Saddam Hussein captured!?!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 6:50 pm

Reports are now pouring in that U.S. Forces have captured the brutal dictator, Saddam Hussien in his hometown of Tikrit, Iraq. About 5:15AM today, eastern time (U.S.) it is reported that members of the 4th Infantry Division have captured him and he is currently detained in U.S. custody following a raid at about 6:00PM (eastern time) Saturday evening in Tikrit that was specifically targeting him. The live feeds I am currently watching on FOX News from Baghdad are picking up TONS of celebratory gunfire from elated Iraqis. A formal announcement is pending "tests" to confirm his identity. A major announcement has officially been scheduled by the U.S. Government to take place at 7:00AM eastern time.And they said we couldn't get him or we gave up! HAHAHA! YAAAAAAAAAAAY! We got him!

cohocarl · Post by **cohocarl** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 7:25 pm

I just told the wife to turn on the TV!!!! Lets pray it is him!! They said an imposter was also captured wearing a fake beard. That is great news. If it's him, we should televise George W. putting a h.p. in his forehead.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 8:53 pm

It's him! We got him! Confirmed by the Iraqi Provisional Government, Tony Blair--Prime Minister of Great Britain, Reuters News, and now the U.S. Government and Military! More concrete DNA tests pending to confirm his identity as well, but inital tests are affirmative.Praise to God in Heaven, we finally got him! Huddled up like some filthy animal 6 to 8 feet down in a dirty hole in the ground. Serves him right.The United States has just given the world a tremendous Christmas present! Thank you, George W. Bush for going after him and sticking with it to see that he was captured, and a huge and special thanks to the wonderful men and women of our armed forces who made his capture a reality! This will certainly be one of the greatest historical events of my lifetime.HAHAHA---they just quoted President of France, Jaques Chirac as saying that he was "delighted" that Saddam was captured. LOL! He must have had his fingers crossed behind his back!

scherry2 · Post by **scherry2** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 9:50 pm

Hooray they got him!!! now to find Osama Bin Laden with whom all this trouble started.

cibomatto · Post by **cibomatto** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 9:56 pm

US Troops Good Job

ArcsVibe · Post by **ArcsVibe** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:11 pm

That is fantastic news!My prayers go out to the troops and their families, may God protect them all.My prayers also go out to the Iraqi people, may they have the courage and strength to start again without EVER living their lives in fear.

Vibe Rater · Post by **Vibe Rater** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:27 pm

Get the rope!!!Thanks to the USA for doing 'the right thing'. This is great news.

Attached files

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:34 am

what fantastic news! one down and one more to go! omasa's got to be peeing his pants now! we're coming!!!great job, Bush, even thru all the criticism, you stood by your word and didn't give up! prayers for the iraqui people as they can now begin to rebuild and get their closure from this tyrant! Thank you to all the men and women serving our country here and abroad to make this hapen! God bless you!go USA! and yes, I AM PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:14 am

Quote, originally posted by trdvibe Â»what fantastic news! one down and one more to go! omasa's got to be peeing his pants now! we're coming!!!I agree, but don't worry, Osama carries an extra diaper on his head for just such an occasion! I hope and pray that we get that rotten SOB next.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:24 am

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»I agree this is great news and now for Bin Laden... This was a real shot in the arm for Bush being reelected. A shot in the arm? This is a hit in the head with a frying pan! If you don't get it now, then you probably never will. The issue of the capture of Saddam will only expose the haters for what they really are.Vibe-Rater---great avitar! I love it! I just don't remember that being part of the scene from "Office Space". I'll have to go watch it again. That avitar made me think of something--G.W. should sign a law that mandates that all "pop the weasel" games must have a Saddam head pop up instead of a weasel. Then we could all do our part to whack him in the head with a mallet!

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:43 am

Catching Saddam is a great thing. I am happy that we did that, if not estatic. This act, however, still does not absolve Bush from lying to the American People about WMDs - the reason why we went into the war without allies who we severly need.Even though we got Saddam, it still does not change our situation in Iraq. Another 17 people killed by a car bomb, and I can imagine that the #s of US soldiers KIA will just continue to rise.This is a complete turn-around from my original stance of supporting Bush in the beginning of the war, you might even be able to find posts here where you can see this. I just want what's best for America, and Bush in '04 is NOT who sohould be in our future.Anyone but Bush in '04!!!

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:49 am

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»I agree this is great news and now for Bin Laden... This was a real shot in the arm for Bush being reelected. I also just want to say that all the thanks should go to the 600 or so Military members who actually did the capturing. Perhaps if Bush was actually there he could deserve some of the celebration, I personally doubt he even knew about "Operation Red Dawn" till after we already ahd him. My congrats goes to those soldiers and leaders who responded so quickly to get Saddam without even a shot fired.Someone needs to send those people a couple hundred cases of beer.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 8:23 am

Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»I personally doubt he even knew about "Operation Red Dawn" till after we already ahd him.I MOST SERIOUSLY doubt that this is true. It would be impossible for any sitting American President to be able to perform his duties as commander-in-chief without knowing about such a large and critical operation. It is a joke to think that Bush is not kept completely abreast of the issues and events regarding military operations anywhere in the world, least of all in Iraq. The press is all over how Cheney and Rumsfeld were noticeably giddy during the past few days. If they knew, than surely Bush knew.I would also like to say that you are absolutely free to form and express your opinions regarding the President at any time, regardless of who's viewpoint you oppose. If this right were denied to us, then I would have been put in jail about a billion times during the Clinton Administration. But if you are going to act as a Bush detractor, then I would assert that you should state whose election for President you would support and why. To state that you would prefer "anybody" to Bush is not a logically valid statement, as "anybody" is not running for the office of President. It makes no sense when people play only one side of the field.And Bush was lying about Iraq having WMD's? This was proven? How did I miss this? If he was lying, than many leaders of many other nations were lying as well because they all signed on to several UN resolutions that acknowledged that Iraq had WMD's and should have them removed from their posession. I suppose that all those Kurds and Shiites and Iranians that were murdered by Saddam with WMD's over many years weren't actually killed, either, then. That was all made up by Bush 20 years ago before he was even governor of Texas, right? Well, get out your history books, folks, they need to be rewritten.

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 8:58 am

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»I MOST SERIOUSLY doubt that this is true. It would be impossible for any sitting American President to be able to perform his duties as commander-in-chief without knowing about such a large and critical operation. It is a joke to think that Bush is not kept completely abreast of the issues and events regarding military operations anywhere in the world, least of all in Iraq. The press is all over how Cheney and Rumsfeld were noticeably giddy during the past few days. If they knew, than surely Bush knew.I would also like to say that you are absolutely free to form and express your opinions regarding the President at any time, regardless of who's viewpoint you oppose. If this right were denied to us, then I would have been put in jail about a billion times during the Clinton Administration. But if you are going to act as a Bush detractor, then I would assert that you should state whose election for President you would support and why. To state that you would prefer "anybody" to Bush is not a logically valid statement, as "anybody" is not running for the office of President. It makes no sense when people play only one side of the field.And Bush was lying about Iraq having WMD's? This was proven? How did I miss this? If he was lying, than many leaders of many other nations were lying as well because they all signed on to several UN resolutions that acknowledged that Iraq had WMD's and should have them removed from their posession. I suppose that all those Kurds and Shiites and Iranians that were murdered by Saddam with WMD's over many years weren't actually killed, either, then. That was all made up by Bush 20 years ago before he was even governor of Texas, right? Well, get out your history books, folks, they need to be rewritten.First off:From the BBC"President Bush heard the news of Saddam's capture first from Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at about 2015 GMT on Saturday." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wor...5.stm (bottom of page)So, Bush did NOT know till after the soldiers had already captured him.As for supporting anyone but Bush in '04, ok I will be more specific. I am personally voting for whoever I feel has the best chance at beating Bush. It it's Dean, then Dean. Clark, then Clark. And the rest of the democrats out there. I normally would probably vote with the Green party. I personally do not side with any single party, as I tend to be quite moderate. I just dislike Bush and his administration so much with respects to the Environment, Women's Rights, Civil Rights (Hooray Patriot Act), the economy (Yay for more money to Big businesses! Short term economic gain at the cost of the future! yaaay!), and I heard a rumor that he smells funny too. I don't care who wins, as long as it isn't Bush, I dislike what he is doing that much. Seems logical enough to me.As for the whole WMD thing, I used it as my main argument for supporting the war back when. I laughed at all the liberal protestors who said that this war was for oil and to get back for GW's Daddy. That's changed a bit. Here we are, still no WMDs found. Haven't seen any proof that Linked Iraw to Al Queda (another reason for going to war) and look at this ... Osama Bin laden is still at large. Sure, Saddam killed a lot of people and he had to go. But right now with our diplomatic policy, we have a situation in Syira, and ... oh wow! North Korea has their Nukes pointed at us. What fun! What I find scary, is that if there was all this "intelligence" (Which the US has actually states that they were in fact mis-informed) that said that there were WMDs for all these countries ... and yet, we can't find any ... how good is our intelligence then? As far as I am concerned, Bush lied to us when he told us about WMDs, about Saddam's connections with Osama. I don't disagree that he HAD WMDs, gasses, missiles and etc. Remember that UN inspectors had been policing him for YEARS and he did in fact as the UN reported destroy his weapons then. The argument is that whether or not he has any NOW, and as far as we are concerned, no proof has been shown that he has had any. So what do I believe when I am told that we went after Saddam because he had WMDs that he would give to terrorists to use against us? LIES. "After 455 Americans killed, 3,000 Iraqi civilians killed, more than 2,000 Americans wounded, 120,000 troops deployed and 200 billion dollars spent in a country the size of California, we got him. Go us."Personally, I would've used a single sniper bullet that cost $2.50 from your local gun store. Go USA! Boo Bush. That is how my feelings are. Untill I see that we have found the WMDs, my feelings will remain the same about lieing. I still think he's an (removed)-hat, but hey, at least if I really dislike what we are doing, I can always move to Canada.I love the USA, but I also dislike being the most hated country in the world because of our foreign politics.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 9:30 am

Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»Even though we got Saddam, it still does not change our situation in Iraq.This may or may not be true, oh omnipotent one. This is the subject of much current debate and both sides have valid points. Still, to say that going after and capturing Saddam was not worthwhile needs to be looked at closer. Making this statement would inherently assert that the world would be a much better and safer place for the majority of people in the world if we had just left Saddam alone. Anyone who honestly believes this needs to immediately have their head examined and to listen to the Iraqi people themselves.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»Another 17 people killed by a car bomb, and I can imagine that the #s of US soldiers KIA will just continue to rise.Well, until the antidote for death is discovered, it will certainly not go down. Would you rather those car bombs be going off in the streets of YOUR town and killing YOUR family members? I didn't think so. And neither did those soldiers who gave their lives to protect you and your family as well as mine. That would ultimately be an eventual result of us sitting back and doing nothing, letting dictators and violent extremists run rampant and unopposed. Death is unfortunately a result of war. Every conflict is going to have its' casualties, distressing as that may be. But that is a price that must be paid for freedom, remember, freedom isn't free, though we appearantly take it for granted far too often. Let's take this reasoning one step further. What if we had sat back and watched Hitler conquer all of Europe? He was a madman who brutalized his own people for his own purposes, too. Should we have just sat back and let him run rampant because to fight him would mean that some of our enlisted men would be killed? If we had done that, you would be seeing the Nazi flag flying today from the government buildings in your town instead of the stars and stripes. Saddam was essentially the same as Hitler. They both brutalized and mass murdered innocent people in their own country, and they both wanted to overtake other nearby countries and do the same. Saddam had already tried. Twice. He unprovokedly attacked Iran in 1980 and fought them for 8 years, then he attacked and occupied Kuwait for several months before we forced him out. He used WMD's on the Iranians in the war with them. He used them on hundreds of thousands of innocent people in his own country because they were of a different ethnicity and agains others because they opposed his brutal regime. Same things Hitler did. So please, tell me why in God's great name we should have just sat back and watched this go on? How can you possibly defend this man and his actions? To oppose removing him is exactly the same as supporting what he was doing! To turn a blind eye to him and his actions IS a vote of support for them.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»- the reason why we went into the war without allies who we severly need.We have no need or use for, whatsoever, for any nation that supports (actively or inactively) a Hitleresque regime! The fact remains that we had more soverign nations support this recent war than we did for the first Gulf War. They may not have all sent troops and tanks, but have aided in other ways. Some nations also chose to support us anonymously out of fear of reprisal. We don't know exactly how many countries chose to support us in this way as I don't believe this number was ever made public knowledge. Don't be duped into thinking that this was a war fought solely by America (or even America and Great Britain for that matter) because that is simply not true. The only difference is that we have more influential and outspoken opposition this time around. But they are speaking out against us selfishly to protect their own monetary interests and nothing more. That is absolutely disgusting and disgraceful; I wouldn't want to be allied with nations that acted in such a way anyhow. In fact, I fully support and participate in boycotting those countries as my way to voice my displeasure with them and their incredibly poor decisions. If they want to support terrorist dictators, they can't earn my money. I encourage others to do the same.

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 9:36 am

Well, at least we can agree that we both love the USA.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 11:54 am

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»I agree I love it here also. Wish all members felt that way. You can't please everyone.Utopia cannot, and will not, ever exist.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:20 pm

And (removed) is that supposed to mean?

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:27 pm

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»And I mean by what exactly I typed. People in this world seem to be never happy with what they have or where they are at in life. Nice save. Sounded more like a personal attack in my opinion.

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:41 pm

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»Nice save? I have not played between the pipes for almost 3 years. And it was not a personal attack. If it was, I would direct it to an individual. Anyways, lets stay on topic here. As moderators we should not be pulling the threads of course. yes, good idea. we don't need another dramatic episode. and why all this rambling about personal attacks? let's get back on topic here! let's all play nicely! Quote Â»It is a good thing he was captured and I find it awesome seeing the She-ites (spelling) finally having their freedom back and not worried about that monster taking over again. People should be free of persecution. Can not have another Hitler running around. we may all disagree about this war or the reasonings about it, but when it all boils down, we support our troops and respect the sacrifices they make. tho it won't end this war, it's a huge step in progress in getting the iraqi people closer to a stable free country. believe me! i want our men and women out of there as quickly as possible, but we can't just leave their country as is now. let's rebuild it and focus our attention on bin laden! i think we all want him found asap!!!

fuel4soul · Post by **fuel4soul** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:44 pm

How many 6 by 8' holes do you think there are in the Middle East that man could be in now? (Bin Laden) Or changes he could have went through, He had so much time to get away. Do you think we can catch him?

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:50 pm

Quote, originally posted by fuel4soul Â»How many 6 by 8' holes do you think there are in the Middle East that man could be in now? (Bin Laden) Or changes he could have went through, He had so much time to get away. Do you think we can catch him?well, my dad was intel for 26 yrs in the military. we, watching as a family, are extremely surprised we got saddam. it will take the same kind of "luck" and intel to capture bin laden. i think he's much more sneakier. more international supporters that make it that much harder. as for iraq's wmd, well, you know we did give them 90 days to hide all of them! i think it will take awhile before we find them if we ever do! but the hunt will continue and bin laden will also be tired and worn as we are on his trail. this gives us all hope that he will also be brought to justice!

joatmon · Post by **joatmon** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:51 pm

Politics makes for angry people. Strong opinions foster harsh words. If there was a politics thread, anyone who posted in it better have tough skin, because it will get ugly.Regardless of political opinion, we can all agree that it is good that Hussein is captured and no longer running free. We can also all agree that we all hope that the US casualty rate will decrease, and that the troops can come home soon. Lets leave it at that.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:54 pm

Quote, originally posted by joatmon Â»Politics makes for angry people. Strong opinions foster harsh words. If there was a politics thread, anyone who posted in it better have tough skin, because it will get ugly.Amen brother! Well put, and excellent obesrvation.Quote Â»Regardless of political opinion, we can all agree that it is good that Hussein is captured and no longer running free. We can also all agree that we all hope that the US casualty rate will decrease, and that the troops can come home soon. Lets leave it at that.Another good point. Way to keep the peace joatmon...

fuel4soul · Post by **fuel4soul** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:04 pm

I for one would like to see more closer ties with Canada..

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:10 pm

yes, like the huge (removed) mall in edmonton! i've always wanted to go there! eventually i will.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:19 pm

Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»First off:From the BBC"President Bush heard the news of Saddam's capture first from Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at about 2015 GMT on Saturday." Yes, that is correct. Please tell me how Bush was supposed to know that Saddam was apprehended before he was actually apprehended? Is he supposed to be psychic or something? Of course he had to be informed of Saddam's capture. He obviously knew what the others knew before the capture--that we were really close and we probably have him pinned down to a small area and we have special forces actively hunting him down and ready to capture him. I don't understand this argument at all. There is no argument to be made here.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»So, Bush did NOT know till after the soldiers had already captured him.LOL! Like I said, what is he supposed to be, a psychic? How the hell was he supposed to know that an event happened before it actually happened? That's silly. He knew full well that the operation was in effect. Your original statement claimed that he didn't even know about "Operation Red Dawn". I stated how it was illogical to beleive that that was true.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»I personally do not side with any single party, as I tend to be quite moderate. Interesting, my biggest qualm with Bush is that he is TOO moderate and caves to others too much despite his better judgement and personal convictions. I am willing to overlook this a bit because I know that our government works on compromise and always has. But I'm still not pleased with it.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»I just dislike Bush and his administration so much with respects to the Environment, Women's Rights, Civil Rights (Hooray Patriot Act), the economyDoesn't sound very moderate to me, sounds more like a man on a mission. Sounds like you fell for the liberal trickery regarding some environmental issues whose main basis was founded on false science. Remember, that many of these things, namely "global warming" and "holes in the ozone layer" have yet to be proven. Despite our best technology that has advanced so much over so many years since we were the first and only nation to put a man on the moon, we still cannot come up with one shred of proof for these thories. And yes, they are scientifically classified as THEORIES, not fact. There is a reason for that. They weren't proven. There's a reason for that as well---because they aren't true. So they had to bend and twist science and create intentionally flawed and inaccurate models to support their theory. Yay corrupt scientists with their evil agendas. YAY!Women's rights? What Bush is now throwing women in jail just because they're women or something? This makes no sense. His adminstration has more women serving in it and at higher positions (other minorities as well) than ANY previous presidential administration EVER! This is being carried over to society in general where the gender-based income gap has narrowed to levels that have never before been seen. Also, there are more women (and again, other minorities) currently working in high/influential positions in American business than ever before. (removed)? Where are you getting your info, man? You need to check into things a little more before beliving the rhetoric.The point on Civil Rights is laughable. So what, you want terrorist non-citizens running around torturing our society as well? Non-citizens are not granted the full constitutional priveledges that citizens have. The Constitution and numerous Supreme Court rulings have reaffirmed this. The Patriot Act clarifies it. Domestic terrorists, whether American citizens or not, are to be classified as an "enemy domestic". These people were dealt with and specially mentioned in the Constitution, as drafted by the Founding Fathers over 214 years ago. The Patriot Act clarifies these provisions and allows our government to save critical time in apprehending and processing these criminals. You want to create a country where people are free to blow other people up? Fine, you go there, I don't want any part of it. I'm more than willing to take off my shoes at the airport and have my person and my luggage scanned several times if it means my society is that much safer. I have no problem with that and the violation of my civil liberties is so minor in comparison to what I get in return for it.And the economy? Do you have any real grasp on the realities and finer points of economics? If you did, you would know that the President has extremely LITTLE capability to affect the economy, and virtually NO ability to affect the economy in the short term. It takes YEARS for governmental changes to the economy to fully affect it, and the President is not even authorized to make 90% of the changes that the government can make to alter the economy. Anyone who has real knowledge of American economics should know this, as it is fundamental. Also, the economy is cyclical, and has always been so historically and will be that way well into the future. Funny how when things start to go wrong, most people start blaming the one person who actually has the least control over it. 99% of Presidental economic policies must have Congressional approval. The President cannot just go and unilaterally do whatever he wants with the economy, that is not possible. The vast governmental economic policy changes and restructuring that were made by the Regan Administration and approved by both houses of Congress were the DIRECT cause of the great economic prosperity that America enjoyed through most of the 1990's. They began to be implemented around 1982-1983. It took at least 10 years for their effects to begin to be felt, and those effects included greater financial stability in the long run. The Clinton Administration was HANDED the grounds to create the first balaced budget in over 30 years, they did not create it themselves, there is no possible way that they would have had enough time to do so. The policies that THEY chose to enact had the effect of counteracting the prosperity to which they were falsely laying claim. You can put whatever name you want on whichever administration I am dicussing here and it makes no difference. The facts are based on the actual policies themselves and their effects, not on whose name appears on the administration that they were enacted under. But when you want to know who did what, you have to look at the names associated with the actions. If you just want to know what actually happened factually, the names are irrelavent. And as for the recent "recession" that has been so widely discussed, we need to look at that a little bit closer as well. Do you know the economic definition of a "recession"? Appearantly most newscasters don't. It is defined as a peroid of negative growth in GDP that lasts at least two quarters. The only period of actual recession that has occured during the current Bush's presidency was in the first quarter of the first year of his term (2001). It began toward the end of the 3rd quarter and into the 4th quarter of 2000 and ended at the end of the 1st quarter of 2001. What does all this mean? The "Bush" recession is not his. It was already taking place for months before he became president (even well before the election) and only continued for about 2 1/2 months into his presidency. So technically, Bill Clinton had more months of economic recession time during his presidency than Bush had. Since then, the economy has experienced constant g
rowth, though at times it was very small. Recent growth has been faster than during ANY period of time during Clinton's years as president. So much for a "Bush" recession or bad Bush economics. Anyone who actually knows and understands economics can look at the factual data and arrive at the truth.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»(Yay for more money to Big businesses! Short term economic gain at the cost of the future! yaaay!)First of all, nobody is GIVING money to "Big businesses". The government is just now allowing them to keep a little more of what they worked to earn. Big difference. Second, the economic gain has not been short term, as I just covered previously. The economy has been in a constant state of growth since the first full quarter of Bush's presidency. His economic stimulus package had to be passed because the growth was so small for a while that is was not outpacing inflation. Third, we want "Big businesses" to grow, and we want this for 2 reasons. 1.) Who hires people and pays them to work? Businesses. So if we eliminate business or take away their incentive to produce goods/services(meaning profit or ability to profit), then they will no longer continue business activities here. Then everyone gets laid off and there are no more jobs. Then everyone starves. So taxing businesses out of existance does no economic good. 2.) When businesses grow, they have to opportunity to strengthen their foundation. This allows them to weather the economic storms that eventually come and go and they become more stabile. Stabile, profit-earning businesses shoulder the largest portion of the commercial tax burden. Drive them away or cause them their profits to shrink and there goes your tax revenue for the government. Also, if I remember correctly, the only people who got a tax break recently were private income earners, not businesses. This does the same thing. The top 5% of income earning individuals in this country pay over 80% of the total income taxes that are collected every year. Not much incentive to become rich now, is it? You earn more money, but you never see it because the government takes it. Yes the wealthier income earners got a larger tax refund in dollar amounts, but it is proprotionate to what they earned. So they got back the same proportion of what they earned as everyone else did, AND they still paid more in actual tax dollars than anyone else. Why do people keep complaining about this? The wealthier people take this bit of extra cash and spend it on neat new stuff. The new stuff they are buying is made and designed by many other workers. If more stuff is sold, then the company can hire more and more workers to make more and more. The government collects tax money on all this growth too. So the workers can make more money, new workers can be hired, businesses can grow and pay more tax dollars, everyone wins. It has worked before. Some people are so against this, why? Does it work too well for their liking?Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»and I heard a rumor that he smells funny too. Oh, that is mature. Probably coming from the same sources as some of the rest of your info.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»I laughed at all the liberal protestors who said that this war was for oil and to get back for GW's Daddy.And you still should because it is still a joke. The case for linking Iraq to Al Qaida was never proven before OR after the war. If you were listening carefully, they were claiming that it was suspected. If it never happened then I thank God that we prevented such an atrocity in time. That's not a risk I'm willing to take. There was never any proof given that made this a basis for war, it was the likely possibility that it happened or would happen. Now we can be safely assured that it will not happen. Mission accomplished. And the situations with Syria and North Korea have existed for years, long before the Bush presidency. So what do you suggest, that we cave to the wishes of madmen (Kim Jong Il and Syrian organized terror organizations)? These people must be confronted and brought down. They harm their own people as well as threaten the rest of the world. And we are just supposed to turn around and look the other way just because they are scary? That will only make things worse. They have to be shown that we mean business and we will use force when necessary. That is the "big stick" that Theodore Roosevelt meant when he said many years ago that the U.S. must "walk softly, and carry a big stick" when dealing with foreign threats. It still applies today.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»Remember that UN inspectors had been policing him for YEARS and he did in fact as the UN reported destroy his weapons then. The argument is that whether or not he has any NOW, and as far as we are concerned, no proof has been shown that he has had any. So what do I believe when I am told that we went after Saddam because he had WMDs that he would give to terrorists to use against us? LIES. Yep. The world has been watching him for years. The UN demanded that all of the weapons of certain types be immedately destroyed and they would send in weapons inspectors to verify this. Remember Hans Blix? Cheif UN weapons inspector who came to a UN meeting in New York and testified that he believed that Iraq was not being truthful in its weapons declaration? I think you forgot this part. And Saddam refused to allow the inspectors in to search certain areas at certain times? That was in direct violation of the UN orders which also read that if this occured, forcable action would be taken. That was UNANIMOUSLY agreed to by the security council. Even Syria. Remember the Al Samoud II missiles that the UN banned Iraq from having? You claim that they were all destroyed as per the UN mandate, voluntarily, by Saddam, right? Well then HOW THE HELL WERE THEY FIRING MISSILES AT US THAT THEY DID NOT POSESS??? They shot those things at our troops at the beginning of the war!!! They must have just materialized out of thin air. And the boatfull of them that mysteriously traveled to Yemen? You can't possibly be that naive. That's proof enough. The whole weapons inspection thing was a game Iraq was playing to buy more time.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»"After 455 Americans killed, 3,000 Iraqi civilians killed, more than 2,000 Americans wounded, 120,000 troops deployed and 200 billion dollars spent in a country the size of California, we got him. Go us."And how many more did it take to subdue Hitler, the equivalent of Saddam Hussein in his time? And Germany was smaller and not allowed to have a standing army or weapons stockpile. Any loss of life is a tragedy, let there be no mistake, but this war was by far a bargain compared to relatively equivalent wars in our past.Quote, originally posted by Geo Â»Personally, I would've used a single sniper bullet that cost $2.50 from your local gun store.And with one shot, you would have had us lumped into a group of countries known as "terrorist nations". Countries in the free world cannot go around assinating the leaders of other nations. This would have set off an exponentially bigger mess in world affairs than the war did.Quote, originally p
osted by Geo Â»I love the USA, but I also dislike being the most hated country in the world because of our foreign politics. We have been the most hated nation in the world for many years now. Because we have what everone else wants and we are the most successful nation that this planet has ever seen. If other countries don't like the fact that we treasure our freedom and plan to keep it by safeguarding it from terrorists and rogue dictators, that's too damn bad. It's like trying to take Charleton Heston's guns from him. They will have to pry our freedom from our cold, dead hands.

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:22 pm

ok for now. let's just agree to disagree. tho it's related to the topic at hand, we need to stay focused. let's not get into a political debate.

ArcsVibe · Post by **ArcsVibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:41 pm

Yes to that! Remember that Canadian soldiers are in Afghanstan fighting with the US and other allies against the Taliban regime.Canada also helped on 9/11 by allowing all the planes to land in our cities and by offering medical and other equipment to our American cousins. All I can ask for now is for peace in that part of the world and for the entire world, and that all our troops can be safe and return home to their families.God Bless those who believe in a free world!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:48 pm

You couldn't have possibly read all that in 3 minutes, it took me over 3 hours to write and research!Also, this is the "off-topic" forum, so as long as nobody is flaming other members, anything goes here. That is what it's here for, no offense intended. If people want to peaceably debate political ideas here, they are free to do so. We have a sexually explicit topic that is currently active in the Vibe Lounge and nobody is crying about that. To forbid free, but somewhat limited discussion is completely un-American. You cannot say "you are free to express you opinions on subjects X and Y, but not on subject Z". That makes the site worthless. Nobody is being forced to participate here. If you don't like the free expression of opinions of any sort, then don't read them. If you want to contribute to the conversation by commenting on only a part of what is being discussed, then by all means, do just that. But there is no GenVibe Nazi standing next to anyone with a gun to their head commanding them to type. The freedom to participate must equal the freedom to not participate. There is a lot out there in the world that offends me, but usually I just have to ignore it. As an American, I have many rights, but the right to not ever be offended is not one of them, so I just have to deal with it. If I can do this, so can anyone else.

fuel4soul · Post by **fuel4soul** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:55 pm

It took me a whole 3 seconds to buzz through it, Does that count? I remember Canada donating doggie booties to the 9-11 rescue dogs..I'm glad that the animals were on their minds, I really respect that and them now.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:00 pm

Quote, originally posted by fuel4soul Â»I remember Canada donating doggie booties to the 9-11 rescue dogs..I'm glad that the animals were on their minds, I really respect that and them now.Canada rocks!Hands down.

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:16 pm

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»You couldn't have possibly read all that in 3 minutes, it took me over 3 hours to write and research!Also, this is the "off-topic" forum, so as long as nobody is flaming other members, anything goes here. That is what it's here for, no offense intended. If people want to peaceably debate political ideas here, they are free to do so. We have a sexually explicit topic that is currently active in the Vibe Lounge and nobody is crying about that. To forbid free, but somewhat limited discussion is completely un-American. You cannot say "you are free to express you opinions on subjects X and Y, but not on subject Z". That makes the site worthless. Nobody is being forced to participate here. If you don't like the free expression of opinions of any sort, then don't read them. If you want to contribute to the conversation by commenting on only a part of what is being discussed, then by all means, do just that. But there is no GenVibe Nazi standing next to anyone with a gun to their head commanding them to type. The freedom to participate must equal the freedom to not participate. There is a lot out there in the world that offends me, but usually I just have to ignore it. As an American, I have many rights, but the right to not ever be offended is not one of them, so I just have to deal with it. If I can do this, so can anyone else.stang, don't get so defensive! i'm just trying to keep peace before it gets into a long drawn out fight. that's all. i'm not saying you can't speak you mind. i actually happen to agree with you and your points, but we don't need a novel. that's all. don't get your panties all in a bunch!

ArcsVibe · Post by **ArcsVibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:24 pm

Bro you got me blushing man I just love the fact that we can get along, our two countries are fantastic, we have the world's largest unprotected border......and I have super awesome friends here on genvibe! to you Rob! Can't wait to meet you and all the Vibers this summer in Michigan.

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:26 pm

i sure wish i could go! sounds like a blast!

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:34 pm

This is exactly the reason why I usually stop myself from commenting on political issues. That's all I will say, and nothing more about that.U S A!

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:46 pm

Perhaps this says it best.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:46 pm

I can respect that. Too bad it has to be that way, though, I personally learn a lot from free and open discussions on political matters. I've been on political chat sites before and they just make me want to blow my brains out for having to exist on the same planet with such stupid people. I can't handle that. The collective IQ of GenVibe members has to be about 100 points higher than that of the members of most of those political sites. Much more stimulating conversation here.Now hopefully we can find Osama bin a Ba$tard, then I will be truly happy with this whole situation.

ArcsVibe · Post by **ArcsVibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:51 pm

I always wear that one with so much pride!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:51 pm

Quote, originally posted by trdvibe Â»stang, don't get so defensive! i'm just trying to keep peace before it gets into a long drawn out fight. that's all. i'm not saying you can't speak you mind. i actually happen to agree with you and your points, but we don't need a novel. that's all. don't get your panties all in a bunch! Undies are cleaned, pressed, and ready to go! If I didn't get to write a novel once in a while, they would take away my hard-earned title of King of Long Posts I can keep my own peace, but when I see fallicy being propagated as fact and I know better, I must respond. But thank you for the kind sentiments!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:54 pm

Quote, originally posted by ArcsVibe Â» to you Rob! Can't wait to meet you and all the Vibers this summer in Michigan. I'd love to go too, but I now fear that I might be stoned (and I don't mean with pot).

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:54 pm

that's right! i forgot about the title. how silly of me! and glad to hear your panties are nice and pressed....

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:56 pm

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»So does the United States. I also like the fact the American Glad has more colours! Hehe, mine is bigger. Yeah, yours is bigger.But maybe you should shrink it down so you don't exclude the members who use dialup from participating in this thread.

ArcsVibe · Post by **ArcsVibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:57 pm

Why would you think that? I respect your opinion bro! Hey I live in Quebec where half want to leave Canada and half want to stay, you live to learn and appreciate other opinions!And you sound like a great person to have a debate with man!

AKLGT · Post by **AKLGT** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:58 pm

mike, where'd you get that pin? do you have one or did you find it. i like it and want to get one.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:59 pm

Dont' actually own the pin -- was just looking for a pic of a canadian and american flag together in one shot...

ArcsVibe · Post by **ArcsVibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:00 pm

Hope and Mike I bought mine at the airport but you can find them in military stores as well in the US.

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:04 pm

Heehee, I love learning stuff too. Just a little frusterated with younger brother who actually doesn't care at all about anything having to do with the current situation of the world... gyagh!!Things are much happier too if politics are just left out of most things too As for the stoned bit, I'll just make sure to bring some Nerf balls to Michigan and we'll have a go at it

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:08 pm

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 Â»Good point again. Unprotected borders are awesome. No hassle and everyone smiling. Great place to be in life man. I don't know what border you are crossing, but when I cross near Niagra, I feel as though my life is in my hands. The border guards there are kinda spooky and are automatically suspicious of everything. Probably a good thing, though.A friend of my girlfriend went to Canada a few years ago and on her way back, encountered some problems with the American officials on her way back into the U.S. She was driving a large SUV, perhaps a Tahoe or something like that, and the boarder guard ran her through the usual questions when she approached the booth. After some questions, the boarder guard decided that they wanted to search the vehicle and ordered her off to the side. She was then ordered to pull into some kind of garage for the inspection. The SUV was too tall to fit in the garage and she stopped short of entering. Then the guards started yelling at her telling her to drive in. She said she couldn't because the car was too big. They threatened to arrest her and her passengers immediately if she didn't pull in. She kept insisting that it would damage her vehicle, but the guard insisted with more and more anger. Fearing what might happen, she did as ordered and scraped the roof. It ended up damaging the whole roof of the vehicle, caving in parts of the roof. They were removed from the vehicle and it was completely torn apart. Seats were taken out, door panels removed, I don't remember what else they tore out. They found nothing illegal, threw the stuff back together, and told her to leave. She asked who was going to pay for the damage to her vehicle and they laughed at her and told her that it was her responsibility since she drove it into the garage and damaged it. This is a bunch of B.S.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:12 pm

Hope: Found the pin online for you:http://www.pinmart.com/shopDet...at=45h ... .=4042This design is a bit different, but still cool. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISA...sting