Do you agree with Bush's plan to add troops?

[Guest Yhitzak]

AmyMcClair Posted #17 on March 23, 2007 09:46 am

As for your statement about Saddam being a nasty person. That is the understatement of the century. Saddam was a modern day Hitler. He performed genicide. Hitler kept Germany going too. Should we have kept our noses out of Germany? When WWII ended, Germany was worse off than it had been before the war. Should we have left Hitler to his mechanations?

Making this comparison is ignorant. Hussein didn't perform genoside against his *own* people like Hitler did; he expressed genocidal wishes and tendencies toward people he deemed outsiders in his own country. This isn't a defence of the guy *or* his actions; this is just a statement of fact. And -as a matter of fact- we *did* just stand aside and let Hitler do his thing for many years before we intervened. Do a little research into world history before throwing out such volatile statements.

The beginning of this war, the events that initiated it are completely irrelevant, now. Fearless Leader flat-out stated that he invaded Iraq based upon incomplete and inaccurate information; this war is based on lies and everyone knows it. On 13th March, 2002, Bush stated in a press conference that Osama Bin Laden was no longer considered a major threat. This is less than one year after the attacks on New York and less than six months after he made the statement that Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the whole scenario, the mastermind behind Al Queda, and the whole problem that America would be facing.

Sending in more troops is nothing more than a last-ditch effort by the Bush Administration to gain support for their actions. No one can win a war based on lies, regardless of how many soldiers you send off to fight in it.