# FOR ALL YOU JOHN KERRY DUMMIES



## PARANHAZ69 (Dec 16, 2003)

Interesting............
Learn these facts to properly debate our poor misguided friends &family before election time !!!

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.

That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following .

FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked ! us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea,
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,
an average of 18,334 per year.

John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.

Johnson...

turned Viet! Nam into a quagmire.

Vietnam never attacked us.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost,
an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton...
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

In the two years since terrorists attacked US!
! ; President Bush has ...
liberated! ! two countries,
crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find her Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for! the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina
Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick, drowning Mary Jo.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

Our Commander-In-Chief is ! doing a GREAT JOB!

The Military moral is high!

The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.


----------



## rozz (Jun 13, 2004)

the military moral is high??

all the tapes, letters, and interviews ive seen are....get me outa here...why are we even here....a good amount of our troops dont even know why they are there...


----------



## rchan11 (May 6, 2004)

Excellent article!


----------



## blueprint (Jan 3, 2004)

i'm still voting for kerry.... i'm all democrat.









but... in all fairness Clinton was the man.


----------



## BASSFISHERMAN (Feb 22, 2004)

if i were american, i would vote for bush


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Though there were a few things Clinton did to piss me off I have to agree that he was a good president. Him and Reagan are the only ones I think can be called "great" or even "good" presidents in recent years.


----------



## blueprint (Jan 3, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> Though there were a few things Clinton did to piss me off I have to agree that he was a good president. Him and Reagan are the only ones I think can be called "great" or even "good" presidents in recent years.


 but you live in canada?? why does it matter?


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

blueprint said:


> elTwitcho said:
> 
> 
> > Though there were a few things Clinton did to piss me off I have to agree that he was a good president. Him and Reagan are the only ones I think can be called "great" or even "good" presidents in recent years.
> ...


 Because our economy is based almost entirely on how well the US economy is doing. We may have all sorts of good measures in place, but if some fuckup bankrupts the country that deals with 80% of our trade, it might affect us just a tiny bit...


----------



## blueprint (Jan 3, 2004)

i still think Kerry is a better canidate for the position than Bush and from what the rave is around here in LA... Kerry it is. I support mostly everything Kerry has indicated, especially the Stem Cell research debate that was smashed by Bush....

Here is the Formula for minorities that vote.
*Minorities = Democrat*


----------



## Piranha Guy (Oct 22, 2003)

First of all what Bush has done is amazing he is making the united states a safer place to live he has brought freedom to the country of Iraq.



> the military moral is high??
> 
> all the tapes, letters, and interviews ive seen are....get me outa here...why are we even here....a good amount of our troops dont even know why they are there...


First things first







ok now that I got that out of the way the media has the biggest democratic bias its not even funny I bet you dont know anyone over in Iraq or any other countries becasue if you did like I do myself then you would know the truth and that is Moral is high and yes they do know what they are doing there. The media dosent want the american people to see this beacuse you idiots who believe it will vote for that jackass kerry. Think about this do you want a guy in office who got married to his first wife for only one reason money. He is a cheep golddigging piece of sh*t and I will be embarased to see him in office and lead this country.

Blue print first of all elTwicho is right canada and alot of other countries depend on the US economy and with the penny pinching Kerry in office we will all be screwed and take the rest of the world down with us. But go ahead and believe the media and there god damn lies about the war.


----------



## blueprint (Jan 3, 2004)

Piranha Guy said:


> Blue print first of all elTwicho is right canada and alot of other countries depend on the US economy and with the penny pinching Kerry in office we will all be screwed and take the rest of the world down with us. But go ahead and believe the media and there god damn lies about the war.


 I believe Kerry is a better canidate because of what he had proposed in his campaign.... I am not downing anything Bush has done, he has accomplished some admirable things in office... i just believe Democrats atleast for me are a better choice with Economical situations...


----------



## Uncle Buck (Jul 14, 2004)

rozz said:


> the military moral is high??
> 
> all the tapes, letters, and interviews ive seen are....get me outa here...why are we even here....a good amount of our troops dont even know why they are there...


 are you thier? how do you know what they all feel


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

blueprint - you're in Manila now ?


----------



## blueprint (Jan 3, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> blueprint - you're in Manila now ?


 Los Angeles, California.

I indicated Manila because piranhas in my area are illegal. My family is from manila though.









anyways to each there own.... i believe this years election will be a surprise for everyone, you can count on that.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

blueprint said:


> Jewelz said:
> 
> 
> > blueprint - you're in Manila now ?
> ...


 That's what I thought ...

How can it be a surprise ? I think the chances of either candidate winning are pretty even. The only surprise will be if Nader wins which isn't going to happen


----------



## rchan11 (May 6, 2004)

bassfisherman said:


> if i were american, i would vote for bush


----------



## Methuzela (Apr 27, 2004)

So your point is what? That because other presidents started wars for less reasons than George "Dumbass" Bush started this one it makes it ok?

Yeah, you know what, Hitler killed *6 MILLION *people, so whats so wrong with what George Bush is doing, right?


----------



## PARANHAZ69 (Dec 16, 2003)

Methuzela said:


> So your point is what? That because other presidents started wars for less reasons than George "Dumbass" Bush started this one it makes it ok?
> 
> Yeah, you know what, Hitler killed *6 MILLION *people, so whats so wrong with what George Bush is doing, right?


 I'm in the military so mindless hippies like you can say ANYTHING you like. So, your welcome for providing a free country for you to do so.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Clinton sucked at being a president









Im still voting Bush.


----------



## nubsmoke (Feb 4, 2004)

You people sound ignorant when you talk about Bush. Bush=good things for rich people, bad things for the enviorment(which will be here long after Bush,Kerry,You and me!). You are blind if you don't see that. I'm not saying Kerry is the man, but he is not coming from lies,scandal( research the assination attempt on Reagan, Hinkley's older brother, and dad ,both oil buddies of Bush senior, were in attendance at the Bush compound for a large party the day after the attempt.)and corruption(Enron???, energy policy debates). You should'nt talk about politics if you don't research both sides.


----------



## qwuintus (Feb 3, 2003)

I don't like to bring up the fereinheit 911 movie, but he does bring up a good theory of his that underneath the iraqi war and the presidency, it was all masterminded inorder to make large sums of money. everything was rigged.
bush only legitimized the war because he let other things happen. his sec of def had done business and provided militry equipment and what not to saddam in the 80s.


----------



## nubsmoke (Feb 4, 2004)

Do some research, a plan was in effect to gain control of the Caspian basin for the last 20 years. It is a known fact that by 2050 , 80% of the worlds oil will come from here. And a pipeline through Afghanistan would keep from involving Russia, the oil companies would hate if Russia could become a power again, and they could if they controled the oil in that region!


----------



## Methuzela (Apr 27, 2004)

PARANHAZ69 said:


> Methuzela said:
> 
> 
> > So your point is what? That because other presidents started wars for less reasons than George "Dumbass" Bush started this one it makes it ok?
> ...


I'm sorry did I say anything anti military? No I didnt, so before you open your mouth and generalize me why don't you actually read the whole post. Good for you for joining the military, but how does it feel to know that your fellow soldiers are in iraq so bush can make money? How does it feel to be a part of big business?

And by the way, all you military people who say that you "fight so that i can have freedom" I would understand that if there was some country coming in here trying to stop me from having freedom. But the military is in other countries doing other things that have *absolutely nothing to do with me being free*. Think about why our soldiers are really in places that they are. It's a shame that our soldiers (*who by the way i do have the utmost respect for*) are being used so blatantly. SO before you spout off all of the cliches that the army has taught you to spout off to the "hippies" of the world, think about things.

Generalizing makes you look pretty stupid, doesn't it?


----------



## qwuintus (Feb 3, 2003)

Guess it was true then... even more reason why to get bush out...


----------



## qwuintus (Feb 3, 2003)

Methuzela said:


> PARANHAZ69 said:
> 
> 
> > Methuzela said:
> ...


 laid down pretty hard...


----------



## nubsmoke (Feb 4, 2004)

I knew there were intelligent people here in this thread! Research=Knowledge=Power, without knowledge , people will take control of your mind!


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

Fahrenheit 911 was mostly theories man, you cant judge someone on theories.

And meth even suggesting Bush has the right to kill 6 million + because Hitler and the Nazis did, even thou you were joking is not right at all. I'm sure if Bush was a Hitler you would be one the first in line to have your mouth permanently shut.


----------



## Methuzela (Apr 27, 2004)

nubsmoke said:


> I knew there were intelligent people here in this thread! Research=Knowledge=Power, without knowledge , people will take control of your mind!


 Word up nubsmoke, thanks for layin down some facts.


----------



## Methuzela (Apr 27, 2004)

Revolt said:


> Fahrenheit 911 was mostly theories man, you cant judge someone on theories.
> 
> And meth even suggesting Bush has the right to kill 6 million + because Hitler and the Nazis did, even thou you were joking is not right at all. I'm sure if Bush was a Hitler you would be one the first in line to have your mouth permanently shut.


Revolt, im jewish, so dont tell me that its not cool to make a metaphor. Cause thats all it was. I was obviously exxagerating. However, if I offended YOU PERSONALLY, i apologize.

by the way, was that some sort of inadvertant underhanded threat? Nicely done.


----------



## qwuintus (Feb 3, 2003)

Revolt - I wasn't judging him, but it does stir up thoughts enough to be brought out for discussion.


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

Methuzela said:


> Revolt said:
> 
> 
> > Fahrenheit 911 was mostly theories man, you cant judge someone on theories.
> ...

















- Methuzela



qwuintus said:


> Revolt - I wasn't judging him, but it does stir up thoughts enough to be brought out for discussion.


TRUE, it brings up thousands of questions, that unfortunally will never be answered by Bush are his staff.


----------



## nubsmoke (Feb 4, 2004)

My how easy you guys get personal! There is no denying the things I've said, I have researched the topic religously, and my opinions are based on fact. How many times have people in control taken advantage of the general population, too many to count. To ignore the underlying lies and deciets is to not think about the future. And to not speak up , makes you as bad as Bush's compadres! And just wait , sooner or later the truth will come out, hopefully not too late!


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Clinton sucked at being a president
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 he got sucked alright :laugh:


----------



## Atlanta Braves Baby! (Mar 12, 2003)

KERRY ALL THE WAY!


----------



## micus (Jan 7, 2004)

all that bullshit articel showed me is that war happy presidents start alot of wars with countries that have done dick all to them, true sometimes its for the best that they interveen, but usually it seems like there is an underlying reason y they go to war, i.e communism. oil, money, ect. also it seems taht americans usually lose out wut with losing thousands of troops,.i dont know how anywar is justified without the country your waring aginst atacking u first,

im not american, but i hope kerry gets it, i also think that if kerry got elected it would seriously help the united states world relations

i mean it seems that bushs way of keeping friends is sayin sh*t like ( if your not with us your against us)

also, it deosnt say much that in detroit 35 ppl were killed, thats seriously not saying a whole lot for detroit, all that says to me is there is alot of ppl with guns who shouldnt have em,

anyway ,


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

PARANHAZ69 said:


> There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....
> In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.


 That says more about how well your society functions than it says about Iraq...


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> PARANHAZ69 said:
> 
> 
> > There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....
> ...


 Look how many people died under Saddam's rule that were ordered to death just by him alone.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

i like bush.. who gives a f*ck if we went to war on reasons other then WOMD.. Sadam is a c*ck sucker and needed to be taken out regaurdless of these WOMD...

Bush..........


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Peacock said:


> i like bush..





> who gives a f*ck if we went to war on reasons other then WOMD


Typical....









Karen: I said nothing about Saddam or how many he killed: I merely showed in what state of decomposition US society is if as many people die in one city by murder as GI's are killed in the Iraqi war zone per month. Very sad.....


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> Peacock said:
> 
> 
> > i like bush..
> ...


 Every country has its bad apples


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Someone brought up a good point in an earlier thread: Why does the Bush administration allow Al-queda terror cells to infiltrate our own country during a time of war. Why are our borders not sealed from any furhter illegal immigrants - among whom many of the terrorists are getting into this country. Are the civil rights lobbyists more powerful than the executive branch, or is Bush really not concerned?


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Fargo said:


> Someone brought up a good point in an earlier thread: Why does the Bush administration allow Al-queda terror cells to infiltrate our own country during a time of war. Why are our borders not sealed from any furhter illegal immigrants - among whom many of the terrorists are getting into this country. Are the civil rights lobbyists more powerful than the executive branch, or is Bush really not concerned?


You think he "allows" them to? Please do explain your thinking on this one. If he knew of any terror cells being harbored here in America (or anywhere as a matter of fact), Im pretty damn positive they would be taken out within a heartbeat.

If anything, we've up'ed our border patrol since 9/11.

President Signs Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act--May 2002

_It authorizes 400 additional inspectors, investigators, and other staff on the INS over the next five years._

Therefore making it a lot harder for illegal immigrants to get through. We cant shut our borders down entirely. Half of the people that flow through the border are American citizens traveling/doing business and what not.


----------



## aaron07_20 (Apr 23, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Clinton sucked at being a president
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 You are so full of sh*t. Clinton was one of our best presidents ever. Bush is one of the worst. All he is doing now is getting our soldiers killed. The only reason you say that crap is because you are a dumb republican.


----------



## ViBE (Jul 22, 2003)

aaron07_20 said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Clinton sucked at being a president
> ...


 I don't know about you, but you sound like an ass.

You're a like a hippie (lol, hug them trees!), *mock*bush likes getting soldiers killed.

Wake up Neo, the reality is simple, war is necessary. What bush is doing is a good thing, so what if theres a scandal that he makes more money and sh*t. I don't give a f*ck, all I care is that he is taking out Saddam. And if your against that, then you should be deported.

If there wasn't war, we'd all be speaking German right now.

Je suis canadien, I don't have to put up with all this crap. But I'd vote for Bush.


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

aaron07_20 said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Clinton sucked at being a president
> ...


Of all the peoples posts i've read on this board during the past 3 weeks, all your posts Aaron make you sound like an ass.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

About the border security, he does not "allow" people to come into the states. Its both a little political and unpublicized info. I think partly he wants the hispanic vote and there isn't as much public scrutiny about the lack of control. Lots of it is in texas. Everyday, thats all jon and ken talk about of kfi. I think bush should do a better job about it imo. However, those that are caught from middle easternn areas are turned over to the cia. about clinton being the "best" prez aaron, why do you think that? Can you support that? I used to think so jst b/c everybody else said so until i found out more. I think hes one of the best speakers and has the most charisma, but a lot of the criticism of the bush admin stems from clintons policies ranging from cia's misinfo, corruption of major corporations, lack of action vs terrrorism, and the economy. Name one major change clinton has done to make the country better. I bet you can't think of one b/c most of his changes didn't affect us a lot other then minor changes(except the environment which i disagree w/ bush). Also, I thinkn its very hard to "seal" the borders considering our whole country is so easy to infiltrate from (north and south all the way east to west)

*note* i always thought we had the highest or close to the highest murder rates till i founnd out nicuraga or columbia(spelling?) -i forgethas 10x the rate we do.


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

I am not going to get into this argument except to say damn Bush and his Patriot Act. He just took my freedom away....


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

seharebo said:


> I am not going to get into this argument except to say damn Bush and his Patriot Act. He just took my freedom away....


I agree 70% with you :nod:


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

aaron07_20 said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Clinton sucked at being a president
> ...


 No wonder everybody here hates you


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

ok really the war issue doesnt matter.. what is going to happen if kerry gets elected? we stay in there and the same sh*t happens, but now we are being let by a frency socialist? or we pull out and iraq comes out even more screwed up and we find ourself in a nuclear holocaust very soon. It was only a matter of time before terrorist organizations gained enough money in order to launch a full scale nuclear attack on the united states, we have done a tremendous job of cutting off these funds and crippling terrorist organizations.

Other then that... America has always been the land in which you get what you work for, if you work harder then the next person you deserve more. This is not what kerry thinks. He wants to take your hard earned money and give it to those who dont make the effort which equates to the downfall of the greatest nation on earth.


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

you know whats weird... dumb random thought... when i go for a job interview, theres at least 40-80 other people going for that same job.... for the job of the president, at least 2, maybe 3... the rest of the people really dont have a chance... just weird we gotta pick from 2 people instead of like 10.


----------



## ViBE (Jul 22, 2003)

Poseidon X said:


> ok really the war issue doesnt matter.. what is going to happen if kerry gets elected? we stay in there and the same sh*t happens, but now we are being let by a frency socialist? or we pull out and iraq comes out even more screwed up and we find ourself in a nuclear holocaust very soon. It was only a matter of time before terrorist organizations gained enough money in order to launch a full scale nuclear attack on the united states, we have done a tremendous job of cutting off these funds and crippling terrorist organizations.
> 
> Other then that... America has always been the land in which you get what you work for, if you work harder then the next person you deserve more. This is not what kerry thinks. He wants to take your hard earned money and give it to those who dont make the effort which equates to the downfall of the greatest nation on earth.


 Well said


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2004)

Bush, and every president preceding him has failed to secure out Southern border. They are too busy pandering to hispanic voters, liberal special interest groups, and corporations addicted to cheap immigrant labor. I seriously doubt that Kerry would do a better job of sealing up the borders.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Bullsnake said:


> Bush, and every president preceding him has failed to secure out Southern border. They are too busy pandering to hispanic voters, liberal special interest groups, and corporations addicted to cheap immigrant labor. I seriously doubt that Kerry would do a better job of sealing up the borders.


 Good one, Bullsnake


----------



## Methuzela (Apr 27, 2004)

Bush is the most embarassing thing this coutnry has ever produced. I'm almost ashamed that he's my president.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

aaron07_20 said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Clinton sucked at being a president
> ...


Yeah he was the best president huh?

Yeah so lets see...he was offered Osama Bin Laden's head on a silver platter, *NOT* once....but *THREE* times. Refused it each time. Then 9/11 happens and kills 3,000 people. And who was responsible for 9/11? Bin Laden, right?!

Alright go ahead tell me how glorious this Clinton was when he was responsible for f0cking up our CIA and refusing each time, Bin Ladens head.

As for the Patriot Act...thats a joke. Id rather give up those freedoms if it means catching more terrorists in this country so that something like 9/11 doesnt happen again. I mean really, how much of an effect have you noticed on your life from the Patriot Act. I still go about my daily life just the same.


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> aaron07_20 said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 karen..i'll answer you question

could 9/11 been avoided?
YES

did bush know of the attacks before of 9/11? 
YES

what did bush do with the word from c.i.a when told about this possible attacks?
NOTHING.

bottomline everybody to everyone was involved in 9/11.from poppa bush term,in between term.. down to bush jr..BUT..bush jr was sitting there with the info in hand and did sqat with it..









when someone hires you for a job..usually the person before hand (somehow..someway)has fucked up something..and its up to the NEW person to fixs it...right????


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

thePACK said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > aaron07_20 said:
> ...


 CIA also told Bush that Saddam had WMD, so what does Bush do? He reacts upon it. Now look at how half the country views him for doing so.


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> thePACK said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


lets not get it twisted....he had to go into iraq..someone had to pay for 9/11....can't get bin laden...get the next best thing..saddam...


----------



## DrewBoOty (Nov 23, 2002)

> lets not get it twisted....he had to go into iraq..someone had to pay for 9/11....can't get bin laden...get the next best thing..saddam...


----------



## wvarda (Aug 8, 2003)

The effects of war aside, terrorists focus on the US not because of its freedoms, but because of its long standing and ruthless foriegn policy. Going into iraq, ignoring the WMD nonsense and the causalities, was a terrible terrible idea because the power vacuum it creates is extremely unstable, and unpredictable. Democracy is the end result of the evolution of the popular political consciousness. It develops from within a society outwards. To enforce democracy simply doesn't work, it isn't a device that can be painted on a society regardless of history and culture. just look at afganistan! where is the democracy there?
these actions just lead more and more to an increasingly unstable middle east, and flare up anti-american hatred. Sure Saddam was a bloody dictator (even if we supported him) but marching in there and overthrowing him in an oversimplistic fashion will lead to nothing but more chaos.

Im just glad im Canadian. I would really hate having the whole world divided between laughing at and hating my leader


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

Lets not slam Clinton because he refused to deal with Bin Laden. Doing so, may have even resulted in something way more tragic than what happened on 9/11. I highly doubt taking out a terrorist organization's leader is gonna stop anything, it would only escalate things even worse. If Bin Laden was no more, someone worse would take up his cause. Unfortunately, being the greatest country and somewhat the noisest, leads to many enemies.

Bush hasn't done anything really besides liberating Iraq. Any president would have retaliated and gone into Afganistan after what happened on 9/11. What Bush has done however, is piss off the whole world. His axis of evil speech must surely have pissed off Iran and North Korea. Apparently there were thoughts of going into Iran recently, because the people who flew the planes on 9/11 apparently paid a visit to Iran prior. The same guys also went into France, UK, but of course we're not invading them right? And you'd have to be pretty damn freaking stupid to piss off North Korea. They probably have nukes and would destroy South Korea in a heart beat. If our soldiers went in to fight them, we'd lose sh*t loads of lives because NK soldiers were trained since childhood to fight.

We've lost the good relations we had to many European nations as a result of going into Iraq. Lives have been lost since entering conflict in Iraq. People being beheaded. We need to stop policing the world, because we are pissing off our dangerous enemies. Fix Iraq and simply stop trying to invade this, oust a leader. We only do things in our own interest, perhaps one day we'll do it simply for good.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Sunman222 said:


> Lets not slam Clinton because he refused to deal with Bin Laden. Doing so, may have even resulted in something way more tragic than what happened on 9/11. I highly doubt taking out a terrorist organization's leader is gonna stop anything, it would only escalate things even worse. If Bin Laden was no more, someone worse would take up his cause. Unfortunately, being the greatest country and somewhat the noisest, leads to many enemies.
> 
> Bush hasn't done anything really besides liberating Iraq. Any president would have retaliated and gone into Afganistan after what happened on 9/11. What Bush has done however, is piss off the whole world. His axis of evil speech must surely have pissed off Iran and North Korea. Apparently there were thoughts of going into Iran recently, because the people who flew the planes on 9/11 apparently paid a visit to Iran prior. The same guys also went into France, UK, but of course we're not invading them right? And you'd have to be pretty damn freaking stupid to piss off North Korea. They probably have nukes and would destroy South Korea in a heart beat. If our soldiers went in to fight them, we'd lose sh*t loads of lives because NK soldiers were trained since childhood to fight.
> 
> We've lost the good relations we had to many European nations as a result of going into Iraq. Lives have been lost since entering conflict in Iraq. People being beheaded. We need to stop policing the world, because we are pissing off our dangerous enemies. Fix Iraq and simply stop trying to invade this, oust a leader. We only do things in our own interest, perhaps one day we'll do it simply for good.


 Boy, we wouldn't want to piss anybody off or do things in our own interest now, would we ?

I got an idea - new political strategy - let's apologize to everybody including the nice terrorists who are trying to kill us and buy them off so they wont' attack us . In fact, let's open our borders and invite them to live here tax free and if they wish to kill a few people - so be it, if it makes them feel more welcome


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Sunman222 said:


> Lets not slam Clinton because he refused to deal with Bin Laden. Doing so, may have even resulted in something way more tragic than what happened on 9/11. I highly doubt taking out a terrorist organization's leader is gonna stop anything, it would only escalate things even worse. If Bin Laden was no more, someone worse would take up his cause. Unfortunately, being the greatest country and somewhat the noisest, leads to many enemies.
> 
> Bush hasn't done anything really besides liberating Iraq. Any president would have retaliated and gone into Afganistan after what happened on 9/11. What Bush has done however, is piss off the whole world. His axis of evil speech must surely have pissed off Iran and North Korea. Apparently there were thoughts of going into Iran recently, because the people who flew the planes on 9/11 apparently paid a visit to Iran prior. The same guys also went into France, UK, but of course we're not invading them right? And you'd have to be pretty damn freaking stupid to piss off North Korea. They probably have nukes and would destroy South Korea in a heart beat. If our soldiers went in to fight them, we'd lose sh*t loads of lives because NK soldiers were trained since childhood to fight.
> 
> We've lost the good relations we had to many European nations as a result of going into Iraq. Lives have been lost since entering conflict in Iraq. People being beheaded. We need to stop policing the world, because we are pissing off our dangerous enemies. Fix Iraq and simply stop trying to invade this, oust a leader. We only do things in our own interest, perhaps one day we'll do it simply for good.


How do you resolve a conflict? You rid yourself of the instigator/source. In this case you remove Bin Laden. You remove the main source and what happens? The organization cripples/weakens. So if a new leader is put in place, you remove that one. Organizations cant run on individualism. So the more leaders you keep removing will leave you with what in the end?

We removed Saddam, look at the events that are preceeding. These of which include the renovation of 3,300 Iraqi schools; the printing of 9 million new math and science textbooks; improvements to telephone and electric services; 600 new judges, and improvements to health care.

So I dont think we went bad with this war. Do you think Saddam offered anything of the sort to his people, or even tried? I dont think so.

We may have lost some of our allies in this war, but this war was justified given the circumstance we were in. Its not like we bombed the hell out of them and packed up our sh*t and left. No, instead we did the right thing. We gave stabilization to a very instable country and removed a mental nutcase out of power. Plus now offered reconstruction. You tell me what country will go to war with another country, then offer to help rebuild schools and bring them back up to their feet?


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> How do you resolve a conflict? You rid yourself of the instigator/source. In this case you remove Bin Laden.


 Wrong!

Do you actually believe that by killing Bin Laden, Al-Zarquawi and all those other creeps you end the problem??? Those hundreds of sleeper cells spread throughout the world are 100% automomous: all they need is one command to start their assigment - and when the time is there, that command will find its way to the cell, wheter you take out Bin Laden and his succesors or not.

Sure, Bin Laden and his direct associates are the face of present-day terrorism, but kill him, and there will be 10 new ones anxiously waiting to follow in his foot steps.

Hunting and killing Bin Laden and his terrorist gang isn't a bad thing, very true, but it is merely fighting symptoms: in the meantime, the disease (ie. the reasons why terrorism actually exists) continues to rage on... And as long as this disease isn't tackled, you can fight the War on Terror as long as you can support it, but you'll _never_ win it








Feel free to try and proove me wrong, though


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

FJK

f*ck J Kerry!

BFL!!!!

BuSH FoR LyFe!


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Judazzz said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > How do you resolve a conflict? You rid yourself of the instigator/source. In this case you remove Bin Laden.
> ...


 tell me.. whats this disease?


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Peacock said:


> Judazzz said:
> 
> 
> > Ms_Nattereri said:
> ...


 Well, why are the Americans hated so much by some in the world?
Don't give me that jealousy-crap, or "just because", or "their religion says so" (fundamentalism means going back to your roots - the roots of islam were laid more than a millenium before the foundations of the USA were laid).
There are other reasons.
What reasons? Look it up: it's not my job to dish up your national history for you: good luck finding books with all the needed information, though...

btw: "disease" was used metaphorically...


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Judazzz said:


> it's not my job to dish up your national history for you


 no, but it is your job to back up your sh*t talking..


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Peacock said:


> Judazzz said:
> 
> 
> > it's not my job to dish up your national history for you
> ...


 Hey if your outlook to the world is like this: "what I don't understand" = "sh*t talking" that's your problem









I feel no need to fill in the blanks for you: it's the history of your f*cking nation, not mine, you should know it, not me.
But why even bother: someone who hardly can blurt out more than "Genocide" in threads like this are too much effort to deal with...

btw: show me where it states that it's "my job" to back up my sh*t talking...


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > How do you resolve a conflict? You rid yourself of the instigator/source. In this case you remove Bin Laden.
> ...


Do I think it will end the problem? Definitely not.

Do I think its a start towards ending the problem? Definitely so!

You gotta start somewhere, why not at the heart of the problem?

I admit, fighting a war on terrorism seems like a goal that will never be reached, but at least were trying right? Even if all this effort just reduces terrorist attacks by just a short percentage...its still all the more worth it so innocent people dont keep dying.

So am I still wrong?!


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2004)

Nothing will be gained by negotiating with terrorists. They are sociopathic killers who take pleasure is death and mayhem. It's the closest thing to "power" these poor, insignificant people will ever have and their hooked on the power and hatred. Their reasons are irrelevant, all they need is a target. 
Love this pic.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Bullsnake said:


> Nothing will be gained by negotiating with terrorists. They are sociopathic killers who take pleasure is death and mayhem. It's the closest thing to "power" these poor, insignificant people will ever have and their hooked on the power and hatred. Their reasons are irrelevant, all they need is a target.


 The solution has not much to do with terrorism per se, let alone negotiating with them.

Terrorists _choose_ to become terrorists - most of them were normal citizens before they took a turn for the worst (although I guess most of you will dismiss the thought of "mindless towelheaded murderers" being capable of rational thought - good for y'all if that comforts you







)
As long as these people have a reason to become a terrorist, the war will continue. Take away the reasons for this (and they are numberous), the war may come to an end...


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Judazzz said:


> Bullsnake said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing will be gained by negotiating with terrorists. They are sociopathic killers who take pleasure is death and mayhem. It's the closest thing to "power" these poor, insignificant people will ever have and their hooked on the power and hatred. Their reasons are irrelevant, all they need is a target.
> ...


 what is their reason?

dont just say "our history"... thats f*cking stupid.. that would be like a mexican having the moral right to kill a texan over "stolen" land..

history? i had nothing to do with what happened.. what did happen?

so why should i have to die?

f*ck them and their f*cking religion..


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Judazzz said:


> Bullsnake said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing will be gained by negotiating with terrorists. They are sociopathic killers who take pleasure is death and mayhem. It's the closest thing to "power" these poor, insignificant people will ever have and their hooked on the power and hatred. Their reasons are irrelevant, all they need is a target.
> ...


 Hahahaha... yeah I know, I know everything is the fault of big bad arrogant Americans.. we brought this on ourselves.. even if it doesn't explain Muslim terror in numerous non-Western countries throughout the world, but why bother thinking about that when you can just blame everything on Uncle Sam ?

I also hope you're not a John Kerry supporter as if it was up to him we would have invaded Iraq back in 1998


----------



## Satans'Fish (Jul 20, 2004)

Just a couple of things:



> FDR...
> led us into World War II.
> Germany never attacked ! us: Japan did.
> From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
> an average of 112,500 per year.


Germany declared WAR on ur asses for fucks sake!



> Clinton...
> went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
> Bosnia never attacked us.


Errr... this was a NATO operation, hence UN&French consent



> ! ; President Bush has ...
> liberated! ! two countries. put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.


Our definitions of liberation are clearly miles apart. And those inspectors are supposed to do what? Confirm those countries are making nukes? And then what? Saddam was a dictator btw.

And finally, don't you think the enormous difference in death tolls have anything to do with the modernisation of the US army and for that matter the circumstances in Iraq (eg. not a change for a decent guerilla war, pathetic opposition)?


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

Lions led by donkeys... watch yourself people.

Does anyone remember history? After the US pulled out of Europe after WW1, thats when everything went to hell again.


----------



## Satans'Fish (Jul 20, 2004)

User said:


> Lions led by donkeys... watch yourself people.
> 
> Does anyone remember history? After the US pulled out of Europe after WW1, thats when everything went to hell again.


 That didn't have anything to do with the US pulling back. Having Germany sign a peace treaty so harsh did the trick.


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

Satans said:


> User said:
> 
> 
> > Lions led by donkeys... watch yourself people.
> ...


So harsh? So I guess its the allies fault right? For making them sign a "harsh" peace treaty, which caused WW2. I am starting to really hate all this sh*t, why the hell is it always the goodside that gets blamed for every damn thing?


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

User said:


> Satans said:
> 
> 
> > User said:
> ...


 Jealousy..

I just want to know how many other things USA will get blamed for - hurricanes, earthquakes, world hunger, globar warming, AIDS, black plague, Spanish inquisition, dinosaur extinction ... I am sure all somehow our fault


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

this is the sh*t that bothers me:



> mprovements to health care.building schools.


helping everyone else in the world..but we can even help ourselfs









sending billions of dollars to aid in the rebuilding,but just last week a school in my area was closed because there was no funding?wtf???but lets build school for others..yippy....improve health care...there saying in 15-20years there will be no help for those that retire and need assistance in the usa because there will be no money for them...yeah wtf???


----------



## Satans'Fish (Jul 20, 2004)

User said:


> Satans said:
> 
> 
> > User said:
> ...


 Where did I say the US is to blame for that? Are you paranoid or sumn, interpreting every single thing as US-bashing...

The harshness of that treaty is to blame. It were France and England that made that treaty, the US was just a r00kie back then. The Germans had to pay shitloads of gold they didn't have, give away pieces of their country and were humiliated over all. Those things pushed Germany even further into the 'swamp' creating the ideal circumstances for a sneaky rat like Hitler to cease power.

@ Jewels: Jealousy at what?







And yes, you are primarily to blame for global warming


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

thePACK said:


> thi sis the sh*t that bothers me:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Does it really bother you that were helping a country get back on its feet after we took out their ruler and destroyed half of their country in the process?

Trust me, I agree very much with the idea that you should take care of home first before helping others. However, we caused this war, we should take care of what we did. Thats what makes us so much different than any other country that has gone to war. Yet, people still want to bash Bush


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

Satans said:


> Where did I say the US is to blame for that? Are you paranoid or sumn, interpreting every single thing as US-bashing...
> 
> The harshness of that treaty is to blame. It were France and England that made that treaty, the US was just a r00kie back then. The Germans had to pay shitloads of gold they didn't have, give away pieces of their country and were humiliated over all. Those things pushed Germany even further into the 'swamp' creating the ideal circumstances for a sneaky rat like Hitler to cease power.
> 
> @ Jewels: Jealousy at what? :laugh: And yes, you are primarily to blame for global warming





User said:


> So harsh? So I guess its the allies fault right? For making them sign a "harsh" peace treaty


Hold just a sec, were did I mention the US by name in my last post? I said allies.









It was harsh but it could have been worser, I mean the allies were trying to make so that germany could never be a threat again, but it failed.


----------



## Satans'Fish (Jul 20, 2004)

User said:


> Hold just a sec, were did I mention the US by name in my last post? I said allies.


Whoops, I really need to buy me some new eyeballs








Sorry 'bout that.



> It was harsh but it could have been worser, I mean the allies were trying to make so that germany could never be a threat again, but it failed.


There motivations were right, but selfish. I can't blame them in any way and talking about it afterwards is always easy, but their attempts to temper Germany only made things worse.


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

What would you have made the Germans do then?

Good times for the USA back then, the country was still basically a virgin, so for one time its not our fault.


----------



## Satans'Fish (Jul 20, 2004)

Well I'd cripple their militairy powers for starters (yes, like the allies did), but leave their economy intact and a possibility to regenerate. That would pretty much do the trick


----------



## delta (Jul 23, 2004)

bill clinton the man what are you smokin do you remenber 911 I shure hope cause ol wild bill had a hand in that ya know plane #2 was flown by a terrorist that isreal had in custady (2 other highjackers were also in this release) isreal said they would never let them go but good ol bill forced (by threat of sanctions) isreal to release them all because the palestinians wanted them DA i wonder why 
i dont even want to get started but there are 100s of things like this (lied to congress while in office etc)


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

Jewelz said:


> Boy, we wouldn't want to piss anybody off or do things in our own interest now, would we ?
> 
> I got an idea - new political strategy - let's apologize to everybody including the nice terrorists who are trying to kill us and buy them off so they wont' attack us . In fact, let's open our borders and invite them to live here tax free and if they wish to kill a few people - so be it, if it makes them feel more welcome :nod:


You obviously are too ignorant to get the point, so let me spell it out for you.

It's simple: the more we continue to "police" the world and stick our noses in other people's business, the more enemies we'll continue to make and we'll start seeing bigger atrocities committed on us. Sure we can do things in our own interest, but not at the f*cking expense of other countries. The US has been using its allies and other countries for their own interest, not the allies, not even mutual interests between the two. Examples: let's continue to allow American companies to exploit people for their labor (including the exploitation to children). Let's continue to oursource jobs in other industries besides tech., while causing many Americans to lose there source of livelihood. These jobs tend to be for people without degrees in higher education, which are hard to come by.

I hope your sarcasm wasn't an attempt to shove words in my mouth. I'm sure your smart enough to read that I didn't say anything about apologizing nor inviting terrorists into our country. But if you did think that, i'm letting you know right now.

I guess it's stupid of me to expect knowleagable responses on an internet forum. Silly me!


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> How do you resolve a conflict? You rid yourself of the instigator/source. In this case you remove Bin Laden. You remove the main source and what happens? The organization cripples/weakens. So if a new leader is put in place, you remove that one. Organizations cant run on individualism. So the more leaders you keep removing will leave you with what in the end?
> 
> We removed Saddam, look at the events that are preceeding. These of which include the renovation of 3,300 Iraqi schools; the printing of 9 million new math and science textbooks; improvements to telephone and electric services; 600 new judges, and improvements to health care.
> 
> ...


 Bush has his way of resolving conflict, its through war. However you are very wrong in that Bid Laden is the instigator/source. He's simply just the face that the US places on "terrorists". Eliminating key figures in the taliban and al queda was a good strategy. Going after one man is just plain stupid. There are far worse terrorist leaders than Bin Laden i'm sure, usually the ones we don't even know about. I don't think you understand how terrorist organizations work. They don't cripple or weaken if you eliminate their leader or even 90% of its members. They have beliefs that are as strong or stronger than yours or mine (religion). Again, these organizations don't run because they have a leader or members, they run because people believe in their ideology (ie. nazism).

We removed Saddam, great job Bush, US. Yet we still face many difficulties and rebellious groups in Iraq that threatens the lives of our soldiers and workers. I agree that we did well in this war, but not every war will have the minimal causalties that we've had.

I ask you this: Should the US go to war with every country that has a dictator who is inhumane to his people? Should we go into North Korea? There are tons of kids who die everyday from malnutrition and hunger. Should we go into Sierre Leonne? Where the average live expectancy is 35 years of age and drugged up kids carry body parts and put them in piles.

We lost some allies and this war was NOT justified at all. We went into Iraq to find WMD (chemical and biological) and found nothing. That was the justification to oust Saddam and we've found nothing to justify our actions. This is the precise reason why we lost allies and our relations have gone to sh*t. We didn't do the right thing. Killing people is never doing the right thing. The people we had to kill served Saddam in fear of there own lives and their families. They were soldiers and they did their duty. Our soldiers did their duty as well. You may think we've stabalized Iraq, but you CANNOT make that observation until 10 years down the road when we're not in their country anymore.

I'll tell you another thing our country does. Actually, let me correct myself. Not "our country" but Bush's administration because they certainly do not speak for the United States as a whole (he didn't even win the popular vote). Our country goes to war with countries (Iraq) with justifications that are unfounded. Our country (Bush) makes threats to other countries because they don't behave in a way we would like them too. Most of this is because they are developing WMDs (nuclear, chem and bio). But guess what? Which country was the first to develop these and use them? United States of America.

I won't get into the "history", but Peacock, don't be so ignorant when you post.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

PARANHAZ69 said:


> When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following .
> 
> FDR...
> led us into World War II.
> ...


Whoa there buddy-boy!

FDR:

* Did NOT lead us into WW2 against the japanese and the germans. He was FORCED to go into war. 
* Germany had U-boats circling around the atlantic shelf, technically, i consider that a threat of invasion.
* Germany and Japan had a pact....something about joining forces and splitting the conquered world amongst themselves

Truman:
*N. Korea was a threat to the US because of its communistic idealism. (Communism was a big thing back in the 50's. [IE. Redscare])
*N. Korea invaded S. Korea, US feared this would lead to communism spreading around the world (Domino Theory)

Kennedy:
*Again, Domino Theory. US feared communism, we already dealing with communism closer to us, Cuba. Vietnam was a dirty war!

Clinton:
*Went to war with Bosnia because of Genocide. Not sure if i agree with this practice, but since the US feels we're the big brother to every little country in this world, and feel that we have the right to just walk in and take out the big man whos killing the little people....then yes, this is justified!

Not trying to discredit your post or anything, just clarifying things about what you posted


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Jewelz said:


> Hahahaha... yeah I know, I know everything is the fault of big bad arrogant Americans..


 Hey man, you're "Aww, we are so damn victimized all the time" routine as soon as you appearantly have none else to say really gets old: how about thinking of a new standard-response for those awkward moments











> Well I'd cripple their militairy powers for starters (yes, like the allies did), but leave their economy intact and a possibility to regenerate. That would pretty much do the trick


Do you really think a nation that can only resolve things through war has the mental capacity to come up with such an idea: it doesn't involve stealth bombers, shock and awe and stuff like that, so it's beyond their capacities?


----------



## BAMBINO (May 29, 2004)

> Do you really think a nation that can only resolve things through war has the mental capacity to come up with such an idea: it doesn't involve stealth bombers, shock and awe and stuff like that, so it's beyond their capacities?










so true.









judazz keep up the good work for me.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Sunman222 said:


> You obviously are too ignorant to get the point, so let me spell it out for you.
> 
> It's simple: the more we continue to "police" the world and stick our noses in other people's business, the more enemies we'll continue to make and we'll start seeing bigger atrocities committed on us. Sure we can do things in our own interest, but not at the f*cking expense of other countries. The US has been using its allies and other countries for their own interest, not the allies, not even mutual interests between the two. Examples: let's continue to allow American companies to exploit people for their labor (including the exploitation to children). Let's continue to oursource jobs in other industries besides tech., while causing many Americans to lose there source of livelihood. These jobs tend to be for people without degrees in higher education, which are hard to come by.
> 
> ...


 Well you're changing your tune now.. Who's talking about pissing off allies ? In your original post and you can scroll up and see if you wish you were worried about pissing off Iran and N. Korea - I was not aware these countries are our allies

Call me ignorant, twist my words however you want.. just make sure you know what you yourself said that trigerred my response, pal


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Judazzz said:


> Jewelz said:
> 
> 
> > Hahahaha... yeah I know, I know everything is the fault of big bad arrogant Americans..
> ...


Hey man, your "I wonder why Americans are hated all over the world" routine as soon as you appearantly have none else to say really gets old: how about thinking of a new standard-response for those awkward moments









I noticed you didn't respond to me asking to explain Muslim terror in non-Western countries throughout the world.. that's OK.. I wasn't expecting one from you anyway.. if terror exists and no Americans are involved, it's unexplainable... likea miracle - if no Americans are there to blame, it's noone's fault; surely can't be the Muslims' fault !


----------



## elTwitcho (Jun 22, 2004)

Judazz, you're doing a great job bro, but it's utterly pointless. You're arguing logic with people who'll value rhetoric above all else and you're not going to get anywhere. You might come up with a very valid argument about why ousting Saddam has done nothing but to destabilize the middle east but you're just going to get "Saddam was a c*ck sucker and america is safer now just because we are" as comebacks. Good job anyways, but oh well.

And don't even bother with the "learn your nations history" line. Somehow you'll get arguments that shooting up your own boat in the Tonkin gulf so you could go kill 2.5 million viets, 50 thousand americans and cause countless devastation was a totally good idea that helped the world. Or that f*cking up the horn of africa was in everyone's best interests. Or that starting the school of the Americas so South Americans could terrorize themselves is totally helpful. Or... well you get the idea.


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

elTwitcho -- you rock. My sentiments exactly.


----------



## Satans'Fish (Jul 20, 2004)

Ditto, but I can be so tempting to fight ignorence


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

elTwitcho said:


> Judazz, you're doing a great job bro, but it's utterly pointless. You're arguing logic with people who'll value rhetoric above all else and you're not going to get anywhere. You might come up with a very valid argument about why ousting Saddam has done nothing but to destabilize the middle east but you're just going to get "Saddam was a c*ck sucker and america is safer now just because we are" as comebacks. Good job anyways, but oh well.
> 
> And don't even bother with the "learn your nations history" line. Somehow you'll get arguments that shooting up your own boat in the Tonkin gulf so you could go kill 2.5 million viets, 50 thousand americans and cause countless devastation was a totally good idea that helped the world. Or that f*cking up the horn of africa was in everyone's best interests. Or that starting the school of the Americas so South Americans could terrorize themselves is totally helpful. Or... well you get the idea.


 maybe if judazzz actually gave facts to back up his arguments instead of saying "look in your history books" or actually gave constructive criticism instead of just blaming and critizing the US, we'd get somewhere. When members here ask specific questions of why, there are rarely if ever any answers from him.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Judazzz said:
> 
> 
> > PARANHAZ69 said:
> ...


 sadam wasnt hindered by our f#$ked up judicial system, it would be great if we could just drive around all the ghettos with a bus and load up all of the useless thugs that just hang out collect unemployment and shoot each other and steal cars and provide no benifit to society, we could throw them all on a train or bus and haul them off to a huge shooting range and line them up, then all of the people who work hard and pay taxes and have had there houses broken into or cars stolen or have been pick pocketed, or been caught in the middle of gang violence can pick these useless pieces of crap off..

then we can take these rich scumbags that steal peoples retirement and spend a few months in a minimum security spa as punishment, but pay less tax than an average hard working individual, we should take them to the shooting range, only this range has a steel curtain that raises slowly so they get shot up from the ankles first and suffer..

last i heard there wasnt a huge insurgency problem or revolt in iraq when sadam was in power and apparently he had no accociation with terrorists (other than himself)..

so what if he killed his own people, there are countries in africa where millions are being killed but i dont hear bush rushing to give tehm freedom or to oust there leaders to stop the killing.. look at how some of these people in arab countries act when they dont have a strong domoinating poiwer to keep them undercontrol..

bush sucks he has taken away our freedoms (patriot act), destroied our economy (huge record deficit), ruined international relationships, started wars killing vast numbers of foriegn civilians (far out numbering our loses on 911) which in the long run will breed more terrorists because some kid in iraq or afganistan lost his whole family and all he knows is that it was from an american bomb or tank shell or what ever..

bush has contridicted himself on everything "we need bin laden", "we dont need bin laden" "we are safer and dont need a new position to coordinate law enforcement as the 911 panel has suggested" then he says " we are still not safe and need a new position as the 911 panel has suggested" all last week he was like we dont need this, then he got pressure form all over for not acting on the suggestions of the 911 panel now all the sudden he thinks we should impliment every thing they have suggested..

he plays on peoples fears and the sad thing is hes scarring people in farm lands and the midwest who are so out of touch with reality they think guns and roses are still on tour.. bush brings up 911 and they are afraid terrorist will fly a plane in to the john deer factory, which is the least of there concerns about loosing factories since bush will probably outsource all of there jobs before a terorist will target something like that. most people in new york arent affraid so much as pissed off with bush's BS..

so as if it isnt clear im voting kerry bush is worthless and reckless, kerry may not be better but atleast he wont start world war three, and has a better economic plan than running the country into the ground.. we need to regain respect int he rest of the civilized world and strengthen the our position in the world economy..


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Judazzz said:
> ...


 I don't have time to respond to everything you said so just a couple of points:

- Kerry wanted to invade Iraq way before Bush did; and has suggested military invasion in Iraq on numerous occasions (until he "changed his mind" recently)

- Saddam did in fact support terrorism; he paid money to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who targeted innocent Israeli civilians


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> We removed Saddam, look at the events that are preceeding. These of which include the renovation of 3,300 Iraqi schools; the printing of 9 million new math and science textbooks; improvements to telephone and electric services; 600 new judges, and improvements to health care.
> 
> So I dont think we went bad with this war. Do you think Saddam offered anything of the sort to his people, or even tried? I dont think so.


wow thats great.. maybe bush should try makeing these improvements at home before he goes off and tries to spread these great accomplishments to the rest of the world, which by the way could give two sh!ts about what we do after we bomb and invade a country unprovoked, one that presented no possible threat to the continental US aside from bush using it as a tool to invoke fear into mindless idiots in this country who blindly support him with no concept of the implications of what is being done..


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> Jewlez said:
> 
> 
> > I don't have time to respond to everything you said so just a couple of points:
> ...


The sad honest fact is, hardy any nation cares about Israeli civilians.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Trust me, I agree very much with the idea that you should take care of home first before helping others. However, we caused this war, we should take care of what we did. Thats what makes us so much different than any other country that has gone to war. Yet, people still want to bash Bush


i cannot understand how you can make comments like this which contradict your support for bush, yet you support and argue his failures constantly... you basically say riht here that he is screwing up by not taking care of us here at home where he was elected to improve our contry (not much improvement needed at the time thanks bill clinton) but he instead does nothing here for months then uses the support of the world to go after bin laden in afganistan then looses the support of most by going to iraq where he has procedded to go into a nose dive of spending in iraq and failing in the US and the nose drive will hopefully end in a firey crash in november when kerry wins..

look at what happend in the last election bush barely won if it wasnt for his connections he would never have been president, its not going to happen again


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> - Saddam did in fact support terrorism; he paid money to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who targeted innocent Israeli civilians


 as he should, the palastinians have been bullied around by the worthless land grabbing oppresing jews for a long long time they have nothing to live for except suicide bombing for vengence, arabs and jews have been fighting since the dawn of man and will never stop.. and because we support the jews americans are hated even more..


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> bush sucks he has taken away our freedoms (patriot act), destroied our economy (huge record deficit), ruined international relationships, started wars killing vast numbers of foriegn civilians (far out numbering our loses on 911) which in the long run will breed more terrorists because some kid in iraq or afganistan lost his whole family and all he knows is that it was from an american bomb or tank shell or what ever..


Destroyed our economy?









I can already tell your anti-jewish.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> Jewelz said:
> 
> 
> > - Saddam did in fact support terrorism; he paid money to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who targeted innocent Israeli civilians
> ...


 I'm done with you; you're obviously an anti-Semite and a terrorist sympathizer


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> nismo driver said:
> 
> 
> > Jewelz said:
> ...


 whats worse defending bush a proven opressor and aggressor with asperations to dominate the world to spread so called "freedom"

or to disagree with supporting the jews and there conflict with palastine.

im sure if palastine had an army and tanks and helicopters they would fight a conventional war and not have suicide bombings. we back isreal they have as much military power as we provide them which shouldnt require much since the palastinians really only have rocks and some small amounts of explosives.. the isralies whine and act like its so horrible that three - twelve people die in a suicide attack then the IDF goes to palastine and kills dozens in retalitation how the hell does that help stop the cycle? they are just as much to blame for the violence as the palastinians..


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

nismo driver said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Trust me, I agree very much with the idea that you should take care of home first before helping others. However, we caused this war, we should take care of what we did. Thats what makes us so much different than any other country that has gone to war. Yet, people still want to bash Bush
> ...


There are pros *AND* cons to every presidential canidate, as well as to everything in life. Just because I support Bush, does *NOT* mean I back him up in everything he does.

Clinton do anything good for this country?! HA! You kidding me?! I wont argue that again, its getting old.

Ohh and if Gore would have won, youd be saying, "Gore barely won." Man come on. You swear as if it was Floridas first time in f0cking up elections. Theyre practically known for it.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

In reply to Nismodriver:

You say we have a messed up judicial system. Name one country in the whole world that has a better one then ours. And would you rather be tried in America where you have rights (almost too many) vs anywhere else.

About stealing peoples money-I agree w/ what you say. But how is that bush's fault.

No huge insurgency in iraq during saddam-What do you call the kurd uprising and the people that lived in the marshes? Remember, this was where the gassing was done and he drained the peoples who way of being.

About people killing in africa-look to what powell did last week. Sanctions are about to be implemented in 30 days. The UN is on it as we speak. Dont forget, w/ iraq, the world was trying to get saddam to work w/ the UN for TEN...count them TEN years.

You say he took away our freedom, ruined our economy, ruined relationships, killed civilians-Well as for freedom, what speicifcally did he take away from you personally? Nothing? Ok next point. Economy...wasn't the economy going w/ 9 months before bush? And look at now....if bush can be blamed for the downslide, you have to GIVE him credit for the robust economy now. Relationships- this can be argued either way but I do think this is one part he could have improved. Civlians- how can you compare that? Are we supposed to say "ok we've killed 3000 iraqis...we can stop now cause thats how many were killed in 9/11"....thats just pointless.

9/11 panel-Ok first of all, before criticizing for "not" implementing the changes, ever thougth why he didn't? According to FBI and CIA, this would cause too many delays, waste of money, and isn't practical. But when he does do it, then you still complain. At the very least commend him for doing something "right".

Playing on peoples fears-So you're one of the ones that believe the orange alert was for his campaign??? Look at the other post about this. Also, about the deer company, does that mean its ok to bomb that?

So if it isn't clear to you, then Yes, I am voting for bush. Kerry has no platform, balls, or credibility. And our economy IS the strongest in the world. Name one thats better.


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> whats worse defending bush a proven opressor and aggressor with asperations to dominate the world to spread so called "freedom"
> 
> or to disagree with supporting the jews and there conflict with palastine.
> 
> im sure if palastine had an army and tanks and helicopters they would fight a conventional war and not have suicide bombings. we back isreal they have as much military power as we provide them which shouldnt require much since the palastinians really only have rocks and some small amounts of explosives.. the isralies whine and act like its so horrible that three - twelve people die in a suicide attack then the IDF goes to palastine and kills dozens in retalitation how the hell does that help stop the cycle? they are just as much to blame for the violence as the palastinians..


I'm tired of this crap, the Palestinians have had many shots and blew them all. 
If Israel hadn't took out Iraqs nuclear reactor, Saddam and other extremist nations would be passing out nukes like fine cuban cigars. It seems Israel and the US is the only nations that hasn't been castrated by liberal ideology. Israel is going to do the same thing to Iran, so get ready to start bitching.


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

Revolt said:


> nismo driver said:
> 
> 
> > whats worse defending bush a proven opressor and aggressor with asperations to dominate the world to spread so called "freedom"
> ...


If Israel took out Irans reactor, thats going to piss Russia off - they have major $ involved in that deal.


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> nismo driver said:
> 
> 
> > Jewelz said:
> ...


"Worthless land grabbing oppressive Jews," . . . . OMG the truth comes out. At least your honest. Just so you know, the worthless Jews have made lasting contributions to Western Culture since they were assimilated. What lasting contributions have any Islamic countries made in just the last century? Yet when a fortunate Islamic person lives in America, he's able to get an education and live a much fuller life. This is not to denigrate the Islamic people, but rather a culture that is generally stuck in the Dark Ages. What about the countless peace proposals that have been rejected by the main branches of the PLO?

Also, how is it that Islamo-facism continues in Sudan, Algeria, phillipines, etc. How many Jews live in these countries? No one ever responds to the fact that so many of the Islamic terrorist actions throughout history have been pointed at nations having little to do with Israel. I don't expect an answer to that one though. It would ruin the "blame the Jews" argument.


----------



## Guru (Apr 20, 2004)

Bush hasn't done any good to the world or why else is the majority of the world pisssed at him. People don't just get mad at US presidents there are many reasons behind why the world is pissed at Bush. In the past other world leaders and world citizens have respectd American presidents very much. I don't think Bush deserves another term because he hasen't done enough to help the American people in my opinion. 
"Bush is the choice for dummies"
If he gets in for another term again the world is going to be in kaos.

Its also sad how some of you guys can compare people dieing in your streets to the people defending your country. Doesn't any one think that there is a problem when that many people are dieing on your streeets everyday. The worst of it all is, is that the majority of all the people that are dieing are the poor people.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

HOACH said:


> Bush hasn't done any good to the world or why else is the majority of the world pisssed at him. People don't just get mad at US presidents there are many reasons behind why the world is pissed at Bush. In the past other world leaders and world citizens have respectd American presidents very much. I don't think Bush deserves another term because he hasen't done enough to help the American people in my opinion.
> "Bush is the choice for dummies"
> If he gets in for another term again the world is going to be in kaos.
> 
> Its also sad how some of you guys can compare people dieing in your streets to the people defending your country. Doesn't any one think that there is a problem when that many people are dieing on your streeets everyday. The worst of it all is, is that the majority of all the people that are dieing are the poor people.


 You want to say "voting for Bush is for dummies"---well Im voting Bush and at least I can spell chaos.









I dont think I will ever understand society. We go into Iraq and take out a dictator that tortured his own people and we get hated on by the world. Then I read this article in the paper how people expect the US to go into Sudan and help all those people being raped and murdered. But for what? So we can get bad mouthed again? So we can build more enemies than allies? Its all a bunch of bullshit!


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

i agree w/ mrs natt. People need to stop blaming the US and take responsibility. Its damned if you dont and damned if you do. Bunch of crybabies.


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> whats worse defending bush a proven opressor and aggressor with asperations to dominate the world to spread so called "freedom"


Why do people say dumb sh*t? A proven oppressor? Some of you people with all do respect, is so full of sh*t its not even funny.











User said:


> If Israel took out Irans reactor, thats going to piss Russia off - they have major $ involved in that deal.


:nod:


----------



## seharebo (Jul 19, 2004)

The mind is like a parachute...it needs to be open to work properly. Bush is not open-minded, in fact he is extremely close minded. I think that is his entire problem. He is like a gun without a safety. There is no thought put to the consequences of his actions. Being a staunch Republican, I think in this respect he breaks from his Republican roots. Unfortunately, it makes the entire party look bad.


----------



## Guru (Apr 20, 2004)

> You want to say "voting for Bush is for dummies"---well Im voting Bush and at least I can spell chaos.
> 
> I dont think I will ever understand society. We go into Iraq and take out a dictator that tortured his own people and we get hated on by the world. Then I read this article in the paper how people expect the US to go into Sudan and help all those people being raped and murdered. But for what? So we can get bad mouthed again? So we can build more enemies than allies? Its all a bunch of bullshit!


You will never understand society because your society is corrupt with many holes that make things difficult for the poor to succed. There are so many barriers put in the way of poor people in america. There is no health care,strict gunlaws, or tax breaks for the poor in your counrty. Over where i live you don't see 100's of people dieing everyday from guns and crime. You don't see that many people dieing over in western europe from guns. Maybe if you all get rid of all the guns in your counrty you will see the difference it makes.

The US umm..... sorry, I mean Bush and Dick won't go into Sudan to stop the rape and murder because there are no interest that they have in Sudan.








There are also many more warlords in Africa that are pillageing villages with rape and violance that goes unherd of. Why don't you go and try and save those people and be the hero that takes out dictators and restores order.

By the way I'm not bad mouthing America. Your allies don't agree with Bush and his decisions. Maybe you need to open your eyes and see the situatiion from the outside your country. If Bush was truly a good guy I wouldn't be saying anything bad about him because there would be no point, but however Bush has not made the best of decisions as US president in the eyes of the rest of the world.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

Jewelz, if you not gonna bother to read his entire post to respond....then don't even bother replying or waste our time. You set yourself up as being ignorant.

On second thought, just stop responding because you really don't add any measureable kind of value to this discussion. We have such a great education system here that many foreigners come here to get it, it's sad that "people" can't even take time to read or even to read "properly".


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

congratulation someone who can argue there support for bush with out just regurgitating the fighting two wars freeing two countries printing books improving health care blah blah blah for everyone but the USA..

we do have too many rights for criminals and the penalties are out of proportion, when a rapist spends less time in jail then a kid caught with dope there is a problem..

it may not be bushs fault these scum bags ripped off thousands of people but he has business relationships with them either currently or in the past and chenny is definitely buddies with these guys..

the Kurdish situation was an uprising not a insurgency, that is also more of a tribal issue between Kurds and Sunnis, yet another bloody mess over differences of religion..

what Powell is doing for Africa is miniscule compared to bushs total disregard for the UN.. wow sanctions in 30 days that's a pretty harsh punishment to get them to enforce human rights.. if they had oil or had tried to assonate bush sr. G W would waste no time in once again ignoring the UN and doing as he pleases..

the economy has recovered in terms of numbers from certain points of view, unemployment hasn't really improved it just hasn't been increasing, we have a record deficits, the fed is going to have to raise interest rates back up which will effect consumer spending, ultimately the government made a few changes to attempt to stimulate the economy, tax refunds and lowering interest rates, this is a short term way of making dung piles look like rose gardens.. the civilian deaths cannot be compared but it is a fact, the point of going to Iraq wasn't revenge killing but we have terrorized the common Iraqis and destabilized there way of life far more than 9/11 effected the united states. the patriot act forfeits many of our privacy rights, law enforcement can use the powers the patriot act gives them to hold suspects for longer periods of time, wire tapping abilities, it has lifted many restrictions on law enforcement that protected many of our rights and bush used our fears of terrorist to push it through congress, many of the items on the patriot act had been vetoed repeatedly earlier and they were shuffled in with patriot act to get them passed, not all of the patriot act is a bad thing but it was yet another of bushs using peoples fears to get what he wanted..

its hard to argue that using fear of terror attacks has not been an issue.. they base it off the most ridiculous things.. they catch some al-quida member who says there is a plot to attack certain targets in the US, he drops a few names and dates, all the sudden hes a good prisoner and will get a normal meal, whose going to say hes wrong, if they don't react to one of these potentially BS leads and it turns out to be true then what? so you can defend that they are covering there azzes by reacting to what these prisoners are saying but its basically a sham..

Im not complaining i do think its good that he is responding to the 911 panel but I also feel its reactive to peoples demands and not proactive to fixing the problems.. he wouldnt have done it unless enough people where pissed that he wasnt going to follow through with the requests of the panel so you could consider that a job well done halfassed..

im not saying its ok to bomb factories im saying its incredibly unlikely that a terrorist would bomb a factory making farm equipment over a target like the main financial centers of the country or the government, so when bush campaigns in these rural, country and various area least likely to be targeted by terrorist and uses the 911/terror card to gain support.

it is really ridicules some couple with five kids and one parent working two jobs in ohio sitting in a trailler are more at risk of tornado because they cant afford a sturdier structure than they are at risk of a terror attack and are likely to vote bush because he creates a fear of attack but reassures them that he must be president to keep them safe from the fear that he is infact creating, unlike a office worker for meril lynch who's working crappy low level desk job to pay for rent in a over priced apartment but has to wonder if there is a slight possibility the terror alert is a true threat or not but hes still going to vote kerry because hes educated enough to recognize bushs policieys are horrendus..

i can admit that bush has done a few and i really mean few things that have been positive but overall hes a failure and more of a danger to the overall long term good of the country..

you can argue "Kerry has no platform, balls, or credibility. And our economy IS the strongest in the world. Name one thats better." bush had no platfor, balls, or credibility before 911 then his platform was crush the arabs in the name of fredom (and oil), he showed his balls by going against the majority and invading iraq alone, the coalition is such a joke, we send 200k troops and a few other nations send 50 - 100 each, britian and austrailia make up the largest non US forces and they are still less than 50k..

as for strong world economy the euro is stronger now than the dollar and the pound has always been stronger.. having a 350billion dollar deficit kills the value of the countries dollar which ultiamtely make the US weaker in the world economy.. saying we have a strong economy would be like a bank approving someone with 10million dollars in debt a loan for 10million more knowing that they have cut there income (taxes) and might not ever pay all the debit off, it wouldnt happen


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Sunman222 said:


> Jewelz, if you not gonna bother to read his entire post to respond....then don't even bother replying or waste our time. You set yourself up as being ignorant.
> 
> On second thought, just stop responding because you really don't add any measureable kind of value to this discussion. We have such a great education system here that many foreigners come here to get it, it's sad that "people" can't even take time to read or even to read "properly".


 im not assuming that you agree with my point of view and dont feel that anyone should but i appreciate your outside view, all im looking for is an inteligent debate.. or to open up someone else mind to cinsider things from a differnt point of view.. i i dont fully agree with diddye but i apreciate that he atleast has a point of view other than regurgitatin the same crap we are subjected to by most bush supporters.. and although HOACH may not even be able to vote in this country i think its very important they americans actually open there eyes and see how we are being looked at by the rest of the world.. honestly if france attacked saudi arabia because they had beef then the US would be flipping out, and france had strong trade ties with iraq much like the US does with saudi arabia


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> honestly if france attacked saudi arabia because they had beef then the US would be flipping out, and france had strong trade ties with iraq much like the US does with saudi arabia










I can't argue with that, we do have very strong ties with Arabia, and the Saudis do some of the same things as Saddam did to women, and preach destruction of the west.


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

nismo driver said:


> im not assuming that you agree with my point of view and dont feel that anyone should but i appreciate your outside view, all im looking for is an inteligent debate.. or to open up someone else mind to cinsider things from a differnt point of view..


 You had an intelligent debate going until you refered to the Jews, the majority of which don't even live in Israel, as worthless and land grabbing. How can you expect any one to really take you seriously when you say things like that. I actually agree with you on the outsourcing issue and the critical state our country is in. So why bring hatred into it?


----------



## rosal548 (Nov 1, 2003)

Reagan was the man, we need another Reagan !


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

Fargo said:


> You had an intelligent debate going until you refered to the Jews, the majority of which don't even live in Israel, as worthless and land grabbing. How can you expect any one to really take you seriously when you say things like that. I actually agree with you on the outsourcing issue and the critical state our country is in. So why bring hatred into it?


 i dotn think i was being hateful, i should have refered to them as isralies, although the world wide jewish population is located outside of isreal, most isralies ae jewish and most importantly ariel sharon is jewish (unless my jewdar needs calabrastion) but either way the isralies have been plowing palastinian homes to build there security fence, which has been condemed by the UN, so aside from that blatant land grab to build the illegal fence they also have all of the settlements which has been a big reason palastine has not accepted peace agreements because isreal refuses to give up all of the BS settlements.. think about it would canada be happy if the US started building settlements with military support on canadian land.. i doubt it the palastinian arguement isnt all that hard to understand but its hard to take them serious when you have a leader like arafat and that nasty pubic facial hair ... oh and lets not forget the IDF tactic of building palastinian supprt by firing rocks fron helicopters into crowds of protestors thats a great way to build trust and support..sharon's techniques are about as diplomaticlly advanced as bush's..


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

WTF are you going to about it though? You can talk about all you want yea, but talking about what the problem is won't solve it.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

User said:


> WTF are you going to about it though? You can talk about all you want yea, but talking about what the problem is won't solve it.


 well honestly the ireil problem is not my problem and im sure kerry wont be much differnt in suport for isreal but i will still vote kerry. and be a so called "john Kerry Dummy" , which i guess is better than "voting for bush because im a dummy" if its gonna be a choice between idiots id rather have a new idiot for the media to rip on theve run low on bush jokes.


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

Thats a good question there, what are you [nistro driver] personally going to do about the Israeli-Arab conflict? The U.N needs to shut the f*ck up, it and the British made the mandate state of Israel & Jordan in the first place, if you read the mandate the palestinians already have a nation called Transjordan, so who is trying to make a land-grab here? Hell man, the king of jordan is now telling the PLO to take what you can get, because we sure as hell don't want the refugees flooding over-here, there own state [jordan] don't even want them, the other arabs couldn't care less about the palestinians, its all about taking the state of Israel piece by piece because there're not powerful enough to destroy face value.

Damn I hate typing


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

HOACH said:


> > You want to say "voting for Bush is for dummies"---well Im voting Bush and at least I can spell chaos.
> >
> > I dont think I will ever understand society. We go into Iraq and take out a dictator that tortured his own people and we get hated on by the world. Then I read this article in the paper how people expect the US to go into Sudan and help all those people being raped and murdered. But for what? So we can get bad mouthed again? So we can build more enemies than allies? Its all a bunch of bullshit!
> 
> ...


Whoa buddy, why dont you come to America first and know what it has to offer before speaking like an ignorant outsider. Our country has more programs and opportunities for the poor/low income families than it does for any of its OTHER people.

There are plenty of ways for poor people to rise up IF they WANT to. In California ALONE, there are shelters where poor people can stay. These shelters offer a lot of services til these people get back up on their feet. Once they get on their feet they can go even further as to get a Cal Grant that will PAY for ALL of their schooling if they choose to get an education while theyre at it. We have welfare programs as well. And health care, its free, so long as you meet the requirements, which Im pretty damn sure any poor person could meet. One of the co-workers I used to work with always brought her mom up to the States to get surgeries for free that she couldnt afford in Mexico. How about that for health care?

And gun laws? Ha! Its called the 2nd Amendment. Right to Bare Arms. You can only put soo many restrictions on them before you start taking away our constitutional right. Once you start taking those away, what does America then become? Definitely not "home of the free" anymore.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

I have some questions:

*Why is John Kerry taking ideas out of a book, thinking it'll provide a better national security?
*Why is John Kerry so pressed about taking our troops out of Iraq, when we all know that as soon as we do, things will roll down hill creating a bigger 'quagmire'?
*Why is John Kerry saying that he'll fix the Social Security funds, when it REALLY is going to runout by the time i reach retirement age?

I'm sorry, but John Kerry is just running around saying that he's a better candidate because he thinks the Bush Administration screwed up. Ok, thats great, but he hasn't really told anybody what he's going to do to 'unscew it up'. He' just blowing hot air, he hasn't really offered the American people anything that Bush hasn't offered. And parading your war buddies up onto stage, and having your wife open her big obnoxious mouth isn't offering much to the american people except telling them that you have a big ego!


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

you dont need a gun to defend yourself. our country was founded with that amendment and i dont particularly agree it should be a right. guns are designed to kill people not to protect you. our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date. what happens when you allow easy access to firearms? people die, mass murders, kids shoot up schools. the benefits do not justify the lives we lose to guns daily. utah f*cking requires you to own a gun i think.

anyways, take Japan or Singapore for example. although i don't necessarily agree with the strictness and harsh punishments they give out to lawbreakers, both countries are generally more peaceful and have less killings than the US.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Sunman222 said:


> you dont need a gun to defend yourself. our country was founded with that amendment and i dont particularly agree it should be a right. guns are designed to kill people not to protect you. our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date. what happens when you allow easy access to firearms? people die, mass murders, kids shoot up schools. the benefits do not justify the lives we lose to guns daily. utah f*cking requires you to own a gun i think.


My father has a gun for 2 reasons. 
1. Protection for when someone breaks in the house and he needs to protect our family.
2. To go hunting with when we go camping.

Are those NOT legit reasons for a gun? We just happen to have a lot of screwballs in our country that ruin it for the majority.


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

HOACH said:


> > You want to say "voting for Bush is for dummies"---well Im voting Bush and at least I can spell chaos.
> >
> > I dont think I will ever understand society. We go into Iraq and take out a dictator that tortured his own people and we get hated on by the world. Then I read this article in the paper how people expect the US to go into Sudan and help all those people being raped and murdered. But for what? So we can get bad mouthed again? So we can build more enemies than allies? Its all a bunch of bullshit!
> 
> ...


 Actually I believe that the majority of Canadians own guns. So the reason for the high murder rate in America probably stems from something else. Some will blame the frontier/conquest mentality that solves problems by shooting them. Others will blame the liberal laws protecting criminals. I doubt it's the violence on TV, since all western nations have that. I'm not really sure what the reason is.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

Karen, you are right. It is totally justified to own a gun for the right reasons. And its very unfortunate that we have people who ruin it for the rest of us. One of the key problems with reform is that our country is just so damn big and diverse, and since we're a democracy, small things usually aren't an issue. Apparently gun control is a small issue.

Protecting the family - right on
Hunting - Just a comment, I guess it's sport and a means of food, though I don't agree with killing "defenseless" animals.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Sunman222 said:


> guns are designed to kill people not to protect you. our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date. what happens when you allow easy access to firearms? people die, mass murders, kids shoot up schools. the benefits do not justify the lives we lose to guns daily. utah f*cking requires you to own a gun i think.
> 
> anyways, take Japan or Singapore for example. although i don't necessarily agree with the strictness and harsh punishments they give out to lawbreakers, both countries are generally more peaceful and have less killings than the US.


 So i assume you fall under the idea that "People don't kill people, guns do", right? Hm....so you're saying that if an insurgent ran up to you with his ak-47 slung over his shoulder, that the rifle will 'magically' leap into his grasp and unload 15 rounds into you? Or how about you walk into a shoot-out between gang members....you're going to tell me that rival gang members really wanted to hug and pat each other on the back, but the gun just HAPPEN to stand up, walk out in the middle of the street and shot the guy in the ass? Or lets try this scenario, some kid finds his dads gun, and after messing around with the child-safetly locks, and the gun safety itself, he points it at his mom and says "hey mom, look...bang, bang, bang" and then ends up shooting his mom...what, the gun got pissed off at his mom and decided to spit a bullet at her?

Using your arguement, "our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date."...which category should i classify you under? biggest idiot? moron? irresponsible? pyschotic? or crazy? Maybe our country does produce all this, but you know what else our country produces? Men and women who are brave enough to take a bullet for a fellow Marine/Soldier. Men and women who are brave enough to wake up everyday to say "damn, its my duty to protect my country" I guess, this country must've forgotten to produce that bone in your body huh?


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

Comparing Canada's gun murder rate and the U.S's is being halfway fair - Canada has 32 million people, the U.S has 300 million. Also the U.S has some areas that has low education levels and nothing to lose.


----------



## roo (May 28, 2004)

only the smartest survive,

poor democrats


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

ProdigalMarine said:


> Sunman222 said:
> 
> 
> > guns are designed to kill people not to protect you. our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date. what happens when you allow easy access to firearms? people die, mass murders, kids shoot up schools. the benefits do not justify the lives we lose to guns daily. utah f*cking requires you to own a gun i think.
> ...


I think you fail to understand my point because it was pretty clear. Yes, of course "people" kill people. Guns just make it that much easier and quicker.

Your example has no basis here. Since when does some random insurgents comes at me in my house in Oregon with an AK-47? Rival gang members use guns to kill each other cause it's simple and easy. If they didn't have access to guns, they would think twice before the messed with other gangs.

Your funniest example is the kid killing his mom one. Were you trying to prove my point or yours? Cause I sure couldn't tell. Take guns out of every situation you put up and i'm sure the result of death is less likely.

Lets not resort to personal attacks. If you need me to name examples of these "idiots, morons, psycho paths, it won't be too hard. You can classify me as whatever you want, but it only shows your own lack of ability to argue my points.

Thanks for agreeing that our country does "maybe" produce these people. Don't even question my own f*cking patriotism because then you're just being f*cking ignorant. I am the first generation in my family in America and don't you f*cking shove words in my mouth and think you know me. I guess you didn't know that not all the people that serve our forces have this "damn, its my duty to protect my country" attitude. There are many who serve because they couldn't go to college, whether it was a financial problem or they didn't make grades. There are people who quite frankly don't give a sh*t about their life. And there a sick people who join solely to see action and to kill people. Don't make sweeping generalizations either, because then you're arguing nothing.

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE ACTIONS OF TERRORISTS, but they are willing to end their lives for a cause that they feel is right and just in their eyes. They are willing to sacrifice their life so that their families can live. There are other countries that have just as loyal armed forces as we do, or even better. Need an example? cause I know you're gonna ask. North Korea.

Why don't you reread my post, reread your own response, and then see if you don't come off as completely ignorant and illiterate.

Edit: Perhaps it's a problem with understanding my tone, if that is so, I apologize.

- Your fellow Chinese American


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

Damn you sound like your speaking at the democratic convention











Sunman222 said:


> Don't even question my own f*cking patriotism because then you're just being f*cking ignorant.





Sunman222 said:


> Edit: Perhaps it's a problem with understanding my tone, if that is so, I apologize.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Sunman222 said:


> I think you fail to understand my point because it was pretty clear. Yes, of course "people" kill people. Guns just make it that much easier and quicker.
> 
> Your example has no basis here. Since when does some random insurgents comes at me in my house in Oregon with an AK-47? Rival gang members use guns to kill each other cause it's simple and easy. If they didn't have access to guns, they would think twice before the messed with other gangs.
> 
> ...


 First of all, my examples are pretty clear and concise, i just added a tone of sarcasm into it. I stated those examples to illustrate your idea that guns, NOT people, kill. Further more, my example about the child shooting his mom, is about gun safety. I would say that about 85% of gun owners have a child-safety lock on their arms, they also practice some sort of preventive measures to ensure that the children do not get in reach of the weapon...in other words, i was making a joke about how people say that gun-safety laws are "ineffective".

As for personal attacks, it was you who said "our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date", i know that you may or maynot have directed this to anyone in particular, but i still find it an insult. Hence the whole reason why i asked what should i classify you under. As for the whole "people join because their college drop-out" arguement, i would like to say "f*ck you." I joined because i had no where else in life to go. I found college wasn't my thing, i couldn't sit still, couldn't pay attention to the damn teacher for 15 f*cking minutes. I literally "dropped out" of college. I joined because i was looking for something to give me structure in life, something to help me out so i wouldn't wind up like some bumfuck on the street. Dont you preach to me about "being the first generation" in this country, thats f*cking bullshit! I am the first generation in this country! I am the first generation in my family to succeed. I am the first generation in my family to join the military, better yet, i am the first generation of my family to join the United States Marine Corps.....so yea, dont f*cking lecture me about being the first.
You say "these people" dont give a sh*t about their life, so i guess i dont give a sh*t about my life too, huh? I guess i just walk out onto a battlefield and say "sh*t, my life is worthless, i guess i'll take 15 people with me". Yea, f*ck you!

North Korea....you know why they are the way they are? Because we were going to kick the sh*t out of them and win the war! They're pissed because they know that we'll do it all over again...happily!


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

ProdigalMarine said:


> As for personal attacks, it was you who said "our country also produces some of the biggest idiots, morons, irresponsible, psychotic, crazy people to date", i know that you may or maynot have directed this to anyone in particular, but i still find it an insult. Hence the whole reason why i asked what should i classify you under. As for the whole "people join because their college drop-out" arguement, i would like to say "f*ck you." I joined because i had no where else in life to go. I found college wasn't my thing, i couldn't sit still, couldn't pay attention to the damn teacher for 15 f*cking minutes. I literally "dropped out" of college. I joined because i was looking for something to give me structure in life, something to help me out so i wouldn't wind up like some bumfuck on the street. Dont you preach to me about "being the first generation" in this country, thats f*cking bullshit! I am the first generation in this country! I am the first generation in my family to succeed. I am the first generation in my family to join the military, better yet, i am the first generation of my family to join the United States Marine Corps.....so yea, dont f*cking lecture me about being the first.
> You say "these people" dont give a sh*t about their life, so i guess i dont give a sh*t about my life too, huh? I guess i just walk out onto a battlefield and say "sh*t, my life is worthless, i guess i'll take 15 people with me". Yea, f*ck you!
> 
> North Korea....you know why they are the way they are? Because we were going to kick the sh*t out of them and win the war! They're pissed because they know that we'll do it all over again...happily!


Your arguments still prove that people kill people and the method is through "guns".

Cry me a f*cking river if you find it an insult. It is not partly true? I was not directing that remark at anyone in particular or anyone on the board. I'm not my problem you get bent out of shape and feel it's an insult to you.

"As for the whole "people join because their college drop-out" arguement, i would like to say "f*ck you." I joined because i had no where else in life to go. I found college wasn't my thing, i couldn't sit still, couldn't pay attention to the damn teacher for 15 f*cking minutes. I literally "dropped out" of college. I joined because i was looking for something to give me structure in life, something to help me out so i wouldn't wind up like some bumfuck on the street."

Did you just prove my point again? It's not anyone's problem other than your "f*cking" self that you can't sit and listen in class, the basic of all human functions. If you have ADD, i'm f*cking sorry then. But most times, it's your own lack of discipline, which leads me to wonder, why the "f*ck" you joined the armed forces. Great job at dropping out of college, cause there are millions of other MORE deserving kids that never get to go. So you joined looking for something to give you structure in life???? That doesn't sound like the "it's my duty to protect my country" attitude you were falsely preaching. If you needed to join the armed forces to "help" out your "life", you're pretty pathetic. (YES THIS IS A PERSONAL ATTACK)

I'll lecture you if you're going to continue to be ignorant. Perhaps the reason you couldn't stand college is because you can't "f*cking" learn anything from school. I'm wondering how you even got though high school. (AGAIN, PERSONAL ATTACK)

I said there are people who don't give a sh*t about their lives and its "f*cking" true. You don't know jack sh*t about North Korea obviously, so I say "f*ck you" and stop being "f*cking" ignorant. Learn something, research something, anything, quite wasting my time.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

On second thought, i'll elaborate on North Korea, since you probably need someone to teach you something.

American soldiers generally train for what? A few years? Correct me please, cause I don't know much and i'll be the first to admit it. North Korean soldiers however, have trained since they were old enough to carry a gun. Seeing as how the US would have to invade NK, they know their territory better than we do. You start trying that sh*t we did on Iraq, ie. bombs over Baghdad, and you're gonna have serious reprocussions because you are bringing it to the doorsteps of Russia and China, not our best allies. I'm sure NK's got some kind of WMD and will use them. Let's not forget that they would completely walk over SK before we even got there, another thing that won't set too well with Korean Americans. I'm just touching the surface here. But the point is, research your sh*t before you post.

Thanks?

Edit: Feel free to lock this thread, cause it's gone to the shitter


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

I believe all normal, sane people can agree that people kill people using a method, weather its a gun, knife, bomb, hammer, axe, running them over with a car, are using your bare hands, your stilling killing someone, but you can take anyway all those items because a few can't control themselves. I agree guns make it easier to kill, but if someone really wants to kill someone they will find away.










I admit I haven't read all these posts, but how did we get on North Korea? NK is a tricking area IMO, you have China, Russia, which aren't very friendly anyway and plus China wants Taiwans ass which could push China and North Korea to become more friendly allies. Seoul would be crushed before the U.S could really help out, and plus who the hell would help us out anyway right now, If China and North Korea started there sh*t?


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

North Korea has been and continues to be communist since the Soviet Union spread communism all over Europe and Asia. They were supplied weapons by the Soviets during the Korean War. So they do have a relationship already with Russia.

The US has always stated that they didn't like communism and wanted to stop or contain it. Which is why we went into Korea and Vietnam, only to get OUR asses kicked. Sure communism doesn't float the US's boat, but seriously, ever think other countries think the same way about capitalism or democracy?

Anyways, to not digress further, the US currently is upset about North Korea reopening nuclear facilities. Particularly because NK isn't really telling us much about them and won't allow UN inspectors to do their jobs. They are said to be capable of producing weapons grade plutonium, which is used to make nukes. It's the same logic we used to justify us going into Iraq. Guess what? We didn't find jack sh*t. We don't know if NK is actually proliferating the use of nuclear weapons, but we do know that they hate us and their current leader is serious about going to war with any country that continues to threaten them. How they even got the technology? Well, the Soviet Union sold, gave, whatever, plans and information to their surrounding countries. This explains why Pakistan and India both have a few nukes, enough to destroy both of them and parts of China.

So in short, it's mainly because we feel that they are a threat because they COULD have "WMDs".

Here's my main fear for us as a nation. We don't even know all the countries let alone, the terrorist organizations that could or already have WMDs. I forgot the title, but it was the movie with Ben Affleck or whatever. There was a nuke in a vending machine at some sporting event and it blew. Although with our national security, you never know what could possibly slip by our borders. We developed this technology to scare the Soviets out of communism, we used it on Japan and consequently won WWII. Now it has come back to bite us in the ass because these countries that hate us, want this technology as a threat against us. The UN is a better version of the League of Nations (or whatever, its history), however they do stress that the world needs to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons as well as chemical and biological. But it doesn't stop nations that aren't even members in the UN. I reality is serious. The US alone has enough nuclear weapons to blow up the entire earth about a hundred times (don't quote me on it). If one country uses it, other countries will retaliate and set off a chain reaction to destroy the world. Ever see the "End of the World" flash movie? Great stuff.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Sunman222 said:


> Your arguments still prove that people kill people and the method is through "guns".
> 
> Cry me a f*cking river if you find it an insult. It is not partly true? I was not directing that remark at anyone in particular or anyone on the board. I'm not my problem you get bent out of shape and feel it's an insult to you.
> 
> ...


 Your arguement is that guns kill people
My arguement is that people kill people

I proved...well, tried to illustrate, that people are the reason that other people die, not guns. You proved that by saying the word "f*ck" numerous times accomplished nothing. You also proved that by personally attacking me that you lack the intelligence to carry out a well thought-out arguement.

As for you seeing that its "pathetic" that i joined the military for structure, i wonder how you feel about the other "pathetic" men and women who joined the services for structure. I guess they TOO are pathetic in their own little ways.



> American soldiers generally train for what? A few years? Correct me please, cause I don't know much and i'll be the first to admit it. North Korean soldiers however, have trained since they were old enough to carry a gun. Seeing as how the US would have to invade NK, they know their territory better than we do. You start trying that sh*t we did on Iraq, ie. bombs over Baghdad, and you're gonna have serious reprocussions because you are bringing it to the doorsteps of Russia and China, not our best allies. I'm sure NK's got some kind of WMD and will use them. Let's not forget that they would completely walk over SK before we even got there, another thing that won't set too well with Korean Americans. I'm just touching the surface here. But the point is, research your sh*t before you post.


I'm quite aware that we're on thin-ice with china due to the taiwan tug-of-war. We supply taiwan with arms, china doesn't like it because it still feels that taiwan is still apart of its republic. No research huh? 
If we did ever engage with N. Korea, we have the backings of S. Korea and about a good 1 million of their armed forces. Also, during 1954-ish?, US forces under the command of General MacArthur had pretty much push back North Korea to the most northern part of the peninsula. If the US would've pushed on further, we would've taken out the North Korean regime, but instead we got ahead of ourselves and pulled back. No research huh?


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

ProdigalMarine said:


> Your arguement is that guns kill people
> My arguement is that people kill people
> 
> I proved...well, tried to illustrate, that people are the reason that other people die, not guns. You proved that by saying the word "f*ck" numerous times accomplished nothing. You also proved that by personally attacking me that you lack the intelligence to carry out a well thought-out arguement.
> ...


 And my argument is that people kill people, and guns make it SO much easier. Do you get that in your head? Probably not, because you "can't pay attention" to people.

Your illustrations didn't follow your points. All of those examples including guns. Wow nice support for yourself on that one buddy.

I like to use the word f*ck, it's part of my daily vocab. I also see that you enjoy using it as well. So why don't we just use it whenever we feel its necessary. Is that okay with you? Or do I "insult" you? Boo "f*cking" hoo.

"You also proved that by personally attacking me that you lack the intelligence to carry out a well thought-out arguement."

Wow, you pulled a fast one there buddy. Thanks for using my own words for yourself. Some real thought put into that one ehh?? I've happy with my arguments, you seen to be the only one having such a hard time grasping them.

Give me the percentage of people who join the armed forces for structure and if it measures up, i'll agree with you there buddy. But not until you prove sh*t, because you are full of it.

Research? That's current "f*cking" news, sorry to burst your bubble. Perhaps you are correct about the Korean War as I really don't have much knowledge on that war in particular (Hey look, I admitted that I didn't really know, you can too!) Have you even been to Korea? I have visited the DMZ explicitly and I even fear for my own life as an American on the borders of one of our "axis of evil" countries. The South Koreans fear NK like you wouldn't believe. Your talking about South Korean soldiers that haven't seen action anywhere near the extent that the US has. I can't prove it because it hasn't happened, but NK will run over SK in a short period. You wonder why the US entered into the Korean War? Exactly, I know you get it now right? SK would have been utterly destroyed back in the 1950s.

I'm glad you know a bit of history, although not too extensive. Seeing as how you joined the armed forces, I would expect more from you bud.

Peace


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

North Korea & China are badass opponents, fighting Koreans and Chinese isn't like fighting the Iraqis at all. I think most of us can agree something is bound to burst in Asia very soon, and its going to be pure hell, and I'm drafting age.







We certainally live on a fucked up planet.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

I feel for you there man. I'm also at drafting age and i'm also Asian. Which has its advantages and drawbacks. Advantage: Jump ranks for how proficient you are in foreign languages.

Edit: Oh I see you are viewing the page and probably typing up a response. Looking forward to hearing from ya!

Ever see that picture, although not in anyways P.C. or acceptable, but it basically read "winning an argument on the internet, is like a retard winning the special olympics".

In a critical thinking class I took back in middle school, arguments become circular as soon as one side resorts to personal attacks and the other side basically by default, must reply in a similar fashion. Quite interesting, wouldn't you say?


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Got deployed for a period of 60 days out there in Korea. Visited the DMZ twice. Trained with the ROK-Marines near the DMZ. Enough said!


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

I'm a avarage white american male, food, water and girls is the only thing I really need, same goes for most living things on the planet if you think about it, you don't really need anything else.

Hopefully the Asia troubles can be resolved, thats probally wishful thinking on my part.

I haven't seen the picture, but I've heard people say it.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

You know there is a difference when your a civilian versus a soldier. Keep that in mind. You have a different mindset and what I'm getting is that you believe the US capable of going into any nation and completely wasting them without struggle, as you have stated about NK.

So very cool that you have been there, for quite a long period, and got training. Great experience for you.

Enough said? What did you say? No hard feelings dude, perhaps if you spent as much time as me thinking and writing these responses, I wouldn't be so quick to dissect them. And perhaps they would better get your views across in a more civilized and mature manner.


----------



## Revolt (Jun 26, 2004)

User said:


> I'm a avarage white american male, food, water and girls is the only thing I really need, same goes for most living things on the planet if you think about it, you don't really need anything else.
> 
> Hopefully the Asia troubles can be resolved, thats probally wishful thinking on my part.
> 
> I haven't seen the picture, but I've heard people say it.


Brillant, couldn't have said it better myself, back to the basics, food, water, and chicks.














Might want to throw in a razor though, one of the two sides will need it IMO.














j/p



> Got deployed for a period of 60 days out there in Korea. Visited the DMZ twice. Trained with the ROK-Marines near the DMZ. Enough said!


Great man, I respect you for it, but do you really want to fight the Koreans though?

----

I to am at the drafting age, although I must say I'm not scared. I must be honest though, I would hate to die in Korea and or China, are Iraq for that matter







and being PWO with Korea are China would suck so bad - pure torture.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

someone watched 007 Die Another Day! just kidding man. and before you ask, yeah i'm bored.


----------



## doctorvtec (May 15, 2004)

Hey, f*ck it, we Americans will be more then happy to rebuild Iraq. We got their oil, right? I mean, that is the only reason we helped them, right?


----------



## User (May 31, 2004)

> someone watched 007 Die Another Day! just kidding man. and before you ask, yeah i'm bored.


I believe we all are











> Hey, f*ck it, we Americans will be more then happy to rebuild Iraq. We got their oil, right? I mean, that is the only reason we helped them, right?


Its to late, I'm to tired, and to loaded on sinus medication.... I can't respond.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

User said:


> Its to late, I'm to tired, and to loaded on sinus medication.... I can't respond.


 suprisingly enough, thats how my face is after i've taken some meds


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

doctorvtec said:


> Hey, f*ck it, we Americans will be more then happy to rebuild Iraq. We got their oil, right? I mean, that is the only reason we helped them, right?


 If you did a little research, youd find that Iraq is not a top supplier of oil to the US. In fact in petrolium alone, they rank 2nd to the bottom in supplying us with it. So to say that is absurd.


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

We won't hear the real reason until Bush is out of office. The ones that you think are simply justifications. And even Bush couldn't even get that right!


----------



## Atlanta Braves Baby! (Mar 12, 2003)




----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

elTwitcho said:


> Judazz, you're doing a great job bro, but it's utterly pointless. You're arguing logic with people who'll value rhetoric above all else and you're not going to get anywhere. You might come up with a very valid argument about why ousting Saddam has done nothing but to destabilize the middle east but you're just going to get "Saddam was a c*ck sucker and america is safer now just because we are" as comebacks. Good job anyways, but oh well.
> 
> And don't even bother with the "learn your nations history" line. Somehow you'll get arguments that shooting up your own boat in the Tonkin gulf so you could go kill 2.5 million viets, 50 thousand americans and cause countless devastation was a totally good idea that helped the world. Or that f*cking up the horn of africa was in everyone's best interests. Or that starting the school of the Americas so South Americans could terrorize themselves is totally helpful. Or... well you get the idea.


 Thanks...

The saddest part: I'm not even really choosing sides - I try to uphold that there's not just the American version: there are two sides, one of which is absent in the US - either because of rational selection or by censorship)
But bias, prejudice and failing to read words as they are written (intentionally or not) seems to make deaf, dumb and blind...

Diddye: again, it's not my job to patch up the flaws in your educational system: if your library can't fill in the blanks (or isn't allowed to), try the internet...
Or keep dishing up the same old empty right-wing rhetoric over and over again: I can't be bothered


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Judazzz said:


> elTwitcho said:
> 
> 
> > Judazz, you're doing a great job bro, but it's utterly pointless. You're arguing logic with people who'll value rhetoric above all else and you're not going to get anywhere. You might come up with a very valid argument about why ousting Saddam has done nothing but to destabilize the middle east but you're just going to get "Saddam was a c*ck sucker and america is safer now just because we are" as comebacks. Good job anyways, but oh well.
> ...


My point isn't about if there is a lack of education in our schools or books, but when a debate is going on, it would be nice to give answer or links instead of "go look back in your books". What does that solve? Its not specific for one, and isn't very convincing of an argument. And about our education system, the general public may not be very well- schooled but dont ever doubt our system b/c we have the top colleges in the world.


----------

