how was afghanistan unavoidable?
Really? Didn't know that. I'm sure McCain could change the policy....being the president and alltime will tell if he ever sees combat. the ironic thing is that if mccain wins, then palin's son will be forced stateside according to policy.
After the 9/11 attacks? Do you remember 2001? People were out for revenge and blood. The Taliban was housing Al Queda training areas. Can you imagine a president not taking action?how was afghanistan unavoidable?
republicans and their legacies.
ford putting hussein in power- Not sure who thinks thats his legacy
reagan and the cold war- Reagan's legacy was ENDING the cold war.
george sr and iraq- This war was unavoidable for anyone.
current "curious george" and iraq- I'll give you Iraq was avoidable, but Afghanistan certainly was not.
Funny how you forget:
Nixon- Got us out of Vietnam. I should add that Democrats got us there.
WW1 and WW2 were both Dems.
Bush I didn't start Kuwait, and you could certainly argue that Bush II didn't start Afghanistan.WWI and WWII ended up being better from us being in there and helping end the war. i hardly think those count. and besides, we didn't START those. vietnam i'll give you.
yes, i remember it - one of my best friends died in the towers working as an investment banker, so i'll never forget that day. there's no reason to flush Al Queda out with people with the missile systems that we have.After the 9/11 attacks? Do you remember 2001? People were out for revenge and blood. The Taliban was housing Al Queda training areas. Can you imagine a president not taking action?
eek!!! true you have a degree in history?Yes, but Republicans has that awful warmonger Lincoln.
:lol:
I don't think I've ever seen history butchered more than in the last 10 minutes
My degree just burst into flames... :lol:
They were all in caves. You could carpet bomb them for months and it wouldn't kill them all.yes, i remember it - one of my best friends died in the towers working as an investment banker, so i'll never forget that day. there's no reason to flush Al Queda out with the missile systems that we have.
I do! :afro:eek!!! true you have a degree in history?
On a basic level, yes. The issues today are not the same as the issues long ago. The parties were also much more regional in the past.so here's the question that i vaguely remember from my college days. the republican and democrat parties stood for different things, but they "flip flopped" on their principles quite a few times in history, is this correct, or was my teacher "out to lunch?"
true enough. the sad thing i realize, the older i get, is that Nader and his "crazy" ideas with energy slowly begin to make sense. man, i wish huckabee was still in this race.On a basic level, yes. The issues today are not the same as the issues long ago. The parties were also much more regional in the past.
Wow, you sound like Clinton. The only problem is that strategy doesn't work. Its costly and ineffective. Troops on the ground is the only way to effectively invade a country.as for the carpet bombs - do them every couple days to make sure they don't come out of the caves, and let them starve to death. might take us a year, but its an answer i'm happy with.
I like Ron Paul.true enough. the sad thing i realize, the older i get, is that Nader and his "crazy" ideas with energy slowly begin to make sense. man, i wish huckabee was still in this race.
whats up with those crazy terrorists anyways? a bunch of virgins? honestly, how about two talented whores?Wow, you sound like Clinton. The only problem is that strategy doesn't work. Its costly and ineffective. Troops on the ground is the only way to effectively invade a country.
Also, there would be a lot of collateral damage, aka civilian deaths, which would probably cause the plan to backfire and be a recruiting tool for Al Queda.
Its always evolved. A flip flop means they are now or were opposites which isn't accurate. They simply have evolved and adjusted.so here's the question that i vaguely remember from my college days. the republican and democrat parties stood for different things, but they "flip flopped" on their principles quite a few times in history, is this correct, or was my teacher "out to lunch?"
I don't think Obama/Biden is the answer. :toofunny:how about two talented whores?
yeah, that was really bad - words can't quite describe how terrible that was. i guess what i'm really wondering is why the republicans would even contemplate putting us in another war - our forces would be stretched way too thin. i also wonder why we have so many gun deaths compared to canada or japan. i think, and again, personal opinion here, is that being so aggressive on an international level sets the stage for unsafe streets at home.Saying Republicans are warmongers when the single biggest destructive force in any war was authorized by a Democrat (Truman dropping 2 atomic bombs) is a bit inaccurate.
They're not. It was an answer to a hypothetical question based on what NATO represents. The Dems hold the same position.yeah, that was really bad - words can't quite describe how terrible that was. i guess what i'm really wondering is why the republicans would even contemplate putting us in another war - our forces would be stretched way too thin.
I don't think anyone realistically would put us in another war unless we were truly backed into a corner.yeah, that was really bad - words can't quite describe how terrible that was. i guess what i'm really wondering is why the republicans would even contemplate putting us in another war - our forces would be stretched way too thin. i also wonder why we have so many gun deaths compared to canada or japan. i think, and again, personal opinion here, is that being so aggressive on an international level sets the stage for unsafe streets at home.
what i guess i should be wondering, is if domestic fatalities ever decreased when a democrat or republican is in office, and what caused such a decrease. was it a lack of war with us as the aggressors, or something else.
what are your thoughts on this rob or peterman?
anythings possible. i wish there was a more concrete answer than that.I don't think anyone realistically would put us in another war unless we were truly backed into a corner.
As for the gun death thing, that is a total stretch. I'd attribute it to it being warmer here before I would our foreign policy. At least there have been studies that have shown violent crime goes up when its warmer out.
To what question?!I don't think Obama/Biden is the answer. :toofunny:
You are learning about history, that is a good direction. I concern myself much more with people attempting to be accurate, than being Republican, Democratic or otherwise.as for the carpet bombs - do them every couple days to make sure they don't come out of the caves, and let them starve to death. might take us a year, but its an answer i'm happy with.
man, mullet won't be happy to see where his thread is heading...
hope i don't get negged. have mercy on me mr mullet.
OBAMA - " um, um......,um , change, hope, change, um, um, um, change, change,hope, and last but not least CHANGE!How terrible is he, he DOES answer the questions that are asked of him in a distinct and forthright manner. I'm sorry that you have a problem with him thinking before he opens his mouth. You may not like what he says but he is fully in charge of what he wishes you to know not some puppet master behind the curtain that missed a couple of hand signals.
:bruce3:
why? clinton and bush both banned some of them. you could make the same argument for mccain/palin.If Obama and Biden get elected say goodbye to all your little supplements.:thumbsup:
To what question?!
I don't think Obama/Biden is the answer.how about two talented whores?
I agree. I don't think either party is on the side of supplements. Its such a win/win issue what politician wouldn't be anti-steroid? Who's going to defend a guy "cheating" in their beloved sports?why? clinton and bush both banned some of them. you could make the same argument for mccain/palin.
not that i have anything against prohormones, but i really wish anyone in the government would make steroids more available to the general public, provided that the individuals buying them would be required to see a doctor to get them, be the appropriate age, and also require them to follow up with bloodwork.
putting steroid possession "schedule III" in the same category of offense as LSD and GHB seems a bit overkill.
um...have you heard of the Biden Bill??why? clinton and bush both banned some of them. you could make the same argument for mccain/palin.
not that i have anything against prohormones, but i really wish anyone in the government would make steroids more available to the general public, provided that the individuals buying them would be required to see a doctor to get them, be the appropriate age, and also require them to follow up with bloodwork.
putting steroid possession "schedule III" in the same category of offense as LSD and GHB seems a bit overkill.
It was a joint effort among the parties that got the bill. Honestly, I think if Biden didn't do it, another congressperson would have. Non-bodybuilders do not understand steroids and every person who doesn't bodybuild I've spoke with about them has had 100% negative ideas about them.um...have you heard of the Biden Bill??
Carter?You guys are missing the point or the silver lining, she's NOT Bush right? You can't go any further down the "man we gone and f*cked up again" spectrum than him.
well said man, and 100% correct. It is not so much Biden as it is a sign of the times.It was a joint effort among the parties that got the bill. Honestly, I think if Biden didn't do it, another congressperson would have. Non-bodybuilders do not understand steroids and every person who doesn't bodybuild I've spoke with about them has had 100% negative ideas about them.
Steroids laws are like anti child molester laws and drunk driving laws. Easy targets that sound good when running for reelection.
I say Bush was worse, hell he had 8 years to Carter's 4. :aargh:Carter?
I disagree. But I think Lyndon B. Johnson had both beat:I say Bush was worse, hell he had 8 years to Carter's 4. :aargh:
I am not talking about the banning of "designer" steroids and what not. Biden will see to it that ALL supplements are gone... Trust me I have talked extensively with some owners of a few well-known supplement companies. If he gets elected all you will be stacking is flinstone chewables..It was a joint effort among the parties that got the bill. Honestly, I think if Biden didn't do it, another congressperson would have. Non-bodybuilders do not understand steroids and every person who doesn't bodybuild I've spoke with about them has had 100% negative ideas about them.
Steroids laws are like anti child molester laws and drunk driving laws. Easy targets that sound good when running for reelection.
I couldn't agree more...I disagree. But I think Lyndon B. Johnson had both beat:
Started Medicaid, Medicare, and Welfare, drastically escalated US involvement in Vietnam...doesn't get much worse than that.
And for those that want to compare Iraq to Vietnam...we were losing 1000 Soldiers a month in Nam, we've lost a little over 4000 Soldiers total in Iraq. Vietnam was 10x the debacle that Iraq was.
You answered your own question.....It was STOPPED bud...as with a lot of other things that none of us probably know aboutYes, one that was stopped at Fort Dix before it hapened but it was going to take place.
Are you serious!!! Let's not forget the facts, which is we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and the CIA lied about the intelligence. So let me get this straight.... we lost over 4,500 troops in a war that was built on a lie, but we won. That is the most ridiculous statement I hear people make anytime they make a statement about the war. .... and according to the White House Mission Accomplished 4 years ago. Cut the bull crap out about we us winning the war. We are not winning, we are limping out Iraq with our tails between our legs for making such a big mess. In case you didn't know------WE INVADED THE WRONG COUNTRY. Let's get real folks!!!!!Won a war? Doh...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.htmlAre you serious!!! Let's not forget the facts, which is we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and the CIA lied about the intelligence. So let me get this straight.... we lost over 4,500 troops in a war that was built on a lie, but we won.
Have you heard anything about the war on your liberal news stations lately? Wonder why that is, they reported the hell out of it when the insurgency was going strong.That is the most ridiculous statement I hear people make anytime they make a statement about the war. .... and according to the White House Mission Accomplished 4 years ago. Cut the bull crap out about we us winning the war. We are not winning, we are limping out Iraq with our tails between our legs for making such a big mess. In case you didn't know------WE INVADED THE WRONG COUNTRY. Let's get real folks!!!!!
Are you serious!!! Let's not forget the facts, which is we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and the CIA lied about the intelligence. So let me get this straight.... we lost over 4,500 troops in a war that was built on a lie, but we won. That is the most ridiculous statement I hear people make anytime they make a statement about the war. .... and according to the White House Mission Accomplished 4 years ago. Cut the bull crap out about we us winning the war. We are not winning, we are limping out Iraq with our tails between our legs for making such a big mess. In case you didn't know------WE INVADED THE WRONG COUNTRY. Let's get real folks!!!!!
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Your Sarah Palin fantasies come true | General Chat | 7 | ||
Fox News: Sarah Palin - Worse Than You Thought. | Politics | 48 | ||
Sarah Palin's $150k Wardrobe. | Politics | 169 | ||
Sarah Palin - The Russia Question | Politics | 13 | ||
Glenn Greenwald Corrects Himself on Sarah Palin | Politics | 0 |