Yes, we know the U.S. is not liked in some parts of the world. We also know that the U.S. may be attacked like it has been in the past.
However, we dont seem to go to the root/cause of the problem. The problem is that U.S.'s presence is not liked and wanted in Muslim countires.
Also, its not liked that the U.S. is supporting Israel.
And please dont come out saying that Muslims hate freedom and thats why they are attacking the U.S. Dont fool yourself.
Bush or Kerry
-
Bubba1
- Moderator
- Posts: 16082
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
- Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS
Jesda, I don't see that as a giant flip flop. IT sounds like he was always for civil unions, and then changed his mind on supporting a specific bill that permitted gay marriage. I happen to agree with Kerry on this issue. I also support civil unions between gays, but if a particular religion has a pre-disposition against gay marriage, then that is their choice not to offer it. If a religion allows it, that's fine too. IMHO Kerry's view is much more fair minded than Bush's position which is a big fat NO to the whole concept, and Bush went even farther by suggesting a friggin' constitutional amendment banning it. Bush is way way wrong.
As far as paying off other countries to gain international support.Might want to think about it for a moment. We pretty much destroyed Iraq's infrastructure in the process of removing Hussein, and the invasion itself was against the wishes of much of the world community and UN. The damage is done. Can't take it back. Now we're faced with a gigantic cleanup bill. The only way to get other countries to help share in the rebuilding costs is to give them incentives to do so. Bush wanted to freeze out companies from countries that didn't support the war from the rebuilding contracts. Now that the costs are looking a whole lot bigger, Bush is reaching out to the same countries he froze out to help overpay Halliburton to do pieces of the job. Is it any surprise that he's not being overwhelmed with generous international support?
I think Kerry's view of mending the international relationships is the right thing to do given the present situation. And if it ionvolves including non-war-supporting allies in the rebuilding process, then so be it. You can't say that Bush improved international relationships after going to war with Iraq.
As far as paying off other countries to gain international support.Might want to think about it for a moment. We pretty much destroyed Iraq's infrastructure in the process of removing Hussein, and the invasion itself was against the wishes of much of the world community and UN. The damage is done. Can't take it back. Now we're faced with a gigantic cleanup bill. The only way to get other countries to help share in the rebuilding costs is to give them incentives to do so. Bush wanted to freeze out companies from countries that didn't support the war from the rebuilding contracts. Now that the costs are looking a whole lot bigger, Bush is reaching out to the same countries he froze out to help overpay Halliburton to do pieces of the job. Is it any surprise that he's not being overwhelmed with generous international support?
I think Kerry's view of mending the international relationships is the right thing to do given the present situation. And if it ionvolves including non-war-supporting allies in the rebuilding process, then so be it. You can't say that Bush improved international relationships after going to war with Iraq.
-
DeathBy240SX
- Posts: 422
- Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 9:02 am
No way I will vote George, but I wish I didn't have to vote Kerry. I feel that Kerry is not the right man for the job, but he is in a sence, the lesser of two evils. <rant> Personally, I consider myself liberal, but certainly not a democrat. I don't really fit neatly into any political party because I form my own opinions. I read/watch/listen to everything I can, whether it supports my opinions or not because what our populace really lacks, is the education to make informed decisions. I don't mean education in terms of schooling, but self education. Too many people hear things from one person, something on TV, etc and make assumptins and form opinions without ever investigating enough to know the whole story (or at least MORE of the story since we rarely know the WHOLE story). I appologize for this being somewhat off topic, but this is what REALLY bothers me about politics (as well as many other aspects of life) today, is uneducated, uninformed, uninterested people making judgements and blindly backing them. </rant>
One last comment on the dropping of bombs in WWII compared to Iraq. To narrow it down to the most basic aspect of the situation, the two are completely different because Iraq DID NOT ATTACK US! Hussain was a "bad" man to say the least, but the connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq is non existant. I never supported invading Iraq, but I also can't support pulling out completely now as we have made a mess, and we need to clean it up. Simply put though, I'm not sure any of our presidential canidates are fit to clean things up the way they need to be. If I was a simpler man, I would merely resign myself to not voting, butt I think it's important for everyone who has an educated opinion on things to vote.
One last comment on the dropping of bombs in WWII compared to Iraq. To narrow it down to the most basic aspect of the situation, the two are completely different because Iraq DID NOT ATTACK US! Hussain was a "bad" man to say the least, but the connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq is non existant. I never supported invading Iraq, but I also can't support pulling out completely now as we have made a mess, and we need to clean it up. Simply put though, I'm not sure any of our presidential canidates are fit to clean things up the way they need to be. If I was a simpler man, I would merely resign myself to not voting, butt I think it's important for everyone who has an educated opinion on things to vote.
AZhitman wrote:1)I'll utter one word: WRONG. And I'll elaborate as follows: The press is NOTORIOUSLY left-leaning. Spend some time in graduate-level Journalism courses and you'll see.
2) How about standing up to a bunch of misguided lunatics who want to take over the world through jihad?
How about calling a spade a spade, saying, "We're not gonna sit back and let you oppress the innocent any longer!"
How about entering a powderkeg with a lit fuse in order to stabilize a region that is DANGEROUSLY close to the initiation of a third (and final) world war?
I ask you all (once again) - What happens when the Islamic militants topple Saudi? What happens when Musharref is assassinated like Sadat was (read your history books, kids)? What happens to all the nukes in Pakistan (that are currently being held for DEFENSIVE purposes)? Answer the question! If you cannot answer this question, no further discussion is necessary!
Do YOU want to live in a world where al Quada (and their kin) has nuclear capabilities?
Not me, baby. Give me a rifle, I'll go play in the sandbox to make sure MY kids (and your kids) don't have to fear some laundry-headed loon with a cracked agenda.
I don't agree with everything Dubya says or does. I don't think he's a GREAT leader. But I DO NOT want a pacifist pantywaist in the White House.
The men and women who gave life and limb, fighting for freedom in the Middle East (and other places throughout the globe) shouldn't have to have bled in vain.
"All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."
You get ONE SHOT to defeat the enemy. The time is now.
If you think that networks are left leaning you are wrong spend an hour watching Hanity and Colmes on FOX news or the ORILEY Factor(Spelling?)
As far as what has happened in the last year of the war we know that Iraq was nowhere near close to declaring war on us. A link between Iraq and Al Qeda hasnt been made , but there is a defenity link with Al Qeda and Saudi Arabia, why wont we go and invade that country? We know that the Kingdom is split as far as the US policy and there are people in that govt. that think its a great idea to fund terrorists in the Palestine or Afghanistan.
If we are such a great country and we're removing evil dictators lets go to North Korea and liberate the people there. Not only will we liberate millions of people we will also destroy a nuclear weapon producing regime that will sell and probably has sold them on the black market where all the US loving people will buy. If you want to talk about an unstable regions in the world that one takes the cake.
Lets also go and invade Israel cause what they are doing there is nothing short of a Holocaust of Palestinians. How would you like it if somebody ran a bulldozer through a place you called a house for some odd years and be forced to move somewhere else so that somebody else can build a house for themselves. Or the new wall they are building right through half the country which is illegal and in violation of numerous UN regulations and not to mention its stealing land from palestine and making it Israeli why dont we do anythign "right" in that region? We always look away, and dont give a rats ***, thats why we are hated in the Arab world and just like the Jews we are bringing it on ourselves.
-
EZcheese15
- Moderator
- Posts: 6518
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 12:40 pm
- Car: 2012 Juke SV
2011 Titan Pro-4X
2007 BMW 328i - Location: St. Charles, IL
- Contact:
nismodave wrote:John Kerry= Pro Choice
George Bush= Pro Life
George Bush has my vote.
Now, THIS is an opinion I respect...it really is this simple for me too. All other issues aside, this one is the deciding factor no matter what. I will never vote for any person who is pro-choice.
As for what Bubba said: "Bush is way way wrong."So is two men or women loving each other in a non-platonic way. There is no other way for it to be, we were not designed for that purpose and its disgusting that people are ****ed up enough to think its ok or morally fine.
Nathan wrote:As for what Bubba said: "Bush is way way wrong."So is two men or women loving each other in a non-platonic way. There is no other way for it to be, we were not designed for that purpose and its disgusting that people are ****ed up enough to think its ok or morally fine.
Agreed. I would spit on them. Just like how racists spit on Chinks. MWUAHAHAAHAHA. jk I'm not that mean.
Edit: maybe gay guys would like my spit...duno
I don't understand how you could make a decision like that based on a single issue. Personally, I'm pro-choice. You can hate me all you want for it, but I don't feel that it's MY choice, or any of my business even, what others choose to do with their bodies. I never plan on being part of an abortion, and THAT is MY choice to make. Our culture really is based on people believing that they know the correct or the "right" way to live and imposing those beliefs on others. I see things slightly differently I guess.
f1seb wrote:If you think that networks are left leaning you are wrong spend an hour watching Hanity and Colmes on FOX news or the ORILEY Factor(Spelling?)
Aside from those two, and occasionally MSNBC, the majority of the media and specifically the print media is very obviously left wing biased. You need look no further than the recent LA Times poll concerning who is in the lead for this presidential race, it was blatantly skewed in favor of Kerry.
f1seb wrote:As far as what has happened in the last year of the war we know that Iraq was nowhere near close to declaring war on us. A link between Iraq and Al Qeda hasnt been made
Quite on the contrary, you will find that fascinatingly enough, even the Clinton Administration believed there was a link. Evidence of this can be found in Bin Laden's indictment in 1998 as described on this website: http://www.weeklystandard.com/...?pg=1A small excerpt from this page, which describes the iraq-al qaeda ties:"In the spring of 1998--well before the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa--the Clinton administration indicted Osama bin Laden. The indictment, unsealed a few months later, prominently cited al Qaeda's agreement to collaborate with Iraq on weapons of mass destruction. The Clinton Justice Department had been concerned about negative public reaction to its potentially capturing bin Laden without "a vehicle for extradition," official paperwork charging him with a crime. It was "not an afterthought" to include the al Qaeda-Iraq connection in the indictment, says an official familiar with the deliberations. "It couldn't have gotten into the indictment unless someone was willing to testify to it under oath." The Clinton administration's indictment read unequivocally:
Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq."
Here I actually agree with you, I think we SHOULD act out forcefully against countries that are anti-American or support terrorism. I support wars you knowf1seb wrote:but there is a defenity link with Al Qeda and Saudi Arabia, why wont we go and invade that country? We know that the Kingdom is split as far as the US policy and there are people in that govt. that think its a great idea to fund terrorists in the Palestine or Afghanistan.
If we are such a great country and we're removing evil dictators lets go to North Korea and liberate the people there. Not only will we liberate millions of people we will also destroy a nuclear weapon producing regime that will sell and probably has sold them on the black market where all the US loving people will buy. If you want to talk about an unstable regions in the world that one takes the cake.
f1seb wrote:Lets also go and invade Israel cause what they are doing there is nothing short of a Holocaust of Palestinians. How would you like it if somebody ran a bulldozer through a place you called a house for some odd years and be forced to move somewhere else so that somebody else can build a house for themselves. Or the new wall they are building right through half the country which is illegal and in violation of numerous UN regulations and not to mention its stealing land from palestine and making it Israeli why dont we do anythign "right" in that region? We always look away, and dont give a rats ***, thats why we are hated in the Arab world and just like the Jews we are bringing it on ourselves.
I haven't fully formulated an opinion on the Israel issue beyond the fact that Palestine is a worthless piece of **** country. The only thing I care to refute from your Israel rant is calling it a "Holocaust of Palestinians". According to the dictionary, a holocaust is: "an act of great destruction and loss of life." While there has been substantial destruction and loss of life, the same could also be be purported to be happening to israeli's by palestinian suicide bombers, terrorists, etc. This is a comment better left unsaid as it implies something on the order of genocide as in the case of the Jewish Holocaust perpetrated by the Germans in WWII. The fact of the matter is, that people are just not dying in that quantity in Israel OR Palestine.
gabossie wrote:I don't understand how you could make a decision like that based on a single issue. Personally, I'm pro-choice. You can hate me all you want for it, but I don't feel that it's MY choice, or any of my business even, what others choose to do with their bodies. I never plan on being part of an abortion, and THAT is MY choice to make. Our culture really is based on people believing that they know the correct or the "right" way to live and imposing those beliefs on others. I see things slightly differently I guess.
Its very simple, I'm adopted...I like my life very much. When I think about abortion, I am thankful that my birth parents toughed out a pregnancy for 9 months and gave me up to a family that had the means to take care of me and love me. When I think about other children not having the same opportunity I was afforded because some selfish **** sucking ***** couldn't keep her legs shut, it sickens me. Its that simple, abortion is wrong because its putting a non-innocent persons feelings ahead of a totally innocent life's future. Nobody is innocent if they are old enough to get pregnant
Nathan wrote:Now, THIS is an opinion I respect...it really is this simple for me too. All other issues aside, this one is the deciding factor no matter what. I will never vote for any person who is pro-choice.
As for what Bubba said: "Bush is way way wrong."So is two men or women loving each other in a non-platonic way. There is no other way for it to be, we were not designed for that purpose and its disgusting that people are ****ed up enough to think its ok or morally fine.
I thought you wouldn't mind "two men or women loving each other in a non-platonic way" bc that way they wouldn't breed. Im just talking about your sig btw
S13GUY wrote:I thought you wouldn't mind "two men or women loving each other in a non-platonic way" bc that way they wouldn't breed. Im just talking about your sig btw
My sig picture is just what it is because it makes me laugh whenever I see it...I mean really, its an invisible dude standing between a smiling dinosaur and what I assume is a dodo bird with "Visualize Voluntary Human Extinction" written above it...thats some funny stuff! Its not intended to be a political statement or anything, I just think its FUNNY
I'm thinking of changing it to a pro-Bush banner though.I find that to be a very respectable reason and I'm sure you will never allow yourself to be in a position where abortion would be an option. What I have a problem with though, is that because of the circumstances in YOUR life that led you to derive these opinions, you feel that you have the athority to tell someone else that they do not have a choice. Your birth parents obviously had a choice, and they made the choice that suited them (not that neccesarilly suited you as they had no idea who you would become or how things would play out in the comming years of your life). I simply don't feel that I'm in a position to examine the circumstances behind each potential abortion situation and come to a blanket decision that would effect many peoples lifes which I have nothing to do with, and no insight into the past, present, or future circumstances which would lead them to make their own decisions. This really has nothing to do with abortion for me, my opinions regarding this carries over to everything. In short, it's not always about "some selfish **** sucking ***** that couldn't keep her legs shut" (metaphorically speaking), sometimes it is. I have no way of knowing and therefor have no ground to make someone elses decisions.
See gabossie, your missing one key point...in my world, I'm almost never wrong This applies to most things, politics being one of the key ones. I arrogantly think I'm better than most people out there (an opinion my slightly liberal girlfriend HATES) and as such, I think I'm in a position to make decisions for them. I mean really, these people cant even merge on a freeway correctly, how can they be trusted with life and death decisions?
This applies to most things, politics being one of the key ones. I arrogantly think I'm better than most people out there (an opinion my slightly liberal girlfriend HATES) and as such, I think I'm in a position to make decisions for them. I mean really, these people cant even merge on a freeway correctly, how can they be trusted with life and death decisions?Are you aware of what VHEMT (sig) is? And why would you change is to a pro bush banner? I mean, if that's really what you want there, that's all good, if it's just because you think it will bother those of us who don't necessarilly agree with you, try again...
*edit*Heh, you trusted them with a decision on your life of death the second you tried to merge with them :pface Seriously though, I find that statement to be a total "cop out" (damn I hate that term) to a reasonably well represented debate. Do you really not have anything else to support your views, or do you really think you're better than me (and everyone else)?
*edit*Heh, you trusted them with a decision on your life of death the second you tried to merge with them :pface Seriously though, I find that statement to be a total "cop out" (damn I hate that term) to a reasonably well represented debate. Do you really not have anything else to support your views, or do you really think you're better than me (and everyone else)?
gabossie wrote:Are you aware of what VHEMT (sig) is? And why would you change is to a pro bush banner? I mean, if that's really what you want there, that's all good, if it's just because you think it will bother those of us who don't necessarilly agree with you, try again...
*edit*Heh, you trusted them with a decision on your life of death the second you tried to merge with them :pface Seriously though, I find that statement to be a total "cop out" (damn I hate that term) to a reasonably well represented debate. Do you really not have anything else to support your views, or do you really think you're better than me (and everyone else)?
Yes, I AM aware of what my sig is...and that guy is frieking NUTS. But the picture is funny, and so it is there
If I put up a pro-bush banner it'd be for the same reason I got a bumper sticker for my car...because I support the man and his campaign. As for this statement: "you trusted them with a decision on your life of death the second you tried to merge with them" you bring up an interesting, and TERRIFYING point. I HATE not being in control of situations totally 
I dont think I'm better than other people in every possible way, but on certain issues I dont see the possibility of me being wrong, it just doesn't exist to me. Abortion is one of these as I see it as a completely black and white issue. Truth be told I dont even agree with it in cases of rape. The only time I agree with it is when a pregnancy is definitely endangering the mothers life, and thats only if we know she is healthy and a positive contributor to the world. The same cannot be said for her unborn child, so I have to make a choice between two unpleasant alternatives. My statement of superiority was mostly referring to abortion and people being pro-choice, although it occasionally extends to other issues as well. My girlfriend decided she was pro-choice in some circumstances last night and we had a HUGE fight, so I'm even more set in my views on the subject now, which makes it even worse for you guys who might argue with me, I'll never be able to back down from such a strong moral stance I don't have a problem with that, I don't expect you to back down. I'm not here trying to change your mind, just presenting my views. I don't think that I have the one right way to live either, it works for me, it doesn't intentionally effect others lives, it makes me happy. Good enough for me. What scares me is that you don't have the same outlook (not on specific issues, but life in general), and that can and will inevitably effect my life, something I feel you have no right and no reason to do.
gabossie wrote:I don't understand how you could make a decision like that based on a single issue. Personally, I'm pro-choice. You can hate me all you want for it, but I don't feel that it's MY choice, or any of my business even, what others choose to do with their bodies.
The reason I can make my decision like that is because of the rights of an unborn child.
I dont think you would of liked to have been sucked out of your mothers womb.
Its a child, not a choice.
gabossie wrote:As far as I'm concerned, the child would never know the difference, it's the rest of the world that may or may not suffer from the loss of the child.
The child would never know the difference?????????????????
So you know what an unborn child feels or does not feel?? Being sucked through a tube and put in the trash???
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THIS WORLD???????????!!!!!!!!!!!
I retract that statement actually. While I don't THINK the child would know the difference simply because of lack of mental and nerve development, I don't know. I never said I supported abortion, in fact, I am against it, I'm meerely pro choice. If you read some of my earlier posts, the same pricipals apply to children as well. It's not my place to decide whether a child dies or not, but it's not my place to decide whether someone else can or cannot have a child.