Can you not see the sources that she is giving you? She has given plenty of unbias sources to counter your arguments. You are the one who is not paying attention.
What should the United States of America do about the situation in Iraq?
			
				
					
						
					
					#91
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 01:47 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#92
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 01:57 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#93
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 07:30 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#94
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 08:04 PM
....Sorry boys, I had to. I know full well most of the guys here are smart. It was just too difficult to pass up.
Anyway, BK did provide you with good sources as to America getting its butt whooped by Canada/Britain back in the grand ol' war of 1812 after trying to invade, which was what the topic had shifted to for some reason. My history classes in middle and high school never really openly said that's what happened, either. They kinda tend to.... skim over the wars where we failed or otherwise acted like imperialistic morons. Never got past WWII in the history books, for some reason. Heh.
			
				
					
						
					
					#95
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 08:33 PM
He's a guy? He seems like a girl if you ask me.
Your insults are so new and clever. You should write them down.
			
				
					
						
					
					#96
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 08:37 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#97
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 08:39 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#98
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 08:50 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#99
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:00 PM
That was sarcasm. Honestly, I wonder how old you really are if you're still using those. Don't people ever laugh at you when you say "You must be a girl because you're liberal-minded"?
Don't people laugh at you when your views on the situation culminate into a cliched Bush=Hitler stance, which is manifested into a banner using nothing but profanity and displayed for all the world to see?
This is a different kind of war. It's going to go on forever. It's like trying to go to war with convenience store or bank robbery. Anybody can be a terrorist. It's not like you have to enlist with Al-Quaeda or something. Most of the time, you don't know who your enemy is until they've done their damage and are dead. Trying to globally hunt down terror is a pipe dream.
I think the goal of the war is to minimize terrorism as much as possible. I will admit that you can't destroy terrorism; it's an ideal, a thought, it exists within all human minds. What I think the Bush Administration aims for (or at least, what I'm aiming for) is to make terrorism into the new communism, where it's reduced to a state of being relatively harmless and spoken in society as a taboo, of sorts.
I can't possibly hope for the death of every terrorist, or the elimination of that ideal. What I can hope for, and with realistic optimism (there's an oxymoron), is for terrorism to be pushed off the world stage and into localized incidents, as opposed to national fiascos.
			
				
					
						
					
					#100
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:13 PM
Don't people laugh at you when your views on the situation culminate into a cliched Bush=Hitler stance, which is manifested into a banner using nothing but profanity and displayed for all the world to see?
Well, HoW, I provided that for him. And I don't think anybody is laughing in the thread I produced about it today. Where there are facts, not profanity. That is just the shortest possible way to say it. So come on, step into the ring over there. See if you come out of it liking our Nazi-fascist president.
The Goal of the War is to impress daddy. I severly doubt that anybody in the Bush administration (meaning Bush, Ashcroft, and Cheney) know anything about war, seeing as how they've avoided the military at all costs. And Vietnam, if I spelled that right.
It's not unrealistic to hope for the deaths of every terrorist in the world, but with Bush around, I hope you're ready for a pretty long civilian to terrorist ratio, because the numbers won't divide down that far. And, if you hope for the death of every terrorist, then you are hoping for the death of Bush, and I thought you loved Bush? My mistake.
			
				
					
						
					
					#101
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:20 PM
Bk, you don't know when to stop do you? Your little mind can't comprehend what I'm saying right now can it? (you are probably looking up comprehend right now in Webster's.) No, they don't laugh at me because they realize I am right, but they have to look deep down to see why. It takes a little bit of deciphering through my material for liberals to understand. But, conservatives see what I say because they are like me.
			
				
					
						
					
					#102
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:34 PM
*glares* Lena is liberal. Lena understands your views. But Lena thinks they are wrong. That's it. I understand you perfectly, despite the grammar.
			
				
					
						
					
					#103
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:40 PM
attack 1 - insulting a man's intelligence. congratulations. Why dont you see if you can actually define comprehend, without using a dictionary.(you are probably looking up comprehend right now in Webster's.)
But, conservatives see what I say because they are like me.
Well, duh. Liberals never know what the hell you are talking about, because you don't make sense to us. conservatives only understand you on theory; conservatism. We all know what your point is before you say it. Along with every other conservative. It's your job to bring up facts that prove your point. Not insults. Or the bandwagon of 'everyone is a conservative.' That's just dumb, man.
You want to see a shitload of facts supporting some liberalism? Bet you twenty bucks you could never compile this much shit. go check out my thread on Hitler and Bush. You should have a hay day with that.
But if we can stop it to a point that it is basically harmless, then I think we won the war.
I agree with you on this. But, there shouldn't have even been a war in the first place. War should only have been used as a last resort. We said, "I'll count to ten, and if you don't work with us by the end, we will go to war with you... 1..2..3.. ATTACK!!!!" Yep, that's our government at work.
			
				
					
						
					
					#104
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:51 PM
Sorry, i just got really mad at you BK.
			
				
					
						
					
					#105
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 10 April 2005 - 09:57 PM
BK, you heard the guy.
Stop with the insults....Do what Lena said ya'lls...
			
				
					
						
					
					#106
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 11 April 2005 - 09:45 AM
Heh. You mean Sovietism and al Queda, not Communism and Terrorism. What you propose in both cases is impossible.What I think the Bush Administration aims for (or at least, what I'm aiming for) is to make terrorism into the new communism, where it's reduced to a state of being relatively harmless and spoken in society as a taboo, of sorts.
I don't disagree, but please, everyone, kick it down a notch. MAB!Don't people laugh at you when your views on the situation culminate into a cliched Bush=Hitler stance, which is manifested into a banner using nothing but profanity and displayed for all the world to see?
I've got a way to do that... but you won't like it.I can't possibly hope for the death of every terrorist, or the elimination of that ideal. What I can hope for, and with realistic optimism (there's an oxymoron), is for terrorism to be pushed off the world stage and into localized incidents, as opposed to national fiascos.
			
				
					
						
					
					#107
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 11 April 2005 - 09:07 PM
We parade around acting like we should always be on guard for terrorism. Yes, it's true we must be wary of terrorism. That's why we have Homeland Security. We just shouldn't be on our toes about it all the time.
Also, the comparison of the War in Iraq to the Revolutionary War isen't a good one. We started the Revolutionary War by ourselves, we asked the countries who didn't like Brittain such as France to help us out.
We brought the Iraq war, without the consent of those there. While it's true there are those who like the way things are running now, that's one similarity the Iraq War has to Revolutionary War. There were imperial loyalists who professed their loyalty to the royal crown in late 1700 america, like there are those who don't like the way Iraq is going.
			
				
					
						
					
					#108
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 13 April 2005 - 04:58 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#109
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 13 April 2005 - 05:04 PM
We have to stay there until the iraqi special forces can fight for themselves. We are getting better, but the situation has not been completed. I heard on the news today that they have a hostage of an american worker? Am I right? I just breezed through the article, i was disgusted! Now you guys know why I want al the terrorists dead! Now you now why I want to bomb the heck out of them. But, we can't. We can't because we have done too much in that country to waste it all. We are making progress. I hope.
Now on the flip side, how many Iraqi prisoners have we taken in this war. We are the terrorists in their eyes. You've got to remember the flip side of the argument.
			
				
					
						
					
					#110
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 13 April 2005 - 05:20 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#111
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 13 April 2005 - 07:01 PM
And you aren't?Yes, but they are under control of corrupt religious leaders that are poisoning their thoughts.
			
				
					
						
					
					#112
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 14 April 2005 - 06:39 AM
Had we not rushed into Iraq, exit strategy or not, the worker wouldn't have ever been captured. Besides, he was there voluntarily. He knew the risks and took them.We have to stay there until the iraqi special forces can fight for themselves. We are getting better, but the situation has not been completed. I heard on the news today that they have a hostage of an american worker? Am I right? I just breezed through the article, i was disgusted! Now you guys know why I want al the terrorists dead! Now you now why I want to bomb the heck out of them. But, we can't. We can't because we have done too much in that country to waste it all. We are making progress. I hope.
			
				
					
						
					
					#113
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 14 April 2005 - 08:04 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#114
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 14 April 2005 - 08:06 PM
Without an organization (Which is why it's an uprising) that's impossible.Maybe so, but about the Iraqi prisoners, how many of them are terrorists? It seems like we capture only terroristic people, like people who make bomb threats or people who people who have bombed structures.
			
				
					
						
					
					#115
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 14 April 2005 - 08:24 PM
Without an organization (Which is why it's an uprising) that's impossible.
What? I don't understand what you mean. An organization of what?
			
				
					
						
					
					#116
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 14 April 2005 - 08:59 PM
			
				
					
						
					
					#117
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 14 April 2005 - 10:45 PM
No. I am not. I have no religious leader that I follow, other than the Lord himself.And you aren't?
			
				
					
						
					
					#118
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 15 April 2005 - 09:50 AM
			
				
					
						
					
					#119
					
					
				
				
				
					
	Guest_Muscle E Mac_*
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 15 April 2005 - 01:15 PM
(I think we are getting a little off course) If you want to talk about God, can you start a new forum. I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but I intended this to be for war, and God is the complete opposite of war.
			
				
					
						
					
					#120
					
					
				
				
				
					
				
			
				
			
			
			Posted 15 April 2005 - 02:36 PM
and God is the complete opposite of war
Well... So, God is the opposite of War, and you are defending Bush? Awesome.


				
				
			
				
				
			
				
				
			
				
				
			
				
				
			
				
				
			
				
				
			





