sox4lifeinPA Posted November 13, 2003 Author Share Posted November 13, 2003 at least we have wes clark to vote for.................. and we wonder why so many people "abstain" from voting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 at least we have wes clark to vote for.................. and we wonder why so many people "abstain" from voting You mean the Wesley Clark who is on videos within the last year, supporting all of Bush's military policies? Umm, can you say opportunist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 13, 2003 Author Share Posted November 13, 2003 my bad... at least we have wes clark to vote for.................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Umm, can you say opportunist? Opportunist. Apu's timing sucked paris hilton ass, but he was mostly factually right. US are not nor ever were angels. The only flaw in his rhetoric was (surprise, surpise) in ovedoing it, and the underlying assumption, sometimes explicitly stated, that US and capitalism as a whole are inherently and unilaterally evil. Gray area and necessary evils abound in life and politics. A thinking person should recognize that simple and unalterable fact. And, please, until you've lived under communit/fascist/fundamental monist/military dictatorship/etc, please ease up on the barocco moralist expounding and the rabid anti-Americanism. Just a bit maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 nuke don't pay any attention to that sally. you've already done more for this country than he will ever do with all his b****ing and whining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Apu, you are living in a dream world. First of all, the war with Iraq was not about oil, per se. A small percentage of the USA's oil came from Iraq, and if the war was indeed about oil, why am I still paying $1.60 a gallon? And I get a laugh from all the moaning about Haliburton and Bechtel. It seems to have never occured to the people that b**** and moan about them that these two companies are the foremost experts in doing what they do. To not hire these people would be irresponsible and truly political. You say according to Bush Iraq had WMDs. Well ,you know what? Iraq had WMDs according to Bill Clinton and the UN as well. Tell me something, Apu. Does someone tell a lie without anyway of not being caught??? Does someone lie and have no plan thought out as to how to get away with it??? That's the thing I can't understand. Why on earth would the administration decide to tell a bold-faced lie about Iraq having WMDs, knowing full well that once we got in there there would be none?... Bush: Let's invade Iraq. Rumsfeld: Why? Bush: 'Cuz I feel like it. But we'll tell the people they have WMDs. Rumsfeld: But they don't. Bush: Eh, we'll worry about that later. Yeah, I bet that's what happened. If he were knowingly lying about it, don't you think there would've been some cover-up or planting of big evidence? Instead, journalists and cameramen document everything and no WMDs. Jesus, if this is the case, I think Bush should be impeached for not being smart enough to lie better!!! And your talk about recruits joining Al-Qaeda is really sickening and typical. God forbid we do anything to upset the terrorists and their flunkies. Tell us, Apu, what would you have done differently, other than slipping on some kneepads. I have no doubts that you were against Afghanistan too. What was won in Korea? Well, if you look at the quality of life in North Korea vs. that in South Korea, the answer should be obvious. And your crying about fighting for oil is really very funny. Wars have been fought for national interests throughout history, both financial, political, and security interests. Wars have been fought over trade, the Suez Canal, riches in colonies, etc. Hell, Britain even fought a war with China over the opium trade! To fight a war over the protection of the lifeblood of our economy (Gulf War I) is perfectly understandable. In fact, not to do so would be irresponsible. I can't tell if you are a Democrat, an America hater, or just a bleeding heart pacifist. Can't be strict Democrat because most of the wars you cry about were under Democrat presidents; WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam. You also want it both ways. You cry about American support for brutal dictators in Chile, but then cry about America taking out a brutal dictator in Iraq. Well, which is it? Oh that's right, you want America to do nothing. At least then, America would have no responsibility for what happens. I got it!!! You're an isolationist. That's all I can come up with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Apu, you are living in a dream world. First of all, the war with Iraq was not about oil, per se. A small percentage of the USA's oil came from Iraq, and if the war was indeed about oil, why am I still paying $1.60 a gallon? And I get a laugh from all the moaning about Haliburton and Bechtel. It seems to have never occured to the people that b**** and moan about them that these two companies are the foremost experts in doing what they do. To not hire these people would be irresponsible and truly political. You say according to Bush Iraq had WMDs. Well ,you know what? Iraq had WMDs according to Bill Clinton and the UN as well. Tell me something, Apu. Does someone tell a lie without anyway of not being caught??? Does someone lie and have no plan thought out as to how to get away with it??? That's the thing I can't understand. Why on earth would the administration decide to tell a bold-faced lie about Iraq having WMDs, knowing full well that once we got in there there would be none?... Bush: Let's invade Iraq. Rumsfeld: Why? Bush: 'Cuz I feel like it. But we'll tell the people they have WMDs. Rumsfeld: But they don't. Bush: Eh, we'll worry about that later. Yeah, I bet that's what happened. If he were knowingly lying about it, don't you think there would've been some cover-up or planting of big evidence? Instead, journalists and cameramen document everything and no WMDs. Jesus, if this is the case, I think Bush should be impeached for not being smart enough to lie better!!! And your talk about recruits joining Al-Qaeda is really sickening and typical. God forbid we do anything to upset the terrorists and their flunkies. Tell us, Apu, what would you have done differently, other than slipping on some kneepads. I have no doubts that you were against Afghanistan too. What was won in Korea? Well, if you look at the quality of life in North Korea vs. that in South Korea, the answer should be obvious. And your crying about fighting for oil is really very funny. Wars have been fought for national interests throughout history, both financial, political, and security interests. Wars have been fought over trade, the Suez Canal, riches in colonies, etc. Hell, Britain even fought a war with China over the opium trade! To fight a war over the protection of the lifeblood of our economy (Gulf War I) is perfectly understandable. In fact, not to do so would be irresponsible. I can't tell if you are a Democrat, an America hater, or just a bleeding heart pacifist. Can't be strict Democrat because most of the wars you cry about were under Democrat presidents; WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam. You also want it both ways. You cry about American support for brutal dictators in Chile, but then cry about America taking out a brutal dictator in Iraq. Well, which is it? Oh that's right, you want America to do nothing. At least then, America would have no responsibility for what happens. I got it!!! You're an isolationist. That's all I can come up with. So no compete contracts are justified? That's insane. At least allow the possibility for companies to bid. But maybe the $400,000 Halliburton gave Cheney influenced the administration's decision. And I'm sure you've seen the reports that Halliburton is charging over double what is necessary per gallon and raking in tons of money. Actually the reports from Hussein Kamal that the Clinton/Bush people used to justify war say in them that Iraq destroyed their weapons of mass destruction and Hussein Kamal was the head of the weapons programs so I think he'd be an authority on it. And Clinton is no innocent person either. Just think back to the firing of the 22 cruise missiles into Iraq that killed 6 innocent people because there was the supposed assassination plot against Dubya's daddy which never materialized and was never true. So f*** Clinton too. The guy is an asshat. The Bush administration lied when May 1 AWOL flightsuit boy landed on the USS Lincoln and said "Mission Accomplished" and declared combat over. Then they changed it to say 'Major Combat' like nobody would remember his original statement. Rove has a plot to get away with it...and in my eyes, they are getting away with it because 50% of the public still believes that Iraq had WMD when we couldn't find any and we still can't. And a CBS report shows that the morning of 9/11 Rummy had actually drawn up plans to invade Iraq. And let's not forget the March 2001 energy conference documents from Cheney's conference that show Iraq's oil fields partitioned to Halliburton, Bechtel, and the companies in there right now. There was no need to invade Iraq. As for what I'd do, I believe exactly what former State Department member William Blum has said on the subject: "If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the USA but now -- oddly enough -- a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims. There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of 330 billion dollars is equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated." We supported Saddam as well as Pinochet. We gave him the weapons and knew that he gassed his own people. Then we blame him for doing that after giving him the weapons and praising him for doing it when it happened in the 1980s? As for political affiliation, I am a democratic socialist wanting something along the lines of what they do in Sweden with social programs etc. The two parties here in America are so corrupt and so beholden to special interests that donate to their campaigns that the voting public gets f***ed either way. For f***'s sake it was Bush vs Gore in 2000. If that's the best the two parties have then we are f***ing screwed as a country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 13, 2003 Author Share Posted November 13, 2003 I am a democratic socialist wanting something along the lines of what they do in Sweden with social programs etc. good luck and make sure you pack an extra set of ear muffs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 I am a democratic socialist wanting something along the lines of what they do in Sweden with social programs etc Sweeden's population please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 13, 2003 Author Share Posted November 13, 2003 Sweeden's population please? sweden's suicide rate please? or... snow bunny population please?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 8,873,052 But the ideas of their social programs can be implemented here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 8,873,052 Precisemundo, senior reformista! Not as easy as you make it out to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 There was no need to invade Iraq. As for what I'd do, I believe exactly what former State Department member William Blum has said on the subject: "If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the USA but now -- oddly enough -- a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims. There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of 330 billion dollars is equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated." The fact that this guy used to work in our State Department is truly frightening. Perhaps you could borrow his kneepads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated. Damn right. The fact that this guy used to work in our State Department is truly frightening. Perhaps you could borrow his kneepads. Not that I view the world through the burned American flag, mind you.... But could you teach me the neat I-am-the-immaculate-center-of-the-universe; f***-em-all philosophy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Not that I view the world through the burned American flag, mind you.... But could you teach me the neat I-am-the-immaculate-center-of-the-universe; f***-em-all philosophy? I don't understand your question. Please clarify? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Please clarify? I don't undersand your request. Clarify how? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniBob72 Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Damn right. Not that I view the world through the burned American flag, mind you.... But could you teach me the neat I-am-the-immaculate-center-of-the-universe; f***-em-all philosophy? I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "the neat I-am-the-immaculate-center-of-the-universe; f***-em-all philosophy". I guess I don't know who you mean and how someone is showing that philosophy. Not being a smartass, just confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 13, 2003 Author Share Posted November 13, 2003 Precisemundo, senior reformista! Not as easy as you make it out to be. truly a fiscal improbablity. I, however, find it odd that "compassionate conservatives" aren't in favor of social programs that help kids and women. piss off about it costing too much money, because I'm sure we could find a hole in the bloated defense budget....I mean, 20 dollar rolls of toilet paper or money for the kids? right. I'm all for destroying the current political parties. They are based off of outdated platforms and it's too the point that people don't want to vote because of the lack of representation. I think there needs to be a platform for people middle of the road: *increased gun control and safety requirements for all hand guns and rifles. Mandatory background checks and waiting periods. *privatization of social security allowing a mix of investment possibilities, so rich or poor have the ability to get the most out of their money AND guaranteeing it's future. *national health care tax, funding a national based health care provider system. *balancing taxes on businesses (primarily big business). A primary financial strain upon businesses are health plan premiums. If the Federal gov't is providing this service, that strain is no longer present and no longer an excuse. *balancing federal income taxes and doing away with the copious amounts of paperwork necessary for filing. (doing away completely with local taxes.) *Reasses abortion laws and update them to protect lives, born or yet to be born. (take that for what it's worth.) *Push for diplomacy and peace at every last cost. Losing American soldiers every day like this is not acceptable. *Social responsibility centers in urban areas. We need to invest in education, family unity, finiancial responsibility, etc. in areas that have little interest in them now. more of the sox4life platform to come. work is over...bye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 I'm really tiring quite quickly of debates with Nuke where he spouts drivel and I have correct him him with facts then the thread dies. I'm terribly sorry if I don't have the time to sit here and debate you all night but unlike you I have to , uhh, WORK FOR A LIVING. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 "If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the USA but now -- oddly enough -- a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims. There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of 330 billion dollars is equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated." As for political affiliation, I am a democratic socialist wanting something along the lines of what they do in Sweden with social programs etc. The two parties here in America are so corrupt and so beholden to special interests that donate to their campaigns that the voting public gets f***ed either way. For f***'s sake it was Bush vs Gore in 2000. If that's the best the two parties have then we are f***ing screwed as a country. Assassinated on the 4th day? I don't think he, or you since you agree with him, would last that long bright boy. As for your "platform" it must be really sad to know that mainstream political thought moves farther and farther away from your positions every day. Even at the height of the radical 60's your ideas would be considered extreme and nowadays even the mainstream of the Democratic party worries that it is "too liberal" to resonate a message with voters. So, make all the noise you want. Nobody's listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 the Joint War Plans Committee had made a report at Truman's request saying an estimate of casualties for an invasion of Japan would be: 40,000 killed 150,000 wounded, 3,500 missing So you can take your statement about millions of lives saved and blow it out your ass because the government didn't even believe that. "I thought our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives." - Dwight Eisenhower shortly after the Japanese surrender And analyst Hanson Baldwin states: "The enemy, in a military sense, was in a hopeless strategic position...Such then was the position when we wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Need we have done it? No one can of course be positive but the answer is almost certainly negative. Even War Secretary Henry Stinson declared openly that the nuke was a diplomatic weapon against the Russians not that they wanted to save American lives. Smedley Butler was actually alive during the war with the Nazis and did do a lot of speaking about how Hitler was evil but that the US was intervening with the wrong intentions [i.e. not peace, democracy etc. but rather economic influence. Yes, the Soviets invaded. It is a short sighted and ill brained foreign policy move to train and give weapons to a group that hates you as much as they hate the Russians. But then again, that's just me and common sense talking. And if we would like for the record, most historians and experts in Russian history actually claim that Russia was never actually communist, it was more of a corrupted dictatorship and not truly communist at all. I wasn't talking about millions of American lives I was talking about JAPANESE lives and you know that. Nice dodge asshole. We would have took a beating to be sure, but their country would have been totally flattened and their citizenry wiped out. Dear old Smedley. Smoking his pipe at home saying that we were fighting hitler for all the wrong reasons. Never mind the fact that he invaded and sacked all of Europe, never mind the fact that even as he was invading Russia he was already dreaming up ways to get at the U.S. nah, we weren't fighting Hitler to save the world from fascism, we were fighting it to get the war industry a few big contracts and make the rich richer. Oh wait, it must have slipped his senile mind, and yours, that the top tax rate in the USA during the war was 90%. Nice try. In the 1980's, Islamic fundamentalists were not the enemy, communisim was. Sure they hijacked a few planes and landed them somewhere else (not crashed them into buildings) and took a few hostages every now and then but they were not regarded as much of a threat. As much as it breaks your heart we were involved in a war against Soviet communisim, thankfully it never got to be a shooting war, and we helped them as a way of indirectly attacking our enemy same as they did by arming the NVA during Vietnam. Had they not violently attacked our country we would never have had to go to war with them like we have. You make it sound like they are storming Oak Street Beach with weapons stamped "Made in the USA". Dolt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Nuke, according to the historical document record, Hirohito was actually brokering a surrender but Truman wouldn't accept Hirohito's requests for a peace pre-nuking but if Truman did then the Japanese army wouldn't have lost millions. But nice dodge, asshole. Nuke, wars have always made the corporate class rich. They get lots of money. I'm not saying it's the only factor. But as the old addage says, money makes the world go round...and corporate interests are always liked by the White House because the corporate whores in the Oval Office are filled with their lobby money. Essentially it's like a hooker turning a trick for the John. 1980s, we actually did give the Islamic Moujhadeen weapons, training and money. And at the time we knew that Islamic fundamentalism was an enemy of the US [think Iran hostage situation] but we went through with the short sighted 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' mentality and it blew up in our face. Even Reagan's son says that a lot of the terrorism problems we are facing now are a direct result of his dad's short sighted policies. But who needs facts when we have knee-jerk anti-communist ranting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted November 15, 2003 Share Posted November 15, 2003 Nuke, according to the historical document record, Hirohito was actually brokering a surrender but Truman wouldn't accept Hirohito's requests for a peace pre-nuking but if Truman did then the Japanese army wouldn't have lost millions. But nice dodge, asshole. Nuke, wars have always made the corporate class rich. They get lots of money. I'm not saying it's the only factor. But as the old addage says, money makes the world go round...and corporate interests are always liked by the White House because the corporate whores in the Oval Office are filled with their lobby money. Essentially it's like a hooker turning a trick for the John. 1980s, we actually did give the Islamic Moujhadeen weapons, training and money. And at the time we knew that Islamic fundamentalism was an enemy of the US [think Iran hostage situation] but we went through with the short sighted 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' mentality and it blew up in our face. Even Reagan's son says that a lot of the terrorism problems we are facing now are a direct result of his dad's short sighted policies. But who needs facts when we have knee-jerk anti-communist ranting? Hirohito may have been their emporer and yeah he did want to throw in the towel. However, Tojo was in charge of the military and wouldn't hear of it. He was all about going out "with honor" E.G. die fighting or by suicide, and was totally prepared to take the rest of the country with him if necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.