View Poll Results: 4 more years for Bush? if he could.
- 267. This poll is closed
Dumb Question- If Bush Could Run Again, Would You Vote For Him?
- 04-15-2007, 01:20 AM
- 05-13-2007, 02:34 PM
- 05-16-2007, 03:01 AM
05-16-2007, 01:35 PM
05-16-2007, 07:21 PM
YES I would also!
Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths . Proverbs 3:5-6
05-16-2007, 08:32 PM
Bush was the better choice in 2000,...Al Gore? He doesn't even take himself seriously!
John Kerry 2004 was the worst candidate ever!
Kerry spent 20 million on an anti voter fraud program, then when the votes were close in Ohio,...he conceded victory to Bush! no recount nothing? Way to fight Johnny boy!!! Thank god he's not the president! He would have surrendered by now!
I think if Bush ran right now(2008) he would not even get his party's nomination.
05-16-2007, 11:36 PM
The democrats got control of the house and the senate this year and have not done sh!t they said they would do. Many of them ran on moderate platforms and skated on the fraud and misconduct of a few righties, not to mention the war weariness.
The only thing they have done is tried to raise taxes (talk about letting Bush's tax cuts expire), make time tables for withdraw (cut n run) and talk about impeaching everyone from Alberto Gonzalez to Cheney to our damned President, who is the only one with a damned backbone left. You need to remember, he's the only one who doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected.
Don't even get me started on freakin Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, and the rest of those hippies...
05-17-2007, 12:16 AM
05-17-2007, 11:36 AM
So, would you like it our troops packed up their stuff and left Iraq tomorrow, regardless of what would happen afterwards. As long as our military, whose job it is to protect our nation, quits fighting the terrorists who vow to kill us where ever they can and are determined to continue the chaos in Iraq and can't wait for us to leave.
To all you hippies, I would love to give PEACE a chance, but peace cannot be a one-sided concept. The Islamic fundamentalists are at WAR with us and right now Iraq is the battleground.
I am for the generals figuring out the best way to end it ASAP, but not for just leaving because people don't like war. Our generals, not our politicians.
05-17-2007, 11:49 AM
unless the retards in charge of this mess get it on the right track SOON, why should we let our troops get killed while the leaders sit around with their thumbs up their asses.
05-17-2007, 11:59 AM
The rules of engagement need to be revised because this is not a conventional war and our enemies follow no rules or codes of conduct.
But just leaving will cause a much larger problem destined for a later time. I saw a program by Ted Coppel called 'Our Children's Children's War' and the title decribes it very well. It is a sad reality we live within. Our world has a lot of major propblems and running away because we can't figure it out is not a viable option. I agree that sitting there while our tropps are blown up and kidnapped is not acceptable either. Stategy must be changed and implemented swiftly to **** them up.
Long term, things must change as well. Much more good-will and education has to be our approach, much like our military has done in parts of Africa. But, right now, more swift action is required than that in the Middle East.
05-17-2007, 01:47 PM
05-17-2007, 02:32 PM
yeah its all fcuked up. im sure no one knows how to changes things or there would have. but at what point do you give up?
4 years? 10? i just dont see an end to this.
05-17-2007, 03:33 PM
I love how everyone things everything can just be simplified into "just nuke them"
Hey how about this one? How about, let's not bother with them in the first place!
05-17-2007, 04:18 PM
05-17-2007, 06:34 PM
I don't believe the US will ever use nuclear weapons or any other WMD again, and neither do they. They aren't affraid of us any more. During the Clinton admin they kept making attacks on US property. The attacks kept getting a little bigger and a little bigger. How did the US respond? By doing nothing. Or you could say the Clinton admin did nothing. Then the 9/11 attacks came and people wanted to know, "What happened?" The average person is apparently just that dumb. Many just blame that on Bush too, since he was in office.
Some say this is another Vietnam. That isn't true for several reasons. Most of the Iraqi's are eduacated people with jobs and the country is industralized. Vietnam was just a rice paddy and still is. Vietnam never attacked us. We knew when we left Vietnam it was over. That isn't the case here. One way I believe it is the same is that there are too many polliticians involved and not enough good military men who are concerned solely with winning battles and taking care of the troops. Many of the military leaders now seem to be more concerned with how their actions in this conflict will effect their potential future political career.
I don't love George W. Bush but not fighting a war is alot easier than fighting one. I believe he's doing what he thinks is right at this point in time, weather it is or not. If he wanted the easy way out American troops would already be home. I give him credit for not taking the easy way out.
Fighting a war in Iraq is better than fighting a war in New York or any other US State as far as I'm concerned.
05-17-2007, 08:42 PM
It is a sad fact that the Nancy Pelosi's, the Harry Reid's, and the John Murtha's of this world want us to quit. To come home and leave history written as President Bush and the Republican's being the one's who ****ed up. That could lead to Democratic control for the next election or two!!! So, screw the long term, screw making the world a better place for our future generations, let's make our President look bad.
It's not like he really needs any extra help at that. Every pic of him on the main stream new networks looks like a monkey, which is funny, I don't care who you are.
I respect our President and think he is morally a beautiful man, even if he is about as good at public speeking as I am at underwater basketweaving. The only thing I wish he would do is be more candid, more upfront and blunt, but, hey, he is a politician.
The overwhelming majority of our military does not want to come home until the job is done and are saints for doing what they have done and continue to do. But, who cares what they say, let's just make the Republicans look bad and blame this all on them. They did not start it, but had the balls to engage the enemy.
05-17-2007, 09:13 PM
Well no one can argue that the war wasn't a mistake, but going home cold turkey would be a big mistake. They need to work from the bottem up to stablize the country again. Start at the local level and eventually get a new goverment set up that can take control. Someone who can auctually put a postive face on Iraq and give people hope.
05-17-2007, 09:27 PM
ok so tell me what would have to happen for us to " win " this war? tell me what it would take to be able to bring the troops home with out it being a mistake?
AND how long do you think it will take? just guess.
05-17-2007, 10:08 PM
Now, the War on Terror, the War on Islamic Fundementalism---That my friend is the million dollar question.
Our sworn enemies are endoctrining their children with hate toward all 'non-believers' and the West. They are fighting a war that may last hundreds of years and are willing to sit back and wait, keep operations small, wait till we stop watching, then boom- 1000's of bombs strike across the globe, IEDs, biological weapons, and if they have them, dirty bombs or even nuclear weaponry.
This is war for our civilization and don't get it twisted. They hate everything we stand for and want to remove us. Kill the JEWS, all Jews, they all should just be slaughtered. Sounds reasonible right. That's what Iran's big dog vows. Hez'bollah, Al' Queada, Islamic fundamentalists, Al-Arqam, fundamentalist Sunnis and Sh'ia, Sunetc... Sadr City... Bad people,.bad places. They would never put me in the talkes because it may make too much sense.
I took a sleeping pill and it's worj=king, I can barely see,
Good night, I gotta drive ti Chicago for an intervioew at 5 am ... Good Times!
All pray for me and if you don't pray, atleast widh for good things. Even if we disagree with polotics,
Peace does not work, even when Jane Fonda, Sean Penn, Alec Baldwin, Daryll Hannah...Good people I'm shore. Peace works well like Commnisn, in a perfect world without the interuption of outside evil forces. Like corruption and people wanting to kill regardless if we all embracde peace. Peace can work, been working on my street for quite some time, then it should work everywhere else,. Let;s do it.
That's my block
05-17-2007, 10:21 PM
I feel uncomfortable reading all of these posts that don't seem to comprehend that the two main Islamic groups are fighting each other within Iraq. The country is in the midst of a civil war. I've been there, things that you see and hear on TV are so dilluted that if you heard the rest you'd be sick to your stomach. The only thing uniting these two warring groups is the general disdain for the West and its culture. There is no stabilization that will occur. Iran is backing the shia in Iraq and the U.S. is doing very little to stop this. To win Iraq, you'd have to go into Iran. Its already become a true quagmire.
05-17-2007, 11:08 PM
No. "they" most certainly did not start this. WE started it. We supported the Shah of Iran. We funded Saddam Hussein. We funded Osama Bin Laden. We have had close ties to the royal family of Saudi Arabia. We have been the power that has supported everyone that has ever oppressed the people over there.
THEY most certainly did not start this. Read some history, and not just history that's 10 years old.
05-18-2007, 09:15 AM
The funny thing is that the unifying factor used to be fear of Sadaam. another funny thing is that the southern Kurdish section of Iraq is completely peaceful no US soldier has died there since 2003,mostly because there are no soldiers there!
The first thing that will happen if the US left Iraq is that the 10% of insurgents that are "Al Queda" operatives would be massacred by the rest of the insurgents who consider them immoral and untrustworthy! Another problem solved!
This was about building 30+ military bases in Iraq, just like the Gulf War was about building military bases in Saudi Arabia!
The US will have to deal with groups of angry people as long as we occupy there home lands! See the history of Israel for a good example of how well this works!
If China had a naval fleet in the Gulf of Mexico and military bases in Texas, do you think some American would try and stop them ?
Next to Israel, Iran is the closest thing to a democracy in the middle east, all the OPEC nations are either kingdoms or dictatorships. Iran has popular elected officials.You can choose COKE or PEPSI.
There is no military or moral reason to engage Iran!
When the US left Vietnam in defeat in 1975, communism did not "sweep in" and dominate the region. Communism was flatly rejected by the people!
Capitalism assimilated and free trade has made South East Asia into a thriving market place!
The upside of Western Culture is the freedom of choice, so ultimately if the people of Iraq have no choice, then they have no freedom!
05-18-2007, 12:31 PM
"WE Started it" that is absolutely nuts! Yes, we have made mistakes in the Middle East but you can't armchair quarterback your way into how everything we did was wrong. Policies and decisions are made based on the best info on hand at the time. We will always have close ties to the Suadis even if we hated them, we need the oil and they control most of it. Yes, we funded Hussein but when something like that takes place you have no idea if the guy will turn into a complete lunmatic and start spitting into the face of the rest of the world.
All of this is the same as the ridiculous "WMD" argument.
As for leaving, I don't see the U.S. ever completely leaving. There are still troops in Korea, Vietnam, Germany, and so on it is just that the people there don't feel the need to blow up anyone in a military uniform. To pack up everything and leave would be a whole new level of irresponsibility...
And YES I would still vote for Bush, what is the Alternative?
05-18-2007, 01:02 PM
Germany,Japan,Korea embraced western capitalism and have no religious reasons to not want a US presence in their countries
The very presence of non Muslims on Muslim land is desecration.
That is an incontrovertible fact.
The US must recognize that unless we can convert a few hundred million Muslims to another religion they will always be unhappy with non Muslim presence on Muslim land.
You don't have to agree with their religious views to understand why this is a quagmire!
05-18-2007, 03:04 PM
AR, I agree with your comments on Muslims not accepting ANY form of government that is not based on their beliefs. I still thin the "WE sarted it statement" is NUTS, especially in the context of read some history. If I read some history then I will blame it all on Britain, Russia, and possibly the Romans instead of using the pieces that are convenient to implicate the U.S. and it's much shorter involvement.
I don't completely agree with your take on Korea, Vietnam, and add Japan. If you spend some time in Asia you learn that the U.S. is a necessary evil to them but not necessarily something they want. It is just a much better alternative than China!
As for Thomas Jefferson and his foresight on Neo Cons, while I do think TJ was brilliant, I don't follow. It sounds like you are pointing toward the crazy notion of a "Bush Theocracy". The entire separation of church and state issue is totally out of control and I think TJ would probably agree that what is often done today to get rid of crosses and such is the opposite of the founding fathers intentions. There is no mention of separation of church and state in the Constitution or any of the writings of the Founding Fathers. TJ's writings on the issue were all implying a need to keep government out of religion.
I bring this up because I am curious as to how Bush has tested our form of government checks and balances?
Has it been tested more than some of the previous administrations?
05-18-2007, 03:46 PM
you`ve all made good points to stay in Iraq but the bottom line is that like 70% of America wants us out. and our government is " for the people, by the people ".
they pay for this war with their taxes. they are the boss. they put the dems in office to end the war.
just because 30% wants to stay doesn`t make it ok.
05-18-2007, 05:59 PM
2000 election - There was a county in Florida in which Al Gore received( -13,000 votes!) There was an immediate red flag and recounts were issued. Bush was ahead by about 600 votes when John Bolton,illegally stopped the recount! It went to the supreme court and the rest was history!
9/11/2001- NORAD, the USAF and the FAA fail to defend the US
against terrorist attack. Ultimately these departments answer to the President who ultimately is responsible "to defend America from enemies both domestic and abroad" He didn't even say he was sorry!..later blames Bill Clinton before the 2006 election!
10-26-2001- The Patriot Act
Congress passed this act after any dissenters had anthrax sent to them.
a 500 page copy was received the night before the vote by congress most of which was never read by the people who signed it. The act contains many Bill of Rights denial clauses that were never discussed publicly. These denials are turned over at the state level by courts claiming they violate the constitution.
March 2003 - Iraq (incomplete) but that "yellow cake" story doesn't look so good anymore
February 2004 - torture and rendition(digital cameras)
2005 NSA wire tapping illegally spying on us citizens. Bush defends the tapping by explaining his lawyers did not think it was illegal and cites a FISA law that is irrelevant because the NSA as a civilian agency does not get a free pass on "no warrant" searches.
Bush then claims that as commander In chief he as the military leader can do what ever it takes to secure the country.
Actually military personnel cannot enact authority over any US citizens(unconstitutional), unless there is a martial law in effect, there was not
Also Bush as the president only becomes commander in chief during wartime. The congress has not declared a war since 1941!
2006The Valerie Plame case Libby libby libby!
2007 The Alberto Gonzales current activity is showing some ugliness with John Ashcroft being pressured on his sick bed to play ball with Cheney.
also Gonzales himself investigated for firing US attorneys that would not act according to "White house mandates" during alleged voter fraud investigations.
and finally Bush has chosen the "Opt out special privilege" on just about every Law he has signed. That means he does not have to follow the same laws that every other citizen must.
So much for, "by the people, of the people and for the people"
That very act alone separates him from the "checks and balance" system more than any other president!
oh and this just in!!!
Last edited by anabolicrhino; 05-18-2007 at 06:41 PM. Reason: breaking news!!!
05-18-2007, 09:50 PM
Well, aren't you full of far left talking points. Exaggeration please... You you insinuating our President sent anthrax to dissenters. Do you really consider AbU Gharib 'torture' and not plain and simple humiliation? In the case of Guantanimo- waterboarding anyone? As for 9/11 Cinton missed plenty of intel, however Bush's cabinent deserves plenty of fault as well. Gonzalez, he handled it wrong, YES, but did nothing wrong; they can let any US attorney go at any time they want for any reason. The Plame case was Lame. Gimme a break. And, War was declared on us whether we have 'declared' it back or not.
I'm sure you wish out President would be impeached. MoveON.FU
Hopefully my humor does not offend you too much.
05-18-2007, 10:42 PM
Oh right, Clinton missed all the intel. Like for example the terrorist plot for New Year 2001 that was thwarted under Clinton as her was going out of office. Like the messages he left the Bush administration warning of Osama Bin Laden being an imminant threat. You know, the guy the Clinton was accused of "wagging the dog" when he launched cruise missiles at some of Bin Laden's camps.
This administration has been far and away the worst in the entirety of American history. It has TRAMPLED AND SPIT on the Constitution. It has stripped every US citizen of rights granted as far back as the friggin Magna Carta. Try to tell Jose Padilla otherwise. Guilty or not, he is an AMERICAN CITIZEN who was held without trial, without even being charged for YEARS. And that's just one of the cases we know about. For all we know there are countless others that are currently simply listed as "missing persons" cases in their hometown.
We are not at war. You cannot declare war on a concept. A war against terrorism cannot ever be won because as long as human beings live there will be terrorists. Because we are not at war, there is no legal or constitutional justification for the suspension of habeus corpus or the suspension of ANY US citizen's Constitutional Rights for any reason whatsoever.
Similar Forum Threads
- By sonofsatan666 in forum Post Cycle TherapyReplies: 1Last Post: 11-08-2006, 01:56 AM
- By BigVrunga in forum General ChatReplies: 41Last Post: 08-23-2006, 10:04 AM
- By ripped22 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 04-18-2006, 06:20 PM
- By CROWLER in forum IGF-1/GHReplies: 46Last Post: 12-16-2005, 06:30 PM
- By WAHCHING in forum Weight LossReplies: 5Last Post: 09-21-2005, 04:05 PM