what do you think of bush and war in afghanistan and iraq?
153681
The President Mr. Bush has taken unfair personal advantage of 9/11 and the American military's dedication and sacrifice to line his and his buddies' pockets and score a personal vendetta against Hussein.  Regardless of what you think of Hussein, the Iraq war was begun under falsely announced pretense, and has now escalated into a neo-genocidal conflict aimed at all who defy us.  There is potentialy an endless supply of enemies against the US, and now they have a convenient way of engaging us on their own continent.  \n\nAfghanistan is a relative success story compared with Iraq.  They bombed us, we eliminated them, that is how it should be.  \n\nI am getting tired of the people who say that if you are against the war, you are against the soldiers.  That is malarkey.  I am against the war because the government is wasting our troop resources on a conflict that we pre-emptively began without due cause.  I support our armed forces and would like to have them home protecting us, not Iraquis.
893793
If you believe Bush, which I don't, we won the same year we started.  What's going on now is peace and nation building.  What happened in Nam, and I was on active duty during the last three years, I retired at 20 years after Desert Storm, was that the Republicans, Nixon and Ford, caved as a result of public pressure and discontent with the body count.  Since Bush dodged service, I think has no understanding of that, and has set us up for the same result.  I will point out that our troops have done a lot of good for the Iraqis, I think our service people are the best of our best, my own daughter and her husband are on active duty.  Yes, I think a lot of us know the invasion was a mistake, I said so from day one, right now the question is how to fix it, and that is not something we will be able to do in a hurry.  Sad, but fact of life.
1139314
2000-2005: Heck yeah.  I kept seeing him with harsh reviews, and constant attacks for no apparent reason, but from liberal sissies who literaly threatened to flee the country if Bush was elected president again.  He can't do whatever everyone wants him to do people!  Hes fallen under stress with the war in Iraq, and has been in trouble since then.  He needs support, not feedback.  Now do us a favor and can it!\n\n2006: Not at all.  I used to be a Bush supporter, as already said.  Now, my repulicanism is going down the drain, as is my hopes of this torment ending.  The war in Iraq, Neuclear threats, Anthrax, Snipers...and we even abandoned Osama Bin Laden!  For crying out loud, do you not know how our Middle East conflicts in Bushs term (Not the war in iraq, but on terrorism) started!?  Where has Osami gone to?  We would know, had Bush not set his mind elsewere
496373
Overtly, the US invaded Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and find Osama Bin Laden.  Neither of these has yet been completely accomplished.\n\nThe Taliban continues and last month had even made a bit of a comeback.  The conditions, such as the treatment of women, are even worse now than they were at the time of the Taliban.\n\nThe reason is because the Bush administration is full of idoits that don't know how to fight wars.  In Afghanistan, like Iraq, there were far too few troops sent to do the job.\n\nUnlike Iraq, the troops in Afghanistan never intended to occupy the country.  The administration naively believed that the Afghani people would greet the troops as liberators and band together to establish a western-style democracy.  This hasn't happened.\n\nToday, the new Afghani government controls only Kabul.  The rest of the country is in the hands of warlords who are at least as bad as, or worse than, the Taliban.  The Taliban contines to hold some territory as well.\n\nLaws are almost non-existant in Afganistan, and the US has done next to nothing to help.  Kabul still hasn't been rebuilt since the Soviet invasion, and the US has allocated no money to do so.  The "aid" that the US does provide isn't even sufficient to train and maintian the security forces that act as the new government's personal bodyguards.\n\nIf the US left today, it would hardly make any difference.  The number of troops and resources dedicated to Afghanistan is so small that it might not even be noticed of they were withdrawn.\n\nThe handling of this war should be a source of great shame to the Untied States.  The Afghani people were the poorest in the world before the invasion, and now they are even worse off.\n\nAmerica, the richest country on the planet, could easily rebuild the country and could do much to help restore order, but won't.  No reason has been given for this since the American press and people have already forgotton about Afghanistan.
1037309
Bush was using scare tactics to grab votes. Karl rove admitted that scaring Americans into a panic would win votes and justify the war in Iraq.\n  I have often wondered why Bush doesn't mention osama bin laden anymore. Here is the real terrorist who was responsible for the biggest terrorist attack in U.S history. There is evidence that the bin laden family have connections to the Bush family. They have extensive business relations for years.\n  Maybe he doesn't mention bin laden because he has no interest in capturing him. If by capturing bin laden could bring millions to Bush and Halliburton than you could bet the farm we would have him by now.\n  Could this be the reason why were in Iraq, to draw attention away from bin laden? Bush said in a speech back in late 2002 "I don't think about bin laden, I don't care were he's at,he's not a big deal to me".\n  This is how crazy Bush is. His idea is "osama bin laden attacked us, so lets go after Saddam". It's like if your neighbor beats up your wife so you go after your pastor.\n  The truth is this, Bush and Cheney can make alot more money invading Iraq and grabbing the oil (see Halliburton) and giving out a lucrative fire fighting contract to a firm once run by Cheney than by capturing Osama. \nBut in fairness to Bush, he has to keep shedding innocent blood or he violates his deal with the devil.\nIf anyone wants to see some real good stuff go to infowars.com or prisonplanet.com
457877
Dislike intensely. I do not think he is trustworthy at all. I think he has lined the pockets of his friends (Halliburton!) at the expense of the middle-class. I think he is a big international bully; if other countries did some of the things Bush as ordered done, like invade another country without the support of the UN, Bush would have invaded them, too.  I also find it offensive how Bush and the rest of the Administration think the public are a bunch of sheep--- really, a $100 gas check, but I have to say it is OK to drill in the Alaskan Wildlife Preserve? What kind of deal is that? And how dumb do you think I am, if you think I would accept that?\n\n I think we need to break the Republican stranglehold on power in the upcoming elections.  And I voted, like I always do.  So I am allowed to complain!
182012
When President George HW Bush was in office, it was a defensive war fought to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. The goal of the war was only the freedom of Kuwait, not to move into Iraq, although a number of US generals were pushing for it. Bush, Powell and other leaders decided it was not in the best interest to go in at that time - this wasn't an "unfinished war" despite what people want to say to demean the current President. The Kurds, thinking we were going to help them free themselves from Hussein, started an uprising. When we didn't come into Iraq, Hussein's army easily suppressed the rebellion and then proceeded to torture and kill entire villiages and towns, including through the use of WMDs (sarin gas), and then openly attempted to assassinate Bush after he was out of office.\n\nAs part of Hussein's surrender, they had to comply by UN laws and treaties. They did not for 12 years. Why would you fault Bush for taking a murderous dictator for task? And name one war that we "got out right away?" We still have troops stationed overseas from WWII, Korea and Vietnam. For some reason, Americans decided that wars can be fought during commercial breaks during sitcoms. Wars are drawn out processes that result in many lives lost, but for the hopefully greater good of society.\n\nGod bless your son, but don't trivalize what he is fighting for.
462334
Iraq, hell no, he's an idiot.  Afghanistan, he's got it only partly right.  The troops in Iraq should be there.  He should be hunting the real cause of 9/11, not some made up BS in Iraq.  Time to IMPEACH the A - hole!!  \n\n.45 your full of crap, inspectors were there in Iraq and told us there was no WMD's.  The UN pulled them out when hostilities were imminent.  Gee who was right? Inspectors? I think so....  But Dumya couldn't have that because it didn't fit his lies.  So start thinking for yourself and quit spouting neo con talking point BS.
188657
I thought the American public had forgotten about Afghanistan...We've already lost too many precious soldiers lives to a war that was based on lies.  These four troops just added to the blood toll on President Bush's hands.  We should be asking the question of how many of our public officials' children have been killed in Afghanistan or Iraq?  The wars in the 20th and now 21st century have always been fought by the poor and lower middle class who have been proud to serve their country with ideals that America was founded on - freedom, liberty and justice.
103347
I think it's kind of gone into a bad light. Although our punishment of bombing Afghanistan fit the crime (in my opinion), as time goes on people do forget what we were trying to accomplish there. And the war in Iraq (which I do not support nor condemn) is taking precedence over what our true cause was.
423316
We don't (my husband and I) and we are middle America. We know bush and chaney are in it for the oil and money from the war. That is their reason for being there. Not terrorists. Afghanistan would be for terrorists, but bush and his crew have pretty much forgotten Afghanistan and all they care about is Iraq and it's oil. The only time bush and company bother to bring up Afghanistan is when they want to use it and terrorist as an excuse to be in Iraq. If they would have really put it all into routing the terrorists in Afghanistan (and not abandoning it for Iraq) I believe things would be a lot different and a lot of the terrorists would have be caught or dealt with by now.
975419
Yes! but what do us Democrats know, right? Even though I am a Persian Gulf War Vet who was in a war in which enough troops were used to get the job done correctly!\n\nI feel sorry for the troops who feel the same as I do who are over there following orders like good troops so often do. \n\nI support the troops but do not support the Bush Administration's Invasion of Iraq which had no WMD's and No link to Al- Quaida and who was contained by the rules set forth from the first Gulf War.\n\nI am so sick of Bush talking down to people like me, I served, he did not, that speaks volumes and I think any veteran with common sense would agree with me.
643362
Let's see... Afghanistan, ruined. Iraq, ruined.  Well, Pres. Bush might try to go in there, but it'll be very unpopular with those already deeply unhappy with his hawkish ways.  And yes, I have just called him a bird-brain.\nFighting a war is very oil-expensive. Those 61 ton tanks don't go far on a gallon. How much oil does he think he has?
329089
Ok last time I do this. Afghanistan was already taken care of and a democratically elected government now holds power there. Granted its a gov based on Islamic Law BUT theyre learning AND it was elected by the PEOPLE. We did not go into Iraq for oil...how many tankers have arrived here from Iraq? NONE.  The main points the President and his admin cited were Saddam's alleged links to Al Queda which rather recently are starting to be CONFIRMED by siezed Iraqui documents as well as Saddam's refusal to cooperate with UN weapon inspectors and even going as far as covertly transporting most of its WMD programs to friendly neighbor nations. Evidence of this is also starting to come out of siezed regime documents. There is ALOT more but I only have a short space to make my main points. The rest of it IS out there, if you have the intelligence to look for it and the wisdom to see that ALL the "mainstream" press is biased...even the socalled "fair and balanced" Fox News.
684119
I have to say other than pay my taxes I have done NOTHING to support the current war effort in Iraq, but have supported it in Afghanistan.  I have friends serving in both locations and I remind them as often as we can email that regardless of how people feel about the wars I will NOT let them return to the "welcome" our vietnam veterans got.  I also discuss (that's right discuss) my views with others who share them and don't share them. I have learned a lot and they have too.\n\n(Remember, supporting our troops who are doing their job is NOT the same as supporting the wars.)
623453
Okay let me make this straight up as I can. I am a moderate Democrat (i.e. Conservatives will say I am too liberal and Liberals will say I am too conservative) I also do not like our current president never have voted for the other guy in both elections. However I do like Tony Blair and the Labor party (I almost always have the BBC on so I can get some real news) with that you know where I stand.\n\nThis is a very complex question with a lot of history to consider. I can tell you what this war is not. First it is not part of the war on terror. President Hussein had nothing to do with 9-11 and frankly for the victims of that hideous act I think it is a great dishonor to say that Iraq is one and the same war. It’s not about oil. Americans think that we pay too much for oil, compared to Europe we pay half as much per a gallon. That’s due to the different driving practices and the better mass transit in Europe.  This war isn’t about WMDs even though that was the purposed reason to rally public support for the war. It’s not about Halliburton getting kickbacks from having a close relationship with the President that is just the icing on the cake. I can not tell you really what it is about its too complex for me to go into here and I would need hours and hours to explain it. \n\nHere we are a few years later. Do I think we should pull out our troops? No basically we broke the country we should fix it. Is there any good of this invasion? Yes, Saddam was not a good leader of his country he committed the most unforgivable sins; Genocide. If Bush said I don’t think the no fly zones aren’t working I don’t think the sanctions are working we need to go in and get this bastard. I would have said hell yes lets roll. Thing is he didn’t do that he didn’t make it about crimes against humanity. Our reason for the war was WMDs. How could Iraq having WMDs threaten the United States? Only one way and that is Terrorism. The only way Iraq could have used them is by deploying one of its Intel officers in a covert attack on our country. It couldn’t have been done by Al Qaeda. Why? Well Al Qaeda thinks that Saddam is the enemy because he exploits Islam for his own needs. Al Qaeda wanted to over throw leaders like Saddam all thro out the Middle East and put in governments like the Taliban in Afghanistan. Problem is people don’t look at history when they look at the middle east they don’t see the events before oil from there became a life blood or after the crusades. There is this dark period where it greatly shaped the Middle East that we know nothing about as westerners. Hence why it is complex.
606244
The action taken in Afghanistan was textbook perfect. I have been bewildered as to what went wrong in Iraq. I cam across an interview with Ex-Speaker Gingrich on Meet the Press this past Sunday; it turns out that they put in a whole different team to run the operation in Iraq, and they being Bush's Theocon Cronies did everything wrong. They became the face of Iraq to Iraq and solidified the concept to the Iraqi people they they were occupied. I am including some links on the Bush Administration which you may wish to be aware of.\n\nYes, we need to pull our forces out.