Bringing the draft back ???

[5030]

Andy:

Here goes. Mike and CowBoyDoc will probably have my head over this, but I'll never catch up with Junkman.

I agree 100% with you. Working in the steel business, especially in the rust belt has left me with a bad taste in my mouth and a lighter wallet too. I see people in metro Detroit living in cardboard boxes in the winter time. Just down the road from me in Adrian, Michigan, there is a number of homeless vets living in the woods. What about those people. The people right here in this country. The United States wants to be the ambassador of goodwill and help the world but we really need to help our people at home first. I know, that is a protectionism philosophy, but we and I mean the American people as a whole, need to address the needs of our own people before we address the concerns of other countries. From what I surmise, the whole Iraq deal is about oil, plain and simple.

In this country, our infrastructure is in a shambles. It's time to concentrate on our own affairs and make the affairs of the world secondary.

Again, to all posters here as well as our moderators, I have read this thread over and over and I had to say my piece. I'll be back quiet now as the say on the CB radio. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Tractors4u]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( From what I surmise, the whole Iraq deal is about oil, plain and simple. )</font>

I would hate to think that we went to war strictly for oil, which I don't believe we did. It would be nice if low gas prices were a side affect of the war. If it was about oil where are all the low gas prices?

 

[OkeeDon]

Riptides and Bob Skurka have questioned my statement that the American public was mislead to believe that Iraq was "somehow connected to 9/11". It's a fair question.

As they stated, the administration never made a direct statement to that effect. They went out of their way, however, to create that impression. Certainly, shortly following the invasion, a majority of Americans believed it to be true. This is a report of a poll taken in September, 2003:

"The Washington Post found that 69 percent of all Americans believe that Hussein worked with al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden to carry out terrorist plans nearly two years ago. In fact, the poll found that even a majority Democrats and independents believe Hussein was a key player.

"Poll analysts conclude that this belief by a large majority of Americans is why the Bush administration has been able to withstand criticism coming from the Democrats regarding the progress in the rebuilding efforts in Iraq."

Even today, after the administration has stated that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, a significant number of people still believe it.

How did this come about? I have spent several hours compiling statements from official transcripts of speeches by Bush, Cheney, Powell and Rumsfield that all have misleading insinuations that tie ****** to Al Qaeda and mention 9/11 and Iraq in the same paragraph. Of course, I also found literally thousands of references from partisan sources that protested these remarks, but I limited my search to full and original transcripts. I have many references, but in the interests of brevity, I'll relate only one as an example:

From the official White House transcript of President Bush's January, 2003 State of the Union Speech:

"Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that ****** Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by ****** Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes."

This type of remark, repeated at every opportunity by administration officials, right wing supporters, and media such as Fox News, bombarded the public until poll results like that cited above became common.

I am convinced, as a result of my own research, not because of any news media, that such remarks, coupled with the claims of WMD and other claims that have turned out to be false -- and were widely predicted at the time to be false -- were a deliberate and successful attempt by the Office of Special Projects under VP Cheney to mislead the public about the reasons for attacking Iraq. In his new book, Bob Woodward quotes Colin Powell as calling that office a "Gestapo office." Powell says he can't recall making the remark.

 

[milkman]

two interesting books for you to read, "The lies of George W Bush", and "How much did you make on the war daddy". The first one is kind of a dry read in spots, a lot of stuff you've heard before but by the end, you get the picture very clearly.

 

[AMP762]

In 1969 I volunteered to go to Nam.I felt it was my duty to help protect the freedom that all people cherish,I did my part , {what the politicians did I had no control of} just like today. After reading this thread in light of the way the people act now I wonder,was it worth it?

 

[OkeeDon]

The issue of protecting our freedom in Vietnam was the basis for all the contention at the time, and is still an interesting question. In that case, we eventually left the country without accomplishing any of our goals, and the North Vietnamese took over. Did our freedom suffer as a result? I leave it to you to decide whether it was worth it.

I do respect you for your service. You were true to your beliefs, and that is to your credit.

 

[riptides]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( After reading this thread in light of the way the people act now I wonder,was it worth it? )</font>

Breaks my heart to see a vet ask this question.
-Mike Z.

 

[5030]

Brent:

The gas prices could be much lower if the Federal and State Gummits didn't tax the gasoline the way they do. Gasoiline like cigaretts is taxed beyond belief. We need another Boston Tea Party in this country.

I missed my vocation in life. Should have been a politician. Just tax the multitudes to support my habits. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[5030]

To all who have posted and to all who are reading this thread and NOT posting...

This thread sure has brought the opinions and beliefs of a really good cross section of America to light. Better than any informational poll conducted by a governmental entity.

It's good reading, that is, reading opinions voiced by TBYNetters.

I'd be willing to surmise that everyone who frequents this site has read this thread, some more than once.

 

[fivestring]

<font color="red">""The Washington Post found that 69 percent of all Americans believe that Hussein worked with al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden to carry out terrorist plans nearly two years ago. In fact, the poll found that even a majority Democrats and independents believe Hussein was a key player."
</font>

Don, that's the problem with polls. 90% of the information is gathered by a left-wing media company doing the polling. Washington Post, New York Times, Chicago Tribune, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc.
Find information from a non-partisan polling company. Information gathered by a cross section of society, not just the left side of society.
As I've said before, I've never been polled.
How many here have been polled and by whom?

 

[AndyM]

I'm going to try to continue this without mentioning political parties or candidates.
I think that's the best way to proceed with this thread... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif


No one has answered my question yet--
Why only Iraq?
There are terrible dictatorships all over the world, whose people need freed from oppressive governments.
Why only Iraq?

I agree with many of the things Gary says. However, just because both of us like bluegrass music, or have blue tractors, or even possibly voted for the same guy for president, we don't agree on everything.
You know what?
It's great that everyone is different in one way or another...

My wife said to me yesterday, "You mean this whole Iraq thing isn't because of 9-11?"

I like to think of my wife and I as "typical average Americans". Even though we are both registered members of a political party, we don't defend everything that happens, just to go with the flow on the party line. We don't agree with everything that our government is doing overseas. However, as Daryl and I both mention (and our views are on opposite ends many times), there are SERIOUS issues in this country that are not being addressed at all, and are just being swept under the rug.

Does our country need to have a strong foreign policy?
ABSOLUTELY! But ask the following questions to yourself...

Are the United States' goals (of the conflict in Iraq) specifically documented anywhere?
Are we accomplishing these goals. If we are, are we hitting the target dates for these goals?

Are we going to take care of the nuclear capabilities and WMD in other countries that are known threats, or are we just going to ignore those ones?

Most importantly, is our government currently doing enough domestically to help the future of this country? Schools, jobs, etc.

Think about the future...

 

[AndyM]

<font color="blue"> The gas prices could be much lower if the Federal and State Gummits didn't tax the gasoline the way they do. Gasoiline like cigaretts is taxed beyond belief. We need another Boston Tea Party in this country. </font>

There were two summers in a row a few years ago where gas hit extreme lows and extreme highs.

The first year was either 1998 or 1999. I remember paying $0.679 for regular unleaded. I remember commenting to my wife that we were paying $0.405 per gallon in tax at the time, so the gasoline was really only costing us around 27 cents!

The very next summer (1999 or 2000) gasoline in this area hit the highest I have ever seen it, when regular unleaded hit $2.049 (except on 9-11, when gas stations were trying to gouge people for $4-$5 per gallon)

Even road diesel was at $1.099 as recently as the first few months of 2002. Now it's $1.729 at the same gas station.

Gasoline in this area is almost up to those record levels from a few years ago, now that it's up to $1.899.

Bring back the 67 cent gas from 5 years ago.
If it was possible then, why can't it be done now???

I'm going to be politically incorrect...
Our government and our military is sitting on the second largest oil reserve in the world. If it isn't going to be used to make money off of like everyone says they are going to do, why can't they at least use it to pay for the $87 billion, rather that having the American tax payers paying for it?

Normally I try very hard to keep politics and religion out of my tractor posts, but since I'm not mentioning sprecific parties or people, I'm going to speak my peace and move on.
I'm going to keep my mouth shut now... /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

[fivestring]

"Most importantly, is our government currently doing enough domestically to help the future of this country? Schools, jobs, etc. "

No. They are too worried about sending money to other countries. For the amount of money we send to ******, we could retire the national debt.
The amount of money sent to France and Germany, we could abolish the gasoline and cigarette tax.
The jobs issue is a tough one. The manufacturing jobs that we lost are gone forever. They will not be coming back because of labor costs. Neither political party will publicly admit to this. The only way to create jobs is to create companies that hire workers or expand existing companies that hire workers. One of the ways to lure businesses into an area is tax breaks. That does not sit well with some people.

"Why only Iraq?
There are terrible dictatorships all over the world, whose people need freed from oppressive governments.
Why only Iraq?"

$$$$???
I think N. Korea could be next if it weren't for the cost in $$$$.

We need to quit being the police department of the world.

 

[MikePA]

<font color="blue"> Why only Iraq? There are terrible dictatorships all over the world, whose people need freed from oppressive governments. Why only Iraq? </font>
Who said it will only be Iraq? Some 'problems' you handle in parallel, others sequentially. Depends how many resources you have at your disposal.

<font color="blue"> However, as Daryl and I both mention (and our views are on opposite ends many times), there are SERIOUS issues in this country that are not being addressed at all, and are just being swept under the rug.</font>
I believe that the primary responsibility of the government, at all levels, is to protect and defend the country. Therefore, whatever is needed to accomplish that is the first thing taken out of a tax dollar. Whatever is left then goes to address the other issues/problems.

The great debate is, what's needed to defend the country and how do we do it? The balancing act has diplomacy (cheaper) at one end and military (more expensive) at the other end. One belief system leaves more $$ for social programs, infrastructure improvements, etc. while the other leaves less.

<font color="blue"> Are the United States' goals (of the conflict in Iraq) specifically documented anywhere? Are we accomplishing these goals. If we are, are we hitting the target dates for these goals? </font>
Assuming they are, why would you expect this information to be shared publicly? I am sure our enemies would love to know what our timetable is.

<font color="blue"> Are we going to take care of the nuclear capabilities and WMD in other countries that are known threats, or are we just going to ignore those ones? </font>
See first and second responses. Why would we announce what we're going to do and when? It is situations like this, i.e., timetables, who is on the list of countries that need dealt with, etc., where we have to trust our leaders that there are plans for all of this. This is why I not only value a candidate's position on issues, but I also try and determine to the extent possible, if I can trust them, do they keep promises, etc. Many people seem to want the government to lay out plans dealing with these topics, evaluate them to see if they are 'OK'. Laying out plans for when highways are going to be repaved is one thing. Laying out plans for dealing with our enemies is something else. Again, at some point it comes down to us trusting our leaders to be doing the right things. At some point, the quest for more and more details means the voters want to micro-manage the government and to the extreme, have a referendum on what we should do. This is not a democracy, it's a representative democracy where we elect people to not only represent us, but also to use their own good judgement and wisdom to make the right choices and decisions, some of which we will probably disagree with. So, we're back at the issue of, at some point, having to trust our leaders. One of the questions I ask myself before voting, at least recently, is, "If their spouse can't trust them, why should I?" /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

<font color="blue"> Most importantly, is our government currently doing enough domestically to help the future of this country? Schools, jobs, etc. </font>
Here we disagree. The items you mention, while important, are not more important than the security of the country. If we do not have security, these other things do not matter.

 

[Boondox]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( To all who have posted and to all who are reading this thread and NOT posting...

This thread sure has brought the opinions and beliefs of a really good cross section of America to light. Better than any informational poll conducted by a governmental entity.

It's good reading, that is, reading opinions voiced by TBYNetters.

I'd be willing to surmise that everyone who frequents this site has read this thread, some more than once. )</font>

Let's hope they also notice and emulate the civility that has characterized this lively debate as well!

 

[AndyM]

<font color="blue"> Let's hope they also notice and emulate the civility that has characterized this lively debate as well!
</font>

AMEN to that! Anywhere else, this thread would have been closed along time ago, with personal attacks and hurt feelings all around. It's great to be in a place where we all have a common interest, and we debate but agree to disagree on other issues.

What a great bunch of people! /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif