0
   

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 12:19 pm
hobit, I don't know what you mean, because the width of the post with the link is the same width as all the other posts on the page.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 12:20 pm
What do you think Japan and Hitler had in mind? And, what was the purpose of 911? Forceful redecoration?

Don't act like you're that naive.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 12:20 pm
I love the idea that we're not subordinated to the will of others... If wishes were...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 12:22 pm
Sofia, Can you please address your question to a individual if that's what you're trying to do? Thx, c.i.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 12:56 pm
Sofia wrote:
What do you think Japan and Hitler had in mind? And, what was the purpose of 911? Forceful redecoration?

Don't act like you're that naive.

The al-Quaeda is less interested in subjugationg the US than in reforming Islam. I have never understood the folks who seem to think divisions of tanks driven by bin-Laden are going to come rolling down Madison Ave. Terrorists, by definition, don't think the way Yammamoto or Rommel did. If they have any desire to change our way of life, it is to make us less open and free, which your little guy in the WH is happy to oblige. the Bush administration couldn't have planned a better event than 11th September to help advance their priorities. Bin-Laden/Al-Queda doesn't want Americans to convert, he wants them to die. There is a difference. In the large view, his "plan" if you will, is unworkable. The only people who have subjugeted others after 9/11 is the administration. It is you, Sofia, who are displaying naivete...The "red Dawn" fantasies of the far right are very misplaced.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 01:39 pm
hobitbob wrote:
sofia wrote:
The vast majority of people in this country have one thing in common. We'd rather die than be subordinated to the will of others.

Who is trying to subordinate us to their will? The only group that seems out to destroy freedom and democracy is the current administration. It seems most americans are happily allowing their wills to be subordinated. Sad


Really? Read what the Iraqi's think about that.

* Iraqis are optimistic. Seven out of ten say they expect both their country and their personal lives will be better five years from now. On both fronts, 32 percent say things will become MUCH better.

* Asked to name one country they would most like Iraq to model its new government on, after being offered five possibilities?-neighbor and fellow Baathist republic Syria, neighbor and Islamic monarchy Saudi Arabia, neighbor and Islamist republic Iran, Arab lodestar Egypt, or the U.S.?-the most popular model by far was the U.S. The U.S. was preferred as a model by 37 percent of Iraqis selecting from those five?-more than neighboring Syria plus neighboring Iran plus Egypt, all put together. Saudi Arabia was in second place at 28 percent.

Again, there were important demographic splits. Younger adults are especially favorable toward the U.S., and Shiites are more admiring than Sunnis. Interestingly, Iraqi Shiites, who are co-religionists with Iranians, do not admire Iran's Islamist government; the U.S. is six times more popular with them as a model for governance.

* And, finally, you can write off the possibility of a Baath revival. We asked "Should Baath Party leaders who committed crimes in the past be punished, or should past actions be put behind us?" A thoroughly disgusted and unforgiving Iraqi public stated by 74% to 18% that Saddam's henchmen should be punished.

Evidence of the comparative gentleness of this war can be seen in our poll. Less than 30 percent of our sample of Iraqis knew or heard of anyone killed in the spring fighting. Meanwhile, fully HALF knew some family member, neighbor, or friend who had been killed by Iraqi security forces during the years Saddam held power.

Perhaps the ultimate indication of how comfortable Iraqis are with America's aims in their region came when we asked how long they would like to see American and British forces remain in their country: Six months? One year? Two years or more? Two thirds of those with an opinion urged that the coalition troops should stick around for at least another year or more.

More.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11927
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 01:40 pm
A little off the subject, but not too much I hope... I just had a wonderful email from a friend which included the following comment about reading the Sunday papers:

"The first thing I read was the front page story on 'Dizzying Dive to Red Ink.' Great line about most of those who get to pay the bill having 'already been put to bed by their parents'."
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 01:45 pm
Brand X, I'm so happy for the Iraqis. Americans are paying with our blood and billions. I hope you're happy too!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 01:48 pm
BTW, did anybody in this administration study about Rome?
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:00 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
BTW, did anybody in this administration study about Rome?


We're already 30 years passed our life expectancy as a civilzation, history will catch up to us soon enough I think.

Brand X, I'm so happy for the Iraqis. Americans are paying with our blood and billions. I hope you're happy too!
Quote:


Some people from other countries faught for your freedom's in this country, right? They gave their lives and possesions up for your freedom, no?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:43 pm
Brand X, I think you have some confusion; the US are the one's that sacrificed for other's freedoms during WWI and WWII at great sacrifice.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:44 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Brand X, I think you have some confusion; the US are the one's that sacrificed for other's freedoms during WWI and WWII at great sacrifice.

Errrr...what about The UK and France?
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:47 pm
What about when America was being formed by foreigners, struggles for unity and freedom, many lives paid those bills.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:50 pm
hobit, Didn't mean to intentionally ignore the contributions of England and France, but without the US, Germany would have won both wars.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:53 pm
Brand X, FYI, the US is composed of immigrants. Only the Native American Indians are considered for all intent and purposes, "non-immigrants." However, if you wish to study anthropology, even American Indians are said to have come from the Far East.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:56 pm
The al-Quaeda is less interested in subjugationg the US than in reforming Islam.

And how did killing 3000 American citizens work into reforming Islam? Again, what was the purpose of 911?
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:58 pm
Splitting hairs aside, all I was trying to get across was, we have had contributions and sacrifices by other countries that we ultimately benefit from, even if the circumstances were different than the dealings in Iraq. Sorry to take it off track, please continue with your discussion.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 02:59 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Brand X, FYI, the US is composed of immigrants. Only the Native American Indians are considered for all intent and purposes, "non-immigrants." However, if you wish to study anthropology, even American Indians are said to have come from the Far East.


Thanks for helping make part of my point.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 03:10 pm
Sofia wrote:
The al-Quaeda is less interested in subjugationg the US than in reforming Islam.

And how did killing 3000 American citizens work into reforming Islam? Again, what was the purpose of 911?

the purpose of a terror attack is to sow the seeds of conflict and discontent. A US that is busy repressing its own citizens isn't likly to have time to go after al-Quaeda. The purpose of Teror is terror. Bin-Laden does not want to take over the US. The doesn't want to "take over" anything. He wants to create anarchy. By striking the US, bin-Laden shows that his organization can attack a "mighty" power and be free of repurcussions (he was wrong), therefore adding legitimacy to his world view and increasing recruitment. Al-Quaeda's principle target isn't the US, it is Islam. Bin Laden and others like him are not too dissimilar from Muntzer and the Anabaptists in 16th century Europe.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Sep, 2003 03:59 pm
"Again, what was the purpose of 911?"

The stated reasons were:
1) US troops in Saudi Arabia
2) US support of corrupt Middle Eastern regimes.
3) US support of sanctions against Iraq.
4) US support of Israel to the detriment of the Palestinans.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 02/28/2026 at 01:09:53