-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Obama, I want you to respond to not holding oversight for your subcommittee. But also, do you reserve a right as American president to go back into Iraq, once you have withdrawn, with sizable troops in order to quell any kind of insurrection or civil war?
SEN. OBAMA: Now, I always reserve the right for the president -- as commander in chief, I will always reserve the right to make sure that we are looking out for American interests. And if al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad. So that is true, I think, not just in Iraq, but that's true in other places. That's part of my argument with respect to Pakistan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/us...pagewanted=all
So we go through all the tough battles cleaning out insurgents from SEVERAL major cities in Iraq....pull out (since it's politically correct)...then when shit breaks loose we can do it all over again with sizable troop levels? And this assclown feels he's qualified to be Commander in Chief of our armed forces? What a joke!!
MR. RUSSERT: I want to ask both of you this question, then. If we -- if this scenario plays out and the Americans get out in total and al Qaeda resurges and Iraq goes to hell, do you hold the right, in your mind as American president, to re-invade, to go back into Iraq to stabilize it?
SEN. CLINTON: You know, Tim, you ask a lot of hypotheticals. And I believe that what's --
MR. RUSSERT: But this is reality.
SEN. CLINTON: No -- well, it isn't reality. You're -- you're -- you're making lots of different hypothetical assessments.
She doesn't come right out and say shit.....GREAT at dodgeball I'll bet. LOL
If ANYONE thinks that one of these two asshats are going to get us out of Iraq for good with tulips shooting out the asses of our soldiers is either nuts or VERY naive.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
I wondered if anyone besides me caught what Berzerk Osamma said about Al Qeda...........that was fucking hilarious. He couldnt run a lemonade stand let alone the U.S.A.
What the fuck was he anyways? Some sort of victims rights attorney or some such happy horseshit? I know I could google it, but he aint worth my time.
If he becomes President, we need to kiss our collective asses goodbye.
b0nger
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
My theory, short and sweet.
Obama and Hillary are being used as a decoy for everything really going on that we don't see, more of a distraction for the other running candidate that is already known underground to be the next president.
And or.
One will become president, fuck everything up as planned, new power will emerge.
The next few years will be tough, see you soon 2012.
:(
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
I promise you ALL the enemies of America want nothing more than to see one of those 2 dip shits win!
If that happens, I would suggest building yourself or contracting someone to build you a nice underground bunker, make sure you stock up on kush too, you are going to need it, 2012 will seem like it's 20 years away.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
OMG Skush build an underground bunker?2012 will seem like its 20 years away?As compared to what ?these last 8 years has been a disaster under bush and his neocon nazis.Bush has done more harm to America has made America less safe than anything else.You advocate building a bunker?What you havent done that already because of bush's insane policies.Its a fact bush has made america less safe due to the invasion of iraq.Its too bad that the rest of the world see's that except Americans.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
these last 8 years has been a disaster under bush and his neocon nazis..
Of course! No political thread would be complete without a comparrison of Bush to Nazis!:thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
Its a fact bush has made america less safe due to the invasion of iraq..
Is it a fact? I suppose since it is a fact you could support that somehow with some kind of evidence as opposed to personal opinion? I would love to see you start a thread about this point, just be sure you put it in the "conspiracy" forum!:thumbsup:
Well, this thread got 3 responses at least before it went down the tubes and turned into "I hate Bush, he is a nazi session!"
But it is afterall a cannabis forum, so what would you expect.:wtf:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
Its a fact bush has made america less safe due to the invasion of iraq.Its too bad that the rest of the world see's that except Americans.
Really, how are we less safe now as compared to then? Also, any thoughts regarding the Dems plans to pull out just to re-invade later?
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
P4B come on you know just as i do that Bush has created more hatred from muslims towards your country.When you bomb the fuck out of a country and kill women and children dont you think that some of these guys might want to strap on a bomb and go visit america.Also how were u not safe before your illegal invasion of Iraq?Did Iraq threaten to bomb u?Iraq wasnt a threat to america just as iran isnt a threat to america now.But we all know isreal feels threatened by those countries so america attacks.Anyway P4B if you do pull out your troops when the dems win the election that would be the smartest thing youve done in 8 years.Not only do the iraq people want you out the majority of americans want out of bushs crusades.Dont you think the iraqi people can decide their own fate?Why would you have to re invade anyway?Unless of course extermists take over the country and decide to get nukes but that would be your own fault if that happens.You should of left saddam in power and left that fucking country alone.After all their was no threat from saddam
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
So I guess that's a no, you can't support your claim that "It's a fact blah blah blah".
P.S.
P4B, does not controll the American troops, he is just a moderator!
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
Also how were u not safe before your illegal invasion of Iraq?
How soon they forget.:(
Also...."illegal invasion"? LMAO...ONLY according to the bleeding hearts across the world and also the U.N. people protecting their dirty tactics in the Food For Oil program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
Did Iraq threaten to bomb u?
Reports from Russia stated that this was in Saddams plan. Since they were in HEAVY with Saddam why shouldn't we believe the report?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
Dont you think the iraqi people can decide their own fate?Why would you have to re invade anyway?
Yes, and their government is the one asking us to stay.
LMAO...ask Obama that one. He's the ONLY dumbass that has made that comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
But we all know isreal feels threatened by those countries so america attacks.
So are we in OR bombing Lebanon? Palestine? Syria? Your statement is based more on hate than actual fact.
As for the less safe now statement.......there are thousands of dead jihadists over there that we don't have to worry about ever again.:thumbsup: I'd say it's going in the right direction.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8182KSKUSH
So I guess that's a no, you can't support your claim that "It's a fact blah blah blah".
That's why the left wing answers questions with questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8182KSKUSH
P4B, does not controll the American troops, he is just a moderator!
But if elected in "08" that could change.....:D
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
OMG Skush build an underground bunker?2012 will seem like its 20 years away?As compared to what ?these last 8 years has been a disaster under bush and his neocon nazis.Bush has done more harm to America has made America less safe than anything else.You advocate building a bunker?What you havent done that already because of bush's insane policies.Its a fact bush has made america less safe due to the invasion of iraq.Its too bad that the rest of the world see's that except Americans.
It's shit like this that makes it obvious why you usually cut-n-paste.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
alright i donot agree with the bush admin., i do think we had no buisness invading iraq, i do think that iraq posed no threat to us, fact is that the "jihadist" are not going to take over america. i dont know why we are at war with iraq but i have my suspicions (ill not elaberate here thats for anther thread).
we may hve let our leaders make the wrong choice, bush my be a "war crimanal", this may be his "holy war" BUT all this no matter what does not change the fact that it happened and we are there.we are mired up to our nuts in a country that needs us right now. wether they want a democracy or even if they want to become a comunist state thats up to the people of iraq to ultimatly decide. the absolute worst thing wecould do for the people of iraq and the rest of the free world is to just cut and run pull the troops out and come home leaving he people of iraq to fend for themselves.
people talk about the number of refugees and dead civillians in iraq that was caused by us. again this is an argument for another thread. but what they dont consider is how that number will double if not increase even more if we just up and leave. first thing that is going to happen is that the sunni, or maybe shiite will decide to have a civil war or ethnic cleansing.once the country i weakened even more iran is going to move in for the kill. and then when iran controls iraq they will become the controlers of the oil and that my freinds is the life blood of the free world.
i dont buy into all the far mongering and i am a liberal but i am ultamatly an american. i love my freedom or at least what i have left. pulling the troops out and opening up iraq for invasion will eventualy lead to the down fall of the american way of life . it may not happen the day or even the year after but if you cripple us thru the cost and availability of oil then it will open us up for a real attack on america. maybe not from jihadist but how bout china or russia. the american army is highly mechanized and with out oil the tanks dont move if the tanks dont move the tanks dont fight. a tank that dont fight becomes a billion dollar fox hole. even the infantry needs oil, we cant move our troops from place to place efficiantly with out a truck or a plane.
i will agree that we need to get our troops out of harms way but we cant do that with out first re-stabilizing iraq. we have to have an exit stratagy that will not leave them vulnerable.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Really, how are we less safe now as compared to then? Also, any thoughts regarding the Dems plans to pull out just to re-invade later?
Have a good one!:s4:
Come'on ... you seem to be a pretty intelligent individual. America is clearly not as safe as it once was. Our image has taken a HUGE hit in the global community. After the devastation of 9-11, most of the world was BEHIND the US ... we had an opportunity to effect change globally with almost all countries willing to listen and help with our cause.
Instead, Bush publicly claims countries like Syria, Iraq, Iran, and N. Korea are part of the "Axis of Evil". America then wages war on Iraq and destabilize the entire region .. despite the concerns of the international community.
In Iraq you now of divisional violence and increasing numbers of terrorist entering the country. These aren't Pro-America terrorists ... they're the same ones who attacked WTC.
Al Queda has a LARGER presence in Afghanistan than it once did.
Iran, Syria, and N. Korea ALL feel threatened by the US since Bush's claims and have become more defiant with the help of allies like RUSSIA and CHINA.
Venezuela is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world ... and look where that relationship has gone.
Why do you people think you are seeing rising tension from China and Russia against the US? America under Bush has become a very arrogant land of policy making ... treating the world like they are "America's children" and should listen to everything we say because "we know what's best for the world" ... and of course, if a country doesn't agree ... Bush thinks he can just "put them in the corner".
With the US economy on a downward slope, the destabilization of the middle east, increased enrollment of terrorist in the middle east, and increasing tension with other military powers ... I don't see how ANY American can honestly believe we are safer now than we were. :wtf:
Go look at gas prices ... that tells you how much many countries feel about the US right now. Not even Bush's Saudi friends are willing to lower gas prices. Any body ever bother and ask why?
THE WORLD IS RUNNING OUT OF OIL ... and oil producing countries are going to nickle and dime America to death until the last drop of oil comes out of the ground.
We aren't safer .... we're just pissing more people off and many of those people have the commodities we seek. In short ... America is biting the hands that feed them. These countries are getting rich and American's are losing their homes.
Safer indeed. :wtf:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
I mean seriously ... I'd rather be sitting here talking about how many ladies "Billy Bob" Clinton sporked than be talking about the possibilities of a new "cold-war" and erosion of "The American Dream".
At least Clinton used his mouth AND ears .... Bush putting his hands over his ears and screaming "NAH NAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" has not made us safer.
Tapping our phones and invading our privacy just to catch a terrorist doesn't make us safer. Not all terrorist will have iphones and email accounts. It's amazing how much Thomas Jefferson understood ... what he said makes more sense NOW than it ever has before. His amazing ability to understand that those who give up their privacy in order to gain security will NEVER have either one.
He would understand that by giving up our liberties, we allow those who fight against them to win. When we give up all our liberties to catch a terrorist ... what will we be fighting for?
No, I say to you .... You are safe only when there are no enemies.
We make this country safe by making friends and not enemies. By creating a strong American and in return ... the money and power to create a strong world. A hope that one day .. it could be AMERICA who can solve global problems and bring solutions that give all people the reasons and desires to live in peace.
That's My American .... Dream.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
Come'on ... you seem to be a pretty intelligent individual. America is clearly not as safe as it once was. Our image has taken a HUGE hit in the global community. After the devastation of 9-11, most of the world was BEHIND the US ... we had an opportunity to effect change globally with almost all countries willing to listen and help with our cause.
Instead, Bush publicly claims countries like Syria, Iraq, Iran, and N. Korea are part of the "Axis of Evil". America then wages war on Iraq and destabilize the entire region .. despite the concerns of the international community.
And most countries are still behind that same cause in Afghanistan.
WE destabilized the region? LOL...How about Hamas, Hezbullah, IRAN? 80% of Iraqs population were happy as hell when we invaded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
Al Queda has a LARGER presence in Afghanistan than it once did.
Iran, Syria, and N. Korea ALL feel threatened by the US since Bush's claims and have become more defiant with the help of allies like RUSSIA and CHINA.
So where are Al-Quada's training bases in Afghanistan again...oh yeah, bombed out! Ya can't say they have a larger presence just because there are more of them buried there than in other lands.
BOTH China and Russia voted yes for a third round of sanctions against Iran so I find this to be false also. Not to mention the assistance that China has provided regarding the N. Korea nuclear challenge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
Venezuela is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world ... and look where that relationship has gone.
This is the same Venezuela that has tanks at its Columbian border because they killed the leader of the leading terrorist group in Columbia. Yeah, Hugo is a hell of a guy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
With the US economy on a downward slope, the destabilization of the middle east, increased enrollment of terrorist in the middle east, and increasing tension with other military powers ... I don't see how ANY American can honestly believe we are safer now than we were. :wtf:
If you call strapping a suicide vest on a woman increasing enrollment have at it. History has dictated when an army begins to use women and children they are in BAD shape for members.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
Go look at gas prices ... that tells you how much many countries feel about the US right now. Not even Bush's Saudi friends are willing to lower gas prices. Any body ever bother and ask why?
THE WORLD IS RUNNING OUT OF OIL ... and oil producing countries are going to nickle and dime America to death until the last drop of oil comes out of the ground.
Get the enviromentalists to back off long enough for us to build some new refineries here in the states and watch the price of gas drop. You'll notice that when the price does start to drop either Iran or Venezuela acts up in some fashion in order to bump prices back up on a barrel of oil. Oil pricing is based on speculation, not supply.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
We aren't safer .... we're just pissing more people off and many of those people have the commodities we seek. In short ... America is biting the hands that feed them. These countries are getting rich and American's are losing their homes.
Safer indeed.
We have to deal with assholes on oil and yes they are getting rich but that has NOTHING to do with Americans losing their homes. If you have a monthly take home income of $1500 you can't afford a $1000 a month house payment. People are allowed to overextend themselves by a banking system that was more than happy to forclose on property because it was would have probably been worth more money and it was a sellers market.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
I mean seriously ... I'd rather be sitting here talking about how many ladies "Billy Bob" Clinton sporked than be talking about the possibilities of a new "cold-war" and erosion of "The American Dream".
At least Clinton used his mouth AND ears .... Bush putting his hands over his ears and screaming "NAH NAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" has not made us safer.
LOL....sure thing. He was to busy getting his Willie wet than to pay attention to the fact that Osama was dangerous. How many times did he elect not to take him out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
Tapping our phones and invading our privacy just to catch a terrorist doesn't make us safer. Not all terrorist will have iphones and email accounts. It's amazing how much Thomas Jefferson understood ... what he said makes more sense NOW than it ever has before. His amazing ability to understand that those who give up their privacy in order to gain security will NEVER have either one.
He would understand that by giving up our liberties, we allow those who fight against them to win. When we give up all our liberties to catch a terrorist ... what will we be fighting for?
And how does this compare to when Abe Lincoln suspended Habeas corpus during the civil war?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
No, I say to you .... You are safe only when there are no enemies.
We make this country safe by making friends and not enemies. By creating a strong American and in return ... the money and power to create a strong world. A hope that one day .. it could be AMERICA who can solve global problems and bring solutions that give all people the reasons and desires to live in peace.
That's My American .... Dream.
I agree, we will be safer when our enemy is defeated. Thinking that they'll sit down for tea and bon-bons is really out of the question though. Hell, even the left wing savior Obama is ready to invade AFTER he pulls out the troops....not to mention bomb Pakistan and clean up Darfur which would definately mean troops on the ground there.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
As I was reading this thread, having quite a laugh, I picked up something which led me to believe that you, P4B, are not very "green" shall we say?
Is this so? :jointsmile:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by r0k
As I was reading this thread, having quite a laugh, I picked up something which led me to believe that you, P4B, are not very "green" shall we say?
Is this so? :jointsmile:
LMAO...I'm green enough my friend.:D
http://boards.cannabis.com/grow-log/...aby-girls.html
Have a good grow!:jointsmile:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
And most countries are still behind that same cause in Afghanistan.
WE destabilized the region? LOL...How about Hamas, Hezbullah, IRAN? 80% of Iraqs population were happy as hell when we invaded.
So where are Al-Quada's training bases in Afghanistan again...oh yeah, bombed out! Ya can't say they have a larger presence just because there are more of them buried there than in other lands.
BOTH China and Russia voted yes for a third round of sanctions against Iran so I find this to be false also. Not to mention the assistance that China has provided regarding the N. Korea nuclear challenge.
This is the same Venezuela that has tanks at its Columbian border because they killed the leader of the leading terrorist group in Columbia. Yeah, Hugo is a hell of a guy.
If you call strapping a suicide vest on a woman increasing enrollment have at it. History has dictated when an army begins to use women and children they are in BAD shape for members.
Get the enviromentalists to back off long enough for us to build some new refineries here in the states and watch the price of gas drop. You'll notice that when the price does start to drop either Iran or Venezuela acts up in some fashion in order to bump prices back up on a barrel of oil. Oil pricing is based on speculation, not supply.
We have to deal with assholes on oil and yes they are getting rich but that has NOTHING to do with Americans losing their homes. If you have a monthly take home income of $1500 you can't afford a $1000 a month house payment. People are allowed to overextend themselves by a banking system that was more than happy to forclose on property because it was would have probably been worth more money and it was a sellers market.
Have a good one!:s4:
- No doubt that other countries are still dedicated to Afghanistan but the global support for America and its policies has diminished since the invasion of Iraq.
The fact that Al Queda is gaining strength in Afghanistan again has been known for some time now. It's a reality.
- Of course Russia and China are going to side with the global community when it comes to sanctions, that doesn't mean these countries are not allies. Doesn't mean that China and Russia don't SELL arms to these countries.
Obviously there is no strategic value for Russia and China to further themselves from the international community. This is politics at its best ..... sugar coating on the outside, shit on the inside.
- No one said that Hugo was a figure of admiration now did they? Just because he isn't a "friend" of Bush and America doesn't mean we should just label a country as "evil" and shut down diplomacy.
This makes things worse, not better. As evidence by Hugo's increasing anti-american stances.
- Anyone who actually believes there are LESS dangerous terrorist today than there were in the past must be blind. We are seeing an increased capture rate of suspected terrorist ... MORE attacks throughout the world ... increased need for security ... etc etc.
How can anyone honestly believe that continued violence, increased tension, and continued destabilization inside the middle east won't breed more terrorists? You think that just because they've recently used women in bombings that its a sign that the terrorists are going away? LMFAO! Hate to break it to you but terrorists groups have used women and children for a long time.. Nothing new there ......
- Obviously you don't understand the history of oil. Building new refineries in the US will not solve our problems. America has already reached its production peak. (back in the 1970s). We are slowly and slowly producing less oil each year. Why? Because there ISN'T ANYMORE.
The middle east is the ONLY region that has yet to officially reach the peak of its oil production but many believe it is either here or already come to past. (considering the giant leap in gas prices the last 10 years).
The solution is to design alternative energy systems. I find it hard to believe that America was able to harness the power of the atom in a weapon over 60 years ago .... yet in that time we are incapable of producing engines that run on something other than oil. Corruption doesn't like change.
You don't think oil prices effect the economy? :wtf: You don't think they cause companies to decrease overhead and cut jobs? You don't think people losing their jobs cause them to lose their homes? :wtf: Obviously it's not the only reason .... but you honestly can't make a connection?
In February ... my old lady spent $350 for gas. For many people .. that's a car payment ... For many people ... that's a rent/house payment.
So yes, oil prices certainly effect American jobs. To say otherwise is incredibly insane.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- No doubt that other countries are still dedicated to Afghanistan but the global support for America and its policies has diminished since the invasion of Iraq.
Recent elections in both Germany and France proves otherwise. Living in the past are we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
The fact that Al Queda is gaining strength in Afghanistan again has been known for some time now. It's a reality.
A little quote from the Outlaw Josey Wales:Dyin' ain't much of a living boy.
Al-Qaeda releases web eulogy of Afghanistan strategist - USATODAY.com
The only place they're gaining strength is in the underworld.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- No one said that Hugo was a figure of admiration now did they? Just because he isn't a "friend" of Bush and America doesn't mean we should just label a country as "evil" and shut down diplomacy.
This makes things worse, not better. As evidence by Hugo's increasing anti-american stances.
Not to mention his anti-Columbian and Brazilian stances. The only people he does get along with are the petty dictators from Cuba, Iran and N. Korea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- Anyone who actually believes there are LESS dangerous terrorist today than there were in the past must be blind. We are seeing an increased capture rate of suspected terrorist ... MORE attacks throughout the world ... increased need for security ... etc etc.
How can anyone honestly believe that continued violence, increased tension, and continued destabilization inside the middle east won't breed more terrorists? You think that just because they've recently used women in bombings that its a sign that the terrorists are going away? LMFAO! Hate to break it to you but terrorists groups have used women and children for a long time.. Nothing new there ......
So do you REALLY believe that you can sit and negotiate with a group that feels the entire world should be under Sharia Law? LOL...only in a Dems dream would that EVER happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- Obviously you don't understand the history of oil. Building new refineries in the US will not solve our problems. America has already reached its production peak. (back in the 1970s). We are slowly and slowly producing less oil each year. Why? Because there ISN'T ANYMORE.
The middle east is the ONLY region that has yet to officially reach the peak of its oil production but many believe it is either here or already come to past. (considering the giant leap in gas prices the last 10 years).
Obviously you don't understand the relationship between refineries, crude oil, and the price of gas. Iran is oil rich...why is their gas so expensive and being rationed? Lack of refineries!
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
The solution is to design alternative energy systems. I find it hard to believe that America was able to harness the power of the atom in a weapon over 60 years ago .... yet in that time we are incapable of producing engines that run on something other than oil. Corruption doesn't like change.
This is true but if you expect the front runners we have to make the change your living in a dream. Clinton and McCain are a definate part of the current system and if anyone checks out Obama on health care knows that he's as corrupt, if not more, than the others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
You don't think oil prices effect the economy? You don't think they cause companies to decrease overhead and cut jobs? You don't think people losing their jobs cause them to lose their homes? Obviously it's not the only reason .... but you honestly can't make a connection?
In February ... my old lady spent $350 for gas. For many people .. that's a car payment ... For many people ... that's a rent/house payment.
So yes, oil prices certainly effect American jobs. To say otherwise is incredibly insane.
It does have an effect but not as much as people overextending their own credit. Earning less than $40,000/year does NOT equate into owning a $200,000 home and also being $5000 in credit card debt.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Recent elections in both Germany and France proves otherwise. Living in the past are we?
A little quote from the Outlaw Josey Wales:Dyin' ain't much of a living boy.
Al-Qaeda releases web eulogy of Afghanistan strategist - USATODAY.com
The only place they're gaining strength is in the underworld.
Not to mention his anti-Columbian and Brazilian stances. The only people he does get along with are the petty dictators from Cuba, Iran and N. Korea.
So do you REALLY believe that you can sit and negotiate with a group that feels the entire world should be under Sharia Law? LOL...only in a Dems dream would that EVER happen.
Obviously you don't understand the relationship between refineries, crude oil, and the price of gas. Iran is oil rich...why is their gas so expensive and being rationed? Lack of refineries!
This is true but if you expect the front runners we have to make the change your living in a dream. Clinton and McCain are a definate part of the current system and if anyone checks out Obama on health care knows that he's as corrupt, if not more, than the others.
It does have an effect but not as much as people overextending their own credit. Earning less than $40,000/year does NOT equate into owning a $200,000 home and also being $5000 in credit card debt.
Have a good one!:s4:
- How do elections in France and Germany prove that America's global image hasn't been tarnished because of the Iraq War? It doesn't ... Sounds like you are in denial.
- If Afghanistan doesn't have a problem with Al Queda ... then why is American pressuring NATO to increase involvement as we sit here debating? Why do government officials continue to warn about the increasing Al Queda presence and the return of Opium production in the country?
I guess everyone else but you is being fooled ...
- Using diplomacy to settle a situation is much better than putting them in the same group as a country you invaded.
- Again, the middle east is PEAKING in its oil production. The United States has ALREADY passed the peak of its oil production. I already stated this. But spending billions-trillions of dollars to build new refineries isn't going to solve anything when the oil runs dry. The money SHOULD be spent to create alternative methods of conventional power. Like I already said ... if the US learned to harness atomic power over 60 years ago, you can't tell me we can't be running machines that run on something other than oil. Heck, with enough time and money ... you could build a car that runs on farts. Heck, France is currently building cars that run on compressed air. 200-300 miles on a tank if I remember right.
- The government lost touch with the people a long time ago ... If you have to be rich to be president ... you can't vouch for the middle class or the poor. There's something wrong when tens of millions of dollars are spent to try and win a job that pays $400,000 a year.
- If people HAVE jobs ... they can continue to pay their debts.
JOBS JOBS JOBS! That's the key. Doesn't matter how much money they owe .. if they have a decent wage job, they can make the payments. What has happened is: Creditors were giving "loose" loans ... those people are seeing their jobs moving over seas, closed, or layoffs ... people no longer have the means to pay their debt and bills. Yes, debt is ultimately bad for America ... but it isn't what is choking the economy. Industry leaving our cities imho is the main culprit in the slowing economy.
In my hometown with a population of 7-10,000 people ... there have been 5 factories in the past few years close alone. That was a massive blow to the community. Not because they owed $5,000 on their credit cards .... but because they saw nearly all of their industry shut down quickly.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- How do elections in France and Germany prove that America's global image hasn't been tarnished because of the Iraq War? It doesn't ... Sounds like you are in denial.
So when the people of other countries elect a more conservative style government that openly supports the U.S., it isn't an issue as to world opinion? Who was tarnished more by the Iraq war; the U.S. or the ones found dirty in the food for oil? Seems that those leaders have been replaced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- If Afghanistan doesn't have a problem with Al Queda ... then why is American pressuring NATO to increase involvement as we sit here debating? Why do government officials continue to warn about the increasing Al Queda presence and the return of Opium production in the country?
Should the U.S. and Canada hold the majority of the responsibility? This is in NATOs backyard.
They did have a safe haven to regroup in Pakistan but they pretty much outlived their welcome there too. We're pushing them out of Iraq, seems that Afghanistan will be their last line of defense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- Using diplomacy to settle a situation is much better than putting them in the same group as a country you invaded.
Once again....try to use diplomacy on a group that's out to rule the world by a religious law. Won't happen! Likewise, Saddam was a leader with intentions on doing another 9-11 on us...once again, won't happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
In my hometown with a population of 7-10,000 people ... there have been 5 factories in the past few years close alone. That was a massive blow to the community. Not because they owed $5,000 on their credit cards .... but because they saw nearly all of their industry shut down quickly.
I can understand your frustration here. My town went through the same thing years back but other businesses in plastics and computors have moved in now.
The main question was whether or not we're safer now than before. How many attacks have been successful on U.S. soil since 9-11? Things such as FISA and the Patriot Act have stopped some of that crap but some just don't want to believe it. Unless it happens, it's just an illusion.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
So when the people of other countries elect a more conservative style government that openly supports the U.S., it isn't an issue as to world opinion? Who was tarnished more by the Iraq war; the U.S. or the ones found dirty in the food for oil? Seems that those leaders have been replaced.
Should the U.S. and Canada hold the majority of the responsibility? This is in NATOs backyard.
They did have a safe haven to regroup in Pakistan but they pretty much outlived their welcome there too. We're pushing them out of Iraq, seems that Afghanistan will be their last line of defense.
Once again....try to use diplomacy on a group that's out to rule the world by a religious law. Won't happen! Likewise, Saddam was a leader with intentions on doing another 9-11 on us...once again, won't happen.
I can understand your frustration here. My town went through the same thing years back but other businesses in plastics and computors have moved in now.
The main question was whether or not we're safer now than before. How many attacks have been successful on U.S. soil since 9-11? Things such as FISA and the Patriot Act have stopped some of that crap but some just don't want to believe it. Unless it happens, it's just an illusion.
Have a good one!:s4:
- Just because the people elect a more conservative government that's more Pro-US (most of our allies ARE ... duh) doesn't mean that people around the world see America in a better light than pre-Iraq. That's like saying that because America voted Bush president twice ... we all agreed with the Iraq war. The country was divided (and still is). There is more to someone getting elected than their stance on international alliances.
- My point being ... if Al Queda is not gaining strength in Afghanistan like you claim, then WHY do we require more military assistance in the area? Why are officials going on tv talking about this problem? If Afghanistan is Al Quedas "last line of defense" like you just said ... then one would think that Afghanistan is Al Queda's stronghold ...
- In a perfect world ... all countries deserve the respect of the international community and for them to acknowledge their sovereignty. My meaning being... America should always extend its hand at the table of diplomacy to nations who have not yet posed an emanate threat to our people. Turning a blind eye to these countries and pretending "we're above it" does nothing more than anger these government even more. And perhaps worse, these nation's citizens don't seek a war with America.
Governments wage wars on behalf of the people ... but seldom will you find people who truly want to kill others. People fight and die for leaders who never have to know what its like to see the mayhem... American, Canadian, Iranian, Korean, Chinese ... most of us are just PEOPLE ... who want to live in PEACE ... and enjoy LIFE.
P.S. As far as I've ever read ... there isn't any proof that Saddam was planning to attack the US. There WAS a document suggesting that Bin Laden would however.
- Just because America has not been attacked since 9-11 doesn't mean that we are safer. How long had it been since US soil had been attacked BEFORE 9-11? I guess we all are allowed to have our own opinion. But I think most people share the same view as I. A view that if we maintain this course of international diplomacy, America will become more and more threatened. (Hence, less secure)
Sure, current legislation has helped spoil terrorist attacks ... I can buy it. But do you HONESTLY believe America wasn't a target prior to 9-11? Both assassination and terrorist attacks have been spoiled LONG before the Patriot Act. (HINT ... that's why we have agencies like the CIA and NSA)
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- Just because the people elect a more conservative government that's more Pro-US (most of our allies ARE ... duh) doesn't mean that people around the world see America in a better light than pre-Iraq. That's like saying that because America voted Bush president twice ... we all agreed with the Iraq war. The country was divided (and still is). There is more to someone getting elected than their stance on international alliances.
True but I'm sure it was a big issue. What about our "world image" when we're the first on on the scene after disasters? LOL...let someone like Ron Paul get in and you'll see how unpopular we can get when all aid, assistance, etc. is shut off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- My point being ... if Al Queda is not gaining strength in Afghanistan like you claim, then WHY do we require more military assistance in the area? Why are officials going on tv talking about this problem? If Afghanistan is Al Quedas "last line of defense" like you just said ... then one would think that Afghanistan is Al Queda's stronghold ...
Being a stronghold and gaining strength are two different things. After all, at the end of WW2 the Nazi's could have called Berlin their stronghold. More troops doesn't always equate to battle. There is also the issue of training Afghan forces, rebuilding, etc.....not to mention sharing the responsibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- In a perfect world ... all countries deserve the respect of the international community and for them to acknowledge their sovereignty. My meaning being... America should always extend its hand at the table of diplomacy to nations who have not yet posed an emanate threat to our people. Turning a blind eye to these countries and pretending "we're above it" does nothing more than anger these government even more. And perhaps worse, these nation's citizens don't seek a war with America.
P.S. As far as I've ever read ... there isn't any proof that Saddam was planning to attack the US. There WAS a document suggesting that Bin Laden would however.
Here's the article: CNN.com - Russia 'warned U.S. about Saddam' - Jun 18, 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecurious1
- Just because America has not been attacked since 9-11 doesn't mean that we are safer. How long had it been since US soil had been attacked BEFORE 9-11? I guess we all are allowed to have our own opinion. But I think most people share the same view as I. A view that if we maintain this course of international diplomacy, America will become more and more threatened. (Hence, less secure)
Sure, current legislation has helped spoil terrorist attacks ... I can buy it. But do you HONESTLY believe America wasn't a target prior to 9-11? Both assassination and terrorist attacks have been spoiled LONG before the Patriot Act. (HINT ... that's why we have agencies like the CIA and NSA)
Your two statements contradict each other. If current legislation has spoiled attacks then I say that we are safer now than before. We were a target, are a target.....the difference is that now we are harder to get to due to current legislation and that they are way to busy dodging "bullets" for lack of better terms. As it's been said, "Better to fight them there than here".
By the way, it's been a pleasure debating this with ya. Debating politics can get very heated and due to site policy personal attacks aren't allowed. You've kept it real and to the point without that.....much respect!:thumbsup:
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
P4B Canada elected a conservative government not because we wanted closer ties with America but because the Liberal government was caught in a scandal that brought them down.To say that France and Germany elected conservative governments because the people want closer ties with America and their policies is a laugh.Also the Taliban is not been forced out of Pakistan and the Pastun region is where they are thriving.Most high ranking generals in the Pakistani army are sympathatic to the Taliban and have no will to fight them.
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Never mentioned anything regarding Canada.....nice to have the assist over in Afghanistan though.:thumbsup:
As for France and Germany....both of the candidates ran on a platform of better ties to the U.S. so it was a factor in their elections.
I know their regrouping up in the hills of Pakistan known better as "no mans land". Kind of strange since they control Afghanistan huh?:rolleyes:
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
LOL they control all areas that dont have a soldiar on it.But as soon as that soldiar leaves the Taliban control it.I dont know if youve noticed but Frances president.his approval rating is at an all time low.I guess when u lay with dogs....................
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
Can you be specific on which areas that coallition forces left and the Taliban took over. Your one article stated that the Taliban had control over the country....now this? LMAO!
French Prez:
Current rating at 36% but why don't they love him?
Having pledged to use his presidency to combat economic fears, Sarkozy is seemingly paying for a January declaration that the "state coffers are empty" and that the government should not be expected to come up with a hand-out.
Poll:French President Sarkozy's Approval Ratings Plunge To 36%-AFP (News Search) | SmartMoney.com
I guess the pro-welfare crowd isn't limited to just one country.
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Clinton/Obama Debate.....LMAO!!!
^ *claps*
Finally! Someone with some junk in their pants has control of France.
