dan-cat
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 05:31
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2002
- Messages
- 3,433
OBAMA WINS (at last)
- Thread starter Sum Guy
- Start date
Rabbie
Super Moderator
- Local time
- Today, 05:31
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2007
- Messages
- 5,906
Certainly although a lot of politicians would like you to forget how they voted in 2003That makes alot of warmongers in some people's books
Yes, I meant that comment as a joke.
We should do a poll though, yourself aside, I wonder how many anti-abortionists are also anti-war, or how many pro-choicers support the war.
In general I don't. The reason I wrote the first post, the one where I said that if you support McCain then you are a warmonger, is because I feel like Americans are passing the buck on doing something about this war. Supporting war mongering makes you an accomplice to the crime, and you have to take responsibility for that.
Look at the cost of this war - the thousands of soldiers that have died, committed suicide, or been permanently injured, the hundreds of thousands of people that have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, many of them completely innocent, the billions of dollars that continue to be spent, all for what? McCain has clearly said that he thinks we are acheiving success in Iraq. He thinks that the Bush strategy is working, and that it should be continued. Not only that, but he thinks we ought to start wars in a couple other countries as well.
By supporting McCain, you ARE supporting the war. That is irresponsible when it is other people's children that are being sent to die, when it is your children and your grandchildren that will be paying the price for decades to come, when innocent women and children in other countries are being bombed. FOR WHAT?
Pbaldy, You can't just say that you agree with McCain on some other issue, so you are compromising on the war and that makes it okay. Would it be okay if I supported Hitler in spite of the concentration camps? Would it be okay if I supported Pinochet in spite of the torture? No, it wouldn't be okay, because complacency makes you just as guilty as the perpetrator.
georgedwilkinson
AWF VIP
- Local time
- Today, 00:31
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Messages
- 3,856
Wow, that's the most level response you've ever written. I'm impressed.
Yes, I support the war.
No, you're not going to change my mind.
I have a friend who died in Iraq, I taught him Sunday School when he was a teenager. He was eager to volunteer when combat started-I am very proud of him. I also had friends die on 9/11, one of them was a consultant whom I managed who later became a friend. I also have a son who is about to become eligible for the draft if they started it up again. I have plenty of motivation from both sides.
It is my opinion that if we don't take action abroad, someone else will take action on American soil. I believe that our best chance of success of having peace at home is electing a president (and congress) who are willing to risk war abroad so we don't have to have war here. For the record, the President of the United States cannot declare war and he/she could certainly not conduct war without Congress' order. If you're going to blame war on someone, blame congress...or, more likely, blame the groups who conduct war on America.
However, that is not why I don't like Obama, nor is it why I'm willing to support McCain (not my first choice). I'm pretty sure that if Obama's elected, he will carry on the legacy, since he'll have information he doesn't currently have. He has pretty much said that in words and through his actions.
Obama has no character. McCain, though as fallable as Obama, has proven that he has a moral imperative that overrides his ego. You'll recall McCain was a member of the "Keating 5" and changed his evil ways because of that incident. He has disagreed with Bush and Republican leadership many times, and though I've disagreed with him most of those times, he always stuck to what he believes is right. This is an endearing quality to me, even though I frequently disagree with him.
And once he gets straightened out on economic policy (he's gradually getting there), he'll have it all together there, though that matters very little in the grand scheme of things, since the President of the US has very little real influence over the economy.
The real reason I'd prefer just about any Republican/Conservative (McCain's not a convervative, BTW) over just about any Democrat/Liberal for President is all about the real power of the President: appointing judges. This board has had heated threads about rampant crime...I believe that appointing judges who are ever so slightly more likely to be conservative will help to alleviate some of the crime. I honestly (I'm serious here) don't care about a judge's stance on abortion...it really doesn't matter to me what a judge thinks about that (and has almost zero influence on my thoughts about a President) though I would consider myself pro-life when it comes to abortion. That means that if I had to make a choice, it would tend to be towards not aborting a fetus, and I would certainly not try to stop somebody else from doing that, through pysical force or legislation.
It's all about the judges. If you like judges who give criminals lots of extra chances to prove that they're bad for society, go with a lib. They won't disappoint you.
Yes, I support the war.
No, you're not going to change my mind.
I have a friend who died in Iraq, I taught him Sunday School when he was a teenager. He was eager to volunteer when combat started-I am very proud of him. I also had friends die on 9/11, one of them was a consultant whom I managed who later became a friend. I also have a son who is about to become eligible for the draft if they started it up again. I have plenty of motivation from both sides.
It is my opinion that if we don't take action abroad, someone else will take action on American soil. I believe that our best chance of success of having peace at home is electing a president (and congress) who are willing to risk war abroad so we don't have to have war here. For the record, the President of the United States cannot declare war and he/she could certainly not conduct war without Congress' order. If you're going to blame war on someone, blame congress...or, more likely, blame the groups who conduct war on America.
However, that is not why I don't like Obama, nor is it why I'm willing to support McCain (not my first choice). I'm pretty sure that if Obama's elected, he will carry on the legacy, since he'll have information he doesn't currently have. He has pretty much said that in words and through his actions.
Obama has no character. McCain, though as fallable as Obama, has proven that he has a moral imperative that overrides his ego. You'll recall McCain was a member of the "Keating 5" and changed his evil ways because of that incident. He has disagreed with Bush and Republican leadership many times, and though I've disagreed with him most of those times, he always stuck to what he believes is right. This is an endearing quality to me, even though I frequently disagree with him.
And once he gets straightened out on economic policy (he's gradually getting there), he'll have it all together there, though that matters very little in the grand scheme of things, since the President of the US has very little real influence over the economy.
The real reason I'd prefer just about any Republican/Conservative (McCain's not a convervative, BTW) over just about any Democrat/Liberal for President is all about the real power of the President: appointing judges. This board has had heated threads about rampant crime...I believe that appointing judges who are ever so slightly more likely to be conservative will help to alleviate some of the crime. I honestly (I'm serious here) don't care about a judge's stance on abortion...it really doesn't matter to me what a judge thinks about that (and has almost zero influence on my thoughts about a President) though I would consider myself pro-life when it comes to abortion. That means that if I had to make a choice, it would tend to be towards not aborting a fetus, and I would certainly not try to stop somebody else from doing that, through pysical force or legislation.
It's all about the judges. If you like judges who give criminals lots of extra chances to prove that they're bad for society, go with a lib. They won't disappoint you.
R
Rich
Guest
What justification do have for the war in Iraq then, other than it's Muslim and a foreign land
georgedwilkinson
AWF VIP
- Local time
- Today, 00:31
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Messages
- 3,856
I don't. I'm still waiting for the Rich plan.
Iraq wasn't about 9/11. It started in the late 80s/early 90s, by them.
Iraq wasn't about 9/11. It started in the late 80s/early 90s, by them.
R
Rich
Guest
We've told you all this before, he was elected by a Scottish electorate who'm he'd bribed and because the oposition was in turmoil that's why so many voters stayed away from the booths, you might also be interested in the fact that the largest public demonstration in British history took part against the illegal, unjust and unwarrented war in Iraq. The vote in favour of the war was based on the lies and fear spread by Bliar and his cronies, the same method just used to pass the 42day detention without charge bill, the same method being used to try and introduce ID cards on the public!
Yes, but shouldn't that action have a clear objective? Shouldn't the troops that we send to war be adequately prepared? Shouldn't we take action in places and against people who pose a clear and present danger, rather than against entire nations that pose little threat? Here are the facts that make me so angry about this war and the people who continue to support it:
1. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
2. President Bush personally put members of the bin Laden family on an airplane out of the U.S. the day after 9/11, when every other plane in the country was grounded.
3. The entire Bush administration ignored intelligence reports prior to 9/11 about the hijackers intent to fly planes into big buildings.
4. The Bush administration abandoned efforts to capture bin Laden (I personally doubt he ever planned to capture him at all) in Afghanistan, instead choosing to start another war in Iraq.
5. Many troops have been seriously injured or killed due to lack of proper equipment and poor planning.
6. Bush has yet to identify a legitimate purpose for this war.
I absolutely agree - that is one of the reasons I could never support Hillary. Not only did she help write the blank check for Iraq, she to this day refused to admit that it was a mistake.
I sincereley hope you will do more research on McCain before November. McCain's first wife was injured in a car accident while he was away at war. When he returned, he promptly divorced the no longer beautiful woman, and married someone younger and prettier and blonder. Is that someone with character?
McCain used to be independent minded, but if you look at his record over the last year, he has voted with the Bush policies 100%. I am not making this up. 100%. Even things he previously disagreed on, he is now agreeing with Bush on. How is that always sticking to what he believes is right?
Who cares about judges when our entire country is headed for disaster? This war has tripled our nation debt, made us more vulnerable to security threats as well as natural disasters, and is ruining the economy.
R
Rich
Guest
Again and yet again, Iraq had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11 other than that they shared a religion, although oddly enough even Christians in Iraq under Hussein had more protection then they had when America had him hung
I don't think they even had that in common (Muslim vs Secular).
Fact: John McCain returned home from Vietnam in 1973, separated from his wife in 1977, started seeing current wife in 1979. Although I do not agree with divorce that does not sound like he promptly divorced his first wife to marry the second.
Fact: several saudi families left the united states after the ban for travel was lifted. See the following, http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp
Right, that is so believeable because the 9/11 commission is perfectly objective and has no vested interested in covering their own a***.
In any case, I don't really think it is significant at all - this is America, the land of divorce and trophy wives. The only reason I brought it up is because George was trying to claim that McCain was a man of character while Obama was not.
ColinEssex
Old registered user
- Local time
- Today, 05:31
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2002
- Messages
- 9,349
Both however were armed to the teeth by the USA.
The US Noraid armed the IRA and the US also armed the Talaban to fight against the Ruskies.
Col
Similar threads
