Whats funnier is we can talk shit about our president without worrying about our sisters getting raped for it. How you like that!dead_rac00n wrote:
Coming from an illeterate president, former alcoholic, and who won elections by strange means, that's quite funnykr@cker wrote:
damn you type fast
"SUPERTRANSCRIPTOR!!!"
I think my favorite part was
"They are thrown into panic at the sight of an old man pulling the election lever ... girls enrolling in school ... or families worshiping God in their own traditions."
Big bad jihaadists scared of literate girls.........
putzes
Oh ok. They are part of the government but aren't leaders. Explain that oxymoron.mafia996630 wrote:
Hezbollah are not leaders, they are part of the government. Hezbollah are considered to be freedom fighters in many people eyes, and are only regarded as terrorist by a limited amount of countries. Including US, UK kind off, Canada, Isreal, Netherlands and Australia, that's it.rawls2 wrote:
How about Syria and Lebonan. You know..those countries that let Hezbollah do their talking. And my us vs. them idea-thats the reality, face it.mafia996630 wrote:
FOR EXAMPLE ..................
all i can think of is Iran maybe, Saddam maybe, that about it. Which leaders are you talking about ?
And this "us V them" is really a good attitude, your gone get far!
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
Until the common Muslim tries to chop my head off, there is no "us V them". Your spreading hate if you really believe this.
Make people like miller change their opinions on everything..
Us v Them?rawls2 wrote:
Cameron, face it, its them vs. us If you wanna stand on the sidelines go ahead. That doesn't mean they wont take your head either. I don't neeed to read your anti-Israeli articles. I believe in God and the Bible. That is enough for me to feel the way I do about Islam. Your not religious, fine. But when the leaders of Islam say, death to the west, thats a problem. I don't care that the common muslim wants peace and a normal life. The problem is that they are not in charge, it's the extremist that rule the countries and make the decisions.
You're either with us or against us?
Black/White, True/False, 1/0?
Please, life is not that simple. What do you propose? Eradicate all muslims or people who might potentially convert to Islam? LOL
I'm not on the sidelines - I'm 95% pro-Palestinian, 100% anti-Al Qaeda and 95% anti-Israel. Hardly having trouble picking sides.
Does God and the bible not preach tolerance? Seriously - do not mention the bible because you just make yourself sound like a ridiculous hypocrite. Ever heard of 'turn the other cheek?', 'Love thy neighbour as thyself?'. I was raised a Catholic you know - I know what the bible says.
The leaders of Islam? Since when did Osama Bin Laden become the Caliph of Baghdad? The Ayatollah in Iran doesn't even preach death to the west - his president preaches death to the state of Israel, that's all. Israel does not qualify as a western nation. They're just the same as the suicide bombers except they use laser guided missiles, bulldozers, F-16s and bunker buster bombs.
I was thinking when you would start insulting, kind of lame. Anyway Hezbollah attacked/defended because they felt like it, NOT BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOVERMENT SAID. The government over there is trying to stop Hizbullah, however if the government decided AS A WHOLE, to attack isreal THEN you could say the leadership is fucked up.rawls wrote:
Oh ok. They are part of the government but aren't leaders. Explain that oxymoron.mafia996630 wrote:
Hezbollah are not leaders, they are part of the government. Hezbollah are considered to be freedom fighters in many people eyes, and are only regarded as terrorist by a limited amount of countries. Including US, UK kind off, Canada, Isreal, Netherlands and Australia, that's it.rawls2 wrote:
How about Syria and Lebonan. You know..those countries that let Hezbollah do their talking. And my us vs. them idea-thats the reality, face it.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
Until the common Muslim tries to chop my head off, there is no "us V them". Your spreading hate if you really believe this.
Secure the borders and clean up what we started. Stop trying to fix every problem that the world demands we do. The rest of the world needs to pick up some of the burden instead of bitching about it.
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-12 03:47:13)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Perhaps, I should say What problem did Saddam cause to US before US sold him those weapons in 80's?Colfax wrote:
Funny you say this being from the down under. Seeing as Australia didn't sign it either.mcminty wrote:
And America could also sign the Kyoto Protocol, and stop fucking the earth up... but it ain't gonna happen.
Mcminty.
We'll sign it when China and India follows it. They signed and yet ," India and China, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement despite their relatively large populations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol
China is the number 2 and India is number 4. Count on those numbers increasing drastically as they become more technologically advanced. I'm sure China will pass the U.S. and yet the can sign the protocol and not reduce emissions..how convenient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … _emissions)
By signing this it would put the United States at a economic disadvantage.QFT!!unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I can't wait until Bush's term is over...just so I can see every one's disillusioned expressions when the world doesn't erupt into a chorus of rainbows in everlasting peace and mutual prosperity.I agree to disagree with everything you sayCameronPoe wrote:
Turn 'the west' into an impenetrable fortress, take Israel to task over its atrocities and state terrorism, withdraw from Iraq and let them have their civil war and hand the Republican party back to traditional isolationists (not neo-conservative imperialists), stop supporting unpopular puppet regimes, stop interfering in the politics of sovereign nations. Bit simplistic but in general I think that would improve things.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Kuwaitsergeriver wrote:
What problem did Saddam cause to US, before US invaded Iraq?
say what? whats that? what did he do? oh yeah....
_____________________________________________
i can't wait to shoot some of you thick headed people on saturday.
VIVA LA [Con]
Fix the problem in Israel which the NAVO & Warschau Pact created themselves by giving the jews their own holy ground....
Before interfering in other countries, ask neighbour countries how to solve the problem. Before doing what the US thinks is right. Keep the culture in mind...
Before interfering in other countries, ask neighbour countries how to solve the problem. Before doing what the US thinks is right. Keep the culture in mind...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_sales … _1973-1990sergeriver wrote:
Perhaps, I should say What problem did Saddam cause to US before US sold him those weapons in 80's?
Oh because it was all the U.S.[sarcasm]
Why don't you talk to france they gave them more money for arms then the U.s. did.
_______________http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_sales_to_Iraq_1973-1990 wrote:
The only substantial western arms supplier to Iraq was France, which continued to be a major supplier until 1990
Random bible quote since people were talking about it about
Ezekiel 25:17
I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.' "
Last edited by Colfax (2006-09-12 05:34:54)
But, the thread isn't about France problems. I didn't say US was the only one to sell the guy weapons. In fact, one of the more important buyers of France was Iraq.Colfax wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_sales … _1973-1990sergeriver wrote:
Perhaps, I should say What problem did Saddam cause to US before US sold him those weapons in 80's?
Oh because it was all the U.S.
Why don't you talk to france they gave them more money for arms then the U.s. did.
I'm showing the contradictions about training Osama and chasing Osama, selling weapons to Saddam and chasing Saddam. Perhaps someone in the past took very bad decisions.
Last edited by sergeriver (2006-09-12 05:34:56)
worst topic discussion ever.deathlyzer wrote:
How should the US deal with the problems we face today?
Everybody here seems to have the answer in their backpocket.
Why has that sentence insulted you? You do know what an oxymoron is don't you?mafia996630 wrote:
I was thinking when you would start insulting, kind of lame. Anyway Hezbollah attacked/defended because they felt like it, NOT BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOVERMENT SAID. The government over there is trying to stop Hizbullah, however if the government decided AS A WHOLE, to attack isreal THEN you could say the leadership is fucked up.rawls wrote:
Oh ok. They are part of the government but aren't leaders. Explain that oxymoron.
LOL. And people talk about how violent Islam is. I love the way all religions are so self-contradictory.Colfax wrote:
Random bible quote since people were talking about it about
Ezekiel 25:17
I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.' "
Read a few chapters before that and you would see what happens . Islam is, the most violent religion. Just read some of it. Christianity, I don't have a problem with, considering I am a Christian, heck, Christian is my first name. It does not self contradict. There was a problem, the lord is going to deal with it. The Lord tolerated that problem as long as possible, and when it becomes to much, he dealt with it.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. And people talk about how violent Islam is. I love the way all religions are so self-contradictory.Colfax wrote:
Random bible quote since people were talking about it about
Ezekiel 25:17
I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.' "
On topic: I think "what the US should do" would largely depend on what you see as a "problem".
On a personal note, I think that the US' major problem ISN'T in regards to foreign policy or terrorism at ALL. There are a lot of domestic issues that need dealing with, and the american people would be a LOT more supportive of foreign policy if they lived better lives.
With that I'm not saying that it's going to be easy, and I''m not saying the average american ISN'T living a good life. I'm just saying that the US as a country is in HUGE debt, unemployment is rising, economic policies are failing, aveerage income is falling while inflation is on the rise. Education standards are lower than they have been for years, and the justice and tax systems are totally out of sync with the real world (not the only country this has happened to though).
Now I'm not going to say that I have a solution for all of this. I dont have the exact figures for everything, so I couldn't eevn begin to type out the correct solution, but I would go as far as to suggest that by simplifying things for the average citizen, a lot of grief and aggrevation can be avoided. Any such change need only be administrative. Sure people will have to learn new tax laws, the court system will have to be reworked, and probably the constitution needs another ammendment. But right now, I think a lot of poeple will agree that taxes and justice are not quite fair anymore. Billionaires pay less in tax than a simple farmer who can't afford to gas up his car or take the missus out for dinner. Druglords walk free on the streets while jaywalkers are put in jail. The burden of evidence, and the rule of law by precedence is impossible to uphold.
IMO, the US can't afford to NEGLECT it's foreign policy, but neither can it afford to neglect it's citizens. A more blaanced approach might be in order. Or at least a clear cut message from the politicians that it's time to get serious about foreign and domestic policies, and this WILL cost more taxdollars, this WILL mean more inflation, it will mean lower intrest, it will mean changes in the tax system, the lagislative process and the legal system in general, and it will mean that the americans will need focus on their economy. Agreed, this will DEEPLY hurt the rest of the world, especially asia who sells so many consumer good to the US, and uses the cash to finance loans to the US, living large on the intrest.
But a leaner, stronger, faster america can more easily afford to talk about economics. They can better afford to take an active role in foreign policy, they can better afford a little critism from the ultra libreals or democrats, because they WILL then have the support of the people, the power, the money and the ability to intervene where ever they need to.
This WILL mean that while the US is "rebuilding", or "licking it's wounds" however you want to phrase the euphomism, the US will have to give up the "world leader" role it has so hungrily hung unto for so many years. IMO that's not a bad thing. Being the front rider on a bicycle team is tiring work, and sometimes you need to catch a break from the wind and let someone else lead. The main problem with that is that there IS noone else who would be a possible "world leader" the way the US has been. China has domestic problems of its own, russia is economically weak, the EU is divided amongst themselves and there are no other large economic forces in the world. So I doubt the US will be able to catch a break here. They will have to keep taking the high road, I guess that's the price to pay for wanting/keeping the role for so long.. Now noone else is ready to assume the throne... Same as in Iraq. Isn't THAT the irony !
On a personal note, I think that the US' major problem ISN'T in regards to foreign policy or terrorism at ALL. There are a lot of domestic issues that need dealing with, and the american people would be a LOT more supportive of foreign policy if they lived better lives.
With that I'm not saying that it's going to be easy, and I''m not saying the average american ISN'T living a good life. I'm just saying that the US as a country is in HUGE debt, unemployment is rising, economic policies are failing, aveerage income is falling while inflation is on the rise. Education standards are lower than they have been for years, and the justice and tax systems are totally out of sync with the real world (not the only country this has happened to though).
Now I'm not going to say that I have a solution for all of this. I dont have the exact figures for everything, so I couldn't eevn begin to type out the correct solution, but I would go as far as to suggest that by simplifying things for the average citizen, a lot of grief and aggrevation can be avoided. Any such change need only be administrative. Sure people will have to learn new tax laws, the court system will have to be reworked, and probably the constitution needs another ammendment. But right now, I think a lot of poeple will agree that taxes and justice are not quite fair anymore. Billionaires pay less in tax than a simple farmer who can't afford to gas up his car or take the missus out for dinner. Druglords walk free on the streets while jaywalkers are put in jail. The burden of evidence, and the rule of law by precedence is impossible to uphold.
IMO, the US can't afford to NEGLECT it's foreign policy, but neither can it afford to neglect it's citizens. A more blaanced approach might be in order. Or at least a clear cut message from the politicians that it's time to get serious about foreign and domestic policies, and this WILL cost more taxdollars, this WILL mean more inflation, it will mean lower intrest, it will mean changes in the tax system, the lagislative process and the legal system in general, and it will mean that the americans will need focus on their economy. Agreed, this will DEEPLY hurt the rest of the world, especially asia who sells so many consumer good to the US, and uses the cash to finance loans to the US, living large on the intrest.
But a leaner, stronger, faster america can more easily afford to talk about economics. They can better afford to take an active role in foreign policy, they can better afford a little critism from the ultra libreals or democrats, because they WILL then have the support of the people, the power, the money and the ability to intervene where ever they need to.
This WILL mean that while the US is "rebuilding", or "licking it's wounds" however you want to phrase the euphomism, the US will have to give up the "world leader" role it has so hungrily hung unto for so many years. IMO that's not a bad thing. Being the front rider on a bicycle team is tiring work, and sometimes you need to catch a break from the wind and let someone else lead. The main problem with that is that there IS noone else who would be a possible "world leader" the way the US has been. China has domestic problems of its own, russia is economically weak, the EU is divided amongst themselves and there are no other large economic forces in the world. So I doubt the US will be able to catch a break here. They will have to keep taking the high road, I guess that's the price to pay for wanting/keeping the role for so long.. Now noone else is ready to assume the throne... Same as in Iraq. Isn't THAT the irony !
I appreciate the fact you are a Christian but I am a diehard atheist, so we are going to differ somewhat on views regarding religions. I've read a lot of the bible (raised catholic) and some of the Qu'ran though. The violence-level associated with each religion depends on your own personal interpretation of either document: the old testament for instance is one of the most violent texts I've read, and the same can be said for parts of the Qu'ran.Miller wrote:
Read a few chapters before that and you would see what happens . Islam is, the most violent religion. Just read some of it. Christianity, I don't have a problem with, considering I am a Christian, heck, Christian is my first name. It does not self contradict. There was a problem, the lord is going to deal with it. The Lord tolerated that problem as long as possible, and when it becomes to much, he dealt with it.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. And people talk about how violent Islam is. I love the way all religions are so self-contradictory.Colfax wrote:
Random bible quote since people were talking about it about
Ezekiel 25:17
I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.' "
It is violent. But why? Because there were people attacking God's people. He never struck out in anger, only in his people's defense or benefit. I won't even go into the Kuran, it'll take too long...CameronPoe wrote:
I appreciate the fact you are a Christian but I am a diehard atheist, so we are going to differ somewhat on views regarding religions. I've read a lot of the bible (raised catholic) and some of the Qu'ran though. The violence-level associated with each religion depends on your own personal interpretation of either document: the old testament for instance is one of the most violent texts I've read, and the same can be said for parts of the Qu'ran.Miller wrote:
Read a few chapters before that and you would see what happens . Islam is, the most violent religion. Just read some of it. Christianity, I don't have a problem with, considering I am a Christian, heck, Christian is my first name. It does not self contradict. There was a problem, the lord is going to deal with it. The Lord tolerated that problem as long as possible, and when it becomes to much, he dealt with it.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. And people talk about how violent Islam is. I love the way all religions are so self-contradictory.
That's why they made a new testament , to move foward and away from barbaric means. Someone else needs to edit their lil book.CameronPoe wrote:
I appreciate the fact you are a Christian but I am a diehard atheist, so we are going to differ somewhat on views regarding religions. I've read a lot of the bible (raised catholic) and some of the Qu'ran though. The violence-level associated with each religion depends on your own personal interpretation of either document: the old testament for instance is one of the most violent texts I've read, and the same can be said for parts of the Qu'ran.Miller wrote:
Read a few chapters before that and you would see what happens . Islam is, the most violent religion. Just read some of it. Christianity, I don't have a problem with, considering I am a Christian, heck, Christian is my first name. It does not self contradict. There was a problem, the lord is going to deal with it. The Lord tolerated that problem as long as possible, and when it becomes to much, he dealt with it.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. And people talk about how violent Islam is. I love the way all religions are so self-contradictory.
that just it... deal with thier own problems before sticking their noses in everyone elses.
but thats logical.... and not lucrative...
but thats logical.... and not lucrative...
Wrong. In the Old Testament they prophesied Jesus' coming. And he did. It wasn't a move away from barbaric means. Barbaric means then are about as barbaric to us as someone being shot on the street and killed. The New Testament was, yes a little centered on how to be kind. But, the first four books were all about Jesus. Then, after Jesus' death, the apostles, their journeys, preachings, letters, so on. Revelation, is a tough book to understand. Still can't quite get it down.jonnykill wrote:
That's why they made a new testament , to move foward and away from barbaric means. Someone else needs to edit their lil book.CameronPoe wrote:
I appreciate the fact you are a Christian but I am a diehard atheist, so we are going to differ somewhat on views regarding religions. I've read a lot of the bible (raised catholic) and some of the Qu'ran though. The violence-level associated with each religion depends on your own personal interpretation of either document: the old testament for instance is one of the most violent texts I've read, and the same can be said for parts of the Qu'ran.Miller wrote:
Read a few chapters before that and you would see what happens . Islam is, the most violent religion. Just read some of it. Christianity, I don't have a problem with, considering I am a Christian, heck, Christian is my first name. It does not self contradict. There was a problem, the lord is going to deal with it. The Lord tolerated that problem as long as possible, and when it becomes to much, he dealt with it.
Last edited by Miller (2006-09-12 06:12:35)
Yes i did take that out of context. There was reasoning:
Context: 15-17
15 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: 'Because the Philistines acted in vengeance and took revenge with malice in their hearts, and with ancient hostility sought to destroy Judah, 16 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am about to stretch out my hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Kerethites and destroy those remaining along the coast. 17 I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.' "
irony...
anyone see it
This wasn't supposed to be a bible debat. Part of that verse is used in 'pulp fiction' thats why i said it
Context: 15-17
15 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: 'Because the Philistines acted in vengeance and took revenge with malice in their hearts, and with ancient hostility sought to destroy Judah, 16 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am about to stretch out my hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Kerethites and destroy those remaining along the coast. 17 I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.' "
irony...
anyone see it
This wasn't supposed to be a bible debat. Part of that verse is used in 'pulp fiction' thats why i said it
Last edited by Colfax (2006-09-12 06:19:32)
Oh noes, how are people going to survive if the US isn't there to bom.. help them!Kmarion wrote:
Secure the borders and clean up what we started. Stop trying to fix every problem that the world demands we do. The rest of the world needs to pick up some of the burden instead of bitching about it.
lol!...i love it...lets go with that...starkingdoms wrote:
simultaneous nuclear strike on every major non-usa city!
The US has "issues" internally & externally. The way the world sees is is born of a hypocracy that the US Government perpetuates: The World must play by "The Rules", but the US (and it's allies) doesn't have to. For example:
1) There was no evidence of WMDs in Iraq. The World was against any action against Iraq for that reason, yet the US rolled on in and found... nothing. Worse than that - the US leaders had NO plan for getting out.
2) Had any other Middle Eastern courty done what Israel did to Lebanon, we would have rushed in guns-a-blazing. Saddam moves in to Kuwait - it's go-time!
We have to stop that crap. Period. The US's greatest weapon *IS* in our back pocket - it's our wallet. If the US Government was that serious about ousting Fidel - open Cuba to the American Tourist, let the cash flow in and see the place improve. Yes, that's VERY simplistic, obviously there will be other factors involved.
We also have to turn our eyes inward. We have a huge surge of "baby-boomers" who are reaching retirement age with Social Security strained, a health care system that will bankrupt most folks and most of the traditional retirment plans lying in ruins thanks to the Ken Lays of the world. It's also a crime that we have american citizens that go hungry, yet we ship tons of food overseas and pay farmers to not farm.
I heard an interesting statistic the other - no idea if it's true or not; the amount of money the US has spent in Iraq would have provided persecriptions for the entire US population for one year! And let's be clear - the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror - that's being fought in Afghanistan.
I have to agree with a number of the folks who posted here: let's take some time to mind our own shop, bring our troops home and get them to work inside the US and invest in ourselves. Right now we are simply provising cash to folks who shoot at us.
1) There was no evidence of WMDs in Iraq. The World was against any action against Iraq for that reason, yet the US rolled on in and found... nothing. Worse than that - the US leaders had NO plan for getting out.
2) Had any other Middle Eastern courty done what Israel did to Lebanon, we would have rushed in guns-a-blazing. Saddam moves in to Kuwait - it's go-time!
We have to stop that crap. Period. The US's greatest weapon *IS* in our back pocket - it's our wallet. If the US Government was that serious about ousting Fidel - open Cuba to the American Tourist, let the cash flow in and see the place improve. Yes, that's VERY simplistic, obviously there will be other factors involved.
We also have to turn our eyes inward. We have a huge surge of "baby-boomers" who are reaching retirement age with Social Security strained, a health care system that will bankrupt most folks and most of the traditional retirment plans lying in ruins thanks to the Ken Lays of the world. It's also a crime that we have american citizens that go hungry, yet we ship tons of food overseas and pay farmers to not farm.
I heard an interesting statistic the other - no idea if it's true or not; the amount of money the US has spent in Iraq would have provided persecriptions for the entire US population for one year! And let's be clear - the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror - that's being fought in Afghanistan.
I have to agree with a number of the folks who posted here: let's take some time to mind our own shop, bring our troops home and get them to work inside the US and invest in ourselves. Right now we are simply provising cash to folks who shoot at us.
why do people think that the whole war is based on a fantasy that is about weapons in iraq, the second day after the marines entered bagdad they found 4 squd missiles in a truck in the backyard of one of the major hospitals + chemical combat suits and a heckload of weapons.
so you see they say that they have gotten rid of the weapons, but they actually just hid them in civilian places that people would get mad over if the us bombed them or checked them. a terrorist don't care if he is saying a big fat lie to a non muslim after their believes we are not human, just check the handbooks that they found in al quida lairs and insurgent nest in iraq and afghanistan.
if they are not muslim they are an infidel and therefore you don't have to say the truth because they are not real people they are lower than animals after their faith.
so you see they say that they have gotten rid of the weapons, but they actually just hid them in civilian places that people would get mad over if the us bombed them or checked them. a terrorist don't care if he is saying a big fat lie to a non muslim after their believes we are not human, just check the handbooks that they found in al quida lairs and insurgent nest in iraq and afghanistan.
if they are not muslim they are an infidel and therefore you don't have to say the truth because they are not real people they are lower than animals after their faith.