Post by: brandogg on October 20, 2004, 08:08:00 AM
Post by: Baner on October 20, 2004, 10:56:00 AM
Post by: gcskate27 on October 20, 2004, 11:16:00 AM
when hes considered the lesser of two evils, i would think the republicans should have picked someone better...
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 20, 2004, 02:20:00 PM
You may think his 3 purple hearts are bullshit (The company Sinclair that started the claims, are now under a charge of discimination for a trailer park they run) but he also won 2 CONGRESSIONALLY awarded medals, which both are investigated by 2 seperate private companies.
Bush can't lead when he's never even been in a war.
Post by: pug_ster on October 20, 2004, 02:51:00 PM
The thing that we hear in this campagain from the most Democrats is how repulsive Bush is. Anti-Bush and Anti-Kerry people have been painting a negative picture about the other guy. So much this dis-information, instead of a Candidate saying 'Why you should vote for me' saying 'Why you shouldn't vote for the other guy.'
As a result, the approval rating for Bush and Kerry is less than 50% In the past presidential election, the approval rating of both candidates are much higher than that.
Post by: faynor on October 20, 2004, 03:08:00 PM
Post by: SmallBusinessGuy on October 20, 2004, 03:14:00 PM
| QUOTE (Maximumbeing @ Oct 20 2004, 10:23 PM) |
| I used to think they were just 2 evils, but the more I read about John Kerry, the more I believe whole-heartedly that he is the best person for this job right now. Bush is a fuck up to the 10th degree, while John Kerry dropped out of YALE to volunteer, not get drafted, VOLUNTEERED, to go fight in the jungles of Vietnam. You may think his 3 purple hearts are bullshit (The company Sinclair that started the claims, are now under a charge of discimination for a trailer park they run) but he also won 2 CONGRESSIONALLY awarded medals, which both are investigated by 2 seperate private companies. Bush can't lead when he's never even been in a war. |
Dude don't ever fucking try to promote Kerry as a fucking hero. My friend's dad was a Marine in Nam for 16 months he was on the frontlines in Anhoa and Danang. Their bases where constantly being overrun, I remember him telling us about one of the times they got overrun because the guys who were standing point were smoking pot and getting high, and didn't signal the rest of the base about the incoming attack, they were killed. Also during that same attack the NVA got a hold of one of the 50 cal stations and turned it on the Marines and begin to firing, they finally stopped them after tossing a few grenades in there. Kerry never saw any action like that, Kerry spent is entire 4 MONTHS on a boat, a fucking boat. He is a fucking prick bitch, and doesn't deserve anyone's respect, not only because he was anti-war going in to Nam, but because he went into the war with the sole purpose of using his account, along with various testimonies of anonymous soldiers (which he used in CONGRESS when giving his testimony against the war, HOW THE FUCK CAN YOU USE ANONYMOUS SOURCES TO PROMOTE YOUR ARGUEMENT?!) to promote his anti-war crusade. I hope Kerry rots in hell. If you really want to make your vote count, vote for whatever independent you feel shares your same agenda whether it is Socialist (Nader) Libertarian (Badarnik), Fascist, Communist, etc., but do not be forced into voting for the two bullshit products of a corrupt two party system.
Post by: faynor on October 20, 2004, 03:23:00 PM
Go smallbusinessguy. Now i myself own a small business and all of these imaginary numbers that Kerry uses to roll back the deficit and the tax cuts are ridiculous. It is amazing to me that candidates will say basically anything and think that responsible AMERICANS won't look it up for themselves. Believe me Ever y president has said their share of fabricated statements. Kerry takes the cake though. Are you DEMOCRAPS seriously voting for this guy 
. Come on , You guys could have done better with Geraldine Ferraro back for a run.... 
Post by: thomes08 on October 20, 2004, 04:14:00 PM
What is more important, getting John Kerry into office? Or getting George W Bush out of office? And in this day and age the people who are against bush are so against him they'd rather pick anyTHING besides him to represent the USA. In order for me to like Kerry with the same magnitude that I hate Bush, he would basically have to think EXACTLY like me, only qualified for the job. And that person doesn't exist.
You can't just use those numbers to say "yoo dems really are stoopid and piqued the rong guy", you have to actually use your brain and think the numbers maymean something completely different. That maybe the numbers are like that because Bush has done such a piss poor job running this country in many minds in america, it would be impossible to find a canidate that we like as much as we hate Bush.
thomes08
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 20, 2004, 05:30:00 PM
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 20, 2004, 05:33:00 PM
Kerry is rolling back the tax breaks that the rich received from their pocket-man Bush.
My friend's parents won the lottery, and the money they got back this year, will pay all their taxes for the next 2 years.
Ridiculous.
Post by: faynor on October 20, 2004, 05:45:00 PM
Try running Kerry's "numbers" and see how he plans to pay for it. TRY AGAIN. 
Post by: SmallBusinessGuy on October 20, 2004, 05:46:00 PM
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 20, 2004, 05:53:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Wow, history book for economics, |
Wow, you could imagine, that those history books might mention OUR ECONOMY IN THE PAST, or you could take your community college economy classes and say you know something.
and Smallbusinessguy, when did I say I disliked our government? I dislike George W. Bush, that doesn't really affect my feelings on Congress, or their ability to judge who deserves medals. And just because someone didn't see their friend blown in two, doesn't mean they aren't a hero.
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 20, 2004, 06:13:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Just like A DEMOCRAP to avoid the real issues. |
Was that a retort? It seemed to me that my response was on the issue on if economy could be found in history books, of course the trends and policies can be found. Though, if you'd rather just watch your spin-machine and call me a democrap, go right ahead, it only shows how the republican party is failing.
Kerry's policy in 2004:
No Republican Left Behind,
making sure BOTH parties
are totally literate, he believes
this will make elections more
fair.
Post by: kadafin on October 20, 2004, 06:48:00 PM
The biggest problem i have with Bush is that has not vetoed a single thing for 4 years... I personaly cannot vote for someone that has absolutely no disgression (this is the major reason our country is doing so bad at home).
(Edit): I am tired and i just made some random statements and yeah...
Post by: thomes08 on October 20, 2004, 06:56:00 PM
) so i'm not going to list them all. ut it seems i do that every week anyways so if you haven't heard the reasons why i think he should go back to texas and open up and manage his library, then please read through some past posts i've mentioned a lot of them many timesthomes08
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 20, 2004, 07:49:00 PM
I don't remember Bush ever being in Vietnam.
Post by: brandogg on October 20, 2004, 08:26:00 PM
Post by: thomes08 on October 20, 2004, 09:04:00 PM
anyways..... go bosox.... or should i say go not the yankees?.... hmmm should i explain why i want the bosox to win?
Post by: gcskate27 on October 20, 2004, 10:19:00 PM
Post by: thomes08 on October 20, 2004, 10:29:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: gcskate27 on October 21, 2004, 01:07:00 AM
Post by: thomes08 on October 21, 2004, 09:49:00 AM
So bush keeping them well armed...... is that the reason why 18 GI's refused to do a mission because they weren't properly armed.
thoms08
Post by: pug_ster on October 21, 2004, 10:18:00 AM
Kerry tried to run a positive campagain (eg why Kerry say you should vote for me.) Bush and the other Republicans just want to portray Kerry as a flip-flop and reason why they shouldn't vote for the other guy. What can Kerry do except run the same negative campagain?
Post by: Baner on October 21, 2004, 10:49:00 AM
Post by: faynor on October 21, 2004, 10:58:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Kerry tried to run a positive campagain (eg why Kerry say you should vote for me.) Bush and the other Republicans just want to portray Kerry as a flip-flop and reason why they shouldn't vote for the other guy. What can Kerry do except run the same negative campagain? |
There is so much logic here it boggles my mind!!!!
What can Kerry do????!!!!
PLEASE!!!!
Post by: faynor on October 21, 2004, 11:07:00 AM
KerrySpeaks
Post by: faynor on October 21, 2004, 11:08:00 AM
Post by: pug_ster on October 21, 2004, 12:33:00 PM
The Republicans need more uninformed voters like you.
Post by: Baner on October 21, 2004, 12:44:00 PM
Edit: I feel left out.
Post by: pug_ster on October 21, 2004, 12:56:00 PM
| QUOTE (faynor @ Oct 21 2004, 08:52 PM) |
Hey pug, please remember the topic at hand and realize why I'm posting about Kerry. But hey, what do I know, I'm just trying to stay on topic..HEHE  |
I did read your posts. You said few times why Kerry is a flip flop and gave a website of why Kerry is a flip flop twice. You only explained once why Bush should be president. That is why I said that why you have more reasons why Kerry is a flip-flop than Bush being a president.
Yes, I am not talking about the topic, but I replying to your post.
Post by: faynor on October 21, 2004, 01:17:00 PM
Getting old already. YAWN!!!!! lets drag something else to death already!!!
Post by: faynor on October 21, 2004, 01:18:00 PM
Post by: thomes08 on October 21, 2004, 04:49:00 PM
Post by: Trisman on October 21, 2004, 05:21:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 21 2004, 06:52 PM) |
| About Kerry's military record, it's shitty. 4 months... 6 months was a tour, which is the shortest you are suppose to be "on the field". If he was all about dropping out of Yale to go to war for his nation, why not take his "injures" like a man much like many of the other war vets (who would decline their purple hearts so they can keep fighting, heard a couple of stories, one is a guy who would have recieved 9 purple hearts, but declined them, on his 8th tour he was killed). Bush's military record isn't the best either, (you guys do need to see that Bush not attending his post were lies setup by the Demos) but he doesn't gloat about it. Bush released his military record for everyone to see, yet to see Kerry do the same. What's he hiding? |
It's not like his military record is being held in a vault somewhere. It's there for everybody to see. But swift boats, and now stolen honor, never mention it. Wonder why............ The only thing wrong with kerry is that he should be a little more aggresive defending attacks against his person. If you look up and investigate his supposed "flip-flops", you find that either they don't exist or he had a legitimate reason.
Post by: Ween311 on October 21, 2004, 06:01:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| It's not like his military record is being held in a vault somewhere. It's there for everybody to see. |
Actually it's not there for everyone to see. You can only see the select bits that have been picked out of his military career and released. Kerry has never signed FS180 to release his military records. The number of unreleased records is somewhere between 80-100 depending on which news sites you believe.
Post by: pug_ster on October 21, 2004, 06:56:00 PM
| QUOTE (faynor @ Oct 21 2004, 09:17 PM) |
| For some odd reason you sound a lot like the Candidate you are supporting. Must be that lie-minded thing. Did I say lie-minded .oops typo(i think) meant like-minded( i think.) Anyhoo, I will gladly gives my reasons for voting for Bush if that is the topic. I might even be honest and tell why i don't support Bush on some things. Just another misinformed republican here |
Didn't I say the only person who you are trying to make an ass of is yourself?
Post by: killallhumans on October 21, 2004, 08:15:00 PM
Post by: gcskate27 on October 21, 2004, 08:22:00 PM
| QUOTE (K98 @ Oct 21 2004, 08:00 PM) |
| wow faynor you are the only one that has shut pug_ster and thomes08 up. Good job. They arent doing a good job backing up their "superior" canidate. haha |
thats because he isnt posting anything new... eash time its the same crap, you can just imagine him sticking his fingers in his ears and saying democrap over and over in these arguments...
Post by: Maximumbeing on October 21, 2004, 08:30:00 PM
I don't see why John Kerry's record is a joke, when Bush wasn't even THERE. He was here in the States, doing jack shit.
Viva Bush!
Post by: thomes08 on October 21, 2004, 09:13:00 PM
| QUOTE (K98 @ Oct 22 2004, 04:00 AM) |
| wow faynor you are the only one that has shut pug_ster and thomes08 up. Good job. They arent doing a good job backing up their "superior" canidate. haha |
yeah.... that or rising above him. His posts are about as useless as mich garveys, or the orcanmans. He says the same thing over and over again about the DEMOCRAPS and i honestly think he's in middle school so what's the point in arguing with bobby hill when hank drilled W into his head a long time ago
thomes08
Post by: gcskate27 on October 21, 2004, 10:31:00 PM
out of your impresive 19 posts, 4 had the word democrap... and you only stopped because you got called on your childishness...
Post by: pug_ster on October 21, 2004, 11:43:00 PM
| QUOTE (K98 @ Oct 22 2004, 04:00 AM) |
| wow faynor you are the only one that has shut pug_ster and thomes08 up. Good job. They arent doing a good job backing up their "superior" canidate. haha |
You're right. I don't have much to say to unintelligentable responses.
Oh, here's a New York Times article.
http://www.truthout....4/101704A.shtml
Edit: Sorry, You will have to register to see the New York time article, but a copy of the original article is in here...
Makes me wonder why does Republicans want to vote for this 'Stay the Course' president. His 'Steady Course' already pissed off all the Democrats and 1/2 of the republican politicans. I guess if he is elected, he will piss off the other half.
Post by: gcskate27 on October 21, 2004, 11:57:00 PM
**it amazes me that people like that are the ones running around calling everyone stupid... gotta love irony...
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 12:04:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," the highly contested anti-Kerry documentary, should not be shown by the Sinclair Broadcast Group. It should be shown in its entirety on all the networks, cable stations and on public television. |
Source NY Times
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 12:14:00 AM
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 12:31:00 AM
)Dss311
edit:spelling
Post by: Heet on October 22, 2004, 12:49:00 AM
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 06:34:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| All the guys from the Swift Vote ads weren't on Kerry's boat. |
All of these men served with John Kerry in the military. (just because they all didn't ride on the same buss to camp doesn't give less validaty to their claims.)
| QUOTE |
| The whole reason for going to war was because Iraq was an 'eminent threat' and possessed WMD's. |
Wrong again. WMDs were not the "whole reason". Violation of 17 UN resolutions over 11 years prompted us to act. WMD's was an additional reason for acting.
| QUOTE |
Colin Powel lied to the UN about setallite photos showing WMD sites and saying they knew exactly where they were only to find empty trailors with no chemical residue showing any signs of a weapon that could have attacked us or neighboring countries |
Lying is something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression. Although Colin Powell may have had inacurate information does need mean he intentionally meant to decieve. If you have some facts to support your claim he lied, please enlighten us. Also, because they were not found, does not mean they didn't exist.
| QUOTE |
| Iraq also had no connections to Al-queda |
Although the evidence is minimal, there is some evidence. You claimed there is "no evidence". Al-zawari for one is linked to Al-qaeda.
| QUOTE |
| The fact is with regards to the Iraq war, we had time to get things in place and to get more allies on board or at least have a better game plan. |
Over thirty-five countries participated in the operation to some extent. These countries did not support us:
1. Russia - they were supllying GPS jamers
2. France - Supplying missles
3. Germany - Supplied Bunkers
Have a better plan? we rolled through Iraq in two weeks. Are you suggesting we needed a better plan to win the peace?
| QUOTE |
| I'm gay |
Enough said. One messed up individual.........
Post by: brandogg on October 22, 2004, 07:03:00 AM
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 08:07:00 AM
| QUOTE (dss311 @ Oct 22 2004, 08:34 AM) |
| It was a sarcastic comment about the bias of the NYT. In one article they mention bad opinions about Bush. Latter on they report Kerry's ill traits. It is hard to see how they endorse Kerry and then write articles like the one I posted. |
The film is in the 'Arts' Section and not in the main news section. It just describes what the film without dramatizing it. Whereas many of the political news articles are critical of Bush and his Administration. The thing I like about NYT is that it can write a story without all the spin.
| QUOTE |
| Anyone see the new Swiftboat ad? Pug_ster reported Bush is alienating party members. Kerry alienated his entire platoon. Last count, I saw 3 swiftvets out of 100 endorse Kerry. Why is that? You would think if he had leadership qualities most of them would side with Kerry. |
How do you get 100? I think most of the veterans are pissed off at Kerry because he protested at the war. In fact, those veterans are lied about the incident when we found out the truth later. So why do we have to trust a bunch of lying veterans?
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 09:14:00 AM
| QUOTE (brandogg @ Oct 22 2004, 03:06 PM) |
| A lot of you people are forgetting what 9/11 means to the US. It means we can't afford to sit around and wait for an attack. It means if there's evidence (which the entire US government believed, and the UN) that an enemy like Iraq is making WMDs, and that they were somehow connected with Al Qaeda (which is what the intelligence also told the entire US gov't), then we need to go in and take out the enemy before it attacks us on our homeland. |
Bush duped us to go to war in Iraq. Bush had to bring Colin Powell to the UN at 2/6/03 to convience the UN to tell Iraq to disarm or else... Powell (who ruined probably ruined his credibility after thsi) just brought a show to the UN told other countries that there is proof that Iraq had WMD. His proof includes 1) satellite photos of the WMD sites, which could be anything, 2) computer generated pictures of mobil weapons lab (why don't they have a picture of the real thing?) and 3) a vile of WMD that they acquired, which could be anything.
The other countries smelled a lie but pushed on weapons inspections anyways and war as the last resort. Guess what, Bush decided to use war as a way to disarm for the missing WMD's.
Post by: melon on October 22, 2004, 09:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (brandogg @ Oct 22 2004, 03:06 PM) |
| A lot of you people are forgetting what 9/11 means to the US. It means we can't afford to sit around and wait for an attack. It means if there's evidence (which the entire US government believed, and the UN) that an enemy like Iraq is making WMDs, and that they were somehow connected with Al Qaeda (which is what the intelligence also told the entire US gov't), then we need to go in and take out the enemy before it attacks us on our homeland. |
There has been some people who have been saying since before the war that the Government was talking bullshit. The reasons for going to war have been Compressively proven to be incorrect. Any link with Saddam Hussein has been proven to be false and lies/misinformation.
There was no need to go to war for the safety of either of our countries.
If you dont belive what i am saying why did Tony Blair apolagise in public because of the information used to go to war? He said all the intelligence we had was wrong.
Why cant people see that most of the anti-war people knew it was bullshit straight away.
With them reasons taken away for going to war and other countries in more devestating situations such as Sudan through war or Ethipoia through famine that could have done with help a lot more urgently the reasons for the war were very Suspicious.
In fact just with British troops we could have secured Sudan and 10% of the money America spent on the war could have saved and rebuilt the lifes of millions of people in Ethiopia, a country where it is still normal to walk miles each day just to get water.
Sorry for rant but I dont understand why people still make excuses up for two shit Governemnts.
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 11:20:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I don't see why John Kerry's record is a joke, when Bush wasn't even THERE. He was here in the States, doing jack shit. Viva Bush! |
1. You're right, Bush nenver did go to Vietnam, did you have to do alot of research to figure that out?
2. Kerry's record isn't a joke, how he depicts(sp?) it is. He wants to be called a war hero because he spent 4 months in a boat. With the first chance he got, he came back to America
3. I've covered all this, earlier in this same topic. If you want a more detailed explaination, you should actually read thru the topic before posting something.
| QUOTE |
| Bush duped us to go to war in Iraq. |
I've said this before too. Clinton pulled the same shit on us back in the early 90s, and what I have to say about that is "Fool me once, Shame on you. Fool me again, Shame on me" or in this case, shame on us all. America believed our intelligence committes, the government believed them, the UK believed it, the UN believed. Sure we did find out later that it was all false, but it was too late. We're there, might as well finish the job.
| QUOTE |
| After everyone that wanted to jump in and fight came to the table, they started to bid for contracts to rebuild Iraq and Bush didn't let countries that opposed the war bid for those contracts. |
Do you see what you said wrong? Those who came to the table and wanted to fight started to bid on contracts, and Bush denied the ones who opposed the war to bid on them. Why let countries reek the rewards, if they don't put forth effort to obtain them? Again, I covered this.(Not sure if it was in this topic or another, but I covered it.)
| QUOTE |
| Why cant people see that most of the anti-war people knew it was bullshit straight away. |
Because they're anti-war, and would pull up any bullshit that could get their hands on to protest the war. Much like saying, why didn't you guys listen to all the war-loveres when they said we should nuke Iraq.
| QUOTE |
| With them reasons taken away for going to war and other countries in more devestating situations such as Sudan |
Why is it not alright to go into Iraq and remove a genocidal tyrant, but freeing poeple in Sudan and Ethopia is ok? If you want a reason why we didn't go into Sudan and we did hit Iraq, here's a couple. Americans would side with the war on Iraq easier due to the recent attack on the WTCs and it being related to Middle Easterners, the fact that there was a genocidal tyrant with the ability to obtain WMDs, and of course, the money.
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 11:41:00 AM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 22 2004, 07:23 PM) |
| I've said this before too. Clinton pulled the same shit on us back in the early 90s, and what I have to say about that is "Fool me once, Shame on you. Fool me again, Shame on me" or in this case, shame on us all. America believed our intelligence committes, the government believed them, the UK believed it, the UN believed. Sure we did find out later that it was all false, but it was too late. We're there, might as well finish the job. |
Personally, the affair with Monica Lewinsky is a personal problem and nothing to do with his administration.
America believed Bush because he and his Administration said there's WMD in Iraq as a 'stunning revelation.' Who asserts influence towards the CIA? George Tenet? No, it was Bush's Administration. After the 9/11 commission formed and said there's no credible evidence for WMD, Bush in turn blamed the CIA for it and Tenet resigned. Believe what you will today, but in the history books years from now you will know the truth.
Finding out too late? There were UN inspectors in Iraq looking for WMD when Bush decided that diplomacy is over and we should attack Iraq. Iraq won't be stupid enough to attack then US with their itchy trigger fingers will definately respond if Iraq uses their so called WMD's.
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 11:47:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Iraq won't be stupid enough to attack then US with their itchy trigger fingers will definately respond if Iraq uses their so called WMD's. |
Could you rephrase or explain that... I'm confused
Post by: pegasys on October 22, 2004, 12:34:00 PM
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 12:42:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 22 2004, 07:50 PM) |
| I think you missed the point about Clinton, I was talking about how he had the UN send in weapon inspectors and they came out empty handed. Could you rephrase or explain that... I'm confused |
As far as I know most of the WMD was destroyed after the first gulf war when the UN inspection process had begun.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4125720/
Clinton made sure there were inspectors in the ground. In 1995, a most senior defector from Iraq who was in charge of WMD's said that all WMD's are destroyed. Anytime after that, of course the Inspectors will come out empty handed.
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 12:54:00 PM
I need your opinion, does my last post (the longer one, posted at 1:23) sound fair, or does it sound bias. Does it cover the quoted topics, or does it leave questions? I wanna try and see what errors I'm amking in debating. I know many of my posts are drenched in opinions, but, to me, it seems like fair opinions make people think about things more than a link to a random news site.
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 01:03:00 PM
Let me ask you;
1) Did Kerry imply there was WMD's in Iraq?
2) Did Kerry say that there was a link between Al Qaeda and Saddam?
From your text, what Kerry said didn't answer the questions for anything above.
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 01:19:00 PM
Post by: faynor on October 22, 2004, 01:26:00 PM
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 01:27:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 22 2004, 08:57 PM) |
| That's what I'm saying. We should have known that there was nothing there. Clinton sent in Inspectors, and they turned up empty handed, but for some reason we thought we'd strike gold this time. Even though we had all the information infront of us, no one cared to look at it. We knew as much as the UN, and many other countries, and we thought what we knew was the truth. Not sure why I'm going furthur with this, since we all agree with it. |
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3403519/
The truth is that it is impossible to verify 100% if Iraq has WMD. Inspectors was sent (or trying to be sent) during the 1990's to check for WMD. There are informants (or dis-informants) who said whether there is or no wmds. But as far as I know, from an informanant in 1995 there was no WMD. Maybe there was another informanent which says otherwise. But you can't rely on informants 100% because they might want to bend the truth for their own gain.
After 9/11, a very cooperative Informanant Chalabi says there are WMD's in mobile trucks. With dumbass proof from him and the eagerness of Bush Administration to 'disarm' Iraq is why we went to war on Iraq.
Baner, you have to tell us how US have proof that Iraq has WMD's.
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 01:42:00 PM
Clinton - 1990s - says there are WMDs - We believe him - No WMDs
Bush - 2000s - says there are WMDs - We believe him - No WMDs
Again, my quote "Fool me once..blah blah blah"
You understand what I'm saying, or is it hard to understand that a Repub is going against Bush for once? All I'm trying to prove is that we've been told the same info twice, and fell for it twice.
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 01:44:00 PM
| QUOTE (faynor @ Oct 22 2004, 09:29 PM) |
| CHYRON: "Face The Nation" 9/23/01 that answers #1 |
Oh brother, taking a sentence and taking out of context. Read the whole story.
http://www.cbsnews.c...ain312276.shtml
Bob Graham said that quote, not Kerry.
| QUOTE |
| CHYRON: "Face the Nation" 9/15/02 This definitely keeps the question going? |
http://www.cbsnews.c...C-SearchStories
Read the whole story, Kerry was talking about sending inspectors. Like I said, he didn't imply that Iraq has WMD's.
| QUOTE |
How you like dem apples pug?  |
Like I said, another misinformed Republican voter.
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 01:57:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 22 2004, 09:45 PM) |
| Want me to draw you a picture to explain this? Clinton - 1990s - says there are WMDs - We believe him - No WMDs Bush - 2000s - says there are WMDs - We believe him - No WMDs Again, my quote "Fool me once..blah blah blah" |
I would like you to explain it to me. Since when does Clinton says there are WMD's while he was president?
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 01:59:00 PM
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 02:06:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Why would he send weapons inspectors into Iraq if he didn't think there were WMDs?!? |
LMAO
Nice Banner! quick and simple......
Post by: gcskate27 on October 22, 2004, 02:09:00 PM
kerrys main beef with the war is how its being carried out, and i certainly cant blame him...
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 02:14:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 22 2004, 10:02 PM) |
| Why would he send weapons inspectors into Iraq if he didn't think there were WMDs?!? |
To make sure there are no WMD's.
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 02:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Oct 22 2004, 10:12 PM) |
| faynor, you dont seem to get that people can be wrong at one point, rethink their position, realise they are wrong and change stances... i know its hard to imagine witha president like bush but its true... some people even, and this is quite bizarre, actually appologise and admit they were wrong... kerrys main beef with the war is how its being carried out, and i certainly cant blame him... |
Not to mention a President who relies on his 'Gut' and 'Instinct' in his war on Iraq.
Post by: Baner on October 22, 2004, 02:19:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| To make sure there are no WMD's. |
That's like saying I'm going outside to make sure it's not snowing, and I can assure you that It's not going to be snowing in GA in the middle of October.
If he didn't think there were WMDs, there would be no reason he'd take the effort in making sure of it.
| QUOTE |
| faynor, you dont seem to get that people can be wrong at one point, rethink their position, realise they are wrong and change stances... i know its hard to imagine witha president like bush but its true... some people even, and this is quite bizarre, actually appologise and admit they were wrong... |
I agree, but the extremes he takes it is what rubs me the wrong way. If he's against the way it's being fought right now, why completly pull out. He can just change what he dislikes about the war. According to the quotes, he did want something done there, why the sudden change about Saddam tho?
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 02:33:00 PM
| QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 22 2004, 10:22 PM) |
| That's like saying I'm going outside to make sure it's not snowing, and I can assure you that It's not going to be snowing in GA in the middle of October. If he didn't think there were WMDs, there would be no reason he'd take the effort in making sure of it. |
Oh brother, like it ever snows in Georgia. That is the wrong analogy.
The fact the matter is that nobody (outside Iraq) can verify if Iraq is producing WMD's. If there is a unsubstantiated claim that Iraq has WMD the UN will a) just get multilateral task force and attack Iraq b ) get the UN inspectors in Iraq to make sure there are no WMD's.
Post by: thomes08 on October 22, 2004, 03:53:00 PM
Just like woman check for breat cancer, they most likely don't have it but it's a precaution.
Like double knotting your shoes before a big game, one knot is most likely enougn but just in case take the precaution.
Like studying for something you're pretty sure won't be on the test, but you do it as a precaution.
ok do you understand what precautions are now?
thomes08
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 04:38:00 PM
| QUOTE (faynor @ Oct 23 2004, 12:09 AM) |
| I AGREE COMPLETELY thomes08. You should take every precaution before you cast your vote for that man.!!  |
After hearing from voters like you, I know who to vote for.
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 04:41:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| So why do we have to trust a bunch of lying veterans? |
You are calling all these vets liars? Doesn't it make more sense that maybe one individual like Kerry is lying rather than the entire squad???? If you were to break this down by odds, you would be a 3/20 longshot! (using the old vets 20 man photo) Or another way to say it, you have a 15% chance of being right. I will put my money on the sure bet!!!
DSS311
ps. I am supposing that all things are equal in my odds analysis. Not some strange coincidence like the swiftvets are all convicted felons.....
ps for Thomes08:
Looks like our favorite link is once again updated & is getting to be a tight race.
electoral-vote.com
Post by: rahula on October 22, 2004, 04:51:00 PM
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 05:19:00 PM
| QUOTE (dss311 @ Oct 23 2004, 12:44 AM) |
| In response to you pug_ster regarding the SwiftVets: I am unsure of the exact number of vets against Kerry. I was just guessing (100) after seeing the commercial of how many were standing against him. I know the last count that supported him was 3. This original link shows who supports Kerry and who does not. (Use your mouse for the rollover image) Pug_ster Quote You are calling all these vets liars? Doesn't it make more sense that maybe one individual like Kerry is lying rather than the entire squad???? If you were to break this down by odds, you would be a 3/20 longshot! (using the old vets 20 man photo) Or another way to say it, you have a 15% chance of being right. I will put my money on the sure bet!!! |
Yes, I am saying that those majority of those vets are Liars.
This is the offical declassified documents of Kerry's incident on that day.
A few days ago Nightline showed a story about Kerry's Vietnam Battle on how he got the Silver Star. The account in that document basically matched of the accounts of what the locals in vietnam recalled. Well, you can read the rest here.
http://abcnews.go.co...story?id=166434
John O'Neill was questioned by Nightline about this and he dodged questions like an idiot. And yes, those dozen vets are liars.
Looke like you are another uninformed Republican Voter.
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 05:54:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Looke like you are another uninformed Republican Voter. |
| QUOTE |
| Yes, I am saying that those majority of those vets are Liars. |
Are you challenging me in regards to Politics?
The uninformed is yourself. The vets have contended several issues about Kerry's potential leadership. Not just one day's event. If Kerry is so believable, why has he not released form 180 revealing is military records? Don't you think it is strange he was discharged in 1978, 6 years after his service ended? I took the liberty and looked up the total number of vets against Kerry and the number is 250!!!! Do you not get it pugster? Your long shot odds are now 3/253. Simple math shows you now only have a 1.1% chance of being correct! LMAO @ Pug_sterSo as you liberals go, you will now lie or defend a stupid position. What will this one be pug_ster? Do you continue to assert 250 Veterans are all liars, or do you have another stance? Maybe you can go with the conspiracy theory I suggested in an earlier thread. If not, try to make up a plausible scenario that we may believe. When it comes down to it pug_ster, you are in denial and just a Bush hater. You can not defend this position with any amount of credibility.
DSS311
Can't wait for your next uneducated reply....
For the Record
I believe pug_ster will continue to insult the 250 vets and call them ALL liars. Hey Haven't you also called Bush a liar?
Post by: estin on October 22, 2004, 06:01:00 PM
he says over and over how there isn't gonna be a draft yet he keeps adding more people to the draft board. all the other past presidents were cutting people and money from this board yet bush adds to it..................pretty funny for someone so dead set on "were not having a draft"
only people that are voting for bush are wealthy people who's main goal in life is to get even richer, and one issue voters against abortion.
Post by: mattyj25 on October 22, 2004, 06:44:00 PM
I just love though how so many of the people out there saying they are so for this war and they truely believe that Iraq was and is a threat to us, yet I don't see them lining up to defend the good ol' US of A. It's easier to talk on the side lines and blindly listen to the President and disregard everything from the opposition then to actually do something about it if it's that important to you. I wonder how many people would be for a war if they had to participate in it? Not many.
There are always better options than going to war. Even former presidents are speaking out against it.
It's a shame that in the year 2004 we are in the situation we are in now. Bitterly divided, thousands dying and religeous extremist trying to throw their morals and values on to others and onto each other from one religion to another.
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 08:04:00 PM
| QUOTE (dss311 @ Oct 23 2004, 01:57 AM) |
| Are you challenging me in regards to Politics? The uninformed is yourself. The vets have contended several issues about Kerry's potential leadership. Not just one day's event. If Kerry is so believable, why has he not released form 180 revealing is military records? Don't you think it is strange he was discharged in 1978, 6 years after his service ended? I took the liberty and looked up the total number of vets against Kerry and the number is 250!!!! Do you not get it pugster? Your long shot odds are now 3/253. Simple math shows you now only have a 1.1% chance of being correct! LMAO @ Pug_ster So as you liberals go, you will now lie or defend a stupid position. What will this one be pug_ster? Do you continue to assert 250 Veterans are all liars, or do you have another stance? Maybe you can go with the conspiracy theory I suggested in an earlier thread. If not, try to make up a plausible scenario that we may believe. When it comes down to it pug_ster, you are in denial and just a Bush hater. You can not defend this position with any amount of credibility. |
250? The issue that I am talking about is the incident at 2/28/1969. From what I understand it, these Veterans accused Kerry that he didn't deserve the purple heart and silver star at that day. These Swiftvets for Lies accused Kerry that he didn't take any fire from the enemy and 'ran away' when one of the swiftboats got hit. The documents and the accounts from the vietnamese people (from Nightline) whom where there on that day says different.
Were there 250 or even 100 veterans whom were there on that day who witness this incident in 2/28/1969? Imagine the senario at that moment when those soldiers at Vietnam being attacked would they 1) try to save their asses or 2) stare at Kerry's boat as if he ran away? One person's account said that they are too busy to save their ass.
Another thing, how many of those 250 veterans actually knew Kerry while he served in Vietnam? From what I know that these veterans hate Kerry because what he did after he did his duty in his tour in Vietnam. That's another issue.
Before deciding to flame me, read the articles that I wrote. Like I said, the only person you try to make an ass of is yourself.
Post by: thomes08 on October 22, 2004, 08:14:00 PM
| QUOTE (dss311 @ Oct 23 2004, 12:44 AM) |
| Thomes08, Those of us on Bush's side could make the same assertion. Bush is taking precautionary actions to make sure WMDs do not get in the hands of terrorists. (could you imagine someone like Ted Kazinski getting a hold of one?) All of the intelligence gathered (US, British, Israel, Others) even suggested their were WMDs. Maybe Sadam was just trying to make everyone in the region think he had them, but he went against all sanctions imposed by the UN which was his mistake. I am glad to see the United States cleaning up the middle east and liberating the Iraqis. Hopefully additional terrorist will be taken down in the near future like Usama & Al Zawari. In the long run I expect Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and other nearby countries will eventually become more civil and less hostile. If this indeed happens, we all win. In response to you pug_ster regarding the SwiftVets: I am unsure of the exact number of vets against Kerry. I was just guessing (100) after seeing the commercial of how many were standing against him. I know the last count that supported him was 3. This original link shows who supports Kerry and who does not. (Use your mouse for the rollover image) Pug_ster Quote You are calling all these vets liars? Doesn't it make more sense that maybe one individual like Kerry is lying rather than the entire squad???? If you were to break this down by odds, you would be a 3/20 longshot! (using the old vets 20 man photo) Or another way to say it, you have a 15% chance of being right. I will put my money on the sure bet!!! DSS311 ps. I am supposing that all things are equal in my odds analysis. Not some strange coincidence like the swiftvets are all convicted felons..... ps for Thomes08: Looks like our favorite link is once again updated & is getting to be a tight race. electoral-vote.com |
yeah, but a precaution shouldn't cost 20,000 lives with no reason reliable enough to have it for more than 6 months. Precautions are supposed to stop catostophic events, not be one.
Post by: estin on October 22, 2004, 08:42:00 PM
| QUOTE (thomes08 @ Oct 23 2004, 04:17 AM) |
| yeah, but a precaution shouldn't cost 20,000 lives with no reason reliable enough to have it for more than 6 months. Precautions are supposed to stop catostophic events, not be one. |
well said man, well said. i wish there was more people that could see this. especially bush/cheney supporters.
Post by: dss311 on October 22, 2004, 09:00:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Before deciding to flame me, read the articles that I wrote. |
Pug_ster,
You began the mild flame with the personal statment; "Looke like you are another uninformed Republican Voter." I just responded to your assertion and defended my position on the subject. I am not as uninformed as you suggest. I try to keep myself VERY informed on current politics & party policies. I can back up all (most)
of my arguments with facts rather than opinions. XS is a great forum for politcal debates. The moderators allow both sides to get in heated debates (and mild flames) with out banning us for our opinions or comments. Regarding the ABC article, I have read from other sources the same information regarding the 1969 event. I do not accept the accounts of Vietnam villagers over our American Veterans. If the scale was balanced with 50% vets favoring Kerry and 50% against, then I might somewhat believe Kerry. The overwhelming amount of vets against Kerry leaves only one conclusion in my mind.
| QUOTE |
| From what I know that these veterans hate Kerry because what he did after he did his duty in his tour in Vietnam. |
This is not accurate. Swiftvets make several contentions regarding Kerry's leadership. They have direct knowledge regarding events/medals/statements/etc. made by Kerry. These vets are a mix of Democrats, Republicans, & Independents. Here is a link regarding the the facts as Swiftvets see it:
SwiftVets FAQs
I will continue to comment on liberal threads including yours as a counter balance to your arguments up until the election. However, you can also count on me to bite back when I am directly challenged or flamed. Not trying to be an ass, just not going to be pushed around either. BTW, I actually do enjoy your, Thomes08, and other liberal comments on this board. Believe it or not, I have actually learned a few thing from you guys! Hopefully you can say the same in regards to me....
DSS311
Talk to you guys on later...Have to go now and MOD a friends Xbox. (2.6 ex)
ps thomes08 - saw your reply, but out of time to properly respond.
ps mattyj25 - I may be in the wrong for personally attacking you because you are gay. It just is a bad trait I have picked up over the years regarding gays. I do however respect your rights and opinions even though I feel they are in contrast with my own. Feel free to hit me back with a flame, I deserve it....
Post by: pug_ster on October 22, 2004, 11:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (dss311 @ Oct 23 2004, 05:03 AM) |
| Pug_ster, You began the mild flame with the personal statment; "Looke like you are another uninformed Republican Voter." I just responded to your assertion and defended my position on the subject. I am not as uninformed as you suggest. I try to keep myself VERY informed on current politics & party policies. I can back up all (most) of my arguments with facts rather than opinions. XS is a great forum for politcal debates. The moderators allow both sides to get in heated debates (and mild flames) with out banning us for our opinions or comments. Regarding the ABC article, I have read from other sources the same information regarding the 1969 event. I do not accept the accounts of Vietnam villagers over our American Veterans. If the scale was balanced with 50% vets favoring Kerry and 50% against, then I might somewhat believe Kerry. The overwhelming amount of vets against Kerry leaves only one conclusion in my mind. This is not accurate. Swiftvets make several contentions regarding Kerry's leadership. They have direct knowledge regarding events/medals/statements/etc. made by Kerry. These vets are a mix of Democrats, Republicans, & Independents. Here is a link regarding the the facts as Swiftvets see it: SwiftVets FAQs I will continue to comment on liberal threads including yours as a counter balance to your arguments up until the election. However, you can also count on me to bite back when I am directly challenged or flamed. Not trying to be an ass, just not going to be pushed around either. BTW, I actually do enjoy your, Thomes08, and other liberal comments on this board. Believe it or not, I have actually learned a few thing from you guys! Hopefully you can say the same in regards to me.... DSS311 Talk to you guys on later...Have to go now and MOD a friends Xbox. (2.6 ex) ps thomes08 - saw your reply, but out of time to properly respond. ps mattyj25 - I may be in the wrong for personally attacking you because you are gay. It just is a bad trait I have picked up over the years regarding gays. I do however respect your rights and opinions even though I feel they are in contrast with my own. Feel free to hit me back with a flame, I deserve it.... |
Okay, I mean what I said because I don't think you know the truth. At least you seem more informed than faynor.
I was talking about those Swiftvets claiming that Kerry lied on on 2/28/69 about the metals he deserved on that day. The documents about what happened on that day are real, and BJ was the person gave me the link to this document. I don't know if you have seen Nightline on 10/14/04. But they got Nightline talked to the local people in Vietnam where the incident took place who don't even know Kerry or any other swiftvets by name could recall what happened that day and what they said matches what was said in the document.
Afterwards Koppel talked to John O'Neill who belong to the Swiftvets about why does this conflict to what Swiftvets talking about. O'Neill (like you) could've said about the story about there are more people who are against kerry and saying this incident is a lie. But instead O'Neill was bitching about something else.
There was only one discrepency between Vietnamese's account and Kerry's account of that incident. It was about the description of the guy whom Kerry killed carrying the RPG. The Vietnamese guy said it was a big guy wearing a black leotard. O'Neill was complaining about that according to Kerry's book, it was a little guy wearing a white lioncloth. And O'Neill was being un-cooporative instead trying to talk about other subjects.
The fact is that in the website you showed, NONE of them ever disputed about what happened on that day. Whereas, a few months back they caused this controversy saying that this was a lie. Yes, they all said that Kerry is unfit and other stuff, but it doesn't make Kerry a liar about this incident.
You can give me all these numbers about these swiftvets who are against Kerry, but I have not seen any proof that they said that Kerry lied on that incident. Bush-Cheney is not talking about this incident so you raising questions about it is like beating a dead horse.
Post by: EverythingButAnAnswer on October 23, 2004, 12:27:00 AM
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Oct 23 2004, 07:52 AM) |
| I don't know if you have seen Nightline on 10/14/04. But they got Nightline talked to the local people in Vietnam where the incident took place who don't even know Kerry or any other swiftvets by name could recall what happened that day and what they said matches what was said in the document. |
Remember Nightline did the most thorough background check known to man (remember not only did this happen over 30 years ago, but the average human brain has the ability to recall insignificant events with relative ease. Also just for the record we won the Vietnam War, so it is after all a democracy not a totalitarian communist state) to ensure the validity of those Vietnamese commenting on the incident. I'm beginning to feel like no one is going to take me seriousry . It looks like what we need is a montage, yeh it's gunna take a montage... I guess what I'm trying to say is Pearl Harbor sucked, and I miss you.
Post by: dss311 on October 23, 2004, 01:11:00 AM
I am contending that two hundred and fifty (250) Swift boat veterans are on the record questioning Kerry's fitness to serve as Commander-in-Chief. That list includes his entire chain of command -- every single officer Kerry served under in Vietnam. You can research my comments/facts by visiting swiftvets.com. I assure you if these facts were misleading or erroneous, the press would have ripped them up by now by proving they didn't serve with Kerry or other inaccuracies. Why would 250 veterans risk their reputation by making claims like this against Kerry? It is obviously not for fame, fortune, or prestige.
You have made the blanket statements like how many of those 250 veterans actually knew Kerry while he served in Vietnam? The answer is EVERYONE of them. Another statement from you was those dozen vets are liars. Which specific vet (besides your O'Neill contention) is lying and about what? Do you have any facts or articles I can research to validate your claims? Or are these just broad statements you are writing hopping others will believe your claims? I am the type of individual who likes to research as many sources as possible and then make a conclusion with the facts at hand.
Last comment and I will give back this thread. You asked me I have not seen any proof that they (additional swift vets) said that Kerry lied on that incident. I am quite sure that I never made a statement suggesting this. My only statements ask Why are 250 Swift Vets against Kerry for President?
DSS311
Footnote: A little inaccurate/misleading number was mentioned in my earlier posts. I claimed only 3 Swift Vets favor Kerry. The actual number is about 13. The three men in the photo that served with Kerry were OICs (Officers In Charge) in Coastal Division 11.
Post by: estin on October 23, 2004, 09:29:00 AM
Post by: pug_ster on October 23, 2004, 02:43:00 PM
As for the other 250 vets, I have read their comments, most of them hated Kerry because he protested the war after his tour in Vietnam.
Faynor, in the original CBS FTN on 9/23/01 mentions that Graham said that quote if you have read it. The trailor didn't even mention that quote. Maybe CBS face the nation lied in their transcript or kerryoniraq website lied.
Both DSS311 and faynor reading this crap from kerryoniraq and swiftvet website and the only ideas that they got from both websites are that kerry sucks. From what I know, both of you don't want to know the truth by reading the other side of the story.
I am not going to waste my time on both of you.
Post by: dss311 on October 23, 2004, 04:10:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| If I would had lied, you would see people like johnnobts, unprofessional, and especially BenJeremey would get on my case. |
Pug_ster,
I do not think anyone here is suggesting you lied. And I am not calling you a liar. I was Just pointing out we were arguing two different issues in regards to the SwiftVets.
| QUOTE |
| I am not going to waste my time on both of you. |
Damn, you are fun to debate. Hopefully you will reconsider your retreat.
DSS311
Post by: faynor on October 23, 2004, 06:27:00 PM
I'm glad some democrats will at least accept some things about Kerry and not just
| QUOTE |
| I am not going to waste my time on both of you. |
LEAVE...Whatever. Make sure you VOTE though. God Bless