|
|
Post by William on Nov 4, 2003 0:55:52 GMT -5
and conservitive is not bad...its just how you become...you are commonly restless rebelious punk teens...i mean 40 year old men arent normally called punks...really...but conservitive isnt wrong...it just has a few stupid ideas...(dodging the fact libierals do too)...
|
|
|
|
Post by leprechauneddie on Nov 4, 2003 13:41:44 GMT -5
The Chaun thinks that everybody has dumb ideas. So just flip a four-sided coin and choose x, -x, y, or -y. Then you get to argue like this no matter what.
|
|
|
|
Post by xpPhantomX on Nov 4, 2003 16:59:17 GMT -5
The Chaun thinks that everybody has dumb ideas. So just flip a four-sided coin and choose x, -x, y, or -y. Then you get to argue like this no matter what. you dont have to read our ideas.leave the board if you dont want to read our ideas. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Mildrid the Nut Schlapper on Nov 4, 2003 17:11:43 GMT -5
and conservitive is not bad...its just how you become...you are commonly restless rebelious punk teens...i mean 40 year old men arent normally called punks...really...but conservitive isnt wrong...it just has a few stupid ideas...(dodging the fact libierals do too)... Ideas like what?? |
|
Clump
X-Treme Gulp
Stop Buggering Me
Posts: 437
|
Post by Clump on Nov 4, 2003 21:24:48 GMT -5
I think that being more conservative might get you into less trouble. Less stupid stuff that you experiment doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by BELETH the Mighty on Nov 4, 2003 21:56:05 GMT -5
I don’t rip on Dubya because he’s a total dumbass (which he is). I rip on him because he’s a total dumbass who happens to be one of the most powerful men currently residing on the planet Earth. First he cheats his way to the presidency, then he starts a frickin’ war. And why? For our protection? To liberate the peoples of Iraq? No. He did it for his own profit. Think about it, from this he will get the following things: the public support of millions of mindless Americans, he’ll have his name down in the history books, and he’ll impress his daddy.
Didn’t it seem strange to you how he stated clearly that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction, and used it as grounds for an invasion when they hadn’t even found any bombs? Do you know why that’s strange? Cuz there are no bombs. And how Saddam was connected with 9/11? Nope, no proof of that either. Of course he didn’t bother to mention these little details until after an entire country had been destroyed and thousands of people had died. So why don’t you go over there right now and tell our soldiers that their President lied to them and they’re dying for nothing? Or wait, tell that same thing to the people of Iraq, especially those who lost their homes and families. I believe it was an Iraqi shop owner who quoted “At least we had some order under Saddam. Now because of the Americans things are worse than before.”
Oh, and here’s a little fun fact: The Bush family has money ties with the Bin Laden family.
That is why I rip on Bush, and that is why I’m never going to gradually lose my views and individuality as I grow older.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Mildrid the Nut Schlapper on Nov 5, 2003 0:19:02 GMT -5
I don't have five hours to write a reply right now, but for starters let's just say, How in hell did he "cheat his way in to an election" there have been many minority popular vote presidents in our country. Its the way the system works. Our political system is not a democracy based on rule of the majority, but a republic based on the rule of the minority. This system has worked for 200 years so far and I see no reason to end it. More on this and the other ppints you adress tommarow(I know I spelt this wrong but its late).
Sorry I have had a lot of homework lately and have been very busy, but as promised...
First of all President Bush did not start a war for his own profit. You need to stop listening to liberal conspericy (sp) theories, seriously. President Bush started the war with Iraq becasue: 1. Saddam Hussien posed an immediate clear and present danger to the United States of America with his posession of WMDs. Yes, we had no real clue as to where he was hiding them. We have found evidence that they exist. Documents stating that scientists and eqipment that could be used to produce WMDs must be moved before the UN inspectors got to the location. We have found evidence of mobile labs. We have also found empty missles without warheads, warheads which still are out there. 2. Saddam made it clear that he had no "love" for the United States. He always supported our downfall and supported the terrorist actions on 9/11. Look, he didn't offer condolences although they would have added insult to injury coming from him. He actually condoned those actions. 3. Saddam Hussien suppoted terrorism. We have found terrorist traning camps inside of Iraq. Also, Saddam paid money to the families of suicide bombers who blew themselves up in the Gaza. 4. Saddam terrorized and burtalized his own people! Is a leader of a nation supposed to do that? NO!!! Also anyone who says this war is for oil and Pres. Bush's own welath is high on something. Not only can we get all of the oil we need from the Saudis and Kuait, but we can get oil from South America as well. How did Pres. Bush gain from this war moniterally? Politcally, yes he did profit from the war however, this always occurs. Pres. Woodrow Wilson in WWI gained popularity (a Democrat and liberal) as well as Pres. FDR during WWII, look his served four or five complete terms and either part of five or six. All becasue oif his poularity due to the war. None of them intended to recive the poularit it just came, and that's because normally American's get behind their country and support it, although there is always some opposition. The opposition currently occuring is rediculios, caused by hippy wantabes, people who fear all conflict even though ist needed, and liberals who can't stand a conservitive in the governement.
Most likly the WMD's are being hid, were destroyed by Saddam just as the war was begging to hid prevent us getting our hands on them and charging him with crimes against huimanity and terroris if we ever caught him, or we sent into neighboring anti-west countires, like Syria.
Now the part about the Iraqi people. After any government is topled, especially one so backward and byzantinne as Saddam's takes awile to fix and form a new governemnt. It would be unrealitic for the Iraqis to expect a new governemnt in a jify. In a recent poll done by an indepedent polling agency, 66% of Iraqis still want the troops there. Many Iraqis feel fearful of the return of Saddam, they don't understand that there is no coming back for him, if he shows his face in public again he'll be ours, dead or alive, all the same to many Americans.
Now the last part...
Yes, President Bush has ties to the Saudi royal family, they made him an honerary member of their family. Hmm...dosn't seem economic to me, just political in the fact that they can say that yeah we are supported by the west and a modern country. I'll have a thread on how modern in fact they are started shortly. Bin laden is also tied to the Saudi family, however to imply a connection between Pres. Saying that Bush has ecominc connections with bin laden is wrong as Pres. Bush would rather die than work with that scum bag, piece of sh-t.
|
|
|
|
Post by William on Nov 5, 2003 0:47:38 GMT -5
ok...well...its tomorrow...sort of...anyway...they have begun the concept of changing it to a true democracy...OH NO!!! down with the system...dman the man...you can do the most damage from within...blah blah blah...too cool for school...yay!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Nov 5, 2003 18:27:19 GMT -5
i agree with admiral, thats the system...if u dont like it then try to change it, though its not likely because it works. changes into direct democracy have been on smaller, state levels. turning presidential elections into direct democracy would lead to complete chaos and supression of minorities (of race and ideals). and seirukyen (or however u spell it), how do u get off saying we destroyed iraq?!?!?! it was already destroyed, we're begining the process of rebuilding it. and for the soldiers in iraq, the majority of them support bush, and they know a lot more about why the war happened than u or me. and for ur iraqi quote, thats just what the media reported. u could go over to iraq and get many many quotes from people who support america and are glad that we're there. and i dont think that shopowner would be saying that if he was a athlete who was tortured because he lost a game to another country. still more of ur crap......"Think about it, from this he will get the following things: the public support of millions of mindless Americans, he’ll have his name down in the history books, and he’ll impress his daddy." all wrong. first he probably lost more support than he gained for doing the right thing with iraq, second he was already in history books just from being elected and would be from normal policy decisions that had nothing to do with war, lastly i dont think he needs to go to war to impress his dad and by saying that all it says is that you have nothing to say and just want to bash him
|
|
|
|
Post by BELETH the Mighty on Nov 5, 2003 21:36:36 GMT -5
Ummm, I say we destroyed Iraq in the sense that we kinda leveled it with bombs. And as you can see we're doing a great job of rebuilding it. Tons of people dying every day, total widespread chaos. Bush really put some thought into that part, didn't he?
And it's not exactly true that the soldiers know more than we do. They were sent over there to kill things, not to know why. And that's the idea from the start. The perfect soldier is a mindless soldier.
And yes, there are people in Iraq who support America, but then there are those who don't. We barged in there without permission, blew shit up, then handed the cleanup over to the U.N. You know we're just going to insert some puppet government in there and tell them all that they can all go back to their ruined homes and live in a peaceful poverty.
And with what he gains, now he's gonna be told of as some war hero, the man who saved Iraq from evil. At this rate, he'll also save Korea from those nasty commies, since any political system that isn't like ours is inherently evil and sinister. And do you realize the pride in little Georgie's mind that he finished what his dad stared 10 years ago? Oh, he must feel so good. I bet he does. He's just stupid enough to make all this enter in to a personal matter.
I'm not just saying all of this for the sake of bashing him, these are the facts. Basically what went wrong here was that we fought the right war (if such a thing can be considered to exist, which I don't think it does) for the wrong reasons. We liberated a country from a total asshole dictator. That was good. What was bad was just about everythign else about the matter. And sorry to bash him, I didn't think I could offend anyone by insulting a mass murderer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Nov 5, 2003 23:03:34 GMT -5
tons of people dieing everyday? u listen to the media too much, theres been some major stuff the last couple week, still not a ton but w/e, but saying that tons are daying everyday is a gross overexageration. also "clean up" was not handed over to UN. as for being a war hero, bush is bashed everyday by the media who wants to see this fail, theres almost never any reports of the good being done in iraq and afghanistan, while anything to do with death and destruction gets front page with charts, diagrams, and/or pictures. for example any mention on afghanistan being almost ready to approve a constitution? a measley couple of paragraphs buried in page 12, w/ the typical death story leading the front page. reporting about the losses is fine, but they need to report about the gains too. and until they do this "war hero" stuff isnt gonna happen
|
|
|
|
Post by xpPhantomX on Nov 5, 2003 23:08:19 GMT -5
[glow=red,2,300]we did not destroy iraq.they destroyed themselves with their government.could this be like vietnam??will the soldiers come home when this is all over only to find no one cares about what they did.the soldiers are fighting for freedom and for their country.and now their country turns their back to them?what the hell.support the soldiers in iraq!without them we wouldnt be living in a free world(or as "free" as we believe) [/glow]
|
|
|
|
Post by BELETH the Mighty on Nov 5, 2003 23:13:19 GMT -5
Do you even know why the Vietnam War was started for America? It wasn't to protect anyone. It was the communists versus the capitalists, and America wanted to crush the commies so they could move in and reap trading profits. Irresputable proof, that is. Whoever told you it was for freedom lied to you.
And Bush did want public support, the criticism he recieved just wasn't expected. This was in part his own fault, because it all got bigger when people found out about how he lied to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by xpPhantomX on Nov 5, 2003 23:16:18 GMT -5
how did bush lie to every one.explain that to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Nov 5, 2003 23:19:49 GMT -5
yes, people were interested in making a profit, but i still believe that freedom was still a large part of it. neways, what was the "irresputable proof"?
|
|
