Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Old_Rooster on April 03, 2007, 12:51:09 PM
-
*crickets chirping* psssssst, they have no plan other than tuck tail and RUN!
-
Negotiate. :)
-
Negotiate. :)
Negotiate with terrorists? dear god, this country is fucking doomed if a dem takes office. say goodbye to every high rise we have left. Goodbye empire state building, goodbye statue of liberty....*sniffle*
-
Negotiate. :)
HOW DO YOU NEGOTIATE WITH PEOPLE WHO TO US SEEM IRATIONAL?
-
C R I C K E T S
-
HOW DO YOU NEGOTIATE WITH PEOPLE WHO TO US SEEM IRATIONAL?
You cannot.
-
C R I C K E T S
LOL. ;D
-
DING DING DING, WE HAVE A WINNER....TELL HIM WHAT HE HAS WON!!!! ;D
-
Here's a link to the 2004 party platform and it's strategy for fighting terrorism. I don't agree with some of it but much of it is sound.
It is eminently more sensible than the republican platform of regime change and incompetent management of US resources.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=D2004
-
hmmmmm, still no plans for fighting terror the democrat way. i assumed as much.
much like their campaigh of 2004 when their candidates ran basically on 'i am not george bush'.
this is why democrats are now unelectable, they put nothing on the table, they just bitch ,whine ,and moan.
-
HOW DO YOU NEGOTIATE WITH PEOPLE WHO TO US SEEM IRATIONAL?
It is rare that national leaders are irrational to the point where diplomacy is useless. Even Hussein was open to diplomacy when self-preservation was an issue.
-
Here's a link to the 2004 party platform and it's strategy for fighting terrorism. I don't agree with some of it but much of it is sound.
It is eminently more sensible than the republican platform of regime change and incompetent management of US resources.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=D2004
There is some good stuff here. I think they don't go quite far and explain what we do when talks fail:
Even as we have scoured Iraq for signs of weapons of mass destruction, Iran has reportedly been working to develop them next door. A nuclear-armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to us and our allies.
The same is true for other countries that may be seeking nuclear weapons. This is why strengthening the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is so critical. We must close the loophole that lets countries develop nuclear weapons capabilities under the guise of a peaceful, civilian nuclear power program. We also need to strengthen enforcement and verification and make rigorous inspection protocols mandatory.
We must work with every country to tighten export controls, stiffen penalties, and beef up law enforcement and intelligence sharing. That way we can make absolutely sure that a disaster like the AQ Khan black market network, which grew out of Pakistan's nuclear program, can never happen again. We must also take steps to reduce tension between India and Pakistan and guard against the possibility of their nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands.
-
It is rare that national leaders are irrational to the point where diplomacy is useless. Even Hussein was open to diplomacy when self-preservation was an issue.
IT IS RARE? EXACTLY HOW RARE?
-
IT IS RARE? EXACTLY HOW RARE?
Very rare. I can think of two examples off of the top of my head. GW Bush throws diplomacy out the window as did Hitler. Both men used diplomacy until it didn't fit their ends any more. Bush with Iraq. And Hitler with the Allied forces.
-
Ya know what?
Even if the dems have NO plan, it saves us $200 Billion a day and 1000 troops a year in Iraq.
And the only domestic attack had the White house's fingerprints all over it, whether you'll face it or not.
-
SO THEN WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR THE BIG NEGOTIATION?
-
Here's a link to the 2004 party platform and it's strategy for fighting terrorism. I don't agree with some of it but much of it is sound.
It is eminently more sensible than the republican platform of regime change and incompetent management of US resources.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=D2004
well now, theres that mumbo jumbo from the kerry run for the white house.
hmmmm, look where it got him.
-
Ya know what?
Even if the dems have NO plan, it saves us $200 Billion a day and 1000 troops a year in Iraq.
And the only domestic attack had the White house's fingerprints all over it, whether you'll face it or not.
you lose all credibility with the crapola about the white house fingerprints all over it.
moon landing was fake also.....thats how much credibility you have when you talk that silly crap.
-
Very rare. I can think of two examples off of the top of my head. GW Bush throws diplomacy out the window as did Hitler. Both men used diplomacy until it didn't fit their ends any more. Bush with Iraq. And Hitler with the Allied forces.
how long would you have let iraq shoot at our planes? how long would you let them thumb their noses at UN resolutions? for eternity?
-
how long would you have let iraq shoot at our planes? how long would you let them thumb their noses at UN resolutions? for eternity?
NO SILLY ROOSTER THEY WANTED TO "NEGOTIATE"..... ::)
-
NO SILLY ROOSTER THEY WANTED TO "NEGOTIATE"..... ::)
Also know as....SPITTING IN THE UNITED STATES FACE.
-
you lose all credibility with the crapola about the white house fingerprints all over it.
Why?
Terry, are you at all familiar with operation Northwoods, a plan in 1962 to crash planes and stage terror attacks in miami in order to instigate a war with Cuba? The joint chiefs and the DoD all approved it - JFK didn't.
Can you research it (Wiki is your friend) and let me know your thoughts on this - a US Govt plan to stage terror attacks on our people to achieve justification for a war?
-
Why?
Terry, are you at all familiar with operation Northwoods, a plan in 1962 to crash planes and stage terror attacks in miami in order to instigate a war with Cuba? The joint chiefs and the DoD all approved it - JFK didn't.
Can you research it (Wiki is your friend) and let me know your thoughts on this - a US Govt plan to stage terror attacks on our people to achieve justification for a war?
I just can't in good concience believe my nation would do that so i shan't research it.
thing is, why would a president in his first term take such a risk to start a war and ruin his presidency?
then you have al-quaeda taking responsibility also so that blows out of the water that bush set it up.
just too kooky for me.
currently my mind is a blur, its lost thinking about them revoking paris hilton's probation and tossing her in jail. I'm imagining all the lesboys using her as their toy girl.
-
I just can't in good concience believe my nation would do that so i shan't research it.
Okay. You admit you'd rather not know, and I accept that. i admire your honesty.
it happened in 1967 also - Lyndon B Johnson gave a direct order that the USS Liberty NOT be rescued - "I want that boat at the bottom of the g*ddamn sea", the transcript said.
1967 - Gulf of Tonken - same thing. Was just declassified.
You see Roosty, after 40 years they declassify these things, because by then, everyone involved is dead or senile. They'll do the same thing with 9/11, just so you know.
Self-attacks and "letting it happen so we can start a war" are common tactics that many nations use. They believe that a few lives lost justify actions which make life better for everyone else.
however, I admire your honestly. Remember one thing though - we're just talking history here. 911 is part of our history now. it's a fascinating subject and just like the Civil War or WWI, we can look at it with honest eyes and see what we can learn from it.
You can question and study 911 and still be a very devoted American.
-
Okay. You admit you'd rather not know, and I accept that. i admire your honesty.
it happened in 1967 also - Lyndon B Johnson gave a direct order that the USS Liberty NOT be rescued - "I want that boat at the bottom of the g*ddamn sea", the transcript said.
1967 - Gulf of Tonken - same thing. Was just declassified.
You see Roosty, after 40 years they declassify these things, because by then, everyone involved is dead or senile. They'll do the same thing with 9/11, just so you know.
Self-attacks and "letting it happen so we can start a war" are common tactics that many nations use. They believe that a few lives lost justify actions which make life better for everyone else.
however, I admire your honestly. Remember one thing though - we're just talking history here. 911 is part of our history now. it's a fascinating subject and just like the Civil War or WWI, we can look at it with honest eyes and see what we can learn from it.
You can question and study 911 and still be a very devoted American.
and if it is revealed, i'll still love my nation. I'll shock you further and tell you that i KNOW there are spooky things the government does but ONLY in our best interest. If it comes out we crashed the planes to keep the rest of the nation safe by taking out Iraq before they got weapons of mass destruction, i'll still salute president bush, might even make me respect him more by realizing he had even bigger balls than i initially thought.
Yep, i agree sometimes our government probably has to do some spooky things and i'd still love my nation, fly the red white and blue proudly and be DAMN glad i'm an AMERICAN!
-
Jack Nicolson said in best in A FEW GOOD MEN that applies to limp wristed liberals thinking the world should be viewed through rose colored glasses and that will make it so......YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!~
-
Why?
Terry, are you at all familiar with operation Northwoods, a plan in 1962 to crash planes and stage terror attacks in miami in order to instigate a war with Cuba? The joint chiefs and the DoD all approved it - JFK didn't.
Can you research it (Wiki is your friend) and let me know your thoughts on this - a US Govt plan to stage terror attacks on our people to achieve justification for a war?
Here we go again...that plan never happened fool, drop it already
-
Here we go again...that plan never happened fool, drop it already
i suspected it didn't. conspiracy theorists run amuk.
-
I think this picture best represents the Democrats' view of fighting terrorism. LOL
-
I think this picture best represents the Democrats' view of fighting terrorism. LOL
LOL!
-
LOL!
:P ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
and if it is revealed, i'll still love my nation. I'll shock you further and tell you that i KNOW there are spooky things the government does but ONLY in our best interest. If it comes out we crashed the planes to keep the rest of the nation safe by taking out Iraq before they got weapons of mass destruction, i'll still salute president bush, might even make me respect him more by realizing he had even bigger balls than i initially thought.
Yep, i agree sometimes our government probably has to do some spooky things and i'd still love my nation, fly the red white and blue proudly and be DAMN glad i'm an AMERICAN!
Cool. I respect this a lot, rooster.
Someone once said that you should love your nation 100% of the time, and your govt when they earn it. I think that makes sense. There have been corrupt administrations in history, there is no denying that. And people who criticized them weren't bad people - they were technically right.
ANd yes, our country is run looking at the next 100 years - and yes, their letting 9/11 happen was a GOOD move for the US' long term interests. It gave us afghanistan, which we upgraded to iraq. Yes, we did it for "freedom" - but it was the freedom that comes from owning resources of the world that CHI/RUS cannot.
In the end - the dems are RIGHT from a moral mindset. And the repubs are right from a practical mindset. Bush did a horrible thing by letting 911 happen, on a moral level. But a wonderful thing, on a utilitarian, longterm US interests, level.
That is why politics is so damn intriguing. Even when you're completely wrong, you're often still completely right. And vice versa.
-
I know what their plan doesn't involve:
- Not consulting a former 4 star army general in your cabinet.
- Invading a country with few ties to terrorism while OBL is still running loose.
- Invading a country without a competent post war plan.
- Sinking 500 billion into project that bred more terrorism
That's just few things!
And take your crickets and shove it where the sun don't shine.
Pathetic Drone Neotaints
Your cult leader BUSH has you so brain washed even the mists of obvious blunders you still run around wondering if the democrats could screw things up more than that.
YOU ALL NEED TO GET YOUR HEADS EXAMINED OR AT LEAST JUST ADMIT TO YOURSELVES HOW STUPID YOU TRULY ARE.
-
Your cult leader BUSH has you so brain washed even the mists of obvious blunders you still run around wondering if the democrats could screw things up more than that.
It's like lying on your deathbed, ravaged with cancer of the ass, mocking heart disaease.
-
HOW DO YOU NEGOTIATE WITH PEOPLE WHO TO US SEEM IRATIONAL?
(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:rNXzOEAM-qLmQM:http://www.freewebs.com/makin-isreal/mushroom_cloud.jpeg)
-
I know what their plan doesn't involve:
- Not consulting a former 4 star army general in your cabinet.
- Invading a country with few ties to terrorism while OBL is still running loose.
- Invading a country without a competent post war plan.
- Sinking 500 billion into project that bred more terrorism
That's just few things!
And take your crickets and shove it where the sun don't shine.
Pathetic Drone Neotaints
Your cult leader BUSH has you so brain washed even the mists of obvious blunders you still run around wondering if the democrats could screw things up more than that.
YOU ALL NEED TO GET YOUR HEADS EXAMINED OR AT LEAST JUST ADMIT TO YOURSELVES HOW STUPID YOU TRULY ARE.
I'm sort of curious. Are there people, democrats I guess, that think terrorism will end if we kill OBL?
lol, the reason OBL really isn't that key, hes an old man for one, possibly dead and there will always be another raghead over there set to become the next OBL. So rather than kill OBL, more important to wipe out Al-Quaeda.
I bet OBL is in some cave shaking, afraid to die, with about 120 iraqi women in his cave as he forces them to suck his cock while he chants JIHAD!
-
I'm sort of curious. Are there people, democrats I guess, that think terrorism will end if we kill OBL?
Great question.
-
Cool. I respect this a lot, rooster.
What?
You respect it a lot if someone would be in support of Bush being behind the attack on the WTC's? ???
How come?
-Hedge
-
Great question.
Then why not go after countries that were the main breeding grounds for terror? Countries such as Pakistan, Saudia Arabia and Egypt.
Taking action doesn't mean what you are doing is right. If you think invading Iraq was right and that invading Iran will also be right then you're a dumbass.
-
Then why not go after countries that were the main breeding grounds for terror? Countries such as Pakistan, Saudia Arabia and Egypt.
Taking action doesn't mean what you are doing is right. If you think invading Iraq was right and that invading Iran will also be right then you're a dumbass.
Invading Iraq was worth it for one reason. For the moment they found Saddam in a hole and he pleaded 'please please don't shoot, i am saddam hussein'
Just for that priceless moment to show the rest of the Iraqi people how this super leader turned into a pussy in one second, well.....PRICELESS!
-
i respect his honesty, hedge.
many of the far right folks here say "bush didn't do it. He wouldn't. He couldn't."
Rooster is a realist, and at 48, he's seen a lot of false terror in the world in his day. He's no 21-year old spring chicken, naive to the bone like some folks arguing here.
It takes courage to say what he said. I think most of his dem-bashing is for fun, and he's a little war-hungry, sure. But with so many simple naive people here, his honestly - although a tad warmongerish - is refreshing.
-
Invading Iraq was worth it for one reason. For the moment they found Saddam in a hole and he pleaded 'please please don't shoot, i am saddam hussein'
Just for that priceless moment to show the rest of the Iraqi people how this super leader turned into a pussy in one second, well.....PRICELESS!
Can you name one world leader you think would have been brave and defiant when surrounded by armed men from above?
-
i respect his honesty, hedge.
many of the far right folks here say "bush didn't do it. He wouldn't. He couldn't."
Rooster is a realist, and at 48, he's seen a lot of false terror in the world in his day. He's no 21-year old spring chicken, naive to the bone like some folks arguing here.
It takes courage to say what he said. I think most of his dem-bashing is for fun, and he's a little war-hungry, sure. But with so many simple naive people here, his honestly - although a tad warmongerish - is refreshing.
Ok.
Must've had a dumb moment.
I re-read your post. Should've figured it out. :-[
Have to agree about the honesty part.
It's a good start for a good argument.
-Hedge
-
Can you name one world leader you think would have been brave and defiant when surrounded by armed men from above?
RONALD REAGAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:rNXzOEAM-qLmQM:http://www.freewebs.com/makin-isreal/mushroom_cloud.jpeg)
yes, exactly! i like your style!
-
RONALD REAGAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Interesting.
I also think Rumsfeld would shout some profane blashphemy. He kept it real. Believed in the cause, lifelong, right, wrong, or otherwise.
-
Interesting.
I also think Rumsfeld would shout some profane blashphemy. He kept it real. Believed in the cause, lifelong, right, wrong, or otherwise.
Can't you hear Rumsfield telling some newbie reporter YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
-
How is the right's 'war on drugs' going?
-
I'm sort of curious. Are there people, democrats I guess, that think terrorism will end if we kill OBL?
lol, the reason OBL really isn't that key, hes an old man for one, possibly dead and there will always be another raghead over there set to become the next OBL. So rather than kill OBL, more important to wipe out Al-Quaeda.
I bet OBL is in some cave shaking, afraid to die, with about 120 iraqi women in his cave as he forces them to suck his cock while he chants JIHAD!
Well some Idiots actually thought invading Iraq would help the fight on terrorism.
Are you one of them?
Of course getting OBL wasn't going to stop them. But letting them leave from tora bora probably was another "only BUSH could be so stupid" move. NOW ALQ is operating fine in those mountains again.
-
Well some Idiots actually thought invading Iraq would help the fight on terrorism.
Are you one of them?
Of course getting OBL wasn't going to stop them. But letting them leave from tora bora probably was another "only BUSH could be so stupid" move. NOW ALQ is operating fine in those mountains again.
You honestly think that Iraq has had zero effect on terrorism?
-
You honestly think that Iraq has had zero effect on terrorism?
Have i ever said that?
Terrorism has increased since the Iraq invasion.
Invading Iraq hasn't helped our cause, it's drained our money and made it worse.
Unless this new government rules Iraq with the same Iron first Saddam did, Terrorism will be worse there. That's all those people will respond to.
-
You honestly think that Iraq has had zero effect on terrorism?
Actually, invading Iraq has caused increases in terrorism, both IN Iraq and OTUSIDE Iraq.
Terror attacks have gone up everywhere since we invaded. We gave them motive, and opportunity.