Posts: 6,828
Threads: 200
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation:
0
For all you Bush supporters out there:
You think he's doing a good job? You think that flier was a bunch of lies? You think the democrats can't prove anything? Well do this for me. PROVE to ME that Bush is doing a GOOD job as president. You can even PM it to me. If you can't even do that then don't say anything bad about the democrats being little pussies. I hope some of you will actually try to convince me. As for now, I couldn't care less about Bush.
Posts: 43
Threads: 4
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
I second that but it doesnt really matter because i'm canadian 
Posts: 1,700
Threads: 34
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
Nubli Wrote:For all you Bush supporters out there:
You think he's doing a good job? You think that flier was a bunch of lies? You think the democrats can't prove anything? Well do this for me. PROVE to ME that Bush is doing a GOOD job as president. You can even PM it to me. If you can't even do that then don't say anything bad about the democrats being little pussies. I hope some of you will actually try to convince me. As for now, I couldn't care less about Bush.
Innocent until proven guilty don't forget. Shoudn't it be the responsibility of his doubters to prove he's doing a bad job.
You cannot assume because there is no 'evidence' of him doing a good job, he must be doing a bad job. Your country is in one piece still.
Posts: 79
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
sure, Usama attacked the US first, then Bush go to Afganistan and kill civilians then he suspect that Iraq have nuclear missiles, so he send his troops there kills civilians, he did give them freedom though wich is a good thing (Anarchy, YEA!!!)
Posts: 1,700
Threads: 34
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
That was the weakest, most moronic argument I've ever seen. You didn't even have a point. *sigh*
Posts: 79
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
Killing civilians for no reason isnt something wrong??? Then Bush should be best friends with Usama and stop hunting him....
Posts: 1,700
Threads: 34
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
There is no excuse for stupidity in my book. Are you possibly inbred?
He didn't kill civilians for no reason, he killed them for a damn good reason. War will always have it's casualties, and luckilly Bush isn't as wishy washy as the rest of the yanks about that. If we hadn't gone into Afghanistan and Iraq, their own regime would of killed more people than we have by now. They had public hangings of ten or so people at a time.
Osama, and Saddam had to be stopped, at all costs. Someone had to be brave enough to stand up and not back down. England and American were the ones to do it, despite anti war protests. We didn't do it for glory or for monetary gain, but because it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
Someone once told me that arguing with a moron, is like arguing with a cripple; No matter who wins, both parties end up looking stupid.
Posts: 79
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
Yes i am stupid. But atleast im not like most other ppl i know that just shut up and look happy and agrees in everything.
Posts: 938
Threads: 39
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation:
0
with war will come casualties,there is no avoiding that.....my opinion he has done nothing that no one else would have done,if he didn't go to war other terrorist groups would have hit the US by now,no doubt...i didn't personally vote for him but he is the leader of the country i live in so being that as it is,i will support my leader in anyway and in any decision (if he's wrong or not)..what people don't understand is he has some of if not the smartest people in the world as advisors and intelligence on decisions he makes,but most of the bush haters belive everything the media seems to to throw out there
Posts: 1,700
Threads: 34
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
Very patriotic muderman. To go with your sig and avatar I suppose. 
Posts: 62
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation:
0
Skye Wrote:Osama, and Saddam had to be stopped, at all costs. Someone had to be brave enough to stand up and not back down. England and American were the ones to do it, despite anti war protests. We didn't do it for glory or for monetary gain, but because it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
When you are talking about war there is no "right thing to do", there is no right and there is no wrong, the choices do not fall into two convenient cattegories. It is perception and politics, and once things are under that heading you can twist whatever truth you want out of it.
And the day i believe a government does something to help people is the day god comes down and tells me everything written in the bible is the truth, In other words it will never happen.
The western world seems to have this remarkable perception that they are the moral high ground of the world. And must force the rest of the world to abide by their standards using the very thing that they look down upon. WAR.
Posts: 1,700
Threads: 34
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
Saddam, killed thousands of Kurdish civilians while testing out his chemical capabilities, when he invaded them back in the 90's which sparked the first gulf war. We sopped him then, and i was the right thing to do from a moral point of view. Had we not intervened he would of gone on to kill millions. He should of been shot back then, but he wasn't.
Osama and Al Qaeda (not sure about the spelling there) had committed atrocities against most major governments. He had to be stopped before he did any more damage. There will always be grey areas, but all we can do is go by our own moral standard, and uphold that throughout the world. Were we not to do that then the world would be a horrific place to live.
Countries HAVE to think outside of their own borders. And should those countries have the power to change the world for the better, I think it a good thing that they do.
Posts: 62
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation:
0
He wasn't stopped because Bush saw that it was a political advantage for him to be in power. He was one of the few secular leaders in the area. Bush jnr seems to have either missed that point or simply ignored it, now he has created terrorist in a country that has never had any before with the exception of rougue kurdish elements who before concentrated their attacks against the Iraqi government itself. Namely a man named Abu Masad Al Zarqawi and the small terrorist group known as Ansar al-Islam. Of course the connections between the two could be argued.
Everyone is looking for a powerful position and no one is concerned for the very people which we are apparantly trying to save. War is politics, it is not morality.
Quote: Countries HAVE to think outside of their own borders. And should those countries have the power to change the world for the better, I think it a good thing that they do.
Yes, the Roman empire, and the Nazi party had that very same mentality, change cannot be forced by war. Unless your plan is to eradicate an entire society, like the Romans and the Nazis tried to do.
Posts: 1,700
Threads: 34
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
This is a case of agreeing to disagree I think. You have some damn good points, and I agree to a point with what you say. But the middle eastern countries in question, and the governments that run them openly support certain terrorist groups, who have distict cultural differences to us. They feel they are justfiably bombing our cities, and killing our families to achieve their goal. A diplomatic solution would be the free world bowing down before terrorism, they would win.
We go to war with a countries armed forces and governments. And innocents inevitabely get caught up in it. They go to war with our men, women and children just trying to go by their day to day lives. Forget politics, I know who has the moral high ground there.
Posts: 62
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation:
0
It's much too late for a diplomacy i know that, but thats hardly the point. All im trying to say is that you should be aware that there is a lot more to this then it seems.
The states that are known to support terrorism in the middle east are Iran, Syria, Yemen, and to some extent the saudis. These are the largest supporters. That are fairly well known by intelligence agencies such as the CIA, ASIO etc.
Suddam may have been a crazy sochiopathic megalomaniac, but he didn't support terrorism. He simply misjudged situations.
Quote: We go to war with a countries armed forces and governments. And innocents inevitabely get caught up in it. They go to war with our men, women and children just trying to go by their day to day lives. Forget politics, I know who has the moral high ground there.
It is very difficult to fight terrorism, it is not a government or a regime, its generally a rag tag group of people that have no real goals except to make a point. To me it seems the most effective way to actually fight the terrorist cells is to actually cooperate with the governments rather then trying to destroy them only to create more strife in an area already on the verge of collapse.
Posts: 79
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
To win a war with violence is like having sex to get back your virginity
Posts: 321
Threads: 5
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
hey i need trang and i need runes and stuff for zon ok i can help u wat lvl is ure char ok
Posts: 79
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
0
Posts: 101
Threads: 3
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation:
0
You think 911 was bad? The terrorism will be tenfolds worst in the years to come for the mess we have caused, and we deserve it.
Cigarettes kill more than 442398 Americans annually. Factor in murder within our states and we have a nice yearly genocide. Rape? Don't worry, we have plenty of rape. We make Saddam look like a puss when it comes to crime.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/spot...king_x.htm
|
