Monday, August 01, 2005

Talk Vs War

The "talk vs war" issue I find too topical at the moment - it isn't that I support war, but as we are already in a mess of our own making, we need to be responsible and clean it up. Writing about the values of seeking peace rather going to war make little sense when involved in an unjustified, illegal, primarily self-gratifying (for W.) and secondarily a "good for business-buddies" war entirely of our governments' making. It is my fervent hope that at some point many of the players in this war (i.e. White House folks) get brought up on charges for their chicanery.


Anonymous Luke said...

I doubt that will happen...

In my mind, its no doubt that this administration blatantly lied about the reasons we needed to go war and then didnt even plan it well. Why did they do this? Who knows..

We have no choice but to clean it up now. I wish they would use the UN much more and bring our boys home immediately.

9/04/2005 6:22 PM  
Blogger MeanSpiritedRepublican said...

There were no lies from the administration about the reasons to go to war.

The President received bad intelligence. Congress voted to go to war based on the same information. Many Democrats voted to go to war based on the same info the President had.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Secondly, Saddam Hussein did posess WMD's. He used them on the Kurds. The military also found WMD's after invading Iraq, just not in the huge stockpiles they expected to. There were also known ties of Hussein to Al Qaeida. Hussein paid $20,000 to the families of successful Palestinian suicide bombers. If this is not supporting terrorism, I don't know what is.

9/13/2005 12:14 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...


It amazes me that you disregard the Downing Street memos, and a host of other proof. No WMDs have been found, so how can they have been there?

I spent last week in central Florida and drive time was with the radio tuned to Christian Talk radio that was in many regards beautifully said and with good message. The undercurrent, however, was very artfully GOP, a fair over-current, too. The media can be horribly skewed if one doesn't listen to more than one side. Take some time and listen to the left side and see if it makes sense to you.

and Peace.

9/16/2005 10:37 AM  
Blogger Josh Ondich said...

I am glad a very christian person has dumped Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and the GOP. I maybe a envanglic, but I am a progressive. The dislike of GOP and The Religious right is why I am a proud Democrat with progressive views. my blog is called The America First Democrat

10/04/2005 4:25 PM  
Blogger Wendy said...

You have brought up a great issue that I have struggled with. I hate this war and from my research of it, I think it was based on lies from the beginning. I wish it would end now. However, there is the other problem--we went in and totally destroyed a country. How can we, in good conscience, leave it after we messed it up? It's kind of a lesser of two evils situation. No matter what we do now, it's not going to be pretty. You are right--our responsibility now is probably to fix what we broke. And yes, I hope that several in the current administration are charged. I really enjoy your thoughts. Keep up the good work!


11/03/2005 2:00 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Thanks Wendy -
I think the ideal situation would be for the U.N. to intervene but see Bolton as placed to prevent that from happening. Where the logic is, I don't know.

11/05/2005 3:22 PM  
Blogger Sam B said...

Apparently, there is a gameplan in place to impeach Bush. The first step was the closed door session several days ago, which brought a lot of publicity to the subject and showed that the Democrats have the balls to do something about these lies. The push will be to take back Congress in '06--a real possibility at this point--and then move for impeachment once the investigation on the misleading intel is completed. There is no doubt that Bush needs to be impeached. Either he was dishonest to the American people, or, if not, he's completely incompetent. Either way he needs to go.

11/07/2005 6:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Click here and then here. Watch them both in their entirety. That settles the debate.

11/20/2005 2:20 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Ah, Chairman - How perfectly republican to go with the party line, afraid to add your own comments for fear of showing that you actually think. Perhaps you don't? And no, the debate is not settled, not by a long shot.

Our president lied to us.

Many Democrats were fooled into believing the lies. Republicans, too. They are complicit in the action if it is shown that they knew the truth behind the lies.

The greatest harm, however, is done in the continued support of a war that only emboldens the terrorists, kills more of our soldiers who DO DESERVE OUR EVERY support (which they don't get in the way of equipment there, or services for the living that return) and drains money from more needed programs while lining the pockets of those that are chums with ... our president and his cabinet.

And yes, you may take pleasure in saying that Bill Clinton lied to the American public, too. But that lie didn't cost any lives.

11/20/2005 3:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

afraid to add your own comments for fear of showing that you actually think. Perhaps you don't?

Did I personally insult you anywhere? What did I do to merit personal attacks as a response?

Watch the videos this time - in their entirety, then comment. You obviously did not, based on your response (at most a few seconds of each). The only way you can claim Bush 'lied' after seeing both of those is if you believe he used time machine designed by Karl Rove and caused information and intelligence to have been manipulated retroactively (not only in the U.S., but also in foreign nations). Now, that wouldn't make the war justified, but it does settle the "Bush lied and people died" argument. You can still believe Bush was/is "wrong" without calling him a liar.

And yes, you may take pleasure in saying that Bill Clinton lied to the American public, too. But that lie didn't cost any lives.

I called no one a liar - so you are putting words in my mouth. I'm not sure how I could take 'pleasure' in anyone lying. That's a really weird thing to say. However, Clinton did not lie about Iraq, nor did any of the other Democrats. They spoke the truth then as it was, or at least as they saw it, and are playing politics now that poll numbers have shifted. If they shift back, they will change their tone again. And Clinton launched a number of military assaults on which I'm sure people were unfortunately killed.

Steps toward Saddam's toppling from power were the focus well before Bush ever took power. It was, indeed, President Clinton who signed into law the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act making it official U.S. policy that Saddam's regime be removed. Much of what Bush has done was extending the policy from the seeds that had been planted. You can agree or disagree with the action, but that doesn't mean someone "lied."

I must say your response was very rude for someone proclaiming to be a Christian. Perhaps that part of the name of the blog should be dropped if you are going to act so condescending and belittling in your comments. I have dialog with a number of so-called "liberal" Christians who are friends of mine, and I have not been treated in such a manner by them.

11/20/2005 11:20 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Chairman -

You are correct on several points and I apologize. I was hurried in my response, had several other things on my mind, and should have waited until a later time to respond. Entirely incorrect on my part. As I am hurried at this moment, too. I will wait until later today to respond.

With apologies,


11/21/2005 7:30 AM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

to the chairman -
Again with apologies for my demeanor of yesterday, it was uncalled for and your rebuke was polite. Thank you.

I wish I had more nice things to say, but can only state my opinion: I had viewed the complete first link only, now I have viewed both. (had to download real player for the second one)

The first piece is a montage of all the clips of the Dems supporting war. Yes. They supported the war for some time, but clips are out of context and artfully arranged to make a case greater than they merit. Imagine the clips we could pull of Cheney et al, not to mention just of W.

The second clip purports to link Osama and Saddam. Yes. Without having any understanding of the situation outside of the piece, it almost makes sense. Pure propaganda.

The sad thing is, chairman, that some of us look at these pieces and buy in to them whole heartedly, while others see Michael Moore's movie and believe it in full. There is middle ground that needs to be tread.

I think I should have stood on my first-stated position of it ain't worth talking about how we got here anymore, let's clean it up as best we can and get home. If there are any criminals to be found here in the U.S., let's get them to trial.

11/21/2005 6:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home