|
Vote Kerry (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ambs |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
But the United States will be safer under a leader who defies the UN, opposes alliances, and basically arrogantly pisses off most of the world? |
apparently, yes :p
well everyone has their own views and beliefs... but bush being president isnt going to keep the country safe... if someone wants to attack the USA, they will... no matter if homer simpson was president or albert einstein... there are just too many other ways...
i feel kerry will do a better job than bush but also focus more on benefiting american citizens' EVERYDAY life... which is quite important too, remember ;) |
|
|
| Vlad |
| quote: | Originally posted by LiquidX
hope you focus on facts though. ;) |
And your doing what every other liberal is doing... hoping. I dont need a president thats gonna wish and hope for things to get better. I want one that will get done, whether people approve or not. All Kerry does is say what Americans what to hear. |
|
|
| XxGrOoVeERICxX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vlad
So we need to ask permission to defend ourselves? |
No, we don't need permission to defend ourselves. Going to another country and attacking them on false information is WRONG.
Yes, we were attacked on 9/11, but we were attacked by Bin Laden, Taliban, Saudi's, etc. not Iraq. |
|
|
| ambs |
i've posted my opinion and what i find important... you have your's but im not getting into the kerry/bush arguement AGAIN
we'll see what happens tomorrow...
may the best candidate win, AND end up president too :p |
|
|
| Vlad |
| quote: | Originally posted by XxGrOoVeERICxX
Yes, we were attacked on 9/11, but we were attacked by Bin Laden, Taliban, Saudi's, etc. not Iraq. |
Thats fine, but Kerry shouldnt have agreed that Sadaam was a threat and should be dealt with - than say, you know what - hes a threat, but Im not giving you guys the money to combat him. You dont think Iraqi's didnt have weapons (doesnt matter if its WMD or not) with the intent to distribute to these rouge groups that want to attack us? Better be safe than sorry. |
|
|
| UWM |
| For my sake and the sake of others I'm going to withhold voicing my opinion on this matter any further. I simply implore all eligible voters to get to the polls tomorrow and make themselves heard, as this is a very important election with regards to the future of our country. |
|
|
| ambs |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
For my sake and the sake of others I'm going to withhold voicing my opinion on this matter any further. I simply implore all eligible voters to get to the polls tomorrow and make themselves heard, as this is a very important election with regards to the future of our country. |
WERD! ;) |
|
|
| XxGrOoVeERICxX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vlad
Thats fine, but Kerry shouldnt have agreed that Sadaam was a threat and should be dealt with - than say, you know what - hes a threat, but Im not giving you guys the money to combat him. You dont think Iraqi's didnt have weapons (doesnt matter if its WMD or not) with the intent to distribute to these rouge groups that want to attack us? Better be safe than sorry. |
Saddam was a threat, no question he was, but not a threat as he was portrayed. Kerry put his 'faith' in what the president was telling him was to be true. If you can't trust what your president, commander in cheif, leader is telling you, then who can you trust?
It doesn't matter if it was WMD's or not?!? Dude, that was one of the many reasons we attacked Iraq, WMD's!!! Funny that reason seemed to change day by day, first WMD's, then for regime change, then to liberate the Iraqi's, and so on...
It has been shown they didn't have any WMD's. For example, I tell you "Hey, let's go to this party, Paul Van Dyk is gonna spin there tonight" Ok, let's go. When you get there, I tell you "Oh, my bad, he's not here, it's DJ Jazy Jeff" you'd be pretty pissed off.
Safe than sorry? I don't belive what we did made us any safer, but in the long run we will be sorry. We gotta do something about it. |
|
|
| daydreamer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vlad
Thats fine, but Kerry shouldnt have agreed that Sadaam was a threat and should be dealt with - than say, you know what - hes a threat, but Im not giving you guys the money to combat him. You dont think Iraqi's didnt have weapons (doesnt matter if its WMD or not) with the intent to distribute to these rouge groups that want to attack us? Better be safe than sorry. |
North Korea, has the "WMD". everyone knows this.
and we know where they stand.
they just don't sit on one of the world's largest oil reserves.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| UWM |
| quote: | Originally posted by XxGrOoVeERICxX
It doesn't matter if it was WMD's or not?!? Dude, that was one of the many reasons we attacked Iraq, WMD's!!! Funny that reason seemed to change day by day, first WMD's, then for regime change, then to liberate the Iraqi's, and so on...
|
If they would just be honest and say "I wanted to finish my daddy's war and secure their oil supply in the process" I might have a little bit more respect .... okay I'm done! :p |
|
|
| Vlad |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
If they would just be honest and say "I wanted to finish my daddy's war and secure their oil supply in the process" I might have a little bit more respect .... okay I'm done! :p |
I agree with that to a certain extent. Im done. :p |
|
|
|
|
