Operation Enduring Freedom/The War Against Terrorism

  1. According to the local news, troops are preparing for deployment for a war against Iraq in the war against terrorism. What I can't understand is why they are putting out such blatant propaganda and lies. Is the news media conspiring with the Bush administration to deliberately mislead the public about the pending war against Iraq? So this is propaganda? They know full well that this war is not about terrorism. It isn't even about weapons of mass destructions. Just today, Bush himself said it was about "liberation". His story changes so frequently he can't get it straight. And worst of all, he made himself (and the U.S.) look hypocritical when he chose to ignore N. Korea's nuclear program all the while pressing on for war against Iraq. This is unreal. Thank God my husband doesn't have to go and put his life on the line for OIL this time. He already did once. I'm sorry for those who have family members at risk. I just had to vent.




    •  
  2. 38 Comments

  3. by   mario_ragucci
    I know. I don't think the fighting in Iraq has anything to do with my security. I'm sorry :-(
  4. by   maureeno
    In the most recent poll, 50% trust Bush, 48% do not trust him.
    His approval rating is 55%.
    52% of Americans support a war with Iraq but 2/3 want proof of WMD.
    BushII is gambling on a spectacular quick and low cost win. He has been able to shift the war on terrorism into a pre-emptive war with Iraq.
    I feel like I am living in a Greek tragedy written with an Orwellian/Huxley twist.
  5. by   ChainedChaosRN
    Last May there was a statement issued from the White House that quoted Bush as saying we would attack Iraq the first of next year. The news media hound dogs didn't comment, no one asked ..WHAT??? We've obviously had this agenda for at least a year. I do not follow the news religiously but is it terrorism? They have nukes? They have oil? Will we ever know the full truth? How many dogs can they wag at once?
  6. by   rncountry
    I have a new found relative that works in microbiology at Walter Reed Army Hospital. It is interesting to note that she says there is not strong support for a war against Iraq there, though it seems to be the topic on everyone's lips. When the events of Sept.11 took place I felt right then that we should be attacking Iraq as one of those that promoted terrorism, due to the reports that one of the hijackers that flew into the WTC had met with an Iraqi "diplomat" ie operative. As time has gone on and nothing further about this has been said, as well as nothing else that connects the Iraqi's to Sept.11 I have taken the other position. I do think that Iraq has the potential to cause great havoc, but I KNOW that Al Quada already has and plans to do more. I can't help but feel with that line of reasoning that Saudi Arabia is more of a problem than is Iraq. Not like we are likely to do anything there though, not to mention this is a regime that is very skilled at the art of deception and manipulation.
    I fear that no matter what the opinions are of this country the President is hell bent on going to war with Iraq.
  7. by   fergus51
    Rncountry, there was a former CIA man on 60 minutes recently. He was working for lawyers trying to sue Iraq on behalf of victims of the WTC. He said flat out this meeting probably never happened. The security agencies that initially said it did have backed away from that and even using his contacts he was unable to find any evidence that an Iraqi operative met with any of the highjackers. Just another scary example of the power of the press being misused
  8. by   sbic56
    Most Americans understand that the reason for any invasion of Iraq is about oil and a personal vandetta on the part or our current president. S. Hussein wanted his dad dead. It's revenge, plain and simple. Why does he try to tie in terrorism? Only because that is a reason that is acceptable to Americans. He can't very well say that he wants to attack Iraq for the real reasons. It's a scarey time to be an American. At least his approval rating is dropping, so he will hopefully have only the remainder of this term to ruin America's reputation in the eyes of the rest of the world. I just hope he is out before it is too late for us to recover from the damage he has done.
  9. by   Q.
    What we we all be thinking if 2 years prior to 9/11, we wanted to attack Afghanistan? Would we be saying the same thing we are now about Iraq?

    Hard to tell, isn't it?
  10. by   sbic56
    What did attacking Afghanistan really accomplish in the war against terrorism? Besides, should we be attacking various suspect countries on the basis of "what if?"
  11. by   l.rae
    Originally posted by Susy K
    What we we all be thinking if 2 years prior to 9/11, we wanted to attack Afghanistan? Would we be saying the same thing we are now about Iraq?

    Hard to tell, isn't it?

    Suzy,ppl can always find something/someone /somewhere...to back their oppinion....and l am talking both sides....but l am with you on this.......l don't know what it will take, but thankfully this was not the prevailing oppinion when we were in the 2 world wars...and others previous... someday l believe pple will be thankful in is not the prevailing thought now...this is about so much more than oil....that is so short sighted....lgot this e-mail the other day...it is thought provoking...so l will just put it here



    I want you to close your eyes and picture in your mind the soldier at Valley Forge, as he holds his musket in his bloody hands. He stands barefoot in the snow, starved from lack of food, wounded from months of battle and emotionally scarred from the eternity away from his family surrounded by nothing but death and carnage of war.
    He stands though, with fire in his eyes and victory on his breath.
    He looks at us now in anger and disgust and tells us this..
    " I gave you a birthright of freedom born in the Constitution and now your children graduate too illiterate to read it.
    I fought in the snow barefoot to give you the freedom to vote and you stay at home because it rains.
    I left my family destitute to give you the freedom of speech and you remain silent on critical issues, because it might be bad for business.
    I orphaned my children to give you a government to serve you and it has stolen democracy from the people."
    It's the soldier not the reporter who gives you the freedom of the press.
    It's the soldier not the poet who gives you the freedom of speech.
    It's the soldier not the campus organizer who allows you to demonstrate.
    It's the soldier who salutes the flag, serves the flag, whose coffin is draped with the flag that allows the protester to burn the flag!!!
    "Lord, hold our troops in your loving hands. Protect them as they
    protect us. Bless them and their families for the selfless acts they perform for us in our time of need. I ask this in the name of Jesus, our Lord and Savior. Amen."
    When you receive this, please stop for a moment and say a prayer for our U.S. ground troops in Afghanistan, AND all over this world.





    ok.....flame on.......................b
  12. by   Q.
    Originally posted by sbic56
    What did attacking Afghanistan really accomplish in the war against terrorism? Besides, should we be attacking various suspect countries on the basis of "what if?"
    No, we shouldn't, but let's be realistic. If we had what the CIA or Bush considered "hard evidence" of terrorist cells that were planning some "catostrophic event" on US soil, but obviously didn't share ALL the details to the general public, would you have been convinced enough to support an attack on Afghanistan before 9/11 occurred, and thus thwarting it?

    My guess is no. And even though there would be 5,000 more American lives living today, we'd still find reason to disagree with it because well, hindsight is 20/20.
  13. by   sbic56
    I am suprised you think that I'd say no to an attack on Afghanistan prior 9/11 if there were "hard evidence" of such an impending attack. If Bush and his boys had some hard evidence that Iraq was currently planning something against the US, I'd feel differently. I also think that if there were hard evidence, we'd know it. I don't believe there is any. As I said previuously, I don't believe this is about terrorism.
  14. by   Q.
    Hey, well lucky for Bush 9/11 occurred - that way it would be easier to use terrorism as a platform. Imagine if it hadn't? What would he use?

    No, we wouldn't know the "hard evidence." Do you really think that such information is disclosed to the media? Not.

close