been building schools (even for women! Heaven forbid!) and infrastructure. Removing land mines left over from previous wars, and teaching the local peoples how to do those things for themselves once we have left.

Those evil Americans, and their evil government! They never ever think about the lasting consequences of their war mongering ways, now do they (?)!

Yeah, just like Obama.

No, just like everybody. So stop the comparisons to treatment by Hitler; it just makes you look like an utter fool.

“The GOP really needs to…throw out the partisan, religious hacks that have dominated the party for the past 20 years.”

That would make the GOP into the Democrats, the party of partisan, anti-religious hacks. No thank you.

Are you delusional? Did you miss the fact that Democrats are almost as likely to invoke “God and country” as the Republicans? At least they know where to draw the line between church and state.
I suspect, however, most Republicans agree with you and you’ll continue to act like children until someone with actual vision leads you in a different direction. We might be waiting for a while.

“…Obama was called Osama…as a racial slur.”

I happen to be Black, so that blows your racism accusation out of the water, at least with regards to me. But I’m not surprised by it. America elects a Black president and liberals still fall back on their pet grievance. When all else fails, cry racism. It’s pathetic.

I don’t give a good goddamn that you’re black; you’re obviously unclear that racism can be directed to non-black people, and being black doesn’t clue you in. This wasn’t a general comment about Obama being a victim for his race; this was the use of “Osama” as a nickname by people like you because of his father’s Muslim background.
Ugh…why do I bother responding to people who are clearly trolls? I think I’ll stop now.

There are some fundamental basics that bond the general Left and Liberals, naturally. But from what I see, the radicals should be seen as a separate entity on to their own. I see them as being mentally ill. There are many radicals out there – enough to create blogs over and share outrage. However, in the grand scheme of things, they DO represent the minority when compared with the rest of the world.

Yes, I do see an unjustified war and a dictator two totally different things.

My opinion of Obama? Pre-presidential judgements and my opinion of his presidency can possibly be different. Can they not? We are into his presidency now. How can I complain or applaud him so early on? I am not that type of person. I wait for one to do or not do something before I form an opinion.

As far as the pre-presidential Obama is concerned… not everything he said or did stroked me the right way. Why did I vote for him? Because politically speaking, he and I are on the same plane … and that is for the most part.

I don’t trust that Obama will do all that he has promised because I can never be so gullible. However, is it a crime for me to trust that he will deliver something positive – something positive at all? Can I not have any hope at all? I am happy with what I am seeing so far. But if you want to get technical, I cannot seriously judge how he is as a president because I haven’t gotten to see what’s he’s got to offer this country and the world. Again, it is too early.

Do I believe that he intends to fight terrorism? Yes. Could I be wrong with my trust in him? Of course.

Now, I never did call Bush a barbarian. Where did you find that I said that. See, there you go putting words in my mouth. Hun. You need to stop that.

I have provided links to you already on where I have defended Bush. I am tired of having to repeat myself again and again. It is up to YOU to believe me. It is your choice.

Why are all things black and white in your world. Why must I hate everything about Bush? Why must one on the Right love everything about Bush. He, in my opinion, was unfairly judged on occasion to which I defended him. But I will say it again, I HATE most of Bush’s policies. He is not as bad as some have made it out to be and has been the target of hyperbole. But I am glad he’s gone. I DO NOT LIKE BUSH AS A PRESIDENT.

Obviously, we define some terms here and there differently. Such is life.