Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dubya gets some respect, finally

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Surely you don't judge people by whether they have a "D" or an "R" in front of their name, do you?
    it indicates the "machinery" that supports a democratic prez has no qualms in going to war - no particular pacifist leanings

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    go to any decent school in GB & you are extensively taught about war history, a subject re-inforced by walking into the assembly hall for morning prayers & seeing the huge embossed board showing all he alumni who died in both wars, some barely 18

    as for the rest, many of the terrorists trained in afghanistan ( as if that needed mentioning )

    as for gore - you have no idea of his thoughts under pressure - his claims of origin of the web & his flawed eco film give no confidence in the reliability of his statements

    the mention of democratic prezs' is to demonstrate they have no hesitation in going to war
    I agree that Democratic Presidents can be just as reckless as Republican Presidents. As a matter of fact, historically, they've been more reckless. But what does that have to do with Gore? Surely you don't judge people by whether they have a "D" or an "R" in front of their name, do you?

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    go to any decent school in GB & you are extensively taught about war history, a subject re-inforced by walking into the assembly hall for morning prayers & seeing the huge embossed board showing all he alumni who died in both wars, some barely 18

    as for the rest, many of the terrorists trained in afghanistan ( as if that needed mentioning )

    as for gore - you have no idea of his thoughts under pressure - his claims of origin of the web & his flawed eco film give no confidence in the reliability of his statements

    the mention of democratic prezs' is to demonstrate they have no hesitation in going to war

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Your casual disregard for innocent life sounds like something an 18th century king might say. I'm glad Poppa Bush sees it my way.
    Originally posted by George H. W. Bush
    Trying to eliminate Saddam..
    i'm from a country which saw unimagineable sacrifice on the western front '14 - '18

    we know how to shed blood & tough it out

    as for pa bush, he wouda got a UN mandate to invade if he wanted & extrication/occupation wouda been a UN problem - likely handled better than US alone but if not, iraqi civil war was price worth paying for kuwait & saudi's long term safety

    That's pretty neat the way you changed the subject. First you said Gore would have invaded Iraq. Then when I disproved that, you tried to tie Iraq to 9/11, despite the fact that even Bush himself admits that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. But it doesn't seem to matter to you that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. They ARE all Arabs after all. I thought you were better than that eldrick.
    no need to change subject ( & afganis are not arabic & i'm happy that was invaded as well - i was more interested in western allies being protected in '91 & '03 & their oil )

    what gore said & what he wouda done if in the hotseat is completely unknown

    it hardly needs pointing out democrats are well capable of going to war - look up who was prez when US went into :

    - ww1
    - ww2
    - korea
    - vietnam
    It's funny how you talk about what "we" did in 1914-18. Were "we" alive in 1914-18? I guess I just place a higher value on life than you do eldrick, but to each his own.

    And in case you didn't know it, the folks who perpetrated 9/11 were Arabs like the Iraqis, not Afghans. As for Gore, you have nothing to support you assertion that Gore would have invaded Iraq, while his pre-War statements indicate that he wouldn't have. And I don't know what the actions of other Democratic Presidents has to do with anything. I never claimed this was a partisan issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Your casual disregard for innocent life sounds like something an 18th century king might say. I'm glad Poppa Bush sees it my way.
    Originally posted by George H. W. Bush
    Trying to eliminate Saddam..
    i'm from a country which saw unimagineable sacrifice on the western front '14 - '18

    we know how to shed blood & tough it out

    as for pa bush, he wouda got a UN mandate to invade if he wanted & extrication/occupation wouda been a UN problem - likely handled better than US alone but if not, iraqi civil war was price worth paying for kuwait & saudi's long term safety

    That's pretty neat the way you changed the subject. First you said Gore would have invaded Iraq. Then when I disproved that, you tried to tie Iraq to 9/11, despite the fact that even Bush himself admits that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. But it doesn't seem to matter to you that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. They ARE all Arabs after all. I thought you were better than that eldrick.
    no need to change subject ( & afganis are not arabic & i'm happy that was invaded as well - i was more interested in western allies being protected in '91 & '03 & their oil )

    what gore said & what he wouda done if in the hotseat is completely unknown

    it hardly needs pointing out democrats are well capable of going to war - look up who was prez when US went into :

    - ww1
    - ww2
    - korea
    - vietnam

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    So you condone him spending our nation's blood and treasure to protect his family's honor? :?
    only shedding blood which wouda, shouda been shed 12y before
    Your casual disregard for innocent life sounds like something an 18th century king might say. I'm glad Poppa Bush sees it my way.
    Originally posted by George H. W. Bush
    Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect rule Iraq. There was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different -- and perhaps barren -- outcome.
    Originally posted by eldrick
    Wrong! Gore spoke out against the war before it started and called out the sinister neocons who were behind it.
    & if he had done nothing, you might have been looking at another 1/2 dozen 9/11s

    war in iraq showed terrorists worldwide 1 thing - america had a big stick & were prepared to use it, probably saving you from many more attacks
    That's pretty neat the way you changed the subject. First you said Gore would have invaded Iraq. Then when I disproved that, you tried to tie Iraq to 9/11, despite the fact that even Bush himself admits that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. But it doesn't seem to matter to you that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. They ARE all Arabs after all. I thought you were better than that eldrick.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    war in iraq showed terrorists worldwide 1 thing . . .
    Yep, that under certain circumstances the US can be just about the dumbest country on earth . .

    Leave a comment:


  • dukehjsteve
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve
    I respect the office of the Presidency, and I even respect that George W. Bush tried to do what he ( with the advice of others such as Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc.) thought was right to do. Having said that, I can say that he is for sure the worst President is US history. Let me repeat that just to be sure is is clear: George W. Bush is the worst President in US hisotory. Franklin Pierce, Warren Harding, etc., move over. GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY.
    Even if all that is true, I believe it is disrespectful to the office, and its integrity shouldn't be compromised by a juvenile stunt.
    And I agree with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • mike renfro
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Very funny as a Daily Show jape, but in real life I think that's in exceedingly poor taste and is an unacceptable denigration of the land's highest official. (Seriously)
    Garry, I don't live in the bay area anymore, but my understanding is that the prop does not designate a President of the United States Wastewater Treatment Plant. Last I looked, the person holding the office was not there by divine right, and is fair game.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    So you condone him spending our nation's blood and treasure to protect his family's honor? :?
    only shedding blood which wouda, shouda been shed 12y before

    Wrong! Gore spoke out against the war before it started and called out the sinister neocons who were behind it.
    & if he had done nothing, you might have been looking at another 1/2 dozen 9/11s

    war in iraq showed terrorists worldwide 1 thing - america had a big stick & were prepared to use it, probably saving you from many more attacks

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Originally posted by eldrick
    passage of time may judge him better

    9/11 happened on his watch & he had to do something to protect his country
    He had to do Afghanistan, he didn't have to do Iraq
    personally, i feel he had to do iraq for what his pa failed to do
    So you condone him spending our nation's blood and treasure to protect his family's honor? :?

    Originally posted by eldrick
    Originally posted by eldrick
    many smarter guys if they'd been in his shoes may have done worse...
    Can you name one?
    al gore
    Wrong! Gore spoke out against the war before it started and called out the sinister neocons who were behind it.

    Leave a comment:


  • cullman
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve
    GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY.
    Sadly, I agree.
    Amen! :!:
    Hold on thar...you guys got the double whammy of James Buchanan and Franklin Pierce who fiddled while America was splitting apart. I think they deserve a little more consideration for the top step of the podium.

    cman :?:

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve
    I respect the office of the Presidency, and I even respect that George W. Bush tried to do what he ( with the advice of others such as Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc.) thought was right to do. Having said that, I can say that he is for sure the worst President is US history. Let me repeat that just to be sure is is clear: George W. Bush is the worst President in US hisotory. Franklin Pierce, Warren Harding, etc., move over. GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY.
    Even if all that is true, I believe it is disrespectful to the office, and its integrity shouldn't be compromised by a juvenile stunt.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Originally posted by eldrick
    passage of time may judge him better

    9/11 happened on his watch & he had to do something to protect his country
    He had to do Afghanistan, he didn't have to do Iraq
    personally, i feel he had to do iraq for what his pa failed to do

    Originally posted by eldrick
    many smarter guys if they'd been in his shoes may have done worse...
    Can you name one?
    al gore

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve
    GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY.
    Sadly, I agree.
    Amen! :!:

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X