I don't understand something...Maybe you liberals can help me!? Republicans, feel free to give your opinion!

Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and they weren't tied to Al Qaeda. Why the hell did we go there in the first place and why did we go with no plan to secure the country?

If the country would have been secured the the way it should have been after the war was won, then we wouldn't give two hoots about Iraq, because there wouldn't be a civil war brewing. And our men and women would have been out of there years ago.

Incompetence that leads to the needless death of our soldiers is why I dislike Bush.

When he is trying to stop those who have been attacking not only their own people but the whole world????? I think you are even more misinformed than you realize!!! First, the evidence has become overwhelming that 9/11 was an inside Job!!! If you look at films like Loose Change 2nd Edition, and Info Wars, and Prison Planet, and The Greatest Lie Ever Sold, and many others that you can watch for free on Google Video, you will hopefully be able to understand what our government is actually capable of doing, and what their motives are!! It is time to Wake Up!! Stop listening to mainstream media, which is owned and controlled by the same people!!! Mainstream media simply cannot be trusted!!!

Why it is bad:

1. Us going over there was all based on lies passed on to the congress and the American people.

2. If he is looking to get those responsible for 9/11, then why in the heck is he in Iraq? It has been proven that Iraq has NOTHING to do with Al Qaeda.

3. Why are we getting our brave men and women killed for an ideal that WE care more about than they do?

4. If he wanted to go into Iraq and do things right, then it should have been the military men running the war in the first place. Funny how the politicians ran the war in the beginning, and then when they failed, they cry to the military - who by the way, overwhelmingly has come out that they were against going into Iraq in the first place (I cite Colin Powell being ousted because he didn't agree with the ideal of a war in Iraq - I am willing to follow the advice of a General as opposed to some guy in a suit that signs bills and campaigns for his job. . .). It wasn't done right in the first place.

Those are just a few of the reasons that I don't like the guy in the Oval Office right now. He rode the deaths of over 3,000 Americans to further his own agenda - NOTHING MORE. It wouldn't matter to me if a Democrat, Republican, or Mother Theresa did that - I would not approve or back them. It is just sick, and George Bush did it. I have to wonder how anyone can defend a person that is low enough to do such a thing. . .

People are angry because Iraq has very little to do with al qaeda. Bush even said himself that Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. He said he was positive there were WMDs but none were found. Yes Hussain was a horrible dictator but the world has much more horrible dictators. We should be concentrating on terrorist organizations such as hezbola and al quaeda and using more intelligence instead of brute force. He has created a situation where we are less able to focus on terrorism because we are worried about an entire middle eastern country in disarray. We are now more vulnerable than ever. This is why even most of the other republicans are losing faith and trust in him.

As a member of the Democratic Party, I understand a lot of the vocal objection is from Democrats and liberals who don't trust Bush. They see him as associated with his father and their ties to corporate oil interests. The same way Republicans and Bush defenders "deny" any proven connection between Cheney/Bush and oil interests, their opposing counterparts "deny" any proven connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 terrorists. So the two sides deadlock. They cannot even hear each other because they already assume the other side is lying and is just arguing for the sake of political opposition and gain.

The TRUE progressive peacemakers do not HATE anyone. I count myself in this camp. I support both the military intervening to provide security while also equal resources are invested in civilian rebuilding efforts. I don't see the situation as "either/or" but "all the above" -- we need both military protection while also emphasizing civilian relief and support. So I think if Democrats/liberals are truly opposed to war, they should support the effort to rebuild and stabilize even more. The problem again is that the issue has become "polarized" where the sides do not trust each other. So they compete and try to defeat the other, which I think makes both fail at their goals.

Colin Powell spoke out publicly about the need for political advocates to focus on common ground so that more could be achieved effectively, rather than let differences divide and conquer our best efforts. George McGovern also issued a statement about increasing resources and reconstruction in Iraq through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I would support Powell and McGovern, and people from both major parties, in working together to make sure all support is invested fully in the areas of concern, instead of playing a no-win tug-of-war for the sake of political posturing. Why not agree that both sides are right, and then both invest in the areas that need help -- both the military for security and the civilian efforts and diplomacy for stability. Why are these two areas painted as opposites, except for exploiting political conflict?

Well, I'm sure that you are proud of your brother. I am very proud of our men and women in uniform and have even sent Treats for Troops two or three times.

The war in Iraq is NOT about fighting terrorism. Bush ordered our troops into that country to capture Saddam Hussein, who tried to kill his father (and there were other ways of seizing Hussein without a full scale invasion). I will admit that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, but in case you haven't noticed, there are many other brutal dictators in the world (see the Sudan, Darfur).

I guess somebody has to keep reminding you conservatives that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the Sep 11 terrorist attacks, NOT Saddam Hussein.

And what makes you think liberals are not involving in the war on terror, such that it is? Liberals are just as patriotic and love the USA just as much as conservatives do.

He attacked the wrong place 2 times-then says they are a religion of peace,he calls the minute men terrorist they are the only ones that are trying to stop the real invasion. And the two border patrol in jail for 12 years for trying to protect us,this is insane. they chase our national Guard like rabbits, Just what don't you understand son?There are a lot of bad guys out there Bush is one.The world invites them into let them kill them so why do they complain.?

Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarrelled with him? (Liberal thinking-it does make sense)

It is not just Bush----that is just trying to point the finger somewhere. There are many scapegoats for our errors if they are errors (a matter of opinion) but in this case pointing the finger on just one party is wrong. Or pointing that finger at one country is wrong. All play their parts--some just deny it.

Change can take place only when Liberal and Conseratives pressures are both strong. Intelligent liberals have always recognized the debt they owe to Conseratives, whose existence permits liberals to push further than they would otherwise have dared. And intelligent Conseratives recongnizes the need for the advances and changes many Liberals have brought forth. Together they make it possible continually to test the limits of what can be done and to do it safely. This Great Nation was built on many conserative ideas--and other Nations have been helped many by those same methods. Maybe in the furture-radical Liberals will get the true picture and calm down--and quit trying to place blame and see all sides. One can only hope. But we need both parties--one sees things as they are (and built a nation) -one sees as they can be (and can make it better-if used right)

because you're pathetically misinformed...

Bush said they were making weapons post gulf-war... and THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING IN... and NONE OF THOSE HAVE BEEN FOUND... Bush himself said this... why do you think Bush has NEVER SAID "we found the WMD?"... because we didn't find the ones he said we were going in after...

and read the 9-11 report... at least care enough about your country to do that... and realize that Iraq had nothing to do with anything...

then go look at our troop deployments, it's on the DOE website... and wonder why we have almost no troops anywhere the report says was responsible for the attacks?

as far as Iraq goes... if you want to be the world's police... that's one thing... but at least be up front about it... and I think we should actually go after the people in the 9-11 report... which is MUCH MORE extensive than just Afghanistan... and we barely have any troops even there anymore...

and in reality... there are dictators that kill many more every year that we should probably police first...

i've got not got self belief you're being truthful. i've got got here upon liberals to be people who usually hotel to censorship tries whilst their fallacies are puzzled, like this censorship attempt I won in an digital mail this morning from a liberal who spoke back this "query" and calls himself Bush Lied thousands and thousands Died: "Message: you're a valueless piece of ****. thankfully for actual human beings like myself you valueless products of **** have no capability what so ever. once you progression out of your mom and dad homestead and get a real interest you would be responsive to how issues artwork interior the actual worldwide. Now wipe the spuge off your face and close the **** up!" As you are able to needless to say see, this liberal hates freedom of speech, as do all of the liberals i've got viewed shouting down conservatives at countless college campuses. Your inference that Conservatives are predominantly people who hate freedom of speech is laughable. and that i basically observed which you do not enable human beings to deliver you emails. it is being slightly a hypocrite...