Bushy 0 Posted July 30, 2004 1.) How did Clinton decimate our military? I keep hearing this with no specific examples. 2.) No military could have stopped 9/11, but the police and other law enforcement agencies might have. But Bush cut a program that paid to put more cops on the streets so he could fund his tax cut to his cronies. Let's see... 1.) Clinton drastically cut Military spending. Meaning less equipment, outdated equipment, less money for recruiting (perfect example; look at all the ads for the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard even, now that Bush is in office. You hardly ever saw them when Clinton was in office. Double hmmm). And etcetera. 2.) If our Military was as strong and as ready as it should've been, not the way Clinton left it, then nobody would've dared really to pull a stunt like flying planes into buildings. Retaliation would be swift and devastating. The Taliban and Al Queda and whatever aren't just these suicide armies. Sure their minions are stupid and brainwashed enough to walk up to school busses and blow themselves to kingdom come, but the leaders aren't that stupid (which is why they're leaders). They actually do want to survive. But they knew that with all the Liberal ewokwads with their heads up their asses in Congress and various other places would not agree to an immediate counter-attack, and they knew that the process of retaliation would be slow. So they had time to run and hide or whatever while the UN had a massive resolution orgy and whatnot. And don't even say anything about those being two different matters, going after Osama and going after Hussen. Same reason, they were connected. Let me make this clear, because I know certain "people" are going to have a thing or two to say about this. I didn't say that all Liberals have their heads up their asses. Only most of the politicians do. My opinion. Go away and leave me alone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 1.) Clinton drastically cut Military spending. Meaning less equipment, outdated equipment, less money for recruiting (perfect example; look at all the ads for the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard even, now that Bush is in office. You hardly ever saw them when Clinton was in office. Double hmmm). And etcetera. Alright, well first, we were in a time of peace. Peace does not mean let's increase our huge debt, to make our military bigger, even though it is the best. It means help the American people, you know...the ones without jobs, enough money to get food...those sorts. ((Btw, where was the first hmmmm)). Also, if you wanted to join the Armed forces you don't need to sit on your butt all day waiting for a television commercial, it's just more waste of money. 2.) If our Military was as strong and as ready as it should've been, not the way Clinton left it, then nobody would've dared really to pull a stunt like flying planes into buildings. How do you know? If we had a bigger military, we would have more troops in the middle east, pissing off the extremists even more. Retaliation would be swift and devastating. Well...you know...Bush would still be president...so basically thats taking a cut at Bush and his policies. The Taliban and Al Queda and whatever aren't just these suicide armies. Sure their minions are stupid and brainwashed enough to walk up to school busses and blow themselves to kingdom come, but the leaders aren't that stupid (which is why they're leaders). They aren't stupid, they just believe in different religions. Just because they aren't like you, doesn't make them stupid. And just because they fight and die for their religion doesn't make them stupid, look at the Crusades. They actually do want to survive. Of course, to try to stop the "Evil Imperialists" That's how Guerilla warfare is fought... But they knew that with all the Liberal ewokwads with their heads up their asses in Congress and various other places would not agree to an immediate counter-attack, and they knew that the process of retaliation would be slow. Well...so you're saying is that you don't want a democracy...you should try North Korea...they have a nice big army and no liberals...and if there is a liberal..they're sent to camps and killed in ways you probably don't want to know about...Democracy means the people control government, and most of the time people disagree with each other. That's why our policies are always so slow in being passed but they're "Fair and equal" So they had time to run and hide or whatever while the UN had a massive resolution orgy and whatnot. Well...actually...they had time to run and hide because of something we call "Surprise attacks", that means the enemy is shocked/stunned for a bit and won't be able to do anything. BTW, I dunno why you're bashing the U.N... And don't even say anything about those being two different matters, going after Osama and going after Hussen. Same reason, they were connected. "Connected" How about Osama and Bush...or maybe how Osama was based in Afghanistan, yet we invaded Iraq...or WMDs...There's so much evidence against Bush in this specific case that you should be smart enough to know not to use it anymore. Let me make this clear, because I know certain "people" are going to have a thing or two to say about this. I didn't say that all Liberals have their heads up their asses. Only most of the politicians do. My opinion. Go away and leave me alone. Your opinion is valued...this is my opinionated response. I'm not attacking you so I am in a sense leaving you alone...im not PMing or IMing you. It;s totally up to you if you wanna respond. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bushy 0 Posted July 30, 2004 *doesn't bother to even read GI's post because it's to freaking long and has way too many quotes in it* Dude, just say what you have to say like in a normal conversation, there's no need to jump from subject to subject and comment on each sentence. Sheesh... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ana 15 Posted July 30, 2004 *shrugs* seems like a sensible layout to me... might be long but it works to address each point and not skip anything. Very professional. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 *doesn't bother to even read GI's post because it's to freaking long and has way too many quotes in it* Dude, just say what you have to say like in a normal conversation, there's no need to jump from subject to subject and comment on each sentence. Sheesh... Im doing placeholders for the readers good...so instead of doing some essay that has the reader asking where the hell the quote i was using was said or something I show it. My writing by itself is short. Politics is a lot of reading...if you wanna get involved get used to reading specially on a MB Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bushy 0 Posted July 30, 2004 (edited) Screw it. I don't debate any more anyway. I state my piece then leave, for the most part. To be honest with you, I really don't care what you had to say on the matter anyway... Edited July 30, 2004 by Bushy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 Well why are you still posting here? :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ana 15 Posted July 30, 2004 This thread is for everyone, not just you. If you don't want to read what GI has to say, you don't have to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bushy 0 Posted July 30, 2004 Well duh, I didn't read it, remember? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 Dont prove to us that you're hypocritical...you you don't care you wouldnt jsut post here with useless retorts saying how you don't care. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Princess 35 Posted July 30, 2004 Drake, I'm starting to like your idea of closing political threads and disallowing political debates more and more Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mickey 1 Posted July 30, 2004 My vote is for bush, he's a president that get stuff done. Now I will be the first to admit that he didn't carry things out perfectly, but perfect is an unattainable position. So far we have seen good results with the war. Yes I know someone is going to say "what? How can you call this dragging on war with 900 fatalities good results?" Simple. Our war on Iraq, first off, was justified. Maybe we had poor info on the WMDs, but the government shouldn't have used that as the sole purpose. This war was justified because: A. Saddam Hussein was an evil and ruthless dicatator who slaughtered his own people and had the capabilites to launch a deadly war on Americans, Whom he hates. B. Saddam has been dodging the mandates and ultimatums set forth by the U.N. for several years. We couldn't afford to give tenth and eleventh chances, especially after the terrorist attacks showed just how vulnerable of a target we are. and C. Elaborating on A and B, we realize that change is not obtained through sitting on our thumbs and allowing possible problems to continue to grow and mutate into full-fledged disasters. We've learned that the hard way all to often in the past. Change is good, without it nothing happens, nothing gets done, and that is troubling. So I support Bush, and I feel he needs to remain in office in order to finish what he began. Then when his term is up, perhaps the Republicans will put in place a good follow-up leader, one with a good economic sense and strength to stand up if we are pushed down again. Kerry would pullout of Iraq and possibly even Afghanistan. Which would leave those countries in a state of massive catastrophic confusion and disorganization. And we all know about the Democrats social reform programs, hmmm the cost of wars plus more welfare to crack addicted moms and more unemployment for lazy deadbeats. Sounds like a stiff tax hike to me. My thoughts on welfare programs is not that we need to end them, we need to set and enforce better qualifications. Like drug testing and time restrictions for drawing unemployment, maybe even a "3 strikes type system." If only I was president ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 Ruin freedom of speech prin :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake 53 Posted July 30, 2004 They are the root of most arguments, hatreds and flames on GB. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 I thought i was :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake 53 Posted July 30, 2004 Nah. You're just the resident idiot. :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 THought that was Bushy :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake 53 Posted July 30, 2004 Nope. It's most definately you, lol. Anyway, how about we just say that everyone will always have differing views on politics and no matter how hard you try to force your ideas on other people, they'll still believe different things. So, let's just stop debating politics...it's kinda pointless and it leads to hostility. I say that if you want to discuss it, whether diplomatically or by slinging mud, then do it over PM or on a messenger...or even find some political discussion board. That's my piece. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 But that leaves people out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Princess 35 Posted July 30, 2004 more unemployment for lazy deadbeats. Oh gee, have you thought that not all people on unemployment aren't deadbeats? Because I'll tell you something, my dad is drawing unemployment right now because his company downsized and eliminated his position because he was too damn expensive. He's been trying to find a job but the economy in Michigan ewoking sucks right now. He couldn't draw unemployment for a full year because he wasn't eligible and things were damn tight around my house. Right now he has a job that is helping us make ends meet but while he's waiting to get into something that pays close to what he used to make, we have to depend on unemployment money because he's making half of what he used to make. Right now we're barely making it because the unemployment check is late getting here, that's not fun. Yeah, thanks a lot for insulting my family. ewok off. My thoughts on welfare programs is not that we need to end them, we need to set and enforce better qualifications. Like drug testing and time restrictions for drawing unemployment, maybe even a "3 strikes type system." There are time limits on unemployment. Trust me, I know If only I was president ... Thank God that you're not Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tsl 7 Posted July 30, 2004 Drake's right. Why does everyone here seek to force their opinions on politics on everyone else? Busy, you're a right winger. GI, you're a left winger... You will never agree. Get over yourselves. Neither of you are political geniouses. Neither of you are 100% right. Neither of you are 100% wrong. If you can't handle people commenting on your opinions, then don't make them publicly known. Especially in debate forums. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 So far we have seen good results with the war. Yes I know someone is going to say "what? How can you call this dragging on war with 900 fatalities good results?" Simple. Our war on Iraq, first off, was justified. How does it being justified mean that it had good results? We've lost soldiers and we lost international support... Maybe we had poor info on the WMDs, but the government shouldn't have used that as the sole purpose. They did...so their purpose totally failed...you can add others...but they basically just kept on talking about WMDs... A. Saddam Hussein was an evil and ruthless dicatator who slaughtered his own people and had the capabilites to launch a deadly war on Americans, Whom he hates. Same with North Korea...N. Korea in a couple of years will have Nukes that can basically hit anywhere in America. Right now they have nukes that can each i think hawaiian islands and part of the west coast, And some signs on the DMZ are pretty much anti-american. Why haven't we invaded? B. Saddam has been dodging the mandates and ultimatums set forth by the U.N. for several years. We couldn't afford to give tenth and eleventh chances, especially after the terrorist attacks showed just how vulnerable of a target we are. True...the UN is clearly weak. That is not a reason to start a war. It is a reason to reform. C. Elaborating on A and B, we realize that change is not obtained through sitting on our thumbs and allowing possible problems to continue to grow and mutate into full-fledged disasters. You cannot reform another country, when your own is in need of some major reforms. You cant just start a war when you think something might turn out bad. We've learned that the hard way all to often in the past. Change is good, without it nothing happens, nothing gets done, and that is troubling. Change is good...war is bad. So War for change is bad. Like Screwing for virginity...war for peace...they dont match. So I support Bush, and I feel he needs to remain in office in order to finish what he began. A war on weak evidence? Then when his term is up, perhaps the Republicans will put in place a good follow-up leader, one with a good economic sense and strength to stand up if we are pushed down again. You said republican...therefore, your reasons are completely biased. If a democrat ran and had great reforms everyhting fit...you wouldnt vote for him...just cause of his party? Kerry would pullout of Iraq and possibly even Afghanistan. Kerry would give control to UN...so it isn't just US dying... Which would leave those countries in a state of massive catastrophic confusion and disorganization. Like keeping US soldiers in to die would really help...that just pisses off our own troops... And we all know about the Democrats social reform programs, hmmm the cost of wars plus more welfare to crack addicted moms and more unemployment for lazy deadbeats. Sounds like a stiff tax hike to me. Bush - Tax cuts, small to lower income, very high to big businesses...then starts a war...that just totally screwed our national debt. Kerry - Take away the big Tax cuts to big businesses...only reward businesses that stay in the states for jobs to come back (('Specially to the rust belt)). Then they would continue plans. Also they would pull out on war once their was a power transfer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GI_Admiral 2 Posted July 30, 2004 Drake's right. Why does everyone here seek to force their opinions on politics on everyone else? Cause we're egotistical maniacs who need everyone to agree with us to be complete. Busy, you're a right winger. GI, you're a left winger... But ... im right handed...wouldnt that make me a better right winger? also you missing an H in his name You will never agree. Sure we agree to disagree... Get over yourselves. Neither of you are political geniouses. Neither of you are 100% right. Neither of you are 100% wrong. I admit that I'm not a political genious....I also admit that I'm not always right. Does that mean im over myself? If you can't handle people commenting on your opinions, then don't make them publicly known. Especially in debate forums. I can handle it...what's wrong with debating? It's how this country thrives...this is just a way of supporting our positions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bushy 0 Posted July 30, 2004 I agree with Mike completely (forgot how to spell your name dude, sorry ). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
