U.S. President George W. Bush bolstered his Israel-Palestine peace treaty plan this past week and called on the leaders of the two countries to make "painful concessions" during his two-day Holy Land tour.
The "painful" concessions will mean dismantling "terrorist infrastructure" and ending Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories, he said.
Bush marked the beginning of his eight-day tour to the Middle East with the renewed push for an Israeli-Palestinian peace pact — an accord he said whose "time has come."
During his two-day visit to Israel and West Bank, Bush engaged in formal talks with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, saying that the two sides needed to get serious talks started immediately.
"There should be an end to the occupation that began in 1967," Bush told reporters in Jerusalem on Thursday. "The agreement must establish a Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people, just as Israel is a homeland for the Jewish people."
Bush also called on Palestinians to confront terrorists and dismantle "terrorist infrastructure."
"Security is fundamental," the president said. "No agreement and no Palestinian state will be born of terror."
Bush also appealed for "Arab countries to reach out to Israel."
"In order for there to be lasting peace... Abbas and Prime Minister [Ehud] Olmert have to come together and make tough choices and Im convinced they will," he said in Ramallah.
"I believe it's going to happen, that there's going to be a signed peace treaty by the time I leave office."
However, Bush also reiterated that the U.S. cannot dictate the terms of peace nor the terms of what a state will look like.
"But we'll help, and we want to help," he added.
Both Abbas and Olmert agreed to work toward such an agreement at the Nov. 27 U.S.-sponsored peace summit in Annapolis, Md.
After two days immersed in Mideast peacemaking, Bush toured Christian holy sites in northern Israel on Friday, listening as robed clerics read him biblical passages about Jesus' days of ministry there centuries ago.
Bush visited Capernaum, a site where Jesus performed miracles, and gazed across the Sea of Galilee, where Jesus walked on water. The president toured the site of an ancient synagogue and held hands with nuns outside the Church of the Beatitudes, where many believe Jesus delivered his famed "Sermon on the Mount."
When asked how it felt to walk in Jesus' footsteps, Bush called it an "amazing experience."
During the visit, Bush was given a crystal statue inscribed with the words "Blessed are those who are peacemakers for they will be called children of God," from the sermon recounted in the fifth chapter of the book of Matthew.
Archbishop Elias Shakur, the Greek Catholic clergyman who showed Bush around the site, said he asked him, "Did you come as a politician, as a leader of state, or as a pilgrim?"
"I came as a pilgrim," Bush said, according to Shakur.
Bush also toured Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem, which he called a "sobering reminder that evil exists and a call that when we find evil we must resist it."
The peace effort was the centerpiece of Bush's eight-day tour, which ends Wednesday.
But Bush – only the second U.S. head of state to visit the Palestinian territories – faces the difficult task of winning over the hearts and minds of Palestinians, who are deeply skeptical about his ability to be an even-handed peace broker as Israel`s closest ally.
"I don't believe he (Bush) will do anything for the Palestinians," said Mohammad Khaldi, a 64-year-old Ramallah resident, according to AFP. "If he wanted to really do something, he had six years for that and he didn`t do a single thing.”
On his way to Kuwait, to visit Sunni Arab allies, Bush said he'd would ask them to reach out to the Jewish state.
From Kuwait he was then scheduled to head to Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, where he is expected to discuss with U.S. allies in the region various issues including Iraq's security, the role of Iran in the region and others. Bush returns to Washington on Wednesday.
RSS
Theotrek, I am not saying it won't do that, I said I would be careful to assume something for which evidence is philosophical if not absent. And I find it very interesting that we were able to see beyond our current universe. Perhaps God spoke to the scientists? I mean really, do they look at the particles or the way the universe is expanding and then deduce, oh well it must have exploded 3 times already.
Chris333-I believe the "conjecture" is based on the laws of physics. If the universe contracts, it would do so at a decent speed, creating an enormous explosion, likely resulting in one more Big Bang. It would be hard to imagine gravity holding in all the matter converging for that impact. The last I read on the matter, this is predicted to be at least the third such collision in universal history.
well citsonga, I agree with your statement that the universe isn't predicted to end in another 20billion years or some extreme amount of time, but I would be careful about saying the universe is going to expand again. This is a theory based solely on conjecture, there is no evidence supporting it.
"GOD is the decider,"
What you say? I thought bush said he was the decider......
"We are living in fallen world that is in the End Times."
There have been predictions of the "End Times" for a few thousand years now. A few thousand years from now, predictions of the "End Times" will still be with us. If a certain cosmological model of the universe is correct, in perhaps another 20 billions years the universe will collapse on itself to form a singularity and time will end.....until, the next Big Bang, when the universe and time will reemerge for another grand cycle.
Annie--
1 Cor 6:2-4 definitely makes room for judging the action of others. This is different from outright condemnation, but we ARE to hold each other accountable.
1John 4:1 follows along the same lines that we are to weigh the information we have at hand.
Just because God allows things doesn't mean He approves of them. We are living in fallen world that is in the End Times.
God's Word tells us that in the End Times, much of what is happening is Biblical Prophecy!
God did allow those others to be in authority, God's plan of salvation is being worked out here on earth and the purposes of GOD.
America was formed as a Republic, NOT a democracy! "to the republic for which it stands, one nation under GOD! Many have forgotten that in the midst of kicking God out of the public square.
God tells us why we have wars, and it's always nice to have someone to blame instead of taking responsibility for our own decisions.
I am not confused at all, I know that my JESUS is LORD and it's not my call to judge my brother;
Why do people think that man is going to "fix" this world when GOD says it is reserved for fire? I have never been more clear on my thinking and having prayed for Godly wisdom in these end times.
I look around the world and ask God to give me HIS eyes to see what is taking place. Mankind (those who don't walk with Jesus) are in rebellion, and all the natural disasters we see increasing are also part of the end time signs that Jesus Himself talked about!
Jesus said, I am to give the reason for the HOPE that I have, and that reason is JESUS! There is no other hope for this dead world. JESUS delivers us out from this world when we accept and receive what HE did on the Cross and thus we enter into The Kingdom of God and we are no longer citizens of this world, but are Citizens of Heaven!
I am an alien here, this is not my home, so I pray for the people of this world to come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and come out of the kingdom of darkness and into The Kingdom of Light!
GOD is the decider, HE rules and overrules! Glory to JESUS!
to chris333 / to annie - I did not mean to be mean or that I am right & you are wrong or I am wrong & you are right. I am just stating the obvious. I have a lot of respect for this country for its laws & its past leaders trying to do their best of what is right. but sometimes what is right can be made wrong. so that just my point
You are probably right, even if Iraq did have WMD we don't have any evidence. But that means that we entered into the war in Iraq under misplaced suppositions, it doesn't mean this entire war is just to put some change in Bush's pocket. That was my point.
chris333 - from oct or nov. 2002 to mar 2003 bush kept repeating & repeating that saddam had wmds & described mushroom cloud, smoking gun & link to al queda & he said it over & over & over. his no 2 dicky said 'we have no doubt that saddam have wmds & are planning to use it against us & our allies.' richard perle said in an analogy 'that if a missile is ready to be launched against us, we would attack to prevent it.' this is the first president to use a pre emptive attack against another country.
annie - that is fine of what you indicated. but the only person who will make the decisions will be bush himself. are the decisions he is making based on wisdom, understanding, knowledge & justice or is it based on love of money?
pro. 17:23 a wicked man accepts bribe in secret to pervert the course of justice.
pr. 29:4 by justice a king gives a country stability but on who is greedy for bribes tears it down
pr. 12:20 there is deceit in the hearts of those who plot evie, but joy for those who promote peace.
dt. 16:18-20 appoint judges & officials for each of your tribe in every town god has given you & they shall judge the people fairly. do not pervert justice or show partiality do not accept bribe for it blinds the eyes of the wise & twist the words of the righteous.
1 tim 6:9-10 people who want to get rich fall into temptation... that plunge men into ruin & destruction. for the love of money is the root of all evil.
christ was not judging the pharisees, experts in the law. he was trying to open their eyes bec. they were adding more suffering to the already suffering people. this great country was founded by laws & justice that is why officials are given authority & prevents them from abusing their power. ok?
seedplanter: "There were satellite video images of Iraqi people moving large vehicles out of their compounds on one entrance as the weapon inspectors moved in to investigate from another. There were also hypothetical diagrams of semi-truck holding cells of mini-factories. I seen the video feed, it was amazing. I personally maintain that it is still possible that there were weapons shipped out of the country."
well, dont think this was enough to invade a country that has cost thousands of lives, distruction of a country, hundreds of billions of dollars and a quagmire that we are stuck in.. The world is filled with WMD's.. The US has thousands of its own. China and Russia have thousands of them and can be easily be targeted, either intentionally or by error, at the good ol US of A. Thats where the real potential threat to the US lies. Not by a handful of WMD that saddam might have had or for that matter what Iran might have, The war in Iraq, as was Vietnam, is a complete disaster. What possible good can come from it? To me, Iraq looks like it will end broken up like Jugoslavia except for a whole lot more blood shed. It will take a major miracle to keep Iraq together. Its certianly going to cost the US treasury hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars more to hold it all together and an indefinte occupation.
Reread theotrek's posts, he describes the Iraq debacle quite well.
One last thing seedplanter, I assume you are posting from Iraq. its hard to imagine that a strong advocate of the war would want to be anywhere other than there..
kaishinden, Iraq's having oil doesn't qualify as a reason for going to war. Just having a resource means little. Besides that, for the amount of money it has cost us to go to war with Iraq, we could by just about all the oil we need from any number of countries. Iraq had "little" connection if any to 9/11, but for better or worse it was seen as a threat. N. Korea is a different story, as it has major backing by China. I wish we or anybody for that matter would oppose N. Korea, I mean the situation cannot get much worse for the N. Korean people, it is really pathetic. Anyway, my argument was not to say that the war in Iraq is justified, it was only to show that to say the war in Iraq is economically motivated is crazy. Yes some people always benefit from wars, such as defense contractors, but not even the Democratic parties will accuse Bush of going into this war primarily to put money in his pocket. Rather they will just say that the legitimate reasons were not substantiated.
annie: "President Bush did not cause this war,"
yeah right, and Hitler didn't strat World War II.
"Who are any of us to judge George W Bush or anyone else."
Hmmm, bush judged saddam . By your line of reasoning, who was bush to judge saddam, wasn't that gods job?
"My Bible says to pray for those in Authority, because GOD allows them to be in their positions, for HIS purposes!"
by your reasoning, God allowed dictators such as hitler, stalin, pol pot, castro, iranian shah, somoza, pinochet, Mussolini, marcos, kim jong-il, mao zedong, etc, etc
anniefourjesus-- Your last post sounds very confused. You seem to want to keep Bush from being held responsible for pushing us into war, yet you want all people to accept responsibility for it. You can't have it both ways. Bush began the war. We all have our share of responsibility for not speaking loudly enough against it. That does not mean that Bush is above criticism for war-mongering. Now he wants to pick a war with Iran.
"Judge not, lest you be judged" does not mean that we are not to correct one another. (Paul called Peter on the carpet in Jerusalem). It means that our criticism needs to come in the humility of recognizing our own faults.
Chris333-- The defense contractors like Blackwater have profited immensely. I don't see how you need me to hunt down justification of that. No-bid contract awards for rebuilding speak for themselves (I believe some of the same happened in the Katrina fiasco, as well.). Bush's policies have all favored big business, harmed the environment, and neglected the lower income populace in favor of tax breaks for the wealthy. Listen to the news, and the reports are there. no, Bush is not alone in sharing the blame. The lobby system works with both parties, executive and legislative branches.
Hmm, WAR - God's Word tells us why we have wars, man's greed for money, power and control! We all fall short of the glory of GOD, everyone on this site too! Who are any of us to judge George W Bush or anyone else.
Are your lives so on track with God that you can judge someone else.
You have no idea the decisions any President has to make. We are not privy to all the information the President is. My Bible says to pray for those in Authority, because GOD allows them to be in their positions, for HIS purposes!
President Bush did not cause this war, all of mankind had a hand in this; man is in rebellion with GOD and even those of us who have given our lives to JESUS CHRIST had a hand in the overall mess of this world!
You need to have a Biblical Worldview, this world is reserved for FIRE; God's Words, not mine.
Jesus Christ, The King is coming and in the meantime, we need to be about our Father's Business, which is "go ye therefore into all the world and preach THE GOSPEL!
For followers of Jesus Christ, we are in this world but we are not of this world, why do you involve yourselves in the affairs of the foreign government. We are part of The Kingdom of God, not the kingdom of this world!
This world including America is DYING! and we need to be sharing the LOVE OF GOD with everyone we meet! That is our commandment from Jesus!
to chris333 - the problem with the REAL EVIDENCE is it becomes a 'LIBERAL' or 'UNPATRIOTIC' thing. when people oppose this war or tell the truth, they are labeled 'LIBERAL, UNPATRIOTIC, LEFTIST MEDIA etc etc. so how can you say that you NEED REAL EVIDENCE OR TRUTH when it is in front of you but REFUSE TO BELIEVE IT bec of support for a 'christian' president?
here are the reasons for the war TRUTH & findings
1. US was attacked on 911 by osama/alqueda ---- Iraq/saddam had no connection
2. WMDs in iraq ---- No WMDs were found
3. liberation of people ----- kim of Nkorea is a dictator with nukes
4. IT IS NOT ABOUT OIL ---- Iraq has OIL.
remember GEORGE BUSH is the DECIDER he is the one making the decisions regarding policies.
theotrek, I need real evidence of that, not just opinions. But even if it were the case, this would not be a case of America benefiting from the war, only Bush and his friends? Anyway, I am sure that there are some who are exploiting this war, as there are always those who exploit every war. It still doesn't change the enormous financial strain put on America from this war. You didn't deal with that and only gave an unsupported assumption that only Bush and a few others are. If this is true, and this entire war was only to make Bush a little richer, then I would be extremely surprised, and I would say that Bush should be treated as a war criminal. But this just seems too absurd to be taken seriously, that Bush would go into a war to put a little extra change in his pocket and a select few others. It is possible, but I have not heard one democrat hopeful even mention it, and they criticize a lot about the war. I guess you are just smarter than them, and you have more resources than they do though? We ought to look at facts and not hearsay.
citsonga,
There were satellite video images of Iraqi people moving large vehicles out of their compounds on one entrance as the weapon inspectors moved in to investigate from another. There were also hypothetical diagrams of semi-truck holding cells of mini-factories. I seen the video feed, it was amazing. I personally maintain that it is still possible that there were weapons shipped out of the country.
Chris333-War has been a boon for Bush's friends/interests, at the expense of the nation and definitely Iraq. Essentially the same for his friendliness to big business at the expense of environment, middle and lower classes.
Kaishinden,
What I meant is that we definitely have not seen any financial gains from this war. Anti-war proponents will accuse the US of going into this war priarily for monetary gains, and then in the same breath say that this war has cost us so much it has almost sent us into a recession. You can't have it both ways, either this war is a financial boon or a serious detriment. Again I don't think Bush and his office were sitting up in the white house saying, "Hey, lets start a war in Iraq to boost our economy and get oil!" I don't agree with a lot of what Bush does, but both sides have their flaws in this argument.
Citsonga,
Your apology is accepted, and I should confess that I too get pretty fired up on these posts, and don't always say what I mean. I would also ask that you would forgive me if I have said anything that was personally offensive. Sometimes I need a lesson in humility.
why do bush supporters evade the premise of the war, which is 'US has been attacked on 911', & 'there are WMDs in Iraq'. these 2 reasons has been debunked & BUSTED! so, they go around in circles looking for other 'reasons' to justify the war. If that does not work, they label people as 'liberals' or 'unpatriotic'. so if christ spoke against this war, is he a liberal, terrorist lover or false prophet?
seedplanter - if he calls himself the DECIDER, why blame the CIA for his failures. that means that his presidency & cabinet is in chaos, no leadership, accountability or responsibility. bush is the problem.
terrorist in iraq? - alqueda in iraq was created bec. of the invasion.
bush is the problem bec he was itching to go to war. late 2002 to mar. 2003, bush was a broken record that saddam is connected to 911 & had wmds & he has links with osama. for the first time in US history, a president decided a PREEMPTIVE WAR. now the neo cons are changing the story that bush was not rushing to war.
chris333 - not for financial gain? there are kickbacks thanks to the NO BID CONTRACTS by bush's friends on the iraq reconstruction. billions are wasted on fraud & corruption bec. there is no accountability. if there is no competition, greed & love of money is prevalent.
jesus girle - 'no right to judge' - what about clinton? the gop 'cast the first stone' when he forgot to close his zipper on miss monica lewinsky.
bush LABELS himself to be a christian, but he does not act like one.
christ was not gullible. he opened his eyes & saw what was happening. how the pharisees used fear, guilt shame blame & labeling to get their way.
Seedpalnter:
“Don't you realize that there were numerous people who joined the military to go to Iraq?”
So, that’s not related at all whether the Iraq war was the right thing to do. There are thousands if not millions of people that are blinded by patriotism or nationalism that go to war if there leaders want them to. WWI was a perfect example of this.
“The people of Iraq are afraid that we will pull out, leaving them in a bigger mess.”
Well some do, some dont, now that we made a mess of the country, they are rudderless without strong leadership in a country that had been held together by a strong man just as Jugoslavia was held together by a strongman until he died. We know how that turned out.
“Don't you realize that it was Democrats and Republicans who voted to invade Iraq?”
I agree, that doesn’t make it right. Most politicians voted in favor of the war because re-election is paramount to all else for most of them. Most politicians are afraid of being branded weak if they don’t support for military action.
“Did you not see the CIA satellite images of Iraq ditching the weapon inspectors.”
What? Don’t understand.
“Hussein purposely made it look like he had nukes in the works to keep Iran on their toes.”
CIA and the weapons inspectors knew otherwise.
“Are you ignorant of the terrorist training camps in Iraq?”
There are terrorist training camps all around the world. Central and South America, Africa, Asia, India, Pakistan, nothing new there. The US has a history of operating such camps too
“Hillary does not intend to pull out.”
I agree she wont pull out. I wont vote for her because she voted for the war.
“Obama wants to invade Pakistan.”
Yes, I didn’t like that comment, I believe it was only political rhetoric though. I would vote for Ron Paul though. He is the only candidate that understands that many of the problems in ME are due to US foreign policy there. His approx. Quote “They [9-11] came over here because we have been over there.” That is what I have been saying.
“And you're pointing at Bush like he's got the problem?”
He and cheney and the neocons are the ones most responsible for the Iraq debacle.
Chris333, "What kind of person am I? I suppose you know from one post?"
I agree, I dont know what kind of person you are, and my commment was inappropriate, I sometimes get too fired up on these posts. Sorry about that. I should have proof read my comments before I sent them.
"Also, yes in the past we did make some stupid moves in the Middle East just for economic gain"
Ah yes, we are in agreement on something.
"what the US did in the past has nothing to do with what the President is doing now, keep your argument on the right point."
The past is the guide to the present and the future Without knowledge and benefit of the past incalculable mistakes are made, Vietnam and Iraq are perfect examples.
Citsonga,
You said "there are so many errors and statements of ignorance in your post, its hard to know where to start to set you straight. Life is way too short to try to convince a person of your sort the truth. I will say this though, If you believe bush invaded Iraq for reasons of altruism, I have some sandy beach front property for sale in Antartica that I can give you a good deal on."
What kind of person am I? I suppose you know from one post? Just like you seem to know everything about the situation in Iraq as well. What is more, you accused me of having "way too many errors" and then provided an example that I didn't even say. I never said Bush went in for reasons of altruism, you assume too much. We haven't gotten a whole lot of oil out of this deal, and if anything we have put ourselves in a financial mess from this war. Finances were not the reason we went into this war, you need to think about this. Are you assuming Bush and his office were sitting in the white house and thought "Hey lets invade Iraq to benefit our economy!" Come on, who is selling who beach front property in Antartica?
Also, yes in the past we did make some stupid moves in the Middle East just for economic gain, but that is not what I am talking about, I am talking about now, what the US did in the past has nothing to do with what the President is doing now, keep your argument on the right point. Also, try criticizing what I say and not assumptions that you wrongly bring into the argument.
I am voting for Huckabee. He does not appear to be owned by anybody. He has a likeability that cuts across party lines. He has the experience.
He wants Guantanamo Bay to be shut down and the prisoners brought to America for oversight. A good thing!
He is also against the use of waterboarding. Torture gives unreliable information.
He does not want to invade Iran. Some people say that Israel can take them out if they become a threat anyway.
McCain may be sold out to George Soros, along with the Democrats.
http://www.shadowparty.com/?p=319
citsonga,
Don't you realize that there were numerous people who joined the military to go to Iraq?
The people of Iraq are afraid that we will pull out, leaving them in a bigger mess.
Don't you realize that it was Democrats and Reublicans who voted to invade Iraq?
Did you not see the CIA satellite images of Iraq ditching the weapon inspectors.
Hussein purposely made it look like he had nukes in the works to keep Iran on their toes.
Are you ignorant of the terrorist training camps in Iraq?
The Democrat debates have almost deleted all questions relating to Iraq.
Hillary does not intend to pull out.
Obama wants to invade Pakistan.
And you're pointing at Bush like he's got the problem?
JHS:: "Lets have draft, and all you war mongers can get suited up and go over there yourselves instead of sending everyone kids who are now overstretched as it is."
I would say all those that support bush and the two wars should pack their bags and head on over. i suspect though, that the very ones that advocate these wars would be the last ones to go. Thats what happened during the Vietnam War. Both bush and cheney were advocates of the war, but when they both had the chance to go, they choose not to.. bush got a place in the Texas national Guard through family connections, which was a ticket out of the war. cheney was able to secure about 6 deferments to avoid the draft. There may have been two others that had to go in there place that might have lost their lives. yet, these chicken-hawks have no problems with starting two wars and are trying to get a third one going. I hope that both someday have an opportunity to experience the Hague for the immoral and incompetent way they have handled Iraq and Afghanistan.
khanson is a Muslim. His statement says a lot.
khanson :: "President George W. Bush is the most sensible leader of American people"
WOW, thats quite a statement considering he might end up being the 1st president to lose two wars- Afghanistan and Iraq. The fool has us booged down in wars that will go on for perhaps decades, that will cost the Ameircan treasury trillions of dollars that has resulted in nothing but death and destruction.
Consider this, it is estimated that bin laden might have spent 1 million dollars to carry out 9-11. He out smarted bush here, bush has spent hundreds of billions of dollars as a result of 9-11 which is on its way to going into the trillionss of dollars. There were a lot smarter and less expensive ways to go after bin Laden and his followers than the foolish road we are going down, which is really only going to creat more terrorism- but hey its been good for the defense contractors.
photche--as you reflect on our beloved freedoms, remember the suspension of habeus corpus, the illegal wiretapping and surveillance, the refusal for accused to hear the charges and evidence against them, the refusal of trial, and the removal of accused to foreign countries where our military and CIA might torture people beyond the reach of our legal system. Sounds like a dictator's tactics to me. Oh, I almost forgot. Every time you go to an airport you are now assumed guilty until proven innocent. What an interesting reversal of policy for a nation that is the freedom and openness mecca of the world.
photche--That's painting a rather pretty picture of a sorry mess, in my opinion. If going in to depose Saddam was such a great idea, why was Britain the only country that supported the decision? Many folks around the world said, well, if the US will attack Iraq without support, who will they go for next? Now it looks like Iran is the next target. Do you see any other bullseyes around the corner?
Chris333, there are so many errors and statements of ignorance in your post, its hard to know where to start to set you straight. Life is way too short to try to convince a person of your sort the truth. I will say this though, If you believe bush invaded Iraq for reasons of altruism, I have some sandy beach front property for sale in Antartica that I can give you a good deal on.
" do not agree with many things the President does, but come on, we don't have to lie to make him look bad, or just misrepresent the facts."
Please point out in my past posts where I lied or misrepresented the facts. As a student of Middle Eastern history fo the last 30 years, I would say I understand it pretty well. I would also say I'm pretty sure I know why the US is in the ME and has buddied up to dictators there for decades- for the big prize- OIL. The average American, such as yourself, may not know these things or choose to ignore them, but the peoples of the ME sure know why the US in their backyard.
President George W. Bush is the most sensible leader of American people. He keeps his promises to his friends and he never runs away from the threats but faces them boldly. A good enemy would respect him for his sincererity and a friend would sleep cool with his support. If it was not Bush taking charge of affairs after 9/11, Donald Rumsfield would have faced military trials at Hague.
Now I wonder, what would happen to Bush's beloved friend President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan.
photche:: "I'm one of those people who thinks that Bush is a good guy at heart and I just have faith that he, as president, knows more about the situation than I do; I trust that his reasons for war with Iraq were valid and with good intentions. "
A lot of German's thought the same thing of Hitler too.
kaishinden79, are you saying that you classify Bush as a dictator? Equivalent to a true dictator like Saddam? Wow. Do you realize all the freedoms that you're so fortunate to have here in the US?
I'm not going to dispute that there are lots of bad, even cruel, leaders in the world. I wish we could take them all out, but that's obviously not realistic. I think in the case of Iraq, that Bush and his administration had other reasons outside of the fact that Saddam was a torturer and murderer to go after him, and I do think that they were/are related to terrorism and 9/11. Maybe they were related to oil and his father's unfinished war too. I think there were lots of reasons, and that there needs to be a lot of reasons before the US goes to war. I'm one of those people who thinks that Bush is a good guy at heart and I just have faith that he, as president, knows more about the situation than I do; I trust that his reasons for war with Iraq were valid and with good intentions. Do I think mistakes were made? Sure, I do. But I still think taking out Saddam was the right thing to do.
to photche - Is saddam the only dictator on this planet? I watched 60 minutes yesterday, & they featured the rape of women in congo & some of them are as young as 6yrs old. where are the US marines that would give these women 'freedom' from this sexual terror? what about the dictator in equatorial guinea who sits in a pool of oil? US is not sending in the marines to free the people from this oppress & corrupt leader. Osama is the criminal who did 911 not saddam. US supported saddam during the 80s. what about the other dictators like augusto pinochet of chile, ferdinand marcos of the philippines (bec of Clark & subic bases), manuel noriega (panama canal) & shah of iran (oil).
bush's reason for the invasion is bec. of 911, but when asked the connection bet saddam & 911, people evade the PRIMARY question & they go around & give 'reasons' or they start labeling who question this war.
by the way, if a leader thinks he is above the law, does not respect the constitution, he is a dicator.
I agree that Bush has made mistakes and that, in some aspects, the war in Iraq has turned into a bit of a debacle. But Saddam tortured his own people. He did awful, horrible, sadistic things to them. In my opinion, taking him out of power was a noble action; something that was morally necessary to do (similar to engaging in war to stop the Nazis from committing their atrocities). I think it's possible to disagree with the war in Iraq without badmouthing our president. At least recognize that we've knocked an awful dictator out of power. The Iraqi's are, unfortunately, not in the best shape as a result, but hopefully things will improve for them and hopefully going forward a fair and just government will be put in place to lead them. I pray for the Iraqi's, that they find peace one day soon.
We were mislead into Iraq, and now it is a standstill war while we wait for the Iraq government to get their act together. The Taliban is making a comeback big time and now Bush wants us to go after Iran......Lets have draft, and all you war mongers can get suited up and go over there youselves instead of sending everyone kids who are now overstretched as it is.
Chris333--I believe the defense contractors have profited immensely from this war. As I recall, there were contracts being awarded to US firms that were hugely non-competitive. We now have the most expensive Embassy in the world and a military base in the ME. can you honestly say that the US has not profited? Some elements have--the ones with their hands in Bush's pockets.
2) They hate our way of life--specifically the Hollywood lifestyle of booze, immorality, and pornography. That is the aspect of our way of life they find abhorrent.
3) No, they did not like Saddam, but the whole world spoke with united voice to say that we were not letting the UN inspectors time to accomplish their goals. Brasil supported the US going into Afghanistan, but termed the Iraq invasion as "Attack of the Empire". We have no right to exert our sovereignty over others. It just makes us the aggressors and dictators.
4)The civil strife would not have been carried out if we had not entered Iraq. We brought in a sword to bring peace. Swords bring death and destruction. Peace must be accomplished with the tools of peace, not of violence and war. We have lost more soldiers through our efforts than were killed in the 9/11. He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword. I think someone important said that... Remember Him? What about when he said love your enemies and turn the other cheek?
citsonga,
1) We have not gotten any oil out of this war, this war is 100% not for financial gain, to suggest something is just common sensically stupid.
2) NO the vast majority of terrorist attacks are not made because we treated them badly (I am not denying we didn't but the whole world was exploited for western countries) However the main reason for terrorist attacks is because they hate our lifestyles, and feel that it is their religions obligation to subdue us and set us straight, or else because someone draws a cartoon of a certain religious leader, that also warrants killing of masses of people in their eyes, your statement shows shear ignorance about radical Islam and the ME, maybe you ought to study a little bit.
3) As of recently the state of Iraq is improving a great deal, to say they were better off with Saddam is stupid, we wouldn't like it much if we were ruled by a dictator who sometimes killed off masses of our population. Many people are suffering and dying in the ME and your "blame america" strategy does absolutely nothing for anyone.
4) Yes we are fighting a war in Iraq, but the vast incredible majority of Iraqi people dying are because of their own people, not ours. They have religious and cultural divisions that are causing more instability there than we ever could do.
I do not agree with many things the President does, but come on, we don't have to lie to make him look bad, or just misrepresent the facts.
citsonga, do you know what Jesus said about people who called others fools?
theotrek, Jesus did clearly address sin the lives of people who were living ungodly lifestyles - some of them religious leaders, but many of them just ordinary people. He came to set us all free from sin, He died on the cross to effect that, and He constantly spoke out against it.
"Who would jesus bomb?" Who, indeed, Citizen?
Seeing this headline nearly made me choke! I thought the editors had finally gone fully off the deep end--until I saw that the story was only about literal, physical footsteps.
Jesusgirl:: "Bush is our President for a reason, if he wasn't supposed to be there he wouldn't be"
Based on your reasoning, allow me to paraphrase your statement somewhat- Hilter was Germany's Fuhrer for a reason, if he wasn't suppose to be there he wouldn't be........ Well, we know how that turned out.
jesusgirl:: "i mean Saddam killed innocent people."
At last count, looks like bush is responsible for more death and destruction than saddam.
I would say you are in need of some learnen about Iraq and the ME, here is some stuff to ponder below, and may I suggest you read up on some history of the ME, say since the fall of the Ottoman Empire after WWI and find out for yourself the destructive influence the West has had in the ME, mainly OIL. You will learn that the US has done a lot of damage there.
Interviews and polls taken of the way Iraqi's felt about their country before and after the invasion seem to indicate that the average Iraqi felt more secure and better off economically than today. The Iraqi people did not ask to be "liberated" by the US. There is in fact a tremendous level of resentment by most Iraqi's towards the US because of the invasion which they did not want or ask for. The average person in Iraq, and indeed the average citizen of the Middle East , understand why the US attempts to impose its will in the ME. Its simple, its mainly about OIL. How would americans take to an invasion of the US by a foreign army - not very well I'm sure. Contrary to what bush, cheney and the neocons tell the largely ignorant american public (ignorant from the standpoint of little to no knowledge of the ME and its history as it relates to the imperial ambitions of Western countries to secure oil interests) the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with liberating the Iraqi's from the grip of sadddam. Its all about US control and influence in the ME. 9-11 occurred because of decades abuses by the US in the ME. Its really too bad the US forgot lessons learned from Vietnam. In both the case of Vietnam and Iraq, american ignorance and arrogance led to the deaths and injury of millions of innocent Vietnamese and Iraqi's. By the way, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.
The thing that really adds insult to injury in Iraq is the fact that the US had no post invasion strategy. bush and his band of fools completely ignored the warnings ME experts offered in regard to having a post invasion strategy to provide security. They did not have a strategy to protect the people nor the countries infrastructure. Amazingly, and quite telling, the only real security provided after the fall of Baghdad, was military protection of the oil ministry. In the mean time, hospitals, schools, clinics, museums, government buildings, universities, libraries, power plants, water and sewage plants- all looted.
bush, cheney and other high ranking neocons are responsible for the destruction of Iraq and its people. Much of the world consider bush and cheney war criminals and should be brought to the Hague.
jesusgirl_2005--BTW, Jesus talked bad about people. He told the truth about their being hypocrites. He wasn't always nice. He was too honest for that.
jesusgirl_2005--Bush has killed more people than did Saddam. I don't hear you suggesting that he be removed from office in the same way. He lied about why he went to war. He covered up the fact that he knew it was a lie. Now he refuses to get out and is trying to get into another war. None of that sounds like one who truly follows the Jesus whose girl you claim to be.
"Bush is our President for a reason, if he wasn't supposed to be there he wouldn't be. Maybe God was supposed to use him to get Saddam out of Iraq, to save people. Even though we have this war still going there is a purpose for it. I don't always understand it, but I know and trust in God to reveal His plan. We all should."
That's what they said about the king of England before the colonists jacked the redcoats in their collective face. This is a democracy, where no government has any kind of mandate of heaven.
Citsonga, who are we to call anyone a fool. we have no right to judge anyone, that should be left up to God. Jesus loves everyone no matter what. Bush did what he thought he should do when the united states entered Iraq. I have to say I am glad we got Saddam out of office, i mean Saddam killed innocent people. Though I can say it is probably time we started pulling out, we have to get the Iraqi people ready to take care of themselves.
You know I am not saying that people can't have an opinion, they can. But nobody has the right to say anything bad about anyone else. You know, as Christians, we are called to love everyone just like God loved us, but that doesn't mean we have to love a person's actions.
Bush is our President for a reason, if he wasn't supposed to be there he wouldn't be. Maybe God was supposed to use him to get Saddam out of Iraq, to save people. Even though we have this war still going there is a purpose for it. I don't always understand it, but I know and trust in God to reveal His plan. We all should.
The closest Jesus came to bombing were the religious hypocrites of the day. They were the only ones he condemned. For all others, he seems to have simply shown mercy, grace, forgiveness, and love. Too bad the irony of Bush's pilgrimage statement seems lost on himself. He honors the place Jesus walked and ignores the message Jesus preached.
bush- arrogant, ignorant, war-mongering hypocritical chicken-hawk. I dont think Jesus would be impressed by this fool.
Who would jesus bomb?