Log In Sign Up

If Bush wasn't president...


Forum: Heated Debates

Notices

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to [email protected].

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Heated Debates LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
June 28th, 2006, 01:12 AM
friskycat01's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bloomington, Indiana
Posts: 820
Okay here is what I mean...

If Bush haden't won the presidency and Al Gore did and Gore was the one who decided he wanted to go to war after 9/11 would you have still supported it? I ask this because a lot of people have the opinion that Bush has selfish and personal resaons for going to war in Iraq. So what if it was a Democratic president without the personal history and issues with Iraq and Saddam Hussein? Would that change your mind about it at all? If you think oil is an issue, what if it wasn't?

For Democratic or bush non-suporters...
Would you be more inclined to support the war if the president that proposed it was the one you voted for?

For Republican or Bush suporters...
Would you be less likely to support the war if the president that proposed it was the one you did not vote for?

I would really like your serious opinion on this. Please don't repond with "well it dosn't matter because Gore isn't President".


I am NOT a Bush supporter and I DON'T support the war but I am really unsure if that would change if the man I voted for had become president. I would like to think it wouldn't but I just don't know. This is why I want to get your opinon on the matter.
__________________
<div align="center"></div><div align="center"> </div>
<div align="center">
</div>
Reply With Quote
  #2  
June 28th, 2006, 02:28 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,253
I do not support the war. I do the soldiers but not the actual war. My views on the war would not change if Al Gore was president.
__________________
Trish
<a href="http://lilypie.com/"><img src="http://lbyf.lilypie.com/7ECBm5.png" width="400" height="80" border="0" alt="Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers" /></a>
Reply With Quote
  #3  
June 28th, 2006, 05:10 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,496
I would be more supportive of the war if we went in with a better defined plan, no matter who was at the helm.
__________________
taking jm breaks if you don't see me around much
Reply With Quote
  #4  
June 28th, 2006, 05:43 AM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,120
I wouldn't even support the war if Barak Obama was president, and that's saying alot! My views have nothing to do with who I support politically.
__________________
Those who love me know how to reach me...it's been real ladies, peace and love!!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
June 28th, 2006, 06:19 AM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 10,865
I think Bush had this war in his mind from the get go, 9/11 or not. He is trying to follow in daddies footsteps. I never supported this war (I am also Canadian) This war has brought on a lot of other things that are affecting other countries. I would never support this war, because it is a pointless endless battle thats never gonna change Iraq. This is all those people have known, there may be a few who want to change, btu you cant change a war torn violent country with war and violence. These people see Death way too often.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
June 28th, 2006, 06:32 AM
frgsonmysox's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Offutt AFB, NE
Posts: 19,799
I don't like the idea of any war. I think the US is too quick to cause/create/and end conflicts existing elsewhere in the world. So I don't think I would support the war regardless of who started it.
__________________
~Beth~ Wife to my Airman Chris, and mommy to: Anthony Nathaniel (8/31/04), Anastasia Fae (8/01/06), Baby C (lost on 10/12/07), David Cillian (7/31/08), Charles George (4/29/10), and Alan Christopher (2/22/12)





My BLOG - A Day In The Life of a Freg (it's a little bit of everything!)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
June 28th, 2006, 07:39 AM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
I would like to know... where was the uproar when Clinton bombed Iraq just to take the attention off of himself during the whole impeachment situation?

I would have supported this war no matter. But we likely wouldn't have gone to war if there were anyone else at the helm.

I think that we should defend ourselves, and after 911 (and many innocent American dying), the terrorism does need to be fought and controlled. We've turned our heads long enough. Time to make them go meet their virgins. Sadam played a role in it, so it's much better to have him out of his seat of power and wealth, so that he can not continue to be in alliance with people like this.

And I, personally, still have the belief that all of the WMD were moved out underground with many of the people. But that's just me.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
June 28th, 2006, 10:36 AM
friskycat01's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bloomington, Indiana
Posts: 820
Quote:
Would there even be a war if anyone else was president?[/b]
See that's the thing, i don't think there would be. I think this war is an extream maesure not to mention all the other issues involved. But do you think another president would have done enough? I think this war has gotten way out of control and has lost its focus (f it evan had the right focus in the firat place) but I also think that no action would have been a mistake. We needed to do something but what would be that middle line? What would have been enough but not too much.

If you don't agree with what Bush has done, what would the right thing have been?
__________________
<div align="center"></div><div align="center"> </div>
<div align="center">
</div>
Reply With Quote
  #10  
June 28th, 2006, 12:18 PM
LouLouMom's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 4,435
I don't see it as an oil issue. Last year only 5% of our oil came from Iraq, so how is that an issue? I would support it regardless of who was president. I think there are people who say they wouldn't support it anyway, but if it was Clinton in there, I bet you would see more support. JMHO. I think it gives those who are already Bush hater's, another reason to hate him.I think that no matter what was done differently, we would have division over it.
__________________










Angel~9/12/05~with us for 5 weeks</span></span></span>
Reply With Quote
  #11  
June 28th, 2006, 12:19 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar Aiming for mediocrity
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: in my house
Posts: 7,374
I would support it regardless of who was the President.

ETA: If we were at war for oil, we would have invaded Canada and/or Mexico, not the Middle East. (I get so tired of that argument)
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #12  
June 28th, 2006, 12:22 PM
friskycat01's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bloomington, Indiana
Posts: 820
Quote:
I don't see it as an oil issue. Last year only 5% of our oil came from Iraq, so how is that an issue?[/b]
I never said there was an oil issue. I said If you belive there is an issue. Some people do belive that it is an issue. I am not one of them but others are entitled to their opinion.

Quote:
If you think oil is an issue, what if it wasn't?[/b]
__________________
<div align="center"></div><div align="center"> </div>
<div align="center">
</div>
Reply With Quote
  #13  
June 28th, 2006, 12:26 PM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
If we were at war for oil, we would have invaded Canada....[/b]
I don't understand... I thought you guys have with your Coke, Pepsi, Walmart and Krispy Kremes..

Honestly there is no reason for the US to invade Canada because it's mainly American parent companies that own our oil....
Reply With Quote
  #14  
June 28th, 2006, 12:33 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar Aiming for mediocrity
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: in my house
Posts: 7,374
Quote:
Quote:
If we were at war for oil, we would have invaded Canada....[/b]
I don't understand... I thought you guys have with your Coke, Pepsi, Walmart and Krispy Kremes..

Honestly there is no reason for the US to invade Canada because it's mainly American parent companies that own our oil....
[/b]
I meant because we get more than 3x the amount of oil imported from Canada than we do the Middle East.....not saying we should invade Canada....am I missing your question?
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #15  
June 28th, 2006, 12:36 PM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If we were at war for oil, we would have invaded Canada....[/b]
I don't understand... I thought you guys have with your Coke, Pepsi, Walmart and Krispy Kremes..

Honestly there is no reason for the US to invade Canada because it's mainly American parent companies that own our oil....
[/b]
I meant because we get more than 3x the amount of oil imported from Canada than we do the Middle East.....not saying we should invade Canada....am I missing your question?
[/b]
I know you get your oil from Canada as I work for the companies that pump the oil.. That's my point. The US wouldn't invade a country they are already getting what they need from it.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
June 28th, 2006, 12:38 PM
friskycat01's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bloomington, Indiana
Posts: 820
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(StaceyC @ Jun 28 2006, 01:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotemain'>
If we were at war for oil, we would have invaded Canada....[/b]
I don't understand... I thought you guys have with your Coke, Pepsi, Walmart and Krispy Kremes..

Honestly there is no reason for the US to invade Canada because it's mainly American parent companies that own our oil....
[/b]
I meant because we get more than 3x the amount of oil imported from Canada than we do the Middle East.....not saying we should invade Canada....am I missing your question?
[/b][/quote]

I know you get your oil from Canada as I work for the companies that pump the oil.. That's my point. The US wouldn't invade a country they are already getting what they need from it.
[/b][/quote]

Good piont.
__________________
<div align="center"></div><div align="center"> </div>
<div align="center">
</div>
Reply With Quote
  #17  
June 28th, 2006, 12:42 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar Aiming for mediocrity
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: in my house
Posts: 7,374
My point is that the oil imported from the Middle East is less than 5%, so why would that be significant?
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #18  
June 28th, 2006, 12:50 PM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
My point is that the oil imported from the Middle East is less than 5%, so why would that be significant?[/b]
Just like in Canada, since the US has began rebuilding Iraq's oil industry (which will take more time to really results) has been done by companies who have American parent companies.. Remember that whole, only American companies will be given contracts to rebuild Iraq time?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
June 28th, 2006, 12:50 PM
friskycat01's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bloomington, Indiana
Posts: 820
Quote:
My point is that the oil imported from the Middle East is less than 5%, so why would that be significant?[/b]
We only get 5% because they won't give us any more than that. Like I said before I don't think it is an issue with this war. BUT if we had control of their oil or put someone in charge that would give us more we could get more that 5%. The reason we get a lot from Canida is because they are willing to sell it to us. If they didn't want to thaey wouldn't have to. I'm sure we have contracts with them but if for some reason they decided they did't want to sell to us when tat agreement expired they wouldn't have to.

I don't know much about it. This is just a theory
__________________
<div align="center"></div><div align="center"> </div>
<div align="center">
</div>
Reply With Quote
  #20  
June 28th, 2006, 01:29 PM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Clinton’s sudden attack against Iraq came just as congressmen were gathering in Washington for what looked to be a certain vote for impeachment. The White House had held out hope that two dozen or so moderate Republicans might break ranks with their party. But early in the week they announced one by one how they planned to vote - and the news was all bad for Clinton. Republicans like Jack Quinn of New York, Tom Campbell of California, Nancy Johnson of Connecticut and a dozen more came out to say they had weighed the evidence produced by independent counsel Kenneth Starr and the House judiciary committee, and concluded that the President had lied and deserved to be impeached.[/b]
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ind...s=M1ARTM0011840

Again I ask... where were all the war nay sayers when Clinton did it WITHOUT provocation?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:46 PM.