Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/22/2002 3:37:30 PM EDT
Sorry for the long subject line, but it appears that some people still don't grasp that we are at WAR. I was talking to my congressmans staff the other day, and I asked a fairly simple question regarding his support(or lack thereof) for Pres Bush on Iraq. When I got the usual answer, (no clarity) I asked simply "Ok which city has to be destroyed for you to get it?" The response to any question on this topic always comes back to "proof". Ok, so which city is your congresscritter willing to give to the flame for PROOF? I think good ole Ciro Rodriguez would probably vote for Houston. You know home of Enron, voted for Bush, not likely to vote for Sanchez etc. I know the question is highly inflammatory, but many people in our goverment gave 3,000 Americans up as "proof", and some people still don't get it. We still look at security through a PC colored lens, will not admit how dangerous our previous President was and is to this country, and basically do not grasp that people that think nothing of killing 3,000 civilians with airliners would rejoice at being handed some form of WMD. I am not a blind follower, I know some of what our current administration is doing is not even close to constitutional, but that is the unfortunate consequence of so many Americans being too wrapped up in the "whats in it for me" mentality of the 90's. Now we have to fight a much harder fight than if we had paid attention when the fight was easy. Think about your city, are YOU a sacrificial lamb for some spineless politico?
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 3:59:26 PM EDT
Well, if I have to choose... I'd go with Berkeley, CA.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:15:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/22/2002 4:29:53 PM EDT by KEA]
Originally Posted By carbonblack: I am not a blind follower, I know some of what our current administration is doing is not even close to constitutional, but that is the unfortunate consequence of so many Americans being too wrapped up in the "whats in it for me" mentality of the 90's.
View Quote
It's more like the consequences of failing to educate successive generations about the price that has to be paid for freedom. It's the consequences of letting our so called representatives commit treason - you know the ones who've never read the Constitution to know what they're supposed to be defending or protecting. Right now, there's only one member of Congress that's willing to tell the truth and he, carbonblack, is from your state. A couple of hundred Ron Pauls in Congress would turn things around. But since that's not going to happen, I guess we'll have to catch him at home and sacrifice D.C.!
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:29:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By carbonblack: Sorry for the long subject line, but it appears that some people still don't grasp that we are at WAR.
View Quote
Really? I hadn't seen a declaration of war by Congress, so we can't be at War.
I was talking to my congressmans staff the other day, and I asked a fairly simple question regarding his support(or lack thereof) for Pres Bush on Iraq. When I got the usual answer, (no clarity) I asked simply "Ok which city has to be destroyed for you to get it?" The response to any question on this topic always comes back to "proof". Ok, so which city is your congresscritter willing to give to the flame for PROOF?
View Quote
You assume Iraq has WMD, and has the capability to strike America. Both very bad assumptions. The reason people ask for proof is because we can't make decisions that will result in a loss of a lot of lives, both American and Iraqi. It is also because those who want war with Iraq are the ones making the accusations, hence the burden of proof is on them.
I know the question is highly inflammatory, but many people in our goverment gave 3,000 Americans up as "proof", and some people still don't get it.
View Quote
If I understood this statement correctly, then Iraq had NO involvement in 9/11, so using them as proof to invade Iraq is in error.
We still look at security through a PC colored lens, will not admit how dangerous our previous President was and is to this country, and basically do not grasp that people that think nothing of killing 3,000 civilians with airliners would rejoice at being handed some form of WMD.
View Quote
I will agree we still have taken almost no steps to stop further 9/11s. No profiling, no armed pilots, federalized airport security, and open borders to name a few problems. I will also admit that those who planned the 9/11 attacks would probably love to to get a WMD. BUT, the will not get it from Saddam. There are a few reasons for this. 1) Saddam does not like Al-qaeda, and vice versa. Saddam is a secular leader, and does not like fanatical islamists. Al-qaeda would like to see Saddam go as much as you. There also is evidence that Al-qaeda has had contact with the Kurds in the North of Iraq, who are Saddams enemies, and also our likely allies in the war against Iraq. This makes a war against Iraq in the name of eliminating terror Orweillian. 2) Saddam's primary purpose is to maintain power. Any attack on the US, either directly by his forces, or through surrogates using WMD would be insane, and would result in his immediate destruction. He is not stupid. He know he cannot hope to defeat the US, even with WMD, so there is no reason to try.
I am not a blind follower, I know some of what our current administration is doing is not even close to constitutional, but that is the unfortunate consequence of so many Americans being too wrapped up in the "whats in it for me" mentality of the 90's. Now we have to fight a much harder fight than if we had paid attention when the fight was easy. Think about your city, are YOU a sacrificial lamb for some spineless politico?
View Quote
I do not want my city to be "a sacrificial lamb for some spineless politico," which is EXACTLY why I oppose the planned war against Iraq. I fear it may led to more attacks against America.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:40:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:44:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By KEA: It's more like the consequences of failing to educate successive generations about the price that has to be paid for freedom.
View Quote
That's it, and needed to be repeated. Freedom has such a high cost, and so few seem to realize it.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:51:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/22/2002 4:52:27 PM EDT by zonan]
Originally Posted By libertyof76: Really? I hadn't seen a declaration of war by Congress, so we can't be at War.
View Quote
Come on, are you from academia by any chance? Still in high school? Sure, congress should have declared war, but when someone is trying to annihilate you, you are at war whether you like it or not (and whether you officially say so or not).
If I understood this statement correctly, then Iraq had NO involvement in 9/11, so using them as proof to invade Iraq is in error.
View Quote
And completely needless. Iraq has continually broken its agreements with the world made after the gulf war. That is all that is needed for us to take him out.
He know he cannot hope to defeat the US, even with WMD, so there is no reason to try.
View Quote
Care to bet a few hundred thousand people on that? You're assuming rationality, which is always a dangerous thing when dealing with muslims. Ask the kurds how rational he is...oh wait, they were gassed.
I do not want my city to be "a sacrificial lamb for some spineless politico," which is EXACTLY why I oppose the planned war against Iraq. I fear it may led to more attacks against America.
View Quote
WAKE UP. The attacks have already happened, do you think they are going to stop if we do nothing? "Better not piss off the muslims, they might attack us." OOOOPS. It's a little late for that. Now it is us or them. I intend it to be us, despite the efforts of people like you.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:53:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gunbert: Well, if I have to choose... I'd go with Berkeley, CA.
View Quote
i'd rather it be madison, wi howbout we share, instead of one big nuke in berkeley, we get two small ones, one at the university in berkeley, and one at the university in madison
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:56:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gunbert: Well, if I have to choose... I'd go with Berkeley, CA.
View Quote
ditto, but its not my state.....
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:58:27 PM EDT
The assholes will hit ANY target they can ! I'd vote for NYC again as that is where the big talking heads of the media are based ! They will be able to look out their office windows to contemplate the devastation as they did after 9/11 . You would think that the fucking pukes would learn ! [usa]
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 4:59:57 PM EDT
It's kind of ironic that cities where there are the most anti-war people (New York, San Francisco) are the most likely targets for WMD's because of their population densities. Terrorists aint going to hit places like Texas, Wyoming, or North Dakota.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 5:40:25 PM EDT
How bout we just nuke the one right next door to idiotof76 so he better understands the dynamic that we are currently faced with as a nation. Stop trying to make excuses. Stop trying to counter the burden of evidence that we all too well understand. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. Your tactical approach to any point of evidence offered by anyone on this board is to cite either an obscure piece of information or to draw from your limited playbook of shallow libertarian dribble and to skew it so that it takes on the form, and not the substance of a credible counterpoint in a given arguement. The final point that you offer up in your so-called post is telling: You oppose war because it could lead to more attacks. Our enemies don't give a rat's ass if we declare war or not. They will attack either way. The have already declared war on us through both word and deed. They want to destroy you, me, us and our nation. Frances, I can call you frances, can't I-If you are too blinded by your paranoia to see it, may I suggest that you take your sorry self to ground zero and soak it all in. Once you are good and mad about how big of an idiot you have been and the fact that 3k of your fellow Americans have assumed room temperature because fundamental islamisists want to destroy America, go see an USMC/USA recruiter. Enlist. Go into combat arms. Go to a foregin land or even a combat zone and get a feel for how our enemies and lukewarm allies feel about the mention of America. See what they want to do to us. Let it all soak in. Then come back when you are a big boy and tell us all how wrong you were. It pains me, and I am sure others, to think that there are people like you who call themselves Americans. You make me sick.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 9:41:13 PM EDT
KEA, you hit it right on the head. Most sheeple do not understand how we have our freedoms. The sacrifice that has been made by our armed forces and by so many others don't mean jack. I find it hilarious to hear people complain about the state of the economy after 9/11. Jeez, get a clue, we took a HARD hit. Its a miracle and a tribute to the American worker and businesses that our economy did not suffer more. Yet, we still have ignorants that do not even attempt to figure it out. It has to fixed and fast because "I" am hurting. Never mind that the feet of clay made during the Clinton "character don't count", "it's the economy stupid" years are going to take some time to shore up. If you saw a picture of one of the Normandy military cementeries during 9/11/02, I could almost hear the question "what have you done to honor our sacrifice?". Pestering the traitors in congress right now seems a better answer than hanging them the next time "proof" is given to us!!!
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 9:51:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By sniper1az: I'd vote for NYC again as that is where the big talking heads of the media are based ! [usa]
View Quote
Aw man!! [size=5][b]DC[/b][/size=5] Then we can start over with the same Constitution and expel all those commie/liberal ones that don't know what the meaning of the word IS is!
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 10:16:24 PM EDT
I was hoping they would sacrifice Berkley CA!
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 10:37:25 PM EDT
Everybody here would vote Berkeley including me but it ain't gonna happen cause they're not worthy of even being a target. It's gonna be NYC or DC.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 10:49:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gunbert: Well, if I have to choose... I'd go with Berkeley, CA.
View Quote
If it was something really low yeild,OK, but still a little close for comfort. Plus my favorite sandwich shop is there. Now SF they could wipe off the face of the earth, especially if they hit SF state. Or the Sacramento when they are in session. So many possibilities.
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 10:55:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Ratters:
Originally Posted By Gunbert: Well, if I have to choose... I'd go with Berkeley, CA.
View Quote
If it was something really low yeild,OK, but still a little close for comfort. Plus my favorite sandwich shop is there. Now SF they could wipe off the face of the earth, especially if they hit SF state. Or the Sacramento when they are in session. So many possibilities.
View Quote
Remember that crazed truck driver who drove the rig into the capital? LOL! Ban semi's!
Link Posted: 9/22/2002 11:22:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By carbonblack: some people still don't grasp that we are at WAR
View Quote
I back my President in any and all actions in this war. I ask only for success. Life and death is as serious as it gets and our enemies feel we are weak and can be killed with impunity. We must change the thinking of those enemies who we allow to live, or we will surely die. carbonblack: Merely a suggestion, break up your posts to make them more readable. Also, the amount of words likely read is an inverse function of the length of the post. Keep it short and simple and more people will read your posts. Merely a suggestion.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 5:55:08 AM EDT
If I had a choice for a region of the country to sacrifice, I'd ask for a very high-yield weapon to be detonated somewhere on the San Andreas fault, so that all of western Kali would slip into the ocean. LA, SF, Berzerkly, SD, Hollywood... The only sad thing I see is losing the SEAL base at Coronado. Oh, well. They'd be able to swim to Hawaii anyway...
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:00:14 AM EDT
BTW, I am in total agreement that war should only be declared by Congress. Thus speaketh the Constitution. HOWEVER, if a clear and present danger exists to the United States, and/or an attack is imminent, and the Congress is too fucking stupid or wrapped up in its own re-election self-worth, then it is the President's duty and responsibility, as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, to launch whatever military action he sees fit to defend the nation. If his decision is later found to be wanting, he can always be impeached and even indicted. Let's face it, do YOU want to leave the immediate decisions as to whether to defend ourselves to the likes of Daschle, who is more interested in keeping his ass in the Senate Majority Leader's office than in keeping Washington DC on the map? Not me. I said the same thing under Clinton, BTW. It's just that he was too much of a fucking coward to do good with the power that had been (nauseatingly) entrusted to him.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:04:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2002 6:07:30 AM EDT by Balzac72]
Anyplace in CA, just not NY again. The rest of the country (especially CA) didn't fully comprehend 9/11, hopefully it wouldn't be us again, then having to try and convince the rest of the liberal hippy parts of the country that we need a preemptive strike. Libertyof76, would you prefer they hit us first before we act? If you hadn't noticed, you and I are only citizens and not privileged to classified docs. If England jumped in IMMEDIATELY after we disclosed out classified intelligence, do you think that maybe that we have credible information about an eminent attack? Or are you waiting for the Pentagon to fax you proof so you can make up your mind? [rolleyes] Oh yeah, if you honestly believe that doing nothing will protect us, get a refund on your college tuition. Can we say 9/11? Don't write them off as crazy muslim fanatics, they aren't a minority, its a matter of time before it happens again, whether we attack or not.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 7:22:08 AM EDT
Congress made a declaration of war on terrorism in the days following Sept. 11th. I don't know if it was a "resolution of force" or a "declaration of war", but it seems that the only people that the significance is lost on are strange, psycho liberals and fools like libertyof76 and his merry band of ostriches.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 7:27:25 AM EDT
I'm willing to sacrifice Harlem but only when Clinton is in his office. (Be better to stealthily remove all other inhabitants.)
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 7:45:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2002 7:46:45 AM EDT by Atencio]
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Libertyof76, would you prefer they hit us first before we act? If you hadn't noticed, you and I are only citizens and not privileged to classified docs. If England jumped in IMMEDIATELY after we disclosed out classified intelligence, do you think that maybe that we have credible information about an eminent attack?
View Quote
I think England would have backed us up no matter what info or lack of we had.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:01:20 AM EDT
Hmmm. I'm thinking East Coast because of the radiation cloud. New Yorks been done. Boston? Lots of liberals there, as well as an annoying accent. That place where the Kennedy's have their summer home? Norfolk? Some of the ugliest topless dancers on the planet. Philly, or maybe the whole state of Pennsylvania? Same reason as Boston, plus it has the added appeal of no one even noticing. As long as they leave Charleston and Savannah alone, those were fun towns.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:12:26 AM EDT
It wont be a city full of liberal types..or the homes of the morally compromised.. Latest batch of local terrs were registered Democraps..so San Francisco is out... Probably the city who overwhelmingly voted for GW Bush...or a strategic one in terms of the economy or intelligence (I guess that rules out DC)
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:29:37 AM EDT
I'd have to say 1_153_370_371_407's hometown, as long as its down wind. If you're going to pick the town where I live, I'm going to pick yours.[:D]
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:56:40 AM EDT
Why Berkley? If you set off a full size nuke in downtown San Francisco, the fallout radius will cover Berkley, Oakland, and Sacramento, thereby eliminating Gray Davis, Jerry Brown, Willie Brown, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and the entire state legislature. One can only dream.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 9:59:38 AM EDT
San Francisco, Berkeley, Santa Cruz...Boston, New York. The more times Islamic wingnuts attack predominantly liberal cities..the more conservative surviving liberals become.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 10:38:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TapperMan: I'd have to say 1_153_370_371_407's hometown, as long as its down wind. If you're going to pick the town where I live, I'm going to pick yours.[:D]
View Quote
Amen. Besides 1_153, 9 of the 12 Wisconsin calender girls live in Madison. Have you seen that calander??????? I cannot believe you'd consider such a waste, even in jest. Just for that, I'm sending a invatation in your name to Paul Soglin, Jim Doyle and Tammy Baldwin for a barbaque at your place next weekend.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 11:19:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod: If I had a choice for a region of the country to sacrifice, I'd ask for a very high-yield weapon to be detonated somewhere on the San Andreas fault, so that all of western Kali would slip into the ocean. LA, SF, Berzerkly, SD, Hollywood... The only sad thing I see is losing the SEAL base at Coronado. Oh, well. They'd be able to swim to Hawaii anyway...
View Quote
Ill take this opportunity to be a humanitarian.. As much as I would like Kali to fall off the face of the earth.. I have to think of the Strippers.. I've been to places across my great nation that are in desperate need of talented lap dancers.. So if we can.. can we save the strippers? [:)] [beer]
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 11:30:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cluster: ... can we save the strippers? [:)] [beer]
View Quote
It's for the children!
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 11:53:07 AM EDT
Berkeley is well east of the San Andreas fault, you idiot.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 3:44:52 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 3:50:06 PM EDT
Choose a US City for destruction. What a sickening topic You guys have been watching too many Twilight Zone reruns!
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 5:42:33 PM EDT
Originally Posted By zonan: Come on, are you from academia by any chance? Still in high school? Sure, congress should have declared war, but when someone is trying to annihilate you, you are at war whether you like it or not (and whether you officially say so or not).
View Quote
I could understand if we were under constant attack, and a threat was immanent, but that is not the case here. Congress has had a YEAR to declare war. They have been in session as in normal times. My current education is irrelevant, BTW. Only the facts and logic at hand.
And completely needless. Iraq has continually broken its agreements with the world made after the gulf war. That is all that is needed for us to take him out.
View Quote
Who cares what agreements it has made. That is between the rest of the world and Iraq, not America. The ONLY valid reason to declare war on Iraq is if they pose an immediate threat to us or they have attacked us. Neither case has been satisfied.
Care to bet a few hundred thousand people on that? You're assuming rationality, which is always a dangerous thing when dealing with muslims. Ask the kurds how rational he is...oh wait, they were gassed.
View Quote
In case you hadn't read my post: Saddam IS NOT A MUSLIM!!!! He is a secular leader, and has no fondness for muslims, especially the fanatical kind. You also might want to ask the Kurds why the are harboring Al-Qaeda members. As for the gassing of the Kurds: That was NOT done by Saddam, it was done by Iran.
WAKE UP. The attacks have already happened, do you think they are going to stop if we do nothing? "Better not piss off the muslims, they might attack us." OOOOPS. It's a little late for that. Now it is us or them. I intend it to be us, despite the efforts of people like you.
View Quote
Again, what does this have to do with Iraq? They have not attacked us. As for doing nothing, I have suggested nothing of the sort. You confuse disagreeing with the current methods being used to stop terrorism with not wanting to stop terrorism.
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Libertyof76, would you prefer they hit us first before we act?
View Quote
Of course not. But there is absolutely no evidence that Iraq will hit us first.
If you hadn't noticed, you and I are only citizens and not privileged to classified docs.
View Quote
Irrelevant.
If England jumped in IMMEDIATELY after we disclosed out classified intelligence, do you think that maybe that we have credible information about an eminent attack?
View Quote
Maybe we do. That information needs to be public however.
Oh yeah, if you honestly believe that doing nothing will protect us, get a refund on your college tuition. Can we say 9/11? Don't write them off as crazy muslim fanatics, they aren't a minority, its a matter of time before it happens again, whether we attack or not.
View Quote
In case you hadn't read my post, I'll say it again: Iraq is a secular country, one which does not like fanatical muslims. They will not support them and will crack down on them. Iraq is not a threat to America. As for 9/11, we did do something: poke our imperial stick into bee hives. Is it any wonder we got stung?
Originally Posted By Torf: Congress made a declaration of war on terrorism in the days following Sept. 11th.
View Quote
That was not a declaration of war. It only authorized the president to go after terrorism. It was a resolution of dubious constitutionality.
I don't know if it was a "resolution of force" or a "declaration of war", but it seems that the only people that the significance is lost on are strange, psycho liberals and fools like libertyof76 and his merry band of ostriches.
View Quote
So anybody that believes in the Constitution is a "merry band of ostriches." And people wonder why the 2nd is violated so much.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:19:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By libertyof76:
Originally Posted By zonan: Come on, are you from academia by any chance? Still in high school? Sure, congress should have declared war, but when someone is trying to annihilate you, you are at war whether you like it or not (and whether you officially say so or not).
View Quote
I could understand if we were under constant attack, and a threat was immanent, but that is not the case here. Congress has had a YEAR to declare war. They have been in session as in normal times.
View Quote
They haven't because of cowardly thinking like yours and partisan politics, which seem more important to the Dems than outside aggressors threatening our country.
My current education is irrelevant, BTW. Only the facts and logic at hand.
View Quote
Oh, your education, or lack of it, is very relevant. Based on your many cowardly, DU type posts, you are the last person that should mention facts and logic. What facts do you have on hand that the rest of us don't to indicate that Iraq is not a threat?
And completely needless. Iraq has continually broken its agreements with the world made after the gulf war. That is all that is needed for us to take him out.
View Quote
Who cares what agreements it has made. That is between the rest of the world and Iraq, not America. The ONLY valid reason to declare war on Iraq is if they pose an immediate threat to us or they have attacked us. Neither case has been satisfied.
View Quote
Who cares? Between the rest of the world and Iraq? What absolute nonsense and cowardice. Again, how do YOU know that they neither were involved in 9/11 nor represent a threat to us? You constantly spout off the cowardly DU crap, but have yet to EVER answer many requests for the info that you are privy to that proves your point and that the rest of us don't have access to.
Care to bet a few hundred thousand people on that? You're assuming rationality, which is always a dangerous thing when dealing with muslims. Ask the kurds how rational he is...oh wait, they were gassed.
View Quote
In case you hadn't read my post: Saddam IS NOT A MUSLIM!!!! He is a secular leader, and has no fondness for muslims, especially the fanatical kind.
View Quote
It doesn't matter is he is Muslim, Christian, Jew, or Buddhist! He is irrational from the word go. You cannot assume that he will be deterred in the way that the old Soviet Union was by the threat of annihilation. He is not. Look back at the original Gulf War. He got his ass kicked but still claimed victory. Not a rational act.
You also might want to ask the Kurds why the are harboring Al-Qaeda members. As for the gassing of the Kurds: That was NOT done by Saddam, it was done by Iran.
View Quote
You stepped in it right there! The Kurds were gassed by Saddam and only his apologists, his admirers, and cowards would say otherwise. As for the Kurds sheltering Al-Qaeda members, where is your proof? For that matter, how about a link to real proof to the absolutely ludicrous statement of yours that Iran gassed the Kurds.
WAKE UP. The attacks have already happened, do you think they are going to stop if we do nothing? "Better not piss off the muslims, they might attack us." OOOOPS. It's a little late for that. Now it is us or them. I intend it to be us, despite the efforts of people like you.
View Quote
Again, what does this have to do with Iraq? They have not attacked us. As for doing nothing, I have suggested nothing of the sort. You confuse disagreeing with the current methods being used to stop terrorism with not wanting to stop terrorism.
View Quote
Again, how do you know that Iraq was not involved? You keep saying this. Again, what do you know that the rest of us don't know? Proof, please.
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Libertyof76, would you prefer they hit us first before we act?
View Quote
Of course not. But there is absolutely no evidence that Iraq will hit us first.
View Quote
Again, how do you know?
If you hadn't noticed, you and I are only citizens and not privileged to classified docs.
View Quote
Irrelevant.
View Quote
No, not irrelavant. Maybe irrelevant to cowards and DU members.
If England jumped in IMMEDIATELY after we disclosed out classified intelligence, do you think that maybe that we have credible information about an eminent attack?
View Quote
Maybe we do. That information needs to be public however.
View Quote
No, it does not need to be made public. Only cowards, DU members, and liberals think that all intelligence data needs to be made public.
Oh yeah, if you honestly believe that doing nothing will protect us, get a refund on your college tuition. Can we say 9/11? Don't write them off as crazy muslim fanatics, they aren't a minority, its a matter of time before it happens again, whether we attack or not.
View Quote
In case you hadn't read my post, I'll say it again: Iraq is a secular country, one which does not like fanatical muslims. They will not support them and will crack down on them. Iraq is not a threat to America.
View Quote
I'll say this AGAIN. HOW DO YOU KNOW? Where is your proof? What info are you privy to that the rest of us aren't. ANSWER THIS DAMN QUESTION!
As for 9/11, we did do something: poke our imperial stick into bee hives. Is it any wonder we got stung?
View Quote
Spoken like a true DU coward.
Originally Posted By Torf: Congress made a declaration of war on terrorism in the days following Sept. 11th.
View Quote
That was not a declaration of war. It only authorized the president to go after terrorism. It was a resolution of dubious constitutionality.
View Quote
Oh, please. How is it Constitutionally dubious? Because you and other cowards say so?
I don't know if it was a "resolution of force" or a "declaration of war", but it seems that the only people that the significance is lost on are strange, psycho liberals and fools like libertyof76 and his merry band of ostriches.
View Quote
So anybody that believes in the Constitution is a "merry band of ostriches." And people wonder why the 2nd is violated so much.
View Quote
Don't lay this off on 'believes in the Constitution' and the '2nd is violated' crap. You don't have a clue. What it really amounts to is that you are of age to serve and your statements only serve to cover your cowardice and hatred of your country. All anyone has to do is search for your comments to see your true colors.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:20:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By libertyof76:
Originally Posted By zonan: Come on, are you from academia by any chance? Still in high school? Sure, congress should have declared war, but when someone is trying to annihilate you, you are at war whether you like it or not (and whether you officially say so or not).
View Quote
I could understand if we were under constant attack, and a threat was immanent, but that is not the case here. Congress has had a YEAR to declare war. They have been in session as in normal times.
View Quote
They haven't because of cowardly thinking like yours and partisan politics, which seem more important to the Dems than outside aggressors threatening our country.
My current education is irrelevant, BTW. Only the facts and logic at hand.
View Quote
Oh, your education, or lack of it, is very relevant. Based on your many cowardly, DU type posts, you are the last person that should mention facts and logic. What facts do you have on hand that the rest of us don't to indicate that Iraq is not a threat?
And completely needless. Iraq has continually broken its agreements with the world made after the gulf war. That is all that is needed for us to take him out.
View Quote
Who cares what agreements it has made. That is between the rest of the world and Iraq, not America. The ONLY valid reason to declare war on Iraq is if they pose an immediate threat to us or they have attacked us. Neither case has been satisfied.
View Quote
Who cares? Between the rest of the world and Iraq? What absolute nonsense and cowardice. Again, how do YOU know that they neither were involved in 9/11 nor represent a threat to us? You constantly spout off the cowardly DU crap, but have yet to EVER answer many requests for the info that you are privy to that proves your point and that the rest of us don't have access to.
Care to bet a few hundred thousand people on that? You're assuming rationality, which is always a dangerous thing when dealing with muslims. Ask the kurds how rational he is...oh wait, they were gassed.
View Quote
In case you hadn't read my post: Saddam IS NOT A MUSLIM!!!! He is a secular leader, and has no fondness for muslims, especially the fanatical kind.
View Quote
It doesn't matter is he is Muslim, Christian, Jew, or Buddhist! He is irrational from the word go. You cannot assume that he will be deterred in the way that the old Soviet Union was by the threat of annihilation. He is not. Look back at the original Gulf War. He got his ass kicked but still claimed victory. Not a rational act.
You also might want to ask the Kurds why the are harboring Al-Qaeda members. As for the gassing of the Kurds: That was NOT done by Saddam, it was done by Iran.
View Quote
You stepped in it right there! The Kurds were gassed by Saddam and only his apologists, his admirers, and cowards would say otherwise. As for the Kurds sheltering Al-Qaeda members, where is your proof? For that matter, how about a link to real proof to the absolutely ludicrous statement of yours that Iran gassed the Kurds.
WAKE UP. The attacks have already happened, do you think they are going to stop if we do nothing? "Better not piss off the muslims, they might attack us." OOOOPS. It's a little late for that. Now it is us or them. I intend it to be us, despite the efforts of people like you.
View Quote
Again, what does this have to do with Iraq? They have not attacked us. As for doing nothing, I have suggested nothing of the sort. You confuse disagreeing with the current methods being used to stop terrorism with not wanting to stop terrorism.
View Quote
Again, how do you know that Iraq was not involved? You keep saying this. Again, what do you know that the rest of us don't know? Proof, please.
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Libertyof76, would you prefer they hit us first before we act?
View Quote
Of course not. But there is absolutely no evidence that Iraq will hit us first.
View Quote
Again, how do you know?
If you hadn't noticed, you and I are only citizens and not privileged to classified docs.
View Quote
Irrelevant.
View Quote
No, not irrelavant. Maybe irrelevant to cowards and DU members.
If England jumped in IMMEDIATELY after we disclosed out classified intelligence, do you think that maybe that we have credible information about an eminent attack?
View Quote
Maybe we do. That information needs to be public however.
View Quote
No, it does not need to be made public. Only cowards, DU members, and liberals think that all intelligence data needs to be made public.
Oh yeah, if you honestly believe that doing nothing will protect us, get a refund on your college tuition. Can we say 9/11? Don't write them off as crazy muslim fanatics, they aren't a minority, its a matter of time before it happens again, whether we attack or not.
View Quote
In case you hadn't read my post, I'll say it again: Iraq is a secular country, one which does not like fanatical muslims. They will not support them and will crack down on them. Iraq is not a threat to America.
View Quote
I'll say this AGAIN. HOW DO YOU KNOW? Where is your proof? What info are you privy to that the rest of us aren't. ANSWER THIS DAMN QUESTION!
As for 9/11, we did do something: poke our imperial stick into bee hives. Is it any wonder we got stung?
View Quote
Spoken like a true DU coward.
Originally Posted By Torf: Congress made a declaration of war on terrorism in the days following Sept. 11th.
View Quote
That was not a declaration of war. It only authorized the president to go after terrorism. It was a resolution of dubious constitutionality.
View Quote
Oh, please. How is it Constitutionally dubious? Because you and other cowards say so?
I don't know if it was a "resolution of force" or a "declaration of war", but it seems that the only people that the significance is lost on are strange, psycho liberals and fools like libertyof76 and his merry band of ostriches.
View Quote
So anybody that believes in the Constitution is a "merry band of ostriches." And people wonder why the 2nd is violated so much.
View Quote
Don't lay this off on 'believes in the Constitution' and the '2nd is violated' crap. You don't have a clue. What it really amounts to is that you are of age to serve and your statements only serve to cover your cowardice and hatred of your country. All anyone has to do is search for your comments to see your true colors. As for your 'imperialist' remarks, the US never has been about empire building. Please show us the great empire we have built. This imperialist crap is straight from DU.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:23:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gunbert: Well, if I have to choose... I'd go with Berkeley, CA.
View Quote
I second that!
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:26:48 PM EDT
I say we play stupid until they take out New York AND DC. Then we can take care of Berkeley ourselves.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:31:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By raven: It's kind of ironic that cities where there are the most anti-war people (New York, San Francisco) are the most likely targets for WMD's because of their population densities. Terrorists aint going to hit places like Texas, Wyoming, or North Dakota.
View Quote
Dude, we have lots of guns and lots of rednecks up here!
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:40:40 PM EDT
Let me guess, you are a Republican neoconservative, right? And you have bought into 100% of the bullshit propaganda that is being spoon fed to us by every media outlet in the country? You are also probably the product of a public education system that inspires people to be the very best statists they can be and convinces them that it is a requirment to vote and die for one's country. Finally, you are between the ages of 15 and 20 years. Does this describe you? Look, the chances of the tiny, backwards nation of Iraq doing anything devastating to the US are nil. The invasion of Iraq is about keeping people's minds off the fact that our over-regulated quasi-socialist system is on the verge of a total collapse. It is also a strategic move for the benefit of Israel, a country that has far too much influence upon US politics because the big, monied interests here in the US are Zionists. Do not read anti-semitism into my remarks, I'm merely trying to describe the unbalanced influence that wealthy people of that religion have on US foreign policy and access to our nation's leadership. Now, mix in a few warmongers who have never seen war first-hand--Wolfowitz, being chief among them, and you have a formula for disaster. We stupid Americans are in for one hell of a ride. Israel is keeping itself alive at our expense. We are not at war. The only people who have told you that are lying scumbags who would like you to believe that so they can take away more of your rights in the name of saving you. Don't be afraid to tell them to fuck off.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 7:03:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By trickshot: Let me guess, you are a Republican neoconservative, right? And you have bought into 100% of the bullshit propaganda that is being spoon fed to us by every media outlet in the country? You are also probably the product of a public education system that inspires people to be the very best statists they can be and convinces them that it is a requirment to vote and die for one's country. Finally, you are between the ages of 15 and 20 years. Does this describe you? Look, the chances of the tiny, backwards nation of Iraq doing anything devastating to the US are nil. The invasion of Iraq is about keeping people's minds off the fact that our over-regulated quasi-socialist system is on the verge of a total collapse. It is also a strategic move for the benefit of Israel, a country that has far too much influence upon US politics because the big, monied interests here in the US are Zionists. Do not read anti-semitism into my remarks, I'm merely trying to describe the unbalanced influence that wealthy people of that religion have on US foreign policy and access to our nation's leadership. Now, mix in a few warmongers who have never seen war first-hand--Wolfowitz, being chief among them, and you have a formula for disaster. We stupid Americans are in for one hell of a ride. Israel is keeping itself alive at our expense. We are not at war. The only people who have told you that are lying scumbags who would like you to believe that so they can take away more of your rights in the name of saving you. Don't be afraid to tell them to fuck off.
View Quote
Another DU coward heard from. Typical of your anti-American posts, dickshot.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:08:35 PM EDT
As a Reformed and Relocated X-CA resident... I'll give the blanket statement - "The Bay Area" - Its a target rich enviroment, and while "Close" only counts with handgrenades and nukes, these Terrorists types have nothing better to do than attempt to plan our demise. I hate to say this, but I must ask, Did NYC learn there lesson... or do they need to be up for round 3?
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:23:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:40:38 PM EDT
D.C., but only if we can evacuate the Smithsonian colletcions first. (Especially the Air&Space Museum) Let's try not to damage SoCal too much. My family's there. The noise comes from Berkely, but the cash comes from just a bit further northwest. Drop the hammer on Marin County, Johnny Lindh's ol' stomping grounds...
Link Posted: 9/28/2002 10:22:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LARRYG:
Originally Posted By libertyof76: My current education is irrelevant, BTW. Only the facts and logic at hand.
View Quote
Oh, your education, or lack of it, is very relevant. Based on your many cowardly, DU type posts, you are the last person that should mention facts and logic. What facts do you have on hand that the rest of us don't to indicate that Iraq is not a threat?
View Quote
What facts do you have that Iraq IS a threat? YOU are the one making the assertion that Iraq is a threat, so where is the proof?
Who cares what agreements it has made. That is between the rest of the world and Iraq, not America. The ONLY valid reason to declare war on Iraq is if they pose an immediate threat to us or they have attacked us. Neither case has been satisfied.
View Quote
Who cares? Between the rest of the world and Iraq? What absolute nonsense and cowardice. Again, how do YOU know that they neither were involved in 9/11 nor represent a threat to us?
View Quote
BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROOF!!! What evidence do YOU have they there were involved in 9/11. The burden of proof is on YOU, because if it was on me, I would have to prove a negative, which is impossible.
You constantly spout off the cowardly DU crap, but have yet to EVER answer many requests for the info that you are privy to that proves your point and that the rest of us don't have access to.
View Quote
I have answered this question MANY, MANY times, yet you STILL say I haven't answered it.
In case you hadn't read my post: Saddam IS NOT A MUSLIM!!!! He is a secular leader, and has no fondness for muslims, especially the fanatical kind.
View Quote
It doesn't matter is he is Muslim, Christian, Jew, or Buddhist!
View Quote
Yes it doesn. Because he doesn't like Muslims, it certain makes a difference, because then he would not help a group whose intent it is to make secular governments fall and muslim theocracy's take their place.
He is irrational from the word go. You cannot assume that he will be deterred in the way that the old Soviet Union was by the threat of annihilation. He is not. Look back at the original Gulf War. He got his ass kicked but still claimed victory. Not a rational act.
View Quote
He is rational when it comes to surviving.
You also might want to ask the Kurds why the are harboring Al-Qaeda members. As for the gassing of the Kurds: That was NOT done by Saddam, it was done by Iran.
View Quote
You stepped in it right there! The Kurds were gassed by Saddam and only his apologists, his admirers, and cowards would say otherwise.
View Quote
So the US Army War College is included in that statement? Because they did an extensive investigation soon after the alleged even and they found it to be false.
As for the Kurds sheltering Al-Qaeda members, where is your proof?
View Quote
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A8987-2002Aug28¬Found=true[/url] The Deputy Sec of State says that Al-qaeda is in Kurdish controlled areas. Not necessary being supported by the Kurds, but wouldn't it make sense for them to NOT let them in their terrority?
For that matter, how about a link to real proof to the absolutely ludicrous statement of yours that Iran gassed the Kurds.
View Quote
For starters, look here: [url]http://polyconomics.com/showarticle.asp?articleid=1967[/url]
Again, how do you know that Iraq was not involved? You keep saying this. Again, what do you know that the rest of us don't know? Proof, please.
View Quote
Again, the burden of proof is on YOU. I can't prove that Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11, that is near impossible from a logical standpoint. Can you prove that the US government wasn't involved in carrying out the attacks? No, and neither can I. But there is no (valid) proof that they were, and that is the key thing. So I ask you, where is the proof that Iraq was involved in 9/11?
:
But there is absolutely no evidence that Iraq will hit us first.
View Quote
Again, how do you know?
View Quote
For starters, BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. Where is evidence of Iraq's capability to hit us?
Maybe we do. That information needs to be public however.
View Quote
No, it does not need to be made public. Only cowards, DU members, and liberals think that all intelligence data needs to be made public.
View Quote
And only statists think that the government should go fight a war based on classified data.
In case you hadn't read my post, I'll say it again: Iraq is a secular country, one which does not like fanatical muslims. They will not support them and will crack down on them. Iraq is not a threat to America.
View Quote
I'll say this AGAIN. HOW DO YOU KNOW? Where is your proof? What info are you privy to that the rest of us aren't. ANSWER THIS DAMN QUESTION!
View Quote
I have answered this question not only above, but it many other topics. You just refuse to see it, so I will say it again: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE!!! THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU!!!!! In any case, some reasons why Iraq is not a threat to the US: They have no nukes, they have no delivery system, and they have no desire to.
That was not a declaration of war. It only authorized the president to go after terrorism. It was a resolution of dubious constitutionality.
View Quote
Oh, please. How is it Constitutionally dubious? Because you and other cowards say so?
View Quote
No, because it wasn't within Congress' delegated powers.
So anybody that believes in the Constitution is a "merry band of ostriches." And people wonder why the 2nd is violated so much.
View Quote
What it really amounts to is that you are of age to serve and your statements only serve to cover your cowardice and hatred of your country.
View Quote
And your whole defense of imperialism consists of calling names. I LOVE my country, but I HATE my government. They are not the same. Get it through your skull.
All anyone has to do is search for your comments to see your true colors. As for your 'imperialist' remarks, the US never has been about empire building. Please show us the great empire we have built. This imperialist crap is straight from DU.
View Quote
For starters we have troops in over 150 nations. We are helping to rebuild Afganistan. We are going to invade Iraq. We give money to other countries. We defend other countries.
Link Posted: 9/29/2002 6:40:36 AM EDT
If you ever wonder how or why the so-called liberals think and why this country is in the shape its in . You dont have to look very far because right here on this board of ours ( which is pretty conservative) we can find our own handringing , second guessing cowards which have unfortunately permeated our society. You cannot argue with these people no matter how much evidence you have to make your case,I would even argue that if President Bush were to show the American people a video of Saddam handing over a case of weapons grade Uranium to Bin Laden these second guessing yellow bellied cowards would find an excuse for good ole Saddam . Maybe saying it was a fake or better yet questioning NOT the content of the video but the legallity of how we got it ! That is what I think our so-called "Liberty" guy would go for. Can you imagine if these cowards permeated society when the Nazis were taking over the world . Remember PM Chamberlain ? ) The bottom line is Iraq provided some assistance to the 9/11 Terrorists , we however do not have a smoking gun , just circumstantial / perifial evidence . That and the fact that they do pose an immement threat due to there WMD programs forces us to take action before we lose anymore of our people. ACTION IS FASTER THAN REACTION PS : please lay off the hit NYC again stuff.
Link Posted: 9/29/2002 7:53:48 AM EDT
Originally Posted By QBit: D.C., but only if we can evacuate the Smithsonian colletcions first. (Especially the Air&Space Museum) Let's try not to damage SoCal too much. My family's there. The noise comes from Berkely, but the cash comes from just a bit further northwest. Drop the hammer on Marin County, Johnny Lindh's ol' stomping grounds...
View Quote
I'll second this choice. Why stop with one nuke though. I say blanket the area north from Santa Rosa and South of Santa Cruz, then east to Sacramento. Liberals are like cockroaches, if even one of them survives they will breed more.
Link Posted: 9/29/2002 8:09:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/29/2002 8:13:08 AM EDT by Bob243]
Originally Posted By Johninaustin: Philly, or maybe the whole state of Pennsylvania?
View Quote
HEY!!!!!! [V] well, OK, If you look at the map ( who voted for gore) That ETH posted on another topic, the blue areas on the easten PA would be safe to nuke with 1 megaton nukes, then NJ will get the the fallout too [:D] As far as Berkley or LA county, they need to detonate a few KM above the ground
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top