Trying to help -by Dennis Miller....

[Whiteclipse99]

TRYING TO HELP - by DENNIS MILLER

ALL THE RHETORIC ON WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD GO TO WAR AGAINST IRAQ HAS GOT MY INSANE LITTLE BRAIN SPINNING LIKE A ROULETTE WHEEL. I ENJOY READING OPINIONS FROM BOTH SIDES BUT I HAVE DETECTED A HINT OF CONFUSION FROM SOME OF YOU.

AS I WAS READING THE PAPER RECENTLY, I WAS REMINDED OF THE BEST ADVICE SOMEONE EVER GAVE ME. HE TOLD ME ABOUT THE KISS METHOD ("KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID!)



SO, WITH THIS AS A THEME, I'D LIKE TO APPLY THIS THEORY FOR THOSE WHO DON'T QUITE GET IT. MY HOPE IS THAT WE CAN SIMPLIFY THINGS A BIT AND RECOGNIZE A FEW IMPORTANT FACTS.

HERE ARE 10 THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN VOICING AN OPINION ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE:

1) OUT OF PRESIDENT BUSH AND SADDAM HUSSEIN ... HUSSEIN IS THE BAD GUY.

2) IF YOU HAVE FAITH IN THE UNITED NATIONS TO DO THE RIGHT THING KEEP THIS IN MIND, THEY HAVE LIBYA HEADING THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND IRAQ HEADING THE GLOBAL DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE. DO YOUR OWN MATH HERE

3) IF YOU USE GOOGLE SEARCH AND TYPE IN "FRENCH MILITARY VICTORIES," YOUR REPLY WILL BE "DID YOU MEAN FRENCH MILITARY DEFEATS?"

4) IF YOUR ONLY ANTI-WAR SLOGAN IS "NO WAR FOR OIL," SUE YOUR SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR ALLOWING YOU TO SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS AND ROBBING YOU OF THE EDUCATION YOU DESERVE.

5) SADDAM AND BIN LADEN WILL NOT SEEK UNITED NATIONS APPROVAL BEFORE THEY TRY TO KILL US.

6) DESPITE COMMON BELIEF, MARTIN SHEEN IS NOT THE PRESIDENT. HE PLAYS ONE ON T. V.

7) EVEN IF YOU ARE ANTI-WAR, YOU ARE STILL AN "INFIDEL!" AND BIN LADEN WANTS YOU DEAD, TOO.

8) IF YOU BELIEVE IN A "VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY" BUT NOT IN THE DANGER THAT HUSSEIN POSES, QUIT HANGING OUT WITH THE DELL COMPUTER DUDE.

9) WE ARE GOING TO LIBERATE THEM.

10) WHETHER YOU ARE FOR MILITARY ACTION OR AGAINST IT, OUR YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN OVERSEAS ARE FIGHTING FOR US TO DEFEND OUR RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT. WE ALL NEED TO SUPPORT THEM WITHOUT RESERVATION.

[Addict]

Gotta love Dennis Miller. Him & Bill Mahr. They make politics worth paying attention too.:D

[mt.biker]

10) WHETHER YOU ARE FOR MILITARY ACTION OR AGAINST IT, OUR YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN OVERSEAS ARE FIGHTING FOR US TO DEFEND OUR RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT. WE ALL NEED TO SUPPORT THEM WITHOUT RESERVATION.

I couldn't have said it better myself....

btw that man has it right on the money!

[GirlRacer]

I'm a HUGE dennis miller fan, he's the best, I have both his books.

[94_AcCoRd_EX]

#10 is VERY well said. Its sad to see all of the anti-war protest in place of what should be support for our troops.

Hehe I like the google one :)

[Mushroom]

That's really Dennis Miller? Just doesn't seem tongue-in-cheek enough to me his material.

[SolPol]

Originally posted by 94_AcCoRd_EX
#10 is VERY well said. Its sad to see all of the anti-war protest in place of what should be support for our troops.

Hehe I like the google one :)

There is a difference between not supporting the troops and not believing that we should be there in the first place.:yes:

[nonovurbizniz]

It's not a matter of what you believe or what you think you should say... or what should happen... it's a matter of the men and women FIGHTING RIGHT NOW... don't need to hear you and Richard Gere whinning like stuck pigs....

It's bad for moral.
It's not gunna change ANYTHING.
And if you tried to do that as an iraqi citizen you would be killed or inprisoned... unless of course your talking about in a year or 2 when the will be FREE.

[SolPol]

What does bad for moral mean? Like the moral of a bad story? I'm confused. Unless you meant morale, then I get it.

I'm exercising my right to say what the hell I want. I do support my troops over there. I hope not one has to die, BECAUSE we shouldn't be there in the first place.

[oc civic]

Originally posted by nonovurbizniz
It's not a matter of what you believe or what you think you should say... or what should happen... it's a matter of the men and women FIGHTING RIGHT NOW... don't need to hear you and Richard Gere whinning like stuck pigs....

It's bad for moral.
It's not gunna change ANYTHING.
And if you tried to do that as an iraqi citizen you would be killed or inprisoned... unless of course your talking about in a year or 2 when the will be FREE.

why are we only freeing the opressed country of iraq??? why stop there??? lol how about zimbabwe and there turture camps.. OH WAIT i know the answer.. we have NOTHING to gain by conquering zimbabwe, or MOST any other third world nation..

[Addict]

Originally posted by oc civic
why are we only freeing the opressed country of iraq??? why stop there??? lol how about zimbabwe and there turture camps.. OH WAIT i know the answer.. we have NOTHING to gain by conquering zimbabwe, or MOST any other third world nation..

They also don't have chemical/biological weapons either. That makes a slight difference.

The "no war for oil" campaign could use some education. They apparently missed some crucial parts.

[oc civic]

this war has little to nothing to do with oil..... imho at least..

but then again there is no real reason..

N.Korea - opressive gov with nukes
china- opressive gov nukes
iran- close enough to iraq in structure and threat

the list goes on and on...

[oc civic]

OMG this is great.. LMFAO

http://www.time.com/time/europe/gdml/peace2003.html

[oc civic]

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd_state.htm


quite a few people with NASTY weapons...

[Addict]

Originally posted by oc civic
http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd_state.htm

quite a few people with NASTY weapons...

That data is also out dated. The references are from 1996-1997 and it was last updated in 2000.

Any country can get those weapons. Its not whether they can, its what they would do with them.

[oc civic]

Originally posted by Addict
its what they would do with them.

last time i checked.. NOONE i knew was psychic... SSSSSSOOOOOOOOO... what they would do with them NO ONE knows...and the ONLY thing outdated on it was progress...

my point was simple... THERE are plenty other countries out there that....

1. are mean dictators/kings/prince
2. do not like us all that much
3. oppress there people...
4. seek desire to have, have or will have soon (weapons of mass destruction) nukes, chem, and or biological weapontry capable of MASS devistation..

[AzCivic]

Originally posted by oc civic
this war has little to nothing to do with oil..... imho at least..


How long did it take for you to figure that one out???

[AzCivic]

Originally posted by oc civic
last time i checked.. NOONE i knew was psychic... SSSSSSOOOOOOOOO... what they would do with them NO ONE knows...and the ONLY thing outdated on it was progress...

my point was simple... THERE are plenty other countries out there that....

1. are mean dictators/kings/prince
2. do not like us all that much
3. oppress there people...
4. seek desire to have, have or will have soon (weapons of mass destruction) nukes, chem, and or biological weapontry capable of MASS devistation..

Well lets see Saddam already used the shit to kill countless innocent people, I think thats a pretty good indication of what he plans on doing with his weapons. It soesnt take a psychic to figure that out.

And do we not do our best to help out people who get screwed over by theyre county/ leaders?

[oc civic]

Originally posted by AzCivic
How long did it take for you to figure that one out???

umm i said that from day one.. we want iraq for TWO reasons.. that im aware of at least..

1. to clean up bush seniors mistakes
2. to have a strategic stronghold in the middle east

[mt.biker]

ah some of you american's make me sick, i'm more behind this war and my country isn't even involved....

if you say you're supporting the troops over there, then you wouldn't be reminding them they are fighting for the wrong cause. Its amazing how so many of you talk shit...

[oc civic]

Originally posted by AzCivic
Well lets see Saddam already used the shit to kill countless innocent people, I think thats a pretty good indication of what he plans on doing with his weapons. It soesnt take a psychic to figure that out.

And do we not do our best to help out people who get screwed over by theyre county/ leaders?

just to be REALLY specific (and no im not saying you are wrong) but give me the specific case, where he used biological/ chemical weapons on his own people?? (please refrain from listing instances where chem agents were used against militant forces bent on overthrowign the country, as we must realize this is a country unlike ours.. political uprising, in a civil war type attacks is common)

also lets leave out when it was used on iranians, since we as a country back door supported that..


so please.. EDUCATE me..

[oc civic]

the more i did the more i realize most of you have NO clue.....

[Addict]

Originally posted by oc civic
the more i did the more i realize most of you have NO clue.....
Really? Since when did you become the offical Iraqi war person?

How about what I said before.
They also don't have chemical/biological weapons either. That makes a slight difference.
The U.S. isn't out to "conquer" these other nations. We are trying to prevent a slightly delusional man from destroying innocent people. Granted the U.S. has done some things that backfired a bit, but that doesn't give these countries the right to kill innocent people.
The U.S. does have something to gain from this. PIECE OF MIND. So do the rest of the nations that back us. Knowing that a dictator who could destroy countless people is no longer in power. Will this likely result in more oil for the U.S. and other nations? Yes. Why wouldn't it? The Iraqi people will gain from that as well. They get our money, we get the oil. Why is that wrong?


I could've sworn we had this debate a few months back. Anyway. That's my last retort. This topic is way over done.

[Zybach]

Denise miller is right, we need to support our troops. Lately I've been seeing crap on t.v. about people trying to stop the war by jamming up streets and trying to slow down everyday business. Their opinions were heard and their views rejected, what else do these tree huggers want?

And as for the "countries with weapons of mass destruction" site. That's pretty wrong. Even if the data is old that doesn't mean those countries are less of a threat than they are today. Having a lot of countries with WMDs is like cramming 100 people in a room and giving everyone a bomb that detonates on impact; eventually someone is bound to screw up and kill the entire world. :mad:

http://msnbc.com/c/0/145/115/10x7/030324_war_5pm01.jpg
Trained Dolphines.

[nonovurbizniz]

OC-
I could make and produce both chemical and biological weapons from shit you can buy online or at local stores.... purchase, possesion, and even research does NOT constitute INTENT...

Mustard gassing your OWN people revolutionary or not... (mr. our country is soooo great cuz we can overthrough the gov. anytime we get jumpy.) AND OPENLY DECLARING HIS INTENT TO INFLICT PAIN AND SUFFERING ON THE AMERICAN GOV AND PEOPLE.

That's intent. MOST countries to which you refer as being a threat... are only doing so in the PUBLIC eye... china, north korea, iran, name ANY OTHER besides what WAS Afghanastan.... ALL of these countries are MORE than aware and accepting of the fact that if they push us TOO far we will ASS-RAPE them.

In turn they act nicey nicey to our gov. behind closed doors and placate the people by making us the boogy man instead of themselves... How much pressure do you think anti-american sentiment takes off of the local gov???

As far as people having there heads up their butts... You seem to be the only one arguing based on thin facts and BS.

SolPol-
moral and morale I could give too flying f*cks that I mispelled something... if you didn't get it your a Retard... If you best retort is pointing out my spelling flaw you are a retarded second grade teacher.

It's just a matter of peoples dislike for bush or inherent mis-trust of the gov... people just start spouting out CRAP about this and that being reasons we're wrong or the war is.... WHATEVER it's NOT in YOUR hands.... AT ALL... if you don't realize Bush and his administration intend on COMPLETING this mission REGARDLESS of loss or public opinion then your dumb....

And if you think making yourself FEEL better by doing something is what you should do your a selfish F*CK who should be thinking about the people who had or have the BALLS to go over there and fight not just to protect OUR freedoms but to bestow those freedoms on another people.

STOP BITCHING IT'S NOT GOOD FOR MORAL....e.

[nonovurbizniz]

Feel free to look at my other posts... I'm not for bush... I'm not for war... I'm not for joining the military....I'm not even for violence towards thieves.... I am the king of passavism....and government mistrust...

THIS IS A TIME OF WAR ALL YOUR DOING BY PRACTICING YOUR RIGHT (and yes if you so choose it is your right and I wouldn't change that) TO PROTEST IS SCREWING WITH THE HEADS OF THE BRAVE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN FIGHTING ON YOUR AND THE IRAQI PEOPLES BEHALF.

[SolPol]

The Iraqi people will gain from that as well. They get our money, we get the oil. Why is that wrong?

Because we are not the world's police.


The U.S. does have something to gain from this. PIECE OF MIND

PEACE of mind?

moral and morale I could give too flying f*cks that I mispelled something... if you didn't get it your a Retard... If you best retort is pointing out my spelling flaw you are a retarded second grade teacher.

It's just a matter of peoples dislike for bush or inherent mis-trust of the gov... people just start spouting out CRAP about this and that being reasons we're wrong or the war is.... WHATEVER it's NOT in YOUR hands.... AT ALL... if you don't realize Bush and his administration intend on COMPLETING this mission REGARDLESS of loss or public opinion then your dumb....

And if you think making yourself FEEL better by doing something is what you should do your a selfish F*CK who should be thinking about the people who had or have the BALLS to go over there and fight not just to protect OUR freedoms but to bestow those freedoms on another people.

STOP BITCHING IT'S NOT GOOD FOR MORAL....e.

Hello, can you hear yourself? Bestow OUR freedoms on another people. Do you see what's wrong with that? OUR freedoms, not theirs. What may be right for you may NOT be right for others. They have an entirely different culture and belief system over there and other places.

Just because you believe the CRAP you've been spoon fed, it doesn't mean I have to. I'm sorry for pointing out that you're a moron by the way. My bad.

[nonovurbizniz]

Ya I've been spoon fed sh*t dude... you don't know me and your making TOTALLY off base assumptions about me....

Would you or for that matter any middle eastern person you know WANT to have the risk of TORTURE DEATH CHILD DISMEMBERMENT because they SAY something negative about there leader...

My wife is Haitian... and she live under aristide... and ya it's great as long as you don't get involved in your gov. or don't question ANYTHING they do... but if you do... expect torture murder your family being tortured ruined imprissoned or driven from the country.

But Haiti is a ****ing country club compared to Saddam Husein's Iraq. Iraq is the most brutal dictatorships in the world.. period..

You think tiananmen square was bad... ya how bout if that was mustard gas and thousands died not anywhere from 0-1000.

And yes I can hear myself... it was purposely overt... that is the mission whether or not you believe it or not...And if you new ANYTHING about even RECENT history you'd be aware of the fact that in the gulf war Bush Sr. encouraged revolt to the Iraqi people and told them we would support their coot (he broadcasted it over every airwave in Iraq during the war). AND THEY DID... and Saddam suppressed it after signing a cease fire... why did bush fold??? BECAUSE OF PROTESTING PUSSIES LIKE YOU WHINNING ABOUT THE "HIGHWAY OF DEATH". He figured he wouldn't get ellected if he kept going after that and it WAS a mistake... we ****ED the Iraqi people and they DESERVE to have our word HONORED even if it is 12 years late.

and as far as you even mentioning oil as a concern your a retard... WE WILL NEVER EVER EVER GET AWAY WITH TAKING THERE OIL....

What do you think the iraqi people or anyone else wants to do with oil??? SELL IT. ON AN OPEN MARKET...

The only reason US gets lower prices on oil is because of the VOLUME... how much did you pay for your exhaust or whatever...the store didn't pay that (and if you were a frequent customer they'd probobly charge you less then the average joe)... and a vendor like nopi probobly pays even less than the store... it's realatively simple economics.

Ya you made me feel like a real moron.. cuz I spelled something wrong... You have your head perminantly BURIED up your A$$ but I didn't notice I forgot an 'e'.... wow I sure have been spoon fed.... putz:rolleyes:

[SolPol]

Hey asshole, I didn't bring oil into this discussion. Maybe you, but not me. Here's the thing, you keep wanting to talk about our freedoms and all that, then you need to respect mine. I was just having a conversation until you wanted to make it personal. I should probably expect that from someone who admires W so much though.

Moron.

[SolPol]

...And if you new ANYTHING about even RECENT history you'd be aware of the fact that in the gulf war Bush Sr. encouraged revolt to the Iraqi people and told them we would support their coot (he broadcasted it over every airwave in Iraq during the war). AND THEY DID... and Saddam suppressed it after signing a cease fire...why did bush fold??? BECAUSE OF PROTESTING PUSSIES LIKE YOU WHINNING ABOUT THE "HIGHWAY OF DEATH".

Wow, he should've finished the job. And in regards to the rest of that, he didn't get re elected BECAUSE he didn't finish the job in the first place. He was riding a huge wave of popularity after that war, so maybe you should check out your recent history tough guy.

And what is a coot? Or maybe I should "new" that already.

[nonovurbizniz]

You are seriously retarded if you think bush was Riding anything but the most serious level of public backlash EVER... do you know how hard it is for an incumbent president to NOT get re-elected...

He got beat by a singing and dancing man from Arkansas... All cuz he went on MTV and told the kids what kinda underwear he wore.

Wave of Popularity... Ya among republicans...the only "hero" that walked out of that war was Schwarzkopf.

So if he was SOOOO popular HOW IN GOD'S NAME DID HE FAIL TO ACHIEVE THE SIMPLIST POLITICAL VICTORY IN HIS CAREER.

He manages to get on as Reagans running mate amidst SERIOUS talk of his envolvment in secret organizations and tendency toward cut throat tactics and back door deals.... BY REAGAN HIMSELF... but he can't manage to get an incumbent re-election...

Ya he was like MJ in the 80's. you pootard

[SolPol]

You're just an idiot aren't you? He was hugley popular after that "war." He didn't get re elected because of new taxes. You know, "Read my lips, no new taxes." Ringing any bells? He had one of his highest approval ratings ever after that "war."

And Clinton got elected because he was WAY better than Bush. And the secret society "nonsense?" All completely true.

Clinton was a better President than either Bush could ever hope to be. I hope he runs again in '04 personally. He could win.

And your hero Reagan? Yeah, he tripled the national debt in eight years. 8!!!

Star Wars, huh huh. What a great idea that was.

And by the way again, what country is gonna come wipe us off the map for breaking the ABM treaty? Or breaking with the Geneva Accords and torturing prisoners in Afghanistan. TORTURING!!!!!!!!

[nonovurbizniz]

Wow... your dumb.

A. I don't like Reagan... I never even said that... like I said your arguing against someone I'm NOT.

B.The No New taxes thing was totally overblown in the media and the blow came BEFORE the war not AFTER so how does that have to do with anything...

C. Your obviously retarded if you don't realize that the economy is not an instant effects kinda thing... Reagan had a crappy economy because of carter and ford...Clinton had a good economy because of bush&reagan.

D. I like clinton for certain reasons... I like Bush SR. for certain reasons... same as reagan... but I'm NO republican and reagan nor bush would EVER be regarded by me as hero's by ANY stretch of the imagination.

E. Your a f*cking genious huh? You wish Clinton would run again huh?.... That's kinda against the rules ya know....

D. WTF is "hugley"

F. Bush lost because he was Too good for the american people and felt no need to justify his actions... because he felt he knew better.... Clinton WON because he was charismatic...and there had been 12 Years of bush...people were tired of the republican way of things... the republican voters where too confident that bush would win so they didn't come out and support their candidate....the democratic voters and indipendant voters came out in MASSES... and ALL voted for Clinton... Bush lost because of his lack of concern with ANYTHING outside of his scope (ie. black people, poor people, education, quality of living for the average american etc etc etc...)

To simplify it and say he lost cuz clinton was better or to say he was somehow magically HUGELY popular after the war but managed to lose and un-losable race is rediculous.

I'm just being a dick calling you a retard and all but you are just arguing a side without really looking at the big picture under the guise that your somehow the revolutionary underdog... I'm no patriot... and I say that proudly... I believe we should support our troops... and I say it because I see ENDLESS problems with america both in gov. and society.... But saying that us freeing the iraqi people for whatever reason isn't good or we should stop is retarded.

What... free tibet but F iraq.... at least the iraqi's will fight with us against their subjigators. The richard gere expects us to what fight the largest army in the world in order to free some monks so they can be on their special mountain... but free the iraqi people GOD NO THEY HAVE VALUE TO THE WORLD. Don't let them free themselves and live off the profitable nature of their land... only if they want to pray or dance all day then we should free them.....

[nonovurbizniz]

Oh and war crimes are prosicuted by the un if there's proof of torture or even mis-treatment of prisoners there WILL be trials and people WILL be held accountable....

If we wanted to torture people or perform illegal war tactics we'd simply skirt around it by agreeing to involve ourselves only with amnesty from post conflict prosocution... we did not do that in Afghanastan... it was a straigt up declaration of war.

We did this MANY times in the 80's and under clinton as well.. I knew a guy who was in special forces since reagan's first term... he said that he was NEVER busier than he was under clinton... and in much more behind the scenes nation shaping ways than bush or reagan EVER did.

[SolPol]

I said they TORTURED prisoners in Afghanistan.

With all the typos in your posts, you don't get to make fun of my one.

And there are differences between there, their and they're. As are there between your and you're. And between where and were. Genius.



E. Your a f*cking genious huh? You wish Clinton would run again huh?.... That's kinda against the rules ya know....


No, you're (that's right, you are) the genius fool. If YOU knew your (that's right, your) Constitution, you would know that the amendment says that no person shall be President for more than two CONSECUTIVE terms. Who is the genius now pal?

C. Your obviously retarded if you don't realize that the economy is not an instant effects kinda thing... Reagan had a crappy economy because of carter and ford...Clinton had a good economy because of bush&reagan.


You're obviously retarded if you don't know that it is commonly held in economic circles that it takes AT LEAST 15 years for a President's actions to truly be measured. Reagan had one of the best economies EVER smarty. That's why mindless sheep like yourself loved him so much. They didn't know it had nothing to do with him. Good knowledge of your recent history though man. You sure put me in my place.

[nonovurbizniz]

As I stated I don't like reagan.... It's a matter of the programs which I didn't like reaping benifits to the economy once declassified...

As far as reagan having one of the best economies.... Ya right if you were an executive or a fat cat. Living ANYWHERE in america you tell me quality of life was at even approaching an acceptable level during his or bush sr's administration and your a moron.

Great stocks were up that's great... people were eating cat food to survive.... the economy benifited rich white people everyone else was surviving on crumbs....

So according to your "economic circles" carter and ford must have been AMAZING presidents.... cuz the 90's actually started looking up...

Reagan's administration was not in "economic collapse" because enough HUGE coorporations and there CEO's made enough money to make it LOOK like it was ok.... try going to harlem or trenton during ANY MINUTE of reagan or bush's administration and you'd be dead... I hate to tell you but just because the programs that help are under the Social Service umbrella doesn't make the reason for the problems non-economic.... the economy is more than the ticker tape dude.

Oh your ability to pick at grammar instead of the issue's is truely the last bastian of a retard. (Ill be shore to prove reed all my posts from now on :pukey)

this post is officially hijacked so I say we should agree to dis-agree.

[SolPol]

No comment on the Clinton thing huh? I'm shocked.

And I hated Reagan even as a kid, so we agree on what his Presidency was like. No need to argue that with me. What you were saying above is exactly what I was talking about.

You spell well and I pointed it out, sounds like the actions of a desperate man calling me a retard for pointing it out.

At least you didn't call me a retart though. I hate that.

[nonovurbizniz]

I don't KNOW your wrong but one thing I do know... If clinton was ALLOWED to run again... he would do it in a second no questions or cares.

It's obviously not an option or it's one which could be fought in court... otherwise people would be suggesting it everyone know's he'd get elected again...

And as for my spelling... as I said... I'm not so into this that I'm going to spell check or interupt my stream of thought for sake of spelling.. I assume people are capable of figuring out what I mean.

[oc civic]

Originally posted by nonovurbizniz
OC-
I could make and produce both chemical and biological weapons from shit you can buy online or at local stores.... purchase, possesion, and even research does NOT constitute INTENT... <-- last time i checked.. you could NOT buy anthrax on the internet.... or at the local grocery store

Mustard gassing your OWN people revolutionary or not... <-- like i said before.. we just shoot them.. that makes us better???

(mr. our country is soooo great cuz we can overthrough the gov. anytime we get jumpy.) <-- not exactly what i said...


AND OPENLY DECLARING HIS INTENT TO INFLICT PAIN AND SUFFERING ON THE AMERICAN GOV AND PEOPLE.

That's intent. MOST countries to which you refer as being a threat... are only doing so in the PUBLIC eye... china, north korea, iran, name ANY OTHER besides what WAS Afghanastan.... ALL of these countries are MORE than aware and accepting of the fact that if they push us TOO far we will ASS-RAPE them.<---you like to site opinions WITHOUT fact behind them...

In turn they act nicey nicey to our gov. behind closed doors and placate the people by making us the boogy man instead of themselves... How much pressure do you think anti-american sentiment takes off of the local gov???

As far as people having there heads up their butts... You seem to be the only one arguing based on thin facts and BS.<-- you have posted not a SHRED of fact...

SolPol-
moral and morale I could give too flying f*cks that I mispelled something... if you didn't get it your a Retard... If you best retort is pointing out my spelling flaw you are a retarded second grade teacher.<-- i agree.. arguing about spelling on the internet is lame..

It's just a matter of peoples dislike for bush or inherent mis-trust of the gov... people just start spouting out CRAP about this and that being reasons we're wrong or the war is.... WHATEVER it's NOT in YOUR hands.... AT ALL... if you don't realize Bush and his administration intend on COMPLETING this mission REGARDLESS of loss or public opinion then your dumb....<-- i fully understand that NOTHING i do wil change the course of war...

And if you think making yourself FEEL better by doing something is what you should do your a selfish F*CK who should be thinking about the people who had or have the BALLS to go over there and fight not just to protect OUR freedoms but to bestow those freedoms on another people.<--- he should LOSE his PERSONAL opinion and freedom to disagree with the gov because its war time??? last time i checked that was not a provision of war time...

STOP BITCHING IT'S NOT GOOD FOR MORAL....e.

[oc civic]

Originally posted by nonovurbizniz


If we wanted to torture people or perform illegal war tactics we'd simply skirt around it by agreeing to involve ourselves only with amnesty from post conflict prosocution... we did not do that in Afghanastan... it was a straigt up declaration of war.

.

IF???? thats exactly what we did.. we stated that as "unlawfull combatants" they are NOT POW'S so they are NOT subject to the terms of the geneva convention... we DID "skate" around it... we sent prisoners to countries who are "friendly" with us, and endorse torture, as to not dirty our hands..

[oc civic]

Originally posted by nonovurbizniz
(Ill be shore to prove reed all my posts from now on :pukey)


maybe you should "PROOFread" them as well.. lol

sorry could not resist..

[SolPol]

Originally posted by oc civic
maybe you should "PROOFread" them as well.. lol

sorry could not resist..

I think that one was on purpose to mess with me man, but thanks.

Anyway, Clinton could and can run again, he just doesn't want to. He would win and and I wish he would run. He should do it. Let's all write to him. Maybe I can find a link to show you he is allowed to.

[accord98lx]

Originally posted by SolPol



No, you're (that's right, you are) the genius fool. If YOU knew your (that's right, your) Constitution, you would know that the amendment says that no person shall be President for more than two CONSECUTIVE terms. Who is the genius now pal?



2 consecutive terms?? Can I see the proofs....I might be learning something here.

[SolPol]

I can't find it yet, I gotta look more. But I have been told that it says only that you can't hold it for more than two consecutive terms.

[accord98lx]

Amendment XXII (22)
"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice"

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxii.html

"22nd Amendment
Since the presidency of George Washington, only one thing could be said to be totally consistent - that no President had the job for more than two full terms. Washington had been asked to run for a third term in 1796, but he made it quite clear that he had no intention of doing so; that an orderly transition of power was needed to set the Constitution in stone. And so it was for almost 150 years.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was first elected President in 1932, and re-elected in 1936. When it came time for the Democrats to nominate a candidate for the Presidency in 1940, two things had happened. First, the Republicans had made great gains in Congress in the 1938 elections. And Hitler happened. Europe was in the throes of a great war, with trouble in the Pacific, too. A change away from Roosevelt, who had lead the nation through the Great Depression, did not seem wise. He was nominated for an unprecedented third term, and won. It was not a landslide victory, however, and it is debatable that FDR would have had a third term had it not been for the war. When 1944 rolled around, changing leaders in the middle of World War II, which the United States was now fully engaged in, also seemed unwise, and FDR ran for and was elected to, a fourth term.

His life was nearly over, however, and his Vice President, Harry Truman, became President upon FDR's death less than 100 days after his inauguration. Though FDR's leadership was seen by many as a key reason that the U.S. came out of WWII victorious, the Congress was determined, once the war ended, to ensure that Washington's self-imposed two-term limit become the law of the land. Specifically excepting Truman from its provisions, the 22nd Amendment passed Congress on March 21, 1947. After Truman won a second term in 1948, it was ratified on February 27, 1951. Truman could have run for a third term, but bowed out early before campaigning began."

--http://www.usconstitution.net/constamnotes.html#Am22

I dont know where you get your consecutive term from but.....I think you're wrong dude. I was taught that a president only had a 2 term limit.

[nonovurbizniz]

SolPol-
Trust me I'm almost sure it doesn't say that... and if it does.. in the constitution... that's just a little piece of paper... there are BOOKS AND BOOKS on presidential law.. it's not all in there.
Here's Article II of the Constitution:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html

NOTHING in there about how many terms you can run only:

"He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:"

As I said I don't KNOW your wrong but there has...wait... I was just looking around... and this guy says I'm wrong and you're right....it's the 22nd amendment:

"The 22nd Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified in 1951 after the death of three-term president Franklin Roosevelt, forbids a person from holding the office of president for more than two terms in a row"

BUT WAIT AGAIN...

HA..... HA HA.... YOUR WRONG DEAD WRONG.... it's this kind of "internet facts" and "I heard"'s that screw up the REALITY... the 22nd amendment to the constitution ladies and gents...:

"Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term. "

NO 2 TERMS. IF YOU SERVE 2yrs OF SOMEONE ELSES YOU CAN ONLY RUN 1 MORE TIME. PERIOD. I TOLD YOU IF HE COULD HE WOULD.

OC-

As far as Afghanastan... right we skated around like I said we would if we felt the need....Personally I don't think that ANY of this torture talk is justified or HALF as bad as anyone pictures...when you talk about american torture it's just not the same anymore... we can't get away with old school saddam type torture anymore. We drug people or threaten them or distort their perception of reality... and sure that's not good but it's not like we rape their wives and gouge out their childrens eyes.

This conflict in Iraq is under MUCH more worldwide scruteny... beyond that the goals are not to hunt down and find people... we know where we want to go... it's just a matter of getting there and getting rid of those who are part of the violent regime.

What I don't think people understand is all we want is a gov. that represents the people over there... if that means a American hating president that's fine... We have learned from the sha of iran to current leadership in Suadi Arabia you cant let people dominate power over there or subjigate their people and pretend that the public likes us when they don't. SA is about to blow up the people in power there are totally in the minority and HATED by the masses and they're not even good to us... they are the one country (besides MAYBE china) that really couldn't care less about us or what we say (us gov.). That's why people over there REALLY hate us... because we fiddled in there affairs scewing things to one way and the other to suit us and it screwed them... Now they believe that the leaders who we helped represent American ideals... and they're particular charactor traits are RIGHT in line with the worst of Capatalism. They take advantage and the people see that as an american trait.

This war could change that...

Seriously read the post from RR about the Operation Human Shield kid... this is a war that they WANT...

Everything I have said IS fact when I wasn't sure I said so and then came back with the facts to back it up....

FACT... Palestine's gov... is helping us in ways not even the GOV. would have EVER expected them to... HOWEVER their newspapers and media and public opinion are WILDLY ANTI-AMERICAN. It's double speak by foriegn Gov's to placate their people.

FACT... Anthrax is a COMMON farm yard desease... You can get and grow spores of it given the determination... look at the cult in japan who made friggin SARIN... yes they manufactured it in vacant buildings in THE MIDDLE OF TOKYO... beyond that you can make ANY NUMBER of explosives...chemical gas reactions....nerve agents ALL from READILLY available everyday items... NO it is not easy but it is MORE than accomplishable...

FACT... SHOOTING SOLDIERS OF A FORIEGN ARMY IS WAY DIFFERENT THAN BLANKET GASSING VILLAGES TO REMOVE THE THREAT ELIMENT WITHIN IT. We are PURPOSLY sacraficing targets not just in bagdad but all over iraq because of soft target issues... whether or not it's par for the course WE ARE TRYING TO BE HUMANE HERE.

You don't lose your personal freedom by not expressing it in a public forum... especially when it's just to be a spoiler... you make people who are worried about their loved ones overseas worry or upset or whatever... YOU have NO vested interest in this one way or the other besides "morally"... get over yourself (not you personally people protesting publicly). I'm not saying don't question the gov's tactics or what they're doing but do so AFTERWARDS... there is no reason for a Marine or Ranger in combat or in Kuwait to watch the tv or read the news and see.
"MILLIONS PROTEST WAR ON IRAQI PEOPLE" or
"INTERNATIONAL TENSIONS PUT PRESSURE ON WAR PLANNERS"

they just don't need to see that shit and neither do their families.

and as far as it being a provision of war time... no but lots of things aren't on the books that used to be given... now everyone questions everything... "why shouldn't I voice my opinion"... because.. it's MUCH MUCH bigger than you.

[oc civic]

growing anthrax in the yard on a dead carcuss (without even knowing it) and weapons grade are VERY differant...

FACT..

lol

[nonovurbizniz]

that's where the growing (certainly not in a yard or on a dead carcass. you grow the spores only) and processing come in... it's ALL perfectly possible even on a low budget. Most of the supplies can be had from local companies ubgrading there equipment or even just dumpster diving at the right spots.

[SolPol]

Well, I stand corrected. I gotta remember who told me that now so I can go kick some ass. I thought it was in the Presidential law books, but I'm not gonna go looking that up.

Oops :confused: