Who stamped out desent?
Nobody.
We opposed the Left's idiocy, but didn't stop you from exhibiting it.
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I was responding to someone who said to shut up till the war was over. That's my bad, I must have misread...oh wait, no I didn't. You're just not taking all the data into consideration and just wanted to go on partisan bickering. "left's idiocy"...what about the "right's idiocy" cause you're all the same form of stupid.
We weren't attacked by Germany either.
Saddam lost Gulf War 1. He signed on to disarm, not fight a slow cook battle and play games with disarmament that went on for 12-years.
What ridiculousness. Germany was in alliance with Japan who did attack us. Germany did actually pose threat to the US. How about not apples to oranges. Think you can manage?
He kicked out Clouseau and the other Inspecteurs of the Sorte (UN).
It was Saddam, he liked pretending he was a big man...and what is the UN going to do anyway? It's rather useless.
He was given one last chance. He did not take it.
The war was not only just, Democrat Senators begged for a second vote to show support.
All intel agencies in the world said he had WMD, including the UN.
The war was not just, intel wasn't right and on such a level that one should be suspicious. Dems and Republicans wanted the war cause the Democrats and the Republicans are the same thing. Faulty intelligence doesn't make something just, it means you should be more careful in the future.
Saddam did attack sovereign people and the UN mandated we get his ass out. We did. Then we had to finish the job.
He also tried to assassinate a former President.
David Kay believed he was a greater threat than anticipated because the country was ripe for a terrorist/WMD transaction.
Yet there was no proof of major terrorist activity in Iraq. In fact, mostly there was never going to be because Saddam ruled that country with an iron fist and nothing challenged him or disrupted his control and power.
And if that sovereign country is Kuwait, well they were side drilling into Iraq and stealing their oil. It doesn't mean that Saddam was justified in invasion, but he had recourse for some compensation. Furthermore, the current ambassador to Iraq could have prevented the whole of it, but that was a political appointment. The ambassador to Iraq was a big time fund raiser for Bush during the election, so got that job. Saddam asked what America would do if he took action against Kuwait for sidedrilling and th ambassador basically said that we'd have no opinion on it. Which of course isn't true, and I'm sure had the ambassador said something like "while you are entitled compensation for stolen oil, the US would heavily look unfavorably upon military action taken against Kuwait" the whole of it would have been avoided; but it wasn't. And Bush 1 was right to stop outside of overthrowing Saddam, not our place to set up governments.
Also, Kuwait is a monarchy, aren't we spreading democracy? Ha
Thank the troops for your rant and your party's inexplicable behavior.
What's my party Mr. Foot-in-mouth?
Let's say the team is in the game.
You want them to win... then at a minimum don't aid and abet the enemy... or piss in our troops faces.
When have I done any of that? Would you like to show that? How is dissent against the government aid and abet? Or pissing on the troops? How is being against an unjust, occupational war set on principles and powers the government was never meant to have doing anything you just claimed?
Or is it that you don't want to hear it, and have made lies, hyperbole, and propaganda to make it seem that if you dare speak out against the war you are somehow damaging the troops. What sort of idiot actually believes that? It's nothing more than partisan hackery to try to quell proper dissent against a war that should have never happened.
Congress and the President deemed it was worthy.
Call your representative.
That doesn't mean I don't get to say anything. Government is corruptible, government is inherently corrupt and naturally progresses towards tyranny and treason. That was an important and well reiterated lesson from the founders. Am I not to speak against unjust government? Really? In the end what you speak against is dissent, and being able to dissent and actually dissenting is one of the most patriotic things a person can do. But you don't like the message of the dissent so you're trying your damnedest to make up excuses as to why the dissent should stop. But it's nothing impressive, it's all full of logical holes and assumptions and other crap rapidly glued together to try to make an argument to halt dissent.
The people find folks like you disrespectful, and that is the diplomatic response.
They enlisted and believe in what they are doing.
What have I done? Show me what I have done that is disrespectful. And if people find it disrespectful that sounds a hell of a lot like their damned problem. You can't rightfully infringe upon my rights because of it; not if you value freedom and liberty. But this neo-fascist approach our government and its supporters have taken lately certainly do not value freedom and liberty. It values State over the People. That's a lot worse than speaking out against unjust, undeclared, unending, occupational war.
Actions have consequences. As does inaction.
Actions do have consequence, something many don't understand. We messed with the Middle East for 60+ years and somehow some of you are surprised that people there hate us and the West.
Your party leaders, a disgusting lot, lead their party faithful down a twisted road.
You actually voted for the war, and then turned your backs on our troops.
The least you could have done is not scream indignation so the enemy would draw strength.
Have propaganda victories.
Have daily material to pump up their idiots.
Who's my party? I never voted for the war, nor do I support those whom did. I align myself with Ron Paul, who voted against the war on all instances because he understood that it wasn't the charge of the government, that the Constitution doesn't give unwavering ability to the government to wage whatever war if feels like that day.
You chose otherwise.
You have to live with those actions and their consequences; the blood of our troops on your hands.
That's stupid, it really is stupid. Intellectually devoid, emotional appeal with no basis is reality. Why is the blood on my hands? When did I send them into a war which has nothing to do with the soveriegnty, freedom, and liberty of America? I didn't do that. The "blood" is on the hands of those who are either too blind or too partisan to see that the course which was taken was improper, that it unnecessarily put at risk the lives and well being of our troops for something which had nothing to do with us. The people who still defend such suspicious and unjust actions as occupational war and those whom spout ignorance like "if you're not with us, you're against us" or "speaking out against the war is not supporting the troops". A bunch of hackery, and full of the type of intelligence I expect to find in a 2nd grade classroom.
Nobody told you you cannot.
Only it has consequences... for our troops.
Enemies love it when their own society is crapping on the troops and government.
Then I suggest our government no engage in unconstitutional, imperialistic occupational wars against sovereign states which pose no threat to America.
