If we win this war...?

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
Stephanie
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 23843
Age: 63
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:53 am
Location: Glassboro, NJ

#21 Postby Stephanie » Fri Mar 07, 2003 9:06 pm

JQ Public wrote:Personally i think this long drawn out process has brought the "liberals' and "conservatives" closer together. B/c we have enough time to talk about these issue we are starting to see eye to eye on some things.


That is a big positive JQ!
0 likes   

Rainband

#22 Postby Rainband » Fri Mar 07, 2003 9:10 pm

OMG!!!! Marshall and stephanie agreed :roll: :lol: :lol: JUST KIDDING. I am not much into politics LOL ask Marshall. I agree Bush has done a great job with the challanges he has had to face :wink: I will vote for him again.!! I also agree with Marshall about the difference of storm2k. We can all disagree but we still have respect, IMHO thats important :D



Johnathan 8)
0 likes   

User avatar
Stephanie
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 23843
Age: 63
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:53 am
Location: Glassboro, NJ

#23 Postby Stephanie » Fri Mar 07, 2003 9:12 pm

wx247 wrote:I would have voted for GW in 2000. Can you believe that? Actually, I am very moderate. I just seem liberal on this board. :)

The president has done some very positive things for this country, while at the same time I have some obvious differences in opinion on how he has handled some things.

Bush was a rock after 9-11. Simple as that. The compassion he showed to the victims and their families while leading the country into this war on terror was tremendous.

I am one who believes that Iraq has been on Bush's agenda since pre-November 2000. Is there anything wrong with that? I say no. BUT... he has tried to pass it off as strictly being based on this war on terror. Saddam needs to dealt with, but Bush needed to be forthright from the beginning that this goes beyond weapons of mass destruction and is ultimately about regime change. At first it was about noncompliance only... now he raises the bar and says only regime change will suffice. And what about the NO nation building promise Bush pledged in 2000, even criticizing Clinton about nation building saying it was too costly.

If everything comes out A-Ok from this war, I don't think it damages the far liberals because they aren't saying Saddam isn'y a bad guy, but that taking innocent lives is wrong.

I think Bush has done a lot of good things while President, but I think Mara Liasson said it best the other night on Special Report w/ Brit Hume when they were discussing the same topic. She said that "the presidency is now Bush's to lose". Dems would not see it a big loss to not get the White House, but the Reps would be devestated to see the White House gone.


Yeah I agree that Iraq has been on his agenda since day one (axis of evil) and to me, helped to forward it. I believe that no matter who was President during those days and weeks following would've been a rock. However, I did feel comforted by President Bush as he offered his support and tried to calm a nation down. I also agree that the White House is definately Bush's to lose.
0 likes   


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests