President - Page 19

WolfMoon · 10-25-2004, 12:11 PM

I thought that Deadhymn had a good point with his

so you support apathy and inaction statement.

What do you do when talking to your enemies does no good?

Anyone?

TeapotScar · 10-25-2004, 02:29 PM

Quote:

What do you do when talking to your enemies does no good?

...Since when was "talking" a policy of the Bush administration?

*Diplomacy*

... try it before you bash it.

And what do you do when it doesn't work? I'll tell you what you do- you build together a strong enough coalition that can just as successfully rebuild a nation as it can destroy one.

When there isn't enough global pressure (troops, and diplomatic pressure) on a nation to ease violent dissent... there will be violent dissent. The 50 soldiers killed execution style yesterday were trained by Amercan forces, and were supposed to be under our protection. The 380 tons of explosives that just "disappeared" in Iraq was definitely the responsibility of the United States! If we're not catching things like these, we're not making *anything* safer for *anyone*. It's just ridiculous!

America, alone, is not strong enough to ensure the safety of Iraq.

.BatteryPoison. · 10-25-2004, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeapotScar

*Diplomacy*

... try it before you bash it.

We did. What Kerry has planned for Iran, Cliton already tried with North Korea. Supplied them with energy so they would suspend their nuclear ambitions. Lots of good that did. North Korea is now an even more dangerous place with WMDs since diplomacy has failed horribly in that situation.

The report on Iraqi WMDs shows the same pattern was developing there. We had the U.N. using diplomacy, yet Iraq was still secretly in pursuit of a WMD program behind the scenes.

Diplomacy is fine, but you usually don't find out that it has failed until these nations have WMDs already made. This is what makes diplomacy a major risk in this day and age.

Disfunction · 10-25-2004, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WolfMoon

I thought that Deadhymn had a good point with his

so you support apathy and inaction statement.

What do you do when talking to your enemies does no good?

Anyone?

My response to deadhymn:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disfunction

I support doing things that benefit the people that we are claiming to help. Sometimes inaction is better than choosing a course of action, because often times the chosen course can dig a bigger hole than the one you were trying to fix. Thank you for playing The Stupid Response Game! You won the grand prize by not listening to what I was saying.

Broken down:

Quote:

Sometimes inaction is better than choosing a course of action

Quote:

Originally Posted by WolfMoon

What do you do when talking to your enemies does no good?

That's when the "sometimes" portion ceases to be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disfunction

...because often times the chosen course can dig a bigger hole than the one you were trying to fix.

Which is what seems to have happened. At which point you wait for the most diplomatically effective time to impliment anything that is a strategy that effects the global community, else you set a precedent for future relations being

Quote:

Originally Posted by What the Bush administration implied by its actions...

"We don't care what anyone else thinks, and we will do whatever we feel is necessary regardless what our allies thought. However, if you have something we want, we'll start listening."

...and that's why ignoring what people say is bad. If the whole scandal involving France and Russia had come to light prior to the invasion *thumbs up* because it worked in favour of what you wanted to do. However the actions were commited without this knowledge, which later came to light. It's a lot like cheating on your spouse, and then saying it was okay because you later learn that they cheated on you.

The end.

P.S.

Wolfmoon, don't get the wrong idea; I respect you more than most.

CptSternn · 10-26-2004, 04:32 AM

N. Korea was contained as was iraq with Clintons policies. They didn't start their nuclear program back up until after bush stopped the energy aid.

Iraq had no wmd's, and no means to produce them. Tis been proven and now is common fact.

Trying to argue they had the means to do it is like arguing all men have the tools they need to **** women, so they all should be incarcerated.

Bottom line is, the us policies involving iran and n. korea only effect the usa. Cuz they are the ones who continue to poke the proverbial bear with the short stick. If those nations do aquire weapons, who do you think they are going to use em on? Nations who have been diplomatic or ones whos fuck-knuckle leader continues to call them childish names?

The only people in the world currently worried about terrorism is the usa, because they choose to take the ostrich approach and say 'we dont have a problem and dont need to talk about it'.

It's like watching a heorin addict slowly kill themselves and deny they have a problem.

Slán

-S

.BatteryPoison. · 10-26-2004, 05:25 AM

North Korea was suspected of continuing it's nuclear weapons program even after the freeze at Yongbyon. It's been a stated fact that the intellegence community has clear evidence that North Korea began it's centrifuge-based uranium enrichment process back in 2000, before Bush ever even took office or was elected.

As for Iraq, they didn't have the means to produce them, but had stacks and stacks of evidence that showed they had plans to obtain them and intent to eventually use them against nations such as Isreal. Why would they have such clear-cut plans if diplomacy was working so well?

.BatteryPoison. · 10-27-2004, 07:55 PM

I just cast my real vote today for Bush. Like Al, I voted Republican across the board, except for one jackass, and that's because my mom had personal issues with the guy's negligence. :P

Course most of the guys on the ballot who were Republicans generally didn't have a Democrat running against them. Guess that shows which way this battleground state is going. S'why I reregistered here! Woo!!

ice · 10-27-2004, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

Woo!!

I debate that!!

.BatteryPoison. · 10-27-2004, 08:03 PM

Too bad, ice... cause you're wrong and...

...well, let's just say the first quote in your sig says it all for me. :D

TeapotScar · 10-27-2004, 08:20 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...aq.wmd.report/

The first line says:

Quote:

Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them, a CIA report concludes.

In fact, the long-awaited report, authored by Charles Duelfer, who advises the director of central intelligence on Iraqi weapons, says Iraq's WMD program was essentially destroyed in 1991 and Saddam ended Iraq's nuclear program after the 1991 Gulf War.

Yes, he was working hard to be able to resume his WMD program after U.N. sanctions were lifted, this is true. With U.N. sanctions still in place, there was no reason to go to war. It was ridiculous to apply so many lives, so much money, and so much conspiring to a war whose results are

a) a drastic increase in terrorism http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...efer=australia

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3756650.stm

b)Dead Iraqi civilians

c)Missing explosives. Hundreds of tons, no less... come *on*- weren't we supposed to be *finding* the dangerous stuff- not *losing* it...

d)A disturbing display of how safe the rush-American-trained Iraqi soldiers are making the country. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...tm?POE=NEWISVA

I could list more. I might, yet.

But here are the points I want to drive home:

War was not the only answer.

There were no WMD's in Iraq.

So voters, please- for my mom? Vote Kerry??? I'm crying- my birthday is 12 days after the election!! :cry: ***Tears***
:cry:

ice · 10-27-2004, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

Too bad, ice... cause you're wrong and...

...well, let's just say the first quote in your sig says it all for me.

LOL >_<

I guess I've been had on my first attempt... oh well...

I still debate you on that matter!

Y'see, you're fairly one faceted on your "I'm right" argument, because by my standards you are left.
You may ask, "where does he get his information?" I can tell you, it wasn't easy.. it involved a lot of X-treme super spying on my part...
See figure One:

Hah! See? I'm invisible!
That means I can dig all this information up, for example, on November 23, 1918, you predicted the Red Sox would go on a winning streak that would last off and on for 84 years, ending with them owning 50 World Series titles until '04, but uhh... lemme check those stats:
Oh, gosh! Looks like they still haven't won once during that whole time... though, they might win tonight, but you got so upset at being so wrong, you aren't watching the game and therefore admit utter defeat.
Utter defeat?
yeah.
Utter defeat.
It also reminds me of the time when you said "This Jesus guy is just a passing fad" back in the fateful year of '03... BC. Hah, were you WAY wrong then, or WAY wrong then? You still haven't admitted to that defeat, but I assure you.
YOU ARE WRONG.
Oh, and one more thing:
Back in '77 you predicted Lynyrd Skynyrd would still be making great music far into the '00s, but uhh... wrong there. After their tragic crash, they hired the lead singer's brother and uh... he sucks. Sorry about that, but he does. Especially that Red White and Blue song that you hear all the time on the radio >_<

Well, with that massive pile of evidence, I also have to question your use of WMDs.. just this night, you released some MAJOR megatonnage of WMDs upon her Maimyness of Maimydom. I don't argue with your point in that thread, but I must say... Secretboy deserved somma that too!
Thus, I argue you are wrong with that use. You didn't use it to your full powers, and there fore are WRONG in using it.

And, as a final note:

No... I'M RIGHT

....

.BatteryPoison. · 10-27-2004, 08:44 PM

Gah, I didn't mean to give both barrels, but it was pent up aggression that went from being aimed at one person to another. I was a little too harsh, so I was wrong... but all that other shit: WTF? LOL. I didn't predict any of that... so you're wrong. And you're a mod who's totally throwing this thread off topic. You're wrong again!!! :D

ice · 10-27-2004, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

Gah, I didn't mean to give both barrels, but it was pent up aggression that went from being aimed at one person to another. I was a little too harsh, so I was wrong... but all that other shit: WTF? LOL. I didn't predict any of that... so you're wrong. And you're a mod who's totally throwing this thread off topic. You're wrong again!!!

Oh, I've never said that I'm never wrong... but uhhh...
YOU JUST ADMITTED YOU'RE WRONG!!!
OH MAN.
THAT'S LIKE WOW.
What a riot.
What a riot.

Don't you think for a second I'm going to forget you admitted that

And as a post script:
Yeah, I'mma mod... I'm aloud to go off topic

TeapotScar · 10-27-2004, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ice

And as a post script:
Yeah, I'mma mod... I'm aloud to go off topic

You're not "aloud" to misspell "allowed." Not on my watch, icy...

:twisted:

FenrisQueen · 10-27-2004, 09:19 PM

I just don't like bush. He's a little too conservative for me. Kerry's not much better, but he is an improvement. Plus, he actually uses correct english...

ice · 10-27-2004, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenrisQueen

I just don't like bush. He's a little too conservative for me. Kerry's not much better, but he is an improvement. Plus, he actually uses correct english...

And uh... the fact that Bush is Republican -which is usually a far more conservative side than the Dems- took you how long to figure out he was conservative?

Uhh... yeah.

And what does better English have to do with choosing who the better president is? Uhh... like nothing?

Whatever.

ice · 10-27-2004, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeapotScar

Quote:

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

And as a post script:
Yeah, I wassa mod... I'm aloud to go off topic

You're not "aloud" to misspell "allowed." Not on my watch, batterypoison you big idiot...

:twisted:

What?! Did you just call BP a big idiot!?!

WMD TIME!

10-27-2004, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeapotScar

War was not the only answer.

There were no WMD's in Iraq.

So voters, please- for my mom? Vote Kerry??? I'm crying- my birthday is 12 days after the election!! :cry: ***Tears***
:cry:

Have to disagree with you there.

War is the only answer, be it us (the few) the world (the proud) or the people of Iraq (the brave) rising up and kicking a little ass, the ends would have resulted in the same outcome.

As for WMDs?

Does it matter? The pacifist, those (god love them) surly folks who believe everything can be solved with a coke and a smile will never have a good enough reason. Their opposition, those card carrying NRA types, are constantly looking for a reason to shoot shit to Shiola and any reason will do. And for the rest of the populace to set aside their apathy long enough to sit up and take notice (truth be told they have better things to do than put their noses in the business end of .357 or coping some free love from a tofu eating treehugging PETA pet) and they’ll need something big to pull them away from the TV.

WMD’s have served their purpose, and like it or not, we’re stuck there.

Whouah.

So what do we do now? Well, we continue to nation build. We invest more money, more troops, we win the popular opinion there by feeding, securing, and edifying the people, and then we begin cashing the checks.

We are, after all, manifesting destiny, and that costs money.

The more we lament the choice and second guess it the more likely we’ll lose our initial investment, and those lives are just too damn essential. Truth is, I feel if we give up Bush we can save face and continue the mission. If we don’t, our nation will divide even further, the world opinion will continue to put pressure on us to hold ourselves to some type of accountability, which will turn our media guns even more fully on anti-war sentiment and culminate in one big snafu and mass exodus of the flavor of South East Asia.

So I just want to make it clear I may be voting with you come Tuesday, this doesn't mean I'll be holding your peace pipe :twisted:

.BatteryPoison. · 10-27-2004, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ice

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeapotScar

Quote:

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

And as a post script:
Yeah, I wassa mod... I'm aloud to go off topic

You're not "aloud" to misspell "allowed." Not on my watch, batterypoison you big idiot...

:twisted:

What?! Did you just call BP a big idiot!?!

WMD TIME!

Uh huh... Teapot and I know who the real author of that big mistake was. And his screen name starts with an I, ends in an E, and has a C in the middle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TStone

So I just want to make it clear I may be voting with you come Tuesday, this doesn't mean I'll be holding your peace pipe

LMAO

AlKilyu · 10-27-2004, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CptSternn

N. Korea was contained as was iraq with Clintons policies.

hahahahahaha!

I swore I was going to ignore your posts, but I accidentally caught that and teared up laughing.

Shit that's good stuff.

Heh.

Yes well...

pfffffffftttttttt hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

CptSternn · 11-01-2004, 06:38 AM

One more day. It will be interesting to see the outcome. Anyone else read where Michael Moore is setting up cameras in polling places around the globe in efforts to catch republicans tampering with the polls?

Pubs here are giving away free pints if Kerry wins. Also, if you have a valid Us voter card (like myself) and Kerry wins you get free drinks all night.

I'm voiting for him either way, but the free drinks are just icing on the cake.

http://www.dehavilland.co.uk/webhost...amp;category=1

If bush wins I'm going to take the final step and just renounce my us citizenship and be a one nation kinda person.

slán

.BatteryPoison. · 11-02-2004, 06:52 PM

If Bush wins, Sternn, I'll fly over and buy you a beer at the bar you often talk about.

AlKilyu · 11-02-2004, 11:03 PM

You realize that the thought of him renouncing his citizenship here caused 80% of the Democrats here to vote Bush, right?

Thanks Sternn!

God Save the Queen!

ice · 11-02-2004, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

You realize that the thought of him renouncing his citizenship here caused 80% of the Democrats here to vote Bush, right?

Thanks Sternn!

God Save the Queen!

Bwah!

Oh, jeeze....

I've REALLY lost it, but HAW.

"This is the end, my only friend the end..."

CptSternn · 11-03-2004, 08:15 AM

BP - Tis right across from my flat - a grand place with good craic nightly.

It appears the bush team is at it again. Over a hundred thousand complaints about voting machines and miscounts and its not even one day after the election!

Exit polls show Kerry with the lead in many states he lost - including Florida.

This should be interesting.

Slán