Wed Jul 14, 2004 9:58 am
Clinton left that war because it was pointless. And so is the Iraq war 
Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:11 am
Bush is most definitly not a good leader because he is a moron and wants to finish what his dad didnt. And he is a loser because he backed out of the military and didnt fight cuz he is a wimp.And he calls himself a "war president" when he himself never fought Gore actually went and fought in the vietanam war.
Do you know Bush personally? There is only so much we can say about someone without actually knowing them. I can't really say Kerry has bad motives, but the actions and events of Bush has shown to me he is an able leader. The reason for him backing out. Maybe he lost that passion to fight, or are like many men and show that their minds are their weapon of choice not their bodies. Just because someone fought in the battlefield doesn't make him a better leader. Those experiences only help in times of war, they are useless in times of peace. Which I don't know about you, but I'm striving for peace not warfare.
Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:27 am
AOSO wrote:[ Which I don't know about you, but I'm striving for peace not warfare.
do u know how much bull shit that is? Bush is a war president. He is for war. Thats an oximoron(sp) to what u just said. Its like a member of the NRA saying guns are bad.
Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:32 pm
nad416 wrote:Clinton left that war because it was pointless. And so is the Iraq war
We leave this war without Osama Bin laden. They will bomb us again.
Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:39 pm
do u know how much bull shit that is? Bush is a war president. He is for war. Thats an oximoron(sp) to what u just said. Its like a member of the NRA saying guns are bad.
Bush has much less taste for wars. Why else would he back out of duty? While Kerry and Gore have tasted bloodshed which sounds more likely they'll want war. It's like many animals. Once they taste blood they crave it. Also, any fairly informed american citizen can tell Bush is doing a fair job in the Iraq war. To call the war useless is like coming up to those people and saying "We give up, just die in your own sufferings". Yes, I do think it has been dragged on, but we all forget that wars are not simple blow'em up and go home situations.
Wed Jul 14, 2004 2:01 pm
nad416 wrote:AOSO wrote:[ Which I don't know about you, but I'm striving for peace not warfare.
do u know how much bull shit that is? Bush is a war president. He is for war. Thats an oximoron(sp) to what u just said. Its like a member of the NRA saying guns are bad.
This is an extremely unintelligent statement and I hope no one takes this seriously. Nad, no one is FOR war. There is a tremendous difference is wanting to go to war and having to go to war. We had to. You may say that we didn't, but if we didn't, we would have no doubt have been attacked again and again until we did something about it. To say the Gulf War was pointless is also very unintelligent. Clinton could have taken care of the whole thing and we wouldn't even be at war today if he had done so, but instead he let the terrorists leaders go time and time again and they became even stronger in power. Thank God for Bush or else the US might not even be here anymore.
Wed Jul 14, 2004 4:00 pm
GiveMeIce wrote:We leave this war without Osama Bin laden. They will bomb us again.
thats bull shit cuz it was a small group of lead by Osama. Not the whole damn country. He is just going to war to finish off what his daddy didnt.
and pd~ i really dont give a shit if u think im dumb. as long as I prove my point
Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:48 pm
nad416 wrote:GiveMeIce wrote:We leave this war without Osama Bin laden. They will bomb us again.
thats bull shit cuz it was a small group of lead by Osama. Not the whole damn country. He is just going to war to finish off what his daddy didnt.
and pd~ i really dont give a shit if u think im dumb. as long as I prove my point
Yeah, except that you are making false statements, so how can you prove a point that's not even true?
Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:58 pm
Nad wtf are you talking about finishing what his dad started? OK lets say you were pres on 9.11 . Ok twin towers bombed. You would be like. No we cant go to war because taht wouldn't be nice. Yeah if they do it again ill think about it. Ok then Sadam wants to bomb us with chemical weapons. Ok bush made a really good move. Going and stopping it before it happens. And he did a hell of a good job!
Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:07 am
Bush did nothing when 9/11 happened. Not one thing! He knew about somethings before 9/11 and maybe could have stopped it, but chose not to because he is a moron. And you say hes doing something with the iraqy war involving 9/11. Thats really BULL SHIT! He is just trying to take there oil. *insert middle finger emoction*
Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:02 am
nad416 wrote:Bush did nothing when 9/11 happened. Not one thing! He knew about somethings before 9/11 and maybe could have stopped it, but chose not to because he is a moron. And you say hes doing something with the iraqy war involving 9/11. Thats really BULL SHIT! He is just trying to take there oil. *insert middle finger emoction*
nad, calm down a bit.
There's no evidence (ala the Zimmerman Telegram) proving the US had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack.
And I won't fault the immediate reaction from the government - shut down the airports to keep it from happening, and work to reassure the populace. Figure out where it came from and retaliate. Dealing with zealots, you cannot allow such acts to go unanswered. Spain (per the post Madrid bombing election swing) and the Philipines (more recent) gave in, signaling the terrorists that they can be swayed by acts in the future.
The US did the right thing going into Afghanistan. However, the error the administration made was going into Iraq before Afghanistan was fully stabilized. I don't support the Iraq war because of the constantly changing reasoning behind it and the no-bid cost-plus contract given to Vice President Cheney's company after Baghdad fell. I've been hearing mummering coming from Washington (via CNN and FoxNews) that post-election they are considering going into the Sudan to halt the genocide of non-Muslims. Bigger mistake because our military is getting stretched entirely too thin.
Back on topic, there's a movement in the Republican party trying to get Bush to drop Cheney for a more palatable Vice-Presidential candidate. Any ideas or thoughts on this from our resident Bush supporters?
Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:43 am
nad416 wrote:Bush did nothing when 9/11 happened. Not one thing! He knew about somethings before 9/11 and maybe could have stopped it, but chose not to because he is a moron. And you say hes doing something with the iraqy war involving 9/11. Thats really BULL SHIT! He is just trying to take there oil. *insert middle finger emoction*
Nad, why are you making these claims? Do you know that Bush knew? Do you know he went their for oil? Did you talk to him personally and he told you, "Yeah, what I'm really doing is different from what I'm letting everyone think I'm doing." Nad, we haven't taken one drop of oil from them since we've been there, so your thoughts on that are false. Also as mrmarcus pointed out, Bush did several things immediately after 9/11. Besides, you don't just jump right into war after something happens. Everything has to be prepared and calculated and perfectly timed, there is no flailing of the fists, so to speak. Also, we tried very, very hard to avoid the war in Iraq by giving Saddam multiple opportunities to oblige our peace offerings and allowing us to inspect the entire nation of Iraq instead of just bits and pieces. After about eight different times of asking nicely, we finally had to get rough with it because we weren't going to take the chance of him bombing us or some other nation resulting in a much worse situation. Why you can't see that he's protecting and saving tens of thousands of lives and helping prevent world devestation is beyond me. I mean, it's not even an issue of conflict and it's very clear and easy to understand.
mrmarcus, although I don't think Cheney is horrible and I think he'd do very well in the debates against Edwards, Condoleezza Rice would be a great VP runningmate.
Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:38 am
PD~ wrote:mrmarcus, although I don't think Cheney is horrible and I think he'd do very well in the debates against Edwards, Condoleezza Rice would be a great VP runningmate.
Now that's a possibility that hadn't crossed my mind.
And if Cheney were to be removed from the ticket, Rice would be a primo selection. Black, female, tough as nails... makes me want to go find that photochopped pic from Aliens with Rice's face on Ripley and Bush's on Newt... would be strangely apropos...
Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:44 am
Nad wtf r you doing making up all this shit! You said Bush was strictly for war! Ok? Got it? good! Now stop making shit up. *doesnt extend middle finger because i dont love the presedents that much*
Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:44 pm
harsh big wipe out wasted
But due stop making stuff up it's not cool nad416
But due stop making stuff up it's not cool nad416
Mon Jul 26, 2004 10:17 am
Bush is the only one with the balls in Washington. If we had Clinton's way, we would just happily fire Tomahawk's at the little Iraqis and watch them run away, only to come back at us 400% the next month. Bush Sr. dealt them a rough blow, and Bush Jr. is going to cripple them for life.
If Carrot head had his way, Saddam would still be sitting pretty and Libya would have sold huge stockpiles of weapons all over the damn place. We need a leader who is going to scare these towelheads, instead of be "humane" and leave them be.
To hell with that, bomb the all of em and show em what it means to kill an american. Go Bush.
If Carrot head had his way, Saddam would still be sitting pretty and Libya would have sold huge stockpiles of weapons all over the damn place. We need a leader who is going to scare these towelheads, instead of be "humane" and leave them be.
To hell with that, bomb the all of em and show em what it means to kill an american. Go Bush.
Mon Jul 26, 2004 10:18 am
nad416 wrote:Bush did nothing when 9/11 happened. Not one thing! He knew about somethings before 9/11 and maybe could have stopped it, but chose not to because he is a moron. And you say hes doing something with the iraqy war involving 9/11. Thats really BULL SHIT! He is just trying to take there oil. *insert middle finger emoction*
Gosh, my 16 month old sister could come up with better reasoning behind that slanderous crud.
Mon Jul 26, 2004 10:24 am
nad416 wrote:Bush did nothing when 9/11 happened. Not one thing! He knew about somethings before 9/11 and maybe could have stopped it, but chose not to because he is a moron. And you say hes doing something with the iraqy war involving 9/11. Thats really BULL SHIT! He is just trying to take there oil. *insert middle finger emoction*
He Started a war with Afganistan thats something but im still for kerry
Mon Jul 26, 2004 10:32 am
MiggityMike420 wrote:nad416 wrote:Bush did nothing when 9/11 happened. Not one thing! He knew about somethings before 9/11 and maybe could have stopped it, but chose not to because he is a moron. And you say hes doing something with the iraqy war involving 9/11. Thats really BULL SHIT! He is just trying to take there oil. *insert middle finger emoction*
Gosh, my 16 month old sister could come up with better reasoning behind that slanderous crud.
stfu
Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:06 pm
Liz Phair baked an apple pie for John Kerry. I usually don't decide until baked goods and indie rock stars are involved. KERRY.
Mon Jul 26, 2004 5:39 pm
MiggityMike420 wrote:Bush is the only one with the balls in Washington. If we had Clinton's way, we would just happily fire Tomahawk's at the little Iraqis and watch them run away, only to come back at us 400% the next month. Bush Sr. dealt them a rough blow, and Bush Jr. is going to cripple them for life.
If Carrot head had his way, Saddam would still be sitting pretty and Libya would have sold huge stockpiles of weapons all over the damn place. We need a leader who is going to scare these towelheads, instead of be "humane" and leave them be.
To hell with that, bomb the all of em and show em what it means to kill an american. Go Bush.
That. Was. Awesome.
Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:17 am
PD~ wrote:MiggityMike420 wrote:
That. Was. Awesome.
Thankyou Sir...let it be known that I am Republican and in favor of mass wipeouts
Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:00 am
I dont really care what party there in just which has the better proposal 
Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:47 am
No matter the proposal, it's all bullshit. By the by, if you've read Hilary Clinton's new book (forget the name), you would read that she actually wants Kerry to win. If Bush gets another four years, that would mean two new candidates running for office (Bush/Gore). She wants the democratic nomination, so she can face a new republican. If Kerry wins, his chances of going 8 years are pretty good. Therefore, she wants to be president in 4 years, not 8...the bitch.
Do NOT vote for this slime, please.
Tue Jul 27, 2004 9:03 am
MiggityMike420 wrote::gameboy
No matter the proposal, it's all bullshit. By the by, if you've read Hilary Clinton's new book (forget the name), you would read that she actually wants Kerry to win. If Bush gets another four years, that would mean two new candidates running for office (Bush/Gore). She wants the democratic nomination, so she can face a new republican. If Kerry wins, his chances of going 8 years are pretty good. Therefore, she wants to be president in 4 years, not 8...the bitch.
Do NOT vote for this slime, please.
Which one - Kerry, Hillary, or Bush?
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.