Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on February 14, 2007, 09:14:38 PM
-
If the leader of your party proposed something you considered completely silly, would you defend it anyway, because "He's your guy"?
or would you admit it's a terrible idea, and that your candidate isn't always correct?
-
I admit that it's a terrible idea...
example: I... am... not... at... all... pleased... that... not... one... single... dem... put... out... a... helping... hand... to... agents... Ramos... and... Compean... >:( I support the republicans who did... Thank god someone is...
I'm disgusted with that choice...
-
Agreed. Neither party is perfect. Sometimes people hear criticisms and their answer is to attack the opposite party instead of admitting their flaws and talking solutions.
I don't trust people like that. If they won't admit flaws, they certainly won't admit mistakes. And you can't improve if you can't admit mistakes.
-
I admit that it's a terrible idea...
example: I... am... not... at... all... pleased... that... not... one... single... dem... put... out... a... helping... hand... to... agents... Ramos... and... Compean... >:( I support the republicans who did... Thank god someone is...
I'm disgusted with that choice...
Can you list the policies enacted by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela you disagree with?
-
Can you list the policies enacted by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela you disagree with?
quality question!
-
I would admit that it is an idea that I disagree with.
-
If the leader of your party proposed something you considered completely silly, would you defend it anyway, because "He's your guy"?
or would you admit it's a terrible idea, and that your candidate isn't always correct?
Common sense.
-
Can you list the policies enacted by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela you disagree with?
why
-
why
How did I know I wouldn't get a response to that question?
-
ok ok, I'll play... I disagree that Chavez didn't eject the foreign opposition in his country from Venezuela immediately--expelled asap. Just as I wish more of the foreign influence in our gov was nipped in the ass...
enjoy ;)
-
ok ok, I'll play... I disagree that Chavez didn't eject the foreign opposition in his country from Venezuela immediately--expelled asap. Just as I wish more of the foreign influence in our gov was nipped in the ass...
enjoy ;)
Thanks for showing everyone why your opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously around here. And remind me, in which socialist paradise do you currently reside?
-
Thanks for showing everyone why your opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously around here. And remind me, in which socialist paradise do you currently reside?
I have an apartment provided for me in Iran--freebee... I have a cozy villa in Venezuela, 375 acre ranch in Wyoming, home in Colorado and a timeshare in Paris... Enjoy 8)
-
I have an apartment provided for me in Iran--freebee... I have a cozy villa in Venezuela, 375 acre ranch in Wyoming, home in Colorado and a timeshare in Paris... Enjoy 8)
Let me try that again. Where do you currently reside?
-
Let me try that again. Where do you currently reside?
I've spent time in Iran and Venezuela and Colorado this month. Last month was the same, The month before I was in Wyoming for a couple weeks then Venezuala for the rest and wasn't in Iran for the whole month, the month before I was in Wyoming for a week and 3 weeks in Venezuela... The month before I was in Venezuela for 2 weeks 3 days and the rest in Iran. The month before I was in Colorado all but 6 days in France, 8 that I had to cut short for an business emergency since I have 2 weeks purchased for that time. Do you want more? :-\
-
I've spent time in Iran and Venezuela and Colorado this month. Last month was the same, The month before I was in Wyoming for a couple weeks then Venezuala for the rest and wasn't in Iran for the whole month, the month before I was in Wyoming for a week and 3 weeks in Venezuela... The month before I was in Venezuela for 2 weeks 3 days and the rest in Iran. The month before I was in Colorado all but 6 days in France, 8 that I had to cut short for an business emergency since I have 2 weeks purchased for that time. Do you want more? :-\
Yes, how do you justify living within the confines of 'The Great Satan' as a supporter of the Chavez dictatorship?
-
Yes, how do you justify living within the confines of 'The Great Satan' as a supporter of the Chavez dictatorship?
Bush is the Devil... Chavez does not have anything against the American People. His issue is with Bush and Neoliberalism... Enjoy being completely wrong yet again... Chavez doesn't hate Americans, he hates US forgeign policy. I would have at one time agreed that nobody but Americans have a right to be critical of American policy but since Bush came along with his NWO and started dictating to the world how things will be... they have every right to be critical now... Blame Bush, not me... So when Chavez says go home gringos, he's saying get your grubby hands out of Venezueala's affairs JUST AS HE SHOULD... Just as many Americans do when they find countries like China or Mexico trying to have direct influence on our policies and government... It is not uncommon to hear Americans say NO, not with our affairs! Chavez didn't do anything different than doing exactly that...
And, my last justification for being here... I was here before you and I love America and love the constitution and am a real patriot, not a psuedo patriot with United we stand Stickers and plastic flags haning from the family SUV... Oh brother... :D
Hope that helps ;D
-
If the leader of your party proposed something you considered completely silly, would you defend it anyway, because "He's your guy"?
Most of the drones who post on political boards would. For them, it's not about intelligent and thoughtful debate on the issues, it's about cheering for what they perceive to be "their team".
-
... Chavez does not have anything against the American People.
Chavez is a Marxist nut-job who admires Fidel Castro.
-
If the leader of your party proposed something you considered completely silly, would you defend it anyway, because "He's your guy"?
or would you admit it's a terrible idea, and that your candidate isn't always correct?
Sure I would admit it if I thought it was a bad idea. The problem is, if I agree with the idea because of the idea and not the party lines I still get accused of only following party lines. Your question isn't really a valid one. Like if you ask do I think bush fucked up, I would say no because it isn't HIS fault alone. You would say "you only say that because you are a bush lover"
-
Chavez is a Marxist nut-job who admires Fidel Castro.
"Castro has done good things for Cuba," Colin Powell
-
Sure I would admit it if I thought it was a bad idea. The problem is, if I agree with the idea because of the idea and not the party lines I still get accused of only following party lines. Your question isn't really a valid one. Like if you ask do I think bush fucked up, I would say no because it isn't HIS fault alone. You would say "you only say that because you are a bush lover"
In your eyes if part of the "fuck up" is his fault did he still "fuck up" or is it an all or nothing situation?
-
Chavez is a Marxist nut-job who admires Fidel Castro.
kinda cool huh :D
-
In your eyes if part of the "f**k up" is his fault did he still "f**k up" or is it an all or nothing situation?
I truly believe that everyone making the decisions are doing so to the best of their ability. The Pres., SECDEF, CJCS, JCS etc. I guarantee that at least 3 of the 4 JCS probably advised Bush that the surge would be worth it. Bush isn't the renegade played out on MSNBC. At the same time, the JCS ask the generals on the ground, they ask the colonels beneath them, they ask the Sergeant Majors and so on. Who gets the blame in the end? The guy at the top. Shit rolls down hill, blame rolls up it. Look at abu ghraib, people blamed Bush and Rumsfeld.
-
I truly believe that everyone making the decisions are doing so to the best of their ability. The Pres., SECDEF, CJCS, JCS etc. I guarantee that at least 3 of the 4 JCS probably advised Bush that the surge would be worth it. Bush isn't the renegade played out on MSNBC. At the same time, the JCS ask the generals on the ground, they ask the colonels beneath them, they ask the Sergeant Majors and so on. Who gets the blame in the end? The guy at the top. Shit rolls down hill, blame rolls up it. Look at abu ghraib, people blamed Bush and Rumsfeld.
Did you answer my question? If he's responsible for part of the blame is he still to blame or is it all or nothing? And just because you believe he is making decisions to the best of his ability doesn't mean he's not responsible for making mistakes.
-
Did you answer my question? If he's responsible for part of the blame is he still to blame or is it all or nothing? And just because you believe he is making decisions to the best of his ability doesn't mean he's not responsible for making mistakes.
I don't think he "fucked up" no. I don't think ANYONE could have done better so I don't consider it fucking up. They are trying things, and if they don't work trying something else. Like I have posted several times. There are no notes from previous wars to consult to see what has worked in the past to combat this type of enemy
-
Bush makes it clear: "I AM THE DECISION MAKER".
When you say that, you take the praise when these decisions work, and you take the blame when they fail.
Bush's decisions to continually remove generals and install new ones every time those in power talk bad about policy. So when you keep firing guys, you gotta take the blame.
-
Bush makes it clear: "I AM THE DECISION MAKER".
When you say that, you take the praise when these decisions work, and you take the blame when they fail.
Bush's decisions to continually remove generals and install new ones every time those in power talk bad about policy. So when you keep firing guys, you gotta take the blame.
What's your view on Chavez, 240?
If I could criticise you (and believe me, I can!), I'd say that you sometimes have your own opinions tainted by seemingly aligning yourself with those here with more radical views.
-
What's your view on Chavez, 240?
If I could criticise you (and believe me, I can!), I'd say that you sometimes have your own opinions tainted by seemingly aligning yourself with those here with more radical views.
I'm about what's best for America without abuses. In other words, 911 was an abuse (you could have attacked a military installation and got the desired psyop effect), but invading afghan was good (based upon f'king us on that oil deal). Stealing Iraqi oil is an inevitable necessity, but letting men die in the cities to run up the tab for the mil ind complex is not.
As far as hugo? He's right when he says george Bush is all about US imperialism over the resources of others. I don't think anyone can really argue the line of bases along the pipeline, and the second line to battle india/china is no coincidence. He's right to unite S. America nations (for their good, not ours) so we can't pick them off one-by-one as we are doing in the mid east. He's wrong if it's true he's f'king his people with his domestic policies, but I don't know a lot about that.
hugo knows he's got the what, 5th most oil in the world? He knows it takes a quick false flag op and we're in their ass like it's prom night. he's unifying them into OPEC2 so they're less vulnerable, just as the smart half of the mid east does.
-
I'm about what's best for America without abuses. In other words, 911 was an abuse (you could have attacked a military installation and got the desired psyop effect), but invading afghan was good (based upon f'king us on that oil deal). Stealing Iraqi oil is an inevitable necessity, but letting men die in the cities to run up the tab for the mil ind complex is not.
As far as hugo? He's right when he says george Bush is all about US imperialism over the resources of others. I don't think anyone can really argue the line of bases along the pipeline, and the second line to battle india/china is no coincidence. He's right to unite S. America nations (for their good, not ours) so we can't pick them off one-by-one as we are doing in the mid east. He's wrong if it's true he's f'king his people with his domestic policies, but I don't know a lot about that.
hugo knows he's got the what, 5th most oil in the world? He knows it takes a quick false flag op and we're in their ass like it's prom night. he's unifying them into OPEC2 so they're less vulnerable, just as the smart half of the mid east does.
The US is not imperialistic.
How do you feel about starving Venezeulans getting by on chicken feet with unstoppable hyper-inflation rampant?
Should you not be ideologically opposed to socialism as a student of business and a proud American?
-
The US is not imperialistic.
wow... bold statement... almost funny :D
-
The US is not imperialistic.
Yes, we are. We are the NWO and it's happening very slowly. Look at how we've influenced the map of the mid east in the last 15 years. You're either being run by one of our choices, you're letting us keep bases in your yard, or we're at your borders with the war clouds (Hi Iran!)
No leader can stop it, and it's necessary for us to maintain our way of living and keep the chinese from growing to a level where they're doing it to us. You don't have to believe we're doing it. But we are. Altruism is dead, charity is gone. You're with us (and our goals of resource mgmt) or you're fucked. It's how it is.
How do you feel about starving Venezeulans getting by on chicken feet with unstoppable hyper-inflation rampant?
it's bullshit, of course.
Should you not be ideologically opposed to socialism as a student of business and a proud American?
no. if every nation was a democracy and capitalist, the world would fail. We need nations whose level is only cost and profit - let the smart third advance to the investment level. we need mnfg nations. without them, we all become the same and that means a slide for the us and the aussies and eur.
-
Yes, we are. We are the NWO and it's happening very slowly. Look at how we've influenced the map of the mid east in the last 15 years. You're either being run by one of our choices, you're letting us keep bases in your yard, or we're at your borders with the war clouds (Hi Iran!)
What you've described to me, however inaccurate, is still not imperialism. I could take you to 'The Vault' on this one, what do you think?
-
Yes, we are. We are the NWO and it's happening very slowly. Look at how we've influenced the map of the mid east in the last 15 years. You're either being run by one of our choices, you're letting us keep bases in your yard, or we're at your borders with the war clouds (Hi Iran!)
No leader can stop it, and it's necessary for us to maintain our way of living and keep the chinese from growing to a level where they're doing it to us. You don't have to believe we're doing it. But we are. Altruism is dead, charity is gone. You're with us (and our goals of resource mgmt) or you're fucked. It's how it is.
And what alternatives would you suggest? Not being properly positioned to maintain our oil supply when oil starts running out (and no one knows exactly when this will happen), and letting our standard of living drop to that of a third-world country basically overnight?
While I'm not suggesting that Bush & Co don't have ulterior motives, that doesn't change the fact that we must maintain operational control over the Persian gulf region at least until alternative energy sources become viable and widely deployed in America. I don't see any other choice.
-
And what alternatives would you suggest? Not being properly positioned to maintain our oil supply when oil starts running out (and no one knows exactly when this will happen), and letting our standard of living drop to that of a third-world country basically overnight?
While I'm not suggesting that Bush & Co don't have ulterior motives, that doesn't change the fact that we must maintain operational control over the Persian gulf region at least until alternative energy sources become viable and widely deployed in America. I don't see any other choice.
As I said - I'm okay with the resource manipulation - I just hate abuses like haliburton and missing billions. I'm okay with invading afghanistan - i just didn't like them letting 911 happen to do it. I understand we have to do shady shit to stay on top (and anyway - iraq was going to get anally reamed by someone for their oil, might as well have been us).
We have to control the mid east now - if we leave, china will take it. I know this, and obama, hilary, mitt, and everyone else knows it. It's the decision of the higher powers, and they're right.
Also I get annoyed by the "we are just helping them" people.
-
What you've described to me, however inaccurate, is still not imperialism. I could take you to 'The Vault' on this one, what do you think?
the vault? i don't follow.
as sandycoos pointed out, the bases line the proposed oil pipeline, and they line what would be the line of defense against an asian invasion (cool rhyme there). If you have a better reason why they line up like this, I'm all ears.
and i believe it's imperialism because we export our culture in addition to our other "gifts".
-
the vault? i don't follow.
See my stickied thread at the top of the board, mate.
-
Bush makes it clear: "I AM THE DECISION MAKER".
When you say that, you take the praise when these decisions work, and you take the blame when they fail.
Bush's decisions to continually remove generals and install new ones every time those in power talk bad about policy. So when you keep firing guys, you gotta take the blame.
It isn't Bush that makes it clear that he makes the decision. It is the constitution that appoints the president as the Commander In Chief.
-
It isn't Bush that makes it clear that he makes the decision. It is the constitution that appoints the president as the Commander In Chief.
No, it's Bush who DECLARES he is the decision maker.
So when people blame the generals, well, HE appoints them. When ppl blame the intel, HE cherry picked it at best (and fabricated it at the worst). This is a fact.