1
   

Democrats now want to Ban the War on Terror

 
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Apr, 2007 05:55 pm
@Silverchild79,
The problem is the US is focused on the oil and the so called "insurgents", truth be told they had no way to forsee the manner in which they were recieved, you see it was a muslim scholar from paquistan who first said that the US would be recieved with roses, and he was not alone in that claim. Did you know that the US has only spent about 1 tenth of the budget for rebuilding Iraq? If the people were to see real changes their attitude towards the american ocupation would no doubt change.
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Apr, 2007 06:28 pm
@Silverchild79,
it would be allot easier to rebuild it if they didn't keep blowing it up with suicide bombs, over and over again
0 Replies
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Apr, 2007 06:36 pm
@Silverchild79,
Of course a terrorist would bomb these sites, the last thing they want is for the general public to support the USA, because if the US does recieve such support than these terrorists are done for in Iraq.
0 Replies
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Apr, 2007 06:40 pm
@Silverchild79,
Quote:
I agree with you there.


I hoped you would, since it was you who explained much of this to me. Smile
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 09:59 am
@markx15,
markx15;13533 wrote:
Where are the terrorist suicide bombings focused?


I guess Kamakazie pilots in WWII were terrorist too. That's the problem with the slogan "War on Terror", now everything is a terrorist act, when in reality it is just a tactic. Besides, weren't most of the hijackers on the planes supposedly from Saudi and Jordan?

Quote:
How many more attacks have you had on your homeland?


How many (foreign borne) did we have before?

Quote:
Iraq is a diversion that avoids american civilian deaths


Our soldiers are American citizens, how many are dead from this farce?

Quote:
keeps the oil flowing,


Among other things, like financial invetsors money

Quote:
establishes greater american military supremacy in the region (keeping some warlords under check)


We've had a military presence in the region for decades

Quote:
and sets the stage for a possible attack on Iran if the proper steps are taken, from a military point of view the ocupation is a total sucess, from a civilian perspective it is unjustified carnage.


Yes, over extending and demoraliziong our troops is a great success. Not too mention that the government we put in place is rock solid and would totally stand the test of time if we left[\sarcasm] Fact is when the real terrorist countries in the region have flexed, the US has pussed out, we picked on the fat kid, and whipped his ass good.
0 Replies
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 10:13 am
@Silverchild79,
Quote:
I guess Kamakazie pilots in WWII were terrorist too. That's the problem with the slogan "War on Terror", now everything is a terrorist act, when in reality it is just a tactic. Besides, weren't most of the hijackers on the planes supposedly from Saudi and Jordan?


Not supposedly, they were, and I believe one was egyptian.

Quote:
How many (foreign borne) did we have before?


None since WWII?

Quote:
Our soldiers are American citizens, how many are dead from this farce?


Do you think that is first and foremost on the mind of your politicians?

Quote:
Yes, over extending and demoraliziong our troops is a great success.


Demoralizing yes, but over-extending? It is hard to over-extend a 2.3 million man army.

Quote:
We've had a military presence in the region for decades


Yes I know, Qatar, Paquistan, but was it enough?
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 01:53 pm
@markx15,
markx15;13658 wrote:
Not supposedly, they were, and I believe one was egyptian.


Exactly, the catalyst for the war on terror, and our occupation of Iraq weren't even from there. More ammunition that the "war on terror" is a farce, and needs to be put in check.


Quote:
None since WWII?


Correctemundo. The US government puts a muslim face on it, and shabam war on terror, when the fact is we have had more "terrorist" acts on America committed by AMERICANS than all the M.E. nations combined.

Quote:
Do you think that is first and foremost on the mind of your politicians?


Never has been, never will.


Quote:
Demoralizing yes, but over-extending? It is hard to over-extend a 2.3 million man army.


Yes, over extended. Our active military is just under 1.5 mil, between the reserve components and active there's just over 4 mil. Of course that's ALL military combined including Coast Gaurd, and a huge percentage of that is logistics. If they aren't over extended, than why are soldiers being kept in Iraq for additional 6 months after a full year? or longer? Why has this been going on since the start?



Quote:
Yes I know, Qatar, Paquistan, but was it enough?


Will it ever be? Terrorism isn't an entity we can stike, it's an ideology, and a fear tactic. There is no enemy to be seen, and killed. Terrorism has been around since mankind. Putting the bodies of the dead on pikes at your lands borders to strike fear into those that would come against you, to bombing of cafes in Paris, to flying planes into buildings. The "War on Terrorism" is a farce and being used to manipulate the public. You think Bin Laden or whoever really cares that Bush is waging a war on terrorism? Well, of course they do, because now they have succeeded in their goals, the American people are afraid, and that's what they want.
0 Replies
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 05:47 pm
@Silverchild79,
And we are left to wonder the true goals of the Bush administration?
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 07:09 pm
@Silverchild79,
"Did you know that the US has only spent about 1 tenth of the budget for rebuilding Iraq? If the people were to see real changes their attitude towards the american ocupation would no doubt change."

I don't think you understand Islam, despite your personal experiences with it. It's barbaric, brutal, destructive, implacable. Anything we could ever build for Muslims they'd destroy within seconds. They hate everything, especially each other. We shouldn't do a damned thing for them, ever.
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 08:09 pm
@markx15,
markx15;13691 wrote:
And we are left to wonder the true goals of the Bush administration?


Of course not. I don't see how anyone can fall for it when 90% of the drugs coming into America make it through the border. I mean seriously, if the US government can't stop literally THOUSANDS of TONS of cocaine, heroin, marijauna, extascy, etc from coming into America, how in the hell do they expect to stop small groups of people? Oh they don't as our borders are penetrated daily by illegal imigrants. Like I said, it isn't about the safety of the American people, it's about controlling them with fear.
0 Replies
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 09:12 pm
@Silverchild79,
And what do these men get out of it? Money?
0 Replies
 
rhopper3
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 09:13 pm
@Silverchild79,
Thats why we shouldn't be ther exposing our kids to that evil. hey if we catch them trapsing through the Texas Hill country I'll be right there with Pinochet hanging their body parts on a tree, but until then we are accomplishing nothing in Iraq but using a mace to swing at poisonous bees, For great mighty swing we take we will kill one or two but we get stung every time and every time we are losing something much more valuable to us than the bees we kill are to the bee keeper...Its bad math and past time to leave
0 Replies
 
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:02 pm
@IM-A-DEMOCRAT-BABY,
IM-A-DEMOCRAT-BABY!;13347 wrote:
liberals and democrats have lots of skate punks and MANY of the minority vote. I bet any of them will kick your ass.


blhahahahahahahahablaabbaldfghagaggaghaha, skaters, punks, minorities....blaghagagagaahahfagsdfgakjlsgskldf Laughing :mebeer:


:devilheadbang: :rocketwhore:
0 Replies
 
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:08 pm
@IM-A-DEMOCRAT-BABY,
IM-A-DEMOCRAT-BABY!;13353 wrote:
Point taken on the humorous thing. but this is a serious discussion even though the bush administration is a joke.

however i still beg to difer on the beating up thing. u guys got all the tough hicks. true. but try taking a ghetto life, grew up in compton, shot 5 times, black dude. democrats have the majority of the black vote. Try taking a real westside crip.


OH MY GOD......:no: i've lived in the 5th ward of houston, they are not that scary or tough. without a gun or a group of people with them they are cowards. stop watching the day time specials and take a nap. And i think the words you dems use are african american.
0 Replies
 
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 May, 2007 05:29 pm
@markx15,
i think i read someone state that afghanistan was over....my brother is over there right now. it's not over yet. Altho i don't agree with the tactics being used...Al queda is still large in afghanistan, The terrorists who attacked us are in Afghanistan, but Afghanistan is never mentioned in these so called "political debates" there is a reason the democrats only focus on Iraq, It IS thier only platform for thier war on the war on terror. You can't ban reality!!!
0 Replies
 
I Understand
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 May, 2007 04:36 pm
@Silverchild79,
Wow some people are so brainwashed. Who quotes FOX news as a source anyway? Half of the nonsense I read on here is neoconservative propaganda.



Conservatives obviously want to conserve the way things are. They are sheltered, and if they actually took a glimpse of reality they would want change. Hence why most of them are country folk who usually have money etc. They never have to question why things are the way they are because they don't see the ugly side of things. This is why you tend to see more liberals in the Northeast and California in the most developed areas of the country. The urban areas. Its not a coincidence that the areas considered to be "blue" states have a more successful people and are more intelligent citizens. Intelligence goes a long way. Especially in politics.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 May, 2007 05:34 pm
@I Understand,
I Understand;15474 wrote:
Wow some people are so brainwashed. Who quotes FOX news as a source anyway? Half of the nonsense I read on here is neoconservative propaganda.



Conservatives obviously want to conserve the way things are. They are sheltered, and if they actually took a glimpse of reality they would want change. Hence why most of them are country folk who usually have money etc. They never have to question why things are the way they are because they don't see the ugly side of things. This is why you tend to see more liberals in the Northeast and California in the most developed areas of the country. The urban areas. Its not a coincidence that the areas considered to be "blue" states have a more successful people and are more intelligent citizens. Intelligence goes a long way. Especially in politics.
Usual Lib dribble. We will see how well your intelligence holds out. Against our sheltered knowledge. Some thing tells me it won't be long.
0 Replies
 
I Understand
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 May, 2007 07:50 pm
@Silverchild79,
I am not entirely liberal. I support Ron Paul. Who is basically a libertarian running as a Republican. I am not a Democrat.
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 May, 2007 08:41 pm
@I Understand,
I Understand;15474 wrote:
Wow some people are so brainwashed. Who quotes FOX news as a source anyway? Half of the nonsense I read on here is neoconservative propaganda.



Conservatives obviously want to conserve the way things are. They are sheltered, and if they actually took a glimpse of reality they would want change. Hence why most of them are country folk who usually have money etc. They never have to question why things are the way they are because they don't see the ugly side of things. This is why you tend to see more liberals in the Northeast and California in the most developed areas of the country. The urban areas. Its not a coincidence that the areas considered to be "blue" states have a more successful people and are more intelligent citizens. Intelligence goes a long way. Especially in politics.


Well i lean more to the right than the left, and i don't have hardly any money, altho i do live in the south. If by "countryflok" you mean people who want what is best for the country, then you are correct. I would strongly consider myself "countryfolk". And besides that, i see alot more trust fund babies who went to private schools on the lib side anyways. That my friend is sheltered. The fantasy world you people live in is repulsive. Libs would ban expelling flatulance if they thought it would save the world from "Global Warming". Intelligence means nothing if you don't know how to use it.(properly)
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 May, 2007 08:15 am
@I Understand,
I Understand;15489 wrote:
I am not entirely liberal. I support Ron Paul. Who is basically a libertarian running as a Republican. I am not a Democrat.
What ever percentage you are lib IMO your full of the same amount of crap. If he's libby, why not run as one? Ain't got a chance that way huh? He's got to run as a repug to have a chance, LOL.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 06:45:35