forresthump2 Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 "Are you saying that people are against the war BECAUSE Al Gore lost the election. By extension then, everyone who voted for W. is pro-war? Your logic sugests, I don't know,...a brain tumor?" Is that all you got, comrade? You didn't address the facts I made about Clinton and the strange lack of protest on his actions. Says a lot about your credibility when you totally ignore the facts I presented and the overall premise. Instead you obviously twist the premise and resort to name calling. Here again are the facts itemized and simplified for your better understanding: in '98, Clinton bombed Iraq in Operation Desert Fox against the UN, AND US Congress, AND with NO resolutions from either to do so. Clinton changed US policy toward Iraq, and thereby called for REGIME CHANGE in Iraq. in '99, Clinton bombed Bosnia, again against the UN, and US Congress, AND AGAIN with NO resolutions to do so. Clinton used his War Powers from the War Powers Act of 1973 and exceeded the allowed powers' 60-day time limit. Clinton used the excuse that attacking Bosnia was a PREMPTIVE action to prevent war from erupting to a wider scale in the Balkans, recalling the previous volatility there preceding the world wars decades ago. It should be noted that the Serbs in no way directly attacked the US and Terrorism was not revealed to the extent it was with the 9-11 attacks. Clinton also called for REGIME-CHANGE with the removal of Milosovich. So you are now implying that the level of Protests for these Clinton actions were as large or anywhere near the scale that are now going on against the Bush43 admin? Bush43 obtained UN resolution 1441 (the 17th resolution requiring Iraq to disarm of WMT) and a specific Resoluton from the US Congress. 9-11-01, 'nuff said (for the sensible anyway). Compare and contrast strawman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Boomac---Sorry I have a decent vocabulary, one that goes beyond "beer call", "titty-bar" and "5 point buck". Yes, even a brief and superficial examination of the news media should inform you it's far more Conservative than Liberal. But I see that you simply argue by assertion and are unable to refute the points I made. You simply choose to believe what you like and ignore evidence that things are otherwise. Being a Union member is in and of itself a Liberal, if not Radical, thing to do in this country despite the fact that some politically uninformed Unionists don't realize it. Evidently you have zero knowledge of Union history and theory, nor any knowledge of the constant efforts of Conservatives to destroy Unionism in this country. Your thinking is as pathetic as the mediocre gear you so proudly list (how sad). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forresthump2 Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 "The vast majority of newspapers, newsmagazines and TV networks are in favor of "Free Trade" and the dissenting opinion on this is given very little coverage." So are most Democrats, as Clinton and Gore were. Do you forget their fight for NAFTA? It's a Bipartisan issue. Your premise that it's supported only or even largely by Conservatives or the GOP is False. Ever listen to Pat Buchanan? LOL "They favor the Conservative view on economic issues." Where's your research to support that? If you're projecting your false assertion above to this statement, then as retorted above, both statements are false. "Labor issues get very little coverage;" Labor Unions have shrunk into obscurity. Maybe they're covering in relation to their importance. As much as their relevance has shrunk, I'd say it's pretty Liberal they get any coverage at all. LOL "Labor is the litmus test for Liberals as no other group is fought by Conservatives as tenaciously as Organized Labor is." This suprises you? Unions largely have now become PACs for the Democratic party. "And note that all newspapers and TV stations are owned by, well owners; and business owners are not noted for their Liberal views." Like Ted Turner is not? LOL A recent poll found that around 70% or so of journalists/editors vote Democrat. even if your statement on owners (shareholders) were true, which it's not, do they write and edit? LOL "Most mainstream media I've read also are against such issues as Living Wage initiatives and Minimum Wage increases." I'm suprised you read the National Review. LOL Come now, you know the majority of Americans get their business news from the Liberal daily papers and Liberal mainstream Network news. Rather, Jennings, Browkaw/Williams conservative? LOL Now if you're talking about where the smarter minority get their business news that's different. Most all in the smarter minority vote GOP because they deal in the real world and not idealogy. Idealogy is bad business. LOL "Think about it Pyro, have your local papers and TV stations been demanding a raise in wages or a return to fair trade? And if not how can they be Liberal?" They will as soon as the Dem pols do. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 tbrennan, But you didn't mean brief and superficial! If you are so damn smart, why don't you start a business and employ some people. Why don't you take the risk and put everything on the line. Nah, you have that gimmy, gimmy, gimmy attitude. You are an insult to anybody that has any pride. By the way, I'm proud of my audio equiptment and everything else I worked my *** off for. That would include a few nice 5 X 5s and yep, I have enjoyed a few drinks in a titty-bar. By the way, what the heck is wrong with Forte IIs and Quartets? I think they sound fantastic and that old Tandberg Receiver is so, so sweet. Now be a good boy and go play with your thesaurus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 HO! HO! HO!... ...and a bottle of RUM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 By the way, can someone please tell me why are US bombs landing in Iran, Egypt, and Syria?? I thought they had "precision targeting." If America is targeting specific areas in Iraq, how the hell are the bombs landing in other countries?? How can you miss a WHOLE COUNTRY?? That is pretty sad. Either, this so-called "precision targeting" is a POS and a "lie," or America is doing this on purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istari Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Kain, you're just a young punk kid who doesn't know sh!t. If I were you, I'd dig a foxhole, one of these cruise missles might just happen to be "mistargeted" to your location, just by accident of course. BTW, what is your exact lattitude and longitude?, we want to make sure one of the atomic cruise missles isn't programmed to your tent by "accident". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 ---------------- On 3/24/2003 8:28:53 AM The Hobbit wrote: Kain, you're just a young punk kid who doesn't know sh!t. If I were you, I'd dig a foxhole, one of these cruise missles might just happen to be "mistargeted" to your location, just by accident of course. BTW, what is your exact lattitude and longitude?, we want to make sure one of the atomic cruise missles isn't programmed to your tent by "accident". ---------------- Hmmm... I rather not reply to this very constructive reponse, LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istari Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Just what I thought "NO BALLS!", just hot air... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 ---------------- On 3/24/2003 8:47:56 AM The Hobbit wrote: Just what I thought "NO BALLS!", just hot air... ---------------- "No balls"?? I would be saying that to the American troops, LOL! Did you see on the news that 5,000 American troops RAN BACK after confronting 500, YES 500!, Iraqis on a ground fight?? The Americans RAN back leaving 10 (I think it was 10) dead American troops behind. Local TV showed pictures of those dead Americans to prove that. I can't believe Americans are such cowards. I mean 5,000 Americans vs. 500 Iraqis and the 5,000 RAN even with all their training and weapons?? So, who did you say had "no balls"?? LMAO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 First off you lil peckerwood, the bombs that fell on other countries did not belong to the US but rather the Iraqi's. Of course, don't let the truth disrupt your social and political myopia. Secondly, You know "how much" about battle? The US didn't run. They backed up and said let's call air support and watch them rifle through all these dumbass camel jockeys. Back to my original thought. ALL the religious fanatics incapable of independent and well-orchestrated thought should be eliminated - better yet just leave them in the desert to wander another couple hundred years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 ---------------- On 3/24/2003 9:18:32 AM Anarchist wrote: First off you lil peckerwood, the bombs that fell on other countries did not belong to the US but rather the Iraqi's. Of course, don't let the truth disrupt your social and political myopia. Secondly, You know "how much" about battle? The US didn't run. They backed up and said let's call air support and watch them rifle through all these dumbass camel jockeys. Back to my original thought. ALL the religious fanatics incapable of independent and well-orchestrated thought should be eliminated - better yet just leave them in the desert to wander another couple hundred years. ---------------- "They backed up and said let's call air support" LOL! 5,000 Americans need AIR SUPPORT to take out 500 Iraqis?? LMAO!! COWARDS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Boomac---All you can do is hurl insults, even Forrest has marshalled an argument against me instead of his usual insults but an arguement is evidently beyond you. Why should I start a business? I'm making more than many business owners now and with lots less grief. God forbid that one should want to live-up to your standards of what's smart anyway, especially as you don't seem to apply them to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Kain. "No Life". Too bad. Why bring a knife to a gun fight? Ask your Daddy to explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Forrest----Well, you decided to argue instead of insult. Gore and Clinton are not Liberals or good Democrats either. Maybe you have to be a Liberal and a Democrat to understand this but it's a view held by many. I see Liberalism and Conservatism in terms of economics and the broad view given in this country by the majority of news outlets I read is Conservative. That this view may be correct is not the point in this arguement, the point is that it's the Conservative view that gets the most press. Every day I read the Chicago Tribune and Sun Times. I read The New York Times and Wall Street Journal a couple of times a week. Every week I read Time, Newsweek and US News, despite the rags all 3 of these magazines has become. Every month I read The Atlantic and Harpers. Of all these papers and magazines only Harpers and The Atlantic espouse Liberal economic views, Harpers much more than The Atlantic. As for TV, well I watch very little news on TV but most I see is Conservatively slanted (MSNBC) or apolitical (local news). Ted Turner ran a non-union operation, so much for his Liberalism. He's a SOCIAL Liberal, a type that I despise almost as much as I despise Conservatives. He's Liberal with other people's money and not with his own. He's the kind of guy that believes in Government subsidized housing, I believe in higher wages and letting people get regular housing. Subsidized housing, and medical care and food stamps are the Taxpayers subsidizing Business; the Taxpayers making up the difference between what some employers pay and what it really costs people to live. A pretty sweet deal for those who pay lousy wages, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Webmaster Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 This is another post that has gotten out of control so everybody cool down. I'm not going to stop you from debating the topic, but please keep your arguments confined to the topic and stop with the personal insults. I banned one forum member today over this type of behavior and I really don't want to have to ban anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istari Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 I find this rather ironic. Here we have a teenager with zero experience in the game of life. He is ranting and raving about the coward Americans while listening to American music (ever heard abaric music - best heard on a Bose system - Awww, thats an American product too though) on America's finest speakers. The closest he has ever got to combat is when he tried to screw his cousin or was that a closer relative?, and they fought him off. (He then went and called his stump trained camel to get relief!) I know that the internet is a great place to spout off things and remain hidden, not risking personal safety and so forth, but if the camel jockey were here right now, in person, I'm sure he wouldn't be saying this crap. However, I am not shirking, I've spent 6 1/2 years in the Army and know a bit about how things go down. If the Iraqis have executed American POWs and/or if they torture American POWs, we the American people should have the armed forces completely level a city (non-nuclear) JUST TO SHOW THEM WHAT WE WILL DO! I hate to see that they have taken a woman captive, makes my blood boil to think what may be happening to her now. (Women should not be in a combat or close combat support role, period. Even women who want to be men shouldn't be allowed!) Let's get this thing over with, NOW! Webmaster, Just read your post after posting this, I don't want to be banned for sure, however I really don't like the fact that KAIN is posting his anti-American rantings here either. I wonder what Fred Klipsch would think if he read this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 After hearing that the state of Florida changed its opinion and let a Muslim woman have her picture on her driver's license with her face covered, this is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a Tampa newspaper. Read on, please! "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom. We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language! "In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture. If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruinsrme Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Jt The helo captured was from you division Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruinsrme Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 JT You will love this one. The HR department has asked that American employees on American soil paying hard earned American tax dollars, US citizens, a good amount whom have served this country to be sensitive to others when discussing the war. We may hurt their feelings. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts