Who was worst US president in the 20th and 21st centuries?

[The Royal Australian Republic]

I agree with almost all of those, I don't think the bushes are as bad as they are made out to be but they definitely had some problems.

George H.W. Bush:
Hikes taxes, invades Kuwait.

George W. Bush
Crony-capitalism
2 Wars
Patriot Act
Massive debt
Bailouts and corporate subsidies everywhere (see "crony-capitalism")

3 major things I don't agree with on your list.
1. He liberated Kuwait to get Saddam out
2. 2 wars: Afghanistan was to pursue Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Iraq was to pursue Al Qaeda and take out a mass murderer
3. The patriot act: think about all the terrorist attacks that the patriot act has helped foiled (including ones we may not know about)

[The Royal Australian Republic]

I agree with almost all of those, I don't think the bushes are as bad as they are made out to be but they definitely had some problems.

George H.W. Bush:
Hikes taxes, invades Kuwait.

George W. Bush
Crony-capitalism
2 Wars
Patriot Act
Massive debt
Bailouts and corporate subsidies everywhere (see "crony-capitalism")

3 major things I don't agree with on your list.
1. He liberated Kuwait to get Saddam out
2. 2 wars: Afghanistan was to pursue Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Iraq was to pursue Al Qaeda and take out a mass murderer
3. The patriot act: think about all the terrorist attacks that the patriot act has helped foiled (including ones we may not know about)

[Libertarian California]

... gautamala, we has operations there by the CIA which tried to reduce human rights violations.

Actually, the Contras were the cause of human rights violations, not the solution.

The Sandinista government brought rapid development to the country, improved health care and literacy in amazing time. The problem: they had to kill the rich to do it. It's called a "democratic revolution". So, yes, they executed some rich assholes, and in the US the rich are the only ones with "rights" but it's hardly fair to say Guatemala was in the name of human rights (or, at least, human rights in anything BUT name)... It was for "elite rights" and "natural resource extraction rights" and "the right to quash democratic governments who oppose American imperialism rights".. but "human rights"... no.

The Sandinistas were such angels weren't the

Wikipedia says:

Under the new "Law for the Maintenance of Order and Public Security" the "Tribunales Populares Anti-Somozistas" allowed for the indefinite holding of suspected counter-revolutionaries without trial. The State of Emergency, however, most notably affected rights and guarantees contained in the "Statute on Rights and Guarantees of Nicaraguans.[41] Many civil liberties were curtailed or canceled such as the freedom to organize demonstrations, the inviolability of the home, freedom of the press, freedom of speech and, the freedom to strike.[41]
All independent news program broadcasts were suspended. In total, twenty-four programs were cancelled. In addition, Sandinista censor Nelba Cecilia Blandón issued a decree ordering all radio stations to hook up every six hours to government radio station, La Voz de La Defensa de La Patria.[42]
The rights affected also included certain procedural guarantees in the case of detention including habeas corpus.[41] The State of Emergency was not lifted during the 1984 elections. There were many instances where rallies of opposition parties were physically broken up by Sandinsta youth or pro-Sandinista mobs. Opponents to the State of Emergency argued its intent was to crush resistance to the FSLN. James Wheelock justified the actions of the Directorate by saying "... We are annulling the license of the false prophets and the oligarchs to attack the revolution."[43] On October 5, 1985 the Sandinistas broadened the 1982 State of Emergency and suspended many more civil rights. A new regulation also forced any organization outside of the government to first submit any statement it wanted to make public to the censorsip bureau for prior censorship.[44]
Some emergency measures were taken before 1982. In December 1979 special courts called "Tribunales Especiales" were established to speed up the processing of 7,000-8,000 National Guard prisoners. These courts operated through relaxed rules of evidence and due process and were often staffed by law students and inexperienced lawyers. However, the decisions of the "Tribunales Especiales" were subject to appeal in regular courts. Many of the National Guard prisoners were released immediately due to lack of evidence. Others were pardoned or released by decree. By 1986 only 2,157 remained in custody and only 39 were still being held in 1989 when they were released under the Esquipulas II agreement.[41]

And let us not forge their Human's right violations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front#Human_rights_violations_by_the_Sandinistas

I can hear you screaming, "It's not a dictatorship when we do it!"

[Free Detroit]

1. Iran-Contra scandal, guns for hostages, etc.
2. Privatization of industries
3. Incurred massive budget deficits for an unnecessary build-up of the American military complex to "defeat communism"

To simplify.

I'll admit Iran- Contra was bad but why is transferring things to the private sector so bad?
Peace through strength is all I have to say on 3

Transferring things to the private sector is not bad - as long as you're one of the oligarchy.

For everyone else, it takes control of key infrastructure out of the public's hands, and puts them under the control of private interests. Private enterprise is accountable to no one, and cannot - by its nature - serve the public interest before its own profit motive.

[Bythyrona]

Foreign policy? What about peace through strength

Declaring war in drugs is a bad thing?

1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

"There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." -Gen. Smedley Butler

2. http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... rugs/cron/
http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/164735/ ... ailure.htm
http://articles.dailypress.com/1996-08- ... a-s-prison
http://november.org/graphs/

or, in song form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yndfqN1VKhY

[Free Detroit]

Actually, the Contras were the cause of human rights violations, not the solution.

The Sandinista government brought rapid development to the country, improved health care and literacy in amazing time. The problem: they had to kill the rich to do it. It's called a "democratic revolution". So, yes, they executed some rich assholes, and in the US the rich are the only ones with "rights" but it's hardly fair to say Guatemala was in the name of human rights (or, at least, human rights in anything BUT name)... It was for "elite rights" and "natural resource extraction rights" and "the right to quash democratic governments who oppose American imperialism rights".. but "human rights"... no.

The Sandinistas were such angels weren't the

Wikipedia says:

Under the new "Law for the Maintenance of Order and Public Security" the "Tribunales Populares Anti-Somozistas" allowed for the indefinite holding of suspected counter-revolutionaries without trial. The State of Emergency, however, most notably affected rights and guarantees contained in the "Statute on Rights and Guarantees of Nicaraguans.[41] Many civil liberties were curtailed or canceled such as the freedom to organize demonstrations, the inviolability of the home, freedom of the press, freedom of speech and, the freedom to strike.[41]
All independent news program broadcasts were suspended. In total, twenty-four programs were cancelled. In addition, Sandinista censor Nelba Cecilia Blandón issued a decree ordering all radio stations to hook up every six hours to government radio station, La Voz de La Defensa de La Patria.[42]
The rights affected also included certain procedural guarantees in the case of detention including habeas corpus.[41] The State of Emergency was not lifted during the 1984 elections. There were many instances where rallies of opposition parties were physically broken up by Sandinsta youth or pro-Sandinista mobs. Opponents to the State of Emergency argued its intent was to crush resistance to the FSLN. James Wheelock justified the actions of the Directorate by saying "... We are annulling the license of the false prophets and the oligarchs to attack the revolution."[43] On October 5, 1985 the Sandinistas broadened the 1982 State of Emergency and suspended many more civil rights. A new regulation also forced any organization outside of the government to first submit any statement it wanted to make public to the censorsip bureau for prior censorship.[44]
Some emergency measures were taken before 1982. In December 1979 special courts called "Tribunales Especiales" were established to speed up the processing of 7,000-8,000 National Guard prisoners. These courts operated through relaxed rules of evidence and due process and were often staffed by law students and inexperienced lawyers. However, the decisions of the "Tribunales Especiales" were subject to appeal in regular courts. Many of the National Guard prisoners were released immediately due to lack of evidence. Others were pardoned or released by decree. By 1986 only 2,157 remained in custody and only 39 were still being held in 1989 when they were released under the Esquipulas II agreement.[41]

And let us not forge their Human's right violations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front#Human_rights_violations_by_the_Sandinistas

I can hear you screaming, "It's not a dictatorship when we do it!"

Angels, no. But hardly bad enough for the US to pass moral judgment upon, and significantly milder than what came before. They represent the current government too, being voted back in democratically as soon as they were able.

Since we're quoting Wikipedia... ::roll::

A Sandinista militiaman interviewed by The Guardian stated that Contra rebels committed these atrocities against Sandinista prisoners after a battle at a Sandinista rural outpost: "Rosa had her breasts cut off. Then they cut into her chest and took out her heart. The men had their arms broken, their testicles cut off. They were killed by slitting their throats and pulling the tongue out through the slit."[68]

Americas Watch – which subsequently became part of Human Rights Watch – accused the Contras of:[69]

* targeting health care clinics and health care workers for assassination[70]
* kidnapping civilians[71]
* torturing civilians[72]
* executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat[73]
* raping women[70]
* indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian houses[71]
* seizing civilian property[70]
* burning civilian houses in captured towns.[70]

Human Rights Watch released a report on the situation in 1989, which stated: "[The] contras were major and systematic violators of the most basic standards of the laws of armed conflict, including by launching indiscriminate attacks on civilians, selectively murdering non-combatants, and mistreating prisoners."[74]

[Libertarian California]

Yeah, Reconstruction was horrible.

Panic of 1873, attempted annexation of the Dominican Republic, Whiskey Ring scandal, William Belknap's impeachment.....

I just Googled those things. Shit. He WAS corrupt.

[New England and The Maritimes]

Actually, the Contras were the cause of human rights violations, not the solution.

The Sandinista government brought rapid development to the country, improved health care and literacy in amazing time. The problem: they had to kill the rich to do it. It's called a "democratic revolution". So, yes, they executed some rich assholes, and in the US the rich are the only ones with "rights" but it's hardly fair to say Guatemala was in the name of human rights (or, at least, human rights in anything BUT name)... It was for "elite rights" and "natural resource extraction rights" and "the right to quash democratic governments who oppose American imperialism rights".. but "human rights"... no.

The Sandinistas were such angels weren't the

Wikipedia says:

Under the new "Law for the Maintenance of Order and Public Security" the "Tribunales Populares Anti-Somozistas" allowed for the indefinite holding of suspected counter-revolutionaries without trial. The State of Emergency, however, most notably affected rights and guarantees contained in the "Statute on Rights and Guarantees of Nicaraguans.[41] Many civil liberties were curtailed or canceled such as the freedom to organize demonstrations, the inviolability of the home, freedom of the press, freedom of speech and, the freedom to strike.[41]
All independent news program broadcasts were suspended. In total, twenty-four programs were cancelled. In addition, Sandinista censor Nelba Cecilia Blandón issued a decree ordering all radio stations to hook up every six hours to government radio station, La Voz de La Defensa de La Patria.[42]
The rights affected also included certain procedural guarantees in the case of detention including habeas corpus.[41] The State of Emergency was not lifted during the 1984 elections. There were many instances where rallies of opposition parties were physically broken up by Sandinsta youth or pro-Sandinista mobs. Opponents to the State of Emergency argued its intent was to crush resistance to the FSLN. James Wheelock justified the actions of the Directorate by saying "... We are annulling the license of the false prophets and the oligarchs to attack the revolution."[43] On October 5, 1985 the Sandinistas broadened the 1982 State of Emergency and suspended many more civil rights. A new regulation also forced any organization outside of the government to first submit any statement it wanted to make public to the censorsip bureau for prior censorship.[44]
Some emergency measures were taken before 1982. In December 1979 special courts called "Tribunales Especiales" were established to speed up the processing of 7,000-8,000 National Guard prisoners. These courts operated through relaxed rules of evidence and due process and were often staffed by law students and inexperienced lawyers. However, the decisions of the "Tribunales Especiales" were subject to appeal in regular courts. Many of the National Guard prisoners were released immediately due to lack of evidence. Others were pardoned or released by decree. By 1986 only 2,157 remained in custody and only 39 were still being held in 1989 when they were released under the Esquipulas II agreement.[41]

And let us not forge their Human's right violations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front#Human_rights_violations_by_the_Sandinistas

I can hear you screaming, "It's not a dictatorship when we do it!"

Right. Meanwhile the contras pioneered using rape as a weapon and routinely massacred civilians for shits and giggles, but that's totally okay.

[Tunasai]

George H.W. Bush:
Hikes taxes, invades Kuwait.

George W. Bush
Crony-capitalism
2 Wars
Patriot Act
Massive debt
Bailouts and corporate subsidies everywhere (see "crony-capitalism")

3 major things I don't agree with on your list.
1. He liberated Kuwait to get Saddam out
2. 2 wars: Afghanistan was to pursue Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Iraq was to pursue Al Qaeda and take out a mass murderer
3. The patriot act: think about all the terrorist attacks that the patriot act has helped foiled (including ones we may not know about)

People often forget Iraq was home to a terrible dictator who did this to his own people
In my mind, anyone who does that deserves to die

[The Royal Australian Republic]

Foreign policy? What about peace through strength

Declaring war in drugs is a bad thing?

1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

"There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." -Gen. Smedley Butler

2. http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... rugs/cron/
http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/164735/ ... ailure.htm
http://articles.dailypress.com/1996-08- ... a-s-prison
http://november.org/graphs/

or, in song form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yndfqN1VKhY

Defending our people from drugs isn't on that list, so we should just let drugs flow in here freely right, is that it?

[Libertarian California]

The Sandinistas were such angels weren't the

Wikipedia says:



And let us not forge their Human's right violations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front#Human_rights_violations_by_the_Sandinistas

I can hear you screaming, "It's not a dictatorship when we do it!"

Angels, no. But hardly bad enough for the US to pass moral judgment upon.

Ah, but the US could pass moral judgement on their backers, the USSR, who have had a history of doing morally objectionable things.

[Elwher]

... gautamala, we has operations there by the CIA which tried to reduce human rights violations.

Actually, the Contras were the cause of human rights violations, not the solution.

The Sandinista government brought rapid development to the country, improved health care and literacy in amazing time. The problem: they had to kill the rich to do it. It's called a "democratic revolution". So, yes, they executed some rich assholes, and in the US the rich are the only ones with "rights" but it's hardly fair to say Guatemala was in the name of human rights (or, at least, human rights in anything BUT name)... It was for "elite rights" and "natural resource extraction rights" and "the right to quash democratic governments who oppose American imperialism rights".. but "human rights"... no.

And ho did the CIA pay for all of this? Oh yeah! Selling 1) crack cocaine to inner city blacks in the US, and 2) selling weapons to both sides in the Iran-Iraq war. Lovely.

I certainly can't claim that the CIA/Contras were champions of liberty, but the Sandinista went for seizing private property from anyone they disliked, forcible suppression of dissenting party rallys in the name of "annulling the license of the false prophets and the oligarchs to attack the revolution.", total censorship of all non-governmental speakers, etc. Not the most freedom loving group either.

To myself, I only say a pox on both your houses.

[Libertarian California]

The Sandinistas were such angels weren't the

Wikipedia says:



And let us not forge their Human's right violations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front#Human_rights_violations_by_the_Sandinistas

I can hear you screaming, "It's not a dictatorship when we do it!"

Right. Meanwhile the contras pioneered using rape as a weapon and routinely massacred civilians for shits and giggles, but that's totally okay.

Do you see me defending the Contras anywhere?

[Bythyrona]

1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

"There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." -Gen. Smedley Butler

2. http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... rugs/cron/
http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/164735/ ... ailure.htm
http://articles.dailypress.com/1996-08- ... a-s-prison
http://november.org/graphs/

or, in song form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yndfqN1VKhY

Defending our people from drugs isn't on that list, so we should just let drugs flow in here freely right, is that it?

...did you even visit one of those links? Stop moralizing the argument.

[The Black Forrest]

3 major things I don't agree with on your list.
1. He liberated Kuwait to get Saddam out
2. 2 wars: Afghanistan was to pursue Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Iraq was to pursue Al Qaeda and take out a mass murderer
3. The patriot act: think about all the terrorist attacks that the patriot act has helped foiled (including ones we may not know about)

People often forget Iraq was home to a terrible dictator who did this to his own people
In my mind, anyone who does that deserves to die

If only that was the reason for the war.

I wonder why the shrub didn't go into Dafur considering all the brutality that went on there?

[Tunasai]

People often forget Iraq was home to a terrible dictator who did this to his own people
In my mind, anyone who does that deserves to die

If only that was the reason for the war.

I wonder why the shrub didn't go into Dafur considering all the brutality that went on there?

Don't change the topic.

My topic is about Iraq, and the man who ran it did that to children. So tell me, not just to fight for that kids life is it? How about the thousands of people who went threw that everyday?

[Libertarian California]

The Sandinistas were such angels weren't the

Wikipedia says:



And let us not forge their Human's right violations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front#Human_rights_violations_by_the_Sandinistas

I can hear you screaming, "It's not a dictatorship when we do it!"

Angels, no. But hardly bad enough for the US to pass moral judgment upon, and significantly milder than what came before. They represent the current government too, being voted back in democratically as soon as they were able.

Since we're quoting Wikipedia... ::roll::

A Sandinista militiaman interviewed by The Guardian stated that Contra rebels committed these atrocities against Sandinista prisoners after a battle at a Sandinista rural outpost: "Rosa had her breasts cut off. Then they cut into her chest and took out her heart. The men had their arms broken, their testicles cut off. They were killed by slitting their throats and pulling the tongue out through the slit."[68]

Americas Watch – which subsequently became part of Human Rights Watch – accused the Contras of:[69]

* targeting health care clinics and health care workers for assassination[70]
* kidnapping civilians[71]
* torturing civilians[72]
* executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat[73]
* raping women[70]
* indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian houses[71]
* seizing civilian property[70]
* burning civilian houses in captured towns.[70]

Human Rights Watch released a report on the situation in 1989, which stated: "[The] contras were major and systematic violators of the most basic standards of the laws of armed conflict, including by launching indiscriminate attacks on civilians, selectively murdering non-combatants, and mistreating prisoners."[74]

Your point? I'm not the one defending the Contras (or Sandinistas). Considering both were horrible. Fascists and Communists. Pick your poison.

[Free Detroit]

Actually, the Contras were the cause of human rights violations, not the solution.

The Sandinista government brought rapid development to the country, improved health care and literacy in amazing time. The problem: they had to kill the rich to do it. It's called a "democratic revolution". So, yes, they executed some rich assholes, and in the US the rich are the only ones with "rights" but it's hardly fair to say Guatemala was in the name of human rights (or, at least, human rights in anything BUT name)... It was for "elite rights" and "natural resource extraction rights" and "the right to quash democratic governments who oppose American imperialism rights".. but "human rights"... no.

And ho did the CIA pay for all of this? Oh yeah! Selling 1) crack cocaine to inner city blacks in the US, and 2) selling weapons to both sides in the Iran-Iraq war. Lovely.

I certainly can't claim that the CIA/Contras were champions of liberty, but the Sandinista went for seizing private property from anyone they disliked, forcible suppression of dissenting party rallys in the name of "annulling the license of the false prophets and the oligarchs to attack the revolution.", total censorship of all non-governmental speakers, etc. Not the most freedom loving group either.

To myself, I only say a pox on both your houses.

Indeed, a pox on both houses - though the problem would not have been nearly as severe without US intervention, and let us not forget the evils committed by the US in order to fund this so-called "humanitarian" mission.

Edited to add this above, but it was late, so plopping it here again... since we were quoting Wikipedia:

A Sandinista militiaman interviewed by The Guardian stated that Contra rebels committed these atrocities against Sandinista prisoners after a battle at a Sandinista rural outpost: "Rosa had her breasts cut off. Then they cut into her chest and took out her heart. The men had their arms broken, their testicles cut off. They were killed by slitting their throats and pulling the tongue out through the slit."[68]

Americas Watch – which subsequently became part of Human Rights Watch – accused the Contras of:[69]

* targeting health care clinics and health care workers for assassination[70]
* kidnapping civilians[71]
* torturing civilians[72]
* executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat[73]
* raping women[70]
* indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian houses[71]
* seizing civilian property[70]
* burning civilian houses in captured towns.[70]

Human Rights Watch released a report on the situation in 1989, which stated: "[The] contras were major and systematic violators of the most basic standards of the laws of armed conflict, including by launching indiscriminate attacks on civilians, selectively murdering non-combatants, and mistreating prisoners."[74]

[The Royal Australian Republic]

... gautamala, we has operations there by the CIA which tried to reduce human rights violations.

Actually, the Contras were the cause of human rights violations, not the solution.

The Sandinista government brought rapid development to the country, improved health care and literacy in amazing time. The problem: they had to kill the rich to do it. It's called a "democratic revolution". So, yes, they executed some rich assholes, and in the US the rich are the only ones with "rights" but it's hardly fair to say Guatemala was in the name of human rights (or, at least, human rights in anything BUT name)... It was for "elite rights" and "natural resource extraction rights" and "the right to quash democratic governments who oppose American imperialism rights".. but "human rights"... no.

And ho did the CIA pay for all of this? Oh yeah! Selling 1) crack cocaine to inOr:

ner city blacks in the US, and 2) selling weapons to both sides in the Iran-Iraq war. Lovely.

The Contras were in Nicaragua, not guatamala.

[Maurepas]

People often forget Iraq was home to a terrible dictator who did this to his own people
In my mind, anyone who does that deserves to die

If only that was the reason for the war.

I wonder why the shrub didn't go into Dafur considering all the brutality that went on there?

Or Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, or Syria, all big friends of the Bush Administration.

[Frisivisia]

1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

"There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." -Gen. Smedley Butler

2. http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... rugs/cron/
http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/164735/ ... ailure.htm
http://articles.dailypress.com/1996-08- ... a-s-prison
http://november.org/graphs/

or, in song form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yndfqN1VKhY

Defending our people from drugs isn't on that list, so we should just let drugs flow in here freely right, is that it?

It honestly depends on the drug. Pot? Yes. Meth, nope.

[Libertarian California]

1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

"There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." -Gen. Smedley Butler

2. http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... rugs/cron/
http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/164735/ ... ailure.htm
http://articles.dailypress.com/1996-08- ... a-s-prison
http://november.org/graphs/

or, in song form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yndfqN1VKhY

Defending our people from drugs isn't on that list, so we should just let drugs flow in here freely right, is that it?

Pretty much. The Founding Fathers used hemp. So should we. I bring them in, because conservatives claim to stand for the Founding Fathers.

Fact of the matter is, the Founding Fathers would have supported drug legalization. Maybe that's why drugs were legal in their time.

[Free Detroit]

Angels, no. But hardly bad enough for the US to pass moral judgment upon, and significantly milder than what came before. They represent the current government too, being voted back in democratically as soon as they were able.

Since we're quoting Wikipedia... ::roll::

A Sandinista militiaman interviewed by The Guardian stated that Contra rebels committed these atrocities against Sandinista prisoners after a battle at a Sandinista rural outpost: "Rosa had her breasts cut off. Then they cut into her chest and took out her heart. The men had their arms broken, their testicles cut off. They were killed by slitting their throats and pulling the tongue out through the slit."[68]

Americas Watch – which subsequently became part of Human Rights Watch – accused the Contras of:[69]

* targeting health care clinics and health care workers for assassination[70]
* kidnapping civilians[71]
* torturing civilians[72]
* executing civilians, including children, who were captured in combat[73]
* raping women[70]
* indiscriminately attacking civilians and civilian houses[71]
* seizing civilian property[70]
* burning civilian houses in captured towns.[70]

Human Rights Watch released a report on the situation in 1989, which stated: "[The] contras were major and systematic violators of the most basic standards of the laws of armed conflict, including by launching indiscriminate attacks on civilians, selectively murdering non-combatants, and mistreating prisoners."[74]

Your point? I'm not the one defending the Contras (or Sandinistas). Considering both were horrible. Fascists and Communists. Pick your poison.

My point was Reagan was a Fascist. That is all.

[Tunasai]

If only that was the reason for the war.

I wonder why the shrub didn't go into Dafur considering all the brutality that went on there?

Or Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, or Syria, all big friends of the Bush Administration.

Egypt didn't massacre people using Mustard Gas and its problems didn't start til near Obama. Libya, same situation. Syria wasn't massacring people yet. Saudi Arabia has oil and also wasn't dropping mustard gas

The topic is IRAQ HOWEVER, stay on subject! I'm here to talk about Iraq

[The Black Forrest]

If only that was the reason for the war.

I wonder why the shrub didn't go into Dafur considering all the brutality that went on there?

Don't change the topic.

My topic is about Iraq, and the man who ran it did that to children. So tell me, not just to fight for that kids life is it? How about the thousands of people who went threw that everyday?

Don't follow the myth of the reason we went into Iraq. We didn't attack simply to get rid of a bad man. There are other nations with far worst then what was going on and we sat back.

The shrub had other reasons for Iraq.......