Ya wanna know "Why We Fight"?

Just for the edification of a few of you. If you go to You Tube and watch this film, in the 4th part at the 14:20 minute mark the President of the United States says with no equivication that "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussain was involved with the September the 11th". Can't get any clearer than that. Bush said it himself. If you continue to watch it from there you will see the father of one of the people who died in the WTC call him a liar because he told us early on he was involved.
 
I don't see any enlightenment arising from hyper-partisanship.

Is this point in reference to something I said? Not meant to be hostile, just curious what your point is here?

As far as the last line, I think it obviously means our status is not guranteed, nor is the state. The state threatens to put us in a chaotic conditions, that many wrongly claim is necessarily synonymous with anarchy.
 
Just for the edification of a few of you. If you go to You Tube and watch this film, in the 4th part at the 14:20 minute mark the President of the United States says with no equivication that "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussain was involved with the September the 11th". Can't get any clearer than that. Bush said it himself. If you continue to watch it from there you will see the father of one of the people who died in the WTC call him a liar because he told us early on he was involved.

I thought that guys story was really powerful. For one, it should make us a little more considerate of those fooled by the propaganda that followed 9/11. I can't blame that poor guy for wanting revenge. Those that continue to spout the nonsense, in the face of what we know now, though...

Hopefully, we are raising future generations that are less trusting of authority.
 
Yeah, I watched this last week. It's very good. It's why I am back on the Paul bandwagon. The fact that he might associate with some folks that solicit racists is trivial. There is no greater threat to minorities or any American than the war machine.

LOL. I don't even know where to start with that. That's funny for so many reasons. The first being: as if you were ever off Paul's nutz
 
LOL. I don't even know where to start with that. That's funny for so many reasons. The first being: as if you were ever off Paul's nutz

I took down the sigpic, drowned my sorrows and removed some pro-Paul posts on my blog. So where was your second choice to start?

I know you lefties really don't care about our government stealing money and lives from the poor to finance the war machine, but some of us see it as more than just a political football.
 
I thought that guys story was really powerful. For one, it should make us a little more considerate of those fooled by the propaganda that followed 9/11. I can't blame that poor guy for wanting revenge. Those that continue to spout the nonsense, in the face of what we know now, though...

Hopefully, we are raising future generations that are less trusting of authority.
I wanted to find that guys e-mail and tell him he was not a bad guy for wanting his son's name on the bomb to hit those responsible for his son's death. Too bad his president didn't want to go after the people that orchestrated the murder of his son and 3000 other people.
 
The most troubling thing about the movie was when Pearl said right into the camera, Nothing is going to change when this administration leaves. WE are not leaving Iraq when this administration leaves office. And he is right, absent a Paul victory, Hillary and Obama, Romney, Huckleberry or McCain, we are there for the foreseeable future, hell up to 1000 years according to one of the candidates.
 
I took down the sigpic, drowned my sorrows and removed some pro-Paul posts on my blog. So where was your second choice to start?

I know you lefties really don't care about our government stealing money and lives from the poor to finance the war machine, but some of us see it as more than just a political football.

Second choice to start:

"Might Associate"? I think we can safely say that case is closed.

Third choice to start:

"Trivial"?

Yeah.....ummmm okay.
 
Second choice to start:

"Might Associate"? I think we can safely say that case is closed.

Though there are some things that are inexcusable, most of the rhetoric is taken out of context to make it seem more than it is. But we know you did not investigate the stuff very closely. Plus, I should have said "might have" as in past tense.

Third choice to start:

"Trivial"?

Yeah.....ummmm okay.

In comparison to the state's pursuit of perpetual war, it is less than trivial. In comparison to our own drug war it is trivial. In comparison to mandatory minimums it is trivial.
 
I thought everybody would be interested in this film. Glad you folks like it and find it educational. Watching it should give you a decient idea of how the military indsutrial congrssional compelx works--and why we fight. It should also give you an idea of how many other programs work that are run by the government. IMO--there is never full disclosure, and the driving force is always money--not us good people's interests first.

Cloaning Paul with Eisenhower--two men with constitutional integrity, that tell it straight to the public (Can you imagine a persedent warning us about something like this today?)---top not military brains coupled with freedom ,free market and individual liberity---ohhhh----what a nice dream.
 
So---we shouldn't try ? Does it mean give up ? Is it inevitable ? Seriously--what is this movie encouraging people to do ?

You wanted a answer from me and asked me twice. I gave you my thoughts. I was hoping the detail of my answer would have dignified a response from you with your opinion.

Were you expecting me to answer differently?
 
Back
Top