# Do you want Bush to



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

Just thought I'd try this so I can start placing my bets...


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

no


----------



## reservoirdog51 (Aug 18, 2003)

yes


----------



## Sunman222 (Apr 19, 2003)

nope, no more monkey in office plz


----------



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

reservoirdog51 said:


> yes


 So why didn't you vote? I know this isn't an election, but it's starting to look a lot like it. People really want someone to win or lose, but then they don't vote.


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)




----------



## Winkyee (Feb 17, 2003)

He's gotta go.


----------



## RhomZilla (Feb 12, 2003)

Hell no!!! After all the shiet hes gotten America into, he's planning to give 85 million more to aid Iraqw??? :finger: Bush can kiss my Rump(sfeld) and bob on my Dick Chaney!!


----------



## pamonster (Jun 26, 2003)

i dont think so hehe


----------



## thoroughbred (Mar 14, 2003)

UMM NO WISH BILL COULD SERVE AGAIN


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

insert soap box speech

War costs money. And it wouldn't be nearly as much if Billy didn't cut the military down to almost nothing. At the current time, George is the only person worth voting for. If Colin Powell ran, he would have my vote. 
As for Billy, I don't understand how people can want to elect a person who is a complete and total liar. Bill was all amout the pocket book and not the future. It's great when you can pump up the economy for 8 yrs with short termed plans and then blame it on the next person when it goes down.

Bottom line, Bill applies band aids. Like the Tomahawk missle attacks that did nothing more than blow up a few people. George is willing to take the problem out, a la Iraqi and Afganistan.

Think long term

/soap box speech


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

Yes.

Bill Clinton caused 9/11.

Too bad all you people that are sayng no..... The Democrats dont have a f*cking candidate who can beat him.

Hillary will not run because she has stated she doesnt wanna run until 2008 and not against and incumbent.

Gore will not run because he will ruin it for Hillary...

Dean will NEVER BEAT bush because hes waaaay to radical....

Good luck fockers!


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

TonyTurbo29 said:


> insert soap box speech
> 
> War costs money. And it wouldn't be nearly as much if Billy didn't cut the military down to almost nothing. At the current time, George is the only person worth voting for. If Colin Powell ran, he would have my vote.
> As for Billy, I don't understand how people can want to elect a person who is a complete and total liar. Bill was all amout the pocket book and not the future. It's great when you can pump up the economy for 8 yrs with short termed plans and then blame it on the next person when it goes down.
> ...


 To expound on your fact about our friend Bill:



> President Clintons foreign travel cost the American taxpayers an estimated $500 million over his eight years.





> For example on Clintons trip to Africa, the Air Mobility Command flew 144 cargo missions transporting several hundred passengers amd nearly 6.5 million points of cargo. The Africa trip alon cost taxpayers at least $43 million


He flew so much to escape the turmol of all his scandals at home. None of his trips had a real or valuable purpose. His trips cost the military millions and severly inhibited their ability to fly regular and much needed missions for national security.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

Im for balanced power in politics, and it seems to be best achieved with a democratic president and republican majorities in the house and senate. I hate the socialist ideals of democrats, yet at the same time we have been more prosperous when a republican is not in office. Everybody liked clinton which is why is was effective, however bush is a little pencil neck... GO ARNOLD!

Im looking forward to the next election when we see juliani running for president.


----------



## RhomZilla (Feb 12, 2003)

Xenon said:


> Yes.
> 
> Bill Clinton caused 9/11.
> 
> ...


 I understand all this.. actually read about it someplace. Its true that Billy did do this to us, also knew about the 2 towers yrs before it happened. But aside from what the public knows.. just the way Bush handles shiet, how he states his viewpoints and how he makes his speeches.







Makes you wonder why the world doesnt look up to us as before.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Xenon said:


> Yes.
> 
> Bill Clinton caused 9/11.


Good ol Billy Clinton did cause 9/11 cause he destroyed our CIA. The CIA that the Bush before him built up. Clinton was an idiot while in office and didnt do any good. Bush, well he pisses me off. Hes way too close with good ol' Kennith Laye. Bush F'ed over California and pretty much said FU to us during our "energy crisis." So, in other words we need a different president. Im kind of iffy on Hillary becoming president. I dont know how well of a politician she is...


----------



## caazi (Jul 28, 2003)

I'd like a black president soon.


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

caazi said:


> I'd like a black president soon.


Marion Berry???...... Puff Puff Pass.....

All kidding aside, if Gen. Colin Powell would run. I could gaurentee his Victory. He is extreamly smart and would do a terrific job. He knows and respects the military, and his way around D.C. politics. My father and him shot the sh*t back in the day at the Pentagon and he thinks the same.
As of current, he is the only Black Man that has a snow balls chance in hell of becoming president, IMHO.


----------



## LaZy (Jun 17, 2003)

HeLLLL No!!!


----------



## STIFFY (Jul 9, 2003)

thoroughbred said:


> UMM NO WISH BILL COULD SERVE AGAIN


 Hell no! he is the reason we got into Iraq and had 911 in the first place. He was handed Bin Laden on a silver platter and turned him down. A cue was organized against sadam and would have been successfull but good old bill wouldnt help the iraq rebels with air support. Futher more where was bill during Nam. Oh thats right he dodged the draft by going Russia. Just look at Cali. its a prime example of how bad the Ds have fucked up this nation. All the f*cking money they spend on wellfare keeps people from getting jobs cuz they make a living out of wellfare and unemployment, and the money and medical aid they give illegal aliens should be put in our schools. Ds are all about buying votes to get into office, not the well being of america.


----------



## tecknik (Jul 18, 2003)

Definately NOT!


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Hell no!!!

The world will be better off without that dumbass...


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

Another note to Clinton. Before Clinton the US Military had been dispatched on roughly 8 foregin campaign. During the Clinton administration our military was dispatched to no less than 40 foreign locations. All this while downsizing the military nearly by half.

Rhomzilla - Are you kidding me? You dont want him back because of the way he talks? Dig up your tapes of 9-11 when Bush made that impromptu speech at Ground Zero....that was the real Bush....you want him out of the Whitehouse because he doesnt read scripted speeches well!!?!?! Sheesh.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

kawi ryder said:


> thoroughbred said:
> 
> 
> > UMM NO WISH BILL COULD SERVE AGAIN
> ...


 Actually, you got to give Clinton credit about the whole welfare thing. He was the one that put limits on welfare where you could on be on it for so long and after that you get cut off and are forced to find a job.

Bush is waaaaay to conservative and old-fashioned for me. An example of this is him trying to overturn Roe v. Wade. If you dont know what that is, basically hes trying to make abortions illegal.


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

Hail Bush.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Xenon said:


> Hail Bush.


 You only say that because you used to be a Texan...


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

I saw that because I know for a fact Gore would have f'ed up the post 9/11 world. At least Bush has had some balls and is a man of his word.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Yeah hes a man of his word...so where are the weapons of mass destruction he always talked about


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Yeah hes a man of his word...so where are the weapons of mass destruction he always talked about


No, no, no, you get it all mixed up, Karen - those liars were the English: the Americans just wanted to liberate them poor Iraqi's...







Honestly.....


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> Ms_Nattereri said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah hes a man of his word...so where are the weapons of mass destruction he always talked about
> ...










I knew that


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

i dont see what the big f'ing deal about weapons of mass destruction is. of course it was just a reason to invade, whether they exist or not. the fact is, the DID exist and even if they didn't they COULD and if they did, Saddam would be a prime candidate to use them. or Uday or Qusay. the point isnt there are X number of nukes here and X amounts of VX gas there, the point is Saddam was a ruthless dictator and his successor would have been even worse. i cant believe Saddam's reign wasn't compared to apartheid, as his religious minority (Shiite?) oppressed the majority (Sunni?). I guess civil rights only apply to race, not ethnicity or religion.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

HELL NO!!!! BUSH IS AN EVIL CORRUPT PUNK THAT ALLREADY SCREWED UP THE WORLD. WHY DO PEOPLE CONTINUE TO SAY THAT IRAQ HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION WHEN WE NEVER FOUND ANY. THATS RIGHT DONT LET OUR GOV MISLEAD YOU NOBODY EVER FOUND ANY WMD IN IRAQ. THE CLOSEST THING TO WMD THEY FOUND WAS A "POSSIBLE" MANUFACTURING PLANT BUT IT WAS LOCATED IN KURDISH CONTROLLED IRAQ SO SADDAM HAD NO ACCESS TO IT WHATSOEVER SO HE COULDNT BE THE ONE RESPOSNIBLE FOR IT.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

FIRST OF ALL IF CLINTON KNEW ABOUT 9/11 YEARS BEFORE IT HAPPENED THEN THAT MEANS THAT BUSH ALSO KNEW THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE ATTACKED SO BUSH WOULD BE EVEN MORE GUILTY SINCE HE KNEW AND WAS IN POWER AND DID NOTHING. ALSO SADDAM AND OSAMA WOULD NEVER BE AN ISSUE IF THE FIRST BUSH TOOK SADDAM OUT OF POWER WHEN HE WAS SUPPPOSED TO AFTER THE GULF WAR. MANY OF YOU DONT WANT TO ADMIT THIS BUT IT IS A DOCUMENTED FACT THAT THE BUSH FAMILY AND OSAMA BIN LADENS FAMILY USED TO BE CLOSE AND DID BUSINESS TOGETHER.BUSH NEVER CAUGHT BIN LADEN OR SADDAM YET HE MANAGED TO PUNISH THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST FOR WHAT A FEW SICK GUYS DID. HOW COULD SOME OF YOU WANT HIM STILL IN POWER. BUSH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR KILLING MORE PEOPLE THAN SADDAM AND OSAMA COMBINED.


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

when you choose to pick up an AK-47 and fight for Sadam or Osama, you are endorsing what they do and therefore are as bad as them. Bush did not send suicide bombers into Iraqi or Afghani places of busniess, hospitals or schools. He did not send military units in with orders to destroy civilian property and lives. Military action against a hostile regime can in no way be compared to flying a plane into a civilian structure.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

TRUE BUSH NEVER SENT SUICED BOMBERS IN BUT HE DID DROP AN ESTIMATED 10,000 BOMBS ON THE CITY OF BAGHDAD. JUST BECAUSE THEYRE CALLED SMART BOMBS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE PERFECTLY ACCURATE THE SMART BOMBS HIT THEIR TARGET BETWEEN 92 AND 95 PERCENT OF THE TIME SO THAT MEANS AROUND 800 OF THE BOMBS MISSED THEIR TARGETS AND HIT CIVILIANS. BEFORE YOU START USING 9/11 AS AN EXCUSE TO ATTACK IRAQ YOU SHOULD REALIZE THAT OSAMA AND SADDAM ARE NOT THE SAME PERSON. OSAMA AND AL QUAEDA ATTACKED US AND THEIR IS NO PROOF THAT SADDAM HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. SADDAM IS A RUTHLESS LEADER THAT WAS VOTED INTO POWER BUT IF HE WAS REALLY THAT BAD THEN WOULDNT HE HAVE USED THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION THAT OUR GOV CLAIMED HE HAD.


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

Really? Saddam and Osama aren't the same person? Wow! You learn something new everyday!

September 11th can be used as an excuse to attack any state that harbors, supports or enables terrorism, in my book. And Saddam was voted into power, yes, by something ridiculous like 99.9% of the vote. If someone held a gun to your head, would you vote for Bush? And you know what? Saddam is a smart guy. You can't be a dumbass and run a nation for however many years while teetering on the brink of becoming a rogue state without being cunning and intellegent. Uday and Qusay, on the other hand, are both f*cking nuts and they would be the heir to any Iraqi weapons or means of producing weapons. I generally try to avoid topics of foreign policy and military engagement, because I don't really delve deep enough into the situation to have a 100% solid, valid opinion that I can back up with sound examples, but in this case, if Bush wants to dismantle any country that has the means and desire to kill me when I'm at work or at home or at the gym, I am going to give him the green light.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

rday said:


> If someone held a gun to your head, would you vote for Bush?


 Dude, you guys have Florida: no need for voting at gunpoint...


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

So any country with weapons to attack and dislike towards us should be destroyed? So according to you we should attack north korea and we should have attacked russia during the cold war? so should we have attacked china a couple of years back when there was tension between us too? Just because a country has the means to attack us and the possible desire does not give us any right to destroy them first.


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

yeah, that whole florida thing was ridiculous. if you're too stupid/senile/whatever to vote for the right person the first time, you have no business contributing to who is going to lead the country. and the whole thing with the little punched hole still hanging on and whether or not that constitutes a vote? these people all need their asses kicked.


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

if whoever in charge feels that they are enough of a threat that they need to be stopped than its good enough for me. if they decide to take down n. korea, so be it. they are getting a bit too big for their britches anyway. they are a perfect example of the brink of rogue nation. Kim Johng or whatever his name is is a crazy bastard.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

True the whole florida thing was ridiculous but has anyone actually seen the ballot. I think its a little suspicious how certain candidates names did not correctly line up to the correct hole. It might be just a big accident but it sounds suspicious that it happened in the state that bush's brother is in charge of. Rday you never finished my question do you think that we should have gone to war with russia or china or do your beliefs only apply to smaller countries that can barely defend themselves. If you look at the opinion of the people of the entire world then you will see that we are no longer the good guys but we are looked at as the biggest threat to world peace.


----------



## EMJAY (Feb 27, 2003)

i think bush is the one who got us in deeo sh*t years ago and is trying to finish it off now. he's also the only one to get us out of it.

just becasue there is a new american president, doesn't mean that the counrties that have beef with us now will stop when we get a new president, even though that new person isn't responsible for what happend when bush was president.

if another president is elected there may be more trouble. bush got everyone deep into this and lets hope he'll pull out.

i also dont get how this sh*t works, but the way i look at it, the votes that are set up its not should we invade iraq:
yes or no, 
it's when we invade iraq should we... whatever. you get the point, he mold the votes to make people think we are really free within democracy.

thats a pretty generic example. but it gets deeper than that. thats just what i think.


----------



## Kory (Jun 5, 2003)

Bush is a f*cking moron who can't deliver a speech without pausing for 5 seconds after every other word. (Must be hard to read those note cards of pre-written speeches). I love his new plan how he wants to cut down all the trees in the western united states because "terrorist" are going to start forest fires and the cutting of the trees down will help are economy. Come on you have to be f*cking kidding me this is suppose to be the leader of the free world and he comes of with this bull sh*t. Anyone with an elementary school education can see why that is freaking retarded.

Oh and Bush shouldn't even be the president Gore won the popular vote. (Another f*ck up in our wonderful system)


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

akio525 said:


> TRUE BUSH NEVER SENT SUICED BOMBERS IN BUT HE DID DROP AN ESTIMATED 10,000 BOMBS ON THE CITY OF BAGHDAD. JUST BECAUSE THEYRE CALLED SMART BOMBS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE PERFECTLY ACCURATE THE SMART BOMBS HIT THEIR TARGET BETWEEN 92 AND 95 PERCENT OF THE TIME SO THAT MEANS AROUND 800 OF THE BOMBS MISSED THEIR TARGETS AND HIT CIVILIANS. BEFORE YOU START USING 9/11 AS AN EXCUSE TO ATTACK IRAQ YOU SHOULD REALIZE THAT OSAMA AND SADDAM ARE NOT THE SAME PERSON. OSAMA AND AL QUAEDA ATTACKED US AND THEIR IS NO PROOF THAT SADDAM HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. SADDAM IS A RUTHLESS LEADER THAT WAS VOTED INTO POWER BUT IF HE WAS REALLY THAT BAD THEN WOULDNT HE HAVE USED THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION THAT OUR GOV CLAIMED HE HAD.


 is all caps really necessary? It is really hard on the eyes.


----------



## mtx1 (May 21, 2003)

Bush all the way! (dont feel like arguing but i say alot about what the others are saying about why to keep him in office!)


----------



## STIFFY (Jul 9, 2003)

akio525 are you a terrorist or something? You really have no idea what you are talking about. bush killing more ppl than saddam and bin laden combined? that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard. bush doesnt gas his own people. he doesnt torture Olympic athletes who dont perform to his satisfaction. How can anyone even say that saddam was voted into office. He forced his way in. all that crap about a free vote was bull sh*t. Why don’t all you haters go live in Afghanistan or some bull sh*t like that. If you dont like the USA then get the f*ck out!


----------



## JesseD (Mar 26, 2003)

kawi ryder said:


> akio525 are you a terrorist or something? You really have no idea what you are talking about. bush killing more ppl than saddam and bin laden combined? that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard. bush doesnt gas his own people. he doesnt torture Olympic athletes who dont perform to his satisfaction. How can anyone even say that saddam was voted into office. He forced his way in. all that crap about a free vote was bull sh*t. Why don't all you haters go live in Afghanistan or some bull sh*t like that. If you dont like the USA then get the f*ck out!


 i couldnt have said that better myself.









in war there are always going to be casualties, but that is what had to be done to get out the bad. many people in afganistan were thrilled when saddam and osama were taken out. they could finaly live their life without fear. its not like we just blew the sh*t out of the whole country and that was that. it is being rebuilt.

and as far as the comment by akio525 stating "SMART BOMBS HIT THEIR TARGET BETWEEN 92 AND 95 PERCENT OF THE TIME SO THAT MEANS AROUND 800 OF THE BOMBS MISSED THEIR TARGETS AND HIT CIVILIANS"...i really dont knwo where u got that information, but i know that smart bombs are pretty damn accurate. also, *even* if that is accurate information, that does not mean that 92-95% of the bombs hit accuratley and the other 8-5% hit 1000 yards away.









800-500 bombs being "off" isn't bad out of 10,000...in my opinion.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

kawi ryder said:


> akio525 are you a terrorist or something? You really have no idea what you are talking about. bush killing more ppl than saddam and bin laden combined? that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard. bush doesnt gas his own people. he doesnt torture Olympic athletes who dont perform to his satisfaction. How can anyone even say that saddam was voted into office. He forced his way in. all that crap about a free vote was bull sh*t. Why don't all you haters go live in Afghanistan or some bull sh*t like that. If you dont like the USA then get the f*ck out!


 Typical response....








If you aren't with us, you're a terrorist sympathisant (no alternatives available), and should get the f*ck out of here!



JesseD said:


> 800-500 bombs being "off" isn't bad out of 10,000...in my opinion.


Besides, it's only Iraqi's (and Afgani's, and Serbs, and Chinese, and... , and....) - mostly civilians btw. - that pay the price, so who gives a f*ck, eh? I guess the fact that their numbers are in the 1000's is unimportant either?


----------



## Raptor (Jan 3, 2003)

Bil has the best track record. !6 trs of republican horse sh*t, and not one could get the economy going.







We were out of debt, now we are going back in the hole where reagan and his toady put us. Bush junior put 2 oil companies down, Thanks to bad management. BILL DID NOT TAKE POWER AWAY FROM THE CIA< REAGAN DID.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

kawi ryder........So anybody that doesnt believe the way you and bush does is a terrorist and should get out? I thought I had the freedom of speech in this country maybe i was wrong. Not only did bush sentance more people to die by execution than any other governor of texas before but the bush family IS responsible for more people dying through both gulf wars. Gassing his own people was bad .....so why did bush sr. leave such a sick dictator in power even after the gulf war when he had a chance? Torturing olympic atheletes????.... How many atheletes could there have possibly been for iraq.... 2 maybe 3? We probably have more atheletes die every year from steroids and ephedrine. Saddam was voted into power as fairly as bush ........ the only difference was saddam actually had the majority votes.

Jesse D ... have you even seen recent news about the so called rebuilding of afghansitan. There still fighting the taliban they havent rebuilt crap this whole time. People in afghanistan are not living free or without fear. I got the figures on smart bombs from some army general that said it on cnn. Just think about the damage that would be caused to a city like new york if 500-800 bombs were randomly dropped on it. weve all seen what 2 airplanes can do to a city just imagine 500-800 of those. Is this an acceptable amount of casualties for any war let alone one that can be avoided.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Raptor said:


> Bil has the best track record. !6 trs of republican horse sh*t, and *not one could get the economy going.*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 So Im gonna take it your insinuating that good ol Bill made our economy prosper, correct? Based on that assumption, it is a typical response from the American people, but also very wrong. What happens after every war?! The economy prospers! Who was president and at war right before Clinton? Bush Sr. And what war was he fighting at the time before his term ended? The Gulf War. He never got to serve his 2nd term as president to enjoy the economy he would have made. Bill Clinton did. Which is all typical in American history if you look back. All presidents that took over after a war, usually have a good name because of the way our economy prospered afterward. And its not just America's economy that prospers like this after war. Germany, as well as many other countries have.

Regan was before Bush Sr. And it was Bush Sr. who built up the CIA. And it was the Clinton Administration that practically trashed it. Currently, Bush Jr. is working on it getting back to where it used to be.


----------



## etalon9100 (Jul 4, 2003)

There are still too many unknowns...

It seems to me that there was quite a lot of anger/finger pointing after Sept. 11 took place. Questions on why this had to happen, how come we didn't stop this before it happened, we knew of Osama's intentions.. etc. etc. Well, if we wanted to prevent Sept. 11, we would have had to barge into another country(s) and start looking for Al Queda members. This of course, would mean some form of war. Would Bush/Clinton have been bashed for doing this? Having our troops put into this kind of action? Possibly.

And after Sept. 11, Bush stated he would fight terrorism; everyone applauded. Isn't that what he's doing now? Isn't Saddam Hussein a big picture when it comes to terrorism? It seems like Bush is following his initial plans. I would think that Osama would have tried to incorporate Saddam into his intentions.. Saddam would have LOVED to have Osama's money.

Possibly, other tragedies that were on the plans have now been prevented?? We obviously will never know this.

In my own honest opinion, we'll never rid the World of terrorism. Too many scumbags are set and waiting for the chance to take over these types of roles.


----------



## fishofury (May 10, 2003)

All I have to say is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

my favorite thing about anti-war/anti-bush people is that their viewpoints are based on over simplified catch phrases and ideas (no war for oil, bush is an imperialist) that in no way consider the complex world politics involved. saying "Bush is gay" or "Bush sucks" is in no way a compelling argument for whether he should or should not be re-elected.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Bush over all is a good president. HOWEVER, I dont like his method of "preventing forest fires" or his idea of making abortions illegal AGAIN. There are many other things that hes done Im not to fond of...


----------



## rday (Mar 10, 2003)

one of the things i like most about bush that ignorant people actually criticize is that he has a really good cabinet and he actually listens to them. I think the ideal situation is to have a mediocre-to-decent president that knows his limitations and surrounds himself with people who are at the forefront of their fields. 2 heads (or 20) are better than 1.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

RDAY why do you continue to insult people yet fail to give reasoning to your own beliefs. Bush has a good cabinet? maybe a few members but the main ones like cheney ,rumsfeld, and candoleeza rice have an even more corrupt past than bush if you did some research. your catch phrase of 20 heads are better than one is true but not when you have 20 people all trying to satisfy their own personal needs instead of whats best for the country.

Ms nattereri if you dont like how he handled the forest fires or abortion exactly why do you think hes a good president? he hasnt caught saddam or osama..... he raised our gas prices to rediculous levels......... the majority of the worlds population dont like us now..... i havent seen any signs of our economy really improving and if it did then it was due to the lowered interest rates that were offered after the 2nd gulf war. Etalon is right that we will never be rid of terrorism because every terrorist we kill or civilian we accidentally kill ...... 10 more terrorists will take his place. just like every time a US soldier is killed over there often his family and friends start hating arabs.


----------



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

rday said:


> my favorite thing about anti-war/anti-bush people is that their viewpoints are based on over simplified catch phrases and ideas (no war for oil, bush is an imperialist) that in no way consider the complex world politics involved. saying "Bush is gay" or "Bush sucks" is in no way a compelling argument for whether he should or should not be re-elected.


 Hows bout, he's a worthless ******* assclown with the IQ of a steer?


----------



## STIFFY (Jul 9, 2003)

rday said:


> my favorite thing about anti-war/anti-bush people is that their viewpoints are based on over simplified catch phrases and ideas (no war for oil, bush is an imperialist) that in no way consider the complex world politics involved. saying "Bush is gay" or "Bush sucks" is in no way a compelling argument for whether he should or should not be re-elected.


 I think you said it best. The Ds really have no argument when it comes to things like this. They will bring up arguments like bush going in w/o un approval when clinton did they same thing. Oh but I guess its different if he only fired more cruse misiles than in the entire gulf war. They argure that bush sr. didnt finish the job. If I remember correctly the un resolution didnt call for going all the way and killing him. It would have been a great thing if they did but then every D out there would have trashed the pres. at the time and now they just complain about how we didnt. You really can not win with these kind of people. I just get a kick out of it every time they try to bring up an argument.


----------



## i shroom i (Aug 23, 2003)

wtf bush is great and rhom wtf whats he gotten us into its not his fault a iraq ***** wanted to f*ck with us and his sons paid for it so...... the only bad thing he did was not kill them all..


----------



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

i shroom i said:


> wtf bush is great and rhom wtf whats he gotten us into its not his fault a iraq ***** wanted to f*ck with us and his sons paid for it so...... the only bad thing he did was not kill them all..


So have the shrooms fried your brain, or have you just always been a moron?


----------



## Kory (Jun 5, 2003)

lmao


----------



## AzNP (May 21, 2003)

i just want to know y attak iraq now and not before???
weapons of mass destruction? where r they?
f****t saddam is ruthless? didnt they know that long ago so y didnt they put a stop before?? lot more ruthless ppl r everywhere, lot more ppl r suffering in africa and korea!
and where da hellllll is osama


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

AzNP said:


> lot more ruthless ppl r everywhere, lot more ppl r suffering in africa and korea!


Good to see at least some people realise that!

For most the world seems to end where American presence/interests end...


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> For most the world seems to end where American presence/interests end...


 And theres a problem with that because, why?!??


----------



## i shroom i (Aug 23, 2003)

So have the shrooms fried your brain, or have you just always been a moron?

dam got me there shrooms fried my brain hmmmmm naw dont think so one thing bush could do is put all you people who talk sh*t about him over in iraq for ben laden to make you his new bitch im sure you would be reall good at that scarface bend over


----------



## garybusey (Mar 19, 2003)

Boooo. Are there ANY yes's from outside the US? No... But really You all have no say in the situation. I'd vote for him IF i lived in the US. But hey, I live in canada, we have NOBODY to vote for.


----------



## garybusey (Mar 19, 2003)

scarfish said:


> i shroom i said:
> 
> 
> > wtf bush is great and rhom wtf whats he gotten us into its not his fault a iraq ***** wanted to f*ck with us and his sons paid for it so...... the only bad thing he did was not kill them all..
> ...


 BLAH BLAH DRAMA!!!!!!!!


----------



## Raptor (Jan 3, 2003)

Ms_Nattereri said:


> Raptor said:
> 
> 
> > Bil has the best track record. !6 trs of republican horse sh*t, and *not one could get the economy going.*
> ...


Based on what? After Vietnam where was the great economy? But thats ok bush won't get back in







:smile: :smile: :smile:


----------



## Raptor (Jan 3, 2003)

Here is a long read on our national debt. We owe a sh*t load of money!
It's funny to see that the penacle of spending is at a reagan era.
rense.com


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

Raptor said:


> Bil has the best track record. !6 trs of republican horse sh*t, and not one could get the economy going.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bill was successfuly at pumping up the Economy because he did so with bull sh*t temporary, short term things. It is very easy for someone to enact short term goals that will last for right around 8 yrs then when he HAS to retire to blame it on his successor. Bill's thinking "Hey, the military is expensive lets cut it down to almost nothing, then when we make money(Spending needs go down) everyone will love me. I don't have the BALLS to go to war anyway, so what the point of a capible military."

And don't blame it on Regan. George Sr. fixed most of the problems he created. Plus, you have to take into account the times. Back then Technology, Crazy People, and the blackmarket had not meshed like now.
Now thanks to f*cking Billy, we had more money going into Bull sh*t programs like Midnight Basketball and other social programs than intelligence and defense.

That the thing with Bill, and democrats in general. They're all about social changes and ignoring the important things like defense. They would rather build a Garden or Playground that we can see than hire a policeman to protect your house. The police man provides a vital role but you only need if someone does something. Now think CIA, They figure, "What good is the CIA??, they don't do anything we can see... Let's take their funding."
Just because you can't see their effect immedaitly does not make them unimportant.

Think of Police for example. Why don't you speed 120MPH down the feeway?? Because you know that there MIGHT...MIGHT.... be a cop sitting up the road just waiting to bust you. You know the repercussions would be severe so you don't do it and follow the laws or close to it. Same thing in my opinion.....

Not doing something and doing something that you can see are very different.

And FYI: George Sr. did want to enter Bagdad and finish off the Job but he was persuaded not to by the f*cking democrats in office. They kept screaming "You made your point, we need oil... Don't do it"








Bill / Democrats


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

A,

You do have the freedom of Speech, and so does he. He can tell you to get the f*ck out of his country just as much as you can tell him to get the f*ck out of your country.

Bush did not sentance a single person to die in Texas. NOT A SINGLE ONE! If by sentanceing people to death you mean respecting the decision of the Judicial branch and 12, uninvolved people, then ok yeah he did. It was not his decision to put them to death....

Yes, Both Bushes sent Amercain soliders(UN Forces) into Iraqi and some died. Welcome to war. War is bloody, expensive, and not popular but it needs to be done. Not one of the soliders expected to walk into Iraqi and have them play a game of paintball, where if they got hit they had to go home. They're soliders in the greatest fighting force on earth, if they weren't ready for that Sacrifice... They shouldn't have joined.

Im getting pretty sick of this B.S about Bush not getting in Fairly. All it is a reason for the loosers to piss and moan. He is the true elected president. They counted the Votes, he won. Anytime the vote is so close this is bound to happen, But it's f*cking over.... let that sh*t go.

In the second to last election Saddam H recieved 96% of all the votes. The following election he recieved 100% of the votes. People must like him right?? No No... He slaughtered that 4% that did not vote for him and made it very clear the same would be done this election to those that didn't vote for him.

If you are in engineer, do you want to go into Afganishan and start working with bullits wizzing past your head?? f*ck no!! It has to be safe before you can start to rebuild. What good would building a bridge or setting up a water system do if all that going to happen is those crazy SOB ares going to blow it up? It makes no sense to build a palace on a land mind. When fighting is over, it will get rebuilt like we are doing now with Iraqi.

As for the number of Bombs missing, that is a good number by any means. Hell Saddam didn't care about missing. He just set up some Scuds and was like, "Hummmm.... Tel Aviv is that way somewhere... Shoot in that direction."
Also, The United States fought a war once upon a time that we cared about hitting Civilan Targets so much, that we neglected to act on the military targets. 
It was called Vietnam. 
Back then, if they park 20 tanks or whatever in a village of 5 civilans we wouldn't hit it because we could hit the poor civilans that were there. And what happend?? We got our butts kicked because of sobbing heart hippies!
I mean what more do you want?? The United states told the Iraqi people that we were coming in and even when. It's not like all of a sudden the city was exploding and the streets were running with blood!
They went after Saddam first, with a few bombs around the deadline. If the Iraqi people didn't get the hint that the US was coming, then they deserve to die via Darwins therory. And A smart bomb missing is not like you are talking about. Sometimes it is, but not always.... A miss for a smart bomb could be as little as 100yds or as much as few thousand. Bottom line is, They Iraqi people knew where Saddam's military was and if they choose to stay by it, knowing full well that it was a military target, then f*ck em..... They should have moved.

All I can say is don't listen to a damn thing the Democrats are saying right now. They are pulling things out of their ass trying to win the next election.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

TonyTurbo29 said:


> A,
> 
> You do have the freedom of Speech, and so does he. He can tell you to get the f*ck out of his country just as much as you can tell him to get the f*ck out of your country.
> 
> ...


 So, are you a Republican???


----------



## tinyteeth (Mar 12, 2003)

bush needs to leave office

i dont hate the man, but we need a better president


----------



## Raptor (Jan 3, 2003)

Paranoid republicans always bitching Bla bla bush has ball's. But wheres his brains to back it UP? Wheres the weapons of mass destruction? Oil is the primary reason we are there. Ever hear of british petroleum? BP Hmmmmm wher do they get their oil? Kewait thats where.
Ok you had your 12 years uninterupted and no "Good economy" Proove wher paranoid spending has payed off. Star wars







yeah good one War against drugs







we still have those. Reagan even screwed his top drug enforcer by releasing info on him to the press. 1 day later he was killed.
Bill cheated BIG DEAL, how many other presidents have? A bunch it just wasn't sought after. Don't get me wrong i stand behind my country no matter which jerk is in office. Don't worry we will win the next election


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

Wow...reading this thread has proved one thing to me. It is amazing how little people know about the politics of this country. Dont worry, I wont expand, I dont need some 15 year old writing in ALL CAPS to tell me how I dont understand anything. Im not even going to point out where people are totally incorrect in there view of events, and timelines....needless to say you should really check your facts before you enter into a debate such as this.
Enjoy the the peace that must come from living in such ignorance...im envious.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

TonyTurbo29 said:


> A,
> 
> You do have the freedom of Speech, and so does he. He can tell you to get the f*ck out of his country just as much as you can tell him to get the f*ck out of your country.
> 
> ...


 check the facts more people were executed in texas while bush was in office than any other gov. Is this just coincidence like the fixed election in bush brothers florida? War is bloody but if you look throuout history you will see that most wars could have been avoided and did not accomplish anything. Where did you get the info on saddam slaughtering 4% of iraqis population from Bush. Somehow I doubt that saddam murdered that many people for that reason without more people saying things about it. Youre right is is pointless to rebuild in a country where the people might blow it up but thats the way iraq and afghanistan are. Many of the Iraqis and afghanis hate us for our involvement and will do things to hurt us while we are over there in their country. Nobody likes there homeland to be occupied by a foreign army would you? As for the scuds saddam launched it wasnt because he didnt care where they landed but there technology is so out of date that the scuds cant shoot accurately. Sorry but i dont feel that holding back was our problem in vietnam we should not have been there in the first place. Just because a country has a different form of government that we dont like doesnt give us the right to force our way of life on them. So youre saying all the innocent people that died it was their fault for being there when our missle blew them up according to darwins theory? Does this apply to the 9/11 victims too since many people knew that osama wanted to attack us? So lets say if you were killed in a terrorist attack while driving by city hall or something then it would be your fault since you knew that saddam or osama might attack? Or do your beliefs only apply to other people.

Grosse gurke means "big cuccumber" in german and youre calling others immature 15 year olds. You say we dont have the facts and were wrong but youre unable to give any reasoning or information.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

grosse gurke said:


> Wow...reading this thread has proved one thing to me. It is amazing how little people know about the politics of this country. Dont worry, I wont expand, I dont need some 15 year old writing in ALL CAPS to tell me how I dont understand anything. Im not even going to point out where people are totally incorrect in there view of events, and timelines....needless to say you should really check your facts before you enter into a debate such as this.
> Enjoy the the peace that must come from living in such ignorance...im envious.


 Hey Jeff....


----------



## STIFFY (Jul 9, 2003)

A, you really are dumb. he was talking about people around military compounds. If they are right around military buildings then they must have some kind of involvment, that is quite a bit different than people who work at the WTC. As for your knowledge about saddam and how he treats his people you really need to wake up. Watch the documentary on history channel called "sons of saddam". that will give you a little peak into how that contury is run. War might not be a good thing but it is nessary. Perhaps not for your afgan terrorist beliefs but for better part of the world is it. Just look at how many civilians got killed in WW2 (i.e. Dresden) and look now. That should show you how far we have come and how much more we value human life. If we just didnt give a f*ck we would nuke all those countries but we dont. We actually send our troops in and rick mass casulties and not catching saddam when we can just nuke him and make sure everyone who opposes us is vaporized. 
You make no sence at all. Just a bunch of islam mumbo jumbo. Shut the hell up!


----------



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

grosse gurke said:


> Wow...reading this thread has proved one thing to me. It is amazing how little people know about the politics of this country. Dont worry, I wont expand, I dont need some 15 year old writing in ALL CAPS to tell me how I dont understand anything. Im not even going to point out where people are totally incorrect in there view of events, and timelines....needless to say you should really check your facts before you enter into a debate such as this.
> Enjoy the the peace that must come from living in such ignorance...im envious.


 I agree with this. Sounds to me that most of the people on this thread are just spewing whatever they can conjur from all the news reports and half remembered articles they've come across. Generalizations galore, say no more!


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

kawi ryder said:


> A, you really are dumb. he was talking about people around military compounds. If they are right around military buildings then they must have some kind of involvment, that is quite a bit different than people who work at the WTC. As for your knowledge about saddam and how he treats his people you really need to wake up. Watch the documentary on history channel called "sons of saddam". that will give you a little peak into how that contury is run. War might not be a good thing but it is nessary. Perhaps not for your afgan terrorist beliefs but for better part of the world is it. Just look at how many civilians got killed in WW2 (i.e. Dresden) and look now. That should show you how far we have come and how much more we value human life. If we just didnt give a f*ck we would nuke all those countries but we dont. We actually send our troops in and rick mass casulties and not catching saddam when we can just nuke him and make sure everyone who opposes us is vaporized.
> You make no sence at all. Just a bunch of islam mumbo jumbo. Shut the hell up!


Ok so all the people that died in the pentagon it was their fault for being there since it was a military target? If the Iraqi TV station the US bombed was a military target then so were the world trade centers.Also wasnt the CIA or FBI office in the wtc ....... if it was then wouldnt that make it a military target .funny how you bring up world war 2. we bombed the civilians of hiroshima and nagasaki which both were not valid military targets while throwing all the japanese americans(my grandparents and relatives) into jail while taking all their land. Theres a lot more to iraq and saddam then a damn show on the history channel. try a source that isnt completely biased against arabs. Why do bush supporters always call people that dont think the way they do terrorists? Have i ever said that i wanted to bomb anyone or anything like that NO. Umm yuore trying to use the amount of deaths in a huge scale world war to the deaths in a little campaign like the gulf war to show that we are more compassionate .......What are you thinking? ww2 lasted 10 times as long and involved at least 10 times the amount of troops so of course theres going to be more casualties and it doesnt show that we value human life any more than before. Also Im a christian not everyone that believes differently than you and bush is a muslim terrorist. Why are all of you bush supporters so quick to call someone a terrorist or muslim just for not thinking the way you do. I guess youre all just following bushs example.


----------



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

Well according to Piranha-Fury, Bush will be defeated by a landslide. On PredatoryFish, Bush is getting beat, but just barely.


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

akio525 said:


> Ok so all the people that died in the pentagon it was their fault for being there since it was a military target? If the Iraqi TV station the US bombed was a military target then so were the world trade centers.Also wasnt the CIA or FBI office in the wtc ....... if it was then wouldnt that make it a military target .funny how you bring up world war 2. we bombed the civilians of hiroshima and nagasaki which both were not valid military targets while throwing all the japanese americans(my grandparents and relatives) into jail while taking all their land. Theres a lot more to iraq and saddam then a damn show on the history channel. try a source that isnt completely biased against arabs. Why do bush supporters always call people that dont think the way they do terrorists? Have i ever said that i wanted to bomb anyone or anything like that NO. Umm yuore trying to use the amount of deaths in a huge scale world war to the deaths in a little campaign like the gulf war to show that we are more compassionate .......What are you thinking? ww2 lasted 10 times as long and involved at least 10 times the amount of troops so of course theres going to be more casualties and it doesnt show that we value human life any more than before. Also Im a christian not everyone that believes differently than you and bush is a muslim terrorist. Why are all of you bush supporters so quick to call someone a terrorist or muslim just for not thinking the way you do. I guess youre all just following bushs example.


The people that died in the pentagon were Military. Yes, some of the people killed were civilan employees but that is part of being in, or working for, the military. It's a risk you take. And it is not their fault that a cowerdly Piece of sh*t like Osama deciede to blind side them. I in no way agree with what he did but that is what happens when the weak want to strike at the strong. They do bull sh*t moves like that because that is all they can do.

Do you even know why we bombed the Iraqi T.V. station??
If you did, you would realize it wasn't a station full of Journalist. It was full of people put there by Saddam and told to say things to benefit Saddam. They were nothing more than Puppets. They were spewing crap about how people should fight the Americans and how they were there to invade and not liberate. It was also being used to help coordinate Saddams Troops in the field as we had severly disrupted his military communications. That was clear and legit military target in my book. Just because it wasn't it tank or bunker, dosen't make it militray.
Just think when you were trying to sneak back into the house at 2 in the morning with your parents sleeping. If somebody was there yelling "There he is, he sneeking in" and pointing at you would you not lay him out???

It's pretty sad the way you think in my book. The world trade center was no where near a military target. It was terrorist target because it was in the united states, and heavily populated. On top of that due to the fact that it was the WORLD trade center, so citizens from many countrys would be killed therefore increasing it's impact.

I agree with you on the Nuclear attacks in Japan. I have personally seen the memorial in Hiroshima and felt the eyes of many Japanese people who had not forgotten bearing down on me. However, if we had not dropped that bomb.... How many more thousands of people would have died? I personally think in the long run, less people died than if we had NOT dropped the bombs.

To rebut your point on it once again. Why was Hiroshima and Nagasaki choosen at targets?? Because they were small, and at the time, somewhat Isolated cities. Once again, the united states choose the lesser form of distruction. They could have easily dropped the bombs on Tokyo, but they didn't. They chose the smallest cities possible to prove their point.

And AGAIN to shut you down. After we dropped the first bomb, we asked Japan for its unconditional surrender. Did they? No. The emporer was too proud to surrender. So we dropped a second nuclear weapon. It was to hammer the point home and to force Japan to surrender.

Many innocent people died. It was an awful act that we have to live with. We are the first, last, and olny nation to use a Nuclear weapon. We have to live with that. However, why were even in the posistion to make that decision. Why were we not fighting with the Japanese on their side?? Because the bastards attacked UUS!!! They hid in a storm and slaughtered an entire fleet in harbor. They started the war, we finished it. The Japanese Army officers that I talked to said that their predicessor "Awoke the sleeping dragon." Think about it.

And as for taking your grandparents land, tough sh*t. That is what happens when your country looses a war. Is it their fault? no, not directly. But their leader took actions that the country would pay for and thats the bottom line. As a people they could have stopped him. Furthermore, US-Japanese relations are very strong now and they welcome us into their country. Excluding Okinawa as they're almost a county on thier own.

The way you are thinking if you picked a fight and the guy kicked your ass and took your money, he would have to give it back. It was the point of him taking it that mattered the most, and that's not the way it works. That guy is going to take that money and buy a 40 of Old E and laugh at you the whole time.

As for a T.V. station that is completely non bias... They don't exist. I think that CNN did a hell of job this war. They laid out the facts and told them as truthfully as possible. But I guess we should listen to Al Jazeera right??? So I guess they're right because they're not "Western". f*ck... According to them the U.S. Forces are retreating under constant Iraqi Army attack. I can still laugh at their information minister "There are no US forces in Baghdad." Well, he must be a sound sleeper because they just circled the information Ministry the night before he said that with a dozen tanks and bradly fighting vehicles.

WWII Vs. Iraqi.
You say it dosen't show they we are more compassionate. Yeah, lets just let hundereds more of our soliders get slaughtered trying to land on a beach. If we werent, we would have sent all the ground troops right into baghdad to get slaughtered in the streets. This time we struck with precision weapons. Weapons that were the smallest needed to complete their tasks. Again, the Iraqi's knew we were comming... They chose to say at the military targets. So 4 or 5 people sitting at an Anti-Aircraft gun got waxed by a tomahawk aimed at the gun and the radar station. Too bad sorry for you. Darwin just chose you. You have no idea of what you are saying. WWII thousands and thousands died. The united states has over thrown 2 goverments in the past 4 years. Goverenments that were oppressive, hostile, terroristic, and brutal too its own people and other nations. What was the death count of US/Allied forces... Less than a 1000. How many solider did it take to kick Hitler out?

I could go on and on but it's not worth it..... Do some reading and maybe you will get to see the light. In closing, don't think Im mad at you or anything like that... You are more than intitled to your opinion, even if it's wrong.


----------



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

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

If the iraqi tv station is a military target in your eyes so is cnn nbc and the wtc. Our tv stations are just as much as puppets as iraqi tv and if yure too blind to see then i feel bad for. The wtc were a military target according to the way you justified hiroshima nagasaki and iraqi tv. Do you have any clue on history to say that the US picked hiroshima and and nagasaki soley because they were the two smalles cities in Japan. If youve really been to japan or know history then you would know that those were not two of the smallest cities at the time. Also the Japanese were on the verge of defeat and Russia was about to enter the war on our side so were two atomic bombs dropped on civilians instead of the military really necessary. After they dropped the first bomb Japan had no idea what the hell was going on and the US quickly dropped a bigger bomb on them in a couple of days. I dont care what the leader of a country is doing with his army it doesnt give our country the right to go and kill their civilians even if it saves the lives of soldiers. Or was it the people that lived in hiroshima and nagasakis fault for being there and not leaving even when they knew they could be a target. You really dont know anything about WW2. Before Pearl harbor we made the first moves against japan by cutting off their oil line and by sending some planes and pilots to china to fight against the japanese so dont even try to make the US sound innocent in Pearl Harbor. Somehow I doubt you talked to a Japanese officer involved in pearl harbor or even current officers in the japanese army since they do not have an army and you wouldnt be able to communicate with an old japanese officer that told you they "awoke the sleeping dragon". You must be confusing the movie pearl harbor with reality since that was a line in the movie. What the hell are you talking about my grandparents losing their land and being thrown into camps because they lost a war my grandfather helped win the war for us by fighting germans . Maybe you didnt know but they put the japanese americans in internment camps before the japanese lost the war so think about what you say before you say it because you dont make sense. Youre starting to make me think that you have no knowledge of the japanese american interment camps during the war. Also I never said find a unbiased tv station I said find an unbiased source just because you obviously get all your information from tv and movies like pearl harbor doesnt mean these are the best sources....... try reading. Just because you see cnn show al jazeera showing a press conference of an obvious lying information minister doesnt mean that al jazeera is saying its all true. When all our tv stations aired bill clinton lying about lewinsky it doesnt make every tv station that aired it completely full of crap. I agree that if some people are sitting around an anti aircraft gun and they get killed then its their fault but it wasnt like that except for soldiers. You expect the poor iraqis to get up and go move to a nicer neiborhood once we said were coming? Its not their fault if they live a couple hundred yards away from an anti aircraft gun and a so called smart bomb misses and blows them up. Dont forget that both countries governments that we took out we helped set up in the first place. Saddam and the US used to be friends before gulf war 1 because we were using saddam and iraq to attack our enemy iran. Dont forget about the taliban... we supported them against russia and basically put them in power. I suggest you go read some articles or books or something since the history channel cnn and pearl harbor havent taught you anything.


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

Sigh.... You make no sense and Im wasteing my time replying to that. 
Ohhh And FYI, I lived in Japan for six years. My father was a Col.(06) in the United States Army and we had a countless number of Japaneese officers over and almost all spoke great english. Everything from Capt's. to 4 Star Generals) So don't say that I don't know.... I lived on the Military installation that was the Japaneese "West Point" for a over 6 years.
And Japan does have a militry a very efficent one that that. It's call the JGSDF and others or Japanese Ground Self Defense force. That also have an Air Force, Navy, and Marine type branches. Do not lecutre me on things you obviously have no Idea about.
But again, Im wasteing my time and im not going to reply to that.


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

Its kind of sad you lived in japan for 6 years and still no clue about japan or ww2.Its also kind of sad that you spell "WASTING" like "WASTEING" when you write. Are people supposed to listen to a person that cant spell the word wasting correctly? Are yo in high school or jr high because a grown adult should be able to spell WASTING correctly. Im sorry but youre mistaken about japan having a efficient military with a navy army marines and stuff. We made sure that after the bomb they would only be allowed a very small coast guard type of military. Their military is so small and weak they would get their ass kicked in a week or two by iraq if they went to war . So was your father the one that told you hiroshima and nagasaki were the smallest cities in japan? I really hope not because that would be sad if a col. in the army actually thought that to be true. Why dont you ask him about our involvement in china against japan before pearl harbor? Then maybe youll see that we werent innocent in pearl harbor. So what base did you live on? My grandpa served in the army for over 30 years and lived at camp zama for most of the time. My dad was raised in camp zama and even i stayed at camp zama for a year. So all my information comes from reliable sources.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

akio525 said:


> Its kind of sad you lived in japan for 6 years and still no clue about japan or ww2.Its also kind of sad that you spell "WASTING" like "WASTEING" when you write. Are people supposed to listen to a person that cant spell the word wasting correctly? Are yo in high school or jr high because a grown adult should be able to spell WASTING correctly.


 Dude, stay on the topic here, ok?
Reading your posts here ain't no picnic either...


----------



## mmmike247 (Jul 22, 2003)

$3 for gas! GOd dammit! nah uh.. kick out of there!


----------



## SERRAPYGO (Feb 4, 2003)

Back to the topic at hand. Has there been any acts of terrorism in the U.S. since 9/11? Hell no. Will I vote for GWB again? Hell yes. Bush siad right from the very begining that this was not going to be a 1-2-3 process. it's going to take time. Terrorist are now on the run, they no longer have a "home base" thanks to Bush and allied efforts. Osama Bin Laden hides in caves now, probably roomies with Saddam Hussien. And I'm f*cking tired of the media reporting all the insignificant negatives of this war on terrorism and reporting nothing positive. Our own media is our worst enemy when it comes to public support. And I'm tired of argueing with liberals and their circular logic.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Serrapygo said:


> Back to the topic at hand. Has there been any acts of terrorism in the U.S. since 9/11? Hell no. Will I vote for GWB again? Hell yes. Bush siad right from the very begining that this was not going to be a 1-2-3 process. it's going to take time. Terrorist are now on the run, they no longer have a "home base" thanks to Bush and allied efforts. Osama Bin Laden hides in caves now, probably roomies with Saddam Hussien.


 Maybe not in the US, but there have been plenty of attacks all over the world since 9/11 (Bali, Casablanca, Iraq), and many of those are supposedly linked to Al Qaeda.
The fact that nothing has happened the last two years doesn't mean it's all over: no one had a clue before 9/11 either (well, some did, but no one decided to follow the leads and figure out what was going on). The problem with global terrorism is that you can protect yourself as much as you want, but the enemy is invisible (and very determined): I wonder how many "sleeper cells" are still active in the West, waiting for their call to action...


----------



## scarfish (Apr 5, 2003)

Serrapygo said:


> Osama Bin Laden hides in caves now, probably roomies with Saddam Hussien.


 Yeah right, they're both probably livin' large in some well-hidden mansion laughing their asses off everytime an American is killed in Iraq (which is quite often if you hadn't noticed). As far as the media reporting pessimistically, that's just a given since there is so much more negative than postive in this mess. Don't get me wrong, I think the media is fucked too, but I stick to my previous statement.


----------



## Death in #'s (Apr 29, 2003)

bush is my commander in chief and he is the man
he grabbed his balls and sent our guys in and we fu$%ed sh^& up
we lost some people but that happens at every war


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

Bush screwed up the middle east so bad he had to apologize recently for the administration being blindsided by all the troubles over there. Im glad that finally bush and some of his supporters are going to have to admit that they screwed up in the middle east.


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

akio525 said:


> Its kind of sad you lived in japan for 6 years and still no clue about japan or ww2.Its also kind of sad that you spell "WASTING" like "WASTEING" when you write. Are people supposed to listen to a person that cant spell the word wasting correctly? Are yo in high school or jr high because a grown adult should be able to spell WASTING correctly. Im sorry but youre mistaken about japan having a efficient military with a navy army marines and stuff. We made sure that after the bomb they would only be allowed a very small coast guard type of military. Their military is so small and weak they would get their ass kicked in a week or two by iraq if they went to war . So was your father the one that told you hiroshima and nagasaki were the smallest cities in japan? I really hope not because that would be sad if a col. in the army actually thought that to be true. Why dont you ask him about our involvement in china against japan before pearl harbor? Then maybe youll see that we werent innocent in pearl harbor. So what base did you live on? My grandpa served in the army for over 30 years and lived at camp zama for most of the time. My dad was raised in camp zama and even i stayed at camp zama for a year. So all my information comes from reliable sources.


 First off, don't try and nit pick my spelling. I don't grab the dictionary every time I don't know how to spell something, nor do I really care if my fingers lag behind my mind and don't always properly write things out. This is not an essay, a report, a narrative, or a statement in which accuracy and spelling is important. Your writings are not the greatest either. If people can read it, who f*cking cares right? No, I'm not in High School. I happen to have graduated with Honors from College with an Associates degree in criminal justice so get off my f*cking back.

Im also sorry that you don't seem to be able to read that well. It shows in your lack of historical knowledge and ability to read what I have written. Never did I say that Nagasaki and Hiroshima were the smallest cities in Japan. I said that they were "small and somewhat isolated cities." And "They chose the smallest cities possible to prove their point". Hiroshima was an army depot on top of that and a major point of embarkation for troops. It was surround with mountains and hill which provided a good way to not only help focus the blast but to contain it. Dropping a bomb that is designed to stop a war on a city of 20,00 will not prove a point. But when they did it twice to cities of a quarter million or more, it made a huge point and the war ended.

And I am not wrong in saying that Japan has an efficient military. Japan military was limited by the US as part of the surrender but it's far from inefficient. Japan, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, has an Army and and a Navy and Marine type units.

I guess these pictures are all fake right???
http://www.jda.go.jp/jgsdf/image/5.jpg
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~steven/images/so2b.jpg
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~steven/images/jchinook.jpg

Their military is self defense based&#8230;. They are small, efficient, and non-aggressive in size and capabilities but no where near inefficient. Also, maybe you should have driven your ass down to Yokosuka and looked in the harbor. Last time I checked, American ships don't fly Japanese flags. 
In closing, the rest of the question you asked of me I already answered. So go back and read what I have written. Im not responding to this non-sense anymore... all it's doing is annoying me.

* Moved to the _I Don't Give a crap anymore_ forum *


----------



## akio525 (Sep 4, 2003)

tonyturbo- Your opinion may be that those bombs could possibly have saved soldiers lives in the long run but personally I dont think that gives them the right to kill over a hundred thousand civilians. You say its ok to kill their civilians to prove a point but thats the same mentality Osama had when he bombed our people. To answer the second half of your post I never said Japan didnt have a military I said they were only allowed an extremely small coast guard kind of military that couldnt stop any real army. Maybe theyre efficient because they dont waste nearly as much money on their military as we do but in my opinion the japanese military is useless since japan is covered in US military bases.


----------



## TonyTurbo29 (Aug 11, 2003)

akio525 said:


> Somehow I doubt you talked to a Japanese officer involved in pearl harbor or even current officers in the japanese army since they do not have an army and you wouldnt be able to communicate with an old japanese officer that told you they "awoke the sleeping dragon".





akio525 said:


> To answer the second half of your post I never said Japan didnt have a military I said they were only allowed an extremely small coast guard kind of military that couldnt stop any real army


LOL

:rasp: La la la la _I can't hear you _la la la la la :rasp:


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

Alright I think you two have duked it out long enough...


----------

