DC Tom Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 You really have to stop with that hockey player = tough mantra. You are losing your credibility. Why you ask? Well, I play hockey (goalie in fact) and I'm willing to wager "tough" would not be one of the first 50 words used to describe me. What the heck, I have time, let's start counting: Handsome Brilliant Debonair Suave Charming Wonderful Modest Insightful Guapo (I'll throw in a spanish one for ya) Articulate Sensitive (JK and the ladies like that one) Genius Tough.... ....oh, I guess you're right. It would be in the top 50. Disclaimer: All or some of the descriptive words about me could be made up and not very accurate. I do, however, play hockey and I don't think tough is near the top of my list of attributes. 62050[/snapback] I don't think "modest" is too high up there, either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGTEleven Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 You're a Boy Scout, eh? BTW, you forgot cunning. 62062[/snapback] ....and linguist Thread, meet gutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 ....and linguistThread, meet gutter. 62073[/snapback] I was wondering what to you so long to knock that one out. You're welcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelissaInPhilly Posted October 8, 2004 Author Share Posted October 8, 2004 Thanks for the responses. We shall see what happens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelissaInPhilly Posted October 8, 2004 Author Share Posted October 8, 2004 No way. Terrorists don't want Bush as president, and if they do something before the election, people are going to get behind Bush exactly like they did after 9-11 and Bush will win a landslide election. It would also prevent Kerry from doing anything, since you can't not support the president after an attack like that. 61965[/snapback] Who knows how terrorists think - perhaps their rationale would be that Bush allowed an attack to occur, and Americans would blame him and vote Kerry in. After all, after Spain was attacked before their elections, didn't they vote the pro-coalition president out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 No way. Terrorists don't want Bush as president, and if they do something before the election, people are going to get behind Bush exactly like they did after 9-11 and Bush will win a landslide election. It would also prevent Kerry from doing anything, since you can't not support the president after an attack like that. 61965[/snapback] WHY DON'T PEOPLE GET THIS!!!!! Al Quaeda doesn't give a rats ass who is President. They want dead Americans and lots of them. Democrat, Republican, Black, White, Asian & Hispanic. They don't care who, they don't care how, they just want to kill as many of us as possible. It's "us" they hate, not individual people. Now they may have a special desire to kill Bush but I don't think they'd pass up a chance at taking out a couple million of us. This war is going to go on forever. I has existeed for what must seem forever in other parts of the world. Bin Laden just brought it home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Why do you think the terrorists don't want Bush to remain president? I think a compelling argument could be made that the very opposite is true. If they are worried about there being a "tough" President, then they might consider that the frat brat, cheer leader who got a cushie stateside gig to stay out of Viet Nam is maybe not as tough as the hockey playing, top student who volunteered to serve and actually saw combat in Viet Nam. Just a thought. Mick, I try not to talk over my head, so I apologize in advance if I don't communicate this properly. What the terrorist want...more than anything else right now...is us OUT of the Middle East. As long as we have a presence in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., they have to fight us there. That is why we are getting attacked all the time in Iraq. These aren't Iraqis pissed because we're in their country. There are terrorists who have been operating LONG before we went in their and broke up their party. I believe that is why we see people crossing borders into Iraq. What you see are terrorist cells coming to the aid of the fight in Iraq because when we DO liberate Iraq, we've taken away one of their big playgrounds. They want us out of the Middle East, if for no other reason than it allows them to communicate better...convert people better...organize better...plan better...and execute their plan better. When we're not taking the fight to them, they take our planes and fly them into our buildings. When we DO take the fight to them, the world as a whole is...oddly enough...a better place for the long term. That's why I believe...YES, they WOULD like Kerry because they know Kerry will do everything he can to get our troops out of the Middle East as quickly as possible, and when that happens, they can regroup, retrain, and then hit us again on our soil. We also can not overlook the strength of having a free Iraq in terms of the entire Middle East picture and the leverage a free Iraq brings, but that's another thread. This is also probably one of the most upsetting parts of the entire WMD thing that everyone is so fixated on. It was easier to explain WMD to the world than to explain how the terrorist networks operate, and that...as it turns out...was a mistake. But it's a fight we were going to have to fight sooner or later. Can I get some verification here? If I'm off base, can someone correct me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Mick, I try not to talk over my head, so I apologize in advance if I don't communicate this properly. What the terrorist want...more than anything else right now...is us OUT of the Middle East. As long as we have a presence in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., they have to fight us there. That is why we are getting attacked all the time in Iraq. These aren't Iraqis pissed because we're in their country. There are terrorists who have been operating LONG before we went in their and broke up their party. I believe that is why we see people crossing borders into Iraq. What you see are terrorist cells coming to the aid of the fight in Iraq because when we DO liberate Iraq, we've taken away one of their big playgrounds. They want us out of the Middle East, if for no other reason than it allows them to communicate better...convert people better...organize better...plan better...and execute their plan better. When we're not taking the fight to them, they take our planes and fly them into our buildings. When we DO take the fight to them, the world as a whole is...oddly enough...a better place for the long term. That's why I believe...YES, they WOULD like Kerry because they know Kerry will do everything he can to get our troops out of the Middle East as quickly as possible, and when that happens, they can regroup, retrain, and then hit us again on our soil. We also can not overlook the strength of having a free Iraq in terms of the entire Middle East picture and the leverage a free Iraq brings, but that's another thread. This is also probably one of the most upsetting parts of the entire WMD thing that everyone is so fixated on. It was easier to explain WMD to the world than to explain how the terrorist networks operate, and that...as it turns out...was a mistake. But it's a fight we were going to have to fight sooner or later. Can I get some verification here? If I'm off base, can someone correct me? 62249[/snapback] You're doing pretty well for a rookie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Lets say there is a huge terrorist attack now, lots of Americans die on our soil. How will Kerry look if he says "Look at Bush, he can't even prevent this from happening. If you vote for me, I'll take care of these guys" He'll be viewed as an insensitive power hungry a-hole and un-American challenging the President right after an attack. Basically, his hands will be tied, and Americans will look to their president for leadership, which you have to admit Bush was pretty damn good at in Round 1 the months after. 62018[/snapback] If such a thing were to happen I don't think Kerry would have to say a thing, especially if it was Al Qaeda. The American people aren't stupid. They'll wonder how it was that he didn't protect us. They gave him a pass before but he's been talking real big about a lot of things and the only thing he's delivered is a bunch of dead soldiers and civilians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 the only thing he's delivered is a bunch of dead soldiers and civilians. 62272[/snapback] And peace on American soil since 9/11. Oh, sorry. That doesn't help your case very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 And peace on American soil since 9/11. Oh, sorry. That doesn't help your case very much. 62274[/snapback] I don't know how good a measure that really is, to be perfectly honest with you. Al Qaeda waited 8 years between WTC Act I and WTC Act II. It certainly didn't have alot to do with our increased "anti-terror" posture - because it didn't really exist at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 You're doing pretty well for a rookie. 62261[/snapback] Yep.......I think that is a pretty close description..... Politics I know nothing about......terrorism I got to see close up for the final years of my tour in the Air Force....... I would also like to add something to this discussion that people may or may not agree with....... A lot of people jump on the culture of Islam and say that it is one of the main reasons why all of this is happening...... I dont agree...I dont blame the culture itself....I think that terrorists have been doing this for SO LONG......that the middle east has entirely lost site of the fact that terrorists are basically criminals who do bad and then try to throw an Islam blanket over it and call it religion or culture I know PLENTY of Middle Eastern people who practice the Islam culture that wouldn't think of harming another person.... These !@#$ terrorist organiations have got the world snowed as to why they do the things they do....they simply dont want us there...are afraid of what our way of life would bring to those people.....and quite simply they know that if the everyday "joe blow" masses that live in those countries realized that a better way of life is available they would get torn to pieces..... They cant have that....so they are blowing things up and beheading people.... Its much deeper then that....but you get the gist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 I don't know how good a measure that really is, to be perfectly honest with you. Al Qaeda waited 8 years between WTC Act I and WTC Act II. It certainly didn't have alot to do with our increased "anti-terror" posture - because it didn't really exist at the time. 62302[/snapback] We are on untreaded ground when it comes to fighting terroism....we dont know anything yet.... But I would like to see If Bushes plan is right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 You really have to stop with that hockey player = tough mantra. You are losing your credibility. Why you ask? Well, I play hockey (goalie in fact) and I'm willing to wager "tough" would not be one of the first 50 words used to describe me. What the heck, I have time, let's start counting: Handsome Brilliant Debonair Suave Charming Wonderful Modest Insightful Guapo (I'll throw in a spanish one for ya) Articulate Sensitive (JK and the ladies like that one) Genius Tough.... ....oh, I guess you're right. It would be in the top 50. Disclaimer: All or some of the descriptive words about me could be made up and not very accurate. I do, however, play hockey and I don't think tough is near the top of my list of attributes. 62050[/snapback] Actually OG, the point was to mock the whole idea of characterizing either candidate as being "tougher" than the other. "Debonair"? "Delusional maybe but not "debonair". Seriously, I hear a lot about how "tough" Bush is. That rich wuss wouldn't have lasted a minute in my neighborhood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 And peace on American soil since 9/11. Oh, sorry. That doesn't help your case very much. 62274[/snapback] I do not beleive we have not had an attack on American soil because we have prevented them, I think they have chosen, for now, not to attack us here. They have been very, very active elsewhere. I posted a long list not so long ago of all the AQ attacks since 9/11. They have been frightfully effective since 9/11. I do not at all believe for a moment that they have been serioulsy weakened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Mick, I try not to talk over my head, so I apologize in advance if I don't communicate this properly. What the terrorist want...more than anything else right now...is us OUT of the Middle East. As long as we have a presence in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., they have to fight us there. That is why we are getting attacked all the time in Iraq. These aren't Iraqis pissed because we're in their country. There are terrorists who have been operating LONG before we went in their and broke up their party. I believe that is why we see people crossing borders into Iraq. What you see are terrorist cells coming to the aid of the fight in Iraq because when we DO liberate Iraq, we've taken away one of their big playgrounds. They want us out of the Middle East, if for no other reason than it allows them to communicate better...convert people better...organize better...plan better...and execute their plan better. When we're not taking the fight to them, they take our planes and fly them into our buildings. When we DO take the fight to them, the world as a whole is...oddly enough...a better place for the long term. That's why I believe...YES, they WOULD like Kerry because they know Kerry will do everything he can to get our troops out of the Middle East as quickly as possible, and when that happens, they can regroup, retrain, and then hit us again on our soil. We also can not overlook the strength of having a free Iraq in terms of the entire Middle East picture and the leverage a free Iraq brings, but that's another thread. This is also probably one of the most upsetting parts of the entire WMD thing that everyone is so fixated on. It was easier to explain WMD to the world than to explain how the terrorist networks operate, and that...as it turns out...was a mistake. But it's a fight we were going to have to fight sooner or later. Can I get some verification here? If I'm off base, can someone correct me? 62249[/snapback] They do want us out but that is not their ultimate goal, it is a step on the way. The thing is, neither Kerry nor Bush nor any other American President is going to completely pack up and leave the middle east. We are not just talking about Iraq here. Do you think that they think that simply by Kerry taking office the US is going to abandon Israel or Saudi Arabia or even Kuwait? These people are not idiots and they are not crazy. We can't and won't leave the middle east because of the oil. As for Israel, based on moral and political grounds, we are never going to up and leave them high and dry and it doesn't matter who is in the White House. Your argument, as I understand it, is basically that they want us out and they think Kerry will leave so therefore they want Kerry. I disagree with the second assumption that they think Kerry will leave. I know the right in this country thinks that or at least pushes that idea as part of their campaign against Kerry. Fact is though, that is seriously flawed thinking unless you seriously think that Kerry would abandon Israel and allow the most important commodity in the world and the largest deposits of that commodity to fall into the hands of terrorists. Seriously, do you think that is what is in Kerry's plan?!?!?! Its ridiculous. Not your argument but the assumption that Kerry would really be any less dedicated to protecting the world's largest known deposits of oil and Israel than any other President. OBL wants us out but he knows that is not going to happen based on an election result. To make that happen he has to leave us no choice and the only way to do that is to kill us, and kill us, and kill us, and kill us some more. To do that, he needs resources: soldiers, weapons and cash. He needs suicide troops by the boatloads. To get what he needs, he has to unite as many muslims as he can. At this point, Bush is probably the most hated man on the planet by muslims in the middle east. He is a great catalyst for them. That fact that his father already made war on Islam is perfect for their propaganda. To paint us convincingly as the great enemy of all Islam, he has to isolate us from the rest of the world so that we become a singularity, an anomaly of anti-muslim evil. That easily explains the concentration of attacks on our allies. He is exploiting the weak bonds holding this coalition, such as it is, together. None of us know what OBL is thinking. Also, he is not the only terrorist in the world. There is no reason to suspect that all terrorists hold the same opinion on who they would like to see win this election. I think the idea that the terrorists would want one or the other to win is campaign rhetoric of the worst kind that exploits the tragedy of terrorism and our fears of the future. I have never pushed an argument on this board that Bush is the favorite candidate among the world's miscreants. I have only responded with an argument that in fact that could be so, in response to others trying to tar Kerry with those feathers. I don't care if they want Bush or if they want Kerry. We will decide what is in our best interests and vote accordingly and as for what terrorists think, lets all give them a collective :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: by not falling in to this kind of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Well, this morning's Seattle PI front page story is about the terrorists targeting our ferries. No surprise I guess - those things hold upward of 150 vehicles each. However I'd probably look to the mechanics or dock workers instead of vehicles, since there are bomb-sniffing dogs screening all vehicles now. Easier to sneak something in and plant it in the engine room. We're taking the 10:15 or 10:45 Kingston Ferry this morning on our way to Dungeness. Eat that terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain America Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Well, this morning's Seattle PI front page story is about the terrorists targeting our ferries. No surprise I guess - those things hold upward of 150 vehicles each. However I'd probably look to the mechanics or dock workers instead of vehicles, since there are bomb-sniffing dogs screening all vehicles now. Easier to sneak something in and plant it in the engine room. We're taking the 10:15 or 10:45 Kingston Ferry this morning on our way to Dungeness. Eat that terrorists. 63303[/snapback] You have all the answers feel free to check it out yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 11, 2004 Share Posted October 11, 2004 Well, this morning's Seattle PI front page story is about the terrorists targeting our ferries. No surprise I guess - those things hold upward of 150 vehicles each. However I'd probably look to the mechanics or dock workers instead of vehicles, since there are bomb-sniffing dogs screening all vehicles now. Easier to sneak something in and plant it in the engine room. We're taking the 10:15 or 10:45 Kingston Ferry this morning on our way to Dungeness. Eat that terrorists. 63303[/snapback] Eat some crabs for me. Dungeness. Mmmmmmmmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts