# The Bush Legacy:  Are you a proud supporter?



## BigDyl (Feb 6, 2008)

Discuss.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

What a crock.  Not all of that is Bush's fault.  Or even _needs_ to be anyone's "fault."  It's called inflation and simply a byproduct of a capitalist environment.

Having said that, Bush is an asshat who made a lot of shitty choices and I'm glad that he'll be gone within a year.


----------



## BigDyl (Feb 6, 2008)

If that was job performance, and you were being evaluated by your company, I think it's safe to say you'd be fired.  I don't think using the excuse "It's not my fault!" would suffice either.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

And I don't give a rat's ass what Germany, Turkey, or Indonesia thinks of us.

Or, as I once said:  



DOMS said:


> I think one of the best things about the US is that we don't give a shit about other's opinions.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

BigDyl said:


> If that was job performance, and you were being evaluated by your company, I think it's safe to say you'd be fired.  I don't think using the excuse "It's not my fault!" would suffice either.




Oh, come on.  You said the same thing about the stuff that happened during Bill Clinton's term.    Even about stuff that really was his fault.


----------



## FitnessRubber (Feb 6, 2008)

DOMS said:


> What a crock.  Not all of that is Bush's fault.  Or even _needs_ to be anyone's "fault."  It's called inflation and simply a byproduct of a capitalist environment.
> 
> Having said that, Bush is an asshat who made a lot of shitty choices and I'm glad that he'll be gone within a year.



it's hard not to be celebrating his departure... even though i'm sure there are plenty more shitty dumb screwups that will come around in that time...


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

FitnessRubber said:


> it's hard not to be celebrating his departure... even though i'm sure there are plenty more shitty dumb screwups that will come around in that time...


That's scary.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

FitnessRubber said:


> it's hard not to be celebrating his departure... even though i'm sure there are plenty more shitty dumb screwups that will come around in that time...



With Hilary at the forefront.


----------



## Irons77 (Feb 6, 2008)

DOMS said:


> With Hilary at the forefront.



Now that's a nightmare!


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

DOMS said:


> With Hilary at the forefront.


The more I see her in public the more I lose confidence in her, not that I really ever did know much about her.
I always figured her Hubby will help her in running the nation.

I'm liking Obama over her as far as the Dem's are concerned. 

I really can't see someone from a Foreign country give her respect, she definitely will be tested.

Obama has a good radio voice, anyone notice that?


----------



## bigss75 (Feb 6, 2008)

The whole tech/ .com boom made Clinton look like an economic genius


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

min0 lee said:


> The more I see her in public the more I lose confidence in her, not that I really ever did know much about her.
> I always figured her Hubby will help her in running the nation.
> 
> I'm liking Obama over her as far as the Dem's are concerned.
> ...



If it wasn't for his negative stance on guns and his pro-"Let the Mexicans come and fuck up our country more" stance, I would have voted for him.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

bigss75 said:


> The whole tech/ .com boom made Clinton look like an economic genius


 

Plus the general up-cycle of our capitalist economy.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

I'm a proud supporter of the movement to hang him from a pole by his balls if that's what you mean.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

Most of my friends support Obama, but not one can answer why. Similar to this.. it's pretty pathetic, actually.

Note: right before this clip, they were all saying how much they love Obama...







YouTube Video


----------



## Arnold (Feb 6, 2008)

min0 lee said:


> The more I see her in public the more I lose confidence in her, not that I really ever did know much about her.
> I always figured her Hubby will help her in running the nation.
> 
> I really can't see someone from a Foreign country give her respect, she definitely will be tested.



really? so then your confidence in GWB must in the negative by now?

this argument about other countries not respecting a female president is just stupid, and even if they don't how much is GWB respected?


----------



## Arnold (Feb 6, 2008)

bigss75 said:


> The whole tech/ .com boom made Clinton look like an economic genius



GWB is still trying to figure out how many internets we have.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

It's obvoius this nation is looking for a strong leader. They see him as having a bit of charisma. Something the others lack.
Sometimes it's how you carry yourself and how you  look,  just like when Nixon and Kennedy had that debate.
Kennedy with his all American looks and then you had  Nixon with the 5:00 shadow "I'm not a crook" look.


----------



## Arnold (Feb 6, 2008)

FitnessRubber said:


> it's hard not to be celebrating his departure... even though i'm sure there are plenty more shitty dumb screwups that will come around in that time...



I am pretty confident that he will go down as one of the worst presidents in history.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

Prince said:


> really? so then your confidence in GWB must in the negative by now?
> 
> this argument about other countries not respecting a female president is just stupid, and even if they don't how much is GWB respected?


It was never positive.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

It's human nature, men will not give a female the same respect as they would a man.

I see it at work.  I have seen it here.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

Prince said:


> this argument about other countries not respecting a female president is just stupid, and even if they don't how much is GWB respected?



It's not a lack or respect, it's lack of fear.

Even then, there are plenty of countries (Russia comes to mind) that would have less respect for a woman president.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

A lot of cultures still think a woman should be seen and not heard.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 6, 2008)

Not that a woman can't be capable.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

min0 lee said:


> Not that a woman can't be capable.



No doubt. But that sort of thinking just isn't the norm on this planet.

Not in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Not in the Middle East.
Not in Japan.
Not in Latin America.
Not _really_ in most of Asia (except _maybe_ India).


----------



## kiko (Feb 6, 2008)

Presidents don't run the country. The people around them do. Don't be surprised if Hillary was actually in charge during the Bill Clinton years.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

Prince said:


> I am pretty confident that he will go down as one of the worst presidents in history.



Worse than Jimmy Carter? Not even close.

Besides.. if Iraq goes well, he will be the President that reshaped the Middle East.  That would be a pretty significant accomplishment.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

I don't mind a woman President at all.  Who gives a shit what other countries think.

Now Hillary, I do mind.  How people can't see through her boggles me.  I understand the attraction to Obama, but again, Hillary boggles me.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> Now Hillary, I do mind.  How people can't see through her boggles me.  I understand the attraction to Obama, but again, Hillary boggles me.



They think she'll be as "good" as her husband.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

Prince said:


> if they don't how much is GWB respected?



I'd say he's pretty well respected by Al Qaeda.  

You people really don't give him enough credit for keeping us safe.  You'll appreciate it in a couple years after a Democrat has pulled us out of Iraq, Al Qaeda claims victory, attracting more support & launching a series of attacks in the states.. likely a series of suicide bombers in malls, killing woman & children.  That's not a fear tactic, that's a fact.

Sad truth, but I honestly expect it to happen.  Bush may have screwed up a lot, but with the state of the world I still say he was the right man for the job.  These terrorists are dogs, and we need a president who will treat them as such.  This PC "torture" shit is way out of hand.

The pendulum will swing back though.. I'm very confident.  We'll let the Democrats remind the United States what happens when you're weak on defense.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

A fact? Really?  Have any sources for this "fact" or is it solely based on propaganda from the media?

The kind of foreign policy you are talking about and the kind of policy that GWB ran is the kind of foreign policy that got us knee deep in this shit anyway.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> A fact? Really?  Have any sources for this "fact" or is it solely based on propaganda from the media?
> 
> The kind of foreign policy you are talking about and the kind of policy that GWB ran is the kind of foreign policy that got us knee deep in this shit anyway.



Really? And here I though 9/11 was planned before Bush came to office... or would you not consider that "knee deep in shit."


The blame Bush for everything rhetoric is just pathetic & completely unproductive. There are plenty of valid complaints you can have about Bush.. no need to make any more up.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> The blame Bush for everything rhetoric is just pathetic & completely unproductive. There are plenty of valid complaints you can have about Bush.. no need to make any more up.



Good luck with trying to get that across.  I've tried half a dozen times, but they just stick there fingers in their ears and sing the praises of Bill.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> A fact? Really?  Have any sources for this "fact" or is it solely based on propaganda from the media?



Go back to the clouds.. you'll have your awakening soon enough.


----------



## Arnold (Feb 6, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> You people really don't give him enough credit for keeping us safe.  You'll appreciate it in a couple years after a Democrat has pulled us out of Iraq, Al Qaeda claims victory, attracting more support & launching a series of attacks in the states.. likely a series of suicide bombers in malls, killing woman & children.  That's not a fear tactic, that's a fact.



another brainwashed American.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

DOMS said:


> Good luck with trying to get that across.  I've tried half a dozen times, but they just stick there fingers in their ears and sing the praises of Bill.



No kidding. The bitch of it is that it will never end.  Say the dems do win (which I sadly admit is likely), pull out of Iraq & all hell breaks loose over there & here.  Will they say oops! Our Bad!! ?  Of course not.. they'll blame Bush, ignoring the obvious fact that the Muslim world hated us before Bush as much as they will hate us after.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> No kidding. The bitch of it is that it will never end.  Say the dems do win (*which I sadly admit is likely*), pull out of Iraq & all hell breaks loose over there & here.  Will they say oops! Our Bad!! ?  Of course not.. they'll blame Bush, ignoring the obvious fact that the Muslim world hated us before Bush as much as they will hate us after.



I don't know.  They're fronting a woman and a black man.  There are plenty of people that won't vote from either for those simple facts.

And I completely agree with you about being attacked if a Dem president tucks his tail between his legs and runs from Iraq. 

After all, that sort of shit is how we got 9/11.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

Prince said:


> another brainwashed American.



is what I said really unlikely?  If Al Qaeda could, they would be launching attacks here left & right. The fact is they haven't been able to.  That's not by chance, it's because of Bush's policy.

If we pull out of Iraq, I will give you ten million dollars if Al Qaeda doesn't claim victory.  After doing so, the region will become unstable & the people will be mesmerized by the group that "defeated America" & join up.  No longer preoccupied with Iraq & with a strong new base of operations, they start attacking us on the homeland.

Is this really all that hard to believe?


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

Whatever, I'm not going to argue this with you since you obviously are blinded by your beliefs.  Did Bush cause 9/11? No.  Did our retarded foreign policy dating back decades before Bush cause the hatred that led to 9/11?  Absolutely.

It's been documented in many intelligence reports and various books on the matter.

Do I think Bush is an ignorant moron that should be impeached and subsequently put on trial for war crimes?  Absolutely.  He has violated the Constitution more times than anyone knows, and he has knowingly approved of the use of torture.  Anyone who supports this man has some serious issues or has some ridiculous tunnel vision to see only what they want to see.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

DOMS said:


> I don't know.  They're fronting a woman and a black man.  There are plenty of people that won't vote from either for those simple facts.
> 
> And I completely agree with you about being attacked if a Dem president tucks his tail between his legs and runs from Iraq.
> 
> After all, that sort of shit is how we got 9/11.



The turnouts at the democratic primaries are ridiculous, especially for Obama.  McCain isn't garnering the conservative vote yet, and I don't know that he can get people to mobilize.

Believe me, I'd love to be wrong!


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> Whatever, I'm not going to argue this with you since you obviously are blinded by your beliefs.  Did Bush cause 9/11? No.  Did our retarded foreign policy dating back decades before Bush cause the hatred that led to 9/11?  Absolutely.
> 
> It's been documented in many intelligence reports and various books on the matter.
> 
> Do I think Bush is an ignorant moron that should be impeached and subsequently put on trial for war crimes?  Absolutely.  He has violated the Constitution more times than anyone knows, and he has knowingly approved of the use of torture.  Anyone who supports this man has some serious issues or has some ridiculous tunnel vision to see only what they want to see.



I may be going out on a limb here, but you voted for Ron Paul, didn't you?   You people always blame America first.

& I'm not blinded, I'm informed.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

The correct path is to improve our relations with those countries, not to bomb them.  We have no business telling them what to do in their own countries, nor do we have business having standing armies occupying them.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> The correct path is to improve our relations with those countries, not to bomb them.  We have no business telling them what to do in their own countries, nor do we have business having standing armies occupying them.



Telling them what to do? Uggh.. I'm done.  You are driven by the media.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

Obviously I will be voting for Ron Paul.  He is the only conservative candidate that has any semblance of intelligence or credibility.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

As I figured, blinded by your views.  As Prince so aptly put it, "another brainwashed American. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





".


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 6, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> As I figured, blinded by your views.  As Prince so aptly put it, "another brainwashed American.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



what does "blinded by your views" mean?


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> The correct path is to improve our relations with those countries



The Middle East?  

...


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 6, 2008)

Going to sleep, last post for the night.

Blinded by your views means that you seem to be unable to see the big picture.  Do I blame America for 9/11?  Absolutely not - it was an atrocity committed by terrorists, that much we know.  However, there are undeniable consequences from our interventionist foreign policy, the hatred towards America being one of them.

The media tells me about us telling other countries what to do?  How about us using the CIA in order to install a new Shah in Iran, or our known attempts at Castro just as a few examples.  We have no right to do these things, and this is why many people in the world hate us.  It has absolutely nothing to do with Muslims vs America or things like that.



DOMS said:


> The Middle East?
> 
> ...



Absolutely.

Now Mexico, that's a different story


----------



## DOMS (Feb 6, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> Telling them what to do? Uggh.. I'm done.  You are driven by the media.



I like the Film Actors Guild scene in Team America.

With a slight modification:

"As [Democrats], it is our responsibility to read the newspapers, and then say what we read on television like it's our own opinion."


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 7, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> Worse than Jimmy Carter? Not even close.


Hell yeah!


> Besides.. if Iraq goes well, he will be the President that reshaped the Middle East. That would be a pretty significant accomplishment


If it goes well? How long has it been? I


----------



## Big Smoothy (Feb 7, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> Worse than Jimmy Carter? Not even close.



Carter was a good man, who was a very weak President.

But I think GWB is worse than Carter.

As Newt Gingrich publicly said (sorry no link), the GWB is the Jimmy Carter of the Republican party. 



> Besides.. if Iraq goes well, he will be the President that reshaped the Middle East.



Iraq is only one country in the Middle East, of 12+ nations.

Reshaping Iraq into a Shiite nation will cause many, many, problems if the Shiite government ever cements control.  (al-Maliki is also backing Hezbollah.)


----------



## KelJu (Feb 7, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> I don't mind a woman President at all.  Who gives a shit what other countries think.
> 
> Now Hillary, I do mind.  How people can't see through her boggles me.  I understand the attraction to Obama, but again, Hillary boggles me.



Let me guess. Ann Coulter for president?


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 7, 2008)

KelJu said:


> Let me guess. Ann Coulter for president?



Maybe just to see the reaction, but no. 

Condoleezza Rice is probably a good vp choice for McCain...  Conservative black woman.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

Great, let's get a woman incompetent as Secretary of State and make her VP to go along with the President that doesn't understand basic economics and will continue to waste trillions


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> Great, let's get a woman incompetent as Secretary of State and make her VP to go along with the President that doesn't understand basic economics and will continue to waste trillions



it'll never happen.. this "change" obsession wouldn't go over well if he chose her.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

I really don't see how you are thinking change is a bad thing.  Our economy is going down the shitter, our dollar is dropping like a rock.  Our current path/fiscal policy is going to do more damage to this country than any terrorist attack ever could.

Then again, I rate the economy as being far more important than this pointless war.  For the record, I think Afghanistan had a point - Iraq didn't.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> I really don't see how you are thinking change is a bad thing.  Our economy is going down the shitter, our dollar is dropping like a rock.  Our current path/fiscal policy is going to do more damage to this country than any terrorist attack ever could.
> 
> Then again, I rate the economy as being far more important than this pointless war.  For the record, I think Afghanistan had a point - Iraq didn't.



I never said it was necessarily a bad thing. I said that it's the word every candidate is throwing around, so bringing along a top official of Bush's administration wouldn't really be a change.

Don't get me wrong, I have plenty of problems with Bush, and Washington in general.  I just still think terrorism is the #1 threat, and for that Bush is the man.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

Well to be honest I cannot/will not overlook all of the crimes that Bush and his administration have committed in the name of "fighting terrorism".

He swore an oath to protect and uphold the Constitution, and he has done anything but that.  I will hold the next President to these same standards.  If there is a problem inherent in the Constitution (which I don't believe there are many), then we should be ratifying amendments to it, not simply ignoring the law it represents.

More than Bush, I blame Congress since they have the power to end this, but don't.  Even so, that does not absolve Bush of his responsibility to do what it right.


----------



## brogers (Feb 7, 2008)

> However, there are undeniable consequences from our interventionist foreign policy, the hatred towards America being one of them.


LiveLeak.com - Al-Qaida Trains Children

I'm sure people who do this to their children can be reasoned with.

I'm sure people who strap bombs to women with Downs Syndrome, then detonate them remotely can be reasoned with.

I'm sure the people who recruited children to clear minefields by rolling around in blankets (so the remains are easier to recover, of course) can be reasoned with.

Certainly, if we just left Iraq and stopped supporting Israel's right to exist, these people would cease being the worst scum the planet has ever seen.  I'm sure they would consider America a great friend instead of the Great Satan.

This is the type of fantasy thinking that is going to get people killed in another terrorist attack.  Muslim fanatics are not rational, reasonable people, stop acting like they are.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 7, 2008)

brogers said:


> LiveLeak.com - Al-Qaida Trains Children
> 
> I'm sure people who do this to their children can be reasoned with.
> 
> ...





So very well said.

Although...you did miss the one where they got the 15 year-old retarded kid to do a suicide bombing with promise of virgins.  Thankfully, he was stopped, and disarmed, at a checkpoint.


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

brogers:  Al-Qaida is NOT Islam.

Al-Qaida is a terrorist organization.  Iran and Iraq are countries that we have fundamental differences with, however they are not threatening us militarily.  I supported the war in Afghanistan because we were specifically going after Al-Qaida and the supporting Taliban regime.  Saddam Hussein had no such links to Al-Qaida, and I believe even hated Osama Bin Laden due to religious differences if I remember correctly.


----------



## brogers (Feb 7, 2008)

Al-Qaeda is an Islamic organization. Terrorists are practicing Muslims who shout "Allah Akbar" when they're beheading civilians, blowing themselves up, or running planes into buildings.

Stop trying to white-wash it.

You seem to be incapable of forming any reasoned statement, stupid comments about 'hanging GWB by his balls for warcrimes' and now some ramble about Iraq.  Hey, genius, It doesn't matter that you thought it was a bad idea to go invade Iraq.  Y'know why?  Because we're already there!  If it was 2003, someone might care, but unfortunately it's 2008.  It's time to stop whining about how we went in and focus on leaving with victory, not surrender.


----------



## maniclion (Feb 7, 2008)

Al-Qaeda was our friend, so was Saddam Hussein and the Taliban....where did we go wrong with our good friends we gave them guns and money and tactical training but somewhere along the way we lost touch with our buddies hell we even loned them John Rambo for crying out loud.....


----------



## brogers (Feb 7, 2008)

Al-Qaeda was never our friend.  Please, do not attempt to spread that myth.  The US helped arm Afghan fighters, not foreign fighters.  Even Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri say this.  They had no contact with the US


----------



## DOMS (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> brogers:  Al-Qaida is NOT Islam.



As someone else put so succinctly: "It is certainly true that Islam is not the only source of terrorism, but some religions are much more likely to lead to terrorism than others. Ever hear of a Quaker terrorist? A Mennonite terrorist? A Buddhist terrorist? A Baha'i terrorist?"


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

brogers:  Do us a favor and don't vote in this upcoming election.  You don't have any common sense in you to be able to choose it seems.

You are worried about victory in a war we shouldn't be in, I'm worried about our country collapsing economically because we can't afford this "victory" you talk about.  That's without even mentioning that the war is illegal by both our own and international standards.

DOMS:  I'm not sure what your point here is.  Attacking a wild dog won't tame it, it will just piss off the wild dog and make it attack you back.  Same idea with Islam at the core.  And this time with Iran, Russia is on their side.  I personally do not want to live through WW3 with two countries that have nuclear capabilities.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> DOMS:  I'm not sure what your point here is.  Attacking a wild dog won't tame it, it will just piss off the wild dog and make it attack you back.  Same idea with Islam at the core.  And this time with Iran, Russia is on their side.  I personally do not want to live through WW3 with two countries that have nuclear capabilities.



Your analogy is apt, but your conclusion is wrong.  A wild dog will bite your hand every time.


----------



## maniclion (Feb 7, 2008)

brogers said:


> Al-Qaeda is an Islamic organization. Terrorists are practicing Muslims who shout "Allah Akbar" when they're beheading civilians, blowing themselves up, or running planes into buildings.
> 
> Stop trying to white-wash it.
> 
> You seem to be incapable of forming any reasoned statement, stupid comments about 'hanging GWB by his balls for warcrimes' and now some ramble about Iraq.  Hey, genius, It doesn't matter that you thought it was a bad idea to go invade Iraq.  Y'know why?  Because we're already there!  If it was 2003, someone might care, but unfortunately it's 2008.  It's time to stop whining about how we went in and focus on leaving with victory, not surrender.


But Bush already declared victory back in 2003.....
"The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th" GWB right below that big Mission Accomplished sign....


----------



## brogers (Feb 7, 2008)

maniclion said:


> But Bush already declared victory back in 2003.....
> "The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th" GWB right below that big Mission Accomplished sign....



The Iraqi army has long been defeated, duh, which is obviously* what he referenced.  However, the foreign islamic nuts wanting their virgins came in, but are now nearly wiped out, which is obviously* what I was referencing.  

*Obvious to a normal person


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> Attacking a wild dog won't tame it, it will just piss off the wild dog and make it attack you back.  Same idea with Islam at the core.



That's a uninformed & cowardly response... I doubt even Clinton or Obama think like that.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 7, 2008)

DOMS said:


> Your analogy is apt, but your conclusion is wrong.  A wild dog will bite your hand every time.



Perfect!


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

How about you back up anything with some rational ideas or arguments?  I've provided my side of the argument, you have done nothing but claim "NOPE, IM RIGHT! and agree with anyone who happens to agree with you"

"Inform" me then, if I'm so "uninformed".  Until then, I'm still going to go with you being another example of an unfortunate brainwashed citizen.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> How about you back up anything with some rational ideas or arguments?  I've provided my side of the argument, you have done nothing but claim "NOPE, IM RIGHT! and agree with anyone who happens to agree with you"
> 
> "Inform" me then, if I'm so "uninformed".  Until then, I'm still going to go with you being another example of an unfortunate brainwashed citizen.



"How about" this his the year 2008 and Muslims still:

1) Consider rape an acceptable punishment for a woman that reports being raped.
2) Will still cut your hand off for stealing food.
3) Will kill you if you're gay.
4) Consider women to be just above the concept of property.
5) Will kill a cartoonist for making fun of their shit-ball prophet.

And the list goes on.

But hey, if that's *your* type of people...


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 7, 2008)

I wasn't referring to you DOMs - I was referring to the other two people who are arguing their points without providing any background information or sources.

You don't have to agree with someone's lifestyle, however it is still their own lifestyle (Yes, I think many of their practices are extremely messed up).  Many countries think our use of the death penalty is barbaric - it's a point of view thing.  I support the death penalty for the record, so don't bring that up.  Are any of those a valid reason to go to war with the country though?


----------



## maniclion (Feb 7, 2008)

brogers said:


> The Iraqi army has long been defeated, duh, which is obviously* what he referenced.  However, the foreign islamic nuts wanting their virgins came in, but are now nearly wiped out, which is obviously* what I was referencing.
> 
> *Obvious to a normal person


What was obvious to me before he even made the decision to go into Iraq was that there sat a country most Muslim Extremists saw as an abomination to Islam and that as it sat bordered by every extremist nation the minute it was destabilized no one could control the in rush of jihadists from all directions to try and make it theirs....I would have focused all resources on Afghanistan and capturing Osama first and then made my move on Saddam, that way we could use our stabilized allies in Afghansitan to help shore up the Iranian insurgency and focused on the other spillovers....as it is now we have Iranians coming from east and west to Iraq and Afghanistan.


----------



## Big Smoothy (Feb 7, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> brogers:  Al-Qaida is NOT Islam.
> 
> Al-Qaida is a terrorist organization.  Iran and Iraq are countries that we have fundamental differences with, however they are not threatening us militarily.  I supported the war in Afghanistan because we were specifically going after Al-Qaida and the supporting Taliban regime.  Saddam Hussein had no such links to Al-Qaida, and I believe even hated Osama Bin Laden due to religious differences if I remember correctly.



It's been confirmed over and over, that Osama and Hussein despised each other.  

As for _catching Osama Bin Laden,_ I don't think the US government is in a hurry to do so.

They've pulled resources and Units out of Afghanistan, and funneled funds earmarked for catching Osama, to Iraq.

It's better for the Neo-Cons to have OBL out there.  He's a bad man.  He can hurt you.

"We need to protect the American people."


----------



## Crono1000 (Feb 8, 2008)

BigDyl said:


> Discuss.




something about this is so ironically hilarious


----------



## maniclion (Feb 8, 2008)

Crono1000 said:


> something about this is so ironically hilarious


It's yellow, cause you pissed all over it!!!


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 8, 2008)

Bottom line Bush is a bad President.

Carter was the Best


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 8, 2008)

Carters brother could have been better.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 8, 2008)

It's almost over, let it die. History will take care of the rest.

Let's move on.

Ron Paul or Obama......don't know...


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 8, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> How about you back up anything with some rational ideas or arguments?  I've provided my side of the argument, *you have done nothing but claim "NOPE, IM RIGHT! and agree with anyone who happens to agree with you*"



kind of like this?



danzik17 said:


> As I figured, blinded by your views.  As Prince so aptly put it, "another brainwashed American.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 8, 2008)

Still waiting on any rational arguments chief.  I've provided mine, where are yours?  Or do you not have any as I suspect?


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 8, 2008)

What exactly do you want me to prove? That your dog theory is bunk?

The proof is in the pudding. You said attacking an angry dog doesn't make them stop.. I said that was a foolish & cowardly statement.

Not attacking them gave us 9/11, among several other attacks. Since then, we've been going after Al Qaeda & they haven't been able to attack us here once in 6 years.   Does that really require any explanation?


----------



## clemson357 (Feb 8, 2008)

min0 lee said:


> A lot of cultures still think a woman should be seen and not heard.



Only the good ones.


----------



## tucker01 (Feb 8, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> What exactly do you want me to prove? That your dog theory is bunk?
> 
> The proof is in the pudding. You said attacking an angry dog doesn't make them stop.. I said that was a foolish & cowardly statement.
> 
> Not attacking them gave us 9/11, among several other attacks. Since then, we've been going after Al Qaeda & they haven't been able to attack us here once in 6 years.   Does that really require any explanation?



So then might as well attack North Korea, China and a slew of other country cause the possibility of threat is there.


----------



## maniclion (Feb 8, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> What exactly do you want me to prove? That your dog theory is bunk?
> 
> The proof is in the pudding. You said attacking an angry dog doesn't make them stop.. I said that was a foolish & cowardly statement.


Ringing a word like "terrorism" or "9/11" and then feeding an angry pack of dogs lies hardly quenches their appetite for blood, you need more steak less sizzle, bring us the head of Osama Bin Laden or shut the fuck up about the Axis of Evil.....


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 8, 2008)

Exactly Iain.  To be honest, I'm far more concerned about North Korea and Pakistan than I am about Iraq or Iran.  Military dictators, itchy trigger fingers, known nuclear weapons.  Even so, it does not mean we need to attack or even sanction a single one of them.

Stay out of their business.  Trade and travel and talk, don't try to shape international politics.


busyLivin:  It's quite obvious _what_ you responded with, but you have not given a single iota of proof as to _why_ what you say makes sense.  Until then, consider this my last post in this thread trying to argue with you.  It's impossible to win an argument against someone who's only response is "IM RIGHT, UR WRONG".


----------



## danzik17 (Feb 8, 2008)

maniclion said:


> Ringing a word like "terrorism" or "9/11" and then feeding an angry pack of dogs lies hardly quenches their appetite for blood, you need more steak less sizzle, bring us the head of Osama Bin Laden or shut the fuck up about the Axis of Evil.....



Exactly.  I would still love to see Osama Bin Laden brought to justice, however I don't even know if he is still alive.  Didn't he have to undergo frequent dialysis in order to survive, and that was back in like 2003?  What are the odds he is still alive?


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 8, 2008)

danzik17 said:


> busyLivin:  It's quite obvious _what_ you responded with, but you have not given a single iota of proof as to _why_ what you say makes sense.  Until then, consider this my last post in this thread trying to argue with you.  It's impossible to win an argument against someone who's only response is "IM RIGHT, UR WRONG".



Again, *what I am I supposed to be responding to?* 

The first time you asked me for proof of anything was after your angry dog statement. I said that statement makes no sense, as Al Qaeda is unable to attack us while we have been attacking them.  They flourished under our period of "doing nothing."

Is that not an anwer? If it's not, please explain what you want me to answer.. I'm certainly not dodging the question.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 8, 2008)

IainDaniel said:


> So then might as well attack North Korea, China and a slew of other country cause the possibility of threat is there.



If North Korea or Iran continue their weapons programs? Absolutely to those two.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 8, 2008)

Before I get hammered.. yes, diplomacy of course comes first.


----------



## BigDyl (Feb 16, 2008)

bump... hmm I'm missed this.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 16, 2008)

BigDyl said:


> bump... hmm I'm missed this.



Shame, we could have used your thoughtful insight.


----------



## DOMS (Feb 16, 2008)

BigDyl said:


> bump... hmm I'm missed this.



You're barely every around anymore.

You don't really care!


----------



## iMan323 (Feb 16, 2008)

I would be glad if the Bush era ended with the words along the lines of "Sic semper tyrannis", but the last thing that motherfucker and Co. needs is the martyr status.


----------



## busyLivin (Feb 16, 2008)

iMan323 said:


> I would be glad if the Bush era ended with the words along the lines of "Sic semper tyrannis", but the last thing that motherfucker and Co. needs is the martyr status.



You're wishing he was killed? You are a moron.


----------



## Big Smoothy (Feb 16, 2008)

busyLivin said:


> If North Korea or Iran continue their weapons programs? Absolutely to those two.



North Korea and Kim Jong Il are not threats to anyone in the regions, nor anyone globally.

The who North Korean nuclear situation was a play for Jong Il to get more aid and funds.  

Iran, who cares?  

India has nukes
Pakistan has nukes
Israel has nukes

And now we learn the the Intell in Iran was wrong.  Mostly just an excuse to attack another country in the Middle East with surgical air strikes.  Zionist Jews have been alarming the U.S. public about Iran because of their interests to protect Israel. 

Check out Podherotz and his latest book.


----------

