The War is Bullshit

[Marlowe01]

I'm going to put this in simple terms because I don't have time to explain everything right now, but I will gladly explain if people want me to. Bush is fucking moron, I'm voting Kerry. We attacked Iraq because, even though didn't put a finger on us, they COULD pose a threat. Even though they don't plan on attacking, they COULD...if they wanted to. I guess that's reason enough to start a war with the ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD. I'm voting for Kerry and Edwards...the REAL DEAL. They have their fucking heads on straight in numerous ways.

[JCOOK]

Well ALLLLRIGGGHHHHTTTTYYYY THEN

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Marlowe01
I'm going to put this in simple terms because I don't have time to explain everything right now, but I will gladly explain if people want me to. Bush is fucking moron, I'm voting Kerry. We attacked Iraq because, even though didn't put a finger on us, they COULD pose a threat. Even though they don't plan on attacking, they COULD...if they wanted to. I guess that's reason enough to start a war with the ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD. I'm voting for Kerry and Edwards...the REAL DEAL. They have their fucking heads on straight in numerous ways.

Well, there are many reasons the war was started. And as far as I'm concerned, not one of them was noble. And telling the public that you're starting a war because a country COULD be a threat is insane...practically hilarious. How many countries on Earth COULD be a threat? Hey, my neighbor next door has a butcher knife. I've seen it, even. This afternoon, I'm going to go next door and kill him with my butcher knife before he ever has a chance to be violent. The law won't mind.:rolleyes:

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Rikk
Well, there are many reasons the war was started. And as far as I'm concerned, not one of them was noble. And telling the public that you're starting a war because a country COULD be a threat is insane...practically hilarious. How many countries on Earth COULD be a threat? Hey, my neighbor next door has a butcher knife. I've seen it, even. This afternoon, I'm going to go next door and kill him with my butcher knife before he ever has a chance to be violent. The law won't mind.:rolleyes:

Man, you guys are smart. I'm very impressed with the Roth fans here.

I can only add to this: "You reap what you sow."


I'm waiting for the comebacks from all of this recklessness. I can only warn you to be prepared. You all know what's going on. Look ahead to when it comes back on our country.

You are not going to have long to wait.



P

[Warham]

Stop with the fucking 'look out it's coming' bullshit. It came in 2001, Phil. What's next, is Iran gonna nuke our ass? We won't have to worry too much about that, because if that happens, most of us won't be here any longer.

Jesus F. Christ

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
Stop with the fucking 'look out it's coming' bullshit. It came in 2001, Phil. What's next, is Iran gonna nuke our ass? We won't have to worry too much about that, because if that happens, most of us won't be here any longer.

Jesus F. Christ

LOL.

Warham, look out. They're coming! They're coming from the sky! You'll see...they're everywhere! They're living in our sewers!! Terrorists! Terrorists everywhere! We must keep bombing countries and taking over their economies every year in case the terrorists are brewing! Because, you know, attacking countries doesn't actually...like...MAKE terrorists, does it?

[Big Train]

I'd be interested to know what everyone thinks is the "Real" reason we went to Iraq. TO settle Daddy's score, oil, or my idea that we needed a sand lot to play ball in that wasn't on our shores.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Rikk
LOL.

Warham, look out. They're coming! They're coming from the sky! You'll see...they're everywhere! They're living in our sewers!! Terrorists! Terrorists everywhere! We must keep bombing countries and taking over their economies every year in case the terrorists are brewing! Because, you know, attacking countries doesn't actually...like...MAKE terrorists, does it?

I'm just getting tired of Phil's shit about 'it's coming'. 3000 people died on 9-11-2001. That was the worst day in U.S. history since the 1940's. If something comes and it's worse than that, we are in real trouble.

[John Ashcroft]

The War is not bullshit, and it's an insult to all that are currently fighting, and all who've died to say so. Guys like you are fucking spoilded little children, who wouldn't know sacrifice, duty, or honor from a fucking hole in the ground. What do you consider sacrifice??? Missing an episode of "The Real World" to go finger-bang your nasty little ho of a girlfriend?

You know what, vote for Kerry! He deserves you, and the rest like you. Thank God that only accounts for about 20% of our public. You're a fucking zit on America's ass. A simple annoyance that poses no real danger, but still a bit of embarrassment. So go out on the rafters and scream at the top of your lungs "Useless mother-fuckers like me endorse "The New JFK"! He's the "real-deal"!" Go on, proclaim your faith in the man. And leave the hard decisions to the adults. Fucking child.

[Sgt Schultz]

This war started in 1979. We took out Saddam because he was a MAJOR threat to the Middle East, and therefore to the U.S.. The Russians informed us, from their own intelligence that Iraq was planning terrorist attacks against the U.S.. The Same people bitching now that the U.S. and Bush didn't "connect the dots" and act BEFORE 9/11 are now bitching that we are connecting the dots and acting.

Our main battle now, in Iraq is against IRAN - since it is them, and al Quedea who are responsible for the conflict that is still ongoing there now.

Mission WAS accomplished when Bush said it was. While still being fought IN Iraq, this is now a war being waged with Iran and al Queada. Iraq has 25,374,691 people - if the Iraqi people were in revolt you'd know it. They aren't. This is a war that was a long time coming and will probably last a long time. It is against Islamic Theocratic Totalitarianism.

They sarted this was in 1979. I remember how we did NOTHING then, and did nothing for many years. It's about time we did.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
This war started in 1979. We took out Saddam because he was a MAJOR threat to the Middle East, and therefore to the U.S.. The Russians informed us, from their own intelligence that Iraq was planning terrorist attacks against the U.S.. The Same people bitching now that the U.S. and Bush didn't "connect the dots" and act BEFORE 9/11 are now bitching that we are connecting the dots and acting.

Our main battle now, in Iraq is against IRAN - since it is them, and al Quedea who are responsible for the conflict that is still ongoing there now.

Mission WAS accomplished when Bush said it was. While still being fought IN Iraq, this is now a war being waged with Iran and al Queada. Iraq has 25,374,691 people - if the Iraqi people were in revolt you'd know it. They aren't. This is a war that was a long time coming and will probably last a long time. It is against Islamic Theocratic Totalitarianism.

They sarted this was in 1979. I remember how we did NOTHING then, and did nothing for many years. It's about time we did.

And after Iran and Islamic Theocratic Totalitarianism.. THE WORLD !

Yupp.. that's our job in the U.S.A.

I think you've just got to view the news to see that 25 million Iraqis are in revolt.

Every country has their "warriors." Whole populations are not warriors. Their warriors are fighting for their lands and religion.

Do you seriously think that because there are 265 million Americans that there are 265 million warriors in the U.S.?

When the warriors of our country begin to fight here on our land here against tyranny here and come out of that large U.S. population it will be the same small numbers of warriors. Maybe only 2% will fight. Our own American revolution proves the same thing.

You're seeing the same thing in Iraq. Millions sit and their warriors are doing the fighting.

Poor reasoning with your population statistics.

You're "rationalizing" a country is not in revolt because only 2% of the whole population is doing the heavy, deadly fighting and dying. You're wrong.

You're wrong.

Tell it to King George and the British in 1776 about your "the whole country isn't in revolt" theory. It doesn't hold water in the real world.

But I'm glad you're involved and interested in trying to understand current events. Keep it up.



P

[DLR'sCock]

Originally posted by Marlowe01
I'm going to put this in simple terms because I don't have time to explain everything right now, but I will gladly explain if people want me to. Bush is fucking moron, I'm voting Kerry. We attacked Iraq because, even though didn't put a finger on us, they COULD pose a threat. Even though they don't plan on attacking, they COULD...if they wanted to. I guess that's reason enough to start a war with the ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD. I'm voting for Kerry and Edwards...the REAL DEAL. They have their fucking heads on straight in numerous ways.



Well, exactly, and by those reasons, that's enough reason for any country to to invade and murder anyone in any country...

[jacksmar]

There’s nothing to rationalize for guys like you Phil. You hate the US. Did I miss anything?

You’re right about a couple things but not because you had any fucking clue about the subject of war. The idea of current conventional war is to involve as few as possible. That happened a long time ago and we’re glad you caught up.

The situation in Iraq is embarrassing to me for many reasons but the reason I’m upset may be a little to unsettling for you Phil and many like you.
Once the war was over it was important to win the battle. Same way in Germany. You go door to door and kill anyone and everyone who presents resistance or withholds information from US troops. Sure you kill a few innocents along the way but who cares? muslims? That should have been the message sent throughout the muslim population. You will die wherever you are, running from the US or fighting the US. You will die.
Have your religion wherever and whenever you want but muslim scrubs hinting at threatening the US will die where they and their children sleep. And our weapons will find you and burn in your caves and mountains.

That message was never sent; missed opportunity. Whenever any nation picks a fight with the US, the whole world should collectively hold their breath.

I don’t agree with many things either US Presidents Bush have accomplished. Kerry is another ass knot commie lib. He gets it from his wife. The guys obviously pussy whipped or to stupid to think for himself.
:fucku: Kerry

[Rikk]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
The War is not bullshit, and it's an insult to all that are currently fighting, and all who've died to say so. Guys like you are fucking spoilded little children, who wouldn't know sacrifice, duty, or honor from a fucking hole in the ground. What do you consider sacrifice??? Missing an episode of "The Real World" to go finger-bang your nasty little ho of a girlfriend?

You know what, vote for Kerry! He deserves you, and the rest like you. Thank God that only accounts for about 20% of our public. You're a fucking zit on America's ass. A simple annoyance that poses no real danger, but still a bit of embarrassment. So go out on the rafters and scream at the top of your lungs "Useless mother-fuckers like me endorse "The New JFK"! He's the "real-deal"!" Go on, proclaim your faith in the man. And leave the hard decisions to the adults. Fucking child.

Obviously you don't read enough papers if you think it's 20%.

Adults? You worry me...you really don't believe in democracy, do you? You'd rather have a government in which soldiers fight without being really told why. You'd prefer government in which the "big boys" make huge decisions that hurt the economy and endanger citizens and don't need to explain why. Look at your history books, Ashcroft. And furthermore, if these guys are so interested in protecting us, why are we in Iraq instead of going after Al Quaida at the core? And why didn't they prevent September 11 in the first place? Why did Condi Rice ignore the warning report that was personally put on her desk in August 2001?

And don't give me your gung ho American bullshit. This is a democracy...if you don't like that, if you don't think we shouldn't question your Daddy's boy, AWOL-running dumbass President, maybe we just shouldn't have an election at all. Maybe George W. should stay President until you say it's time for someone YOU like to take his place. Jesus. Talk about ignorance. Go look up the word "democracy".

[Rikk]

Originally posted by jacksmar
There’s nothing to rationalize for guys like you Phil. You hate the US. Did I miss anything?:fucku: Kerry

It's posts like this that make me smile and sigh relief, knowing which dumbasses will be beaten this November. If this is the attitude and intelligence you find in Bush-supporters, if questioning any government action or analyzing a situation beyond what Rumsfeld says is happening means an idiot reads that as hating his country, then bring it on. What is "loving the U.S." then? Hating every other country and not questioning any U.S. violence whatsoever? I guess Vietnam was right too, huh? And I guess not going into Rwanda to prevent a genocide was right too, because that's what the U.S. did, huh?

And fuck Kerry? Well, good...I'm glad to see you have your arguing skills worked out.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by jacksmar
There’s nothing to rationalize for guys like you Phil. You hate the US. Did I miss anything?

You’re right about a couple things but not because you had any fucking clue about the subject of war. The idea of current conventional war is to involve as few as possible. That happened a long time ago and we’re glad you caught up.

The situation in Iraq is embarrassing to me for many reasons but the reason I’m upset may be a little to unsettling for you Phil and many like you.
Once the war was over it was important to win the battle. Same way in Germany. You go door to door and kill anyone and everyone who presents resistance or withholds information from US troops. Sure you kill a few innocents along the way but who cares? muslims? That should have been the message sent throughout the muslim population. You will die wherever you are, running from the US or fighting the US. You will die.
Have your religion wherever and whenever you want but muslim scrubs hinting at threatening the US will die where they and their children sleep. And our weapons will find you and burn in your caves and mountains.

That message was never sent; missed opportunity. Whenever any nation picks a fight with the US, the whole world should collectively hold their breath.

I don’t agree with many things either US Presidents Bush have accomplished. Kerry is another ass knot commie lib. He gets it from his wife. The guys obviously pussy whipped or to stupid to think for himself.
:fucku: Kerry

Strong words you use. Let me try it.

I'm prepared right now to see misguided "patriots" like you face to face and you will die.

Hey, I like talking like dat:D

I guess we'll both be fighting for the U.S..

But we're all going to lose.

All of these threads on the Internet, all of the news day-to-day, it's at our doorstep.

Be sure you're a good shot. I am:D



P

[jacksmar]

And, for the last time….. the US isn’t a fucking democracy.

The United States of America is a Republic.

And Rikk while I agree GW is a privileged frat boy, Colin Powell and Dick Cheney are adults.

And see my Kerry link about the Bush AWOL bullshit. Guess who keeps this shit up. Ass knot Commie libs

Look up Republic for your own benefit.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by jacksmar
You’re right about a couple things but not because you had any fucking clue about the subject of war. The idea of current conventional war is to involve as few as possible. That happened a long time ago and we’re glad you caught up.
After making a stupid statement live on the Internet for all to see would you mind defining what WMD's are?

The big causalites are coming.

You'll probably be one of them.



P

[King VH]

Ashcroft is right, the noble men and women who serve this country are losing morale everytime someone says the war was for oil, or some bullshit like that. It's a slap in the face. I can't wait to hear one of FORD's republican conspiracy theories. I enjoy listening to his bullshit lies.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by King VH
Ashcroft is right, the noble men and women who serve this country are losing morale everytime someone says the war was for oil, or some bullshit like that. It's a slap in the face. I can't wait to hear one of FORD's republican conspiracy theories. I enjoy listening to his bullshit lies.
Noble?

We've seen that "noble" cigarette hanging from her lip Nazi at the prison.

The truth hurts.

Give me a break !

When the Soviet Union could no longer quarantee rolling in tanks the "troops" in Yugoslavia and Romania were on your TV shooting at their tyrants and killing their wives, too.

Troops wearing the same uniforms were shooting at each other in the streets of their own countries.

I won't be shocked to see the same thing happen in the U.S. soon.

It's going to be something.



P

[jacksmar]

We’re going to lose? You just said you were a good shot?!?

If we’re not shooting at one and other, I don’t believe anyone in their right mind would try to bring anything to a US doorstep again.



I’m hardly a misguided patriot; if needed again, I’m already on a short list.
:)

[John Ashcroft]

Originally posted by Rikk
Obviously you don't read enough papers if you think it's 20%.

Adults? You worry me...you really don't believe in democracy, do you? You'd rather have a government in which soldiers fight without being really told why. You'd prefer government in which the "big boys" make huge decisions that hurt the economy and endanger citizens and don't need to explain why. Look at your history books, Ashcroft. And furthermore, if these guys are so interested in protecting us, why are we in Iraq instead of going after Al Quaida at the core? And why didn't they prevent September 11 in the first place? Why did Condi Rice ignore the warning report that was personally put on her desk in August 2001?

And don't give me your gung ho American bullshit. This is a democracy...if you don't like that, if you don't think we shouldn't question your Daddy's boy, AWOL-running dumbass President, maybe we just shouldn't have an election at all. Maybe George W. should stay President until you say it's time for someone YOU like to take his place. Jesus. Talk about ignorance. Go look up the word "democracy".

First of all fruitcake, we're a Republic, not a democracy. Look it up if the big words scare you. Secondly, we did go after Al Qaeda at it's core, (Afghanistan) and you libs took issue with that as well (remember "Quagmire" after only the second fucking week????). Thirdly, sorry bud, but the "base" of the Democratic party truly is in the 20% range. But fear not, the base of the Republican party is only in the 20% range as well. These are voters who wouldn't vote for the other party no matter what. It's the so-called "swing" vote that makes up the rest of the voting public. And all of those opinion polls you like to read, well they are of "likely" voters only, and typically off by at least the margin of error (especially this early in the election season). Oh, and one more thing on this issue, in the latest poll, 54% of likely voters believe the war in Iraq was not only justified, but going well.

So anyway, trying to belittle my intelligence will get you nowhere. Especially considering that you're brining a knife to a gun fight. You add nothing to discussion around here. You provide no supporting evidence to anything you post. You simply shoot from the hip about the way you feel things "ought to be". Telling me I know nothing about democracy and such just makes you look petty, small, and ignorant (again, especially considering the United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy).

So, go have a cold one, get your shit together, then come back when you want a second helping.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by jacksmar
We’re going to lose? You just said you were a good shot?!?

If we’re not shooting at one and other, I don’t believe anyone in their right mind would try to bring anything to a US doorstep again.



I’m hardly a misguided patriot; if needed again, I’m already on a short list.
:)
Ya know, I just put a guy on ignore today for talking like this. Well, not quite. He said "shut up." Now I know how he feels, but I won't tell you to shut up. Maybe I'll take him off ignore. I'm a fair person:)


P

[jacksmar]

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm

Did we actually find evidence of any of these key weapons programs?

You provide the link.

[jacksmar]

Shut up? He’s missing the simplest point given to us all:
Two ears ----- One mouth.

Guess since you started the thread I’m a guest anyway!!!
:)

[BigBadBrian]

Same thread as a dozen others....different title. :gulp:

[Honeyhunter]

I'm shure we know where our nukes are. Isay dust off the enolagay and bomb that fucking sandbox.

[jacksmar]

And I don’t want to keep beating the same drum, but why are these stories so hard to find?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/07/31/national0212EDT0421.DTL

We found saydam in a hole in the ground and reports say ohsayma is hiding underground. What is it with these people and hiding in the Earth? Sooner or later the Earth First types are going to get wind of this and demand that these guys quit using the Earth for their hiding place because it was never meant for that in the first place, according to them.
:D

[Phil theStalker]

In America soon citizens and troops will be fighting together and each other. They will carry the same American flag and if in uniform they will wear the same uniforms. But the side that needs the UN's help will be the side I'm not on.

You sound like you need the UN, jacksmar.

So I know what American "troops" you'll be fighting with.

Do some more push-ups:D



P

[Rikk]

Originally posted by jacksmar
And, for the last time….. the US isn’t a fucking democracy.

The United States of America is a Republic.

And Rikk while I agree GW is a privileged frat boy, Colin Powell and Dick Cheney are adults.

And see my Kerry link about the Bush AWOL bullshit. Guess who keeps this shit up. Ass knot Commie libs

Look up Republic for your own benefit.

That's your defense? That the U.S. isn't a democracy??? LOL!!!!!:D

[ctiger2]

Tell me the world is not a better place with Saddam out of the picture... They may have gone to war for (in hindsight wrong reasons) but the end result was good for the USA. The USA is where I live.

W in '04.

[Big Train]

still trying to see what people think we went in there for? I want to hear not only from liberals but conservatives. If WMD's weren't a reason (let's just assume for the sake of argument) what were the important secondary reasons we went in there? I'm sure I'll hear a lot about oil, but I want to hear the rest of the case as it's understood to be.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Rikk
It's posts like this that make me smile and sigh relief, knowing which dumbasses will be beaten this November. If this is the attitude and intelligence you find in Bush-supporters, if questioning any government action or analyzing a situation beyond what Rumsfeld says is happening means an idiot reads that as hating his country, then bring it on. What is "loving the U.S." then? Hating every other country and not questioning any U.S. violence whatsoever? I guess Vietnam was right too, huh? And I guess not going into Rwanda to prevent a genocide was right too, because that's what the U.S. did, huh?

And fuck Kerry? Well, good...I'm glad to see you have your arguing skills worked out.
Rikk, I say, "bring it on" to them, too:) They coined the phrase. I like to use it, too.:D

I can and I can't believe some guy in this thread said I "hate America" and implying that people like you "hate" America, too.

Kerry isn't for pulling U.S. bases out of the Middle East either. No matter who wins there will be fighting in the streets.. of Badhdad? Of New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit "burn baby burn," Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, well, you get the idea, sadly.

It's coming no matter which "skull & bonesmen" get in the White House this fall. The war for the fall of America is underway by the one world government and they don't like losing.

But they're going to lose.



P

[Marlowe01]

I'm so SICK of turning on the news every morning and having to hear about TERROR or the word terror or the word TERRORISM. Bush doesn't realize that by trying to play "police of the world" that it's pissing off every country on the planet. America is gonna be fucked pretty soon when other countries start to think WE are a threat. Remember: we're fighting a war because a country COULD attack us, but has no reason to. Bush=FUCKING MORON.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Marlowe01
I'm so SICK of turning on the news every morning and having to hear about TERROR or the word terror or the word TERRORISM. Bush doesn't realize that by trying to play "police of the world" that it's pissing off every country on the planet. America is gonna be fucked pretty soon when other countries start to think WE are a threat. Remember: we're fighting a war because a country COULD attack us, but has no reason to. Bush=FUCKING MORON.

Couldn't agree with you more. Has anybody ever heard the story NEVER CRY WOLF? Bush and his dad's friends are hurting the U.S.'s reputation just to make money for him and his friends. And it's funny how much the U.S.'s world-reputation has been damaged between September 11 and now. There's no more pity...just anger and hatred.

And I'm tired of people thinking that the only things that matter are direct U.S. interests. Number 1, going to war wasn't really in the country's best interests...just certain interested parties. Number 2, how you're perceived in the world community will certainly affect your future well-being. This is more and more an international business and social community. Denying this is completely ignorant.

Antagonizing countries even further and teaching citizens that wars don't always NEED to be fought can hurt the country's future place in the international community, can antagonize enemies and provoke future attacks, and also causes American citizens to further mistrust their own government. Just look at how divided the country is now. And crying "The U.S. is not a democracy, it's a Republic" makes me laugh even more. Saying this is all justified because the U.S. isn't a democracy in the first place just stresses the point even further at how much people are willing to dump free-thinking in order to protect their government's reputation...at any cost.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Big Train
still trying to see what people think we went in there for? I want to hear not only from liberals but conservatives. If WMD's weren't a reason (let's just assume for the sake of argument) what were the important secondary reasons we went in there? I'm sure I'll hear a lot about oil, but I want to hear the rest of the case as it's understood to be.

Drugs and Oil. Starting with the poppy fields in Afghanistan... ...If the CIA didn't deal drugs, the already weakened American economy would collapse... ...and Bush and Cheney are oil Barons in their own right, lining their pockets and the pockets of their companies (Haliburton and the Carlyle Group) every step of the way... ...Iraq was just an ego boost for little Georgie to get the big bad man Daddy couldn't get...

[Warham]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
Rikk, I say, "bring it on" to them, too:) They coined the phrase. I like to use it, too.:D

I can and I can't believe some guy in this thread said I "hate America" and implying that people like you "hate" America, too.

Kerry isn't for pulling U.S. bases out of the Middle East either. No matter who wins there will be fighting in the streets.. of Badhdad? Of New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit "burn baby burn," Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, well, you get the idea, sadly.

It's coming no matter which "skull & bonesmen" get in the White House this fall. The war for the fall of America is underway by the one world government and they don't like losing.

But they're going to lose.



P

I come here to read this shit. If it's going to happen no matter who wins, then what the fuck do you care?

Why are you in here spouting off your liberal nonsense?

Oh, right, I'm on ignore. :rolleyes:

[John Ashcroft]

You're damn right Warham. What fucking nonsense out of the lot of 'em. Rikk's apparently in ignore mode. As soon as someone shoots a hole in his misconceptions, he moves on like it never occurred. I know it's typical behavior of liberals, but I still point it out when I can.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
You're damn right Warham. What fucking nonsense out of the lot of 'em. Rikk's apparently in ignore mode. As soon as someone shoots a hole in his misconceptions, he moves on like it never occurred. I know it's typical behavior of liberals, but I still point it out when I can.

LOL! I responded to your rant...I think it's hilarious that your defense of the government's behavior is that America is not a democracy. What the hell kind of defense is that? That doesn't make any actions that weren't justified suddenly be excusable.

I point out facts. You whine and group any complainers in as "liberals", which is something I've never called myself anyway. It's hilarious...the only thing you keep spouting in this forum, Ashcroft (the only forum you ever seem to be in, considering this is a David Lee Roth forum), is that there is something wrong with questioning your government or questioning a war is insulting the soldiers. No. To question a war is to make sure it's in the best interests of the world, the country invading and the soldiers who are doing the actual dirty work. If someone questions a war (e.g. Vietnam) and we discover there was no real reason for it to happen, then the soldiers are the ones that are vindicated (although if the questioning happens posthumously, then what are you going to say to dead soldiers?). Obviously you don't understand what democracy is. And your only defense to that is that America isn't a democracy.

Well, I'd love to see your pal George Bush declare in a speech tomorrow that America is not a democracy...I think it would pretty much sink any chance he has left of winning. And there would be a giant uproar. Declaring that it's okay because we are not living in a democracy is a pretty sad argument, and it doesn't make you look good.

Democracy, anyway, is an idealogical notion...it's not a reality because you always need government. But America prides itself on being hte land of the free...and freedom includes questioning your government. If you can't do that, then you might as well live in a dictatorship. And what I also find amusing is your giant use of the word (or accusation) "liberal"...or how about "left"? Well, funny enough...do you know that the traditional definition of a leftist person is someone that actually thinks government should have a greater role in our lives? A true right-winger thinks government power should be diminished. So next time you accuse someone of being a "leftist" or "liberal" because they demand that we should question the government, I think you should realize the contradiction. Freedom of speech and democracy (yeah yeah, America isn't a democracy...whatever) are about looking at issues and deciding what's best for the country...not taking sides and making enemies.

Have a nice day.:)

[MAX]

This is exactly why I stay out of this discussion. My late Grandmother told me at a very early age to never argue either politics or religion. This is exactly why I do not.


Anyway, sorry Rikk cos I HAVE to represent and you are one of my very best and most dear friends around but.....


"W" in 2004!!!!! :killer: ;)

[Big Train]

Keeyth,

Help me with a connection your making. How does the CIA drug trade (alleged) boost the US economy? You would think they wouldn't be filing 10-40's on that sort of thing, it's more of a cash and carry business.

Where does that money go and how does it keep our economy from collapsing?

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Warham
I come here to read this shit. If it's going to happen no matter who wins, then what the fuck do you care?

Why are you in here spouting off your liberal nonsense?

Oh, right, I'm on ignore. :rolleyes:
I care about surviving. That's what I care about. And I want to be able to save as many of my family as I can save. Straight up, dude.


PRIVATE MESSAGE:

Warham: Phil I'm sorry for saying you should "shut up." It was rude of me. You raise a lot of interesting questions.

Phil theStalker: Oh Warham, you're t2oo kind;)


Okay Warham, I took you off ignore, because you're a thinker. There is hope for you. I can take disagreement, idiocy, porn, profanity, perversion, but I dislike rudeness. Rudeness is a waste of time.

And time is something we all don't have a lot of right now.


You take care:)

Phil

[lms2]

Why is it so hard for you to understand that both sides are wrong. Just like with the VH saga. Okay. I side with Roth cause this is his site...but my honest opinion is that if the sisters and Mikey were such total fuck ups, Dave could never have made them what they were in the first place.

Kudo's to our noble military for defending this Country. Shame on this country for not being more deserving of the lives lost for it.

It's not Bush's war and he is not wrong for fighting it.

Kerry will never be the reason it ends.

As for the United States being a super power. Our days are numbered. Every great nation since the beginning of time has been beaten by a weaker, less deserving nation, that wanted it just a little bit more and were willing to fight just a little bit harder, and a little bit smarter because they had something they believed in. Most importantly, every great nation that has fallen before us has beaten themselves.

The walls crumble from within. Don't think they don't. That is the biggest mistake you can make. And that we are making. A country divided cannot stand. Though Phil is a little doomsday for me. He is more right than any of us want to admit. So joke about nuking the stupid bastards, but nuclear war is no laughing matter-and it does not take a whole country to fire off a missle. The UN does not have to approve it. It just takes one sick paranoid freak. And there happens to be alot of those in office, everywhere in the world.

To fight or not to fight is not the question, the question is, just exactly what are we fighting for?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by MAX
This is exactly why I stay out of this discussion. My late Grandmother told me at a very early age to never argue either politics or religion. This is exactly why I do not.


Anyway, sorry Rikk cos I HAVE to represent and you are one of my very best and most dear friends around but.....


"W" in 2004!!!!! :killer: ;)

FUCK YOU MAN!!!!!!!!! FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D

It's all good. You know, I have no problem with people that have a different opinion from mine. I don't understand it, but that's the point...people don't always agree. Ashcroft I'm not too fond of because he can really only go on about "liberals" and accuse people of hating America (plus be pretty insulting) without actually offering many points. And he'll think he won if you don't respond to him directly. But this is a FORUM...my responses are directed to everybody. If you want personal conversation, Ashcroft, try a PM. That means private message.

Anyway, you're right MAX...I actually regret getting involved in these conversations, because I'm really here to talk David Lee Roth and Van Halen. But I sometimes read something and feel I have to respond. And then tensions rise, etc.

Oh, I almost forgot, Kerry in 2004!!!:hogan:

[lms2]

Rikk. Just go with it. Thats what keeps us coming back again and again. That anger. That need to respond. People who feel differently than you are what make life worth living. If you cannot objectively question your values, and come out believing stronger than you did before. You have nothing worth valuing.

My problem is no matter which side you are on, I will argue with you, and if/when I finally convince you I am right, I switch sides. At least you know what you believe in. ;)

F*ck Bush and Kerry, Vote ROTH.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lms2
Rikk. Just go with it. Thats what keeps us coming back again and again. That anger. That need to respond. People who feel differently than you are what make life worth living. If you cannot objectively question your values, and come out believing stronger than you did before. You have nothing worth valuing.

My problem is no matter which side you are on, I will argue with you, and if/when I finally convince you I am right, I switch sides. At least you know what you believe in. ;)

F*ck Bush and Kerry, Vote ROTH.

Great points! Debate should teach you something. Of course, I'll never believe that Sammy Hagar should be Van Halen's lead singer and I'll never believe George Bush should be President.

You're right...differences of opinion make life interesting.

Oh, and a vote from me!:)

[Rikk]

Oh...I already gave you a high vote. Well...there! Turns out I was right!

[lms2]

Sorry, I would vote for you, but we exchanged votes some time ago.

If Hagar had never joined Van Halen, the world would never know how important David Lee Roth really was in that band.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lms2
Sorry, I would vote for you, but we exchanged votes some time ago.

If Hagar had never joined Van Halen, the world would never know how important David Lee Roth really was in that band.

Maybe...but we'd have maybe six or seven more amazing albums. It would be the 13-pack instead of the 6-pack!

[lms2]

Never give up hope. Still could be, and then the six pack will be worth way more.

Besides, even without Hagar, the band was taking a turn for the worse. Everything happens for a reason.

I guess we could always send Spammy to Iraq. Worse than a nuclear weapon... (long slow agonizing death)

[MAX]

Originally posted by Rikk
FUCK YOU MAN!!!!!!!!! FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D

Oh, I almost forgot, Kerry in 2004!!!:hogan:

LMAO!!! That Hogan smiley is gay BTW!!!! lol ;) Dude, all is cool, it will always be and that is EXACTLY why I will not debate politically. What is the point? You will never change my mind nor would I change yours. However, a lot of people just enjoy the debating and more power to them.

Kerry is a fag though....... :p

[Cathedral]

Here's an idea for you "This War is Bullshit" thinkers.
Find a soldier you can respect and tell them that, then sit down and get ready to be educated beyond the politicians point of view.

If you want the truth, go to THE source and avoid the watered down, modified and homoginized view points of the sub-sources.

Avoid the soldiers who signed up just for college money and got shipped out. they lied to themselves at the recruiters so they'll probably lie to you about their experiences.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Here's an idea for you "This War is Bullshit" thinkers.
Find a soldier you can respect and tell them that, then sit down and get ready to be educated beyond the politicians point of view.

If you want the truth, go to THE source and avoid the watered down, modified and homoginized view points of the sub-sources.

Avoid the soldiers who signed up just for college money and got shipped out. they lied to themselves at the recruiters so they'll probably lie to you about their experiences.
Been there done that.. if you can find one of the poor lads on leave and not over extended tours. My life doesn't revolve around brainwashed "kids" in uniform who needed jobs and college money. (sic)

The best soldier's comment I've heard was live over the TV from Iraq the day so-called governing was turned over to the hand picked U.S. puppet government.. again.

The reporter, a female American with CBS, was asking a full metal jacket GI kid questions while walking a street in 110 degree heat. She was asking him if there were any changes he could notice that day.

The young, and tired, and brave, and.. he's one of our best.. he said, "Yes, there is a slight different today. Only yesterday we couldn't walk down this street, but today most people are out in the streets with the news and they are leaving us alone and we can walk down this street we're walking on right now."

Then in a split second and in the last 3 seconds of the clip he said, "But we shouldn't even be here."

That "kid" was a man. He probably turned into a man in Iraq and he now has a man's opinion that made the "Wag The Dog" media editing.

Wait until THOSE "kids" show up back at home. The country's going to get an ear full. That "kid" MAN saw his buddies killed and innocent civilians killed and a rebuilding that profits Bush and his cronies. He's not going to need any message board to get his opinion. He's already speaking his mind and it's not the White House lie.

Most of the "kids" and even 30 year olds in the military are in a "need to know" operation. They couldn't be counted on for a balanced opinion unless, like this young many who added onto the CBS reporter's questioning, "..we shouldn't even be here," they've become independent thinking "men" over there.

They, our troops, already know "it's bullshit." I have a neighbor, a young boy, a man, with two kids about 3-4, beautiful kids, he's serving in Iraq. He's been home once, had a few BBQ's, a camping trip, and shipped right back out to Iraq. His children haven't seen him for over a year day-to-day. And these kids are beautiful. You can see this family's sacrifice. You can watch the news and see sacrifice on both sides in Iraq.

The war in Iraq has nothing to do with bin Laden and 9/11 except that it is an excuse to bring more American bases to the Middle East after Kuwait and further the one world government plan of the globalists with U.S. blood and money. Of couse, the truth is it's the globalist's money and our troops are their "toy" soldiers. That's the way they see it.

However, Americans aren't that foolish after Vietnam. There will be marching in the streets at first over the truth of what I just said, but soon the demonstrations will turn into a shooting war this time around.

The marching was done against them in the '60's. It won't be repeated again. This time it's going to quickly escalate to a shooting war to see who will govern this country (i.e., the world) and what they call their beloved German bloodline "homeland."

Add another mass casualty terror act in the U.S. like 9/11 or worse and you've got a civil war right on your hands overnight.

Are you prepared?




P

[John Ashcroft]

Originally posted by Rikk
LOL! I responded to your rant...I think it's hilarious that your defense of the government's behavior is that America is not a democracy. What the hell kind of defense is that? That doesn't make any actions that weren't justified suddenly be excusable.

I point out facts. You whine and group any complainers in as "liberals", which is something I've never called myself anyway. It's hilarious...the only thing you keep spouting in this forum, Ashcroft (the only forum you ever seem to be in, considering this is a David Lee Roth forum), is that there is something wrong with questioning your government or questioning a war is insulting the soldiers. No. To question a war is to make sure it's in the best interests of the world, the country invading and the soldiers who are doing the actual dirty work. If someone questions a war (e.g. Vietnam) and we discover there was no real reason for it to happen, then the soldiers are the ones that are vindicated (although if the questioning happens posthumously, then what are you going to say to dead soldiers?). Obviously you don't understand what democracy is. And your only defense to that is that America isn't a democracy.

Well, I'd love to see your pal George Bush declare in a speech tomorrow that America is not a democracy...I think it would pretty much sink any chance he has left of winning. And there would be a giant uproar. Declaring that it's okay because we are not living in a democracy is a pretty sad argument, and it doesn't make you look good.

Democracy, anyway, is an idealogical notion...it's not a reality because you always need government. But America prides itself on being hte land of the free...and freedom includes questioning your government. If you can't do that, then you might as well live in a dictatorship. And what I also find amusing is your giant use of the word (or accusation) "liberal"...or how about "left"? Well, funny enough...do you know that the traditional definition of a leftist person is someone that actually thinks government should have a greater role in our lives? A true right-winger thinks government power should be diminished. So next time you accuse someone of being a "leftist" or "liberal" because they demand that we should question the government, I think you should realize the contradiction. Freedom of speech and democracy (yeah yeah, America isn't a democracy...whatever) are about looking at issues and deciding what's best for the country...not taking sides and making enemies.

Have a nice day.:)

Ah, missed the point entirely... You threw down with the premise that I don't understand democracy, I simply corrected your misconception of what type of system the United States is. I assigned no other meaning to "Republic" vs. "Democracy". You simply are using typical liberal smear tactics by assigning meaning to my statements that does not exist.

It won't work.

However, I'll talk in smaller words so you can understand what I was trying to say (so you won't make the mistake of assigning imaginary meaning to my statements again).

You went on a rant claiming Republicans are trying to destroy democracy. The whole base of the rant is simply flawed. I didn't even attempt to counter your charge because we can't get there until you understand just what the fuck you're talking about (clearly you don't). It's important for you to understand our system correctly before you can come here and claim to be it's savior. Or even come here to claim a group of Americans are trying to destroy it. So, I'm simply asking "destroy what"? You see, you don't even know what us Conservatives are "trying to destroy". You apparently don't have the slightest notion of how our system works. It's apparent by your claims of being the defender of democracy.

Once again, our nation is a Republic, not a democracy (say the pledge if you remember it, it's in there). Do you know the difference? And if you don't, no worries. There are plenty of people here that can educate you. Once properly educated, we can continue debate on the merits of any given policy (including the war).

Oh, and BTW, don't worry your little self about where and when I post. You're adding absolutely no merit to yourself with your little observation (although once again, typical behavior from people like you. If you can't win in the arena of ideas, attempt to discredit your opponent).

[Rikk]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
Ah, missed the point entirely... You threw down with the premise that I don't understand democracy, I simply corrected your misconception of what type of system the United States is. I assigned no other meaning to "Republic" vs. "Democracy". You simply are using typical liberal smear tactics by assigning meaning to my statements that does not exist.

It won't work.

However, I'll talk in smaller words so you can understand what I was trying to say (so you won't make the mistake of assigning imaginary meaning to my statements again).

You went on a rant claiming Republicans are trying to destroy democracy. The whole base of the rant is simply flawed. I didn't even attempt to counter your charge because we can't get there until you understand just what the fuck you're talking about (clearly you don't). It's important for you to understand our system correctly before you can come here and claim to be it's savior. Or even come here to claim a group of Americans are trying to destroy it. So, I'm simply asking "destroy what"? You see, you don't even know what us Conservatives are "trying to destroy". You apparently don't have the slightest notion of how our system works. It's apparent by your claims of being the defender of democracy.

Once again, our nation is a Republic, not a democracy (say the pledge if you remember it, it's in there). Do you know the difference? And if you don't, no worries. There are plenty of people here that can educate you. Once properly educated, we can continue debate on the merits of any given policy (including the war).

Oh, and BTW, don't worry your little self about where and when I post. You're adding absolutely no merit to yourself with your little observation (although once again, typical behavior from people like you. If you can't win in the arena of ideas, attempt to discredit your opponent).

I've said it before, I'll say it again. You are a true fucking idiot. You do not know how to read. "Republicans are trying to destroy democracy"? Interesting. Where was that contrived from? And now I'm the defender of democracy? And don't talk down to me about being educated, dumbass. University-educated, thank you very much. You, on the other hand, care so much about politics that you spend all your pathetic time talking politics (and politics only) at a freaking music site. Sad.

Don't tell me when I can debate. I will debate when I want to. In fact, I am debating with people here...but not you. You are ignoring almost every point I post. And you are repeating yourself over and over again..."We are a Republic." Very good. What does this prove? Does this somehow discount the idea that people should be allowed to question their government in the United States? For the third time you avoid the point. And because you are an egotistical idiot that doesn't understand that saying something over and over again does not make an argument. Arguing with you is like trying to put out a forest fire by pissing on it. It's a hopeless exercise. I feel like I'm watching a fish flop around in a boat, trying to survive. You cite your few "facts", say the same things over and over again and then get insulting with everybody that jumps in here. Here's "John Ashcroft" at the David Lee Roth site, talking about how this country is a Republic and how all "liberals" are trying to destroy the Republicans. Yawn. Make an argument. It's all you have to do. You have the debating skills of a five-year-old. Maybe, if you actually analyze posts, you'll realize it's not all one big conspiracy and that people are actually just trying to make sure their government is doing the right thing. Maybe your way of dealing with such insolence is to insult people...but many people like to just question their government. It kinda goes hand-in-hand with that voting thing you don't seem to be too fond of either.

Is this really the Democrats vs. the Republicans? Well, this November it is. For me, it's a group of politicians versus another group of politicians. John Kerry doesn't hold all my answers...but he certainly isn't George Bush. It's about the party and the groups he represents. But if you want to talk integrity, I still think it's hilarious that you have a dumbass President that went AWOL questioning the integrity of another man that actually fought. But that's just media bullshit. If you think one party holds all your answers, then continue being a groupie. I could give a shit about your Republican party. You've read things into my statements without them actually being said (you really seem to be filled with a lot of hatred, "Ashcroft"...BTW, get your own idea...you are NOT John Ashcroft). I do think overall more harm is done to the economy by the so-called "right-wing" Republicans. Well, this President has been a bigger spender than the last one. He's pushed for greater government involvement in personal freedoms. How the hell is that right-wing? Do you just vote for him because he has a "Republican" tag next to his name?

Anyway, you really make me laugh. Watching you not really argue and make up things I've said is just hilarious.

Have a nice day...snicker...John Ashcroft.:D

[Warham]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
I care about surviving. That's what I care about. And I want to be able to save as many of my family as I can save. Straight up, dude.


PRIVATE MESSAGE:

Warham: Phil I'm sorry for saying you should "shut up." It was rude of me. You raise a lot of interesting questions.

Phil theStalker: Oh Warham, you're t2oo kind;)


Okay Warham, I took you off ignore, because you're a thinker. There is hope for you. I can take disagreement, idiocy, porn, profanity, perversion, but I dislike rudeness. Rudeness is a waste of time.

And time is something we all don't have a lot of right now.


You take care:)

Phil

As Bill Clinton, your hero, might say, "I don't recall sending a private message."

[Marlowe01]

Could someone please tell me one GOOD reason why our troops are over there? Don't give me that "you don't have an ounce" of honor BULLSHIT. If I'm lacking so much honor, tell me why we're over there then. This war is only being fought for Bush and Cheney's companies, Haliburton and Carlyle...nothing more, nothing less. Oh, and I'm going to say this again: I'm so SICK of hearing about TERROR on the news. SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY!

[Marlowe01]

Five bucks says once the election rolls around, Bush and his idiot friends all announce to us, "Oh yeah...(with a big smile) we've discovered Osama bin Laden." This will make people think that he should be re-elected...so, in the end, he will. But I still think Bush=FUCKING MORON. Can someone please tell me ONE good thing Bush has done for our country? PLEASE!!???

[Marlowe01]

Oh, and another thing: when's the last time there was an actual OCCURENCE of terror against the US, other than September 11th? Wait, NEVER! The terror alerts just make people were are paranoid already even MORE paranoid. I'm also getting tired of people commercializing 9-11-01 by making T-shirts, etc. Ok, you can remember the date and remember what it stands for, but it's been 3 YEARS. Some people need to learn to MOVE ON.

[Marlowe01]

People, you have 2 choices for president this year: 1- John Kerry, and 2- David Lee Roth. Enough said.

[Marlowe01]

This goes for everyone...any soldier you DO ask about the war will ask the same question: Why are we here?

[Marlowe01]

I can see maybe why we're in Afganistan, KIND OF, but Iraq is just a waste of our time. Plain and simple. The soldiers themselves don't even know why they're in Iraq. Bushwhacker probably didn't even disclose why they're over there to them...it's top secret. LOL

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
The War is not bullshit, and it's an insult to all that are currently fighting, and all who've died to say so. Guys like you are fucking spoilded little children, who wouldn't know sacrifice, duty, or honor from a fucking hole in the ground. What do you consider sacrifice??? Missing an episode of "The Real World" to go finger-bang your nasty little ho of a girlfriend?

You know what, vote for Kerry! He deserves you, and the rest like you. Thank God that only accounts for about 20% of our public. You're a fucking zit on America's ass. A simple annoyance that poses no real danger, but still a bit of embarrassment. So go out on the rafters and scream at the top of your lungs "Useless mother-fuckers like me endorse "The New JFK"! He's the "real-deal"!" Go on, proclaim your faith in the man. And leave the hard decisions to the adults. Fucking child.

"Yep, us adults have responsibilities. We don't have time to think for ourselves or rationally project the consequences of our foriegn policy. If the American people voted BW into office, then he must be the right person for the job. And if he's the right person for the job, then dag nabbit, then he must be making the right decisions. Who am I to question the executive branch? Plus, I got a $200 tax break this year! Yay Bush!"

You thoughtless war mongers are the real zits on America's Ass. We could have used our troop strength for something that might benefit the human race, but instead we squandered it to steal oil and continue our pig-headed and wreckless Mid-East policies. Now it will take years to reconstitute. And our enemies know that.

While you obviously have some intelligence Ashcroft, you are thoroughly brainwashed. I'd feel bad for you except that the illimination of free thought really does make life more pleasant.

[Rikk]

Never understood the hogwash TERROR ALERTS that seem to be released every time Bush has something negative happen to him in the press. I mean, if these weren't self-serving reports, why would an honest government release them? If anything, it seems to almost dare the attackers and it scares Americans. What is an American going to do if an Orange Alert comes up? Look under his bed before he goes to sleep? It just scares people and causes people to go out less, etc. It ends up crippling the economy to a small degree.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
"Yep, us adults have responsibilities. We don't have time to think for ourselves or rationally project the consequences of our foriegn policy. If the American people voted BW into office, then he must be the right person for the job. And if he's the right person for the job, then dag nabbit, then he must be making the right decisions. Who am I to question the executive branch? Plus, I got a $200 tax break this year! Yay Bush!"

You thoughtless war mongers are the real zits on America's Ass. We could have used our troop strength for something that might benefit the human race, but instead we squandered it to steal oil and continue our pig-headed and wreckless Mid-East policies. Now it will take years to reconstitute. And our enemies know that.

While you obviously have some intelligence Ashcroft, you are thoroughly brainwashed. I'd feel bad for you except that the illimination of free thought really does make life more pleasant.

I think you're giving Ashcroft too much credit...he's not intelligent. But he is brainwashed. Furthermore, saying that questioning a war is insulting to the soldiers is a completely illogical argument. That's like saying questioning Jewish extermination was an insult to the S.S. Stormtroopers shooting people in the back of the head. There's no logic to it. Soldiers do fight for unlawful causes, Ashcroft. You may not think so...but you probably don't read your history. Of course, the soldiers aren't really to blame. But as bad as I feel for them, I feel worse for those whose homes and businesses have been decimated and those businesses in Iraq going bankrupt because Bush has inexplicably opened up an international market, killing the living of the domestic Iraqi businessman. But I guess this doesn't matter, does it, Ashcroft? Because it's up against them, eh pardner? Yee-haw!

[ODShowtime]

Well, "intelligent" to a republican means being able to parrot the correct response for every argument on the official list of winnable arguements and not addressing the losable ones, which he does nicely. I don't think it's nice to gang up on people, but he was getting a little sassy. I'm sure he'll make another grand entrance once he gets a break from servicing the snack machines at the barracks.

One thing I am worried about that is being mentioned in this thread is that old GW has not had any big shenanigans lately. I am very concerned about what kind of bullshit ace he has up his sleave. These bastards will do anything to stay in office because they know that once voted out, there is a good chance they'll face indictment for charges ranging from corruption to war crimes.

And Ashcroft loves them!!! "so what that I my VP's old company is being sued by their stockholders for accounting fraud while he was the CEO, no biggy! All adults commit accounting fraud every now and then!"

get your head out of your fucking ass man!!!!

[Warham]

If Bush went into Iraq to steal oil, why is it still $50 a barrel?

Remember when the libs were saying, 'oh shit, Bush is going to lower the barrel prices so that he'll get re-elected.'

I don't see that yet.

Also, troop strength is not used to benefit the common man. Troop strength is used to win wars and keep our country safe. Our armed forces don't exist to benefit the human race.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
If Bush went into Iraq to steal oil, why is it still $50 a barrel?

Remember when the libs were saying, 'oh shit, Bush is going to lower the barrel prices so that he'll get re-elected.'

I don't see that yet.

Also, troop strength is not used to benefit the common man. Troop strength is used to win wars and keep our country safe. Our armed forces don't exist to benefit the human race.

Actually, first off, it wasn't the "libs". What is that? A licorice candy? It was the media anyway. CNN posted that. And CNN aren't exactly left-wing media.

Second, the report said Bush would have the gas prices brought up slightly over the summer and brought down right before the election. So far, the prices have indeed gone up this summer. Will they be brought down around October? Just watch.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Warham
If Bush went into Iraq to steal oil, why is it still $50 a barrel?


Remember when the libs were saying, 'oh shit, Bush is going to lower the barrel prices so that he'll get re-elected.'

I don't see that yet.

Also, troop strength is not used to benefit the common man. Troop strength is used to win wars and keep our country safe. Our armed forces don't exist to benefit the human race.


#1 "If Bush went into Iraq to steal oil, why is it still $50 a barrel? "

the goal wasn't for the US or US consumers to profit overall, just that the profits are flowing into the coffers of bush&friends. Plus, the Iraqis keep on attacking "their own" oil pipelines to prevent us from getting it to market.

If Iraq's oil industry was functioning at full capacity, which even without attacks would take a long time to accomplish, we would see a reduction in price from the increase in supply... except that bush&friends would control production and hence supply. That's why they want it all, so they can control output and price. Not too hard to understand really. It's right in front of everyone with enough sense to see it.


#2 "Our armed forces don't exist to benefit the human race."

That is rather naive, isn't it? Ok, good point.

I understand that one of our strategies overall was too surround Iran, which we have accomplished nicely, but now what? If we go in there we'll fuck everything up. Those people are not happy with the Clerics, but they're rally behind them in a heartbeat.

[Warham]

Iran will probably be next, I'm sure.

CNN not left-wing? You are talking about the Clinton News Network, right?

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Marlowe01
This goes for everyone...any soldier you DO ask about the war will ask the same question: Why are we here?

How many of the boys and girls over there have you talked to/know, because I wouldn't say any soldier.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Marlowe01
Some people need to learn to MOVE ON.

Easy for you to say. You didn't grow up there or have memories of going to work there every day.

I hope we never move on just so that we'll never forget.

It might have been just a pair of buildings and their lil buddies to you, but for some of us it was a second home.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Marlowe01
Bush doesn't realize that by trying to play "police of the world" that it's pissing off every country on the planet.

Funny, other countries don't have a problem with us playing police of the world when it directly helps them obtain a goal. How about all the lil problems that have nothing to do with us at all that we get pulled into because they want us to play police of the wolrd. Then when something happens and we act without them begging us, we're a problem. Can't have it both ways.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
Iran will probably be next, I'm sure.

CNN not left-wing? You are talking about the Clinton News Network, right?

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I like you Warham, but come on!!! The CNN network went nuts with the whole Lewinsky-gate crap, but when Bush is rumored to have endangered the life of a CIA operative, when stories that Bush went AWOL come to light, when his DUI conviction is brought up, when evidence that the imminent threat for war was fabricated is presented, CNN typically has a quiet report and then buries it.

If you think CNN is left-wing, then I'm afraid to ask what you think is Conservative news. Where do you get your news? Fox?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Funny, other countries don't have a problem with us playing police of the world when it directly helps them obtain a goal. How about all the lil problems that have nothing to do with us at all that we get pulled into because they want us to play police of the wolrd. Then when something happens and we act without them begging us, we're a problem. Can't have it both ways.

LOL. When did "other countries" come out and collectively say this?

Dude, this isn't America vs. The World. This isn't "Oh help us, Mr. America". America is always acting in its own best interests. It may work with other countries because both gain. But if you think the rest of the world are just spoiled brats, complaining about this fucking war, then I have some "freedom fries" and "liberty toast" to sell you.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Big Train
Keeyth,

Help me with a connection your making. How does the CIA drug trade (alleged) boost the US economy? You would think they wouldn't be filing 10-40's on that sort of thing, it's more of a cash and carry business.

Where does that money go and how does it keep our economy from collapsing?

What, you've never heard of money laundering?? It's a trillion-dollar business there buddy...:rolleyes:

[Ally_Kat]

Who's the rest of the world? France and Germany who were getting backdoor deals from Iraq? Some protesters who, no matter what, will object anything. Anarchists who don't like any government? The majority of people in Spain who allowed a terrorist bombing to affect their election and get the people the teorrists wanted in office elected?


God, I hope we never end up like Spain.

[Ally_Kat]

Oh! forgot --


Originally posted by Rikk
America is always acting in its own best interests.

except with that ethnic cleansing happening back in the 90s. Clinton okayed helping out with that not because UN troops weren't doing shit or where getting hammered. Nope. He did it because his personal approval ratings were dropping. Great nobel leader.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
Soldiers do fight for unlawful causes, Ashcroft. You may not think so...but you probably don't read your history.

He doesn't need to. He's served.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
Never understood the hogwash TERROR ALERTS that seem to be released every time Bush has something negative happen to him in the press. I mean, if these weren't self-serving reports, why would an honest government release them? If anything, it seems to almost dare the attackers and it scares Americans. What is an American going to do if an Orange Alert comes up? Look under his bed before he goes to sleep? It just scares people and causes people to go out less, etc. It ends up crippling the economy to a small degree.

They had chatter that said 9/11 was going to happen. they didn't mention the possbility of an attack for whatever reason. People bitched. People wanted to be warned if something significant was found. So they made this system to placate people. Now the same people who bitched for it keep bitching that there's this useless system. Well, the voices shouted for it. And if we were to do away with it, the voices would shout we were planning the next huge attack to ourselves.

Just proof that you can never please the public.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
They had chatter that said 9/11 was going to happen. they didn't mention the possbility of an attack for whatever reason. People bitched. People wanted to be warned if something significant was found. So they made this system to placate people. Now the same people who bitched for it keep bitching that there's this useless system. Well, the voices shouted for it. And if we were to do away with it, the voices would shout we were planning the next huge attack to ourselves.

Just proof that you can never please the public.

It's not about pleasing the public, dude. It's about keeping them safe but not causing an unnecessary panic. An honest and responsible politician would know that making a bullshit color scheme is only going to make things worse.

[MAX]

Excellent points Ally. Also, we aren't just doing this all by our lonesome. Why isn't anyone giving props to our stellar friends who are in this effort with us? We should thank the Bristish, our mates from Oz and the Polish for standing beside us.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
He doesn't need to. He's served.

And this means he's always right about world affairs? I don't think so. I respect men who put their lives on the line for their country, but this doesn't mean I respect every cause they are fighting for. That's ridiculous. Do you respect the cause the German soldiers were fighting for at Normandy? I'm sure those boys were also innocent and trying to help their cause. I'm sure those boys thought they were doing good. But it's a damn good thing they were beaten and proven wrong, isn't it?

To say you must respect every war because you don't want to disrespect the troops is insanity. Vietnam was wrong. Even the history books preach this now. Does this mean I think badly of the soldiers that fought in that war? Hell no. I think badly of the politicians that sent them there (one Democrat, one Republican).

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Rikk
I've said it before, I'll say it again. You are a true fucking idiot.

Rikk, truer words were never spoken!


But if you want to talk integrity, I still think it's hilarious that you have a dumbass President that went AWOL questioning the integrity of another man that actually fought.

Let's not forget John Ashcroft's 7 (count 'em SEVEN) deferments to get out of going to Vietnam himself! Why would you align yourself with that pussy, JA? Will the real John Ashcroft please stand up?
(not for his country he wont!):D

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
It's not about pleasing the public, dude. It's about keeping them safe but not causing an unnecessary panic. An honest and responsible politician would know that making a bullshit color scheme is only going to make things worse.

So then what would you do? Remember, if you don't have some visible way to telling them where things are, they'll bitch.

I want to hear about your system.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Oh! forgot --



except with that ethnic cleansing happening back in the 90s. Clinton okayed helping out with that not because UN troops weren't doing shit or where getting hammered. Nope. He did it because his personal approval ratings were dropping. Great nobel leader.

Clinton did shit about Rwanda. He acted once it was all over. And that was disgusting. I don't pander to either party. I think the Democrats are capable of tons of shit. And it was all well and good for Clinton to talk about the tragedy of the Tutsis after the whole thing was over...but by then, almost 900,000 people were murdered.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
So then what would you do? Remember, if you don't have some visible way to telling them where things are, they'll bitch.

I want to hear about your system.

It's called private intelligence. You don't tell the public "It's time to start pannicking...look for terrorists under your beds at night." There is NOTHING the public can do about it. You don't tell them they may be killed tonight but not tell them how or why. That just disrupts the economy. The color alert system is a political smokescreen, nothing more. Few intelligence intellectuals in the country would disagree with this.

Why don't you tell me how it helps to get the country into a panic? What is the public to do when it's an orange alert? Look both ways before crossing the street?

And it's not about avoiding people's bitching. Who cares if people bitch? It's about what's best for the country. People bitch about speed limits and taxes. But they're necessary. You don't just pander to the public. And I don't think for one second they were thinking of the public. I think fear sells ballots, and I think it also makes the American people think that intelligence is really doing something. And maybe they are. But why advertise it?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Rikk, truer words were never spoken!

Let's not forget John Ashcroft's 7 (count 'em SEVEN) deferments to get out of going to Vietnam himself! Why would you align yourself with that pussy, JA? Will the real John Ashcroft please stand up?
(not for his country he wont!):D

Yeah, I don't understand this Ashcroft bullshit...the man is a rather corrupt service-avoider. Why use him as your username?

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
Clinton did shit about Rwanda. He acted once it was all over. And that was disgusting. I don't pander to either party. I think the Democrats are capable of tons of shit. And it was all well and good for Clinton to talk about the tragedy of the Tutsis after the whole thing was over...but by then, almost 900,000 people were murdered.

Exactly. It might have been ni our best interest to help out ; Make us look compasionate and that we care. But no, he just stood by. Only acted with stuff that hurt his rating. His PERSONAL rating. Not even the f'in country's.

Not that I support haivng to solve every world problem, but the accounts I've read of what happened over there are horrible. Something could ahve done ot help out at least.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Funny, other countries don't have a problem with us playing police of the world when it directly helps them obtain a goal. How about all the lil problems that have nothing to do with us at all that we get pulled into because they want us to play police of the wolrd. Then when something happens and we act without them begging us, we're a problem. Can't have it both ways.
Why do people say "us" when the U.S. government does something the American people never approved of?

Do you all have enough bullets or none?

Do you at least have food stocked up?

Do you have a water purification system?


That's what "us" have to take care of while "they" use our country's government offices until the time "we" take the government back.

Ta-da.



P

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by MAX
Excellent points Ally. Also, we aren't just doing this all by our lonesome. Why isn't anyone giving props to our stellar friends who are in this effort with us? We should thank the Bristish, our mates from Oz and the Polish for standing beside us.

Afghanistan
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain (even though they pulled out)
Tonga
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan

[MAX]

Thanks Ally for being more specific. :)

[jacksmar]

“not taking sides and making enemies.� – Rikk

I can and I can't believe some guy in this thread said I "hate America" and implying that people like you "hate" America, too. – Phil on jacksmar

You sound like you need the UN, jacksmar. - Phil

The UN should leave the US, Phil. And Rikk that was taking a side. The rest of the world should wonder if the US (we) likes them. Period.

I’m not some blind neocon or some plebe leftist commie lib.

"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended. Its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war . . . and in the degeneracy of manners and morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." James Madison 1795

Anytime I need a look at the future of the United States, I need only look from where we’ve come. I’m not the conservative type most would put a label on.

http://usembassy.state.gov/islamabad/wwwh03100801.html

You can draw your own conclusions, but I think (there it is!!!!!) Powell has the demeanor, resume, ability, and respect to get most of my attention to the Iraq war matter.

Okay?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Exactly. It might have been ni our best interest to help out ; Make us look compasionate and that we care. But no, he just stood by. Only acted with stuff that hurt his rating. His PERSONAL rating. Not even the f'in country's.

Not that I support haivng to solve every world problem, but the accounts I've read of what happened over there are horrible. Something could ahve done ot help out at least.

True, true.

At the same time, there's a genocide beginning right now in Sudan, and the Bush administration is one of the few in the world that is denying its importance and trying at all costs to avoid involvement...and for the same reasons Clinton avoided Rwanda: no profit. Seriously, they want to help the Iraqi people? What about helping an entire civilization that is about to be wiped out through vicious murder?

The U.S. call themselves peacekeeprs, and sometimes they are. But in many cases, they'll ignore something. Genocides happen every decade (it's not just the holocaust...a big misconception). The Armenian Genocide (which took several members of my family, including my great-grandmother and great-uncle!), the Ukrainian famine, the Cambodian holocaust, and many many more. Democrat, Republican...both parties have a history of ignoring these tragedies while fully knowing they're happening. If the U.S. is supposed to protect the world, they should stand by that and support proper human rights legislation. We're in Iraq while maybe a million Africans will be slaughtered. And NOTHING is being done about it. The Canadians saved many 100,000 lives in Rwanda with no help from anyone. Maybe this time they could actually be able to work with someone and stop this one.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by jacksmar
“not taking sides and making enemies.� – Rikk

I can and I can't believe some guy in this thread said I "hate America" and implying that people like you "hate" America, too. – Phil on jacksmar

You sound like you need the UN, jacksmar. - Phil

The UN should leave the US, Phil. And Rikk that was taking a side. The rest of the world should wonder if the US (we) likes them. Period.

I’m not some blind neocon or some plebe leftist commie lib.

"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended. Its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war . . . and in the degeneracy of manners and morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." James Madison 1795

Anytime I need a look at the future of the United States, I need only look from where we’ve come. I’m not the conservative type most would put a label on.

http://usembassy.state.gov/islamabad/wwwh03100801.html

You can draw your own conclusions, but I think (there it is!!!!!) Powell has the demeanor, resume, ability, and respect to get most of my attention to the Iraq war matter.

Okay?

:( It's not about Powell. It's not about a man. It's about facts and no possible alternative. I don't make my decisions based only on what is told to me on CNN or CBS. I think it's right to do research and also realize that men like Colin Powell may have agendas of their own. To think otherwise is the ultimate in naivety.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
<marquee scrollamount=9 direction=up>Afghanistan
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain (even though they pulled out)
Tonga
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan</marquee>
A bunch of former Soviet commie countries looking for a big brother again in the U.S., oh, and Palau, don't use the people of Palau as a country, Ally_Kat. I like to read you, but you are not fully knowledgeable about all of what you are seeing and writing. Palau is a U.S. base for the 1st Marine Division.. well, I don't have the time to go through each so-called "country" on "our" side, there Ally. Do you think the little islanders there on Palau really care about what happens in Iraq? NO! They don't. They do not. How did the little "country" of Palau find out more about the need of a war to bring "democracy" to Iraq than the little city of Cleveland?

Your theory about "countries" supporting "us" is flawed greatly, dear.:)

Wake up and learn, Al.

It's the pits of the world. They're all slaves to the Soviets or now the U.S. or wherever their next world meal-ticket is to come from.

Boy, that's a stellar array of "countries" on "our" side for nothing more than bringing "demorcracy" to the little country of Iraq.

Yeh sure.

If you believe that then I'm going to have to stop reading you.

Why?

Because you're smart and have the facts, like this long list, but you don't learn from them.

I'm sorry to say this, but you have a "shallow" explaination of all of your "facts," honey:)




P

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
It's called private intelligence. You don't tell the public "It's time to start pannicking...look for terrorists under your beds at night." There is NOTHING the public can do about it. You don't tell them they may be killed tonight but not tell them how or why. That just disrupts the economy. The color alert system is a political smokescreen, nothing more. Few intelligence intellectuals in the country would disagree with this.

Why don't you tell me how it helps to get the country into a panic? What is the public to do when it's an orange alert? Look both ways before crossing the street?

And it's not about avoiding people's bitching. Who cares if people bitch? It's about what's best for the country. People bitch about speed limits and taxes. But they're necessary. You don't just pander to the public. And I don't think for one second they were thinking of the public. I think fear sells ballots, and I think it also makes the American people think that intelligence is really doing something. And maybe they are. But why advertise it?

Yeah, that's what we have. That's what most major countries have.

And when the alert came for Downtown, they told us where and how. I don't support telling all the details. Maybe a lil this is what is suspected, but deffy not everything they know about something. And I know they dont' tell everything.

But, there are some stupid-ass people who live in the world that feel the public should know everything that is handed to every person who works at every intelligence angency on the globe. Trying to tell them you can't do that because suspect Mohammad and his crew will disappear and never show up again is like talking to a brick wall. They'll cry that it's a conspiracy and other random stupid claims about how there's 3 people in a bunker under the Atlantic ocean rulling the world. The system that is out is to placate them and unfortunatly "them" is a good part of the world's (not just America's) population.

Why advertise it? It's the same thing with people who think that going to a ranch means the President's not working that day. The public thinks that if they don't hear about something or don't see people in a certain place talking about it, that it's over and nothing is being done about it.

And quite frankly, if I were president, I would have done similar. One less thing to have the public and media harp me over that I'm not informing the American people and that I'm doing nothing while I'm trying to conduct the affairs of the country.

[Keeyth]

Ally, Ally, Ally... ...the reason we weren't told about the chatter prior to 9-11 is because Bush wanted, no more to the point NEEDED, 9-11 to happen in order to further his plans for this war and to further his global domination in the Middle East... ...I know that is extremely unpallatable to think of, but I truly believe he is that fucking evil... ...and I'm not alone in thinking this.
In fact, if you read "The Grand Chessboard" written in 1997 (FOUR YEARS before 9-11-01) a former aide to Carter and Reagan circled an area called the Caspian Basin (Afghanistan) and said "This is where the next world conflict will be. This is where they have discovered the largest remaining underground oil reserve, and America wants it. However, in order for the American people to get behind an invasion of that country would require an act ON THE LEVEL OF PEARL HARBOR to earn their support."
And what did we get? 9-11.
This was spelled out in this book FOUR YEARS before it happened...
...similar plans are called for in the PNAC (written by Cheney and the BCE) that FORD is always talking about... ...There is a criminal syndicate running this country right now, and they got there by stealing an election... ...we have a sitting president nobody elected... ...our first Commander-in-THIEF... ...why is it so hard to believe you are backing the wrong horse?

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Ally, Ally, Ally... ...the reason we weren't told about the chatter prior to 9-11 is ur first Commander-in-THIEF... ...why is it so hard to believe you are backing the wrong horse?
I have noticed this about her, too. She's so smart. Yet she's stuck on the wrong side for.. some reason.

It's her own personal life. Let her figure it out the next time the lights go out all over the U.S. (and the whole country of Italy and the whole city of London) because a lonesome little old "tree branch" touched a power line in Cleveland. Yeh, right. Haha.



P

[Rikk]

I won't talk about Bush knowing about it beforehand. There's little real evidence of that. But I will say that it certainly helped in terms of giving that administration room to do anything they wanted, foreign policy-wise.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Yeah, that's what we have. That's what most major countries have.

And when the alert came for Downtown, they told us where and how. I don't support telling all the details. Maybe a lil this is what is suspected, but deffy not everything they know about something. And I know they dont' tell everything.

But, there are some stupid-ass people who live in the world that feel the public should know everything that is handed to every person who works at every intelligence angency on the globe. Trying to tell them you can't do that because suspect Mohammad and his crew will disappear and never show up again is like talking to a brick wall. They'll cry that it's a conspiracy and other random stupid claims about how there's 3 people in a bunker under the Atlantic ocean rulling the world. The system that is out is to placate them and unfortunatly "them" is a good part of the world's (not just America's) population.

Why advertise it? It's the same thing with people who think that going to a ranch means the President's not working that day. The public thinks that if they don't hear about something or don't see people in a certain place talking about it, that it's over and nothing is being done about it.

And quite frankly, if I were president, I would have done similar. One less thing to have the public and media harp me over that I'm not informing the American people and that I'm doing nothing while I'm trying to conduct the affairs of the country.

Your argument is contradictory. You complain about "stupid" people needing to know everything and explain why that is not good. Then you say it's a good idea to pander to the public and let them know everything. That is not logical. Furthermore, if your only goal is to save people (and not pander to the public), don't you think not giving in to "stupid" public pressure is more important?

There has been little intelligence information that has really meant much. It's been fear-mongering. After 9-11, Guiliani urged people to not see terrorists on every sreet corner and to just go out and not be afraid...don't hurt the economy. What does Bush do? He pushed for fear, because it helps his public image. But it sure doesn't help the country, because if there is a threat the public will be no safer with an orange light being revealed on their TV screens.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Rikk
I won't talk about Bush knowing about it beforehand. There's little real evidence of that. But I will say that it certainly helped in terms of giving that administration room to do anything they wanted, foreign policy-wise.
BOJINKA

Operation BOJINKA

I'd heard and read about Operation BOJINKA long, long before 9/11. You'd have faired better if I were in the White House, I'm sure of that. But you get Bush and Rice instead.

If you need for me to explain for you what Operation BOJINKA was then join Bush and Rice and Co., who I believe have set our country up on purpose for their own long term agendas. Wait till the big 3rd World War starts and they try to consolidate the whole planet.

Yeh, old George never heard of the "one world government" even though I've heard they're building it, a "one world government" right from the lips of David Rockefeller.

But I guess Bush misses all of that; his daddy, too. All of them.

But I will agree with you that Bush doen't know much of anything before hand. His "handlers" do. I believe that.



P

[Ally_Kat]

That's right, I'm wrong and you guys are all right that there's going to be some revolution in a few years where, in this world were every country is out for their own interests (one of the reasons France and Germany cockblocked the UN approval) and can't fully agree on anything, we'll be living under the same leader and somehow be able to make things work.

Everything in this country, and now this world, has been one huge secret conspiracy since JFK's assassination.

I stopped beliving in tall tales when I was little.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
That's right, I'm wrong and you guys are all right that there's going to be some revolution in a few years where, in this world were every country is out for their own interests (one of the reasons France and Germany cockblocked the UN approval) and can't fully agree on anything, we'll be living under the same leader and somehow be able to make things work.

Everything in this country, and now this world, has been one huge secret conspiracy since JFK's assassination.

I stopped beliving in tall tales when I was little.
Nah, yer on yer period again. We all understand. This happens to you every month:D



P

[Keeyth]

Phil I have only known you from HitchWorld, and never knew this side of you... ...here's a vote for ya! :D

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
That's right, I'm wrong and you guys are all right that there's going to be some revolution in a few years where, in this world were every country is out for their own interests (one of the reasons France and Germany cockblocked the UN approval) and can't fully agree on anything, we'll be living under the same leader and somehow be able to make things work.

Everything in this country, and now this world, has been one huge secret conspiracy since JFK's assassination.

I stopped beliving in tall tales when I was little.
You don't even have a cock, Ally_Kat. How can you use the words, cock block? You don't even know what a cock block is. If you do, please explain what a cock block is and if it's one word or two:)



P

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Phil I have only known you from HitchWorld, and never knew this side of you... ...here's a vote for ya! :D
Hey thanks, dude! I like what you write, too. I need all the votes I can get, because somebody "cock blocked" me with a negative vote and I've had a black star for months.

I'll bet it was Joe Rogan.



P

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
That's right, I'm wrong and you guys are all right that there's going to be some revolution in a few years where, in this world were every country is out for their own interests (one of the reasons France and Germany cockblocked the UN approval) and can't fully agree on anything, we'll be living under the same leader and somehow be able to make things work.

Everything in this country, and now this world, has been one huge secret conspiracy since JFK's assassination.

I stopped beliving in tall tales when I was little.

Sweetie, you ARE still little, but I like that about you!;)

However, dismissing these things as tall tales is what they want, and makes you either blind, or brainwashed... ...I'm only trying to help you see that.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
Hey thanks, dude! I like what you write, too. I need all the votes I can get, because somebody "cock blocked" me with a negative vote and I've had a black star for months.

I'll bet it was Joe Rogan.



P

Yeah, I got a negative vote from some Busheep fucker in the past too... ...still trying to get rid of my black star too... :D

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
Your argument is contradictory. You complain about "stupid" people needing to know everything and explain why that is not good. Then you say it's a good idea to pander to the public and let them know everything. That is not logical. Furthermore, if your only goal is to save people (and not pander to the public), don't you think not giving in to "stupid" public pressure is more important?



Point to where I said it's a good idea to tell everything. I'm saying that pandering to the public in terms of saying "we've had some serious chatter over here and it sounds to be legit" and raise the color when something is up just to shut them up.

But I never said I would tell them the chatter I found. ;)

Instead you have the actualy chatter. Let's say that there's legit chatter that the Empire State building and the Sears Tower are planned to be hit soon. You gotta warn the public somehow now incase you can't get to the guys before it happens and because of 9/11 and how they said they weren't told, but you don't want to let up that you're onto the lead. Lay it onto another area, be extremely vague, or use the actual area but throw in bogus van bombs and other shit that wasn't in the chatter. Not to fuck with the public's head, but to have those plotting it laugh and think we're not onto it.

And plus, obviously not when you use the location switchup, but it can also help to show thsoe planning, who watch the media closely, that we're observing.

But the media is another story with how they take shit and run away wih it making everything sound super scary and the like. There was some Canadian here who actually believe the media that NYC was a hellhole and was shocked to find out that I walk home after dark without weapons on me. I forget who that was.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Rikk
I won't talk about Bush knowing about it beforehand. There's little real evidence of that. But I will say that it certainly helped in terms of giving that administration room to do anything they wanted, foreign policy-wise.

Well, if you look hard enough, there actually IS quite a bit of evidence...
...even though the 9/11 cOmmission is covering up/whitewashing all of it... :(

...somebody got paid... :mad:


...either way, you get a vote from me too! :D

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
Nah, yer on yer period again. We all understand. This happens to you every month:D



P

Dude, that ain't cool.:(

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
That's right, I'm wrong and you guys are all right that there's going to be some revolution in a few years where, in this world were every country is out for their own interests (one of the reasons France and Germany cockblocked the UN approval) and can't fully agree on anything, we'll be living under the same leader and somehow be able to make things work.

Everything in this country, and now this world, has been one huge secret conspiracy since JFK's assassination.

I stopped beliving in tall tales when I was little.

I don't necessarily go that far, so don't group everyone together. There are more than two sides to every debate.

At the same time, I do think you are rather naively buying just what's been given to you.

One more point, don't you think it's kinda strange to tell the press there is a high attack alert? Don't you think it's better to just shut up about it so that the attackers aren't aware that you're on to them? Then you could catch them without raising their defenses and allowing them to escape. Makes sense to me...then they can't try it again.

[ODShowtime]

Phil, do you know something we don't? I don't have revolution penciled in anywhere on my calendar yet.

I do keep a couple cans of beefaroni around "just in case"

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
You don't even have a cock, Ally_Kat. How can you use the words, cock block? You don't even know what a cock block is. If you do, please explain what a cock block is and if it's one word or two:)



P

It's when someone else fucks up your chances of getting action. And everyone here uses it as one word. Some people get fancy and hyphanate it. And I can use any word I want :)




Originally posted by Phil theStalker
Nah, yer on yer period again. We all understand. This happens to you every month:D



P


You couldn't be any more wrong. lol And even if I was, you'd never know. I've had gal pals ask me when the hell I am, because they can never tell. I'm cool like that

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Ally, Ally, Ally... ...the reason we weren't told about the chatter prior to 9-11 is because Bush wanted, no more to the point NEEDED, 9-11 to happen in order to further his plans for this war and to further his global domination in the Middle East... ...I know that is extremely unpallatable to think of, but I truly believe he is that fucking evil... ...and I'm not alone in thinking this.
In fact, if you read "The Grand Chessboard" written in 1997 (FOUR YEARS before 9-11-01) a former aide to Carter and Reagan circled an area called the Caspian Basin (Afghanistan) and said "This is where the next world conflict will be. This is where they have discovered the largest remaining underground oil reserve, and America wants it. However, in order for the American people to get behind an invasion of that country would require an act ON THE LEVEL OF PEARL HARBOR to earn their support."
And what did we get? 9-11.
This was spelled out in this book FOUR YEARS before it happened...
...similar plans are called for in the PNAC (written by Cheney and the BCE) that FORD is always talking about... ...There is a criminal syndicate running this country right now, and they got there by stealing an election... ...we have a sitting president nobody elected... ...our first Commander-in-THIEF... ...why is it so hard to believe you are backing the wrong horse?

Here's my question to you...If there's a criminal syndicate running this country, how the hell will electing John Kerry help you?

You guys love talking about all this conspiracy shit, but if this country is under the Bush family's lock and key, John Kerry certainly won't change things. The BCE controls every major election, right?

See, if I were one of you guys, I would be lining my basement with enough food stuffs and weapons to survive the nuclear holocaust, because according to your thinking, there is no way out. The New World Order is coming, and electing Kerry or any other Democrat won't help.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
I don't necessarily go that far, so don't group everyone together. There are more than two sides to every debate.

At the same time, I do think you are rather naively buying just what's been given to you.

One more point, don't you think it's kinda strange to tell the press there is a high attack alert? Don't you think it's better to just shut up about it so that the attackers aren't aware that you're on to them? Then you could catch them without raising their defenses and allowing them to escape. Makes sense to me...then they can't try it again.

How do you know that any mention of what is known is made without ensuring that one can follow or catch the fuckers when they flee?

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Rikk
Dude, that ain't cool.:(
It's adult comedy.

Comedy not insult.

There is a difference and I hope at least Ally_Kat knows it even if you didn't git tit:D




=PtS=
:spank:

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
Phil, do you know something we don't? I don't have revolution penciled in anywhere on my calendar yet.

I do keep a couple cans of beefaroni around "just in case"
I love comedy!:D


"They" always say they pick the time and the place they want the fight.

I think it will come to that.

Keep your eyes open as per "the writing's on the wall."

Mark all days with an X to be safe, it's later than you think.




P

[Phil theStalker]

<marquee scrollamount=9 direction=up>
Originally posted by Ally_Kat
It's when someone else fucks up your chances of getting action. And everyone here uses it as one word. Some people get fancy and hyphanate it. And I can use any word I want :)
<marquee scrollamount=9 direction=down>=PtS=
:spank:</marquee>
You couldn't be any more wrong. lol And even if I was, you'd never know. I've had gal pals ask me when the hell I am, because they can never tell. I'm cool like that </marquee>
Well, you are kewl.. and a grate mod.

NOOOOOOOO, I'm not trying t2o git sum pussy, guys!:D



=PtS=
:spank:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
Here's my question to you...If there's a criminal syndicate running this country, how the hell will electing John Kerry help you?

You guys love talking about all this conspiracy shit, but if this country is under the Bush family's lock and key, John Kerry certainly won't change things. The BCE controls every major election, right?

See, if I were one of you guys, I would be lining my basement with enough food stuffs and weapons to survive the nuclear holocaust, because according to your thinking, there is no way out. The New World Order is coming, and electing Kerry or any other Democrat won't help.

Don't group everyone together. I don't believe in a coming holocaust. I believe the fear-mongerer is in the White House. And that's what I speak out against.

[Warham]

I wasn't talking to you Rikk. I was talking to Phil, the conspiracy nut.

:D

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Here's my question to you...If there's a criminal syndicate running this country, how the hell will electing John Kerry help you?

Because he isn't part of it... ...simple as that.


You guys love talking about all this conspiracy shit, but if this country is under the Bush family's lock and key, John Kerry certainly won't change things. The BCE controls every major election, right?

Well, the hope is certainly that Kerry will changes things... ...if Bush wins this election after all of his fuckups, or there is another problem like the one in Florida, I think then you need to be very scared that the BCE does in fact control the elections... ...I'm hoping that Florida was the only one they are able to get away with... ...people are watching for it now.


See, if I were one of you guys, I would be lining my basement with enough food stuffs and weapons to survive the nuclear holocaust, because according to your thinking, there is no way out. The New World Order is coming, and electing Kerry or any other Democrat won't help.

I beg to differ. Even IF your New World Order is really happening, just because they take over and run the country illegally, doesn't mean I have to be brainwashed into buying into their bullshit just becasue they are in power... ...just like I don't have to believe all the crap the Bush Administration is selling you through the parroting media today. Electing a Democrat or anyone not affiliated with the Bush Family WILL help... ...in fact, it's our only hope.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Rikk
Don't group everyone together. I don't believe in a coming holocaust. I believe the fear-mongerer is in the White House. And that's what I speak out against.
You know, Warham finally's got it. Everything he says is exactly true. It won't make a difference if Kerry is elected.

Stock up now, pals.

This is when the wood is green.




P

[ELVIS]

C'mon Rikk...

Ally can defend herself...

I wonder if Ally gives tit for tat...

hehehe...


:elvis:

[Warham]

Kerry is going to lose the elections because he has nothing to run on, not because Bush is going to steal anything.

I haven't heard a liberal say why they love Kerry besides 'he's not Bush'. Nobody has ever won an election that way.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Rikk
Don't group everyone together. I don't believe in a coming holocaust. I believe the fear-mongerer is in the White House. And that's what I speak out against.

I don't believe in any holocaust coming up either.
I think those 'Survival nuts' are just that... ...Nuts!

I do however fear the raping of our Constitutional rights, and the deception of America at the hands of the Bush family, and all for their own personal gain.
The real terrorist is IN the White House, and he uses 'Terrorism' as a tool to get his way with the American public. :mad: That pisses me off.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I think then you need to be very scared that the BCE does in fact control the elections... ...I'm hoping that Florida was the only one they are able to get away with... ...people are watching for it now.

are democrats



More of this bullshit ???

algore LOST in Florida, and he lost by a greater margin with each recount...

On top of that it has recently been discovered that over 46,000 people, 68% of which are democrats, are registered in both New York and Florida...

Subtract these potential voters from the equation, and what do you have ??

You are way off the mark, dude...


:elvis:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I don't believe in any holocaust coming up either.
I think those 'Survival nuts' are just that... ...Nuts!

I do however fear the raping of our Constitutional rights, and the deception of America at the hands of the Bush family, and all for their own personal gain.
The real terrorist is IN the White House, and he uses 'Terrorism' as a tool to get his way with the American public. :mad: That pisses me off.

Now, that I agree with. Anyone who doesn't look at the United States and see a downward spiral the last few years is fooling himself/herself.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I don't believe in any holocaust coming up either.
I think those 'Survival nuts' are just that... ...Nuts!


That's no way to talk about your new buddy Phil...


The real terrorist is IN the White House, and he uses 'Terrorism' as a tool to get his way with the American public. :mad: That pisses me off.


You sir, are NUTS!




:elvis:

[ELVIS]

..and you agree with that childish bullshit, Rikk...

Man...:rolleyes:

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I don't believe in any holocaust coming up either.
I think those 'Survival nuts' are just that... ...Nuts!

I do however fear the raping of our Constitutional rights, and the deception of America at the hands of the Bush family, and all for their own personal gain.
The real terrorist is IN the White House, and he uses 'Terrorism' as a tool to get his way with the American public. :mad: That pisses me off.
After you get my vote you turn on me and call me a nut. A typical politician.:D

We'll see who is nuts the next time the lights go out.

Yeh, I've always thought it obvious that if al-Qaeda had any nukes why would planes be ordered used by the one world order.

But biologicals are out there and chemicals are very cheap and easy to store and to use.

It doesn't have to be a nuke nut case situation for it all to come down very rapidly.

If you want to know, then that is when the revolution begins. For those who don't know the day of the revolution:)



P

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Kerry is going to lose the elections because he has nothing to run on

Well it seems to be an awfully close race right now for you to be saying something like that... ... and Bush stole one before, what makes you think he won't try again?




I haven't heard a liberal say why they love Kerry besides 'he's not Bush'.

Isn't that enough??:D When you look hard enough into who Bush is and what he's done, that alone becomes a pretty good reason, in and of itself.
Kerry is at least a man who has served his country, was not afraid to go and fight for it, knows what war is, and for that alone is better suited to a position of power that makes the decision of whether or not a war is really necessary and whether it is worth risking American lives to fight it.

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by ELVIS
:elvis:
Elvis, you are a gentleman just like the real Elvis.

true dat:)



=PtS=
:spank:

[ELVIS]

It's hard to believe you are 37 years old, keeyth...

I'll bet you still smoke dope...


:elvis:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
After you get my vote you turn on me and call me a nut. A typical politician.:D

We'll see who is nuts the next time the lights go out.
P

I wasn't calling you a nut Phil, I was talking about the kind of person Warham was describing in his 'line your basements' post...

I'm still campaigning!!:D

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Phil theStalker
Elvis, you are a gentleman just like the real Elvis.

true dat:)



=PtS=
:spank:


Thankya very much...:D

I only lose my self control when FORD goes off the deep end...


:elvis:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
It's hard to believe you are 37 years old, keeyth...

I'll bet you still smoke dope...


:elvis:

Sorry to disappoint you Elvis, but I'm clean and sober... ...however, aren't you DEAD?? And didn't you die from a drug overdose??? Hmmm... ...you must be having a flashback...:rolleyes:

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I wasn't calling you a nut Phil, I was talking about the kind of person Warham was describing in his 'line your basements' post...




Phil is that person...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Thankya very much...:D

I only lose my self control when FORD goes off the deep end...


:elvis:

I am not FORD... ...and I wasn't aware you HAD any self control! :D :gun:

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Sorry to disappoint you Elvis, but I'm clean and sober... ...however, aren't you DEAD?? And didn't you die from a drug overdose??? Hmmm... ...you must be having a flashback...:rolleyes:


Did it ever occur to you that I'm not the real Elvis ??

Have you seen Bubba Ho-Tep ??

Clean and sober ??

Any history of mental illness ??


:elvis:

[lucky wilbury]

i'm amazed a 5 page bullshit thread from people who are against the war but are for for kerry who was pro war (as far back as 1998) i guess people with no principles seem to flock to one another

[ELVIS]

John Kerry...

Pro-anti-man...

[Rikk]

Originally posted by ELVIS
..and you agree with that childish bullshit, Rikk...

Man...:rolleyes:

Which childish bullshit? That childish bullshit about it being okay to question your government? Tell me specifically what you're referring to.:D

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
i'm amazed a 5 page bullshit thread from people who are against the war but are for for kerry who was pro war (as far back as 1998) i guess people with no principles seem to flock to one another

Logic...logic...don't you understand logic?

Your argument is moronic. Try again and we'll talk.:D

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Did it ever occur to you that I'm not the real Elvis ??

Have you seen Bubba Ho-Tep ??

Clean and sober ??

Any history of mental illness ??


:elvis:

No shit Shirley? I thought you was the real thing...

Bubba Ho-Tep = Funny movie actually.

Clean and Sober = Yep.

Mental Illness = nope, other than to argue with you, which I guess could be considered a mental illness, huh?:D :wow2:

[MAX]

Originally posted by ELVIS
John Kerry...

Pro-anti-man...


Hahaha!!! Classic! I'm going to start using that on a daily basis. :D

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Keeyth
No shit Shirley? I thought you was the real thing...

Bubba Ho-Tep = Funny movie actually.

Clean and Sober = Yep.

Mental Illness = nope, other than to argue with you, which I guess could be considered a mental illness, huh?:D :wow2:

Wasn't BUBBA HO-TEP the movie done by the guy who did PHANTASM (an awesome movie!)?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
i'm amazed a 5 page bullshit thread from people who are against the war but are for for kerry who was pro war (as far back as 1998) i guess people with no principles seem to flock to one another

Uh oh! Cover that up! Your cluelessness is starting to show again! :rolleyes:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Rikk
Wasn't BUBBA HO-TEP the movie done by the guy who did PHANTASM (an awesome movie!)?

I don't know, but I'll have to look into that!:D

[ELVIS]

No...

Evil dead...

Army Of Darkness...

Bruce Campbell


:elvis:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
John Kerry...

Pro-anti-man...

Clever, I'll give you that.

However, it has come to light that Bush is an even bigger flip-flopper than Kerry has ever been, and on more issues. I heard an entire radio show dedicated to that fact the other night on KGO...

[Warham]

Bush wouldn't have voted for the war before voting against it.

[Keeyth]

Hey Elvis,

Under your avatar, it says "No one's above suspicion"...
...does that include Bush???? :D

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Bush wouldn't have voted for the war before voting against it.

He would have if he could have seen his poll numbers drop the way they did! :D

[ELVIS]

Sure it does...

I believe in questioning the government...


:elvis:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by ELVIS
No...

Evil dead...

Army Of Darkness...

Bruce Campbell


:elvis:

No, I just looked it up. It stars Campbell. It's directed by Don Coscarelli, the guy who directed PHANTASM.

[ELVIS]

Learn something everyday...:D

[Phil theStalker]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Sorry to disappoint you Elvis, but I'm clean and sober... ...however, aren't you DEAD?? And didn't you die from a drug overdose??? Hmmm... ...you must be having a flashback...:rolleyes:
You're asking ELVIS if he's dead and you've been on this board since April.

I'll bet you've been waiting f4or juuuust the right moment t2o ask that:D



Now the moment's gone.

It twats fun:)




P

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
Logic...logic...don't you understand logic?

Your argument is moronic. Try again and we'll talk.:D

lets see the first post and the following posts in the thread were about how the war was bad no al quada connection no thtreat and kerry wouldn't have done anythng. yet for YEARS kerry has talked about a threat from iraq wmd and al queda in iraq and he WOULD have still attacked iraq :

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/09/kerry.iraq/index.html

Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said Monday he would not have changed his vote to authorize the war against Iraq, but said he would have handled things "very differently"


-----------------

now if you want kerry speeches from the floor of the senate on this i'll post them. he says the SAME thing as bush. so for everyone here to either say a: bush lied or b: kerry wouldn't have done anything are completly wrong. now for someone to say their voting for kerry because of iraq how can they both kerry and bush's postions are the same. and the people who are woting for kerry have no principales because they are voting againest bush over iraq yet supporting kerry who was for the iraq war

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Uh oh! Cover that up! Your cluelessness is starting to show again! :rolleyes:

yep thats it i'm clueless yet who's the one who was posting bullshit saying it wasn't a plane at the pentagon? :rolleyes:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
lets see the first post and the following posts in the thread were about how the war was bad no al quada connection no thtreat and kerry wouldn't have done anythng. yet for YEARS kerry has talked about a threat from iraq wmd and al queda in iraq and he WOULD have still attacked iraq :

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/09/kerry.iraq/index.html

Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said Monday he would not have changed his vote to authorize the war against Iraq, but said he would have handled things "very differently"


-----------------

now if you want kerry speeches from the floor of the senate on this i'll post them. he says the SAME thing as bush. so for everyone here to either say a: bush lied or b: kerry wouldn't have done anything are completly wrong. now for someone to say their voting for kerry because of iraq how can they both kerry and bush's postions are the same. and the people who are woting for kerry have no principales because they are voting againest bush over iraq yet supporting kerry who was for the iraq war

Uh uh...logic still missing. I have been posting for many pages (as have several others) that the war is bullshit...NOT that Kerry is a godsend. You can't very well use the guy you're criticizing to back up your points (especially if many of us don't exactly think of him as a savior either). All I've said is that I don't see how the country could get much worse...anything is better than the lowest IQ President ever. The war is bullshit...any comments from '98 or ANYTIME by Kerry does not do anything to dent that argument...just as any Bush arguments don't either.

When are some of you going to realize it's not about one guy versus another guy? A country, a war, foreign policy...it's a lot more complicated than black and white. It's not either column Kerry or column Bush. Those are just political candidates that MAY share some of your views...but political opinions can be anything and they can be very complicated. This whole "damn liberals" attitude is amusing. But it's just a cop-out for those that don't really feel like arguing. You can't just group people in together. I'm not a liberal...I consider myself a scientific person, and a fiscal converative with liberal social ideas and deep beliefs in international human rights and find those needs are far greater than world exploitation. And as for fiscal conservatavism, a ton of defense spending that brings government spending far above Clinton's annual spending is NOT fiscal covservativism. Sending the country into further defecit does NOT seem to be in line with traditional conservative values.

[ELVIS]

You are a LIBERAL!

[Warham]

I'll go on record and say I believe that going into Iraq was the correct thing to do.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by ELVIS
You are a LIBERAL!

:rolleyes: Labelling is amusing. I'd rather be that than a Republican. But in any case, can't you argue something that has actual argumentative significance to it?:D

[MAX]

Originally posted by Warham
I'll go on record and say I believe that going into Iraq was the correct thing to do.

I wholeheartedly agree.

[lucky wilbury]

i bring up kerry because he has NO principales like the people who are for him but againest they war. ir you againest the war and you have principales you would vote nadar or some other thrid party canidate but not kerry

[ELVIS]

http://www.jarabina.com/images/00023.jpg

:elvis:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
i bring up kerry because he has NO principales like the people who are for him but againest they war. ir you againest the war and you have principales you would vote nadar or some other thrid party canidate but not kerry

LOL. Don't stand on your high horse. I wouldn't vote for Nadar...that just gives Bush (the much greater evil) a bigger chance of winning. Hell, it's even come out that the Republicans have been secretly funding the Nadar campaign. Now, that's really standing for one's ideals.:rolleyes:

Kerry is a politician. He will say what people will want to hear. I don't care if he fucks African chipmunks every Friday evening. He is a candidate that clearly represents better interest groups than Bush's administration does. It's not about the man...it's about the final result and the interested parties.

And don't bring up integrity. Bush is dumber than an Ox and a chickenshit who got out of serving and stayed in a classroom and then an airplane while America was under attack. Fucking spineless pussy businessman.

[lucky wilbury]

bush has principales kerry doesn't plain and simple. the fact that he doesn't is and should be scary to anyone. you might not like bush but you know where he stands. with kerry you don't. he doesn't stand with ANY interests groups either he plays all sides. thats spinless. bush did served in the ang and you served where? according to the 9-11 commision as well as dem 9-11 commisionor lee hamilton, the former nyc mayor, many democrats AND john kerrys own wife bush did the right thing by staying calm on 9-11

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
bush has principales kerry doesn't plain and simple. the fact that he doesn't is and should be scary to anyone. you might not like bush but you know where he stands. with kerry you don't. he doesn't stand with ANY interests groups either he plays all sides. thats spinless. bush did served in the ang and you served where? according to the 9-11 commision as well as dem 9-11 commisionor lee hamilton, the former nyc mayor, many democrats AND john kerrys own wife bush did the right thing by staying calm on 9-11

Where did I serve? Where's the relevance there? Bush didn't serve. He went AWOL. Half the freaking country has now seen the documents proving this, and the only ones contesting it are his hardcore supporters. And where does Bush stand? To just retort with "Kerry has not principles and Bush does" doesn't mean shit. For Christ's sake, man...make an argument with evidence. Don't just disagree. Bush stands for something indeed...his daddy's fortune.

And how is sitting in a classroom for 10 minutes after hearing of the SECOND plane hitting New York doing the RIGHT thing?? He just sat there. It's pathetic. And what did he gain by staying in his plane all day and not saying anything to the American people? He was scared. His own daddy phoned him and told him to get back home.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
Bush didn't serve. He went AWOL.

Doesn't the military issue official AWOL papers? If so, I havne't heard or seen it and would love a link to it

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
bush has principales kerry doesn't plain and simple. the fact that he doesn't is and should be scary to anyone. you might not like bush but you know where he stands. with kerry you don't. he doesn't stand with ANY interests groups either he plays all sides. thats spinless. bush did served in the ang and you served where? according to the 9-11 commision as well as dem 9-11 commisionor lee hamilton, the former nyc mayor, many democrats AND john kerrys own wife bush did the right thing by staying calm on 9-11

Principals??? Spineless?? Served in the Air National Guard???
My god man, you are delusional. Bush's spineless principals caused him to go AWOL for two months during his 'service' in order to 1.) avoid having to take a drug test, and 2.) to avoid having to go to Vietnam. Kerry HAS more principals in his little finger than Bush has in his whole body, and he served his country fully. You have proven yourself a definite quack when it comes to your logic.

Why don't you take a look at how long Bush sat there after Andy Card told him the second plane had hit the towers and we were under attack. Actually, even more telling about that tape is the way Mr Card didn't even wait for a response from the president, as if he knew he was just reporting something the president was expecting. This is supposed to be our commander in chief, THE decision maker, and after telling him we are under attack, Mr Card immediately pulls away and checks his watch, even turning away from the president. If you had just delivered such news to the president, wouldn't you have stayed leaning towards him to hear if he had a response???? It is a very telling work of body language on that tape of Bush in the school during the attacks...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Doesn't the military issue official AWOL papers? If so, I havne't heard or seen it and would love a link to it

Not if you're a Bush. Daddy would see to that. Don't forget we're talking about the BCE here. It is documented that he went AWOL on his physical/drug test... ...I'll try to find it for you.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
Where did I serve? Where's the relevance there?

your calling him a coward so you must have served right or are you a coward as well? the ang is service which it appears is more then you


Originally posted by Rikk
Bush didn't serve. He went AWOL. Half the freaking country has now seen the documents proving this, and the only ones contesting it are his hardcore supporters.

really bush went awol and you've seen documents proving this well post them. i want ot see the the ang papers bring up bush on the charge of being awol and the transcripts of the hearings that show he was awol. but i have the feeling thats not going to happen. but we do have threads like this:

http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1787&highlight=guard

Ex-airmen douse rumors over Bush's Guard service
'Serious' pilot flew in NORAD runs, volunteered for Vietnam combat duty


amoung other as well as he got an honorable discharge. can't get one of those if your awol now can you. hell even the now out of buisness george magazine debunked that awol crap and that ws a liberl rag!



Originally posted by Rikk
And where does Bush stand? To just retort with "Kerry has not principles and Bush does" doesn't mean shit. For Christ's sake, man...make an argument with evidence. Don't just disagree.

fine you want one issuse lets go with wind power. kerrys says he's for it yet he joined a lawsuit to stop the construction of a wind farm off of natucket because it looks bad. he's for it every where else but not in his backyard




Originally posted by Rikk
Bush stands for something indeed...his daddy's fortune.

you got eidence to back that up?


Originally posted by Rikk
And how is sitting in a classroom for 10 minutes after hearing of the SECOND plane hitting New York doing the RIGHT thing?? He just sat there. It's pathetic.

and whats he going to do run off? then do what? he thousands of miles away the most he can do is be on the phone and thats it from fla which brings us to the next point


Originally posted by Rikk
And what did he gain by staying in his plane all day and not saying anything to the American people?

he wasn't on a plane all day he went to an air force base to monitor whats going on. he didn't go back to dc because in an emergency the pres and vp are to be separated at all times o ensure the line of succesion in case something happens



Originally posted by Rikk
He was scared. His own daddy phoned him and told him to get back home.

you got evidence to back that up? maybe phone records? didn't think so

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Principals??? Spineless?? Served in the Air National Guard???

your near san jose why do't you go over to Moffett field with that with that attitude.



Originally posted by Keeyth
My god man, you are delusional. Bush's spineless principals caused him to go AWOL for two months during his 'service' in order to 1.) avoid having to take a drug test,

wrong on both. bush wasn't awol and he didn't take physical because he was going of flying status. if your not flying anymore no reason to take a physical.



Originally posted by Keeyth
and 2.) to avoid having to go to Vietnam.

which is disputed by peole who flew with him who say he volunteered



Originally posted by Keeyth
Kerry HAS more principals in his little finger than Bush has in his whole body,

his princaplaes are so sound that he'll vote for something before voting againest it.


Originally posted by Keeyth
and he served his country fully.

which is debatable even his own diaries cast doubt on his story


Originally posted by Keeyth
You have proven yourself a definite quack when it comes to your logic.

Why don't you take a look at how long Bush sat there after Andy Card told him the second plane had hit the towers and we were under attack. Actually, even more telling about that tape is the way Mr Card didn't even wait for a response from the president, as if he knew he was just reporting something the president was expecting. This is supposed to be our commander in chief, THE decision maker, and after telling him we are under attack, Mr Card immediately pulls away and checks his watch, even turning away from the president. If you had just delivered such news to the president, wouldn't you have stayed leaning towards him to hear if he had a response???? It is a very telling work of body language on that tape of Bush in the school during the attacks...


yep i'm the quack yet your the one posting this bullshit along with everything else you've posted. your nuttier then ford.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Doesn't the military issue official AWOL papers? If so, I havne't heard or seen it and would love a link to it

yes they do. the issuse papers as well as arrest warrents to say you awol. then you have a trial to deciede weather or not you were. then you either get convicted and either thrown in jail and dishonorable discharged or just dishonorable discharged. thats an over simplfied version of things i'm sure JA,BBB or Sarge could spell it out in greater detail

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
your near san jose why do't you go over to Moffett field with that with that attitude.

Moffett's been closed now for a couple of years. And I'll go anywhere with my attitude. "I'll go places with my attitude you wouldn't go with a gun" :D




wrong on both. bush wasn't awol and he didn't take physical because he was going of flying status. if your not flying anymore no reason to take a physical.

Or if you aren't going to pass the drug test...





which is debatable even his own diaries cast doubt on his story

Oh yeah??? Here:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1963&e=9&u=/ap/20040825/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_vietnam_records






yep i'm the quack

Yes, you certainly ARE!

. your nuttier then ford.

Coming from you that's a compliment! :D

[/B][/QUOTE]

Navy Report Backs Kerry Role in Incident

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1963&e=9&u=/ap/20040825/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_vietnam_records

Now you'll ignore this right wilbury?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
your calling him a coward so you must have served right or are you a coward as well? the ang is service which it appears is more then yo

My god man, I never served. But if I had, I wouldn't go fucking AWOL to avoid fighting. That's just horrible arguing. Use logic!

Furthermore, you call that wind example a proof of Kerry's lacking character? What about going to the American people with a shitload of supposed evidence of WOD that are an IMMEDIATE THREAT. This was never really proved. We're talking immediate threat. They found nary a single weapon. If they had, Bush would have been running with it like a mother fucker all summer...but you just see little reports saying CNN found a piece of something that was once a weapon, etc. Is that reason to go to war?? LOL. It's such a crock. How about the fact that Saddam worked for Bush in the first place, using American weapons to gas the Kurds?

God, you want integrity, that's a little higher than a fucking windmill.:rolleyes:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
yes they do. the issuse papers as well as arrest warrents to say you awol. then you have a trial to deciede weather or not you were. then you either get convicted and either thrown in jail and dishonorable discharged or just dishonorable discharged. thats an over simplfied version of things i'm sure JA,BBB or Sarge could spell it out in greater detail

His daddy is one of the richest men in the country. He got him out of it, for Chrissakes. You're SO naive, it's not funny. I'll find the link I had, if I can. I think keeyth is also looking for a link.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
yes they do. the issuse papers as well as arrest warrents to say you awol. then you have a trial to deciede weather or not you were. then you either get convicted and either thrown in jail and dishonorable discharged or just dishonorable discharged. thats an over simplfied version of things i'm sure JA,BBB or Sarge could spell it out in greater detail

and you are actually nutty enough to think daddy bush couldn't get his son out of that jam? You really do make me laugh

[Keeyth]

see below

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Doesn't the military issue official AWOL papers? If so, I havne't heard or seen it and would love a link to it

Here are ALL the records... ...he DID NOT volunteer for Vietnam as our delusional wilbury would have you believe... ..see for yourself: http://www.awolbush.com/

[Warham]

'I want proof, not leads.'

Kerry was a hero of the war, that we can all agree on. But what he did after he got back is despicable.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Keeyth
yep i'm the quack

Yes, you certainly ARE!

. your nuttier then ford.

Coming from you that's a compliment! :D



Navy Report Backs Kerry Role in Incident

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1963&e=9&u=/ap/20040825/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_vietnam_records

Now you'll ignore this right wilbury? [/B][/QUOTE]

well considering kerrys own diaries tell a different story as well as people who were there it's most likely kerry faked his report

[Keeyth]

Department of Defense
The Pentagon
Washington, D.C. 20301-1900


To whom it may concern:

Recently, I was made aware of allegations concerning several violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by George W. Bush during the Vietnam War. The alleged acts include being Absent Without Leave (UCMJ Article 86) for a period of more than a year from his National Guard assignments in Texas and Alabama. According to the UCMJ, a person who is AWOL for more than 30 days with evidence of no intent to return to duty is guilty of Desertion. (UCMJ Article 85)

To understand the gravity of this offense, one need only read the section 4.9.5 e. of Article 85, which states that the maximum punishment for desertion in a time of war (3), is, "Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct". As far as I am aware, George W. Bush has never received any punishment for these alleged crimes, nor has he ever been charged.

When I read about these allegations in national media outlets including, but not limited to; The Boston Globe(1), The Washington Post(2), The Birmingham News(3), and The Dallas Morning News(4), I decided to call the Department of Defense to find out what the Statute of Limitations was for these crimes. I was informed that because of the nature of the crimes; deserting one's country during a time of war, that there is NO statute of limitations, and these crimes, if proven, can still be prosecuted today.

The purpose of this correspondence is to make a formal written complaint with circumstantial and documentary evidence of George W. Bush's violations of the UCMJ. Since he is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces, the details of his past service or lack thereof, are of particular interest to the American people.

DETAILS:

From May to November 1972, George W. Bush was living in Alabama working on the US senate campaign of Winton Blount and was required to attend drills with the Air National Guard unit in Montgomery, Alabama. There is no record that he attended any drills whatsoever. Additionally, General William Turnipseed (r) who was commander of the unit at that time has stated in interviews that he never saw Bush report for duty.

On September 5, 1972, Bush had requested permission to perform duty for September, October, and November at the 187th Tactical Recon Group in Montgomery. Permission was granted, and Bush was ordered to report to General William Turnipseed. In interviews, Turnipseed, and his administrative officer at the time, Kenneth K. Lott, have stated that they had no memory of Bush ever reporting.

Seven months later, at Ellington Air Force Base in Texas, Bush's two superior officers were unable to complete his annual evaluation covering the year from May 1, 1972 to April 30, 1973 because, "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report." Both superior officers, who are now dead, and also Ellington's top personnel officer at the time, mistakenly concluded that Bush served his final year of service in Alabama. Bush returned to live in Texas after the senatorial election in November, 1972, so this is obviously not true.

According to the records available from the National Guard, the period between May 1972 and May 1973 remains unaccounted for. George W. Bush himself has refused to answer questions about this period in his life, other than to state that he fulfilled all of his National Guard commitments. If this were true, why is there no record of him fulfilling these commitments at either of his posts in Texas or Alabama? Why is there not one commanding officer that can come forward and state unequivocally that Bush reported for duty?

If the allegations are true that Bush deserted his country during a time of war, this is one of the gravest offenses one can commit against their country, short of treason. This is why there is no Statute of Limitations concerning these crimes. My father served proudly as a field surgeon in Vietnam, and it distresses me greatly that a person could use his family's influence and power to not only avoid the draft for service, but then to not fulfill the duties that he was assigned in substitute for serving in Vietnam.

These crimes are not to be taken lightly, and I believe that all men and women who serve America proudly would be shocked that a soldier was allowed to abuse the system in the way that George W. Bush allegedly has. These charges warrant investigation, and until a satisfactory record of Bush's service is produced, I can only assume that Bush did indeed desert his country in a time of war.

I implore you to investigate these charges. In this time of war and talk of preemptive strikes against other countries, it would serve the American people greatly to know that our Commander in Chief did not run away from duty during Vietnam. If this man is to send other's husbands, wives, and children to die in a foreign land, we must make sure that he fulfilled his obligations and commitments to America before he demands that others do the same.

[Keeyth]

Questions about Bush's Guard service unanswered:

http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-23-bush-service_x.htm?csp=1

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Here are ALL the records... ...he DID NOT volunteer for Vietnam as our delusional wilbury would have you believe... ..see for yourself: http://www.awolbush.com/

i see your ignoring the other thread with people who were actually there who say he did. you can post all your internet theory bullshit all you wnat but it only shows how deparate you are. you make claim after claim with nothing to back it up. posting someones letter doesn't back you up either.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury


well considering kerrys own diaries tell a different story as well as people who were there it's most likely kerry faked his report


BWAAHAHAHAHAHA!! Quack! Quack,quack! quack!! oh no! Duck!:D

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
i see your ignoring the other thread with people who were actually there who say he did. you can post all your internet theory bullshit all you wnat but it only shows how deparate you are. you make claim after claim with nothing to back it up. posting someones letter doesn't back you up either.

Um, how about the one from "USA Today"??:rolleyes:

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
'I want proof, not leads.'

Kerry was a hero of the war, that we can all agree on. But what he did after he got back is despicable.

I think fighting and then denouncing the war you've been fighting for is pretty gutsy and...considering what we've since learned about the war and the devestation it caused. More bombs were dropped on Vietnam and Cambodia than were dropped during the entire second World War. Millions of Vietnamese civilians died for no reason. You may think that denouncing such an action for so-called "red containment" when all that was being promoted was another dictatorship is despicable. Maybe you slept through the late 60's and early 70's. Me, I wasn't alive yet. But this isn't conspiracy shit. I learned all of these things in my two American History courses in University, plus various other history books. You couldn't even try to disagree with these facts. They are all TRUE. So, speaking out again Vietnam is NOT despicable. If Americans are killing millions of civilians, is it wrong to speak out against such an action because it's disrespectful to said troops? Give me a fucking break.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
My god man, I never served. But if I had, I wouldn't go fucking AWOL to avoid fighting. That's just horrible arguing. Use logic!

again where is your proof he was awol. i bump a thread on this for ya


Originally posted by Rikk
Furthermore, you call that wind example a proof of Kerry's lacking character?

that was just one issue. how about voting for the war before voting againest funding it?


Originally posted by Rikk
What about going to the American people with a shitload of supposed evidence of WOD that are an IMMEDIATE THREAT. This was never really proved. We're talking immediate threat.

no they weren't


Originally posted by Rikk
They found nary a single weapon.If they had, Bush would have been running with it like a mother fucker all summer...but you just see little reports saying CNN found a piece of something that was once a weapon, etc.

nothing was found? tell that to the guys that were eposed to sarin. i'll bump a thread on that. they have found other things going back to last october as well


Originally posted by Rikk
Is that reason to go to war?? LOL. It's such a crock. How about the fact that Saddam worked for Bush in the first place, using American weapons to gas the Kurds?

God, you want integrity, that's a little higher than a fucking windmill.

saddam didn't use american weapons. he used RUSSIAN made weapons. supplied by russia. don't see to many abrams tanks in the iraqi army but you see a hell of a lot of russian t 37's

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
i see your ignoring the other thread with people who were actually there who say he did. you can post all your internet theory bullshit all you wnat but it only shows how deparate you are. you make claim after claim with nothing to back it up. posting someones letter doesn't back you up either.

You asked for proof, then you called it bullshit. LOL. You wouldn't agree no matter what was posted.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
You asked for proof, then you called it bullshit. LOL. You wouldn't agree no matter what was posted.

he posted a letter from someone asking them to investgate thats not proof of shit. thats like take a post from here and offering it evidence of something

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
saddam didn't use american weapons. he used RUSSIAN made weapons. supplied by russia. don't see to many abrams tanks in the iraqi army but you see a hell of a lot of russian t 37's

LOL. Now you've shot every bit of credibility you may have had. Saddam didn't use American weapons?? I'm done with you. It's like arguing with a brick wall that wants to see his own point and none other. Do you really think the Americans would go to war with Iraq if they were allied with the Russians (still the Soviets at that point).

Have a nice day.:)

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
he posted a letter from someone asking them to investgate thats not proof of shit. thats like take a post from here and offering it evidence of something

Read everything at the link. I've even seen a photocopy of the original document. It's not bullshit.

[Rikk]

BTW Warham, I still think you're a good guy! We're just disagreeing here (politically).;)

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Here are ALL the records... ...he DID NOT volunteer for Vietnam as our delusional wilbury would have you believe... ..see for yourself: http://www.awolbush.com/

I don't see any arrest warrants...?

Dude, with all the people and process involved with AWOL, do you think they would all keep quiet? Where's the leak of how daddy covered it up?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
he posted a letter from someone asking them to investgate thats not proof of shit. thats like take a post from here and offering it evidence of something

Ah, now YOU'RE ignoring the USA Today article... ...or is that 'internet theory' as well...

...One question for you before we go on: When you are proven wrong, are you able to admit it???

[Warham]

Originally posted by Rikk
I think fighting and then denouncing the war you've been fighting for is pretty gutsy and...considering what we've since learned about the war and the devestation it caused. More bombs were dropped on Vietnam and Cambodia than were dropped during the entire second World War. Millions of Vietnamese civilians died for no reason. You may think that denouncing such an action for so-called "red containment" when all that was being promoted was another dictatorship is despicable. Maybe you slept through the late 60's and early 70's. Me, I wasn't alive yet. But this isn't conspiracy shit. I learned all of these things in my two American History courses in University, plus various other history books. You couldn't even try to disagree with these facts. They are all TRUE. So, speaking out again Vietnam is NOT despicable. If Americans are killing millions of civilians, is it wrong to speak out against such an action because it's disrespectful to said troops? Give me a fucking break.

The problem is, most American soldiers were NOT killing civilians by removing body parts, torturing them to death, raping women, shooting kids in the back, etc. I know my father didn't do that when he was over there, and I'm sure he didn't know anybody who did it as well. Kerry says he did do it.

Who's to believe?

BTW, I like ya too, Rikk. :D

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Rikk
LOL. Now you've shot every bit of credibility you may have had. Saddam didn't use American weapons?? I'm done with you. It's like arguing with a brick wall that wants to see his own point and none other. Do you really think the Americans would go to war with Iraq if they were allied with the Russians (still the Soviets at that point).

Have a nice day.:)

Currently. Iraq had weapons from France, Germany, Russian, and China. Part of the secret deal they had for that oil and reason why those countries werne't so happy with the idea of goign after Saddam.

And don't tell me they didn't use them at our boys. My cousin's group got attacked and there was a huge Chinese flag on the metal. Not to mention the one they shot into Kuwait.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
I don't see any arrest warrants...?

Dude, with all the people and process involved with AWOL, do you think they would all keep quiet? Where's the leak of how daddy covered it up?

Ally, pay attention. Daddy is VERY high up. The Bush name has been in power since they were financing Adolf Hitler, when granddaddy Prescott Bush was with Brown Brothers Harriman, Adolf's backers. As Rikk stated, do not be so naive as to think coverups of this and much greater magnitudes don't happen all the time.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
LOL. Now you've shot every bit of credibility you may have had. Saddam didn't use American weapons?? I'm done with you. It's like arguing with a brick wall that wants to see his own point and none other. Do you really think the Americans would go to war with Iraq if they were allied with the Russians (still the Soviets at that point).

Have a nice day.:)

your the one with no creditability. tell me who makes rpg's, ak-47 ak74,ak 105, migs etc etc etc. or better yet who made this iraqi tank?

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Ally, pay attention. Daddy is VERY high up. The Bush name has been in power since they were financing Adolf Hitler, when granddaddy Prescott Bush was with Brown Brothers Harriman, Adolf's backers. As Rikk stated, do not be so naive as to think coverups of this and much greater magnitudes don't happen all the time.

How did financing Hitler pan out for the Bush family? I'd be interested in hearing about that.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Ah, now YOU'RE ignoring the USA Today article... ...or is that 'internet theory' as well...

...One question for you before we go on: When you are proven wrong, are you able to admit it???

you haven't proved anything. you don't get an honorable discharge if your awol.plain and simple. you wouldn't get the points. plain and simple. i know these matter are a little over you head but damn could you really be that stupid.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Ally, pay attention. Daddy is VERY high up. The Bush name has been in power since they were financing Adolf Hitler, when granddaddy Prescott Bush was with Brown Brothers Harriman, Adolf's backers. As Rikk stated, do not be so naive as to think coverups of this and much greater magnitudes don't happen all the time.

There'd still be someone.

Are you fully aware as to what goes into a declaration of AWOL?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
you haven't proved anything. you don't get an honorable discharge if your awol.plain and simple. you wouldn't get the points. plain and simple. i know these matter are a little over you head but damn could you really be that stupid.

Dude, you get proof. You now question the USA Today article after asking for a link...without even really reading it! And then people are stupid!??

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Warham
How did financing Hitler pan out for the Bush family? I'd be interested in hearing about that.

I've always wondered that, too, myself, but I just figured it helped tie in those Bush-Hitler pics

[Keeyth]

who's the stupid one who fucked up the thread with that big ass picture?
And you are SO naive. Rikk was right. You just don't get it. Have a nice day. :)

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
The problem is, most American soldiers were NOT killing civilians by removing body parts, torturing them to death, raping women, shooting kids in the back, etc. I know my father didn't do that when he was over there, and I'm sure he didn't know anybody who did it as well. Kerry says he did do it.

Who's to believe?

BTW, I like ya too, Rikk. :D

Absolutely not were the all Americans doing such acts. But the reasons for fighting weren't so honorable. The Americans were backing a brutal dictatorship. And they bombed the shit out of those people (and my family knows two vets who took part in village massacres...one of whom later killed himself).

The soldiers there aren't the people I'm criticizing. I'm sure your father and SO MANY OTHER Americans were great men, fighting for their country. But in retrospect, it's easy to see that that was not a noble war. And it just helps prove that just because you criticize a war doesn't mean you are denouncing the men doing the fighting.

Don't forget, BTW, we have a sheep to pick this week!;) I'm thinking DIAPER.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
There'd still be someone.

Are you fully aware as to what goes into a declaration of AWOL?

Did you READ the article, Ally? I'm not saying he was REPORTED as AWOL, just that he WAS AWOL.. ...there is a difference. You see, when Daddy Bush has your back you can go AWOL and not have it be reported officially. See the definition of a COVER-UP.

[Warham]

Why don't we just drop the shit about both candidate's war record?

Bush obviously had some interesting things going on in his record, and we've all heard about what Kerry did when he came back from Vietnam, hanging around with Hanoi Jane (not to mention that Kerry's pic is hanging in the Hanoi Communist's Hall of Fame).

Let's concentrate on the war that Kerry voted for before he voted against it, shall we?

[Rikk]

You know what's amazing?...I don't even care whatsoever that he went AWOL. If his being in office was better for the country, I'd still want him to win. But he's done more harm for this country than any President since Nixon. And when people question Kerry's integrity, I can either bring up the FACT that he went AWOL and had daddy cover it up or the FACT that they promised imminent threat and it's pretty clear they went to war on a lie. I saw right through the U.N. demonstration before the war even broke it up...it was such clear pseudo-science. You don't look for a conclusion before you even have your premises. You don't look for reasons to fit the answer you already want (war). It was such a joke. I'm surprised at how many Americans bought it. Even the media is embarressed now. I heard Wolf Blitzer of all people (talk about a puppet) a month ago (on the Daily Show) admit how embarressed the networks and CNN have been since the war started and all of their reports were disproven.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
Dude, you get proof. You now question the USA Today article after asking for a link...without even really reading it! And then people are stupid!??

you don't even have to read anything to know the truth. ALL documents show bush got and honorable discharge. end of story. you cna't get one if your awol. period end of story. if one was awol there would be paper saying the person was awol and there are NONE. and where are those paper that say bush is awol. thats right there are none because none exist. niether one of you two have clue one about the military or the ang thats clear. in order to get out of the ang you need a certain amount of points. it doesn't matter when you work to earn the point. you can work 4 days in a row to earn the points if your going to miss time or you can make up the points later if you miss days. now bush has ALL the required points for his ang days. those are the facts plain and simple. get over it.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
you don't even have to read anything to know the truth. ALL documents show bush got and honorable discharge. end of story. you cna't get one if your awol. period end of story. if one was awol there would be paper saying the person was awol and there are NONE. and where are those paper that say bush is awol. thats right there are none because none exist. niether one of you two have clue one about the military or the ang thats clear. in order to get out of the ang you need a certain amount of points. it doesn't matter when you work to earn the point. you can work 4 days in a row to earn the points if your going to miss time or you can make up the points later if you miss days. now bush has ALL the required points for his ang days. those are the facts plain and simple. get over it.

LOL. I guess you don't really want to be disproven. I guess the USA Today would make up such a story based on NO evidence. LOL. Have a nice day.

BTW, I'm cool with you, bro. I just disagree with you here.;)

[Ally_Kat]

I just read that USA thing twice. I'm sorry, but that's an editorial and proves only the writers' opinions. They don't document proof for a good handful of things that they claim.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Did you READ the article, Ally? I'm not saying he was REPORTED as AWOL, just that he WAS AWOL.. ...there is a difference. You see, when Daddy Bush has your back you can go AWOL and not have it be reported officially. See the definition of a COVER-UP.

And I'm telling you with the amount of people involved, someone would.....nevermind, you wouldn't understand unless you had military in your family.

[Warham]

It's impossible to have a cover up that large and not have somebody spill the beans, that's what Ally is trying to tell you guys. There's too many loose ends, and people in general have a hard time keeping their yaps shut if they have a secret. It's human nature.

[lucky wilbury]

Originally posted by Rikk
LOL. I guess you don't really want to be disproven. I guess the USA Today would make up such a story based on NO evidence. LOL. Have a nice day.

BTW, I'm cool with you, bro. I just disagree with you here.;)

it's not that i don't want ot be disproven ( i can't be on this) but if bush was awol he would have never fullfilled the required time and not have recieved the point to make him elligable to get an honorable discharge. for example if the reguirmnet says bush needed 100 and got 100 he did his time and got his honorable discharge (which he did) if bush needed a 100 and got 60 he would have still owed 40 and never have gotten and honorable discharge. in fact he would still be in the ang and be required to make up the days but thats not the case. i'm cool with everyone even ford i leave the political disagreements behind when i leave the front line

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
I just read that USA thing twice. I'm sorry, but that's an editorial and proves only the writers' opinions. They don't document proof for a good handful of things that they claim.

Ally, go to the awolbush website. the document showing he didn't show up for duty is there. Rikk told you he saw it and it's not bullshit. not to mention there are a number of other very revealing documents on that site. Open your mind to the possibility that you are backing a deserter and a coward. It will make it easier for you when it finally sinks in...

[Ally_Kat]

The point system Lucky just explained. Did you understand that?

[Warham]

The problem with the lib's strategy is this: They pounded Bush's war record four years ago and it did little to harm Bush's reputation. I don't know why they would pull this bag of tricks out again, seeing as it didn't work then.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
It's impossible to have a cover up that large and not have somebody spill the beans, that's what Ally is trying to tell you guys. There's too many loose ends, and people in general have a hard time keeping their yaps shut if they have a secret. It's human nature.

I'm sorry, I'm just not that gullible as to believe that. Bean spillers can be killed... ...just look at whitewater, Vince Foster, etc.

and you don't think the Bush family could cover up an ANG record? Puh-LEASE!!:rolleyes:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
it's not that i don't want ot be disproven ( i can't be on this) i'm cool with everyone even ford i leave the political disagreements behind when i leave the front line

I'm cool with you too, but I think you have been disproven on this...;)

[Warham]

The public will eventually get sick of hearing about Vietnam, and then Kerry is going to have to run on his record in the Senate.

What did Kerry accomplish as a senator for 19 years? That's more important than what he did in 'Nam.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I'm sorry, I'm just not that gullible as to believe that. Bean spillers can be killed... ...just look at whitewater, Vince Foster, etc.

and you don't think the Bush family could cover up an ANG record? Puh-LEASE!!:rolleyes:

Yeah, well tell me which one of Bush's National Guard brothers or commanders got killed over knowing too much info?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
The point system Lucky just explained. Did you understand that?

I refuse to believe you can be so simplistic when it comes to believing that a Daddy in power can't take care of some stupid litte 'points' system! My god! He's capable of much more than that! That was probably no more than a phone call to make all that crap go away! Do you really believe it's that hard for these things to happen??

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
The problem with the lib's strategy is this: They pounded Bush's war record four years ago and it did little to harm Bush's reputation. I don't know why they would pull this bag of tricks out again, seeing as it didn't work then.

It worked. He had to steal the election.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I refuse to believe you can be so simplistic when it comes to believing that a Daddy in power can't take care of some stupid litte 'points' system! My god! He's capable of much more than that! That was probably no more than a phone call to make all that crap go away! Do you really believe it's that hard for these things to happen??

And with everyone invovled, you don't think someone would say, "Wait a minute..."

[Warham]

Bush didn't steal anything. He won in every recount, no matter how hard Gore tried to create more hanging chads.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Yeah, well tell me which one of Bush's National Guard brothers or commanders got killed over knowing too much info?

Now you're putting words in my mouth. I'm just pointing out that much larger cover-ups HAVE occured, and if they were important enough, people have been killed to keep things quiet. I doubt Bush's coverup of his ANG service required little more than a phone call from Daddy.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
And with everyone invovled, you don't think someone would say, "Wait a minute..."

If they did, you've heard how George Bush sidesteps the answers. And if the Commanding officer says forget about it, you forget about it. Discipline is well taught in the military, is it not?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Bush didn't steal anything. He won in every recount, no matter how hard Gore tried to create more hanging chads.

Yeah, and there's nothing funny about the fact that the state that had all those problems happened to be run by Bush's BROTHER right?
Oh that's right, cover-ups are impossible...:rolleyes:

[Warham]

It's funny that you guys talk shit about what Bush did during the war...what did your hero Bill Clinton do during the war? I don't even remember him serving in the National Guard. He ran off to Europe.

Does that mean Clinton wasn't qualified to send troops to Kosovo?

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Warham
The public will eventually get sick of hearing about Vietnam, and then Kerry is going to have to run on his record in the Senate.

What did Kerry accomplish as a senator for 19 years? That's more important than what he did in 'Nam.

I agree with that last statement 100%. It's his work as a public servant that counts. Mind you, I think he'll be a far better public servant than Bush.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
It's funny that you guys talk shit about what Bush did during the war...what did your hero Bill Clinton do during the war? I don't even remember him serving in the National Guard. He ran off to Europe.

Does that mean Clinton wasn't qualified to send troops to Kosovo?

Sending troops to help out someone is a little different than pushing the whole coutry into war over nothing other than personal gain...

[Warham]

Well, he's been a public servant longer than Bush.

What has he done with the time given?

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Sending troops to help out someone is a little different than pushing the whole coutry into war over nothing other than personal gain...

Troops were killed during the Clinton administration.

Was he qualified to send those troops to die because he evaded the Vietnam War?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
What did Kerry accomplish as a senator for 19 years? That's more important than what he did in 'Nam.

True, and what he's done has been good enough to win him the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

What did Bush accomplish over the last 4 years? Hell for the last 19 years? He's ran several companies into the ground, bankrupted them, and now he's spent the last 4 years trying to do the same thing to this country. Hmmm...

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Rikk
It's his work as a public servant that counts.

Please enlighten us with his accomplishments...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Troops were killed during the Clinton administration.

Was he qualified to send those troops to die because he evaded the Vietnam War?

That's a matter of opinion. I don't feel he abused his power in sending soldiers to help liberate countries that were asking for our help. I think that's a little different than starting an all out war that ends up crippling the American economy all for his own personal gain...


That being said, I'm under no illusions that Clinton was some kind of angel... ...there were a lot of people Clinton didn't have to pardon there in the end.... ...because they were dead.

But Clinton didn't do things that directly profited for him while bankrupting the economy of his own country. That's exactly what Bush is doing.

[ELVIS]

How do you figure the American economy is "crippled" or "bankrupt" ??

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
True, and what he's done has been good enough to win him the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

What did Bush accomplish over the last 4 years? Hell for the last 19 years? He's ran several companies into the ground, bankrupted them, and now he's spent the last 4 years trying to do the same thing to this country. Hmmm...

The only reason Kerry won the Dem. Primary is because he's the best of the 'anybody but Bush' crowd, not for what he did in the Senate.

[Warham]

Seems like the U.S. Economy is getting better. I don't see any bankruptcy going on.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
How do you figure the American economy is "crippled" or "bankrupt" ??

We're getting there... ...where do YOU see it going?

[ELVIS]

It's doing great...

[Warham]

Clinton’s Kosovo Frauds
by James Bovard, January 2001


AS AMERICANS DEBATE what President Clinton’s legacy should be, too little attention is given to his remarks on Kosovo. The United States launched a war against a European nation largely at Clinton’s behest. Clinton’s war against Serbia epitomized his moralism, his arrogance, his refusal to respect law, and his fixation on proving his virtue by using deadly force, regardless of how many innocent people died in the process.

Clinton claimed on March 24, 1999, that one purpose of bombing Serbia (including Kosovo) was “to deter an even bloodier offensive against innocent civilians in Kosovo and, if necessary, to seriously damage the Serbian military’s capacity to harm the people of Kosovo.” The CIA had warned the Clinton administration that if bombing was initiated, the Serbian army would greatly accelerate its efforts to expel ethnic Albanians. The White House disregarded this warning and feigned surprise when mass expulsions began.

Yet NATO Supreme Commander Gen. Wesley Clark said on March 26 that the upsurge in crackdowns on ethnic Albanians was “entirely predictable.” Since NATO had no ground forces in the area ready to intervene and since NATO planes stayed three miles above the ground to minimize pilot casualties, NATO could do nothing to stop the surge in ethnic cleansing. Violence spurred by the bombing was quickly invoked as the ultimate justification for the bombing.

The longer the bombing went on, the more brazenly NATO ignored the limits it had initially imposed on its targets in order to limit civilian casualties. In the final weeks of the 78-day war, all that mattered was finding new targets so that NATO spokesmen could continue their daily bragging about a “record number of sorties flown” and “record number of bombs dropped.” According to Human Rights Watch, at least 500 civilians were killed by NATO bombing; the Yugoslavian government claimed that 2,000 civilians were killed. NATO repeatedly dropped cluster bombs into marketplaces, hospitals, and other civilian areas.

As Serbian civilian casualties rose, purported Serbian atrocities mushroomed. On May 13, 1999, Clinton declaimed that “there are 100,000 people [in Kosovo] who are still missing” — clearly implying that they might have been slaughtered. Clinton also claimed that 600,000 ethnic Albanians could be “trapped within Kosovo itself, lacking shelter, short of food, afraid to go home, or buried in mass graves dug by their executioners.”

On April 15, 1999, Clinton opened a speech to newspaper editors by proclaiming the “stark contrast between a free society with a free press and a closed society where the press is used to manipulate people by suppressing or distorting the truth.” However, NATO consistently misrepresented its own actions. The Washington Post’s Bradley Graham noted on May 24, 1999, that Pentagon and NATO

briefings about the air operation have ... acquired a propaganda element aimed at demonizing Milosevic and his Belgrade government and imparting a moral imperative to the conflict. U.S. and NATO spokesmen, in scripts closely coordinated with the help of several public affairs specialists loaned by Washington to Brussels, routinely mix reports on allied strikes with fresh accusations of atrocities by Yugoslav forces.
Graham noted that the spokesmen routinely sought to delay admitting NATO responsibility for bombing civilians for “at least one news cycle or two before owning up to attacks gone awry.”

For Clinton, bombing Serbia was a triumph of idealism. The Washington Post reported that on the day after NATO planes bombed the Chinese embassy, “Clinton complained to British Prime Minister Tony Blair that news coverage was not fully presenting the moral dimensions of the war.” In the final days of the bombing, the Washington Post reported that “some presidential aides and friends are describing Kosovo in Churchillian tones, as Clinton’s ‘finest hour.’” The Post also reported that according to one Clinton friend “what Clinton believes were the unambiguously moral motives for NATO’s intervention represented a chance to soothe regrets harbored in Clinton’s own conscience.... The friend said Clinton has at times lamented that the generation before him was able to serve in a war with a plainly noble purpose, and he feels ‘almost cheated’ that ‘when it was his turn he didn’t have the chance to be part of a moral cause.’”


Clinton’s Kosovo peace

On June 10, 1999, NATO and the government of Yugoslavia reached an agreement to end the bombing. In his June 10 victory speech, Clinton proclaimed:

The demands of an outraged and united international community have been met. I can report to the American people that we have achieved a victory for a safer world, for our democratic values, and for a stronger America.... We have sent a message of determination and hope to all the world.... Because of our resolve, the 20th century is ending not with helpless indignation but with a hopeful affirmation of human dignity and human rights for the 21st century.
However, experts who compared the final surrender agreement with the Rambouillet text were surprised to see that NATO had dropped many of its most onerous demands from three months earlier. In a June 11 speech at an Air Force base, Clinton bragged: “Day after day, with remarkable precision, our forces pounded every element of Mr. Milosevic’s military machine, from tanks to fuel supply, to anti-aircraft weapons, to the military and political support.” Throughout the bombing campaign, NATO and Pentagon spokesmen gushed about the slaughter NATO was inflicting on the Serbian military.

However, once the bombing stopped, the Clinton administration was stunned to see the Serbian army withdraw in fine order with polished buttons and good morale. A confidential postwar U.S. military investigation concluded that the damage claims had been exaggerated nearly tenfold. In reality, only 14 tanks, 18 armored personnel carriers, and 20 artillery pieces were taken out, despite the claimed dropping of more than 20,000 bombs on the Serbian military.

On the other hand, NATO did have a very high “kill-rate” for the cardboard decoy tanks that the Serbs erected all over Kosovo. At the end of the war, the Serbian military largely was unscathed, but the country’s civilian infrastructure was in ruins. NATO bombs were far more effective against women, children, hospitals, and retirement homes than against soldiers.

After the peace agreement, NATO was plagued by a surplus of dead Serbian civilians and a severe shortage of dead ethnic Albanians. In late October, pathologist Emilio Perez Pujol, who headed a team of Spanish investigators in Kosovo, told The Times of London, “I calculate that the final figure of dead in Kosovo will be 2,500 at the most. This includes lots of strange deaths that can’t be blamed on anyone in particular.”

In a special videotape address to the Serbian people, Clinton declared,

I want you to understand that NATO only agreed to be peacekeepers on the understanding that its troops would ensure that both sides kept their commitments and that terrorism on both sides would be brought to an end. They only agreed to serve with the understanding that they would protect Serbs as well as ethnic Albanians and that they would leave when peace took hold.
In a Thanksgiving 1999 speech to American troops in Kosovo, Clinton proclaimed, “Thanks to you, we have reversed ethnic cleansing.” Clinton noted that there had been “almost one million refugees,” but “because we acted quicker [than in Bosnia], they all came home.” Clinton ignored the ongoing massive exodus of Serbs racing north for their lives. Jiri Dienstbier, the UN representative on human rights, declared in late 1999,
The spring ethnic cleansing of ethnic Albanians, accompanied by murders, torture, looting, and burning of houses, has been replaced by the autumn ethnic cleansing of Serbs, Romas [gypsies], Bosniaks, and other non-Albanians accompanied by the same atrocities.
One U.S. government official told the Washington Post in August 1999: “It looks like it’s over for the Serbs. We can talk about peace, love, and democracy, but I don’t think anyone really knows how to stop this.” A November 1999 report by the International Crisis Group concluded that “there are as many killings right now in Kosovo as there were before NATO intervened.”

Clinton also declared in November 1999 that the Kosovar children “love the United States ... because we gave them their freedom back.” Perhaps Clinton saw freedom as nothing more than being tyrannized by people of the same ethnicity. Once the bombing started, NATO transformed former terrorists into “freedom fighters” — a term explicitly used in the June 1999 agreement between the NATO and the KLA. As the Serbs were driven out of Kosovo, Kosovar Albanians became increasingly oppressed by the KLA, which ignored its commitment to disarm.

In his 1999 talk to troops in Kosovo, Clinton bragged, “You just look around this room today. We just celebrated Thanksgiving, with, I bet you, conservatively, 25 different ethnic groups represented among the American military forces here in this room — maybe 50, maybe it’s more.”

Clinton’s standard of virtue seemed to consist of little more than ethnic bean counting: the greater the number of ethnic groups, the greater the virtue. He talked as if every bomb dropped was a triumph for multiculturalism and diversity. He was far more concerned with counting the number of ethnic groups at dinner than in noticing the ongoing purge of the Serbs. Since the United States promised to bring peace to Kosovo, Clinton bears some responsibility for every burnt church, every murdered Serbian grandmother, every new refugee column streaming north out of Kosovo. Despite these problems, Clinton bragged at a December 8, 1999, press conference that he was “very, very proud” of what the United States had done in Kosovo.


The legacy of the Serbian War

Clinton’s experience in Kosovo gave him great empathy for Boris Yeltsin when Yeltsin sent in the Russian military to obliterate Chechnya. At a summit of Western leaders in Istanbul in November 1999, Clinton declared,

We want Russia to overcome the scourge of terrorism and lawlessness. We believe Russia has not only the right but also the obligation to defend its territorial integrity.... Russia has faced rebellion within, and related violence beyond, the borders of Chechnya. It has responded with a military strategy designed to break the resistance and end the terror.
At the time Clinton endorsed Yeltsin’s policy, the Russian military was flattening Grozny with long-distance rockets and pounding the entire province with its bombers, making little effort to limit civilian casualties. A few weeks after Clinton endorsed Yeltsin’s policy, the Russian military announced that they would kill any person still residing in Grozny at the end of a 72-hour period. (At that time, an estimated 40,000 civilians, largely elderly, were still in the city.) This brutal ultimatum did not stop Clinton from later characterizing the Russian military assault as an effort to “liberate Grozny.”


Conclusion

In a CNN interview shortly after the peace agreement with Serbia was announced, the president enunciated what his aides labeled the “Clinton doctrine”:

There’s an important principle here.... While there may well be a great deal of ethnic and religious conflict in the world ... whether within or beyond the borders of a country, if the world community has the power to stop it, we ought to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing.
The “Clinton doctrine,” if strictly followed, would mire the United States in scores of conflicts around the world. But even though there is little danger that Clinton would actually risk following his own doctrine, his all-caring rhetoric generated positive press.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Seems like the U.S. Economy is getting better.

That's an illusion. Read the papers. Especially in contrast to where we'd be without the war...

[Warham]

Yeah, the Dow Jones is an illusion too? Seems pretty real to me.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Yeah, the Dow Jones is an illusion too? Seems pretty real to me.

You need to look at where the funding is coming from and it's too convoluted for me to get into right now. But, you can believe what you want, it's a free country... ...for now.