Yeah i know. The guy who led solidarnosc in poland. Why you asking?VaLzbeStoNeD wrote:
A lil' offtopic, or not, you decide...
Got a question, , do you guys know who Lech Kaczynski is?
Rape cows on my farm
I would wear a suit
simple
simple
No, that was Lech Walesa. He (Kaczynski) is the current president of Poland I believe, and despised by Walesa.David.Podedworny wrote:
Yeah i know. The guy who led solidarnosc in poland. Why you asking?VaLzbeStoNeD wrote:
A lil' offtopic, or not, you decide...
Got a question, , do you guys know who Lech Kaczynski is?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/16/news/policy.php
Looks like Kaczynski is on Bush's side...
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-16 13:32:23)
Pressure any sane and reasonable president could easily handle. How hard is it to resist lashing out when you're a sane and reasonable person who knows it won't do you any good? Not very. Once bitten, twice shy.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
I am simply asking how the hell ANY American president could deal with this kind of situation if it arose. Could you imagine the decisions that would have to be made? There would be a huge amount of pressure to retaliate, then there would be the pressure from the international community for its concerns.
Well that pretty much confirms you as a failed president. You can't 'go after guys' who don't wear a uniform. Is that so hard to understand? The Brits couldn't beat the IRA - they conceded that in a report a fortnight ago. 30 years battling the IRA and they couldn't bring it down no matter what they did - one of the foremost military powers in the world. Why? Because conventional armies CANNOT defeat popularly supported paramilitary organisation on their home turf. It's exactly why Vietnam failed. You can win it if you throw the rules out the window like in WWII but that can only be done if your very own nation or way of life faces a very real existential threat. The recent wars in the middle east were always going to struggle to find legitimacy - Iraq posing a threat to the US, don't make me laugh!DeathBecomesYu wrote:
If we were attacked on such a level, I am asking how you would truly handle all the pressure and reactions from all sides especially if you KNEW that AQ did it because they claimed it. I think you would have to go after these guys...you can't just sit on your hands or tuck your tail between your legs and scamper away and I am not saying that we should turn the deserts to glass. Seriously, what could be done?
The sooner people come to terms with the fact that terrorism must be policed rather than responded to militarily the smarter we'll get at defeating it through our experience and developed expertise.
Revenge is a dish best served cold. To act rashly will more than likely backfire.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Of course we would have to ask how it happened in the first place...I understand what Poe said completely but that would be hind sight. How would you appease the people who want to retaliate,
CIADeathBecomesYu wrote:
how would you go after AQ,
Not much if you're a smart president. Special forces only. Perhaps tomahawks.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
how far would the military be involved
Depends on what your chosen course of action would be.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
How much international support and cooperation could be get to get these people.
Well if you were to be any sort of a respectable president with the courage of his convictions you'd explain to the populace why it would be a stupid mistake and steadfastly wait until all of the information was in so that you could make an informed decision that will, in the long run, work out better for everyone.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
If 300,000 Americans were dead.....I doubt our government or leaders are just going to call hearings to see how it happened...people would demand much more and then how do you deal with that and the international community.
I would probably carry through with Bush's international hitlist.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
My question is this. As some of you may know by listening to the news and/ or reading the news that threats from Al-qaida are becoming more and more threatening. There was a recent intelligence report stating that this AQ has the people in place and have access to nuclear/ dirty bomb material and the know how to put it to use. Now, no one knows how close they are to actually pulling something off but I do believe that this will happen in Europe or if AQ's wish were to come true...in America. Now here is my question. If a nuclear bomb does go off (big, small or dirty), let's say in the heart of Chicago or some other major city and AQ claims responsibility, if you were the American president....What would you do?
Since AQ does not have a conventional army, does not have borders of any kind....how should America respond, especially if YOU were president.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-07-16 16:15:55)
If I was president the first thing I would do is bring home all our troops stationed all over the world and use them to guard our borders. Step two leave the U.N and Nato we will no longer be the worlds policemen , also we will no longer sending any country free aid it will b cash and carry. Step three I want all the arms and equipment we lend/ leased during WWII returned in original condition , if not available gold or oil at todays prices will be okay. Step four all illegal aliens and foreign students will have 30 days to leave the country , if not they get a 5 year jail term and then tossed out .
Now, if I were president, here’s what I would do. Next time some country does something we don’t take a pining too, such as supporting terrorism or speaking French, I’d pick the dumbest reason for an attack, e.g., "A ‘q’ should always be followed by a ‘u’. I don’t make the rules, Iraq, but I will enforce them." The more irrational you look, the more scared the country will be that you will really hit them hard. I’d then give the country the old one-week notice until bombing starts. Then, after just twenty-four hours, I’d start bombing. When the stupid dictator calls to complain, I’d say, "I meant one week max. Oh, and by the way, ground troops - one week." I’m sure that would be enough to capitulate the average evildoer, but some extra measures could help intimidate others as well. Like, instead of just saturation bombing a city, super-saturation bomb it. After annihilating everything until nothing but ash is left, I’d nuke the ashes. It’s that extra bit of extremely disproportionate use of force that makes other countries start to wonder if America "has it all together" and really worrying who we’ll lash out against next.
Of course, Europe will start complaining, and Europe’s bad mouthing of America gives comfort to our enemies. I mean, those guys values are so messed up they think calling someone a "cowboy" is an insult. Best idea would be to assassinate the leader of the first European country we hear a peep out of. This will probably make us look evil, though, when we want the image of crazy and violent. So, when the Europeans ask why, I’d claim to never have heard of the person: "I didn’t even know France had a leader. Sure it wasn’t suicide? Yeah, committing suicide with a sniper rifle would be hard, but not impossible if you had a five-hundred yard length of string to work the trigger." Assassination does seem a little extreme, but we’re talking about Europe. I mean, what are they going to do other than quickly capitulate under a mild threat of force. We’ll probably start seeing, "We all love America!" parades in bids to not be our next targets.
Now the world will be pretty convinced that America is frick’n nuts and just looking for a fight, but we need to really ingrain it into everyone’s conscious so that no one will ever even contemplate crossing us. This requires making good use of our nukes. I know, nukes can kill millions of people, but they sure aren’t doing anyone any good just sitting around. I mean, how many years has it been since we last dropped a bomb on someone? No one even thinks we’ll actually use one now. Of course, using nukes shouldn’t be done haphazardly; all uses have to be well planned out because the explosions are so cool looking that we’ll want to give the press plenty of notice so they can get pictures of the mushroom cloud from all sorts of different angles. But what to nuke? Well, usually the idea is populated cities, but, by the beliefs of my morally superior religion, killing is wrong. So why can’t we be more creative than nuking people. My idea is to nuke the moon; just say we thought we saw moon people or something. There is no one actually there to kill (unless we time it poorly) and everyone in the world could see the results. And all the other countries would exclaim, "Holy @$#%! They are nuking the moon! America has gone insane! I better go eat at McDonalds before they think I don’t like them."
But why stop there. We’ve got like tons of national parks; we surely wouldn’t miss just one if we nuked it. Our excuse will be that we heard a drug dealer was hiding there. Then the foreign nations would be like, "Sacre bleu! These Americans are nuking themselves! Surely they will think nothing of bombing us! Let’s adapt their vapid culture as our own so they might consider us one of them."
Now all other countries will be completely freaked out and never even dream of messing with us. They’ll say the name of America with hushed whispers and always praise us in public for fear of reprisal. We’d be like an Old Testament god to them; perhaps they would even start worshiping us - actually, we should make that a condition of favored trade status. Not only will we have ensured peace for ourselves, but we can also now easily end any conflict between other countries. We see two nations warring over some territory, all we’ll have to do is say, "Hey, break it up," and they’ll be racing to concede to each other rather than get on the bad side of the "crazy, homicidal Americans." And, if people are being oppressed by an evil government, all we’ll have to do is say, "Hey you! Stop being communist!" and the next day they’ll have elections, capitalism, and free-press to keep from having their country turned into a parking lot. It will be that easy to motivate our fellow man, because there is hardly anything people treasure more than not being annihilated.
Now all that’s needed to keep peace is to come up with new and creative ways of looking insane and belligerent without actually harming anyone. Missile defense is probably a good step in that direction. Next time some country steps out of line, we launch a nuclear missile at them. Just seconds before it hits, we blow it up with our missile defense so that everyone there sees the huge explosion in the sky. Then the president would just call up their leader and say, "Hey, we lost sight of our SDI test. Did you see if it worked?"
By now, you’re probably saying, "Great idea. But how to do we pay for all these random acts of violence?" Just create an "Other Country Tax", a tax for being a country other than the U.S. After implementing my plan, all the countries will be eager to pay the money, and probably add a nice tip to win favor.
So there you have it, a real peace plan that could actually work. Warmongering pacifists want us to act all nice such that countries think we’re rational and won’t kill everyone with a blind fury, thus making it possible they might actually attack us and draw us into a war. But, if America follows my idea and lashes out at the slightest provocation with unmeasured vengeance, there can be peace. So there’s the choice: either be a homicidal maniac thus ensuring peace and love in the world, or be some pacifist hippy while the streets flow with the blood of the innocent.
source: http://www.imao.us/docs/NukeTheMoon.htm
Of course, Europe will start complaining, and Europe’s bad mouthing of America gives comfort to our enemies. I mean, those guys values are so messed up they think calling someone a "cowboy" is an insult. Best idea would be to assassinate the leader of the first European country we hear a peep out of. This will probably make us look evil, though, when we want the image of crazy and violent. So, when the Europeans ask why, I’d claim to never have heard of the person: "I didn’t even know France had a leader. Sure it wasn’t suicide? Yeah, committing suicide with a sniper rifle would be hard, but not impossible if you had a five-hundred yard length of string to work the trigger." Assassination does seem a little extreme, but we’re talking about Europe. I mean, what are they going to do other than quickly capitulate under a mild threat of force. We’ll probably start seeing, "We all love America!" parades in bids to not be our next targets.
Now the world will be pretty convinced that America is frick’n nuts and just looking for a fight, but we need to really ingrain it into everyone’s conscious so that no one will ever even contemplate crossing us. This requires making good use of our nukes. I know, nukes can kill millions of people, but they sure aren’t doing anyone any good just sitting around. I mean, how many years has it been since we last dropped a bomb on someone? No one even thinks we’ll actually use one now. Of course, using nukes shouldn’t be done haphazardly; all uses have to be well planned out because the explosions are so cool looking that we’ll want to give the press plenty of notice so they can get pictures of the mushroom cloud from all sorts of different angles. But what to nuke? Well, usually the idea is populated cities, but, by the beliefs of my morally superior religion, killing is wrong. So why can’t we be more creative than nuking people. My idea is to nuke the moon; just say we thought we saw moon people or something. There is no one actually there to kill (unless we time it poorly) and everyone in the world could see the results. And all the other countries would exclaim, "Holy @$#%! They are nuking the moon! America has gone insane! I better go eat at McDonalds before they think I don’t like them."
But why stop there. We’ve got like tons of national parks; we surely wouldn’t miss just one if we nuked it. Our excuse will be that we heard a drug dealer was hiding there. Then the foreign nations would be like, "Sacre bleu! These Americans are nuking themselves! Surely they will think nothing of bombing us! Let’s adapt their vapid culture as our own so they might consider us one of them."
Now all other countries will be completely freaked out and never even dream of messing with us. They’ll say the name of America with hushed whispers and always praise us in public for fear of reprisal. We’d be like an Old Testament god to them; perhaps they would even start worshiping us - actually, we should make that a condition of favored trade status. Not only will we have ensured peace for ourselves, but we can also now easily end any conflict between other countries. We see two nations warring over some territory, all we’ll have to do is say, "Hey, break it up," and they’ll be racing to concede to each other rather than get on the bad side of the "crazy, homicidal Americans." And, if people are being oppressed by an evil government, all we’ll have to do is say, "Hey you! Stop being communist!" and the next day they’ll have elections, capitalism, and free-press to keep from having their country turned into a parking lot. It will be that easy to motivate our fellow man, because there is hardly anything people treasure more than not being annihilated.
Now all that’s needed to keep peace is to come up with new and creative ways of looking insane and belligerent without actually harming anyone. Missile defense is probably a good step in that direction. Next time some country steps out of line, we launch a nuclear missile at them. Just seconds before it hits, we blow it up with our missile defense so that everyone there sees the huge explosion in the sky. Then the president would just call up their leader and say, "Hey, we lost sight of our SDI test. Did you see if it worked?"
By now, you’re probably saying, "Great idea. But how to do we pay for all these random acts of violence?" Just create an "Other Country Tax", a tax for being a country other than the U.S. After implementing my plan, all the countries will be eager to pay the money, and probably add a nice tip to win favor.
So there you have it, a real peace plan that could actually work. Warmongering pacifists want us to act all nice such that countries think we’re rational and won’t kill everyone with a blind fury, thus making it possible they might actually attack us and draw us into a war. But, if America follows my idea and lashes out at the slightest provocation with unmeasured vengeance, there can be peace. So there’s the choice: either be a homicidal maniac thus ensuring peace and love in the world, or be some pacifist hippy while the streets flow with the blood of the innocent.
source: http://www.imao.us/docs/NukeTheMoon.htm
Last edited by lavadisk (2007-07-16 18:18:23)
lemon-lime
if i were president, i would bowl over the ecological lobby and allow drilling in the ANWAR region. California and gulf coast are also on notice that offshore oil rigs are in the works. I would also have the department of nuclear energy draw up plans for nuclear reactors in several areas across the country. funding would be increased for improved solar cell efficiency and cost offsets for consumers to install these on loan with any billback (extra energy you have that normally is pumped into the grid) be used for paying down the loan. this would be great for CA and other sunny areas of the country that want to use solar.
borders: i'd first and foremost free Ramos and Compean (two border agents in prison for enforcing our border laws). next, i'd overhaul our immigration laws to make it a more streamlined process yet still keep the integrity of our country intact by hiring more people to take on the caseloads. Also, any illegal immigrant who commits a felony crime is immediately deported after trial. 3 strikes for misdemeanors. child abuse, rape, murder, drug dealing - deportation time.
I'd also (and this is probably not going to be popular) instigate a mandatory 12-24 month service program for young adults. They can choose to serve in their communities in some capacity or on the border as national guard or in public works projects or peace corps, etc. The idea here is to improve character of youth through service and youth choice in what they want - not a draft to do xyz only.
i'd put the US support of the UN up to the people's vote. if the people think we have a chance at overhauling the UN then so be it. otherwise, they can move to france. i think it still can be saved but you have to do alot of overhaul there. too much corruption
agressive lobbying with china and russia. they are the current thorns in our side with regards to sanctions having any effect on terrorst nations. we need to scratch their backs a bit more unfortunately.
terrorist nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, etc - put on notice. You will face heavy US sanctions if you don't close down the madrassas. any nuke/bio/chem attack on US will instigate an immediate retalitory strike on Mecca and Medina along with buldozing of the Mosque in Jerusalem. That's my deterrency. sorry if it offends but i get offended when US people get their heads sawed off in name of allah.
subsidize some amount of new drug development and implement tort reform for lawsuits against the doctors and drug industry. These lawsuits cause our doctors to have huge insurance premiums which they pass onto the consumer (you and i).
actually follow through with the push to encourage education in the math and sciences. Bush mentioned this - i'd actually make it happen. Scholarships would be given to these fields. one way to reduce outsourcing is to get back the lead we had in math/science talent we had in 50s-70s. we have such a great need for H1B visa holders in high tech to fill jobs that US people can do if they just tried and had the $$$ to fund it.
welfare reform: i liked the idea that there was a cap on max years you could be on welfare assistance. However, we should also supply these people with training and job skills so they can escape their situation. I'd instigate massive public works projects reminiscent of FDR in the 30s. you want $$$ - you have to give something to get it. no free lunch. however, at the same time, you get a skill, so you are actually getting something for free - pride in accomplishment and character.
business integrity: i'd work with global corporations to ensure that they are more responsible in their accounting practices and not fleecing the consumer.
of course this explains why i'm unelectable and wouldn't be popular.
borders: i'd first and foremost free Ramos and Compean (two border agents in prison for enforcing our border laws). next, i'd overhaul our immigration laws to make it a more streamlined process yet still keep the integrity of our country intact by hiring more people to take on the caseloads. Also, any illegal immigrant who commits a felony crime is immediately deported after trial. 3 strikes for misdemeanors. child abuse, rape, murder, drug dealing - deportation time.
I'd also (and this is probably not going to be popular) instigate a mandatory 12-24 month service program for young adults. They can choose to serve in their communities in some capacity or on the border as national guard or in public works projects or peace corps, etc. The idea here is to improve character of youth through service and youth choice in what they want - not a draft to do xyz only.
i'd put the US support of the UN up to the people's vote. if the people think we have a chance at overhauling the UN then so be it. otherwise, they can move to france. i think it still can be saved but you have to do alot of overhaul there. too much corruption
agressive lobbying with china and russia. they are the current thorns in our side with regards to sanctions having any effect on terrorst nations. we need to scratch their backs a bit more unfortunately.
terrorist nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, etc - put on notice. You will face heavy US sanctions if you don't close down the madrassas. any nuke/bio/chem attack on US will instigate an immediate retalitory strike on Mecca and Medina along with buldozing of the Mosque in Jerusalem. That's my deterrency. sorry if it offends but i get offended when US people get their heads sawed off in name of allah.
subsidize some amount of new drug development and implement tort reform for lawsuits against the doctors and drug industry. These lawsuits cause our doctors to have huge insurance premiums which they pass onto the consumer (you and i).
actually follow through with the push to encourage education in the math and sciences. Bush mentioned this - i'd actually make it happen. Scholarships would be given to these fields. one way to reduce outsourcing is to get back the lead we had in math/science talent we had in 50s-70s. we have such a great need for H1B visa holders in high tech to fill jobs that US people can do if they just tried and had the $$$ to fund it.
welfare reform: i liked the idea that there was a cap on max years you could be on welfare assistance. However, we should also supply these people with training and job skills so they can escape their situation. I'd instigate massive public works projects reminiscent of FDR in the 30s. you want $$$ - you have to give something to get it. no free lunch. however, at the same time, you get a skill, so you are actually getting something for free - pride in accomplishment and character.
business integrity: i'd work with global corporations to ensure that they are more responsible in their accounting practices and not fleecing the consumer.
of course this explains why i'm unelectable and wouldn't be popular.
So when Christians do shit in the name of God (i.e. dumb the masses + carry out terrorist attacks), you go blow up Vatican City?terrorist nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, etc - put on notice. You will face heavy US sanctions if you don't close down the madrassas. any nuke/bio/chem attack on US will instigate an immediate retalitory strike on Mecca and Medina along with buldozing of the Mosque in Jerusalem. That's my deterrency. sorry if it offends but i get offended when US people get their heads sawed off in name of allah.
Pissing off 1 billion people to the extreme will NOT solve terrorists - because instead of 1 million people who want to destroy the US, you have 100 million or half a billion. Great plan that.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
They are always pissed at the west. Have been for years. Tis life and the world we live in.Spark wrote:
So when Christians do shit in the name of God (i.e. dumb the masses + carry out terrorist attacks), you go blow up Vatican City?terrorist nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, etc - put on notice. You will face heavy US sanctions if you don't close down the madrassas. any nuke/bio/chem attack on US will instigate an immediate retalitory strike on Mecca and Medina along with buldozing of the Mosque in Jerusalem. That's my deterrency. sorry if it offends but i get offended when US people get their heads sawed off in name of allah.
Pissing off 1 billion people to the extreme will NOT solve terrorists - because instead of 1 million people who want to destroy the US, you have 100 million or half a billion. Great plan that.
same here and declare victory and LOl leaving the nation in turmoil LOlGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
invade Iraq
we should pull out and re-invade it.
First, bomb the fuck outta Ireland!!DeathBecomesYu wrote:
My question is this. As some of you may know by listening to the news and/ or reading the news that threats from Al-qaida are becoming more and more threatening. There was a recent intelligence report stating that this AQ has the people in place and have access to nuclear/ dirty bomb material and the know how to put it to use. Now, no one knows how close they are to actually pulling something off but I do believe that this will happen in Europe or if AQ's wish were to come true...in America. Now here is my question. If a nuclear bomb does go off (big, small or dirty), let's say in the heart of Chicago or some other major city and AQ claims responsibility, if you were the American president....What would you do?
Since AQ does not have a conventional army, does not have borders of any kind....how should America respond, especially if YOU were president.
lol...that was a good one....it really seems like a place of one-sided, tunnel vision " we are right, you are wrong" philosophy....well, I should be careful because I am basing off of the few that are here. Apparently, according to Poe, I would fail at president of the United States. The problem is that I wouldn't want to be president in this time because no matter what you would do, you would be the biggest ass in the world and even if you did something good, it would be "water under the bridge" and ignored by everyone including the help of the press.lowing wrote:
First, bomb the fuck outta Ireland!!DeathBecomesYu wrote:
My question is this. As some of you may know by listening to the news and/ or reading the news that threats from Al-qaida are becoming more and more threatening. There was a recent intelligence report stating that this AQ has the people in place and have access to nuclear/ dirty bomb material and the know how to put it to use. Now, no one knows how close they are to actually pulling something off but I do believe that this will happen in Europe or if AQ's wish were to come true...in America. Now here is my question. If a nuclear bomb does go off (big, small or dirty), let's say in the heart of Chicago or some other major city and AQ claims responsibility, if you were the American president....What would you do?
Since AQ does not have a conventional army, does not have borders of any kind....how should America respond, especially if YOU were president.
I love how every word I wrote is broken down into bits and then retaliated as if I had started the holocaust. There is nothing black and white in this world. You will never make everyone happy but you cant go around in the world and ALWAYS believe that your opinion is right and the guy who doesn't agree with you is a giant ass hole. That is what I get in these forums...people with extreme tunnel vision on how they believe the world should be and anyone else is an idiot.
Even though I would never want to be a president, I believe I would be a good one because I wouldn't be affiliated with one party. I could care less about lobbying, money, or power.....my goal would to get people together, put your egos away and do what is right for your country and the world. The two party system needs to go....what if we someone actually chose a VP from another party and forget the partisan BS that permeates our government and pretty much every government. I would do all I could to broker sensible peace and get people to get their heads out of their asses and get rid of stubborn politics. Its amazing how things cant get done just because someone wants to be "right" at all costs.
I keep hearing how we should never be at risk for an attack of a nuclear(small) or dirty bomb attack. They keep saying, on these forums at least, that our borders should never be open enough to let something like that happen. Here is the problem....its not about letting something in here through somebody's suitcase...its much BIGGER than that. I don't think most of you realize the amount of stuff that goes in and out of this country on a daily basis. Every state in the United States is like a small country any where else. Of course for countries, in Europe, have a hell of a lot easier time controlling what goes in and out. Its like guarding an area the size of Texas or smaller. Just imagine the material coming into our country on a daily basis. I have read and seen interviews of people who work at docks, loading, unloading and they believe that it would be impossible to inspect every trailer, boat, package that comes into the U.S.. If we did, our economy would come to a screeching halt. That is a huge problem...so what do you do? I have no idea.
The borders of the United States are probably the hardest in the world to deal with. We have always been a country with open arms, open free market society and i guess that mind set will have to change according to people in these forums, but do we live in fear of what "might" happen or keep our way of life......I prefer our way of life. Here is the problem with some people on these forums, you would not make a good president because you are too close minded about anything outside of your belief system, because you refuse to accept anyone else's ideas and because you belittle anyone who doesn't agree with you. That is what is wrong with politics and governments around the world, that is why people can not get along, that is why we have war because people are "set" in their ways and are not tolerant of anything else. Nobody wants to see the big picture...they only want to see what benefits them or supports what they want or belief. People need to quit swinging their penis around, drop the egos and open their eyes and maybe something could get accomplished that is worthwhile.
Imprison David Beckham and his Mrs, Skeletor
Last edited by BN (2007-07-17 00:35:34)
What, all one billion of them? I doubt it. Most of them (even the guys in regions which are terrorist-infested shitholes) don't give a flying fuck about al-Qaeda or the US, and just want to get on with their life and religion in peace. But I assure you, fire a single bullet at Mecca and all of them will come rallying to the terrorists' perverted cause.usmarine2005 wrote:
They are always pissed at the west. Have been for years. Tis life and the world we live in.Spark wrote:
So when Christians do shit in the name of God (i.e. dumb the masses + carry out terrorist attacks), you go blow up Vatican City?terrorist nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, etc - put on notice. You will face heavy US sanctions if you don't close down the madrassas. any nuke/bio/chem attack on US will instigate an immediate retalitory strike on Mecca and Medina along with buldozing of the Mosque in Jerusalem. That's my deterrency. sorry if it offends but i get offended when US people get their heads sawed off in name of allah.
Pissing off 1 billion people to the extreme will NOT solve terrorists - because instead of 1 million people who want to destroy the US, you have 100 million or half a billion. Great plan that.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Make USA behave more ecologicaly, because it kills the Earth.....
lol. After opening this thread, which is a thinly veiled endorsement of what Bush did after 9/11 - the politics of rage and irrationality, you have the cheek to describe me as having tunnel vision!!! lol. It's unbelievable that you Republicans seem the beat the same old tired and counter-productive war drum. By the way you're wrong, if you did something good as President in that troubled time you would very much so get acknowledged for it I would bet. This really does seem like a 'Bush couldn't help it - he's a good guy deep down' post, which is blatant nonsense.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
lol...that was a good one....it really seems like a place of one-sided, tunnel vision " we are right, you are wrong" philosophy....well, I should be careful because I am basing off of the few that are here. Apparently, according to Poe, I would fail at president of the United States. The problem is that I wouldn't want to be president in this time because no matter what you would do, you would be the biggest ass in the world and even if you did something good, it would be "water under the bridge" and ignored by everyone including the help of the press.
There are certain things that are black and white and a whole lotta grey everywhere else in life. I don't believe my opinion is always right. If you had been around longer you'll find that I concede on issues I'm wrong about if presented with rational and persuasive argument. You aren't bringing anything persuasive to the table here. Tell me in logical steps how YOU would deal with the situation so that I can explain where I believe you might be wrong or where you might be right. All you have offered are questions. Now it is time for you to provide answers rather than glibly push aside an alternative path that I have offered up as a suggestion.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
I love how every word I wrote is broken down into bits and then retaliated as if I had started the holocaust. There is nothing black and white in this world. You will never make everyone happy but you cant go around in the world and ALWAYS believe that your opinion is right and the guy who doesn't agree with you is a giant ass hole. That is what I get in these forums...people with extreme tunnel vision on how they believe the world should be and anyone else is an idiot.
Most of your posts suggest that you are Republican, no offence. Here is another reason why you would have problems as President. Bringing people together is pretty damn difficult, especially in this age of 24/7 media polarising opinion into two camps. Unless you brought serious curbs on press freedom and ownership of the press then you won't be dissolving any ideological differences people might have any time soon. The reason partisan politics exists is because that is the way society is built: politics is a cycle of leftist and rightist governments ultimately bringing balance over the long term - left and right could only brought closer together if you transformed US society into the Scandinavian model. It is too late for that now, besides the reason the US is so successful in certain respects is because it is right wing, allowing big business to do practically whatever they want: you can't fuck with the very thing that built the country into the massive success that it is.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Even though I would never want to be a president, I believe I would be a good one because I wouldn't be affiliated with one party. I could care less about lobbying, money, or power.....my goal would to get people together, put your egos away and do what is right for your country and the world. The two party system needs to go....what if we someone actually chose a VP from another party and forget the partisan BS that permeates our government and pretty much every government. I would do all I could to broker sensible peace and get people to get their heads out of their asses and get rid of stubborn politics. Its amazing how things cant get done just because someone wants to be "right" at all costs.
Don't get me wrong - you will be and are possibly at a risk of a dirty bomb attack. What must be done is to prevent that from happening as best you can. People hate America throughout the middle east from Morocco all the way across to Pakistan. The majority of 1 billion middle eastern muslims, I would venture, dislikes America. That is a massive area and a massive number of people. There are only 300m Americans of which only a fraction of that make up your army. How can the army of the United States of America possibly prevent the activities of militants from Morocco to Pakistan? This is about rationality here. It would be far simpler to police your own borders properly - IN THE INTEREST OF PREVENTING CIVILIAN AMERICANS FROM GETTING KILLED IF NOTHING ELSE. Hell the ancient Chinese built the Great Wall: it's not rocket science and the US has the cash.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
I keep hearing how we should never be at risk for an attack of a nuclear(small) or dirty bomb attack. They keep saying, on these forums at least, that our borders should never be open enough to let something like that happen. Here is the problem....its not about letting something in here through somebody's suitcase...its much BIGGER than that. I don't think most of you realize the amount of stuff that goes in and out of this country on a daily basis. Every state in the United States is like a small country any where else. Of course for countries, in Europe, have a hell of a lot easier time controlling what goes in and out. Its like guarding an area the size of Texas or smaller. Just imagine the material coming into our country on a daily basis. I have read and seen interviews of people who work at docks, loading, unloading and they believe that it would be impossible to inspect every trailer, boat, package that comes into the U.S.. If we did, our economy would come to a screeching halt. That is a huge problem...so what do you do? I have no idea.
PS You said it yourself: each state is like a small country. Why would it be so hard for the border states to effectively monitor their own borders in the interests of safety?
You're right it will have to change. The changes have already begun. A French friend of mine had to go to the US Embassy here in Ireland recently to get his visa for a business visit to the US. Fly into Israel and that should give you a pretty good idea of the price Americans need to pay to stay safe. Their security is second to none. When you become hated by a particular group of people you have to face the consequences.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
The borders of the United States are probably the hardest in the world to deal with. We have always been a country with open arms, open free market society and i guess that mind set will have to change according to people in these forums, but do we live in fear of what "might" happen or keep our way of life......
Well are you gonna defend it? War in the middle east doesn't protect it or serve it well, as has been shown in countless CIA and military reports. Does your way of life include, as ATG informed me, one of his illegal immigrant Mexican employees having been over and back to Mexico several times in the last few years? If that is possible then it is frankly amazing there hasn't been a dirty bomb yet. Perhaps the magnitude of the threat faced by the US in terms of Islamic terror is overblown.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
I prefer our way of life.
What was your idea again? Quick on the criticism, short on potential solutions....DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Here is the problem with some people on these forums, you would not make a good president because you are too close minded about anything outside of your belief system, because you refuse to accept anyone else's ideas and because you belittle anyone who doesn't agree with you. That is what is wrong with politics and governments around the world, that is why people can not get along, that is why we have war because people are "set" in their ways and are not tolerant of anything else. Nobody wants to see the big picture...they only want to see what benefits them or supports what they want or belief. People need to quit swinging their penis around, drop the egos and open their eyes and maybe something could get accomplished that is worthwhile.
PS Cheers for generalising the opinions of four million Irish people on the basis of one independently minded Irish individual.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-07-17 01:35:57)
First off...It was a little joke that I was commenting on by lowing.....RELAX and I even said that I shouldn't judge based on a few people here...so READ next time. Now for your double standard, thanks for generalizing me and thinking that I am Republican. I am not affiliated with any party. Actually I think the 2 party system needs to be abolished and get regular people back into government. As it sits now, we have a small group of people that are going to spend millions upon millions upon millions to be president. The media will spend millions upon millions more to televise debates set up just so that only the two parties are heard and the smaller voice is not. It is a damn shame that all that money is wasted...there are tons of better things that money could be used for. Basically only rich people can be leaders of our country and that is sad.
Next, I posted this thread to see how other people would deal with what an American president has to deal with since a lot of foreign people here have nothing good to say about the president or this country, but as I see not many are saying much. The presidency, in my opinion, is a thankless job and pretty much a lose, lose proposition. In this day and age, it won't matter if you are Republican, Democratic..you will get derailed either by the other party, the public pressure at home or elements internationally.
Finally, I don't have the answers and don't claim to have them. That is the difference between you and I. I won't be obnoxious enough to believe that I do and make someone else feel like an ass if they don't feel like I do. The only thing that I would say is that I would definitely be open minded and to get people working together instead of always trying to bring down "the other guy". So many things don't get done or are not done properly because politicians only worry about their power, party or themselves. That needs to change but I don't know how unless there was a true revolt to take our government back in some way.
Honestly Poe, you would be one of the most difficult people to work with in resolving an issue because you only believe you are right. I can imagine if you were in government that you would be one of the guys throwing chairs at someone else (as seen on TV) because you aren't getting your way. This is just my opinion but I don't see compromise in your behavior, I don't see an open mind, I don't see someone who could cooperate in the best interest of everyone because from reading almost every post you make, you feel that you have ALL the answers and everyone else is a complete IDIOT if they can't see what you want them to see and that my friend would never make a good leader....NEVER.
Next, I posted this thread to see how other people would deal with what an American president has to deal with since a lot of foreign people here have nothing good to say about the president or this country, but as I see not many are saying much. The presidency, in my opinion, is a thankless job and pretty much a lose, lose proposition. In this day and age, it won't matter if you are Republican, Democratic..you will get derailed either by the other party, the public pressure at home or elements internationally.
Finally, I don't have the answers and don't claim to have them. That is the difference between you and I. I won't be obnoxious enough to believe that I do and make someone else feel like an ass if they don't feel like I do. The only thing that I would say is that I would definitely be open minded and to get people working together instead of always trying to bring down "the other guy". So many things don't get done or are not done properly because politicians only worry about their power, party or themselves. That needs to change but I don't know how unless there was a true revolt to take our government back in some way.
Honestly Poe, you would be one of the most difficult people to work with in resolving an issue because you only believe you are right. I can imagine if you were in government that you would be one of the guys throwing chairs at someone else (as seen on TV) because you aren't getting your way. This is just my opinion but I don't see compromise in your behavior, I don't see an open mind, I don't see someone who could cooperate in the best interest of everyone because from reading almost every post you make, you feel that you have ALL the answers and everyone else is a complete IDIOT if they can't see what you want them to see and that my friend would never make a good leader....NEVER.
I agree with you there. Well if I was American that would be what I would want.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Actually I think the 2 party system needs to be abolished and get regular people back into government. As it sits now, we have a small group of people that are going to spend millions upon millions upon millions to be president. The media will spend millions upon millions more to televise debates set up just so that only the two parties are heard and the smaller voice is not. It is a damn shame that all that money is wasted...there are tons of better things that money could be used for. Basically only rich people can be leaders of our country and that is sad.
I think I said plenty. This is a debate forum. You glibly dismissed my plan without actually going into any great detail as to why you dislike the ideas, why you think the ideas wouldn't work, why such and such plan would be better. The onus is on you to convince me that I am wrong. It seems convenient for you that you have precluded yourself from taking part in the solution to your little conundrum.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Next, I posted this thread to see how other people would deal with what an American president has to deal with since a lot of foreign people here have nothing good to say about the president or this country, but as I see not many are saying much. The presidency, in my opinion, is a thankless job and pretty much a lose, lose proposition. In this day and age, it won't matter if you are Republican, Democratic..you will get derailed either by the other party, the public pressure at home or elements internationally.
I gave a potential solution, which may or may not work or may or may not be better than the response given to similar events. You must have ideas. You allude to the fact that it would be difficult for you as President to 'stay your hand'. That, to me, seemed like a subtle nod to Bush & Co. and we all now that Bush & Co. failed and are now political wormfood.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Finally, I don't have the answers and don't claim to have them. That is the difference between you and I. I won't be obnoxious enough to believe that I do and make someone else feel like an ass if they don't feel like I do.
How? Elaborate. Remember human nature when you give your response.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
The only thing that I would say is that I would definitely be open minded and to get people working together instead of always trying to bring down "the other guy". So many things don't get done or are not done properly because politicians only worry about their power, party or themselves. That needs to change but I don't know how unless there was a true revolt to take our government back in some way.
Not true. Perhaps if you offered a genuine retort once in a while my judgement might be tested. With logic you can expose the flaws in anyone's argument. Take my points and tear them apart. Go on.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
Honestly Poe, you would be one of the most difficult people to work with in resolving an issue because you only believe you are right.
That's quite amusing. I'm the one who continually advocates compromise along the lines of the Northern Ireland peace process. I don't think many chairs were thrown around during those discussions. Perhaps if you presented the position with which I am supposed to compromise I could but in the absence of a willingness to express any concrete opinions on the matter from you then I'm afraid I can't even begin to.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
I can imagine if you were in government that you would be one of the guys throwing chairs at someone else (as seen on TV) because you aren't getting your way. This is just my opinion but I don't see compromise in your behavior, I don't see an open mind, I don't see someone who could cooperate in the best interest of everyone because from reading almost every post you make, you feel that you have ALL the answers and everyone else is a complete IDIOT if they can't see what you want them to see and that my friend would never make a good leader....NEVER.
DBY - start dealing with my arguments and not my style of posting.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-07-17 02:30:12)
I'd never use the veto to help Israel to continue the violations to human rights and Palestine would be a free country, I'd pull out from Iraq and apologize, I'd ask Saudi Arabia to stop harboring terrorists while plays the "I'm your ally" game. That should be enough to solve the AQ issue.
Last edited by sergeriver (2007-07-17 04:43:09)
Who said I was joking?DeathBecomesYu wrote:
First off...It was a little joke that I was commenting on by lowing.....RELAX and I even said that I shouldn't judge based on a few people here...so READ next time. Now for your double standard, thanks for generalizing me and thinking that I am Republican. I am not affiliated with any party. Actually I think the 2 party system needs to be abolished and get regular people back into government. As it sits now, we have a small group of people that are going to spend millions upon millions upon millions to be president. The media will spend millions upon millions more to televise debates set up just so that only the two parties are heard and the smaller voice is not. It is a damn shame that all that money is wasted...there are tons of better things that money could be used for. Basically only rich people can be leaders of our country and that is sad.
Next, I posted this thread to see how other people would deal with what an American president has to deal with since a lot of foreign people here have nothing good to say about the president or this country, but as I see not many are saying much. The presidency, in my opinion, is a thankless job and pretty much a lose, lose proposition. In this day and age, it won't matter if you are Republican, Democratic..you will get derailed either by the other party, the public pressure at home or elements internationally.
Finally, I don't have the answers and don't claim to have them. That is the difference between you and I. I won't be obnoxious enough to believe that I do and make someone else feel like an ass if they don't feel like I do. The only thing that I would say is that I would definitely be open minded and to get people working together instead of always trying to bring down "the other guy". So many things don't get done or are not done properly because politicians only worry about their power, party or themselves. That needs to change but I don't know how unless there was a true revolt to take our government back in some way.
Honestly Poe, you would be one of the most difficult people to work with in resolving an issue because you only believe you are right. I can imagine if you were in government that you would be one of the guys throwing chairs at someone else (as seen on TV) because you aren't getting your way. This is just my opinion but I don't see compromise in your behavior, I don't see an open mind, I don't see someone who could cooperate in the best interest of everyone because from reading almost every post you make, you feel that you have ALL the answers and everyone else is a complete IDIOT if they can't see what you want them to see and that my friend would never make a good leader....NEVER.
To Cam,
I think the fundamental difference between the you and I ( I will speak for myself ) is this.
You think all of the terrorism the west is threatened with stems from the ME. You even stated in another thread that the terrorists "Stated reason" for bombing London was involvement in Iraq.
I have an opinion that the terrorism that is threatening the world is because of Islamic extremism and the "Stated reason" of a Muslim dominated world. To convert or kill the infidels. The Islamic extremists do not tolerate our way of life, and " God Willing " will destroy it. They have ZERO TOLERANCE for western society and our values. We were not in Iraq or Afghanistan before 911 or in 93 or in 98 or in 88 etc. This would be a threat to us regardless of Iraq.
i would try another strategy:
win their hearts and minds, instead of kill them all.
drop presents and candys, instead of bombs and rockets.
build schools and hospitals, instead of armor.
what every elder german remembers, when he thinks of post war time is: the nice u.s. soldier who gave him chocolate, chewing gums and cigarettes.
what every young iraqi will keep in mind is, the aggressive ignorant u.s. monster, who kicked his fathers ass.
you can not win against terrorism by terrorizing.
win their hearts and minds, instead of kill them all.
drop presents and candys, instead of bombs and rockets.
build schools and hospitals, instead of armor.
what every elder german remembers, when he thinks of post war time is: the nice u.s. soldier who gave him chocolate, chewing gums and cigarettes.
what every young iraqi will keep in mind is, the aggressive ignorant u.s. monster, who kicked his fathers ass.
you can not win against terrorism by terrorizing.
We've survived 800 years of war lowing, our Culture has already tried to be destroyed & eradicated by imperial Protestantism, we have survived Famine / War and our culture prevails through the millennia !!!! bring it on!!lowing wrote:
First, bomb the fuck outta Ireland!!