Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

MSNBC: Worldwide terrorism-related deaths on the rise


Joe Sick

Recommended Posts

I fear that you have misunderstood my question. I asked, “what would Kerry do differently”, not “what would Kerry have done differently”. The reality is, regardless of anyone’s partisan position… we are here at war now. What about the next 4 years? How do we defeat terrorism, and how does Kerry’s plan differ from what Bush is already doing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

So you don't address the flip-flop issue?

I don't really care about that. First of all, I'm not a Bush supporter. Second of all, Bush is a politician and contradicts himself. All politicians do. I seriously doubt those two sentances cost Bush your vote.

"Hey, he said something about Israel. Try to paint him as an anti-semite."

I'm not trying to do anything. I never said you were an anti-semite either. I'm not particularly pro-Israel. I am simply noting that liberals and the Democratic party, for whom I have often voted in the past, have over the past year latched onto this 'blame Israel' campaign. And yes, in some cases, this has spilled over into the "American Jews blindly follow Israel and are therefore part of some Jewish/Israeli Conspiracy" realm. And every time I see a liberal, with whom I often agree, follow this particular party line it genuinely scares me. I feel like my chosen party is stabbing me in the back because it's Israel's turn to get thrown into the Moral Equivalency grinder, and I'm eventually going to get caught in the backlash.

And like I said, it may cost Kerry my vote this year.

The point, and why I brought Israel up, is that Saddam was NEVER a threat to us. NEVER. Even with chemical weapons and 100 mile missiles, he was not going to attack us. A dictator doesn't want to mess with us because that would jeopardize his position.

The other fact is that there is NO evidence that Saddam dealt with Al Qaeda. NONE.

Therefore, we have no business in Iraq. Our being in Iraq provides fire to any terrorist organization anywhere. It is a rallying cry for them.

So Bush you think made an ill-informed decision and executed it terribly. What does this have to do with Israel, exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by RC

JW,

Want a job? My house needs painting, can't pay you anything though.

Sorry. I'm at work right now, making $20 a hour to type on the computer and shoot holes in Republican spin.

(I did paint houses during my college years, though. If you want to try to make smart remarks, I can paint your wife and/or girlfriend tonight.) :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

Sorry. I'm at work right now, making $20 a hour to type on the computer and shoot holes in Republican spin.

(I did paint houses during my college years, though. If you want to try to make smart remarks, I can paint your wife and/or girlfriend tonight.) :laugh:

you work for the government also :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Henry

I don't really care about that. First of all, I'm not a Bush supporter. Second of all, Bush is a politician and contradicts himself. All politicians do. I seriously doubt those two sentances cost Bush your vote.

I'm not trying to do anything. I never said you were an anti-semite either. I'm not particularly pro-Israel. I am simply noting that liberals and the Democratic party, for whom I have often voted in the past, have over the past year latched onto this 'blame Israel' campaign. And yes, in some cases, this has spilled over into the "American Jews blindly follow Israel and are therefore part of some Jewish/Israeli Conspiracy" realm. And every time I see a liberal, with whom I often agree, follow this particular party line it genuinely scares me. I feel like my chosen party is stabbing me in the back because it's Israel's turn to get thrown into the Moral Equivalency grinder, and I'm eventually going to get caught in the backlash.

And like I said, it may cost Kerry my vote this year.

So Bush you think made an ill-informed decision and executed it terribly. What does this have to do with Israel, exactly?

Did you even read my first post?

Saddam was never a threat to us. That was my whole point!

He was a threat the Middle East (which includes Israel) and maybe Europe, but never the US.

Understand now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

Did you even read my first post?

Saddam was never a threat to us. That was my whole point!

He was a threat the Middle East and maybe Europe, but never the US.

Understand now?

middle east = israel, SA, Egypt etc...

europe = germany, england, france etc....

= US interests

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

THEY were already there. It is mainly (by the casualty counts) Iraqis who are fighting us.

Ah, the old flypaper plan. At least you admit that our soldiers are being used as targets.

Big question: Will Bush mention Osama in his speech tonight? I don't know if I've heard a single mention of him yet.

You'll have to point me to the intelligence on that there, pal.

The folks that we were worried about while I was there were foreign fighters, not Former Regime Loyalists. FRLs were the ones doing drive-bys -- not blowing up truck bombs at the UN.

Stick with what you know, my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jbooma

middle east = israel, SA, Egypt etc...

europe = germany, england, france etc....

= US interests

So when it suits you, we are to follow the UN credo of "an attack on one, is an attack on all."

Typical conservative statement is "We can't let our gov't. be controlled by the UN" in the same sentence as "but Saddam defied the UN."

If Israel, SA, Egypt, Germany, England, France weren't worried about it, why should we be?

Saddam never attacked us. Al Qaeda did. We should've spent that money to tighten our borders and used those 100k troops to hunt down Osama, even if we had to take over Afghan & Pakistan to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jpillian

You'll have to point me to the intelligence on that there, pal.

The folks that we were worried about while I was there were foreign fighters, not Former Regime Loyalists. FRLs were the ones doing drive-bys -- not blowing up truck bombs at the UN.

Stick with what you know, my friend.

JPillion, Man, I'll take it from someone who was there over some opinionated, ill informed, rhetoric spewing, unfactual, guy 100% of the time.

Will you now "attack" a soldier who has basically proven your stance as inaccurate? Should be interesting, personally, I'd clam up while still maintaining some element of personal pride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

Did you even read my first post?

Saddam was never a threat to us. That was my whole point!

He was a threat the Middle East (which includes Israel) and maybe Europe, but never the US.

Understand now?

Did you read mine?

For the third time, I think that article is misleading. I don't feel like explaining why again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jpillian

You'll have to point me to the intelligence on that there, pal.

The folks that we were worried about while I was there were foreign fighters, not Former Regime Loyalists. FRLs were the ones doing drive-bys -- not blowing up truck bombs at the UN.

Stick with what you know, my friend.

Yeah, I've been looking for a link, but can't find it. I thought the reported casualties of the war were showing like 95% were Iraqis. I can see the other 5% being instigators.

I guess if you lump the civilians in with true insurgents, the numbers would come up out like that.

Either way, that 5% that causes problems wasn't there before and now they have any easier target, right down the road from wher they live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by skin-n-vegas

JPillion, Man, I'll take it from someone who was there over some opinionated, ill informed, rhetoric spewing, unfactual, guy 100% of the time.

Will you now "attack" a soldier who has basically proven your stance as inaccurate? Should be interesting, personally, I'd clam up while still maintaining some element of personal pride.

Feel free to clam up whenever you want.

We won't be missing much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Henry

And there it is again. The new liberal line attacking all things Israel. And the exact sort of thing that may lose the Democrats my vote.

You think that Pat Buchanan is a fan of Israel?

He just wrote a whole book about the influence of Israel and AIPAC on the neoconservative agenda.

Nice try...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jbooma

I understand why JW is so afraid he is the lone liberal in richmond, if the truth came out it would all be over :laugh:

What are you laughing about?

What is the "truth"?

Must be an inside joke.

Richmond, as one of those "metropolitan areas" that conservatives love to ridicule, is highly democratic. Check out our city council.

This is too easy, to smack around 4-5 conservatives at once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

What are you laughing about?

What is the "truth"?

Must be an inside joke.

Richmond, as one of those "metropolitan areas" that conservatives love to ridicule, is highly democratic. Check out our city council.

This is too easy, to smack around 4-5 conservatives at once.

sure with all those down there that think the cival war is still going on :D

i know the va government based in richmond is far from democratic

don't get me wrong i like richmond and might be getting my masters down there but it is mainly conservative, now the NOVA area I would say is leaning more democratic now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by luckydevil

So, if the UN signed off on the Iraq war..................you would have been ok with it?

Uhhh...that's the whole point.

A true coalition that would allow us as a group to accomplish our disarmament mission in Iraq, while leaving flexibility for us to respond to other threats.

Why didn't W go back for the second vote? The "lay your cards on the table" vote?

Let me guess, you're going to say we already had permission from the UN, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jbooma

sure with all those down there that think the cival war is still going on :D

i know the va government based in richmond is far from democratic

don't get me wrong i like richmond and might be getting my masters down there but it is mainly conservative, now the NOVA area I would say is leaning more democratic now

The governor and lt. gov are democratic. The repugs do control the legislature, but Warner gets pretty much what he wants.

The ones who think the Civil War is going on don't live in the city. They live out on their "compounds" in the country. (A strong Pro-Bush voting block, I might add.)

Masters in what? Richmond or VCU?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by luckydevil

just want to add

JB

for a guy who slams "liberals" all day, your view on the role of government(concerning domestic policy) is extremly liberal.

i am neither right or left but in the middle i tend to vote republican but do agree on the democratic side on some issues, i just don't like people who are far one way and try to say everything you think is wrong, i just slam destino in the gang because it is fun :)

i have never believed you can look at something with a slant, you have to see how both sides feel and then make a decision where you stand

to me the people that just choose a side and stick to it no matter what are the weak ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jackson's Ward

The governor and lt. gov are democratic. The repugs do control the legislature, but Warner gets pretty much what he wants.

The ones who think the Civil War is going on don't live in the city. They live out on their "compounds" in the country. (A strong Pro-Bush voting block, I might add.)

Masters in what? Richmond or VCU?

JW on a serious note when I meant they think the "cival war" is going on I am talking about how it feels when you go to richmond it seems that there is still a lot of race issues, thats all, which is completely different up here of course.

VCU in Healthcare Management with an influence in IT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...