Posted on 07/10/2003 6:17:24 AM PDT by Int
This is really an interesting question. Why would he have given up his reign for nothing? If wmd are not in Iraq, how long have they not been there and why would saddam give up his reign when he could still be there with all those un flunkies running all over the place and not finding anything?
Not in iraq is more worrisome than not at all.
and we became the richest, most powerful nation due to it
To the extent that it happened, which is far, far less than you think, we became great in spite of it, not because of it.
For those that tried to dump their cheap labor products on us they were slapped with tariffs, that policy was in the Republican platform into the seventies. (when the mistake seems to have been temporarily corrected)
It's called progress. Live and learn from your mistakes.
BTW Mr. Protectionist (corporate welfare advocate), I like less expensive products, so do others or there would be no market for them. I need no protection from you, nor do I desire an artifically high paying job making poor quality products in low skilled industries in order to prop up some Democrats in their phony jobs.
The American economy is still the stongest in the world despite all the gloom and doom scenerios put forth by protectionists for decades. It is because of the RELATIVELY low protectionists policies of government thugs and their enablers.
I love showing Republicans up as anti freedomists and having them defend tyranny. It's so much fun!
HOW DARE YOU ASK THAT QUESTION? YOU ANTI AMERICAN BUSH HATER!!!!
< /sarcasm>
Well, the result is that despite the claim that Iraq had WMD and was an immediate and direct threat to us, the evidence to prove that has not yet been seen. There may have been a problem with the decision making process therefore....so let's find out and hear about it.
Blind faith may be okay in religion, but not in politics or government.
Welcome to Bushbotland.
AMEN
What a joke. Exactly what have you shown us, that those Nike sneakers came down a whole bunch when they moved to Vietnam to pay workers .20 an hour? T-shirts at my local Wal-Mart made in China still cost $15.00 to 20.00, same price when they were made in the states, employing Americans.
The idea you're now getting choice is what's delusional. The only choice you're getting is what workers assembled the products, the owners of the companies are the same. Who incidentally are getting richer thanks to government sponsored "free trade" deals. What products are the Chinese or Mexicans buying from us? It's corporate welfare no matter how you want to spin it.
No. I'm saying an Executive admin needn't have their every move & action reported to, nor dissected by, the media-types.
A decision making process is just that, a method to arrive at a decision. How anyone in the press thinks this is their business to know is incredulous. Especially since the source(s) the Bush admin used possibly can't be publicized, for security, safety, or whatever reason.
And we're getting away from the main point, which is: Bandow, and everyone else, (even Clinton & the U.N.), knows the Hussein regime had WMD's in the 90's.
Maybe Bandow believes Saddam had an epiphany and destroyed them.
I would think this has the very real potential to compromise a lot of sources and intelligence gathering means, human and otherwise.
That's dangerous. And there's another name for it, but...I won't go there.
No. It should be looked into regardless of any label.
Who cares? I don't buy that crap anyway. If people value their money more than the sneakers they won't buy em. That's supply and demand. And it's smarter than you.
T-shirts at my local Wal-Mart made in China still cost $15.00 to 20.00, same price when they were made in the states, employing Americans.
Maybe you better buy some stock in such smart comapnies and share in the profits.
Who incidentally are getting richer thanks to government sponsored "free trade" deals.
Ah,, Republicans playing the liberal politics of envy game. I love it. Oh no!!! The rich got richer!!! Someone made money!!! Oh No!!!!
What products are the Chinese or Mexicans buying from us?
US? Like me and you? Hint, WE aren't in it together. I don't try to sell anything to Mexicans or Chinese. So it's none of my business.
It's corporate welfare no matter how you want to spin it.
YEP, your tarriffs are corporate welfare.
Uh,oh...that sounds like the 'he has more information than us, we'll have to take his word' song and dance of the LBJ days.
Seems like a review of if and where we went wrong is something that can be done without compromise to at least some extent. What is the alternative...? Just blind faith is not a good idea in a free society.
Well he is the President, RJ.
Let me ask you, was RR expected to reveal his every intention, aim, & strategy when he was having talks with Gorbachev?
Hmmmm....I'd say you are begging the question here.
We are not discussing diplomatic talks. The issue is armed conflict in which Americans died. We were told certain things. The question is were they accurate? If not, why not? These are legitimate questions.
Cheney convinced me before the war that we should proceed. If his arguments were not correct, I'd like to know that the reason for the lack of accuracy has been examined, determined and if possible corrected before we do it again.
I guess you're a blind faith kinda guy. I'm not.
No, there's not a thing wrong with anyone getting rich. That's not the point and you know it. What it's about is government sponsored trade deals that are putting Americans out of work so companies can use cheaper labor for higher profits. Tariffs is not corporate welfare, it protects American jobs by putting all companies on a level playing field. How do you expect American businesses to compete against those who pay .20 an hour? We're practically forcing them to move to stay competitive. Outsourcing is a perfect example of that.
Here's a prediction for what it's worth, in 5 to 10 years these type of free trade deals are gone with the wind, too many Americans losing their jobs will force change. It will be spun in other ways, but globalism as it is currently structured is not long for this world, that is if politicians want to keep their jobs.
Here's a little tip: what you've been bemoaning this whole thread, and falsely accusing libertarians of supporting, is what's known as 'managed trade'.
'Free trade' is something else entirely.
Tariffs are government intervention in those arrangements. They are corporate welfare, and your favorite "job welfare". (read union welfare)
A level playing field is one low tariff (read tax) for all countries no matter who they are. Any good trade agreement can be written on the back of a match book. "We each charge each other 5% on everything with no exceptions". End of agreement.
No I never said libertarians, only the Cato Institute. They are in favor of these trade deals like NAFTA, which aren't doing much for us economically. Illegal immigrants continue to pour in while real wages decline.
That was my point from the beginning, the organization is losing credibility among many conservatives over their positions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.