UAL747
Topic Author
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:30 pm

Personally, I'm really hoping for a democratic candidate for president this year. I think our country needs a fresh face and a more moderate and progressive regime in the white house. Personally, I'm worn out from the past 8 years. 9/11 took a toll on all of us and was a wake-up call as to who our REAL enemies are, but I think since then, everything has been handled in the completely wrong manner.

We've been at war with two nations in the past 8 years and the current war was one based on suspicion, not fact, and even the current administration is admiting that to some degree.

Our president, with all-due-respect, has the image of being a moron. Whether he is or isn't is a good question. I think perhaps he is a very smart man, but his mannerisms, decisions, and rhetoric are just plain ignorant sounding.

I think that our country needs to move away from the relgious/political climate that we live in right now. No offense to any religion, but the two don't mix well, and it makes the republican candidates sound mystical and archaic. I would think in a Nation which is a melting pot of cultures, and our successes have been based on that, to single out one religion as the moral code of which our troops and infrastructure should be based is politically wrong.

Religion is dangerous when used with politics, and I don't see why conservatives Christians think that they are immune to that as well. While our country was founded on Christian principles, we also developed this country to be free of religious bigotry and tolerant of other religions. Now, as to whether the founding fathers actually meant "tolerant of different religious "sects" or entirely different relgions is up for speculation, but we ARE based on the principle that each man/woman has religious freedom and that politics should be void of religion. What I find interesting is that conservative Christians want relgious/political ties in the US, but when it comes to Islam in lets say, Iran, it's defined as religious extremism, only because it is not Christianity. I also believe in Gay rights, and fundamentally, a Christian based politician cannot grant gays rights. Whether they personally believe in them or not, a conservative government will never allow it, no matter how soft the verbial padding is. To this day, I still haven't come to understand the "Log Cabin Republicans." Anyhoo....

Now onto a different topic. Social programs...I think that while the current administration sees problems with education, and promoted the "No Child Left Behind", our public schools are suffering. During college I was a substitute teacher at some local Oklahoma schools and our schools are pathetic. Not only at the local level, but at the national level.

I think there has been some sort of breakdown in the value of the education and a TREMENDOUS problem with the amount of funding that schools get. Oklahoma having the 2nd worst school system in the US and the 2nd to the lowest teacher pay in the US. Something has to happen. I'm all for starting social funding, whether it be through taxes, lotteries, or some other fund raising campaign to educate our children, and I think that a democrat president would be more keen on seeing that through than a conservative republican who is worried about increasing taxes. Our schools need to be cleaned out and started anew. Our over-worked and underpaid educaters all too often fail to spark interest in their students, tend to lose control of the classroom, and each passing hour of everyday, potential leaders in our youth are left behind in the dust with the rest of their friends, no future, no passion, no will. It is my opinion that teachers should be one of the highest paid civil servants as they are educating the future of this country. We need programs like music in school, interest clubs, and extracirricular activities to spark students' interest in something they can be passionate about and look forward to working with that passion in the future. Our classrooms have become too large in public school education. If you look at private schools, there is a reason you have to take entrance exams, they only offer a limited number of seats in each class to ensure quality education. I was fortunate enough to go to a private episcopal prep school before college, where the class size was small and the teachers attention was well divided. A teacher cannot adequately teach a 30 student classroom, let alone get control of them. While education is more of a "state" issue, it SHOULD be a priority to the federal government, end of story...

Healthcare is another problem we have in the US. It's simply TOO expensive with TOO little funding. Here's a sensitive subject for me. My family is in the healthcare industry, it is our primary income for our company. When we started, social healthcare was not that prevalent and we fortunately made TONS of money off of private pay patients. Then social healthcare programs started coming online and our profits went down the toilet. We had tremendous problems in the late 80's and early 90's because funding projects like medicare and medicaid did not have enough support. So basically, we had to lower OUR standards of healthcare for patients, reducing the patient/nurse/doctor ratios and offer a substandard product which increased lawsuits and the amount of insurance we had to carry for each of our facilities. Now don't get me wrong, I don't live in the past like my dad and grandpa do and wish we had all private pay patients, because today, no one can afford to be a private pay patient unless you are in the top 1% of income in the US, and even then, it is sometimes out of reach. As a company, we have had to come to accept that, and in our industry as well as other healthcare industries, we have come to a common knowledge that increased funding for social healthcare has to be the answer. We have many lobbyists who work for us on a state level that work closely with democrat politicians to increase the amount of money given to healthcare funding so that we, like other healthcare companies, can offer a quality product again, make a profit, while still affording the patient more than adequate care, lower our overhead and insurance costs, and retain clients to full capacity. Should EVERYONE be able to have adequate health care? Yes IMO, but we have to find a balanced way of doing so so that everyone benefits, both the patient and the healtcare provider, and everyone can afford it.

On foreign relations: I think the democrats would offer a more progressive and less suspicious look on foreign relations. It seems today that our politicians have "clearly" defined and I quote, "Those who are with us and those who are against us." I think that's the wrong approach to take and we used one event, 9/11, to define almost a decade of foreign policy. I think a democratic president would take a strong approach to monitoring nuclear advances by other nations, but also provide economic relief to those nations who need it. I don't think we should be at odds with Iran, Syria, and other Arab countries, but we should have close dialogue with what is an important and somewhat overlooked area of the world. When it comes to this part of politics, I think we've crapped in our own pants and ruined what should be a progressive stance on this part of the world. I onced learned in a geo-economic class that the quickest and easiest way to advert war is to retain economic relations with a possibly hostile nation. While we have our problems with China, it is working with them. The Chinese are probably more hard nosed about social issues than our own present government, but we could be at a huge stand off with them due to old ideologies that still exist on both sides of the Pacific, but we retain and continue to gain foreign trade and an economy with China, which has kept our nations peaceful for many years, and also earned us a partner into Asia. We could also do the same with Iran, Syria, and other nations. It worked immediately following World War II and I don't see why it couldn't work now. Give these oppressed people some money to start a business with, let their nations prosper and develop a middle class, and you will start to see the fruits of democracy spread throughout even the most oppressed nations.

While I still think we should be leaders in World Politics, we should lead by example, not force. I think we made a big mistake with the war in Iraq and I feel that it was started with false pretenses and false hopes. We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq, then we were told they transferred them to Syria, then we were told that they had capabilities of having nuclear weapons, and then we were told we were there to liberate the people of Iraq. As to the answer for the mess we are in now, I dunno. I'm hoping someone more brilliant that me can come up with an exit strategy as things just keep getting worse and worse. REmember two years ago when we were all excited about the new government in Iraq and "Misson Accomplished!"? Doesn't seem to be happening as it's either us, or someone else blowing up everything to hell. Please, PLEASE, someone tell me what good has come out of the war with Iraq? I understood the mission for the war in Afghanistan, and a mission that I feel has been lost in the clouds of Iraq.

On the Arab vs. Jews issue, I think we need to play a more moderate role, or if we are, we need to have a better PR campaign to show that we are moderate on the issue. I don't claim to understand or know a lot of about this issue, but only one fact is, that it's been going on for years and no one has been able to stop it. I think we need to support both sides and again, stop the closing off of societies and provide economic relief to those parties who are also moderate on the issue. Again, I think that economics and trade are the answers here, not only between Israel and Palestine, but Israel and the entire Arab community.

The issue of Islamic extremism also needs to be addressed. Again, if we can have dialogue, it's damned better than sitting on this side of the world barking "You are our Enemy" messages all over the airwaves, because it's only going to create the same sentiment on the other side of the world. Personally, I think this is a personal fight between oppressed people and the US as a whole. It's obvious because on one side we have random people fighting against the US, a non-cohesive army of displaced islamic fundamentalists. They don't represent any nation, just a group of people, and they are fighting against an Entity, the US namely. In all honesty, I don't think the average person in the US really gives 2 cents what happens in any of these countries, but you ask the oppressed Arab the same thing, and you get fiery and very personal answers. 1. I think it's because the war, whichever one you want to talk about, has always been faught on their soil and we, the US tend to look like a remote island with sunshine 24 hours a day with 75 dgree F weather, and 2. Our wealth and power throughout the world is, well, annoying to some. Do I think we should give up that power? No because in the grand scheme of things we have done the world some good, especially in the 20th century, and helped the world rebuild after almost destroying itself and making other people's lives better, but somehow, in our fury against the Muslim world, we have become less generous and created an underlying sense of hatred, not only toward Muslims and Arabs, but even Jews, because we somehow feel connected to this struggle through the 9/11 events, and we are starting to see the world in a much more diverse view due to instant media and information technology.....well, enough on that...

On immigration, I'm a liberal with a conservative opinion. This is probably the only place where I really don't align with liberal thought. In my definition, liberals would welcome legal immigration, and some would welcome immigration without document. Our Governor, Brad Henry in Oklahoma reluctantly signed a VERY stiff immigration bill in Oklahoma that I actually think is a good thing. It makes harboring, housing, and employing illegal immigrants a felony for anyone charged. This includes apartment complex's, banks, merchants, etc. So basically, you have papers, or no work. I would love to see a president take a REAL stand on illegal immigration as it is necessary for the integrity of our country's jobs. Having said that, I think we also have to re-educate the consumer, and that in itself is a daunting task. If we deal stiffly with immigration, then we will not have as cheap of goods as we do now. It is true that illegal immigrants take the jobs less desirable, giving us cheap labor. I feel we are in the middle of a gray area when it comes to consumer economics and immigration. We have not felt the big thud we are going to have soon. We have reached a post-industrial age in the US where we are a society of information, not production, (well, it seems to be headed that way to me). We produce a surplus of items at low cost due to the fact that we have increased technology to such advanced levels that our workers cannot find work at a decent wage, and 2, there is already a subculture labor force in the form of illegal immigrants ready to take those jobs. We've got to get back to the value of good old-fashioned work at better wages, and getting rid of illegal immigrants would be a great start to that.

Well, those are my general thoughts on my perfect candidate.

To start, I would start secret dialogue with Iran and send them a few Boeing 777 aircraft  Smile

So what do you want to see happen in the next 4-8 years? Please keep this civil as these topics tend to end up in fights. Only good educated opinions please  Smile

UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
David L
Posts: 8547
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:14 pm

Can I assume you're not looking for answers like "a javelin"?
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:18 pm



Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Our president, with all-due-respect, has the image of being a moron.

Thanks to copious amounts of help from the liberal media, 527 groups like Moveon.org and the like. Granted he is not a good orator, but that should be low on the list of any Chief Executive to begin with, If you are voting for someone based on their speaking ability, you are selling yourself quite short.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
I think that our country needs to move away from the relgious/political climate that we live in right now.

It is? I am not a religious person but I don't feel that we are in that situation at all. As a matter of fact with the passing of Jerry Fawell and some others, the religious right has fewer voices now than in the past 30 years.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Religion is dangerous when used with politics, and I don't see why conservatives Christians think that they are immune to that as well.

I have yet to see a conservative Christian sue a local municipality for not putting a nativity scene up at Christmas. The opposite is sadly more numerous and much more vitriolic.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
a Christian based politician cannot grant gays rights.

Neither can an atheist. You either have unalienable rights or you don't.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Oklahoma having the 2nd worst school system in the US and the 2nd to the lowest teacher pay in the US. Something has to happen. I'm

If the local school board can't get it's act together and solve the majority of these problems, then what is the federal government supposed to do? Schools should be a local concern.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Should EVERYONE be able to have adequate health care?

And everyone does have adequate healthcare. If they are below the poverty line there are programs to help them.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
We could also do the same with Iran, Syria, and other nations.

And when it becomes apparent that those countries were just using talks as a ruse while they continued to develop weapons or fund terrorist plots as with NK?

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
It worked immediately following World War II and I don't see why it couldn't work now. Give these oppressed people some money to start a business with, let their nations prosper and develop a middle class, and you will start to see the fruits of democracy spread throughout even the most oppressed nations.

You are assuming that those countries would allow direct aid to their people. You are also assuming that the political leaders of those nations want a middle class type populace.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq,

We were? When?

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
and then we were told we were there to liberate the people of Iraq.

You were told we were going in to liberate the people of Iraq before the first troops set foot in Iraq.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
REmember two years ago when we were all excited about the new government in Iraq and "Misson Accomplished!"? Doesn't seem to be happening as it's either us, or someone else blowing up everything to hell.

Mission Accomplished celebrated the end of major hostilities with Saddams army. We should still be impressed with the quickness at which not only was a functioning government set up in a former dictatorship, but that they were able to overcome significant cultural difference and agree on a Constitution. Several days ago there was a running gun battle in L.A. in which several gangs shot it out with AK47's. Does that mean that our government is going down the drain?

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
The issue of Islamic extremism also needs to be addressed. Again, if we can have dialogue,

How do you have a dialogue with a group whose opening stance is, "We want to kill you" and whose response to any entreaty is "Fine, but then we are going to kill you"?


Since there is no one running for President that has even a remote chance of winning that seriously believes in cutting down the size and scope of government, who is elected is of little concern to me.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:21 pm

A lot of stuff in there, so I'm only going to weigh in on this one for now:

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
I think there has been some sort of breakdown in the value of the education and a TREMENDOUS problem with the amount of funding that schools get.

I think there's been a breakdown in priorities in education. If you look at the issues that higher levels of government have really gotten involved in, they're almost chiefly of the petty variety - the intelligent design vs. evolution debate, for instance. The ellimination of afterschool programs for lack of money, or the ellimination of music programs for lack of money, get almost no attention at all, which is a shame since they're far more important that specifically what kids are learning in science class. The education system of this country is a mess, and nobody has the political will to make the major changes that are necessary to fix it, partly because it's not an big election issue. I give Bush credit for trying with NCLB, but it has created more problems than it has solved, and we need to try a different track.

The education system in the US is unique in that there are no tracks that different students get shunted down as they progress (up until college). Everyone in the public school system gets the same education. While a noble idea, it runs into the problem that such an education has to be dumbed down to a certain level so that enough students can get through it, and thus will be wasting the time of those students who are above average at their level. They could get a better education at a private school, but if they don't have the money then that's not an option. Thus the system seems to work on the basic assumption that ability is pre-determined by income, which isn't the case. Perhaps we need to start creating something of a track system within the public school system so that we can effectively meet the needs of each subset of children, rather than just the needs of the average.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:25 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 5):
Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
I think that our country needs to move away from the relgious/political climate that we live in right now.

It is?

It was. I'd agree that much of the momentum for a lot of that movement has been lost (fortunately), but back when the whole gay marriage amendment thing and Terri Schiavo thing were going down, there was a lot of religion in politics. Fortunately, McCain won't be nearly as receptive to the religious wing as Bush was, and they wouldn't try to align themselves with Hillary or Obama.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:57 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):

Neither can an atheist. You either have unalienable rights or you don't.

That is absolute nonsense. An athiest has no coded moral reason to say that gays cannot get married or have a civil union, or adopt children etc. Conservative Christian groups do have a code- the Bible- and they use it to bring their RELIGIOUS beliefs into the broader public sphere. We don't live in a theocracy- or at least we aren't supposed to. Yet with GWB the power and influence of the religious right has expanded such that now many groups are on the verge of losing their inalienable rights. UAL747 is very correct in that we appear quite hypocritical as we denounce Islamic theocracies, yet domestically we have our own "Christian" agendas- like placing constitutional bans on gay marriage. But apparently its okay to be hypocritical.

Quoting David L (Reply 1):
We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq,

We were? When?

Please, dont pretend like you dont know what he was talking about. Bush, Rumsfeld, and Sec of State Powell (at the time) all talked incessantly about the "Weapons of Mass Desctruction" and Iraq's supposed "Intent" to acquire Nuclear weapons. These allegations were false, clearly. If we launch an invasion and dont find a shred of evidence to support any of the allegations that were once pushed upon the people of the United States- to create fear, and therefore support, for this ill-fated war. If you really don't believe me- watch these clips of President Bush himself as well as Colin Powell making the case for war at the United Nations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkOCIfNQXP0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYBA9JD5oW4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-C3svWjJUY&feature=related

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):
Mission Accomplished celebrated the end of major hostilities with Saddams army. We should still be impressed with the quickness at which not only was a functioning government set up in a former dictatorship, but that they were able to overcome significant cultural difference and agree on a Constitution.

A functioning government? With frequent suicide bombings taking place? What are you talking about? Meanwhile, there are fears that a swift US pullout from Iraq will send it into further turmoil. Clearly some people aren't happy there. Furthermore we see that the trend of suicide bombings is far from over. At the moment we are experiencing a downturn, but it has not even reached a 'record low'. Just shy of 4,000 American soldiers dead to date. I dont even want to mention the estimates of Iraqis killed.... at least 100,000 killed. And by the way, the "Mission Accomplished" publicity stunt- what a shame. Tasteless use of the soldiers who actually did go out and fight the wars, and who did get injured, and lose lives. Bush should be ashamed of himself, that he sent them all out based on lies and deception. And then he used them to gain publicity and support.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3b/DoD_PERSONNEL_%26_PROCUREMENT_STATISTICS_-_Personnel_%26_Procurement_Reports_and_Data_Files_-_GLOBAL_WAR_ON_TERRORISM_-_OPERATION_IRAQI_FREEDOM_by_month_March_19%2C_2003_through_September_1%2C_2007_-_killed_in_action%2C_died_of_wounds%2C_accidents.jpg/800px-DoD_PERSONNEL_%26_PROCUREMENT_STATISTICS_-_Personnel_%26_Procurement_Reports_and_Data_Files_-_GLOBAL_WAR_ON_TERRORISM_-_OPERATION_IRAQI_FREEDOM_by_month_March_19%2C_2003_through_September_1%2C_2007_-_killed_in_action%2C_died_of_wounds%2C_accidents.jpg

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):

How do you have a dialogue with a group whose opening stance is, "We want to kill you" and whose response to any entreaty is "Fine, but then we are going to kill you"?

You need to have a dialogue with yourself, and figure out why it is that terrorist activity takes place at all. It's not because we are "free" or that they care that women can dress provocatively here, or that we are christians. Its because the US foreign policy for years is about keeping power, using other people for our benefit. Our politics are filthy- the problem is that the vast, vast majority of Americans do not know, and do not care to know the truth. As long as we have a bedtime story and are told that everything is hunky-dory, we're more than glad not to ask questions. But really our foreign policy now simply generates more hatred and terror around the world...

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):
Several days ago there was a running gun battle in L.A. in which several gangs shot it out with AK47's. Does that mean that our government is going down the drain?

A raging gun battle in one small part of L.A. is quite unlikely to cause civil unrest across the rest of the United States. There is simply no comparing a gun battle in LA to what's going on in Iraq.

-AA777
 
SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:04 am

Breasts, blonde hair, Armani suits, botox and the surname Clinton.
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:17 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):
Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Our president, with all-due-respect, has the image of being a moron.

Thanks to copious amounts of help from the liberal media,

He hasn't need any help, RJ. Stop blaming everyone else for this presidents' shortcomings. They're painfully obvious. Except to the blind followers.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:37 am



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
that gays cannot get married or have a civil union, or adopt children etc.

Just where exactly in the Constitution does it say that who you marry or adopting children is an unalienable right?So and atheist, or an agnostic like me can oppose those and not bring religion into the discussion.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Bush, Rumsfeld, and Sec of State Powell (at the time) all talked incessantly about the "Weapons of Mass Desctruction"

But not actual nuclear weapons. There has been enough misinformation on both sides.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
and Iraq's supposed "Intent" to acquire Nuclear weapons

That is what he should have said.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
A functioning government? With frequent suicide bombings taking place? What are you talking about?

How many provinces have been turned back over to the Iraqis to control, do you even have an idea of how many there are in total?

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
the moment we are experiencing a downturn,

I find it amusing when there is an "upturn" it is described as the whole country melting down into civil war yet when things are going well it some how can only be described as temporary.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Bush should be ashamed of himself, that he sent them all out based on lies and deception

If you would care to show where he wantonly lied or deliberately misled the troops I will forward it on to Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi since they would like to have that evidence.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
But really our foreign policy now simply generates more hatred and terror around the world...

Yep, if we left them alone they certainly wouldn't come here and attack us would they?

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Furthermore we see that the trend of suicide bombings is far from over.

According to whom?

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
A raging gun battle in one small part of L.A. is quite unlikely to cause civil unrest across the rest of the United States. There is simply no comparing a gun battle in LA to what's going on in Iraq.

Yet if a bomb goes off in Baghdad somehow the people living in northern Iraq are affected.

I have a bet outstanding with Falcon, I will offer the same to you , that if elected, one year after his inauguration President Obama will still have troops in Iraq.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:41 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):
I have a bet outstanding with Falcon, I will offer the same to you , that if elected, one year after his inauguration President Obama will still have troops in Iraq.

You do? News to me.

I wouldn't bet against that, RJ. But I will bet you by that time he's begun a withdraw. He won't, nor can he, I don't believe, pull all troops out at once, but I do think the process will begin within a year, unless someone convinces him otherwise.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:45 am



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Conservative Christian groups do have a code- the Bible- and they use it to bring their RELIGIOUS beliefs into the broader public sphere.

Well lets see here. The majority of our country considers themselves christians. And the Bible is the code set by God. And since Christians believe the Earth was created by God bringing the Bible into the "broader public sphere" makes sense since its the word of God.
Blue
P.S. As long as it isn't a democrat I'm happy. And I know many don't care about my opinion because I'm 15 but honestly I can really care less.
All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
 
UAL747
Topic Author
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:49 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):
I have a bet outstanding with Falcon, I will offer the same to you , that if elected, one year after his inauguration President Obama will still have troops in Iraq.

Well, I hope it is Hillary, but nonetheless, we will probably HAVE to have troops in Iraq for a long time. Prez Bush started something in Iraq that will be the Vietnam of the 21st century. It's sad, but we are going to be there for a long time. Doesn't matter if we started it or they did, we are going to be there for an extended period which is going to require a huge amount of civil and military loss on the sides of the US and Iraq. We are killing innocent civilians by the dozen every day and we are killing innocent soldiers, who have to do what the prez and next prez tell them to do....even if the new president is totally against the war. We have made a huge mess in Iraq and no one can deny that. Can you give me any proof that the world is safer and better off without Iraq and Saddam Hussein? I was sickened by the fact that he was hanged, because I don't believe in death for any crime, and maybe that's the liberal in me, but what good, oh please tell me, is going to come out of Iraq and the current war? Please, TELL ME!


UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 2:05 am

1. A president who doesn't hide everything and his/her administration does from the American people. Secrecy IS needed some of the time, but not all of the time.

2. A president that doesn't pander to the wealthiest of Americans and corporations, and thinks of everyone else as an afterthought.

3. A president who doesn't treat allies and friends like dirt when they exercise their soverign right to disagree with us. We need a president who treats our friends with respect, not bully them.

4. A president who doesn't simply threaten those who would be our enemies, but one who will think of force as a last option, not as a first.

5. A president who will see the oppostion in this nation not as an enemy, but Americans who also want to move the nation forward, but simply may have different ideas as to how to do so, and people who should be inculded in discussion on the future of this nation.

6. One who is respected, not simply mocked and feared.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 2:24 am



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 9):
You do? News to me.

The original thread has been deleted but I made reference to it again here..

Will We See A Brokered DNC Convention?
Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 25):
I think the fact McCain wants to stay in Iraq ad infinum will also hurt him, and will be an advantage for Obama.

I think if Senator Obama is elected President you are going to be sorely disappointed within the first few months of his administration. My bet from the other thread still stands unanswered which pretty much tells me what I need to know when you spout this stuff.


Withdrawls are supposed to commence this summer and if the security situation dictates will continue through the fall and into the winter till levels are back to pre-surge. If the security situation continues to improve further withdrawls will be announced. My offered bet was for you to name your price, I have the money in my hand, President Obama will still have troops in Iraq. His advisers will tell him on inauguration day that if he pulls out too quickly the situation will deteriorate and his administration will bear the blame for failure. You have yet to respond.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 12):
A president who will see the oppostion in this nation not as an enemy, but Americans who also want to move the nation forward, but simply may have different ideas as to how to do so, and people who should be included in discussion on the future of this nation.

I'll let the others slide because they are ridiculous in their own right but I would like you to name one time the President has come out in public and been anything less than magnanimous or complimentary to anyone on the other side of the aisle. Just one time. I can quote numerous times Senator Reid or Speaker Pelosi have used insulting language towards this President or called him unsavory names in public. He has invited the democratic leadership to countless meetings, both before and after they became the majority and been rebuffed by them or had his ideas ridiculed by them as they were on their way out of the White House. There are a lot of things this President could have done differently but being more civil or accommodating to the opposition is not one of them. I will await quotes and sources, unless all you have is opinion.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:50 am

Ability to spell potato.

How many more 'presidental' speculation threads must we read before 4 Nov.?

 no 
 
David L
Posts: 8547
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:33 am



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Quoting David L (Reply 1):
We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq,

We were? When?

Please, dont pretend like you dont know what he was talking about.

And please don't pretend I said that.  Smile
 
RicciPettit
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 5:14 pm

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:06 pm

Will Smith, he would "make this look good".

Reckon we would ever see Arnie make a go for it?
Elements of the past and the future combining to make something not quite as good as either!
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:38 pm



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
AA777

Good post AA777.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
But really our foreign policy now simply generates more hatred and terror around the world...

Sad but true.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 7):
He hasn't need any help, RJ. Stop blaming everyone else for this presidents' shortcomings. They're painfully obvious. Except to the blind followers.

 rotfl  Succinct, witty and accurate, what more could we ask for?
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:44 pm



Quoting UAL747 (Reply 11):
Can you give me any proof that the world is safer and better off without Iraq and Saddam Hussein?

Can you give me assurance that he would not have threatened us one day?

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 11):
I was sickened by the fact that he was hanged,

Yes, I'm sure that all those that he had tortured and raped feel the same way. I'm also sure that all those he had killed collectively rolled over in thier mass unmarked graves.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
Sad but true.

The Utopian speaks.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:24 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

But not actual nuclear weapons. There has been enough misinformation on both sides.

You are grasping at straws... UAL's original point was that Iraq's "threat" was drummed up by the United States by false intelligence.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

I find it amusing when there is an "upturn" it is described as the whole country melting down into civil war yet when things are going well it some how can only be described as temporary.

Look at that graph and tell me that any downturn in sectarian violence HASNT been temporary....

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

If you would care to show where he wantonly lied or deliberately misled the troops I will forward it on to Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi since they would like to have that evidence.

He doesnt have to lie to the troops. Sadly for them, they have to do what he says, regardless of his reasoning or the veracity thereof. He lied to his citizens...the people who put their trust in him to actually protect them. That would be yourself, myself, and 300 million others. No offense, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think this war was not planned and that you were not misled by this President before the war started. There was no connection between Al Qeada and Saddam Hussien, as has been stated by the GWB administration. Furthermore there were no WMD found in Iraq. I dont think there is much more to say. His entire premise for going to war proved to be false.... and clearly its not really about the freedom of the Iraqis.... if it were, we'd be in Sudan, and numerous other places where people are being oppressed.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

Yep, if we left them alone they certainly wouldn't come here and attack us would they?

They wouldnt come here if the US had better foreign policy around the world to begin with. Terrorism doesn't come about just because "people dont like us" on a whim. There have been some major injustices in the world, and we've angered people enough to feel they have to resort to this to gain attention. Sad, but true.

-AA777
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:30 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 18):
Can you give me assurance that he would not have threatened us one day?

The abortion of the UN inspections (which have turned out to have been highly successful in verifying and containing Saddam's capabilities) was only "justified" with an immediate threat emanating from Iraq which could not even allow for the few weeks the inspections had needed.

Simply abandon this crashed and burned line of argumentation.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 18):
The Utopian speaks.

Well, on our side we've ticked off the correct predictions one by one. What about your own record?
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:39 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 18):
Can you give me assurance that he would not have threatened us one day?

No, but there are plenty of countries that could possibly threaten us one day who we're not at war with. In fact, we're best buddies with some of them.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13069
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:06 pm



Quoting RicciPettit (Reply 16):
Reckon we would ever see Arnie make a go for it?

No. Ahhnullt was born an Austrian citizen, so even if he does have the US citizenship now, he's ineligible to run for President.

As for me, if I was an American citizen, I'd like to see a president, who goes out to the people during whatever sex scandal there is, and tells them that his sex life is none of their goddamn business.  Wink

Seriously, the next US president should be wise in his handling of major issues such as Iraq and Afghanistan, he should be open to the issue of gay rights (particularly gay marriage), he should not be influenced by the religious wing, he should be a good speaker (IMO one of the necessary requirements to be a politician is that he or she knows how to speak, unlike Bush who can't put a single sentence together without stuttering and sudden rephrasing if he isn't reading from a piece of paper or a teleprompter), and he should get rid of this culture of fear that started after 9/11 by not creating more paranoia than there already is.
 
csavel
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 9:38 pm

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:13 pm

I want

A president who is fiscally conservative but socially libertarian.

A president who wants to get gov't out of BOTH my pocketbook and my bedroom

A president who tells the American people AND businesses that government is the solution to everything

A president who will end farm welfare and corporate welfare in general.

A president who knows, and is familiar with science

A president who isn't so afraid of being called a "flip-flopper" that he will never EVER change his mind or policies even when there is ample evidence that the policies failed

A president who will encourage freedom elsewhere but will deliberately step back in places where we've interfered in other countries affairs so their march to freedom can come on their terms

A president who cares about the environment as the "commons" of the country and the world. Read up on the tragedy of the commons.

A president who realizes that even absent global warming, fossil fuels have no future and we need to re-engineer our economy before it is re-engineered for us

A president who won't sugar coat pabulum to Americans because it is easier

A president who won't use 9/11 or terrorism in a cynical way to scare us into giving up our freedoms

A president who can speak at least one foreign language fluently (I think Kennedy was the last one. He spoke passable French)

Simly put, a presiden who has no shot of ever getting elected.
I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:52 pm



Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
You are grasping at straws

Nope, tired of hearing the facts misinterpreted. You complain later in your post that the Administration claimed AQ and Saddam were in cahoots together, which is false, yet when the actual wmd's thought to be in Iraq are misstated I am some how grasping at straws.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
UAL's original point was that Iraq's "threat" was drummed up by the United States by false intelligence.

Correct. But that is not what he said and I corrected him. You seem to have a problem when the correct information is put out.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
He lied to his citizens...

Where and when? Lie implies knowledge of the truth.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
No offense, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think this war was not planned and that you were not misled by this President before the war started

If you would care to quote where and when he talked about invading Iraq prior to 9/11 feel free to do so.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
was no connection between Al Qeada and Saddam Hussien, as has been stated by the GWB administration

I think you unwittingly hit on the truth here. You are correct that the Bush administration never stated that there was a direct connection between AQ and Saddam. They did state that the two groups had met but not that one had anything more to do with the other prior to the Iraq invasion.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
Furthermore there were no WMD found in Iraq.

Correct, but the information at the time, regardless of what Klaus, Barogue, and few of the other Utopians would have us believe was that he did indeed have them. Numerous Senators, Congressmen, a former President and Vice President, and various other world leaders and UN officials all agreed on that. What they disagreed on was what course of action to take. Of course those that had back room deals going on with Saddam didn't want to see him kicked out of power since that took money out of their pockets.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
His entire premise for going to war proved to be false.

WMD's were not his entire premise for going to war, feel free to google his State of the Union speech, 2003, and his hes statement just prior to commencing military activities in March of 2003.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
and clearly its not really about the freedom of the Iraqis.... if it were, we'd be in Sudan, and numerous other places where people are being oppressed.

Sudan is an actual civil war.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
Terrorism doesn't come about just because "people dont like us" on a whim. There have been some major injustices in the world, and we've angered people enough to feel they have to resort to this to gain attention. Sad, but true.

Again, OBL declared war on the United States in the 90's. We ignored that threat and stood by while two of our embassies were blown up, a naval ship attacked, and several other plots were foiled and did nothing. Foreign policy is dictated towards sovereign states, not individuals unless that individual is the dictator and represents the State. OBL and AQ see us as infidels, they don't like us period. Until you can wrap your mind around that, you're wasting time and lives.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):
Simply abandon this crashed and burned line of argumentation.

Believe what you wish. It's not your country at war. We might not even be there if your country had been a little more vigilant prior to 9/11.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):
Well, on our side we've ticked off the correct predictions one by one. What about your own record?

Yep, you've proved hindsight is always 20/20. No matter what the final outcome you will always find fault with us going there so what you think of our record is of no concern.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13069
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:06 pm



Quoting Csavel (Reply 23):
A president who is fiscally conservative but socially libertarian.

A president who wants to get gov't out of BOTH my pocketbook and my bedroom

A president who tells the American people AND businesses that government is the solution to everything

A president who will end farm welfare and corporate welfare in general.

A president who knows, and is familiar with science

Slightly OT, but your points remind me of part of a speech Helmut Kohl once made regarding such issues. I quote and translate (translation in parenthesis):

Weg von mehr Staat, hin zu mehr Markt. Weg von kollektiven Lasten, hin zur persönlichen Leistung. Weg von verkrusteten Strukturen, hin zu mehr Beweglichkeit, Eigeninitiative, und verstärkter Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. (Away from more state, and towards more market. Away from collective burdens, and towards personal effort. Away from the old structures, and towards more flexibility, proactivity, and increased competitiveness.)
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:17 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):
Correct, but the information at the time, regardless of what Klaus, Barogue, and few of the other Utopians would have us believe was that he did indeed have them. Numerous Senators, Congressmen, a former President and Vice President, and various other world leaders and UN officials all agreed on that. What they disagreed on was what course of action to take.

Rubbish.

Everybody agreed to have Iraq checked for the existence of WMDs. That's what the UN inspections were for.

But there was no even halfway plausible evidence for the immediate urgency Bush/Cheney/Powell claimed to prematuely abort those inspections, especially as they would have completed in a mere matter of weeks.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):
Of course those that had back room deals going on with Saddam didn't want to see him kicked out of power since that took money out of their pockets.

So you being wrong and others being right makes you draw the conclusion that those who had it right must be corrupt?

You are speaking volumes about yourself here.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):
Believe what you wish. It's not your country at war. We might not even be there if your country had been a little more vigilant prior to 9/11.

Ah, are we at last straws again?  crazy 

Free reminder: Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. And the Iraq invasion severely damaged the chances of success in Afghanistan which actually did.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):
Yep, you've proved hindsight is always 20/20. No matter what the final outcome you will always find fault with us going there so what you think of our record is of no concern.

If your "us" is the neocons in and behind the Bush administration and their hangers-on, you're right. This particular group which had hijacked the USA and gone on a wild joyride through the past seven years has had its chance and has blown it to such epic proportions that you shouldn't get your hopes up for any pat on the back for the entire destruction.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:19 pm



Quoting LTU932 (Reply 25):
lightly OT, but your points remind me of part of a speech Helmut Kohl once made regarding such issues.

And 16 years of stagnation and climbing debt followed. I'd look for a different witness if I was you.
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:24 pm

My answer succinctly - a relinquishing of usurped powers to Congress (and even more). Powers granted or simply taken by this administration should be in the hands of Congress (like methods of surveillance, for example).
Living the American Dream
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:33 pm



Quoting Klaus (Reply 26):
Rubbish.

Your opinion.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 26):
You are speaking volumes about yourself here.

Oil for food, the tip of the iceberg.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 26):
Ah, are we at last straws again?

Remind me where the 9/11 hijackers were recruited from and did the early formation of their plans.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 26):
Free reminder: Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

Correct. But until 9/11 the Presidents focus was on tax reduction, and Social Security reform. He was actually being criticized by the left for not being engaged enough in foreign policy.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 26):
This particular group which had hijacked the USA and gone on a wild joyride through the past seven years has had its chance and has blown it to such epic proportions that you shouldn't get your hopes up for any pat on the back for the entire destruction.

Well that 7 years includes a Presidential election which he won with over 50% of the vote, something the previous President can never claim to have achieved.

The next President, if they go soft on security, and allow an attack to occur against us again, will be a one term President if it occurs in the first term and will hand the White House over to the other party if it occurs in a second term. By then I expect, especially since I foresee a democratic party President in the White House, the budget to be in a mess and taxes on the rise with the implementation of several budget melt down programs.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
UAL747
Topic Author
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:40 pm

[quote=RJdxer,reply=29]

You really don't see any of the errors of the last 7 years do you? Or is it that you are so politically blind that you just overlook them, but if they were made by dems, then it would be something you would attack them for.

Your administration has made countless blunders in the name of 9/11, in the name of Oil, in the name of Bush, in the name of the people of Iraq.

I stopped getting into political debates on here, esepecially after the last election only because I knew there was no hope for the rest of the new 4 year term. Nothing good has come out of it, and if you would be so kind, please show me what good has come out of this presidency at all?

If the dems were in the same mess I would be equally as critical....

UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:55 pm



Quoting UAL747 (Reply 30):
but if they were made by dems, then it would be something you would attack them for.

Nope, we should have done this after the first gulf war, we made a mistake by not doing it during President Clintons second term, I'm glad we finally got it done.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 30):
please show me what good has come out of this presidency at all?

Your taxes are lower, unfortunately the bad side is that costs and the size of government were not cut correspondingly. The economy has benefited from this Presidents economic policies. No President is totally responsible for any economies ups and downs but for the past 7 years interest rates have been low, inflation has been held in check, and unemployment has been at or near statistical full employment. Not a single terrorist attack has taken place against this country since 9/11 excluding attacks against our military forces overseas fighting the terrorists directly. There has not been a single case of domestic terrorism either. You can continue to paint this administration as bad if you wish, and it has failed when it comes to spending cuts, but you can't deny the facts I've listed.

The next President needs to get on the ball, make the tax cuts permanent and find a way to cut entitlement spending. That is the only way we will ever get back to a balanced budget since entitlement spending growth will make defense spending look like out of pocket expenses as more baby boomers retire and the ratio of workers to retirees gets closer and closer.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:58 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 29):
Well that 7 years includes a Presidential election which he won with over 50% of the vote, something the previous President can never claim to have achieved.

Oh. Wow. Now that must justify everything.

It is sad watching you defend the indefensible. I'd look for an actual way out of this mess if I was you.
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:04 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):
Correct, but the information at the time, regardless of what Klaus, Barogue, and few of the other Utopians would have us believe was that he did indeed have them. Numerous Senators, Congressmen, a former President and Vice President, and various other world leaders and UN officials all agreed on that.

This is nonsense- there were many articles written about how high ranking officials in Washington literally pressured intelligence agents/ agenices to 'find' evidence that would incriminate Iraq and make the situation look dangerous.

From the Washington Post:

Vice President Cheney and his most senior aide made multiple trips to the CIA over the past year to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives,
according to senior intelligence officials.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...ntId=A15019-2003Jun4¬Found=true

There's the link.

Its brutally obvious that there wasn't enough evidence to really make the case for war. And the Bush Admin repeatedly told the American public and the world how Iraq/Saddam Hussein was a threat to world stability etc... when in reality, they did not have such evidence. THAT constitutes a lie- ESPECIALLY when they use information to get public support for a war.

This war was a foreign policy decision- simple as that. Just a big show placed by the fearmongers who we currently call our 'leaders.'

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):
Again, OBL declared war on the United States in the 90's. We ignored that threat and stood by while two of our embassies were blown up, a naval ship attacked, and several other plots were foiled and did nothing. Foreign policy is dictated towards sovereign states, not individuals unless that individual is the dictator and represents the State.

And you still arent asking the appropriate question. Why. You are taking the simple answer that has been fed to you by the US government... but you arent looking at the entire history of US Foreign policy in the Middle East. You seem to have no urge to explore the roots of Terrorism. WHY did OBL declare war on the west? And regarding your comment that foreign policy is dictated towards sovereign states.... does that mean that there arent 'oppressive' regimes that support the US against the will of the public? (*Cough cough Saudi Arabia*.) And furthermore, do you imply by your statement that US foreign policies have no bearing or effect on the people who are living in the nations which the US policy concerns? And is it impossible that these people who ARE affected by US foreign polices would take matters into their own hands and create terrorist organizations when they feel that injustices are happening that are not being dealt with by their governments? (Assuming these effects are negative).

Dont be so naive. There is a lot of psychology in terrorism. These people are very deliberate and they feel that they have been wronged on several levels. Thus, they find ways to justify violent actions towards the west.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):

Sudan is an actual civil war.

And yet we dont really send much aid to the Sudanese...or help fight the repressive Sudanese government.... why? Oh, I know.... allocation of resources. What does Sudan have that we want? Nothing, really.... so we let them rot. Dont be decieved, this war was not about us being freedom fighters and invading another country for their benefit. If it was for anyone's 'benefit' it was for our own....

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 24):

If you would care to quote where and when he talked about invading Iraq prior to 9/11 feel free to do so.

There was plenty of time between September 2001 and March 2003 to plan a war.... and given the fearful psyche of the American public at the time- what a better time to 'take care of things' than that.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 26):

If your "us" is the neocons in and behind the Bush administration and their hangers-on, you're right. This particular group which had hijacked the USA and gone on a wild joyride through the past seven years has had its chance and has blown it to such epic proportions that you shouldn't get your hopes up for any pat on the back for the entire destruction.

Thanks for your comments, Klaus. Agreed 100%.

-AA777
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:05 pm



Quoting Klaus (Reply 32):
It is sad watching you defend the indefensible. I'd look for an actual way out of this mess if I was you.

Fortunately for us, you don't live here. Again, prior to 9/11 Iraq was not even on the radar and this President was being criticized for not being engaged in foreign policy enough. Had German intelligence officials been on the ball perhaps the 9/11 hijackers might have been identified before they were able to attack and the remaining 7 years of the Bush administration could have been devoted to getting entitlement spending under control and more covet action could have been taken against OBL and AQ. Thanks for letting us down, again. Seems to be the norm for Germany.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:21 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 34):
Had German intelligence officials been on the ball perhaps the 9/11 hijackers might have been identified before they were able to attack and the remaining 7 years of the Bush administration could have been devoted to getting entitlement spending under control and more covet action could have been taken against OBL and AQ. Thanks for letting us down, again. Seems to be the norm for Germany.

I'd venture to say that the Germans (and French too) are on the ball. There havent been any attacks there, any any attempts have been thwarted.

And by the way, the US had intelligence about 9/11- or at the very least about planes possibly being used as weapons. For a long time beforehand. The 9/11 commission report states this... and they recieved several warnings in the months leading up to 9/11 about possible terrorist attacks from oh, 5 different countries- including: Italy, Israel, Jordan, Egypt and the United Kindom.

-AA777
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:28 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 34):
Again, prior to 9/11 Iraq was not even on the radar

As we know by now, Iraq was front and center to the Bush administration right from the start. 9/11 just provided an apparent "opportunity".

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 34):
Had German intelligence officials been on the ball perhaps the 9/11 hijackers might have been identified before they were able to attack and the remaining 7 years of the Bush administration could have been devoted to getting entitlement spending under control and more covet action could have been taken against OBL and AQ. Thanks for letting us down, again. Seems to be the norm for Germany.

So the total failure of the Bush presidency is in fact actually Germany's fault.

Okay. I think we've now got an excellent impression of how your mind works.  hypnotized 
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:20 am



Quoting AA777 (Reply 33):
Its brutally obvious that there wasn't enough evidence to really make the case for wa

How many times doe we have to go over this? Senate and House intelligence select committees, which meet behind closed doors, had every opportunity to ask questions of the intelligence agencies. They had the right to subpoena anyone and everyone they wanted too. Yet it wasn't until after the invasion had begun that all of the sudden we heard how intelligence analysts felt pressured. Please show me where, before the invasion, an intelligence analyst or House or Senate member of the select committee was saying that Saddam didn't have these weapons.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 33):
And the Bush Admin repeatedly told the American public and the world how Iraq/Saddam Hussein was a threat to world stability etc... when in reality, they did not have such evidence

Along with a number of House and Senate members, one of whom is running for the DNC nomination right now. I find it amusing that people like you will let everyone off the hook with the single exception of the politician you don't like. The President is ultimately responsilbe for ordering the invasion but you act as if he did it without any kind of consultaton with Congress at all. It was the right decision and the situation over there is getting better whether you wish to admit that or not.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 33):
THAT constitutes a lie- ESPECIALLY when they use information to get public support for a war.

Again, please show where, prior to the invasion, an intelligence analyst was blowing the whistle to Congress saying "I'm feeling pressured!" or that "the administration has doctored the evidence!". Then and only then could you say that President Bush had advance knowledge that the intelligence was false.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 33):
This war was a foreign policy decision-

All wars are foreign policy decisions.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 33):
Why. You are taking the simple answer that has been fed to you by the US government...

And you are ignoring the statement made by OBL.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 35):
The 9/11 commission report states this

The 9/11 commission states that a vague report was presented to the President with no evidence to back it up. That is a long way from, 19 hijackers will take over 4 airliners. A shame the patriot act was not in place, Zacharia Massoui's computer might have been able to help out investigators but unfortunately due to the law in place at the time they couldn't get a warrant.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 35):
about possible terrorist attacks

Key word is "possible". Had the administration cracked down on flying at that point based on the information they had, liberals would have been crying bloody murder.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 36):
As we know by now, Iraq was front and center to the Bush administration right from the start. 9/11 just provided an apparent "opportunity".

But also was the offer to negotiate, and a whole year of dealing with the UN and Congress before making the commitment to invade.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 36):
So the total failure of the Bush presidency is in fact actually Germany's fault.

The Bush Presidency has hardly been a total failure.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 36):
Okay. I think we've now got an excellent impression of how your mind works

We've known for quite awhile how the Utopian mind like yours works and for 10 years prior to 9/11 we watched our citzens get killed and injured by thinking that way.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:11 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):
Key word is "possible". Had the administration cracked down on flying at that point based on the information they had, liberals would have been crying bloody murder.

At least one FBI field agent had specific information about the peculiar flight training some of the attackers were taking. Had there been more attention taken, the attacks could have been prevented.

But I forget, it's all Germany's fault for not preventively rounding up anybody suspected of being muslim...!  crazy 

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):
But also was the offer to negotiate, and a whole year of dealing with the UN and Congress before making the commitment to invade.

Wait - so it wasn't urgent after all? You're even contradicting yourself!

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):
The Bush Presidency has hardly been a total failure.

Well, "total" may be overstating it a little bit - by a few percent, perhaps. 90+ percent failure are still far removed from what I'd want for my own country.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):
We've known for quite awhile how the Utopian mind like yours works and for 10 years prior to 9/11 we watched our citzens get killed and injured by thinking that way.

Strangely, however, my "utopian" views have turned out to be quite close to what we've seen happening while the positions you're defending here have turned out to be a mixture of delusion and wishful thinking.

So "utopian" would actually be a much better fit to the grand designs of your neocon leaders you're so ardently supporting.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:23 am



Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
rounding up anybody suspected of being muslim

Which if the FBI had done over here just based on flying, the liberals would have had a field day over. Passengers on a recent NW flight are finding out what happens when you turn someone in who is acting in a supposedly suspicious manner. Even post 9/11 we cannot profile young Muslim men for fear of "offending" them.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
Wait - so it wasn't urgent after all? You're even contradicting yourself!

I never said it was. I said it was something that needed to be done, If he would have left voluntarily so much the better but that was not to be.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
90+ percent failure are still far removed from what I'd want for my own country.

Domestically he has not been a failure. As stated, taxes are lower, inflation is still in check, unemployment has been low for 4-5 years now, receipts to the Treasury are up. The mortgage crisis is not of his making since democrats are the ones who forced banks to amend their lending practices to include those that would not ordinarily qualify. The only part I see a failing in was the inability to limit spending as well as get entitlement spending under control.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
So "utopian" would actually be a much better fit to the grand designs of your neocon leaders you're so ardently supporting.

Had we followed the Utopian model, Saddam would still be in charge, the sanctions would have ended, and he most likely would be doing everything he could to reconstitute all his WMD programs. He certainly would not be sitting still while his his next door neighbor went nuclear.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:11 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
Which if the FBI had done over here just based on flying, the liberals would have had a field day over.

Rubbish. Training everything except takeoff and landing is suspicious by itself, as the field agent correctly determined.

But I see: It's the fault of the "PC people" that 9/11 happend. And, of course, the fault of Germany!  crazy 

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
Wait - so it wasn't urgent after all? You're even contradicting yourself!

I never said it was.

Then there was no reason to abort the UN inspections.

Sorry. You just shot your own foot off - again.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
Domestically he has not been a failure. As stated, taxes are lower, inflation is still in check, unemployment has been low for 4-5 years now, receipts to the Treasury are up.

"Of course we're now drowning in debt, but at least the party was fun!"

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
The mortgage crisis is not of his making since democrats are the ones who forced banks to amend their lending practices to include those that would not ordinarily qualify.

Ah, the democrats are at fault for that! I wondered where the blame would go this time...!  crazy 

You're a hoot!

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
The only part I see a failing in was the inability to limit spending as well as get entitlement spending under control.

...such as "entitlement spending" for a huge, totally unnecessary and incompetently executed military endeavour?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
Had we followed the Utopian model, Saddam would still be in charge, the sanctions would have ended, and he most likely would be doing everything he could to reconstitute all his WMD programs.

Yeah, without the Iraq war we would all be dead by now. Talk about delusion.  hypnotized 

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
He certainly would not be sitting still while his his next door neighbor went nuclear.

He was safely contained and would have remained so. And Iran would most probably have elected another moderate president without the supremely stupid handling of the region by the Bush administration.
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:18 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 13):
I'll let the others slide because they are ridiculous in their own right

Amazing. Common sense is now reduce to "ridiculous" to you. No wonder the far right has us so fucked up in this nation.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 34):
Again, prior to 9/11 Iraq was not even on the radar

That's if you don't want to believe the words of TWO former WH insiders who both say that from the minute he took office, this president was looking for a pretext to attack Iraq. There's those far-right wing blinders again.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
Domestically he has not been a failure

 rotfl 

Taxes are lower at a time when he has spent us into oblivion, borrowing against the future of our kids and grandkids, which, it seems, is the modern GOP way, going back to Ronald Reagan; high-paying jobs were outsourced, replaced by mostly lower-paying jobs with fewer benefits; the gap between richest and poorest has increased alarmingly since Mr. Bush has been in office; he has divided this nation like no other president in our history; he hides virtually everything he does behind an iron curtain of paranoia and secrecy; housing forclosures are at record highs.

Now, tell me again he hasn't been a failure?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
The mortgage crisis is not of his making since democrats are the ones who forced banks to amend their lending practices to include those that would not ordinarily qualify.

What a crock of shit that is. The mortgage crisis, as far as I'm concerned, stems directly out of the banking reform bill, which gave banks huge windfalls, and fucked over consumers all over this nation. The Dems have been in power in Congress 1 year; those sub-prime loans came out long before the Dems took over last January.

Again, don't blame the Dems for what the Republicans did while they were in charge, RJ.

This president has been a complete disaster, domestically and in foreign policy, for this nation. The only people who have benefitted from his "stewardship" are the wealthy and banks. Those in the military and their families have not-they're the only one this president has asked to sacrifice during a time of war and national crisis; the middle class hasn't, seeing so many good paying jobs outsourced as national policy, replaced by poorer paying ones.

Some record, which will only look even worse in the next decade or so, I'm sure. and you SUPPORT all this? No wonder Americans are sick and tired of ultra-conservatism!

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 39):
Had we followed the Utopian model, Saddam would still be in charge, the sanctions would have ended, and he most likely would be doing everything he could to reconstitute all his WMD programs.

Wait a minute, RJ. Hold on. RECONSTITUTUE all his WMD programs? Uh, I thought we went to war because HE HAD WMD? Remember? I mean, the President told us that was THE REASON (not the ones made up afterwards, when nothing was found).

Are you telling me now, that the President was LYING to us? That he DIDN'T tell us the truth?

So, what did we go to war for, RJ, if Saddam didn't have a chance to reconstitute his program? Telling another nation who their leader should be? To finish off the '91 war? What was THE REAL REASON?

The real reason was this: this president wanted to keep the American people frightened after 9/11, because it was the only way he and his party could win elections after those attacks. His other policies had failed, and this was the best way to keep power-through fear.

Thank you for confirming that, not only is this president a failure, but he is a liar as well. We appreciate that confirmation.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
Toast
Posts: 1249
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:04 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:50 am



Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

The next president of which country? Ghana? The Maldives? Vanuatu? There are a lot of elections in the world this year, you know...  dopey 

Well, my ideal candidate for the US would be the same I would like to see in every country...

1. Well-educated, well-read, well-travelled, with a mature, sharp and critical intellect. In a word, the opposite of Mr. Bush.
2. An atheist, or at the very least a lukewarm believer who doesn't wear his religion on his sleeve and never weaves dogma and superstition into his speeches. The opposite of Mr. Bush.
3. Aware of the world around him, multilingual, and an expert in geopolitics and world cultures. The opposite of Mr. Bush.
4. Not subservient to lobbies and corporations. The opposite of Mr. Bush.
5. Profoundely anti-militaristic. The opposite of Mr. Bush.
6. Socially as liberal as possible. The opposite of Mr. Bush.
7. Able and willing to accept criticism. The opposite of Mr. Bush.
8. Preferably not completely full of shit, such as, I dunno, Mr. Bush.

Gender, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, spouse and family life - all irrelevant. "Flip-flopping", if it means understanding one's past errors and evolving and maturing and learning with time, is a plus.

The US has had many presidents who managed to raise the standards of excellence in politics. Now that Mr. Bush has shown everyone how to scrape the absolute bottom, all future candidates should atleast know what NOT to do to avoid disasters on such a scale.

Quoting Csavel (Reply 23):

Simly put, a presiden who has no shot of ever getting elected.

 checkmark  Yup!
Shit Piss Fuck Cunt Cocksucker Motherfucker Tits
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13069
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:02 am



Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):
And 16 years of stagnation and climbing debt followed. I'd look for a different witness if I was you.

I'm bloody well aware that Kohl eventually failed with his economic policies and we ended up with a then higher than ever unemployment rate. I was just quoting that speech because a post reminded me of it. The speech is good IMO, but obviously Kohl never really acted on it.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:11 am



Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Rubbish.

Really, then why are we still not allowed to profile young Muslim men boarding aircraft for extra security? Have a bunch of 80 yr old grandmas blown up a plane that I did not hear about?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Then there was no reason to abort the UN inspections.

Again, I did not say it was urgent.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Of course we're now drowning in debt, but at least the party was fun!"

Did I not say I faulted the administration for not cutting spending?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Ah, the democrats are at fault for that!

For the mortgage crisis yes, they are the one that held up legislation until those that would not ordinarily have a good enough credit rating to get any type of loan had language forcing banks to consider them through "alternate" credit history means.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
such as "entitlement spending" for a huge, totally unnecessary and incompetently executed military endeavour?

Military spending is the only spending that the Federal Government is mandated to do in the Constitution. Everything else is the citizens robbing the Treasury.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Talk about delusion

Yes, lets talk about delusion. You have been unable to answer any of the questions and have only illogical 10 year old responses at this point. When you can discuss our domestic situation with facts instead of smiley faces we will have something to talk about.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
He was safely contained and would have remained so.

Not if the sanctions had been lifted which many were pressing for.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
And Iran would most probably have elected another moderate president without the supremely stupid handling of the region by the Bush administration

Yes, they've elected so many since 1979.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 41):
No wonder the far right has us so fucked up in this nation.

Now there is the other side reaching out as usual. Falcon anything you have to say about this administration is so completely colored by hate as to be absolutely useless to discuss. When you have a single fact to back up any of your statements (and that will be a first) maybe it would be worth debating with you. Until then I won't waste my time. BTW still haven't taken me up on that bet. Or haven't you quite figured out how to hedge your bet as you usually do?
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13069
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:28 am



Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Iran would most probably have elected another moderate president without the supremely stupid handling of the region by the Bush administration.

Even if they do elect another moderate president, what can he do? He's still outranked by the Supreme Leader of Iran, who can reject whatever policy the President is trying to make whenever he pleases. Besides, there's no guarantee that a more liberal and moderate candidate will even make it to the election because the religious authorities can always deny him the candidacy.
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:31 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 44):
Falcon anything you have to say about this administration is so completely colored by hate as to be absolutely useless to discuss.

You confuse "loathing of policy" with "hate". Hate is reserved for people like Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, the jackasses who run Hezbollah and Hamas, etc. Not for any U.S. president, RJ. I greatly dislike this presidents' policies, and I cannot stand his smug arrogance. I cannot stand who he has around him-the same smug attitude. But I don't, and never will, hate the man. The same cannot be said for his VP.

so, right there, you are wrong-as usual, I might add. My views are colored by what I see is bad policy, bad execution of policy, and doing some teriffic damage to the long-term fortunes of this nation.

So, as far as I'm concerned, I have every right to comment. It's not reserved for those who are blinded by loyalty to party and ideology over loyalty to country, which is what I think you, and a few others on here, like JetJack, are guilty of.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 44):
BTW still haven't taken me up on that bet. Or haven't you quite figured out how to hedge your bet as you usually do?

I'm not betting, because I don't disagree. I think once in office, Obama will have to revisit that one, and realize an immediate withdrawl is not in our best interest. I do think that he'll have begun a withdrawl, however, by the 2nd half of his first term.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:32 am



Quoting LTU932 (Reply 43):
The speech is good IMO, but obviously Kohl never really acted on it.

That does somewhat damage its value for a quote, don't you think?  mischievous 
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:45 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):
President is ultimately responsilbe for ordering the invasion but you act as if he did it without any kind of consultaton with Congress at all. It was the right decision and the situation over there is getting better whether you wish to admit that or not.

Is it getting better? I'm not so sure. You cannot say so with certainty either. The aforementioned graph shows peaks and valleys of violence. I have no reason to believe that this current trend is anything but another lull in the violence. Furthermore... wait until the Americans leave... heaven only knows what will happen.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):

Again, please show where, prior to the invasion, an intelligence analyst was blowing the whistle to Congress saying "I'm feeling pressured!" or that "the administration has doctored the evidence!". Then and only then could you say that President Bush had advance knowledge that the intelligence was false.http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/1838732/

Clearly there were intelligence analysts who didnt feel that what the Bush admin was doing with the information was right. And I did show it to you in that article.... you want names and dates and all of this malarchy... but how do you expect me to get that for you based on anonymous interviews given by CIA officials? Obviously... Obviously- there were concerns-- otherwise there wouldn't have been an article written at all. Where there is smoke there is fire. Get real- it is you who is denying what is plainly evident to anyone with an eye that is not jaded by overly-nationalistic views.

Furthermore- what kind of 'dissent' or 'opposition' could have been voiced in that year and a half after 9/11?? None. Anything else would have been unpatriotic. You fail to remember the psychological state of Americans at the time- People were afraid, and who else was there to soldify and perpetuate peoples fear further but our own George W and cronies.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):

Key word is "possible". Had the administration cracked down on flying at that point based on the information they had, liberals would have been crying bloody murder.

Oh, im sure so many people would have been upset if they cracked down on people bringing box cutters, knives or various other sharps on board commercial airplanes. Because that would affect SO many people....

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 37):

All wars are foreign policy decisions.

My goodness. Spare me the hair-splitting. It was a pre-meditated foreign policy decision. An intention of the Bush Admin for months and months was to start this war... 9/11 was brilliantly used as a pretext, however.... is that clear enough?

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 41):

That's if you don't want to believe the words of TWO former WH insiders who both say that from the minute he took office, this president was looking for a pretext to attack Iraq. There's those far-right wing blinders again.

Precisely. Its easy to see what you want to see......

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 41):
Wait a minute, RJ. Hold on. RECONSTITUTUE all his WMD programs? Uh, I thought we went to war because HE HAD WMD? Remember? I mean, the President told us that was THE REASON (not the ones made up afterwards, when nothing was found).

Are you telling me now, that the President was LYING to us? That he DIDN'T tell us the truth?

No no! According to RJ, apparently there were "OTHER" reasons besides WMD that we went to war with Iraq/ Saddam Hussein..... thats news to me. Because all I can remember Bush/Rumsfeld/Powell/Rice talking about was Iraq and WMD WMD WMD!!! CHEMICAL WEAPONS! BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS! INTENT TO OBTAIN NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!

.....and what did we find?

Nothing.

-AA777
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Do You Want To See In The Next President?

Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:46 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 44):
Quoting Klaus (Reply 40):
Then there was no reason to abort the UN inspections.

Again, I did not say it was urgent.

Then there would have been absolutly no justification to force an abortion of the UN inspections - but you're still defending exactly that!

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 44):
Yes, lets talk about delusion. You have been unable to answer any of the questions and have only illogical 10 year old responses at this point. When you can discuss our domestic situation with facts instead of smiley faces we will have something to talk about.

You think I'm not taking you seriously? Even though you're presenting such a consistent and well-founded argumentation?

Must be because I'm evil and ony interested in the destruction of all that's good and just, just like everybody else who's after you for no particular reason...!  hypnotized 

You're welcome.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, notaxonrotax, Scorpio and 27 guests