i guess its nearly official, we are all screwed (1 Viewer)

[Ziff]

Alot of you seem devastated that Bush was elected... The world wont end. Bush isn't an extremist by any stretch of the imgination. It will just be 4 more years of a conservative government, not so bad.

sure you might be unhappy, but i don't think is is such a big deal.

Not to mention that it is only four years. Full stop.

America is a country with a real constitution

 

[Cactus]

Alot of you seem devastated that Bush was elected... The world wont end. Bush isn't an extremist by any stretch of the imgination. It will just be 4 more years of a conservative government, not so bad.

sure you might be unhappy, but i don't think is is such a big deal.

HAVE YOU BEEN ON MARS.......IN A CAVE.......WITH YOUR EYES AND EARS SHUT????!!! Think about what has happened in the last 4 years.....we have had 2 wars (3 if you include the war on the oh so elusive 'terror')....the Bali bombing and the Australian embassy bombing in Jakarta. To name a few. Australia's involvement in Bush's wars led to those attacks. Civil rights are being trampled in the US, with the Patriot Act. People are living in FEAR. That is what has happened. It's not conservative government, it's war-mongering and fear-mongering.

What we are saying is, if this happened in 4 years (less than 3 really) what will happen in the next 4. Bush now thinks he has a mandate. Who's next, Iran, Sudan, North Korea? He's not going to stop at Saddam. The 1 place we know he wont invade is Saudi Arabia.......

 

[MoonlightSonata]

sure am glad i am living in australia and not america
im concerned because we seem to be attempting to live just like america junior these days

even our liberal party wont allow gay people to get married

yea, real liberal

The Liberals are economically liberal

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Alot of you seem devastated that Bush was elected... The world wont end. Bush isn't an extremist by any stretch of the imgination. It will just be 4 more years of a conservative government, not so bad.

sure you might be unhappy, but i don't think is is such a big deal.

I think it is reasonable to feel devastated, he's an awful president. But people tend to overlook the importance of Congress

The Supreme Court appointments are disturbing. Imagine if Bush made abortion illegal

 

[Rorix]

Cactus is an idiot.
I can't decide if I should point out the flaws in his posts, if it would be worth it. Hrm, perhaps when I've got more time.


Moonlight: Bush has a policy of appointing judges who know they are just judges, and don't attempt to interfere with aspects that would reduce Congress' power.

 

[Cactus]

Cactus is an idiot.
I can't decide if I should point out the flaws in his posts, if it would be worth it. Hrm, perhaps when I've got more time.

I'd love to know how I'm an idiot. It amazes and disgusts me how intolerant people on the right are about other peoples opinions.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

The liberals are liberal on the economy and on IR.....
Conservative on social values...

 

[Rorix]

By request.

Why was the war in Iraq bad. Ask the 1100 families who have lost a son or daughter who was in the US Army. How about the possible 100,000 Iraqis who have died (so far).

Ridiculous. This criticism can be applied to every war. You're not making a point.

The 100K figure is also subject to much criticism.

Because we were lied to. There were no 'weapons of mass destruction'.

That's not true, unless you can prove that Bush, Blair, Howard and co. knew there were no WMD and deliberately mislead the public. Oh, you also need to criticise Clinton and Kerry too.

90% of 20-24 year olds surveyed in a National Geographic poll, beleive that the group of hijackers from 9/11 was partly or mostly made up of Iraqis.Last time I checked, the group was made up mostly of SAUDIS. Is that not a reason why it was bad? It was not based on fact or reason, and they have lied to us consistently about it.

Another logical fallacy, speaking of reason. A group of 20-24 year olds thought something incorrect, therefore the whole war is incorrect. That doesn't follow, budding young philosopher. You again use the word lying, which I'd like you to prove. In fact, I believe you're lying to me, since you don't know that they were lying and you intent to mislead. You also know there were a variety of logical reasons to invade Iraq.

Did you ever see Farenheit 9/11? Remember the part where the solider in Iraq's final letter to home ended "I hope they dont re-elect this idiot".

Your proposal: What soldiers think is correct.

OK then, if that's true, the overwhelming majority of the army is Republican.

He has NO IDEA how the rest of the world works, he assumes it's all like Corporate America.

I'm glad to see you're presenting factual logical arguments in support of your opinion. Especially to George Bush's thoughts, do you have a mind reading machine or something?

Evidence: When Osama Bin Laden was first being looked for, the US was offering US$15 million for his capture dead or alive. After 6 months, no Bin Laden........what did Bush do? He upped the reward to US$30 million. As if the goat herders in Afghanistan had decided $15 million was not enough for them to turn in Bin Laden.

Oh, this is your 'evidence'. True or false: $30 million will not discourage anyone who would claim the $15 million reward. Ergo, your point is stupid.

More evidence; in his recent video, Bin Laden said that Bush is a fool if he thinks that America is his target because as Bush says "of our freedom'. Bin Laden said, "if we are attacking the US because of it's freedom, why arent we attacking Sweden?"

Oh well if Osama says it, it must be true. What you probably don't know is that one that same tape, Osama lamented the lack of violence in the Afghanistan elections. SOUNDS LIKE HE JUST LOVES DEMOCRACY, EH?

My point is, that Bush is out of touch with reality, and I find it disturbing that people will back him to keep them safe, while a man who has actually defended his country in combat, and been shot 3 times for his troubles, stands by idle.

'Swiftboat', anyone? Flip-flop, anyone? BTW: Kerry agreed to Iraq and Afghanistan, so if Kerry is always correct, Bush's wars were also correct.
Wow, wrong again!


You don't seem to understand the form of 'argument'. See, what you're supposed to do is start from true premises, then you work your way towards a conclusion.

An argument like:
1. A group of 20-24 yr olds thought something incorrect about the war.
2. Therefore, the war is not based on reason.

Is obviously totally stupid.

It must just be that I'm not tolerant of your opinions or something.

 

[Cactus]

Ridiculous. This criticism can be applied to every war. You're not making a point.

But there was no reason for this war. If you are going to send these kids off to a war, at least do it for a decent reason for fucks sake.

That's not true, unless you can prove that Bush, Blair, Howard and co. knew there were no WMD and deliberately mislead the public. Oh, you also need to criticise Clinton and Kerry too.

Oh come on. Seriously do you watch/read the news. What happened to George Tenet when the CIA revealed that Pres. Bush had ignored CIA advice to exclude the comment about Iraq buying depleted uranium, because they had no evidence to support that claim. Bush kept it in his speech, even though the CIA said it was untrue.

A group of 20-24 year olds thought something incorrect, therefore the whole war is incorrect.

I did not say that because these people are misled the war is not based on good reasons......
I'm saying that people in general are being mislead by the media and government about these things. The media is blending people's perceptions, because we are told Iraq harbours Al Quada, and Al Quada is a terrorist organisation, therefore Iraq is a terrorist nation. That is what they are trying to get us to beleive........

Your proposal: What soldiers think is correct.

OK then, if that's true, the overwhelming majority of the army is Republican.

I'm sorry if i lose it here but READ MY FUCKING POST BEFORE RUNNING IT DOWN. I never said that the majority of the army isn't Republican. That is not the point I was making. Ther point I was making is, there are people out there losing their lives for a cause they don't even beleive in. I think that if someone has so much respect for their country that they are willing to lose their life, even if they don't beleive in the cause, that we owe it to them to make sure that if they die, at least they did it for a good reason.

Oh well if Osama says it, it must be true. What you probably don't know is that one that same tape, Osama lamented the lack of violence in the Afghanistan elections. SOUNDS LIKE HE JUST LOVES DEMOCRACY, EH?

What? That doesnt make sense. If Osama says that his terrorist organisation is not just attacking America because of it's 'freedom' then doesn't that make it true. I mean it is his organisation.......

'Swiftboat', anyone? Flip-flop, anyone? BTW: Kerry agreed to Iraq and Afghanistan, so if Kerry is always correct, Bush's wars were also correct.
Wow, wrong again!

Why didn't you quote me saying "Kerry is always correct"? Oh thats right because I never said that.


I would be greatful IF YOU ARENT SO FUCKING PATRONISING IN THE FUTURE. I am presenting my point of view, and I think it's sad that you have to take such a high and mighty attitude. It's typical of the right wing and people like you, who misconstrue what people say, to meet their own ends, are what is wrong with politics today.

 

[jm1234567890]

HAVE YOU BEEN ON MARS.......IN A CAVE.......WITH YOUR EYES AND EARS SHUT????!!! Think about what has happened in the last 4 years.....we have had 2 wars (3 if you include the war on the oh so elusive 'terror')....the Bali bombing and the Australian embassy bombing in Jakarta. To name a few. Australia's involvement in Bush's wars led to those attacks. Civil rights are being trampled in the US, with the Patriot Act. People are living in FEAR. That is what has happened. It's not conservative government, it's war-mongering and fear-mongering.

What we are saying is, if this happened in 4 years (less than 3 really) what will happen in the next 4. Bush now thinks he has a mandate. Who's next, Iran, Sudan, North Korea? He's not going to stop at Saddam. The 1 place we know he wont invade is Saudi Arabia.......

lol, now who's fear-mongering....

do you seriously think that the jakata bombings woudn't have happened anyway?

 

[Cactus]

lol, now who's fear-mongering....

do you seriously think that the jakata bombings woudn't have happened anyway?

Who knows, we gave them a pretty good reason to do it though didnt we.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

no because terrorism has only been a new thing...

I look at it in the view.. terrorism has been happening FOR AGES, the wars are happening now... because we're FIGHTING BACK.

Some indonesians HATE australia because of our involvement in east timor.... which no one will argue wasn't justified.

Iran, Sudan, North Korea

The UN Wants him to go into the Sudan.
He's already said Iran will NOT have a nuclear weapon.
They won't attack North Korea unless North korea threatens them first.... they already have a nuke, they're too dangerous.
You believe that bs about saudi arabia?.. i'm not even going to start on that.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

WTF do you mean a pretty good reason to do it?
We never attacked indonesia, except during the east-timor conflict... when apparently we weren't fighting the indonesian governments forces...

So what, because we sent troops to IRAQ, 2000 troops to iraq, that justifies indonesians attacking us..... HOW?!

 

[Cactus]

I look at it in the view.. terrorism has been happening FOR AGES, the wars are happening now... because we're FIGHTING BACK.


You believe that bs about saudi arabia?.. i'm not even going to start on that.

By fighting back you mean, invading countries that have no relation to Al Quada? And 'that bs' about Saudi Arabia, was George Bush allowing vital people in the FBI's investigation of a mass murder to flee the country. If you know so much, tell me how much of the US economy is owned by Saudi Arabia.......

 

[Not-That-Bright]

alot less than the foreign investment which US companies have in china.

My suggestion would be to read : http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/fahrenheit911/saudities.htm

Then decide what u want, just view both sides...

 

[Rorix]

Iraq has relations to Al Quada. Afghanistan has relations to Al Quada. Perhaps you're referring to Haiti or something? Micheal Clarke approved the 'bin Laden flights'. You know who he is, right? And I'm willing to bet the figure you have on Saudi Arabia is wrong, coming from Micheal Moore like these other points.

But there was no reason for this war. If you are going to send these kids off to a war, at least do it for a decent reason for fucks sake.

Yes there was. You just don't agree with the reasons.

Oh come on. Seriously do you watch/read the news. What happened to George Tenet when the CIA revealed that Pres. Bush had ignored CIA advice to exclude the comment about Iraq buying depleted uranium, because they had no evidence to support that claim. Bush kept it in his speech, even though the CIA said it was untrue.

Still not seeing truth that Bush mislead the country there, buddy. George Tenet also thought Iraq had WMDs, so I don't know why you're bringing him up.

I did not say that because these people are misled the war is not based on good reasons......

Oh, why was it mentioned then?

I'm saying that people in general are being mislead by the media and government about these things.

Oh, I see, your objection is that because 20-24 year olds thought something false the war was wrong. Hey wait, wasn't that what I was saying before?

because we are told Iraq harbours Al Quada, and Al Quada is a terrorist organisation,

Sorry, but both those statements are true.

therefore Iraq is a terrorist nation. That is what they are trying to get us to beleive........

That's your opinion, I'm not sure exactly what constitutes a 'terrorist nation'.

Ther point I was making is, there are people out there losing their lives for a cause they don't even beleive in. I think that if someone has so much respect for their country that they are willing to lose their life, even if they don't beleive in the cause, that we owe it to them to make sure that if they die, at least they did it for a good reason.

Oh, so what about the majority of people who lose their lives that thought we really did need to invade Iraq? Do you just ignore them so you can make your bullshit point? SUP EDWARDS.

What? That doesnt make sense. If Osama says that his terrorist organisation is not just attacking America because of it's 'freedom' then doesn't that make it true. I mean it is his organisation.......

It only doesn't make sense because you're being deliberately ignorant.
George Bush: Osama hates freedom.
Osama: Why aren't I attacking Sweden?
Osama: WHY THE FUCK WASN'T THERE MORE VIOLENCE IN AFGHANISTAN, WE SHOULD BE CORRUPTING DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS?

Why didn't you quote me saying "Kerry is always correct"? Oh thats right because I never said that.

My point is, that Bush is out of touch with reality, and I find it disturbing that people will back him to keep them safe, while a man who has actually defended his country in combat, and been shot 3 times for his troubles, stands by idle.

What you're saying is that Kerry can keep America safe. And Kerry agreed with Afghanistan and Iraq. Ergo, Bush is keeping America safe.

I would be greatful IF YOU ARENT SO FUCKING PATRONISING IN THE FUTURE. I am presenting my point of view, and I think it's sad that you have to take such a high and mighty attitude. It's typical of the right wing and people like you, who misconstrue what people say, to meet their own ends, are what is wrong with politics today.

You don't take kindly to criticism, do you?

 

[Cactus]

Oh, I see, your objection is that because 20-24 year olds thought something false the war was wrong. Hey wait, wasn't that what I was saying before??

I will spell this out very very clearly for you, but I know you will choose to mis-interpret it anyway. People are being mis-led, willingly or unwillingly about the war in Iraq and the nature of terrorism in general. I think it is wrong for the government to be allowing their people to be misled about such important issues.
I am not saying that the government is intentionally misleading them (although they might be) and I am not saying that because the people are misled the war is wrong.

I bet you are going to say that this group of people doesn't represent the general population now right? Maybe it doesnt and it was a statistical anomaly that the results do not indicate the general trend. If you have any other polls that contradict what I am saying, please let me know, I would be very interested to find out more information. Unlike you I do not pretend to know everything and I am under no false assumptions that eveything I say is correct. These are my opinions, attack them, but do not attack me.

 

[Rorix]

I will spell this out very very clearly for you, but I know you will choose to mis-interpret it anyway. People are being mis-led, willingly or unwillingly about the war in Iraq and the nature of terrorism in general.

On what issues? That Iraq doesn't have links to terrorism? That Saddam was a bad man? Could you be any less specific? The nature of terrorism in general? What the fuck does that mean?

Oh, for your information

Iraqi intelligence documents from 1992 list Osama bin Laden as an Iraqi intelligence asset. Numerous sources have reported a 1993 nonaggression pact between Iraq and al Qaeda. The former deputy director of Iraqi intelligence now in U.S. custody says that bin Laden asked the Iraqi regime for arms and training in a face-to-face meeting in 1994. Senior al Qaeda leader Abu Hajer al Iraqi met with Iraqi intelligence officials in 1995. The National Security Agency intercepted telephone conversations between al Qaeda-supported Sudanese military officials and the head of Iraq's chemical weapons program in 1996. Al Qaeda sent Abu Abdallah al Iraqi to Iraq for help with weapons of mass destruction in 1997. An indictment from the Clinton-era Justice Department cited Iraqi assistance on al Qaeda "weapons development" in 1998. A senior Clinton administration counterterrorism official told the Washington Post that the U.S. government was "sure" Iraq had supported al Qaeda chemical weapons programs in 1999. An Iraqi working closely with the Iraqi embassy in Kuala Lumpur was photographed with September 11 hijacker Khalid al Mihdhar en route to a planning meeting for the bombing of the USS Cole and the September 11 attacks in 2000. Satellite photographs showed al Qaeda members in 2001 traveling en masse to a compound in northern Iraq financed, in part, by the Iraqi regime. Abu Musab al Zarqawi, senior al Qaeda associate, operated openly in Baghdad and received medical attention at a regime-supported hospital in 2002. Documents discovered in postwar Iraq in 2003 reveal that Saddam's regime harbored and supported Abdul Rahman Yasin, an Iraqi who mixed the chemicals for the 1993 World Trade Center attack...

I am not saying that the government is intentionally misleading them (although they might be) and I am not saying that because the people are misled the war is wrong.

90% of 20-24 year olds surveyed in a National Geographic poll, beleive that the group of hijackers from 9/11 was partly or mostly made up of Iraqis.Last time I checked, the group was made up mostly of SAUDIS. Is that not a reason why it was bad? It was not based on fact or reason, and they have lied to us consistently about it.

Yes you are. 90% of 20-24 year olds thought something incorrect, "Is that not a reason why it was bad?". QED, stop disputing your false conclusions.

I bet you are going to say that this group of people doesn't represent the general population now right? Maybe it doesnt and it was a statistical anomaly that the results do not indicate the general trend. If you have any other polls that contradict what I am saying, please let me know, I would be very interested to find out more information.

Again, you continue to try and make what 90% of 20-24 year olds think a relevant issue. When it's not.

Unlike you I do not pretend to know everything and I am under no false assumptions that eveything I say is correct. These are my opinions, attack them, but do not attack me.

That's funny, I seem to remember you attacking me just about 30 minutes ago, and in this post?
Well, there you go, you learnt that Iraq and terrorists are connected.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

misled... in your opinion.

I am not saying that the government is intentionally misleading them (although they might be) and I am not saying that because the people are misled the war is wrong.

They're doing what they think is right, and it'd seem most americans agree with them lol
Your refusal to even comment on the website i presented you with a link to make me believe you like believing blindly what micheal moore says, sorry that the website is full of all these 'facts' and lacks entertainment! i'll tell them to put on some scary music.

Unlike you I do not pretend to know everything and I am under no false assumptions that eveything I say is correct.

People are being mis-led, willingly or unwillingly about the war in Iraq and the nature of terrorism in general.

Wouldn't... People 'Might be' being mis-led be better.... even then that's kinda still saying that you believe you're right, because you have essentially defined what is the 'right direction' and the 'wrong direction'.

These are my opinions, attack them, but do not attack me.

The opinions are yours, are you telling me you wouldn't attack racists? Their racism is only their 'opinion'.

edit: if 90% of 20-24 year olds thought that the terrorists were mainly iraqi's this sure didn't affect their voting decision.. most of them voted kerry.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Moonlight: Bush has a policy of appointing judges who know they are just judges, and don't attempt to interfere with aspects that would reduce Congress' power.

Well he would say that!