Did bush make a joke about attacking Iraq today?

dcarlson

I'm interested to see who gets voted in. It'll send a pretty big message worldwide to where my buddies from the south are headed in the next 4 years. Status quo or something different.

As for Iraq, I think the U.N. should be in control of building a Nation.

PolkWannabie

Right ... Let's let the French & German's back in right away ... LOL ...

The UN has proved themselves incapable of doing anything the last few years other than passing meaningless resolutions with no teeth that they then refuse to back up.

ohskigod

the democrats are politicizing the war on terror, plain and simple. the only reason that we know we cant find weapons of mass destruction, is becausde Bush is the only one that did something about Saddam blatantly thumbing his nose at the UN Security Council's 17 previous resolutions about weapons inspections (sorry Clinton, sailing a few tomohawks into iraq doesnt count). the fact is, the UN security council is almost impotent when it comes to securing world peace and safety. Its always the US and England stepping up to the plate, and we allways catch heat for it from the "World Community". Of course, this is the same "World Community" that we protected from Hitler. This is the same "World Community" that would still be cowering at the feet of the former Soviet Union were it not for Reagan staring the beast in the face and basically winning the cold war.
If the same people that hoosier eloquently quoted were in charge of securing freedom and our way of life, we would all be in really big trouble. Not that all Democrats in the past were bad, it just seems that the current batch just blatantly sells their souls for more power. Not that republicans arent sometimes guilty of this (no one is perfect), but it is just not as blatant.

Demiurge

Originally posted by PolkWannabie
Right ... Let's let the French & German's back in right away ... LOL ...

The UN has proved themselves incapable of doing anything the last few years other than passing meaningless resolutions with no teeth that they then refuse to back up.

The U.N has never been capable of doing anything. Kofi Annan and his son already screwed the Iraqi people once with his 'oil for food program'.

PolkWannabie

Oh ... that can't be right ... I thought that's why we were there ... it's all about oil, isn't it ? :rolleyes:

spyderman

Proof of a lie? The proof is in bush's state of the union speech. The statement of "Iraq's attempted purchase of nuclear materials from Africa". This was an admittedly false statement. It's origin was blammed on the Brits. But like I said, the bush admin interpreted that info and went to war based on that info. They are ulitimately responsible.

Doesn't take much courage to send others to their deaths. bush was real good at it as Governor of Texas. (Only, this time all of the soldiers were innocent.) It takes more courage and intelligence to resist the temptation to go to war.

Like I said earlier, the administration made their decision to go to war based on a pre-election agenda, half-truths, and misinformation. They are ulitimately responsible.

At this point, pulling out of Iraq is the worst thing we could do. Conquering Iraq, isn't that what Halliburton is doing today?:) This is doing just wonders for our already devistated world image.

According to Oneill, the Iraq agenda was immediate. According to Clark's testimoney, Al-Queda was basically ignored.

Why won't Condelizza Rice, the National Security Advisor, testify for the 9/11 commission? That one really makes ya wonder!

You see what this administration is doing? They use fear to manipulate people into acting. Fear of the unknown is a powerful weapon that the right-wing wields adroitly.

spyderman

You're exactly right about those quotes, only one little difference... The Clinton administration didn't make the wrong decision and rush off to a needless war with Iraq.

Blameless, certainly not. I think it was Brokaw who a day or two after 9/11 asked Clinton if he felt he had done enough to bring down bin laden...

Try as hard as they might, the bush admin can't tie Iraq to the war on terror. They are just looking for more support for their decision to go to war, besides the truth - OPEC. We can't control OPEC. (More on this later...)

A founding principle this country used to adhear to was nutrality. Never go to war unless you are attacked. When did WWII start and when and why did we decide to enter??? The iminent threat was the WMD's which have turned out not to exist. YES THEY LIED!

Now, there are many countries in the world that treat their people poorly, why aren't we no doing something about that? We're gonna bring democracy to the middle-east? Why, OIL.

This is a bigger issue than the oil just in Iraq. It deals with how costly it is to drill for oil in the US. Bush and Chaney are both oil men. They want a higher oil and gasoline price in order for US companies to profit from drilling for oil here at home. They can't compete with OPEC if prices are kept low. This is basic MICROECONOMICS.

Seriously, think about it just a little farther...

Why not bring our form of democracy to China, N Korea, Cuba??? Hmm, no real oil there...

scottdawg

Kerry supporters ought to give a listen to Zell Miller, he has chosen to support this country and his president. A democrat for George Bush. Putting all political BS aside he tells it like it is.

spyderman

If anything it has destabilized and polarized the world.

bush politicized 9/11 when he ran that ad. The bush admin is running a campaign based on his ability to fight terror. The problem is he is culpable for the eight months prior to the attack.

Let me ask you this question, why was every plane in the country grounded immediately after the 9/11 attack...except for the planes carrying the bin laden family members?

Wouldn't it have been helpful in tracking down osama to have investigated the brothers sister and cousins or whomever else might have had recent contact with osama?

Instead, the bush admin allowed these planes to leave the country... Makes ya wonder...

PolkWannabie

Spyder,

You really do need to investigate the facts ...

I find it very interesting that while acusing the right of using rhetoric that you opt to point at nothing factual.

Go back and read the exact statements that were made, not the liberal press' interpretation of those statements.

spyderman

they just aren't spun to the right-wing marching orders.

The GOP is afraid, very afraid. Bush barely won in 2000 and his record right now is terrible.

He has spent the most money of any president before him, he took a huge surplus and turned it into one of the biggest deficits ever!

They keep claiming that the economy is growing, yet US job creation is anemic!

Although, US white collar jobs are growing, just overseas, in countries like India faster than we can say Enron. These jobs will never come back! 180,000 white collar jobs went to India last year, and an overall total of about 900,000 left the country.

Technology in these countries is starting to catch up to the US. Mark my words, this is gonna come back and bite us in the arse someday soon!

Hey, where is Polk building their speakers now??? Hmm...
:mad:

PolkWannabie

We'll talk about it AFTER you cite fact #1 ...

VR3

Let me be the FIRST to say... --- SPYDER: SHUT UP --- Have a goodnight

ohskigod

"Ohskigod, please tell us how Iraq is linked to the war on terror???"


thats easy. everyone likes to think that terrorists are organized like countries, or corporations. it's not Al Qaeda unless it is clearly marked "Al Qaeda"

Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are not organized like social clubs with discernable members. i.e., we know Saddam was a long financial supporter of Hamas and other palestinian terror groups (he pays familys of suicide bombers, etc). Terror camps were found within Iraq (not that the left leaning media would remind us of that). Just becasue it did not have an "Al Qaeda" flag on it, does not mean it is not related. These groups (for lack of a better word) are organized in ways we can not even comprehend. the only common denominator is that they want to kill us (that includes you and your family Spyder).

Bush made it painstakingly clear, if you support terrorists, you are as bad as they are. Saddam supported terrorism. I dont care if a clear paper trail doesnt sashay right over to Al Qaeda.

p.s., how is Bush destabilizing and polarizing the world, but not Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups? The "World" is getting dumber and dumber when it comes to placing blame for global problems.

spyderman

If you don't like it, don't read it.

Hasn't your daddy taught you to respect your elders? Now go out back an get me a switch.

BTW, you've also shown the depth of your intelligence by your little one-liner here.

I was nice enough to revise my flea market post an you tell me to shut up here??? :mad:

OK, just remember that paybacks are a ****.

VR3

I shall remember that -- We don't discuss politics or religion here. It is a simple rule. -- PS: If your payback is ANYTHING like your flea market post - then I will have no problems or worries or lost sleep.

spyderman

you just don't want to acknowledge them because you can't win.

You've taken a very weak debate approach here.

Since you can't win the argument you choose not to fight. Sad.

I can't wait for the Bush v. Kerry debate.

VR3

Spyder, Back to my above 'one-liner'. IT DOSNT BELONG HERE. Politics and Religion - None. As PhantomOG and Jesse said - "Religion and Politics.....does not belong here" Troy chimes in -- "Amen Brother, Amen!" -- It is true. It dosnt belong. This entire thread has HOS written all over it. --- If you want to duke it out with PW so bad, PM him.

PolkWannabie

Originally posted by spyderman
you just don't want to acknowledge them because you can't win. You've taken a very weak debate approach here. Since you can't win the argument you choose not to fight. Sad. I can't wait for the Bush v. Kerry debate.

Can't win ? You haven't yet suggested anything to even debate so no effort on my part was required ...

I find it interesting what you consider to be facts as most of your examples are rhetoric and hyperbole, not factual.

Let's look at them in detail ...

Originally posted by spyderman
1. The GOP is afraid, very afraid. Bush barely won in 2000 and his record right now is terrible.

2. He has spent the most money of any president before him, he took a huge surplus and turned it into one of the biggest deficits ever!

3. They keep claiming that the economy is growing, yet US job creation is anemic!

4. Although, US white collar jobs are growing, just overseas, in countries like India faster than we can say Enron. These jobs will never come back! 180,000 white collar jobs went to India last year, and an overall total of about 900,000 left the country.

5. Technology in these countries is starting to catch up to the US. Mark my words, this is gonna come back and bite us in the arse someday soon!

1. Well there's certinly nothing FACTual there. (Hint: To say something is "horrible" does not make it a fact)
2. First of all presidents don't spend money directly, but even if they did every budget ever passed is bigger than the budget that preceded it so this statement doesn't really make any particular point.
3. The US government by and large does not create jobs, companies create jobs. (You remember, the "mini evil dictatorships", right ?)
5. Uh ok ...
4. This is closest thing I could find in your post that resembled a FACT. It's not real clear how the executive branch of government would be responsible for this other than by either passing legislation that encouraged this or vetoing legislation that discouraged this. If you consider that to be a leading cause then I'm not aware of any legislation that has been passed while Bush was in office that did either of these, are you ? The best recent example I could think of off hand would be NAFTA, which was put into effect when ? and I assume for some reason that although you have a problem with companies moving jobs overseas which by definition means investment by US firms overseas that for some reason you don't have a problem with the FACT that a major portion of Kerry's and his wife's assets are invested overseas, right ? and that IS A FACT. Look it up.

You really do need to study up on how government works and have some idea of when laws were passed and while your at it you should also have a better idea of how financial markets work as well as national economics and which events are the precursors of others as it's clear from your posts that you don't have a clue and frankly I don't have enough remaining free time on the planet to educate you.

Demiurge

PolkWannabe....

Arguing with this guy is useless. The proof is in the pudding that he isn't capable or even willing to engage in a debate using a linear thought process. Everything comes back to him hating Bush.

Spyderman is a Liberal trying to act as if he was a Republican/Conservative in the past. What a joke that is. The guy has a huge Liberal agenda and a bug up his **** about Bush.

You can make a solid arguement and he won't even respond to what you say...He'll just reply saying 20 other completely unrelated things. One second he'll be talking about jobs and then all of a sudden it's the war. No debate can be had in that kind of setting.

So....the conclusion is that you hate Bush, and hate is the operative word here.

I, an open minded person, am willing to realize there are some things I don't like about Bush and other things that I really do like. The most important of which, is the safety of the United States. Bush is the only one willing to do something. Terrorists need to be killed. That is the reality. Kill them before they kill you.

Kerry is inconsistent and a traitor. He was involved in groups that plotted to assasinate U.S Senators. He flip flops on everything. He has no plan. He has no chance.

The more Kerry talks the more likely Bush will win in a landslide. The #1 thing that went wrong for the Liberals was their pussyfooting & flip-flopping after 9/11. It's over for you.

Demiurge

"1. The GOP is afraid, very afraid. Bush barely won in 2000 and his record right now is terrible."

He won. This is 2004. Get over it! And I gotta agree with PolkWannabe...'terrible'...that means nothing.

"2. He has spent the most money of any president before him, he took a huge surplus and turned it into one of the biggest deficits ever!"

Yes, he spends way too much. What exactly do you think John Kerry is going to do? Spend less? LMAO...John Kerry will outspend Bush immediately. You've heard how much John Kerry will cost the U.S haven't you?

"3. They keep claiming that the economy is growing, yet US job creation is anemic!"

The jobless rate is at 5.6% (which also happend to be the average)....which is consequently 20 thousandths of a percent better than it was during all of Clintons years.....

...why didn't we hear bitching then? Oh, right...there wasn't a guy with an (R) in office....just a liar.

"4. Although, US white collar jobs are growing, just overseas, in countries like India faster than we can say Enron. These jobs will never come back! 180,000 white collar jobs went to India last year, and an overall total of about 900,000 left the country."

So what? Here's a clue for you....Businesses are started to make money, not create jobs for people. There will always be work in the U.S as long as there are people who start businesses and need people to make their product or offer their services. Jobs are simply a bi-product of demand for ones products/services.

"5. Technology in these countries is starting to catch up to the US. Mark my words, this is gonna come back and bite us in the arse someday soon!"

Good for India. Maybe we should elect John Kerry so we can have even more verbose environmental restrictions on our companies. Then we can tax them more too! We'll tack a few more bucks on the minimum wage too....so it costs even more for business owners to provide jobs....

....that'll work!

The more money being in the U.S costs businesses the more apt they'll be to locate elsewhere. I mean....hell....
Sen. John Kerry is fond of calling CEOs who employ foreigners “Benedict Arnolds".....yet of the 79 H.J. Heinz & Co factories, owned by Kerry and his wife....57 are overseas!!!!!!

HYPOCRITE.....Why aren't you bitching about those jobs? Hmmmm?



:rolleyes:

dcarlson

Dem,

Environmental restrictions are absolutely necessary. I won't go into full detail of the history of my city but we have one of the top 5 pollutors in North America. The company is INCO, the top nickel producer in the world. A lot jobs and money. There has to be a balance between the economy and the environment.

Here's a pic of the view I have out of my spare room.

dcarlson

This picture is from another window. It's a little blurry but you can see there's no trees and the rocks are stained black.

Depending on which way the wind blows we get a nice taste of sulfur in the air.

spyderman

Now, when you finish your statement with a rude, run-on sentence like this:

"You really do need to study up on how government works and have some idea of when laws were passed and while your at it you should also have a better idea of how financial markets work as well as national economics and which events are the precursors of others as it's clear from your posts that you don't have a clue and frankly I don't have enough remaining free time on the planet to educate you."

You're only trying to minimalize and attack the person, instead of engaging them in a meaningful debate. Debating me on the ideas and facts would have been so much more interesting.

Instead, you invalidated any point that you may have tried to make in your previous comments. It is an ineffective and inappropriate debating tactic.

If you'll look at my comments, I didn't attack you as a person. I didn't attack your intelligence. I stated opinions and facts about a topic. You seem to have been threatened by this and felt the need to attack my intelligence.

That's part of the problem with the right. They are extemely closed minded. They think they are always correct. If other people don't automatically agree with them, then they attack them and try to present them as stupid and/or un-American. We've already seen it happen with the bush campaign.

PolkWannabie

ROTFL ... I didn't say you were stupid, just uneducated. Not to worry though it's probably just the result of liberal educational policies that are so much "nicer".

Demiurge

Originally posted by dcarlson
Dem,

Environmental restrictions are absolutely necessary. I won't go into full detail of the history of my city but we have one of the top 5 pollutors in North America. The company is INCO, the top nickel producer in the world. A lot jobs and money. There has to be a balance between the economy and the environment.

Here's a pic of the view I have out of my spare room.

I think the key word I used here was verbose environmental restrictions. I should have added trite to that as well...

I never said there shouldn't be any, but people like Spyderman act as if they don't know why those jobs are leaving the U.S. It's the overtaxation, verbose & trite environmental restrictions, high labor costs, and the fact that Americans aren't willing to do the **** jobs in a lot of cases.

I think that's pathetic, but it's not just Americans it's Canadians, Europeans, and any other technologically advanced capitalistic countries....although it could be argued that, unfortunately all of those nations are plunging into socialism....and all of the above **** is causing it.

Sorry you live by a factory....but I bet your land value is priced with that in mind.....

dcarlson

Unfortunately, it's not just the land around the nickel refinery. It extends for a 30 min drive in all directions. Inco is a little over 100 years old and it devasted the land before there were environmental guidelines. About 20 years ago as a boy scout we went planting trees around the city. The city is doing much better greenery wise but it's taken that many years and more to get to our current point which still isn't normal. I have no pity for big business taking advantage of the environment for more money or even jobs for that matter.

dcarlson

Oh, by the way, that stack is a good 10 miles away. As far as I know, it's the largest one in the world.

disneyjoe7

From that picture from your spare room, that Tower is 10 MILES AWAY :eek:

Just how tall is that ????

Originally posted by dcarlson
Oh, by the way, that stack is a good 10 miles away. As far as I know, it's the largest one in the world.

dcarlson

380 Meters - 1246 Feet. This pic gives a little better of a perspective.

I have a camp that is a 45min drive and on a good clear day on a hill you can just see the stack and smoke trail.