Missiles Found?

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
StevieD- Would it make you feel any better if 'Dubya' got head from a fat chick?
Just kidding, I think. Got this in the E-Mail this morning...

Rules for Being a Good Republican

1) You have to believe that the nation's 8-year prosperity prior to W's administration was due to the work of Ronald Reagan and George H. Bush, but that today's growing deficit and rising gas prices are all Clinton's fault.

2) You have to believe that those privileged from birth achieve success all on their own.

3) You have to be against government programs, but expect Social Security checks on time.

4) You have to believe that government should stay out of people's lives, yet you want government to regulate only opposite-gender = marriages and what your official language should be.

5) You have to believe that pollution is OK, so long as it makes a profit.

6) You have to believe in prayer in schools, as long as you don't pray to Allah or Buddha.

7) You have to believe that only your own teenagers are still virgins.

8) You have to believe that a woman cannot be trusted with decisions about her own body, but that large multinational corporations should = have no regulation or interference whatsoever.

9) You love Jesus and Jesus loves you and, by the way, Jesus shares your hatred of AIDS victims, homosexuals, and ex-President Clinton.

10) You have to believe that society is colorblind and growing up black in America doesn't diminish your opportunities, but you still won't vote for Alan Keyes.

11) You have to believe that it was wise to allow Ken Starr to spend $50 million dollars to attack Clinton because no other U.S. presidents have ever been unfaithful to their wives.

12) You have to believe that a waiting period for purchasing a handgun is bad because quick access to a new firearm is an important concern for all Americans.

13) You have to believe it is wise to keep condoms out of schools, because we all know if teenagers don't have condoms they won't have sex.

14) You have to believe that the ACLU is bad because they defend the Constitution, while the NRA is good because they defend the Constitution.

15) You have to believe that socialism hasn't worked anywhere, and that Europe doesn't exist.

16) You have to believe the AIDS virus is not important enough to deserve federal funding proportionate to the resulting death rate and = that the public doesn't need to be educated about it, because if we just ignore it, it will go away.

17) You have to believe that biology teachers are corrupting the morals of 6th graders if they teach them the basics of human sexuality, but the Bible, which is full of sex and violence, is good reading and right on the mark.

18) You have to believe that Chinese communist missiles have killed more Americans than handguns, alcohol, and tobacco.

19) You have to believe that even though governments have supported the arts for 5000 years and that most of the great works of Renaissance art were paid for by governments, our government should shun any such = support. After all, the rich can afford to buy their own art and the poor don't need any.

20) You have to believe that the lumber from the last one percent of old growth U.S. forests is well worth the destruction of those forests and the extinction of the several species of plants and animals therein.

21) You had to believe that we should forgive and pray for Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, and Bob Livingston for their marital infidelities, = but that Bastard Clinton should have been impeached.

That was fun now wasn't it?
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
Let me ask you Dr. since Bush and Co. are doing such a good job defending us who do we attack next? Iran? Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? India maybe? No wait, North Korea? Who holds the biggest threat? Obviously you must of thought it was Iraq but certainly terrorism doesn't end there. So tell me who do we blow up next? Where is the next cell? Seems to me since War is the only answer then we must continue this crusade.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
--at the time i think the Soviets were more of a threat....dont you think Stevie D? or would you rather embrace the communist doctrine over here...

How did the cold war end, Freeze? Was it with war? I could just see you if you were alive in 1960---NUKE EM!!!!

--also -- just HOW would we have used diplomacy against Hussein...pass another UN resolution? Give Blix some more time? LMAO....great idea!!!!


Sure, why not? Of course, when you rush 200,000 troops over there, you've pretty much committed to the same plan that was drawn up in 2000.


-- Are we engaging the Soviet Union right now?

Was diplomacy a part of that, ya figure? Or was there some war with them that I missed?


--Right now, we are engaging our #1 threat ot national security and that is FUNDAMENTAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM. And Bush and Co. are doing a hell of a job.


This is a simple question, Freeze: Should we also invade Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Syria? I think the case that you attempt to make supporting this war fits just as well or better with the aforementioned countries.

And if you feel that we shouldn't, why in the world not?

Or, does it really boil down to: I'll vehemently support our hawkish neo-conservatives(Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Cheney) with whatever they choose to do? But if they don't mention certain countries as being as dangerous as Iraq, then I refuse to look into it. I choose to ignore tons of evidence to the contrary.

What is the answer Freeze? Should we keep going after this one?
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
Chanman, nice post and to answer your question I don't think it would hurt!;)
 

Bluemound Freak

WAR EAGLE!
Forum Member
Oct 9, 2001
2,249
0
0
North Alabama
What I am saying is not that you have changed your arguement! But that the fact remains that the arguement of the Liberals and Democrats was give him more time........Pass a resolution.......You won't find anything.........Peace.......Don't inveade for Oil! So now that there is proof of WMD you stated " Well I wonder where he got them?" And my point is instead of saying damn we were wrong..........Damn France was wrong..........Damn Germany was wrong........You are all still pointing the finger at The U.S. Govt. for being responsible for this mess! That is like saying that if I gave you 200.00 and you bought a gun with it and then killed somebody that I would somehow be responsible for your actions with the 200.00! :shrug:

The other thing is who cares if we propped him up way back when...........Damn I used to like the Dixie Chicks! But now that I know what they are about I don't like em! Same difference! If Saddam was playing the good guy and Reagan Liked him, Damn that means that any Republican President from here on out has the same views! Not Smart thinking!
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
think the answer resides in....lets see....

doubt we will go after any of those countries as their governments should get a strong hint that we will not tolerate supporting terror....already i think Saudi Arabia has gotten that message....

i think Iraq is as far as it goes for now...

You think i would have wanted to Nuke russia in the 1960's? uhhhh....no....great guess though

the UN/Blix experiment was just a big cat and mouse doomed to fail ploy...now we have 200,000 REAL inspectors over there doing their job


diplomacy works in some instances and in other it doesn't......with a guy like Hussein it didnt and wasn't going to work...
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
Chanman great post....unfortunately i think some republicans agree with some of those and probably most liberals think all republicans believe all of them....

that is how the left views the mindset of the right...that is why conservatism is so foreign to them...that is why the feeling of elitism hounds them on the left...

obviously most conservatives would disagree with all of them though...

examples:
1. Reagan, Bush, and Clinton all left the economy alone -- actually Bush did not as he raised taxes - and that was the reason for success -- success resides in the PEOPLE -- giving the the best grounds for being productive and not unproductive producing legislation

2. Not in the least...but one likes to pass along his wealth to his heirs and it should not all be stolen from him by the gov't

3. Against most "programs"...and think that SS should be returned to the people and let those who can save up their $$ individually with a little responsibility instead of getting double dipped paying the govt to do so as efficient as they are

i could go on....
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
"Originally posted by dr. freeze
think the answer resides in....lets see...."

Well that's the easy (only) way out of that question.

Let's see what? Let's see what Rummy says? Come on, man, take a stance against terrorism!


"doubt we will go after any of those countries as their governments should get a strong hint that we will not tolerate supporting terror....already i think Saudi Arabia has gotten that message...."

Really? I don't understand how, say, Iran is going to be less inclined to pursue their highly developed Chem/Bio program. Or how it's less likely for them to pass them along to terrorists.


"i think Iraq is as far as it goes for now..."


Yes, I think so too, and I agree with it. Do you agree with stopping at Iraq? You really think this is any sort of deterrent to terrorists?


"You think i would have wanted to Nuke russia in the 1960's? uhhhh....no....great guess though"

Nuke was an exaggerartion, but i'd bet anything that you would be calling for a war when the Soviets set up shop in Cuba. Sometimes things can actually work themselves out peacefully. At any rate, it's easier to call for an attack on a third world country with a rag-tag army.


"the UN/Blix experiment was just a big cat and mouse doomed to fail ploy...now we have 200,000 REAL inspectors over there doing their job"


Yes, and 2 years from now we'll be here at MJ's talking about these 200,000 inspectors stationed in Iraq trying to referee tribal wars while getting sniped at and suicide bombed.


"diplomacy works in some instances and in other it doesn't......with a guy like Hussein it didnt and wasn't going to work..."

Actually it seemed to be working fine for the last 12 years, strange as it might seem to say.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
Kosar i agree with some of what you say about the end game of this....but i think the risk of inaction exceeded the risks of action....

my stance is, is that the Iranian, Saudi, Syrian gov'ts will be less inclined to charismatically and monetarily to support terrorism and also that mindset...i think that is the only way to keep them in check...they know we might act if they threaten us...and the question in their minds of that should deter them....

that is what i mean by wait and see....if we see the Syrian government starting to fund terror groups and develop nuclear programs and other WMD to terrorize us, the cycle starts over....first we try diplomacy and if that doesnt work we put an end to it....think we have been forced to adopt preemption in this day and age

i can see the hawk's point of view and i can see Buchanan's and other coherent's point of view...(not the amnesty international folks at all -- they would have left Osama alone)....and both make good points but i think the hatred for the US is going to be there no matter what and we have to go after these threats....

best thing we can do now is to keep a watchful eye on these guys and also their bankrolls....i dont know the endgame in Iraq...honestly dont think anyone does...but it should be better than what was there...and if it worse, then we will have to deal with it when the time comes...hopefully we get out of there soon
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
We better not have our troops there 2 years from now. We should be the hell out of there in 6 months if we are smart. If were there more then a year we lost. What im waiting to see is where and how amny air bases we may have there. You see I always said this is about in 1/3's. WMD, OIL, AIRBASES.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
yeah we did hold off Hussein for 12 years but i think that the prospects of those WMD getting into hands that we didn't want them to get into were there....and that is what prompted this...

granted that is speculative, but i dont think we want to play roulette anymore after 9-11
 

Bluemound Freak

WAR EAGLE!
Forum Member
Oct 9, 2001
2,249
0
0
North Alabama
Nuke was an exaggerartion, but i'd bet anything that you would be calling for a war when the Soviets set up shop in Cuba. Sometimes things can actually work themselves out peacefully. At any rate, it's easier to call for an attack on a third world country with a rag-tag army.

SO should we just "WARN" them again? Should we tell someone that they have to disarm and then just keep on telling them now you better disarm! If they have such a Rag-Tag army and were so damn defensless then why did they not say well hell we might ought to listen to these guys they look pissed and disarm! But no they continued to be defiant and would not cooperate! So booo hoooo we invaded them! They should have done as they have been told for the past 12 years and then there would be nothing for you to disagree with!
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
12 years? This guy been a bad ass since 1978 when he came to power. We had all we needed to deal with him since 1987. Most the Arab world hated are asses then. What did he sell them since 1987? Yes we new this should not be to tough. Unless he used Chem war fair on us. We had the air to our self. He only had half a air force left since 91. Half his tanks were gone. Chit when they use back of pick up trucks for there bradleys. This was never going to be more then 21 day war. Two more days to go. It's the chit that goes on from now on I worry about. And somehow nothing did in Iraq has me fealing any safer. Im happy for the Iraqi people. As long as they are good to our troops. As for Saddam he should have been delt with in 87.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
DJV and Freeze,

Naturally I totally agree with getting out of there as soon as possible. But of course, if we rush out of there too quickly there will be a power vacuum that will lead to unlimited civil unrest that would TOTALLY defeat the purpose of this whole dream of, ' hey, let's go over to Iraq and set up a democracy just like we got'. It's huge catch-22 that I don't believe we will have a reasonable solution to.

At this late date (postwar is virtually upon us), our own government is bitching and crying at each other about how to go about it. As I have said all along in these threads, the endgame will be incredibly difficult, and that has been my main reason for opposing this war.

I sure hope that if we leave too quickly and leave a slaughter behind (like in 1991) that all the sudden humanitarians (we're there to save the Iraqi's!) that support the war show the same shock and outrage that was buttressing their cries for war.

Then again, if our guys are there 2, 3, 5 years from now trying to install that elusive democracy amongst people that want no part of it, i'd like to hear how this whole thing was worth it.


Freak,

I agree, and I said it back then. We should have finished it. At least when we left, there wouldn't still be only one power left to systematically slaughter the others. We could have left immediately like we did and they could all slaughter each other until a less brutal regime took over!!
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
yeah...do the job right....myself i think it will take a year or two...

best plan i think is to do something like UAE....loose confederation with consolidated power in central govt responsible for as little as possible
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top