Reply With Quote
McCain 47
Hunter 44
Tancredo/Thompson 41
Pretty much in line with what I thought it would be.
I wish you would have been in Vietnam when we first arrived there.
They didn't take too kindly to the raping of the country women and the killing of little children because we couldn't make up our minds on who exactly was "Charlie".
I can see how this affected the fabric of our society since we are now a third world country due to our withdrawal from Vietnam.
We haven't advanced at all and democracy took a black eye after the withdrawal. Europe is blanketed by communism due to our actions.
And what do you attribute your own idiocy to?
Yea, invading a country that has no ties whatsoever to 9/11 is highly moral. Ignoring the countries that had a direct relationship to 9/11 (Afgahnistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia) is also the epitome of morality.
You're a paranoid little aren't you?
The cause of terrorism in the Middle East is our presence there, coupled with a misguided religious fervor.
That will change when we let them kill themselves off.
McCain 47
Hunter 44
Tancredo/Thompson 41
Pretty much in line with what I thought it would be.
Yeah because that happened all the time over there...just like in Iraq.
I can see how this affected the fabric of our society since we are now a third world country due to our withdrawal from Vietnam.
We haven't advanced at all and democracy took a black eye after the withdrawal. Europe is blanketed by communism due to our actions.
You ing idiot...there was a complete and utter genocide after we pulled out.
We also rendered the death of every American sent over there meaningless, not to mention provided the blueprint for our own defeat for the current conflict we find outselves involved in.
Just remember you are the asshole that considers a ing genocide over 2 million people...
As nothing.
.
We resumed a war...we still in a state of War with Iraq...
Yea, invading a country that has no ties whatsoever to 9/11 is highly moral. Ignoring the countries that had a direct relationship to 9/11 (Afgahnistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia) is also the epitome of morality.
And we can't take Saudi Arabia out you idiot...what we can do is make them a governmental pariah in the mid-east.
No, I'm not paranoid...you're just stupid. Legitimately stupid, and ignorant on this subject...and we both know it.You're a paranoid little aren't you?
No idiot...The cause of terrorism in the Middle East is our presence there, coupled with a misguided religious fervor.
The main cause of terrorism is the Mid-East governments that were put in place by Europe post WWI and WWII, that are ill equipped to rule countries and tend to the needs of hudreds of millions of people, living on ing sand.
That will change when we let them kill themselves off.
You asswipe...just one of them has the potential to ing wreck our entire world...not a problem, unless you have governments willing to enable them to do so.
Here's the casues of terrorism:
Afghanistan:
Unemployment 30%
Population below the poverty line: 53%
Saudi Arabia:
Population below the poverty line: 54%
Iran:
Unemployment: 15% <<<< And I'm calling BS on that one...it was much higher just a few years ago.
Population below the poverty line: 40%
Pakistan:
Unemployment: 6.5% Incidentally...one of the things we did post 911 was give them trade agreements not to mention a ton of developmental aid.
Population below the poverty line: 24%
And you know what?
Sanctions make it worse...
They also tend to inordinantely punish the most innocent segment of the population...infants. Which results is some seriously pissed off people.
The two major head countries are Iran and Saudi Arabia...
Can you give me a good reason why two countries sitting on the world's largest oil and gas reserves have rampant unemlployment? and a third of their country living in poverty?
Those people are uneducated, homeless, and just completely ed...
They get a religious education and a suicide mission, and an indoctrination into why it's Americas fault, buy Mullah's with a second grade education, who incidentally, spout the same ing propaganda you do....and call it fact.
...and that's the way the leaders of those countries deal with that situation...
While they count their trillions...and consider their extreme wealth proof they are the doing the right thing.
And the countries that put these guys in power...were Europe. The country that initially backed the radical Islam movement, was the Soviet Union. The country that created the Palestinian Israeli situation...was Great Britain...
You know what they thought?
They're just a bunch of subhuman stupid savages...
Which is something that about 90% of the so called life loving liberals believe in thier heart of hearts.
And you are just ing like them...because you know what they thought when they were ass ing that region of the world?
Those dumb savages....they can never get to us.
Well those savages can get to us now...you asshole.
And that clever little method of dealing with their unemployment and poverty, which we call radical Islam...is now a huge ass threat.
Pull your head out...
Those people didn't embrace that way of life...they were a bunch of people happy to be living on their sand until Europe came ing with them, with vastly superior technology and resources...
They have no guns to help themselves with, they have no media to display their plight in it's true light, and they do not have the right, to voice their disproval of their ty governments...
You out of sight, out of mind, POV, is an idiots point of view...and it's also not any kind of true liberalism...
It is in fact, an extreme form of racism and indifference.
I've got to side with whottt on these issues.
Guliani is one of the worst candidates IMO. Talk about riding out 9/11 for all its worth. I am fairly suprised whottt is suporting this guy but I don't want to turn this thread into a debate anymore than it has already become so I'll leave it at that.
Im not a big Giuliani guy but some of our things match up.
I thought I was a Huckabee guy, but am suprised he disagrees with me on so many things.
Strange.
That's why I stopped posting on this thread.
Manny sold out
I miss the old days when he was a crusader for true liberalism.
I support him...I just think he's a little touched in the head. Touched in a way that doesn't necessarily aid the country at this particular moment in time. The guy was POW for a long time...I think it had an impact on him that makes him both extremely honorable and to be respected...but not necessarily a guy that should be President right now. I don't think his judgement and grasp of the issues are entirely strong.
That said...he's the candidate that would get my vote if Guilianni doesn't get the nomination. And if he doesn't get it...LMAO I'll probably vote for Hilary.
#1. Ron Paul lost me when he said, they don't want us there...2) ron paul
Who was he referring too?
He wasn't referring the Saudi Government...who in fact did want us there.
He wasn't referring to the millions of people who have left that region and have been critical for our friendships with brutal regimes...
He wasn't referring to the hundreds of millions stuck in that region...without freedom of speech to speak out of their government(but plenty to burn American flags and feed the propaganda machine), without free press...but who long for a better way of life, and resent the out of us for thinking being lucky enough to be born in a free region of the world somehow makes us better than them. While we do business with those most responsible for their plight.
He was referring to Radical Islam...a minority in the middle east...a minority with the intent, determination, ruthlessness, and backing to seize power and impose their will upon a largely defensive majority...and make an extremely bad situation worse...and even more oppressive.
A minority...that abhors civil rights, liberties and embraces xenophobia, racism and religious bigotry...basically everything mankind has embraced since the enlightenment.
He wants to repect those guys POV...that makes him a bad candidate to me.
Because he respects them because they threaten us the most...not because they are reflective of the majority of the inhabitants of the Middle East.
He wants to pretend it's not there and somehow it will all go away...
That won't make it go away...that is in fact, what created it.
Us thinking sanctions were the peaceful alternative...ignoring all the infant deaths caused, the loss of employment....the silent execution of millions, while the true aim of those sanctions, wasn't even in our sights
Us thinking that we could do business with those same governments and that our association with them wouldn't reflect badly on us...or that those governments wouldn't use us as scapegoat for their own incompetent leadership...resulting in rampaant unemployment, over population and poverty...
I give those leaders credit for one thing though...they are masters of redirecting, manipulating that anger away from themselves. You almost believe they actually are the helpless ones...
#2. I don't agree with Ron Paul's stance on abortion. I am pro abortion...I swallow my pride and vote for the anti-abortion guys because of their pro war stance.
Limited resources are the cause of every major conflict in the history of man, since the dawn of time...more people isn't going to solve that problem.
Having a ton of kids doesn't mean people are good parents and will set their kids up to do more than just suffer and have not....
It's a fairy tale irresponsible POV, not based in reality...the fact that he is both anti-war and anti-abortion makes him a bad candidate at this particular time in history.
If every candidate was anti-war...I'll vote for the pro abortion guys over the anti-abortion guys.
If it makes you feel any better...I wouldn't vote for the Pope or Pat Robertson either.
Nowhere in the bible does it say...be a dumbass and I'll reward you for it.
My ideal candidate would be a domestic liberal with a commitment to establishing a non dicatorial hole in the middle east(Iraq, since we are already there) with true representative government...who also is willing to make the pre-requisite veiled threats to the ty mid-eastern leaders about the fate that will befall them should a nuke get set off in this country...
That candidate doesn't exist...Guilianni, Clark and McCain are the closest ones...Giulianni wins out because...well he's the one that will most likely make the threat that matters most...the Saudi Family, the Mullah's in Iran, and Pakistan...that if somehow for some unfortunate reason, one of those terrorist groups they know nothing about and can't control...should set off a nuke on American soil...that he will nuke them...
Because that's what will do more to prevent it from happening in the immediate future, than anything else.
It'll also hit home with the leaders of the Millitant movements seeking power...
Usama wants to be the King of the Ottoman Empire...not a radioactive wasteland.
I do not for one second believe Paul would ever make such a threat...and even if he did, I don't think anyone would believe him...which means he would be the guy most likely to actually have to collect on that threat.
I don't want the guy that can fight if he has to do so, but doesn't look like he can fight so he's continually having to prove that he can...
I want the guy that no one wants to fight in the first place. He'll be less likely to have to collect on that threat.
Guilianni I'll believe it when he says it...basically the same thing I felt about Bush. That's what decides the guy I vote for...at this particular time. Everything else is secondary.
I want the bad cop right now...the good cop's time will come...but now is not that time.
I think I've found my candidate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxXgzl_zYSY
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions