Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories

  • Catz
  • I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
  • General
  • A place for discussions about anything
  • Politics
  • Politics, government, and national issues.
  • Entertainment
  • Music, television, humor, movies, and everything else mildly entert...
  • Computers
  • Computer systems, hardware, programs, and operating system discussion.
  • Software
  • Discuss operating sytems, applications and general programs.
  • Video Games
  • Nintendo, Playstation, and Sony systems & games.
  • Technology
  • This general tech forum covers everything from iPods to new technol...
  • Internet
  • Discussion about emailing, blogging, popular websites, and anything...
  • Living
  • Lifestyles and routine activities. Discuss people, religions, and w...
  • World & Science
  • World discussion including global and national events, news, politi...
  • Global Events
  • News and events including war, terrorism, and society.
  • OpenPost
  • Announcements, development, and support for OpenPost.

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    •  
      CommentAuthortakai
    • CommentTimeJun 6th 2005
     # 1
    Maybe you've heard, but senator Hillary Clinton may be running for prez in 2008... Which is also the first election I'll be able to vote.

    Obviously with 2 years left it isn't certain, but if she does run, I'm sure as hell voting for her. The only republican candidate I've heard about is Bush's cousin or something like that who may also be running.

    Too early to tell much really, but it'd be cool to see a woman as president for once...
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 7th 2005
     # 2
    ......... no...... just no.....

    think drugs and say no



    you want to see a woman president? you did during clinton. you know she was behind everything he did, tweeking and pushing.

    why do u think she stayed w/him during the monica lewinski scadal? power...

    i have NOTHING against democrats in general, if i think someone will do a good job then ill vote for them reguardless of party afiliation, but to be honest, this woman scares me....
    •  
      CommentAuthortakai
    • CommentTimeJun 7th 2005
     # 3
    LOL

    Yea she scares me too.. I never said I liked her, I just said it would be cool for a woman to be president. To be honest I think both parties have had shitty candidates during all of the elections I've been alive for. Well.. Bill Clinton was alright.. Kerry was NOT the right choice to try to beat Bush with though.

    We need like, some hardcore liberal voices in the government.. But not just any liberals.. We need hippies. Too many rich Christian conservatives in the government imo. It's called checks and balances. Hippies and oil ranchers.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2005
     # 4
    lmfao, hippies and oil ranchers, nice

    well, i love to say im one of those more conservative types. the whole outlaw gay marriage (ive no problem w/them living together and stuff but this isnt the place for that discussion) i dont think people should play God and mess w/cloning and genes and such, and i think having a big army is nice


    and takai, if u dont like her the why vote?

    that would completely destroy the very reason people our age were given the right to vote.


    plus i think Condie is gunna be a canidate as well for the republicans

    how bout that, black AND a woman, 2 birds with one stone. That or theyr tryen to make it so that Arnold can run for office
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2005
     # 5
    It'd be funny to see a woman in office, but does it really count if said woman has a penis?



    Should she be running in 2008, I don't think I'll be voting for her. I'm yet to see any real reason to, aside from the fact that she's a woman, which I'm hoping won't end up being a real issue, come 2008.
    •  
      CommentAuthortakai
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2005
     # 6
    Condo as president.. That would be hell..
    I guess both of the female candidates are bitchy though.

    Why vote if I don't like her? Because that's how you voice your opinion in a democracy... I still agree with her on a lot of subjects.

    I have no idea how it would turn out if a woman ran for president. You'd have the radical feminists that would vote for the female no matter who she was, then you'd have the guys that vote for the man because he has balls, and then everyone else.

    Also, even if I don't like Hillary, if she's elected she'll put democrats back in position (like in the house).

    I think that cloning, stem cell research, and genetic engineering should all be legal.. It's for the better.. It would solve a LOT of diseases and disabilities and could save a lot of lives. I don't think it's playing God either. It's another one of those subjects where I think that people are just scared because they don't know where it could lead.. If you don't like it, then don't participate or support it. No one says it has to be a government funded program.. It usually isn't.

    Bush doesn't realize that not everyone believes the same things as him.. What about people that don't believe in god? Or believe in a different one? Why should they have to be limited by his religious rules? What if they get a cancer that could have been solved by stem cell research, but there's no cure because it was against Bush's religion?

    A big army, eh, I can't disagree with you there.. But I always think it's ironic how people that don't support stem cell research and call it murder when you use 1 undeveloped embryo for research that could save millions of lives, but that it's ok to have wars and kill millions of people with guns.

    Maybe it's just me.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2005
     # 7
    i never said it was murder to use a fetus, and i also never said it was ok to go to war....

    Afghanistan, yes, they fucked us over bad so we fucked them over.

    Iraq, ehh...... in all reality we shouldnt have gone into this one. Yes sadam was a horrible person and killed millions, but thats millions of people that arn't ours. I want our soilders home alive as much as the next guy.

    Why vote if I don't like her? Because that's how you voice your opinion in a democracy[/quote:798c690800]

    I completely and totally fail to see your reasoning behind this.

    yes voting is how you voice your opinion, but why voice an opinion you dont even agree with? Vote 3rd party if you have to, voice whats true to you.

    and yea, if she makes it to the presidential run off you will have the exact people u described doing exactly that



    btw..... why dont u elect a woman president?

    cuz shes nuke a country every month *rimshot*
    • CommentAuthorRez
    • CommentTimeJun 9th 2005
     # 8
    Umm, he actually said that he still agrees with her on many subjects, so it makes perfect sense why he would vote for her.
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 9th 2005
     # 9
    I agree with most of what takai's said so far. The only problem I see with having a woman run for office is because, as takai pointed out, there are many, many people who would vote for her simply because she is a woman. That's not the way it should work.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeJun 11th 2005
     # 10
    i would rather not see hilary in office...

    i would however like to see the governator in office. that way we wouldn't need an army...just send him over to kill whoever needs to be killed lol!
    •  
      CommentAuthorKuro
    • CommentTimeJun 11th 2005
     # 11
    Y'know, I'd be laughing my ass off all the way to 2012 if Jeb Bush was elected President.
    •  
      CommentAuthortakai
    • CommentTimeJun 12th 2005
     # 12
    LOL Gary, that would be the day. The Terminator War On Terror.

    And I wouldn't be laughing if Jeb Bush was president.. That would be gay..

    Change of subject.

    I don't understand the logic behind Republican politics.. If you cut taxes for the rich, it will allow them to hire more people and create more jobs for the poor.. Uhhmm.. Haven't you ever watched/read Robin Hood!?!? Making the rich richer, even if they create more jobs, is only giving the rich more power... We live in a democracy, not a monarch. Democracy is based on the idea of a large middle class with small rich and poor classes. When you work for someone, even if they pay you, you are still giving them the money back when you buy their products.

    Giving rich people tax cuts does NOT help our economic system, it only piles the capital up in large businesses, which then monopolize everything and control the government because they're the only ones that can afford to pay for law school and expensive media advertising.

    I've noticed something about Republicans: They are either extremely rich or are Republicans just because their parents are.

    As our government puts more and more Republican ideas into effect the bottom class is getting bigger and bigger.. Seriously I bet there'll be a lower class revolution sometime in the future.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2005
     # 13
    im sure you realise this takai but the majority of America is middle class people. Me, gary, you, frosty, ash, even the bastard englishman are all middle class.

    Although i tend to agree that making the brother bush the next prez wouldnt be the best idea, simply because of too much family involved.

    When you work for someone, even if they pay you, you are still giving them the money back when you buy their products. [/quote:b12c09347c]

    yes your right, but that is how economies work. People work to make money, taking money away from the company. then spend it on products, giving it back so either themself or someone else can work to make it back. There is no way around that.

    As for the tax breaks, i believe they were pretty universal. Most the people i know got money back from the government this year.

    I could just as easily say the same about democrats, Their all either poor people or their parents were. You also have to look at the fact that wether you think it or not your parents are usually the reason you think and act the way you do. For example if your parents were hardcore republicans or democrats you would most likely grow up the same. and if your father beat your mother and you hated him for it you would grow up and never hit a woman because he influinced you.


    lower class revolution..... sounds like something one of them pinko commies would say..... you a commie takai?!?
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeJun 17th 2005
     # 14
    im not middle class...

    im a rich government agent that was sent here to spy on all of u

    <.< >.>

    now u all have to die
  1.  # 15
    im voting for hillary in 2008 also. the other candidate (so far) is jeb bush and i dont want yet aqnother bush to be in charge of our country. i think its time for a woman to have her turn (and we would get bill back, so bonus).
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 28th 2005
     # 16
    ......... bill fucking sucked hardcore

    hes a large reason Sept 11 happened.....

    he cut our military to crap causing us to pull up all these reservs....

    he started the whole food for oil thing which was a great idea, but like communism, failed...
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 28th 2005
     # 17
    All of this coming from a man who supports George W.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 28th 2005
     # 18
    yes, i support him since he is our president, and i voted for him

    do i agree with everything he does? no, but never the less i support him


    and what does my preferance have to do with the fact that Clinton screwed us over?
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 28th 2005
     # 19
    Because he didn't, and Bush did.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 28th 2005
     # 20
    ..........


    he let Osama go twice for attacks on the US, if he had gone after him sept 11th would never have happened

    if he hadnt cut funding and the amout of active members in the military we wouldnt have ahd to call up all these reserves to do the job he should have done 8 years ago
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 28th 2005
     # 21
    Oh, and Bush has done such a great job since then, right? Where's Osama now? We don't know.


    Take a look at the "war" in Iraq. It's a joke. Our men are getting murdered for absolutely NO reason. And whose fault is that? Your man, George W's.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2005
     # 22
    i wasnt talking about Bush, i was talking about clinton. I know GW hasnt made the best decisions but that is beside the point at the moment
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2005
     # 23
    I know you weren't talking about Bush. But I was. And why is it beside the point? Because you have no arguement? Because Bush is a total screw up, and you know it? -_-'
    •  
      CommentAuthorDurrendel
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2005
     # 24
    no, at least he had the balls to DO something about our country getting attacked rather then sit with his thumb up his ass while the world thought us as pussys for not going after the man responsible for the deaths of our people.

    if someone came up and killed a few members of your family wouldnt you would want revenge too.


    and i suppose that Tax reform and SS reform are bad too huh?

    getting money back from the government must suck.

    and retirement? pshh.... id rather have to pay for it all myself and work til im 85!
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2005
     # 25
    Had the balls to do something? Not only did he fuck us over entirely, but he went ahead and fucked over Iraq while he was at it. It's not better over there. It's worse. They hate us now more than ever. The war in Iraq is a joke. Bush is a joke. And we're straying off topic, so after this, I won't reply to any post about Bush or the war, unless it somehow ties in with Hilary being president.


    Speaking of which, to stay on topic, I agree with whoever said they'd rather see her than another Bush in office.
    •  
      CommentAuthortakai
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2005
     # 26
    Bush has done a lot of dumb things, but not everything he's done has been bad. The war in Iraq was a bad idea.. Didn't turn out to be for the right reasons.. But at least they have a democracy now. Bush's ideas for SS don't make any sense, and if we go through with his plan we may have another economic depression.. But hey, at LEAST he's trying to do something right. Btw - the solution to Social Security is to just make the retirement age older! Simple! People use to only live to be 65 or so, but now most people live until their mid 90s. People that are perfectly capable of working are sitting on their ass while the government pays their rent. I know this because my mom works for the Social Security Administration. :P

    I hate Bush but I do recogonize the things that he does well. Hillary isn't the perfect president either, but she would do a better job than Bush.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBSF
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2005
     # 27
    I will also be able to vote i think...or no or em maybe and if i do I will vote for her. I am a femenist and am taking a women in history class. I want to see a women history to see the look on everymans face... haha
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2005
     # 28
    That, as I believe I said before, is a very STUPID reason to vote for someone, and is exactly why I, and many others, are against seeing a woman run for office. That being, if you're not clear, is that people will vote for her simply because she is a woman, which is the absolute WRONG reason to vote for someone.
    •  
      CommentAuthorFatty
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2005
     # 29
    Hey if she votes for Hillary because she's a woman let her. I actually agree more with that aspect of voting for her than yours. You only vote for her because she's NOT republican.Dont say cause she's not another bush its cause she's not republican. As such you only choose her becasue you see it as a better choise but really did you even look at her campaine? and thing she promised? Would you? No why not because you don't care so long as the republicans don't have control of the goverment. So in the end Bsf unlike you has a real reason and some explination and caring behind her choise, Not to mention the comment about that being why people hate women who run for office is a lie. You may personally beleive that but all in all this country is still very sexist. It still believes men can only run for goverment because woman are stupid, I mean look at the president of Harvard said women were stupider than men. Well I think its about time a woman ran for president after all they always get the low end of the stick when it comes to politics. Your views are more about getting Bush's administration out at any cost rather than having a competent president thus your views are MORE hollow than Bsf's making your insukts to women more of a sexist remark of an assuming suprior than of someone who knows what there talking about so drop the high and mighty act.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBSF
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2005
     # 30
    That, as I believe I said before, is a very STUPID reason to vote for someone, and is exactly why I, and many others, are against seeing a woman run for office. That being, if you're not clear, is that people will vote for her simply because she is a woman, which is the absolute WRONG reason to vote for someone.[/quote:4176ba45c1]Well that is not the only reason why I would vote for her. I believe that she can be a strong leder for america. Ive seen her work..and imo i think its good. I strongly believe that she can run this country not only that but better than any other guy.
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2005
     # 31
    Fatty, I AM a Republican. Why would I vote against them, unless I felt that, which is the case with this, there was just reason to?


    Voting for someone because they're a woman is like voting for someone because they're your friend, or because you like the way they dress. Stupid reasons that have nothing to do with what they're even being elected for.


    And you're right. This country is very sexist. But my point remains valid. Let a woman run for office, and you've got several thousand feminists voting for her for that reason alone, which, again, is the direct WRONG reason to vote for someone. Maybe she's a good candidate, maybe she deserves the spot. That's all well and good. But it's not gonna stop people from voting for her for the WRONG reasons. That's not why we vote.


    And what high and mighty act? Not once did I insult a woman (expect I said Hilary had a penis, but that was a joke). I stated a valid point, and I backed it up. Think before you speak, please. Yes, I want Bush out. Why? Because I disagree with what he does. He's a bad leader, and anyone who'll replace him, or anyone in his family, is worth it. That, mon ami, is called politics. When you disagree with what the president does, you get rid of him. How is my reasoning hollow?


    /pwned
    • CommentAuthorRez
    • CommentTimeSep 7th 2005
     # 32
    Well, being all britsh and stuff i dont know shit about Hillary clinton or a lot about Bush to be honest, but i just thought i'd point out that Ash is totally right on this, a lot of people would vote for her based only on the fact that shes a woman, and they think it would be kinda cool to have a female president for a change, which i spose is a pretty good reason for anyone to not want her to run for office.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeSep 7th 2005
     # 33
    in comment to previous posts...and yes i promise ill comment on hilary as well

    many of you would say that bush has screwed us over in the past 4 years or so. and while he has strayed from his original goal and i am not agreeing with his current decision, his original plan to invade iraq was the right thing to do. no, iraq did not have mass weapons of destruction nor did they has the resources, but since when has resources ever been an issue for a terrorists to obtain a nuke or what not. now your obvious rebutal would be. "but iraq did not attack america on 9/11." this is somewhat true. saddam huessan did not have direct controll over the attack, but he funded a MAJOR part of it. he has also been caught housing members of the taliban in his very own country. now you will probably say, "well why didnt we just go attack Bin Laden?" well that is a very good idea. next election, you should run for president and i'll vote for you and i'll bet u every damned bone in your body that you dont come close to finding him. so since we shouldnt attack, iraq just who should we attack? no one u say? bush was a total fucktard for starting a war you say? well gee i guess that would qualify just about every other president in american history for being a fucktard as well. iraq at the time was the ONLY target available. there was no where else to establish that America doesn't bend over and take it up the tailpipe. Bush is not the only president to have done this exact same thing in American history. does Hiroshima ring a bell? and for those who say hiroshima was wrong to, you are an idiot. yes the world lost ALOT of japanese people b/c of that nuklear strike, but just ow many American lives did we save in the process...? gee, i think about 100,000 lives. survival of the fittest people. deal with it. there could not possibly be a valid argument to that entire statement. just about the only thing you could say is, "...well uh...your gay!" thus prooving your ignorance.

    oh and i don't believe hilary should become president because if she stays with a man that cheats on her not once, but three times, then it just prooves that she is a power hungry bitch that would stay with the devil is he promised her enough power...
    •  
      CommentAuthorFatty
    • CommentTimeSep 7th 2005
     # 34
    The high and might act had nothing to do with insults Ash. I had to do with tone like you post against me it said
    Think before you speak, please[/quote:9c8e1bb0ed] Thus implying that I don't think yet every word out of my mouth(or fingers rather) were though of. But your point is NOT valid because more people in this country thing about personal things like being a republican than about the country. Bush ONLY won the election because he was a southern Catholic. That,mon ami, is called politics. The reason is hollow for one because Bush CAN"T RUN AGAIN guenius, so maybe you should think before you speak. Bush served his two terms in 2008 which is what this discussion is about. So if you would only choose Hillary over Bush it's because you don't care who beats him you just have a personal vendetta against Bush, not so much politics as hate which I know influences politics but it's also what corrupts it. And we don't vote to get someone out just cause we don't like him we vote to get him out because he's doing a really bad job THAT HIS PREDECESSOR CAN DO BETTER. And like Gary said Hillary is power hungry(and may very well have a penis) so do you really thing a goverment under her will be better? She'll just try to pack the supreme court to get over the republicans like FDR tried to do. She wants complete control where as Bush doesn't even have control. Your point isn't valid because the whole case of wanting Bush out so you vote for Hillary is moot. Voting is always been about who is liked better thats how you WIN so if Hillary is liked better because she's a women than that means she is LIKED BETTER. If you look back in history JFK only won because he was the better smile. So yes it may not be the best reason to vote for someone but its the one that is most understood and used. And as such NONE of Bush's family may run for president next term because his daughters are too young still (and not to metion women cant legally hold the office of president so the whole debate over hillary is also moot) and his daddy already served as president and did bad enough to not get two terms so no one would want him back. In the end Ash you look dumber that you are, so stop acting like you know politics because I unlike you study politics. And don't pretend like you saved face with the pwned shit cause honestly thats like something Tatlin would do. This is a serious discusion so lets not acted like were little immature computer geeks and then acted like we understand politics. And really your not Republican you only said that to save face in the fact that I proved you reason hollow so next post you will also do the same thing because you hate to admit that I'm right. Ever. And Rez honestly man i don't think it would matter to you one bit who won cause America is just a Fallen Nation making right now Britain the leading world power. But you stated reasonable things to be honest seeing as you don't get mush american political news huh? I've already stated the things to prove your views right yet wrong. Now no one miss interpret this I am NOT defending Hillary or Bsf I was simply saying Ash was wrong on a view and defending what I said.

    Now moving on to Gary's ridiculous claims. Your information that Saddam Backed the terrorists came from where exactly? A republican biased paper maybe? As for housing members of the Taliban TECHNICALLY so has the US so don't act to suprised by that one buddy. But as for the Bin Laden thing I agree that we can't catch him but attacking Iraq doesn't make it any different. If you wanted known terrorist Palestine would have been the country to go for back when Yasser Arafrat(sp?) was in charge and using the TALBAN to aid his goverment. So why Iraq? Because as Ash has said before Bush and probably more like the Bush administration had to prove that they weren't total fuck ups. And America IS bending over and taking it in the tailpipe in Iraq. And the comparison to Hiroshima isn't even appropriate. We were attacked by the JAPANESE MILITARY in the night at pearl harbor. 9/11 wasn't proven to be Iraq so it was more like if japan attacked and we decided to invade and drop bombs on vietnam. Close to japan, still oriental but not the ones at fault(also still prove "bad guys" because there communist"). And I don't disagree with Truman at all dropping the bombs worked and we can't go back to see if we could have stopped the war other ways. And well my argument is valid so uhhh...your gay.(im just kidding man i said this because of the fact that you said there was no valid argument) Now I fully expect everyone to say something to make themselves appear smarter but really most of you don't know shit about this subject beyond what the paper tells you. You don't analyze the news you read it and belive it. By that views you would have seen the "attack on the us ships in Israel" as face value and not gotten the fact that a set-up missile laucher doesn't miss an amphibious landing cruiser by flying over the bow. If the target was the ship first of all the shot wouldn't have been at the bow would it? No it wouldn't make a dent in it( the ship is made to withstand the attack) but then the article said a US warehouse was hit as an after thought. Now through analasis you can see that the warehouse and not the ship was the target and then they said two more missiles were fired but also missed. The two missiles went the opposite was and ALMOST hit a van with a Quate(sp?) licence plate. Now were the missiles really aimed at the ships going the opposite way? No. But now I'm off topic my points are proven but of course this debate will go on because you all have to save face at the fact that by proving you wrong I made you look stupid and of course all of you will over look the compliments. How cliche.
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeSep 7th 2005
     # 35
    I'm aware he can't run again. Someone brought up his brother running earlier. Read everything.


    If it's Hilary vs. another Bush, yes, I'd rather see Hilary. Yes, I hate Bush, but it's BECAUSE of the bad job he's doing. If you recall, I supported Bush the first time around. My point is valid, you simply refuse to accept it. And even IF my reasons for voting for her were wrong, that doesn't make the reasons I stated earlier for NOT voting for her any less right. You can't judge the validity of something by a person's opinion on a complete other matter. That is, as you say, "moot".


    Nextly, I AM Republican, I've ALWAYS supported the Republican party since I had any idea what it was. It is NOT your place to tell me otherwise. Again, I supported Bush as the running Republican the first time around.


    Yes, people vote because they like someone better. Did I say they didn't? No. I said it was wrong, which aparently you agree with. So tell me, how, exactly, have I been wrong so far? The simple answer is, I haven't. If she runs, she'll get more votes because she's a woman. Am I wrong? No. Maybe I don't study politics, but I know enough to know what I'm talking about, and you know damn well that I am perfectly capable of keeping up with you, and anyone else on this forum. Don't insult my intelligence.
  2.  # 36
    I think that Hilary Clinton would be an excellent president, not only because she has shown herself as a good leader, but also because she has shown this country that she is a competent politician. She has clearly proven to the country that she is a good senator. Now, I know that people have voted for men because they were good senators, so why can't they vote for a woman because she is a good senator?
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2005
     # 37
    yea but if any of you have been watching c-span lately, you would know that the democrats are looking to nominate a democrat with conservative views. i'm not making this up, even bill mahr, one of the biggest liberals i know has been quoted to say that exact same thing.

    and fatty, yes iraq was housing AND funding the taliban. my source....CNN! yes that of so liberalistic news channel. and the difference between American housing the taliban and Iraq, is that we are not intentionally doing it, if we knew they were taliban we would probably arrest them. and comparing 9/11 to pearl harbor/hiroshima is perfect. it's almost the exact same story, except that in this case we can't find the person in charge, so we go to the person who gave him the most support...SADDAM! pwned!

    sit down fatty...the adults are trying to have a debate.

    and i fail to see how America is taking it up the tailpipe, because as far as casualties go, the Iraqi war is the most successful war in American history.
    •  
      CommentAuthorFatty
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2005
     # 38
    Gary are you an idiot? The war wasn't succesful because we didn't acheive are original goals, we wasted soldiers lives and as far as it goes we are STILL there when we don't need to be. Now sure invade iraq for the Taliban members but don't saty there and fucking run a new goverment for them. Let them clean up there own mess we go in we take care of what we need to and the rest is someone else's problem. And for the record the "war" in iraq isn't an actual war it was a military policing or some shit. America hasn't been to war since Veitnam.(Just a little fun fact) So Gary as I stated earlier you completly missed what I said about Yasser Arafrat and ignored it. The man was Known to harbor and support terrorism and on top of it he was at war with Isreal are ally so why not invade them instead? Now your insult was pointless because your no smarter than anyone else nor does age have anything to do with this debate...on top of which your insult was a rip off of one used to insult Gerad, not even original.

    Ok now Ash your right it wasn't my place to claim you not a republican nor insult your intelligence even though I complimented you(which like I said you would, you compltely ignored). Bush's brother is irrelivant because Bush's brother is a fuck up. Not to metion he wouldn't run because of the lack of support for Bush I doubt he would dare it. Now I don't refuse to agnolage your veiws so stop acting as though your the only one who's smart ok?
    Now you vote for a president because the are better and thus LIKED more. You have been wrong so far because you told someone else there views on a presidential chose was wrong you not me said someone was wrong. I said I agreed with Bsf's idea and said your reason was hollow and proved that. SO before you act as though I was in the wrong here YOU read everything. SO don't assume you haven't been wrong when you yourself said I quote
    You can't judge the validity of something by a person's opinion on a complete other matter[/quote:dc04f2decb]
    Yet you yourself did just that. So that proves my point so don't get all bitchy(which you will anyway) becasue I pointed out you were doing what you acussed me of doing. On top of it your only voting for Hillary because she isn't Bush is also just as "STUPID" a reason to vote for someone because you didn't look to see if she was even better than Bush was, so you could be replacing him with someone far worse(this is all hypothetical btw) thus very stupid indeed. As I recall you started hating Bush about the time he cracked down on the FCC and I DON"T recall you supporting him the first time because as I recall we didn't discuss politics back in 8th grade.(don't take that the wrong way that could just be my memory of 8th grade its all a little funny, too much alcohol?) Yet you still seem to be unable to admit I might ever be right...why is that?

    And who the fuck is Ggsuperfan? Uhhh that's great kid? Your views are at least not sexist or just as bad. But really I don't have much to say to you but disagree with your opinion with my own opinion. Hilary is too power hungry like I belive Gary said.


    Back to Gary

    i fail to see how America is taking it up the tailpipe[/quote:dc04f2decb]

    Well you might but I don't so I'll explain. Bush gets hit with 9/11, ok not his fault he acts ok all good and then he invades Iraq ok they refused to give up known terrorists ok. But then we stayed and took on the responcability of THREE goverments(yes three we are also running Afganastan's goverment for them too) when we can barley run ours(and don't say I'm wrong there wouldn't be so much corruption if I wasn't) and then BRAC decides to close almost every east coast base. Why? Because the Bush admin believes the threat is North Korea and thus moved are troops either to Iraq or out west. So then we are practicly defenceless on the eastern side of the us. Then Katrina hits and Bush steps in with his admin and takes charge then admits that it wasn't good enough yet it was his group doing it. So really if the president orders something to happen and oversees it himself then claims that it isn't good enough it makes the country look weak. On top of that Bush has declined all aid from other nations but asked Congress to let him spend $56 Billion on the costs to repair and rebuild New Orleans putting the U.S. in so much more debt that we are no longer abole to come up with plans to get out of this defacite. So obviously the country is running fine right mister adult?
    And again 9/11 is NOTHING LIKE HIROSHIMA because Hiroshima was acted firstly by an entire nations military, we also provoked it if you read your history we froze japan's accets first. And then to add on top of it we attacked the ones guilty not the ones hiding the ones guilty. Its like Vietnam was in suspiction of helping and we attacked them still like I said oriental but not the target then to top it off we would then invade Korea because there a threat but still not the bad guys. We would then set up a new goverment in both places yet still haven't attacked Japan the cause and supporter of the attack. Now look at the world and which goverment was using terrorists at the time? Iraq? Nope. Afganastan? Nope. Palistine? Yep. So then to be like Hiroshima we would have attacked Palistine not Iraq. So don't compair 9/11 to Pearl Harbor because Pearl Harbor was an attack BACK where as 9/11 was unprevoked and the situations arn't the same close but not quite. So close from being not a compltet idiot but then even a broken clock is right two times a day. And like I said earlier if you want to discuss politics like civilized people(you know the only kind that have politics) then don't act like an eleven year old and say pwned and then attempt to insult me because I'm only 17. So sue me. Your still the one who is over 18 playing online games and saying pwned in a political discusion...ironic.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeSep 9th 2005
     # 39
    lol ok fatty i'm not as to which insult you are refering to but whatever, i don't even remember insulting you or even mentioning age in my last post. i never insulted u and u turn the debate into something childish by calling me an idiot...way to go fatty. and ididn't mention yasser b/c he's a dead pric.

    and i never even said that this "war" was successful b/c of our goals, i stated that it is successful in the fact that we have only lost about 1500 soldiers. i agree completely that bush has lost sight of his original plan and at the present moment in time i do not agree with what he is doing.

    now i think you would agree with me when i say u support taking our troops out and lettin them clean up there own mess. well look at it this way...america is not the only country that has troops in iraq right now, just about every single one of our allies have troops in iraq. they are sacrificing there people b/c ofsomething that we believe in, not they themselves. even japan and norway have troops in iraq fighting alongside our soldiers. it would be incredibly stupid of us to pull out now. how do u think those allies would feel if we basically said, screwu we're leaving. they wouldn't like it, infact alot of them would no longer consider us as allies. and that would be bad. they are fighting for something that they don't even believe in all b/c they have respect for us. leaving would make things alot worse. if you can't agree with that, then you are infact and idiot. pay attention to the news every once in awile before you debate and stop makin stuff up that sounds good in writting.

    oh and by the way, i dare you to go up to any soldier fighting on our side in iraq right now and repeat to them your views on bush and the war, and i'll be damned if you don't get pistol whipped by every one.

    majority wins and according to america and the iraqi people, they want us to stay there.
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeSep 9th 2005
     # 40
    Gary, most of the people over there are there because they HAVE to be, not because they chose to be. Yes, they CHOSE to enlist. But I'm sure most, if not all, would much rather be home than there, and YOU are the idiot if you honestly think they all agree with Bush.


    No matter how you look at it, losing 1500 soldiers is not a success. And there's no way that's all we've lost.


    If we pulled out now, our "allies" would pull out with us.


    The majority of America and Iraq want us gone. Iraq has wanted us gone for months upon months. American families, friends, neighbors, who've all lost the lives of their loved ones, all want us out of there. If you support the war so damn much, why aren't you over there?
  3.  # 41
    but what is an army there for, if not to go into war, I'm not saying that war is good or anything but when someone enlists to the army I think that they kinda know that going to war is one of the risks. If someone enlists just for the college money or anything other than the want to defend their country then they have no business enlisting in the first place.
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeSep 9th 2005
     # 42
    Thank you for stating the obvious.
    • CommentAuthorRez
    • CommentTimeSep 9th 2005
     # 43
    lol, americas allies are only there so bush doesnt hog the oil....
    This war, if you can even call it a war, happened cause Bush is a dick, and i wouldnt look much further into it than that.
  4.  # 44
    okay, well I was stating the obvious only because someone wasn't getting the obvious.
  5.  # 45
    no, Bush is a George... Cheney is a Dick.

    just to make myself clear, I was only supporting Bush during the ellection because I hated John Kerry with a burning passion. So, I had no other choice.. except Nader, who is crazy.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeSep 10th 2005
     # 46
    bullshit! dam u just prooved what i was saying. pay attention to the news people! if you don't pay attention to that what other source do you have? well over half of America and Iraq want us there. don't be stupid! wtf? if America didn't want us there, why the hell wasn't Kerry elected....because he was a lieing pric! even the democrats didn't like him. again if you have been paying attention to the news, you would know that hilary herself is trying to support the war. she doesn't really think that cause she is knon far and wide as a hardcore liberal. she is "saying" that she supports the war, b/c the majority supports the war. minority doesn't win kiddies...

    and yes whether you like it or not, WAY over half of iraq wants us there. the only people that don't want us there are...what's that???? you don't say! the terrorists! that's b/c we are fighting against them. they do not even come close to making up half of the population in iraq. stating that neither majority in America and Iraq wants us to be there is just plain ignorant. stop saying stuff just to sound good.

    and to that whole "our allies are there b/c they have to be" NO SHIT! that's there only reason b/c they are our allies! they may not want to be there but they have to be. my previous argument stands. they would feel extremely insulted if we were to pull out now and leave them high and dry. sure they would probably leave too but that doesn't erase the fact that we left a war that we had a big part in starting. and alot of our allies are in Iraq b/c they don't want things to get worse, i.e. iraq getting more power, and attacking every country around them.

    perfect example: hitler had power WAY before WWII. every1, including America, knew he was a tyrant before he even had the means to attack, but every one just ignored him because they thought he would just change his mind. look it up in a history book. its there i promise.

    oh and by the way, America has plenty of oil...the only problem is liberal bastards are protesting drilling it b/c it would disrupt a herd of caraboo and make the ratio of caraboo to humans uneven in Alaska. those dam cows outnumber humans 3 to 1! i doubt we will "disrupt anything. anyway my point is this: we are having a tough time with oil, b/c bush is doing exactly what the people want...NO DRILLING HERE IN AMERICA! we have plenty of undrilled oil wells just waiting to be tapped, but once again liberals think its not right to rob earth of it's natural resources. so in short, its the liberals fault that America's gas prices are so high.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBSF
    • CommentTimeSep 10th 2005
     # 47
    aigdao pshsh ok

    first of all from what ive seen in the news not only do terrorist want us out there are normal people that want the us out too why cus they liked their lives and theyve seen all the killing thats going out..its not only terrorist so get it right...there are pro sadam people that are NOT terrorist...
    •  
      CommentAuthorChris Ace
    • CommentTimeSep 10th 2005
     # 48
    Gary, all you ever do in a topic like this is shoot shit out of your ass, and then turn around and kiss Bush's.


    The news tells you what you WANT to hear. NOT the truth. They tell you what will pull people in.


    NO ONE wants this war. Can you look me in the face and honestly tell me you're willing to throw away the innocent lives of your fellow Americans over something so STUPID and POINTLESS? And if you can, why the fuck aren't you over there? You must not support the war.


    If we pulled out, our allies would pull out with us. They'd probably be happy to STOP losing all of their men. Again, NO ONE wants to be there. Your thought on "our allies would hate us" DOESN'T make a BIT of sense.


    And Gary, drilling holes all over the place will NOT solve our oil problem. Because, no matter what, we're deep in a shit hole, and going nowhere fast. Read what I posted about Hubbert's Peak. Oil is among the ONLY reasons we're in Iraq, because Bush is the kind of president, and America is the kind of country, that don't give two shits about anyone other than themselves.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBSF
    • CommentTimeSep 10th 2005
     # 49
    plus the US got mad at those who didnt support them for example MEXICO
    •  
      CommentAuthorGary
    • CommentTimeSep 10th 2005
     # 50
    that's it! i retire from all forms of political debate on this forum. talking to you people is like having a discussion with a child.