Bush haters rejoice...

[2ndAmendment]

If you watched the Debate you would have known that when Kerry said "Global Test" that he really said "We must pass a global test with our countrymen first". Not "a global test with other countries".

That is the spin.

When we went to war with Iraq nobody really knew why were going to war. It was all a big secret the Administration was keeping. They didn't even have proof that WMD even existed. To this day we still haven't found any, it seems like the UN inspectors were doing a pretty good job at what they do.....

Even Clinton and the U.N., including France, Germany, and Russia, thought Iraq had WMD. Having been in the "community", I know the reasons for secrecy and also the imperfection of intelligence especially when the "community" in the U.S. had been gutted by the Clinton administration including a law that was passed to prevent using "bad actors" as sources. DUH. If you can use the "bad actors", no one is left. Intelligence on the ground went to almost nothing. Electronics can not make up for people on the ground. The Senate Intelligence committee had the same info as the President. Kerry saw the same stuff Bush did and signed off on it.

If you haven't been in the "community", don't talk about what you don't know.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Say no to BIG GOVERNMENT!

"We don't need laws restricting what we see, that would be called Communism."

Here we see another problem...Communism is a totalitarian Economic system, which employs rigid censorship...Censorship shows up in Fascist, Maoist, and certainly many dictatorship societies. And our Founding Fathers actually supported degrees of censorship: Check Hamilton and Adams...support for the Sedition act?

Dig deeper, read more, get better, think harder, convince more!

So you think its ok if the Government can restrict what you can watch on television? You don't think you can make those decisions on your own? Well I'm an adult, and I make those decisions for myself, as an adult should. I do agree that there should be some censorship, for an example the ratings we on television shows and movies are great, that helps aid the decision to watch a program or not, but you should have the choice, not big government.

 

[2ndAmendment]

The perspective offered following is NOT from the mind of Hessian...rather from Chuck Colson:......(I have paraphrased)

The hatred toward the US is rooted in a view that freedom and democracy breeds corruption/decadence. We are baffled why people don't seem to embrace freedom that we offer. The reason rests on the fact that Hollywood and the media are in a constant race to shock, stun, exploit more & more vices---and this is seen in the Middle East and they see that we don't just tolerate it...we make $$ off it!

So the Imams & Mullahs preach to their devout men that they must rise up and not accept the promises of freedom, must not support any American regime because of our unending support of Israel, we do not understand or work within their customs which offends them greatly.

and now I quote:
"When we tolerate trash on television and permit pornography to invade our homes via the internet...we are inflaming radical Islam."

So, the fight to liberate Iraq was noble...the push for Democracy is laudable...But we will not defeat radical Islam until we pull the motivation away from their radical Imams and push America as a MORAL force for good, not a cesspool of excess.

 

[SamSpade]

You said so yourself that we would have lost our Arab allies if we took out Saddam. Well guess what we took out Saddam this time, and now we have hardly any allies, even in the westernerized world.

Ok, now I'm beginning to think you're some MPD *pretending* to be against the war. Because you're either seriously uninformed, or pulling my leg.

At the start of the war, only six European nations opposed the war - France, Germany, Belgium, Russia, Belarus and Greece (who still permits U.S. bases to be used for the war). 22 joined, and about 9-10 are neutral or hold an ambiguous position (e.g. Norway is not part of the Coalition but nevertheless has troops in Iraq). The other 'western' power, Japan, has been with us from the beginning.

The European nations are:
United Kingdom
(Spain)
Portugal
Denmark
Netherlands
Iceland
Italy
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Poland
Czech Republic
Slovakia
Hungary
Albania
Macedonia
Romania
Bulgaria
Turkey
Croatia
Slovenia
Ukraine

(Spain has since left).

The remaining nations are:

Japan
South Korea
Singapore
Philippines
Afghanistan
Azerbaijan
Uzbekistan
Georgia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Solomon Islands
Mongolia
Palau
El Salvador
Colombia
Nicaragua
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Australia
Kuwait
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Uganda
Rwanda
Angola
Tonga

And we have other allies who support the decision even though they have not committed resources.
(Qatar, Oman, UAE, Bahrain - you know, *ARAB* states).

I'd hardly call that "nobody".

 

[UrbanPancake]

Americans are flipping the bill and loosing more lives!!

Ok, now I'm beginning to think you're some MPD *pretending* to be against the war. Because you're either seriously uninformed, or pulling my leg.

At the start of the war, only six European nations opposed the war - France, Germany, Belgium, Russia, Belarus and Greece (who still permits U.S. bases to be used for the war). 22 joined, and about 9-10 are neutral or hold an ambiguous position (e.g. Norway is not part of the Coalition but nevertheless has troops in Iraq). The other 'western' power, Japan, has been with us from the beginning.

The European nations are:
United Kingdom
(Spain)
Portugal
Denmark
Netherlands
Iceland
Italy
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Poland
Czech Republic
Slovakia
Hungary
Albania
Macedonia
Romania
Bulgaria
Turkey
Croatia
Slovenia
Ukraine

(Spain has since left).

The remaining nations are:

Japan
South Korea
Singapore
Philippines
Afghanistan
Azerbaijan
Uzbekistan
Georgia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Solomon Islands
Mongolia
Palau
El Salvador
Colombia
Nicaragua
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Australia
Kuwait
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Uganda
Rwanda
Angola
Tonga

And we have other allies who support the decision even though they have not committed resources.

I'd hardly call that "nobody".

A coalition is a UNION of Nations into one body, if that's the case then why have Americans suffered 90% of the deaths, and paid 90% of the bill? Sounds like these countries are only siding with us on a very limited scale. Saying your with us is different from actually sharing in the supply of resources and men. Actions always speak louder then words.

 

[2ndAmendment]

England tried to rule us from afar and they had there puppet governors ruling the colonies and enforcing colonists to follow english tax laws. Now look at it like this; The Americans installed a puppet government that represents American VALUES which creates more Arabs who hate America, which in turn enables them to create more terrorists cells who vow to destroy the American Puppet Government in Iraq, and install there own government in Iraq of there choice.

You really need to study the history of the Revolution before you try to discuss it. Before the Confederation, the 13 original states were English colonies and King George did rule them. I'll stop there, but again, your lack of knowledge is showing.

Your capitalization, grammar, and punctuation are terrible. Are you sure you are a student? High school? College? What school? I want to make sure my kids don't go there.

 

[2ndAmendment]

... but you should have the choice, not big government.

Now you are talking like a Constitutionalist or Republican. What are you? Are you sure? Democrats are for bigger government with more government control. Republicans are typically for less, except McCain and a few RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). Constitutionalists are for Constitutional government and are far more conservative than Republicans; the Federal government is about 80 to 90 percent beyond the bounds of the Constitution.

 

[UrbanPancake]

You really need to study the history of the Revolution before you try to discuss it. Before the Confederation, the 13 original states were English colonies and King George did rule them. I'll stop there, but again, your lack of knowledge is showing.

Your capitalization, grammar, and punctuation are terrible. Are you sure you are a student? High school? College? What school? I want to make sure my kids don't go there.

I'm sorry if I haven't exactly been keeping track of my capitalization, and grammar. I'm trying to work and debate at the same time.(I have deadlines here to keep, I was only trying bring up a real debate with my peers) I wanted this to be a debate about the presidency not on the english language (Whenever the losing side of the debate insults the opposing parties intelligence that usually means they have run out of true statements to support there side of the debate). I'll be back, I'm going to have some pancakes for lunch see'yah.

 

[SamSpade]

A coalition is a UNION of Nations into one body, if that's the case then why have Americans suffered 90% of the deaths, and paid 90% of the bill? Sounds like these countries are only siding with us on a very limited scale. Saying your with us is different from actually sharing in the supply of resources and men. Actions always speak louder then words.

Wrong on both stats. You've been listening too much to Kerry and Edwards.

By your measure, WW2 wasn't a coalition of allies either, because Russia had better than 80-90% of *all* combat casualties. By your definition, neither we nor the British even showed up. Heck we had more combat deaths freeing France, than *France* did.

It's true we have the most troops in the region. But our allies *die* just as much as anyone else does. Japanese, Polish, South Koreans, Italians, British, Australians - they've all had tragic days where they've lost a lot of lives. I'm disgusted by the idea they have to die in greater numbers before their commitment and sacrifice even counts. By that token, all OUR guys in WW2 died for nothing.

 

[2ndAmendment]

A coalition is a UNION of Nations into one body, if that's the case then why have Americans suffered 90% of the deaths, and paid 90% of the bill? Sounds like these countries are only siding with us on a very limited scale. Saying your with us is different from actually sharing in the supply of resources and men. Actions always speak louder then words.

Again, sounding the Edwards and party line. You and the Democrats are really taking heat for neglecting the deaths of the Iraqis that have lost their lives or been wounded.

 

[Ken King]

A coalition is a UNION of Nations into one body, if that's the case then why have Americans suffered 90% of the deaths, and paid 90% of the bill? Sounds like these countries are only siding with us on a very limited scale. Saying your with us is different from actually sharing in the supply of resources and men. Actions always speak louder then words.

You are John Edwards, so we know for a fact that you're not working.

 

[SamSpade]

You are John Edwards, so we know for a fact that you're not working.

Changing the subject but....

Did you or anyone just cringe at how many times Edwards quoted verbatim from John Kerry's playbook? I think an original idea would be lonely in his head.

 

[Larry Gude]

Kerry; the gift that keeps on giving...

...to wit:

that he really said "We must pass a global test with our countrymen first".

A global test with our countrymen.

Hmm.

How about a lunar test or maybe Rhorsach?

I give. What is the global test we must pass before we can pass our own test?

"Alex, I'd like idiotic statements for $100, please..."

 

[aps45819]

why have Americans suffered 90% of the deaths, and paid 90% of the bill?

I thought the Iraqies suffered 90% of the casualities? I'd rather have my taxes used for bullets in Iraq than body bags in NYC.

 

[aps45819]

You are John Edwards, so we know for a fact that you're not working.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ken King again.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Wrong on both stats. You've been listening too much to Kerry and Edwards.

By your measure, WW2 wasn't a coalition of allies either, because Russia had better than 80-90% of *all* combat casualties. By your definition, neither we nor the British even showed up. Heck we had more combat deaths freeing France, than *France* did.

It's true we have the most troops in the region. But our allies *die* just as much as anyone else does. Japanese, Polish, South Koreans, Italians, British, Australians - they've all had tragic days where they've lost a lot of lives. I'm disgusted by the idea they have to die in greater numbers before their commitment and sacrifice even counts. By that token, all OUR guys in WW2 died for nothing.

In World War II it was very clear to everyone that it was a true and real Coalition. Plus Hitler was much worst then Saddam is today.

 

[Larry Gude]

Therefore...

...

Plus Hitler was much worst then Saddam is today

The proper response is "Good! Saddam will not reach that level of infamy."

This is GOOD.

 

[SamSpade]

In World War II it was very clear to everyone that it was a true and real Coalition. Plus Hitler was much worst then Saddam is today.

Well, prove it. Ask a Russian, he will tell you that *Russia* alone won that war, and had the Americans and British not shown up, they'd have taken Germany *anyway*.

Sound familiar?

 

[UrbanPancake]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ken King again.

Why? I feel strongly about the Kerry/Edwards ticket, I will post away to hearts desire. Plus I have posted on this website under a different screen name before. I think it's great that everyone is so interested in this presidency and forum. This is a true example of American Democracy at work. I feel my views are validated as I'm sure you feel yours are. I really don't understand why Republicans get so Frustrated when some one who doesn't agree with them challenges their belief system. (Example like Bush in the Debate with Kerry, those faces killed me; I wonder if that is how he acts around foreign leaders when they question him? )

 

[2ndAmendment]

Why? I feel strongly about the Kerry/Edwards ticket, I will post away to hearts desire. Plus I have posted on this website under a different screen name before. I think it's great that everyone is so interested in this presidency and forum. This is a true example of American Democracy at work. I feel my views are validated as I'm sure you feel yours are. I really don't understand why Republicans get so Frustrated when some one who doesn't agree with them challenges their belief system. (Example like Bush in the Debate with Kerry, those faces killed me; I wonder if that is how he acts around foreign leaders when they question him? )

If I had been debating Kerry, I would have probably made those kind of faces too. I would be thinking, "How can this guy think like that?"