Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 7/2/2003 11:44:23 AM EDT
"I don't beleive in nation building." - George Bush, on the campaign trail. George Bush today: "One thing is clear (Liberian President) Taylor has to go." Bush now is telling Liberians who they can and can't have as their President. Taylor, while likely a POS himself, WAS elected in a Democratic election (which admittedly was controversial itself.) I'm REALLY getting tired of Republican globalism. What EXACTLY would Gore have done differently than Bush here??? Can you say Mogadishu?? Can you say Viet Nam???? Yes, I'm mad as hell. And tired of RINOS|'s. (Republicans in name only)
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 11:49:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/2/2003 11:50:53 AM EDT by Zaphod]
This is going to take some very light treading to ensure that the least confusion is created. G-Man, I'm not clear of the situation in Liberia, simply because I've not read all the articles. Granted, the first thing that popped into my mind on hearing the news was, "Liberia? WTF are we going to Liberia for?" I am willing to agree with you that the United States should generally not get involved in scenarios where a national interest (of OUR nation) isn't involved, but by the same token, as the most free and powerful nation on earth, don't you think we have SOME responsibility to remove those who are brutalizing their people, if only on principle? Granted, we cannot be the world's police force, and I'll admit to not knowing where exactly the line should be drawn, but I don't think kneee-jerk opposition is a realistic solution either. Your thoughts? Edited to add: Gore would have sent our forces in without weapons. Don't want to appear to aggressive to the locals, don't you know... [puke]
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:02:50 PM EDT
If we should help people who are being brutalized, where were we in several years ago when the Tutsis and Hutus were having a little disagreement? We get involved in these things, and the outcome is never good. There is no damn point.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:11:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:11:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Chimborazo: If we should help people who are being brutalized, where were we in several years ago when the Tutsis and Hutus were having a little disagreement? We get involved in these things, and the outcome is never good. There is no damn point.
View Quote
Fuck the tutoos and hutooz. They've been killing eachother for centuries, why the fuck should we get involved? Africa is a black hole we should stay away from.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:13:48 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:17:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Fuck the tutoos and hutooz. They've been killing eachother for centuries, why the fuck should we get involved? Africa is a black hole we should stay away from.
View Quote
The same can be said for the israelis and palestinians.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:18:11 PM EDT
To clarify my earlier point: I'm not supporting this little trip into Liberia based on the information I currently have. If the mission is just, I just hope we go in and out quickly. If this is a cover op to hit against terrorism or any other threat to our freedoms, then I hope they go in and KICK ASS. At the very least, we should never get into situations where the outcome is not clear-cut (i.e. - "We're her to remove so-and-so." "Well, he's dead now." "OK, bye!").
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:19:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio:
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Fuck the tutoos and hutooz. They've been killing eachother for centuries, why the fuck should we get involved? Africa is a black hole we should stay away from.
View Quote
The same can be said for the israelis and palestinians.
View Quote
Wrong. We have a vested interest in the stability of the Middle East, of which Israel is a part. What our major interest in Africa is, aside from hunting Al-Qaeda, is not yet clear to me.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:26:04 PM EDT
G-Man...stop, take a deep breath and think for just a sec...would you prefer Algore and the Dems back in power...REALLY? Even a deaf, dumb and blind Democrap knows Taylor's election was rigged. While I would agree with you that at this point, I wouldn't send our guys into that shithole...I'm not getting daily briefings either...nor do I have the long-term vision that Bush and his staff do. I suspect that somewhere deeply hidden in all this is ample justification to do whatever our leaders have planned...with the furtherance of our national security in mind. Hell...who knows, maybe some Al Qaeda are hiding out there! I just haven't paid any attention to Liberia...but I do trust Dubya far more than I would have Gore or any of the nine dwarfs currently running against him. One other point: From strictly a political perspective, were Bush to clean that mess up, it steal another big issue from the morons on the Left who are always crowing that we never get involved in black Africa. Well...at least Clintoon didn't. Maybe Bush is going to. Oh...and BTW, we DID get ourselves involved in the Congo in the early '60s. A SeaBee bud of mine was over in that shithole in '61 (I think...) and got his ass shot at by those Simba bastards.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:32:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/2/2003 12:34:40 PM EDT by ArmdLbrl]
Why do you think that Bush's statement means WE will be removing Taylor? OR even if we did, it would involve more than a snipers bullet in his head or a Hellfire on his car? And right now getting the Embassy staff and any other remaining westerners out of there would still require the introduction of at least a MEU for a day or two.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:35:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:43:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio:
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Fuck the tutoos and hutooz. They've been killing eachother for centuries, why the fuck should we get involved? Africa is a black hole we should stay away from.
View Quote
The same can be said for the israelis and palestinians.
View Quote
Your analogy is lacking in all regards. We are not fighting the israelis or the palestinians, we are a 3rd party observer/financial participant. Our US troops have not gotten killed from our involvement in the israel issue like what would happen in Africa. The thing about Africa is that they are too fuckin stupid to know we're helping them. Think Somalia. There's no reason that one US life should perish to stop the tribal wars.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 12:52:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/2/2003 12:52:30 PM EDT by DK-Prof]
Actually, I think it is quite clever. By going into Liberia and firing some rockets from Cobra helicopters while Marines sit offshore in a carrier, Bush can totally support that the whole Iraq war was about freeing the poor opressed Iraqis that we care so much about. How many democrats and US-bashers around the world have been saying "if Bush cared so much about suffering people, why doesn't the US send troops to Africa?" By making a token effort in Liberia, Bush can shut all of those people up once and for all. Genius. Pure unadulturated, diabolical genius.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 1:29:54 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 1:35:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: Genius. Pure unadulturated, diabolical genius.
View Quote
One thing's for sure: GWB has been surprising A LOT of people with his political moves. I don't care if it's him or Mr. Rove or the Tooth Fairy; he's been running circles around his enemies for the better part of three years. It's GREAT to watch! [:D]
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 1:51:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 2:40:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/2/2003 2:52:20 PM EDT by Hawkeye]
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 2:44:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Balzac72:
Originally Posted By Chimborazo: If we should help people who are being brutalized, where were we in several years ago when the Tutsis and Hutus were having a little disagreement? We get involved in these things, and the outcome is never good. There is no damn point.
View Quote
Fuck the tutoos and hutooz. They've been killing eachother for centuries, why the fuck should we get involved? Africa is a black hole we should stay away from.
View Quote
I agree with you. I'm just pointing out that when we say "we're concerned for the people...blah, blah, blah...", we are totally full of it. Otherwise, we would have been in Rwanda.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 3:04:23 PM EDT
I didn't realize there was oil in Liberia.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 3:13:57 PM EDT
Overall, I like what Bush has done. However, social spending is growing at a higher rate than when Clinton was in the whitehouse, we have just seen what may be the largest increase in the size of our government ever, and he says he'll sign the AWB. I'm not really sure who Bush is.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 3:49:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Emoto: Overall, I like what Bush has done. However, social spending is growing at a higher rate than when Clinton was in the whitehouse, we have just seen what may be the largest increase in the size of our government ever, and he says he'll sign the AWB. [red]I'm not really sure who Bush is[/red].
View Quote
Maybe he is, exactly who your lying eyes are telling you he is.....A Democrat!!! [}:D]
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 3:49:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Emoto: Overall, I like what Bush has done. However, social spending is growing at a higher rate than when Clinton was in the whitehouse, we have just seen what may be the largest increase in the size of our government ever, and he says he'll sign the AWB. I'm not really sure who Bush is.
View Quote
neither is he.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 3:54:01 PM EDT
Can anyone explain how sending 50-75 Marines to boost security at the US embassy there is nation building? Can anyone explain how the US president complaining about another nation's president is nation building?
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 4:24:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/2/2003 4:25:05 PM EDT by cyanide]
He is going to try and wag the dog again ???? Want my vote work on the economy Pres. Bush.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 4:43:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By HamburgerTrain: I didn't realize there was oil in Liberia.
View Quote
LOL! Bush wants control of all those cruise ships flying the Liberian flag. I didn't know Haliburton ran cruise lines.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 5:05:35 PM EDT
He is going to try and wag the dog again ???? Want my vote work on the economy Pres. Bush.
View Quote
You on crack? Or are you really a subversive from DU? Goverments cannot have a positive effect on economics. They can only emplace or remove drains or obsticles. They cannot create what isn't there. Only Liberals (or libertarians?) beleve that goverment can create economic growth through "redistibution" of wealth. Even that is a fiction.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 5:06:03 PM EDT
Anybody what a rational mind knew we would be in Iraq for a few years to come. After all, how long did we spend in Germany? Japan? And he made the "Nation Building" statement prior to 9-11, which changed things. Now get your facts straight prior to wasting your vote again this Presidential elect. SGtar15
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 5:07:52 PM EDT
Facts is this....We are the only true superpower in the world. Now is a great time to expand our borders and colonize. SGtar15
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 5:57:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: Genius. Pure unadulturated, diabolical genius.
View Quote
One thing's for sure: GWB has been surprising A LOT of people with his political moves. I don't care if it's him or Mr. Rove or the Tooth Fairy; he's been running circles around his enemies for the better part of three years. It's GREAT to watch! [:D]
View Quote
It is something to watch anyway..[rolleyes] I love the way Bush ran circles around Ted Kennedy, on the EXPANSION of the dept of education, (How old were you in '94"" 15-16?).And then there's the "political move", of signaling to Fienstien and Schumer, that he'll re-authorize the UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AWB. And then there's the expansion of the bankrupt medicare program, to cover drugs for seniors, so they'll vote for him. Not to mention his SUPPORT for the supreme court "Diversity" decision. I'm sure glad we don't have a socialist demo in office...[}:D] You make a real good "conservative" zaphod...
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 6:03:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:
He is going to try and wag the dog again ???? Want my vote work on the economy Pres. Bush.
View Quote
You on crack? Or are you really a subversive from DU? Goverments cannot have a positive effect on economics. They can only emplace or remove drains or obsticles. They cannot create what isn't there. Only Liberals (or libertarians?) beleve that goverment can create economic growth through "redistibution" of wealth. Even that is a fiction.
View Quote
You should strike libertarians from that statement. They are absolutely against redistribution of wealth, or any other government involvement in the economy.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 7:31:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86: It is something to watch anyway..[rolleyes] I love the way Bush ran circles around Ted Kennedy, on the EXPANSION of the dept of education, (How old were you in '94"" 15-16?).And then there's the "political move", of signaling to Fienstien and Schumer, that he'll re-authorize the UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AWB. And then there's the expansion of the bankrupt medicare program, to cover drugs for seniors, so they'll vote for him. Not to mention his SUPPORT for the supreme court "Diversity" decision. I'm sure glad we don't have a socialist demo in office...[}:D] You make a real good "conservative" zaphod...
View Quote
sigh.... Why is it always all-or-nothing with you people? I mention my glee at the fact the President has the Lefties on the ropes (an undeniable fact, made all the more unbelievable in light of the fact that so much of THEIR stuff is being enacted), and you automatically assume that I SUPPORT GWB in ALL these things he's doing. I don't. I am, IMO, far more Conservative than GWB. That doesn't mean I can't have some fun watching the REAL enemy squirm as they are out-flanked at every turn by someone they STILL think is a complete idiot. No matter how you slice it, it's fun to watch. Now, if you want to continue to live with an attitude of complete doom and gloom because 110% of YOUR agenda is not being passed, go right ahead. I'm going to try and enjoy the good things in life while ALSO trying to change the things I don't like.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 7:53:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod: I mention my glee at the fact the President has the Lefties on the ropes (an undeniable fact, made all the more unbelievable in light of the fact that so much of THEIR stuff is being enacted)...
View Quote
That's the point, champ. There's [i]supposed[/i] to be a difference between liberals and conservatives, between Democrats and Republicans.
That doesn't mean I can't have some fun watching the REAL enemy squirm as they are out-flanked at every turn by someone they STILL think is a complete idiot.
View Quote
If you were a liberal, how could you be disappointed by the performance of this administration?
Now, if you want to continue to live with an attitude of complete doom and gloom because 110% of YOUR agenda is not being passed, go right ahead. I'm going to try and enjoy the good things in life...
View Quote
...and all I'm going to do is repost, for educational purposes, what you said earlier about the Bush Administration's agenda. After you read your words again, tell us exactly [b]whose[/b] agenda is being expanded by 110%.
Originally Posted By Zaphod: I mention my glee at the fact the President has the Lefties on the ropes (an undeniable fact, made all the more unbelievable in light of the fact that so much of THEIR stuff is being enacted)...
View Quote
So, exactly [i]who[/i] is on the ropes, again?
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 8:08:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin: That's the point, champ. There's [i]supposed[/i] to be a difference between liberals and conservatives, between Democrats and Republicans.
View Quote
Oh, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Don't get me wrong, here. But I WILL NOT subscribe to the idea that having the Republicans in charge is not BETTER than having the Democrats in charge, even if the situation is far from perfect.
If you were a liberal, how could you be disappointed by the performance of this administration?
View Quote
Well hell's bells, Gobblin! The people on the Left want to kill and evicerate GWB and everyone even remotely associated with him! Don't you think they'd be HAPPY if so much of what THEY believe in was being passed? ...and all I'm going to do is repost, for educational purposes, what you said earlier about the Bush Administration's agenda. After you read your words again, tell us exactly [b]whose[/b] agenda is being expanded by 110%.
View Quote
You misunderstood my point. You guys are perfectly willing to drop a person because they do not toe YOUR line 100% of the time. There are no exceptions, no mitigating circumstances, no compromises. I'm sorry, but that is simply unrealistic. If we were all to think that way, we would quickly find ourselves completely isolated politically, and then LOOK OUT, Bill of Rights and everything else we hold dear. It's not your opposition to the President's positions on certain items that offends me. That is a healthy part of the political discourse within a party! Hell, I AGREE with you on most of it! What frustrates me is the all-or-nothing, if-he-doesn't-see-it-our-way-he's-a-communist-dictator attitude. I find it destructive to our ultimate goals. Now do you understand?
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 8:29:48 PM EDT
Boy, it's a good thing that no other European nation got involved during the American Revolution... Taylor-out Mugabe-out Castro-out Hussein-out Bin Laden-out Chavez-out Columbian Commies-out Kim-out China-out, under it's own weight Walk tall & carry a big stick. Looks like we got a bigger stick.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 8:50:36 PM EDT
[IMG]http://www.africaguide.com/images/afrmap.gif[/IMG] This is real simple folks. Sierra Leone has diamond mines which are under control of their Muslim rebel pseudo government and due to the fact their sales fund terrorist with connections with al-queda, they are not legal for them to sell to the rest of the world. Liberia, Sierra Leone's neighbor, has been laundering and selling the diamonds on the world market. We have passed bills in congress and have been pushing treaties to address this problem. There are other Liberian connections with terrorism that are not as solid or obvious. So, Bush says we are going in due to humanitarian reasons and are going to support a change in government. It solves problems with terrorism in Liberia, and if no major connections with terrorism are found, Bush can't be blamed for doing this under false pretense.
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 4:33:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/3/2003 4:35:58 AM EDT by garandman]
Originally Posted By LWilde: G-Man...stop, take a deep breath and think for just a sec...would you prefer Algore and the Dems back in power...REALLY?
View Quote
Campaign finance reform Patriot Act Medicare prescription drugs (biggest new entitlement in 40 years) Now Liberia [size=6] ARE YOU SURE AL GORE ISN'T IN POWER??? HOW COULD ONE TELL THE DIFFERENCE???[/SIZE=6]
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 4:48:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Originally Posted By liberty86: It is something to watch anyway..[rolleyes] I love the way Bush ran circles around Ted Kennedy, on the EXPANSION of the dept of education, (How old were you in '94"" 15-16?).And then there's the "political move", of signaling to Fienstien and Schumer, that he'll re-authorize the UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AWB. And then there's the expansion of the bankrupt medicare program, to cover drugs for seniors, so they'll vote for him. Not to mention his SUPPORT for the supreme court "Diversity" decision. I'm sure glad we don't have a socialist demo in office...[}:D] You make a real good "conservative" zaphod...
View Quote
sigh.... Why is it always all-or-nothing with you people? I mention my glee at the fact the President has the Lefties on the ropes (an undeniable fact, made all the more unbelievable in light of the fact that so much of THEIR stuff is being enacted), and you automatically assume that I SUPPORT GWB in ALL these things he's doing. I don't. I am, IMO, far more Conservative than GWB. That doesn't mean I can't have some fun watching the REAL enemy squirm as they are out-flanked at every turn by someone they STILL think is a complete idiot. No matter how you slice it, it's fun to watch. Now, [red]if you want to continue to live with an attitude of complete doom and gloom because 110% of YOUR agenda is not being passed, go right ahead[/red]. I'm going to try and enjoy the good things in life while ALSO trying to change the things I don't like.
View Quote
Believe me, I enjoy life. Especially since I pretty much got out of politics except for a few issues.... 110% of MY agenda?? Bush has done NOTHING on MY agenda!! MY agenda, is restoring constitutional govt in our country. GWB has done NOTHING in that area, in FACT, the opposite is true. Zaphod, name a few things bush has done YOU approve of, not "war on terror" related...[rolleyes]
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 5:09:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod: You misunderstood my point. You guys are perfectly willing to drop a person because they do not toe YOUR line 100% of the time. There are no exceptions, no mitigating circumstances, no compromises. I'm sorry, but that is simply unrealistic. If we were all to think that way, we would quickly find ourselves completely isolated politically, and then LOOK OUT, Bill of Rights and everything else we hold dear. It's not your opposition to the President's positions on certain items that offends me. That is a healthy part of the political discourse within a party! Hell, I AGREE with you on most of it! What frustrates me is the all-or-nothing, if-he-doesn't-see-it-our-way-he's-a-communist-dictator attitude. I find it destructive to our ultimate goals. Now do you understand?
View Quote
It's obvious YOU don't understand!! Bush and the repubs have enacted 0% of the Patriot agenda. Name anything they've done to RESTORE the Constitution by reducing Federal encroachment in the States.... You continually talk this 100% Bullshit, when Bush and the repubs aren't even enacting 5%!!! [rolleyes] "Where's the beef"?? (Not the bullshit)
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 5:30:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: The same can be said for the israelis and palestinians.
View Quote
Amen Brothaaaah!
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 5:38:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: Only Liberals (or libertarians?) beleve that goverment can create economic growth through "redistibution" of wealth. Even that is a fiction.
View Quote
Is that like "here's a tax refund, now invest it in the economy by spending it." ?? Not that I'm for or against the tax refunds, but that and your quote above sound much alike. Scott
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 5:43:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod: Oh, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Don't get me wrong, here.
View Quote
I like the sentiment, but let's dig a little deeper here:
But I WILL NOT subscribe to the idea that having the Republicans in charge is not BETTER than having the Democrats in charge..
View Quote
What's better? Other than the war on terror, which of the administration's policies are better or different than the Democrat's agenda? 1.Which ones?
Well hell's bells, Gobblin! The people on the Left want to kill and evicerate GWB and everyone even remotely associated with him!
View Quote
2. Why? 3. Do you think GWB knows that the libs are pissed at him? 4. If you answer "yes" to the previous question, then GWB can't possibly be enacting all this socialist/liberal crap to court their vote, right? 5. [b]So why is he pushing all the liberal causes, friend?[/b]
You misunderstood my point...I find it destructive to our ultimate goals.
View Quote
I understand things pretty clearly, champ. We have a Republican president who has championed many traditional socialist and liberal causes, and those individual agendas which he has not had the opportunity to push yet, he has promised to do so soon. 6.So, what's destructive to our ultimate goals again? 7. [i]What are your goals, exactly?[/i]
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 5:44:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By garandman: [size=6] ARE YOU SURE AL GORE ISN'T IN POWER??? HOW COULD ONE TELL THE DIFFERENCE???[/SIZE=6]
View Quote
Here's how: If Gore were prez, the agenda items would be gridlocked. Since the Prez is the same party as the controlling party in Congress, we, the citizens, are getting [b]Boned[/b] with socialist crap. Scott
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 6:25:37 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 6:45:39 AM EDT
We should not be the World Police. If he has to go, the people in Africa should take care of it. Breaking off diplomatic relations should have happened a loooooooong time ago. The fact that Taylor is a POS been widely known for a long time. And the UN is just now thinking somebody has to do something? The whole thing stinks. The more we support UN intervention in other countries, the weaker we become against them here at home.
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 8:33:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mojo: BTW, Where's Gore, anyway?
View Quote
Far as I can tell, Trent Lott's ingenoious "power sharing" arrangement right after the most recent election, wnet all the way to the top.
The difference? --Terrorism grows greatly in different part of the world. --Saddam is still in power. --Afgan Taliban is still in power. Just to name a few.
View Quote
That's ONE item, all spread out to make it look more inpressive than it is. ASIDE FROM the war on terror / defending teh nation, WHAT IS DIFFERENT UNDER BUSH THAN UNDER CLINTON??? Simple reality is the Republican CANNOT stand prosperity, and cannot LEAD. I'm NOT certain where tha leaves me, OTHER THAN not being willing to vote FOR the slower descent into socialism, courtesy of the Repubs.
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 8:36:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By prk: The more we support UN intervention in other countries, the weaker we become against them here at home.
View Quote
THIS is why I screamed so loud and long about NOT using Res 1441 as basis for going into Iraq. Cuz NOW we're stuck with EVERYTHING that the UN wants. Y'all validated the UN by supporting Res 1441. Now yer STUCK with the UN. Good job, dolts.
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 9:06:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/3/2003 9:10:00 AM EDT by liberty86]
Originally Posted By Scottman:
Originally Posted By garandman: [size=6] ARE YOU SURE AL GORE ISN'T IN POWER??? HOW COULD ONE TELL THE DIFFERENCE???[/SIZE=6]
View Quote
Here's how: If Gore were prez, the agenda items would be gridlocked. [size=3][red]Since the Prez is the same party as the controlling party in Congress, we, the citizens, are getting [b]Boned[/b] with socialist crap[/red][/size=3]. Scott
View Quote
A point the repub apologists will ignore. These guys are like a bunch of little girls greeting the Beatles on Ed Sullivan.... Not one of 'em will respond to arguements about Bush's SOCIALIST domestic, and internationalist agenda.... Here's Ronald Reagens answer to Bush;
"Isn't our choice really not one of left or right, but of up or down? Down through the welfare state to statism, to more and more government largesse accompanied always by more government authority, less individual liberty, and ultimately, totalitarianism, always advanced as for our own good. The alternative is the dream conceived by our Founding Fathers, up to the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with an orderly society. We don't celebrate dependence day on the Fourth of July. We celebrate Independence Day." --Ronald Reagan (1984)
View Quote
Real good Constitutionalist, is George Bush...[rolleyes]
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 9:11:09 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 9:53:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Scottman:
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: The same can be said for the israelis and palestinians.
View Quote
Amen Brothaaaah!
View Quote
This was posted a few weeks ago, and posted again for those who don't believe that the U.S. has intentions of direct involvement in a centuries old civil war. [url=www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A61545-2003Jun15]U.S. Troops May Have to Go After Hamas, Lawmaker[/url] Reuters Sunday, June 15, 2003; 10:35 AM By Lori Santos WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading Republican lawmaker said on Sunday U.S. forces may have to help "root out terrorism" in the Middle East conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, including taking aim at Hamas. In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Sen. Richard Lugar, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said American forces might be part of an international force to help stop attacks by Hamas, the main group behind a campaign of suicide bombings against Israelis, and other groups. Hamas has said it would reject any peace deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Lugar said such a force could be used to quell Israeli and Palestinian disputes, "and, maybe even more important, to root out the terrorism that is at the heart of the problem." Asked if that meant such troops would go after Hamas or other groups, he said, "That may be the conclusion." "...It may not be just Hamas but clearly Hamas is right in the gunsights," he added. "DON'T UNDERESTIMATE PRESIDENT BUSH" "...The terrorist aspect really has to be dealt with and that's why I say don't underestimate President Bush," Lugar said. Lugar is headed to the region next week and said he, as well as top U.S. officials, would be there seeking to halt the cycle of violence that is jeopardizing the U.S.-backed peace "road map." The United States has appealed for restraint from both sides after a week of bloodshed in which more than 50 people were killed. Last week's violence included the killing of four soldiers in the Gaza Strip, a Palestinian suicide bombing on a Jerusalem bus and seven Israeli helicopter strikes on militants, including an attempt to assassinate a Hamas leader. Bush has sent the veteran diplomat John Wolf to the region to prevent the failure of the peace plan affirmed at a June 4 summit in Aqaba, Jordan, with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. Lugar said Secretary of State Colin Powell also would be free after meetings in Jordan next Sunday. UNILATERAL ACTION? Whether to insert forces into the volatile situation is being considered, including "whether they are to be all by themselves" or in conjunction with a United Nations or NATO force, he said. "That is always a possibility but having said that, I would just say this is down the trail. We have to be very, very careful about the use of American forces," he said. "But clearly, if force is required ultimately to root out terrorism, it is possible there would be American participation."
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 9:59:38 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: "root out terrorism" "and, maybe even more important, to root out the terrorism that is at the heart of the problem." "...The terrorist aspect really has to be dealt with and that's why I say don't underestimate President Bush," Lugar said. "But clearly, if force is required ultimately to root out terrorism, it is possible there would be American participation."
View Quote
Good thing we declared "war on terrorism." That's our "in" to the party. [rolleyes] Scott
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top