Captain America
-
Posts
276 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Captain America
-
-
Unfortunatley the only way patriotism can be taught is by the example of our learders .Look what you have today the media , the comedians make a mockery of outr leaders no matter who they are. The true patriots are the young men and women in our military but you dont think the press will let the rest of the general public see that.
The news media is a necessary vermin. My suggestion to countires thinking about becoming democratic ,build more jails and keep you fingers crossed. I know it sounds corny but freedom really isnt free.
-
-
Thats right Rich , but the libbers dont have an answer .Bottom line is Kerry wants the draft and he wants higher taxes,
-
Komrade Flopenstien
-
NO. There are no benefits .The military today is far better than the one that fought in in Viet Nam, that is not to say that there were no patriots in that war
-
The military had him targeted before the war and were ready to go but Bush canceled the plan three times because he allegedly was afraid that if they took him out, they would lose a reason to go to war.
Why would he Komrade Kerry said there were no terrorists in Iraq,Personally I am in favor of letting the heads of these terrorists groups live when we know where they are and what they are doing as long as we can monitor them ,a wealth of information can be gathered that way
-
For those of you into polling...this just in. I still maintain that the only poll that will count is on November 2. Guess the people were somewhat impressed seeing the two candidates side by side without handlers or swiftboat weasels to shore them up.
You failed to respond ,so I,ll ask again. If this was the wrong war at the wrong time,with no WMD's found. Then is it safe to assume tha you and Kerry are in favor of restoring Saddam to power
-
Actually BadDad, I was vehemently opposed to the war before we went in, and in fact cited Augustine's principles for a just war as the basis for my opposition in some detail One poster specifically asked me (before we went in at all, mind you) whether I believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. My response, for which I was somewhat flamed) was "no". Turns out I was right. I also said that the key was not just to find wmd but also solid evidence of an intent to use them against us. I believed (as has been borne out) that the existing sanctions, including the no fly zone, were in fact working. We know that now. This war could have been avoided. If we would have worked with others, Saddam could have been overthrown by those who should overthrow him...the Iraqis.
Wasteful and unnecessary war. Many of our finest have given their lives and come home wounded to satisfy the incompetent people we have in the white house.
In other words we went in and we were wrong (didaster) , or we could have waited and been wrong (bigger disaster).Also if you believe we were totally wrong then I assume you are in favor of reinstating Saddam to his former position .You cant have it both ways.
-
My solution to more of the same, is what should have been done in the first place. Before we go off on Syria, Iran, N. Korea or anybody else we first verify that the intelligence we are receiving is accurate. Second, if it is accurate we use it to build a strong coalition of our allies that will back us with both troops and treasure for not only the initial war but whatever occupation period would follow it. Third, I would listen very carefully to our military commanders, their plans, their needs and their concerns. Fourth, I would exhaust all diplomatic paths available.
Last, I would stop trying to equate a regime change based upon WMD's with the war on terror, unless there is irefutable evidence that the terrorists that are attacking U.S. interests either here or abroad are being harbored by that regime, as in the case of Afghanistan. Although our military is the most powerful in the world, it is not limitless and until we finish with our commitments in Afghanistan and Iraq, we should be very careful of going after anybody else. Maybe that's one of the main reasons that Iran and N. Korea are now openly defying us in their developement of nuclear weapons.
Second, if it is accurate we use it to build a strong coalition of our allies that will back us with both troops and treasureIf you think that Germany ,France and Russia didnt support us because they felt it was wrong . think again they assured Saddam we would not attack and all three of them are up to thier ears in the UN oil for food scandal that is now starting to come out.
For ten years we and the UN tried to get Saddam to say he didnt have WMD's .Dont you think thats long enough? After 9/11 we cannot afford the luxary of extensive dilomacy that most likey goes no where.
As far as N Korea and Iran goes when Bush wins in Novemember they will capitulate , however if Kerry got in it would continute to drag on, giving them yet more time to build nukes.
The bigger scandle is the oil for food scandal.
If you say as Kerry says wrong war worng time , then would you re instate Saddam to his former position and if not why?
-
Many of us here on PPP, both liberal and conservative, were opposed to it. That I can recall not one person was opposed to it because they thought Saddam was a great guy. Although there were many reasons including, but not limited to, not convinced that WMD's were present, not convinced that Saddam presented an "imminent danger of attack", if he did have weapons he would definately use them against our troops during the attack or give them to terrorists, not convinced that it would be a relatively inexpensive war and short occupation, not at all convinced that the secular Iraqi Baathist party would have contact with Islamic fundamentalist terrorists like Al Qaeda, we still hadn't finished the war in Afghanistan yet, it would become a recruiting tool for UBL and others, etc.
In addition, the rationale being offered up by the Bush administration to go to war with Iraq, was much more legitemately applicable to othe countries, i.e. Iran, N. Korea, Pakistan, Syria, etc. Most of the world was also in opposition to a war with Iraq, including the general populations of the countries that joined the "coalition" (especially Spain, G. Britain, Italy, Poland and Australia). The U.N. would not go along with Mr. Bush' last resolution, the U.N. weapons inspectors requested more time and even Saddams more traditional enemies sat on the sidelines, i.e. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Syria, (all of whom,except Iran, were part of the coalition during the first Gulf War with both troops and treasure).
None of this gave pause to this adminstrations rush to war. The intelligence that they had, and we couldn't see, was indisputable. The threat was real and Saddam was even reconstituting his nuclear weapons program with aluminum tubes and yellow cake from Niger. The people in Iraq were tired of being oppressed by Saddam and would greet us with open arms and flowers. The cost of the occupation would be bourne by the Iraqi oil wealth not U.S. tax payers money.
Once "major combat operations" ended, the clamour for WMD began. We were told that it would take time, both here on the PPP board and by the administration. Shortly thereafter David Kay came out with his report stating there were no WMD's, but that also was disputed by the administration. Now this latest report comes out stating that there was no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, there have not been nor are there presently any WMD's in Iraq since at least 1993 and that Saddam had allowed the programs to wither over the years.
In the meantime, the U.S. has spent 120 billion dollars for something that was going to cost us only around 2 billion. Over 1,000 U.S. troops have died, upwards of 20,000 have been wounded, 13,000-20,000 Iraqi's have been killed, terrorists are pouring into Iraq and killing coalition forces, civilian contractors and Iraqi's at ever escalating rates, terrorist attacks have increased worldwide, and there is no end in sight.
The present administrations response today to anybody who mentions any of the above is, we must stay the course. Our path is difficult and will take much hard work, but we must stay on it. I don't see us getting out of Iraq for quite sometime and don't think we can reasonably do so. We created the mess we're in and we must see it through. But, to "stay the course" means more than staying in Iraq, it means continue with the misguided policies in the war on terror that got us into the war in Iraq in the first place and that's just rediculous.
p.s. I will respond to civil debate but flamers and personal insults will be ignored.
What is your solution ,you give none?
-
Man, there's so much stevestojan that goes on you wouldn't believe. Certain folks can go on believing whatever they want. I've said many a time I'm not an intell guy, but I do operational planning based on intell. It doesn't take a stroke of genius to connect dots when you are handed objectives for an operations or conceptual contingency plan. Fortunately or unfortunately for me, I have to live in the real world.
You should know that the liberals do not live in the real world. Their real world is what the see and hear on TV from the liberal press.
-
I don't care. He's the President and he's supposed to make the right decision and blew the biggest one of his first term when he invaded Iraq without irrefutable proof. He made us look like fools and bullies to the rest of the world, and although much of the sentiment on this board leans toward giving the old :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: to the rest of the world, the world is not as big a place as it used to be and it really does matter what the rest of them think. GW is a buffoon and can't regularly string two original thoughts together without making up new words and mumbling and stumbling through every other agonizong moment. He represents us badly. John Kerry at least seems to have something between his ears when he speaks and talks like he cares about our place in the rest of the world. I don't know how good of a president Kerry would make, but I know what a horrible president GW has been.
Flame away GOP!
Kerry agreed with Bush on this matter so I guess you could say the same thing about him.Kerry would have a kinder , gentler caring war
:I starred in Brokeback Mountain: -
I have just decided after watching the debates and some of Cheneys comments , that if he is looking for a job (not likely) he would make a great coach for the Bills
-
-
Sorry, but the incorporation of America is a big issue for me, and a lot of other people. I am very interested in what the vice president would have to say. It is troubling that Cheney, and president Bush both seem to feel that they are beyond reproach, and it is equally troubling that so many conservatives see this stuff as "no big deal". I honestly think president Bush and vice-presidnet Cheney have braught hyperbolie and effusiveness to a new level, and so many of you seem to be fine with it....
So what about Haliburton or do the lefty losers use it for a buzz word to fill the empty space between their ears ,while the are watching the news that plays them like a fine fiddle , you know whats his name Rather and thier other hero Michael POS Moore
:I starred in Brokeback Mountain: -
If the libber say the debate was a tie , then that means Cheney won.The libbers just cant admit defeat.
What a classless bunch of lamers .Kerry is scum , not for his Viet Nam service but what he said when he got home , while we still had soliders in POW camps. Komrade Kerry is a communists piece of dung and the brainless libbers will settle for this rather than vote for Bush what a total bunch of losers. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:
-
Any time a Democrat says its a tie means they lost
58 percent of the military is made up of registered republicans.Let see Kerry will make Jesse Jackson Secretary of State and Rangle Secretary of Defense.
-
Cheney pointed out that he never met Edwards before last night. Well, that was one of a great number of lies from Mr. WMD, Saddam-AlQaeda link, the economy is rosey.
The fact that they didn't meet on the Senate floor is no big deal. Unlike his predecessors, Cheney only meets with Republican senators when he comes to the Senate. Cheney is looking for nose reduction cream this morning for his Pinnochionitus!
The noise you hear is you and the rest of the libbers clawing at the side of your coffin , its not only slipping away its slipped away.
-
-
So we are back to the favorite right-wing mantra of "if your poor its your fault because your lazy!" What bunk. Tell that to millions of single parents who are working two or three jobs in the "new service economy" where wages are far lower, they get no medical coverage, and you can forget retirement. These folks are working their tails off just to survive, much less thrive! Go tell that mom she is lazy and see how many testicles you come back with!So we are back to the favorite right-wing mantra of "if your poor its your fault because your lazy!"
Thats is addition to being stupid. Tell mom to keep her legs closed and finish grammar school.Or she could go to Vegas and get a job as a high paying hoe and make some real money
Same old libber BS pay for the losers. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: -
Edwards did fine for a lawyer who changed careers and has 4 years experience in the Senate. The naivity of this guy is charming while at the same time alarming in a VP candidate. The democratic base got served enough of what they probably needed tonight to keep the momentum going in the wake of Kerry's performance, but this performance probably hurt with the all powerful undecideds.
By this time following the first debate, the libs had lit up this board talking about Kerry's win. Many conservatives were classy in acknowledging Kerry's victory and issues with Bush. No surprise - as of yet the same class has not been returned. I'm sure tomorrow we'll be hearing about how Edwards trounced Cheney. After all, he used the time tested Tennyboy debate tactic (HALIBURTON) as well as the classic blzrul tactic (screw the facts, just bash bash bash).
Where did you ever get the idea the libbers had any class?
-
Cheney is hammering Edwards. That said, I doubt enough people are watching this thing for it to make any kind of difference.
The sad thing is that I now believe both of these guys are actually better candidates for their parties than either Bush or Kerry. Granted, its not necessarily because they're all that great themselves (although Cheney is giving a very good accounting of himself and his positions tonight).
I was thinking the same thing my self. Cheney has been around a long time ,tonight you can see why.
-
The vote was 402-2 and Rangle voted "no" after introducing the legislation
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a..._co/the_draft_6
Well , well Rangle typical Kerry guy he supported it before he didnt support it
Besides who would want to suppport this so close to elections? Now let me guess those two votes were democraps -
The report concludes that the 4 ads, 2 each by each candidate, are the most misleading about the other candidate to date.
My solution
: Have each candidate sign an oath that they will not put misleading data in the ads that they are required to state that they approve. If they approve a misleading ad, they are jailed, similar to contempt of court. Every day that the candidate spends in jail, is a day away from the campaign trail. If the candidate is in jail on the day of the debate, the feed shows the candidate through his prison bars, complete with the prison uniform. This may be the only way to stop the lies. We need a deterrant to keep these clowns from lying. Also if you're not in jail & make it to the debate, one misleading statement & they stop the debate, put you in a portable cell, make you change your clothes and resume the debate, with the liar talking from his cell. Then he is forced to leave the stage doing the "perp walk". There is no accountability when it comes to lying in political ads. Seriously, each lie should result in the ad being forced off the air and a heavy fine levied against the campaign which counts against the amount they are allowed to use.
Well,, I never ..Politicains lying ,now there is a new concept .I say wash their mouth out with soap ,,, ah just the Republican , The Democrat would cry abuse and have the ACLU involved.
kerry leads
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Kerry flips flops you bob and weave now once again if it was the wrong war at the wrong time do you want Saddam back and if not why?
If you dont wnat him back then I gues it was the right war at the right time .
Also Kerry admits that France and Germany would not even join him as allies in Iraq. Naturally they don want to get involved ther are all involve d in the oil for food scandel and that figure amounts to billion for Saddam and some of these allies well the poor peop;e in Iraq still suffered being the ultimate libber I am sure you dont want that .Now answer the original question Back or not?
Mathematical conundrums ,whats safe sex got to do with it?
