"if Iraq didn't have oil"

if a frog didn't have legs it wouldn't jump... but frogs don't jump
*because* they have legs, they jump so they can move.

If terrorism wasn't supported by oil money then we wouldn't be in
Iraq... If we had, at the time, the intestinal fortitude to go after
those using oil money to support terrorism, the primary presupposition
for war, we'd be in Iran.

if it was only that easy

its seems it real easy for most to brain washed by bush.you start a war.
u hide behind your whitehouse walls. on 911 you sit in class room for 7
minutes. doing nothing.and you are are leader. not mind .i choose to
fight my own battles not like bush.

Buddy are you typeing through and inturputing program or are you from
Deliverence? I hear banjo music

you need to put the beer down. and come back to real life.

1. We are now in Iraq, and for better or worse we are going to be there
for a while. I say we do like we did in Korea; consolidate every last
troop into two or three camps. Build those camps up into Posts (camps
are temporary, posts are permenant). Using the soldiers fresh out of
training, rotate every single soldier we have out there now back home.
Within six months our reserves and guard are back home. Then SLOWLY,
SLOWLY MIND YOU, we start eating land (so to speak). Move outwards and
fortify every step of hte way. Yes it is slow, but is is an offense by
defense. Also this way we would have regular duty soldiers who are
trained and ready for this crap on site if we do have to deal with Iran.

2&3. Close up our borders to ALL travel that is not military. And I DO
mean ALL travel. Temporarily. Take the guardsmen we just brought home
(refer to #1) and post them along the entire border, at airports, etc.
Once this is done we do a full amnesty granting census. All "aliens"
currently inside the border have one choice. Isolation for high
intensity background check or go home. No they can not bring family
over.
Start working on our problems at home; i.e. homelessess, medical, taxes,
low income, etc... Once everything is on track and we are settled in we
open the borders again and this time we enforce customs and
declerations. And for you worried about nation to nation commerce? Use
Canada as an example. At the border, our trucks go past the guard; pull
over and stop; get out of the vehicle and sign it over to the border
guard. They then take authority for one coming into the us that did the
same thing. We never actually cross the border on either side.

4. first, see #3. Then, legalize low level drugs such as marijuana.
Tax the **** out of it like we do ciggarrettes and alchohol. ban
smoking and driving just like drinking and driving. Same penalties.
Now the BIG one. Legalize prostitution. This will generate thousands
of jobs. Give the ladies and gents full 1 million percent medical
coverage. And again, tax the hell out of hte services. We do this we
are going to shrink the number of pimps (sorry guys) and illegal
commerce. We will never completely end it. That is impossible; but we
will get a better control onit. That will help decrease the money
going to the drug lords which then goes to terrorism, etc.

5. ok so I have already covered everything and then some, lol. and no
not neccesarily in numbered order, oh well youget my ideas.

Any suggestions to imrove? I would love to show the numbers based on a
service tax to show how much increased revenue we would have at state
level just by legalizing and taxing prostitution.

oh that cant do that . thenwhere will our judges get their kick backs
from.

I did not say it would be popular. Just that it would work. generally
speaking.

i gave it up years ago. but still really dont think nothing that bad
about burning one. to me better choice then drinking but to many old
folks in congress.

Daniel you have some excellent ideas.

as much as i would love to comment. i have to bow out of this topic. it
is way over my head.

oh... i see! GB gets us into this BULL SH-T war and you ask how to get
us out?? why dont you ask your president? he got us in this DAMN
MESS!!!!

so true

No fun. like I have said in other thread as well, President Bush did NOT
get us into "this mess" as you have so articualtely put it. The people
that falsified information and gave bad reports are the ones that did.
President Bush reacted reasonably and correctly with the information he
had at the time. Yes, he should have done a better fore check on those
he appointed as advisors, but when it came out that the information was
faulty, some of in intentional He did what wa right and replaced them.

I would have to disagree with you Daniel according to the New York
Times:

WASHINGTON, Aug. 18 - A former Bush administration official who led the
fruitless postwar effort to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
told Congress on Wednesday that the National Security Council led by
Condoleezza Rice had botched intelligence information before the war and
was "the dog that did not bark" over Iraq's weapons program.



Where was the N.S.C?" Dr. Kay asked, suggesting that the president had
come to depend too heavily on information supplied by Ms. Rice, Mr.
Bush's national security adviser, and that the president needed to reach
out to others for national security information.

Dr. Kay added: "The dog that did not bark in the case of Iraq's W.M.D.
weapons program, quite frankly, in my view, is the National Security
Council."

Dr. Kay did not identify Ms. Rice by name in his often-impassioned
testimony. But his remarks were clearly aimed at her performance and
reflected a widespread view among intelligence specialists that Ms.
Rice, perhaps Mr. Bush's most trusted aide, and the National Security
Council have never been held sufficiently accountable for intelligence
failures before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the Iraq war.

Dr. Kay has said in the past that faulty prewar information about Iraq's
weapons programs represented a serious failure of American intelligence
agencies. But his comments on Wednesday appeared to go much further,
both in their vehemence and in Dr. Kay's willingness to single out
particular agencies for blame, notably the National Security Council and
the C.I.A.

"Iraq was an overwhelming systemic failure of the Central Intelligence
Agency," Dr. Kay said. "Until this is taken on board and people and
organizations are held responsible for this failure, I have a real
difficulty in seeking how a national intelligence director can correct
these failures."

He was referring to a proposal by the Sept. 11 commission for the
appointment of a national intelligence director to oversee the work of
the government's 15 spy agencies, including the C.I.A. and several
within the Defense Department.

In his sharp attack on the National Security Council, Dr. Kay said that
the council had failed, in particular, to provide Mr. Bush and Mr.
Powell with the intelligence information they needed before the war
about Iraq's weapons capabilities, especially after both had expressed
some skepticism about the extent of Iraq's weapons programs.

"Where was the National Security Council when, apparently, the president
expressed his own doubt about the adequacy of the case concerning Iraq's
W.M.D. weapons that was made before him?" Dr. Kay asked.

"Why was the secretary of state sent to the C.I.A. to personally vet the
data that he was to take the Security Council in New York, and
ultimately left to hang in the wind for data that was misleading and, in
some cases, absolutely false and known by parts of the intelligence
community to be false?" he continued. "Where was the N.S.C. then?"

Daniel if the intelligence was bad why does Ms. Rice still have her job?

ms rice or uncle tom. still has her job because she in with bush. just
more lies to all american people. like we are over there so they wont be
over here. another great line from our lovely leader 2008 cant get here
soon enought.

first I would have to ask why this is coming from a FORMER memeber of
counsel? Why is he FORMER? Not my friend, but the intervee.
Second I do not know everything, and I would not want to know everything
(you ever see the adam sandlar movie where he plays god? I do NOT EVER
want that!). I have said before that I agree President Bush has made
some mistakes. He is only human. I am not about to say that he
dismissed every wrong person (who knows, maybe Ms. Rice is still there
because Ole George is more like Bill than we thought?). I sure don't
know. But I DO know that he came out publicly and dismissed several
people for faulty work. He can nonly do so much as a single person
relying on what others tell him. After a certain pooint he has to stand
up and say "ok here's what we're going to do" for good or ill.